Diamond Python Range?
- Thread starter Gruni
- Start date
Help Support Aussie Pythons & Snakes Forum:
- Status
Sel
Very Well-Known Member
No idea where those places are, but Diamonds are along the east coast,,from Mid north nsw (port mac) and they can be found as far south as Vic..although im not sure how common that is.
Last edited:
Sel
Very Well-Known Member
I googled that place, and now im curious. Its a bit inland..so not sure.. maybe you should go and have a look 
RedFox
Very Well-Known Member
Diamond coastal intergrades should be around that area. I wouldn't think there would be diamonds. ???
chimerapro
Active Member
I would say the animals you saw were M.s.mcdowelli. Personally I feel diamonds M.s.spilota range ends at approx Taree with Port Macquarie animals being 100% mcdowelli. Others may feel different but when on a genetic level mDNA proves they are identical anyway so all eastern animals that are coastal/diamond/jungle carpet pythons are just habitat specific variations not anything else but that. Technically there is no impenetrable line ( the manning river system possibly could be a genetic barrier) that ends diamonds range and starts mcdowelli so your question is open to interpretation. I've found the nicest diamond looking mcdowelli carpets are found around the Bellingen region but I'd love to see pics of the ones you have seen in Oxley Wild Rivers NP.
P
Pythoninfinite
Guest
As a resident of Telegraph Point, a bit north of Port Mac, I agree 100% with Bigguy. I've seen dozens of the local pythons on the mid north coast in the past 9 years, and between the two locations Bigguy mentions, every one of them has characteristics of both to a greater of lesser extent. None of them looks like a Diamond that you might pick up on the central coast or further south, or a Coastal that you might get from Coffs and further north, they might look close to one or the other, but there are always minor characteristics which give them away as intergrades.
Jamie
Jamie
I have spent years in that strip of World Heritage rainforest between the Barrington Tops and Qld border and I've seen all manner of mixes of these two forms. Back in the 1990's I saw what looked like a pure Diamond (but was probably actually an Integrade with mostly Diamond blood) in the Dorrigo National Park - in the carpark on the road up the mountain. The furthest north I've seen a confirmed 100% Diamond was Barrington Tops - in the Williams River area. The furthest south I've seen a 100% Coastal was in the Toonumbar Scrub, north of Casino.
I was in a bit of a mischief mood when I posted this last night as I knew it stirs up some heated opinions but it had been a long weekend and I was too tired to post a full reply let alone pictures.
The full story is this... My mate and I were going on a camp with our sons and it was already after 8:00 at night. Going down a steep section of road and chatting away I thought I had a stick on the road and I was already almost on top of it before I realised that it was a snake and tried to straddle it but was sure I'd run over its head. I pulled up and went back up to see how hurt it was or at least ID what it was and there it was making its way back into the grass and a bit grumpy at me for disturbing its basking and nearly killing it. :lol: After a bit of a bluff strike at me and showing some patience while we got a good look it yawned and headed off again. Unfortunately the flash on my phone was on the wrong setting and in the torch light the pics don't do it justice but it was a stunning coastal about 1.5m long and the thickness of a fifty cent piece. The pale parts were a fairly bright yellowish colour and the dark parts were a caramel/toffee colour. I was so excited to see it and that it was unharmed.
A litle while later and now on the lookout I spotted another snake on the track this time about five and a half feet long and a lot thicker. We pulled up and this one wasn't bothered by us in the least. All it did was lift its head about eight inches for the camera opportunity. After modeling for us it waited until we headed back to the car and while I thought about what I could use to motivate it off the road it did a lazy u-turn and slowly headed back into the scrub. This one was what I would describe as a diamond, with the lovely green colour with the fine black outline around the scales. It had some barring in its pattern and some rosettes as well.
Both snakes would be real talking points in any collection and the chance to see them up close like that kept a smile on my face for the whole weekend. On top of that, the water was crystal clear and we saw turtles on the bottom as well as jumping back in the water from branches where they had been basking as well as a good sized lace monitor in a dead tree in the middle of the camp site.
Tonight after work I'll host the best of the pics I have of the two snakes for everyone to have a look at.
The full story is this... My mate and I were going on a camp with our sons and it was already after 8:00 at night. Going down a steep section of road and chatting away I thought I had a stick on the road and I was already almost on top of it before I realised that it was a snake and tried to straddle it but was sure I'd run over its head. I pulled up and went back up to see how hurt it was or at least ID what it was and there it was making its way back into the grass and a bit grumpy at me for disturbing its basking and nearly killing it. :lol: After a bit of a bluff strike at me and showing some patience while we got a good look it yawned and headed off again. Unfortunately the flash on my phone was on the wrong setting and in the torch light the pics don't do it justice but it was a stunning coastal about 1.5m long and the thickness of a fifty cent piece. The pale parts were a fairly bright yellowish colour and the dark parts were a caramel/toffee colour. I was so excited to see it and that it was unharmed.
A litle while later and now on the lookout I spotted another snake on the track this time about five and a half feet long and a lot thicker. We pulled up and this one wasn't bothered by us in the least. All it did was lift its head about eight inches for the camera opportunity. After modeling for us it waited until we headed back to the car and while I thought about what I could use to motivate it off the road it did a lazy u-turn and slowly headed back into the scrub. This one was what I would describe as a diamond, with the lovely green colour with the fine black outline around the scales. It had some barring in its pattern and some rosettes as well.
Both snakes would be real talking points in any collection and the chance to see them up close like that kept a smile on my face for the whole weekend. On top of that, the water was crystal clear and we saw turtles on the bottom as well as jumping back in the water from branches where they had been basking as well as a good sized lace monitor in a dead tree in the middle of the camp site.
Tonight after work I'll host the best of the pics I have of the two snakes for everyone to have a look at.
thomasssss
Very Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2011
- Messages
- 2,381
- Reaction score
- 0
chimerapro
Active Member
How can almost genetically identical animals intergrade? When the status of these two subspecies is in doubt with some taxonomists ect. I'm not having a go or starting an argument just trying to invoke discussion on the topic
Personally regardless of mDNA results if I was a splitter I would be inclined to allocate M.spilota M.intermedia (intergrades) and M.mcdowelli to full species status and if I was a lumper I would recognise M.s.spilota, M.s.mcdowelli and intermediate forms where their range overlaps and hybridisation occurs resulting in an intergrade. The third option being that both M.s.spilota and M.s.mcdowelli both have habitat specific adaptation types that are not intergrades as such but the subspecies themselves evolving to occupy a niche unable to be filled by the holotype adaptation? I think the science of nomenclature is flawed somewhat in regards to a species and genus can be defined as animals that are unable to produce fertile offspring as well as morphological, ecological and physiological characteristics. Mitochondrial DNA has thrown a spanner in the works of the taxonomic description process giving rise to an increased differing of opinion amongst us all in regards to what is and isn't a species/subspecies ect. I look forward to your opinions on this topic and I hope my uneducated attempt at giving a scientifically formed opinion is comprehensible to you both and all others reading Sorry OP if this was not the direction you had wished the thread to go in and I too don't wish it to turn into another "what is an intergrade" thread lol
Ok.....
There are two different ideas regarding the formation of species. One is known as the biological species concept (which has "rules" that include non viable offspring produced from hybrids, this actually take more than a single generation). The other is the use of genetics to separate species.
The rate which species evolve is different according to environmental issues facing that taxon. So while you may not see a barrier to gene flow now 20 million years ago there may of be a sea there eg in Australia, the Eyreian basin.
In the case of carpets it appears the the eastern Australian populations including spilota, mcdowelli and cheynei are very recently divergent and as a result genetically very similar. You are able to have significant morphological change but have very little genetic change. This is where the conjecture arises. The various carpet populations on the east coast look different so there is an argument to keep them split but from a genetic point of view they are the same and should be sunk.
IMHO I would like to see mcdowelli and cheynei placed into variegata. Variegata and metcalfei remain subspecies of Morelia spilota and diamond remain distinct. Both imbricata and bredli remain a full species. The reason for names this way is based on the genetics and the correct nomeculture.
hopefully that makes sense?
cheers
scott
There are two different ideas regarding the formation of species. One is known as the biological species concept (which has "rules" that include non viable offspring produced from hybrids, this actually take more than a single generation). The other is the use of genetics to separate species.
The rate which species evolve is different according to environmental issues facing that taxon. So while you may not see a barrier to gene flow now 20 million years ago there may of be a sea there eg in Australia, the Eyreian basin.
In the case of carpets it appears the the eastern Australian populations including spilota, mcdowelli and cheynei are very recently divergent and as a result genetically very similar. You are able to have significant morphological change but have very little genetic change. This is where the conjecture arises. The various carpet populations on the east coast look different so there is an argument to keep them split but from a genetic point of view they are the same and should be sunk.
IMHO I would like to see mcdowelli and cheynei placed into variegata. Variegata and metcalfei remain subspecies of Morelia spilota and diamond remain distinct. Both imbricata and bredli remain a full species. The reason for names this way is based on the genetics and the correct nomeculture.
hopefully that makes sense?
cheers
scott
It intrigues me that the snake I saw is considered significantly north of the accepted range of diamonds and yet it looked VERY diamond in its colour and pattern. Certainly the climate on the escarpment is very similar to that found around the blue mountains so I can see that diamonds would viably survive here. I know there is no clear answer and at the end of the day as I said I was playing mischieviously rather than posting a standard herping or I.D. thread.
All I know is that both snakes were stunning! And, that I would happily have either one in my collection especially the diamond/intergrade.
All I know is that both snakes were stunning! And, that I would happily have either one in my collection especially the diamond/intergrade.
ronhalling
Very Well-Known Member
Lol up until we had this very same discussion about 6 months ago here in this Forum i was under the impression that our big girl was pure Coastal as the breeder said the mother was from Kempsey and the father was on loan from a guy in Byron Bay, I have now agreed after much rock throwing and after many branches being broken over my head that she is more than likely an Intergrade, although i have seen what i would describe as being pure Coastals in the Cairncross State Forest an Intergrade she will remain, Pic following ...................Ron
...................RonAttachments
mtDNA really does mislead people! Completely different species can have 100% identical mtDNA. mtDNA has virtually no affect on traits like colour, pattern, size, scalation, ability to breed with other individuals, food preference, or anything else we'd recognise as 'traits'. It tells a bit of the story about the history of population separation, but that doesn't always have anything to do with speciation or local population differentiation.
The DNA which makes one snake large or black or spotted or striped or like to eat birds or have large teeth or heat pits or climb or burrow or have big belly scales to slither on land or keeled scales to stick in rock crevices etc. etc. is all nuclear DNA, not mtDNA. mtDNA isn't even in the nucleus (where the 'real' DNA is).
As far as the morphology etc. of species goes, mtDNA says nothing. The mtDNA shows that Carpet Pythons along the east coast freely interbreed and have probably never been separated, but that doesn't mean they can't differentiate (which they obviously have). It also shows that the term 'intergrade' is probably not correct to use for these snakes, because it is not a case of two different things which evolved separately coming together and making some hybrids while others remain pure, it says that they were probably all once the same and are slowly becoming more different along the span of their distribution - it's the opposite of what the 'intergrade' concept suggests is going on with these snakes.
With mammals the biological species concept (if animals can breed together and make fertile offspring they're the same species) works quite nicely, but in snakes it doesn't work at all; according to it *ALL* pythons are the same species. Reptiles have really weird and robust DNA, so the genetics rules don't really work with them. It's obvious that there are big genetic differences between Diamonds from Sydney and Carpets from Townsville, so the mtDNA being identical is clearly misleading. Because of the continuous gene flow and the probable recent divergence in traits between these areas there is probably a fairly small *number* of genetic differences between, say, Carpets from Sydney (or Gosford or wherever) and Carpets from Brisbane (or Townsville or Cairns or Prosperpine etc.), but they are clearly very big and important genetic differences. You can get two different species which are virtually identical to look at and in their way of life, but they can have a huge number of genetic differences. Or, you can have just one single nucleotide of difference (the smallest possible genetic difference) and have the difference between a black snake and a white snake, or a speckled Lace Monitor and a Bell's phase, or a large animal and a small one. Get, say, 20 of these sorts of 'big impact, small genetic size' mutations and you have a radically different animal, but that difference is almost impossible to detect with normal DNA analysis.
The geneticists don't like to acknowledge this because it makes justifying their claims more difficult, and would often invalidate the claims they want to make. Unfortunately, it leaves a lot of people misunderstanding what's going on.
The DNA which makes one snake large or black or spotted or striped or like to eat birds or have large teeth or heat pits or climb or burrow or have big belly scales to slither on land or keeled scales to stick in rock crevices etc. etc. is all nuclear DNA, not mtDNA. mtDNA isn't even in the nucleus (where the 'real' DNA is).
As far as the morphology etc. of species goes, mtDNA says nothing. The mtDNA shows that Carpet Pythons along the east coast freely interbreed and have probably never been separated, but that doesn't mean they can't differentiate (which they obviously have). It also shows that the term 'intergrade' is probably not correct to use for these snakes, because it is not a case of two different things which evolved separately coming together and making some hybrids while others remain pure, it says that they were probably all once the same and are slowly becoming more different along the span of their distribution - it's the opposite of what the 'intergrade' concept suggests is going on with these snakes.
With mammals the biological species concept (if animals can breed together and make fertile offspring they're the same species) works quite nicely, but in snakes it doesn't work at all; according to it *ALL* pythons are the same species. Reptiles have really weird and robust DNA, so the genetics rules don't really work with them. It's obvious that there are big genetic differences between Diamonds from Sydney and Carpets from Townsville, so the mtDNA being identical is clearly misleading. Because of the continuous gene flow and the probable recent divergence in traits between these areas there is probably a fairly small *number* of genetic differences between, say, Carpets from Sydney (or Gosford or wherever) and Carpets from Brisbane (or Townsville or Cairns or Prosperpine etc.), but they are clearly very big and important genetic differences. You can get two different species which are virtually identical to look at and in their way of life, but they can have a huge number of genetic differences. Or, you can have just one single nucleotide of difference (the smallest possible genetic difference) and have the difference between a black snake and a white snake, or a speckled Lace Monitor and a Bell's phase, or a large animal and a small one. Get, say, 20 of these sorts of 'big impact, small genetic size' mutations and you have a radically different animal, but that difference is almost impossible to detect with normal DNA analysis.
The geneticists don't like to acknowledge this because it makes justifying their claims more difficult, and would often invalidate the claims they want to make. Unfortunately, it leaves a lot of people misunderstanding what's going on.
ronhalling
Very Well-Known Member
What He ^^^ said ....................Ron
....................RonAs gorgeous as that snake is Ron there are features missing compared to a pure diamond that the one I saw has. To me yours is more of a coastal than a diamond if you are catagorising it as an intergrade, if you get what I mean?
- Status
