Bredli Python?

[Pythonguy1]

Just got a quick question in regards to where the Bredli python sits in morelia. I always thought that they were a carpet python subspecies but I've noticed a few people saying that they are not a subspecies at all, but rather a different species in morelia. Is this true? Or are they a subspecies?

Cheers, Josiah.

 

[Garry McGaw]

G'day Josiah this is what I found
Morelia bredli is a non-venomous python species found in Australia. No subspecies are currently recognized.[2]

 

[Herpetology]

ignore this

 

[Pythonguy1]

OK, so it is it's own species Morelia bredli not Morelia spilota bredli.
Nice. Thanks guys ?

 

[Sdaji]

Morelia bredli is seperate from the Morelia sp. species aka not a carpet python

Morelia being a group under the pythonidae/ spilota being carpet species/ then the name of subspecies
I.e Morelia spilota McDowelli

I lost a few brain cells reading this
[automerge]1616711374[/automerge]

OK, so it is it's own species Morelia bredli not Morelia spilota bredli.
Nice. Thanks guys ?

It's debated. In reality it is a situation more appropriate to call a subspecies, but there's a big trend for splitting among herpers. Different authors have different opinions so you'll see books and various other sources called bredli a subspecies of Morelia spilota or its own species of Morelia. Very, very obviously, it is within the Morelia spilota clade, and calling it a different species by any objective measure is incorrect, but hey, it's 2021 and we live in a post-fact and post-truth world.

 

[Herpetology]

I lost a few brain cells reading this

I lost brain cells trying to write it and it doesn’t even make sense to me considering I myself call them a carpet python

 

[Ajar5]

The Morelia complex requires further taxonomic study to give better transparency between the species. The only data I can find is when Gow first described bredli in 1981 he said it was similar to variegata although variegata had less mid-body scale rows and larger head scales. Morelia carinata and viridis are noticeably different from spilota. There isn't even a clear title for viridis as some call it chondropython viridis and others Morelia viridis..

 

[Harpo]

I thought science describes it as an actual separate species currently. Not sure where spilota and the bredli split evolutionary wise, and I'm not the expert, but they obviously have a common ancestor, but until the science says different, I vote species.

 

[Sdaji]

I thought science describes it as an actual separate species currently. Not sure where spilota and the bredli split evolutionary wise, and I'm not the expert, but they obviously have a common ancestor, but until the science says different, I vote species.

What exactly is 'the science'?

By DNA, they're clearly not different species. It's only considered a different species because bredli population is disjunct.

Put it this way, if bredli was a valid species, using the same standards would mean you'd have to split humans into dozens if not hundreds of different species.

 

[Harpo]

What exactly is 'the science'?

Sorry Sdaji, I'm just a poorly educated layman, by science I mean the basic stuff I learned in school about the animal classification system, literature does say its a species, doesn't it? I have seen plenty of stuff get re-classified over the years. If they are clearly the same species, what the? Now I'm losing brain cells, and clearly I can't afford that! Fill me in, what am I not getting...do you recon they might be re-classified one day? or should, rather? I'm here to learn ?

 

[Sdaji]

Sorry Sdaji, I'm just a poorly educated layman, by science I mean the basic stuff I learned in school about the animal classification system, literature does say its a species, doesn't it? I have seen plenty of stuff get re-classified over the years. If they are clearly the same species, what the? Now I'm losing brain cells, and clearly I can't afford that! Fill me in, what am I not getting...do you recon they might be re-classified one day? or should, rather? I'm here to learn ?

Many different people write reptile books, some of them call bredli a species, some of them call it a subspecies. Most of these people have no scientific qualifications, they're just reptile enthusiasts with no more relevant qualifications than you have and less than I do. Most of the people calling it a separate species just do so because they like the idea of it being a different species.

Let's put this another way. During the natural climate change cycles, Carpet Pythons covered more or less of Australia. There was a time when the area occupied by bredli was connected to the coastal (I don't mean mcdowelli, I mean the coast of Australia) populations of spilota. Currently, the population in central Australia is isolated. If the climate was to change again and allow Morelia spilota to expand to its previous distribution, bredli would readily interbreed with the others. Conversely, species like viridis etc which actually are valid separate species, do not hybridise with spilota under natural conditions, and indeed are currently found sympatrically with them, clearly showing they are valid species.

Just because one person writes a book which calls it a species does not mean it is univerally 'accepted by science' as a different species. It's not currently universally accepted. It wouldn't be any more a reclassification as the rejection of a proposed classification.

And again, if you accept bredli as a species, you're accepting a system which would divide humans into literally dozens if not hundreds of different species. Some races of 'humans' are far more different from each other than Morelia spilota bredli is from other Morelia spilota.

 

[Harpo]

OK, I'm hearing you mate, but, in my ignorance, now my brain is actually hurting. Would it be fair for me to think then that bredli could be called M. spilota bredli because by DNA they are not different species? I think my nose just started bleeding.
So, could I loosly compare bredli to a race of people within the entire species?


I'm now daydreaming about how homo sapiens even became homo sapiens - I really enjoy your posts man.

 

[Sdaji]

OK, I'm hearing you mate, but, in my ignorance, now my brain is actually hurting. Would it be fair for me to think then that bredli could be called M. spilota bredli because by DNA they are not different species? I think my nose just started bleeding.
So, could I loosly compare bredli to a race of people within the entire species?


I'm now daydreaming about how homo sapiens even became homo sapiens - I really enjoy your posts man.

Morelia spilota bredli is a common way of classifying them and many books do.

I'm not going to answer that question about human genetics because it's a step down a rabbit hole, and you barely look into that rabbit hole before seeing all sorts of screamingly obvious facts which you will get yourself in a lot of trouble for openly stating. I'd love to discuss them, but I prefer not to deal with the nonsense which comes with being accused of committing hate crimes.

I'm glad you enjoy the posts

 

[Harpo]

I'd love to discuss them, but I prefer not to deal with the nonsense which comes with being accused of committing hate crimes.

Yes, good call mate. I didn't mean to go that way either. in retrospect I should have used some other species example ? , but it is weirdly interesting stuff to think about indeed. Thanks for feeding my brain once again Sadji, you are good at making me learn stuff. It's nice to have a conversation with someone with a lot of knowledge who will take the time for less brainy folk such as ME.

I have too many more dumb questions about spilota complex now, this has opened a can of worms of more ignorance.

 

[nick_75]

The genetic make up of any modern organism is a result of genetic admixture, that has occurred in the past. Whether carpet pythons or humans, DNA is exchanged as populations, that share a close common ancestor, interbreed, after a period of isolation.

Sdaji's earlier example of the bredli population once being connected to and interchanging DNA with other members of M. spilota is a good example of this process.

The populations have then separated, with M bredli becoming genetically isolated and over a period of time have developed unique gene pools. If the populations of M bredli and M spilota were then able to interbreed, this admixture would then result in new lineages.

The same process happened with modern humans. Different species of humans moved and became isolated over time. Then intermixed as populations encountered each other, becoming something new. (I'm being vague here for the same reasons Sdaji alluded to).

 

[GBWhite]

The taxonomy used by Gow in describing the Central Australian Python (Morelia bredli) as a "New Species of Python" in 1981 was very poor and was basically based on characteristics such as colouration, pattern, number of mid body scales, number of head shields (both of which are consistent with other members of the M spilota group) and distribution but because it was published in a recognized herpetological journal of that period it was accepted by the herpetological community. Gow G F 1981. "A new species of Python from Central Australia" AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF HERPETOLOGY 1 (1): 29-34
However it was reclassified as a species without formal taxanomic treatment leaving the elevation to species level questionable. Prior to that it (as were all the members of the Morelia spilota group that have since been elevated to species level) was always classed as Morelia spilota variegata.

Similarly Morelia cheynei, M mcdowelli and M variegata were all seperated from Morelia spilota variegata and elevated to species level (again using very poor taxonomic characteristics similar to those used by Gow) by Wells and Wellington in their work " A Synopsis of the Class Reptilia in Australian" AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL of HERPETOLOGY Vol 3 (3-4) 31 December 1983. In the same journal Wells and Wellington formally elevated Morelia imbricata (Smith,1981) to species level. The synopsis was submitted and accepted by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) and as such. along with M bredli all are currently recognized as valid species.

As with the two examples above, due to its universality, the wording of the ICZN Code leaves considerable room for interpretation.

Moreover, strictly following the glossary definition of the word description, the Code would require that a taxon must be uniquely distinguished from other taxa and generalized statements do not imply uniqueness, eg - "separated by distribution" or "separated by analysis of dna". In addition distribution itself is not an attribute of an organism and according to the glossary definition of the word "distribution" it, in itself is not a character, as it is not intrinsic to any specimen within the taxon.. Some taxonomists are likely to accept a geographic population, especially an insular population, only separated from other such populations by distribution, however species/subspecies must also be distinguishable by characters other than by their isolated locality or distribution.