Carpet pythons - what's in the name?

[DanN]

Hi Ian,

Obviously there are traits (e.g., colour) that are specific to certain regions. For example, I bet you I can tell H. sapiens from Rwanda apart from H. sapiens from Sweden (this is by no means racist – it’s a fact).

But does that mean that these two locality specific humans are different species? Of course not. Every species and its populations vary to some degree (be it genetically, morphologically, etc), otherwise all carpets would be identical. However, taxonomy is somewhat subjective in that we cannot agree where to draw the line with many species.

For example, some species of snakes are differentiated from their nearly identical conspecifics because of the presence vs. absence of a sub-ocular scale (a scale between the bottom of the eye and the scales of lips [labials].

But is the presence of that sub-ocular scale really sufficient to call them different species? Perhaps their genetic make-up is identical, or they are all the same colour?

Therefore, IMO, taxonomists should approach systematics with a holistic methodology. In other words, they should look at colour, scalation, ecology, genetics, historical biogeography, current geographical separation, etc.

However, many species have been (and are being) described based upon only one of the above attributes. For example, Wells and Wellington, I think, first made up the sub species names we know for carpets today (mcdowelli, cheynei, etc) – although they elevated them to full species (I think, memory fades). Then Barker and Barker (1994) came along and used the names to describe these same “locals” as subspecies. This was all done primarily upon the basis of colour.

Subsequently, a separate line of inquiry (molecular genetics) has come along and suggested otherwise… and now we’re all confused.

IMO taxonomists all too often rely on single modes of inquiry when describing species, rather than looking from all angles. Using lots of methods to determine whether locals/species/subspecies are different is particularly important when such diversity is cryptic (i.e., Morelia viridis/spilota)

So, yes, the locals can be differentiated based upon colour, but whether colour variation has any basis taxonomically remains to be seen.

Wow, I really can ramble...

 

[Waterrat]

Dan, to what degree do you think ecology of species should be look at in taxonomy. M. viridis / spilota would be a good example (at the genus level).

 

[Jungle_Freak]

The main thing is that taxonomists did not take into account is the effect of polygenic traits .
These traits for colour and pattern, overall min and max sizes, also clutch size variations and even scale counts.

Carpet python are moulded by natural selection within each area of habitat .

Link to polygenic traits for further reading .

Polygenic Traits

 

[Waterrat]

Roger, I don't think you can take clutch size as a classification character. All we know about clutch sizes is from captive breding and it would be dangerous to extrapolate. That applies to many other polygenic traits too but on the other hand, many, e.g. scale count, colour & patterns (as you mentioned) are being used in taxonomy.

 

[MR_IAN_DAVO]

So who could tell me the difference between a Tully Jungle & a Palmerston jungle?
Not being smart but relevant.
Cheers
Ian

 

[Jeffa]

So who could tell me the difference between a Tully Jungle & a Palmerston jungle?
Not being smart but relevant.
Cheers
Ian

Whatever would bring you more money if you are going to sell

 

[Bushman]

That's an excellent post Dan. Your contributions to these forums is most welcome.
You're assessment is spot-on imo. Feel free to ramble anytime!

 

[Waterrat]

So who could tell me the difference between a Tully Jungle & a Palmerston jungle?
Not being smart but relevant.
Cheers
Ian

From my experience and that of many (but not all) others - none. That's like the scrubbies in the Wet Topics are solid and thick, while the ones from the tip of Cape York and long and thin - still the same scrubby.
Some Palmerston carpets have patterns you don't see in those from Tully and visa versa but you do see B&W carpets in Tully that would pass for Julatten ones. It's just one big mixed bag. Some of the carpets I have seen at Cape Trib are different again and one could easily start a "Cape Trib" new breed. The point is, in all those localities, there is less consistency in the morphs than variation.

That's an excellent post Dan. Your contributions to these forums is most welcome.
You're assessment is spot-on imo. Feel free to ramble anytime!

Agree. Some members here should be made "honorary members with distinction". ...e.g. Slickturtle, Pythoninfinite (or whatever is spells like), Glebo, Gerdhains and others I can't think of at the moment.

Whatever would bring you more money if you are going to sell

Hmmmmm, really meaningful.

 

[Jeffa]

The reality is that each subspecies local specific animals are evolving to their own environment(more so with isolated populations). Very closely identical at this stage.
Michael or Dan, have you witnessed a "hybrid" mating between a (what we would call a jungle to a what we would call a carpet)?
Would it be safe to assume that breeding a pair of the Atherton pythons that your mate sent you Michael would sell for more if they were sold as jungles as opposed to carpets?

 

[Albino93]

Agree. Some members here should be made "honorary members with distinction". ...e.g. Slickturtle, Pythoninfinite (or whatever is spells like), Glebo, Gerdhains and others I can't think of at the moment.

bluetounge1 (i think thats his username) for sure, he has alot of knowledge and great info

 

[Waterrat]

The reality is that each subspecies local specific animals are evolving to their own environment(more so with isolated populations). Very closely identical at this stage.
Michael or Dan, have you witnessed a "hybrid" mating between a (what we would call a jungle to a what we would call a carpet)?
Would it be safe to assume that breeding a pair of the Atherton pythons that your mate sent you Michael would sell for more if they were sold as jungles as opposed to carpets?

Jaffa, this seems to be a contradiction in terms, at least that's how I see it. "jungle" and "carpet" are the same and if they are sub-species (hmmmm) than they can't produce hybrid.
Mate, tell us,what exactly is "Atherton" (apart from being a small town where carpets don't live)? isn't it just another carpet like the "Mareeba" and rest of them?
We need to separate the innovative marketing jargon from reality to make any sense out of it. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[DanN]

I can't figure out how to do the "quote thing", so here I'm replying to Waterrat, Jungle-Freak and Jeffa

Jungle-freak: "Carpet python are moulded by natural selection within each area of habitat ."

Well.. in some cases this is true, while in others it is not. For any trait to be a product of natural selection it must be adaptive (i.e., provide a selective advantage). However, reptiles in general often show great phenotypic plasticity in ecological traits. For example, min/max body sizes frequently vary in response to prey availability. In populations where prey is scarce snakes might be small, whereas in populations of the same species where prey is abundant they might be large.

However, when juveniles are taken from high and low prey density populations and reared under the same conditions, they grow to the same sizes. Therefore, body size is not a heritable trait, and thus isn’t under “natural selection”.... (Although some argue that phenotypic plasticity is itself adaptive)… Similarly, non-adaptive processes might be at play, whereby variation is just random.

There are some examples of polygenic effects (or correlational selection) in snakes, however, these are limited (often because they’re damn hard to figure out).



Waterrat:"Dan, to what degree do you think ecology of species should be look at in taxonomy. M. viridis / spilota would be a good example (at the genus level)."

Are ecological traits good taxonomic characters? Well, yes and no. How do we tell if traits are genuinely adaptive (and therefore heritable) or merely the result of phenotypic plasticity? For example, green pythons from most populations breed seasonally (i.e., hatching occurs in Nov/Dec each year), while some populations appear to breed throughout the year. Now, is this because those populations are truly different from one another, or is it because one population has access to more food (at different times of the year), allowing the snakes to breed whenever they want? I don’t have the answer (unfortunately ).

Most taxonomists currently work in the present. However, IMO, account should be taken of what might happen in the future with species. I’m not saying "guess", but in some cases species may not be heavily divergent now, but it quite clear that they are on their own evolutionary trajectory. This should be taken into account where applicable.

Therefore, to answer the question. Ecology in taxonomy should be used on a case by case basis, and with caution.



Jeffa: "Michael or Dan, have you witnessed a "hybrid" mating between a (what we would call a jungle to a what we would call a carpet)?"

I have seen a few carpets from the “hybrid area” (the Tablelands, Daintree, etc) and to be perfectly honest I have never once thought (at the time) whether they resembled jungles or coastals – I just see them as carpets. However, this doesn’t mean that there isn’t a difference between them... it's just that I don't even know how to tell them apart..

 

[Norm]

Quite some time ago this thread got way too intellectual for my simple brain!

Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2

 

[MR_IAN_DAVO]

Quite some time ago this thread got way too intellectual for my simple brain!

Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2

Hi Norm, I am sure that you don't mean that you have a simple brain, but rather more like me to think about this subject simply with my limited brain knowledge.
I can understand what Michael said earlier that some jungles (as an example) may show different traits like head pattern or spot on the nose, but for this to be named a localaty type it would have to be very consistant with breeding within that local range.
With my simple brain knowledge I have seen some people say that they have a area type Jungle, but without taxonemy proof it would be hard to argue for or against. So in my brain i would call them all Jungles unless they came from an area that was isolated geographicaly. By that i mean total isolation by landscape, not just a river or gorge, as snakes don't know boundaries unless they can't go there.
Now a classic isolation to me would be like a Darwin carpet python compared to a Coastal carpet python. But maybe i am thinking about this too simply.

Cheers
Ian

 

[junglepython2]

Ian, a python doesn't have to look different or be unique to have a locale tag on it, as long as it genuinly came from that area. Some people just like to know where there pythons originate from. Putting a locale name to something doesn't magically make it a new species or subspecies. I have Katherine olives that I'm sure look like just about any other olive from just about anywhere in the country despite this they are still Katherine olives as there parents were wild caught in around Katherine, NT nothing more nothing less.

 

[MR_IAN_DAVO]

Ian, a python doesn't have to look different or be unique to have a locale tag on it, as long as it genuinly came from that area. Some people just like to know where there pythons originate from. Putting a locale name to something doesn't magically make it a new species or subspecies. I have Katherine olives that I'm sure look like just about any other olive from just about anywhere in the country despite this they are still Katherine olives as there parents were wild caught in around Katherine, NT nothing more nothing less.

I realise this & agree totally. To name a snake from a local area, that snake would have to be known to originate from that area alone. As another example - Proserpine coastal carpet, that is fine if that snake originated from Proserpine & is a know fact, but once again with my limited experience can one really say that for definate that it is a local Proserpine type eccept for the fact that it came from that area. What would prevent a Proserpine Carpet mateing with a Mackay carpet in the wild? they are not that far apart & no geographical isolation.JMO.

Cheers
Ian

 

[Waterrat]

I don't see any real problems, after all people can call their snakes whatever they like, I only feel sorry for those entering the hobby, buying a snake with fancy label and getting just another M.s. imbricata (or whatever).
If this is a problem, and yes, some people complained that they were sold Mareeba carpet without full and honest explanation. It can be overcome by simply naming certain colour morphs (that are consistent) what they look like, instead of locality names. For example, we could have Black & gold carpets instead of "Palmerston", black & white instead of "Julatten", etc.. If locality names are appropriate to use, then the breeding stock should not only represent the locality type but be actually obtained from that locality. Nothing wrong with "Mission Beach carpet", Prosepine carpet", etc., as long as the original (unpolluted / outcrossed) stock is genuine.

 

[MR_IAN_DAVO]

I agree Michael as this would keep it simple. I have seen many breeders name snakes from a certain locality & that is fine if that is genuine & can be proven. Some tend to name as a breeding project or lines, such as Peter Jungles, Roger jungles,SXR Jungles, to go further than this in captive breeding can be difficult to prove. I can accept if someone has a closed breeding line from a specific locality, but once again hard to prove & one would have to take on good faith/trust.

Cheers
Ian

 

[Waterrat]

I agree Michael as this would keep it simple. I have seen many breeders name snakes from a certain locality & that is fine if that is genuine & can be proven. Some tend to name as a breeding project or lines, such as Peter Jungles, Roger jungles,SXR Jungles, to go further than this in captive breeding can be difficult to prove. I can accept if someone has a closed breeding line from a specific locality, but once again hard to prove & one would have to take on good faith/trust.

Cheers
Ian

It's probably unreasonable to be asking for a proof of provenance, it's better to ask for an honest statement from the breeder and then it's up to the buyer to take it or leave it. In the and, to implement any changes (which is very unlikely) depends on the breeder's attitude and willingness to stop calling their carpets Atherton, Mareeba and whatever and use different, more descriptive names. Even "Honey carpet" would be perfectly fitting if the snake's overall appearance resembled honey (hard to imagine). LOL

Just to explain, I stated this thread inspired by another thread where a lady bought Mareeba carpet, thinking she bought something special. That sort of thing shouldn't happen.

 

[Jeffa]

Agree Michael. But things won't change. Just say if there were two isolated poulations of Gtp's in Aussie territory, Iron range which there are and Lockerbie scrub apparently (unsure of this one). But is some bloke claimed he was selling Lockerbie Scrub native Gtps as opposed to native Gtps and they were the same in appearance DNA etc. Would they fetch the same price? The extra name sells it sometimes. I would prefer to buy a jungle from a specific lineage (even if it was bulldust or exactly the same as the next carpet unnamed from the next town down the road. Same species and imo subspecies cheynei and macdowli (excuse spelling) but Jungles have a better name as far as selling is concerned.

P.s Maybe you should label your Aussie Gtps Iron Range native Aussie Gtps and see if there is increase in Demand? Hell, even bump up the price for the extra wording.