Please help identifying this snake skin

[dizyben]

This skin was found intact on my laundry doormat. I live close to Camden NSW and have seen both brown and red-bellied black snakes on our property and want to know which one it could be. It measures 1.5m.

 

[JUNGLE-JAK]

snake

thats all i know

 

[Tassie97]

hmm id say RBB

 

[r3ptilian]

Head scalation points to RBB.

 

[Python-Lover4lyf]

I'd agree with the others. Looks like a RBB (IMO)

 

[saratoga]

Head looks like a RBB although the anal scale appears to be single and subcaudals are almost entirely divided except perhaps one or two. I thought red bellies normally had about one third of the subcaudals single.

 

[waruikazi]

Head looks like a RBB although the anal scale appears to be single and subcaudals are almost entirely divided except perhaps one or two. I thought red bellies normally had about one third of the subcaudals single.

This is what stopped me from commenting on the ID. And i thought they had a divided anal scale... The pic isn't fantastic because the shed is all twisted up but it looks like the anal scale is single.

 

[r3ptilian]

I thought the same thing, thats why I studied the head. Frontal shield and supraocular look to be Psuedechis more than Psuedonaja. A better pic of rostral and anal scales would help a lot.

This is what stopped me from commenting on the ID. And i thought they had a divided anal scale... The pic isn't fantastic because the shed is all twisted up but it looks like the anal scale is single.

 

[Bushman]

Head scalation points to RBB.

What exactly about the head scalation points towards Pseudechis porphyriacus?

I thought the same thing, thats why I studied the head. Frontal shield and supraocular look to be Psuedechis more than Psuedonaja. A better pic of rostral and anal scales would help a lot.

What is it about the frontal shield and supraocular that look more like Pseudechis than Pseudonaja? :?

I think that it is more likely to be Pseudonaja textilis. I disagree with R3ptilian in that the frontal in itself and relative to the supraoculars indicates Pseudonaja textilis. i.e in P. textilis "the frontal is twice as long as it is broad, being equal in width to the supraoculars."*
Whereas the frontal in Pseudechis porphyriacus "is nearly as broad as it is long, but it is smaller than the supraoculars."*

I agree that close examination of the rostral scale would help.

*'A Field Guide To Reptiles of the Australian High Country', R. Jenkins and R. Bartell

 

[waruikazi]

Textilis have divided anal and sub-caudal scales...

What exactly about the head scalation points towards Pseudechis porphyriacus?


What is it about the frontal shield and supraocular that look more like Psuedechis than Psuedonaja?

I'm going to go directly against the general opinion so far, and for the very reason that R3ptilian uses.
I reckon that the frontal in itself and relative to the supraoculars indicates Pseudonaja textilis. i.e in P. textilis "the frontal is twice as long as it is broad, being equal in width to the supraoculars."*
Whereas the frontal in Pseudechis porphyriacus "is nearly as broad as it is long, but it is smaller than the supraoculars."*

I agree with R3ptilian only in as much as close examination of the rostral scale would help.

'A Field Guide To Reptiles of the Australian High Country', R. Jenkins and R. Bartell

 

[Red_LaCN]

Anaconda! I have no idea.

 

[Bushman]

Anaconda! I have no idea.

Why post then?

Textilis have divided anal and sub-caudal scales...

Are you arguing against the skin being a Pseudonaja textilis based on anal and sub-caudal scales?
Whilst your statement is essentially correct there are exceptions to this rule i.e in P. textilis subcaudals "all paired (rarely several anterior subcaudals single)."*
Thus I don't think that subcaudals can be used to reliably confirm or exclude either species in this case. Even though Cogger makes a distinction between the two genera in his key based on this feature i.e "usually all subcaudals divided or at most a few anterior ones undivided"* for Pseudonaja. And "usually at least anterior 20% of subcaudals undivided, remainder divided"* for Pseudechis.

 

[waruikazi]

No, i'm saying why i don't think an accurate ID can be made from this shed. Also the temporolabial and supralabial appear to be divided, which suggest not pseudonaja.

Why post then?



Are you arguing against the skin being a Pseudonaja textilis based on anal and sub-caudal scales?
Whilst your statement is essentially correct there are exceptions to this rule i.e in P. textilis subcaudals "all paired (rarely several anterior subcaudals single)."*
Thus I don't think that subcaudals can be used to reliably confirm or exclude either species in this case. Even though Cogger makes a distinction between the two genera in his key based on this feature i.e "usually all subcaudals divided or at most a few anterior ones undivided"* for Pseudonaja. And "usually at least anterior 20% of subcaudals undivided, remainder divided"* for Pseudechis.

 

[Bushman]

Pseudonaja textilis

I can confirm that the snake was a Pseudonaja textilis.
Examination of the slough determined this beyond doubt.
For those interested, all of the sub-caudals are paired apart from the first few.
The nasal scale is in broad contact with the preocular, and the frontal shield is twice as long as it is broad.
All these features indicate Pseudonaja textilis.

The mid-body scales were in 17 rows and the anal was divided, which is the same for both species.

No, i'm saying why i don't think an accurate ID can be made from this shed. Also the temporolabial and supralabial appear to be divided, which suggest not pseudonaja.

Gordo, what is "temporolabial"? I've never heard of this (scale?).

 

[TheCheshireCat]

I'm sure he meant Temporal Scales.

 

[dizyben]

I can confirm that the snake was a Pseudonaja textilis.
Examination of the slough determined this beyond doubt.
For those interested, all of the sub-caudals are paired apart from the first few.
The nasal scale is in broad contact with the preocular, and the frontal shield is twice as long as it is broad.
All these features indicate Pseudonaja textilis.

The mid-body scales were in 17 rows and the anal was divided, which is the same for both species.


Gordo, what is "temporolabial"? I've never heard of this (scale?).

Thanks for identifying the skin Bushman. I appreciate your expertise

 

[$NaKe PiMp]

I can confirm that the snake was a Pseudonaja textilis.
Examination of the slough determined this beyond doubt.
For those interested, all of the sub-caudals are paired apart from the first few.
The nasal scale is in broad contact with the preocular, and the frontal shield is twice as long as it is broad.
All these features indicate Pseudonaja textilis.

The mid-body scales were in 17 rows and the anal was divided, which is the same for both species.


Gordo, what is "temporolabial"? I've never heard of this (scale?).

hey bushman
Temporolabial scale is a large lower temporal scale,which is present on some elapids but not on Pseudonaja apparently.


good id bushman,pictures of skins make it harder than actually examining the real thing, and the confusion between Pseudechis porphyriacus and Pseudonaja textilis is

At first glance they both have 17 scales mid body
both have divided anal scale
Black snakes first few subcaudals are single then rest are divided
While browns subcaudals are usually all divided somtimes the first few are single

ive noticed the dark pigment of Black Snakes is usally notacible and retained in the sloughed skin acoss head and back

heres a picture i took of Pseudechis porphyriacus head scalation and you can see what Bushman was explaining about the Frontal scale which is different to Pseudonaja

 

[Red_LaCN]

Why post then?

I post as i am interested myself and when scrolling thru the latest posts i can see which threads i have replied in,so i know which to check back on. As stated,i was interested in how others determine a snake species from a skin.

 

[$NaKe PiMp]

thats good Red_LaCN we all like to learn,and a good online discussion usally helps point us in the right direction,while arguments that erupt usually dont lol

knowing scalation is vital to correctly id,and theres many factors that can confuse it.

 

[Bluetongue1]

I stayed out of this one for the very reasons $nake PiMp mentioned – variation with each species means that they can overlap in terms of body scalation.

I used to have some diagrams of the head scales on a range of elapids but unfortunately it got lost some years ago. I am yet to find something on the net to fill the void. It was line drawings from above, side on and in front. If anyone can point me in the direction of something similar, I would be most appreciative.

Blue