Does there have to be a specific reason? (more)

Posted by WW on April 25, 2002 at 06:24:51:

In Reply to: Re: evolution of the rattle posted by Marty on April 24, 2002 at 06:06:42:

Most pitvipers vibrate their tails when aggressed against - this is a primitive condition for the clade, and the main exceptions to the rule are some arboreal species. On many substrates, this vibration will cause a rustling noise w/o the aid of a rattle.

If this tail vibration has an appreciable aposematic effects (i.e., at least some predators or potential "crushers" take it as a cue to avoid the snake), then any increase in the volume of the noise might lead to increased effectiveness, and thus increased fitness for the bearer (assuming no other costs). Thus, the first snake that retained the terminal tail cone after a shed and made more noise with it would have been at an advantage. This would apply irrespective of habitat, so long as it confers some survival advantage in a confrontational situation.

In other words, under this scenario, the rattle evolved per chance in the common ancestor of Sistrurus and Crotalus because, due to some quirk, a snake that used tail vibration as a defensive strategy evolved a derived character that enhanced its effectiveness. It could have happened anywhere, but did in the common ancestor of Crotalus and Sistrurus. No need to invoke any special circumstances to explain it.

Just an alternative scenario...

Cheers,

Wolfgang

• WW Home

Follow Ups:

• True, true James Can Dyke 04/25/02 (1)
  • Yeah, Lachesis have been hypothesized... Kenny Wray 04/26/02 (0)
• Hey Wolfgang!... Kenny Wray 04/25/02 (1)
  • Hey Kenny, WW 04/26/02 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: Most pitvipers vibrate their tails when aggressed against - this is a primitive condition for the clade, and the main exceptions to the rule are some arboreal species. On many substrates, this vibration will cause a rustling noise w/o the aid of a rattle. : If this tail vibration has an appreciable aposematic effects (i.e., at least some predators or potential "crushers" take it as a cue to avoid the snake), then any increase in the volume of the noise might lead to increased effectiveness, and thus increased fitness for the bearer (assuming no other costs). Thus, the first snake that retained the terminal tail cone after a shed and made more noise with it would have been at an advantage. This would apply irrespective of habitat, so long as it confers some survival advantage in a confrontational situation. : In other words, under this scenario, the rattle evolved per chance in the common ancestor of Sistrurus and Crotalus because, due to some quirk, a snake that used tail vibration as a defensive strategy evolved a derived character that enhanced its effectiveness. It could have happened anywhere, but did in the common ancestor of Crotalus and Sistrurus. No need to invoke any special circumstances to explain it. : Just an alternative scenario... : Cheers, : Wolfgang

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

---

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Crotalidae Forum ]

KINGSNAKE.COM Enjoy all our content free of charge with a user account that gives you full access to every feature. For added visibility, paid options are available - post in our Classifieds, showcase your business with Banner Ads or a Directory listing, promote reptile events, and more. Quick Links Home Advertise Classifieds Lost Password Your Account Community Journals Events Featured Articles Forums Photo Gallery Legal & Safety Terms of Service Classified TOS Age Verification Business Verification Vendor Complaint Support Banner Ad Help Classified Help Classified Tips Contact Us Forum Help Register for free ✓ Sign up! Kingsnake.com ® is a registered trademark © 1997-