 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Contact Sales! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by Kingmilk on September 18, 2002 at 22:39:39:
In Reply to: ADDENDUM to above post posted by sbogill on September 18, 2002 at 22:17:52:
Thanks S.B.;
I agree with you one hundred percent. Scale count is essential and the dna tests compared to other Jefferson county stock is essential. Without either of those there is no proof. I would caution you though on the poosibility of pattern and color mutation. What you may not be taking into account is the recent geological history and thus too the evolutionary history of the Elaphe obseleta in Kentucky, and the rest of the eastern US. Only about ten thousand ya, as the last ice age ended were Elaphe again able to enter Ky. Before then, throughout the Wisconsanin glaciation, all of the Elaphe were concentrated in the deep south, from Mid Tenn to Ngeorgia, southward. At this time all the supspecies of the eastern US were much more concentrated with much more intergradation. When they moved out into new land following the wisconsanin glaciation, they took many genes with them. Obsoeta are very variable across their range, and the striping is a normal pattern in obseleta. The Ky obseleta very easily can be carrying recessive genes or modifiers which can reemerge later to look like a "new morph" when in fact it is not. Striping is also linked to lightening of pattern, so these two genes could even be linked on the same loci. From a genetics and geological aspects, that striped snake is really not so "far" out there. It is quite to be expected that such morphs would arise. The blotched snake is even more typical of Kentucky patterning, IMHO, due to the reds and yellow which are visible in the pattern and is typical of many obseleta seen in Ky.
Now, do I think he should call them a locality? No. I think for a morph like these it is irrelevant and useless. There is not enough proof to show that. Dna testing would be helpful, but may not be available for some time for this kind of testing. My solution is to give it a pretty name and call it that and let locality go. They are both pretty snakes. Someone will like them regardless of titles and localities. I agree with you that a locality title is a bit much and I would offer that if in the future this person or anyone else finds such a snake, they do their documentation then, and make sure lots of people know about it as it is happening. Again, all is just MHO.
Brian
