 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 |
News & Events:
|
Posted by Patrick Alexander on January 13, 2001 at 21:55:50:
In Reply to: Re: leucistic spiloides posted by dg on January 13, 2001 at 20:43:51:
: : As I recall, Sacha Korell was the one that had pictures of it. It was noticably different from a leucistic Texas rat, as it lacked any of the bug-eyed-ness that's present to some extent in all of the leucistic Texas rats that I've seen pics of. The eyes also seemed more greyish than bluish.
: Well then, if that's the case what I thought was a leucistic Tx rat must in fact be a leucistic grey rat!!!! (see pic) WOOOO HOOO!!! And all of these years I have been selling them as lindheimeri...
Ah, but I wasn't saying that the non-bug-eyed-ness established non-Texas-rat-ness. But it does make it more likely, compared to finding a snake in the wild that looks more like the `typical' leucistic Texas rat.
: :I'm guessing that you'd know it was spiloides from the range...
: So according to your logic, if I catch a leucistic rat snake in New York City it has to be a black rat? (since this would be outside of lindheimeri's range) Just because a snake is found in the wild does not mean it originated there.
But, then, there's a large difference between finding a snake in New York City, and finding one out in the countryside in, say, Virginia. If it wasn't caught near a city, I'd say it probably wasn't an escapee, especially given that Texas rats aren't particularly popular as pets, and thus seem less likely to be found as escapees.
: Sorry Patrick, but I don't think your criteria pass the test.
Well, most of my criteria in this case is that, from what I've seen, Mr. Korell seems to know what he's talking about. Don't worry, I wasn't claiming to have `proof' anyways. :)
Patrick Alexander
