A recent Ray Hoser piece describes two new California Rattlesnakes
http://www.smuggled.com/issue-33-pages-34-41.pdf
I have seen hundreds of oreganus in the central Coast Ranges, and his new species "funki", as defined, is subsumed in the normal range of variation in coastal oreganus by my recollection.
I have only seen a couple dozen helleri in the field, but the new form "idlewildi" seems also to be non-diagnoseable as I have seen coastal scrub snakes that match his description.
The range of ontogenetic and intrapopulational variation, as well as existence of habitat morphs in Pacific Rattlers seem to be well beyond Hoser's knowledge of these snakes, and think that they are instant synonyms.
Jeff
"New" California rattlesnakes
Moderator: Scott Waters
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
It's April 1st, right?Jeff wrote:A recent Ray Hoser piece describes two new California Rattlesnakes
http://www.smuggled.com/issue-33-pages-34-41.pdf
I have seen hundreds of oreganus in the central Coast Ranges, and his new species "funki", as defined, is subsumed in the normal range of variation in coastal oreganus by my recollection.
I have only seen a couple dozen helleri in the field, but the new form "idlewildi" seems also to be non-diagnoseable as I have seen coastal scrub snakes that match his description.
The range of ontogenetic and intrapopulational variation, as well as existence of habitat morphs in Pacific Rattlers seem to be well beyond Hoser's knowledge of these snakes, and think that they are instant synonyms.
Jeff
Just read the diagnosis for C. funki and his paper needs some serious peer review.
Given how variable the patterns are and the fact that both patterns occur in the exact same range, just seems to be a weak case IMHO for species elevation from pattern morph. Am I not seeing enough in the description?...it is readily distinguished from that species by the presence of a distinct whiteish-yellow band
or stripe running across the head between eyes and distinct black borders of the darker brown dorsal body blotches, versus
neither in C. oreganus, or at best only indistinct for one or other or both traits.
- Jeroen Speybroeck
- Posts: 826
- Joined: June 29th, 2011, 1:56 am
- Location: Belgium
- Contact:
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
Please. Ignore. Hoser.
- Fieldnotes
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:12 pm
- Location: Anaheim, California
- Contact:
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
The more I research the Idyllwild rattlers, the more i'm intrigued — http://blogs.thatpetplace.com/thatrepti ... 7zuDrQvui5
- Chad M. Lane
- Posts: 567
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:40 pm
- Location: Manteca, CA
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
Bwahaha! < The only reply to Hoser's work.
Cheers,
Chad
Cheers,
Chad
- Fieldnotes
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:12 pm
- Location: Anaheim, California
- Contact:
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
From Idyllwild, Riverside County — Californiaherps.com
If others have pictures of 'Crotalus h. idyllwildi' from Idyllwild or San Jacinto Mtns please post.
- John Koerner
- Posts: 20
- Joined: April 17th, 2015, 9:55 pm
- Location: Green Valley, AZ
- Contact:
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
From the National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24463169
This seems to be a legit and fascinating topic.
However, I think there is a difference between "venom variation within a species" ... and it somehow being a different species altogether.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24463169
This seems to be a legit and fascinating topic.
However, I think there is a difference between "venom variation within a species" ... and it somehow being a different species altogether.
- Steve Bledsoe
- Posts: 1809
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:14 am
- Location: San Clemente, CA www.swfieldherp.com
- Contact:
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
Variations in venom components within the same rattlesnake species is nothing new. Crotalus s. scutulatus is known to have 3 different venom types across it's US range from California to west Texas. It seems ridiculous that a difference like this warrants an elevation of small populations to species status. But then again, the term "species" itself doesn't seem to have much meaning anymore these days.
I'm about ready to dust off my old volumes of Wright & Wright and go back to using Masticophis, Elaphe and Leptotyphlops!
I'm about ready to dust off my old volumes of Wright & Wright and go back to using Masticophis, Elaphe and Leptotyphlops!
-
- Posts: 60
- Joined: February 4th, 2013, 7:43 pm
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
I prefer not to even give this man's name any repeat hits online. He's his own editor, publisher, and reviewer. I think the global consensus on his "publications" is to ignore them for ten years, and when necessary resurrect or describe taxa properly. That way his papers become officially forgotten while scientifically credible sources get the credit they deserve for the work and methodologies they adhere to.
His previous papers on cobras and rattlesnakes were the subject of an email from me to the late Dr. Joseph Collins, and were quickly followed by CNAH rejection of the relevant usages. Not long afterward, a worldwide group of scientists made relevant submissions in Zootaxa and to ICZN regarding the non-publication methods of his work. Things I noted to Dr Collins, and noted in these papers, were that papers did not appear to be properly printed and deposited, and that the "publication" in question was both edited and published by the author, eliminating any real 'peer review' or 'publication'.
His previous papers on cobras and rattlesnakes were the subject of an email from me to the late Dr. Joseph Collins, and were quickly followed by CNAH rejection of the relevant usages. Not long afterward, a worldwide group of scientists made relevant submissions in Zootaxa and to ICZN regarding the non-publication methods of his work. Things I noted to Dr Collins, and noted in these papers, were that papers did not appear to be properly printed and deposited, and that the "publication" in question was both edited and published by the author, eliminating any real 'peer review' or 'publication'.
- Jeroen Speybroeck
- Posts: 826
- Joined: June 29th, 2011, 1:56 am
- Location: Belgium
- Contact:
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
FrogO_Oeyes wrote:I prefer not to even give this man's name any repeat hits online. He's his own editor, publisher, and reviewer. I think the global consensus on his "publications" is to ignore them for ten years, and when necessary resurrect or describe taxa properly. That way his papers become officially forgotten while scientifically credible sources get the credit they deserve for the work and methodologies they adhere to.
His previous papers on cobras and rattlesnakes were the subject of an email from me to the late Dr. Joseph Collins, and were quickly followed by CNAH rejection of the relevant usages. Not long afterward, a worldwide group of scientists made relevant submissions in Zootaxa and to ICZN regarding the non-publication methods of his work. Things I noted to Dr Collins, and noted in these papers, were that papers did not appear to be properly printed and deposited, and that the "publication" in question was both edited and published by the author, eliminating any real 'peer review' or 'publication'.
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
OP and everyone else in this thread are already familiar with Hoser and the controversy that surrounds his work. If a couple of OGs familiar with the locality in question want to talk about a Hoser topic, that's their call. It comes across as petty to say that anything attached to Hoser shouldn't be discussed. Y'all are taking the would-be herpetologist, that is Hoser, too seriously. And frankly, taking yourselves too seriously.
Derek
Derek
- Jeroen Speybroeck
- Posts: 826
- Joined: June 29th, 2011, 1:56 am
- Location: Belgium
- Contact:
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
Jeroen Speybroeck wrote:.
- Jeroen Speybroeck
- Posts: 826
- Joined: June 29th, 2011, 1:56 am
- Location: Belgium
- Contact:
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
Spending time to discuss if Hoser's ravings hold any truth is taking him too seriously. Assuming that I would think to be able to have a say in what people may or may not discuss around here is taking me too seriously.
Re: "New" California rattlesnakes
Looking at my post, now, I can see that I used too harsh of a tone. I apologize for that.
Derek
Derek