Elaphe or Pantherophis?

ydnic · 02-07-05, 07:27 PM

Building a webpage and I am really struggling with this one.

I never really cared that they changed the name in 2002 to Pantherophis - I figured speaking person to person who cares. (I`d probably just say corn or rat snake anyways)

Now that I am making a webpage - caresheets, information and what not, I am not sure which to use because I don`t want to come off as though I am not educated in the matter of what I am speaking about.

Any suggestions?

Thanx!

marisa · 02-07-05, 07:31 PM

If I was making a care sheet or a website about them, I'd be using Pantherophis.

It might not be the "commonly" passed around name as most of us are still stuck on Elaphe conversation wise, but it's the proper correct name.

Marisa

ydnic · 02-07-05, 07:33 PM

Yeah thats what I thought as well.

Thanx marisa - got some changes to make!

gonesnakee · 02-08-05, 03:35 PM

I would use the new name, but also refer to the old one as to not confuse newbies etc. You know kind of help the transition take place, Mark

ydnic · 02-08-05, 03:41 PM

Thanx Mark!

Its kind of a confusing thing isn`t it?

I mean I checked out other web pages and it is mainly stated as Elaphe - so I wasn`t sure what To choose. I know which is the right term - but with know the widely excepted term I guess I just needed some opinons.

Thanx for the imput guys!

CamHanna · 02-08-05, 04:08 PM

I'd go with Pantherophis even though it may confuse a few people and is not recognized by the EMBL Database or by the CNAH. Utiger and his buddies (2002) made a pretty good case in my opinion and Rodríguez-Robles & de Jesus-Escobar (1999) support a close relationship between Lampropeltinids (Lampropeltis, Pituophis, Pantherophis, Rhincheilus and others). I'm no expert but I don't see how Pantherophis can fall within one strongly supported group (Lampropeltini) and be placed in a genus with a bizillian snakes don't. Elaphe's been considered polyphyletic for quite a while; eventually people will have to accept the new genera.

RODRIGUEZ-ROBLES and DE JESUS-ESCOBAR (1999)

UTIGER et al. (2002)

Cam

ydnic · 02-08-05, 04:16 PM

What I have read leads me to believe that The CNAH does recognise it -
or at least support it? Is this wrong?

CamHanna · 02-08-05, 04:30 PM

I'm not sure of their official stance (or even if they've taken one). I made my statement based solely on the content of their name list.

rwg · 02-08-05, 04:56 PM

Whatever you use, make sure you have both on every page that refers to either one so that you get hit both ways by search engines. Seems likely that Pantherophis will become common, but we're certainly not there yet.

other Roy