Brazilian? Really? - Page 2

Strutter769 · 01-03-12, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngster

ADW: Epicrates2.jpg
Looks legit, says a doctor took the photo and something about copyright so I would think it's real actually.

Nice detective work there, youngster!

**millertime89** · 01-03-12, 09:05 PM

I'm Dr. Kyle Miller

See the similarity?
I'm not buying it guys, not based on one, poor quality picture.

youngster · 01-03-12, 09:14 PM

University of Michigan Museum of Zoology site, good enough?

Strutter769 · 01-03-12, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngster

University of Michigan Museum of Zoology site, good enough?

I dunno, that Miller guy, he a tough one to.convince!

Jk, Kyle!

Snakesitter · 01-03-12, 11:44 PM

Keep in mind they recently redid the epicrates taxonomy, I think we're down to six rainbow subspecies now. That color scheme would be very unusual for a Brazilian. Still a cool image though, real or not.

Strutter769 · 01-04-12, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snakesitter

Keep in mind they recently redid the epicrates taxonomy, I think we're down to six rainbow subspecies now. That color scheme would be very unusual for a Brazilian. Still a cool image though, real or not.

Cliff (or any of our Epicrates officianados) I read something about this change, but don't fully understand it. Can someone maybe explain why it was done and what exactly it means to have fewer subspecies? What does it mean for Epicrates in general and maybe for the hobby or breeding?

CDN_Blood · 01-04-12, 06:46 AM

Having your picture taken in Brazil doesn't make you a Brazilian. The country of Brazil is *huge* and it borders several other countries so there are overlapping territories. Borders are a human thing, they don't apply to animals unless they're defined by geographic features which stop them from travelling elsewhere. Besides, that snake is much too robust to be mixed with a Brazilian - it's more along the lines of the maurus, crassus or assisi proportions.

I wouldn't say this is an intergrade or that the image has been altered. I'd say it's most likely a recognized subspecies of Epicrates, but which exactly is debatable. It's very difficult to find people who really know the currently defined subspecies.

My guess would be something along the lines of Epicrates cenchria polylepis (Central Highland Rainbow), but again, I'm just taking an educated guess and can't say for sure.

KORBIN5895 · 01-04-12, 09:16 AM

Happy 25th Todd!

CDN_Blood · 01-04-12, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

Happy 25th Todd!

That's in July and I don't want to rush the reminder of how old I'm getting, but thanks Kevin :P

KORBIN5895 · 01-04-12, 10:59 AM

You need to change your signature then. Just saying.

marvelfreak · 01-04-12, 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strutter769

Cliff (or any of our Epicrates officianados) I read something about this change, but don't fully understand it. Can someone maybe explain why it was done and what exactly it means to have fewer subspecies? What does it mean for Epicrates in general and maybe for the hobby or breeding?

I do know they put Peruvian and Brazilians together as one. The why and what other one the combined i don't know.

Strutter769 · 01-04-12, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marvelfreak

I do know they put Peruvian and Brazilians together as one. The why and what other one the combined i don't know.

So Peruvians are now Cenchria Cenchria?

**millertime89** · 01-04-12, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strutter769

So Peruvians are now Cenchria Cenchria?

I didn't know they ever weren't.

back to the original topic...
Epicrates cenchria alvarezi?

from: http://arachnophiliac.info/burrow/ga...akes/index.htm

Strutter769 · 01-04-12, 01:40 PM

Wow. Beautiful! The dorsal markings almost look like a leopard phase, or is that only with c. cenchria?

Snakesitter · 01-04-12, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strutter769

Cliff (or any of our Epicrates officianados) I read something about this change, but don't fully understand it. Can someone maybe explain why it was done and what exactly it means to have fewer subspecies? What does it mean for Epicrates in general and maybe for the hobby or breeding?

A few years back, scientists studied the differences between the old subspecies using a more modern set of techniques, and from these determined some of the subspecies were so similar they did not qualify as fully separate groups after all.

The study, which was authored by Paulo Passos and Ronaldo Fernandes in 2008, narrowed the existing epicrates cenchria complex from nine to five subspecies, as follows:

E. c. cenchria (“Brazilian”)
--(now includes) E. c. gaigei (“Peruvian”)
--(now includes) E. c. hygrophilus (“Espirito Santo”)

E. c. crassus (“Paraguayan”)
--(now includes) E. c. polylepis (“Central highland”)

E. c. maurus (“Colombian”)
--(now includes) E. c. barbouri (“Marajo Island”)

E. c. alvarezi (“Argentine”)

E. c. assisi (“Caatinga”)

For those interested in reading it, the paper is called “Revision of the Epicrates Cenchria Complex (Serpentes: Boidae),” and lays out their methodology fairly clearly...if slowly.

As for what it means....I view this, as with all matters of classification, as an unsettled issue. I would still avoid creating intergrades between any of the former subspecies, because for all we know someone else will reverse these findings in another few years. For example, Jeff Clark, an experienced US rainbow breeder, is maintaining his Peruvian snakes as a separate "locality" to preserve their look.

I hope this helps answer your question!