Elaphe or Pantherophis

[Colin Vestrand]

Corn snakes, Fox snakes and American rat snakes are technically classified as being of the genera Pantherophis, formerly Elaphe... does anyone actually use this classification in the US though?

i know it was a Russian herpetologist who started this whole thing, but i own a Korean rat snake and i gotta say the scalation, behavior, care, and overall look of the snake is exactly the same as our American Elaphe. i can't seem to find the original paper on this, or the revised version from 2007.

does anyone have more info or maybe just some thoughts on this?

[Skiploder]

Corn snakes, Fox snakes and American rat snakes are technically classified as being of the genera Pantherophis, formerly Elaphe... does anyone actually use this classification in the US though?

i know it was a Russian herpetologist who started this whole thing, but i own a Korean rat snake and i gotta say the scalation, behavior, care, and overall look of the snake is exactly the same as our American Elaphe. i can't seem to find the original paper on this, or the revised version from 2007.

does anyone have more info or maybe just some thoughts on this?

http://www.cnah.org/detail.asp?id=121

Maybe pituophis now? I'm not sure that the original reclassification was formally approved by the ICZN.

I always thought that the original reclassification was hotly debated because it was based on mtDNA and not nDNA.

[Colin Vestrand]

ha! well that's first i've heard that... sounds pretty far fetched. bull, pine, and gopher snakes are nothing like the rest of Elaphe/Pantherophis to me.
i know the original study was not approved, but a friend of mine had told me that the follow up is taken to be fact now; and since he's a herpetologist and a teacher at a major university i figure he knows what he's talking about.

[stangs13]

Ya! Pantherophis is used now by americans, just look at all the other corn forums out there! They use it. Some still like to use the Elaphe name.

[Skiploder]

ha! well that's first i've heard that... sounds pretty far fetched. bull, pine, and gopher snakes are nothing like the rest of Elaphe/Pantherophis to me.
i know the original study was not approved, but a friend of mine had told me that the follow up is taken to be fact now; and since he's a herpetologist and a teacher at a major university i figure he knows what he's talking about.

I've PM'd you with original paper.....

Colin, I think the problem with the original study (other than the controversy with the DNA testing) is that it highlights an unresolved philosophical argument between cladists and more traditional taxonomists. It ultimately comes down to how you define paraphyletic - the cladists have been dismantling paraphyletic taxa and the traditionalists argue that Reptilia is monophyletic.

In other words - I think the split is due more in part to philosophical differences between two camps of taxonomists than any hard difference is genetics or morphology. Is Elaphe an unnatural polyphyletic assemblage of species? I don't think so, but apparently, people ultimately responsible for the official re-classification see the argument differently.

I have a feeling we're going to see a lot of these changes in the upcoming years.

[Colin Vestrand]

that makes sense... we, in the carpet community, are seeing a lot of this as well. personally i'd like to see things as simplified as possible.
thanks again craig!