• In case most of you have not noticed, I made changes to the donation amounts as well as the durations for all of the paid membership levels. Things are winding down here, and this seems to be the most prudent way to deal with the "end of life" period of this site.

    Contributor level members - $10 per 30 days
    Sponsors - Eliminated
    Benefactor level members - $25 per 30 days
    Endowment level members - $50 per 30 days

    Account Upgrades Page
  • Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

Rosy Boa Taxonomy

F

Flatfish1

Member
Joined
May 29, 2019
Messages
85
Reaction score
1
Points
8
Location
Julian, CA
What is the latest accepted taxonomy of Rosy Boas? I only ask this because I have a new Rosy that I caught in Ramona, CA, and I like to label them on the enclosure with a photo and the common name and scientific name. I labeled her a Coastal Rosy Boa, Lichanura Trivirgata Roseofusca. But now I'm finding out that may be older classification - that all rosies should now be classified only as Lichanura Orcutti. So what do the experts think? Lichanura trivirgata, with two subspecies (Some even say four subspecies), or Lichanura Orcutti to cover them all?
 
To the best of my understanding, it is neither. Lichanura orcutti covers the coastal and desert rosy boas, but subspecies are no longer recognized. Mexican and Baja rosies are still trivirgata. Your animal would be Lichanura orcutti, no subspecies.
 
Correct, Elena. Wayne, bear in mind that many hobbyists are very resistant to accepting this new nomenclature; I see their point, since much useful information is lost (though much more is gained, of course) with the change. (A very similar situation recently occurred in the Lampropeltis triangulum complex).

I believe this is the paper that establishes this taxonomy:

Wood, et al. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 46 (2008) 484–502

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&...x0b2RyZWVkZXJzbGFifGd4OjNhN2ZlMDMwNWMyZDZiNmE
 
Nice to have a scientific paper for a little light reading on a Friday afternoon! Thanks. So my girl is Orcutti. Now I can correct my label and feel like I know what I'm talking about! Apart from locality descriptions, do you think it might still be helpful to use words like "Coastal" and "Desert" as part of the common names for Lichanura Orcutti?
 
Flatfish1 said:
Apart from locality descriptions, do you think it might still be helpful to use words like "Coastal" and "Desert" as part of the common names for Lichanura Orcutti?
Click to expand...

I think so.

Nitpicking: Lichanura orcutti (no caps on the specific epithet). Gonna make a label, make it perfect. :)
 
Back
Top