ELAPIDS and Pythond question

[Fuscus]

I am capable of biting you, breaking your skin with my teeth and putting a small amount of my saliva into your body, which will digest some of your bodily tissues

I humbly request that you don't.
Thanks.

 

[Magpie]

The main reason they are considered "venemous" is that the "saliva" they have is in fact as toxic as the "saliva" produced by things like browns snakes and death adders. They just don't produce much of it or have a very good delivery system.

 

[Sdaji]

The main reason they are considered "venemous" is that the "saliva" they have is in fact as toxic as the "saliva" produced by things like browns snakes and death adders. They just don't produce much of it or have a very good delivery system.

Which is insufficient to count by my definition of venomous. I produce more saliva ("venom") than a tiger snake, it's just that it isn't very toxic and I don't have a good delivery system. Clearly it's a somewhat arbitrary point at which the line must be drawn.

 

[Sdaji]

I humbly request that you don't.
Thanks.

I acknowledge your request and am quite happy to oblige, Fuscy
Although you do look pretty scrumptious :lol:

 

[Magpie]

Clearly it's a somewhat arbitrary point at which the line must be drawn.

So where do you suggest we draw it?
A red bellied black snake won't usually kill an adult human, is it not venemous?
A Portugese man of war has no fangs, is it not venemous?

 

[Sdaji]

So where do you suggest we draw it?
A red bellied black snake won't usually kill an adult human, is it not venemous?
A Portugese man of war has no fangs, is it not venemous?

I am not telling anyone off here, note that I've said very clearly that it's arbitrary, view vary and that's fine.

But as to your question...

lethality and venomous are clearly not synonymous. Lethal to humans is by no means anything to do with the title 'venomous'. I would say that the 'venom' needs to have a significant affect or use, either defensive such as honey bees, which use their venom in a very clear way, purely defensive and often/usually non lethal or offensive, such as snakes killing prey (or both). It doesn't look at all like these snakes use their "venom" as any form of defense, and it doesn't look like they use it to kill their prey either, since it is swallowed alive. If you injected human stomach acid into someone's vein it would do a lot of damage, but there is no delivery system for this to naturally occur and thus we aren't considered venomous for having such nasty stuff inside our body.

Many people have suggested that python bites bleed much more than would be expected, due to anticoagulants in the saliva. Does this make it count as venom? If a common tree snake is venomous I'd say that pythons quite likely are as well.

This controversy has actually been argued in regard to the posibility of some mammals being venomous, especially shrews.

 

[ashley_morris22]

thanks everyone, now i know.

 

[Fuscus]

There is a term regarding bites which may clear the air ( or muddy the water )
"Of no medical consequence"

 

[africancichlidau]

This controversy has actually been argued in regard to the posibility of some mammals being venomous, especially shrews.

I like Shrews, they hold all my enclosures together, Hic!

 

[Tommo]

y do u want the money to go up? Even tho they r worth the money it just means that u r gonna pay more. lol smart thinkin tommo

lol, im not complaining about the price, i just think that even if they did cost more then i would still get them...wait a sec...stupid government :evil:

 

[africancichlidau]

Tommo, do something about your avatar, I'm starting to fancy you!!

 

[craig23]

I find it hard to belive that GTS can have large venom glands and potent venom, and Dr Fry is the only one to have discovered and announce this fact in the very recent past.
Surly plenty of australian biologists/scienists/ herpetologists have already looked at such basic anatomy before of one of our most common snakes.

 

[craig23]

Venom is not just saliva, and venom glands are not just saliva glands. They are highly modified. Venom consists of over 90% protiens compared to less than half this for saliva, and the key difference between venom and saliva is that some protiens in venoms are TOXIC. yes human saliva contains enzymes that can digest etc, however it does not contain toxic protiens aimed at immobilising or killing prey.

 

[Fuscus]

While the Dendrelaphis species, like virtually all other 'colubrids', are venomous, the venom gland for a 2 meter specimen would be around 25 millimeters long. The venom drop for drop is as toxic as comparative elapid venoms, however the quantity delivered is small (about a milligram or less) and the venom delivery not hugely efficient. They can deliver enough to help settle down a frog but not enough to cause symptoms in a human. Pop open the mouth of a roadkill or live one and you'll see some enlarge teeth in the back. Not as big as in Boiga but they are there

from http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=683&sid=5977795428660e60f8994d36175d5d25 I'm assuming VenomDoc is Dr Fry.

 

[Sdaji]

Venom is not just saliva, and venom glands are not just saliva glands. They are highly modified. Venom consists of over 90% protiens compared to less than half this for saliva, and the key difference between venom and saliva is that some protiens in venoms are TOXIC. yes human saliva contains enzymes that can digest etc, however it does not contain toxic protiens aimed at immobilising or killing prey

It is accepted that snake venom is modified saliva and venom glands are modified salivary glands. (other venoms are very different). Not all venom is designed to immobilise or kill. What is your definition of toxic??? You can drink snake venom, it won't kill you, but inject the same stuff into your vein and you'll have very little time (a few seconds in some cases) to say goodbye to any of your friends who are present. The enzymes in venom destroy tissues and have other affects such anticoagulant properties, but these also occur in unanimously considered "non venomous" species, so the presence of such in the snakes in question doesn't mean all that much.

 

[ackie]

what r u getting at sdaji?
Even tho ther presence of venom doesn't mean much the fact is that these r still venomous snakes, thats all i was pointing out when i first mentioned venomous colubrids in this thread.

 

[Sdaji]

what r u getting at sdaji?
Even tho ther presence of venom doesn't mean much the fact is that these r still venomous snakes, thats all i was pointing out when i first mentioned venomous colubrids in this thread.

I am getting at these snakes not being "effectively" venomous and so I do not consider them as such, except in the strict sense which includes anything with saliva. I'm not trying to fight with anyone and as I've said from the start (actually, for many months) it's open to opinion and each to their own, but posessing a toxin which could be useful if you had delivery mechanisms which you do not and thus not using it doesn't count as venonomous in my opinion, and in fact would include toxic plants, and in the strictest sense pretty much any living thing.

For me to consider something venomous it has to have and use venom in a more than negligible way.

I'd actually be interested in finding out how the "toxic as elapid venom" measure was done, as comparing colubrid to elapid venom is like comparing apples and oranges.

 

[Fuscus]

I'd actually be interested in finding out how the "toxic as elapid venom" measure was done, as comparing colubrid to elapid venom is like comparing apples and oranges.

Ask him - there is a contact page at http://www.venomdoc.com/

 

[ackie]

the "toxic as an elapid" was done by extracting toxins from colubrid venom and toxins from elapid venom (in this case cobra) and comparing the two.