a pic of my favouite little sydney adder
Acanthophis taxonomy is richly debated and as yet, there are no definitive answers as to which species are valid and which are not. The only two that are considered "guaranteed" are Acanthophis pyrrhus and Acanthophis wellsi. Of course, both Acanthophis antarcticus and Acanthophis praelongus are valid, but where they begin and where they end is hotly debated, especially throughout the top end (all southern Adders from ~Townsville through to Perth, inland to around Windorah are accepted as A.antarcticus). In a paper published about 8 years ago, it is suggested that A.praelongus is restricted to FNQ, and the NT (and northern WA/NW QLD) Acanthophis are made up of A.rugosus and A.hawkei. One day someone will invest the time and energy into finally working out which species are valid and which aren't!
Jonno can you tell us how to tell praelongus and antarcticus apart? About the only species that i can't name from looking.
A.praelongus are supposed to have more keeled scales but that's not very helpful when you look at the extremes of the ranges of these "species". The former curator of herpetology, John Coventry, once said to me that he doubted that they were valid species, but merely geographic variants. Specimens from different parts of their range and even different habitats from close localities can look very different. The death adders are a highly variable group that may or may not be represented by many more recognised species...or they may just be a variable species that occupies lots of different habitats. I'll wait until a proper scientific review is done by a recognised taxonomist before I'll be recognising any more Australian species other than antarcticus, praelongus, pyrrhus and wellsi. That doesn't mean there aren't others - I'd just like to see the science and not shonky amateur taxonomy.
Enter your email address to join: