Talk:Central African rock python: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 08:57, 23 December 2013

Latest revision as of 22:38, 11 July 2025

(42 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{Talk header}}

{{AARTalk|class=B|importance=high}}

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1=

{{WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles|importance=high}}

{{WikiProject Anthropology|oral-tradition=yes

}}

}}

{{GLAMARKive}}

{{old move|date=5 June 2022|from=African rock python|destination=Central African rock python|result=moved|link=Special:Permalink/1091925750#Requested move 5 June 2022}}

{{Talkheader}}

== Natalensis is now a species on its own ==

== "Endangered" in Africa, "nuisance" in North America ==

Please update.

While the rock python has an "endangered" status in Africa, it is considered a major nuisance in Florida (along with the Burmese python, the ball python, the Nile monitor, and the green iguana) as a result of having established colonies. [[Special:Contributions/147.70.242.54|147.70.242.54]] ([[User talk:147.70.242.54|talk]]) 19:33, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Python natalensis is now a subspecies on its own. And seperated from sebae.

== Arkive content validation ==

https://m.facebook.com/groups/1643835265678127?view=permalink&id=1788498164545169

The armive article which text was taken from was authenticated (28/04/09) by Dr. Luca Luiselli, Senior Researcher in Ecology, Institute Demetra, Rome, Italy. http://www.intecol.net/pages/002_personal.php?id=lucamlu

TCO (reviews needed) 00:23, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

http://reptile-database.reptarium.cz/species?genus=Python&species=natalensis&search_param=%28%28taxon%3D%27pythonidae%27%29%29

== Merge with Natal subspecies? ==

AWDF 09:39, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

There is a huge overlap and commonality of the two info on the two subspecies. I found [[Painted turtle]] covering all four subspecies, in the same situation, to work much better together as one and it is now Featured. Would like to merge the two articles. Also, there was an initial structure of covering both the species as a whole and one of the two subspecies in this article (but even that is violated). Would just clean things up to put all together. We can do redirects from the subspecies names to the species article. They really are very similar and have been studied often as one entity.[[user:TCO|TCO]] ([[User:TCO#Reviews needed|reviews needed]]) 18:39, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

https://m.facebook.com/groups/1643835265678127?view=permalink&id=1788498164545169

== commonest common name? ==

Is Natal rock python more common or Southern African rock python?

The previous classification was changed in 1999. So this wikipedia page needs an update.

Google shows "Southern African rock python" three times more than "Natal rock python". We'll mention both, but I want to use SARP as most common. Also SARP was how was used in our ARkive donation, which is majority of text now.[[user:TCO|TCO]] ([[User:TCO#Reviews needed|reviews needed]]) 18:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

: Most of the sources I've seen use Southern African rock python. [[User:Aurous One|Aurous One]] ([[User talk:Aurous One|talk]]) 22:50, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

(Previously) Northern African Rock Python P.sebae sebae Southern African Rock Python P.sebae natalensis

==26JUL status==

(After 1999) as classified by cites African Rock Python Python sebae

Done integrating ARKive content. Up to a B now. Added more text. Cut some old unreffed text. Added a bunch of pics (from us). Merge/deleted the other subspecies (only 1.5 sentences came over). To take it any further would require researching actual references. Think it's better article now than before though.[[user:TCO|TCO]] ([[User:TCO#Reviews needed|reviews needed]]) 23:59, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Southern African Python aka Natal Python Python natalensis

== Improvement needed! ==

Natalensis is lifted to its own species.

''Python natalensis'' is a separate species since 1999, which is supported by almost every herpetologist in recent literature and publications! ''Python natalensis'' shows prominent differences in squamation, pattern, habitat, general behavior, reproduction,... Please give ''Python natalensis'' its own article back! For more information take a look at the reference list of the German wiki for [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nördlicher_Felsenpython ''Python sebae''] and [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Südlicher_Felsenpython ''Python natalensis'']. Thank you and good luck! --[[Special:Contributions/77.57.177.59|77.57.177.59]] ([[User talk:77.57.177.59|talk]]) 19:19, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

:The taxonomy is (still) disputed. Article explains this (and gives both sides). I think we are better showing the traditional taxonomy as the new one has not yet been universally agreed on. And note, the more recent and authorotative sources favor the subspecies, not species labels (check the refs). FYI, the English and French wiki article have always had a subspecies labeling, not full species. Also, Arkive source did as well. The subspecies do intergrade (interbreed) so traditional species concept would consider them same species. In any case, this is discussed in text and only real issue is article naming, etc. Of course, if scientific community every completely agrees on a different taxo, we can change. I doubt it will happen for reasons above.[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 00:53, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi there! I’m glad to here that you try to get more literature about these two pythons! After reading more about them, I’m sure you will change your mind about the subspecies status. I’m not aware of any reputable herpetologist (scientific and NOT popular scientific or herpetocultural stuff), who doubts the species rank for Python natalensis since 1999. Next to the reptile database [[http://reptile-database.reptarium.cz/species?genus=Python&species=natalensis&search_param=%28%28genus%3D%27Python%27%2Cexact%29%28species%3D%27natalensis%27%2Cexact%29%29]] here a small selection of publications that I’m speaking about:

*G. J. Alexander: Thermal Biology of the Southern African Python (Python natalensis): Does temperature limit its distribution? In: R. W. Henderson, R. Powell (Hrsg.): Biology of the Boas and Pythons. Eagle Mountain Publishing Company, Eagle Mountain 2007, ISBN 978-0-9720154-3-1, p. 51–75.

*G. J. Alexander, J. Marais: A Guide to the Reptiles of Southern Africa. Struik Publishers, Cape Town 2007, ISBN 978-1-77007-386-9, p. 61–65.

*S. Spawls, K. Howell, R. Drewes, J. Ashe: A Field Guide to the Reptiles of East Africa. Academic Press 2002, ISBN 0-12-656470-1, p. 305–310.

*B. Lanza, A. Nistri: Somali Boidae (genus Eryx Daudin 1803) and Pythonidae (genus Python Daudin 1803) (Reptilia Serpentes). Tropical Zoology 18, 2005, p. 67-136, here a useful link: [[http://www.megasphera.cz/africanvenomoussnakes/images/Herpetologie%20Afriky/Odborné%20články%20k%20stáhnut%C3%AD/Eryx%20Python%20Somalia.pdf]]

*And even Walls elected them to full species rank a year before Broadley1999 officially did: J. G. Walls: The Living Pythons. T. F. H. Publications 1998, ISBN 0-7938-0467-1, p. 142–146, 166–171

Good luck and thanks for your efforts! --[[Special:Contributions/77.57.177.59|77.57.177.59]] ([[User talk:77.57.177.59|talk]]) 14:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

You can contact also [e-mail] for extra verification AWDF 09:48, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

:OK. Let me research it...[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 17:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

:IUCN now shows [https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/13300572/13300582 "Central African python" (''P. sebae'')] and [https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/13300560/13300564 "Southern African Rock Python" (''P. natalensis'')] as two separate species. So does ITIS. ITIS has marked the subspecies names as invalid and the two species-level names as valid. —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 00:37, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

===Preliminary notes (research in progress)===

== Is this an apex predator? ==

[http://www.itis.gov/servlet/SingleRpt/SingleRpt?search_topic=TSN&search_value=202186 ITIS] has the traditional taxonomy and cites McDiarmid 1999, which seems very well regarded.

I think {{diff2|1081741686||this edit}} is incorrect but I don't know. [[User:Invasive Spices|Invasive Spices]] ([[User talk:Invasive Spices#top|talk]]) 9 April 2022 (UTC)

== Requested move 5 June 2022 ==

CITES (trade treaties) seems to still use the traditional taxonomy (although there is discussion of changing it).

<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->

IUCN does not list python sebae in any fashion (at all).

:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]] after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. ''

The result of the move request was: '''moved.''' Uncontroversial. <small>([[Wikipedia:Requested moves/Closing instructions#Non-admin closure|non-admin closure]])</small> — ''Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung'', ''[[User:Mellohi!|mello]]'''''[[User talk:Mellohi!|hi!]]''' ([[Special:Contributions/Mellohi!|投稿]]) 17:11, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Broadley 1999 is the source of most of the competing species claims (''would like to look at that paper'').

----

* [[:African rock python]] → {{no redirect|Central African rock python}}

Not really finding a killer discussion of taxonomy on the web. Like one that discusses both sides of the question (even if taking a position on which is right). In particular would like to read discussion of the "mixed region" and if the two snakes intergrade (mate).

* [[:Southern rock python]] → {{no redirect|Southern African rock python}}

– or ''{{-r|Python sebae}}'' and ''{{-r|Python natalensis}}''. ITIS and IUCN show these as separate species with the suggested article names as the primary common names. ITIS has marked the subspecies-level names as invalid and the two species-level names as valid. The {{-r|Southern rock python}} article already includes "African" in the boldfaced common name in its opening sentence. —⁠ ⁠[[User:BarrelProof|BarrelProof]] ([[User talk:BarrelProof|talk]]) 00:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

: '''Support'''. I don't see Central African rock python at ITIS, only at the IUCN. Reptile database uses Southern African rock python but not Central African rock python. However, before the species split, the two subspecies were commonly known as the Southern and Central African rock python (e.g. [https://africawildtrails.com/danger-zone-the-african-rock-python/ here], [https://www.petmd.com/reptile/species/african-rock-python here] and [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Central+African+rock+python%22&client=firefox-b-d&channel=trow5&sxsrf=ALiCzsYoR-2AxCoATe-71kRH1aVwrleGtA%3A1654580983574&ei=9-aeYurJIsehgQbJy7moDw&ved=0ahUKEwiqoZy-0pr4AhXHUMAKHcllDvUQ4dUDCA0&uact=5&oq=%22Central+African+rock+python%22&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyBggAEB4QFjoHCAAQRxCwAzoKCAAQRxCwAxDJAzoECCMQJzoFCC4QgARKBAhBGABKBAhGGABQkwdYvRZgphxoAXABeACAAW6IAacCkgEDMS4ymAEAoAEByAEIwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz others]), so the IUCN is just using the common names of the subspecies for the same snakes at species level in accord with the revised taxonomy. I see know reason not to follow the IUCN. —&nbsp;<span style="font-family:Arial;background:#d6ffe6;border:solid 1px;border-radius:5px;box-shadow:darkcyan 0px 1px 1px;">&nbsp;[[User:Jts1882|Jts1882]]&nbsp;&#124;[[User talk:Jts1882|&nbsp;talk]]&nbsp;</span> 06:01, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.</div><!-- from [[Template:Archive bottom]] -->

</div><div style="clear:both;"></div>

{{done}} [[User:DrVogel|Dr. Vogel]] ([[User talk:DrVogel|talk]]) 17:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

==Removed items==

Looking at Google scholar, it seems that papers are published in the 2000s using both species and subspecies descriptions. Actually not really that much activity going on of any sort with python sebae. Definitely a lot less than [[Chrysemys picta]], which had thousands of papers and a similar taxonomy debate.

Removed these items, as they will refer to ''Python natalensis'', not ''Python sebae'', or are uncertain:

*[[:File:Python's picnic - Flickr - mango atchar.jpg|thumb|right|Constricting a pregnant goat]] [in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe]

A subjective Google web (in US) searching around for top pages (I looked at first screens, did not quantify) seemed to show more use of subspecies than species. Although certainly some on each side. And Wiki serves as a source for a lot of hobbyist sites, so this is ambiguous.

*[[:File:Adult Female Python sebae 1.33aspect.jpg|thumb|right|Captive female]] - no provenance, so uncertain (is it identifiable?)

* In 1979 in [[Waterberg District Municipality|Waterberg District]], Limpopo Province (then Northern Transvaal), South Africa, a {{cvt|4.5|m|ft}} Central African rock python killed a 13-year-old boy.<ref name=ark9/> The victim died due to suffocation and internal injuries; his body was released by the python after intervention by an adult man some 20 minutes after the attack began.<ref name=ark9/> The victim's head was covered in saliva, and scientists thought "it could have easily succeeded in swallowing" the {{cvt|1.3|m|ft}}, {{Convert|45|kg}} boy had it not been interrupted.<ref name=ark9/>

Number of web pages recalled gave 22,000 for "python sebae natelensis" and 21,000 for "python natalensis". So that's a wash...

* In 2002 near [[Durban]], South Africa, a 10-year-old boy was reportedly swallowed by a Central African rock python over a three-hour period, as seven other children stayed hidden in a mango tree.<ref name=flanagan/><ref name=ayoob>{{ cite news | title=Boy quiet as snake swallows him | date=23 November 2002 | work=News24 | publisher=24.com | last=Ayoob | first=Zoobair | url=http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Boy-quiet-as-snake-swallows-him-20021123 }}</ref> The animal was not captured and the story could not be verified, although detailed descriptions of the snake's markings and predation technique were reported to have seemed credible to a local snake park operator.<ref name=flanagan>{{cite news | title=Hunt for giant snake that ate 10-year-old Durban boy whole | last=Flanagan | first=Jane | ___location=Johannesburg | date=24 November 2002 | work=The Telegraph | publisher=Telegraph Media Group Limited | url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/southafrica/1414171/Hunt-for-giant-snake-that-ate-10-year-old-Durban-boy-whole.html }}</ref>

There is a large pythonidae taxo review from 2010 (by a Zherman {{=)|wink}}) that has the species usage. (but it does not really discuss pro and con...I trust papers more even if they take a position if they show both sides and give a reason for why they take a position...)

The attacks by pet pythons at various locations also need to be checked for identification, particularly if they preceed widespread knowledge of there being two species of rock pythons. - [[User:MPF|MPF]] ([[User talk:MPF|talk]]) 22:37, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Not crazy about the reptile database as a source.

I have not gotten the books mentioned yet or the one paper on distribution of southern one.

I also looked at all our en-Wiki lists and the like (list of pythons) and they all have the traditional taxonomy. And the en-Wiki article has always had natalensis as subspecies (we did have a separate article...but it was always as the subspecies...never species).

At the end of the day, it is not up to us to decide if Broadley is right/wrong, but to reflect consensus of what is used in science (and even in trade and legislation). I would not want us to be jumping on a new fashion...or stuck behind if really the whole World has moved on. I'm leaning to staying with the article as is, mostly based on ITIS and the usage in English language web. In any case, we do give both sides (in the article) and can probably expand the discussion. The only issue is sort of a Wiki one of what our default is for the article naming.

[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 14:58, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

:The Somali paper is quite nice in giving an overview of Sebae in general (and regardless of taxo issue). Good reference for a lot of behavior and the Roman tilings and all that. It was reviewed by Broadley and does use his 1999 elevation of the subspecies. Does not add any more on the argument and in Somalia there are no natalensis, so does not discuss co-occurence. Definitely an example of continuing the Broadley usage. It does discuss the issue of a lot of the 20th century literature using the single species system, so it becomes difficult looking at old literature on the African rock python to know which is reffered to.[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 16:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

:This is from the 2010 German python taxo paper in zookeys (in context of a different discussion): "The resurrection of the genus Heleionomus for Python sebae and Python natalensis is unwarranted because the actual status of natalensis and sebae has not been fully resolved and, furthermore, separation from Python would compromise monophyly of the genus Python." (note, though, they do seem to advocate natalensis elevation. just saying they also say not really resolved.)[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 16:48, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

:I have a research request in to get the Broadley 1999 paper.[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 17:29, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

:emailed McDiarmid and Broadley (a 2006 email, I could find).[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 18:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

==Cleaning up some old issues==

Interesting to see degredations creep in, if I'm away for a while. Several good faith, but negative adds were made. There were some fine ones as well. Just...easy to see cruft or mistakes come in as well.

1. The "largest ever" keeps getting added as a found in Florida claim. But I researched this and what actually happened is the largest specimen IN FLORIDA, was found in the Everglades. See: [http://www.nbc-2.com/Global/story.asp?S=12226516]. So cutting this false factoid that keeps coming in. (update, added it to the invasive species section).

2. Some comments on snake unlikelihood of attacking humans modified (we had already covered this aspect, new text was not new sourced). Discuss if needed.

[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 01:27, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

3. (to do) make tables for the gallery view workarounds.

Removed inclusion of well documented urban myths of African rocks eating people. There has never been a confirmed report of a human being consumed by an African rock, ever. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.0.131.236|24.0.131.236]] ([[User talk:24.0.131.236|talk]]) 15:07, 6 August 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Removed the mention of the idiotic theory being floated that an African rock killed two boys in Canada recently. It's not only not verified, it's a ridiculous theory that denies facts. The autopsy report will conclude this definitely. Such speculation has no place in a wiki article. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/24.0.131.236|24.0.131.236]] ([[User talk:24.0.131.236|talk]]) 15:10, 6 August 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== Germans have an FA ==

Way more sources than we have, many of them in English. Lot of stuff on culture as well. I need to read through it all. Can get by in German, but not fluent. [[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 03:29, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

== python blues ==

Just looked at the history of this article. We had an IP delete a sentence about evolution and also lost content description. And then a followup gnome merged the rump para into the next para. So you can't even tell what left.

Also we got overlinking with, for example, subspecies linked twice in a few first sentences. And a "blue next to blue" confusing link (genus and python). (Note the python genus article would be the place where the word genus is linked if there is a tension.)

[[User:TCO|TCO]] ([[User talk:TCO|talk]]) 00:45, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

== Attacks on humans ==

The [[African_rock_python#Attacks|page says]] that :

: <i>There has never been a verified report of a human being consumed</i>.

but [[2013 New Brunswick python attack]] says otherwise.

Which is the correct version? X[[User:Ottawahitech|Ottawahitech]] ([[User talk:Ottawahitech|talk]]) 20:03, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

On page 27 of "Boas and Pythons of the World" by herpetologist Mark O'Shea, the author mentions an incident in Uganda in 1951 where an African Rock Python swallowed a 13 year old, subsequently regurgitating the victim. Neither of the children in the alleged New Brunswick attack were consumed. [[Special:Contributions/99.242.144.216|99.242.144.216]] ([[User talk:99.242.144.216|talk]]) 08:28, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

:Just to clarify on the original question, two kids were killed in New Brunswick, but they were not consumed (eaten) by the pythons. In a 2002 case, a 10-year-old was allegedly swallowed by an African Rock Python, but the snake was not captured, and with nothing but witness accounts the incident was not "verified". A 1973 report of a soldier who was recovered from the stomach of a large python was similarly unverifiable. [[User:Agyle|Agyle]] ([[User talk:Agyle|talk]]) 08:57, 23 December 2013 (UTC)