just wondering

[greene]

Is the common garter snake the only garter snake species In the U.S that has full species status?

[kibakiba]

"common" either refers to whatever you consider common, or an eastern garter snake. There are many species of garter that have "full species status"

[greene]

I mean eastern garter snake. Is the ribbon snake a garter species?

[kibakiba]

Yes, it is. There are different species of ribbon snake, too. They all fall under Thamnophis.

[EasternGirl]

Well, actually, technically the species of Thamnophis sirtalis is the Common Garter Snake...and any subspecies falling under that species could be considered a Common Garter Snake...according to The Garter Snakes: Evolution and Ecology. (Right? For those of you that have the book...am I reading that correctly?). But like Chantel said, most of the time when people refer to the common garter snake, they are referring to easterns....the subspecies Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis. And like Chantel said, there are many species of garters and ribbons.

[chris-uk]

e
Well, actually, technically the species of Thamnophis sirtalis is the Common Garter Snake...and any subspecies falling under that species could be considered a Common Garter Snake...according to The Garter Snakes: Evolution and Ecology. (Right? For those of you that have the book...am I reading that correctly?). But like Chantel said, most of the time when people refer to the common garter snake, they are referring to easterns....the subspecies Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis. And like Chantel said, there are many species of garters and ribbons.

I don't think you have that right. I think when an animal has been classified into a subspecies the common name for the subspecies applies, and not the common name of the parent species. In the case of T. sirtalis, you wouldn't call a tetrataenia, infernalis, or concinnus a "Common Garter" - they have been classified as subspecies with their own common name, therefore you wouldn't use the common name for the species they belong to when you have a more accurate subspecies name.

[EasternGirl]

Well, the reason I said that is because in the book, it has a section for Common Garter Snake...and it starts the section title: Thamnophis sirtalis, Common Garter Snake, and then lists all of the subspecies. Do you have the book Chris? It's on page 259. So it's giving the impression that one could classify all of those subspecies as the common garter and that T.sirtalis is the common garter. So I'm not sure...

[EasternGirl]

Okay...wait...I'm half asleep...I just reread what you wrote. I get what you are saying now. So you are saying then...that Common Garter would apply to T.sirtalis as a species as a whole but not to each individual subspecies that fall under that category since they have their own specific name? Right...gotcha. Then why do people often refer to easterns as common garters?

[kibakiba]

As far as I know, they are the most wide spread garter... I think.

[EasternGirl]

Yeah...I think you're right.

[BUSHSNAKE]

e

I don't think you have that right. I think when an animal has been classified into a subspecies the common name for the subspecies applies, and not the common name of the parent species. In the case of T. sirtalis, you wouldn't call a tetrataenia, infernalis, or concinnus a "Common Garter" - they have been classified as subspecies with their own common name, therefore you wouldn't use the common name for the species they belong to when you have a more accurate subspecies name.
tetratenia, infernalis and concinnus are in the common garter complex...they are common garters

[chris-uk]

tetratenia, infernalis and concinnus are in the common garter complex...they are common garters

Sure.... But what would you commonly call them? You wouldn't call any of them Common Garter Snake because you can be more accurate with the name for them by using the common name for their subspecies.

[kibakiba]

I'd say if one garter is extremely common in your area, it would be called a common garter. All northwesterns in my area are called "common garters". For people who aren't educated about species and all the fancy names, it's easier.. And, if you know which garters are common in the area, there is no problem... Unless you or they wanted to know exactly what species they had.

[ConcinusMan]

most of the time when people refer to the common garter snake, they are referring to easterns....the subspecies Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis. And like Chantel said, there are many species of garters and ribbons.

Unfortunately, more often they are referring to just about any Thamnophis they see, even though that's not correct.

Any T. sirtalis ssp., and only a sirtalis, falls under the umbrella of "common garter snake"

Current scientific classification recognizes thirteen subspecies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subspecies) (ordered by date):


T. s. sirtalis (Linnaeus, 1758) – Eastern Garter Snake
T. s. parietalis (Say (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Say), 1823) – Red-sided Garter Snake (has also been introduced to northern Halland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halland) in Sweden (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden))
T. s. infernalis (Blainville (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Marie_Ducrotay_de_Blainville), 1835) – California Red-sided Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=California_Red-sided_Garter_Snake&action=edit&redlink=1)
T. s. concinnus (Hallowell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Hallowell_(herpetologist)), 1852) – Red-spotted Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Red-spotted_Garter_Snake&action=edit&redlink=1)
T. s. dorsalis (Baird (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spencer_Fullerton_Baird) & Girard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Frédéric_Girard), 1853) – New Mexico Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=New_Mexico_Garter_Snake&action=edit&redlink=1)
T. s. pickeringii (Baird (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spencer_Fullerton_Baird) & Girard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Frédéric_Girard), 1853) – Puget Sound Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Puget_Sound_Garter_Snake&action=edit&redlink=1)
T. s. tetrataenia (Cope (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Drinker_Cope), 1875) – San Francisco Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Garter_Snake) (endangered (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangered_species))
T. s. semifasciatus (Cope (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Drinker_Cope), 1892) – Chicago Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Garter_Snake)
T. s. pallidulus Allen (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glover_Morrill_Allen), 1899 – Maritime Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maritime_Garter_Snake&action=edit&redlink=1)
T. s. annectens Brown, 1950 – Texas Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Garter_Snake)
T. s. fitchi Fox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wade_Fox), 1951 – Valley Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Valley_Garter_Snake&action=edit&redlink=1)
T. s. similis Rossman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_A._Rossman), 1965 – Blue-striped Garter Snake (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blue-striped_Garter_Snake&action=edit&redlink=1)
T. s. lowei Tanner, 1988[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Garter_Snake#cite_note-3)

[ConcinusMan]

I'd say if one garter is extremely common in your area, it would be called a common garter. All northwesterns in my area are called "common garters". For people who aren't educated about species and all the fancy names, it's easier.

That doesn't mean it's correct. Northwesterns are not "common garter snakes". They are "Northwestern Garter Snakes" and have no recognized subspecies.

Greene, I'm trying to understand what you mean by "full species" status.:confused:

[kibakiba]

Yes, Richard, I know. It doesn't make it correct, but that's what people call them, and they aren't going to stop. It doesn't matter to them if it's the most wrong thing they could ever do. I get people looking dumbfounded if I say "northwestern garter snake", but they immediatly know what I mean if I say "common garter snake". In those cases, though, I normally tell whoever I'm talking to, that the "common garter snake" is actually a northwestern, or whatever garter is common in their area. Like, my friends case.. Pugets are their "common garter".

[ConcinusMan]

Yes, Richard, I know.

I'm aware that you know, but others reading might not. ;)


Like, my friends case.. Pugets are their "common garter".

Point taken, but pugets are "common garters" (sirtalis') :rolleyes: Even if northwestern's are more common. Pugets only occur in the northwest so they are northwestern as well. This is fun. Like "who's on first" :p

If thats not confusing enough, consider that garter snakes in general, are common, so they are all common garters, sans quotes, but i don't think that was what the original question was about.

[d_virginiana]

The first thing I thought about when I was reading this was that I want to start calling my Canis lupus familiaris a wolf now. It would do wonders for her ego :D

Even subspecies can get federal protections as endangered (I'm pretty sure), if that's what the original question was about?

Around where I live, all garters are just 'garter snakes', and black ratsnakes and black racers are both 'black snakes'. You have to listen to a ten minute story about what someone caught the snake eating and how big it was (size is immediately doubled if someone is scared of snakes) to figure out what they're is talking about.
Oh, and depending on someone's personality, anything brown and near the water is either 'water snake' or 'water moccasin'. In an area that has an almost nonexistant cottonmouth population, it seems like literally everyone you talk to has seen one.

[ConcinusMan]

The first thing I thought about when I was reading this was that I want to start calling my Canis lupus familiaris a wolf now. It would do wonders for her ego :D

I'm sure it would, but if you called both wolves and dogs "canines" then you would be correct. But for some reason, "Common Thamnophis" just didn't catch on.:D

All dogs are canines but not all canines are dogs. All spiders are arachnids, but not all arachnids are spiders. All cacti are succulents but not all succulents are cacti. Finally, all "common garter snakes" are thamnophis' but not all thamnophis' are "common garters".

[Stefan-A]

T. s. lowei Tanner, 1988[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Garter_Snake#cite_note-3)


Last time I checked, that one was considered synonymous with one of the others. Dorsalis, I think it was.

[EasternGirl]

So basically...what I was originally saying...that any subspecies of garter falling under the species of T.sirtalis technically can be referred to as a common garter...is correct then? That is how it is listed in the evolution and ecology book.

And I was also wondering what Greene meant by "full species status"....

[chris-uk]

...what I was originally saying...that any subspecies of garter falling under the species of T.sirtalis technically can be referred to as a common garter...is correct then? That is how it is listed in the evolution and ecology book.

And I was also wondering what Greene meant by "full species status"....

I think so, but why would you? Just because it's technically correct to call any sirtarlis a Common Garter Snake, nobody who knows what they are looking at would want to use a more generic name when a more precise name is available?

[greene]

I meant not considered a subspecies and is its own species

[ConcinusMan]

So basically...what I was originally saying...that any subspecies of garter falling under the species of T.sirtalis technically can be referred to as a common garter...is correct then?

Yes. You are correct. However, each subspecies also has its own common name, i.e. "red spotted" , "Valley garter", etc.


I meant not considered a subspecies and is its own species

well in that case, T. ordinoides has no subspecies, nor does T. radix or T. gigas.

all T. sirtalis' are split into subspecies. its just that eastern garters were described first, so their species and subspecies name is "sirtalis"

maybe this will answer your question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garter_snake#Taxonomy