Abstract
Stomach content analyses of 28 Leptotyphlops humilis humilis and 17 L. dulcis dulcis indicate that these snakes feed extensively on ants and termites which compromise 54-64 per cent of the total diet. L. d. dulcis appears to be more fossorial in its feeding activity than L. h. humilis which preys on a greater percentage of surface-dwelling arthropods. Presumably, this serves to reduce competition for the available food supply in geographical areas of sympatry. Both species show a definite preference for soft-bodied prey-types. In addition, several insect species which live as commensals in ant and termite nests are readily consumed along with their hosts. INTRODUCTION Most of the existing literature on the blind snakes of the genus Leptotyphlops deals specifically with the systematics of the group (Klauber, 1940) and their general ecology and geographical distribution (Banks and Farmer, 1963; Banta, 1965; Brattstrom, 1953; Turner and Wauer, 1963). Previous investigations on the feeding behavior of the Western Blind Snake, Leptotyphlops humilis humilis, and the Texas Blind Snake, L. dulcis dulcis, have demonstrated that these fossorial species feed extensively on ants and termites (Brattstrom and Schwenkmeyer, 1951; Reid and Lott, 1963; Stebbins, 1966). It has been further shown that L. d. dulcis frequently utilizes the pheremone trails of some ant species to locate its prey (Watkins, Gehlbach and Baldridge, 1967). Although it has been suggested that additional softbodied arthropods are also consumed (Stebbins, 1954), quantitative and qualitative information concerning the specific food preferences of these snakes is lacking. The purpose of the present study was to accurately analyze the feeding habits of these two species in an area of sympatry as well as to determine what differences, if any, exist in their food preferences. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty-eight L. h. humilis and 17 L. d. dulcis were collected 5 km ESE of Chiricahua, Cochise Co., Arizona during May through August 1971. The area was characterized by sand flats and intermittent boulder-strewn hillsides. Several rocky canyons with dry creek beds were present. There were no apparent micro-habitat differences between the two species. The prevalent vegetation included mesquite (Prosopis juliflora), incense bush (Symphoricarpos sp.), creosote (Covillea) and ocotillo (Fouquieria splendens). Most specimens were collected along paved and dirt roads at night. Several individuals were found within rocky crevices during the day. L. h. humilis specimens ranged in length from 21.4-33.8 mm; L. d. dulcis individuals from *Current Address: Dept. of Zoology & Entomology, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50010, USA.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
