The way that herpetologists have traditionally measuredlive snakes is by stretching them on a ruler andrecording the total length (TL). However, due to the thinconstitution of the snake, the large number of intervertebraljoints, and slim muscular mass of most snakes,it is easier to stretch a snake than it is to stretch anyother vertebrate. The result of this is that the length ofa snake recorded is infl uenced by how much the animalis stretched. Stretching it as much as possible is perhapsa precise way to measure the length of the specimenbut it might not correspond to the actual length ofa live animal. Furthermore, it may seriously injure a livesnake. Another method involves placing the snake in aclear plexiglass box and pressing it with a soft materialsuch as rubber foam against a clear surface. Measuringthe length of the snake may be done by outlining itsbody with a string (Fitch 1987; Frye 1991). However, thismethod is restricted to small animals that can be placedin a box, and in addition, no indications of accuracy of thetechnique are given. Measuring the snakes with a fl exibletape has also been reported (Blouin-Demers 2003)but when dealing with a large animals the way the tapeis positioned can produce great variance on the fi nal outcome.In this contribution we revise alternative ways tomeasuring a snake and propose a method that offers repeatableresults. We further analyze the precision of thismethod by using a sample of measurements taken fromwild populations of green anacondas (Eunectes murinus)with a large range of sizes.
Read full abstract