Dispersion was studied in four island populations of tiger snakes (Notechis ater) in southern Australia. Within islands, snakes were usually aggregated in areas of high densities of prey and/or cover. Differences in the dispersion patterns of snakes among islands were correlated with differences in the spatial distributions of these resources. On an island where both resources were abundant and randomly spaced, snakes were also randomly dispersed. The evidence supports the hypothesis that resource densities are important determinants of dispersion in island tiger snakes and may have contributed to evolutionary divergence in these populations. l of erpetology, Vol. 25, No. 3, pp. 278-283, 1991 i t 1991 Society for the Study of Amph bians and Reptiles l atterns in Tiger Snakes (Notechis ater. Elapidae) on Dispersion is the spatial pattern of individuals within a population, and has been much studied (e.g., Hutchinson, 1953; Odum, 1959; Brown and Orians, 1970; Pielou, 1977; Brower and Zar, 1984). Individuals can be dispersed randomly, evenly, or clumped. In population ecology most sampling methods (particularly mark-recapture models) assume equal catchability and random distributions of individuals (Caughley, 1977; Krebs, 1989). However, these assumptions are in many cases incorrect. Mat1 Present Address: Alabama School of Mathematics and Science, P.O. Box 161628, Mobile, Alabama 366162628, USA. i is the spatial pa tern of individi i a population, and has been much (e. ., Hutchinson, 1953; Odum, 1959; ing systems, predator-to-prey ratios, territoriality, and survivability are influenced by spatial patterns, perhaps more than simply by density values (Brower and Zar, 1984). For snakes, dispersion has never been explicitly studied in the field (see review by Gregory et al., 1987). However, numerous published observations on snake ecology suggest, a priori, that random distributions should not occur because snakes are mobile organisms whose critical resources (e.g., food, shelter, basking sites) would not be expected to be homogeneous in any given habitat. Although there are few studies on the social behavior of snakes (Leyhausen, 1965), and some authors have concluded that snakes are solitary s, predator-to-prey ratios, te ritorisurvivability are influenced by spatial , erhaps ore than simply by density ( er and Zar, 1984). s, dispersion has never b en ext ied in the field (s e review by Gregl., 1987). However, numerous published i s on snake ecology su gest, a priori, 278 This content downloaded from 157.55.39.215 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 05:10:57 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms SPATIAL PATTERNS IN ISLAND TIGER SNAKES or asocial (e.g., Brattstrom, 1974), male-male combat (Shine, 1978), mating behavior, and seasonal aggregations qualify snakes as social animals. Interactions that influence dispersion patterns among conspecifics can in turn limit prey types or lead to differential mating success, perhaps resulting in differentiation of populations (Stamps, 1977; Case, 1982; Stamps and Buechner, 1985). During mark-recapture studies of black tiger snakes (Notechis ater) on several offshore islands in southern Australia (Schwaner, 1985, 1989; Schwaner and Sarre, 1988), spatial patterns of individuals were quantified. Dispersion in each population was compared with similar measurements of two essential resources, prey and cover, to determine how these parameters were correlated within each island. Given that types of prey and cover differed (Schwaner, 1985), were these patterns and their relationships similar among islands?