No, the adder is the only venemous snake species in the UK

Grass snakes are no more dangerous than a corn snake, although they smell alot worse lol

 

Smelly Snake

 

Feeding
They prey almost entirely on amphibians, especially the common toad and the common frog, although they may also occasionally eat mammals and fish. Captive snakes have been observed taking earthworms offered by hand, but dead prey items were never taken [1]. The bite is not dangerous as there are no teeth in the jaws. Just before the throat however there are teeth that can inject poisonous saliva in a prey prior to being swallowed. The snake can not use these teeth for biting. The snake will search actively for prey often on the edges of water using sight and sense of smell with Jacobsons organ. They consume the prey live without using physical constriction.

Sorced From Wikipedia- Natrix natrix

 

that staes they have no teeth, if thats the case how do they get hold of thier prey?

 

You could always eat one and find out :whistling2:

 

So If I Were Poisond By A Grass Snake My Hand Would Be In Its Mouth

Umm Grass Snake For Dinner, Dont Think So

 

So If I Were Poisond By A Grass Snake My Hand Would Be In Its Mouth

Umm Grass Snake For Dinner, Dont Think So

I think PrimalUrges was trying to highlight the fact that you're using the wrong word. You should be using the word venomous, not the word poisonous. From Wikipedia;

Venomous refers to animals that deliver (inject) venom into their prey when hunting or as a defense mechanism.

Poisonous, on the other hand, describes plants or animals that are harmful when consumed or touched.

 

grass snakes are not poisonous or venomous, they rely on constriction to kill there prey. you can have a elergic reation to a bite though because of there saliva, this can happen with all non-venomous snakes, but far as i know its not that common

 

No, grass snakes aren't constrictors! They just grab their prey (frogs etc)and swallow it.

 

I think evidence is starting to emerge that toxic saliva / venom actually evolved very early in squamate radiation meaning that maybe 60% of the current exant species would have ancestors that would be considered 'venomous' and have secondarily lost the toxic venom. It is wildly known that many snakes (all) saliva contains compounds (mostly proteins) that are also found in some very strong venoms (or highly hoimologous with them) even if the snake itself is considered 'harmless' or 'non-venomous' today. Natrix is one of these and I believe (can't find the paper) that they actually have quite distinct 'venom' although it only effects the physiology of amphibians rather than mammals?

Cheers

Andy

p.s. I have it on good authority (after a lifetime of travelling the world catching snakes) that good old European grass snake musk is the smelliest of all!

 

I think evidence is starting to emerge that toxic saliva / venom actually evolved very early in squamate radiation meaning that maybe 60% of the current exant species would have ancestors that would be considered 'venomous' and have secondarily lost the toxic venom. It is wildly known that many snakes (all) saliva contains compounds (mostly proteins) that are also found in some very strong venoms (or highly hoimologous with them) even if the snake itself is considered 'harmless' or 'non-venomous' today. Natrix is one of these and I believe (can't find the paper) that they actually have quite distinct 'venom' although it only effects the physiology of amphibians rather than mammals?

Cheers

Andy

p.s. I have it on good authority (after a lifetime of travelling the world catching snakes) that good old European grass snake musk is the smelliest of all!

That's really interesting. I assume that over time the evolutionary trend amongst prey species is towards immunity to a predators' venom so a shift away from venom towards other modes of killing prey would seem logical...you can't become immune to suffocation, after all!

 

That's really interesting. I assume that over time the evolutionary trend amongst prey species is towards immunity to a predators' venom so a shift away from venom towards other modes of killing prey would seem logical...you can't become immune to suffocation, after all!

I guess not! lol

It would be my guess that this primitive venomous state was very similiar to rear fanged snakes today and initially was like a 'mild sedative'. As this common ancestor radiated each species either went down the 'more sophisticated delivery system and more toxic venom route' and became what we now call the elapids and vipers, and others went down the modification of behaviour, diet and killing technique instead (colubrids etc).

Of course this is pure conjecture (and on a time scale must have happened after the split with the boids) but it makes sense to me!


Cheers

Andy

 

why am i not surprised thats from wikipedia.

 

One of many examples that help to illustrate why we tell you not to use it (or at least if you do, make sure you check it with other sources!):2thumb:

 

A recent paper suggests that Iguanians (Iguanids, Agamids and Chamaeleons) form a group with snakes that has a common venomous ancestor.

Vidal, N. & Hedges, S.B. (2008 The molecular evolutionary tree of lizards, snakes, and amphisbaenians. Comptes Rendus Biologies,

Wherein...

Together with snakes and anguimorphs, iguanians form a clade – Toxicofera – characterized by the presence of toxin secreting oral glands and demonstrating a single early origin of venom in squamates.

 

*needs to get paper*

wouldn't that suggest that the venom pre-dates the entire serpentes group!?

 

If you are refering to Garter Snakes then yes they are venomous, but because they are rear fanged they have an ineffective way of transfering it to prey, also if you are bitten its so weak that it is harmless to humans and you can only get a slight swelling if you are alergic to it.

 

Am I right in thinking that garter snakes are also poisonous? (and yes, I'm using the word poisonous in its correct context) Not that I ever intend to eat my garter snakes, I just seem to recall having read this irelevant snippet somewhere..