THE REPTILES OF OHIO 245 



Thatnnophis btitleri (Cope) 

 Butler's Garter Snake 



(Page 96; maps 23 and 60; plate 13. fig. I) 



Three papers have appeared during the past few years on the taxonomic 

 status of Thamnophis butleri. 



In the first of these, Albert G. Smith (1945) reviewed the butleri complex 

 and concluded that two species are involved. The easternmost population, 

 inhabiting northwestern Pennsylvania and southwestern New York, he referred 

 to Thaynnophis brachystoma (Cope); specimens from the rest of the range 

 (see map on page 97) he considered as butleri. Smith pointed out that in 

 brnchystomct the maximum number of dorsal scale rows is almost invariably 

 17 and the upper labials are normally 6; the corresponding counts in butleri 

 are 19 and 7. In a later paper (1949) Smith reviewed these two snakes again, 

 but this time he reduced them to subspecific status and considered them both 

 to be races of 7 hamnophis radix. 



Certain obvious errors in Smith's data and conclusions (in his 1949 contri- 

 bution) led to the preparation of a third paper (Conant, 1950) on the status 

 of Thamnophis butleri. In this I have attempted to show that there is no 

 proof of mtergradation between radix and butleri: the two forms occur together 

 both in Ohio and in southeastern Wisconsin. There also is no evidence of 

 intergradation between butleri and brachystoma. Smith pointed out (1945, 

 151) that there is a gap between the ranges of these two snakes. The gap 

 actually is greater than he supposed, for an error has come to light recently 

 for which I have only myself to blame. During the preparation of the original 

 maniLscript for the Reptiles of Ohio, I insisted on examining all material 

 myself, but, at the moment of going to press, I accepted a few records that 

 were sent to me by a herpetological colleague. Unfortunately, he mistook a 

 specimen of Thamnophis s. sauritus (NU 19) for butleri. This was from 

 Hiram, Portage County. Hence the easternmost Ohio locality (map 23) 

 must be eliminated. 



In my opinion, butleri is entitled to full specific status and ro is brachy- 

 stoma. 



Thomas (in Conant, Thomas, and Rausch. 1945) has made some interest- 

 ing comments upon the past and present distribution of butleri. He expresses 

 the opinion that this snake "may be considered as a relict cf a former climate, 

 since it exists in isolated colonies throughout most of its range." It is an 

 endemic species of the eastern part of the Prairie Peninsula, and, as Thomas 

 indicates, it probably persisted throughout Wisconsin times beyond the periph- 

 ery of the ice sheet whence it may have moved into the glaciated portions of 

 the Prairie Peninsula soon after the retreat of the ice. 



The range of butleri (stated on p. 98) should be amended to include 

 southwestern Ontario (Logier, 1939); New York and Pennsylvania, of course, 

 should be deleted. New Ohio records are: 



Erie County: Sandusky (ANSP 16948-51). Fairfield County: Black Lick 



Woods, on bolder of Franklin Co. (OSM 628). LoGAN CoUNTY: (OSM 540); West 



