Talk:Green Anaconda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Amphibians and Reptiles Portal Green Anaconda is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use amphibians and reptiles resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] Which is longer?

Although this article states that the Green Anaconda occassionally reaches lengths up to 10 meters, it says that the Reticulated Python actually grows to be longer. The Reticulated Python article agrees that it, and not the Green Anaconda, is the longest snake in the world. However, the article on the python claims that the largest recorded specimen was only 9 meters, which makes it shorter than the Green Anaconda. Unless the anaconda data is wrong, or the python data is outdated (and a specimen longer than 10 meters has been found), then the Green Anaconda should win the prize for length.

According to the Guiness Book of Records, the record is held by a 10m (32ft 9.5in) reticulated python, shot in Sulawesi, Indonesia in 1912. Keep in mind the anaconda does get heavier, which when people use the term "larger" leads to some disagreement. -Dawson 19:01, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

The main anaconda article says the longest anaconda ever found measured 11,50 m. Still, most sources put its maximum length at about 9 m. I do think the anaconda is the biggest snake because, as Dawson said, it gets heavier (because it's thicker). It's like the Komodo dragon and the Papua monitor- the Komodo dragon is the largest lizard with a length of 3 m and a weight of up to 150 kg, but the lighter, thinner Papua monitor can be up to 4,75 m long and is the longest. Jerkov 14:06, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the longest measured Papua monitor was 2.44 m (8 ft), with some scientist giving an estimate of 2.7 m (9ft), others even 3.7 m (12 ft); so there's no definite proof of it being longer than the Komodo dragon – for which there are also higher estimates than the measured 3.10 m (10 ft 2 in) captive specimen.

As for the green anaconda, some sources have taken seriously the claim of a 11.43 m (37 ft 7 in) specimen reportedly measured in Colombia by a group of engineers in 1944. Guinness has disregarded this though, giving the credit to a 8.45 m (27 ft 9 in) specimen caught in Brazil in 1960. This individual had a girth of 111 cm (43¾ in) and an estimated weight of 230 kg (c. 500 lb); though comparing with the measurements a large captive reticulated python specimen named Colossus (length 8.69 m/28 ft 6 in, weight 145 kg/320 lb, girth 95 cm/37½ in), I got a weight of 194 kg (428 lb) with the given dimensions – perhaps an estimated 200 kg (441 lb) was roughly converted to 500 lb? Note that an 8+ metre green anaconda is already spectacularly large: very large measured and photographed anacondas I've seen have usually been within the range of 5–6.5 m (c. 17–21 ft) in length and 80–110 kg (c. 180–250 lb) in weight. Besides the 1960 Brazil specimen, I've never heard of a reliably measured green anaconda over 7 m (23 ft) long. The heaviest snake actually weighed was a 183 kg (403 lb), 8.23 m (27 ft) long captive Burmese python named Baby – so apparently the green anaconda has it beat. --Anshelm '77 18:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know. A snake skin naturally sretches after it has died. The python was bigger than it should have been.

Are metres in the article derived from feet or vice versa? 11 metres is approximately 36 feet, not 29, and 9 metres 29,5 feet, not 26. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.148.76.226 (talk) 18:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Breeding Season

It is mentioned in the article that the breeding takes place in rainy season but the web site the article references for "cannibalism" in green anacondas (http://pages.prodigy.net/anaconda/canib.htm) states that breeding occurs in dry season when anacondas concentrate in the more permanent water sources. These two statements totally condratict and someone who has really studied the species should edit the article if current statement is wrong.

[edit] Should this be here?

Upon reading the article I found the following line in the geographical range paragraph:".. and Anacondas are also found in new England aquariums". I don't really think that New England aquariums are the range on Anacondas. Shouldn't this be edited? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.0.148.56 (talk) 23:14, 15 October 2007 (UTC)