Abstract
Only a few studies have estimated fang replacement rate (FRR) in free-ranging snakes. We compared FRR between Crotalinae and Viperinae, two major clades of Viperidae. Crotalinae species differ by having pit organs which allow efficient strike at the prey, while, based on an earlier study, Viperinae species have relatively longer fangs. We hypothesized that FRR is related to the risk of fang damage and predicted that: (1) FRR is related positively to fang length; and (2) the FRR of Viperinae is faster than that of Crotalinae. To test these predictions, we determined the FRR, fang length, body size and hunting strategy of 21 Viperidae species, 7 Viperinae and 14 Crotalinae, controlling for allometric and phylogenetic effects. The average FRR of Viperinae was 2.6 times faster than that of Crotalinae, supporting our second prediction. However, in contradiction to our first prediction, FRR within subfamilies was related negatively to fang length. The phylogenetic analysis indicated that FRR and fang length covaried throughout the lineage, and that the relationship between FRR and fang length persisted beyond phylogenetic relatedness, implying that fang replacement of the two subfamilies followed different evolutionary pathways.
Data availability
All data in this study are included in the manuscript and in Appendix 1.
References
Broeckhoven, C. & du Plessis, A. Has snake fang evolution lost its bite? New insights from a structural mechanics viewpoint. Biol. Lett. 13, 20170293 (2017).
Klauber, L. M. A statistical study of the Rattlesnakes VI. Fangs. Occasional papers of the San Diego Society of Natural History, Vol. 5. 1–61 (1938).
Cundall, D. Envenomation strategies, head form, and feeding ecology in vipers. in Biology of the Vipers (eds (eds Schuett, G. W., Hӧggren, W. M., Douglas, M. E. & Greene, H. W.) 148–161 (Eagle Mountain Publishing, Eagle Mountain, UT, (2002).
Cundall, D. Viper fangs: functional limitations of extreme teeth. Physiol. Biochem. Zool. PBZ. 82, 63–79 (2009).
Chiszar, D. et al. Strike-induced chemosensory searching in Old World vipers and New World pit vipers. Anim. Learn. Behav. 10, 121–125 (1982).
Glaudas, X., Kearney, T. C. & Alexander, G. J. To hold or not to hold? The effects of prey type and size on the predatory strategy of a venomous snake. J. Zool. 302, 211–218 (2017).
Deufel, A. & Cundall, D. Functional plasticity of the venom delivery system in snakes with a focus on the poststrike prey release behavior. Zool. Anz – J. Comp. Zool. 245, 249–267 (2006).
Forbes, L. S. Prey Defences and Predator Handling Behaviour: The Dangerous Prey Hypothesis. Oikos 55, 155–158 (1989).
Wüster, W., Peppin, L., Pook, C. E. & Walker, D. E. A nesting of vipers: Phylogeny and historical biogeography of the Viperidae (Squamata: Serpentes). Mol. Phylogenet Evol. 49, 445–459 (2008).
Pough, F. H. & Groves, J. D. Specializations of the Body Form and Food Habits of Snakes1. Am. Zool. 23, 443–454 (1983).
Carwardine, M. Animal Records (Sterling Publishing Company, Inc., 2008).
Norris, R. L., Bush, S. P. & Cardwell, M. D. Bites by venomous reptiles in Canada, the United States, and Mexico. in Auerbach’s Wilderness Medicine (eds (eds Harris, N. S., Cushing, T. A. & Auerbach, P. S.) 729–759 (Elsevier, Amsterda, (2016).
Oliveri, M., Čermáková, E. & Knotek, Z. The viper fangs: clinical anatomy, principles of physical examination and therapy (a review). Acta Vet. Brno. 85, 247–250 (2016).
Fitch, H. S. Autecology of the copperhead. Univ. Kans. Publ Mus. Nat. Hist. 13, 85–288 (1960).
Ernst, C. H. A Study of the Fangs of Snakes Belonging to the Agkistrodon-Complex. J. Herpetol. 16, 72–80 (1982).
Ernst, C. H. A Study of the Fangs of Russell’s Viper (Vipera russellii). J. Herpetol. 16, 67–71 (1982).
Tesler, I., Sivan, J., Degen, A. A. & Kam, M. Replacement of fangs in a free-ranging desert viperid, Cerastes vipera. Zool. Jena Ger. 152, 126013 (2022).
Ernst, C. H. A Study of Sexual Dimorphism in American Agkistrodon Fang Lengths. Herpetologica 20, 214–214 (1964).
Werner, Y. L. Reptile Life in the Land of Israel (Chimaira, 2016).
Holding, M. L. et al. Evolutionary allometry and ecological correlates of fang length evolution in vipers. Proc. Biol. Sci. 289, 20221132 (2022).
Gloyd, H. K. & Conant, R. Snakes of the Agkistrodon Complex: A Monographic ReviewSociety for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles., Oxford and Ohio,. (1990).
Felsenstein, J. Phylogenies and the Comparative Method. Am. Nat. 125, 1–15 (1985).
Harvey, P. H. & Pagel, M. D. The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology (Oxford University Press, 1991). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198546412.001.0001
Symonds, M. & Blomberg, S. A. Primer on Phylogenetic Generalised Least Squares. in 105–130 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43550-2_5
Adams, D. C. & Collyer, M. L. Phylogenetic Comparative Methods and the Evolution of Multivariate Phenotypes. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 50, 405–425 (2019).
Harmon, L. J. Phylogenetic Comparative Methods. (2019).
Pagel, M. Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 401, 877–884 (1999).
Freckleton, R. P., Harvey, P. H. & Pagel, M. Phylogenetic analysis and comparative data: a test and review of evidence. Am. Nat. 160, 712–726 (2002).
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing_. R Foundation for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2024).
Pinheiro, J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D. & Team, R. C. Nlme: Linear and Nonlinear Mixed Effects Models. (2024).
Paradis, E. & Schliep, K. ape 5.0: an environment for modern phylogenetics and evolutionary analyses in R. Bioinformatics 35, 526–528 (2019).
Revell, L. J. phytools 2.0: an updated R ecosystem for phylogenetic comparative methods (and other things). PeerJ 12, e16505 (2024).
Wickham, H. Ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer-, 2016).
Yu, G., Smith, D. K., Zhu, H., Guan, Y. & Lam, T. T.-Y. ggtree: an r package for visualization and annotation of phylogenetic trees with their covariates and other associated data. Methods Ecol. Evol. 8, 28–36 (2017).
Alencar, L. R. V. et al. Diversification in vipers: Phylogenetic relationships, time of divergence and shifts in speciation rates. Mol. Phylogenet Evol. 105, 50–62 (2016).
Shi, J. S. et al. Molecular phylogenetic analysis of the genus Gloydius (Squamata, Viperidae, Crotalinae), with description of two new alpine species from Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, China. ZooKeys 1061, 87–108 (2021).
Guiher, T. J. & Burbrink, F. T. Demographic and phylogeographic histories of two venomous North American snakes of the genus Agkistrodon. Mol. Phylogenet Evol. 48, 543–553 (2008).
Roelke, C. E. & Childress, M. J. Defensive and infrared reception responses of true vipers, pitvipers, Azemiops and colubrids. J. Zool. 273, 421–425 (2007).
Thomas, R. G. & Pough, F. H. The effect of rattlesnake venom on digestion of prey. Toxicon Off J. Int. Soc. Toxinology. 17, 221–228 (1979).
van Jansen, L., Kieser, J. A., Dickenson, M., Gordon, K. C. & Fraser-Miller, S. J. Chemical and mechanical properties of snake fangs. J. Raman Spectrosc. 47, 787–795 (2016).
Zahradnicek, O., Horacek, I. & Tucker, A. S. Viperous fangs: Development and evolution of the venom canal. Mech. Dev. 125, 786–796 (2008).
Vonk, F. J. et al. The king cobra genome reveals dynamic gene evolution and adaptation in the snake venom system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A. 110, 20651–20656 (2013).
Campbell, J. A. & Lamar, W. W. The Venomous Reptiles of the Western Hemisphere (Comstock Publishing Associates, 2004).
Fathinia, B., Rastegar-Pouyani, N., Rastegar-Pouyani, E., Todehdehghan, F. & Amiri, F. Avian deception using an elaborate caudal lure in Pseudocerastes urarachnoides (Serpentes: Viperidae). Amphib – Reptil. 36, 223–231 (2015).
Acknowledgements
We thank Prof. Juan D. Daza and two anonymous reviewers for constructive suggestions on an earlier version of this paper, and two anonymous reviewers for constructive suggestions on a later draft. We also thank Dr. Boaz Shacham of the National Herpetology Collection, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and the Department of Life Sciences, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, for providing us with snake specimens.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
JS, AAD and MK conceptualised the study; JS, IT and SH collected the data; MK and IT analyzed the data; all authors contributed to the writing of the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary Material 1 (download PDF )
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sivan, J., Tesler, I., Hadad, S. et al. Comparison of fang replacement rate in Viperidae snakes.
Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-46398-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-46398-w
Keywords
- Fang replacement rate
- Fang length
- Viperinae
- Crotalinae
- Phylogeny
- Hunting strategy
- Post-strike behavior
Source: Ecology - nature.com
