Heterodon platirhinos - Latreille, 1801
Eastern Hog-nosed Snake
Other English Common Names: Eastern Hognose Snake, eastern hog-nosed snake
Synonym(s): Heterodon contortrix Stejneger and Barbour, 1917:76
Taxonomic Status: Accepted
Related ITIS Name(s): Heterodon platirhinos Latreille in Sonnini and Latreille, 1801 (TSN 563935)
French Common Names: couleuvre nez plat
Unique Identifier: ELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.106140
Element Code: ARADB17020
Informal Taxonomy: Animals, Vertebrates - Reptiles - Snakes
Image 10862

© Michael Patrikeev

 
Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family Genus
Animalia Craniata Reptilia Squamata Colubridae Heterodon
Genus Size: B - Very small genus (2-5 species)
Check this box to expand all report sections:
Concept Reference
Help
Concept Reference: Collins, J. T. 1990. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians and reptiles. 3rd ed. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Herpetological Circular No. 19. 41 pp.
Concept Reference Code: B90COL01NAUS
Name Used in Concept Reference: Heterodon platirhinos
Taxonomic Comments: Specific name formerly spelled "platyrhinos"; see Platt (1985) for justification for change.
Conservation Status
Help

NatureServe Status

Global Status: G5
Global Status Last Reviewed: 28Jan2014
Global Status Last Changed: 30Oct1996
Rounded Global Status: G5 - Secure
Reasons: Though undoubtedly local populations have experienced decline or extirpation, the species occurs across a huge range in a variety of habitats.
Nation: United States
National Status: N5 (05Oct1996)
Nation: Canada
National Status: N3 (28Dec2011)

U.S. & Canada State/Province Status
United States Alabama (S5), Arkansas (S5), Connecticut (S2S3), Delaware (S4), District of Columbia (SH), Florida (SNR), Georgia (S5), Illinois (S5), Indiana (S3), Iowa (S4), Kansas (S4), Kentucky (S5), Louisiana (S3), Maryland (S5), Massachusetts (S4), Michigan (S3S4), Minnesota (S4), Mississippi (S5), Missouri (S5), Nebraska (S4), New Hampshire (S1), New Jersey (S5), New Mexico (SNR), New York (S3), North Carolina (S4S5), Ohio (S4), Oklahoma (S5), Pennsylvania (S3), Rhode Island (S2), South Carolina (SNR), South Dakota (S2), Tennessee (S4), Texas (S5), Virginia (S5), West Virginia (S2), Wisconsin (S3S4)
Canada Ontario (S3)

Other Statuses

Canadian Species at Risk Act (SARA) Schedule 1/Annexe 1 Status: T (05Jun2003)
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): Threatened (30Nov2007)
Comments on COSEWIC: Reason for Designation: This species faces several threats, particularly increased mortality and severe habitat fragmentation caused by an expanding road network and increased traffic. The species is mobile for a snake, but this mobility places it at high risk when it encounters roads. The species also suffers from persecution by humans not only because it is a relatively large snake but also because of its complex defensive threats when confronted. In southwest Ontario and south of the Canadian shield, the species has suffered extensive habitat loss from agriculture and rapid increase in housing development. Poaching for the illegal wildlife trade is a growing threat.

Status History: Designated Special Concern in April 1997. Status re-examined and designated Threatened in November 2001 and November 2007.

IUCN Red List Category: LC - Least concern

NatureServe Global Conservation Status Factors

Range Extent: >2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Range Extent Comments: The range extends from southern New England through southern Ontario to Minnesota and South Dakota, and south to southern Texas, the Gulf Coast, and southern Florida (Conant and Collins 1991, Ernst and Ernst 2003).

Area of Occupancy: >12,500 4-km2 grid cells
Area of Occupancy Comments:  

Number of Occurrences: > 300
Number of Occurrences Comments: This species is represented by hundreds of occurrences (subpopulations).

Population Size: 100,000 to >1,000,000 individuals
Population Size Comments: Adult population size is unknown but surely exceeds 100,000. This snake is fairly common in many parts of its range.

Number of Occurrences with Good Viability/Integrity: Very many (>125)

Overall Threat Impact: Medium
Overall Threat Impact Comments: No major threats are known. Locally, some populations have declined as a result of conversion of habitat to intensive human uses.

Short-term Trend: Relatively Stable (<=10% change)
Short-term Trend Comments: Extent of occurrence, area of occupancy, number of subpopulations, and population size probably are relatively stable or declining at a rate of less than 10 percent over 10 years or three generations.

Long-term Trend: Decline of <30% to increase of 25%

Intrinsic Vulnerability: Moderately vulnerable

Environmental Specificity: Moderate. Generalist or community with some key requirements scarce.

Other NatureServe Conservation Status Information

Inventory Needs: Document specific occurrences in conjunction with other biotic field surveys.

Protection Needs: Conservation needs include the following: secure permanent protection for large tracts of suitable habitat through legal means; limit pesticide use in preferred habitat types; educate the public regarding the snake's harmlessness; and control fire ants on certain parcels of important habitat.

Distribution
Help
Global Range: (>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)) The range extends from southern New England through southern Ontario to Minnesota and South Dakota, and south to southern Texas, the Gulf Coast, and southern Florida (Conant and Collins 1991, Ernst and Ernst 2003).

U.S. States and Canadian Provinces
Color legend for Distribution Map
Endemism: occurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations

U.S. & Canada State/Province Distribution
United States AL, AR, CT, DC, DE, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, MD, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VA, WI, WV
Canada ON

Range Map
Note: Range depicted for New World only. The scale of the maps may cause narrow coastal ranges or ranges on small islands not to appear. Not all vagrant or small disjunct occurrences are depicted. For migratory birds, some individuals occur outside of the passage migrant range depicted.

Range Map Compilers: NatureServe, 2005


U.S. Distribution by County Help
State County Name (FIPS Code)
CT Fairfield (09001), Hartford (09003), Litchfield (09005), Middlesex (09007), New Haven (09009), New London (09011), Tolland (09013), Windham (09015)
IA Louisa (19115), Muscatine (19139)
KS Edwards (20047), Ellis (20051), Hamilton (20075), Reno (20155), Sedgwick (20173), Seward (20175)
MN Aitkin (27001), Anoka (27003), Carver (27019), Cass (27021), Chisago (27025), Crow Wing (27035), Dakota (27037), Fillmore (27045)*, Goodhue (27049), Hennepin (27053), Houston (27055), Hubbard (27057), Isanti (27059), Mille Lacs (27095), Morrison (27097), Olmsted (27109), Pine (27115), Ramsey (27123), Scott (27139), Todd (27153), Wabasha (27157), Wadena (27159), Washington (27163), Winona (27169), Wright (27171)*
MS Warren (28149)*
NH Hillsborough (33011), Merrimack (33013), Rockingham (33015), Strafford (33017)
OH Adams (39001), Athens (39009)*, Clermont (39025), Erie (39043), Hamilton (39061), Lucas (39095), Morgan (39115)*, Muskingum (39119), Perry (39127)*, Scioto (39145)
PA Allegheny (42003)*, Armstrong (42005)*, Bedford (42009), Berks (42011)*, Blair (42013)*, Bucks (42017)*, Cambria (42021)*, Carbon (42025), Centre (42027), Chester (42029)*, Clearfield (42033), Columbia (42037), Cumberland (42041)*, Dauphin (42043), Erie (42049)*, Fayette (42051), Franklin (42055), Fulton (42057), Huntingdon (42061), Indiana (42063)*, Luzerne (42079), Montgomery (42091)*, Northampton (42095)*, Perry (42099)*, Pike (42103)*, Schuylkill (42107), Somerset (42111)*, Union (42119)*, Wyoming (42131)*
RI Kent (44003)*, Providence (44007), Washington (44009)
SD Clay (46027), Union (46127), Yankton (46135)
WV Berkeley (54003)*, Boone (54005)*, Cabell (54011)*, Greenbrier (54025)*, Hardy (54031)*, Jackson (54035)*, Jefferson (54037)*, Lincoln (54043)*, Mason (54053)*, Mercer (54055)*, Morgan (54065), Nicholas (54067)*, Pendleton (54071)*, Ritchie (54085)*, Roane (54087)*, Wayne (54099)*, Wetzel (54103)*, Wirt (54105)*, Wood (54107)*, Wyoming (54109)
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
U.S. Distribution by Watershed Help
Watershed Region Help Watershed Name (Watershed Code)
01 Piscataqua-Salmon Falls (01060003)+, Nashua (01070004)+, Merrimack (01070006)+, Lower Connecticut (01080205)+, Farmington (01080207)+, Blackstone (01090003)+, Narragansett (01090004)+, Pawcatuck-Wood (01090005)+, Quinebaug (01100001)+, Shetucket (01100002)+, Thames (01100003)+*, Quinnipiac (01100004)+, Housatonic (01100005)+, Saugatuck (01100006)+
02 Middle Delaware-Mongaup-Brodhead (02040104)+*, Middle Delaware-Musconetcong (02040105)+*, Lehigh (02040106)+, Schuylkill (02040203)+, Upper Susquehanna-Tunkhannock (02050106)+*, Upper Susquehanna-Lackawanna (02050107)+, Upper West Branch Susquehanna (02050201)+, Bald Eagle (02050204)+, Lower Susquehanna-Penns (02050301)+*, Upper Juniata (02050302)+, Raystown (02050303)+, Lower Juniata (02050304)+, Lower Susquehanna-Swatara (02050305)+, South Branch Potomac (02070001)+*, Cacapon-Town (02070003)+, Conococheague-Opequon (02070004)+, Shenandoah (02070007)+*
04 Lower Maumee (04100009)+, Cedar-Portage (04100010)+, Lake Erie (04120200)+*
05 Middle Allegheny-Redbank (05010006)+*, Lower Allegheny (05010009)+*, Lower Monongahela (05020005)+, Youghiogheny (05020006)+*, Little Muskingum-Middle Island (05030201)+*, Upper Ohio-Shade (05030202)+*, Little Kanawha (05030203)+*, Hocking (05030204)+*, Wills (05040005)+, Middle New (05050002)+*, Greenbrier (05050003)+*, Gauley (05050005)+*, Lower Kanawha (05050008)+*, Coal (05050009)+*, Lower Scioto (05060002)+, Upper Guyandotte (05070101)+, Lower Guyandotte (05070102)+*, Lower Great Miami (05080002)+, Raccoon-Symmes (05090101)+*, Twelvepole (05090102)+*, Ohio Brush-Whiteoak (05090201)+, Little Miami (05090202)+
07 Leech Lake (07010102)+, Elk-Nokasippi (07010104)+, Pine (07010105)+, Crow Wing (07010106)+, Redeye (07010107)+*, Long Prairie (07010108)+, Platte-Spunk (07010201)+, Clearwater-Elk (07010203)+*, Crow (07010204)+*, Twin Cities (07010206)+, Rum (07010207)+, Lower Minnesota (07020012)+, Upper St. Croix (07030001)+, Kettle (07030003)+, Snake (07030004)+, Lower St. Croix (07030005)+, Rush-Vermillion (07040001)+, Cannon (07040002)+, Buffalo-Whitewater (07040003)+, Zumbro (07040004)+, La Crosse-Pine (07040006)+*, Root (07040008)+, Coon-Yellow (07060001)+, Upper Iowa (07060002)+*, Copperas-Duck (07080101)+
08 Lower Yazoo (08030208)+*, Lower Big Black (08060202)+*
10 Lewis and Clark Lake (10170101)+, Vermillion (10170102)+, Lower Big Sioux (10170203)+, Upper Saline (10260009)+
11 Middle Arkansas-Lake Mckinney (11030001)+, Coon-Pickerel (11030004)+, Gar-Peace (11030010)+, Middle Arkansas-Slate (11030013)+, Upper Cimarron-Liberal (11040006)+
+ Natural heritage record(s) exist for this watershed
* Extirpated/possibly extirpated
Ecology & Life History
Help
Reproduction Comments: Lays clutch of 4-61 eggs, May-August (earlier in south than in north). Eggs hatch in 39-65 days. Usually sexually mature in 2nd year.
Ecology Comments: Population density estimated at about 1-2/ha in pasture in Kansas, about half this density in ungrazed area; mean dis- tance between successive captures was 682 and 952 ft in two areas (Platt 1969).

In Arkansas, individuals had large, well-defined home ranges of 21-73 ha (average 50 ha, n = 8), which for individuals remained similar in size and location from year to year (Plummer and Mills 2000). Movements of translocated snakes tended to be more erratic and unidirectional, and translocated snakes exhibited reduced survival.

Non-Migrant: N
Locally Migrant: N
Long Distance Migrant: N
Palustrine Habitat(s): Riparian
Terrestrial Habitat(s): Cropland/hedgerow, Grassland/herbaceous, Old field, Woodland - Conifer, Woodland - Hardwood, Woodland - Mixed
Special Habitat Factors: Burrowing in or using soil, Fallen log/debris
Habitat Comments: Habitats include openly wooded upland hills, forest edges, fields, woodland meadows, prairies, forest-grassland ecotones, sand plains, barrier islands, fire-managed pinelands, river valleys, riparian zones, and various other habitats with loose soils and amphibian prey. This snake crawls on the surface and burrows into soil. It overwinters in burrows (made by mammal or self-dug) or under rocks of talus slopes. Eggs are laid in nests a few inches below the ground surface (Platt 1969) or in rotting wood (DeGraaf and Rudis 1983).
Adult Food Habits: Carnivore
Immature Food Habits: Carnivore
Food Comments: Eats mainly amphibians, especially toads (Platt 1969). Also various other kinds of small vertebrates, and rarely invertebrates.
Adult Phenology: Crepuscular, Diurnal, Hibernates/aestivates
Immature Phenology: Crepuscular, Diurnal, Hibernates/aestivates
Phenology Comments: Active from late April to October or November in Kansas and Wisconsin (Vogt 1981, Collins 1982). May be active during warm weather during cold season (Minton 1972).
Length: 116 centimeters
Economic Attributes Not yet assessed
Help
Management Summary
Help
Biological Research Needs: Determine if any populations that are sympatric with fire ants have declined.
Population/Occurrence Delineation
Help
Group Name: Medium And Large Colubrid Snakes

Use Class: Not applicable
Minimum Criteria for an Occurrence: Occurrences are based on evidence of historical presence, or current and likely recurring presence, at a given location. Such evidence minimally includes collection or reliable observation and documentation of one or more individuals (including eggs) in or near appropriate habitat where the species is presumed to be established and breeding.
Separation Barriers: Busy highway or highway with obstructions such that snakes rarely if ever cross successfully; major river, lake, pond, or deep marsh (this barrier pertains only to upland species and does not apply to aquatic or wetland snakes); densely urbanized area dominated by buildings and pavement.
Separation Distance for Unsuitable Habitat: 1 km
Separation Distance for Suitable Habitat: 10 km
Separation Justification: Available information on movements of colubrid snakes is limited to a small minority of species. These data indicate that nearly all species have home ranges smaller or much smaller than 25 ha (e.g., less than 3 ha, Pituophis catenifer in California, Rodriguez-Robles 2003), with some up to about 75 ha (Heterodon platirhinos, average 50 ha, Plummer and Mills 2000), and the largest up to 225 ha in the biggest colubrids (Drymarchon, summer mean 50-100 ha, USFWS 1998).

Radiotelemetry data for Pantherophis indicate that residents of hibernacula that are 1-2 km apart (with suitable intervening habitat) probably interbreed (Prior et al. 1997, Blouin-Demers and Weatherhead 2002). However, "evidence of genetic structure even over short distances (e.g., 2-20 km) implies that gene flow among rat snake populations can be easily disrupted" (Prior et al. 1997). Loughheed et al. (1999) found evidence of substantial genetic exchange among local hibernacula (< 6 km apart), but gene flow over distances of 10s of km appears to be substantially less. Based on extensive radio-tracking data, Blouin-Demers and Weatherhead (2002) found that home range size of Pantherophis averaged 18.5 ha and ranged up to 93 ha; based on the most mobile individuals, Pantherophis from hibernacula up to 8 km apart can come together for mating. Pantherophis and probably other colubrids exhibit high fidelity to hibernacula and shift even to nearby sites only rarely (Prior et al. 2001).

Many of the several studies that report small home ranges for colubrids did not employ methods (e.g., radio telemetry) suitable for detecting full annual or multi-annual home range size, dispersal, or other long-distance movements, so these may have yielded underestimates of home ranges or activity areas.

At least some colubrids, including medium-sized species such as garter snakes, not uncommonly move between areas up to a few kilometers apart, and several species make extensive movements of up to several kilometers, so separation distances of 1-2 km for suitable habitat are too small for medium-sized and large colubrids.

A separation distance of 10 km for suitable habitat was selected as most appropriate for snakes assigned to this Specs Group because it seems generally unlikely that two locations separated by less than 10 km of suitable habitat would represent distinct occurrences.

For the purposes of these occurrence specifications, upland habitat is regarded as unsuitable habitat for aquatic and wetland snakes. For upland snakes, shallow or patchy wetlands are treated as unsuitable habitat whereas large deepwater habitats (subjective determination) are barriers.

Inferred Minimum Extent of Habitat Use (when actual extent is unknown): .5 km
Date: 12Feb2013
Author: Hammerson, G.
Notes: Separation distance for suitable habitat was changed from 5 km to 10 km based on comments from Dale Jackson (12 Feb 2013).
Population/Occurrence Viability
Help
U.S. Invasive Species Impact Rank (I-Rank) Not yet assessed
Help
Authors/Contributors
Help
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Edition Date: 28Jan2014
NatureServe Conservation Status Factors Author: Jackson, D. R. (2014); Hammerson, G. (2006)
Element Ecology & Life History Edition Date: 01Sep2006
Element Ecology & Life History Author(s): Hammerson, G.

Zoological data developed by NatureServe and its network of natural heritage programs (see Local Programs) and other contributors and cooperators (see Sources).

References
Help
  • Behler, J. L., and F. W. King. 1979. The Audubon Society field guide to North American reptiles and amphibians. Alfred A. Knopf, New York. 719 pp.

  • Blem, C.R. 1981. HETERODON PLATYRHINOS. CATALOGUE OF AMERI- CAN AMPHIBIANS AND REPTILES. SSAR. NO. 282:1-2.

  • Bragg, A.N. 1960. Is Heterdon Venomous?. Herpetologica 16:121-123.

  • Brinker, S.R. and M.J. Oldham. 2007. COSSARO Candidate Species at Risk Evaluation Form for Eastern Hog-nosed Snake (Heterodon platirhinos). Natural Heritage Information Centre. Prepared for Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough. 15 October, 11 pp.

  • Christiansen, J.L. 1983. Temporal separation of sympatric hognose snake species (Heterodon) in Iowa. Proc. of the Iowa Acad. Sci. 90(1).

  • Collins, J. T. 1982. Amphibians and reptiles in Kansas. Second edition. Univ. Kansas Mus. Nat. Hist., Pub. Ed. Ser. 8. xiii + 356 pp.

  • Collins, J. T. 1990. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians and reptiles. 3rd ed. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles. Herpetological Circular No. 19. 41 pp.

  • Collins, J. T. 1997. Standard common and current scientific names for North American amphibians and reptiles. Fourth edition. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles, Herpetolgical Circular No. 25. 40 pp.

  • Conant, R. and J. T. Collins. 1991. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians: eastern and central North America. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Massachusetts. 450 pp.

  • Conant, R., and J. T. Collins. 1998. A field guide to reptiles and amphibians: eastern and central North America. Third edition, expanded. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Massachusetts. 616 pp.

  • Cook, F. R. 1984. Introduction to Canadian amphibians and reptiles. National Museum of Natural Sciences, National Museums of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.

  • Crother, B. I. (editor). 2008. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. Sixth edition. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Herpetological Circular 37:1-84.

  • Crother, B. I. (editor). 2008. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. Sixth edition. Society for the Study of Amphibians and Reptiles Herpetological Circular 37:1-84. Online with updates at: http://www.ssarherps.org/pages/comm_names/Index.php

  • Crother, B. I. (editor). 2012. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. 7th edition. SSAR Herpetological Circular 39:1-92.

  • Cunnington, G. 2003. Spatial ecology and reproductive behaviour of ht eeaster Hog-nosed Snake (Heterodon platirhinos) in Wasaga Beach, ON. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Network, Pelee Island, Ontario, Canada.

  • Cunnington, G.M. and J.E. Cebek. 2005. Mating and Nesting Behavior of the Eastern Hognose Snake (Heterodon platirhinos) in the Northern Portion of its Range. The American Midland Naturalist 154(2): 474-478.

  • DeGraaf, R. M., and D. D. Rudis. 1983. Amphibians and reptiles of New England. Habitats and natural history. Univ. Massachusetts Press. vii + 83 pp.

  • Doucette, R., and G. Cunnington. 2003. Eastern Hog-nosed Snakes (Heterodon platirhinos) in Wasaga Beach Provincial Park, 2001& 2002. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Amphibian and Reptile Conservation Network, Pelee Island, Ontario, Canada.

  • Doucette, R., and M. Gurr. 2001. Eastern Hognose Snake Research Program in Wasaga Beach, Ontario: Final Report -- 2001 Field Season. Ontario Parks, Shell Environment Fund, TD Friends of the Environment Foundation, and The Friends of Nancy Island Historic Site & Wasaga Beach Park, Ontario. 20 pp. + 10 appendices.

  • Dundee, H. A., and D. A. Rossman. 1989. The amphibians and reptiles of Louisiana. Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge.

  • Dyer, W.G. 1994. Some Helminths of the racer, Coluber constrictor, and the eastern hognose snake, Heterodon platirhinos, in Southern Illinois. Transactions of the Illinois State Academy of Science 87(1):43-45.

  • Edgren, R. A. 1957. Melanism in Hog-nosed Snakes. Herpetologica 13: 131-135.

  • Edgren, R. A. 1961. A simplified method for analysis of clines; geographic variation in the Hognose Snake Heterodon platyrhinos Latreille. Copeia 1961(2): 125-132.

  • Edgren, R.A. 1952. Geographic variability in the common hog-nosed snake, Heterodon platyrhinos Latreille.. Systematic Zoology 1(4): 184..

  • Edgren, Richard A. 1955. The natural history of the hog- nosed snakes, genus Heterodon: a review. Herpetologica 11:105-117.

  • Ernst, C. H., and E. M. Ernst. 2003. Snakes of the United States and Canada. Smithsonian Books, Washington, D.C.

  • Fitzgerald, E. C. 1994. Habitat suitability index models for three threatened snake species in an urban county. University of Missouri-Columbia (M.Sc. Thesis). 104 pp.

  • Hammerson, G. 2001. EO Specs for Medium and Large Colubrid Snakes (ELCODE ARADB00002). NatureServe, unpublished. 2 pp.

  • Harding, J. H. 1997. Amphibians and reptiles of the Great Lakes region. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor. xvi + 378 pp.

  • Johnson, T. R. 2000. The amphibians and reptiles of Missouri. Second edition. Missouri Department of Conservation, Jefferson City. 400 pp.

  • Kelly, H.A. 1934. The Hog-nosed snake (Heterodon contortrix) in Parry Sound District, Ontario. Canadian Field-Naturalist 48(2): 39.

  • Kennedy, J.P. ND. Eggs of the Eastern Hognose Snake, Heterodon platyrhinos. The Texas Journal of Science, pgs 416-422.

  • Kirsch, S.M. 1981. Ecology of the Eastern Hognose Snake (Heterodon platyrhinos Latreille) in Southeastern South Dakota. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Department of Biology, University of South Dakota. 42 pp.

  • Klau, H.H. and P.R. David. 1952. The Bimodality of length distribution in Heterodon p. platyrhinos L. and its relation to the season in which the specimens were collected. American Midland naturalist 47(2): 364-371.

  • Klemens, M. W. 1993. Amphibians and reptiles of Connecticut and adjacent regions. State Geological and Natural History Survey of Connecticut, Bulletin 112. xii + 318 pp.

  • Lazell, J. 1993. Heterodon platirhinos (Eastern Hognose Snake): Melanism heredity. Herpetological Review 24(1): 35.

  • McAlister, W. H. 1963. Evidence of mild toxicity in the saliva of the Hognose Snake (Heterodon). Herpetologica 19(2): 132-137.

  • McCoy, C.J., Jr. and A. V. Bianculli. 1966. The distribution and dispersal of Heterodon platyrhinos in Pennsylvania. Journal of the Ohio Herpetological Society 5(4): 153-158.

  • Michener, M. C., and J. D. Lazell, Jr. 1989. Distribution and relative abundance of the hognose snake, HETERODON PLATIRHINOS, in eastern New England. J. Herpetol. 23:35-40.

  • Mills, M.S. and R. Yeomans. 1993. Heterodon platirhinos (Eastern Hognose Snake): diet.. Herpetological Review 24(2): 62..

  • Minton, S. A., Jr. 1972. Amphibians and reptiles of Indiana. Indiana Academy Science Monographs 3. v + 346 pp.

  • Minton, S. A., Jr. 2001. Amphibians & reptiles of Indiana. Revised second edition. Indiana Academy of Science, Indianapolis. xiv + 404 pp.

  • Mirarchi, R. E., M. A. Bailey, T. M. Haggerty, and T. L. Best, editors. 2004. Alabama wildlife. Volume 3. Imperiled amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 225 pages.

  • Mirarchi, R.E., editor. 2004. Alabama Wildlife. Volume 1. A checklist of vertebrates and selected invertebrates: aquatic mollusks, fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 209 pages.

  • Mitchell, J. C. 1994. The reptiles of Virginia. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. xv + 352 pp.

  • Mount, R. H. 1975. The reptiles and amphibians of Alabama. Auburn University Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama. vii + 347 pages.

  • Oldham, M.J. 1996. COSSARO Candidate V,T,E Species Evaluation Form for Eastern Hognose Snake (Heterodon platirhinos). Unpublished report prepared by Natural Heritage Information Centre for Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 3 pp.

  • Oldham, M.J., W.F. Weller, D. Seburn and C. Seburn. 1995. Atlas of Ontario Amphibians and Reptiles Draft Species Account, Eastern Hognose Snake - Coulevre Nez Plat, Heterodon platirhinos. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Ontario Field Herpetologists, Natural Heritage Information Centre. 26 pp. [draft, March 1995]

  • Oldham, M.J., and R. Ben-Oliel. 2001. COSSARO Candidate V, T, E Species Evaluation Form for Eastern Hognose Snake (Heterodon platirhinos). Natural Heritatge Information Centre, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Peterborough, Ontario. 8 pp. + 5 appendices.

  • Palmer, W. M., and A. L. Braswell. 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. North Carolina State Museum of Natural Sciences, University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

  • Platt, D. R. 1969. Natural history of the hognose snakes Heterodon platyrhinos and Heterodon nasicus. Univ. Kansas Pub. Mus. Nat. Hist. 18:253-420.

  • Platt, D. R. 1985. History and spelling of the name HETERODON PLATIRHINOS. J. Herpetol. 19:417-418.

  • Platt, D.R. 1983. Heterodon. Pp. 315.1-315.2, in, Catalogue of American Amphibians and Reptiles.

  • Plummer, M. V. 2002. Observations on hibernacula and overwintering ecology of eastern hog-nosed snakes (Heterodon platirhinos). Herpetological Review. 33(2):89-90.

  • Plummer, M. V., and N. E. Mills. 2000. Spatial ecology and survivorship of resident and translocated hognose snakes (HETERODON PLATIRHINOS). Journal of Herpetology 34:565-575.

  • Plummer, M.V., Mills, N.E. 2000. Spatial Ecology and Survivorship of Resident and Translocated Hognose Snakes (Heterodon platirhinos). Journal of Herpetology 34(4): 556-575.

  • Sahanatien, V. 1984. The Spotted Turtle (Clemmys guttata), Eastern Hognose Snake (Heterodon platyrhinos) and Eastern Fox Snake (Elaphe vulpina gloydi) in Georgian Bay Islands National Park. Parks Canada, Natural Resources Canada, Ontario Region. Unpublished report. 39 pp.

  • Schueler, F. 1992. Status Report on the Eastern Hognose Snake, Heterodon platirhinos in Canada. Canadian Museum of Nature, Research Section, Ottawa, Ontario. 20 pp.

  • Schueler, F.W. 1996. Status Report on Eastern Hognose Snake (Heterodon platirhinos). Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 31 pp.

  • Schueler, F.W. and F.R. Cook. 1992. The status of the Eastern Hognose Snake, Heterodon platirhinos, in Canada. Prepared for The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Unpublished report. 34 pp. + supplement.

  • Scott, D. 1986. Notes on the Eastern Hosnose Snake, Heterodon platyrhinos: Latreillle (Squamata: Colubridae), on a Virginia Barrier Island. Brimleyana 12:51-55.

  • Seburn, D. 2004. National recovery strategy for the Eastern Hog-nosed Snake (Heterodon platirhinos) in Canada. Draft.

  • Sexton, O.J. 1979. Remarks on defensive behavior of Hognose Snakes, Heterodon. Herp Review 10(3): 86-87.

  • Smith, H.M. and F. N. White. 1955. Adrenal Enlargement and Its Significance in Hognose Snakes (Heterodon). Herpetologica 11:137-144.

  • Tennant, A. 1984. The Snakes of Texas. Texas Monthly Press, Austin, Texas. 561 pp.

  • Tennant, A. 1997. A field guide to snakes of Florida. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas. xiii + 257 pp.

  • Tennant, A. 1998. A field guide to Texas snakes. Second edition. Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas.

  • Trauth, S. E., H. W. Robison, and M. V. Plummer. 2004. The amphibians and reptiles of Arkansas. University of Arkansas Press.

  • Vogt, R. C. 1981. Natural history of amphibians and reptiles of Wisconsin. Milwaukee Public Museum. 205 pp.

  • Wenzel, D.E. 1990. Observations of captive breeding behavior, matings and oviposition in the Eastern Hognose Snake (Heterodon platirhinos). Bull. Chicago Her. Soc. 25(5): 86.

  • Werler, J. E., and J. R. Dixon. 2000. Texas snakes: identification, distribution, and natural history. University of Texas Press, Austin. xv + 437 pp.

  • Young B.A. and J. Lalor. 1998. Sound production in the eastern hognose snake, Heterodon platyrhinos (Serpentes: Colubridae): Does it snore?. Amphibia-Reptilia 19: 407-418.

Use Guidelines & Citation

Use Guidelines and Citation

The Small Print: Trademark, Copyright, Citation Guidelines, Restrictions on Use, and Information Disclaimer.

Note: All species and ecological community data presented in NatureServe Explorer at http://explorer.natureserve.org were updated to be current with NatureServe's central databases as of October 2015.
Note: This report was printed on

Trademark Notice: "NatureServe", NatureServe Explorer, The NatureServe logo, and all other names of NatureServe programs referenced herein are trademarks of NatureServe. Any other product or company names mentioned herein are the trademarks of their respective owners.

Copyright Notice: Copyright © 2015 NatureServe, 4600 N. Fairfax Dr., 7th Floor, Arlington Virginia 22203, U.S.A. All Rights Reserved. Each document delivered from this server or web site may contain other proprietary notices and copyright information relating to that document. The following citation should be used in any published materials which reference the web site.

Citation for data on website including State Distribution, Watershed, and Reptile Range maps:
NatureServe. 2015. NatureServe Explorer: An online encyclopedia of life [web application]. Version 7.1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available http://explorer.natureserve.org. (Accessed:

Citation for Bird Range Maps of North America:
Ridgely, R.S., T.F. Allnutt, T. Brooks, D.K. McNicol, D.W. Mehlman, B.E. Young, and J.R. Zook. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Birds of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Bird Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Robert Ridgely, James Zook, The Nature Conservancy - Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International - CABS, World Wildlife Fund - US, and Environment Canada - WILDSPACE."

Citation for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
Patterson, B.D., G. Ceballos, W. Sechrest, M.F. Tognelli, T. Brooks, L. Luna, P. Ortega, I. Salazar, and B.E. Young. 2003. Digital Distribution Maps of the Mammals of the Western Hemisphere, version 1.0. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Mammal Range Maps of North America:
"Data provided by NatureServe in collaboration with Bruce Patterson, Wes Sechrest, Marcelo Tognelli, Gerardo Ceballos, The Nature Conservancy-Migratory Bird Program, Conservation International-CABS, World Wildlife Fund-US, and Environment Canada-WILDSPACE."

Citation for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe. 2004. Global Amphibian Assessment. IUCN, Conservation International, and NatureServe, Washington, DC and Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Acknowledgement Statement for Amphibian Range Maps of the Western Hemisphere:
"Data developed as part of the Global Amphibian Assessment and provided by IUCN-World Conservation Union, Conservation International and NatureServe."

NOTE: Full metadata for the Bird Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/birdDistributionmapsmetadatav1.pdf.

Full metadata for the Mammal Range Maps of North America is available at:
http://www.natureserve.org/library/mammalsDistributionmetadatav1.pdf.

Restrictions on Use: Permission to use, copy and distribute documents delivered from this server is hereby granted under the following conditions:
  1. The above copyright notice must appear in all copies;
  2. Any use of the documents available from this server must be for informational purposes only and in no instance for commercial purposes;
  3. Some data may be downloaded to files and altered in format for analytical purposes, however the data should still be referenced using the citation above;
  4. No graphics available from this server can be used, copied or distributed separate from the accompanying text. Any rights not expressly granted herein are reserved by NatureServe. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring by implication, estoppel, or otherwise any license or right under any trademark of NatureServe. No trademark owned by NatureServe may be used in advertising or promotion pertaining to the distribution of documents delivered from this server without specific advance permission from NatureServe. Except as expressly provided above, nothing contained herein shall be construed as conferring any license or right under any NatureServe copyright.
Information Warranty Disclaimer: All documents and related graphics provided by this server and any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server are provided "as is" without warranty as to the currentness, completeness, or accuracy of any specific data. NatureServe hereby disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to any documents provided by this server or any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, including but not limited to all implied warranties and conditions of merchantibility, fitness for a particular purpose, and non-infringement. NatureServe makes no representations about the suitability of the information delivered from this server or any other documents that are referenced to or linked to this server. In no event shall NatureServe be liable for any special, indirect, incidental, consequential damages, or for damages of any kind arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information contained in any documents provided by this server or in any other documents which are referenced by or linked to this server, under any theory of liability used. NatureServe may update or make changes to the documents provided by this server at any time without notice; however, NatureServe makes no commitment to update the information contained herein. Since the data in the central databases are continually being updated, it is advisable to refresh data retrieved at least once a year after its receipt. The data provided is for planning, assessment, and informational purposes. Site specific projects or activities should be reviewed for potential environmental impacts with appropriate regulatory agencies. If ground-disturbing activities are proposed on a site, the appropriate state natural heritage program(s) or conservation data center can be contacted for a site-specific review of the project area (see Visit Local Programs).

Feedback Request: NatureServe encourages users to let us know of any errors or significant omissions that you find in the data through (see Contact Us). Your comments will be very valuable in improving the overall quality of our databases for the benefit of all users.