Roadless Areas
Home/Species/ Common Mud Turtle

Kinosternon subrubrum

(Lacepède, 1788)

Common Mud Turtle

G5Secure Found in 7 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G5SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
LowThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.106169
Element CodeARAAE01050
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
Endemicendemic to a single nation
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassChelonia
OrderTestudines
FamilyKinosternidae
GenusKinosternon
Other Common Names
eastern mud turtle (EN)
Concept Reference
King, F. W., and R. L. Burke, editors. 1989. Crocodilian, tuatara, and turtle species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Association of Systematics Collections, Washington, D.C. 216 pp.
Taxonomic Comments
Crother (2017) and Turtle Taxonomy Working Group (2021) recognize K. steindachneri as a distinct species and continue to recognize hippocrepis as a subspecies of K. subrubrum.

From Crother (2017): Based on a mitochondrial DNA restriction fragment analysis, Walker et al. (1998) resolved hippocrepis as sister to the clade including steindachneri, subrubrum, and baurii, but nearly all subsequent authors retained hippocrepis and steindachneri as subspecies of K. subrubrum. However, Bourque (2016) elevated hippocrepis to a full species based on morphological data from living and fossil form. Nevertheless, without a range-wide analysis of morphometric and/or molecular data supporting that change, we continue to recognize hippocrepis as a subspecies of K. subrubrum.

See Iverson (1991) for a phylogenetic analysis of kinosternine turtles.
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2024-11-13
Change Date1996-10-23
Edition Date2024-11-13
Edition AuthorsGundy, R. L. (2024)
Threat ImpactLow
Range Extent200,000-2,500,000 square km (about 80,000-1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences> 300
Rank Reasons
This species is endemic to the eastern United States where it is common and widespread. The population faces threats from habitat loss due to development and agriculture, road mortality, and incidental pesticide poisoning.
Range Extent Comments
This species is endemic to the eastern United States from Long Island, New York, south to the Florida Panhandle, east along the Gulf Coast states to eastern Texas, and north to southern Illinois and southern Indiana (Ernst and Lovich 2009, Meshaka et al. 2017). There is also a disjunct population in northwestern Indiana (Ernst and Lovich 2009). Using Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) (2024) records from 2004-2024, range extent is estimated to be 2,189,688 km².
Occurrences Comments
There are many hundreds of occurrences throughout the range.
Threat Impact Comments
Threats to this species include habitat loss due to development and agriculture, vehicle strikes along roadways, and incidental poisoning from pesticides (Ernst and Lovich 2009, Meshaka et al. 2017).
Ecology & Habitat

Diagnostic Characteristics

Lamb and Lovich (1990; see also Copeia 1991:561) found that the following characteristics reliably distinguished K. baurii from K. subrubrum subrubrum. Baurii: carapace stripes present, greatly reduced, or absent; side of head bearing a pair of stripes, either continuous or broken; canthal stripe typically extends anteriorly from eye to tip of snout; in males, ratio of posterior humeral/plastron length (PH/PL) falls between 0.29-0.33 and ratio of plastral forelobe length/plastron length (FL/PL) falls between 0.35-0.38; in females, PH/PL falls between 0.28-0.35 and FL/PL falls between 0.32-0.35. Subrubrum: carapace stripes absent; side of head variable, from no markings to extensive spotting or stripelike patterning, but seldom involving a pair of stripes; if side of head is patterned, then canthal stripe, if present, does not extend anterior of eye; in males, PH/PL falls between 0.25-0.28 and FL/PL falls between 0.39-0.42; in females, PH/PL falls between 0.24-0.28 and FL/PL falls between 0.36-0.39. See Lamb and Lovich (1990) for further information on distinguishing baurii from subrubrum in Georgia, the Carolinas, and Virginia. See Lovich and Lamb (1995) for information on distinguishing K. subrubrum hippocrepis from K. baurii.

Habitat

Shallow, slow- or nonflowing fresh or brackish water with soft bottom and abundant aquatic vegetation; also wet meadows. Frequently travels overland. Basically a bottom-dweller. Occupies various aquatic or terrestrial sites (up to at least 135 meters from wetlands; Buhlmann and Gibbons 2001) when inactive. Eggs are laid in a nest dug in an open area in soft soil not far from water; also in and under vegetable and other debris and in muskrat tunnels (Ernst and Barbour 1972). See Bodie et al. (1996) for information on nest site selection. Hatchlings may overwinter in nest.

In South Carolina, terrestrial nesting forays lasted 2-29 days (mean 9 days); gravid females left water, buried themselves, usually stayed buried until a rainstorm occurred, nested during a rainstorm, buried themselves again after nesting, and later returned to the water, usually when another rainstorm occurred (Burke et al. 1994).

Ecology

Aquatic home range size was estimated at about 0.05 hectares in Oklahoma, but movements of several hundred meters (up to 408 meters) were recorded (Mahmoud 1969).

In South Carolina, annual survivorship of adults was 0.82 (Gibbons 1983). Further study in South Carolina indicated that annual survivorship 0.88 for adult females and 0.89 for adult males; first-year survivorship (from egg laying) was 0.18-0.34 over 5 years (Frazer et al. 1991).

Reproduction

Nests early as February in Louisiana, mid-March in Texas, later in north; may nest all year in Florida. Clutch size often 2-4; one clutch/year in southern Illinois, more than 1 in Texas, Arkansas (3), Louisiana, South Carolina (1-3, average 1.2 clutches/year). Eggs hatch in about 3-4 months in Arkansas and Florida, 11 weeks in Maryland. Sexually mature in 4-6 years (7-8 cm CL). In South Carolina, the mean proportion of adult females nesting in a given year was 0.51 (Frazer et al. 1991).
Palustrine Habitats
HERBACEOUS WETLANDFORESTED WETLANDRiparian
Other Nations (1)
United StatesN5
ProvinceRankNative
MissouriS5Yes
PennsylvaniaS1Yes
TennesseeS5Yes
DelawareS5Yes
MississippiS5Yes
LouisianaS5Yes
IllinoisS3Yes
IndianaS1Yes
FloridaS3Yes
New YorkS1Yes
MarylandS5Yes
GeorgiaS5Yes
New JerseySNRYes
OklahomaSNRYes
North CarolinaS5Yes
TexasS5Yes
District of ColumbiaS4Yes
VirginiaS5Yes
AlabamaS5Yes
South CarolinaS5Yes
KentuckyS3Yes
ArkansasS5Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
1 - Residential & commercial developmentRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
1.1 - Housing & urban areasRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
1.2 - Commercial & industrial areasRestricted (11-30%)Slight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2 - Agriculture & aquacultureLarge - restrictedSlight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2.1 - Annual & perennial non-timber cropsLarge - restrictedSlight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
4 - Transportation & service corridorsLarge - restrictedSlight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
4.1 - Roads & railroadsLarge - restrictedSlight or 1-10% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
9 - PollutionRestricted - smallNegligible or <1% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
9.3 - Agricultural & forestry effluentsRestricted - smallNegligible or <1% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
9.3.3 - Herbicides and pesticidesRestricted - smallNegligible or <1% pop. declineHigh (continuing)

—

Roadless Areas (7)
Arkansas (1)
AreaForestAcres
Blue MountainOuachita National Forest9,755
Louisiana (1)
AreaForestAcres
Saline Bayou W & S River CorridorKisatchie National Forest5,355
North Carolina (4)
AreaForestAcres
Catfish Lake NorthCroatan National Forest11,299
Catfish Lake South - BCroatan National Forest172
Pond Pine BCroatan National Forest2,961
Sheep Ridge AdditionCroatan National Forest5,808
South Carolina (1)
AreaForestAcres
Wambaw ExtFrancis Marion National Forest527
References (26)
  1. Bennett, D. H., J. W. Gibbons, and J. C. Franson. 1970. Terrestrial activity in aquatic turtles. Ecology 51:738-740.
  2. Bodie, J. R., K. R. Smith, and V. J. Burke. 1996. A comparison of diel nest temperature and nest site selection for two sympatric species of freshwater turtles. American Midland Naturalist 136:181-186.
  3. Bourque, J. R. 2012. An extinct mud turtle of the <i>Kinosternon flavescens</i> group (Testudines, Kinosternidae) from the middle Miocene (late Barstovian) of New Mexico. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 32(1):68-81.
  4. Bourque, J. R. 2016. New mud turtles (Kinosternidae, <i>Kinosternon</i>) from the middle–late Miocene of the United States. Journal of Paleontology 89(5):821-844.
  5. Buhlmann, K. A., and J. W. Gibbons. 2001. Terrestrial habitat use by aquatic turtles from a seasonally fluctuating wetland: implications for wetland conservation boundaries. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 4:115-127.
  6. Burke, V. J., J. W. Gibbons, and J. L. Greene. 1994. Prolonged nesting forays by common mud turtles (<i>Kinosternon subrubrum</i>). Am. Midl. Nat 131:190-195.
  7. 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.
  8. 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
  9. Crother, B. I. (editor). 2017. Scientific and standard English names of amphibians and reptiles of North America north of Mexico, with comments regarding confidence in our understanding. 8th edition. SSAR Herpetological Circular 43:1-104. [Updates in SSAR North American Species Names Database at: https://ssarherps.org/cndb]
  10. Ernst. C. H., and J. E. Lovich. 2009. Turtles of the United States and Canada. Second edition, revised and updated. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. xii + 827 pp.
  11. Ernst, C. H., and R. W. Barbour. 1972. Turtles of the United States. Univ. Press of Kentucky, Lexington. x + 347 pp.
  12. Frazer, N. B., J. W. Gibbons, and J. L. Greene. 1991. Life history and demography of the common mud turtle <i>Kinosternon subrubrum</i> in South Carolina, USA. Ecology 72:2218-2231.
  13. Gibbons, J. W. 1983. Reproductive characteristics and ecology of the mud turtle, <i>Kinosternon subrubrum</i> (Lacepede).Herpetologica 39:254-271.
  14. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). 2024. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) data portal. Online. Available: https://www.gbif.org/ (accessed 2024).
  15. Houseal, T. W., and J. L. Carr. 1983. Notes on the reproduction of <i>Kinosternon subrubrum</i> (Testudines: Kinosternidae) in east Texas. Southwest. Nat. 28:237-248.
  16. Iverson, J. B. 1977. <i>Kinosternon subrubrum</i>. Cat. Am. Amph. Rep. 193.1-193.4.
  17. Iverson, J. B. 1979. Reproduction and growth of the mud turtle, <i>Kinosternon subrubrum</i> (Reptilia, Testudines, Kinosternidae), in Arkansas. J. Herpetol. 13:105-111.
  18. Iverson, J. B. 1991b. Phylogenetic hypotheses for the evolution of modern kinosternine turtles. Herpetological Monographs 5:1-27.
  19. King, F. W., and R. L. Burke, editors. 1989. Crocodilian, tuatara, and turtle species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Association of Systematics Collections, Washington, D.C. 216 pp.
  20. Lovich, J. E., and T. Lamb. 1995. Morphometric similarity between the turtles <i>Kinosternon subrubrum hippocrepis</i> and <i>K. baurii</i> . Journal of Herpetology 29:621-624.
  21. Mahmoud, I. Y. 1969. Comparative ecology of the kinosternid turtles of Oklahoma. Southwestern Naturalist 14(1):31-66.
  22. Meshaka, W.E., Jr., Gibbons, J.W., Hughes, D.F., Klemens, M.W., and Iverson, J.B. 2017. <i>Kinosternon subrubrum</i> (Bonnaterre 1789) – Eastern Mud Turtle. In: Rhodin, A.G.J., Iverson, J.B., van Dijk, P.P., Buhlmann, K.A., Pritchard, P.C.H., and Mittermeier, R.A. (Eds.). Conservation Biology of Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises: A Compilation Project of the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group. Chelonian Research Monographs 5(10):101.1–16. doi: 10.3854/crm.5.101.subrubrum.v1.2017; iucn-tftsg.org/cbftt/.
  23. Turtle Taxonomy Working Group (TTWG) [Rhodin, A. G. J., J. B. Iverson, R. Bour, U. Fritz, A. Georges, H. B. Shaffer, and P. P. van Dijk]. 2021. Turtles of the World: Annotated Checklist and Atlas of Taxonomy, Synonymy, Distribution, and Conservation Status (9th Ed.). In: Rhodin, A. G. J., J. B. Iverson , P. P. van Dijk, C. B. Stanford, E. V. Goode, K. A. Buhlmann, and R. A. Mittermeier (Eds.). Conservation Biology of Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises: A Compilation Project of the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group. Chelonian Research Monographs 8:1–472. doi: 10.3854/crm.8.checklist.atlas.v9.2021.
  24. Turtle Taxonomy Working Group [van Dijk, P.P., Iverson, J.B., Shaffer, H.B., Bour, R., and Rhodin, A.G.J.]. 2012. Turtles of the world, 2012 update: annotated checklist of taxonomy, synonymy, distribution, and conservation status. In: Rhodin, A.G.J., Pritchard, P.C.H., van Dijk, P.P., Saumure, R.A., Buhlmann, K.A., Iverson, J.B., and Mittermeier, R.A. (Eds.). Conservation Biology of Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises: A Compilation Project of the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group. Chelonian Research Monographs No. 5:000.243-000.328. Online. Available: www.iucn-tftsg.org/cbftt/.
  25. Walker, D., and J. C. Avise. 1998. Principles of phylogeography as illustrated by freshwater and terrestrial turtles in the southeastern United States. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 29:23-58.
  26. Walker, D., P. E. Mohler, K. A. Buhlmann, and J. C. Avise. 1998. Phylogeographic patterns in <i>Kinosternon subrubrum</i> and <i>K. baurii</i> based on mitochondrial DNA restriction analyses. Herpetologica 54:174-184.