Chelydra serpentina

(Linnaeus, 1758)

Snapping Turtle

G4Apparently Secure (G4G5) Found in 84 roadless areas NatureServe Explorer →
G4Apparently SecureGlobal Rank
Least concernIUCN
High - mediumThreat Impact
Identity
Unique IDELEMENT_GLOBAL.2.103761
Element CodeARAAB01010
Record TypeSPECIES
ClassificationSpecies
Classification StatusStandard
Name CategoryVertebrate Animal
IUCNLeast concern
CITESAppendix III
Endemicoccurs (regularly, as a native taxon) in multiple nations
KingdomAnimalia
PhylumCraniata
ClassChelonia
OrderTestudines
FamilyChelydridae
GenusChelydra
Other Common Names
Common Snapping Turtle (EN) Eastern Snapping Turtle (EN) North American Snapping Turtle (EN) snapping turtle (EN) Tortue serpentine (FR)
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
Peninsular Florida population sometimes has been regarded as a separate species, C. osceola. MtDNA exhibits almost no variation within or between populations in the southeastern U.S. (Walker et al. 1998), though there are moderate mtDNA differences between individuals in North America and those in Central and South America (Philips et al. 1996). Phillips et al. (1996) proposed that three evolutionary species be recognized in the Chelydra serpentina group, but Sites and Crandall (1997) disputed their methods and conclusions and emphasized the need for further study using improved methods. In accordance with Phillips et al. (1996) and Shaffer et al. (2008), Crother (2012, 2017) and Turtle Taxonomy Working Group (2012, 2021) abandoned the recognition of subspecies.

This species has previously been called the Common Snapping Turtle (e.g. Collins 1997), but according to Crother et al. (2008) the adjective has been dropped because it might be misinterpreted as referring to the abundance of the species rather than its being the typical, most widespread species of its family.
Conservation Status
Rank Method Rank calculation - Biotics v2
Review Date2024-08-12
Change Date2024-08-12
Edition Date2024-08-12
Edition AuthorsK. Hunting (2024)
Threat ImpactHigh - medium
Range Extent>2,500,000 square km (greater than 1,000,000 square miles)
Number of Occurrences> 300
Rank Reasons
This species is common in most parts of its range but populations may be vulnerable in other parts. Increased legal and illegal harvest of this species and the on-going loss of wetlands within this species range suggest declines may be occurring in some parts of its range.
Range Extent Comments
In the U.S., this species range includes the eastern continent east of the Rocky Mountains from the Canadian border south and east to the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic seaboard respectively. In Canada, this species range includes mainland Nova Scotia, southern New Brunswick, southern and central Quebec, southern and central Ontario, southern Manitoba, and southeastern Saskatchewan (COSEWIC 2008). This species has been introduced in many areas including western North America (western U.S. states and Canadian provinces) and parts of Europe and Asia. Based on a concave hull analysis of recent observation records (GBIF 2024) from within its described range, the range extent of this species is about 5,830,000 km2.
Occurrences Comments
The number of occurrences of this species is unknown but exceeds 300.
Threat Impact Comments
In Canada, the most prevalent threats are legal and illegal harvesting, direct persecution, and road mortality all of which effect adult survivorship; a vital rate significantly effecting population status (COSEWIC 2008). Harvest in Ontario and Nova Scotia is permitted with a license. In the U.S., these threats as well as loss of wetland and riverine habitat (Dyke et al. 2015) are threat factors in the U.S. Virginia, USA, identified this species as warranting Greatest Conservation Need until research results inform the sustainability of harvest for domestic and foreign consumption. Similarly, South Carolina designated this species as Greatest Conservation Need based on the uncertain sustainability of harvest for the pet trade (South Carolina Department of Natural Resources 2015).
Ecology & Habitat

Description

Shell hard, often with attached mud or algae; rear edge of upper shell saw-toothed; tail as long as or longer than carapace, with crest of large bony scales; head large, with hooked jaws; lower shell relatively small, composed of nine shields; limbs strong, with webbed toes and strong claws; maximum upper shell length nearly 50 cm, but usually less than 36 cm. Adult: upper shell relatively smooth, longitudinal ridges not very prominent. Mature male: anal opening farther from base of tail than in female, usually posterior to rear edge of carapace (under rear edge in female); grows to larger size than female. Juvenile: carapace with three longitudinal ridges. Hatchling: carapace rough, with conspicuous ridges, producing a cryptic dead-leaf-like appearance. Eggs: shell moderately pliable, somewhat brittle, with visible pores; 23-35 mm x 22-31 mm (average 28 mm x 27 mm). Source: Hammerson (1999).

Habitat

Snapping turtles occupy all types of freshwater habitats (streams, lakes, reservoirs, ponds, marshes, swamps), especially those with soft mud bottoms and abundant aquatic vegetation or submerged brush and logs. They occur in brackish water in some areas. Usually they are on the bottom but sometimes bask out of water, especially younger individuals and in far north. Hibernation occurs singly or in groups in streams, lakes, ponds, or marshes; in bottom mud, in or under submerged logs or debris, under overhanging bank, or in muskrat tunnel; often in shallow water; sometimes in anoxic sites (Brown and Brooks 1994, Herman et al. 1995). Nesting occurs in soft soil in open areas, often hundreds of meters from water (up to 181 m from permanent water in Michigan, Congdon et al. 1987), sometimes in muskrat houses.

Ecology

In Ontario, males occupied relatively stable, overlapping home ranges; summer range 0.4-2.3 ha (Galbraith et al. 1987). Also in Ontario, July-August foraging home ranges in three sites during one year were 2.3-18.1 ha (means fell between 5 and 9 ha); home range length was about 550-1990 m; home range size did not vary with habitat productivity (Brown et al. 1994). In another Ontario study, home range size over a year was 1.0-28.4 ha, averaging about 9 ha for females and about 2-3 ha for males (Pettit et al. 1995).

Frequently incurs high rates of nest predation (30-100% in Michigan) by various Carnivora (Congdon et al. 1987). See Iverson (1991) for a compilation of survivorship data (egg survival low, not more than 0.22; adult survival generally high, over 0.90). A population in Ontario, Canada, was characterized as stable, with adult female annual survivorship greater than 0.95; later, a great increase in adult mortality occurred, apparently due primarily to otter predation on hibernating turtles; there was no compensatory density-dependent response in reproduction and recruitment (Brooks et al. 1991). In Michigan, actual annual survivorship of juveniles was over 0.65 by age 2 and averaged 0.77 between ages 2 and 12 years; annual survivorship of adult females ranged from 0.88 to 0.97; population stability was most sensitive to changes in adult or juvenile survival and less sensitive to changes in age at sexual maturity, nest survival, or fecundity (Congdon et al. 1994).

Reproduction

Mating may occur any time during the warmer months. Snapping turtles in North America typically nest from late May to early July (mainly in June), but mainly from mid-June to early July in the far north. In dry regions, ground-softening rains often stimulate nesting. Clutch size averages 20-35, sometimes exceeds 100; 1 clutch/year in Michigan. Hatching and emergence from the nest typically occur about 2-3.5 months after laying, from late August to early October (most often in September), but sometimes the young do not emerge from the nest before winter.

Snapping turtles commonly experience low reproductive success due to extensive predation on their eggs, but females produce large clutches and may live and reproduce for several decades, so eventually they produce offspring that join the breeding population. In Michigan, nest survivorship over 17 years ranged from 0 to 64% and averaged 23% (Congdon et al. 1994). In Ontario, growth rate and reproductive output increased with habitat productivity (Brown et al. 1994). In Michigan, minimum reproductive frequency was less than annual (0.85) (Congdon et al. 1994).

Females are sexually mature in about 8 years in Iowa, 10-20 years in Ontario (later in north than in south), 11-16 years in southeastern Michigan (Congdon et al. 1994); also in Ontario, mean age of first nesting estimated at 17-19 years (Galbraith et al. 1989). In Ontario, the mean age of nesting females was estimated at 33-40 years (Brooks et al. 1988, Galbraith and Brooks 1989).
Palustrine Habitats
TEMPORARY POOLHERBACEOUS WETLANDSCRUB-SHRUB WETLANDFORESTED WETLANDBog/fenRiparian
Other Nations (2)
CanadaN4
ProvinceRankNative
New BrunswickS3Yes
QuebecS4Yes
ManitobaS3Yes
British ColumbiaSNANo
SaskatchewanS3Yes
AlbertaSNANo
OntarioS4Yes
Nova ScotiaS3Yes
United StatesN5
ProvinceRankNative
MinnesotaS4Yes
New MexicoS5Yes
OklahomaSNRYes
ColoradoS4Yes
New YorkS4Yes
South CarolinaS5Yes
ArkansasS5Yes
AlabamaS5Yes
District of ColumbiaS5Yes
LouisianaS5Yes
WyomingS4Yes
ArizonaSNANo
MichiganS5Yes
NevadaSNANo
North DakotaSNRYes
Rhode IslandS5Yes
West VirginiaS5Yes
PennsylvaniaS5Yes
IndianaS5Yes
NebraskaS5Yes
TexasS4Yes
DelawareS5Yes
MissouriS5Yes
MarylandS5Yes
New JerseyS5Yes
WisconsinS4Yes
MontanaS3Yes
VirginiaS5Yes
MaineS5Yes
North CarolinaS5Yes
IowaS5Yes
IllinoisS5Yes
OhioS5Yes
New HampshireS5Yes
UtahSNANo
KansasS5Yes
OregonSNANo
MassachusettsS5Yes
ConnecticutS5Yes
TennesseeS5Yes
South DakotaS5Yes
IdahoSNANo
VermontS5Yes
WashingtonSNANo
KentuckyS5Yes
FloridaS5Yes
GeorgiaS5Yes
MississippiS5Yes
Threat Assessments
ThreatScopeSeverityTiming
2 - Agriculture & aquacultureLarge (31-70%)Moderate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
2.1 - Annual & perennial non-timber cropsLarge (31-70%)Moderate or 11-30% pop. declineHigh (continuing)
4 - Transportation & service corridorsLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
4.1 - Roads & railroadsLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
5 - Biological resource useLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
5.1 - Hunting & collecting terrestrial animalsLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
5.1.1 - Intentional use (species being assessed is the target)Large (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)
5.1.3 - Persecution/controlLarge (31-70%)Moderate - slightHigh (continuing)

Roadless Areas (84)
Arkansas (3)
AreaForestAcres
Dismal CreekOzark-St. Francis National Forest9,160
East ForkOzark-St. Francis National Forest13,037
Little BlakelyOuachita National Forest3,342
Florida (2)
AreaForestAcres
Alexander Springs CreekOcala National Forest2,954
Natural Area WsaOsceola National Forest2,543
Georgia (2)
AreaForestAcres
Helton CreekChattahoochee National Forest2,348
Pink KnobChattahoochee National Forest12,127
Idaho (1)
AreaForestAcres
Bear CreekCaribou-Targhee National Forest118,582
Illinois (1)
AreaForestAcres
Ripple HollowShawnee National Forest3,788
Indiana (1)
AreaForestAcres
Mogan RidgeHoosier National Forest8,435
Louisiana (1)
AreaForestAcres
Saline Bayou W & S River CorridorKisatchie National Forest5,355
Michigan (1)
AreaForestAcres
FibreHiawatha National Forest7,432
Minnesota (3)
AreaForestAcres
Cabin CreekSuperior National Forest6,071
Kawishiwi Lake To SawbillSuperior National Forest15,305
Wood LakeSuperior National Forest596
Missouri (2)
AreaForestAcres
Irish Rare II Study AreaMark Twain National Forest1,226
Swan Creek Rare II Study AreaMark Twain National Forest7,310
New Hampshire (3)
AreaForestAcres
Carr MountainWhite Mountain National Forest17,110
Kinsman MountainWhite Mountain National Forest8,999
Sandwich RangeWhite Mountain National Forest16,797
New Mexico (1)
AreaForestAcres
Candian RiverCibola National Forest7,149
North Carolina (6)
AreaForestAcres
Bald MountainPisgah National Forest11,085
Cheoah BaldNantahala National Forest7,795
Harper CreekPisgah National Forest7,325
Pocosin AdditionCroatan National Forest286
Pond Pine BCroatan National Forest2,961
Tusquitee BaldNantahala National Forest13,670
North Dakota (5)
AreaForestAcres
Bullion ButteDakota Prairie Grasslands19,877
Kinley PlateauDakota Prairie Grasslands16,900
Long X DivideDakota Prairie Grasslands10,099
Ponderosa PineDakota Prairie Grasslands7,471
SheyenneDakota Prairie Grasslands14,537
Pennsylvania (2)
AreaForestAcres
Clarion RiverAllegheny National Forest3,821
Tracy RidgeAllegheny National Forest9,034
South Dakota (1)
AreaForestAcres
Indian CreekBuffalo Gap National Grassland24,666
Tennessee (7)
AreaForestAcres
Bald MountainCherokee National Forest11,743
Beaver Dam CreekCherokee National Forest5,070
Brushy RidgeCherokee National Forest7,469
Devil's BackboneCherokee National Forest4,287
Slide HollowCherokee National Forest4,057
Stone MountainCherokee National Forest5,367
Sycamore CreekCherokee National Forest6,984
Texas (3)
AreaForestAcres
Big CreekNational Forests in Texas1,447
Little Lake CreekNational Forests in Texas596
Winters BayouNational Forests in Texas730
Vermont (4)
AreaForestAcres
Bread LoafGreen Mountain and Finger Lakes National Forests1,768
Griffith Lake 09084Green Mountain and Finger Lakes National Forests1,833
Lye Brook Addition 09085Green Mountain and Finger Lakes National Forests1,111
Wilder Mountain 09082Green Mountain and Finger Lakes National Forests8,759
Virginia (20)
AreaForestAcres
Bear CreekJefferson National Forest18,274
Beards MountainGeorge Washington National Forest7,505
Beaver Dam CreekJefferson National Forest1,135
Brush MountainJefferson National Forest6,002
Brush Mountain EastJefferson National Forest4,916
Dolly AnnGeorge Washington National Forest7,855
Elliott KnobGeorge Washington National Forest9,380
Garden MountainJefferson National Forest3,960
JerkemtightGeorge Washington National Forest16,687
Kelley MountainGeorge Washington National Forest7,590
Laurel ForkGeorge Washington National Forest9,967
Little RiverGeorge Washington National Forest27,292
Mountain Lake Addition AJefferson National Forest1,469
Mt. PleasantGeorge Washington National Forest8,933
New London Bridge BranchJefferson National Forest844
North MountainJefferson National Forest8,377
Northern MassanuttenGeorge Washington National Forest9,444
Peters Mountain Addition BJefferson National Forest2,909
Seng MountainJefferson National Forest6,428
Southern MassanuttenGeorge Washington National Forest11,985
West Virginia (11)
AreaForestAcres
Canaan LoopMonongahela National Forest7,867
Cranberry AdditionMonongahela National Forest11,123
Cranberry Glades Botanical AreaMonongahela National Forest785
Dolly Sods Roaring PlainMonongahela National Forest13,392
Falls Of Hills CreekMonongahela National Forest6,925
Glady ForkMonongahela National Forest3,239
Little MountainMonongahela National Forest8,172
Mcgowan MountainMonongahela National Forest10,504
Middle MountainMonongahela National Forest19,020
North Mountain HopevilleMonongahela National Forest6,525
Spice RunMonongahela National Forest6,251
Wisconsin (3)
AreaForestAcres
09157 - Chase CreekChequamegon-Nicolet National Forest6,140
09177 - Le Roy CreekChequamegon-Nicolet National Forest8,138
09182 - Pentoga RoadChequamegon-Nicolet National Forest5,008
Wyoming (1)
AreaForestAcres
Walker PrairieBighorn National Forest62,434
References (39)
  1. Brooks, R.J., D.A. Galbraith, E.G. Nancekivell, and C.A. Bishop. 1988. Developing management guidelines for snapping turtles. General technical report RM-Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (USA).
  2. Brooks, R. J., G. P. Brown, and D. A. Galbraith. 1991. Effects of a sudden increase in natural mortality of adults on a population of the common snapping turtle (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>). Can. J. Zool. 1314-1320.
  3. Brown, G. P., and R. J. Brooks. 1994. Characteristics of and fidelity to hibernacula in a northern population of snapping turtles, <i>Chelydra serpentina</i>. Copeia 1994:222-226.
  4. Brown, G. P., C. A. Bishop, and R. J. Brooks. 1994. Growth rate, reproductive output, and temperature selection of snapping turtles in habitats of different productivities. J. Herpetol. 28:405-410.
  5. 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.
  6. Congdon, J. D., A. E. Dunham, and R. C. van Loben Sels. 1994. Demographics of common snapping turtles (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>): implications for conservation and management of long-lived organisms. American Zoologist 34:397-408.
  7. Congdon, J. D., et al. 1987. Reproduction and nesting ecology of snapping turtles (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>) in southeastern Michigan. Herpetologica 43:39-54.
  8. COSEWIC. 2008. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Snapping Turtle (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>) in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa, 47pp. Online. Available: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/species-risk-public-registry/cosewic-assessments-status-reports/snapping-turtle-2008.html
  9. 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
  10. 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.
  11. 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]
  12. Dyke, S.R., S.K. Johnson, and P.T. Isakson. 2015. North Dakota State Wildlife Action Plan. North Dakota Game and Fish Department, Bismarck, ND, 468 pp.
  13. Ernst, C. H., and R. W. Barbour. 1972. Turtles of the United States. Univ. Press of Kentucky, Lexington. x + 347 pp.
  14. Ernst, C. H., and R. W. Barbour. 1989a. Turtles of the world. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. xii + 313 pp.
  15. Froese, A. D., and G. M. Burghardt. 1975. A dense natural population of the common snapping turtle (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>). Herpetologica 31:204-208.
  16. Galbraith, D. A., and R. J. Brooks. 1989. Age estimates for snapping turtles. J. Wildl. Manage. 53:502-508.
  17. Galbraith, D. A., M. W. Chandler, and R. J. Brooks. 1987. The fine structure of home ranges of male <i>Chelydra serpentina</i>: are snapping turtles territorial. Can. J. Zool. 65:2623-2629.
  18. Galbraith, D. A., R. J. Brooks, and M. E. Obbard. 1989. The influence of growth rate on age and body size at maturity in female snapping turtles (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>). Copeia 1989:896-904.
  19. Gibbons, J. W., S. S. Novak, and C. H. Ernst. 1988. <i>Chelydra serpentina</i>. Cat. Am. Amph. Rep. 420.1-420.4.
  20. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). 2024. Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) data portal. Online. Available: https://www.gbif.org/ (accessed 2024).
  21. Haxton, T. 2000. Road mortality of snapping turtles, <i>Chelydra serpentina</i>, in central Ontario during their nesting period. Canadian Field-Naturalist 114:106-110.
  22. Iverson, J. B. 1991c. Patterns of survivorship in turtles (order Testudines). Canadian J. Zoology 69:385-391.
  23. 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.
  24. Lagler, K. F. 1943. Food habits and economic relations of turtles of Michigan with special reference to fish management. American Midland Naturalist 29(2):257-312.
  25. Lang, M.W., J.C. Ingebritsen, and R.K. Griffin. 2024. Status and Trends of Wetlands in the Conterminous United States 2009 to 2019. U.S. Department of the Interior; Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 43 pp. Online. Available: https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2024-04/wetlands-status-and-trends-report-2009-to-2019_0.pdf
  26. Major, P. D. 1975. Density of snapping turtles, <i>Chelydra serpentina</i> in western West Virginia. Herpetologica 31:332-335.
  27. Pettit, K. E., C. A. Bishop, and R. J. Brooks. 1995. Home range and movements of the common snapping turtle, <i>Chelydra serpentina</i> <i>serpentina</i>, in a coastal wetland of Hamilton Harbour, Lake Ontario, Canada. Canadian Field-Naturalist 109:192-200.
  28. Phillips, C. A., W. W. Dimmick, and J. L. Carr. 1996. Conservation genetics of the common snapping turtle (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>). Conservation Biology 10:397-405.
  29. Portofee, M.C., M.A. Child, and D.R. Edds. 2017. Semiaquatic turtles of Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve, Chase County, Kansas. Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science 120(1–2):68-72.
  30. Shaffer, H.B., D. E. Starkey, and M. K. Fujita. 2008. Molecular insights into the systematics of snapping turtles (Chelydridae). Pages 44-49 in Steyermark, Finkler, and Brooks (editors). Biology of the snapping turtle (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>). Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
  31. Sites, J. W., Jr., and K. A. Crandall. 1997. Testing species boundaries in biodiversity studies. Conservation Biology 11:1289-1297.
  32. South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. 2015. South Carolina State Wildlife Action Plan (SWAP) (2015 revision). Columbia, South Carolina. Available online at: https://www.dnr.sc.gov/swap/index.html
  33. Stebbins, R. C. 2003. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Third edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.
  34. 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.
  35. Turtle Taxonomy Working Group [van Dijk, P.P., Iverson, J.B., Rhodin, A.G.J., Shaffer, H.B., and Bour, R.]. 2014. Turtles of the world, 7th edition: annotated checklist of taxonomy, synonymy, distribution with maps, 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 5(7):000.329–479, doi:10.3854/crm.5.000.checklist.v7.2014.
  36. 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/.
  37. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2024. State Wildlife Action Plans (SWAP). A National Look at Species of Greatest Conservation Need as Reported in State Wildlife Action Plans. U.S. Geological Survey. Science and Analytics Synthesis (SAS) Program. Online. Available: https://www1.usgs.gov/csas/swap/
  38. 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.
  39. Walker, D., P. E. Moler, K. A. Buhlmann, and J. C. Avise. 1998. Phylogeographic uniformity in mitochondrial DNA of the snapping turtle (<i>Chelydra serpentina</i>). Animal Conservation 1:55-60.