Do Black snakes have teeth?
608207
yes all snakes have teeth, they need them to hold on to food as they swallow them... WHOLE. \nSnakes have many more teeth than found in mammals. Many snake species have over 200 teeth, which can be found in two rows along the top and bottom of its mouth. Unlike mammals, the teeth are attached to the side of the jawbone. Snakes cannot use their teeth to chew pray since they are all pointing backwards. This is to help the snake swallow and hold it's prey. If one of it's teeth comes out or gets broken it is quickly replaced by another tooth (this is much like sharks teeth). Also snakes usually shed their teeth to always make sure that they are sharp. All of the snake's teeth are the same length and size except the elongated teeth of Boas and Pythons and the Venomous snakes. that's probably why your friend said that.
374507
Yes! They have about 25, 600 teeth and can chew through about anything!
559225
Much of the support for the idea that snakes evolved at sea is their close phylogenetic relationship with the extinct group of marine reptiles, the mosasaurs.\n\nBoth snakes and mosasaurs share a number of unique characters, such as a hinge in the middle of the lower jaw, loss of the symphysis joining the two halves of the lower jaw, and the stabilization of the spinal column (the zygosphene-zygantra articulation).  These adaptations seem to have been a major evolutionary success, and led to adaptive radiations of the mosasaurs, snakes and the aigialosaurs (another extinct related group).\n\nIf the group (often called the Pythonomorpha) evolved at sea, it would explain a lot of the other adaptations (such as reduced or modified limbs) that these groups show.  However, more and more the fossil evidence seems to indicate that the Pythonomorpha probably evolved on land, and then each group developed adaptations ideal for marine environments totally separately.\n\nThis solution is not as elegant as it would be if all of the adaptations in the Pythonomorpha occurred at the same time, but it appears that sometimes evolution does not occur as elegantly as we might like.\n\nA terrestrial origin for snakes does explain some of the other unusual features of snakes, such as their eyes which show signs of having been reduced or completely lost at one point, and then an entirely new visual anatomy developed as they re-emerged from a subterrainean existence.
670924
Birds have one, snakes have one, and i believe a few of the lizards only have one.
184632
The Black Mamba is a snake from South Africa. It grows up to about 12-14' in length. It is considered to be the most poisonous snake in the world. They eat mainly small mammals and birds. Without immediate medical attention a bite to a human is always fatal.
403754
To my knowledge, there are no snakes that reproduce mostly through asexual means.  Numerous snakes are known to be able to reproduce by parthenogenesis, producing little clones of the mother, but never as a primary mode of reproduction, usually only if males are not available.
667063
The phylogeny of snakes is poorly known due to the fact that snake skeletons are typically small and fragile, making fossilization unlikely. It has however been generally agreed, on the basis of morphology, that snakes descended from lizard-like ancestors. Recent research based on genetics and biochemistry confirms this; snakes form a venom clade with several extant lizard families.\n\nRecent fossil evidence suggests that snakes directly evolved from burrowing lizards, either varanids or some other group. An early fossil snake, Najash rionegrina, was a two-legged burrowing animal with a sacrum, fully terrestrial. One extant analog of these putative ancestors is the earless monitor Lanthanotus of Borneo, although it also is semi-aquatic. As these ancestors became more subterranean, they lost their limbs and became more streamlined for burrowing. Features such as the transparent, fused eyelids and loss of external ears, according to this hypothesis, evolved to combat subterranean conditions (scratched corneas, dirt in the ears). According to this hypothesis, snakes re-emerged onto the surface of the land much as they are today. Other primitive snakes are known to have possessed hindlimbs but lacked a direct connection of the pelvic bones to the vertebrae, including Haasiophis, Pachyrhachis and Eupodophis) which are slightly older than Najash.\n\nThe alternative hypothesis, based on morphology, suggests that ancestors were related to mosasaurs — extinct aquatic reptiles from the Cretaceous — which in turn are thought to have derived from varanid lizards. Under this hypothesis, the fused, transparent eyelids of snakes are thought to have evolved to combat marine conditions (corneal water loss through osmosis), while the external ears were lost through disuse in an aquatic environment, ultimately leading to an animal similar in appearance to sea snakes of today. In the Late Cretaceous, snakes re-colonized the land much like they are today. Fossil snake remains are known from early Late Cretateous marine sediments, which is consistent with this hypothesis, particularly as they are older than the terrestrial Najash rionegrina. Similar skull structure; reduced/absent limbs; and other anatomical features found in both mosasaurs and snakes lead to a positive cladistical correlation, though some features are also shared with varanids. Supposedly similar locomotion for both groups is also used as support for this hypothesis. Genetic studies have indicated that snakes are not especially related to monitor lizards, and (it has been claimed) therefore not to mosasaurs, the proposed ancestor in the aquatic scenario of their evolution. However, there is more evidence linking mosasaurs to snakes than to varanids. Fragmentary remains that have been found from the Jurassic and Early Cretaceous indicate deeper fossil records for these groups, which may eventually refute either hypothesis.\n\nThe great diversity of modern snakes appeared in the Paleocene, probably correlated with the adaptive radiation of mammals following the extinction of the dinosaurs.
103909
>>>>>> Only vertebrates have teeth.\n\nThat isn't true. Lampreys have teeth and are not vertebrates. The radulae of many molluscs also have teeth.\n\nThe rest of your answer was spot on though.
504128
Sharks do have backbones, as all vertebrates. Sharks do not have true bone, but their cartilaginous skeleton can be heavily calcified so that their vertebrae have the apperance of "bone" because they look like hard white cylindric spools. You might have seen their vertebrae made into necklaces and such by artisans. \nThis is what a shark trunk vertebra looks like:\nhttp://www.marinebiodiversity.ca/shark/english/porbeagle_vertebra__copy.jpg\nAnd without the neural and haemal arches they look like this: \nhttp://homepage.mac.com/mollet/Cm/BaskingSharkImages/basking%20shark%20vertebra%204.jpg\n\nAnd these are fragments of backbones:\nhttp://www.indonetwork.info/member/77806_backbone2.jpg\n\n(Notice the white color because the cartilage is calcified.)\n\nAlmost all the cartilaginous fish have backbones made of vertebrae (i.e. both sharks and skates/rays); the exception are the chimaeras or ratfish which do not have vertebrae, but retain a notochord (the primitive condition).
180569
snakes are immune to there on venom but not to other species\nof snakes
296332
The flat teeth near the back of your mouth indicated that you crush things such as leaves (lettuce), the sharp-pointy teeth near the front indicate that your teeth were designed to eat meat (pork-chops...yum). Therefore human teeth represent an omnivorous animal.
632812
Low mostly.Because most pisonous snakes don't want to bite you.Only if they get scared of you or if you harass them they may bite.If you live in tropical areas like south america or africa you might be a little at risk.Black mumbas attack when they see you.Even if you did not harm them they want to bite you.So chances of snake bites are quite high in the tropical areas and Africa.
7756
it depends on the family of the snake tat belongs 2 \nex:take python it will eat all small snakes which does not belong to python family..
323727
Well, yea and no..Only vertebrates have teeth as we know them, but insects, including caterpillars, do have structures called "teeth". \n\nCaterpillar mouthparts are mandibles, which are the mouthparts of all the arthropods - by far the largest and most successful animal group, which includes insects, crustaceans, spiders and relatives, millipedes, centipedes and a few more slightly obscure groups of things.
450124
They tend to be an agressive snake.  They do not make good pets (Yes, there are some that remain small enough to be pets).\n\nOther than that, don't know what you're looking for...
34095
They can move faster than snakes. When a venomous snake is trying to bite the mongoose, the mongoose is fast enough to avoid the bite many times. When the snake gets too tired, the mongoose eats the snake.\n\nContrary to popular belief, the mongoose is NOT immune to snake venom.
36923
Mamba\nGreen mamba & Black mamba. \nThese are venomous arboreal snakes of tropical Africa\n\nAm I right Sir?