Invasive Species Compendium

Detailed coverage of invasive species threatening livelihoods and the environment worldwide

Datasheet

Chrysemys picta
(painted turtle)

Toolbox

Datasheet

Chrysemys picta (painted turtle)

Summary

  • Last modified
  • 13 November 2018
  • Datasheet Type(s)
  • Invasive Species
  • Preferred Scientific Name
  • Chrysemys picta
  • Preferred Common Name
  • painted turtle
  • Taxonomic Tree
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •   Kingdom: Metazoa
  •     Phylum: Chordata
  •       Subphylum: Vertebrata
  •         Class: Reptilia
  • Summary of Invasiveness
  • C. picta is an aquatic turtle native to North America popular with pet fanciers around the world. The pet trade is the most common mode of invasion pathway for this species, as individuals escape from their enc...

  • Principal Source
  • Draft datasheet under review

Don't need the entire report?

Generate a print friendly version containing only the sections you need.

Generate report

Pictures

Top of page
PictureTitleCaptionCopyright
Chrysemys picta (painted turtle); adult, at water surface. Eastern USA. September, 2011.
TitleAdult
CaptionChrysemys picta (painted turtle); adult, at water surface. Eastern USA. September, 2011.
Copyright©Greg Schechter- CC BY 2.0 - via Wikimedia
Chrysemys picta (painted turtle); adult, at water surface. Eastern USA. September, 2011.
AdultChrysemys picta (painted turtle); adult, at water surface. Eastern USA. September, 2011.©Greg Schechter- CC BY 2.0 - via Wikimedia

Identity

Top of page

Preferred Scientific Name

  • Chrysemys picta Schneider

Preferred Common Name

  • painted turtle

Local Common Names

  • Germany: Zierschildkröte

Summary of Invasiveness

Top of page

C. picta is an aquatic turtle native to North America popular with pet fanciers around the world. The pet trade is the most common mode of invasion pathway for this species, as individuals escape from their enclosures or when people release them intentionally when they are tired of caring for their pet, when their animals are sick, or to establish new populations. C. picta has been introduced to Europe (Kraus 2009), parts of the United States (Kraus 2009), and in Asia in Indonesia and Philippine Islands (Uetz and Hosek, 2015) but evidence of impact is lacking in the literature. C. picta is listed as Least Concern in the IUCN Red List (IUCN, 2016).

Taxonomic Tree

Top of page
  • Domain: Eukaryota
  •     Kingdom: Metazoa
  •         Phylum: Chordata
  •             Subphylum: Vertebrata
  •                 Class: Reptilia
  •                     Order: Testudines
  •                         Family: Emydidae
  •                             Genus: Chrysemys
  •                                 Species: Chrysemys picta

Notes on Taxonomy and Nomenclature

Top of page

Based on colour pattern and morphology (Ernst and Lovich, 2009), there are three currently recognized subspecies of C. picta (Uetz and Hosek, 2015): the western painted turtle, C. picta bellii (Gray, 1831); the midland painted turtle, C. picta marginata (Agassiz, 1857), and the eastern painted turtle, C. picta picta (Schneider, 1783). Based on phylogenetic analysis using mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA), a former fourth subspecies, the southern painted turtle, C. dorsalis (Agassiz, 1857), was elevated to species status (Starkey et al., 2003), however the taxonomy of C. dorsalis remains debatable (Uetz and Hosek, 2015).

Description

Top of page

C. picta is a small (up to 25.4 cm carapace length) turtle that is olive to black with yellow and red borders along the scute seams and red bars or crescents on the marginal scutes (Ernst and Lovich, 2009), giving it the common name ‘painted turtle’. The carapace is smooth and oval, and some individuals may have a red or yellow mid-dorsal stripe (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). The hingeless plastron is yellow with black or red to brown blotches, and the neck, legs and tail have yellow and red stripes (Ernst and Lovich, 2009).

Distribution

Top of page

C. picta is the only native transcontinental turtle species in North America. It occurs from southern British Columbia eastward to Nova Scotia in Canada, and Oregon southeastward to southern Georgia in the USA (Ernst and Lovich, 2009), and with scattered southwestern populations in Arizona, Colorado and Utah (Lovich et al., 2014).

C. picta dorsalis, originally described from Louisiana, was elevated to species status (as C. dorsalis, according to Starkey et al., 2003) but records of its occurrence are included with C. picta s.s. in the Distribution Table and maps.

C. picta has been introduced to Europe (Kraus 2009) in Austria (Kaltenegger, 2006), Germany (Podloucky, 1998; Fritz and Lehmann, 2002), the UK (Swanton, 1928; Taylor, 1948, 1963; Fitter, 1959; Frazer, 1964; Beebee and Griffiths, 2000; Arnold and Ovenden, 2002), Malta (Despott, 1913) and Spain (Mateo, 1997; Barbadillo et al., 1999; Pleguezuelos, 2004; Rhodin et al. 2010).

Although native to many states of the USA, there have also been introductions via the pet trade (Kraus 2009) in Arizona (Hulse, 1980; Jennings, 1987b; Lazaroff et al., 2006), California (Banta and Morafka, 1966; Bury and Luckenbach, 1976; Stebbins, 1985; Jennings, 1987a, 2004; Holland, 1994; Spinks et al., 2003), Colorado (Rodeck, 1948; Livo et al., 1998), Florida (King and Krakauer, 1966; Bartlett, 1967; Iverson and Etchberger, 1989; King and Burke, 1989; Krysko et al., 2011), Illinois (Dancik, 1974) and New Mexico (Stuart, 2000, 2001).

C. picta has also been introduced to Indonesia and the Philippine Islands (Uetz and Hosek, 2015). 

Distribution Table

Top of page

The distribution in this summary table is based on all the information available. When several references are cited, they may give conflicting information on the status. Further details may be available for individual references in the Distribution Table Details section which can be selected by going to Generate Report.

Continent/Country/RegionDistributionLast ReportedOriginFirst ReportedInvasiveReferenceNotes

Asia

IndonesiaPresentIntroducedUetz and Hosek, 2015; Van Dijk, 2016
PhilippinesPresentIntroducedUetz and Hosek, 2015; Van Dijk, 2016

Africa

ZambiaPresentIntroduced

North America

CanadaPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-AlbertaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-British ColumbiaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-ManitobaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-New BrunswickPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-Nova ScotiaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-OntarioPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-QuebecPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-SaskatchewanPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
MexicoPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
USAPresentPresent based on regional distribution.
-AlabamaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-ArizonaPresentNative Not invasive Hulse, 1980; Jennings, 1987; Lazaroff et al., 2006; Kraus, 2009; Van Dijk, 2016Limited native range. Introductions via the pet trade at least 5 times without any current evidence of establishment
-ArkansasPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-CaliforniaAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced1974, 1990sBanta and Morafka, 1966; Bury and Luckenbach, 1976; Stebbins, 1985; Jennings, 1987; Holland, 1994; Jennings, 2004; Kraus, 2009; Van Dijk, 2016Introduced intentionally and via the pet trade at least 7 times, uncertain if established
-ColoradoPresentNative Not invasive Rodeck, 1948; Livo et al., 1998; Kraus, 2009; Van Dijk, 2016Limited native range. Introduced via the pet trade at least 3 times without any current evidence of establishment
-ConnecticutPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-DelawarePresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-District of ColumbiaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-FloridaAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced1933, 1938, 1964, 1983, 2007 Not invasive King and Krakauer, 1966; Bartlett, 1967; Iverson and Etchberger, 1989; King and Burke, 1989; Kraus, 2009; Krysko et al., 2011Introduced via the pet trade at least 5 times without any current evidence of establishment
-GeorgiaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-IdahoPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-IllinoisPresentNativeDancik, 1974; Van Dijk, 2016Native and introduced via the pet trade
-IndianaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-IowaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-KansasPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-KentuckyPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-LouisianaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-MainePresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-MarylandPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-MassachusettsPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-MichiganPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-MinnesotaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-MississippiPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-MissouriPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-MontanaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-NebraskaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-New HampshirePresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-New JerseyPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-New MexicoPresentNative Not invasive Stuart, 2000; Kraus, 2009; Van Dijk, 2016Limited native range. Introduced via the pet trade at least 2 times without any current evidence of establishment
-New YorkPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-North CarolinaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-North DakotaPresentNative
-OhioPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-OklahomaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-OregonPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-PennsylvaniaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-Rhode IslandPresentNative
-South CarolinaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-South DakotaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-TennesseePresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-TexasPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-UtahPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-VermontPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-VirginiaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-WashingtonPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-West VirginiaPresentNativeVan Dijk, 2016
-WisconsinPresentNativeUetz and Hosek, 2015
-WyomingPresentNative

Europe

AustriaAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced Not invasive Kaltenegger, 2006; Kraus, 2009Introduced via the pet trade at least 2 times without any current evidence of establishment
GermanyAbsent, formerly presentIntroducedPodloucky, 1998; Fritz and Lehmann, 2002; Kraus, 2009; Van Dijk, 2016Introduced intentionally and via the pet trade at least 3 times, uncertain whether established
MaltaAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced1910 Not invasive Despott, 1913; Kraus, 2009Introduced intentionally
SpainLocalisedIntroduced Invasive Mateo, 1997; Barbadillo et al., 1999; Pleguezuelos, 2004; Kraus, 2009; Van Dijk, 2016Introduced via the pet trade at least 4 times
UKAbsent, formerly presentIntroduced1905 Not invasive Swanton, 1928; Taylor, 1948; Fitter, 1959; Taylor, 1963; Frazer, 1964; Beebee and Griffiths, 2000; Arnold and Ovenden, 2002; Kraus, 2009Introduced intentionally and via the pet trade at least 4 times

History of Introduction and Spread

Top of page

C. picta has been introduced, without evidence of establishing, to Austria (Kaltenegger, 2006), Germany (Podloucky, 1998; Fritz and Lehmann, 2002), the UK as early as 1905 (Swanton, 1928; Taylor, 1948, 1963; Fitter, 1959; Frazer, 1964; Beebee and Griffiths, 2000; Arnold and Ovenden, 2002), Malta as early as the 1910s (Despott, 1913), Arizona in the 1960s and 2002 (Hulse, 1980; Jennings, 1987b; Lazaroff et al., 2006), California in 1974 and the 1990s (Banta and Morafka, 1966; Bury and Luckenbach, 1976; Stebbins, 1985; Jennings, 1987a, 2004; Holland, 1994; Spinks et al., 2003), Colorado in 1947 and 1993 (Rodeck, 1948; Livo et al., 1998), Florida in 1933, 1938, 1964, 1983 and 2007 (King and Krakauer, 1966; Bartlett, 1967; Iverson and Etchberger, 1989; King and Burke, 1989; Krysko et al., 2011), Illinois in 1971 (Dancik, 1974), and New Mexico in 1998 and 2000 (Stuart, 2000, 2001).

This species has been introduced at least four times via the pet trade to Spain, where it has successfully become established (Mateo, 1997; Barbadillo et al., 1999; Pleguezuelos, 2004; Kraus, 2009; Rhodin et al. 2010). 

Introductions

Top of page
Introduced toIntroduced fromYearReasonIntroduced byEstablished in wild throughReferencesNotes
Natural reproductionContinuous restocking
Austria   Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Kaltenegger (2006); Kraus (2009) Introduced via the pet trade at least 2 times without any current evidence of establishment
California 1974, 1990s Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Banta and Morafka (1966); Bury and Luckenbach (1976); Holland (1994); Jennings (1987); Jennings (2004); Kraus (2009); Stebbins (1985) Introduced intentionally and via the pet trade at least 7 times, uncertain if established
Colorado 1947, 1993 Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Kraus (2009); Livo et al. (1998); Rodeck (1948) Introduced via the pet trade at least 3 times without any current evidence of establishment
Florida 1933 - 2007 Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Bartlett (1967); Iverson and Etchberger (1989); King and Burke (1989); King and Krakauer (1966); Kraus (2009); Krysko et al. (2011) Introduced via the pet trade at least 5 times without any current evidence of establishment (1933, 1938, 1964, 1983, 2007)
Germany   Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Fritz and Lehmann (2002); Kraus (2009); Podloucky (1998) Introduced intentionally and via the pet trade at least 3 times, uncertain if established
Hawaii 1960s, 2002 Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Hulse (1980); Jennings (1987); Kraus (2009); Lazaroff et al. (2006) Introduced via the pet trade at least 5 times without any current evidence of establishment
Illinois 1971 Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Dancik (1974) Introduced via the pet trade
Indonesia Indonesia   No No Uetz and Hosek (2015) No other information provided
Malta 1910 Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Despott (1913); Kraus (2009) Introduced intentionally
New Mexico 1998, 2000 Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Kraus (2009); Stuart (2000); Stuart (2001) Introduced via the pet trade at least 2 times without any current evidence of establishment
Philippines Philippines   No No Uetz and Hosek (2015) No other information provided
Spain Pet trade (pathway cause) Yes No Barbadillo et al. (1999); Kraus (2009); Mateo (1997); Pleguezuelos (2004) Introduced via the pet trade at least 4 times
UK 1905 Intentional release (pathway cause) ,
Pet trade (pathway cause)
No No Arnold and Ovenden (2002); Beebee and Griffiths (2000); Fitter (1959); Frazer (1964); Kraus (2009); Swanton (1928); Taylor (1948); Taylor (1963) Introduced intentionally and via the pet trade at least 4 times

Risk of Introduction

Top of page

C. picta is an aquatic turtle species with beautiful colouration, commonly known as ‘painted turtle’, and is popular with pet fanciers around the world. The pet trade is the most common invasion pathway for this species, as individuals escape from their enclosures or are intentionally released by people tired of caring for their pet, or when their animals are sick, or to establish new populations.

Habitat

Top of page

C. picta prefers slow moving shallow fresh water with soft bottom, vegetation and basking sites, but it is also tolerant of brackish water and polluted fresh water (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). It avoids fast moving water (Ernst and Lovich, 2009).

Habitat List

Top of page
CategorySub-CategoryHabitatPresenceStatus
Multiple
Terrestrial
Other
Ice Principal habitat Natural
Freshwater
 
Lakes Principal habitat Natural
Reservoirs Principal habitat Natural
Rivers / streams Principal habitat Natural
Ponds Principal habitat Natural
Brackish
Estuaries Secondary/tolerated habitat Natural

Biology and Ecology

Top of page

Genetics

C. picta has 50 chromosomes (Stock, 1972; Killebrew, 1977a; DeSmet, 1978).

Reproductive biology

Females attain a larger size than males. Males have longer foreclaws to hold onto females during reproduction, a longer and thicker tail, and the cloaca is posterior to the carapace (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). Males actively look for females, and so are more inclined to disperse to new water bodies (Tuberville et al., 1996). Males typically mature in 2-4 years or between 7 and 9.5 cm plastron length (PL), whereas females typically mature in 6-10 years or 9.7–12.8 cm PL (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). Courtship and mating typically occur from March through June, but can sometimes last until September (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). A female can store viable sperm for up to three years and a clutch may have multiple male parents (Pearse et al., 2001a). Oviposition of up to 23 eggs typically occurs from April through July (Dundee and Rossman, 1989; Trauth et al., 2004). Females can oviposit up to five clutches in a year (Ernst and Lovich, 2009).

Physiology and phenology

C. picta can tolerate cold temperatures, but its northernmost distribution is likely determined by exposure to subfreezing temperatures (St. Claire and Gregory, 1990). The critical thermal minimum for C. picta is about -2°C (Ernst and Lovich, 2009); however, Diamond (1989) reported survival as low as -8°C.

Longevity

C. picta can live between 30 and 40 years in the wild, and possibly up to 61 years (Congdon et al., 2003a; Siess, 2005; Ernst and Lovich, 2009).

Activity patterns

C. picta is diurnal and active mostly during warmer parts of the year, although individuals can be active all year in southern populations (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). C. picta can move long distances to adjacent water bodies, sometimes over land (MacCulloch and Secoy, 1983a), but its home range has not been adequately studied (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). Homing ability has been documented, some of which required crossing over land (Cagle, 1944b; Williams, 1952; Gould, 1959; Emlen, 1969; Ernst, 1970e; Whillans and Crossman, 1977; DeRosa and Taylor, 1978; Quinn and Graves, 1998).

Population size and structure

C. picta can exhibit dense population sizes of up to 838 individuals per hectare (Gibbons, 1968b; Frazer et al., 1991b). Age classes are typically skewed toward adults, especially in rivers (Ernst and Lovich, 2009).

Nutrition

C. picta is an omnivorous generalist and feeds upon a large variety of algae, plants and animals (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). 

Climate

Top of page
ClimateStatusDescriptionRemark
Cf - Warm temperate climate, wet all year Tolerated Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, wet all year
Cs - Warm temperate climate with dry summer Preferred Warm average temp. > 10°C, Cold average temp. > 0°C, dry summers
Ds - Continental climate with dry summer Preferred Continental climate with dry summer (Warm average temp. > 10°C, coldest month < 0°C, dry summers)

Latitude/Altitude Ranges

Top of page
Latitude North (°N)Latitude South (°S)Altitude Lower (m)Altitude Upper (m)
51.350631 31.434958

Air Temperature

Top of page
Parameter Lower limit Upper limit
Absolute minimum temperature (ºC) -8
Mean maximum temperature of hottest month (ºC) 34

Water Tolerances

Top of page
ParameterMinimum ValueMaximum ValueTypical ValueStatusLife StageNotes
Water temperature (ºC temperature) 1 Optimum It can be observed swimming under ice

Means of Movement and Dispersal

Top of page

Natural dispersal

C. picta disperses from its hibernating ponds to outlying bodies water during spring, and slowly migrates back to hibernacula during autumn (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). 

Accidental introduction

The pet trade is the likely invasion pathway for C. picta around the word, and it is possible that animals have escaped enclosures and therefore were accidentally introduced. However, information is needed to illustrate individual accidental releases.

Intentional introduction

C. picta has been intentionally introduced in Malta, the UK and California (Kraus, 2009). This species has been introduced via the pet trade (unknown if accidental or intentional) in Spain, the UK, Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida and Illinois (Kraus, 2009). 

Impact Summary

Top of page
CategoryImpact
Environment (generally) Positive

Risk and Impact Factors

Top of page Invasiveness
  • Proved invasive outside its native range
  • Has a broad native range
  • Abundant in its native range
  • Highly adaptable to different environments
  • Tolerant of shade
  • Capable of securing and ingesting a wide range of food
  • Highly mobile locally
  • Benefits from human association (i.e. it is a human commensal)
  • Long lived
  • Fast growing
  • Gregarious
  • Has propagules that can remain viable for more than one year
Impact outcomes
  • Negatively impacts animal health
  • Reduced native biodiversity
Impact mechanisms
  • Hybridization
  • Predation
Likelihood of entry/control
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally accidentally
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally deliberately
  • Highly likely to be transported internationally illegally

Detection and Inspection

Top of page

C. picta is easily detected (see Description). As many as 50 individuals can be observed on a single log at one time (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). 

Similarities to Other Species/Conditions

Top of page

C. picta is sometimes confused with other native North American turtles such as Graptemys, Pseudemys and Trachemys, but all of these have a vertebral keel, serrated posterior carapace rim and usually much larger females (Ernst and Lovich, 2009). Additionally, Deirochelys has a much longer neck, wide stripe on the forelimb, and vertically striped behind (Ernst and Lovich, 2009).

Prevention and Control

Top of page

Due to the variable regulations around (de)registration of pesticides, your national list of registered pesticides or relevant authority should be consulted to determine which products are legally allowed for use in your country when considering chemical control. Pesticides should always be used in a lawful manner, consistent with the product's label.

SPS measures

Chrysemys picta is not listed in CITES, and is listed as Least Concern in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 

Gaps in Knowledge/Research Needs

Top of page

Although many aspects of about the natural history of C. picta have been reported, data are needed regarding impacts on biodiversity in their introduced range. 

References

Top of page

Arnold EN, Ovenden DW, 2002. Reptiles and amphibians of Europe. Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press, 288 pp.

Banta BH, Morafka D, 1966. An annotated checklist of the recent amphibians and reptiles inhabiting the City and County of San Francisco, California. Wasmann Journal of Biology, 24:223-238.

Barbadillo LJ, Lacomba JI, Perez-Mellado V, Sancho V, Lopez-Jurado LF, 1999. Amphibians and reptiles of the Iberian Peninsula, Balearic and Canary Islands (Anfibios y reptiles de la Peninsula Iberica, Baleares y Canarias). Barcelona, Spain: Editorial Planeta.

Bartlett RD, 1967. Introduced chelonians in Dade County, Florida. International Turtle and Tortoise Society Journal, 1:19,35.

Beebee TJC, Griffiths R, 2000. Amphibians and reptiles: a natural history of the British herpetofauna. London, UK: HarperCollins, 270 pp.

Bury RB, Luckenbach RA, 1976. Introduced amphibians and reptiles in California. Biological Conservation, 10:1-14.

Cagle FR, 1944. Home range, homing behavior and migration in turtles. Miscellaneous Publications of the Museum of Zoology University of Michigan, 61:1-34.

Cagle FR, 1954. Observations on the life cycles of painted turtles (genus Chrysemys). American Midland Naturalist, 52:225-235.

Congdon JD, Nagle RD, Kinney OM, Loben Sels RCvan, Quinter T, Tinkle DW, 2003. Testing hypotheses of aging in long-lived painted turtles (Chrysemys picta). Experimental Gerontology, 38:765-772.

Dancik T, 1974. A survey of the turtles of the Des Plaines River. Bulletin of the Chicago Herpetological Society, 9:23-33.

Degenhardt WG, Painter CW, Price AH, 1996. Amphibians and reptiles of New Mexico. Albuquerque, USA: University of New Mexico Press, 431 pp.

DeRosa CT, Taylor DH, 1978. Sun-compass orientation in the painted turtle, Chrysemys picta (Reptilia, Testudines, Testudinidae). Journal of Herpetology, 12:25-28.

DeSmet WHO, 1978. The chromosomes of 11 species of Chelonia (Reptilia). Acta Zoologica Pathology (Antwerp), 70:15-34.

Despott G, 1913. I nostri rettili. Archivium Melitense, 2:93-96.

Diamond JM, 1989. Resurrection of frozen animals. Nature, 339:509-510.

Dundee HA, Rossman DA, 1989. The amphibians and reptiles of Louisiana. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA: Louisiana State University Press, 300 pp.

Emlen ST, 1969. Homing ability and orientation in the painted turtle Chrysemys picta marginata. Behaviour (Leiden), 33:58-76.

Ernst CH, 1970. Homing ability in the painted turtle Chrysemys picta (Schneider). Herpetologica, 26:399-403.

Ernst CH, Ernst EM, 1973. Biology of Chrysemys picta bellii in southwestern Minnesota. Journal of Minnesota Academy of Science, 38:77-80.

Ernst CH, Lovich JE, 2009. Turtles of the United States and Canada, Second edition. Baltimore, Maryland, USA: The John Hopkins University Press, 827 pp.

Fitter RSR, 1959. The ark in our midst. London, UK: Collins, 320 pp.

Frazer JFD, 1964. Introduced species of amphibians and reptiles in mainland Britain. British Journal of Herpetology, 3:145-150.

Fritz M, Lehmann HD, 2002. Fund of the North slip Lingen Sichen Zierschildkrote, Chrysemys picta bellii, on a body of water in Baden-Wurttemberg. (Fund von Schlupflingen der nordamerikansichen Zierschildkrote, Chrysemys picta bellii, an einem Gewasser in Baden-Wurttemberg.) Elaphe, 10:45-48.

Gould E, 1959. Studies on the orientation of turtles. Copeia, 1959:174-176.

Holland DC, 1994. The Western pond turtle: habitat and history. Portland, Oregon, USA: United States Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration.

Hulse AC, 1980. Notes on the occurrence of introduced turtles in Arizona. Herpetological Review, 11:16-17.

IUCN, 2016. The IUCN (the International Union for Conservation of Nature) Red List of Threatened Species. http://www.iucnredlist.org/

Iverson JB, Etchberger CR, 1989. The distributions of the turtles of Florida. Florida Scientist, 52:119-144.

Jennings MR, 1987. Special Publication no. 3 of the Southwestern Herpetologists Society.

Jennings MR, 1987. Status of the western painted turtle (Chrysemys picta bellii) in Arizona. Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science, 22:129-133.

Jennings MR, 2004. An annotated check list of the amphibians and reptiles of California and adjacent waters. Third Revised Edition. California Fish and Game, 90:161-213.

Kaltenegger D, 2006. The domestic European Sumpfschildkrote (Emys orbicularis) and the increasing problem of illegal exposed Rotwangen-Schmuckschildkroten (Trachemys scripta elegans). (Die heimische Europäische Sumpfschildkröte (Emys orbicularis) und die zunehmende Problematik durch illegal ausgesetzte Rotwangen-Schmuckschildkröten (Trachemys scripta elegans).) Österreichs Fischerei, 59:93-97.

Killebrew FC, 1977. Mitotic chromosomes of turtles, Part 4: The Emydidae. Texas Journal of Science, 29:245-253.

King FW, Burke RL, 1989. Crocodilian, tuatara, and turtle species of the world: a taxonomic and geographic reference. Washington, DC, USA: Association of Systematics Collections, 216 pp.

King W, Krakauer T, 1966. The exotic herpetofauna of Southeast Florida. Quarterly Journal of the Florida Academy of Sciences, 29:144-154.

Kraus F, 2009. Invading nature: Springer series in invasion ecology 4. Springer, 563 pp.

Krysko KL, Burgess JP, Rochford MR, Gillette CR, Cueva D, Enge KM, Somma LA, Stabile JL, Smith DC, Wasilewski JA, Kieckhefer GNIII, Granatosky MC, Nielsen SV, 2011. Verified non-indigenous amphibians and reptiles in Florida from 1863 through 2010: Outlining the invasion process and identifying invasion pathways and stages. Zootaxa, 3028:1-64.

Lazaroff DW, Rosen PC, Lowe Jr CH, 2006. Amphibians, reptiles, and their habitats at Sabino Canyon. Tucson, Arizona, USA: University of Arizona Press, 158 pp.

Livo LJ, Hammerson GA, Smith HM, 1998. Summary of amphibians and reptiles introduced into Colorado. Northwestern Naturalist, 79:1-11.

Lovich JE, LaRue CT, Drost CA, Arundel TR, 2014. Traditional cultural use as a tool for inferring biogeography and provenance: a case study involving painted turtles (Chrysemys picta) and Hopi Native American Culture in Arizona, USA, Copeia, 2014(2):215-220

MacCulloch RD, Secoy DM, 1983. Movement in a river population of Chrysemys picta bellii in southern Saskatchwean. Journal of Herpetology, 17:283-285.

Mateo JA, 1997. Introduced species in the Iberian Peninsula, the Balearic Islands, Madeira and Azores. (Las especies introducidas en la Península Ibérica, Baleares, Canarias, Madeira y Azores.) Distribucion y biogeografia de los anfibios y reptiles en Espana y Portugal, vol. 3 (Distribution and biogeography of amphibians and reptiles in Spain and Portugal, vol. 3. Monographs of Herpetology).

Mitchell JC, 1994. The reptiles of Virginia. Washington, DC, USA: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Palmer WM, Braswell AL, 1995. Reptiles of North Carolina. Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA: University of North Carolina Press, 412 pp.

Pearse DE, Janzen FJ, Avise JC, 2001. Genetic markers substantiate long-term storage and utilization of sperm by female painted turtle. Hereity, 86:378-384.

Pleguezuelos JM, 2004. Introduced amphibian and reptile species. (Las especies introducidas de anfibios y reptiles.) In: Atlas y libro rojo de los anfibios y reptiles de España, 3rd edition (Atlas and red book of amphibians and reptiles of Spain) [ed. by Pleguezuelos, J. M. \Márquez, R. \Lizana, M. (.]. Madrid, Spain: Dirección General de Conservación de la Naturaleza-Asociación Herpetologica Española, 502-532.

Podloucky R, 1998. Status of Emys orbicularis in Northwest Germany. Mertensiella, 10:209-217.

Quinn, VS, Graves BM, 1998. Home pond discrimination using chemical cues in Chrysemys picta. Journal of Herpetology, 32:457-461.

Rodeck HG, 1948. The turtles of Colorado. Journal of the Colorado-Wyoming Academy of Science, 3:54.

Sexton OJ, 1959. Spatial and temporal movements of a populations of the painted turtle, Chrysemys picta marginata (Agassiz). Ecological Monographs, 29:113-140.

Siess SA, 2005. Longevity record for an eastern painted turtle. Bulletin of the Chicago Herpetological Society, 40:125-126.

Spinks, PQ, Pauly GB, Crayon JJ, Shaffer HB, 2003. Survival of the western pond turtle (Emys marmorata) in an urban California environment. Biological Conservation, 113:257-267.

St Claire RC, Gregory PT, 1990. Factors affecting the northern range limit of painted turtles (Chrysemys picta): winter acidosis or freezing? Copeia, 1990:1083-1089.

Starkey DE, Shaffer HB, Burke RL, Forstner MRJ, Iverson JB, Janzen FJ, Rhodin AGJ, Ultsch GR, 2003. Molecular systematics, phylogeography, and the effects of Pleistocene glaciation in the painted turtle (Chrysemys picta) complex. Evolution, 57:119-128.

Stebbins RC, 1985. A field guide to western reptiles and amphibians. Second Edition. Boston, Massachusetts, USA: Houghton Mifflin, 336 pp.

Stock AD, 1972. Karyological relationships in turtles (Reptilia: Chelonia). Canadian Journal of Genetics and Cytology, 14:859-868.

Stuart JN, 2000. Additional notes on native and non-native turtles of the Rio Grande Drainage Basin, New Mexico. Bulletin of the Chicago Herpetological Society, 35:229-235.

Stuart JN, 2001. Geographic distribution: Chrysemys picta bellii. Herpetological Review, 32:116-117.

Swanton EW, 1928. The mammals, fishes, reptiles and amphibians of Haslemere and district. Haslemere Natural History Society Science Paper, 10:4-27.

Taylor RHR, 1948. The distribution of reptiles and amphibia in the British Isles, with notes on species recently introduced. British Journal of Herpetology, 1:1-25.

Taylor RHR, 1963. The distribution of amphibians and reptiles in England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland and the Channel Isles: a revised survey. British Journal of Herpetology, 3:95-101.

Trauth, SE, Robison HW, Plummer MV, 2004. The amphians and reptiles of Arkansas. Fayetteville, Arkansas, USA: University of Arkansas Press, 421 pp.

Tuberville, TD, Gibbons JW, Greene JL, 1996. Invasion of new aquatic habitats by male freshwater turtles. Copeia, 1996:713-715.

Uetz P, Hosek J, 2015. The Reptile Database. http://reptile-database.reptarium.cz/

Van Dijk PP, 2016. Chrysemys picta. (errata version published in 2016). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, e.T163467A97410447. http://www.iucnredlist.org

Whillans, TH, Crossman EJ, 1977. Morphological parameters and spring activites in a central Ontario population of midland painted turtle, Chrysemys picta marginata (Agassiz). Canadian Field Naturalist, 91:47-57.

Williams JE, 1952. Homing behavior of the painted turtle and muskturtle in a lake. Copeia, 1952:76-82.

Principal Source

Top of page

Draft datasheet under review

Contributors

Top of page

21/04/15 Original text by:

Kenneth Krysko, University of Florida, USA

Distribution Maps

Top of page
You can pan and zoom the map
Save map