Snake Venom Viscosity Properties Help It Flow into Prey

Most venomous snakes do not have hollow fangs. Their venom flows down outer grooves and lessens in viscosity due to suction after the bite. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Snakes are misunderstood. They’re not slimy. They’re not charmed by music. And the poisonous ones don’t all inject venom into their prey through hollow needlelike fangs. In fact, the fangs of most toxic serpents have external grooves that direct the flow of poison. And the venom’s viscosity is key to getting it where it needs to go. So says a study in the journal Physical Review Letters. [Bruce Young et al., "Tears of Venom: Hydrodynamics of Reptilian Envenomation"]

Okay, some snakes do use the "hollow fang trick" to take care of their prey. Rattlesnakes, for example. But most snakes have solid fangs, which they use to punch holes in their victims’ skin before they let the venom fly—or slide. Those fangs tend to have grooves that help direct the flow. But scientists got to wondering how that approach could be effective. Couldn’t struggling prey simply brush off the poison as it trickles?

Turns out that the venom’s viscosity keeps it nestled in the groove. And when a fang penetrates the victim’s tissue, the groove makes a canal that generates suction. That suction pulls the venom into the wound. But it also makes the venom less viscous, allowing it to move even faster into the prey. Because getting bitten by a snake sucks.

—Karen Hopkin
[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe