Nine of the herpetologists even refused to vote one way or the other - leaving the poll blank in protest. Some scientists pointed out that the fight was likely to end along the lines of mutually assured destruction, with the anaconda maybe surviving a little longer because the dragon’s venom is slow acting. The herpetologists’ votes also seemed to come under a bit of duress - I got multiple messages suggesting that the outcome was highly dependent on whether the fight took place in water (advantage: anaconda) or on land (advantage: dragon). Anacondas can get a LOT bigger than Komodo dragons - like 29 feet long and 500 pounds compared with 10 feet and 330 pounds - and anacondas have been known to eat the species of toothy, clawed lizards that do live in their native environment. First, why were the herpetologists so confident in the anaconda? It seemed to come down to two factors. There’s even the possibility that, someday in the future, interspecies warfare could save your life.īut let’s go back to Glen’s awesome reptile cage match for a moment.

More importantly, though, it matters because real-world battles between different species can shape how those species evolve and where they live. It affects how much money my editor now owes me, for one thing. And who wins a fight between two different species matters. In a deeply unscientific poll of 125 herpetologists 2 - folks who study reptiles and amphibians for a living - that I conducted for this article, nearly 66 percent favored the anaconda.

It has claws and serrated, shark-like teeth that can rip through any flesh.

But if they did, the Komodo dragon is longer and heavier than a football player 1 and capable of running at speeds of 11 mph. Granted, a South American water snake and an Indonesian land lizard are unlikely to ever meet up in real life. I was ready to throw down for the Komodo dragon here.

Boa vs python vs anaconda