Evidence found
168 records across 3 countries and territories, 1909–2025.
Oocatochus rufodorsatus · GBIF taxon key 2458432
Where has the Frog-eating Rat Snake been recorded?
Oocatochus rufodorsatus occurrence evidence comes from 168 records in 3 countries and territories, from 1909 to 2025. Most records come from China.
- 168 records
- 3 places
- 12 years recorded
- Squamata class
Observation evidence passport
Source coverage
CC0 GBIF Animalia occurrence facets, including country, month and year summaries.
Refreshed 2026-09-24. Inspect the taxon on GBIF.
What this means
The species has been recorded in the listed places in the stated source universe. Peak month: May.
2 months reach at least 10% of the peak facet count.
What this does not mean
repeated describes the record pattern, not a formal range, residency, abundance or conservation assessment.
A single record remains evidence of a recording, not proof that a population lives there.
Compare this animal’s observation pattern
When it is recorded
JFMAMJJASOND
Peak month: May. Records cluster in the months an animal is present and being looked for, so a summer peak can reflect observer effort as much as the animal.
Records over time
19092025
Recording effort has risen steeply almost everywhere since the 1990s, so a rising line usually shows more observers rather than more animals.
Where Frog-eating Rat Snake has been recorded
The countries below show where occurrence evidence exists for Frog-eating Rat Snake. They do not define a complete habitat range: survey effort differs by place, and historical or one-off records can appear alongside repeated presence.
| Place | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| China | 109 | |
| South Korea | 50 | |
| North Korea | 9 |
Related animals
Others in the family Colubridae.
Record pattern: repeated
Repeated records across many years and months. This is inferred from how many years and months the animal appears in, not from a range map — treat it as evidence, not a formal assessment.
Repeated records across many years and months. This is inferred from how many years and months the animal appears in, not from a range map — treat it as evidence, not a formal assessment.