My top 3 of the most feisty in nature of european snake species:
1. Rhinechis scalaris
2. Hierophis viridiflavus
3. Hemorrhois hippocrepis
But like most or all of us based on limited experience, so most likely not significant.
Everything depends ofcourse on multiple possible circumstances:
Way of handling (every snake is higly aggravated when grabbed firmly in the heart/lung region)
Weather conditions (a cold hibernating snake is not going to bite so quickly)
Personal state of the snake: Snakes in shedding display more defensive behaviour in my experience.
etc...
For the Natrix biting at night. It never happened to me but could it be a feeding response? They often hunt at night but their vision at night might not be so good. Maybe they respond more to touch than vision or smell while hunting at night?
The interesting/puzzling thing to me is what is the evolutionally advantage of not biting?,
why if a potential predator grabs you do you not give it a good chew in the hope it drops you?
Beats me, just as it does you. Anybody, somebody...?
Why does it have to be explained in terms of evolutionary advantage? Not every aspect of behaviour in species can or should be explained in that way. Is biting potential predators really relevant in the succes rate of survival for those species? In my opinion you always have to look at the mechanisms of evolution in a broader context.
Biting at predators or not might be better explained as a secondary effect of other more significant characteristics.
f.i. Active and fast hunters probably are more likely to be nervous in nature.
Why do snake species have different colours? Can you explain this always in terms of evolutionary advantage? I don't think so. If it is not relevant for evolution, it can be just developed by chance + when less relevant it is more likely that you see more diversity in that characteristic within a species.
So to conclude: Mario is probably right again:
my opinion: it strongly depends on individual/personal character - not on the species
).
