Human fear for snakes was clearly an (interesting) off topic.
I've read the purpose of the study, and I've said at once that it's interesting, but at the same time I've moved some reflections.
This is the background of the study: "A KEY PREDICTION for a defensive venom function is that it should cause near-instant severe pain, to repel a predator before the snake has been killed or injured.A KEY PREDICTION for a defensive venom function is that it should cause near-instant severe pain, to repel a predator before the snake has been killed or injured. If the pain only arose after a delay, the predator will have already killed the snake making venom useless as a defensive strategy.The aim of the project is to gain a greater understanding of defensive selective pressures in the evolution of snake venom.. The aim of the project is to gain a greater understanding of defensive selective pressures in the evolution of snake venom."
Are we really sure that a painless but incredibly powerful venom like the one of a Taipan would be useless for defensive purposes?
I've seen many fights of cats vs snakes on the web (or dogs vs snakes): most of those fights were against not venomous snakes, and many of these were rather long (minutes of fight). I think that if in such a fight (cat vs O.taeniurus for instance) would have been a Taipan, a cat could have been killed in a matter of seconds after a well assigned bite and the snake could have survived...
Are we really sure that pain will scare a dog, a wolf, a wild boar or a big cat? Or would pain on the contrary raise fight willingness, anger and attention in these predators?
For bites happening inside vegetation, are we sure that causing pain would be so useful for a snake? Or would pain rather attract attention of a cow, horse or dog towards the biting snake?
I hope my questions are intopic now...