David Cundall (Lehigh University) is the man with answers and the data.

Here's a sample:

Elapid snakes have previously been divided into two groups (palatine erectors and palatine draggers) based on the morphology and inferred movements of their palatine bone during prey transport (swallowing). We investigated the morphology and the functioning of the feeding apparatus of several palatine draggers (Acanthophis antarcticus, Oxyuranus scutellatus, Pseudechis australis) and compared them to published records of palatine erectors. We found that the palatine in draggers does not move as a straight extension of the pterygoid as originally proposed. The dragger palato-pterygoid joint flexes laterally with maxillary rotation when the mouth opens and the jaw apparatus is protracted and slightly ventrally during mouth closing. In contrast, in palatine erectors, the palato-pterygoid joint flexes ventrally during upper jaw protraction. In draggers, the anterior end of the palatine also projects rostrally during protraction, unlike the stability of the anterior end seen in erectors. Palatine draggers differ from palatine erectors in four structural features of the palatine and its relationships to surrounding elements. The function of the palato-pterygoid bar in both draggers and erectors can be explained by a typical colubroid muscle contraction pattern, which acts on a set of core characters shared among all derived snakes. Although palatine dragging elapids share a fundamental design of the palato-maxillary apparatus with all higher snakes, they provide yet another demonstration of minor structural modifications producing functional variants. J. Morphol. 2010. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

I investigated the influence of prey size on skull growth in boa constrictors. That work is posted on my Research Gate site.

Gordon Schuett

A bit more information from Cundall & Irish (1989) Journal of Zoology

The bolyeriid snakes Casarea dussumieri and Bolyeria multocarinata are unique among vertebrates in possessing an intramaxillary joint that separates the maxilla into anterior and posterior segments. In contrast to previous studies, which suggest that this joint permits enhanced elevation of the anterior maxillary teeth, our films of live Casarea show that the snout and anterior maxillary teeth are actively depressed 15° 20° below rest position through bilateral retraction of the palatomaxillary arches. Patterns of bone movement in living Casarea support the hypothesis that a caudally directed force is transmitted to the snout via the medial bones of the palatomaxillary arch, suggesting functional affinities between Casarea and higher henophidians.

The intramaxillary joint, in conjunction with the curvature of the mandibles, allows the jaws of Casarea to encircle hard, cylindrical prey held transversely in the mouth. Because the Mauritian terrestrial vertebrate fauna lacks mammals and is dominated by skinks and geckos, which Casarea is known to consume, we suggest that the intramaxillary joint functions in a manner analogous to that achieved by quite different maxillary modifications in colubrid scincivores. Although the origin of the bolyeriid intramaxillary joint remains unclear, its structural refinement and evolutionary stability may be due to selection pressures arising from limited prey diversity.

Thank you Gordon W Schuett for your answer. I will check David Cundall work. Im already reading about intramaxillary joint in O. Reippel works but I will also check Cundall & Irish (1989) work.

Im the most interested in for example leght of quadrate and supratemporale (and other bones) on maximum size of prey consumed by snake. Which bones are usefull in what environment. More precisly what propotions of snake bones have influence on snake fittnes in particulary environment. I'm also looking for work about sexual dimorphism in Boidae and Pythonidae.

Some interesting works are already done for Natricinae between sexual dimorphism and prey catching environment.

Hibbitts, T.J., Fitzgerald, L.A., 2005. Morphological and ecological convergence in two natricine snakes. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society. 85, 363–371. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2005.00493.x

Vincent, S.E., Moon, B.R., Shine, R., Herrel, A., 2006b. The functional meaning of “prey size” in water snakes (Nerodia fasciata, Colubridae). Oecologia 147, 204–211. doi:10.1007/s00442-005-0258-2,

Shine, R., 1986. Sexual differences in morphology and niche utilization in an aquatic snake, Acrochordus arafurae. Oecologia 69, 260–267.

Borczyk, B., 2014. Allometry of head size and shape dimorphism In Grass Snake (Natrix natrix). Turk. J. Zool. (In press).

Hampton, P.M., 2011. Comparison of cranial form and function in association with diet in natricine snakes. J. Morphol. 272, 1435–1443. doi:10.1002/jmor.10995 - And I'm looking for something similiar for other snakes.

I already read thoose works:

Arnold, S., 1993. Foraging theory and prey-size-predator-size relations in snakes. Ecological Behaviour, New York: McGraw Hill Seigel RA, Collins JT, 87–115.

Aubret, F., Bonnet, X., Harris, M., Maumelat, S., 2005. Sex Differences in Body Size and Ectoparasite Load in the Ball Python, (Python regius). J. Herpetol. 39, 315–320. doi:10.1670/111-02N

Bertona, M., Chiaraviglio, M., 2003. Reproductive biology, mating aggregations, and sexual dimorphism of the Argentine Boa Constrictor (Boa constrictor occidentalis). J. Herpetol. 37, 510–516.

Camilleri, C., Shine, R., 1990. Sexual Dimorphism and Dietary Divergence: Differences in trophic Morphology between Male and Female Snakes. Copeia 3, 649 – 658.

Chiaraviglio, M., Bertona, M., Sironi, M., Lucino, S., 2003. Intrapopulation variation in life history traits of Boa constrictor occidentalis in Argentina. Amphib. Reptil. 24, 65–74.

Feldman, A., Meiri, S., 2013. Length–mass allometry in snakes. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 108, 161–172. doi:10.1111/j.1095-8312.2012.02001.x

Forsman, A., Shine, R., 1997. Rejection of non-adaptive hypotheses for intraspecific variation in trophic morphology in gape-limited predators. Biology Journal of the Linnean Society 62, 209–223.

Frazzetta, T.H., 1959. Studies on the morphology and function of the skull in the Boidae (Serpentes). Part 1. Cranial differences between Python sebae and Epicrates cenchris. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology. 119, 453–472.

Frazzetta, T.H., 1975. Pattern and Instability in the Evolving Premaxilla of Boine Snakes. American Zoologist 15, 469–481. doi:10.1093/icb/15.2.469

Gans, C., 1961. The Feeding Mechanism of Snakes and Its Possible Evolution. American Zoologist 1, 217–227.

Greene, H.W., 1983. Dietary Correlates of the Origin and Radiation of Snakes. American Zoologist doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icb/23.2.431

Greene, H.W., Burghardt, G.M., 1978. Behavior and phylogeny: constriction in ancient and modern snakes. Science 200, 74–77. doi:10.1126/science.635575

Lee, M.S.Y., Bell Jr., G.L., Caldwell, M.W., 1999. The origin of snake feeding. Lett. Nat. 400.

Luiselli, L., Angelici, F.M., 1998. Sexual size dimorphism and natural history traits are correlated with intersexual dietary divergence in royal pythons (python regius) from the rainforests of southeastern Nigeria. Ital. J. Zool. 65, 183–185. doi:10.1080/11250009809386744

Monteiro, L.R., 1998. Ontogcnetic changes in the skull of Corallus caninus L., 1758 and Corallus enydris L., 1758 (Serpentes: Boidae), an allometric study. SNAKE-NITTAGUN- 28, 51–58.

Pearson, D., Shine, R., Williams, A., 2002. Geographic variation in sexual size dimorphism within a single snake species ( Morelia spilota , Pythonidae). Oecologia 131, 418–426. doi:10.1007/s00442-002-0917-5

Pough, F.H., Groves, J.D., 1983. Specializations of the Body Form and Food Habits of Snakes. American Zoologist 23, 443–454. doi:10.1093/icb/23.2.443

Rodríguez-Robles, J.A., Bell, C.J., Greene, H.W., 1999. Gape size and evolution of diet in snakes: feeding ecology of erycine boas. J. Zool. 248, 49–58. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.1999.tb01021.x

Shine, R., 1994. Sexual Size Dimorphism in Snakes Revisited. Copeia 1994, 326. doi:10.2307/1446982

Shine, R., Harlow, P.S., Keogh, J.S., Boeadi, 1998. The influence of sex and body size on food habits of a giant tropical snake, Python reticulatus. Funct. Ecol. 12, 248–258. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2435.1998.00179.x

That is what I have found but I'm still searching. If anyone have some suggestions or doing research about it, I will be very gratefull to hear about it. I'm looking for those informations for my Master degree paper.

There've been few if any studies looking at intraspecific variation in skull bone measurements in snakes, but this should be of interest because of the obvious variation (e.g. lengths of supratemporal, quadrate, mandible and maxilla relative to snout-occiput) among related species of some groups. A lot of variation among species in elapids (group I happen to know best) resembles a within-species ontogenetic trend (pera-/paedomorphocline) that is largely independent of phylogeny, i.e. small species or those using slender prey remain similar to early developmental stage, with short stl and quad plus relatively smooth, bulbous braincase, while larger species and large-prey specialists have elongate suspensoria and stronger muscle crests.  There seems to be much less of this kind of variation (independent of actual ontogeny/size - e.g. relatively juvenile appearance of skull in adult Antaresia) in pythons and boas.  Other specific adaptations involving the snout bones, palatopterygoid (e.g. the dragger/erector mechanisms), maxillary kinesis (involving frontal and prefrontal morphology) and dentition correlate better with phylogeny but will tend to complicate the use of measurements to describe the ontogeny-like patterns (e.g. snout variation affects skull-length measurements) requiring multivariate analysis rather than ratios.

Note that fitness pertains to lifetime reproductive output, so relevant measurements to compare would comprise a whole ontogenetic trajectory rather than values at one instant. Are you proposing a longitudinal field study involving repeated head measurements (stereoradiography?) of individuals whose diet and reproduction is also being monitored?  That seems to be what your question requires.