Feeders for Veileds : Help

[tHeGiNo]

I am incorporating some information on feeders into one of my caresheets, as you will see it is on Veiled Chameleons. I would appreciate if you guys would mention any suggestions in regards to the description of each insect. If you have something good / bad / a suggestion about one of them, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

<b>Waxworms</b>: waxworms are relatively high in fat and lack essential vitamins in comparison to the other choices of readily available insects. They are therefore not recommended as a staple diet. They are, however, a great tool for fattening and assisting growth spurts

<br><br>

<b>Moisture</b>: 60.97 <br>
<b>Protein</b>: 15.40 <br>
<b>Fat</b>: 20.12 <br>
<b>Carbohydrates</b>: 2.54 <br>
<b>Calcium</b> (mg/100g): 13.14 <br>
<b>Vitamin C</b> (mg/kg): 23.60 <br>
<b>Calories</b>: 181.08 <br>
<b>Dietary Fiber</b>: 1.60 <br>
<b>Ash</b>: 0.97

<br><br>

<b>Zoophobias</b>: also known as superworms, zoophobias are a great additive to any varied diet. They have an overall fit nutrition level, although they lack sufficient calcium levels.

<b>Moisture</b>: 58.91 <br>
<b>Protein</b>: 18.92 <br>
<b>Fat</b>: 15.07 <br>
<b>Carbohydrates</b>: 5.81 <br>
<b>Calcium</b> (mg/100g): 10.80 <br>
<b>Vitamin C</b> (mg/kg): 9.80 <br>
<b>Calories</b>: 135.63 <br>
<b>Dietary Fiber</b>: 2.20 <br>
<b>Ash</b>: 1.29

<br><br>

<b>Mealworms</b>: mealworms, overall, boast a low nutritional value. They would however, in diminutive quantities, contribute protein and moisture into a varied died.

<b>Moisture</b>: 62.89 <br>
<b>Protein</b>: 18.65 <br>
<b>Fat</b>: 13.64 <br>
<b>Carbohydrates</b>: 3.62 <br>
<b>Calcium</b> (mg/100g): 3.28 <br>
<b>Vitamin C</b> (mg/kg): 38.10 <br>
<b>Calories</b>: 135.63 <br>
<b>Dietary Fiber</b>: 2.00 <br>
<b>Ash</b>: 1.20

<br><br>

<b>Crickets</b>: crickets are the most broadly desired insect for the majority of the hobby. They have an overall balanced nutritional value, which makes them great as a staple diet. However, as with any feeder item, they should be offered with the occasional varied diet.

<b>Moisture</b>: 68.96 <br>
<b>Protein</b>: 20.72 <br>
<b>Fat</b>: 5.74 <br>
<b>Carbohydrates</b>: 3.06 <br>
<b>Calcium</b> (mg/100g): 21.53 <br>
<b>Vitamin C</b> (mg/kg): 105.90 <br>
<b>Calories</b>: 51.66 <br>
<b>Dietary Fiber</b>: 2.80 <br>
<b>Ash</b>: 1.52

<br><br>

[DragnDrop]

Analysis charts are a great guideline, but don't take them too seriously. There's no telling how the the insects and worms in any analysis were gutloaded, so take the results with a grain of salt.

We do assume they did feed all the various bugs properly to get an honest assessment, however, it's known that gutloading ingredients can affect the outcome. I'm not saying they deliberately fiddled to get good results in the bugs they're trying to push, but look at it this way. Crickets are known to fare well on grain, veggies, fruit and even dry dog or cat food, so you feed them well on all of these for a few days. Mealworms are often just put in bran - it's got lots of nutrients but compared to the cricket diet, it sucks big time. If the mealworms in the study were kept that way, they're going to come out way short on nutrition. It's easy to increase their fat content by adding a relatively oily grain such as corn meal or flour..

If the crickets had been fed just before the analysis, they'd come up with a glowing nutritional report, since all the nutrients in their food are still inside the crickets.. On the other hand, if the mealworms had to wait unfed for 12 hours for their turn to hit the blender, they'd have used up and pooped out a lot of nutrients which wouldn't be available for the analysis. Just one of the things that can affect the final outcome.

I can make up a batch of the fattest crickets you've ever seen, use them for a few months and your leos will be oozing more oil than a texas oil well.... just give the crickets the skin from you KFC supper. They love the stuff (as do roaches :) ). Just goes to show it's quite possible to fudge the results of any analysis, and what you get with your critters depends on what you feed them.

Let's just say, "the best you can get from an analysis is a list of nutrients and 'most likely' proportions, if gutloaded according to the regimen used by those conducting the tests".

[tHeGiNo]

Do they think they are correct, from a general perspective, from where you can say this is more healthy then that?

[vipervenom]

I agree with DragnDrop, that is a basic 'guideline' as the crickets should be gutloaded. Who knows what they did to feed thme or house the feeders when taking the analysis.

[tHeGiNo]

Thats the whole purpose of it though, a guide line. This was taken by a fairly reliable source, though. All I am looking for a is a guideline.

[Collide]

Id have to say a good base is silks and crix and the rest is good for variaty. as long as your gutloading your insects your cool. over all though i would have to say i have seen the best results with silk worms.

[dank7oo]

Just curious where you found the info for the nutritional content? Looks similar to an E-zine page on feeders.

Jason

[chamitch]

variety is the key. thats all

[gfisher2002]

Even if gutloading was not incorperating into the tests, it's interesting to know all that about the insect itself. Kind of cool.

Garrett

[tHeGiNo]

Well I actually got it from a site which is no longer active, from a company called GRUBCO. It was http://www.herp.com/grubco/grubco.html though.

[DragnDrop]

Grubco is now at http://www.grubco.com

The chart is at Nutritional Information Chart (http://www.grubco.com/Nutritional_Information.cfm)
If you notice, the current values in the chart are different than what was shown when you got your info way back when. I've watched the chart change a few times over the years, which is one of the reasons I checked into just how accurate the nutritional info really is.
You can get a different version of it at

Nutrition by Dr. Sue Donoghue VMD, DACVN (http://www.chameleonnews.com/year2002/sept2002/nutrition/nutrition_sept_02.html)

Nutritional Value of Various Insects - Iowa State Univ. (http://www.ent.iastate.edu/Misc/insectnutrition.html)

There are several other sites with charts and info if you want to do more research.

If you compare the percentages of these and any other charts, you can see there is a big variation.

What it all boils down to is the same as I said earlier - you can use the info as an indication of what MIGHT be in your feeder bugs, but don't take it as gospel truth. If you do put the info online, it would be an idea to mention that there is a variation etc etc etc, since some people take anything online as the be all and end all.

I'm not trying to start an argument, just want to show that gutloading and insect nutrition aren't all as cut and dried as the charts seem to indicate. Gutload your bugs with a good variety of foods suited to them, offer a variety of foods to pets, and you'll be on the right track.

[tHeGiNo]

Awesome, thanks for the new grubo link! I am in no way saying these are the gospel truth. Infact, I made it quite clear on the caresheet that these are to be used on a general reference basis ONLY, as to which is high in what. For example, if I am feeding my herps mealworms, with a calcium ppm of 133, I know I must add in an insect with higher calcium levels, such as butterworms, to form a balanced nutrition. I never said the charts where 'cut and dried as the charts seem to indicate' either, again, I intend to use it only as a general reference chart. And again, I made this VERY clear on the caresheet.

Thanks again. On a side note, what did you type in the search engine to get those results? I have been trying numerous things through the past few months and was not able to find anything!

[DragnDrop]

I've collected a lot of insect bookmarks in the 9 years online, some are outdated, some are new. Every so often I do a Google search (go to adavanced search), "insect nutrition" in the 'exact phrase' field and 'analysis' in the 'all words' field
Right now there are 160 hits, just weed out the ones that don't apply, but quite a few of them will have decent info.

You can also check out Melissa Kaplan's site, she has some info at Nutrients of Foods Commonly Fed to Carnivorous and Omnivorous Reptiles (http://www.ssnakess.com/forums/newreply.php?s=&action=newreply&threadid=35727)

There are also 'Eat a Bug' type sites meant for human food which have nutritional analysis as well. You'd be amazed at how different the info is on some of them compared to the reptile food charts.

It's good to know you'll tell your viewers that the info is a guideline, since so many of them will cut a good feeder out of the menu after reading misleading or downright false info.

[tHeGiNo]

I actually incorporated something like what one of the sites you showed me portrayed, in which: 'if you have a sick chameleon who needs a higher protein intake, feed blah, if you have a thin chameleon seeking calories, feed bleh. I would assume that the information on grubo should not be laballed false, and does provide a good guideline. Would this be a fair assumption (eg. crickets have a higher protein level then wax worms)?