The Savannah Monitor Diet thread..

[jarich]

Originally Posted by BeardedDee

A question I would ask is, would a female Sav on an insect only diet be able gain enough calcium to shell potentially 50-60 eggs?

I dont think anyone is saying anything about an insect only diet. And in answer to your question, yes, the monitor could get enough calcium on an invert only diet. (Though if we are talking boscs, then the clutches are more like 15-25.)

Ill agree with you Wayne that indeed these animals can sustain themselves on just about anything, as long as it has enough calories. But like Daniel said, sustain themselves and thrive are different things.

I bring up the saturated fat thing only because I feel like we are at a level of discussion whereby we can get into finer detail. I dont look to feed any of my reptiles just what they can get by on, I try to feed them the best, most nutritious diet I can feed them. Like I said, I cant imagine higher levels of saturated fat having much effect at all on younger animals in a proper habitat. I just think that it seems likely that this could effect longevity. Is there proof? No, but I think that it makes sense from a nutritional point of view and from the conjectural evidence to keep those fats to a lower level. Nutritionally speaking, animals not adapted to a high saturated fat diet develop health problems when they are fed this diet and their metabolism slows down. We also see that even properly supported boscs do not live longer than around 12 years usually, yet we suspect that they live much longer in the wild. Larger monitors used to eating more red meat do seem to live longer in captivity however. So it might make sense that this maybe having an effect on longevity. Again, no scientific proof on this, as no studies have been done either way.

Now if you think the only measure of monitor health is whether they breed or not, well then this argument means little. Im not a breeder, so to me longevity and the ability to breed seem like better indicators. Thats just my perspective though.

[infernalis]

Originally Posted by jarich

I dont think anyone is saying anything about an insect only diet. And in answer to your question, yes, the monitor could get enough calcium on an invert only diet. (Though if we are talking boscs, then the clutches are more like 15-25.)

Ill agree with you Wayne that indeed these animals can sustain themselves on just about anything, as long as it has enough calories. But like Daniel said, sustain themselves and thrive are different things.

I bring up the saturated fat thing only because I feel like we are at a level of discussion whereby we can get into finer detail. I dont look to feed any of my reptiles just what they can get by on, I try to feed them the best, most nutritious diet I can feed them. Like I said, I cant imagine higher levels of saturated fat having much effect at all on younger animals in a proper habitat. I just think that it seems likely that this could effect longevity. Is there proof? No, but I think that it makes sense from a nutritional point of view and from the conjectural evidence to keep those fats to a lower level. Nutritionally speaking, animals not adapted to a high saturated fat diet develop health problems when they are fed this diet and their metabolism slows down. We also see that even properly supported boscs do not live longer than around 12 years usually, yet we suspect that they live much longer in the wild. Larger monitors used to eating more red meat do seem to live longer in captivity however. So it might make sense that this maybe having an effect on longevity. Again, no scientific proof on this, as no studies have been done either way.

Now if you think the only measure of monitor health is whether they breed or not, well then this argument means little. Im not a breeder, so to me longevity and the ability to breed seem like better indicators. Thats just my perspective though.

That age would be under ideal conditions. Daniel had stated (somewhere) that all of the adult animals he found were young adults with high parasite loads and massive ticks, sometimes attached in ears and nostrils, as well as the Cloacal Vent.

These animals were in rough shape. However he did clarify that the sample range was small. So would this be indicative of all animals in the wild?