Calcium supplements for snakes?

[CosmicOwl]

Originally Posted by Tsubaki

An athlete's diet usually won't make you healthier, unless you also get an athlete's exercise.(it will make you healthier if you have a very bad diet, but that is a different story) An average person needs an average diet, ill wait giving my snake supplements until i see them use the dumbbells i provided!


Joking obviously!

That was sort of what I meant, but I didn't articulate it well enough. To use a better analogy, let's say you took an average person and put them on a diet with more fruits and vegetables as well as lean proteins and healthy fats. They'd probably be in better shape than they were before. That's the point I'm getting at. Perhaps the average captive snake diet is optimum; I don't know.

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

So you think a juvenile lizard would have the same calcium content as an adult?

I can also guarantee you the calcium content of an 11g mouse and a 35g mouse will be different.

You're right on both points, but I think the figures were an average. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make though. I didn't say that the figures were bullet proof, just that they were interesting. And according to those figures, and adult anole would have much more calcium than a comparably sized mouse.

[KORBIN5895]

Well first the figures don't say if it is an adult anole or a juvenile or a hatchling. That in and of itself could really change the answer to your questions.

Secondly a 10g mouse is a hopper which is just starting to move around and feed on solids. Their skeletal structure wouldn't be solid and completely formed yet so there would be a huge difference between them and an adult. My point is that the "test group" for adult mice us way too large to be of any accurate or practical use.

[jarich]

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

Well first the figures don't say if it is an adult anole or a juvenile or a hatchling. That in and of itself could really change the answer to your questions.

Actually, it does. It quite clearly states they were adult anoles.

Secondly a 10g mouse is a hopper which is just starting to move around and feed on solids. Their skeletal structure wouldn't be solid and completely formed yet so there would be a huge difference between them and an adult. My point is that the "test group" for adult mice us way too large to be of any accurate or practical use.

Yes, there is a difference between an 11 g mouse and a 35 g mouse. The question though is whether or not it is of statistical significance in relation to the percentage of total weight. These are not measurements of total calcium, but rather a measurement of the percentage that calcium is in regards to the total dry matter. The delineation of the mice along the lines shown for neonate, juvenile and adult reflect the statistical grouping of the subjects based on those measurements. However, since you are just guessing about skeletal structure, development and its relation to total DM, thats all it is and you have nothing to refute empirical evidence like that shown in the chart. You saying its not accurate or practical would sort of be like a 5 year old child telling a trained physicist he is wrong about why his rubber ball bounces so high.

Either way, as for the nutrition of snakes, Cosmic Owl, I would tend to agree with Jerry and say that rodents are a fairly decent total package of nutrition, with the possible exception of pinkies. Even hoppers have a good enough mineral ratio to sustain snakes nutritional requirements. Most snakes will be weaned off of pinkies reasonably quickly, which would be the only rodent that might not have an appropriate ratio. Feeding a snake for a long time on pinkies could present problems, I suppose, but seems rarely to be the case. I have heard of people feeding pinkies for extended periods of time that end up with stunted pythons. There are obviously other husbandry issues in such cases though too so it would be hard to pin that on the pinkies alone.

As for feeding a snake lizards or frogs over rodents, the issue would likely not be the vitamin/mineral content but rather the fatty acid profile. In that regard, you could make a case for saying that feeding reptiles/amphibians was healthier for snakes that were adapted to only such a diet over the entire course of their lives. It wouldnt seem to be the case though for snakes adapted to a more varied diet or a diet consisting of rodents or other mammals at some point in their development. Often snakes that change prey type over the course of their lives do so because of prey size and behavioural niche rather than due to any nutritional considerations. For instance, some snakes are more arboreal when they are young, so small lizards or eggs make up a larger part of their diet at that age. When they get older and larger, they become more terrestrial, and so feed on rodents and other mammals more. Its not due to nutrition, but behaviour and prey availability in that niche.

If you are looking to improve anything, I would say look to your lighting over your nutrition though. Providing UVB for your snake will allow it to regulate its Vit D levels more naturally and therefore affect levels of absorption and release for minerals like calcium, phosphorous, magnesium, etc. This will also affect its immune system and hormone regulation in a positive way. Again, not life threatening either way, but should have more of an effect than changing from rodents to lizards, or dusting said rodents.

[CosmicOwl]

jarich, that was a very well thought out post. You're probably right about the dietary habits of young snakes having little to do with nutrition. As for lighting, I put a halogen light and a small CFL in my adult corn snakes cage to help with the growth of plants(which are actually growing really well), but he seems to be making use of the small amounts of UV light. He spends a lot of time basking, and he's out more frequently than when he didn't have additional lighting. My other snakes are in tubs though, so I can't provide them any lighting without significant modification to the lids. They're not out much during the day. Anyway, thank you for the information, it was very interesting.

[KORBIN5895]

Apparently it's not so clear..... I kept looking at the left side for the age of the lizard.....

Now let's talk about a what I do know. A thirty gram mouse would have the same amount of calcium as a forty five gram mouse but the percentage would be different as the larger mouse carries a lot more fat. On the other side of the spectrum a hopper mouse is not fully developed and cannot survive on its own. How is it even possible to compare something that is still growing and developing with something that is fully developed and done growing?

[jarich]

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

Apparently it's not so clear..... I kept looking at the left side for the age of the lizard.....

Strange, as you repeatedly looked on the right side to determine the age and weight of the mice.

Now let's talk about a what I do know. A thirty gram mouse would have the same amount of calcium as a forty five gram mouse but the percentage would be different as the larger mouse carries a lot more fat. On the other side of the spectrum a hopper mouse is not fully developed and cannot survive on its own. How is it even possible to compare something that is still growing and developing with something that is fully developed and done growing?

Once again, you're not talking about what you know. You're talking about what you think. Until you have done what the people who made those charts did, which is actually weigh, measure and analyze each for their nutritional components, then you really KNOW nothing. You're trying to refute hard data with what you guess to be true, which is not particularly effective or scientific.

Either way, it's not particularly an issue here as everything from hopper to an adult is fine for a snake that is adapted to a varied or rodent diet, so we don't have to continue down that road.

CosmicOwl, great to hear you were able to provide additional lighting for your corn. There really is a growing body of evidence to show it makes a difference in their health.

[CosmicOwl]

Originally Posted by jarich

Strange, as you repeatedly looked on the right side to determine the age and weight of the mice.



Once again, you're not talking about what you know. You're talking about what you think. Until you have done what the people who made those charts did, which is actually weigh, measure and analyze each for their nutritional components, then you really KNOW nothing. You're trying to refute hard data with what you guess to be true, which is not particularly effective or scientific.

Either way, it's not particularly an issue here as everything from hopper to an adult is fine for a snake that is adapted to a varied or rodent diet, so we don't have to continue down that road.

CosmicOwl, great to hear you were able to provide additional lighting for your corn. There really is a growing body of evidence to show it makes a difference in their health.

I had always read that corns didn't need any additional lighting, but I'm honestly sold on it being beneficial for them. I've noticed physical and behavioral changes in my big guy since I moved him to soil and started giving him additional cage lighting. He was a healthy snake before, but I think he's benefited a lot from the UV and and having a substrate that requires effort to burrow into. He's visibly thicker and the muscles in his back and sides are noticeable even when he is resting.

Honestly, this kind of change is the sort of thing that makes me wonder if perhaps there are benefits to things like adding supplements to prey items or feeding varied prey to a snake. Are there more potential benefits that are being overlooked by keepers like myself? Maybe in a few years, supplements will be discussed in a similar way to UVB is being discussed in regards to monitors.

[KORBIN5895]

Originally Posted by jarich

Strange, as you repeatedly looked on the right side to determine the age and weight of the mice.



Once again, you're not talking about what you know. You're talking about what you think. Until you have done what the people who made those charts did, which is actually weigh, measure and analyze each for their nutritional components, then you really KNOW nothing. You're trying to refute hard data with what you guess to be true, which is not particularly effective or scientific.

Either way, it's not particularly an issue here as everything from hopper to an adult is fine for a snake that is adapted to a varied or rodent diet, so we don't have to continue down that road.

CosmicOwl, great to hear you were able to provide additional lighting for your corn. There really is a growing body of evidence to show it makes a difference in their health.

I may be an ******* but I'm not a liar.

So you believe that a hopper mouse is the same nutritionally as a retired breeder? You don't think that the additional fat on a retired breeder would change the calcium percentage? Would a mouse continue to grow a larger skeleton to keep the ratios the same?

[CosmicOwl]

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

I may be an ******* but I'm not a liar.

So you believe that a hopper mouse is the same nutritionally as a retired breeder? You don't think that the additional fat on a retired breeder would change the calcium percentage? Would a mouse continue to grow a larger skeleton to keep the ratios the same?

Again, the problem is that you are just guessing. It's pretty easy for anybody to just randomly speculate on the nutritional content of prey items. You could be right, but do you have any information to back your point up?

[KORBIN5895]

Originally Posted by CosmicOwl

Again, the problem is that you are just guessing. It's pretty easy for anybody to just randomly specngulate on the nutritional content of prey items. You could be right, but do you have any information to back your point up?

Actually it's deductive reasoning. It is a known fact that the larger retired breeders have a higher fat content than breeding adults. Rp says so on the site itself.

[CosmicOwl]

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

Actually it's deductive reasoning. It is a known fact that the larger retired breeders have a higher fat content than breeding adults. Rp says so on the site itself.

That may be true, but your comments about the calcium content of a 10 gram mouse is speculation. Perhaps the difference was not significant enough to warrant differentiating young adult mice from from mature adult mice. And what of the potential differences in calcium between male and female mice? Were they supposed to calculate that as well? Or the difference between breeding females and males and non breeding females?

You can call it deductive reasoning if you want, but you haven't presented any actual evidence to suggest that the calcium content of a 10 gram mouse is(on average) significantly different than that of a 30 gram mouse.

[jarich]

Originally Posted by KORBIN5895

I may be an ******* but I'm not a liar.

So you believe that a hopper mouse is the same nutritionally as a retired breeder? You don't think that the additional fat on a retired breeder would change the calcium percentage? Would a mouse continue to grow a larger skeleton to keep the ratios the same?

No, I know you're not a liar. I just found it kind of funny. A guy who has such vitriol for "stupid" people, missing something so simple. Guess we are all stupid sometimes, so it's usually just a matter of perspective.

Anyway, as for your assessment of various ages of mice, the problem is that there are so many variables, too many for it to be a simple matter of deduction. Yes, older adults have more fat, but then fat is less heavy than muscle, as you know. Just like bone is heavier than cartilage. These are just a few, so I think it's safe to say that these sort of assessments require empirical evidence, and that such evidence is preferable to simple deduction. Unless you feel strongly enough about it to test your theories too. It costs roughly $500 per test, so a mere $40,000 will get you there.