Something that really confuses me (newbie)

[cement]

I agree that proper nutrition is the number one element for health of any species.
The link between calcium and vitamin D is important because as far as I know, the absorption of calcium is maintained by the presence of enough vitamin D. Maybe the case for calcium is overstated just like it was with humans. It may even turn out, that with proper research that calcium isn't even as important as say magnesium or zinc or other minerals.
I always supplied it too our vitticeps but he got heaps of time out in the sun anyway, when you look at natural origins of location, say diurnal desert or open woodland species over forest or cave species (nocturnal or not), there could be a reasonable assumption that uv lighting (if theres an inability to access full sunlight might be good) if a diet is lacking in certain vitamins.
Probably hasn't been properly researched though? I would be interested to read any research papers on it.

 

[Sdaji]

I agree that proper nutrition is the number one element for health of any species.
The link between calcium and vitamin D is important because as far as I know, the absorption of calcium is maintained by the presence of enough vitamin D. Maybe the case for calcium is overstated just like it was with humans. It may even turn out, that with proper research that calcium isn't even as important as say magnesium or zinc or other minerals.
I always supplied it too our vitticeps but he got heaps of time out in the sun anyway, when you look at natural origins of location, say diurnal desert or open woodland species over forest or cave species (nocturnal or not), there could be a reasonable assumption that uv lighting (if theres an inability to access full sunlight might be good) if a diet is lacking in certain vitamins.
Probably hasn't been properly researched though? I would be interested to read any research papers on it.

It's actually nonsensical to make an absolute statement about anything being the most important. It is always dependent on circumstance. If you don't have air or water, you're suddenly going to think air or water is the most important thing (in the case od air that thought will be particularly sudden). If the temperature is 2 degrees you're suddenly going to think temperature is the most important thing. If everyone around you is dying of a virus, you'll suddenly think hygiene or quarantine or something is the most important thing. If you have inadequate food, diet suddenly seems like the most important thing. If you lack magnesium or zinc or calcium or protein or water or any other nutrient, that nutrient becomes the most important nutrient. When any essential thing is in abundance, it is still essential but we generally consider it to be unimportant because we take it for granted.

In general, I'd say the most important thing reptile keepers should understand and focus on is temperature, based on it being the thing keepers most commonly get wrong. Diet is certainly up there, especially with many lizards.

Definitely, there is a relationship between calcium, vitamin D3 and in some species UV. UV is used by some species (including humans) to create vitamin D3, which assists in calcium absorption. If you consume dietary vitamin D3 you don't need UV to produce endogenous vitamin D3. If you have less vitamin D3 (whether endogenous or exogenous, and specifically for the purposes of calcium absorption it doesn't particularly matter which) you'll need more calcium. So, how much calcium, D3 or UV you need depends on how much of the other two you're getting, plus which species you are.

With or without scientific papers, if a species can live happily for consecutive generations in a cave, it doesn't need UV and that reality is all the proof we need. Similarly, if I can keep them in perfect health to old age and do it for multiple generations without any UV, that's all the proof we need. It's reality, it's empirical evidence.

 

[user 43767]

With or without scientific papers, if a species can live happily for consecutive generations in a cave, it doesn't need UV and that reality is all the proof we need. Similarly, if I can keep them in perfect health to old age and do it for multiple generations without any UV, that's all the proof we need. It's reality, it's empirical evidence.

Hi, I remember some months ago you stated you had "bred more varanids than all of the top breeders put together", considering you`re now also claiming (some/most of certain species?) were/are in perfect health until "old age", I`d like to ask what ages these animals lived to (please give details of species if possible). I`m asking a serious question in order to learn about your animals and methods, not criticising anything you`ve said. Thanks!

 

[Sdaji]

Hi, I remember some months ago you stated you had "bred more varanids than all of the top breeders put together", considering you`re now also claiming (some/most of certain species?) were/are in perfect health until "old age", I`d like to ask what ages these animals lived to (please give details of species if possible). I`m asking a serious question in order to learn about your animals and methods, not criticising anything you`ve said. Thanks!

You're heavily misquoting me there, I've never made such a bold claim. I'm pretty sure that in at least two seasons I bred more of one specific monitor species than everyone else put together, but I've certainly never come anywhere near breeding the most varanids in total, let alone more than everyone else combined.

The oldest monitors I've produced and kept track of which never had any UV would have been over 15 years old when I last knew of their situation. Some of them may still be alive now but they changed hands and I don't know what happened. They were Pygmy Mulga monitors. I never actually had one die of old age and don't know of any which were kept well and died of old age. I did see a few which I'd sold and weren't properly cared for which grew up with nasty metabolic bone disease (some of them did have UV) which didn't live too long. Surprisingly, one pair which grew into undesrsized adults with nasty MBD deformities did successfully reproduce. Small clutch which wasn't all fertile, but they did produce a couple of babies. I was excited to see them about 2 years after I'd sold them as hatchlings then a little horrified when I actually laid eyes in them!

Whatever the species, including skinks, dragons, turtles, etc, if there are going to be problems with metabolic bone disease from lack of calcium (whatever the cause), it will show up most in young growing animals. If the conditions are good enough to allow them to grow up in good condition they will allow the animal to have a long healthy life. This is not the case with all environmental variables (high temperatures or overfeeding for example), but adult animals have much lower calcium requirements than growing animals, so in this specific respect, we have almost all the information we need within their first year of life, but I've kept skinks, geckoes, monitors, turtles and legless lizards (and snakes of course) without UV from hatching/birth without UV to at least 5 years. The shortest lived reptiles I've worked with have been geckoes, some of the smaller species averaged less than 5 years, although I don't believe UV would have lengthened their lives.