U
U.W.S
Guest
Hi all,
The aim of this thread is to provide some preliminary information on a research project we have been conducting on the growth and development of Children's pythons. The following abstract was presented at CARA, and provides a general account of the trial methods and results so far.
At this point it should be noted that this is preliminary data and the study is ongoing. It should also be noted that contrary to the opinions and views of certain prominant entities within the reptile industry, animal welfare has been the central theme of this project, and in conjunction with other aspects of captive management, is the ongoing focus of the study.
Prior to reading the abstract and associated graphs, there are several importaint points to consider;
1) Once again, this is preliminary data - the study is ongoing. Results of the study when complete will be published elsewhere
2) Feeding is voluntary. This must be stressed.
3) The trial was, and is, conducted under carefully controlled experimental conditions.
4) The project has ACEC approval (obviously)
5) This is not to be considered as a guide to feeding. No responsibility will be taken for the actions of any individual as a result of implementing the feeding practices employed in this study. See point #3. This may be seen as negating any validity of the data, but as most of you would be aware, there are some very silly people out there.
Finally, and most importantly, we are experienced keepers and breeders who have an interest in the animals we study. This research, whilst producing knowledge that is 'obvious' to some people, is nonetheless producing data that is new and has potential application for the average keeper. I look forward to seeing the ensuing debate and discussion. I'm sure Hazzard will answer any questions you may have about the project and potential applications.
Jason
Growth and development of children’s pythons (Antaresia childreni) in captivity.
Flesch, J.S., Wolf, L, and Duncan, M.
University of Western Sydney
Pythons are a commonly-kept reptile easily maintained in captivity, with the children’s python often regarded as a ‘starting’ reptile for many young keepers. Accordingly, this species has been bred in large numbers to supply this demand and is anecdotally, the most commonly maintained python species in Australia. However, whilst there are some basic published guidelines on their captive management and feeding, there have been no definitive studies on their nutritional requirements for growth, development, reproductive performance and overall health. This study aims to provide such information for the species, with preliminary data provided in this paper.
In May 2007, pythons (n=37) were randomised by weight and sex and allocated to a feeding treatment of either low intake (L) and fed 10% of weight in food items weekly or high intake (H) and fed up to 30% of their weight in food items weekly. Animals were housed in plastic tubs maintained at 30°C with a 12:12 photoperiod with ad libitum water, hide boxes and paper substrate. Animals were weighed weekly to determine their intake of frozen/thawed mice which increased incrementally with python size. Snout-vent length (SVL) and head width (HW) were measured every four weeks and shedding intervals recorded.
L and H treatments consumed a weekly average of 10.6% and 16.7% of food items respectively over the study period, with no significant difference in food intake between males and females (p=0.797). Energy intake from L and H treatments was 717 (SEM±6.6) and 4671(SEM±51.6) kcal respectively. Weight change between feeding treatments was significant (p<0.001), with L pythons increasing 43g over the study period with a mean weight of 63.8g (SEM±11.7). H pythons had a mean weight increase of 299g with a treatment weight mean of 329.7g (SEM±118.6). There were no apparent differences in metabolic efficiency between feeding treatments, with a mean of 0.064kcal consumed for each gram of weight gain.
SVL and HW differed significantly between feeding treatments (p<0.001), although the relationship was linear (y=80.90x–371.0, r2=0.901). There were no significant differences between sexes within treatments (p=0.526) or on the rate of SVL and HD increase between treatments (p=0.837), indicating that the growth response to food intake was similar. There were significant differences in shedding rates and intervals between L and H treatments, with L pythons shedding on average 4.6 (SEM±0.9) times over the study period or every 64 days and H pythons shed on average 7.7 (SEM±1.1) times or every 38 days.
Preliminary data provided by this study has demonstrated that children’s pythons are self-limiting in their food intake, even when offered what is essentially an ad libitum diet. Although feed intake did have a highly significant effect on growth rates, the differing feeding regimens did not impact morphometric ratios or efficiency of utilisation of feed items. Additional phases of this research will investigate the effects of these feeding treatments on reproductive performance and body composition.
The aim of this thread is to provide some preliminary information on a research project we have been conducting on the growth and development of Children's pythons. The following abstract was presented at CARA, and provides a general account of the trial methods and results so far.
At this point it should be noted that this is preliminary data and the study is ongoing. It should also be noted that contrary to the opinions and views of certain prominant entities within the reptile industry, animal welfare has been the central theme of this project, and in conjunction with other aspects of captive management, is the ongoing focus of the study.
Prior to reading the abstract and associated graphs, there are several importaint points to consider;
1) Once again, this is preliminary data - the study is ongoing. Results of the study when complete will be published elsewhere
2) Feeding is voluntary. This must be stressed.
3) The trial was, and is, conducted under carefully controlled experimental conditions.
4) The project has ACEC approval (obviously)
5) This is not to be considered as a guide to feeding. No responsibility will be taken for the actions of any individual as a result of implementing the feeding practices employed in this study. See point #3. This may be seen as negating any validity of the data, but as most of you would be aware, there are some very silly people out there.
Finally, and most importantly, we are experienced keepers and breeders who have an interest in the animals we study. This research, whilst producing knowledge that is 'obvious' to some people, is nonetheless producing data that is new and has potential application for the average keeper. I look forward to seeing the ensuing debate and discussion. I'm sure Hazzard will answer any questions you may have about the project and potential applications.
Jason
Growth and development of children’s pythons (Antaresia childreni) in captivity.
Flesch, J.S., Wolf, L, and Duncan, M.
University of Western Sydney
Pythons are a commonly-kept reptile easily maintained in captivity, with the children’s python often regarded as a ‘starting’ reptile for many young keepers. Accordingly, this species has been bred in large numbers to supply this demand and is anecdotally, the most commonly maintained python species in Australia. However, whilst there are some basic published guidelines on their captive management and feeding, there have been no definitive studies on their nutritional requirements for growth, development, reproductive performance and overall health. This study aims to provide such information for the species, with preliminary data provided in this paper.
In May 2007, pythons (n=37) were randomised by weight and sex and allocated to a feeding treatment of either low intake (L) and fed 10% of weight in food items weekly or high intake (H) and fed up to 30% of their weight in food items weekly. Animals were housed in plastic tubs maintained at 30°C with a 12:12 photoperiod with ad libitum water, hide boxes and paper substrate. Animals were weighed weekly to determine their intake of frozen/thawed mice which increased incrementally with python size. Snout-vent length (SVL) and head width (HW) were measured every four weeks and shedding intervals recorded.
L and H treatments consumed a weekly average of 10.6% and 16.7% of food items respectively over the study period, with no significant difference in food intake between males and females (p=0.797). Energy intake from L and H treatments was 717 (SEM±6.6) and 4671(SEM±51.6) kcal respectively. Weight change between feeding treatments was significant (p<0.001), with L pythons increasing 43g over the study period with a mean weight of 63.8g (SEM±11.7). H pythons had a mean weight increase of 299g with a treatment weight mean of 329.7g (SEM±118.6). There were no apparent differences in metabolic efficiency between feeding treatments, with a mean of 0.064kcal consumed for each gram of weight gain.
SVL and HW differed significantly between feeding treatments (p<0.001), although the relationship was linear (y=80.90x–371.0, r2=0.901). There were no significant differences between sexes within treatments (p=0.526) or on the rate of SVL and HD increase between treatments (p=0.837), indicating that the growth response to food intake was similar. There were significant differences in shedding rates and intervals between L and H treatments, with L pythons shedding on average 4.6 (SEM±0.9) times over the study period or every 64 days and H pythons shed on average 7.7 (SEM±1.1) times or every 38 days.
Preliminary data provided by this study has demonstrated that children’s pythons are self-limiting in their food intake, even when offered what is essentially an ad libitum diet. Although feed intake did have a highly significant effect on growth rates, the differing feeding regimens did not impact morphometric ratios or efficiency of utilisation of feed items. Additional phases of this research will investigate the effects of these feeding treatments on reproductive performance and body composition.
