Naturalistic Diet

[PetNcs]

Funny enough, as Petr is always talking about pollinators, none of those beetles are pollinators, except maybe some of the Leaf Beetles, but they only ate 1.

I do not consider it funny at all more sad that youndar again to do pointless attacks. When people speak about pollinators i refer to the common understanding that
“pollinator is an animal taking partnin the process of pollination”, I never refer soecifically to beetlesnif not explicitly said, as the majority of pollination job is done by hymenopterans and lepidopterans.
The study dors NOT explicitely say that it detected roaches: it can refer both to roaches as well as to termites, of which the Latter is the one more probable, especially if biased by their breeding season (which is the only period when they are massively active at daytime and penetrating the live space of active chameleons otjerwise it is hard to imagine when they can cross mutually their trajectories, as both roaches and termites being predominantly terrestrial and nocturnal).

 

[PetNcs]

might sound reasonable, not for me
I have not sold ANY Single granule of pollen in my whole life and, I
My only motivstion is the welfare of the chameleons basednon the logic Inexplained thoroughly. Any potential accusation of commercial interests here would be fake and funny.

 

[cyberlocc]

Petr I am not understanding why you are trying to start a fight, when I am agreeing with you? And we were having IMO a good productive conversation?

Can we rewind, check out my pollen jelly, reasoning and see what you think.

What is some ideas, other than mine to solve the mentioned issues. If you don't like Boiling, Agar Agar, and orange juice.

 

[PetNcs]

Okay, so this came up in another thread as a derail, so I thought it best to move it here.

@CasqueAbove Wanted a more Naturalistic Diet, so we delve into a Study that @JacksJill Provided. My comment was analyzing the data and finding the Families that are represented and translating them.


Jacksjills Study, would play a hand to that.

Bees make up a very small portion of the diet, in her link (first one offers breakdowns). Here is that section.

So 32 Hymenoptera, 2 of them were Bees, Apidae are bees, the other 3 are wasps.

That means they ate more Roaches, than they did "Bees"

As to the Beetles, what kind.

Cerambicidae: Longhorn Beetle.
Chrysomelidae: Leaf Beetle (large family, not very specific)
Coccinellidae: Ladybugs, odd as I have been lead to believe these are toxic to reptiles.
Curculionidae : True Weevils
Elateridae: Click Beetles


Funny enough, as Petr is always talking about pollinators, none of those beetles are pollinators, except maybe some of the Leaf Beetles, but they only ate 1.

Ladybugs, eat mostly aphids, mites, whiteflies and scale insects. They are themselves insectivores.

Weevils, some do eat some pollen, however they are not strictly pollinators, at all. they also eat leaves, and decaying matter, and depending on the species, certain plant matter. Such as Rice, Grain ect.

Calliphoridae: Carrion Flies, or Blue Bottle/Green Bottle flies. In the wild, these feast on well carrion. So there is Preformed Vit A, and alot of it, seeing how this is the biggest number of any insect.
Stratiomyidae: Solider flies, which we are all familiar.
Syrphidae: Hoverflies, pollinators, so there is some pollen insects.
Drosophilidae: Fruit Flies, Drain Flies, ect.

Cicadellidae: Leafhoppers, NOT to be confused with Grasshoppers, these guys suck sap from plants and trees.
Cixiidae: Planthoppers, Aphids, Scale, Whiteflies, basically the things the lady bugs eat. Small insects.
Psylidae: Plant lice again very tiny, like planthoppers.


Now let us Delve into these and what we can do, to get some in the Culture, and move to a more natural Feeding as @PetNcs suggests is best to do.

Does anyone keep any of these as feeders, can you share youre experience with them and how to cage them, and care for them ect?
[/QUOTE
I understand there is a flaw of this study in practical applicability to the topic discussed, as it is evidently a qualitative study and not a wuantitativr one, thus saying nothing about the real VOLUME share but just numbers.
In my recent study of the diet of pardalisnin Madagascar, a count-based study hugely differed from volume shares die to different size and weigjt of the pertinent eaten insects.

 

[PetNcs]

When I say small mix, I mean not potent. Like I said, I'm not against it and I've been using it myself. But there is no science backing any special properties of it(that I'm aware of). One could find the same nutrients through other methods.

I think you're confusing what I'm getting at. It's not a bad supplement, but I wouldn't tell someone it must be used

Well we have different views.
One of my former students is a head of a Bee institute here, I frtninfo from him...

 

[cyberlocc]

I understand there is a flaw of this study in practical applicability to the topic discussed, as it is evidently a qualitative study and not a wuantitativr one, thus saying nothing about the real VOLUME share but just numbers.
In my recent study of the diet of pardalisnin Madagascar, a count-based study hugely differed from volume shares die to different size and weigjt of the pertinent eaten insects.

That is a very good point.

 

[jamest0o0]

might sound reasonable, not for me
I have not sold ANY Single granule of pollen in my whole life and, I
My only motivstion is the welfare of the chameleons basednon the logic Inexplained thoroughly. Any potential accusation of commercial interests here would be fake and funny.

You were talking about 'why would Arcadia use it'... idk why I keep posting this, but i will one last time... I doubt there is any harm using it for chams(though some *people have had kidney issues from using it), but it is probably not necessary either, given a well rounded diet. And there is nothing proven special about it other than it containing a wide range of nutrients(all of which can be found in other foods without much difficulty). There is also the big question of it even being digestible.

Nobody accused you of anything. I try to give you the benefit of the doubt, but every thread I see of yours you have an argumentative chip on your shoulder. What's the deal man? Maybe the language barrier and we're reading each other incorrectly? I can't imagine you are that combative when talking to people in person. Idk what's been going on, but it's as if every post of yours is defensive. I'm looking at this as a friendly conversation over a mutual interest...

 

[PetNcs]

Okay, I will bundle this one up with the above one, and just quote this one.

I agree that the beetles eat pollen and nectar, 110%. I agree thats more natural, and thats why I want to move to feeding pollen, nectar blend.

Why Boil:
Because its bee pollen. We had this in the other thread, the study's done on it, bee pollen is altered by an enzyme that only the bees can break down, so that best case, there is non digestible substances in the pollen mix.

From the study's, and articles I listed in the other thread, they said 30% or more, of the pollen granules, including when powdered could not be digested by anything but Bees.

A few of them said, that boiling the pollen will break down the enzyme. You are right, about possible loss of vitamins doing so, it's something we will have to look into more.

So the chameleon, will be largely okay with the undigestable matter, if the pollen was dusted on ect. However the small beetles may not fair as well.

Why Orange Juice:
Orange Juice, on top of offering tons of vitamins, the citrus also is a natural preservative.

it's use in the idea, was in low amounts, and for the preservative reasoning. It will help the finished mixture stay better longer, so it does not spoil or mold, as quickly.

in other beetle jelly's, it's used for the same effect, it makes a jelly that would be putrid in a day or 2, last 3 or 4.

It will also help fill the fruit gap, for the flower beetles.


Why Agar Agar:

This also ties back in to why boil, as the Agar Agar has to be boiled for this to work.

Agar Agar turns the powder into Jelly, powder would be very messy and unruly. The beetles trample their food, and would make a mess. The majority of the pollen would be wasted, create mold, and nastiness fairly quickly if given as a powder.

If given as a powder, than a constant supply of fruit would have to be provided to take the place of nectar and fruits. As that is how the beetles drink in the wild.

The jelly fulfills both goals, and is how beetles are raised in captivity.


The typical beetle jellys, used and sold for beetles, consit mostly of Brown Sugar and Banana.

The Bee Pollen Jelly I proposed would be much more natural and healthy than that IMO.

I read your explanatio.
and understand where you aee coming from
Regardless. i do not buy its logic.

why we should force Chamaleons to digest pollen better in captiviry rhan in rhe wild?
I am perfectly fine if they digest it exsctly that lousy way asnin the way as rhis exactly is natural. They ate used to dogest it partly and not dogest a partnof it. No issue.

i do not buy why we shouldboil suxh a precious substance like pollen and. Destroy all aminoacids by denatirating them and vitalins by modifying them. We loose too much and the trade off is lousy or st least questionable.

i am against adding simplemacids from citeuses into the food of chameleons (througj the beetles) just for the reasons you named for two reasons:
It is not natural
It can cause acidosis that destroys the homeiostasis

again, with all the respect, I will never recommend to do so soubtful artificial process loosing so much with an absolutelyninedequate gain

i insist:
If chameleons est pollen raw (and they do), letbus est it raw and digest it same incomplrte way as they do in the wild

If pollinators eat pollen and natkral juices, let then eat (but do not force them todigest additional acids) and feed the xhameleons with them

do not add cooked agar agar to theirnintestines as it does not make sense, itnis unnatural

Frankly again:
I do not get the logic of your spproach

istead of taking pollen and give it to xhameleons same as in the wild

you advocate of a totally artificial and unnatiral process desttoying many ofnits valuable natiral substances, adding unnatursl substances and unnaturaly boiling rhe mixture

it lacks sense for me totally.

And while youbsre the one always pusjing for evidence and pinlished science, you honhere feliberately on a field of wekly justified or absurd specullations and not well thought through constructs. I am really puzzled.

 

[PetNcs]

You were talking about 'why would Arcadia use it'... idk why I keep posting this, but i will one last time... I doubt there is any harm using it for chams(though some *people have had kidney issues from using it), but it is probably not necessary either, given a well rounded diet. And there is nothing proven special about it other than it containing a wide range of nutrients(all of which can be found in other foods without much difficulty). There is also the big question of it even being digestible.

Nobody accused you of anything. I try to give you the benefit of the doubt, but every thread I see of yours you have an argumentative chip on your shoulder. What's the deal man? Maybe the language barrier and we're reading each other incorrectly? I can't imagine you are that combative when talking to people in person. Idk what's been going on, but it's as if every post of yours is defensive. I'm looking at this as a friendly conversation over a mutual interest...

I guess itnis language issue.
I do kot feel offended at all
This is why I used conditional to reger to it.
Sorry for misunderstandibgs, alm OK!

doubt is the daily food if a scientist!

 

[cyberlocc]

I read your explanatio.
and understand where you aee coming from
Regardless. i do not buy its logic.

why we should force Chamaleons to digest pollen better in captiviry rhan in rhe wild?
I am perfectly fine if they digest it exsctly that lousy way asnin the way as rhis exactly is natural. They ate used to dogest it partly and not dogest a partnof it. No issue.

i do not buy why we shouldboil suxh a precious substance like pollen and. Destroy all aminoacids by denatirating them and vitalins by modifying them. We loose too much and the trade off is lousy or st least questionable.

i am against adding simplemacids from citeuses into the food of chameleons (througj the beetles) just for the reasons you named for two reasons:
It is not natural
It can cause acidosis that destroys the homeiostasis

again, with all the respect, I will never recommend to do so soubtful artificial process loosing so much with an absolutelyninedequate gain

i insist:
If chameleons est pollen raw (and they do), letbus est it raw and digest it same incomplrte way as they do in the wild

If pollinators eat pollen and natkral juices, let then eat (but do not force them todigest additional acids) and feed the xhameleons with them

do not add cooked agar agar to theirnintestines as it does not make sense, itnis unnatural

Frankly again:
I do not get the logic of your spproach

istead of taking pollen and give it to xhameleons same as in the wild

you advocate of a totally artificial and unnatiral process desttoying many ofnits valuable natiral substances, adding unnatursl substances and unnaturaly boiling rhe mixture

it lacks sense for me totally.

And while youbsre the one always pusjing for evidence and pinlished science, you honhere feliberately on a field of wekly justified or absurd specullations and not well thought through constructs. I am really puzzled.

Couple of points,

Mostly just that the concern of digestion is not of the chameleon, they will pass what they cannot digest. The beetles, however might not be able to.


You bring up, the wild. However Beetles are not eating Bee pollen, not in that form. Bee Pollen is not the same thing as Flower Pollen, however Flower Pollen is really expensive.

We could skip the boiling, by switching to flower pollen instead of Bee pollen. Solely in the aspect of Beetles care, Chameleons are largely fine with bee pollen, the undigested will pass with out issue.


However, a powder substance, will make a mess. That is not going to work, it will be wasted and make molds and such in the beetles substrate. So how do we make the pollen into an edible version that will remain in tact, and not create a mess, or mold quickly?

Honey is used in the Beetle Jellys, in a small amount, would Honey + Nectar + Flower Pollen be a better mix? I'm not sure if this would get hard, quickly, as the beetles cannot eat hard stuff. However the syrup form, is easier to deal with, and more efficient at the use.

We cannot give the beetles a never ending supply of Fresh Pollen filled flowers. So nothing we do is going to be natural, its a question of the best way to give them a more natural pollen diet in a way that is feasible.

As to the Nectar, can we buy a Nectar? Im looking and not really sure you can? I know folks use sugar water for hummingbirds, is that close enough?

 

[Redman]

I have noticed that the sugar glider community makes a nectar for their animals but I have NO idea if any of the formulations available would be harmful to our chams, based on ingredients. But it's another avenue to explore in looking for options for your nectar replacement. Just thought I would mention it.

 

[snitz427]

I have given thought to adding natural sources of pollen to my enclosures. I let most of my insects free range and I have observed bugs such as the hawk moths attempting to eat or drink from plants that resemble flowers in my cages. I typically have several black soldier fly flying around the enclosures at any given time. I’ve also placed mantis ooths in the enclosure. I feel like all of the bugs will benefit from having a natural flower source whether it is for pollen or food.

I was going to add cranberry hibiscus (clarice is a plant eater), jewel orchids, begonia thelme, and maybe nasutrum (edible). All of them flower almost non-stop, with little effort. My buddy is growing hibiscus amazingly well in her living room this winter, so I think my cages will suffice.

So the chams have access to bee pollen plus an insect that might have had contact with pure pollen.

 

[cyberlocc]

I have noticed that the sugar glider community makes a nectar for their animals but I have NO idea if any of the formulations available would be harmful to our chams, based on ingredients. But it's another avenue to explore in looking for options for your nectar replacement. Just thought I would mention it.

Seems to be honey and water, mixed with a bunch of other stuff, that has no purpose in nectar, but likely other nutrition for the gliders.

 

[jamest0o0]

I guess itnis language issue.
I do kot feel offended at all
This is why I used conditional to reger to it.
Sorry for misunderstandibgs, alm OK!

doubt is the daily food if a scientist!

Appreciate it, I didn't intend to come off rudely either!

 

[Redman]

Seems to be honey and water, mixed with a bunch of other stuff, that has no purpose in nectar, but likely other nutrition for the gliders.

I have seen several formulations in my searches that listed flower pollen. But yes, there are some that are pretty useless too.

 

[CasqueAbove]

What do you mean with “veiled can inhabit wide range”... does it refer ti their adaptability and hardiness?

Whenever I research range it is vague. I always see "From grassland plains to 3000 feet"
Though I have never seen this in a scientific regional aspect. so that is why I said to my understanding.

It is great you have been there. Knowledge of what it is like on the ground is significant.

Also know my interest in this is as a hobby. If I could I would set up exactly like there home, with misting linked to real time weather. This is not for the chameleon, I don't think he cares.
It is for me, it is fun.

Also if you had any photos of the area, or know of plant species that may be found in the US. I would be happy.

 

[Redman]

I once did a fishroom light setup that was tied to the weather outside.

I did a solar panel array that powered the lights but didn't use a battery. That way the lights fed directly off the amount of sun that was shining at the time, dimming and getting brighter in direct correlation to the actual weather.

It did seem to have an effect on the breeding behavior of the fish, but like you it was pretty much a cool idea for me and most of the fish didn't really care. LOL

 

[PetNcs]

Couple of points,

Mostly just that the concern of digestion is not of the chameleon, they will pass what they cannot digest. The beetles, however might not be able to.


You bring up, the wild. However Beetles are not eating Bee pollen, not in that form. Bee Pollen is not the same thing as Flower Pollen, however Flower Pollen is really expensive.

We could skip the boiling, by switching to flower pollen instead of Bee pollen. Solely in the aspect of Beetles care, Chameleons are largely fine with bee pollen, the undigested will pass with out issue.


However, a powder substance, will make a mess. That is not going to work, it will be wasted and make molds and such in the beetles substrate. So how do we make the pollen into an edible version that will remain in tact, and not create a mess, or mold quickly?

Honey is used in the Beetle Jellys, in a small amount, would Honey + Nectar + Flower Pollen be a better mix? I'm not sure if this would get hard, quickly, as the beetles cannot eat hard stuff. However the syrup form, is easier to deal with, and more efficient at the use.

We cannot give the beetles a never ending supply of Fresh Pollen filled flowers. So nothing we do is going to be natural, its a question of the best way to give them a more natural pollen diet in a way that is feasible.

As to the Nectar, can we buy a Nectar? Im looking and not really sure you can? I know folks use sugar water for hummingbirds, is that close enough?

i do notnunderstand why you make it soo complicated. The whole story becomes totally messy...

so you care for beetles more than chameleons in your approach within this topic? So my response is: skip it. Forget the beetles. Are the beetles not good vectors? Ok! DO NOT USE THEM then and no headache.

Pollinator beetles anyway play generally not that significant role as food source as do the major polinators: bees.

and as usual, you bring with every answer a new complication not even waiting before we resolve the previous one.

Flower pollen is different from bee pollen. Of course you are right. But in the process we talk about, namely chameleon ingestion of pollen, itnis merely a valid complication and you must know it!!!

Flower pollen is a pollen from flowers. OK

Bee pollen is a ball of pollen made by young beeswhen they land on a flower. It's a mixture of pollen, saliva, and nectar or honey. Bees carry these balls back to the hive in sacs on their legs and store them in the hive's honeycomb. The pollen then ferments into “bee bread,” which feeds a bee colony. (Cited from wikipedia)

so,chameleons ingest a pollinator bee:
It contains flower pollen and two pellets of bee pollen which is recently (just seconds or minutes ago) collected flower pollen put tohether with saliva and nectar evtl little honey just for the purpose that it forms the pellet to be easy transported to the hive!
what a difference?! Almost zero. Within this short period of time NOTHING happens with the flower pollen, the fermentation takes place onlynin the hives and takes days to weeks!

The ratio of ingested „pure flover pollen“ just contaminating the hairy bee body and the bee pollen carried a pellet is 1:1000 my rude guess and can be easily!ignored.

the gut of bees is then potentially full of bee bread if they est it before they go for a nectar and pollen hunt...

So, working with bee pollen is perfectly fine and we do not need to overcomplicate it with an yet minute ammount of fresh flower pollen... this minutisation is a way how to distract from the merit of the debate and efficiently kill the debate IMHO and I do not understand why you do so.

we discuss the bee pollen as a natural part of cham diet
And you come with complications like how to make beetles to digest it and what is the tiiiiiiiiinyyyyy difference between flower pollen and bee pollen sic!!!

nectar? Fir beetles? I am far from ready to discuss this, it has no sense

 

[CasqueAbove]

So all this talk brings me to a point.

I sort of belong to two camps on this.

1. The average keeper. We have seen many chams do just fine with the limited feeders we have, so long as proper supplication is provided. We can argue that wit more "optimal" care it would have lived longer, but it lived a fare number of years. Say 3-5 for a male veiled. No this is not full life expectancy, but it does not mean the animal suffered greatly.

2 The naturalist. We want everything as close to nature as possible. Our chams tend to live the full 5-7 expected. Is this because of the extra variety? Or just the fact that we dote over them more than the average keeper.

My lean toward the naturalistic is as a hobbyist.

 

[PetNcs]

Whenever I research range it is vague. I always see "From grassland plains to 3000 feet"
Though I have never seen this in a scientific regional aspect. so that is why I said to my understanding.

Please do not refer to dubious sources that lie as they do not have the info.
go to chameleons.info, you will find several articles there dealing with their biotope including photos
They do not inhabit various biotopes, just ONE.
rhey do NOT inhabit deserts not they live in grassland plains (as there are no in Yemen there), they inhabitspecific montane biotopes that are MUCH colder than yiu imagine
Thisnis their homecountry THiS WEEK