Quad eggs took less than 25 days to hatch!!!

[Chris Anderson]

Sorry to be a skeptic, but from reading your other thread, it sounds to me like the laying container you used was not new (in other words it was not an empty container that you put fresh laying medium in right before she laid, but rather was a laying container that had either been in the enclosure for some time or had been used previously with other T. quadricornis clutches) and that you had multiple females using it, is that correct? It sounds to me like this is a previous clutch that had been laid by one of your females (possibly from retained sperm?) and that you only discovered it when this female was digging in the same area trying to lay her current clutch (in effect when she was digging test holes). I highly doubt it was actually laid at the same time as the subsequent eggs, especially given the short incubation time. Could you provide more details about the laying container, its use history, etc.? Did you take weight measurements before and after the female supposedly laid the clutch of huge eggs to verify that she had actually laid a clutch?

Chris

 

[pamnsam94]

Sorry to be a skeptic, but from reading your other thread, it sounds to me like the laying container you used was not new (in other words it was not an empty container that you put fresh laying medium in right before she laid, but rather was a laying container that had either been in the enclosure for some time or had been used previously with other T. quadricornis clutches) and that you had multiple females using it, is that correct? It sounds to me like this is a previous clutch that had been laid by one of your females (possibly from retained sperm?) and that you only discovered it when this female was digging in the same area trying to lay her current clutch (in effect when she was digging test holes). I highly doubt it was actually laid at the same time as the subsequent eggs, especially given the short incubation time. Could you provide more details about the laying container, its use history, etc.? Did you take weight measurements before and after the female supposedly laid the clutch of huge eggs to verify that she had actually laid a clutch?

Chris

I don't blame you Chris for being skeptical. I want an explanation and yours certainly seems plausible, if not probable. It's a shame I didn't take any weights on the mother (before and after she laid). Three friends happened to witness the event. One of them called me to let me know the female was laying. When I arrived, each of my friends made statements like, "I saw her laying", "she laid 5 and is working on another", etc. I was so shocked at the size of the eggs, that I didn't think to question the "witnesses". My first thought was wondering how the female could have laid such huge eggs. I left the room to get the incubation container ready (measuring the proper ratio of vermiculite to water, etc.), and when I came back, the female had climbed up into the tree. Although she definitely seemed much thinner to me, I mentioned that she still looked as though she might have some eggs. However, most of us know that depending on how a female is sitting, it sometimes appears that a female is carrying eggs even though she has just finished. The opposite is also true sometimes. It might appear that a female has already laid when in fact she hasn't. Just in case she still was carrying eggs, I started a hole at the bottom of a branch where it was angled into the substrate. And, as I mentioned earlier, she expanded that hole/tunnel and dug down about 6 to 8 inches until she hit the bottom of the enclosure. She then turned around in the normal fashion, facing outward, she laid the 10 normal sized eggs.

The "soil" is just coco fiber. Mostly, its use is simply an aesthetic one to cover the bottom of the enclosure. I'll also mention that I intentionally made only one area mounded up to a suitable depth for egg-laying. The rest of the enclosure only has approximately one inch of coco fiber on the bottom. The potted tree has a covering of lava rock covered with an inch or so of coconut fiber. I only wanted there to be one area in the enclosure for egg laying. When I see any of my females in any of the cages pace around or start digging test holes. my normal procedure is to remove her to a large and somewhat darkened 18 gallon tote with branches. In that container, I usually will dig an angled hole and almost always, the female will expand that hole and lay there. Just in case though, I have a single area in the enclosure should she start laying when I'm not around. Also, I have misters that go off for 5 minute intervals 3 times per day. As you might imagine, the substrate can get pretty wet, but I have the excess water directed toward a drain.

After reading your post, I had one of those "duh" moments (I must admit I'm pretty embarrased now) because what you say makes sense to a degree. Let me explain. As you can see from the attached pics my friend took, the substrate is beyond moist. In fact, it's bordering on wet. It seems that would have killed the eggs. In addition, as mentioned, the coco fiber is only about 1"-1 1/2" deep there, although I realize she may have pushed it up to a degree to make it a little deeper.

I talked to my friends, the "witnesses", and I found out that they did not actually see what they led me to believe they saw. All of them simply saw what appeared to them as her trying to cover the eggs up. So, the witnesses are not helping my case, and me not taking weights on the female certainly doesn't help either.

I'm still puzzled though because of how wet that particular area is and how shallow it is. It also seems pretty inconceivable that 5 months passed without me finding the eggs because I'll sift through the substrate to periodically clean it, and I'll also completely change the substrate out from time to time. However, I must admit, I don't keep records on those maintenance procedures.

Take a look at the attached photos. The egg closest to the female has a clear fluid attached to it that I would describe as "jelly-like" in terms of its consistency. One other egg had that too. I assumed it was oozing out from inside the egg through a minute hole I couldn't even see. Do you know what that is? I have ideas, but I'm not sure.

Although I don't name most of my chameleons, I'd better right now. Otherwise, the following will get really confusing. Until I think of good names, I'll call the larger female Alpha and the smaller female Beta. Beta is definitely the mother of the 8 huge eggs I found on 9/26/12 and the 10 eggs she laid the following day. I only let her breed with the 5-horned male pictured in my avatar. Alpha only bred with the male I had that recently died, although now, I'm giving her opportunities to breed with the 5-horned male in my avatar. Once I find another adult male, I will once again not let Alpha breed with avatar male. It seems pretty inccredible to me that I wouldn't have found Beta's eggs earlier. Five months prior to finding Beta's huge eggs was almost exactly when the 14 eggs, laid by Alpha, started hatching. Alpha laid 10 more eggs on 9/10/12, only six of which appear good. I find it very odd that I wouldn't have noticed back in April that Beta was gravid.

I'm thoroughly confused now because, while your explanation seems more reasonable, especially given what would be an increadibly short incubation period of 24 days or less, I can't make sense of the things I brought up.

All of the quad clutches I've had since the early 90s have hatched pretty much right at the 5 month mark, give or take a week. Since this account still needs more verification (something unfortunately I might not be able to provide), does anyone have any info of a verified account of a short incubation period and how short it was (4 months, 3 months, 2 months)?

Chris, if your explanation is correct, then I may have an answer for the brown coloration of the huge eggs that I asked about in the other thread I started. In the past, when I've had eggs laid in peat and noticed brown spots on some of them, I thought that staining from the peat might be the cause. However, I'm not sure if coco fiber would do the same, although I don't really know for sure if brown spots on eggs can be caused from peat either. The brown coloration may be something completely different. I don't know.

Finally, under my post "Huge quad eggs!!!", look at Bill's (DeremensisBlue) posts regarding his huge eggs with photos. Plus, he mentions someone else that had huge eggs. However, in those circumstances, the incubation period was normal. Again, if you have any info on what the jelly-like, clear substance is on one of the eggs in the photo, or if you know of verified short incubation times (for quads especially but it would be interesting to hear about other species as well) please let me know. Thanks.

Perry

 

[pamnsam94]

I forgot the pics. Here they are.

 

[clarkrw3]

I find this whole thing very interesting!! As well as the woman that got pregnant while pregnant

I do know that people that use coco fiber in gecko lay bins tend to have brown stained eggs, for what that's worth. I always use sphagnum peat moss for my gecko lay bins and never had the brown coloration.

 

[Chris Anderson]

Hi Perry,

Yeah, unfortunately I think its a case where we won't be able to say with certainty either way. As you mentioned, females have a way of looking like they laid when they haven't, and looking gravid when they aren't, so it can be difficult to tell for sure if a female is lighter, particularly when she still has (part of) a clutch. Also, I know there have been a number of times where I've dug through a laying container, knowing a female laid, and a pretty good idea of where she did, and missing it for quite a while. I could definitely see missing a clutch, particularly if it was one you weren't expecting or watching for (which can happen quite easily!).

There are a number of species that are known to have eggs hatch in 3 months or less. Most of them are Rhampholeon, Rieppeleon or Brookesia species, but T. melleri is an obvious example of a species with a remarkably short incubation period. 25 days, however, is extremely short, and seems unlikely in a relatively large, high elevation species.

As you said, the coloration could be explained by being in the cocofiber for an extended period. The oozing could be explained by the high moisture content of the cocofiber as well.

My opinion is that it is likely that these are an older clutch that was missed. It may still have had a quick incubation period (they often do when incubated more "naturally"), but I'm just not convinced 25 days for T. quadricornis seems probable. Unfortunately we may never know though.

Chris

 

[Kent67]

I take it, then, that there's not been a reported case of a clutch retained far beyond a normal period that did not kill the female while also showing embryonic development beyond the norm? I still have not had a chance to read the first thread about the huge eggs but when I read the first post here I considered the ovoviviparous specimens that were found with groups of embryos developing at different stages (ages) from each other and wondered if something similar could have happened here (vascularized eggs at laying/no diapause).

 

[pamnsam94]

Hi Perry,

Yeah, unfortunately I think its a case where we won't be able to say with certainty either way. As you mentioned, females have a way of looking like they laid when they haven't, and looking gravid when they aren't, so it can be difficult to tell for sure if a female is lighter, particularly when she still has (part of) a clutch. Also, I know there have been a number of times where I've dug through a laying container, knowing a female laid, and a pretty good idea of where she did, and missing it for quite a while. I could definitely see missing a clutch, particularly if it was one you weren't expecting or watching for (which can happen quite easily!).

There are a number of species that are known to have eggs hatch in 3 months or less. Most of them are Rhampholeon, Rieppeleon or Brookesia species, but T. melleri is an obvious example of a species with a remarkably short incubation period. 25 days, however, is extremely short, and seems unlikely in a relatively large, high elevation species.

As you said, the coloration could be explained by being in the cocofiber for an extended period. The oozing could be explained by the high moisture content of the cocofiber as well.

My opinion is that it is likely that these are an older clutch that was missed. It may still have had a quick incubation period (they often do when incubated more "naturally"), but I'm just not convinced 25 days for T. quadricornis seems probable. Unfortunately we may never know though.

Chris

I agree that we'll probably never know for sure. Too bad I didn't weigh her before and after those 8 eggs were discovered. Bill had multiple clutches with huge eggs and thought that was normal until he saw eggs that were considered normal sized. I'm still wondering about those. Apparently they were laid as large as the eggs I found, although I don't know all the details. However, this only lets me know that female quads must be able to carry and pass such huge eggs, (nothing else) since the incubation period was normal.

I know about species that are known to have relatively short incubation periods compared to other species, but I'm wanting to know of species whose eggs have been verified to hatch in considerably less time than what is normal for the species. I also realize that generally, species have a range of time (depending on environmental factors, etc.) that is considered normal. I'm just trying to find out if there have been verified cases of considerably shorter than normal incubation times for any given species.

The misting cycles I've been using have been consistant, and like I mentioned, the particular area she laid could be described as extremely moist to wet. Does that at least seem extremely peculiar to you? During your trip to Cameroon, did you gain any insight as to moisture levels in the soil where quads are found, or does it simply vary too much to draw any conclusions?

Regarding the oozing material, someone suggested to me that it may have been from the female if she just laid them. I just don't know what that substance would be though. I had initially thought that the two eggs, which had the jelly-like substance on them, simply "burst" coming out of the female or while still inside her, thinking it was egg white or something. Although I've cut open many eggs that have gone bad, I've not really studied them enough to learn about all of the substances an egg contains. Also, I usually think of egg white as being runny (at least chicken eggs are that way), not jelly-like. Now that I think about it more, it was very similar in consistency to snail eggs that I sometimes have to scrape off the inside of freshwater aquariums. Whatever it was, I found it rather interesting.

Perry

 

[Chris Anderson]

Hi Kent & Perry,

I don't know of any examples of oviparous chameleon species retaining clutches for periods that would shorten the incubation period so substantially (as a proportion of the "typical" incubation period), or of oviparous species retaining multiple clutches, particularly so close to oviposition of the second. Obviously a female can hold a clutch a certain amount of time to find an appropriate laying spot, but typically, as far as I know, not finding one results in reabsorption or eggbinding.

I definitely agree that egg size can vary greatly between clutches from one individual and between individuals of the same species. I've never seen anything to indicate, however, that egg size at oviposition effects incubation time. It definitely would effect neonate size at hatching, but I've not seen anything on incubation period.

As for examples of species who have had clutches hatch in considerably less time depending on incubation conditions, as you said, there is a lot of variation in incubation times depending on various factors. The difference between 5 months and 25 days though, seems extreme, and in my opinion, unlikely.

Now, that said, the typical gestation period for T. quadricornis is usually about 2 months, but there are cases of it lasting as much as 4.5 months. Typically embryonic development begins some period after oviposition (following certain environmental conditions). Its not impossible to imagine that in a case of extended gestation, embryonic development could begin prior to oviposition, and coupled with incubation conditions that favor rapid development (particularly at the mid-late developmental stages), that the period of post-oviposition incubation, could be reduced dramatically relative to the typical incubation length following a normal gestation duration and incubation conditions. That said, I've never seen anything to show it does or would happen, either.

Unfortunately, we really can't be certain. I guess its the scientist in me that resorts to assuming the norm when evidence to prove a novelty is lacking. Interesting none the less.

Chris

 

[pamnsam94]

The more I think about it, the more I'm becoming convinced that the female did indeed lay two clutches months apart (just how many months though I still don't know). During the time she was gravid, I remember thinking one day that she looked thinner. I thought for sure she laid her eggs, even though I never saw her walking around on the floor or digging any test holes, etc. I proceeded to dig up the deep area (mounded up area) where I thought the eggs had to be. Nothing. Next, I uncovered every square inch, or so I thought, of the 1" deep coco fiber on the rest of the enclosure's floor. I must have missed an area (sort of a nook) that is right up against an artificial tree buttress, an area that I have dug up frequently when cleaning out the substrate. It's a very small area that substrate can get lodged in. Although the substrate in most areas is only around an inch, I suppose it's possible that coco fiber might have sloped up against the root. Although I'm pretty sure that I checked that area and cleared it of coco fiber when checking for eggs, I do have room for doubt. Next, I looked at the female again, this time sitting in a different position, and she once again appeared to be gravid. I didn't think anything else of the matter because after all, I was convinced I checked every area of the enclosure.

However, the primary reason I'm becoming more convinced that the eggs were laid months apart is because of one of my earliest thoughts after seeing the huge eggs. Although my largest female had laid 16 eggs last year (14 of which began hatching at the end of April), they were 16 normal sized eggs. I couldn't conceive of this smaller female laying 18 eggs, especially since 8 of them were huge. She just didn't look that big to me. Although I will always have room for doubt with either scenario due to the circumstances, I'm definitely leaning towards the two groups of eggs being laid months apart, not a day apart. It's hard for me to remember when I initially thought she had laid. I want to say it was either mid to late May or June, which would still make for a shorter than normal incubation period of 3 to 4 months, but I can't say for sure.

Lastly, I'll mention that way before I heard of the often used 1 to 1 ratio of vermiculite to water by weight which I read about a long, long time ago. I had used incubation media that was obviously too wet. In those experiences, the eggs would grow pretty big and rather quickly while incubating (quite a bit bigger than the 14 eggs that hatched at the end of April). but they would fail to hatch. If these eggs did indeed incubate in situ, then at least I've learned that quad eggs can get quite a bit wetter than I ever imagined and still hatch.

Sorry if I wasted anyone's time in reading about this whole situation, especially if the 24 day or less incubation time wasn't the case. But, that is what the forums are for, right, learning from each other's experiences? I only found out today that my friends did not actually witness egg laying but at best just saw the female covering up the eggs. Plus, once I saw Bill's pics of huge eggs laid by his female(s), I didn't question that laying huge eggs was possible. Had I thought about it more, I hope it would have eventually occurred to me that the female might have simply been digging up eggs from her previous clutch. Thanks for everyone's input. I hope this discussion was helpful to others, not just me.

Perry

 

[pamnsam94]

I'm so relieved and thrilled at the same time!!! I finally, finally have a definite answer!!! She did in fact lay both clutches only one day apart, which means the huge eggs took less than 25 days to hatch after all!!! I'm amazed all over again!!! I was talking to one of our three friends (mentioned earlier in the thread), about what I was sure must have happened (believing the female must have dug up an earlier clutch that she laid months ago). Patty then asked me, "Did you talk to Yvonne?" I didn't even know she stopped by that day and witnessed the event (earlier than my other three friends). So, four of our friends were there that day before I was called to come see. Long story short, I talked to Yvonne today and she insists that she saw two of the huge eggs actually coming out of the female. I asked her a second and third time just to make sure. Our three other friends only saw the female pushing the eggs around trying to cover them up. Yvonne is a credible eyewitness, and I have no doubt anymore that it did indeed happen. Unfortunately, one of our other friends, the one who took a few pics, only took pictures during the time the female was trying to cover the eggs. She wasn't there earlier. Yvonne also mentioned that the female was facing the opposite direction when she saw the two eggs being laid. There was no tunnel because the dirt is so shallow in that area, so the process was easy for her to observe.

My wife told me I couldn't make this message short. As usual, she's right. She knows me too well. She wants me to get off the computer now and finish packing because we leave for vacation today. I'll bring my laptop with me to follow up and answer any questions that anyone has. I can't tell you how relieved I am to finally have an answer as to what actually happened.

Perry

 

[pamnsam94]

Did you read my post a couple of days ago that my female quad did in fact lay a clutch that hatched in less than 25 days? I was resigned to the belief that I would never have a definitive answer as to what actually happend. Not knowing for sure one way or another would have driven me crazy. Thanks to our friend Yvonne, I don't have to wonder anymore!!! I'm still pretty excited!!! Can you tell? Who wouldn't thought that something so bizarre was even possible???

Perry

 

[Trace]

Once again I’m going to be the sceptic. The fourth witness may be credible but did does she know exactly what size a quad egg should be? To her the eggs may have looked large coming out but maybe were, in fact, normal sized. To this day I’m surprised at how big eggs really are. Also in my experience people who don’t keep reptiles can’t necessarily differentiate the subtleties between actual specimens. Since the female wasn’t in a true tunnel perhaps she was turning, twisting and moving to help expel the eggs (the live bearing species do this to expel their young) or moved to protect herself from the perceived predators watching her. She doesn’t want to get eaten while she is laying eggs. So when Yvonne saw the two eggs being laid she may have been facing one direction but maybe had changed position when the other witnesses saw her laying. Perhaps the oozing you saw on the larger eggs happened because the laying female accidentally punched a hole in them when she was digging.

There are too many variables for me to believe this was one clutch and the incubation was only 25 days.

 

[mcleodschams]

I find this whole thing very interesting!! As well as the woman that got pregnant while pregnant

I do know that people that use coco fiber in gecko lay bins tend to have brown stained eggs, for what that's worth. I always use sphagnum peat moss for my gecko lay bins and never had the brown coloration.

i use coco fiber n my fattails laying and sweat boxes and yes the coco stains the eggs brown specled kinda look to them

 

[pamnsam94]

Once again I’m going to be the sceptic. The fourth witness may be credible but did does she know exactly what size a quad egg should be? To her the eggs may have looked large coming out but maybe were, in fact, normal sized. To this day I’m surprised at how big eggs really are. Also in my experience people who don’t keep reptiles can’t necessarily differentiate the subtleties between actual specimens. Since the female wasn’t in a true tunnel perhaps she was turning, twisting and moving to help expel the eggs (the live bearing species do this to expel their young) or moved to protect herself from the perceived predators watching her. She doesn’t want to get eaten while she is laying eggs. So when Yvonne saw the two eggs being laid she may have been facing one direction but maybe had changed position when the other witnesses saw her laying. Perhaps the oozing you saw on the larger eggs happened because the laying female accidentally punched a hole in them when she was digging.

There are too many variables for me to believe this was one clutch and the incubation was only 25 days.

Yvonne saw two eggs actually coming out of the female on September 26th. The other witnesses only saw the female pushing dirt around later that same day. All 8 huge eggs were taken out of the enclosure on that day. The following day, the female expanded the hole/tunnel I made in a completely different area of the enclosure and laid a total of 10 normal sized eggs. Although Yvonne didn't know before this whole event what size eggs normally are, the fact that she actually witnessed two eggs being expelled by the female on the 26th in the exact same spot that our other 3 friends saw her pushing dirt around confirms that she laid at least two of the huge eggs that day. I was completely resigned to the belief that she must have dug up a previous clutch after hearing Chris' explanation. As I mentioned, I even had one of those "duh" moments and was somewhat embarrassed that I hadn't asked the other three witnesses more thoroughly as to what they actually saw. It turned out though that they only saw the female pushing dirt around. Most of the eggs were either parially or totally exposed because the area was really shallow. The coconut fiber wasn't deep enough for her to dig any kind of tunnel. If you read all of my posts concerning this event, you'll see that I had my doubts about both explanations. I’ll believe wherever the evidence leads. I mentioned that although I did not take any pre or post gravid weights, I definitely thought the female looked much thinner after I recovered the 8 huge eggs. Finally, although I acknowledged the fact that whether or not a female looks gravid at any given moment can depend on the way the female is sitting, what confirms that she did in fact lay huge eggs that hatched in less than 25 days was Yvonne seeing 2 of the eggs actually being expelled. Again, I can understand anyone being skeptical, especially if this is a first for an oviparous chameleon species, but I can’t deny what Yvonne saw. Plus, it does answer the problems with what seemed at first to be a more likely explanation.

Perry

 

[djfishygillz]

One thing I take from this is that you mentioned 8 HUGE EGGS.

Eggs can be bigger than others from different females of course, but it seems as if those eggs were probably incubating for a while- thus their large size- and the female having no where else to lay went back to the same spot as her earlier clutch.

 

[pamnsam94]

One thing I take from this is that you mentioned 8 HUGE EGGS.

Eggs can be bigger than others from different females of course, but it seems as if those eggs were probably incubating for a while- thus their large size- and the female having no where else to lay went back to the same spot as her earlier clutch.

I know I'm dredging up an old thread, but I have an update plus I have a few more questions. First though, I want to respond to the last post, which I never responded to. Better late than never. Right?

Look at the second post by DeremensisBlue on this page https://www.chameleonforums.com/huge-quad-eggs-93469/index2.html It's a good example which shows that just because quad eggs might be huge, that doesn't mean they must have been incubating for awhile. What matters most to me is that to this day, Yvonne insists that she saw two of the huge eggs actually being expelled. I questioned her multiple times, and since I believe she is a credible witness, I don't doubt her. Although I realize that skeptics remain, I believe some would doubt even if I had pics of the eggs being pushed out by the female or if I had taken weights of the female before and after laying. Some even might say I was making it up because it seems so unbelievable. Bottom line, there is no way I can prove it to everyone's satisfaction.

That aside, those 8 babies are doing great. In addition, the same female that laid those two clutches over two days (first the 8 huge eggs, followed by the 10 normal sized eggs) has been gravid for over 3 months now. I expected her to lay awhile ago (2 months is a commonly reported gestation time). She is so plump, I expected her to lay long before my other female laid her 9 eggs on 2/16. I normally expect the usual, but with this female, I don't know what to expect, but I'll keep everyone updated. It'll be interesting to see how long she retains this clutch before laying, though I'm not expecting anything like what happened before.

Finally, I want to ask how soon before hatching that someone may have turned eggs and still had them hatch.

When I retrieved those eggs to incubate them, not only had they been moved around by the female, but I made no effort to keep them in the same orientation in which I found them. In other words, the eggs were turned over. Since all 8 of the eggs hatched, it must not have mattered that they were turned.

If the eggs hatched later in the day that I found them or the next day, it means that the neonates remained in the incubation container around 24 days before I discovered them. Knowing that some hatchling turtles will overwinter in a nest, I suppose it is possible. However, the hatchling turtles' metabolism is lower in the winter than it is the following spring. Given that the eggs were at room temperature (70 F), I wonder if it is possible for them to remain in the container for that long without receiving any care. Remember, they were particularly strong the day I discovered them and they are still doing well.

Does anyone know for a fact how long neonates of theirs have remained in the container? I imagine not, simply because when you know they've hatched, you take them out, right? You wouldn't leave them in there just to perform an experiment.

At the other end of the spectrum, let's say the eggs hatched 20-23 days after I put them in the incubation container. If that was the case, it means that eggs can be rotated that long (20-23 days) before hatching with no ill effect, especially since all 8 of the eggs hatched.

How long before hatching has someone accidently rotated eggs (30-45 days?) and still had them hatch. Surely someone has dropped a whole clutch of panther eggs or veiled eggs a month or so before hatching. If so, did all of them hatch? We all hear, "You can't turn reptile eggs after they are laid because the babies will die.", but does that only apply near the beginning (after a week or so) through sometime near the end (a month or so before hatching) of the incubation process?

Perry

 

[pssh]

I have never kept or bred quads, but I have heard of people who have dropped or turned (non-quad) eggs months into the incubation with them still hatching just fine. Some people reported that only some of the clutch hatched and some have said all of them hatched. I have also heard people say that after turning them none had hatched. I don't know what causes only some to hatch, or if it was even related to dropping them, but it is very possible for chameleon eggs to hatch after being turned.

For my babies (again, not quads) I leave them in the incubation container until they are up and walking. When some curl up and lay there for a while, I leave them there until they are walking around. That might be a day or so, but beyond that, I don't know how long you could leave them there without issue.

I wonder if the female had retained them prior to laying them for a while and just didn't have any issues with them? Perhaps they started to develop while they were in her still? I wonder if that is possible.

 

[sdheli420]

Wow Perry what are you feeding those Mom's? If I had eggs hatch that fast would scare me to death. But you can do it, I know you can. I sure wish I were closer, I would almost pay to babysit your baby quads I miss them so much. I am thankful every day for TJ, my male quad from Kevin (dooley1). Just make sure you have a good sitter and have fun. You know how long you have planned this vacation.

well said, that is extremley odd!!..i would freak out...

 

[pamnsam94]

I have never kept or bred quads, but I have heard of people who have dropped or turned (non-quad) eggs months into the incubation with them still hatching just fine. Some people reported that only some of the clutch hatched and some have said all of them hatched. I have also heard people say that after turning them none had hatched. I don't know what causes only some to hatch, or if it was even related to dropping them, but it is very possible for chameleon eggs to hatch after being turned.

For my babies (again, not quads) I leave them in the incubation container until they are up and walking. When some curl up and lay there for a while, I leave them there until they are walking around. That might be a day or so, but beyond that, I don't know how long you could leave them there without issue.

I wonder if the female had retained them prior to laying them for a while and just didn't have any issues with them? Perhaps they started to develop while they were in her still? I wonder if that is possible.

I can imagine a scenario where a whole container of eggs was dropped a few weeks before hatching and some of the eggs by chance (if the top of the eggs were not marked with a pencil, etc.) were placed back in their original position. In that case, it makes sense that some of the eggs would hatch while the other ones didn't. However, I find it interesting that you know of people who dropped all of the eggs and all of them still hatched. We all hear that eggs (depending on the species, whether the eggs in question normally go through diapause, etc.) can be turned a week or two into incubation without any problem, but it seems slightly odd that with all of the clutches of panther and veiled eggs that keepers have had, that there is not good documentation (that I know of anyway) of how long before hatching that eggs can be safely turned. I imagine that there must be a critical time (I wish I knew when that was) when eggs cannot be turned, but that sometime near the beginning and end of incubation, they can be turned without harm.

Perry

 

[pssh]

I used to hear that turning them would drown the babies, but now I'm hearing a lot about how it crushes the embryo. If it doesn't drown them, then it would make sense that closer to the end of development, the baby is too big to be crushed by the yolk.