# Question about Red Eyed Tree Frog Plants



## LeggedFrog (Dec 27, 2021)

HI all - 
I'm building a paludarium in a vertical 10 gallon tank for 2 Red Eyed Tree Frogs. I saw on a YouTube video that they require live plants but also the frogs require little light. Having had a high-tech planted aquarium before, I know how much light it takes to keep these plants alive and I don't think the frogs would like so much light. Does anyone have any suggestions for low-light hardy plants that would be a good choice for this build? Thanks


----------



## ctharnettnz (Dec 25, 2021)

Red eyes are nocturnal so I'm assuming as long as you have adequate shaded places for them to hide and roost during the day the light shouldn't matter.


----------



## ashdavisa (Oct 27, 2018)

LeggedFrog said:


> HI all -
> I'm building a paludarium in a vertical 10 gallon tank for 2 Red Eyed Tree Frogs. I saw on a YouTube video that they require live plants but also the frogs require little light. Having had a high-tech planted aquarium before, I know how much light it takes to keep these plants alive and I don't think the frogs would like so much light. Does anyone have any suggestions for low-light hardy plants that would be a good choice for this build? Thanks


Pothos are a great plant for red-eyes. They're tough and have great leaves for tree frogs to sit on. They'll also grow in high to low light without much fuss.
With these frogs being nocturnal, it's not a bad thing to have bright lights for your plants during the day- just be mindful of the heat they put off (even LEDs can put out a bit, especially in an aquarium). That said, I would reconsider the 10 gallon if it's meant to be a home for adult frogs. Aim for something closer to a 29 gallon or an 18x18x24 front-opening terrarium (or larger!).


----------



## IShouldGetSomeSleep (Sep 23, 2021)

LeggedFrog said:


> HI all -
> I'm building a paludarium in a vertical 10 gallon tank for 2 Red Eyed Tree Frogs. I saw on a YouTube video that they require live plants but also the frogs require little light. Having had a high-tech planted aquarium before, I know how much light it takes to keep these plants alive and I don't think the frogs would like so much light. Does anyone have any suggestions for low-light hardy plants that would be a good choice for this build? Thanks


A 10 gallon is much to small for red eyes also They really aren't a species that would do well in a paludarium and I believe that it will just make caring for them harder.


----------



## LeggedFrog (Dec 27, 2021)

Thanks everybody, so I arrived at that creature because I looked up what animal would be good for a paludarium and it said that one was a good choice. But they must have meant larger than 10 gal. What animal(s) might be good for a 10 gal paludarium?


----------



## fishingguy12345 (Apr 7, 2019)

LeggedFrog said:


> Thanks everybody, so I arrived at that creature because I looked up what animal would be good for a paludarium and it said that one was a good choice. But they must have meant larger than 10 gal. What animal(s) might be good for a 10 gal paludarium?


The short answer is none. 10 gallons is a very small enclosure for almost every live animal


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

I can't answer your question, but I will point out that literally 9.5 out of 10 websites that purport to give exotic animal care info are worse than worthless. This is not an exaggeration. The proliferation of 'Amazon Affiliate' sorts of sites is making the finding of accurate info nearly impossible.


----------



## LeggedFrog (Dec 27, 2021)

OK, guess I'll just do plants and water - that's still a Paludarium, right? lol maybe a cool foggy waterfall would work. Thanks for the advice.


----------



## CrazyCat (Nov 21, 2021)

Not sure if it would work well with water, but isopods would do fine in a 10 gallon, and there's a bunch of neat color patterns. And if not isopods, probably other small insects that would do well. Jumping spiders are cute, mantises (maybe, would need to check adult size), some ideas to consider if you want a creature inside


----------



## fishingguy12345 (Apr 7, 2019)

CrazyCat said:


> Not sure if it would work well with water, but isopods would do fine in a 10 gallon, and there's a bunch of neat color patterns


Isopods will commit mass suicide by climbing into the water portion and dying.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

LeggedFrog said:


> OK, guess I'll just do plants and water - that's still a Paludarium, right?


Yes, and one that you can hone your plant-growing chops on -- so that if someday you decide to care for frogs in an appropriately designed vivarium, you'll be that far ahead in relevant experience and be able to concentrate on animal care rather than both animal and plant care.


----------



## solidsnake (Jun 3, 2014)

I totally agree with the above post(s)! Use it and learn how to manage humidity, lights, substrate, viv/paludarium construction, etc. It’s too small for any vertebrate though. 

I foresee some difficulty in making a paludarium with such little floor space afforded by a 10gal enclosure. Paludarium or vivarium, you’ll have to be very choosy in which plants to use since most will likely out grow your enclosure rather quickly. That doesn’t mean that it’s impossible to work with though. Go for it and post some pictures!


----------



## Ravage (Feb 5, 2016)

Some of the smaller tropical mantises might work in such a 10 gal. But maybe without a waterfall, a fog fall would be just as attractive though. The orchid mantis is quite small and needs humidity, but that's nearing the end of my mantis knowledge.


----------



## Dr. Manhattan (Oct 28, 2016)

Socratic Monologue said:


> I can't answer your question, but I will point out that literally 9.5 out of 10 websites that purport to give exotic animal care info are worse than worthless. This is not an exaggeration. The proliferation of 'Amazon Affiliate' sorts of sites is making the finding of accurate info nearly impossible.


This ^. I feel exactly the same way about those sites I usually go on those just to laugh at the bad grammar and misspellings.


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

I recently bought 6 RETFs and they're in a 24x18x24 exp terra which is probably minimum size. But after careful consideration I decided not to make it a paludarium since these frogs need a source of clean water daily which wasn't easy to do with standing water in the bottom. So I opted for a shallow dish easily cleaned and refilled and a separate rain chamber for breeding when ready.


----------



## ctharnettnz (Dec 25, 2021)

John J M said:


> I recently bought 6 RETFs and they're in a 24x18x24 exp terra which is probably minimum size. But after careful consideration I decided not to make it a paludarium since these frogs need a source of clean water daily which wasn't easy to do with standing water in the bottom. So I opted for a shallow dish easily cleaned and refilled and a separate rain chamber for breeding when ready.


That tank is way too small for 6 frogs. Like 2 frogs max in those exo terras.


----------



## solidsnake (Jun 3, 2014)

^^ I was thinking the same thing. 6 of anything would probably be pretty cramped in an enclosure measuring 24x18x24 .


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

That's what I thought initially, but after extensive reading I found out that RETFs are social and that a 18x18x24 was recommended for 2-4 and 24x18x24 for up to 6 by consensus of over a dozen articles. But I've got my eye out looking to pick up a 36x18x36 when I can.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

I looked yesterday and couldn't find any current reliable info on them in the usual places. The sheet on Frogforum addresses caging mostly to talk about tubs vs fish tanks -- so, not a very deeply considered view of their needs; that amphibian care site can be a bit hit and miss (again, some sheets there are dated); Amazon affiliate sites are just cut and pasted from the others.



John J M said:


> RETFs are social


Can you (or anyone) elaborate on this? Does 'social' here mean 'tolerates conspecific cagemates without killing them, usually' or 'exhibits social interaction and bonding that should be accomodated in captivity lest they decline in health' or something in between those two?


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

Unfortunately, no elaboration on social was made, but I interpreted the meaning as the latter. Perhaps incorrectly based upon what I would consider the meaning of social to be. As I continue my reading on RETFs, if I find the reference to enclosure size and social habitats, I'll be sure to post this information here. Unfortunately, I've read so much but didn't bother to save the information thinking that it was solely for my benefit not intended to post any of it at the time.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

John J M said:


> As I continue my reading on RETFs, if I find the reference to enclosure size and social habitats, I'll be sure to post this information here.


We, and the hobby generally, would appreciate that. There's no body of knowledge about RETFs to compare to the details that we've amassed here in the archives and in the heads of keepers about dart frogs, but considering how popular tree frogs are (and how many problems keepers seem to have with them compared to darts) it would be good if that amount of information increased. We could start by looking critically at the recommendations currently out there.


----------



## ctharnettnz (Dec 25, 2021)

Socratic Monologue said:


> We, and the hobby generally, would appreciate that. There's no body of knowledge about RETFs to compare to the details that we've amassed here in the archives and in the heads of keepers about dart frogs, but considering how popular tree frogs are (and how many problems keepers seem to have with them compared to darts) it would be good if that amount of information increased. We could start by looking critically at the recommendations currently out there.


There should be a tree frog section on the forum to start this ball rolling.

Edit: just realized there already is 🤦‍♂️


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

I sorry to say that I've been unable to find much information on RETFs on this site. I've checked care sheets and tree frogs as well as others without much luck. Am I missing something? I'm sure that there is a wealth of information contained by some of the members but can't find much written. I'd appreciate if someone could point my in the right direction. Thanks in advance.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

I don't know that you're missing anything. 

DB is a dart frog site. It has long had a place for a limited amount of sort of off topic discussions about other amphibians, but the variety of animal forums has lately changed in such a way that we're being called on to answer many more of these sorts of questions. 

The body of knowledge that exists on the publicly-searchable internet regarding tree frogs seems quite dated. During the last decade of forum upheaval, enough dart people stayed here to keep the discussions alive, but on other herp sites that didn't happen as effectively for a few reasons, including not enough critical user mass, forum owners not staying on top of maintenance, spammers (one irreplaceable snake forum was closed and content removed due to the failure to keep ahead of spammers).

The proliferation of Amazon Affiliate type of sites is certainly a force in this, as well. People read those sites, think they have gained information, and so don't come to a forum to get and share information. Those sites are just another sort of spamming, I guess.


----------



## jclee (Jul 13, 2009)

On the word "social" - I see it widely used for animals that can cohabitate, which is much less common with reptiles than amphibians. The word gets used in that way, often, more than as an accurate reflection of animals' emotional states (i.e. enjoy each others' company or interact in beneficial ways as a result of cohabitation etc.). There's not much research on reptile/amphibian emotion, probably because (a) their brains are not like mammals' and so we cannot easily draw inferences like we often do with dog/cat MRIs, etc. (b) up until fairly recently (in the broader history of research, anyway), there were widespread assumptions that ruled a lot of reptile research. They led to a lack of research on reptile and amphibian emotional potential/states. 

I say this as someone with no real formal education in herpetology, but similar questions/debates have come up in other online arenas that I'm in that have prompted me to do a little database searching. Hopefully, if I'm widely off the mark, a herpetologist can jump in and correct me.

Regarding the desire/hope to broaden Dendroboard beyond its established purpose: I share it. I took a break from amphibian keeping, and when I returned, I found that my go-to amphibian forums had turned to crickets (so to speak). A lot of traffic moved away from forums/discussion boards and into Facebook groups, it would seem, while I wasn't paying attention. I really hate this. There's no way to establish some rudimentary sense of people's expertise, which often allows the least informed voices to dominate. In addition to that, many (most) of the Facebook groups that I've found are really geared toward beginners/novices, which leads to a lot of statements about care that are treated as absolutes (and widely parroted) so that one doesn't accidentally lead someone new into improper husbandry that would hurt their animal (if they don't have basic care down). There's no way to search archives/topics on Facebook, either: just files that admin/mods release, which are also often created for beginners.

I've lurked here for a long time, but I posted very little when I had other places to turn to (since I keep frogs, but not darts). I've found myself engaging more here, lately, because I miss having a dynamic where people who've really gone out of their way to learn about the topic at hand would give a detailed and/or accurate answer (without being drowned out by people who repeat basic care sheets or accidentally spread misinformation).


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

jclee said:


> On the word "social" - I see it widely used for animals that can cohabitate, which is much less common with reptiles than amphibians


Yes, unfortunately that is often the usage. 'Unfortunately', because it ignores all the distinctions on the continuum of conspecific interactions (tolerating conspecific interactions or actually benefiting from them), and is vague in what "can cohabitate" means (they won't kill each other on introduction, won't decline over months, will exhibit only mild behavioral anomalies but not physical health symptoms, etc).

That's an interesting point about emotional states. I wonder if we actually need to know internal states in order to ascribe sociality to an individual or species; more weakly, perhaps we can infer their emotional states (or ascribe emotional states to them) based on their overt behaviors instead of MRI studies (as in the mammals you mentioned), brain cortisol level testing, etc. I do that with the humans I interact with every day, and I think it works OK.

I keep about two dozen species of herps, and the only one of those I see actually benefiting from cohabitation is Terrapine carolina (box turtles) -- they get a little crazy when separated from the group (I used to keep mourning geckos, and those seem to benefit from conspecific cohabitation too). But all the species I keep will "tolerate" cohabitation -- they don't tend to eat each other, and except for male geckos of most species they don't kill each other, and least not usually. But I wouldn't and don't cohab any of them (except the turtles) unless they're breeding animals, since they tolerate enough in captivity in the best of situations.


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

@jclee you bring up some very good points, not the least of which has to do with the definition of SOCIAL, and specifically what that might be as applied to amphibians and reptiles. I believe that SM also kind of hinted at this, but I hadn't really picked up on it at 1st reading to the same degree as in reading your response. Namely that social applied to these animals may simply mean that they can be housed together without problems of aggression towards other members of its species. This sort of cohabitation behavior I would apply the word tolerance to rather than social. Social should be reserved for species that prefer or even decline in health when housed in the absence of other members of its species (which is the definition of social that I tend to think of when I hear/read the word social). But now that you bring up this point, that is perhaps what those other articles that said RETFs are social actually meant and perhaps would have been less misleading if they just said that they are tolerant of cohabitation rather than saying that they are social.

On phylogenetic issue of social, I don't know that I fully agree with that assessment as applied to amphibians and reptiles. Certainly there are fish that are tolerant and some that are actually social in that some schooling species do decline in health if kept in isolation. Is this emotional? Who knows. Perhaps. But I'm sure that it has to do with brain biochemistry and as such may be inferred as emotional from that perspective. Perhaps not psychologically as we would experience it, but if isolation leads to decline, there must be something biochemically modifying health and having to do with brain chemistry perhaps via hormones.

I believe one source that said that they were social was the Exo Terra website. I'm going to search again and post some of where I read social applied to RETFs.









Red-Eyed Tree Frog Care Sheet & Pet Guide - FrogPets


Red-Eyed Tree Frogs are likely the most well-known frogs in the world. Certainly among treefrogs, to say the least. With their big red eyes, orange...




www.frogpets.com





This source specifically states the definition of social as I would define it. It also recommends the size cage I indicated earlier. Obviously this is not an authoritative reference, but when it comes to care sheets and information, they rarely or ever are and are generally based upon private empiricism.





__





Top 4 Unique Characteristics of Red Eyed Tree Frogs


Top unique characteristics of red eyed tree frogs that make them stand out of most pet amphibian that you should know if you're interested in this pet.



www.redeyedtreefrog.org





Another article that states social and somewhat defines it.









Red Eyed Tree Frog Care (Complete Habitat, Diet, & Care Guide)


In this guide our team covers everything new owners need to know about red eyed tree frog care and habitat setup. Caring for frogs doesn't have to be hard!




www.reptileadvisor.com





See comments section for social.









Impact of Plant Cover on Fitness and Behavioural Traits of Captive Red-Eyed Tree Frogs (Agalychnis callidryas)


Despite the importance of ex situ conservation programmes as highlighted in the Amphibian Conservation Action Plan, there are few empirical studies that examine the influence of captive conditions on the fitness of amphibians, even for basic components ...




www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov





Finally, I include this reference not because it has anything to to with social interaction but because it has some good information on RETFs and because it is an example of authoritative information which is applicable to housing environment.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

No offense, but those websites are filled with dangerous misinformation. 

The first, for darts, claims fake plants are OK, and recommends a fogger and layer of sphagnum.

The second is 12 year old articles that are so basic as to be worthless.

The last one: the 'recommended leopard gecko breeders' section recommends two of the worst flippers in the trade (with extensive typos on the name of one of them), and one of the lowest quality mass breeders. Pure spam, 100%.

Websites like those are one of the main reasons that so many herps are unintentionally abused ("The internet said...."). Please, don't anyone read those sites except to learn what harmful spam looks like.


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

Socratic Monologue said:


> No offense, but those websites are filled with dangerous misinformation.
> 
> The first, for darts, claims fake plants are OK, and recommends a fogger and layer of sphagnum.
> 
> ...


No argument or disagreement here! I only posted those as examples of information on social as applied to RETFs. I even mentioned that they were NOT authoritative sources of information but representative of the information out there. However, the final reference that I included was an example of an authoritative source of information. And even though it's not pertinent to our discussion on social, it is pertinent to housing environment and "psychological" well being of amphibians via environmental choices provided. 

@SM thanks for pointing out the critique on those papers and why the information contained in them are not reliable. For me that goes without saying but it's good that you said why lest any of the readership may not understand the difference between authoritative information and those that are not.


----------



## IShouldGetSomeSleep (Sep 23, 2021)

What does social mean in the first place? With invertebrates, species that work together like ants are termed as social while species that live in groups but do not work together are classified as semi-social. From what I know about red eyed tree frogs I would classify them as semi-social, they don't work together but are often found in close proximity to each other and don't display territorial traits making them "semi-social",
Using this definition of social there are no such things as "social" frogs but instead only "semi-social" frogs.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

John J M said:


> However, the final reference that I included was an example of an authoritative source of information.


Edited in after I posted, to be clear. 

But yes, that's the sort of actual information (not cut and pasted nonsense put up to sell products on Amazon, or get hits on reptile flipper and drop-shipper sites) that we need. Thank you for linking it -- it looks great.


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

@SM it took me a bit to find the reference links that I was looking for and I don't know how to save the post to add them without doing it as an edit. Every time I leave the post without posting it 1st it disappears on me while I'm looking up the link. That's why my posts are full of edits. Sorry for the inconvenience. 

And you're welcome on that one reference which does include the plants species or at least genera that they used in their experiment. Although any similar plants should work equally well. 

Insofar as social goes I've yet to find anything authoritative on their social behavior. So I'd assume it's actually somewhere between complete tolerance to perhaps semi- social at best. So far my observations indicate no aggressive behavior towards each other as they appear quite content to perch next to each other but without any meaningful interactions between them.


----------



## jclee (Jul 13, 2009)

John J M said:


> So far my observations indicate no aggressive behavior towards each other as they appear quite content to perch next to each other but without any meaningful interactions between them.


The most interaction my frogs have had with one another in the past week came last night, when one accidentally pooped on the other, who was napping below. 

Kidding aside, though, I've had the same observation, John; my frogs either tolerate or are indifferent to one another. My guinea pigs (a proven social species and herding animal) will literally chirp and wheek (cry) for one another and fidget nervously if kept apart for more than a few minutes. I am pretty confident that I could isolate all of my frogs (mostly various Agalychnis sp.) in solitary, individual enclosures and their behavior would remain unchanged.

But, again, the bulk of "_Internetz (Mis)Information_" that people encounter bandy the word around to casually mean "they won't kill each other," and this is further complicated by a lot of novices' anthropomorphizing the animals' experience, imposing assumptions that a single animal in an enclosure must be lonely or need a friend. My friends are often initially shocked when I tell them about my single-occupant enclosures, and inevitably, their first question is, "Won't they get lonely?" I have to politely explain some basics of care for whichever of my animals they're asking after, often concluding with something like, "Well, they're not people, after all." It gets tiring.


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

@LeggedFrog the last paper I posted above should help to answer your original question about appropriate plants for RETFs. Hope that helps you and good luck.

@jclee 😂 too funny. Love your sense of humor.


----------



## John J M (Jul 30, 2021)

@LeggedFrog the publication that I posted above regarding plants for RETFs started them out with devil's Ivy which from my understanding would include for instance golden pothos. And later switched to Dieffenbachia because of its broader leaves to better accommodate subadult frog size. My RETFs are also subadult and seem to choose pothos with no problem and also a variety of Chinese evergreen with red leaf margins. Unfortunately it doesn't contain the varietal name. They also seem to enjoy larger leaf members of the prayer plant family but not to the same degree (personal observation). I would imagine that any similar sized and structured plant leaves would perform equally well so long as they are nontoxic. There's a definite preference for Chinese evergreen plants, again personal observation, although I did not include Dieffenbachia in my habitat. Hope that helps as a starting place for you. Had I read this paper prior to planting I would have included dieffenbachia. But I'm not sure if their choices of cover are due to the plants themselves or their location within the enclosure because the Chinese evergreen and pothos are near the back where the UV and heat lamps are located on opposite sides of the enclosure with the pothos between the 2 lamps, whereas the prayer plant is located near the front where the major light source is 5000k LED lighting, but much less. heat lamp (near IR) and negligible UV. So it's possible that microenvironment may be coloring their choices of plants as well.









UV left and near IR right.


----------

