# FF Culture Media Plus NUTRAROSE



## dopederson (Mar 26, 2006)

I am running a little experiment to see how nutrarose effects FF cultures. The two cups are identical other than the fact that I added a small amount of the NutraRose to the second one. I can not comment on whether or not this increase in coloration at the pupa stage will translate to FF carrying more color; But I know that when I started adding paprika to my cultures last year, the eyes of my flies defiantly turned bright red. There looks to be an increase in production but there isn't any way to back that observation up. Anyone have any thoughts on the subject?









Without NurtaRose









With NutraRose


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

The pigment in the eyes of the flies is a combination of pterin and carotenoid. In the eyes of some insects is one of the areas where carotenoids are known to occur however this does not mean that the carotenoid in question will be used by the frog for pigment or vitamin A production. 

Ed


----------



## stchupa (Apr 25, 2006)

Did you add equal amounts of flies to each culture? 

The one w/ naturose looks to be producing more.


----------



## dopederson (Mar 26, 2006)

There were roughly the same amount of flies. I didn't count :shock:


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

Couple of thoughts... Naturose is not cheap so Im not sure it would be cost effective to add to the cultures. Also since FFs can not be gut loaded would their really be any benefit?


----------



## rozdaboff (Feb 27, 2005)

I add Naturose to my media - you don't have to add much (1 tbs per 10 cups dry medium). I never noticed a change in production with it though. 

While it may not make a difference on the nutritional content of the adult fly - I do feed larvae, so there may be some effect there.


----------



## Brandon Knowles (Mar 23, 2007)

_Couple of thoughts... Naturose is not cheap so Im not sure it would be cost effective to add to the cultures. Also since FFs can not be gut loaded would their really be any benefit_

But being that the effects of the naturose are there, isnt it logical to say that they have not been gut loaded, but eye or skin (skin isn't the right word) loaded. Or is the naturose metabolised in some way to achieve the effects seen in the photos? A way that would not be transfered to the frogs? - brandon


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

tinting of pupal skins should not be construed to mean that the carotenoid is being carried over to the frogs in the flies as the larval skin has been molted.. 

If you are feeding ff larva then I would suspect that there is significant advantage to adding it to the media as there will be particles sticking to the larva as well as in the gut contents of the larva. Whether this is cost effective when compared to dusting the flies with the supplement is something you have to decide for yourself. 

There are some carotenoids in the eyes of the flies but you can't use the color of the eye of the fruitfly as a marker as the red color is due to pterins and not carotenoids... It is possible that the addition of the algae to the supplement caused an increase in the pterin pigment or a decrease in the brown pigment (caused by ommochromes the combination of the two are what determines the red color of the eye). 

If you want a really good vehicle for transfering carotenoids.. appropriately sized crickets can be gut loaded with a astaxanthin containing diet.. 

Ed


----------



## Brandon Knowles (Mar 23, 2007)

dopederson how much naturose did you add? What do the flies look like and have you confirmed what looks like a distictly higher yield? - brandon


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Let me hijack this with a slightly off topic thread.. 

Why does everyone automatically assume the most productive cultures are providing the best frog food? 


Ed


----------



## elmoisfive (Dec 31, 2004)

Beats me why they would think that...if anything I suspect the reverse is more likely. Usually rapid growth is associated with more of the nutrients (using the term in its broadest sense here) being directed towards growth as opposed to storage in tissues. On the other hand, I'm not certain that within the range of what one normally sees in a FF culture that you would notice a difference from a frog nutrition perspective.

Bill


----------



## Brandon Knowles (Mar 23, 2007)

_Why does everyone automatically assume the most productive cultures are providing the best frog food_?

Isn't it reasonable that higher production suggest optimum conditions for fruit flys. Do you have a theory as to why a culture that (all other things being equal) produces less would produce more healthy flys? - I suspect from your post that you do. The eggs and larva - again all things being equal since we're of the naturose thread a bit did not in this scenario find the culture more healthy - else there would be more of them. So why expect the adults are more healthy for it. 

Dont want to go toe to toe with you entomologically (sp?) Ed, but I think I've made a reasonable point that you may now shoot down........brandon


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "Isn't it reasonable that higher production suggest optimum conditions for fruit flys."endsnip

It implies optimal stimulation for egg laying... not necessarily for further development of the flies.. There is competition for egg laying 


snip "Do you have a theory as to why a culture that (all other things being equal) produces less would produce more healthy flys? - I suspect from your post that you do. The eggs and larva - again all things being equal since we're of the naturose thread a bit did not in this scenario find the culture more healthy - else there would be more of them. So why expect the adults are more healthy "endsnip

There are a number of different items that play into this scenario but I am going to focus on one of the main ones at the moment. 
If you search the literature you can find papers documenting competition among the larva in the culuture. In fact the older larvae prevent the younger larvae from accessing the nutrients as much as possible reducing thier overall fitness.. A insect has a minimal threshold for nutrients to develop normally however depending the nutrient involved it may still develop but will simply develop at a smaller size, with less fat reserves, or other deficiencies. Keep in mind that the supplements we used on the insects are for insects that are of optimal nutritional quality. If the culture has a lower density of larva then those larva may be able to more effectively uptake nutrients without all of the competition between the larvae. 

There is a drive to get the most bang for the dollar out of the cultures but there can also be hidden consequences for creating massive populations in the cultures as the flies may mature with less reserves. Or if the larval population is sufficiently high, the lenght of time to maturity maybe increased.. 

see the following http://www.springerlink.com/content/tx6858w8u5779561/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/x06h65m0647380k9/
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v3j8t7k4271101l6/


These are some of the reasons why we shouldn't be automatically looking at simply maximizing production of the flies. 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "Usually rapid growth is associated with more of the nutrients (using the term in its broadest sense here) being directed towards growth as opposed to storage in tissues. On the other hand, I'm not certain that within the range of what one normally sees in a FF culture that you would notice a difference from a frog nutrition perspective."endsnip

Hi Bill,

The problem is that over time, when using limited crop variety for food the deficiencies can scale up over time in the consuming population.. 

Ed


----------



## Brandon Knowles (Mar 23, 2007)

Excellent .....so I suppose that if a strain/media/media additive contributed to higher production that woud be a good thing so long as the initial and subseqent breeding populations were limited......? - brandon


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "so I suppose that if a strain/media/media additive contributed to higher production that woud be a good thing so long as the initial and subseqent breeding populations were limited......"endsnip

I think I understand what you are asking here (but maybe not). 

No, the females can deposit more eggs than there is food for the larva and the larva that hatch in the first 48 hours increase the mortality and slow the growth of any larva that hatch in the next 48 hours (or later). According to the literature there is significant depression of further growth of later larva. This suppression and competition can result in flies that are nutrient deficient emerging from pupae. The flies simply emerge from the pupae at a smaller size and with a higher mortality. The females also contain/lay fewer eggs (which is an indication of reduced lipid supply in the flies). 
In addition there is competition amoung the older larva for the nutrients leading to competition interference which increases with population density. This can also reduce the nutritional value of the flies.

There is a trade off between number of flies produced and nutrient quality of the flies.. where this falls on a graph I can't tell you as it would be well beyond my budget to determine but using the idea that an explosively producing culture means it is nutritionally sound is not a correct assumption. This is a problem because the supplements we use on the flies are geared towards a insect that is not insufficient in fats, protiens, certain mineral or amino acids. 

Also as another item in the discussion, all because someone has a productive culture it doesn't mean that the supplement will work as well for you (at least initially). If you are culturing your flies over multiple generations then the flies (and the yeast/bacteria carried on their bodies) will adapt to your culturing conditions and optimize for those conditions. 

I think, people need to look more at what they are trying to supply to the frogs as opposed to the "holy grail" of maximized fruit fly production.. and modify thier methods of delivery to accomedate those needs (dusting, feeding of larva, different feeders to name a couple of examples)

Ed


----------



## Brandon Knowles (Mar 23, 2007)

I understand the points you made and read the summary's of the papers you listed - very convincing. 

I was not suggesting that a massive first hatch out of flies would be optimal (regardless this could easily be accomplished by adding stupid numbers of adult breaders at the get go, forgoing any special additives. Rather that an additive that shows substantial increases in fecundity is more likely than not beneficial in and of itself, but the issues you raised about density are obviously well established. 
Seems like limiting starter flies or the time they were allowed access to the culture would solve the density problem, but in the case of pulling breeders after a day or two ......sounds like a hassle depending on the numbers of frogs you have. 

Regardless the photos suggest a huge difference in production. I don't see how the components of Naturose could produce that effect. - I think its more likely that doperson used about the same number of flies, but perhaps older flies in the regular culture.......Hopefully he'll give us an update.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "Regardless the photos suggest a huge difference in production. I don't see how the components of Naturose could produce that effect. - I think its more likely that doperson used about the same number of flies, but perhaps older flies in the regular culture.......Hopefully he'll give us an update."endsnip

Or that the culture was a couple of degrees warmer causing a more rapid time to pupation... 

Ed


----------



## npaull (May 8, 2005)

> In addition there is competition amoung the older larva for the nutrients leading to competition interference which increases with population density. This can also reduce the nutritional value of the flies.


Ed, 

Is there any reason to think (ie any studies) that a fruit fly that is not as maximally nutrient-packed as could be is more nutrient-poor than those insects (for many species, mites) that make up the majority of some dendrobatids diet?

In other words, is there any way of knowing if a second-generation, nutrient-poor dusted ff is less nourishing than many/most wild insects?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "Is there any reason to think (ie any studies) that a fruit fly that is not as maximally nutrient-packed as could be is more nutrient-poor than those insects (for many species, mites) that make up the majority of some dendrobatids diet? "endsnip

Maybe.. Due to a difference here..herps in the wild are known to select thier diet to maximize thier nutritional intake. They have been known to select prey items that are higher in calories or ones that contain a higher calcium content and option that by the methods we use for feeding them they are denied. (for example selecting termites over ants) as they are typically offered a monoculture diet with at best a limited number of variations. I haven't seen any information that shows a breakdown on mites on a kcal basis and would love to see anything that contains that data. 

snip "In other words, is there any way of knowing if a second-generation, nutrient-poor dusted ff is less nourishing than many/most wild insects?"endsnip

But the deficiencies can occur earlier than the second generation. It could also occur in the first generation flies that were laid 48 hours after the initial flies. 
The only way to tell for sure would be a bunch of expensive analysis that tracked nutrient content over generations in a culture. 

Keep in mind that this is a new angle on this for me so I am still digging in the literature while forming these thoughts... it mainly grew out of the various comments I see posted about maximizing production of a culture without thinking about how this may affect the nutrition of the frogs in the long run... I suspect that there may also be differences in the strains of the flies used... 

Ed


----------



## npaull (May 8, 2005)

Interesting thoughts Ed; I'd love to see where this leads you. What got me thinking was the general and non-specific observation that many captive animals which provide human nutrition (from cows to chickens) generally are more calorie-dense than their wild equivalents despite mass-production techniques. I wonder to what extent there are parallels between this and the captive propagation of fruit flies.

Given wild evolutionary pressures to produce a lean, mean, predator-dodging breeding-machine, I think it is a useful exercise to consider the effects of predator release and artificial selection in the propagation of fruit flies for food.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

I can speculate that ffs are more caloric dense than some ants as P. cinereus treats them as a more calorically dense food item. (and has been used to as a food source to model territoriality and courting behaviors including fecal pellet smashing). 

I think one of the differences between domesticated and wild birds/mammals is that the birds and mammals have been selected (for the most part there are exceptions like runner ducks) to have a higher fat ratio. Historically these animals were sold by the pound so it benefited the farmer to have a fat animal as it has a greater value. 
We haven't done this with ffs as of yet. I would strongly suspect that there are nutritional changes compared to the wild stock but there may also be variations between different mutations as well as different culture methods. 

Its an interesting line of thought due to how ffs live. When you have competition problems with domestic animals you decrease density and/or increase access to food, water and shelter.. This may not work with the flies as there is also apparently a tendency for the larva to aggregate to prevent fungal filaments from preventing feeding..... 


Ed


----------



## dopederson (Mar 26, 2006)

This topic is rolling along nicely.

To give you a better idea of the test that I ran:
-Both cultures that are pictured were started from the same group of flies that I subdivided into the two cups.

-One can concluded that the cups got roughly the same number of flies of the same age.

-Both cultures were stored in the same environment in terms of temp, humidity and so forth. 

The experimental variable was the addition of 1/4 teaspoon of Nutrarose to the experimental culture. 

The effects on my cultures could be linked to a need for some trace elements that my normal media does not provide. My reasoning for trying this out was two fold: Come up with a more reliable and successful means of delivering the color enhancing nutrients in Nutrarose to my vents. So that I can enjoy RED VENTS FOREVER not ORANGE or YELLOW.


----------



## rozdaboff (Feb 27, 2005)

If you want to make sure to get the color enhancing power to your vents - I would also recommend dusting with Naturose (very easy to do - very fine), and feeding larva that have been raised on your Naturose enhanced medium.


----------



## hoyta (Jan 18, 2006)

*yep*

snip- STOP SNIPPING DA&^*(!!!! It made reading this thread a pain in the arse!


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

quote "-Both cultures were stored in the same environment in terms of temp, humidity and so forth. endquote

Depending on the location and air currents, locations as little as 2-3 inches can be cooler or warmer by 1-2 degrees. I'm not saying that this the case for you but unless you are actively trying to equalize the temperature there can be differences. 

Ed


----------

