# About the Oophagy study...some new thoughts



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

So for all of you who read my post regarding studying egg feeders' feeder eggs, to better understand its components, I have had some new ideas and thoughts I wanted to throw out there to yall. ( read this post: http://www.dendroboard.com/phpBB2/viewt ... hlight=pum for more background info.)

So I was thinking, since I am relatively new to darts, why throw myself into pumilio when I don't have any experience with them, let alone any other eggfeeders? Along with this, why shouldn't I just try vents and if I need to (for the tads' sake or otherwise) be able to "bail out" so to speak and raise the tad on my own? This would be much better for everyone involved, help me get more experience, help me gain some more knowledge and experience in the realm of oophagy, and provide starting funds to invest in the best proven pair of pums I can get. With appropriate feeding and supplementing measures I could also possibly set up two pairs and switch tads around to keep feeder eggs coming consistently... This seems like an overall better idea. I don't want to do anything rash and end up doing something stupid w/o thinking it thoroughly through. What do yall think? Any ideas for improvement on that or other ideas entirely?

Some of these questions seem somewhat rhetoric and silly to me (but of course it is 10:30 and I am exhausted...) so tell me if I need to clarify something or if something doesn't make sense. I tried to read back over and edit it as needed but I am really tired right now...

Your help and responses are much appreciated, thats why dendroboard is awesome  ,


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Any comments, suggestions? Still need some guidance...


----------



## kyle1745 (Feb 15, 2004)

Vents are not egg feeders... so im not sure there is a cheap option to help with your test. You best bet maybe some man creek pumilio.


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Guess I was thinking of Imi's or something.....doh  Thanks for pointing that out lol...I have been trying to find a pair of Bastis or Man Creeks, but nothing proven. Pinned down a source for a male basti and possibly a female (both local b/c of weather) but the asking price for the female has been...large. Cost isn't really what is bugging me though, I have plenty of funds for a nice viv and a probable pair of pums. The ability to bail out the tad and raise it myself if needed is really what I am looking at. Would it even matter? I just don't want to lose any tads unnecessarily. If you think the results would not effect (or be irrelevant to) obligate eggfeeders, I would probably just go with pums.


----------



## Curt61 (Jan 16, 2007)

Hey, I am new to this also but I bought a proven trio with 10 gallon tank set up, so far I have one froglett and some tads in the water, I havn't done anything with the tads or frogletts except toss spring tails into the water( I havn't seen the tads in the water but there is gel on the glass and the man I bought them from said that there were eggs there before he gave them to me) so pretty much there has got to be tads in the water somewhere.

Hope this helps you, Curtis


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

The thumbnail group, which are facultative egg feeders, will not help you out in your ways to look for pumilio egg substitutes. Thumbnails are supplemented feeder eggs from the parents to help with the fact that they are laid in bodies of water with limited food resources with the tadpole, and the tadpole may not survive otherwise... but unlike obligate eggfeeders, the tadpoles eat EVERYTHING else they get get their mouths on. They are rather ravenous little critters, and we have to work at providing them the same varied diet they'd get in the wild.

The obligate eggfeeders are different... they have literally gone the other way... instead of eating everything, they eat only ONE thing. If taken care of correctly by the parents, the tadpole has a really high chance of surviving. The problem in captivity has been finding something that is close enough that a) the tadpoles will eat, b) won't kill the tadpoles, and c) the tadpoles will successfully morph on. I've known only a few that have morphed froglets successfully away from the parents, and they were VERY time intensive, and with high rates of deformities and nutritional issues.

The two groups of frogs you're talking about are pretty unrelated, and an example of how eggfeeding has developed more than once within the family. You'll get some experience on raising up smaller frogs, but thats about it... pumilio tend to be a whole other bag of tricks. I'd just wait on more experience before diving into them and working on this.


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Gotcha, that answer my question. Thanks Corey.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

Just to put a wrinkle in this, pumilio have been raised on other dendrobatid eggs. If vents or some of the other facultative egg feeders produce eggs that pumilio will eat and grow on, then analyzing those eggs could provide some insight into what is required to create a pumilio diet.


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

See thats what I was thinking when I thought of this, and had heard about. Although I had heard it was not nearly as effective as feeding actual pum feeder eggs, it does work with some success correct? Thats where my question popped up :? Actual pums (seeing as many other obligates are out of the question for me) are looking like the best choice. Already thinking of some ideas of how to approach this systematically...might post those once I develop them into something coherent for yall to scrutinize


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

thekidgecko said:


> Although I had heard it was not nearly as effective as feeding actual pum feeder eggs, it does work with some success correct?


I don't know. I know there was a paper published in Herp Rev. about using enucleated auratus eggs to raise pumilio but I haven't kept up with what people have reported trying hear. Robb Melancon could probably tell you more since he seems to be the one who has experimented the most. My personal hypothesis is that pumilio tads don't require nutrition any different than other dart frogs. The difference is whatever is in those eggs to make them recognize them as food. Again, only a hypothesis. Also, I believe, but could be wrong, that pumilio in the wild have been observed feeding on other things other than food eggs in their phytotelmata. But obviously these items would only supplement the diet and not provide the staple. If this is correct, then my hypothesis above could be wrong.


----------



## Ben_C (Jun 25, 2004)

> Although I had heard it was not nearly as effective as feeding actual pum feeder eggs, it does work with some success correct?


Another question to ask is whether or not it is worth it to remove pumilio tadpoles and raise outside the tank.
Drift can be a very powerful force in small populations (e.g. captive population of D. pumilio) and without more knowledge on what exactly is occuring when obligate egg feeders take care of their offspring, it may not be to our advantage to allow this behaviour to possibly drift out of the population.
In fact, we may be putting selective pressure on parents not to care for their offspring as those that decide to be 'lazy' and not put forth the costly investment still produce the same (if not more) offspring to hte next generation...

Just a couple thoughts,
B


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Yes, that was already addressed in the previous thread that I linked to. This isn't really meant for that purpose, but rather to help understand the structure as related to function, rather than use it to raise tads. Although one reason I wanted to do this is to have the information on hand in case of an emergency situation (entire species or entire morph/population wise). Check out that thread for more info. Its a lot of posts, but all in all we decided it was kind of like the atomic energy stuff Einstein came up with. If used correctly and responsibly by the right people, it would be extremely beneficial in certain circumstances, but would be pretty bad if it got into the wrong hands. What a conundrum.... :roll:


----------



## rmelancon (Apr 5, 2004)

I've done quite a bit of experimentation with alternate means of raising obligate egg feeders. I can say that pumilio can morph into healthy froglets (that have yielded apparently healthy adults) strictly on eggs from non-obligate species (tinctorious, auratus, truncatus, etc). I'm not sure if Histrionicus has ever been successfully raised on a strict non-obligate egg diet, but they have been raised on pumilio eggs.

In regards to affecting natural behavior I always allow the parents to raise what they want, but dont' know if the frogs I raise "manually" suffer any ill effects from the way they were raised. It would seem unlikely but I'm no biologist.

If what Brent says is true, I would think you could harvest eggs from other dendobatids and blend them together with food of normal tads along with some type of gelatin to hold everything together... so somebody figure out how to do that ;-)


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

So, one would need to isolate the variable that is causing them to recognize this as food, correct? That would make things make a WHOLE lot more sense. This would be easier than blending pum eggs with other dart eggs and food by a lot. Keep removing things until you find what it recognizes as food....hmm...  Heck I'm up for it, what do you all think about that? I bet a few of us could cooperate on collecting data and experimenting on something like this, too. This is sounding like a much better overall idea than before, glad I am posting as much as possible first lol...


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

rmelancon said:


> In regards to affecting natural behavior I always allow the parents to raise what they want, but dont' know if the frogs I raise "manually" suffer any ill effects from the way they were raised. It would seem unlikely but I'm no biologist.


I agree with this. The behaviors are almost certainly genetically hard wired rather than learned. Which means the behavior is present when the right genes are expressed. So if a tadpole is going to grow up without these behaviors, it likely wouldn't make a difference whether the tad was reared by its parents or by some primate feeding it an artificial diet. The problem occurs when you raise entire generations of frogs by artificial means with no way of knowing whether the behaviors are being preserved. At least with natural rearing, frogs that have lost these parental behaviors will not reproduce to pass this along to their offspring. With Robb's method, all parents are known to have the behaviors which increases the chances the artificially reared tads will too.

My only concern is from looking at how quickly artificial tad rearing became the standard, and nearly exclusive, way of raising frogs among the non-egg feeders. I just worry if an effective and easy to use artificial diet is developed, we will have generations of pumilio produced that have never carried a tad on their back or laid a food egg.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

thekidgecko said:


> So, one would need to isolate the variable that is causing them to recognize this as food, correct?


That's my guess. Evolutionarily it doesn't make sense that egg feeders would require fundamentally different nutrition than other frogs. They are still building pretty much the same proteins and structures to become a frog. I would further guess that their pickiness about what they eat as tads is something of an evolutionary fluke caused by the food eggs being such a successful diet that there was no selective pressure to not be picky. Figure out what triggers their appetite and I'll bet you solve the puzzle. But don't discount the possibility of behavioral cues. Egg feeding tadpoles have been observed thrashing their tails and going into something of a frenzy when an adult frog approaches. It is possible that visual cues are responsible for allowing the tad to recognize when dinner is coming.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

I personally think that the niche that the egg feeders were taking advantage of probably pressured them into being able to take their needed nutrition out of the feeder eggs... question is that did that pressure change their digestion to the point where they no longer can handle other foods, or is it that they need mom to do the little wiggle dance that says all clear, come get dinner. If it was totally behavioral, I don't see how tads raised artificially on eggs of other dendros would have even snacked on the eggs. The bahavior is a big part on getting the tadpoles on the eggs ASAP, but I do have to wonder about other possible reasons on why they don't eat other easily available foods... or why they try do with disastrous results.


----------



## rmelancon (Apr 5, 2004)

bbrock said:


> ...But don't discount the possibility of behavioral cues. Egg feeding tadpoles have been observed thrashing their tails and going into something of a frenzy when an adult frog approaches. It is possible that visual cues are responsible for allowing the tad to recognize when dinner is coming.


It is also worth noting that the tadpoles being artificially reared (at least the pumilio) do the feeding dance when I feed them too. So the reponse by the tadpoles isn't lost in the artificial method. For some reason I haven't noticed it as much with histrionicus tadpoles, they don't dance but they do eat.


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

OK, this is sounding interesting. I was hoping you would find this thread Robb, lol. Seeing as they will eat other dendrobatid eggs, there must be a common factor that makes them think "food". This means, comparing species feeder eggs is out of the question as well. So, this means I would just have to keep removing things until I find what it is right? BTW I'm thinking Histos are out of the question for me right now :lol: I'll have to try them when I tough.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

KeroKero said:


> I personally think that the niche that the egg feeders were taking advantage of probably pressured them into being able to take their needed nutrition out of the feeder eggs...


Put a slightly different way you could say that their ability to meet their nutritional needs from food eggs "allowed" them to take advantage of a niche (small leaf axils) that had less competition.



> question is that did that pressure change their digestion to the point where they no longer can handle other foods,


That's a pretty important point and something worth thinking about. For example, I could see where they might lose the ability to break down chitin pretty quickly so most arthropod foods may pass through relatively undigested. Another possibility is that food eggs contain critical enzymes for digestion that "normal" tadpoles have to manufactur themselves.

The first possibility poses few practical problems since we can offer other foods in highly digestible forms. The second possibily would create a challenge since we would need to supply the missing enzymes.

I'm still going to go with my original hypothesis that it is a feeding stimulous issue. The only reason being that I think I have heard that pumilio tads tend to refuse most foods offered. If that isn't correct, then this hypothesis could probably safely be tossed out the window.


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Well, if they are eating other pum's eggs when not parent-reared (hand reared) one could assume that the feeding response is not triggered by a behavioral cue. Thus, you could assume that it is most likely a chemo-sensory cue. That is my hypothesis anyway. My guess is the same as yours, but in reverse. The tadpole's thrashing my trigger the laying response from the female. So far, I am thinking the best thing that could come out of this is something like a readily accepted tadpole supplement. Hopefully something with extra color enhancers, vitamins, and minerals. This could possibly help prevent SLS (as caused by supplement deficiency) when parent-raised tadpoles don't get everything needed (due to lack of insect variety in diet of adults?) This would also hopefully eliminate the need for stressing out froglets with calcium gluconate drops.

As for their digestive systems, I have no idea. That would have to be tested post finding the feeding trigger.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

thekidgecko said:


> My guess is the same as yours, but in reverse. The tadpole's thrashing my trigger the laying response from the female.





> This could possibly help prevent SLS (as caused by supplement deficiency) when parent-raised tadpoles don't get everything needed (due to lack of insect variety in diet of adults?) This would also hopefully eliminate the need for stressing out froglets with calcium gluconate drops.


I've never seen a parent-reared pumilio froglet develop spindly so I'm not sure a supplement is need for parent-raised tads. I've also never had to do the calcium gluconate treatment and consider it an undesirable stop-gap procedure that should be ended as soon as we develop better husbandry practices. Personally I think providing froglets with UVB light and feeding them actuall soil-born arthropods are the husbandry practices that make calcium gluconate supplementation obsolete. Regardless, I don't think a tadpole supplement will help with calcium nutrition of froglets because calcium defficiency can be developed at any stage in life and requires a chronic supply of proper nutrition. In other words, a froglet that emerges from the tadpole stage in a perfect nutritional state would still develop calcium defficiency later if vitamin D3 and calcium availability are not adequate.


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Correct, but I have heard some say that they get spindly, and you are probably right about it being our faults. However, providing a direct supplement would be ideal for a stage where we can only indirectly supplement the parents. This could also help us keep appropriate coloration by adding elements found in the adults food naturally that we cannot get or culture. In the end, there is no way we can duplicate nature, but we can provide feasible options to provide the same/similar results.

Also, I am not saying calcium gluconate is what I would personally do. First of all, if the frog is eating why not just use supplements? Also, why let it get that way in the first place? Supplement the parents when they need it most, while raising new tads and laying eggs.

Either way, a direct supplement provided during the tadpole stage would still be beneficial, as is supplementing at every stage in the frogs life.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

I'm not sure where there was the jump in association with SLS and calcium... there are humorous known reasons, and many more unknown factors that cause SLS, and I don't think calcium as a tadpole is the one causing SLS froglets... properly feeding the tadpoles with their diet as close to the wild is a good start... if we give them the nutrition they are evolutionarily adapted to getting, SLS from nutrition isn't an issue. Another thing to note... mentioning tadpoles raised by parents don't generally get SLS... if this was a case of the adults nutrition, how likely is it that the reason tadpoles are not transported and/or cared for may be due to the parents for some reason knowing the tadpoles wouldn't be healthy? Or some are ignored because enough others are being raised so they don't want to stretch their nutritional resources... by removing and caring for eggs we've raised up a number of tadpoles and froglets, with extra TLC, that if left to the adults and the wild, never would have made it in the first place...

I'd personally I'd skip the color enhancers in pumilio tadpoles, they are diet dependent for xanthophores their whole lives, and this is better done in the froglet stage, and you might be asking for trouble putting in another additive.

Just because the froglet is feeding does not mean you can supplement them... have you ever tried to dust a springtail? Froglets under ideal conditions will be eating minute critters present in the tank... often not what we feed them on purpose. A lot of the health issues of getting froglets past 6 months seemed to be geared around the nutrition in the first few weeks where our standard feeder insects are too big. In a well established tank like brent's, there are probably dozens of little critters they are eating, which also may be the basis for the color differences seen in his froglets as well... obviously something about the in tank diet is working better than the out of tank diet! Unfortunately many pumilio pair tanks these days are just too small and not designed correctly to take advantage of this...


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

All good points Corey.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

I'm not sure where there was the jump in association with SLS and calcium... there are humorous known reasons, and many more unknown factors that cause SLS, and I don't think calcium as a tadpole is the one causing SLS froglets... properly feeding the tadpoles with their diet as close to the wild is a good start... if we give them the nutrition they are evolutionarily adapted to getting, SLS from nutrition isn't an issue. Another thing to note... mentioning tadpoles raised by parents don't generally get SLS... if this was a case of the adults nutrition, how likely is it that the reason tadpoles are not transported and/or cared for may be due to the parents for some reason knowing the tadpoles wouldn't be healthy? Or some are ignored because enough others are being raised so they don't want to stretch their nutritional resources... by removing and caring for eggs we've raised up a number of tadpoles and froglets, with extra TLC, that if left to the adults and the wild, never would have made it in the first place...

I'd personally I'd skip the color enhancers in pumilio tadpoles, they are diet dependent for xanthophores their whole lives, and this is better done in the froglet stage, and you might be asking for trouble putting in another additive.

Just because the froglet is feeding does not mean you can supplement them... have you ever tried to dust a springtail? Froglets under ideal conditions will be eating minute critters present in the tank... often not what we feed them on purpose. A lot of the health issues of getting froglets past 6 months seemed to be geared around the nutrition in the first few weeks where our standard feeder insects are too big. In a well established tank like brent's, there are probably dozens of little critters they are eating, which also may be the basis for the color differences seen in his froglets as well... obviously something about the in tank diet is working better than the out of tank diet! Unfortunately many pumilio pair tanks these days are just too small and not designed correctly to take advantage of this...

I'm just not seeing the advantages to this... we've got so much work to do with breeding them and raising resulting froglets, that I think focusing on the tadpoles right now isn't worth the effort. All these pumilio are breeding... yet why are we not seeing all those offspring around as adults? It's not a problem at the tadpole stage...


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Note: Could one not just provide high calcium foods to the springtails to gutload?


----------



## rmelancon (Apr 5, 2004)

KeroKero said:


> ... Another thing to note... mentioning tadpoles raised by parents don't generally get SLS... if this was a case of the adults nutrition, how likely is it that the reason tadpoles are not transported and/or cared for may be due to the parents for some reason knowing the tadpoles wouldn't be healthy? Or some are ignored because enough others are being raised so they don't want to stretch their nutritional resources... by removing and caring for eggs we've raised up a number of tadpoles and froglets, with extra TLC, that if left to the adults and the wild, never would have made it in the first place...
> ...


Another interesting note is that at one point I was raising three bj tadpoles (one surrogate, two on misc. eggs) and the parents were raising one, all from the same clutch. The two I was raising and the surrogate came out fine and the one the parents raised came out spindly.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

Mason - in theory, springtails kept in high calcium soils should have higher calcium content... but this is not exactly easily done in cultures, at least not how we culture them. And another point is VARIETY of foods is needed for good nutrition, its probably even more important in juvies. Springtails are currently the only truly small thing we culture for these guys and they are just not a good building block by themselves. Froglets need to be in tanks with a good supply of microfauna to really get the diversity they need in these first few weeks, otherwise you're playing catch up after they start being able to take dusted flies. This "catch up" might likely be a source of downfall for a majority of the froglets...


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

That makes sense. Right, which goes back to the variety of insects I mentioned above.

Anyway, getting back on the topic of oophagy, what chemical variables would be appropriate to eliminate first? (As in likely triggers)


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

KeroKero said:


> I'm not sure where there was the jump in association with SLS and calcium... there are humorous known reasons, and many more unknown factors that cause SLS,


What is it about SLS that you find so funny? ;-) Sorry, couldn't resist.

I think there are two factors that are often missing with respect to providing the right microfauna. The first is size of the enclosure simply because a couple of frogs in a small viv can drastically reduce the populations of microfauna as opposed to in a large viv. The ecological rule of 10 may be useful the consider. The rule says that about 10% of the energy consumed is converted into body mass. So very roughly, it takes 10 grams of insect for each gram of frog and 10 grams of plant to feed 1 gram of insect which means 150 grams of plant to feed 1 gram of frog. But the 10 grams of insect is the consumption rate. You likely need a population that supports 10-100 times that amount to actually sustain the consumption rate. The point is that the larger the viv, the less likely the frogs will snarf everything that moves and there will be abundant prey available for developing froglets.

The second missing factor is real mineral soil. Real soil typically contains calcium, aluminum, and other mineral nutrients. When critters live in mineral soil, the consume minerals and minerals stick to their bodies. And when frogs eat the critters, they not only get those minerals but often get a few soil particles stuck to their tongues as well. More minerals. The result is a more complete and balanced diet for the frogs.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

I find it funny, in a sad way, that people think SLS is so simple 

Excellent post Brent!

Large enclosures + real mineral soil + microfauana = healthy froglets!

Your BJ tank is an excellent example that I wish was done more often! Pumilio pairs in 18s make me sad


----------



## spydrmn12285 (Oct 24, 2006)

How does one make their soil full of the minerals that you have described Brent? And is dusting of food items every feeded a requirement anymore once you do this?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "How does one make their soil full of the minerals that you have described Brent? And is dusting of food items every feeded a requirement anymore once you do this?"endsnip

I'll let Brent answer the soil question.. 
But the frequency of dusting should be dependent on the frequency at which you are offering food. Keep in mind that even if you have a soil that is well balanced with minerals the minerals are useless to the frog unless there are sufficient soil invertebratss for the frogs to consume along with the soil (as Brent outlined above). 

Ed


----------



## spydrmn12285 (Oct 24, 2006)

I see, thanks for that Ed. I guess you can achieve the optimal amount of minerals, microfauna, etc with only a very large enclosure.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

and even if you achieve the optimal amount of minerals you may still be providing insufficient levels of vitamins. 

Ed


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

spydrmn12285 said:


> How does one make their soil full of the minerals that you have described Brent? And is dusting of food items every feeded a requirement anymore once you do this?


One way to guestimate the calcium content of a soil is to test the pH since neutral to basic soils typically have calcium carbonate or similar as their buffer. Soils collected from areas with a limestone bedrock base also should be calcium rich as would be chalky soils. Or you could just add lime to your substrate being careful not to overdo it and nuke your plants. If you start with an acidic substrate and add enough lime to get a slightly acid (6.0 - 6.5 or so) pH, then you should be in good shape. I don't get that carried away but now that I'm typing this, I will probably start supplementing my substrate with lime. I use Redart potter's clay mixed about 3:1 with some locally collected soil (I collect from beneath conifers to get a good mycorrhizal fungus innoculum).

Whether you need to supplement is a good question but I do to be safe. The viv is large enough that I only add flies about once every week or two (usually every other week) but I do dust them with something when they go in. With UVB light present, the frogs seem to do fine.

Even in a small vivarium I think the potential benefits of mineral soils may be overlooked. The large size only makes it possible to have self sustaining populations of springtails and such. But even if you are dumping in sprintails and ff to feed the frogs, the frogs are still likely to ingest particles of substrate. It seems like if those particles were mineral rich it would be a bit of a bonus.


----------



## KeroKero (Jun 13, 2004)

So in theory if we made our media substrate for springtails with your method of adding lime, we don't have to worry about the plants, and could add springtails to a tank, or feed out springtails (or in theory other soil yummies) with slightly higher calcium content? Its an interesting thought....


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

KeroKero said:


> So in theory if we made our media substrate for springtails with your method of adding lime, we don't have to worry about the plants, and could add springtails to a tank, or feed out springtails (or in theory other soil yummies) with slightly higher calcium content? Its an interesting thought....


I look at as an additive thing. At least there is some calcium present that the frogs might ingest. Without doing a lot of expensive analysis, it is impossible to know if it provides the same added nutrition that having arthropod cultures self sustaining in place would provide. Nor is it possible to know if the complete calcium requirements of the frogs are being met. But I think it may provide "something more" than the typical horticultural based substrates provide.

That last part is the biggest hurdle to mineral soils. Our hobby has grown up around the idea of hydroponics and greenhouse horticulture which gives us soilless mixes and hydroponic substrates that mainly act as well drained support structures for plants. I actually think these substrates designed for greenhouse and windowsill pot culture have limited our progress toward developing complex ecosystems in vivaria. But it is a very different way of doing things and people who have been successful using more traditional substrates often don't like the change.

I guess this probably should have been splite to a new topic since we have strayed from the original thread.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

snip "typing this, I will probably start supplementing my substrate with lime."endsnip

Any source of calcium carbonate would work as long as the particle size is small enough and is evenly distributed in the soil... 

Keep in mind that arthropods in general are a poor source of carotenoids and are usually poor sources of vitamin A. Frogs in the wild are not exposed to "opitmized" conditions to stimulate reproduction year round allowing the females to sequester carotenoids and vitamin A for egg production. 

Ed


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Aaaaaaaaaany way....

Lol. That hijack was fun and very informational  

Any recommendations of what I should try eliminating first?


----------



## booboo (Jan 22, 2005)

Isnt this what i was saying a long time ago...








dtealin my work boy :lol: 

At least your doing something! Are you recording data? Any sort of "summary" of how you started to do this? I am very interested to see how this works out.


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Yeah, the credit for the idea definately goes to you. lol, I got bored waiting for something to happen  

Still gathering ideas before I start anything.


----------



## npaull (May 8, 2005)

Not to be a Negative Nancy here, but what do you even mean by "eliminate?" More precisely, how do you intend to isolate a chemical component of an egg, and remove it? 

How do you intend to isolate the effects of removal of the chemical from the effects of the agents you use to remove it?

If the "key ingredient" is a specific protein, how do you intend to isolate it from other proteins in the egg?

If it is a structural protein, how can it be removed without destroying the egg as a single, edible entity?

Again, I am not trying to rain on anyone's parade. But this sounds like an experiment that is going to require a) a lot of time and b) a pretty advanced biochemical laboratory and a huge well of biochemical knowledge. I think having these questions posed at the outset will ultimately be more helpful.


----------



## thekidgecko (Oct 30, 2006)

Booboo: I haven't started with anything yet, but I intend to record everything. I'm asking as many questions as I can so I can do it as close to the right way as I can the first time. I've learned that from experience, lol.

npaull: Yes, those are all very helpful questions.

This is why I ask what would be the best factor to eliminate, or rather isolate and test on its own (so destroying the "Edible entity" of the egg might not be a factor, depending on response from the tads). One problem to this would be how to present an edible body impregnated with said chemical from a feeder egg (still be edible by the tadpole)

Although it could be a combination of chemicals, it seems most logical to me to test them individually first. Also, I have access to both aforementioned requirements. I have almost three years to in the current location I am, my teacher's forte is biochemistry, and we have an advanced biochem lab that has yet to be broken-in by anyone from lack of interest.


----------



## bbrock (May 20, 2004)

I think what Nathanial is asking is what methodology will you use to assay the chemical composition. It's probably a good bet that your lab doesn't have a mass spectrometer but I've always thought this would be the tool to use to crack this mystery. I even spoke to a mass spec tech about it once but we never got far with the scheme because would be an expensive and long ordeal. What I have always thought is that if you could get the chemical profile of a food egg, a chicken egg yolk, and some good fish food, it might provide some clues. The chicken egg yolk apparently contains something that makes the tads recognize it as food but does not provide adequate nutrition. So it is possible that the appetite stimulant is a compound that the chicken egg and food egg have in common. And if my hypothesis is correct, the fish food would provide close to complete nutrition but be lacking the food stimulant. So by comparing the food egg with fish food, you could rule out all compounds they have in common. But the whole deal is a very, very, difficult process since there will be thousands of compounds present in each and even with a mass spec, you need to have some idea of what you are looking for before you start - at least as I understand it which isn't saying much.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

This is probably where you want to start looking at the literature. I would also check out the associated bibliography.. 

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/pd ... 91.00037.x 

I think the first thing you would need to do is check out how many jelly coats the feeder eggs have and compare them to non-feeder eggs... There maybe a difference here that would give you the clue to get started... 

Ed


----------

