# When did people become against UVB?



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

More than once now I've seen the recommendation to avoid UVB supplementation for non-obligate dart frogs, when did this become a standard as its not supported by even older established data see for example this thread UVB exposure Dendrobates

With the exception of a lot of studies on tadpoles exposed to UV light, organisms including a number of invertebrates have higher prior to activation-D3 and active D3 circulating in their body than those that are not allowed UVB access. The goal is to let the frog self regulate their own exposure. 

(as a neat invert one see Oonincx, D. G. A. B., et al. "Evidence of vitamin D synthesis in insects exposed to UVb light." _Scientific reports_ 8.1 (2018): 1-10.)

Some comments 
Ed


----------



## IShouldGetSomeSleep (Sep 23, 2021)

Ed said:


> More than once now I've seen the recommendation to avoid UVB supplementation for non-obligate dart frogs, when did this become a standard as its not supported by even older established data see for example this thread UVB exposure Dendrobates
> 
> With the exception of a lot of studies on tadpoles exposed to UV light, organisms including a number of invertebrates have higher prior to activation-D3 and active D3 circulating in their body than those that are not allowed UVB access. The goal is to let the frog self regulate their own exposure.
> 
> ...


Well I can't speak for frogs but in the Roach hobby there are a few species that do best when kept with a UVB lamp over the tank. So I can totally believe there are inverts that gain some benefit from UVB exposure.


----------



## Eurydactylodes (Sep 7, 2021)

UVB is necessary for many reptiles; iguanas, varanids, day geckos, etc…, and it is harmful to many reptiles (Gonatodes spp, Sphaerodactylus spp, etc…) Most of us have kept dendrobatids successfully for years without UVB, and many of us have used UVB on dendrobatids (especially large obligates) with great success. I have seen first hand the effects of UVB exposure on animals that do not need it, and it can be awefull; shedding issues, discoloration, and issues with their eyes are common. The UVB craze is great for some animals, and is way overblown for others-including dendrobatids. I will say, many dendrobatids have UVB exposure in the wild, but there is a vast difference between exposure from the sun and a harsh bulb radiating a small enclosure.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Ed said:


> More than once now I've seen the recommendation to avoid UVB supplementation for non-obligate dart frogs, when did this become a standard as its not supported by even older established data see for example this thread UVB exposure Dendrobates
> 
> With the exception of a lot of studies on tadpoles exposed to UV light, organisms including a number of invertebrates have higher prior to activation-D3 and active D3 circulating in their body than those that are not allowed UVB access. The goal is to let the frog self regulate their own exposure.
> 
> ...


Hi Ed,

I think the recommendations here are usually that UVB is not recommended as a general rule, because the risk of adding it improperly can be deadly, whereas the risk of not adding it is nowhere near as catastrophic when combined with proper supplementation (cal + d3, amongst other things).

There is a lot of pooled experience that would also support that UVB is not necessary for many Dendrobatidae to thrive in captivity (whatever that really means: reproduce, live long lives, etc.).

I think it is mainly risk vs reward, and at this point should likely be left to more experienced hobbyists to tinker with. We spend half our time on this forum just trying to get people to use proper supplements.


----------



## 2Lorenzoss (11 mo ago)

...and then there's what the plants need.


----------



## Eurydactylodes (Sep 7, 2021)

2Lorenzoss said:


> ...and then there's what the plants need.


That is usually just LED


----------



## Eurydactylodes (Sep 7, 2021)

Eurydactylodes said:


> That is usually just LED


----------



## bulbophyllum (Feb 6, 2012)

Chris S said:


> I think the recommendations here are usually that UVB is not recommended as a general rule, because the risk of adding it improperly can be deadly,


Deadly in what way?


----------



## connorology (Oct 6, 2018)

When I was at the National Zoo in DC recently their dart frogs all had UVB on them. I have been considering adding it to my terribilis but I'd need to rebuild the top of my enclosure first. I'm not anti-UVB. 

My only beef with the "UVB craze" (as it was described above) is that the rationale for using UVB with a lot of herp species that don't "need" it is presumed benefits extrapolated from human/mammalian data, while completely ignoring the risk of vision damage and skin cancer in human/mammalian data, which I consider to be cherry picking. That might be pedantic though. Another real issue is that newer hobbyists getting info from Facebook tend to treat UVB as a box to check instead of understanding how to position it appropriately. I feel pretty strongly that everyone should have a UVB meter - even using a weaker bulb it is easy to get UVB readings much higher than you'd get in the desert unless you are using aftermarket modifications to lift the fixture a few inches from the top of the enclosure.


----------



## 2Lorenzoss (11 mo ago)

The available data and I read the link provided in another post last night at the bottom of the page, research that was done on usb vs. non, it is beneficial to healthy growth. In low levels as well. Then when healthy mature growth has set in I think a switch to LED's would be better.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

I have a small Shade Dweller (I think that's what it's called) 7% UVB rig that I've never unpacked, but it's been my intention to try it out, as my enclosure tops have a screen area that will allow UVB penetration (I can't recall but think window screen will cut up to 30% of light penetration which in this case isn't a bad thing).

The idea is to have it on a timer to come on at noon or so for a few minutes.

My frog room is in a basement with obstructed Western exposure windows 14 feet away and about 5-5.5 feet high up, give or take. Non-lethal strength (it's important to specify this as windows in front of vivaria can easily kill frogs) sunbeams strike the tanks in the late afternoon. I usually see P. terribilis moving into the patches of sunlight.

What they're doing is hard to say. Could they be:

Responding to UVA?
Responding to the warmth?
Is it related to hunting?
Is my observation _incorrect_ and they're merely _not bothering to avoid it_?
In terms of the tanks themselves, there's opportunity to get cover and avoid exposure if I try the UVB light and they don't want to be there; and I think beginning with short durations and observing them is a good start.

I'm not averse to trying this out but as an experienced hobbyist I still intend to be very careful and make sure I don't do more harm than good.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Interesting how back in the day the ideal iguana light was a T12 5% (and worked pretty well) and now a 7% T5HO is 'shade'. I guess now everyone needs a bluetooth toothbrush or they might as well be living in a cave, too. Same deal: the technological imperative -- once something becomes available, it becomes a need.



connorology said:


> everyone should have a UVB meter - even using a weaker bulb it is easy to get UVB readings much higher than you'd get in the desert


Can confirm. This is what my frequent comments on animals hiding/not feeding/dying from same are motivated by, and continue to be supported by similar occasional reports here and elsewhere that (at least elsewhere) are often sidelined by unsupported comments about possible other factors that didn't change concurrently with the provision of UVB. 

I'm not sure 'people' (implying something like 'most people') here are 'against' providing UVB to darts. The main attitude -- in general, not only on this topic) here seems to be making recommendations only with consideration of 
--the experience level of the keeper, 
--the viv size/design, 
--the species kept, 
--the reason that keeper is keeping that species (pet, breeding), 
--the relative practical gain that species might have from providing UVB, 
--the cost of equipment and running/maintaining that equipment, 
--whether a certain husbandry complexity is actually *needed* (where 'needed' doesn't mean 'likely provides some physically unnoticeable but scientifically measured increase over some baseline state', but rather means something more like 'there's a non-negligible chance that the animals will at some point be observably less well off than without this') and so should be provided no matter the expense or complexity,
-- whether something is simply the most straightforward and cheapest way to provide a widely agreed on baseline element of care (e.g. providing D3 orally).


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Eurydactylodes said:


> and it is harmful to many reptiles (Gonatodes spp, Sphaerodactylus spp, etc…)


What is this conclusion based on? I keep and breed sphaerodactylus and all of them have access to UVB. Everyone I know who breeds Sphaeros and Gonatodes provides UVB. I'm really willing to be corrected though if you know something I don't, this is a sincere question.
I have heard people discuss the possibility of UVB causing shedding issues in very young animals before but other breeders I know who don't provide UVB for babies still make it available for adults.


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

@Socratic Monologue -- I think viv size is also a big consideration. Yes, frogs should be able to self-regulate, but I feel better about trying this eventually given all my terribilis tanks are 36" high. Between tank height, screen, hardscape barriers, and experiments with shorter durations of UVB light, I think I feel safe trying it. But whether or not I'm able to notice anything quantifiable is a whole other kettle of frogs. As it is a lot of my observations are inconclusive or difficult to prove. So far, my frogs appear to be thriving, but I think some of these things are best attempted to be observed over at least a generation of animals.


----------



## connorology (Oct 6, 2018)

This isn't frog related, but I just upgraded my 25 year old ball python to a large custom made enclosure that is equipped to provide top down basking opportunities with a halogen light and also UVB lighting (I have a ton of old T5 tubes from my chameleon that still put out ok UVB if they go into a single reflector - I figured I might as well use them for my animals that may hypothetically benefit from lower level UVB). It's a very large planted bioactive enclosure on the main level and then has a rack tub underneath that he can crawl into through a hole that basically takes him into the enclosure I kept him in when I was a kid - newspaper substrate, water dish, basic hide box, old school heat pad.

So far he seems to pop out to do a couple laps around the main enclosure like an old man walking around the park and then he just goes back into his tub and sits on the heat pad. This single experience with a single geriatric animal doesn't "prove" anything... just thought I'd point out that Arcadia is unlikely to share this story on their IG page. I also wonder if some of the photos shared on social media of more nocturnal species "basking" (ball pythons, leopard geckos and the like) are actually indicating that those enclosures do not have adequately heated dark hides - the move to provide bioactive enclosures and full spectrum lighting has led to a lot of herp keepers snubbing heat pads in favor of basking lights. I'm sure I could force my python to bask if I shut off his heat pad.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

The thinking of that they and a lot of other vertebrates do fine ignores a number of factors starting with multiple taxa when given access maintain higher circulating levels of active D3 and pre-metabolites, this is because the hobby tends to only concentrate on its action with respect to calcium metabolism. D3 is required for multiple systems ranging from DNA synthesis, repair if DNA, gene regulation, and even immune system function. People need to stop thinking of it as a vitamin as it acts like a hormone much more than a vitamin. 

If animals are maintaining a higher concentration in their circulation then they have a greater need for it then is being provided by oral supplementation (see for example Verschooren, Elfi, et al. "Ultraviolet B radiation (UV-B) and the growth and skeletal development of the Amazonian milk frog (Trachycephalus resinifictrix) from metamorphosis." _Journal of Physiology and Pathophysiology_ 2.3 (2011): 34-42. ) even in nocturnal species. 
See also Michaels, C. J., R. E. Antwis, and Richard F. Preziosi. "Impacts of UVB provision and dietary calcium content on serum vitamin D3, growth rates, skeletal structure and coloration in captive oriental fire‐bellied toads (Bombina orientalis)." _Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition_ 99.2 (2015): 391-403. Where the animals were tested on a UVB plus supplementation vs supplements only diets... 

The whole "doing okay" mentality with respect to D3 is an opposite of the frequent position on optimization of care to prevent issues where positions are presented as virtual absolutes (only housing tinctorious in pairs comes to mind). Many dendrobatids reach their highest density in disturbed habitats where they are readily exposed to sunlight. 

As for getting the proper distance and intensity, the use of Ferguson Zones is helping to address that issue. See for example Figure 4. UV index estimates based upon the Ferguson zones. Columns 1... With the bulbs coming with distances and intensity to reach those exposures. Some brands come with a better consistency in their products than other, in this case it can be better to pay a little more.

I was surprised given the constant expansion of options and consistency of data supporting the benefits to see recommendations against the use of UVB up to and including (not necessarily here ) that it will kill your frogs... 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Mw42 (Mar 27, 2021)

Fahad said:


> I have a small Shade Dweller (I think that's what it's called) 7% UVB rig that I've never unpacked, but it's been my intention to try it out, as my enclosure tops have a screen area that will allow UVB penetration (I can't recall but think window screen will cut up to 30% of light penetration which in this case isn't a bad thing).


Based on the experience I have setting up that same fixture for Day Geckos in a similar enclosure you're unlikely to see measurable UVB exposure past 16" from the screen. I can't keep P. terribilis here so I don't have any experience with them but I don't think they're climbers are they?


----------



## Mw42 (Mar 27, 2021)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Interesting how back in the day the ideal iguana light was a T12 5% (and worked pretty well) and now a 7% T5HO is 'shade'. I guess now everyone needs a bluetooth toothbrush or they might as well be living in a cave, too. Same deal: the technological imperative -- once something becomes available, it becomes a need.


There's been a lot of advancement in both the understanding of UV requirements and the technology. The T12 5% bulb you reference was essentially useless unless the animal could get within 6" of it but we lacked the tools to measure it at a hobbyist level. You can get a decent UV meter now for $200, I can remember paying just about $800 for one when I needed it at work in 2001.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

connorology said:


> ythons, leopard geckos and the like) are actually indicating that those enclosures do not have adequately heated dark hides - the move to provide bioactive enclosures and full spectrum lighting has led to a lot of herp keepers snubbing heat pads in favor of basking lights. I'm sure I could force my python to bask if I shut off his heat pad.


This is complex as we'd need to delve into how the herps absorb heat in the form of infrared wavelengths but if your setting up the enclosure the animal should have a gradient that allows heat without exposure to UVB and there are m in multiple configurations possible depending on caging, wattage and even basking area substrates. Many taxa are are now being studied on their use of UVB (see for example Oonincx, D. G. A. B., et al. "The nocturnal leopard gecko (Eublepharis macularius) uses UVb radiation for vitamin D3 synthesis." _Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part B: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology_ 250 (2020): 110506.). 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Mw42 said:


> Based on the experience I have setting up that same fixture for Day Geckos in a similar enclosure you're unlikely to see measurable UVB exposure past 16" from the screen. I can't keep P. terribilis here so I don't have any experience with them but I don't think they're climbers are they?


The effects of screening is also a topic of research see for example Michael Burger, R., William H. Gehrmann, and Gary W. Ferguson. "Evaluation of UVB reduction by materials commonly used in reptile husbandry." _Zoo Biology: Published in affiliation with the American Zoo and Aquarium Association_ 26.5 (2007): 417-423.

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Ed said:


> The thinking of that they and a lot of other vertebrates do fine ignores a number of factors starting with multiple taxa when given access maintain higher circulating levels of active D3 and pre-metabolites, this is because the hobby tends to only concentrate on its action with respect to calcium metabolism. D3 is required for multiple systems ranging from DNA synthesis, repair if DNA, gene regulation, and even immune system function. People need to stop thinking of it as a vitamin as it acts like a hormone much more than a vitamin.
> 
> If animals are maintaining a higher concentration in their circulation then they have a greater need for it then is being provided by oral supplementation (see for example Verschooren, Elfi, et al. "Ultraviolet B radiation (UV-B) and the growth and skeletal development of the Amazonian milk frog (Trachycephalus resinifictrix) from metamorphosis." _Journal of Physiology and Pathophysiology_ 2.3 (2011): 34-42. ) even in nocturnal species.
> See also Michaels, C. J., R. E. Antwis, and Richard F. Preziosi. "Impacts of UVB provision and dietary calcium content on serum vitamin D3, growth rates, skeletal structure and coloration in captive oriental fire‐bellied toads (Bombina orientalis)." _Journal of animal physiology and animal nutrition_ 99.2 (2015): 391-403. Where the animals were tested on a UVB plus supplementation vs supplements only diets...
> ...


Hi Ed,

How do you measure things like DNA synthesis and repair, gene regulation or even whether growth rates are optimal at a hobbyist level though? And do they in fact indicate that the frogs care requirements are not being met? I'd suggest many (properly) cared for frogs probably lead lives that are a lot more stress free than their wild counterparts - no true dry seasons, no food shortages, less or no conspecific aggression. In those scenarios, are things like lack of DNA repair as necessary? I don't know - I don't have these answers.

It's an honest question, and I don't dispute the science that has been done. What are the noticeable impacts when we *don't* have UVB? Are the frogs not as long-lived? Are they in pain, or somehow deficient in how they carry out their daily tasks? Does it hinder reproductive success, or recovery from egg laying/tadpole care? We can see clearly that many reptiles (and certain frogs!) suffer greatly and obviously from a lack of UVB. It doesn't seem quite as obvious to me with many dart frog species.

In some instances, I think some hobbyists have found some connections - specifically in regards to reproduction (as it is always a goal for many breeders/hobbyists), but for many of the other things and certainly for certain genus, it doesn't seem to have any noticeable/measurable impact.

The fact that is quite clear though is that too much and unregulated UVB can cause discomfort, pain and in some cases death. This is more important in the greater scheme of things right now and that is really the main point I was trying to make.

I'm listening though, and many others are too. There should always be progressive discussion regarding things like this as it furthers the hobby and the care of these animals in captivity.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

bulbophyllum said:


> Deadly in what way?


There have been instances where it has caused burning and/or death in scenarios where the animals have no escape or way to regulate their access to it. Whether it was too strong of a bulb, or a bad habitat setup, the risk is real in the same way we (mammals/humans) can get sunburns (and skin cancer, and even immune system degradation) from UVB.


----------



## Eurydactylodes (Sep 7, 2021)

Louis said:


> What is this conclusion based on? I keep and breed sphaerodactylus and all of them have access to UVB. Everyone I know who breeds Sphaeros and Gonatodes provides UVB. I'm really willing to be corrected though if you know something I don't, this is a sincere question.
> I have heard people discuss the possibility of UVB causing shedding issues in very young animals before but other breeders I know who don't provide UVB for babies still make it available for adults.


If it works for you, it works for you! I have had some bad experiences keeping my sphaerodactylids with UVB, but my experience is certainly not universal


----------



## connorology (Oct 6, 2018)

Ed said:


> This is complex as we'd need to delve into how the herps absorb heat in the form of infrared wavelengths but if your setting up the enclosure the animal should have a gradient that allows heat without exposure to UVB and there are m in multiple configurations possible depending on caging, wattage and even basking area substrates. Many taxa are are now being studied on their use of UVB (see for example Oonincx, D. G. A. B., et al. "The nocturnal leopard gecko (Eublepharis macularius) uses UVb radiation for vitamin D3 synthesis." _Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part B: Biochemistry and Molecular Biology_ 250 (2020): 110506.).
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


Yes, I am aware of this. My enclosure lets my python select a wide array of parameters. I am commenting on a social media trend of folks posting photos of pet reptiles basking devoid of context which are then shared by the Arcadia company's social media accounts as a marketing strategy to sell more units. These photos may or may not reflect a benefit from the products mentioned - but it is a marketing strategy treated as scientific evidence by some lower information herp keepers online. Again, I am not commenting on whether they are ultimately right or wrong - just on the fact that I think an instagram account of a for-profit entity is a suboptimal source of husbandry information.

I am familiar with the paper, though I remain unclear on why it is frequently cited as evidence that leopard geckos should have UVB. It found no clinical benefit from providing UVB and concluded:

"Growth and weight gain were similar in [UVB and no UVB groups], and this, together with the absence of clinical symptoms, suggests that dietary vitamin D3 alone can meet the vitamin D requirements for growth of this nocturnal gecko, during the first six months of life. It remains to be investigated whether the higher vitamin D metabolite levels holds other health benefits for this species, such as improved bone density or immune response."

Again, I am not commenting on whether or not I think UVB is good or bad for these species, there may be a future study that convincingly shows leopard geckos benefit from UVB. But this is not that study. I also worry about UVB for leopard geckos specifically because there are so many hypomelanistic or albino morphs that are likely more susceptible to UV damage.


----------



## connorology (Oct 6, 2018)

Chris S said:


> What are the noticeable impacts when we *don't* have UVB? Are the frogs not as long-lived? Are they in pain, or somehow deficient in how they carry out their daily tasks? Does it hinder reproductive success, or recovery from egg laying/tadpole care? We can see clearly that many reptiles (and certain frogs!) suffer greatly and obviously from a lack of UVB. It doesn't seem quite as obvious to me with many dart frog species.



I think this is a very fair point. Take UVB out of the equation. Heck, take herps out of the equation - whenever the majority of people are doing something a certain way, and a person or group comes along and says "hey we should shift how we do this because it causes a problem" it is reasonable to ask "ok, I'm open to it, what problem?"

I feel like debate over UVB lighting stalls here for many species. If you deprive a chameleon or a bearded dragon of UVB lighting they will develop significant disease and/or die. If you do not provide UVB to a properly supplemented leopard gecko.. nothing happens. If you do provide UVB to a leopard gecko, they may have an increase in D3 levels - but there are no reference ranges for what D3 levels are healthy for them, so that is not usable information, and the individuals without UVB do not show signs of illness without UVB.

The UVB/UVI guidelines for most/all herp species are experimental. In the long run we may find that animals kept under UVB do better in captivity than those who are not. But that has not been demonstrated at this time for a majority of species. Asking newer keepers who don't know what they are doing to try and set up complicated equipment without known safety/efficacy may not be the most practical strategy.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Hi Chris




Chris S said:


> Hi Ed,
> 
> How do you measure things like DNA synthesis and repair, gene regulation or even whether growth rates are optimal at a hobbyist level though? And do they in fact indicate that the frogs care requirements are not being met? I'd suggest many (properly) cared for frogs probably lead lives that are a lot more stress free than their wild counterparts - no true dry seasons, no food shortages, less or no conspecific aggression. In those scenarios, are things like lack of DNA repair as necessary? I don't know - I don't have these answers.


Like many other metabolic processes these are highly conserved process so there is data from multiple other taxa that can be used to demonstrate need (like Wang, Tian-Tian, et al. "Cutting edge: 1, 25-dihydroxyvitamin D3 is a direct inducer of antimicrobial peptide gene expression." _The Journal of Immunology_ 173.5 (2004): 2909-2912.) 
If the frogs given the opportunity keep higher levels of D3 and its pre-metabolites circulating, it is an indication of need as it costs metabolic energy to keep those levels in the tissues. 
DNA repair is needed as it occurs routinely in the cells for multiple reasons including spontaneous mutations, exposure to free radicals, mycotoxins, and low levels of indoor air pollution, and probably other items I'm forgetting or lack knowledge regarding. 



Chris S said:


> an honest question, and I don't dispute the science that has been done. What are the noticeable impacts when we *don't* have UVB? Are the frogs not as long-lived? Are they in pain, or somehow deficient in how they carry out their daily tasks? Does it hinder reproductive success, or recovery from egg laying/tadpole care? We can see clearly that many reptiles (and certain frogs!) suffer greatly and obviously from a lack of UVB. It doesn't seem quite as obvious to me with many dart frog species.


At some point I'm sure someone will get around to X-Raying the frogs to determine bone density on different diets and supplement combinations but again the function and needs of D3 are heavily conserved so we can look at other taxa for indications about what constitutes the "degree" of health (see for example Tapley, Benjamin, et al. "Meeting ultraviolet B radiation requirements of amphibians in captivity: A case study with mountain chicken frogs (Leptodactylus fallax) and general recommendations for pre‐release health screening." _Zoo biology_ 34.1 (2015): 46-52.) 


Chris S said:


> In some instances, I think some hobbyists have found some connections - specifically in regards to reproduction (as it is always a goal for many breeders/hobbyists), but for many of the other things and certainly for certain genus, it doesn't seem to have any noticeable/measurable impact.


To be recognized as a care issue does it have to be an overtly negative impact observable on a macro scale? We are talking about a reactionary versus preventative mind sets in regards to the care of the frogs, it is clear across taxa (even inverts!!) that access to UVB is beneficial for multiple systems beyond calcium. 



Chris S said:


> fact that is quite clear though is that too much and unregulated UVB can cause discomfort, pain and in some cases death. This is more important in the greater scheme of things right now and that is really the main point I was trying to make.


Improper care whether it is excessive humidity, improper supplementation, or improper use of UVB are all able to cause illness and death but the recommendation of proper use of supplements, sufficient air flow are suggested but it is commonly suggested to not use UVB. See the dichotomy? 



Chris S said:


> listening though, and many others are too. There should always be progressive discussion regarding things like this as it furthers the hobby and the care of these animals in captivity.


I know you are and hopefully you don't think I'm targeting you but the data on the value of access to UVB continues to expand so it is jarring to see the anti UVB arguments. 

Some comments 
Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

connorology said:


> I feel like debate over UVB lighting stalls here for many species. If you deprive a chameleon or a bearded dragon of UVB lighting they will develop significant disease and/or die. If you do not provide UVB to a properly supplemented leopard gecko.. nothing happens. If you do provide UVB to a leopard gecko, they may have an increase in D3 levels - but there are no reference ranges for what D3 levels are healthy for them, so that is not usable information, and the individuals without UVB do not show signs of illness without UVB.


Levels are being established slowly Gould, Amelia, et al. "Evaluating the physiologic effects of short duration ultraviolet B radiation exposure in leopard geckos (Eublepharis macularius)." _Journal of Herpetological Medicine and Surgery_ 28.1-2 (2018): 34-39.


connorology said:


> The UVB/UVI guidelines for most/all herp species are experimental. In the long run we may find that animals kept under UVB do better in captivity than those who are not. But that has not been demonstrated at this time for a majority of species. Asking newer keepers who don't know what they are doing to try and set up complicated equipment without known safety/efficacy may not be the most practical strategy.


Except these metabolic processes are highly conserved between taxa but testing like xrays demonstrating increased bone density in anurans can be considered indicative of benefits.


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Eurydactylodes said:


> If it works for you, it works for you! I have had some bad experiences keeping my sphaerodactylids with UVB, but my experience is certainly not universal


I'm honestly not trying to interrogate you or question your expertise but I'm interested in what those bad experiences were.
Really not trying to start a debate or anything, I genuinely just want to do what's best for the geckos so the more info and different perspectives available to me the better.
If you have time I would genuinely value hearing about your experiences with UVB and sphaeros/gonatodes.


----------



## connorology (Oct 6, 2018)

Ed said:


> Levels are being established slowly Gould, Amelia, et al. "Evaluating the physiologic effects of short duration ultraviolet B radiation exposure in leopard geckos (Eublepharis macularius)." _Journal of Herpetological Medicine and Surgery_ 28.1-2 (2018): 34-39.
> 
> 
> Except these metabolic processes are highly conserved between taxa but testing like xrays demonstrating increased bone density in anurans can be considered indicative of benefits.


Respectfully, I feel like you're just sort of listing journal article headings but the articles you have listed that I am familiar with don't really say what you're implying they do. Could you maybe clarify what pertinent details you are gleaning from a publication - and why - when listing it? It sort of kills discussion/debate if you list a bunch of articles without an explanation of what your takeaway is. Especially since most of these are behind paywalls and might be challenging for others to obtain - and to reiterate, UVB may well become the standard in the future, but the burden of proof is on those making that argument. It is unlikely hobbyists who do not feel it is necessary are going to figure out how to get paywall protected articles and then do several hours of reading just to understand an allusion made on a forum post. If you make a specific assertion and then provide the citation it is likely going to be easier to understand the position and then fact check it.

The Gould paper you are referencing now was published prior to the Oonincx paper and did not establish reference ranges for D3, it tested baseline levels without UVB and then showed they increased with UVB exposure - but again, without reference ranges that information is not particularly useful. These studies are not showing any _clinical_ benefit. Gould et al also recommended UVB for leopard geckos due to concerns of hypervitaminosis D, but there's no real evidence that this occurs in pet leopard geckos - their cited sources for hypervitaminosis D were studies in panther chameleons and humans. They also noted the risks of sunburn, damage to eyesight, and cancer with UVB and stated that UVB was recommended instead of dietary D3 "until" safe D3 levels had been determined, implying that once the safe regimen had been obtained it might be sufficient to meet the needs of leopard geckos. That position, combined with Oonincx's later conclusion that the D3 supplementation protocol they developed "can meet the vitamin D requirements for growth of this nocturnal gecko, during the first six months of life" does not convince me that UVB is necessary for leopard geckos, or that oral D3 is bad. Quite the opposite. And again my endless disclaimer: this is a comment on the findings of these studies and should not be construed as a position on whether or not to use UVB lighting, there may be wellness/enrichment reasons to use it, and medical benefits that have not yet been studied.

(I have attached the two aforementioned papers for anyone who does not have access)


----------



## Eurydactylodes (Sep 7, 2021)

Louis said:


> I'm honestly not trying to interrogate you or question your expertise but I'm interested in what those bad experiences were.
> Really not trying to start a debate or anything, I genuinely just want to do what's best for the geckos so the more info and different perspectives available to me the better.
> If you have time I would genuinely value hearing about your experiences with UVB and sphaeros/gonatodes.


Absolutely!
A few months ago I added lov-level UVB to a veteran pair of Gonatodes albogularis, and a few Sphaerodactylus enclosures. Of the five enclosures, three (the Gonatodes albogularis, Sphaerodactylus torrei, and Sphaerodactylus argus) pairs developed severe skin issues-peeling skin with wet tissue underneath, dramatic discoloration and difficulty shedding. I removed the UVB after a week, and about two months later, they had all shed out and looked good again (albeit with some scarring that will probably take a few more shed cycles to fully resolve.)
I would love to hear about your success with UVB. Do you provide it to your hatchlings? What benefits do you see?


----------



## Fahad (Aug 25, 2019)

Mw42 said:


> Based on the experience I have setting up that same fixture for Day Geckos in a similar enclosure you're unlikely to see measurable UVB exposure past 16" from the screen. I can't keep P. terribilis here so I don't have any experience with them but I don't think they're climbers are they?


That's good to know. My terribilis all climb daily, as high as they can go. Some more so than others, but they'll tackle steep inclines all the time.


----------



## Chris S (Apr 12, 2016)

Ed said:


> I know you are and hopefully you don't think I'm targeting you but the data on the value of access to UVB continues to expand so it is jarring to see the anti UVB arguments.
> 
> Some comments
> Ed


Not at all!

I don't have much to add to this discussion other than what I have previously posted. My personal experiences are obviously anecdotal, so I don't think they are particularly relevant to a conversation like this.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

connorology said:


> my 25 year old ball python


Interestingly, it may not be entirely entirely clear this species benefits from UVB.



https://bvajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1136/vr.101555






Mw42 said:


> The T12 5% bulb you reference was essentially useless unless the animal could get within 6" of it but we lacked the tools to measure it at a hobbyist level.


That is simply false. 

I kept a green iguana for over 20 years with a primary basking area about 18" off said lamp. This regimen was in place starting after the animal was diagnosed and treated (by a vet) for fairly advanced MBD at a very young age (my first herp pet ever, lots of mistakes) and continued for two decades of apparently acceptable health. Many thousands of iguanas were kept similarly.


----------



## connorology (Oct 6, 2018)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Interestingly, it may not be entirely entirely clear this species benefits from UVB.
> 
> 
> 
> https://bvajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1136/vr.101555


My understanding is that there isn't much (any) evidence ball pythons specifically benefit from UVB in terms of D3 increases- there is decent evidence some species of colubrids can benefit from UVB, and one recent paper that suggests ball pythons may "like" sunbathing - where "like" is defined as increased basking behavior when UVB is provided, though albino animals avoided UVB (I don't have this citation saved - I can try and find it if anyone would like me to). 

As my python is wild type, one paper has suggested basking behavior is increased when D3 is provided, and I have extra UVB bulbs anyway I figured it would make sense to provide UVB for enrichment purposes if nothing else. I have yet to observe any overt basking behavior, but he has only been in the enclosure for a week so I suppose this could change over time. The reason I built his enclosure from scratch is so I could include bioactive and specialized lighting elements and also a retreat into 1990s/00's husbandry in the event the new school husbandry isn't as great as proponents claim. I'm banking on his ability to thermo/UVB regulate and just choose the spot that is best for him. Or travel between them.


----------

