# The Tadpole "Water Change" Experiment



## Gamble

On this forum, I see many discussions & many different methods used by people when it comes to tadpoles & water changes. Many people do water changes frequently, others do not do water changes at all.

I, personally, am one of those people who changes my tadpole water everyday - everyother day.

Due to this, I've decided to do a little experiment.
I'm going to raise one tadpole following my usual routine. The other, I will not do water changes other than removing debris & topping off.

The species of tadpole I will be using are Green Imitators. Both of these tadpoles hatched out on the same day; (12/20/12). They will both be fed the same amount of food, using the same water, at the same temperature, in the same size standard tadpole cup.

I am not planning on testing water chemistry, unless it is viewed to be of importance by you, the viewers.

The goal of this experiment, is to basically determine if there are any VISUAL differences between the two by the time they morph out.

I will periodically post new pictures; (probably once a week?); to share the ongoing results.

If anyone has any input, opinions, or comments during the course of this experiment, please feel free to share.

Now let the games begin! Enjoy.

Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Gamble

DAY 1: 

Here is a picture of the two tadpoles side by side. The tadpole on the left is of the regular water changes. The tadpole on the right is of no water changes.
As of now, I do not notice any differences in size. 
(The one on the right may look smaller, but it is the angle of the way the tadpole is laying in the cup ... in person they are the same size)























Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

Unless this measures the pH, buffering solubles, etc, it would be very variable for everyone involved. If you lower the pH of the water and keep it buffered, you should be able to change the water rarely and get the same results if you had a higher pH and changed it daily. Of course, then phosphates and such come into the equation. Personally, I'd keep a low pH, with water tannins, a little bit of aquatic plants (perhaps floating), and good lighting. 

Though, certainly this couldn't hurt and will only help guide people towards the best way to raise tadpoles.


----------



## Gamble

Blue_Pumilio said:


> Unless this measures the pH, buffering solubles, etc, it would be very variable for everyone involved. If you lower the pH of the water and keep it buffered, you should be able to change the water rarely and get the same results if you had a higher pH and changed it daily. Of course, then phosphates and such come into the equation. Personally, I'd keep a low pH, with water tannins, a little bit of aquatic plants (perhaps floating), and good lighting.


My water is in a 35g barrel. I boil oak leaves and fill the can to the top. I also add black water extract & use a water dechlorinator. Both tadpole's water will come from this batch so they will both be receiving the same water.

They are both on the same shelf, next to eachother, under a 12 hr lighting timer. (I have plants growing on the same rack, on a shelf above them.

I do not use any kind of plants or physical leaf in their cups. (Or any of my other tads).

Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## drewman1962

Looking forward to see how this turns out.


----------



## Gamble

drewman1962 said:


> Looking forward to see how this turns out.


Thx Drew;
Me too!


----------



## therizman2

I like it! Saves me the trouble of trying this out


----------



## IEatBugs

It will be interesting to see what happens. My guess is that they will be the same size when they morph out.


----------



## Gamble

IEatBugs said:


> It will be interesting to see what happens. My guess is that they will be the same size when they morph out.


That's my guess too.
Some people say w/o water changes they morph bigger, sooner ... etc ... and people that do water changes say the same. (I am one of those people). So in all honesty, I was gonna do this for my own personal reasons & then decided that this should be something to share with everyone.


----------



## hypostatic

Gamble said:


> My water is in a 35g barrel. I boil oak leaves and fill the can to the top. I also add black water extract & use a water dechlorinator. Both tadpole's water will come from this batch so they will both be receiving the same water.
> 
> They are both on the same shelf, next to eachother, under a 12 hr lighting timer. (I have plants growing on the same rack, on a shelf above them.
> 
> I do not use any kind of plants or physical leaf in their cups. (Or any of my other tads).
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


The experiment setup seems good. From what you described it seems that the only variation between the two cups are the water changes, and the tadpoles themselves.

When you say that you ill be determining the visual differences between the tads when they morph out, what will you be looking for specifically? Will you also try to compare the sizes/masses of the frogs?


----------



## eos

I'll be tagging along...


----------



## Gamble

hypostatic said:


> The experiment setup seems good. From what you described it seems that the only variation between the two cups are the water changes, and the tadpoles themselves.
> 
> When you say that you ill be determining the visual differences between the tads when they morph out, what will you be looking for specifically? Will you also try to compare the sizes/masses of the frogs?


Yea pretty much those will be the only differences. 

I'm going to be looking at size & color. I'm also going to watch to see if milestones happen at noticeably different times ... ie: back leg growth, front arm development, time of tail absorbtion ... etc ... and see if there's any substantial differences. 

Unfortunately, I have no way of actually measuring weight/mass other than visual inspection.


----------



## ZookeeperDoug

From a purely scientific standpoint, I think you need a much larger sample size. Two tads, one in each group, doesn't make a very accurate experiment. It's been a while since I took biostatistics, but I think you would need at least 10 in each group to show statistically significant differences, and probably 100 to really be definitive.

Of course this is probably well out of the scope of your intentinions, just providing a sceptic point of view. We may see something interesting from these two tads, but realistically the sample size is much to small to determine any significant differences.


----------



## Gamble

ZookeeperDoug said:


> From a purely scientific standpoint, I think you need a much larger sample size. Two tads, one in each group, doesn't make a very accurate experiment. It's been a while since I took biostatistics, but I think you would need at least 10 in each group to show statistically significant differences, and probably 100 to really be definitive.
> 
> Of course this is probably well out of the scope of your intentinions, just providing a sceptic point of view. We may see something interesting from these two tads, but realistically the sample size is much to small to determine any significant differences.


I agree.

But as you said, this is just a skeptic point of view, as I am an advocate of water changes. My sample size of doing water changes is plenty as I have successfully morphed out 100+ tads using my current method. 
The sample size of NOT doing water changes is indeed lacking, but I do not have enough tadpoles at my disposal to accomplish that task currently.

Therefore I figured I could atleast show some comparison by using two tads of the same species, hatched on the same date to show a more immediate outcome & comparison.
I did my best to control alot of the variables tho.

This isn't really an experiment in a scientific aspect, but moreso just an experiment of personal interest that I've decided to share with the hobby instead of keeping it to myself.


----------



## Ed

Ian Hiler showed pictures of hundreds of tadpoles being reared without changes.. they used the mid sized plastic pet carriers with at least a quart of water for each tadpole. They saw no size differences. 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Gamble

Ed said:


> Ian Hiler showed pictures of hundreds of tadpoles being reared without changes.. they used the mid sized plastic pet carriers with at least a quart of water for each tadpole. They saw no size differences.
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


I suspected that would be the case. 
Was there any documentation of speed of metamorphosis ... etc?

Has there been any health implications, good or bad, between the two methods?


----------



## Ed

Gamble said:


> I suspected that would be the case.
> Was there any documentation of speed of metamorphosis ... etc?
> 
> Has there been any health implications, good or bad, between the two methods?


There are number of different methods of doing it ranging in water volume to number of tadpoles but in general those doing it in single tadpole containers saw no variations in size/time to metamorphosis that could not be accounted for by temperature variation. 

Ed


----------



## bobrez

Ed said:


> Ian Hiler showed pictures of hundreds of tadpoles being reared without changes.. they used the mid sized plastic pet carriers with at least a quart of water for each tadpole. They saw no size differences.
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


I remember that thread  does anyone have a link so studies can be compared


----------



## srrrio

Gamble said:


> I, personally, am one of those people who changes my tadpole water everyday - everyother day.


Gosh for you sake, I hope you find no difference in your experiment. Changing 30 tadpole containers, say at 1 minute each =30 minutes a day, plus all the other frog maintenance stuff, that is a commitment! 

I am sort of curious what led you go about it that way?


----------



## Gamble

srrrio said:


> Gosh for you sake, I hope you find no difference in your experiment. Changing 30 tadpole containers, say at 1 minute each =30 minutes a day, plus all the other frog maintenance stuff, that is a commitment!
> 
> I am sort of curious what led you go about it that way?


You have no idea! Before I cut down on my collection, at one point, it took me 3 hrs every day between tadpoles, eggs, feeding, froglets, cleaning ... etc. (Which is what led me to cut down). I went from 15 tanks (half of which were breeding) to the 6 I have now.

I was lucky enough to have a great mentor, (Mike Novy), who has taught me alot. I used to go to his house once or twice a week and help him with his collection in exchange for knowledge. (His frog room is awesome btw). It was something he does as part of his routine that I decided to make a part of my own routine.

Basically, the short answer is ... thats what I was taught to do. 

That's what worked for him, that's what works for me ... if it isnt broke, then dont fix it


----------



## Ed

srrrio said:


> Gosh for you sake, I hope you find no difference in your experiment. Changing 30 tadpole containers, say at 1 minute each =30 minutes a day, plus all the other frog maintenance stuff, that is a commitment!
> 
> I am sort of curious what led you go about it that way?


There are faster ways to do it... For example you set up over a sink and use a fine meshed fish net.. The tadpole and water gets dumped into the net, the cup is refilled with aged (temperature acclimated/dissolved gas acclimated) water and the tadpole is placed into the new cup. The net is turned over so the next cup washes any caught debris free.... Seconds per tadpole. 

In my early days at the zoo, I used to manage hundreds of tadpoles and Ambystoma larva per day.... 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Gamble

Ed said:


> There are faster ways to do it... For example you set up over a sink and use a fine meshed fish net.. The tadpole and water gets dumped into the net, the cup is refilled with aged (temperature acclimated/dissolved gas acclimated) water and the tadpole is placed into the new cup. The net is turned over so the next cup washes any caught debris free.... Seconds per tadpole.
> 
> In my early days at the zoo, I used to manage hundreds of tadpoles and Ambystoma larva per day....
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


Yea thats smart.

A way I cut it down is by changing my water changes to every other day instead of every day. I also stopped using individual water jugs and use a 35g trash can as a water bucket with an airstone in the bottom for surface agitation. Now as im doing water changes I just dunk the jug to fill it instead of having to fill 60 jugs at a time.


----------



## Ed

I still use a 35 gallon trash can to keep water ready.... (RO in this case).. At the zoo I used two 35 gallons for the area with the dendrobatids and a two more for the area with the Ambystoma larvae. 

Ed


----------



## Gamble

Ed said:


> I still use a 35 gallon trash can to keep water ready.... (RO in this case).. At the zoo I used two 35 gallons for the area with the dendrobatids and a two more for the area with the Ambystoma larvae.
> 
> Ed


It makes things ALOT easier when it comes to water changes.


----------



## Gamble

DAY 5:
















Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## hypnoticaquatic

if you have a tds meter it would help to see how much waste there actually putting out w/ that volume of water. having seen enough with fish and shrimp there is a easy correlation of the two but unless the tds crept several hundred and never fixed the differences were minimal. if u did test the tds it might be helpful for others to see if they need to change the water or if it can creep up to a specific tds. nice work on this experiment


----------



## drewman1962

Hoping for a day 10 update with pictures. Like to see how different the water is looking at this stage and if you see any difference in the sizes.


----------



## Gamble

drewman1962 said:


> Hoping for a day 10 update with pictures. Like to see how different the water is looking at this stage and if you see any difference in the sizes.


The water is getting a little bit cloudier, but for the most part it looks the same. Also, the tads still look the same and are both starting to sprout their back legs.


----------



## Ed

Nick,

If you want to continue the experiment onto a second group for some real interesting results, when the tadpoles metamorph, just rinse out the containers where you didn't change the water and refresh with new water and a tadpole from the same parents. The established cup will already have a biofilter going as well as a established group of aufwuchs and you may see a greater difference from those cups... 

If you had the kit tracking water quality between the two may also paint you an interesting picture... 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Gamble

Ed said:


> Nick,
> 
> If you want to continue the experiment onto a second group for some real interesting results, when the tadpoles metamorph, just rinse out the containers where you didn't change the water and refresh with new water and a tadpole from the same parents. The established cup will already have a biofilter going as well as a established group of aufwuchs and you may see a greater difference from those cups...
> 
> If you had the kit tracking water quality between the two may also paint you an interesting picture...
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


Hey Ed -
That's a good idea. I will do that.
How many times can the same cup be used in that way? 

Also, I will look to see if I still have my API Freshwater master test kit; if I can find it I can test every water parameter and post the results along with the pictures.


----------



## Ed

A friend of mine reuses them until a tadpole dies in the cup which is when it is cleaned and disinfected before reuse.... so potentially multiple generations. He swears by that method. 

As for the water tests, make sure your reagents aren't expired as that can give you some funky results. 

Ed


----------



## Gamble

DAY 10:





























It's hard to tell from the pictures, but the water in the Non water change cup is definitely starting to get cloudy. 

I also tested the water with an API Master Test Kit as suggested and here are the results:

BASE WATER:
Ammonia: 0 - .25 ppm
Nitrites: 0 ppm
Nitrates: 0 ppm
PH: 7.2 - 7.6

WATER CHANGE:
Ammonia: 0 - .25 ppm
Nitrites: 0 ppm
Nitrates: 0 ppm
PH: 7.2 - 7.6

NO WATER CHANGE:
Ammonia: 8 ppm
Nitrites: 0 ppm
Nitrates: 0 ppm
PH: 7.2 - 7.6


Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Gamble

DAY 15:






















As you can see, the water is beginning to get pretty cloudy. 
Size wise, there is still no noticeable difference. 

Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

No tannins? Leaves?


----------



## Gamble

Gamble said:


> My water is in a 35g barrel. I boil oak leaves and fill the can to the top. I also add black water extract & use a water dechlorinator.
> 
> I do not use any kind of plants or physical leaf in their cups. (Or any of my other tads).
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


You've mentioned this before ... here was my answer ^

Yes tannins; no physical leafs.


----------



## daggekko

Do you have any issues with any species of the thumbs doing 100% water changes on the tadpoles? I have had a couple species of frogs with tiny tadpoles in the past that when given a 100% water change the tadpoles died rapidly. I was using aged water at room temperature. Just trying to do some learning

Neat experiment too!


----------



## Blue_Pumilio

My short term memory. 

The water just looked so clear...my mixtures are always so dark, though I use peat moss instead. 




Gamble said:


> You've mentioned this before ... here was my answer ^
> 
> Yes tannins; no physical leafs.


----------



## Gamble

daggekko said:


> Do you have any issues with any species of the thumbs doing 100% water changes on the tadpoles? I have had a couple species of frogs with tiny tadpoles in the past that when given a 100% water change the tadpoles died rapidly. I was using aged water at room temperature. Just trying to do some learning
> 
> Neat experiment too!


I rarely have a tadpole death. Maybe 2% mortality rate; if that. 
This includes thumbs & other species.

Aging water? Does that mean that you do not use any type of water conditioner? 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't aged water still leave potentially unwanted minerals in the water, depending on it's makeup?

If so, maybe that is part of the reason you are having problems?


----------



## Gamble

Blue_Pumilio said:


> My short term memory.
> 
> The water just looked so clear...my mixtures are always so dark, though I use peat moss instead.


It's cool ... I forgive you 
My water is a little darker than the pictures make it look, but it is still light. 
But you're right, peat does tend to make it a little darker.


----------



## daggekko

Yeah I have jugs sitting on a shelf for a few days before I actually use them. Never ever had an issue with any frogs doing it this way, and so far my 1 tadpole I can find in the enclosure is doing well. I've been misting more so the bromeliad cup will overflow a bit giving fresh water. 

When you say you boil oak leaves, do you end up boiling 35 gallons of water or just boil the leaves for cleaning/leaching purposes? And black water extract-I've seen the tetra brand at some point. Do you just follow the instructions on the bottle? And I suppose I should ask about everything, are you using RO water or using the dechlorinator as a means to rid the water of (obviously chlorine) and minerals?


----------



## Gamble

daggekko said:


> Yeah I have jugs sitting on a shelf for a few days before I actually use them. Never ever had an issue with any frogs doing it this way, and so far my 1 tadpole I can find in the enclosure is doing well. I've been misting more so the bromeliad cup will overflow a bit giving fresh water.
> 
> When you say you boil oak leaves, do you end up boiling 35 gallons of water or just boil the leaves for cleaning/leaching purposes? And black water extract-I've seen the tetra brand at some point. Do you just follow the instructions on the bottle? And I suppose I should ask about everything, are you using RO water or using the dechlorinator as a means to rid the water of (obviously chlorine) and minerals?


I boil the leaves on the stove, (about 2 gal), and dump the whole thing into the 35g barrel, (for the tannins) then fill it up the rest of the way with dechlorinated tap water. I add about a capful of blackwater extract (for the Vitamin B) for every 10g. 
The brand I use is called Tropical Science - Amazon Rain. It's about $16 for a 14.5oz bottle.
It contains Vitamin B2, B6, & B12 in addition to Vitamin C.
The dechlorinator is API Stress Coat+.
I also have an air stone in the barrel for surface agitation.


----------



## jeosbo01

Gamble said:


> I rarely have a tadpole death. Maybe 2% mortality rate; if that.
> This includes thumbs & other species.
> 
> Aging water? Does that mean that you do not use any type of water conditioner?
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't aged water still leave potentially unwanted minerals in the water, depending on it's makeup?
> 
> If so, maybe that is part of the reason you are having problems?


To my knowledge (over 20 years of fish keeping, 10 or so also keeping frogs) Stress Coat + will only remove a minimal amount of minerals (if any at all) from most tap water. The biggest issue with just letting water sit out to age is that most municipalities now use chloramine to treat water. Unlike chlorine chloramine is fairly stable and tends to hang out in the water MUCH longer then chlorine.

I used Stress Coat products for many years but switched to either Prime or home-made dechlorinator a few years ago (normally Prime, sometimes I buy the stuff to mix my own though). I was never anything but pleased with Stress Coat in most of my tanks and only switched because or anecdotal evidence that it caused breathing issues with some of the more delicate anabantoids I was working with.

At any rate, I am very much enjoying this thread!


----------



## kitcolebay

Thanks Nick for doing this! Really interesting to follow and the conversations it leads to. I haven't "established" my means of raising tads yet and trying to absorb what I can in the meantime. It's interesting to learn all the different methods involved along with the potential pros and cons of each.

Thanks, Chris


----------



## Gamble

Yes, chloramines ... thank you.

I've never heard anything bad about StressCoat. (I came from the fish hobby also).
In fact, its ironic that you said that bc I switched from Prime to SC+ as I was under the impression SC+ was a better product. Who knows. 

Either way, I'm glad you enjoy the thread.


----------



## Gamble

kitcolebay said:


> Thanks Nick for doing this! Really interesting to follow and the conversations it leads to. I haven't "established" my means of raising tads yet and trying to absorb what I can in the meantime. It's interesting to learn all the different methods involved along with the potential pros and cons of each.
> 
> Thanks, Chris


Hey Chris-
I'm glad that you find this thread helpful. 
No thx necessary tho ... I do what I do to do my part


----------



## daggekko

I've actually done quite a bit in the fish hobby myself. I tend to try not to use chemicals with my frogs and geckos though. I am on the steep learning curve again with frogs(since I recently got back into them) though so I am glad I came across this thread. I always prefer prime to stress coat so I will probably go ahead and use it with my frogs. The biggest problem(I've worked in a few different pet shops for quite some time) with the products is the customers don't follow the directions and actually WAY overdose the stuff. For those with fish, have you ever seen some stores use water conditioner in the bag when you buy fish?? I cannot tolerate that because a lot of the employees will give 2 or 3 squirts for a little bag which is over the edge of overdosing. Just saying since jeosbo01 said he noticed breathing issues. I've heard stress coat actually in way stings/stresses the fish out to make the produce the slime coat. Could be completely wrong but I've always like seachem products better. 

All this being said, sorry for hijacking the thread to a degree. I am definately enjoying this thread and can't wait for the next update!


----------



## Gamble

I've been debating on using a zoomed product I have stashed away called: Reptisafe. It supposedly adds electrolytes & trace elements of calcium to the water too. 
I figure between this & the blackwater vitamins, my tadpoles should do even better.


----------



## jeosbo01

daggekko said:


> I've actually done quite a bit in the fish hobby myself. I tend to try not to use chemicals with my frogs and geckos though. I am on the steep learning curve again with frogs(since I recently got back into them) though so I am glad I came across this thread. I always prefer prime to stress coat so I will probably go ahead and use it with my frogs. The biggest problem(I've worked in a few different pet shops for quite some time) with the products is the customers don't follow the directions and actually WAY overdose the stuff. For those with fish, have you ever seen some stores use water conditioner in the bag when you buy fish?? I cannot tolerate that because a lot of the employees will give 2 or 3 squirts for a little bag which is over the edge of overdosing. Just saying since jeosbo01 said he noticed breathing issues. I've heard stress coat actually in way stings/stresses the fish out to make the produce the slime coat. Could be completely wrong but I've always like seachem products better.
> 
> All this being said, sorry for hijacking the thread to a degree. I am definately enjoying this thread and can't wait for the next update!


I too have seen people WAY overdose on both SC and Prime but can assure you that is not the cause of the issues I observed. It is entirely possible that there was really no issue at all, but when an $800 (at the time) breeding pair of Betta macrostoma acts distressed after a small water change (of temp, pH and hardness matched water) you start looking at options. I also noticed issues in several other wild Betta species and the problems seemed to resolve when I switched to Prime.

James


----------



## daggekko

Gamble said:


> I've been debating on using a zoomed product I have stashed away called: Reptisafe. It supposedly adds electrolytes & trace elements of calcium to the water too.
> I figure between this & the blackwater vitamins, my tadpoles should do even better.


Hey, I looked at some products today and noticed that Reptisafe claims to change the PH. I believe it says it lowers it. Thought it might be worth mentioning.


----------



## Gamble

daggekko said:


> Hey, I looked at some products today and noticed that Reptisafe claims to change the PH. I believe it says it lowers it. Thought it might be worth mentioning.


Yea i think it says it on the bottle. I'll have to check. 
The black water extract does too. 

With the volume of water I'm working with tho and the fact that it sits and im only adding about 5 gal a week of new water, I don't think it will make a big difference. (I hope).

Thx for the heads up buddy.


----------



## Ed

Gamble said:


> I've been debating on using a zoomed product I have stashed away called: Reptisafe. It supposedly adds electrolytes & trace elements of calcium to the water too.
> I figure between this & the blackwater vitamins, my tadpoles should do even better.


Not necessarily... there are reasons why blackwater streams are low in the dissolved mineral and have a low hardness like that seen in "hard" water.. the reason is that the humic acids (which are what colors the water) react with carbonate, magnesium ions and carbonate ions (and a number of others).... producing carbon dioxide and water (from the carbonate reacting with the humic acids) and humates, and calcium and magnesium humates are insoluble, so they precipitate out of solution. Other metal ions may end up in chelation complexes which can reduce thier bioavailability. 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Gamble

Ed said:


> Not necessarily... there are reasons why blackwater streams are low in the dissolved mineral and have a low hardness like that seen in "hard" water.. the reason is that the humic acids (which are what colors the water) react with carbonate, magnesium ions and carbonate ions (and a number of others).... producing carbon dioxide and water (from the carbonate reacting with the humic acids) and humates, and calcium and magnesium humates are insoluble, so they precipitate out of solution. Other metal ions may end up in chelation complexes which can reduce thier bioavailability.
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed


Hi Ed -
Thx for the information ... but can I have that in plain, noneducated simple english for dummies please? It was like I was reading a foreign language  I have no clue what you just said.


----------



## Ed

> Okay.. hmm lets see.... humic acids are what you are getting when you boil the leaves.. for example tannic acids are a kind of humic acid (a number of them are from the breakdown of lignin (look it up).... H
> 
> In the simplest terms
> humic acid + H20 reversiably reacts with the water to produce humates (base form) and H2O3+ (hydronium ion)...
> H2O3+ plus carbonate (HCO3- and CO3--) yields H20 + CO2...
> Humate (base form) reacts with magnesium, calcium to form salts that do not dissolve in water, removing them from being available in the water column...
> with some metal ions chelation means that in solution, there end up being multiple humate ions bind to the metal ion in such a way that the aggregate is stable (at least in solution) and it can remove the ion from reacting with other molecules (which can prevent it from being available for biological reactions). A classic theory of this is EDTA chelation therapy for intravenous treatment of lead poisoning.
> 
> Does that help?
> 
> Ed
> 
> PS For a good discussion on these topics I suggest Ecology of the Planted Aquarium, Echinodorus Press.


Correction... everywhere I typed H203, it should be H3O... My mistake... 

Some comments 

Ed 
.


----------



## papafrogger

Ed said:


> Okay.. hmm lets see.... humic acids are what you are getting when you boil the leaves.. for example tannic acids are a kind of humic acid (a number of them are from the breakdown of lignin (look it up).... H
> 
> In the simplest terms
> humic acid + H20 reversiably reacts with the water to produce humates (base form) and H2O3+ (hydronium ion)...
> H2O3+ plus carbonate (HCO3- and CO3--) yields H20 + CO2...
> Humate (base form) reacts with magnesium, calcium to form salts that do not dissolve in water, removing them from being available in the water column...
> with some metal ions chelation means that in solution, there end up being multiple humate ions bind to the metal ion in such a way that the aggregate is stable (at least in solution) and it can remove the ion from reacting with other molecules (which can prevent it from being available for biological reactions). A classic theory of this is EDTA chelation therapy for intravenous treatment of lead poisoning.
> 
> Does that help?
> 
> Ed
> 
> PS For a good discussion on these topics I suggest Ecology of the Planted Aquarium, Echinodorus Press.


Isnt it amazing how even when Ed simplifies something it still feels like you stepped into a college lecture?


----------



## Gamble

Ed said:


> Correction... everywhere I typed H203, it should be H3O... My mistake...
> 
> Some comments
> 
> Ed
> .


Ok I understood the first sentence atleast ... and tried piecing together the rest, but let me take a stab ... 
Are you basically saying that using Reptisafe with the calcium mixed with the tannin water could potentially become a poisonous mixture per sey?

Or did I misunderstand?


----------



## Gamble

papajuggalo said:


> Isnt it amazing how even when Ed simplifies something it still feels like you stepped into a college lecture?


Yea pretty much. Lol.


----------



## daggekko

Gamble said:


> Hi Ed -
> Thx for the information ... but can I have that in plain, noneducated simple english for dummies please? It was like I was reading a foreign language  I have no clue what you just said.


HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH. Oh man I'm still laughing. I understood it but started wondering how on earth anybody manages to learn things like that in the first place!!


----------



## Gamble

daggekko said:


> HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH. Oh man I'm still laughing. I understood it but started wondering how on earth anybody manages to learn things like that in the first place!!


Ok ... well then you translate. What did he say? Lol


----------



## daggekko

I like how Ed's second attempt made me feel like an idiot. Thanks Ed


----------



## daggekko

The tannis do something fancy in the water which causes the minerals you are so worried about to basically become null. The bioavailability should refer to the new mixtures not being able to be used up by living things. 

Ed did my dumbed down version come out correctly?


----------



## Ed

daggekko said:


> The tannis do something fancy in the water which causes the minerals you are so worried about to basically become null. The bioavailability should refer to the new mixtures not being able to be used up by living things.
> 
> Ed did my dumbed down version come out correctly?


In essence yes.... except it really isn't something fancy... 

Nick it doesn't form anything toxic, it just really reduces the calcium (or a number of other ions) from being readily available for the tadpoles. It is probably not worth the money to try and add a water conditioner that includes things like calcium. 

And it is high school chem..... 

Ed


----------



## daggekko

The only thing I remember about high school chemistry is thermite. Which when the teacher set off the reactions almost caught the ceiling on fire!!


----------



## Gamble

Ed said:


> And it is high school chem.....
> 
> Ed


Sorry I never took that course. Lol

My thing was history. 
I was a bad seed as a kid and grew up in inner city ... the only chemistry I ever learned was of illegal nature ;-) jk.

But I'm trying to keep up with all you smart biology chemist scientist guys ;-)


----------



## B-NICE

Great thread, I've passed on the water changes. The water is getting rather cloudy, and the java moss seems to be making algae on the side of the cups.


----------



## Gamble

B-NICE said:


> Great thread, I've passed on the water changes. The water is getting rather cloudy, and the java moss seems to be making algae on the side of the cups.


You'll get algae without using java moss. 

I dont use anything in my cups and have algae in alot of them.


----------



## B-NICE

ok cool my varadero tad is about a month or so old and the back legs have popped the front look like they are about to come...


----------



## ALLEN HUNTER

All I've ever used is reptisafe and have had nothing but success. I'm pleased with it. 





Gamble said:


> I've been debating on using a zoomed product I have stashed away called: Reptisafe. It supposedly adds electrolytes & trace elements of calcium to the water too.
> I figure between this & the blackwater vitamins, my tadpoles should do even better.


----------



## easternversant

Ed said:


> And it is high school chem.....
> 
> Ed


Unfortunately not anymore. I've noticed a very significant decline in the quality of secondary education since I graduated high school--and I'm not that old. In my experience most college freshman don't understand why they even need citations in papers....

Hijack ended, please continue


----------



## Gamble

ALLEN HUNTER said:


> All I've ever used is reptisafe and have had nothing but success. I'm pleased with it.


That's good. However, I don't think Ed what was saying that we _can't_ use it, just that it was pointless to use it if it's for the benefits of the calcium bc the tannins make the calcium unusable for the tadpoles. 
Right Ed?

I'm happy to hear that you are indeed successful though Allen


----------



## Ed

Gamble said:


> That's good. However, I don't think Ed what was saying that we _can't_ use it, just that it was pointless to use it if it's for the benefits of the calcium bc the tannins make the calcium unusable for the tadpoles.
> Right Ed?


Correct, don't count on it doing anything for the tadpoles.. 

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Gamble

DAY 24:

It is barely noticeable, but the tadpole WITH water changes is ever so slightly bigger than the tadpole without water changes. 

I'm not sure if it is noticeable to you, the viewers ... so let me know if it's detectable from the pictures.
As I said, it is barely apparent. 






























Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Pumilio

For me it seems that the left one is bigger.

Nice project by the way. 

So many ways of raring tadpoles. 

Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Gamble

Pumilio said:


> For me it seems that the left one is bigger.
> 
> Nice project by the way.
> 
> So many ways of raring tadpoles.
> 
> Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2


You are Correct Doug. 

In all of my pictures, the cup WITH water changes will always be on the left & WITHOUT on the right. 
Thx, I appreciate it.


----------



## goof901

Pumilio said:


> For me it seems that the left one is bigger.
> 
> Nice project by the way.
> 
> So many ways of raring tadpoles.
> 
> Sent from my GT-N7100 using Tapatalk 2


I agree. it is just a bit longer, and the body seems a bit fatter too.


----------



## drewman1962

I see ther slight difference also...So, Nick. With what you are seeing...do you think you may cut your water changes down to once a week or maybe even every other week.


----------



## Gamble

drewman1962 said:


> I see ther slight difference also...So, Nick. With what you are seeing...do you think you may cut your water changes down to once a week or maybe even every other week.


Drew -
No not at all. If this continues to go the direction it is appearing to head, it just justifies my argument that doing regular water changes results in bigger/healthier tads/froglets ... I'm an advocate of water changes. Always have been.


----------



## goof901

So you change the water everyday? and how much water? sorry if this has already been covered, i couldn't find it.


----------



## Gamble

goof901 said:


> So you change the water everyday? and how much water? sorry if this has already been covered, i couldn't find it.


I change the water everyday - every other day. I do 100% water changes & I feed every water change.


----------



## ZookeeperDoug

Gamble said:


> Drew -
> No not at all. If this continues to go the direction it is appearing to head, it just justifies my argument that doing regular water changes results in bigger/healthier tads/froglets ... I'm an advocate of water changes. Always have been.


I'm an advocate of water changes and do them myself as well, but I see a pretty decent degree of variability in the size of the froglets that morph out and all my frogs recieve regular partial water exchanges. I find it hard to nessesarly say that based on two tadpoles reared one with each methods that any conclusion can be made.

I'm curious what other factors are you controling? Are both water volumes kept the same, same amount of food for each tad each time? Any other factors that could contribute to the difference?


----------



## Gamble

ZookeeperDoug said:


> I'm an advocate of water changes and do them myself as well, but I see a pretty decent degree of variability in the size of the froglets that morph out and all my frogs recieve regular partial water exchanges. I find it hard to nessesarly say that based on two tadpoles reared one with each methods that any conclusion can be made.
> 
> I'm curious what other factors are you controling? Are both water volumes kept the same, same amount of food for each tad each time? Any other factors that could contribute to the difference?


Water volume, water & room temperature, amount of light and amount of food is all kept the same. Age of tadpoles were also the same.

I plan on doing a second round like Ed suggested once these morph out.


----------



## us13fox

I stopped over to Gamble's today and got a good first hand look at the experiment, and I will have to say that the water change one is slightly bigger than the non water change. It's hard to notice until you see them in "for real life".


----------



## scoy

This is a very cool little science ecperiment. I always think about these things another one i was thinking about is temp Id like to see a few tads grown in different temp waters to see if this effects sex and other things. I know with alligators temp plays a big roll.


----------



## Gamble

scoy said:


> i was thinking about is temp Id like to see a few tads grown in different temp waters to see if this effects sex and other things. I know with alligators temp plays a big roll.


THAT would be an interesting experiment ... but would require an insane sample size of tadpoles/species.


----------



## Pumilio

Gamble - did you change all of the water each time? or just parts of it.


----------



## scoy

This is a very long thread and hard to keep up with, but I'm pretty sure he said he changes it 100%.


----------



## Gamble

Gamble said:


> I change the water everyday - every other day. I do 100% water changes & I feed every water change.


10 characters


----------



## Pumilio

Hehe. Hard to read on my mobile sometimes 

Sent from my Galaxy Note II


----------



## Gamble

Pumilio said:


> Hehe. Hard to read on my mobile sometimes
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Note II


It's cool lol. I have the same phone ... and the screen is huge, so there's no excuse


----------



## Pumilio

I wondered since i got 4 tadpoles from unkown species of ranitomeya that has been sitting in the same water with refill. 

Think its safe to move them over in new tadpole water? 


Sent from my Galaxy Note II


----------



## Gamble

Pumilio said:


> I wondered since i got 4 tadpoles from unkown species of ranitomeya that has been sitting in the same water with refill.
> 
> Think its safe to move them over in new tadpole water?
> 
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Note II


If you're gonna do, do it slowly. 
You may need to acclimate them like you do fish.


----------



## Dendro Dave

Interesting... I'm in favor of as little work as possible though so I'd always let mine morph out in tank, or had a few little 10gals set up with a bunch of easy aquatic plants and a filter. 

If they need a home after the experiment let me know  ...so many empty vivs to fill.


----------



## Gamble

DAY 30:






















Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Gamble

Dendro Dave said:


> If they need a home after the experiment let me know  ...so many empty vivs to fill.


What did you have in mind? 



Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Dendro Dave

Gamble said:


> What did you have in mind?
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


Well I'm unemployed, living on some savings, credit, and family generosity... so much more then shipping would be out of my price range ;(


----------



## FrogBoyMike

Not sure if you covered this already but i couldn't find it;
what temp do you prefer to keep your tad water and do you keep them under lights or no direct light
I've been keeping mine between 75-80 

also is there a reason you choose not to keep leaves or moss in the water?
I only ask because most of mine seam to enjoy hiding under the almond leaves as well as munch on them as they get older

-Mike


----------



## scoy

Gamble dosent mess around he dosent deal with a gallon here and there hes got 35gs of specially formulated tad water.


----------



## Gamble

FrogBoyMike said:


> Not sure if you covered this already but i couldn't find it;
> what temp do you prefer to keep your tad water and do you keep them under lights or no direct light
> I've been keeping mine between 75-80
> 
> also is there a reason you choose not to keep leaves or moss in the water?
> I only ask because most of mine seam to enjoy hiding under the almond leaves as well as munch on them as they get older
> 
> -Mike


My "frog room/area" is in the sublevel of my home. (I live in a split level). Its a bit cooler down there & the room temp is between 70-71°F during the winter. I have not seen any adverse effects in their growth or morph out time due to this.

The tads are kept under lights but not directly. They are on the 2nd shelf of a rack. The top shelf has plastic bins full of plants, so the light shines thru but its not alot & does not shine on the tads directly.

I do not add any moss or leaves bc it makes doing daily water changes more difficult.
Besides, it's not a necessity to have those things. 

If it's the "munching" you're concerned about, there's plenty of algae and bacterial film for them to feed on.


----------



## Dendro Dave

Gamble said:


> My "frog room/area" is in the sublevel of my home. (I live in a split level). Its a bit cooler down there & the room temp is between 70-71°F during the winter. I have not seen any adverse effects in their growth or morph out time due to this.
> 
> The tads are kept under lights but not directly. They are on the 2nd shelf of a rack. The top shelf has plastic bins full of plants, so the light shines thru but its not alot & does not shine on the tads directly.
> 
> I do not add any moss or leaves bc it makes doing daily water changes more difficult.
> Besides, it's not a necessity to have those things.
> 
> If it's the "munching" you're concerned about, there's plenty of algae and bacterial film for them to feed on.


Mines my living room... at least 7 tanks ranging from 18-75 gallons surround me. Most in desperate need of remodel since with hardly any frogs I let them go to hell. 

I found before I had Echo and was using her room as my frog room, I didn't get back there much. It was like...feed/mist, check on them...Ok back to my life. I like having them in my bedroom/living room...they get more attention, and I get more enjoyment. Plus my tanks weren't as nice then as they were later when I got better at viv building (and they were up and running with frogs in them), so it didn't seem like such a shame to have them hidden away in the back room.


----------



## srrrio

Gamble said:


> I do not add any moss or leaves bc it makes doing daily water changes more difficult.
> Besides, it's not a necessity to have those things.


That is the thing though, it is not a "necessity" to do water changes either


----------



## Gamble

srrrio said:


> That is the thing though, it is not a "necessity" to do water changes either


That's a matter of opinion 
To me, it is a necessity.


----------



## JPccusa

srrrio said:


> That is the thing though, it is not a "necessity" to do water changes either





Gamble said:


> That's a matter of a opinion
> To me, it is a necessity.


I don't know about necessity (tads survive either way), but this experiment will help to determine which way is better.


----------



## srrrio

I understand what the experiment is about, I just worry when we make generalized statements!

Although, since the subject of leaves/moss has been brought up again, I wonder if there is some value in the tads being able to seek shelter, just as they will when they become froglets? 
I put oak, or almond with any tads I raise outside the tank, and they generally like to rest underneath, on top of, or beside. They usually dart for cover when I disturb them.
I see this behavior as closer to how it should be in nature, and therefore a good thing.


----------



## Gamble

srrrio said:


> I understand what the experiment is about, I just worry when we make generalized statements!
> 
> Although, since the subject of leaves/moss has been brought up again, I wonder if there is some value in the tads being able to seek shelter, just as they will when they become froglets?
> I put oak, or almond with any tads I raise outside the tank, and they generally like to rest underneath, on top of, or beside. They usually dart for cover when I disturb them.
> I see this behavior as closer to how it should be in nature, and therefore a good thing.


Other than proven factors, (ie. Humidity, temp ... etc ), everything we do is generalized. That's why there are no right or wrongs. Many different approaches work for many different people. 

As stated before, I do what I do bc I was taught to do it that way by the individual that mentored me. It works & it's successful ... as is your way; for you.


----------



## Dendro Dave

One thing I'm not sure a lot of people are aware of is that small ponds, or tad cups etc...etc... When filled up, and regularly topped off will go through a little nitrogen cycle like our vivs/aquariums, and especially with live plants, some rock or wood in there as surface area for friendly bacteria and with the filtering action of plants they will eventually become a pretty stable environment. 

Basically it goes like this.... Put water in a bowl, it is fresh for a couple days...then it gets stagnate and you start to get bacteria blooms, ammonia / nitrogen imbalances ect..etc... A dangerous period for any fish/tads, the time/reason for most tad deaths. But given time and salvation from evaporation with regular top offs, nature tends to find its balance and a suitable habitat for the tad that can handle its waste products and little uneaten food is achieved. 

I've been able to keep fish/tads in viv ponds not much bigger then your average betta bowl with no filtration other then live plants and the surface area of shoreline rock and wood growing friendly bacteria for literally years. The tads morph out and go on their way...the fish live fine, though I typically only put 1 or 2 in there and use a species like betta that can deal with low oxygen. A bubbler isn't a bad idea just to make sure the water stays oxygenated enough, and break up surface film, but it also increases evaporation. 

Tads in the wild morph out in pretty jacked up conditions....Little muddy puddles left by tire tracks, and old pop bottles or beer cans etc..etc... And in those, and in bromiliads and other plants they don't get regular water changes. They just get a little fresh water from the rains. It's that those little ponds have been there for months or years, and allowed to reach a biological balance that allows tads to survive...plus these guys are likely somewhat adapted to handle these conditions for the duration it takes them to morph out. 

The tad's waste products, or uneaten food decomposing is the biggest threat to them, but top offs, and controlled feeding can minimize that risk. You don't have so much risk of that small body of water becoming massively out of balance in a short time if you neglect to do a water change for couple days because it has its own little micro ecosystem to deal with such things, always struggling to maintain a balance. You don't have that in a system that is constantly having its old water replaced with fresh and never allowed to find that balance. 

I personally favor systems like this because it is just so much less work with more then acceptable results when done well....or larger aquariums with dividers to keep tads separate and more then adequate filtration and top offs to help keep any inhibiting chemicals that tads produce in competition from each other to a minimum. Of course the fresh water changes work too...just a lot of work IMO with not enough extra pay off (If any)...but whatever floats your proverbial boat  ...it all works.


----------



## Ed

scoy said:


> This is a very cool little science ecperiment. I always think about these things another one i was thinking about is temp Id like to see a few tads grown in different temp waters to see if this effects sex and other things. I know with alligators temp plays a big roll.


Temperature sex determination doesn't occur in frogs. They are all heterogametic... this has been discussed in the past see for example http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/87631-sex-ratio-dendrobatids.html 

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/general-discussion/6585-when-sex-dart-frog-determined.html 

http://www.dendroboard.com/forum/breeding-eggs-tadpoles/22068-sex-tads.html

Some comments 

Ed


----------



## Gamble

DAY 40:






















Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Gamble

DAY 47:






















These are about a week or 2 from morphing out, so we shall see what happens.

I will note that the tadpole WITH water changes is developing his spots & color, which is a sign that it will be morphing soon. (Its about 60 days give or take) whereas the tadpole WITHOUT water changes is also developing its spots, its not quite as defined currently.

Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## daggekko

Looks like on day 40 the one on the left was larger. Now on today it looks like they are nearly the same!


----------



## us13fox

I was over on Monday and saw a difference in the two. The one with water change was def larger than the one with out. I'm sure they have grown somewhat since I was over though. My prediction is its going to come down to their size when they morph.


----------



## Gamble

DAY 52:




























The tadpole without water changes is starting to get its spots. Its hard to see it in the picture bc the water is cloudy.

Now on to the more important discovery ... 







This is the tadpole cup WITHOUT water changes.
If you look closely, you can see TINY white dots ... those white dots are BUGS swimming in the water! 
This is the first time ive noticed it. They are about the size of a tip of a needle.
None of the other tadpoles have this. (They all get daily water changes).
The only one with these swimming bugs is the tadpole cup without the water changes.
What are they???? ... and how did they get in there?
Is it good or bad that they are present?
(Just to clarify, these are NOT springtails. Springtails will float on the water surface ... these are literally swimming throughout the whole cup.)
Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## goof901

interesting discovery because i have something very similar outside in my fountain. Have you noticed the tad eating them?? I would guess that they got in on either A) tad food B) the leaves (if any) C) Moss (if any)


----------



## Gamble

goof901 said:


> interesting discovery because i have something very similar outside in my fountain. Have you noticed the tad eating them?? I would guess that they got in on either A) tad food B) the leaves (if any) C) Moss (if any)


I have not noticed the tadpole eating them, but then again they're hard to see as is, so a tad eating them would be extremely hard to distinguish. It appears to me that they may be bothersome bc the tad moves around alot more than the others.

A) Possible ... and not changing the water has allowed them to build in population.
* to note, I feed a mix of "Seafood Delight" flake & Cyclopeeze ground up into a powder ... both came from Jehmco*
B) There are no leaves other than in the main 32g barrel & if they were there they would be in all of the cups, which they are not.
C) No Moss in anything at all.


----------



## us13fox

The first thing that comes to mind for me would be sea fleas aka Sea Monkeys. I can't remember off the top of my head if they are a parasite or not but that's the only freshwater one I can think of. 

On another note though I was over Monday and I noticed the tads are similar size. There is no noticiable size difference but the spots were more defined on one and not the other. I forgot which tad was is which cup.lol


----------



## Taari

Those are probably water fleas, or daphnia. They are good fry food, or in this case tadpole food. Daphnia are harmless, if indeed that is what they are.

I wonder if the difference between the two tadpoles in size is because of the ammonia at the beginning. I started off as a fishkeeper, and so I understand the nitrogen cycle intrinsically. The high ammonia when you tested your water towards the beginning of the expiriment makes me uncomfortable. 8ppm is VERY high, and enough to cause immediate death of most fish. 

I am curious if tadpoles would be better off with a cycled cup of water (that is, there is nitrifying bacterial growth on plants and the sides of the cup) that isn't changed, or frequent water changes?


----------



## Gamble

Taari said:


> Those are probably water fleas, or daphnia. They are good fry food, or in this case tadpole food. Daphnia are harmless, if indeed that is what they are.
> 
> I wonder if the difference between the two tadpoles in size is because of the ammonia at the beginning. I started off as a fishkeeper, and so I understand the nitrogen cycle intrinsically. The high ammonia when you tested your water towards the beginning of the expiriment makes me uncomfortable. 8ppm is VERY high, and enough to cause immediate death of most fish.
> 
> I am curious if tadpoles would be better off with a cycled cup of water (that is, there is nitrifying bacterial growth on plants and the sides of the cup) that isn't changed, or frequent water changes?


Thats what I was thinking too Taari. Just wonder how they got in there.

I also agree with the ammonia. I came from fish keeping too, which is why I'm so adamant about water changes. 100% isnt healthy for fish, but tadpoles are more resilient, hence why it survived the ammonia spike.
Ed has stated that it probably wise to reuse the cups a few times to aid in this, and also at his suggestion, I will be doing another round of this.

If both tads show no difference in morph size ... etc ... I may do a combo of both. Ie. Changing water but not as much if it means having this daphnia is beneficial as a food source. 

I've invited Ed to lend his perspective ... hopefully he makes an appearance.


----------



## sounddrive

I did an expirament a few years back using a group of 12 auratus tads 6 with changes and 6 without....... Really wasn't a huge difference from one to the next. I personally think that replicating the axle of a broom makes the most sence. In nature broomiliads don't get water changes and is still a preferred spot for tad deposits.


----------



## carola1155

sounddrive said:


> In nature broomiliads don't get water changes and is still a preferred spot for tad deposits.


Don't most bromeliads get regularly flushed with rainfall?


----------



## sounddrive

Yes and no they more get tipped of by rain fall not turned upside down and dumped out..... If you have ever taken a broom apart looking for a frog you will find that the axles go very deep and tend to have dead insects and what ever else fell victim to the broom or tad... So that said a topped of dirty broom axle filled with debris is a comfy spot to a hungry tad to grow up.


----------



## heckler

sounddrive said:


> Yes and no they more get tipped of by rain fall not turned upside down and dumped out..... If you have ever taken a broom apart looking for a frog you will find that the axles go very deep and tend to have dead insects and what ever else fell victim to the broom or tad... So that said a topped of dirty broom axle filled with debris is a comfy spot to a hungry tad to grow up.


Just to add onto this...

The rain water will dilute the water that is in the brom axil, but the debris and tadpole waste will dirty it up again

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Gamble

heckler said:


> Just to add onto this...
> 
> The rain water will dilute the water that is in the brom axil, but the debris and tadpole waste will dirty it up again
> 
> Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2


Yes it does dirty it up ... but that water is constantly being refreshed numerous times daily due to the amount of rainfall in the rainforest.


----------



## Dendro Dave

Gamble said:


> Yes it does dirty it up ... but that water is constantly being refreshed numerous times daily due to the amount of rainfall in the rainforest.


Plus as long as it doesn't dry out completely it is going to have a micro ecosystem in there of bacteria and what not to help deal with frog waste.


----------



## Gamble

DAY 56:
The tadpole WITH water changes has morphed out!















The tadpole WITHOUT water changes hasn't popped either of its front legs yet ... guess we will see how long it takes.















It should be noted that this is the standard time it takes my Imi tads to morph out. NONE of them have ever taken more than 60 days to morph.

Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## scoy

Awsome, just to bad the test group wasnt bigger.


----------



## Gamble

scoy said:


> Awsome, just to bad the test group wasnt bigger.


Yea I know. 
I'm gonna be doing a 2nd round tho.
May try this with my Varadero tads too once they hatch.


----------



## Dendrobati

Gamble,

I have followed this thread with a lot of interest. 
Even though I did not post anything (I think), I would like to say thank you for sharing all this with us!

Personally, if "I could choose", I think I would do water changes. Maybe not everyday, but 3 times a week.
With the number of tadpoles we have, I chose not to do water changes just because... well, just because it would take me all day to do it. 

Either way, great experiment, Gamble. Looking forward for a new experiment with your Varadero tads, if you decide to do it. 

Marta


----------



## hypostatic

Gamble said:


> I, personally, am one of those people who changes my tadpole water everyday - everyother day.


I was thinking about the exp method, and although you're only comparing two tads in this experiment, you've morphed out a lot of other tads before with water changes, and you said that "NONE of them have ever taken more than 60 days to morph". So while this lone tad without water changes can't definite tell you much since you're sample size is just one, you should still learn something if no tad has ever morphed out in more than 60 days (although it might easily be an outlier in the data set?).

Anywho, I have a more relevant question: if a tad takes longer to morph out, does it mean anything specific in regards to the animal's health/development? Like, do those frogs end up smaller or less healthy or something?


----------



## Gamble

hypostatic said:


> Anywho, I have a more relevant question: if a tad takes longer to morph out, does it mean anything specific in regards to the animal's health/development? Like, do those frogs end up smaller or less healthy or something?


It's ironic that you ask that, bc I was debating this same question in my mind when I posted the last pics.

Sizewise, we will see once it morphs out.
But in terms of health, I've come to the conclusion that it probably doesn't affect or change a thing. I just think it interesting that it has taken longer to morph than what the norm is.
If anything, this may show that the initial ammonia spike and lack of water changes MAY HAVE stunted its development length slightly.

I'm just guessing/assuming tho, & I think this may be more apparent once I do the next round.
I think this time tho, I'm going to do 3 tads, 1 with water changes, 1 without water changes & 1 without water changes but reusing the old cup that has a bacteria buildup in it ... this may help to show some differences if any exist.


----------



## Gamble

Dendrobati said:


> Gamble,
> 
> I have followed this thread with a lot of interest.
> Even though I did not post anything (I think), I would like to say thank you for sharing all this with us!
> 
> Personally, if "I could choose", I think I would do water changes. Maybe not everyday, but 3 times a week.
> With the number of tadpoles we have, I chose not to do water changes just because... well, just because it would take me all day to do it.
> 
> Either way, great experiment, Gamble. Looking forward for a new experiment with your Varadero tads, if you decide to do it.
> 
> Marta


Thanks for watching Marta. 
At one point, I had close to 100 tads ... & yes, it got to be a pain in the @$$, so I can understand where you're coming from. I probably would do the same as you if I get to that point again.


----------



## heckler

What I have been doing is just monitoring the water level and refilling when it gets low. Not a water change, but it does help refresh it

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Gamble

Well so much for that debate ... the other tadpole morphed out today.















Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------



## scoy

What are your plans for the little guys now that there famous?


----------



## Gamble

A friend of mine put a deposit down on the next 3 I had morph out ... these 2 are part of the 3 he paid for.

But don't worry folks, I have more coming out of the water shortly


----------



## Dendrobati

Gamble said:


> A friend of mine put a deposit down on the next 3 I had morph out ... these 2 are part of the 3 he paid for.
> 
> But don't worry folks, I have more coming out of the water shortly


Next time you should do an auction on the tads you experiment with once they morph out!


Everyone wants a famous tadpole, there is not many around!

Marta


----------



## Gamble

Thats something to consider! ... if I do, ill donate the money to TWI.
Only problem is that I hate shipping. Lol
(Well the risks involved anyways).


----------



## Arpeggio

Gamble said:


> DAY 52:
> 
> Now on to the more important discovery ...
> View attachment 37291
> 
> This is the tadpole cup WITHOUT water changes.
> If you look closely, you can see TINY white dots ... those white dots are BUGS swimming in the water!
> This is the first time ive noticed it. They are about the size of a tip of a needle.
> None of the other tadpoles have this. (They all get daily water changes).
> The only one with these swimming bugs is the tadpole cup without the water changes.
> What are they???? ... and how did they get in there?
> Is it good or bad that they are present?
> (Just to clarify, these are NOT springtails. Springtails will float on the water surface ... these are literally swimming throughout the whole cup.)
> Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


Those are cyclops, they are an invertebrate that is very very common in planted tanks. They are harmless, they feed on detritus and other goodies and are actually beneficial. Fry fish love them and I noticed you feed Cyclopeeze, that's what the food is made from.


----------



## Gamble

Thx buddy.
Ed emailed me & said they could be copepods & suggested I look at them under a microscope ... but unfortunately I do not have access to one.


----------



## Arpeggio

Gamble said:


> Thx buddy.
> Ed emailed me & said they could be copepods & suggested I look at them under a microscope ... but unfortunately I do not have access to one.


No problem, and cyclops are a type of copepod.


----------



## Gamble

And here are the two metamorphs ... 





















I don't think there appears to be a size difference. 
I will take more pics once they absorb their tails.

Sent from my Galaxy Note II using Tapatalk 2


----------

