# Isopods



## Zippy (Dec 30, 2015)

I was curious if one can culture wild collected isopods from an area that has a winter cold period? I’m not sure what the pathogen concern would be and I only ask as we have had such a wet summer and they are all over the logs in our wooded front yard.

Thanks
Pete


----------



## S2G (Jul 5, 2016)

Too risky. They'd do fine, but I wouldn't risk an entire rebuild and my frogs to save $20-50 on isopods.


----------



## Zippy (Dec 30, 2015)

S2G said:


> Too risky. They'd do fine, but I wouldn't risk an entire rebuild and my frogs to save $20-50 on isopods.


Yes, I agree but do tell me what makes the isopods I purchase any different? They were originally from the wild, the also have the potential to cause problems to frogs or the Vivarium. If I were to culture them over say several generations how would they be any different from ones I see on the boards? Yes, I realize that many frogs have been exposed to the ones for sale here with no ill effects. However, at one point they were straight from the wild. Just some thoughts


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

I would be worried that any newly caught wild isopods could carry parasites or chytrid. Be it amphibian parasites that need an invertebrate intermediate host or parasites of isopods themselves. Even if raised for a few generations in a culture an infected founder could pass harmful organisms into it's culture media and to that culture's descendants even after that infected founder is long gone. I assume that since new cultures have generally been started with brand new media and a small number of younger individuals from a previous culture over and over through the years that the risk has been greatly reduced and eventually eliminated over time. I assume that secondary cultures founded with small populations of all infected individuals eventually dwindled and crashed while cultures founded with all healthy individuals thrived over the years leading to the ones we have in the hobby today.


----------



## S2G (Jul 5, 2016)

Zippy said:


> Yes, I agree but do tell me what makes the isopods I purchase any different? They were originally from the wild, the also have the potential to cause problems to frogs or the Vivarium. If I were to culture them over say several generations how would they be any different from ones I see on the boards? Yes, I realize that many frogs have been exposed to the ones for sale here with no ill effects. However, at one point they were straight from the wild. Just some thoughts


Nothings different except care maybe. Its not as simple as you make it to be though. You need to quarantine them for a long time amongst other things. 

You could breed them and everything be ok. Then on the other side you could breed them and bring some kind of ailment in that affects everything.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

I am attempting this and experimenting it on some Slender Salamanders and a fence lizard before i put them near a dart. A few points. 

1.) They are local, i live in a very clean neighborhood not a sewage dump. No dead animals, or anything just fallen leaves. These bugs are from a very clean environment (Orange County, CA)

2.) Chytrid is fungus which is seems to be species specific. No reason chytrid would use an isopod as a host as far as i know (it is a fungus). It is also waterborne and these isopods are land based.  Parasites are usually host specific as well, but is anyone aware of any known isopod parasites? I dont know of any and if there is it is probably exotic and not in California lol Ive checked and it seems usually, isopods are the parasites themselves ! 

3.) Everything available in stores was at one point a wild organism. This is just a fact. And if you have a population reproducing and not spreading parasites/disease, that is probably a good sign you have a clean batch of bugs. 

4.) Kind of a continuation of 3, but it has been done before so there is nothing to say you cant do it again yourself. 

5.) If you use Armadillium Vulgare, which is more than likely since it is very common, they would make an excellent cleaning crew, hiding during the day, too large to eat and kill off, and would produce soft shelled offspring for tasty frog treats. Some might make it to a safe size.

Again, I have no offspring yet, just a healthy looking wild population. I will update here.


----------



## Captain Awesome (Jan 13, 2018)

I am not discouraging you doing this. I say go for it BUT your assumptions are misleading and there is a lot to consider. A clean neighborhood would just mean there isn't pollution? Contaminants work themselves out over generations so that is not a concern. Parasites and pathogens are everywhere. The animals in CA have evolved to deal with CA parasites. They are not limited to something exotic. When you put the frogs from Columbia etc in with these potential pathogens, they have not encountered and do not have defense against them. This is why you never release pets even if they are native. They can take out entire populations.


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

I am not personally aware of the exact endoparasites that can use isopods as a vector to infect amphibians but I would not risk it to save $10. I bought dwarf white isopods seven or eight years ago and still have them today. Acanthocephalans, nematodes, and coccidia would be my biggest concerns. There is a worm that infects the species of isopod that you are collecting that uses them as a host to infect birds, changing their behavior to make them more likely to be eaten. 
If this worm ended up in a frog would it simply die or cause a cyst like the pig tapeworm in humans? (http://www.biokids.umich.edu/critters/Armadillidium_vulgare/)

The concern with chytrid isn't that it would use the isopods as a host, rather that the moist environment that they would be collected from would also be an environment that wild frogs would be found. My concern is that they could simply carry the spores on their exoskeleton which would remain viable as long as they never dried out.

Viruses can use invertebrates as vectors, that includes Ranavirus.
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1439-0450.2001.00495.x

As I said before, if you keep starting new cultures with new media and a small number of young founders from a previous culture over and over eventually the risk is greatly reduced. That would certainly break the cycle of any parasites that merely use the isopods as intermediate hosts and will over time reduce the risk of isopod specific parasites.


----------



## Woodswalker (Dec 26, 2014)

Chytrid is NOT species specific. It has been found to be hosted in freshwater shrimp, in addition to afflicting multiple species of frog. While it has not been found in isopods as far as I know, the fact that they are crustaceans does not rule them out as potential vectors, even if it's through simple cross contamination and not by being a host. 

There have been a few previous discussions on this. This thread has some good links and information. https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/s...9-chytrid-can-use-freshwater-shrimp-host.html A National Geographic article on the presence of chytrid in crayfish: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/121217-chytrid-fungus-amphibian-frog-crayfish-science/ Another thread: https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/s...d-eliminate-killer-fungus-amphibians-zsl.html 


Isopods do have some parasites, and can carry viruses known to infect frogs. This article confirms the discovery of iridovirus in A. vulgare and P. dilatatus. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022201180900415


This article describes finding invertebrate iridoviruses in multiple amphibian and reptile species, including at least one dendrobatid. http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.5818/1529-9651-26.1-2.54?journalCode=hpms


Everything DOES come from the wild at some point. That's why we quarantine, test, and treat (according to their needs) new species entering the hobby, and that should include invertebrates as well, as far as I'm concerned. We have no idea what they may have come into contact with in the wild, even if they look clean and healthy to the naked eye. 

Since there are plenty of isopods that have already been through several generations of captive breeding, many of which were brought into the hobby by entomologists, it's really puzzling that anyone would bother to collect really common ones like A. vulgare from the wild for their tanks. They are abundant in the hobby already, and common isopods are cheap. I just don't see how it would be worth the risk.


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

Woodswalker said:


> Chytrid is NOT species specific. It has been found to be hosted in freshwater shrimp, in addition to afflicting multiple species of frog. While it has not been found in isopods as far as I know, the fact that they are crustaceans does not rule them out as potential vectors, even if it's through simple cross contamination and not by being a host.
> 
> There have been a few previous discussions on this. This thread has some good links and information. https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/s...9-chytrid-can-use-freshwater-shrimp-host.html A National Geographic article on the presence of chytrid in crayfish: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/121217-chytrid-fungus-amphibian-frog-crayfish-science/ Another thread: https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/s...d-eliminate-killer-fungus-amphibians-zsl.html
> 
> ...


I stand corrected. From one of the above linked articles:


> "One possible reason is that chytrid infects other animals. For a study published today in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Taegan McMahon, a graduate student in ecology at the University of South Florida in Tampa, looked at some possible suspects and focused on crayfish, those lobsterlike crustaceans living in freshwater. They seemed like a good possibility because they're widespread and because their bodies have a lot of keratin, a protein the fungus attacks.
> 
> In the lab, McMahon exposed crayfish to the disease and they got sick. More than a third died within seven weeks, and most of the survivors were carrying the fungus. She also put infected crayfish in the water with tadpoles—separated by mesh, so the crustaceans wouldn't eat the baby frogs—and the tadpoles got infected. When McMahon and her colleagues checked out wetlands in Louisiana and Colorado, they also found infected crayfish."


If close to two thirds of the crayfish survived the chytrid infection but still carried the fungus, then it stands to reason that isopods could have a similar chance of surviving with chytrid infecting them as well.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

There are many threads on here on this same topic where people are claiming to catch wild bugs and feed without ever breeding a single generation. Then there are those who began their cultures inside their viv! What i cannot find, is a single example where someone tried this and had negative results. This is anecdotal and im not using this as a rebuttle it but does say something about the practice of raising/feeding wc imo


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

PhylloBroTM said:


> What i cannot find, is a single example where someone tried this and had negative results. This is anecdotal and im not using this as a rebuttle it but does say something about the practice of raising/feeding wc imo


More likely, it says something about reporting bias: there are many folks who make a handful of posts here that end in a report of things going downhill. Were these people of the sort who think that anecdote, common sense, or simple lack of evidence trumps empirical science and thereby threw all sorts of unknown material into their vivs without reporting it here?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

PhylloBroTM said:


> I am attempting this and experimenting it on some Slender Salamanders and a fence lizard before i put them near a dart.
> 
> Parasites are usually host specific as well


Although the latter point is false, these two prorasipositions are contradictory in spirit: If parasites are host specific, then an "experiment" on other host species will lead to no relevant data at all.


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

I didn't mention him in an earlier post because I couldn't remember the username or find the threads but there was one member active on the forums years ago who used wild feeders, lost frogs, treated other frogs for parasites, and changed his mind about wild feeders. I did find some of his posts now:
https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/g...reatment/25945-really-nasty-lesion-worms.html
https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/food-feeding/84615-wild-isopods.html#post746956
https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/food-feeding/186937-reevaluating-risks-wild-food.html

The only way to reduce the risk is by serial culturing the isopods using young individuals for each successive culture for years.

The only way to eliminate the risk is to spend the $10 on isopods that have been in the hobby for hundreds of generations and are known to be clean.

Years ago, before I had dart frogs, I seeded a plant only vivarium with microfauna from my compost pile. I didn't want to spend the money to order microfauna when they were right there for me to catch. This vivarium never housed frogs so it wasn't an issue. Once I decided to spend $200 on my first pair of frogs I realized it was in my best interest to minimize the risks of loosing them so I seeded their vivarium with microfauna from a vendor instead. I still have isopods descended from that initial purchase years later. I am not trying to be argumentative, but why potentially kill your frogs to save $10?


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Okapi said:


> The only way to eliminate the risk is to spend the $10 on isopods that have been in the hobby for hundreds of generations and are known to be clean.


I agree, though more to a weaker version: "The best way to drastically the risk is to spend the $10 on isopods that have been in the hobby for hundreds of generations and are virtually certain to be clean."

Another reason to use widely-tested materials of all sorts (bugs, media, water, supplements, etc.) is trackability in case of problems. When a hobbyist gets 'problem X', she can run down a list of all her practices and materials; other hobbyists who have used those practices and materials can troubleshoot and often solve the problem. But if the problematic viv was constructed with parts from a 1972 Mustang and the flies are fed Froot Loops and the landscaping came from outer space and the plants are sprayed with magic water from some eBay guy I can't remember the name of, well, there's not much troubleshooting to be done, since no one will have tested any of that.

When my wild-fed frogs get a problem, I've effectively eliminated the usefulness of the entire hobby community, since no one has fed bugs from my backyard. But if I got my bugs from Vendor123, I can talk to others who got the same bugs and compare notes, and possibly learn something.


----------



## Zippy (Dec 30, 2015)

I do get the whole concept of a 10$ cost to risk a frog that has a greater value let alone time spent raising. Nor would I be inclined to do so with my own. The point here is other wild populations now sold are not imho problem free... they simply have been used long enough that the numbers of problem free events make them a supposed safe choice. I doubt anyone was taking time to actually do fecals ( how does one do that on an isopods ) nor swabbing for various fungi/ virus through PCR. It would be nice to get more species captive grown for food.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Here's 20-some types:

Isopods Archives - Roach Crossing


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

A lot of species and color morphs have crossed over from the invertebrate keeping hobby to the herp feeder hobby to the dart frog hobby already
https://capecodroaches.com/t/isopods
NEHERP - Feeders & Microfauna
https://www.glassboxtropicals.com/Isopods-s/114.htm
Isopods Archives - Roach Crossing
https://shop.bugsincyberspace.com/Isopods_c15.htm


----------



## Zippy (Dec 30, 2015)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Here's 20-some types:
> 
> Isopods Archives - Roach Crossing


I’m liking the clown isopod!


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

The Commando Isopod is pretty cool looking too


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Although the latter point is false, these two prorasipositions are contradictory in spirit: If parasites are host specific, then an "experiment" on other host species will lead to no relevant data at all.


My point was a parasite that is host to a isopod may not affect an amphibian or reptile. 

You come in here with this talk about emperical evidence and data in an attempt to discourage experimentation how ironic. The data i get would be worth the 10$ or a frog if it goes bad. If it goes well, which it has in the past, like any good hypothesis, it can be repeated again and again. This species takes over a year to mature so this project is a 3-4 year thing but im going to do it as well as raise commercial species. If it is a success, i will offer them to others. Thank you for the input and encouragement.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

Does anyone know which isopods give frogs problems with digestion? that would be an issue in the long term even if they were "clean".


----------



## S2G (Jul 5, 2016)

Woodswalker said:


> Chytrid is NOT species specific. It has been found to be hosted in freshwater shrimp, in addition to afflicting multiple species of frog. While it has not been found in isopods as far as I know, the fact that they are crustaceans does not rule them out as potential vectors, even if it's through simple cross contamination and not by being a host.
> 
> There have been a few previous discussions on this. This thread has some good links and information. https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/s...9-chytrid-can-use-freshwater-shrimp-host.html A National Geographic article on the presence of chytrid in crayfish: https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/121217-chytrid-fungus-amphibian-frog-crayfish-science/ Another thread: https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/s...d-eliminate-killer-fungus-amphibians-zsl.html
> 
> ...


Thanks for taking the time. This is what I was getting at, but didn't have the time to put together


----------



## S2G (Jul 5, 2016)

....some people just have to touch the stove...

It's putting off heat, it's glowing red....but I still have to touch it to see if it will actually burn me. 

The questions have been answered, but it seems like people are still grabbing at straws trying to justify a bad idea they want or already are doing


----------



## Kalle (May 14, 2010)

PhylloBroTM said:


> My point was a parasite that is host to a isopod may not affect an amphibian or reptile.
> 
> You come in here with this talk about emperical evidence and data in an attempt to discourage experimentation how ironic. The data i get would be worth the 10$ or a frog if it goes bad. If it goes well, which it has in the past, like any good hypothesis, it can be repeated again and again. This species takes over a year to mature so this project is a 3-4 year thing but im going to do it as well as raise commercial species. If it is a success, i will offer them to others. Thank you for the input and encouragement.


You seem to value the life of a frog very low if you think it's worth to risk its life for this. I mean, where's the potential gain if it's a success? What will you prove? That you've managed to collect a few patogen free isopods in your backyard? 

In my opinion, if there's a risk for the lives of which you are responsible for the potential gain for the experiments success should be waay higher.


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

PhylloBroTM said:


> The data i get would be worth the 10$ or a frog if it goes bad.


Not the best attitude to have in a hobby full of people who love these frogs.




PhylloBroTM said:


> If it is a success, i will offer them to others. Thank you for the input and encouragement.


http://www.roachcrossing.com/for-sale/non-roach/common-roly-poly/

Here you go. Instant success. $5 plus shipping. Saved you 4 years and potential dead frogs.


----------



## Andrew Lee (Jan 21, 2014)

Kalle said:


> You seem to value the life of a frog very low if you think it's worth to risk its life for this. I mean, where's the potential gain if it's a success? What will you prove? That you've managed to collect a few patogen free isopods in your backyard?
> 
> In my opinion, if there's a risk for the lives of which you are responsible for the potential gain for the experiments success should be waay higher.


Not only that, you stated that this would be a 3-4 year long experiment. Is that effort really worth the risk? Keep in mind that the primary motive was to save 10 bucks. From the looks of it, the cost of your 3-4 year long experiment would far outweigh the initial motives that the OP had expressed(to save 10 dollars). Sure you can make the argument that you're trying to add new isopod species to the hobby but if you take a look at the isopod community, there are already numerous species that pretty much appeal to every condition: large, small, cheap, expensive, common, rare, tropical, temperate, etc. It's also kind of funny that you dismiss our warnings as irony. We're trying to warn you of the potential risks which is losing a frog which costs WAY more than 10 dollars. Call of us close-minded but we just choose to value our frogs more than a couple of isopods.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

Kalle said:


> You seem to value the life of a frog very low if you think it's worth to risk its life for this. I mean, where's the potential gain if it's a success? What will you prove? That you've managed to collect a few patogen free isopods in your backyard?
> 
> In my opinion, if there's a risk for the lives of which you are responsible for the potential gain for the experiments success should be waay higher.


Assuming i do not value the life of a frog is a pretty low blow. Just because we disagree on a few things does not mean i do not value the life of the animal. I wonder if the same was said when they first began to introduce alternative food sources. 

Your opinion on this subject is valid, but your assumptions about me are unnecessary.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

Andrew Lee said:


> Not only that, you stated that this would be a 3-4 year long experiment. Is that effort really worth the risk? Keep in mind that the primary motive was to save 10 bucks. From the looks of it, the cost of your 3-4 year long experiment would far outweigh the initial motives that the OP had expressed(to save 10 dollars). Sure you can make the argument that you're trying to add new isopod species to the hobby but if you take a look at the isopod community, there are already numerous species that pretty much appeal to every condition: large, small, cheap, expensive, common, rare, tropical, temperate, etc. It's also kind of funny that you dismiss our warnings as irony. We're trying to warn you of the potential risks which is losing a frog which costs WAY more than 10 dollars. Call of us close-minded but we just choose to value our frogs more than a couple of isopods.


Everyone is missing my reason for doing this.

If enough people had done this before (like i am talking about), and the information was out there, this conversation would not be an arguement. You would be able to site them and their experience but there is just a handful of posts here and there. To me, if i can help future froggers by sharing my personal experience, IT IS WORTH IT. It is how ALL of us got our information. By people attempting what hasnt been done before, getting positive/negative results, and sharing their findings. Thats all i want to do. 

Whether that is worth it is a matter of opinion.


----------



## Kalle (May 14, 2010)

PhylloBroTM said:


> Everyone is missing my reason for doing this.
> 
> If enough people had done this before (like i am talking about), and the information was out there, this conversation would not be an arguement. You would be able to site them and their experience but there is just a handful of posts here and there. To me, if i can help future froggers by sharing my personal experience, IT IS WORTH IT. It is how ALL of us got our information. By people attempting what hasnt been done before, getting positive/negative results, and sharing their findings. Thats all i want to do.
> 
> Whether that is worth it is a matter of opinion.


Well I think you're missing one big thing too. If you're succesful in breeding safe wc isopods you haven't really proven anything worth something to anyone else. All you've proved is that the isopods you collected were safe. That doesn't mean that if anyone else goes out and collects some in their neighborhood will have the same results. All you're basically doing is gambling with your animals lives and health. 

Is breeding isopods a new thing? - *No*

Are the benefits of having isopods in your viv an untested thing? -* No*

Are there potential issues of collecting and introducing wc live food in your viv? - *Yes *

Will you have disproved the above if you are succesful? - *No*

Are there safe strains of isopods ready for breeding already readily available? - *Yes*


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

PhylloBroTM said:


> Assuming i do not value the life of a frog is a pretty low blow.


I would guess that would probably be the previous post regarding possibly introducing pathogens to your frogs being worth it for data...



PhylloBroTM said:


> *The data i get would be worth* the 10$ or* a frog if it goes bad.*


Don't misinterpret replies to your posts that are contrary to what you want to hear as criticism or negativity. Everyone in the hobby wants the hobby to grow. No one in the hobby wants others to have to learn things the hard way by potentially losing frogs.
You are asking for advice from a community of people who have an interest in keeping frogs healthy long term. Several people have given advice as well as evidence that is contrary to what you actually want to hear so you choose to ignore it and keep pushing to find the answer you want. 



PhylloBroTM said:


> Everyone is missing my reason for doing this.
> 
> If enough people had done this before (like i am talking about), and the information was out there, this conversation would not be an arguement. You would be able to site them and their experience but there is just a handful of posts here and there. To me, if i can help future froggers by sharing my personal experience, IT IS WORTH IT. It is how ALL of us got our information. By people attempting what hasnt been done before, getting positive/negative results, and sharing their findings. Thats all i want to do.
> 
> Whether that is worth it is a matter of opinion.


I am having a hard time understanding why the risks are worth it to you? The exact species of isopod you plan to bring to the hobby is already in the hobby. It *has* been done before, many many times. You can buy cultured isopods of numerous species right now, including the very one you are interested in. Use the data of Rain_frog losing frogs and spending hundreds of dollars on deworming his collection multiple times. Use the data of scientists who have found invertebrate iridoviruses of which your isopod is a known vector, in multiple amphibian and reptile species, including at least one dendrobatid. Ignoring that data and forging ahead is not helping future froggers, it is selfish rather than scientific. You may find it "worth" losing frogs but you will find very few people in the hobby dedicated to preserving these frogs who would agree that it is "worth" it.


----------



## Kalle (May 14, 2010)

PhylloBroTM said:


> Everyone is missing my reason for doing this.
> 
> If enough people had done this before (like i am talking about), and the information was out there, this conversation would not be an arguement. You would be able to site them and their experience but there is just a handful of posts here and there. To me, if i can help future froggers by sharing my personal experience, IT IS WORTH IT. It is how ALL of us got our information. By people attempting what hasnt been done before, getting positive/negative results, and sharing their findings. Thats all i want to do.
> 
> Whether that is worth it is a matter of opinion.


An honest question as I, given your questions on the forum, assume you're quite new to the hobby. Can you say with a 100% that you can identify any introduction of patogens or issues that you might cause with your experiments? Or is it just black or white, they live it's succesful, they die it's a fail?


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

You say use the data of Rain_Frog, but i have not found that data. Where could i reach this person if at all? I need that data because that is the evidence that i need to develop my position. The best info i got was iridovirus in frogs, however that report ended with there has not been any findings on whether the virus effected the amphibians still research to do. To make a decision on something, i would need information from someone with experience with the subject itself. The citations were helpful for sure but they dont say anything about serial breeding, pathogenicity, anything. Not specific enough. The discussion has gone from being informative about the topic to just being critical of me. Dont know how that happened.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

I have sent Rain_Frog a private message asking if he/she would post their experience publicly in the forum. This is what i wanted to achieve guys. If he has done it already then i wont do it at all. I have also reached out to the department of entemology at UC Riverside and i am waiting for a response. (rying to clarify whether terrestrial isopods fall under entemology). After this i am going to go over the risks. im serious about this and am considering every precaution. 

The reason i stand by what i said, "it is worth it", it because this information is not on the web for people like myself who are ignorant to the subject. If i lost a frog i would be devestated. But when i seen someone talking about this, i would shut it down EVERY TIME from a place of personal experience. Potentially saving countless frogs and hobbyists. Maybe im trying to be too noble. But i am absolutely taking everyones advice into consideration and am still searching for more! I am not taking this lightly at all. in a way i am playing devils advocate but it is just to gain more knowledge. But the claim that i do not value the life of a frog was a bit much for a discussion as subjective as this one has been so far. Ignorant definitely, but careless, selfish, uncompassionate? come on guys.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

PhylloBroTM said:


> You come in here with this talk about emperical evidence and data in an attempt to discourage experimentation how ironic.


This is equivocation on your part. No, not the misuse of 'ironic' when what you mean is 'hypocritical', but rather the use of 'experimentation' in two different ways in the same argument. 

The sense of 'experimentation' relevant to empirical evidence and data is the kind that science depends on: (1) the formulation of a relevant hypoothesis that is either so far untested or needing retest, (2) a complete review of the relevant literature, (3) the collection of data from a sufficient number of experimental and control groups, and (4) statistical analysis of that data. 

The second sense of 'experimentation' (the one I am discouraging) is the throwing of stuff in a pot to see what floats up. That's the kind of 'experiment' you're suggesting. It ignores all four points of the first sort of experimentation.



PhylloBroTM said:


> Maybe im trying to be too noble.


No; you come off as someone trying to portray themselves as much more knowledgable than they actually are, and reflexively countering all attempts to point out that fact.



PhylloBroTM said:


> The discussion has gone from being informative about the topic to just being critical of me. Dont know how that happened.


See above.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

Socratic Monologue said:


> This is equivocation on your part. No, not the misuse of 'ironic' when what you mean is 'hypocritical', but rather the use of 'experimentation' in two different ways in the same argument.
> 
> The sense of 'experimentation' relevant to empirical evidence and data is the kind that science depends on: (1) the formulation of a relevant hypoothesis that is either so far untested or needing retest, (2) a complete review of the relevant literature, (3) the collection of data from a sufficient number of experimental and control groups, and (4) statistical analysis of that data.
> 
> ...


The pot calling the kettle black. How about you offer some actual information instead of trying to give grammar lessons. I am here to learn. What are you here for? You are providing nothing to this discussion.


----------



## Kalle (May 14, 2010)

PhylloBroTM said:


> The pot calling the kettle black. How about you offer some actual information instead of trying to give grammar lessons. I am here to learn. What are you here for? You are providing nothing to this discussion.


Tons of information and warnings in this post. Like This is what you're risking and No there's no need to do it as there are other safe options available. And what do you do? "I don't believe you guys I'm going to do it anyway! And when I fail I'll post the fact that I was wrong all along and that makes it still worth it and the life of my animals that I just killed!" Basically that's what you're saying. 

One more time. No one gains any new valuable information with you either succeeding or failing. So you're risking the health of your animals for no potential gain at all. You telling the world of your experiment is of no more use than an anecdote. Proves nothing.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

Kalle said:


> Tons of information and warnings in this post. Like This is what you're risking and No there's no need to do it as there are other safe options available. And what do you do? "I don't believe you guys I'm going to do it anyway! And when I fail I'll post the fact that I was wrong all along and that makes it still worth it and the life of my animals that I just killed!" Basically that's what you're saying.
> 
> One more time. No one gains any new valuable information with you either succeeding or failing. So you're risking the health of your animals for no potential gain at all. You telling the world of your experiment is of no more use than an anecdote. Proves nothing.


The only reason i am being a bit stubborn is because what i am talking about has been done before already so its weird that you guys are so aggressive against others doing it, while buying from people who have done the same exact thing in the past. 

What i wanted to prove is that it can be done by a hobbyist. Which I would encourage if i seen someone else doing it. 

Anyway, i am not going through with it if it does nobody any good. But if you guys want the hobby to grow, i would rethink how you guys are with others. It is very discouraging.


----------



## Zippy (Dec 30, 2015)

I think we all need to pour a nice glass of bourbon and just relax. This topic went sideways. I was curious in my original statement because I could simply nurture a variety that would tolerate cold/ freezing conditions. That said yes there are sources of various isopods on many sites links; Common Roly-Poly - Roach Crossing. But and it’s a big but....but not as big as my gut😉. The various species in description say where they originated from. Places like Nj or elsewhere. You could not guarantee these do not carry disease, nor in my opinion does the same apply for the purple/ white , pink with yellow polka dots, ones with a Mickey Mouse face apply. It appears to be safe because we or “some one” as in many frog keepers have used them without I’ll effects. That said, anything = risk as a food source or cohabitant in vivarium. Wild obtained= another possible risk...so vivarium keeper beware. Cheers 🥃


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

PhylloBroTM said:


> To make a decision on something, i would need information from someone with experience with the subject itself.





PhylloBroTM said:


> You say use the data of Rain_Frog, but i have not found that data. Where could i reach this person if at all? I need that data because that is the evidence that i need to develop my position.





PhylloBroTM said:


> I have sent Rain_Frog a private message asking if he/she would post their experience publicly in the forum. This is what i wanted to achieve guys. If he has done it already then i wont do it at all.


I gave you three links to threads that Rain_frog posted in and even gave you a basic summary of what happened to his frogs in his case. Here they are:


Okapi said:


> I didn't mention him in an earlier post because I couldn't remember the username or find the threads but there was one member active on the forums years ago who used wild feeders, lost frogs, treated other frogs for parasites, and changed his mind about wild feeders. I did find some of his posts now:
> https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/g...reatment/25945-really-nasty-lesion-worms.html
> https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/food-feeding/84615-wild-isopods.html#post746956
> https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/food-feeding/186937-reevaluating-risks-wild-food.html





PhylloBroTM said:


> The reason i stand by what i said, "it is worth it", it because this information is not on the web for people like myself who are ignorant to the subject. If i lost a frog i would be devestated.


You are no longer ignorant to the subject. That has been the purpose of this whole thread. You have simply made up your mind and are holding out for one person to agree with you.




PhylloBroTM said:


> To make a decision on something, i would need information from someone with experience with the subject itself.


This is like saying you need to gain first hand experience getting hit by a car in order to be credible enough to warn other people that walking across the road without looking for cars first is a bad idea. My dad warned me to look both ways before crossing the road my entire childhood. I personally know that he was never hit by a car crossing the road but I still see the value in his advice and will pass it down to my future children as well.



PhylloBroTM said:


> But when i seen someone talking about this, i would shut it down EVERY TIME from a place of personal experience. Potentially saving countless frogs and hobbyists. Maybe im trying to be too noble. But i am absolutely taking everyones advice into consideration and am still searching for more!


Again, why shouldn't I trust my dad to warning me about the danger of getting hit by cars? He was never hit by a car so why is his warning valid? 



PhylloBroTM said:


> The best info i got was iridovirus in frogs, however that report ended with there has not been any findings on whether the virus effected the amphibians still research to do.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridoviridae
Hm... That family includes Ranavirus. Rana means frog. Ill search that now:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranavirus


> Ranavirus infections in amphibians have been implicated as a contributing factor in the global decline of amphibian populations. The impact of Ranaviruses on amphibian populations has been compared to the chytrid fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis, the causative agent of chytridiomycosis.


I will compile the data I have just gathered in the past 30 seconds on wiki and extrapolate a conclusion. Isopods can carry a specific family of viruses. Viruses in that family can infect invertebrates, fish, amphibians, and reptiles. One of those viruses is comparable to a fungus that is wiping out amphibians at an alarming rate and is known to cause a high rate of frog mortality. I would reasonably conclude that it would not be a worthwhile risk to expose frogs in my care to wild vectors of this family of viruses caught in an area where this virus could be. That is just ONE risk factor. That doesn't include the risk for chytrid or the risk for any endoparasites.



PhylloBroTM said:


> The citations were helpful for sure but they dont say anything about serial breeding, pathogenicity, anything. Not specific enough.


Serial breeding was mentioned an example of how to minimize risk. It is essentially a summary of how the isopods that you can buy from vendors right now have been passed from hobbyist to hobbyist for generations. If you want lab examples look up the lab breeding of mice and fruit flies.

Examples of Pathogenicity would be every fungus, virus and parasite that people have mentioned so far.



PhylloBroTM said:


> The discussion has gone from being informative about the topic to just being critical of me. Dont know how that happened.


Critical of your idea, not you as a person. Which is reasonable considering that you asked why something is a bad idea, received an enormous amount of feedback including links explaining why, yet still keep asking why it is a bad idea. That is selfish. If I as a child decided to ignore my dads advice not to run in front of cars or questioned him because none of the neighborhood kids got hit by cars, my crossing the road without looking both ways would have been selfish and potentially disastrous.



PhylloBroTM said:


> I have also reached out to the department of entemology at UC Riverside and i am waiting for a response. (rying to clarify whether terrestrial isopods fall under entemology).


Isopods do indeed fall under entomology, this is a fantastic idea. Entomologists and individuals in the invertebrate keeping hobby are how the various species of isopods I linked for sale above found their way into our hobby.



PhylloBroTM said:


> The only reason i am being a bit stubborn is because what i am talking about has been done before already so its weird that you guys are so aggressive against others doing it, while buying from people who have done the same exact thing in the past.
> 
> What i wanted to prove is that it can be done by a hobbyist. Which I would encourage if i seen someone else doing it.
> 
> Anyway, i am not going through with it if it does nobody any good. But if you guys want the hobby to grow, i would rethink how you guys are with others. It is very discouraging.


It has been done before. A hobbyist whose story I linked to you lost frogs and had multiple vet bills due to using wild invertebrates to feed his frogs.

If you mean adding a new species of isopod to the hobby, the species you are talking about is already in the hobby. I have linked sites where you can purchase it right now, saving yourself 4 years of moving baby isopods to clean cultures to minimize the risk of frog illness.

There was once a hobbyist/frog breeder who spread chytrid in the hobby wiping out frogs in the collections of multiple hobbyists, including at least one moderator of this forum. He is back to selling frogs under a new name but is blocked from the classifieds here and many of the experienced hobbyists have kept track of him to warn others not to buy from him outside of this forum's classifieds. I haven't brought him up yet because any thread that mentions his name seems to get locked. But his "i dont care what others say, im going do do what I want" selfish attitude cost the hobby as a whole. 

We want the hobby to grow. That includes you not losing hundreds of dollars in frogs and quitting the hobby or potentially giving sick frogs to someone else later on. Especially when you in all honesty are not trying something new. Frogs will eat isopods. There are safe isopods, including the species that you are interested in, already in the hobby for you to feed frogs. In the future I would rather be congratulating you on building a nice vivarium or morphing your first phyllobates froglets than posting in a thread to say I'm sorry that your frog died or answering questions about medicating skinny frogs full of nematodes.


----------



## Okapi (Oct 12, 2007)

Zippy said:


> I think we all need to pour a nice glass of bourbon and just relax. This topic went sideways. I was curious in my original statement because I could simply nurture a variety that would tolerate cold/ freezing conditions. That said yes there are sources of various isopods on many sites links; Common Roly-Poly - Roach Crossing. But and it’s a big but....but not as big as my gut😉. The various species in description say where they originated from. Places like Nj or elsewhere. You could not guarantee these do not carry disease, nor in my opinion does the same apply for the purple/ white , pink with yellow polka dots, ones with a Mickey Mouse face apply. It appears to be safe because we or “some one” as in many frog keepers have used them without I’ll effects. That said, anything = risk as a food source or cohabitant in vivarium. Wild obtained= another possible risk...so vivarium keeper beware. Cheers 🥃


Come on Zippy! Fight me!    In all seriousness I don't believe anyone in this thread has actually been aggressive

The reason that the isopods already in the hobby are considered safe is because they have been cultured in a serial manner long enough. New cultures are started with young individuals out of cultures started with young individuals out of cultures started with young individuals etc etc etc for so many generations that the risks are low. Fruit flies are a great example of serial cultured feeders. They were used in university and lab research since the 1920s at least. Eventually people familiar with that research brought them to the pet hobby to feed fish, baby chameleons, and dart frogs. They are many thousands of generations removed from the wild type and are known to be safe.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Zippy said:


> I think we all need to pour a nice glass of bourbon and just relax. Cheers 🥃


Bourbon...can't find bourbon...

I have wine. Will wine work? Wine is OK, right? Tell me wine will work!!!



Seriously, you're a good sport for tolerating the derail. Thanks.


----------



## Andrew Lee (Jan 21, 2014)

This is why I love this community. Our various opinions foster a healthy dose of discussion. Sure, it can get a little heated at times, but it's all in the best interest of helping one another. Also helps make sure we consistently refer back to past threads!


----------



## Kalle (May 14, 2010)

PhylloBroTM said:


> The only reason i am being a bit stubborn is because what i am talking about has been done before already so its weird that you guys are so aggressive against others doing it, while buying from people who have done the same exact thing in the past.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




If you felt attacked by me I'll be the first one to apologize, sincerely. It was not my intention to jump on you but to jump on your idea. 

You seem to be someone with a lot of good intentions and strong will. I think you can use that for a lot of good things in this hobby, better things than what you were planning. Diving into and becoming a responsible breeder of healthy frogs for instance. Not something to be frowned upon just because it's been done before. If you find an area where a lot of people fail and want to try a different angle, keep extensive logs, collect data, share.


----------



## PhylloBro (Sep 21, 2018)

Kalle said:


> If you felt attacked by me I'll be the first one to apologize, sincerely. It was not my intention to jump on you but to jump on your idea.
> 
> You seem to be someone with a lot of good intentions and strong will. I think you can use that for a lot of good things in this hobby, better things than what you were planning. Diving into and becoming a responsible breeder of healthy frogs for instance. Not something to be frowned upon just because it's been done before. If you find an area where a lot of people fail and want to try a different angle, keep extensive logs, collect data, share.


Thank you your apology truly means a lot. and i will apologize for not listening to people who obviously have more experience than me. I am new but am very passionate about dart frogs so i am leaving my comfort zone by coming on here to learn from other people actually in the hobby rather than googling and hopping from page to page. It isnt always easy interacting with other people especially for help i hope you guys can understand. 

Anway, I hope we can move forward and help create an awesome learning environment for everyone. Thanks for the great advice again guys and i hope i can give good updates on my microfauna cultures i am ordering some Dwarf whites and Tropical springtails today !


----------

