Uvb and D3

[Diver]

It is their differing needs that are addressed in the attached paper. I would think that on the contrary that there is little to no evidence to suggest that any frogs DON'T need UVB. D3 oral supplementation was invented when people realised that keeping animals indoors away from natural sunlight was causing them harm and figured out that it was the d3 that sunlight was formerly providing that was missing. Back then, the only remedy was to expose the animals to natural sunlight or administer a synthetic. We no longer need the synthetic (which is known to be a poor way to address the problem) as we now have freely available technology to replicate the missing sunlight.
It is not only frogs of course, we know that all animals with very few exceptions process sunlight to produce vitamin d3, and that includes humans. We get the majority of our d3 that way despite a hugely varied diet. As far as larger amphibians are concerned (you'll notice Bufo marinus on the list), while they may be able to meet a certain amount of their requirement IF they find prey that contains it, they wouldn't meet it all that way and almost certainly none at all as juveniles when their diet would be almost entirely insect in nature.

[jasonm96]

To me, it just looks like a guide to what exposure per species would have in the wild and how to recreate that. But I'll read it fully later. Many believe that D3 should still be included even if UVB is used, but that's its cut down. Animals that get real sunlight might not need it at all

Rhinella marina I doubt feeds a lot on vertebrate prey, it's just very opportunistic. Now, horned frogs on the other hand do, especially C. Cornuta on other frogs. They can eat their other siblings even at the young age hence why many breeders raise them in incidual deli cups. It could meet all their needs? Many used to be raised on just fish and pink mice with no supplementation, but we do know now that this can cause other problems. There's plenty of evidence that they can do well without it.

Now, when we talk about let's say fire-bellied toads or red-eyed tree frogs, it is very obvious to me that they will use the suns rays for the vitamin D needs. Does this mean that they need it to do well in captivity? No. Would it be beneficial? Of course. But UVB is just as much guesswork. Realistically, a lot of hobbyist ain't going to pay £200 for a UV meter unless they have a large collection. UVB lamps are delicate, can be damaged or installed incorrectly. If you're using UVB, it's always better to go for a large tank, unless the species does sit indirect sunlight for hours on end (waxy monkey frogs, although this frog needs a large tank anyway) Too much or too less exposure can be bad, just as manmade D3 products. I am actually going to get one of these myself at one point. I do get the argument on UVB and I support that it could be beneficial to many species, but I not believe anyone who is keeping their frogs without UVB is providing bad husbandry... on the other hand, if the invidual species actually has been proven to benefit from exposure and it's easy enough to provide, then I would encourage the provision of UVB. But I wouldn't recommend cutting D3 from supplements.

[Diver]

To me, it just looks like a guide to what exposure per species would have in the wild and how to recreate that. But I'll read it fully later. Many believe that D3 should still be included even if UVB is used, but that's its cut down. Animals that get real sunlight might not need it at all

Exactly. A guide to the UVB present in the wild and how to recreate it is exactly what it is required when planning the best photo-gradient.

Rhinella marina I doubt feeds a lot on vertebrate prey, it's just very opportunistic. Now, horned frogs on the other hand do, especially C. Cornuta on other frogs. They can eat their other siblings even at the young age hence why many breeders raise them in incidual deli cups. It could meet all their needs? Many used to be raised on just fish and pink mice with no supplementation, but we do know now that this can cause other problems. There's plenty of evidence that they can do well without it.

All large frogs and toads are opportunistic predators and marinus definitely eats a large amount of vertebrate prey. It's a big problem for native wildlife in Australia. Highly doubtful that any could meet all d3 needs throughout life from diet alone. 'Doing well without it' could mean that everything seems fine, but the frogs bones are like rubber. They can survive surprisingly well with such deficiencies, but it's very poor husbandry to allow it to occur.

Now, when we talk about let's say fire-bellied toads or red-eyed tree frogs, it is very obvious to me that they will use the suns rays for the vitamin D needs. Does this mean that they need it to do well in captivity? No. Would it be beneficial? Of course. But UVB is just as much guesswork. Realistically, a lot of hobbyist ain't going to pay £200 for a UV meter unless they have a large collection. UVB lamps are delicate, can be damaged or installed incorrectly. If you're using UVB, it's always better to go for a large tank, unless the species does sit indirect sunlight for hours on end (waxy monkey frogs, although this frog needs a large tank anyway) Too much or too less exposure can be bad, just as manmade D3 products. I am actually going to get one of these myself at one point. I do get the argument on UVB and I support that it could be beneficial to many species, but I not believe anyone who is keeping their frogs without UVB is providing bad husbandry... on the other hand, if the invidual species actually has been proven to benefit from exposure and it's easy enough to provide, then I would encourage the provision of UVB. But I wouldn't recommend cutting D3 from supplements.

Hypervitaminosis d3 is impossible with UVB, it's only possible with synthetic supplementation. The idea is to mimic the UVB index that naturally occurs where the animal lives in the same way we mimic the temperature, humidity and photo period. This is the advanced husbandry that we should all be encouraging people to strive for in the interests of the animals and the hobby in general. Can you keep animals in a way that requires less effort? Yes. Should you? No. It's the keeper's responsibility to provide the best possible care available. Lights being delicate or possibly being incorrectly installed is a very poor excuse to not use them and justifying a tiny enclosure on the same basis is even worse.

You're obviously interested in the subject matter Jason, and to be honest I don't come on here very often any more as like most fora now this one is becoming quieter in favour of the many very active Facebook groups. Could I suggest you join us in the group 'Advanced Herp Husbandry'? You will have access to many of the world's leading scientists and herpetologists who are at the cutting edge of modern husbandry practices. I think you'd enjoy it

[jasonm96]

I'm very much interested in the care of my animals and love to read books on them.

I'm aware that D3 is regulated by the body when exposed to lights, but what I mean with too much UVB might be bad, as it is for us.

If the frogs did not fare well with this then experts/breeders would recommend UVB lighting. These guys literally spend so much time with their frogs, studying them and trying new things. They breed them for a living and so I trust them the most. They would know if something was missing. I believe you breed too don't you? I'd trust what you do with your animals, the species you kept and would take advice. But I fully trust Philippe de Vosjoli's guide to horned frog care and his methods. Working closely with one species and lots of them is the best way to learn how to care for them. I do prefer practical advice rather than theory and UVB lighting with amphibians needs more research IMO and proven results per species, in detailed information on how they were housed, fed and what lighting and for how long they received it. But I'm re-doing my tanks over the next few months and I am putting better lighting on some where I believe will benefit and for displaying the frogs. I'll still use my supplements contain D3, though.

Those were not excuses, but actually concerns. In order to fully rely upon UVB as a the main source of D3 and leave behind the old supplementation regimes, the correct wild index as you know has to be provided. But there's guesswork unless you have the UVB meter and it's pricey. For the light and shade method, for me the tank size does come into consideration. Unlimited space in the wild allows the animal to select many light and heat gradients to it's preference. In small (but not necessarily tiny) tanks often recommended, the animals will not have much choices and could be stressed. This will have to be updated and hobbyists will need to buy larger tanks and create different types of set ups. Breeders aswell, it will be very different and pricier than the current practices. We have a serious interest in frogs, but for someone who simply wants a pet, it's a lot different. They might just want the basics and the animal, not to spend a fortune. Just my thoughts. I do like to have debates on these things,it's a great way to learn and share advice. There's so much to be learn.

I will check it out, thanks!

[Diver]

Yes, absolutely correct that sufficient shelter must be provided, if you kept a frog in a bare box it would no doubt be similar to putting a human in the middle of the desert with the resulting over-exposure. Animals self-regulate in the same way that we do, but of course must be given the opportunity to do so.
I take on board what you're saying about people who just want a 'pet', I think the issue I have is when (as I have seen on here many times) new keepers are told that this very basic way of keeping animals is the correct way. I believe everyone should be encouraged to keep animals to the absolute best of their abilities and we are very fortunate these days to have the equipment and the knowledge to be able to do so, it's the responsibility of the more experienced to guide the novice in the best direction (I feel). This does include larger enclosures than the 'norm' for sure, many recommended sizes have no hope of providing proper photo and temperature gradients let alone enough space for the animal.
As far as the Horned Frog is concerned, I've never kept them so I can't argue against what you have heard from people who breed them (I put this in the Tree Frog section as it's my area of interest), but it's worth noting that in the snake side of the hobby, big breeders like Brian Barczyk have an enormous following and the keeping methods he recommends (keeping large constrictors in bare tiny tubs and drawers) are emulated by thousands but also abhorred by just as many people so opinions do vary!
Papers like the attached along with easily accessible information on for instance the Arcadia website are thankfully becoming more common and are a resource to help people know how to provide UVB for their animals without the need for an expensive meter. For me (and I remember all the shortcomings of the pre-UVB era only too well) it's something to point people in the direction of as they strive to care for their charges in vastly improved manner from 'the old days'. Also, we shouldn't forget that benefits of simulating natural sunlight are not just limited to the d3 production, even most people who argue the synthetic oral method will grudgingly admit this.

[jasonm96]

This is exactly it. But new keepers to fully understand pet shops must be supplying the correct equipment and advice (many don't) or even if they do, a lot of people do just think it's the pet shop wanting to make money, unfortunately as a £10 frog can cost hundreds to properly set up. New books focused on the on the care of amphibians will be produced in the future and include how to properly use UVB. Yes the Arcadia books help, but an all in one solution focused solely on amphibians in better. The future looks good but it will take time and more studies and results from breeders will help