Uvb and D3

[Jenste]

This forum is an appropriate place- but recent conversations have not been "appropriate" in tone and have been causing more disruption than learning. When it comes to technology being used with the care of living beings, there will always be debate.

[Diver]

Debate is a good thing, surely? I didn't see what apparently turned into an argument, just some deleted comments and an apology.
Then: There is no need to argue, but if you do want to prove your point you are welcome to do so in respectful manner in a separate thread. You are welcome to share your scientific data, nobody knows everything ( even vets**and personally I would love to hear new data I might not be aware yet.

But apparently this invitation to start a separate thread to discuss new scientific discoveries in a respectful manner has now been retracted.

[Jenste]

Debate is fine when those debating can keep the posts courteous and informative. Lately they have been quickly turning argumentative and the "deleted posts" you referenced were ones that had dwindled down to including name calling which is not helpful in anyway to anyone.

Generally starting a separate thread to try and gear the conversation back to it's original intent is fine but when the topic has been a hot button for some lately, we watch them carefully to make sure they also do not resort to inappropriate behavior. Sometimes others need time to let their blood cool down a bit, more threads can spread the fire so to speak.

[LilyPad]

I do think it can be a quality discussion so long as it is kept polite. The other thread was not kept polite, hence the deleted post.

There are current studies that still show both sides of the debate. Studies from 2014-2015 still show issues with embryonic development and death in amphibians when exposed to uv. Studies from 2014-2015 also support uv. There is some suggestion that pesticides in the environment inhibit the amphibians to the point that they do not properly shelter themselves or their eggs from uv, but that is still at the level of hypothesis and suggestion rather than having provided proof last I read. There are a few that would make interesting reads, but they cost money. Because they are fairly new, I have not found other sites who have purchased, read, and reviewed the study for others to be able to access some of the information for free yet.

Either way, your frogs are thriving with UV, my frogs are thriving without UV and with calc +D3 supplements alone. Many people have the same experiences as both of us.

[Krispy]

Well, there are so many sides to this coin. Like here's a good one. Even our 3 unplanted tanks which are our whites(moe larry, and shemp), the beardies(monster and lil bruddah), or the pacman(bigweld) we also include a full spectrum bulb. Our belief if the closest to natural sun we can get, the better. Glass reflects uv, not absorbs it, remember this, so with nice clean glass, we still 'believe' that they absorb small amounts of all the uv no matter what. Keeping in mind uvb needs d3 and all that. The bulbs do not provide what they fully need. They aren't the sun, and no matter how hard we try with our planted viv's its still not real nature. So on top of all the uv everywhere we rotate supplements every other feeding. From regular calcium, to calcium+d3 to fill in the gaps. Then theres gut loading their food. Ah. Another odd thing we do. Well more my doing than the wifes. I like to do an electrolyte soak once a month for all my animals. We use zoo med electrolyte. Needed? Probably not. Is it good for their immune systems and full of other important vitamins they can soak in, yes.
Many moons with snakes. About 3-4 years now with frogs. 2bps, mom wanted my red tail so i hooked her up, firebellies,red eyes, whites, pacman, anoles, longtails, and damaged beardies we adopted from petsmart. 2 casualties. 1 was a whites from petco in his dying throws from mbd, the other a baby pacman(poor aunt fanny) fell victim to a power outage while we were away. Also another reason i been banging my head over solar.
But overall, no real health issues, good checkups, no, well anything. Maybe its overkill, but it works out great for us. So we think uv helps.

[Diver]

So, if everyone has now calmed down.... While not a party to the recent heated arguments, I have seen incorrect advice being given lately which could do with being addressed and the way to address it is to try and give the correct information rather than attacking the person involved as that just causes bad feeling and an argumentative stance which it not conducive to a learning experience. I'd like to think that everyone on here is receptive to new information even if it changes what they thought they knew, I certainly am because it from this that we learn more about the subject that many are clearly passionate about. Opinions certainly vary, but opinions are not facts so perhaps we can straighten out a few scientifically verifiable facts that we can hopefully all agree on regarding this subject.

To reiterate some of the comments from Dr. Ivan Alfonso on this thread: http://www.frogforum.net/showthread.php?t=24225

Frogs need calcium. Without it they will suffer from a variety of maladies and will ultimately die. In the wild they would obtain this from a varied diet but in captivity with the most freely available feeders such as crickets, calcium is lacking and therefore must be supplemented, an easy task as feeders can be dusted with calcium and the animal cannot overdose so plenty can be given to ensure a sufficient amount.
However, all the calcium in the world is ineffective unless the animal has vitamin d3 with which to process the calcium. In the wild this is obtained from sunlight. In captivity the caged animal is deprived of natural sunlight so two methods exist to supply the required d3, one is oral supplementation, the other is provision of UVB from artificial lighting.
The problem with oral supplementation is threefold. Firstly, we don't know what a correct dose is. Even if we did there is no way of administering the correct dose via dusting of feeders. Secondly, it is possible to overdose so therefore harm the animal we are trying to keep healthy. Finally, it has now been proven the the oral (and unnatural) administering of d3 is far less efficient than originally thought. The consequence of all this is that it's impossible to give a frog the correct dose of d3 orally.
UVB lighting has become by far the preferred way to provide d3 to frogs worldwide in zoos, institutions, breeding facilities and by hobbyists worldwide. The reason being is that it is the natural way in which the process occurs in the wild, it is far more efficient than oral supplementation and (as now has been proven), frogs can detect UVB through their eyes and so can regulate the amount of UVB they are exposed to. This means the correct amount can be obtained without overdose exactly as the frog would in the wild by varying their exposure to sunlight.
Of the two methods it is clear, and scientifically proven, than UVB lighting is preferable to oral supplementation for the provision of vitamin d3. Added to this is the huge weight of anecdotal evidence showing the other benefits to animals that have provided with UVB lighting including colouration, display of natural activity, breeding success and overall health. We do also see a lot of threads on here with often young frogs suffering from a variety of undiagnosed health issues, there is a very good chance that many of these have been been cause by preventable deficiencies of calcium/d3.
There are now many scientific papers available to help people decide on the UVB/d3 issue, I don't have time to trawl for them all but obviously people can do their own research. Here's a small selection:

This one is particularly interesting as it shows that frogs provided with oral d3 still developed MBD showing it's inefficiency:

http://www.amphibianark.org/pdf/Husb...quirements.pdf

This one shows oral supplementation as ineffective compared to UVB in an animal that is very resistant to UVB:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20206712

This one demonstrates that frogs are able to detect UVB (as well as the inefficiencies of oral supplementation)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20206712

This is a good read too:

http://www.jzar.org/jzar/article/view/70/38


With all the obvious proven and anecdotal reasons to provide UVB along with adequate cover for frogs it's difficult to understand why it should not be a standard part of modern husbandry, there seems no good reason to withhold it. The reasons given on the previous thread of decreased ventilation or inadequate plant growth are of course not reasons at all with the availability of compact bulbs, t5 and t8 tubes and even miniature fans. When you know you can improve the well-being of your charges by providing UVB even on a 'just in case' basis, is it really not worth providing just for the cost of a bulb?

[Diver]

Here's a little more reading from a forum in the UK. Only just found this thread, but I think it's hugely indicative of the different husbandry techniques over here:

Written in 2009.

We're on the cusp of a change.
It seems that at least here hobbyists have begun to open up to the idea that Amphibians could indeed utilise UVB and that they may infact benefit from exposure to it.
This is going to be a rambling exploration

First things first.
Amphibians like all vertebrates require Calcium in their bodies in sufficient amounts to be able to function optimally and thrive. Calcium is needed for not only bone density but also functions within the muscles, blood, nervous system, organs and exchanges on a cellular level.
Lack of Calcium is much more than just softer bones.
- The efficiency of nerves and the nervous system is compromised as the body tries to ration out the Calcium it does have (Hence twitching toes/legs or spasms).
- The ability for muscles to be controlled is damaged, (prolapses can be a direct result as the cloacal sphincter muscles cannot be maintained).
- Hormonal regulation and/or homeostasis may be impaired, the animal may lose it's ability to maintain it's bodily balance or fail to breed despite appearing in good health outwardly as a deficiency renders it infertile or unable to respond to breeding cues. If the animal is able to breed it's offspring may be damaged from conception as a result of health problems in the adult animals.
- Then the bones themselves, you'd be suprised to know how many fractures an otherwise normal looking and mobile amphibian can have. This may leave the animal in constant pain, or it may impair their ability to feed and breed in such a minor way that it is never questioned or suspected.


Often the major argument amongst hobbyists to evidence "Good health" is that animals have bred...
Unfortunately for many species of animals (and indeed plants) reproduction may often be the last ditch effort to ensure genes are passed on despite the health of the animal being dire and the living conditions almost unbearable.
If you could not get these animals to breed in captivity where competition is minimal, parasitism is reduced, predation is non-existant and food is abundant, THEN you'd really have something to worry about!
Breeding in captivity is not an indication of health nor 'happiness' in our animals. Sorry!


Amphibians, like all vertebrates, require Vitamin D3 in their bodies in order to utilise dietary Calcium, I won't go into the D3 pathway and specifically how it is used by the body to regulate calcium uptake, you can read about that here;
UV Lighting for Reptiles: Vitamin D synthesis in Ultraviolet Light

So, knowing this we are faced with two options which are the crux of this issue. Outlining them I hope to make it clear why UVB exposure is the safest, most logical and feasible option.


Dietary supplements.
Vitamin D3 can be absorbed by the body via the gut, however, this route of uptake is unregulated and allows for overdose and the resulting bodily imbalance.
The majority of amphibian keepers currently rely on multivitamin supplements to fulfill this role (although there are some who genuinely don't think it is needed for these animals!?!? and those who never use supplements).
Supplements come in little plastic pots that most people keep near their vivaria or in the cupboards below, people buy in bulk to save money so may have tubs stored at room temperature and above for 6-12 or more months... Vitamins are the entire purpose of our use of multivitamins instead of plain calcium (which as a pure mineral does not degrade or denature in a pot).
So then, we have a clear problem if we know that vitamins such as D3 are incredible fragile compounds, degraded or denatured by moisture, higher temperatures and exposure to atmospheric air. A tub of Nutrobal will be next to pointless after 6 months sat next to your viv and after 6 months worth of opening and closing, letting in moist atmospheric air...
So on one hand this method has the potential for overdose but also the potential to be completely pointless if the product is not stored and used appropriately, but, there is no way of the average hobbyist knowing when or how fast this occurs...


UVB exposure
The joy of opting for UVB exposure rather than plain supplements is that not only can you actually buy a meter to measure the exact level you are using and actively check for degradation of your chosen D3 provider, BUT this pathway is self limited within the skin of the animal!!!

Any Herptile in our care, amphibian or not, should be provided with a suitable environment in captivity this should include appropriate refugia - burrows/hiding spots, shade, foliage, caves, whatever. It should also include a full day/night cycle, the overall health of captive animals, their ability to breed and their hormonal balance is affected by their ability to experience Circadian Rhythms. (ALL animals whether nocturnal, diurnal or crepuscular). We should strive to provide a naturalistic light cycle including beneficial UVB (and UVA) exposure and we should design our vivaria to accomodate this.

Many reluctant keepers use the argument of;
"But they're nocturnal they would never be exposed to it!?!"
Go to the wild and see it for yourself These animals sleep in the relative open even if they are truly nocturnal, your average treefrog sleeps on leaves or treetrunks exposed directly or indirectly (via reflection) to UVB.

I can tell you that amphibians, like lizards for instance, can be more or less demanding in terms of UVB. Some species can be exposed to massive levels of UVB on a daily basis and still show room for improvement in their calcium levels (e.g: Canopy dwelling treefrog species), others can be exposed to short blasts of high UVB exposure once in a blue moon and have good calcium levels (e.g: Arid environment burrowing sps.)
There is clearly a difference in tolerance to UVB exposure (meaning their skin may have greater resistance) and actual physical levels needed (meaning they may require a much greater overall exposure than other species to achieve the same level of "health") between individual species.


Common sense must apply, vivariums may be constructed to provide naturalistic levels of exposure and cover as per the individual species.
There is no single answer and there never will be.

Just consider this, I have seen animals with no visible skeleton jumping around like there is no tomorrow and breeding. This does not mean that it is acceptable for these animals to subsist, to live under sub-lethal stresses and we will know about it eventually...
The amphibian hobby does not seem as negative towards WC animals as others, I can think of no species which has yet been bred consistently for a number of generations with no injection of WC genes at some point.
I can tell you that damage to offspring can be seen in the shorterm resulting directly from poorly kept adult stock, but no one is looking for it.

Poor success in metamorphs is blamed on bad water or bad luck.
1000 Amazonian milk frog eggs can be whittled down to 5 successful metamorphs a year later and people say "oh well that's why they lay so many"... No. They lay so many to get through metamorphosis AND have some survive predation. Juveniles are passed along so people don't get to see where they begin to fail to thrive, or breed.

Frogs that look perfectly healthy can be walking around with a shattered pelvis (I've seen it...) and amplexing females nightly as they are healthy breeding animals!

[Diver]

And here's where the full thread and discussion can be found:

http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forum...y-musings.html

[elly]

Very interesting, thanks. I will ask, does anyone know if tree frogs are subject to burns from UVB?