A lot of great stuff here, and I might respond to it in more detail later. However, I want to push back on the bee pollen thing a bit. I use it sometimes, and it's probably relatively harmless in moderation. But the claim that it's ubiquitous in the wild for chameleons is extremely debatable and lacking published research, although several studies have been done to characterize chameleon diet so it's not like it's completely unknown (see below). Furthermore, think about how much pollen is on any given pollinator. Highly variable and often a tiny amount. In my (admittedly, only 1 so far) trip to Madagascar, I didn't observe a single chameleon sitting on a flower or nearby a flower, and I only encountered maybe 3 bees during the entire 2 weeks-much more common were beetles and katydids/hoppers, none of which were covered in pollen. That's an n=1 so shouldn't be taken as overwhelming evidence, but talking to local guides they don't report seeing chameleons sitting at flowers all day eating-same with others who have been to Madagascar. One even stated that "chameleons don't really eat bees", and he has never seen it in many years of guiding. If chameleons were perched waiting for bees to eat all day, guides would probably use flowers as a commonly visited location to show us the chameleons that gather there. They don't do that-the hot spots they take guests to aren't flowers. So I'd argue that A) not all chameleons even encounter pollinators regularly B) Even the ones that do encounter pollinators are variable and the amount of pollen they consume is probably a really tiny amount. Presenting this as if
all chameleons are eating
mostly bees and thus they
should all be supplemented with pollen is not accurate based on the data we have at this time.
Check this out below. Being extremely generous, we can say that maximum 1/4 of the diet of wild chameleons (including flies + ants + bees etc. all as potential pollen-covered insects) is made up of anything resembling pollinators w/pollen on them. For some species, like some tiny calummas and brookesia, it looks like very very little. Even for a study cited by some as showing that most of the diet is bees or pollen-laden insects (Pleguezuelos et al), this is not the case (although yes, it does show that bees, wasps and ants (can't distinguish between these easily) are indeed eaten in moderate amounts). Important to note that usually bees wasps and ants are grouped up in these studies so who knows how few are actually actively consuming or are covered in pollen.
https://www.madcham.de/en/chamaeleonfutter/
Pleguezuelos, J.M., Poveda, R., and Ontiveros, D. 1999. Feeding habits of the common chameleon, Chamaeleo chamaeleon in the southeastern Iberian Peninsula. ISRAEL JOURNAL OF ZOOLOGY. 45:267-276
Why are we not talking about feeding ants? Feeding carrion-consuming insects (which has actually been documented, even in the article above)? Feeding more grasshoppers? Feeding spiders? I think part of the reason for the bee pollen pushing is the "natural is harmless" craze that has been plaguing human healthcare and the supplement industry for generations. It's easy to think of natural things like bee pollen as being panaceas of health and thus impossible to overdo. I think it's easy to fall into this trap but it's largely based on gut feelings not substantiated by data, and in my opinion the bee pollen stuff is barely an exception. It's better characterized in humans. Remember, if we feed pollen and honey to human children under 1, there is a chance they end up hospitalized and near death due to their immature immune system and c. botulinum spores present in these food items. Not to fearmonger, just an example that "natural" substances should still be approached with caution. Who knows if there is anything comparable with pollen/honey in chameleons. Not everything from nature is harmless and everything we do to animals in captivity should be thought about carefully. This is not what is being practiced when arguing that bee pollen should be fed as a staple food source to every chameleon. Why not supplement bugs with fungal spores all the time in captivity, as I saw a lot of mushrooms in Madagascar anecdotally with bugs on them? The list goes on.
In short, I feel that bee pollen is probably fine in moderation. I am more critiquing the rationale leading to it occasionally being promoted as a completely harmless substance. Stating it is basically the answer to many husbandry problems and attributing illnesses to a lack of pollen muddies the picture and gives the impression that we have this figured out mechanistically and practically when we simply don't. If we assume the problems are from a lack of pollen or that pollen cures x, y, z, I believe it reduces our ability to explore other alternatives or fill in gaps that are sorely needed (like considering fungi in the environment, considering carrion-containing prey items, frugivory, etc.). If we really think that bee pollen is the answer we should strive to test this out rigorously. Someday I'd be happy to test that hypothesis (unless someone gets to it before I do) and if it proves out, I would present the data to the public in as unbiased of a way as possible. If it leads to better outcomes I am all for it and would love for that to be the simple answer.
, but isnāt the standard form that we ask new keepers to complete and then is assessed and critiqued by experienced members sort of also saying āthis is the right way to do itā
. Teaches a little humility to get in a fight and sometimes get destroyed.
