let us start new, I apologize, I am not a snowlflake but after having been bashed here like a piece of …., i might iverreact. I will gladly answer all your questions and say my opinion and evidece-based statements or speculations and I will clearly divide them from each other, OK?
1) My "base" for it is everything I wrote in the reply.
A) Various published analyses of chameleon poop showing only small amounts of pollinators.
WELL, THERE ARE NO WIDE SCALE STUDIES AS YOU KNOW.
I HAVE FOUND POLLINATORS EXTREMELY FREQUENTLY, presented the evidence on my site incl youtube channel. Numerous keepers witnessed this.
B) Limitations with study designs leading to inability to distinguish between members of Hymenoptera and thus potential over-reporting of pollinators even in the relatively small proportion of the diet they seem to comprise.
THAT IS A SPECULATION I
CAN NOT CONFIRM
C) Various anecdotal observations of myself, other visitors of Madagascar, and guides who have spent their entire lives there reporting ~0 bee consumption.
WELL, THERE WE GO:
EVIDENCE OF ABSENCE? I HAVE NO DATA ON TIME AND WAY HOW YOU COLLECTED DATA SO I JUST CAN SPECULATE ON SOME VERY WEIRD BIAS AND NOT REPRESENTATIVENNESS OF YOUR OBSERVATIONS. I SPENT IN MADAGASXAR MANY MONTHS, will spend soon again 3 MONTHS, YOU SPEAK A OUT INCIDENTAL
ONSERVATIONS,
I JlHAVE HUNDREDS OF WORKERS
IN MASAGASCAR WORKING ON PROJECTS THERE. THEY STATE ORHERWISE
I HAVE ANALYZED HUNDREDS OF FECAL SAMPLES FROM F PARDALIS AND THEY WERE FULL OF POLINATORS: DIPTERANS, HYMENOPTERANS AND COLEOPTERANS, THERE ARE MANY VIDEOS AS EVIDENCE
D) Evidence that the very guiding practices themselves in Madagascar (honed over many years of observation and designed to see as many chameleons as possible across environments) do not account for any behavioral pattern of chameleons sitting on flowers or being found preferentially near pollinators.
NOO NEED FLOWERINV PLANTS ARE EVERUWHERE AND THE HIGHER THE CHAMELEONS SIT, THE LESS THEY WILL BE EXPOSED
TO ORTHOPTERANS AND MORE TO FLYING POLLINATORS
ALSO
I KEEP HUNDREDS OF CHAMELEONS IN HUGE NATURAL
CAGES FULL OF FLOWERING TREES AND BUSHES. I ALSO HAVE BEEHIVES THERE. THE PREFERENCE OF BEES AND WASPS AND FLIES OVER EG ORTHOPTERANS IS ABSOLUTELY EVIDENT. HUNDREDS OF KEEPERS REPORT ABOT THE SAME, I AM REALLY PUZZLED WHERE YOU COLLECT YOUR DATA STATING THE OPPOSITE.
E) Observations surrounding the amount of pollen a pollinator is able to carry and the inherent variability in the process.
YES DIFFERENT POLLINATORS GET CONTAMINATED OR GUTLOADED OR DELIBERATELY EQUOPED WITH (bees) POLLEN VARIOIS WAYS
To distill my entire set of observations/ideas here to "I went to Madagascar once and didn't see chameleons eating bees" is really not appropriate and I'd hope for better.
WELL
SO HOW
MANY FECAL
SAMPLES
HAVE YOU ANALYZED? HOW MANY CHAMELEONS
HAVE YOU BEEN ABLE TO
OBSERVE SO LONG THAT YOU EVEN SAW THEM EATING?
I HAVE OBSERVED CHAMELEONS IN THE WILD FOR MANY HUNDREDS OF FULL DAYS, OBSERVED THOUSANDS OF SPECIMENS OF MANY TENTHS OF SPECIES AND SAW THEM EATING ON SEVERAL THOUSANDS OF OCCASSIONS. BIG PART OF THESE OBSERVATIONS ARE STILL IN MY FIELD NOTES NOT YET ANALYZED NOR PREPARED FOR PIBLICATION
IT IS NOT LAZINESS IT IS LACK OF TIME.
PLUS, I AM CONVINCED THAT THERE IS PROBABLY NOONE ELSE IN THE WORLD
NOW PAYING SO MUCH ATTENTION TO CHAMELEONS AS MYSELF SO THAT UNFORTUNATELY-FORTUNATELY I AM ONE OF FEW SOURCES OF EVIDENCE WHILE THERE ARE MERELY ANY COMPARABLE OTHERS
2) Why do you feel the issues above such as carrion consumption, beetle consumption, fungal element consumption, ant consumption etc. are "absolutely marginal"?
CARRION CONSUMPTION IS AN INTERESTING WUALITAGIVE TOPIC BUT BASED O. MY EXPERIENCE THE VOLUME IS TRACE-LIKE
BEETLES ARE NOT MARGINAL, especially chaffers (pollinators),
SOME CARRION FEDING ONES AI JAVE OBSERVWD TOO BUT SELDOMLY
ANTS ARE MARGINAL AS THEY ARE CONSUMED ONLY OCCASSIONALLY: THE MOST CHAMELEONS IGNORE THEM DIE SMALL SIZE AND SEASONALLY (SINGLE DIGIT NUMBER A YEAR) AND LOCALLY, THEY GET FED WHEN BREEDING COLONIES FLY
This is the crux of the issue-please explain why or how you think these factors don't matter. It comes off as if you are the one dismissing it right now without offering much reasoning. You don't think Brookesia species might encounter ants regularly?
WELL. I HAVE NOT OBSERVED THEM FEEDING ON ANTS, I DO NOT KNOW
THEY ARE VENOMOUS AND HAVE FORMIC ACID AND ARE BLACK (whichbis a food color often omitted) SOMEONE NEED TO STUDY IT, I AM A BIT SKEPTICAL.
BEING STOUND ANT NESTS IS DANGEROUS FOR SMALL
CHAMELEONS
Why or why not? You think tiny calumma species or Brookesia should be supplemented with pollen despite being so diminutive?
I WOULD SAY YES
SMALM POLLINATORS
ARE QUITEN TOO
BUT YES FOR
SMALL
SPECIES POLLEN MIGJT BE LESS IMPORTANT
Why or why not? If you read my statements I bolded the main points, being that I don't think bee pollen is a cure all for every chameleon in captivity in every circumstance.
I
HAVE NEVER SAID ANYTHING LIKE THAT
I JUST BELIEVE IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT
MY LONG TERM EXPERIENCE AND SPECIFIC REILTS OF EXPERIMENTS INDICATE SO
3) I have read all or almost all of your articles. I have seen the video "Chameleons eat bees" on your youtube channel. Most of the video content is captive veiled chameleons eating bees. I do not doubt that captive chameleons will often eat bees when presented with them, as that is a fact that you (predominantly) and others (including myself) have observed and documented. To my knowledge, this is not currently a point of contention.
I HAVE OBSERVED
YEMEN CHA
ELEONS IN FHE WILD 20UEATS AGO. YEMEN IS IN WAR
THE WILD FECAL SAMPLES WERE FUL OF BEES, IN SIMMER
IT WAS OVER 90%
OF THE GIT CONTENT
AˇE
C ARABICUS IN YEMEN AMD OMAN
I JABE EVEN OBSERVED THEM TL CONSUME FLOBER OF SCACIAS FIˇ OF POLLEN BOTH SEEN TJEM EATIN AS WELL
AS IN THE FAECE
4) Even if you produce 10 hours of multiple individual c. calyptratus eating bees in the wild that is one species in one context. Why should this be generalized to all chameleon species in captivity year-round? Do you feel it should?
THERE ARE OBVIOUSLY DIFFFEREMCES. BETWEEN SPECIES
I BELIEVE THEY ARE MORE DRIVEN BY AVAILABILITY THAN CHOICE
BUT THE GENERALIZATION YOU MENTION TO HAVE NOT DONE LITERALLY, HOWEVER IT FITS. C CALYPTRATUS AND OF PARDALIS BUILD MORE THAN 90% OF ALL CHAMELEONS IN THE CAPTIVITY (GUESS) SO THE UYYUH
THE VAST MAJORITY OF SOECIES THE NEXT MOST FREQUENT SPECIES IS T JACKSONII AND T HOEHNELII, I EXPERIMENT V VE CCA CX CF WITH BOTH. WHILE PRESENCE OF POLLEN IN THEIR FOOD MADE NO OBSERVABLE NEGATIVE EFFECTS, THE BABIES RAISED WITHOUTNIT HAD DEVELOPMENTAL PROBLEMS TJOUGH OTHERWISE SUPPLEMENTED NORMALLY
5) You state that you have studied a lot of chameleon poop in the wild and that you find pollinators in the poop, yes? If so, how do you overcome point 1B above? How do you interpret 1A in the context of your own findings?
1B SEE FURTHER, THE BIAS OF LOW ID LEVEL IS IMHO KINOR AND CAN BE MITIGATED
1A IT IS NOWASAYS VERY HARD AND ETHICALLY PROBLEMATIC TO USE ANY INVASIVE METHODS OF
GUT CONTAMR ANALYSIS. THE MOST A AILABLE MERHOD IS FECAL ANALYSIS. IT HAS A GREATBDISADVANTAGE. HEALRHY XHAMELEONS CAN DIFEST MANY FEEDERS FULLY SIMYOUNSEE NO IDENTIFIABLE REMNANTS (IMSEENITMIN THE FSRM TOO, if ai know what they are fed with and compare it with fecal analyses - thousands of samples, youncan identify only some feeders, some disappear - upto 50%QUALITATIVELY AND OBER 80% WUANTITATIVELY DO NOT APPEAR)
FOR DNA ANALYSES WHICH WERE IDEAL AND WOULDMDELICER BEZTER RESULTS ESPECIALLYMIF FLUSHING OF STOMACHS WOULD BE USED, YOU NEED LOTS OF PAPERWORK AND A LAB, WHICH REQUIRES RESEARCH SND EXPORT AND CITES PERMITS AND FUNDING, IT IS NOWADAYS NOT ACCESSIBLE FOR ME
MOREOVER, THE FENERAL. IMMENT IS: IN OUR HEAVILY COMMERCIONALIZED WIRLD WHERE RESESECH MUST HAVE IMPACT ITNIS HARD TO JUSTIFY STUDIES WHICH NO REAL COMMERCIAL AND PRACTICAL OUTPUT. NOONE WILL FUND IT AND NO STUDENT WOULD LIKE TO DO SUCH STUDIES AS THEY WOULD RANK LOWNIN COMPAEISN WITH OTHERS
THEREFORE, WE RELY ON INCIDENTAL IBSERVATIONS ANDNINFREQUENT NON SYSTEMATIC STUDIES
6) As I stated earlier (albeit briefly), we have biological basis for how pollen can be harmful.
HUMAN BASED,
NO REASON TO ASSUME IT WOULD FIT TO REPTILES, ESPECIALLY NIT TI THISE WHO EBIDENTLY FEED ON POLLEN IN IRREGULAR BUT LARGE QUANTITIES. IT MAKES NO EVILUTIONARY SENSE. ITNIS LIKE IF A CARNIVORE WOULD BE SYSTEMATICALLY INTOLLERABLE TO TAURINE