Retained or breed?
- Thread starter Jerm
- Start date
sandrachameleon
Chameleon Enthusiast
Well I dont know how she does it (not retain). I dont know how one retains it either. Im not a biologist.
I feed my chameleons almost daily, but not much at a time.
I feed my chameleons almost daily, but not much at a time.
sandrachameleon
Chameleon Enthusiast
perhaps you feed her too much? or perhaps she sees other chameleons? or perhaps she is just wired that way.
Ryan Jarosek
New Member
The wired thing is what I am thinking with my girl.
I have 8 female panthers and all of them seem to be more "normal" or at least in line with each other. That is except for the one who produces huge clutches no matter what I do.
I have been trying different things like limiting food, playing with temperature. I have not been able to slow her down at all. I am always looking for something new to try.
Chameleon Company
Avid Member
The only way that we have found to reduce or halt the continuous production of clutches once bred is to reduce their ambient temps by 10-12 degrees day and night, similar to a Madagascar winter. This would be taking them down to 58-62F at night, and 80-84F day. I am also sure that there is a food-water stress component, such that if you induce shortages of either and effectively weaken the female, you can stymie sperm-retention clutches. That, however, might be akin to cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. Otherwise, double and triple clutching is how these animals are programmed to take advantage of the warm season in Madagascar, especially during bountiful times.
Its not about "machines". It is about understanding the natural history and husbandry of the animals that we keep
The major problem, as we see it, is that most captive husbandry comes up a bit short of Mother Nature, and whereas a female in the wild may be quite able to sustain that volume of egg production in a season, captive females often do not fare that well. That captive animals may get adequate volumes of food and water encourages multiple clutching. That the quality of the nutrition-vitamins-minerals may be deficient diminishes the viability of the female and the eggs. End result is too often that many females burn out, and the eggs are no good. However, if your husbandry is good, it can be done effectively.
Its not about "machines". It is about understanding the natural history and husbandry of the animals that we keep
The major problem, as we see it, is that most captive husbandry comes up a bit short of Mother Nature, and whereas a female in the wild may be quite able to sustain that volume of egg production in a season, captive females often do not fare that well. That captive animals may get adequate volumes of food and water encourages multiple clutching. That the quality of the nutrition-vitamins-minerals may be deficient diminishes the viability of the female and the eggs. End result is too often that many females burn out, and the eggs are no good. However, if your husbandry is good, it can be done effectively.
Ryan Jarosek
New Member
Thanks Jim , I am glad you jumped in here. I was hoping you would provide some insight.
You mentioned in a thread one time of a record clutch. 50+ eggs. I just had a girl lay a 53 egg clutch wanted to see how that measured up.
But what I am really curious about is...
In regards to diet. I provide a good balance of feeders that IMO are gut loaded very well using a good dry mix and lots and lots of veggies. Do you think "quality" of the feeder can play a part as much as "quantity".
Couldn't one feeder gut loaded really well equate to a few feeders gut loaded not as well. I am curious about your thoughts on that. Could it be possible to unintentionally provide an overabundance of nutrition with , sorry for the lack of a better description "super feeder insect". Dusted and gutloaded.
You mentioned in a thread one time of a record clutch. 50+ eggs. I just had a girl lay a 53 egg clutch wanted to see how that measured up.
But what I am really curious about is...
In regards to diet. I provide a good balance of feeders that IMO are gut loaded very well using a good dry mix and lots and lots of veggies. Do you think "quality" of the feeder can play a part as much as "quantity".
Couldn't one feeder gut loaded really well equate to a few feeders gut loaded not as well. I am curious about your thoughts on that. Could it be possible to unintentionally provide an overabundance of nutrition with , sorry for the lack of a better description "super feeder insect". Dusted and gutloaded.
Chameleon Company
Avid Member
Hey Ryan,
57 quality eggs ... ... however, I do not recommend that folks hope for such large numbers, as beyond about the mid 40's, there is an adverse ratio between clutch size and hatch rates in most cases.
My main feeling about clutch size is that a healthy female should always be a provided the best nutrition we know to give. There seems to be two components to clutch size that act in general ways otherwise:
1) The size of the female is in direct ratio to clutch size (size of the girl also often being genetically pre-determined); and
2) A seperate genetic pre-determination to clutch size, in that some bloodlines will lay more than others. We get to observe this when we retain 3-5 females from the same clutch for breeding, and compare that to other sibling female breeding groups. There are patterns observed where the only component that was different was the bloodline.
In support of the above, another observation is that the clutch size for any given female will not vary that much throughout the life of that specific female, in most cases. It is very uncommon to have a girl lay 20 in one clutch, and then 30 in the next. My estimate would be that with 75% of all adult females, the clutch size will stay within a 20% variance by quantity. Put another way, one girl will always lay more or less in the mid 20's, while an adjacent unrelated female on the same diet, husbandry conditions, etc., will always lay in the mid 30's. There are exceptions, but there are observable tendencies.
Yes, quality of food is more important than quantity IMO. Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, "quantity" seems to be able to fool a female into both breeding, and then double-clutching, sometimes to her detriment. I use the word "fool" loosely, as she is only doing as programmed. Mother Nature does not seem to have equipped chameleons to turn off their breeding processes when under-mineralized, etc. Secondly, I think it safe to assume that if the animal has the necessary building blocks, it will tend more towards its maximum production abilities than if it is lacking in such nutrition.
Regarding "over-abundance", I think that one needs to include balance in any such considerations. While we all believe that negative issues can be created with too much calcium, too much protein, too much of a specific vitamin, etc., surely it is also possible to provide the animal nutrition that is out-of-balance, also creating a "too much" (because something else is "too little") situation. Everything about "balance" is still a very inexact science, as there are so many interactive parts to getting it right, and they will vary from set-up to set-up.
These animals do shut down in the cool season in most of their ranges. If you were to import 50 WC animals per month every month of the year, it would be obvious, as measured by how many were gravid on import. It also makes pretty safe sense to assume that Mother Nature has selected such that offspring are produced when things are most viable for their survival. I do not know how all the factors interact for chameleons, and likely never will, but we can consider such naturally occurring things as temperature fluctuations, water and food availability, sun angles and daylight duration, etc., all as possible influences on production cycles. We can mimic most of that if desired, and manage egg-production cycles in ways more natural and survivable IMMHO than what occurs with year-round constant environments that do not change.
Back to work.
57 quality eggs ...
... however, I do not recommend that folks hope for such large numbers, as beyond about the mid 40's, there is an adverse ratio between clutch size and hatch rates in most cases.My main feeling about clutch size is that a healthy female should always be a provided the best nutrition we know to give. There seems to be two components to clutch size that act in general ways otherwise:
1) The size of the female is in direct ratio to clutch size (size of the girl also often being genetically pre-determined); and
2) A seperate genetic pre-determination to clutch size, in that some bloodlines will lay more than others. We get to observe this when we retain 3-5 females from the same clutch for breeding, and compare that to other sibling female breeding groups. There are patterns observed where the only component that was different was the bloodline.
In support of the above, another observation is that the clutch size for any given female will not vary that much throughout the life of that specific female, in most cases. It is very uncommon to have a girl lay 20 in one clutch, and then 30 in the next. My estimate would be that with 75% of all adult females, the clutch size will stay within a 20% variance by quantity. Put another way, one girl will always lay more or less in the mid 20's, while an adjacent unrelated female on the same diet, husbandry conditions, etc., will always lay in the mid 30's. There are exceptions, but there are observable tendencies.
Yes, quality of food is more important than quantity IMO. Unfortunately, as mentioned earlier, "quantity" seems to be able to fool a female into both breeding, and then double-clutching, sometimes to her detriment. I use the word "fool" loosely, as she is only doing as programmed. Mother Nature does not seem to have equipped chameleons to turn off their breeding processes when under-mineralized, etc. Secondly, I think it safe to assume that if the animal has the necessary building blocks, it will tend more towards its maximum production abilities than if it is lacking in such nutrition.
Regarding "over-abundance", I think that one needs to include balance in any such considerations. While we all believe that negative issues can be created with too much calcium, too much protein, too much of a specific vitamin, etc., surely it is also possible to provide the animal nutrition that is out-of-balance, also creating a "too much" (because something else is "too little") situation. Everything about "balance" is still a very inexact science, as there are so many interactive parts to getting it right, and they will vary from set-up to set-up.
These animals do shut down in the cool season in most of their ranges. If you were to import 50 WC animals per month every month of the year, it would be obvious, as measured by how many were gravid on import. It also makes pretty safe sense to assume that Mother Nature has selected such that offspring are produced when things are most viable for their survival. I do not know how all the factors interact for chameleons, and likely never will, but we can consider such naturally occurring things as temperature fluctuations, water and food availability, sun angles and daylight duration, etc., all as possible influences on production cycles. We can mimic most of that if desired, and manage egg-production cycles in ways more natural and survivable IMMHO than what occurs with year-round constant environments that do not change.
Back to work.
Last edited:
sandrachameleon
Chameleon Enthusiast
that's about typical of my daytime temp, sometimes up to 32-ish C (basking spot). Doesnt get that cold at night though. Coldest (in winter) is around18C/65F but usually a bit warmer.
Its worth noting that my females are not unhealthy, not underfed, not overfed, not short lived (except one). I could also be lucky (or unlucky, depending our your purpose) to have females "wired" for fewer eggs. Several have been related, so it could be a genetic difference.
