|
21-29 of 29 messages
|
Previous
Page 3 of 3
|
|
RE: some problems
|
Reply
|
|
by theemojohnm on November 9, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I use the river-rock style aquarium gravel John describes almost exclusively now. The biggest con, is that it it heavy enough to rarely get stuck to an aminal or ingested when feeding.
Even another great advantage for large collections, is that it does not have to be purchased very often, as it is re-useable. Rinse under some hot water, and its ready to be used again. It maintains a great heat gradient under heat lamps. It also can be sprayed down a bit so that there is a thin layer of moisture underneath the gravel, keeping the surface dry but the underside moist, for the tropical, high humidity animals. Or, it can be kept completely dry for desert species.
It also looks pretty nice.. ;)
Take Care.
~John Mendrola.
|
| |
|
RE: some problems
|
Reply
|
|
by theemojohnm on November 9, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Arin,
You can ussually find the natural-looking "river-rock" style aquarium gravel at any shop that sells fish. PetsMart and Pecto each have similar gravels close to this.
Basically, the are like natural "water-smoothed" pebles and are shades of browns, tans, grays, etc. They are used usually for more natural-looking planted tropical fish tanks.
Sometimes you find them in bags of rather large and rounded particles, and sometimes they are a bit smaller.
Generally, this type of gravel is usually smoother than the jaged painted gravels used for aquariums. I use the finer river-rock gravel for smaller snakes, and the larger grit for my larger snakes. This probably makes no difference, but I just think it may make them feel a bit more comfortable when moving over it all the time.
Take Care.
~John Mendrola.
|
| |
|
RE: some problems
|
Reply
|
|
by 23bms on November 10, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Regarding point B, I bow to the consensus and admit I was wrong.
Regarding point A, I make no concession whatsoever. Broadley and Wuster wrote an interesting paper on the subject a few years ago. It is available at:
http://biology.bangor.ac.uk/%7Ebss166/Publications/2004_Naja_annulifera.pdf
If you are aware of any work calling their conclusions into question, please share it.
jrb
|
| |
|
RE: some problems
|
Reply
|
|
by puffadder7 on November 12, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
get a good look at a snouted cobra look at the scale count then look a a naja haje same thing as mine just banded, arin
|
| |
|
RE: some problems
|
Reply
|
|
by puffadder7 on November 12, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
also the scales leading to the eye, snouteds have one egyptians have two, also naja annulifera has very small eyes compared to naja haje,arin
|
| |
|
RE: some problems
|
Reply
|
|
by 23bms on November 14, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In N Haje, the upper labials contact the eye. in N annulifera, the upper labials are seperated from the eye by occulars. The animal in your profile has no labials contacting the eye. The dorsal scale counts of the two species overlap and are not definitive.
N Annulifera.
Case closed.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
