Mike,
I didn't mean to disparage maternal incubation. Lots of balls are hatched that way. Either way will work. In fact I would agree that if you don't have a good incubator set-up with a good reliable thermostat you are probably better off having mom incubate the eggs. My real point was that everything else being equal, I still think the ability to get mom eating 2 months sooner can't help but be a big plus. Epecially for females that drop clutches late that you are trying to turn around for the upcoming season. I don't profess to be an expert, but I personally belive clutch size is influenced and tends to be larger in females that are brought up to ideal weight and held for a longer period of time before cycling. You just can't help but feel much more comfortable about breeding a female that dropped a clutch in July or August where an incubator was used and has thus has been able to eat at least 3-5 months before cycling compared to that same female that maternally incubated her eggs and therefore only was able to eat for 1-3 months before cycling. More likely in the second case the female should have the year off.
Just an opinion.

[ Hide Replies ]

• incubator vs mom - geraldsnakes, Thu Jun 2 20:59:17 2005
• RE: incubator vs mom - PetMania, Thu Jun 2 21:07:44 2005
• RE: incubator vs mom - gwhit, Thu Jun 2 21:49:44 2005
• RE: incubator vs mom - mkreptiles, Thu Jun 2 22:06:41 2005
• RE: incubator vs mom - gwhit, Thu Jun 2 23:07:47 2005
• Here's an article for you to read - jmartin104, Fri Jun 3 05:47:11 2005
• RE: Here's an article for you to read - gwhit, Fri Jun 3 10:42:01 2005
• Thanks! np - jmartin104, Fri Jun 3 10:54:07 2005