Reptile & Amphibian Forums

The debates about the differences between wild monitors and captive monitors have been a fascinating way to watch both sides hone their positions.

We know for an absolute undeniable fact that many captive monitors are physiologically capable of multiclutching, ie. lay fertile eggs numerous times in one year. I don't think anyone here will deny this as a known, indisputable fact.

Based on this bit of fact that we can all agree on, I have a question for the scientists.....

Do you guys really believe that evolution has evolved to the point that many monitors can multiclutch in captivity but they don't utilize this powerful reproductive option in the wild?

Personally, I believe it's possible that some species can multiclutch in the wild under ideal conditions; say a small tropical species in a good year. However, my understanding is that numerous studies of even small species have yet to show evidence of it actually occurring, so if it does happen it is the exception rather than the norm.

I have noticed that the scientists have really focused on the larger species in declaring that multiclutching does not occur in the wild. They seem to have left the door open on the notion of smaller species multiclutching in the wild.

From a survival perspective, the fact that the smaller species seem to prolifically multiclutch in captivity indicates the need for further study on wild populations.

The captive monitors are either multiclutching because their captive environment is either "ideal" or it is so frought with stress and peril that these animals feel the need to multiclutch in order to ensure the survival of their race.

Having seen FR's captives in action, my guess is that these lizards are more happy and content rather than stressed.

An earlier post referring to captives multiclutching because they are stressed and in poor conditions was intended as a joke and not to be taken seriously.

As far as scientists concentrating their efforts in the hopes of proving that multiclutching can occur, I would imagine they'd be more concerned with what normally does occur rather than trying to find the exception during an unusual year. Most studies are about what normally happens in nature, but I am sure if a study encompassed one such exceptional year and multiclutching were observed, it would be recorded and included in the results.

I realize it was a joke, that is why I used it as one of my two possible choices.

Therefore, any thinking person would quickly realize that it was likely that captive monitors are multiclutching because conditions are indeed ideal.

This is only your pigeonholing your own thoughts. We never said IT happened all the time. It may. All we say is, they can, its a matter of when and where. You sir have added the rest of those constraints.

That you want your thoughts to be "normal" and others to be, not, is very concerning.

Also, the studies that you call science and normal. How do you know that the year or two any of these studies is normal? in the skeem of things? As far as I know, these studies are not based on figuring out which year to do the study. They do them, when convienent. Funding and time. So to say, they represent normal is very odd. Thats again, something you assume. Or added because its convienent to you.

Again, your more about arguing then figuring it out. FR

I trust in Momma Nature, she gave monitors the ability for a reason, but they also would not be using the ability for a reason as well. Two words: Population Control. Frank can breed the heck out of some monitors, now imagine if his results occured in say 80% of the wild monitor population. How many monitors would starve to death each year, how much more territorial would they become due to the dwindling food sources and how quickly do you think entire species would wipe out do to famine?

Can I prove that? Nope. Could it ever be proved? Possible. Can I dig up materials on other animals and population control (such as how the loss of predators had adversely affected the population of deer in the USA)? Sure can. Would anyone who actually enjoys monitors ever want it to be proved?

That being said, smaller monitors would be the more likely to multiclutch in the wild. Large monitors tend to be the primary predators in their natural habitats. How many things hunt Komodos, Waters or Niles? Not many besides man. Thus their populations would only be controlled by food sources (having versus not having food available). Smaller monitos are the prey of other creatures (including monitors), their populations are more prone to being wiped out by predators, hence they would be more likely to have a NEED to multiclutch to continue the species.

With the exception of humans, animals in nature do not have more children then can be cared for by the resources available.

-Andrew

What special "ability" is it that everyone keeps claiming monitors have, besides being able to reproduce. You make it seem like multiclutching is some sort of mystical power we can't trace in the wild. Just because in captivity they can reproduce in certain ways doesn't mean it's natural. Does anyone here honestly believe that their varanids' enclosure/room/whatever actually replicates nature exactly in wet seasons, photoperiods, and everything else that occurs in their natural environment? Leaving multiclutching out, do you see monitors behaving the same way in captivity as they do in nature? No, they do not, and that is a fact. Why is it so hard (for a few) to believe that the conditions that influence monitors behavior in the wild in turn also influence their breeding habits, making them a different animal than what your monitor may be. Most people understand that, so why can't some believe/understand that just as they behave differently in the wild, they also breed differently in the wild. I've read numerous posts by keepers about how they took a monitor outdoors and let it roam. After roaming out of its familiar areas, and into the so called "wild", it behaved in more wild ways that the owner had never seen (biting/forced vomitting, etc.). All I'm saying is monitors in the wild, as well as all reptiles, are psychologically different than those being kept in cages(whether it be a WC indidivual or CB), and depending on their situation (wild or captive), they behave accordingly (and usually differently).

Nice post, and your right, overpopulation can occur, then balance out. Also, to refill empty or disturbed habitats does happen. Like after extended droughts and fires and floods. Is this what its designed for????? I have often mentioned, a static population, not only may not multiclutch, but have very little production at all, the reason is as you say, the energy source is at a minimum.

Consider this, many of the multiclutching species are very small, like, V.kingorum,gilleni,brevicauda,storri,caudolineatus,acanthurus, etcs. The smaller of these, only have a few eggs per clutch, like 1 to 5 eggs. how long would they last in an environment, that is full of snake predators, lizard predators, bird predators, and mammal predators, and floods and fires and droughts???? Considering the amount of predation, I would be very surprised that the smaller monitors needed any other reason to multiclutch.

This reproductive approach is used my many other similar sized lizards. For instance geckos, iguanids, agamids, lacirdids. At one time, they would not breed in captivity, then they did, then they multiclutched. Then they were shown to in nature as well. This same line of events is here, only monitor folks are only partway down the line.

I would think that something like a Blackthroat, that can produce 50 eggs, shows reason to not need multiclutching often. Althought they have been shown to double clutch in captivity. I have never heard of one triple clutching.

Then take lacies, a largish monitor that lays few tiny eggs, for their size. It would be easy to think they multiclutch.

Please consider, that overproduction, in nature, is only to add to the ecosystem. As food to support the other animals. Including ants. FR

About large species, remember they are not always large. In the egg and when young they are vulnerable to many things. They do not all make it to adulthood.

In birds, if you remove eggs from the nests, the females keep laying eggs. If you let them collect enough eggs, they stop laying and start brooding.

Maybe something similar happens with monitors?

If a female lays a nest of eggs, maybe if she tries to check up on it, and finds it is gone, she'll prepare another clutch of eggs? In captivity, where we dig up the eggs and incubate them artificially, this happens all the time. In the wild, where the eggs most of the time just sit there until they hatch, it is uncommon.

Just and idea - feel free to tear it to shreds ...

Luke

You need to post that at the top of the page for everyone to take notice.

That idea needs some serious investigation.

And I have brought that up before. But then I tested it. Part of the not digging up eggs thing. I have a pic of digging up a fresh batch of ackie eggs only to find right next to it, a clutch hatching in the cage. If you wish, I will find and post it. I am sure its on my computer, because i posted it before.

Also, outside under natural sun and temps. Our monitors lay clutch after clutch, and many times I leave them in there, and they still lay. a note of interest, they have yet to disturb a good clutch of eggs. In fact, I will find burrows all over, except where the eggs are.

The reason, I strongly support monitors ability to multiclutch is, we have tested it in as many different ways as I can think of and they still do. Even to stop feeding.

For instance, with lites on 24/7 there is reason to think the lites can be of influence. I do not discount that(chickens) But the first many years of our monitors breeding were done on Lites on a time clock. Then as I mention above, outdoors, with no additional lites.

My reining queen of multiclutching is an 8 year old cross, that has spend her entire adult life outdoors, she breeds in the summer and has laid 51 clutches for us. She still looks good and I am sure she will add to that this next year, unless I go stupid, which I can do. I updated and reported this for the last two years on .net.

Thanks for the discussion, FR

Ah, well. Man proposes, nature disposes.

Luke