Re using corkbark and other items.

[Stylopidae]

nice, moving the goalposts....until now, the term disinfecting hasnt even come up...we are talking about sterilization here.

While I mistakenly used the term sterilization in my first post, I corrected it in my 2nd or 3rd post...somewhere around there.

So, no, I've been using the term correctly for a few posts now. Didn't initially, but did correct myself several times before this post.

For example:

If we're arguing from anecdotes, I disinfect all enclosures with 5% bleach between uses and bake all wood before and after putting it in an enclosure. I don't reuse substrate. I've never had the mould problems Marshall describes.

I'm sure that most hobbiests have some sort of disinfection protocol. A search for bleach yields quite a few results, which implies that it's common practice to disinfect enclosures/materials between uses.

Having worked in many rearing facilities from academia, industry, and government, I can tell you that sanitation protocols are used to prevent excess deaths. I mean, sure, experiments aren't valid if half your critters die...but that's why sanitation is needed. It's even explicitly in the training materials given to new employees at some institutions. Without these protocols, insect rearing on scale would not be possible.

You even responded to a post using the corrected language:



Even then, this isn't the first time I described specific protocols...protocols which are VERY far from the sort of sterile rearing you seem to think I'm describing.

I never said things shouldnt be kept clean, I said they dont need to be sterilized.

And yet a discussion of simple cleaning procedures has become a debate about axenic/sterile rearing.

As I said earlier, it's just weird.

I was NOT IN ANY WAY comparing the two, I was stating that they CAN live in places most other living things cant, showing they have a significant resilience to things other animals won't....of course captive animals live longer, that's not the discussion here

I mean, I get your argument but you're looking at a situation where less than 1% of animals survive, no matter how you slice it. I've worked with Diabrotica in the lab, and a lot of them reared on artificial diets succumb to bacterial growth passed on by the substrate the eggs were laid in. Survival for them means that a hundred million become a few million. This is just not convincing because it's plain to see that dirty environments aren't good for critters, even when they're adapted to living there.

I am also not saying to not clean things, or keep enclosures clean, I dont know how you are even making that reach.....I am saying, sterilization isnt something that will optimize care, because its unnecessary and can actually cause complications.

When someone reacts this way to a simple description of sanitization procedures, and then turns it into a semantic argument...that is not making a reach.

If they are probably rare, as would be shown by the total and complete lack of any evidence suggesting otherwise, then why would it be a concern. Look, I can reduce my chances of getting hit by lightning by always walking on rubber surfaces, but that doesn't mean I would be in danger if I don't. My point is that we shouldn't be worrying about things that are virtually unheard of.

I mean, there's literally a post about (perceived) nematodes in the forum right now. So rare doesn't mean nonexistent.

There are a few threads around here where keepers lose multiple specimens in quick succession (I did link one example earlier), and it's always chalked up to poor husbandry without any real questioning about the circumstances. Just because proving disease is impossible for virtually everyone in the hobby, doesn't mean diseases don't exist in the hobby. We almost certainly overlook outbreaks.

Whatever combination of letters you want to use-sanitize, disinfect, clean-it's not a bad idea.

 

[cold blood]

While I mistakenly used the term sterilization in my first post, I corrected it in my 2nd or 3rd pos

it is moving the goal posts....when I make a statement regarding sterilization, and only sterilization and you respond with disinfect, you are moving the goalposts to suit your argument.

and yet a discussion of simple cleaning procedures has become a debate about axenic/sterile rearing.

There was no disagreement or even discussion about cleaning procedures, you brought this up straight out of the blue, I am talking about, and ONLY talking about the original points, sterilization and viruses...period.

When someone reacts this way to a simple description of sanitization procedures, and then turns it into a semantic argument...

does it? Cause that's precisely what I see you doing. Instead of arguing against my point, you argue against similar, but clearly different points.

I mean, there's literally a post about (perceived) nematodes in the forum right now. So rare doesn't mean nonexistent.

Yep, nematodes are very rare....but soooooooo much more common than your "perceived" virus problem (of which there is no evidence to support)....but again, we aren't talking about nematodes here, are we, we are discussing the virus and sterilization points.

Whatever combination of letters you want to use-sanitize, disinfect, clean-it's not a bad idea.

But all three of these terms have different definitions, as you made a point to note......I am all for two of them, I am only arguing against the one...sterilization.

 

[Mike Withrow]

I have re used cork bark and water dishes in other spider's enclosures.
I don't keep many new world but,that's about the only time I don't re use substrate.

The moss I use and some of the wood comes straight from the woods in my area.
Before anyone goes nuts. I live within 10 minutes of a national park named Mammoth Cave. And the spots I collect things are in remote really high knobs where no activity other than animal and human have walked through. No run off from Agriculture activity or anything.

Zero in any at all of my spider's period.

And to note I do not collect anything on the park. I just happen to live close to it.

This thread got really interesting to read.

 

[Stylopidae]

it is moving the goal posts....when I make a statement regarding sterilization, and only sterilization and you respond with disinfect, you are moving the goalposts to suit your argument.

There was no disagreement or even discussion about cleaning procedures, you brought this up straight out of the blue, I am talking about, and ONLY talking about the original points, sterilization and viruses...period.

Nah, I mentioned cleaning procedures a few times and they were all pretty basic. Boiling tongs after handling dead specimens, discarding substrate, etc. No mentions of things like autoclaving, using boiled water, or anything else I've seen in axenic labs.

Regardless, I don't think these strawmen are the important ones. Let's keep talking arthropod pathology.

Yep, nematodes are very rare....but soooooooo much more common than your "perceived" virus problem (of which there is no evidence to support)....but again, we aren't talking about nematodes here, are we, we are discussing the virus and sterilization points.

I'm going to switch the conversation to your second, more important, strawman: You're sitting here pretending that the scope of this discussion is relegated to viruses, probably because I keep harping on about how detection is difficult. I do honestly believe that some conditions such as DKS and wet moult could have viral causes, and I'm trying to be as intellectually honest about the limitations of hobbiests as I can. I think that's a mistake on my part because complex and murky situations make denialism easy.

In reality, I've also mentioned fungi and bacteria many times so let's turn the conversation to those because I don't think you'll be able to deny their impact quite as easily. Since you overlooked terms like 'disinfection' and 'sanitization' in many of my posts, let me quote one of my first posts in this thread to start us off:

Veterinary care for mammals is different than invertebrates. Not only are things like antibiotics available for mammals, but vaccines are as well. That's why parvo isn't a thing in most households.

Antibody production is a synapomorphy of vertebrates; tarantulas don't make them. We also can't really give antibiotics/antifungals to inverts. The vast majority of vetinerary care for bugs revolves around hygiene as a result.

Even with all the medical care available for mammals, are you telling me that they simply move animals between enclosures without any disinfection protocols?

The most obvious symptom of bacterial/fungal infection I can think of is a cyst because this is where most antibiotics and antifungals are used for mammals. A spider rubs up against something, gets a microscopic cut and the cut gets infected by some kind of opportunistic pathogen. Could be bacterial, could be fungal. I'm not sure it matters.

Lo and behold, the term cyst pops up with 10 pages of results. I'm not going to read through every thread there, but just skimming the results it sure seems like a lot of spiders die from cysts. If I were to culture these, I think it would be logical to hypothesize that I'd get bacteria from some animals, and fungi from others.

In mammals, there are a lot of similar opportunistic infections. Aspergillus infections can cause cysts, and these are treated with antifungals. Pasteurella, a common cause of skin and respiratory diseases, even has it's own vaccine. In insects, similar conditions are caused by Pseudomonas and Aspergillus. I would hypothesize that the pathogens we'd culture from spider cysts would be things like Aspergillus, Pseudomonas, and Serratia (a pathogen I've mentioned several times, by the way) because this is what causes similar conditions in insects. These wounds are almost certainly not sterile.

I mean, we tell people to keep their enclosures as dry as possible while still maintaining a moisture level that keeps an acceptable humidity level. We don't tell them to do this to ward off bad humors and weird vibes. We tell them to do this because overly wet conditions allows micro-organisms to breed. Facultative pathogens are rare from a microbial ecology standpoint, but when there are high numbers of microbes that also means high numbers of facultative pathogens.

While you might not worry about these critters, you're certianly doing things to keep their levels down...whether or not you realize or acknowledge it.

If you were to see a mouldy hide, or red residue on a water dish, I doubt you'd reuse these for another terrarium without some sort of...microbe-getting-rid-of steps.

But all three of these terms have different definitions, as you made a point to note......I am all for two of them, I am only arguing against the one...sterilization.

I mean, sure. They all have different definitions, but let's not get bogged down in splitting hairs because I don't think there's any practical difference in this context.

 

[Ultum4Spiderz]

I'll clean it and sometimes I'll toss it in the freezer to kill off anything....

You’d toss bark in the freezer? Must be that old myth you can kill germs with cold ? I just rinse or clean it off and use it again .

 

[Stylopidae]

You’d toss bark in the freezer? Must be that old myth you can kill germs with cold ? I just rinse or clean it off and use it again .

Freezing is going to kill mites, but won't do much else.

I always bake my wood at 350*F for about 30 minutes before using it for another specimen.

 

[cold blood]

I always bake my wood at 350*F for about 30 minutes before using it for another specimen.

And I never do this and never have had a problem in 25 years...but when I bake wood, i get mold growing on it rather quickly.

Regardless, I don't think these strawmen are the important ones.

There you go again

I'm going to switch the conversation to your second, more important, strawman:

and again

Ignore what I say and claim its a straw man....wonderfully condescending and untrue.

You're sitting here pretending that the scope of this discussion is relegated to viruses,

The scope of the conversation IS about viruses and sterilization, these are the things we are arguing, and you keep adding things I AM NOT arguing about.

I do honestly believe that some conditions such as DKS and wet moult could have viral causes

possible,but I'd sure love to see proof.

In reality, I've also mentioned fungi and bacteria many times so let's turn the conversation t

Lol, talk about what you like, dont go claiming I am arguing against things I am not even discussing.....if I dont mention it and you do, you are not arguing my points, you are taking completely different points and arguing them AS IF I am arguing against you.

I don't think you'll be able to deny their impact quite as easily. Since you overlooked terms like 'disinfection' and 'sanitization' in many of my posts,

I didnt over look anything, I am NOT TALKING ABOUT THESE THINGS...this is an argument you are having with yourself and are trying to put it on me.

Look, you cant have a discussion about one point, completely change the subject and then act as if you are still arguing the same point.

I am talking about sterilization, and ONLY sterilization and its .

 

[spideyspinneret78]

Just do whatever you're comfortable with. I reuse water dishes, decorations, cork bark, etc after giving things a quick rinse. Same for enclosures although I personally don't reuse substrate. If I have concerns about the health of the previous inhabitant, then I thoroughly clean enclosures out with soap and water. If your tarantulas are healthy, then I don't think there's an issue with reusing items.

 

[tommyno]

I never had a problem reusing corkbark or other items like artificial plants. I just put in under running hot water to clean it from poop.

 

[slocoj91]

Insects have extremely high mortality in the wild. Less so in captivity, and hygeine is the major reason why.

You really think hygiene is the main reason?
Temperatures tend to be more stable, because we can limit the impacts the external environment has on our own. There is ample food, typically offered in a state with 'ideal' nutrition. A distinct lack of heavy booted individuals stomping around burrow entrances. Same with predators - both those who have them as prey species, and those to whom arachnids may be collateral damage during a chase/hunt.

The reason many inverts have so many offspring is because some are expected to die. Some produce offspring who are genetically predisposed to not surviving and essentially provide easy food for predators so that their healthy siblings can escape.

For creatures that have existed, thrived, for so long, it is reasonable to conclude that any key problematic pathogens are dealt with as needed. Through egg sac care, choice of burrow/web location, hunting of live prey - doesn't mean there aren't errors that occur, but their survival certainly suggests that they have exactly the capability to deal with these things they need. Errors mean death, death means they don't have offspring who may be predisposed to make the same error.

The stability and extra care of captivity does result in more surviving. But I think it's worth noting, especially, that the occasions where bacteria/pathogens become a concern often carry indications of husbandry issues as well, if not existing at that time they had existed previously, and the overarching impression is that susceptibility to pathogens occurred as a result of other issues. In the wild the 'other issues' are broad but in captivity it comes down to keeping them in a way that isn't optimum for the species in question. In the cases where these issues occur it's not like the keeper has recently added a new specimen that carried something in. Whatever caused the issue was therefore there to begin with, it just had an opportunity once the tarantulas system was no longer functioning at max.

In such a susceptible specimen, whereby the pathogen was already in existence in their 'air space', maybe they've just molted and you're putting them in an upgraded enclosure. You don't know they're that bit 'weaker' compared to other slings of the species. They can be placed into an enclosure with a substrate mix that comes from a main store you own - old sub gets bad stuff picked out, then added to this mix which has springtails etc - or into one with sub that was baked. I know which I go for, based on having tried both.

I'd also like to point out, though I need to find the source, that I've seen it mentioned before that baking of items that could contain pesticides will generally make the item more likely to cause harm. Something worth bearing in mind, as I've seen baking mentioned for items picked 'wild', but unless you're certain that pesticides aren't used there/can't have spread there, then there's a risk involved.

 

[TechnoGeek]

I use stuff that I collect from my garden too, not just from other enclosures. All you need to do is throw it in boiling water or in an oven for like 15 to 20 minutes and that would kill any parasites and breakdown any potentially harmful chemicals.

 

[Introvertebrate]

You really think hygiene is the main reason (Insects have extremely high mortality in the wild. Less so in captivity)?

No way. Predators, unforeseen weather events, luck of the draw. Maybe 0.01% hygiene related.

 

[TechnoGeek]

Parasites do account for a lot of dead insects, but it almost certainly isn't the main cause of death. That would be predation. Everything eats insects, quite literally.

 

[cold blood]

Parasites do account for a lot of dead insects, but it almost certainly isn't the main cause of death. That would be predation. Everything eats insects, quite literally.

agree...think about it...one big toad can single handedly decimate an emerging sac all on its own.