# Exo-terra Nano



## mythicdawn07 (Jun 18, 2009)

Exo Terra Nano Glass Terrarium - Surrey Pet Supplies


what's your thoughts? lol.


----------



## Mutley.100 (Nov 3, 2008)

Looks cute . :lol2:


----------



## Richard77 (Feb 19, 2009)

I like the look of that, not a bad price either!


----------



## daftlassieEmma (Oct 23, 2008)

Mutley.100 said:


> Looks cute . :lol2:


 i thought this too :blush:


----------



## TEENY (Jan 4, 2008)

Looks pretty cute, would be ok for smaller mantids too


----------



## beardys (Sep 28, 2009)

seen in real. abs crap. what the hell would you keep in that. i think a micro cricket.

they've brought two new ones out. the bigger one also has a icckle heat mat. that is sweet


----------



## mythicdawn07 (Jun 18, 2009)

They'll be cool for grown on slings


----------



## beardys (Sep 28, 2009)

mythicdawn07 said:


> They'll be cool for grown on slings


they are 20 by 20 by 20 and they have another one which is a bit taller. even a sling isnt going to keep it that for long


----------



## Mutley.100 (Nov 3, 2008)

beardys said:


> they are 20 by 20 by 20 and they have another one which is a bit taller. even a sling isnt going to keep it that for long



The 8x8x12 would do quite well for mature avic's or psalmo's


----------



## Ballz Deep (Sep 16, 2010)

i think its awesome


----------



## connor 1213 (Apr 6, 2009)

think there really kool!

dunno what i could put in it tho...


----------



## mythicdawn07 (Jun 18, 2009)

Have to say that website has some pretty good prices, atleast some of the best i'v come across.


----------



## R Thomas (Oct 12, 2010)

Must say I would like to try one. They do look ideal for smaller arboreal T species.


----------



## alexdittrich (Apr 27, 2010)

brilliant - about time they brought out something that would cater for slightly more unusual critters


----------



## frogbmth (Jan 1, 2010)

Ahah! Perfect for a nice display cage for an orchid mantis :2thumb:


----------



## 9Red (May 30, 2008)

Are they doing a compact top for it as well?


----------



## frogbmth (Jan 1, 2010)

Yes, 20cm

YouTube - Exo Terra Nano Glass Terrarium - Sneak Peak At This New Reptile Enclosure


----------



## mythicdawn07 (Jun 18, 2009)

frogbmth said:


> Yes, 20cm
> 
> YouTube - Exo Terra Nano Glass Terrarium - Sneak Peak At This New Reptile Enclosure


 
oo i didnt know they did the tops for them too, they are quite decent sized for some species.


----------



## Jay<3Jess (Sep 13, 2010)

Is that place genuine? Seen some stuff on there which is like half the price you would normally see  Don't wanna buy and get scammed so if someone can clearfiy for me, thanks.


----------



## beardys (Sep 28, 2009)

you wouldnt catch me putting anything in them. even for a mantis your looking at 4 times there length and these are no where near big enough. if we made something that small, we'd be bashed for it. just because they are made by exo terra doesnt mean they are the correct size.


----------



## jaykickboxer (Feb 11, 2008)

beardys said:


> you wouldnt catch me putting anything in them. even for a mantis your looking at 4 times there length and these are no where near big enough. if we made something that small, we'd be bashed for it. just because they are made by exo terra doesnt mean they are the correct size.


It's easily big enough for plents of thing and jay jay yes they are genuine they have a big shop near me!


----------



## naz_pixie (Oct 6, 2008)

jaykickboxer said:


> It's easily big enough for plents of thing and jay jay yes they are genuine they have a big shop near me!



wwheres there store?! i work in wimbledon x


----------



## Graham (Jan 27, 2007)

The shop/warehouse is just around the corner from Hersham Station, and yes they are totally legit, I buy nearly all my reptile stuff (and chicken feed etc...) from there now as they're only a few minutes away.


----------



## beardys (Sep 28, 2009)

jaykickboxer said:


> It's easily big enough for plents of thing and jay jay yes they are genuine they have a big shop near me!


so just to back that up, what do you think could live in them??? what sizes do they get???


----------



## lucozade3000 (Aug 16, 2008)

Any store selling them yet?
Heard of them a few months ago, great size for smaller inverts!
These will make some babies Viridasius very happy for Christmas!!

-J


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

beardys said:


> you wouldnt catch me putting anything in them. even for a mantis your looking at 4 times there length and these are no where near big enough. if we made something that small, we'd be bashed for it. just because they are made by exo terra doesnt mean they are the correct size.


Well they'd be ideal for the smaller mantids like orchids or spiny flower mantids. 

They'd also make perfect homes for smaller arboreals like taps or smaller avics (_A. minatrix _for instance only get's a 4-4.5" legspan).

Or for those with a bit of cash to spend they'd nicely suit grown on juvis, remember some species are _very _slow growing, you're going to have them at suitable sizes for that tank for a good few years.

They'd also do nicely for some of the true spiders.

And then there's the dwarf Ts.

Smaller scoripons.

I don't know why you seem to think they're too small for anything when people have mentioned a number of things they'd be suited too...


----------



## beardys (Sep 28, 2009)

Hedgewitch said:


> Well they'd be ideal for the smaller mantids like orchids or spiny flower mantids.
> 
> They'd also make perfect homes for smaller arboreals like taps or smaller avics (_A. minatrix _for instance only get's a 4-4.5" legspan).
> 
> ...



just saying that are they really big enough??? yeah they look great but is it in the best interest of the animals living in such a small space


----------



## Richard77 (Feb 19, 2009)

I currently have my adult female avic avic in a acrylic 8"x8"x13" and she's great in it, bearly leaves her web anyhow and when she does it's only because she's chasing a cricket. Perect size for a tapinauchenius to... :ideah ho, I feel a xmas prezzy to myself coming on:2thumb:


----------



## frogbmth (Jan 1, 2010)

A 2 inch animal that hardly moves would be very happy IMHO and too large an enclosure can be a problem for feeding so yes I think they can very much be in the animals best interest

Andy


----------



## xvickyx (Jul 21, 2009)

I like it, would be nice for a mantis


----------



## Love Pets (Nov 23, 2009)

Looks great!
These small terrariums would be ok even for pygmy chameleons babies and some gecko juvies(mourning geckos,tiger geckos etc.).


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

beardys said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> just saying that are they really big enough??? yeah they look great but is it in the best interest of the animals living in such a small space


Once again: yes, yes it is. For a lot of inverts small spaces are preferred and large spaces are (under wild conditions) near certain death. Spiders barely move if possible, same goes for many mantid species.

You see, when we say they're suited to them we don't mean that they're not suited to them. Confusing I know.

Suited to them _includes _size.


----------



## beardys (Sep 28, 2009)

Hedgewitch said:


> Once again: yes, yes it is. For a lot of inverts small spaces are preferred and large spaces are (under wild conditions) near certain death. Spiders barely move if possible, same goes for many mantid species.
> 
> You see, when we say they're suited to them we don't mean that they're not suited to them. Confusing I know.
> 
> Suited to them _includes _size.


now now. keep the sarcasm to yourself please. the thread is about what do people think of them. lets not this turn into another thread that rfuk is famous for. slagging match.


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

beardys said:


> now now. keep the sarcasm to yourself please. the thread is about what do people think of them. lets not this turn into another thread that rfuk is famous for. slagging match.


Sorry mate, I agree it was a bit uncalled for.

So more politely: I believe size was included when people said they were suitable. Bear in mind that tarantulas don't actually _like _moving, and either won't like or simply won't use larger areas. There's a lot of people that put smaller avics in the next size up of exo-terra and watch as a corner is used and the rest of the tank goes to waste.

Many mantid species are under 3" in length (4x3=12), however I've been told that 2.5-3x is the height needed for mantids, not 4 (not accounting for substrate though). So mantids up to 4" could be good in those, and I think that's actually the majority of mantis species. Once again, as ambush predators many of them won't actually use extra space, though it may interfere with their catching prey.

The general rules we go by and seem to work for our spiders suggests that those sizes are good for smaller T's, many of which will reach about 10cm leg-span tops.


----------



## Animalmadness (Dec 8, 2009)

beardys said:


> [/COLOR]
> 
> just saying that are they really big enough??? yeah they look great but is it in the best interest of the animals living in such a small space


Mantids are ambush predators, so a smaller enclosure is better (more chance of coming into contact with food):2thumbobviously there are limits though)but i can see your point


----------



## mythicdawn07 (Jun 18, 2009)

Well they seem to be getting alot of intrest and its nice to see exo terra making new and different size terrariums.

if i ever get my loft sorted i'll be ordering a few they are decent looking and not too expensive.


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Hedgewitch said:


> Sorry mate, I agree it was a bit uncalled for.
> 
> So more politely: I believe size was included when people said they were suitable. Bear in mind that tarantulas don't actually _like _moving, and either won't like or simply won't use larger areas. There's a lot of people that put smaller avics in the next size up of exo-terra and watch as a corner is used and the rest of the tank goes to waste.
> 
> ...


What do you base this on exactly? 

Just most people seeem to spout this "fact" without so much as even having tried the same spider(s) in 2 different sized containers with notes on behaviour. 

Seems a bit circular to me to say "I keep my animals in smaller tubs. They don't move much in these small tubs, so you're better keeping them in smaller tubs since they don't move much."


----------



## snowgoose (May 5, 2009)

GRB said:


> What do you base this on exactly?
> 
> Just most people seeem to spout this "fact" without so much as even having tried the same spider(s) in 2 different sized containers with notes on behaviour.
> 
> Seems a bit circular to me to say "I keep my animals in smaller tubs. They don't move much in these small tubs, so you're better keeping them in smaller tubs since they don't move much."


My female verdezi was housed in a 30 x 30 x 30 exo and used the whole of the available space, she would often be out and about for a little walk. She is not housed in a much larger fish tank ( 81 x 36 x 45 ) and she can still be seen out and about walking around most days. She has the exact same behavior as she did in the exo.


----------



## G18241 (Feb 28, 2009)

They look so cute 

Mantis and slings would be fine in them surely...just a slightly more expensive route than plastic tubs/cups etc if you want everything to look nice


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

snowgoose said:


> My female verdezi was housed in a 30 x 30 x 30 exo and used the whole of the available space, she would often be out and about for a little walk. She is not housed in a much larger fish tank ( 81 x 36 x 45 ) and she can still be seen out and about walking around most days. She has the exact same behavior as she did in the exo.


This is exactly my point - certain spp. will utilise the space given to them (within reason, I haven't tried this in something 14ft x 14ft or something!). I've seen it time and time again.


----------



## Graham (Jan 27, 2007)

The price is good for something of that size, compare to other similarly sized enclosures. I normally build my own but these are so cheap it'd hardly be worth the effort, a shelf-full of them would look great.


----------



## Ally (Mar 8, 2006)

They're really cute!

The plastic sweetie jars could do with replacing in my cabinet...


----------



## daftlassieEmma (Oct 23, 2008)

Ally said:


> They're really cute!
> 
> The plastic sweetie jars could do with replacing in my cabinet...


 reckon you could fit one in a stocking too


----------



## jaykickboxer (Feb 11, 2008)

naz_pixie said:


> wwheres there store?! i work in wimbledon x


There on the a3 near esher do about 15 minute drive from Wimbledon


----------



## Ally (Mar 8, 2006)

daftlassieEmma said:


> reckon you could fit one in a stocking too


I'd need *counts* 12 for now and about 10 more once the little aborials grow up 

Maybe I need to think of doing this in stages!

And they don't become available until the 31st Dec


----------



## Graham (Jan 27, 2007)

> Maybe I need to think of doing this in stages!


I was thinking a couple a month wouldn't break the bank until I have enough of them.


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

GRB said:


> What do you base this on exactly?
> 
> Just most people seeem to spout this "fact" without so much as even having tried the same spider(s) in 2 different sized containers with notes on behaviour.
> 
> Seems a bit circular to me to say "I keep my animals in smaller tubs. They don't move much in these small tubs, so you're better keeping them in smaller tubs since they don't move much."


I understand the circular logic part, but when placed in larger tubs most of my spiders don't seem interested in strolling about (with the exception of my iridopelma that made a web, sat in that for three weeks, wandered around the tub a couple of times and then moulted... increased activity before a moult, unusual eh?).

I've only really seen concerted efforts to leave their lairs and wonder around when incredibly hungry after a moult. That and when food is within reach.

However it will differ from spider to spider, species to species.

Either way, I actually base their lack of movement on the fact that they are ambush predators who may not eat for long periods of time in the wild, and as such "enjoy" conserving energy. To a spider, who's not continually throwing energy away heating it's body like we do, movement may well be the greatest loss of energy (I don't know, any ideas if that's accurate or just stupid?)

That and the risk of encountering other spiders if they decide to wander about (T's often having rather high local abundance, even the antisocial species being considered to live in loose "colonies" yesno?). And the oft quoted paper about T's rarely leaving a single square meter once established (slings being the dispersal stage). Webs can be easily blocked to keep out ants and tarantula hawks, but a spider in the open is easy prey to these two main predators. They're also quite lost once off their webbing I believe.

Much of this however is not backed up by anything like papers or decent research, it's more... postulation? I'll admit it may be based in part on the received wisdom that Ts don't like to move much.


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Hedgewitch said:


> I understand the circular logic part, but when placed in larger tubs most of my spiders don't seem interested in strolling about (with the exception of my iridopelma that made a web, sat in that for three weeks, wandered around the tub a couple of times and then moulted... increased activity before a moult, unusual eh?).
> 
> Again it depends on the species - most of my animals do wander about, with the exception of those species that are almost exclusively obligate burrowers. The initial response is extremely high activity, almost seems like they are "scoping out" the limits of the environment. It then tends to level off a little, and the animal either burrows or remains in a subset of the area, unless prey should be provided.
> 
> ...


Most of the papers above are linked quickly culled from a search - I quickly scanned the abstract (although I have read one of them before) in hopes of giving a flavour of how complex their behaviour is. 

You have to remember, that choice of burrow site is more than just "ok, that'll do" - which is why I provide many potential sites for my animals rather than just one. Even in captivity, where we know that predation is low, reproductive success etc is higher (sometimes), the spider does not. It should still be allowed to display natural behaviour. I slightly digress here from "activity" but this is also an important issue. 

A small tank by virtue of it's small volume can only have a lower maximum number of sites than a larger tank. You can only fit so much complexity into an enclosed container, so IMO bigger is better. I'll give an example - my planted tank has a visually "ideal" (for me) hide that I constructed from tree fern trunks. I orientated it in a certain manner, and my X.immanis occupied it for about 3 days. 

Then it tried to alter this to suit, and ended up digging down the back of the hide in another location. Upon completion, it occupied this for about 1 day then returned to the initial hide. Perhaps the new hide was inferior, or perhaps it was potentially superior, but limited by my tank design in terms of substrate depth or such. Whatever the issue, to me it was clear she was evaluating the 2 potential sites and eventually settled on one that was presumably, optimal from the choice available.


----------



## Hedgewitch (Feb 12, 2008)

GRB said:


> Most of the papers above are linked quickly culled from a search - I quickly scanned the abstract (although I have read one of them before) in hopes of giving a flavour of how complex their behaviour is.
> 
> You have to remember, that choice of burrow site is more than just "ok, that'll do" - which is why I provide many potential sites for my animals rather than just one. Even in captivity, where we know that predation is low, reproductive success etc is higher (sometimes), the spider does not. It should still be allowed to display natural behaviour. I slightly digress here from "activity" but this is also an important issue.
> 
> ...


Though I ask (bearing in mind that you know more than I do about inverts), how transferable is the paper on jumping spiders to tarantulas? Jumping spiders: Araneomorph, high visual acuity, stalking predators.
Tarantulas: Mygalomorph, low visual acuity (apparently, more on that later), ambush predators.
My only point is that they are rather far from one another in several ways. Though I believe the point you were making is that spiders as a group have been shown to be able to build "mental maps".

Mayhaps I do underestimate their sensitivity. I have though in the past seen them respond to me being near the tubs, but usually I don't see responses till I'm within... hmm, 4-6"? The responses I've seen actually seem to be visually based. Due to where my spiders are in my room I wouldn't see them moving as I came though, not without seeing through the door, so I'll take your word for that one.



> No, it is true enough. However, to assume that tarantulas are rocks that require only a legspan in tank space is also pushing that too far. If you ever observe tarantulas for a long time, they are overall motionless for discrete periods but do move in small motions, or shift position etc. I think the reason they do not move much is a) to conserve energy, and b) possibly more importantly, not to confuse/mask vibration signals from their own movements with that of potential prey passing by.




Forgive me but I don't quite understand that first sentence... Was it agreement or disagreement? Sorry, this is just me being dense. 

I wasn't suggesting that they don't move full stop, I often find my tarantulas in different parts of their (often extensive) webs. Nor do I think a leg-span is a suitable sized house, though I guess that was an exaggeration. 
The point about masking prey vibrations: I never thought of that one, makes a lot of sense though.

I suppose that the wandering about one is most definitely a species dependant one.




> And the oft quoted paper about T's rarely leaving a single square meter once established (slings being the dispersal stage) (which paper?). Webs can be easily blocked to keep out ants and tarantula hawks (yes it's so effective for those hawk moths, lol) , but a spider in the open is easy prey to these two main predators (actually I'd only argue for ants, since most hawk moths actively search for tarantula burrows as a cue). They're also quite lost once off their webbing I believe.


Hawk moths? :Na_Na_Na_Na:

But in all seriousness, I was forgetting how tarantula hawks will haul Ts out of their burrows etc. And then _dig_ (cue facepalm) their own hole for the body (depending on species).

As for the paper (or was it a study): I don't know 
I said oft quoted.

I know they weigh up the benefits/anti-benefits (I can't remember the word), for the smaller spiders I usually provide a number of possible hides/webbing anchor points for them to choose from. Though often they go for the intended area.

I agree with the points you've made. I'm wondering about the idea of putting smaller juveniles in their final tank earlier on to give them a number of choices, and let them grow into the tank (to be fair, that's what I do anyway). That way you can fit choices in, and if, once large it appears too crowded remove some (a bit at a time).


----------



## GRB (Jan 24, 2008)

Hedgewitch said:


> Though I ask (bearing in mind that you know more than I do about inverts), how transferable is the paper on jumping spiders to tarantulas?
> 
> Depends who you ask and about which feature, hehe. In this case, I simply wanted to illustrate it's been studied in a few groups of different life history traits and yet there still seems to be some ability to "map" their local environ. I have a paper which I have only scanned which goes into the 3d behaviour of spiders. The general approach was to draw the animals from webs, rotate the entire web 90/180/360 degree etc and then time how it finds it's way back. This was repeated and showed the expected improments with repeated measures, but interestingly, if you removed the silk dragline, they could still find their way back, albeit slower. It could be olfactory cues, or it could be spatial recognition. When I read the paper(s) properly I'll have a better idea.
> 
> ...


Pretty similar with me tbh - although I do admit that spiderlings get cricket tubs rather than 30cm exo-cubes, and my adults are not in 10ft cubes of rainforest! However, I do try to increase the individual container size rather than buying more spiders and worrying about space later.

I suppose my ethos is just to provide "bigger than recommended" but within reason. At the end it's still a trade-off for husbandry and the needs of the animal. I can see why people would want to increase efficiency etc, I just wish they'd use that as the reason rather than quoting spurious and often (IMO) incorrect biological reasons to cram them into shoeboxes. It then gets ingrained into the hobby forums and trying to discuss against it takes mammoth effort - and still usually fails.


----------



## shugnsheena (Feb 9, 2008)

So would a sun beetle b ok in this?


----------



## Kuja (Dec 14, 2011)

epic old thread revival lmao, them cubes are tiny i wouldn't feel comfortable sticking anything inside it


----------

