# Mantella laevigata breeding information sheet



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

I thought since I've seen this species mentioned a few times recently but very few people seem to currently keep them, I would share my experiences from breeding M. laevigata. 

They are truly wonderful animals to keep and a unique Mantella since they demonstrate parental care similar to that of Ranitomeya and Oophaga. In the flesh, the green colouration on the dorsum and vivid blue speckling underneath are truly stunning. As adults they will grow to a little over an inch and can be kept very happily in groups, regardless of gender balance.


















More so than many South American dartfrogs, M. laevigata seem to benefit from seasonality when in captivity. They will remain relatively dormant during the 'dry season' and will rarely be seen. Beginning a 'wet season' abruptly will change their behaviour entirely. They will become much more bold, call incessantly and breed prolifically provided that appropriate egg deposition sites are available. These can be tubes or film canisters, half filled with water. Breeding activity seems to be limited only by the number of deposition sites available.

The courtship/mating process is as you might expect - male finds suitable laying site and calls ad nauseam until female shows up. After a bit of splashing about and a brief amplexus, eggs are laid and the female heads off. One point of interest here is that a completely different call is produced by the male during courtship and this is a good way to tell when there is real 'action'. As opposed to the pretty much continuous 'cricket-like' solicitation call which is a regular chirp, the breeding vocalisation becomes a sporadic and irregular trill. Solicitation call:

Mantella laevigata calling - YouTube

Generally two or more eggs are laid per site and usually all are fertilised. Unlike in dendrobatids, eggs are often laid directly into the water rather than on land adjacent to water.

Left in place, eggs will develop, hatch directly into the water (tadpoles are not transported) and the female will return to deposit feeder eggs. Unlike dendrobatids, these will often also be fertilised by the male:










Dart keepers, don't worry, despite being white they are fertile!!

The following images are of eggs I removed 2 days post-fetilisation and continued to feed with eggs from the mother:










Day 3 - things progress quickly in the world of Mantellidae....:










Day 5 - hatched and swimming:










Day 10:










Day 20:










Day 30 - it's all about the back legs:










Day 50 - colouring up, but no front legs yet!:










Day 55 - Front legs through:










And out of the water on day 60 - still with plenty of tail left to resorb.










Over the following few days they are in and out of the water but, on day 65, now pretty much terrestrial.

To illustrate feeding on an egg; first breaking through the jelly:

Mantella laevigata tadpole feeding - YouTube

Then downing the yolk!:

Mantella laevigata tadpole feeding 2 - YouTube

Those who breed this species ex situ report that froglets morph at about half of the size of those raised in situ by the parents. From my observations the reason for this seems to be that until 30-40 days, the larvae will refuse all food items presented that are not feeder eggs, and therefore become malnourished up to this point if eggs are not provided. After 30-40 days, the larvae will begin to accept the usual range of tadpole feeds often provided to dendrobatids.

Hope this is of interest to those thinking of trying out this wonderful Mantella species!

Any questions, fire away,

Nick


----------



## Ron Magpie (Oct 11, 2009)

AMAZING stuff- thanks for this, it's a group I've always wanted to know more about. :2thumb:


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

Wonderful post Nick !! I'm going to stick with the S american frogs,but even so hugely impressed with your care of these. I'd never heard of the egg feeding in mantella,so is this widely known? will be your first question.

Again very cool post thanks:notworthy:

best

Stu


----------



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

Cheers Stu, much appreciated 

Yes, the egg feeding thing is widely known - it's just you who wasn't told ;-)

(Only joking, M. laevigata is the only species known to do this I believe... Promise I'll answer all subsequent questions more seriously!!!)

Nick


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

Yeah I know,no one tells me nuffin:whistling2:

Ahh mate we can be serious and learn and have a laugh:Na_Na_Na_Na:

So have you tried them on live food at all,just one of those random thoughts that popped into the old grey matter? Just interested if the stimulii of movement might give other options apart from eggs. You have already told me that it is possible to morph them out of viv,so that points towards them eating something else,yes i remember much smaller,but surely they can't develop completely,without food?

oh god here we go...why didn't i just click the like button:lol2:


Stu


----------



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

That's (another ;-)) question I can't answer Stu - I'm certainly no expert on the Mantellidae!!

No, I actually didn't try them on live food which was a significant oversight... 

I actually don't know what stage they get to with zero food because I wimped out of that experiment when it was clear after a few weeks that the tads simply were not feeding (or growing). I then started providing feeder eggs harvested from the viv and they really took off. Would they have got to the detritivorous stage without provision of feeder eggs? I guess so, as people have reported success - albeit producing very small and presumably somewhat impaired offspring.... Remember that their development is fairly rapid compared to dendrobatids. 

I just find it interesting that the tads have seemingly lost the impetus to feed on anything except conspecific eggs in the early stages of development. There must be a reason and figuring it out would presumably get us some way towards understanding better how obligate oophagy developed in the new world species. 

Presumably food is scarce, or nutrient poor, for whatever reason, so selection has led to surplus deposited eggs being preferred and (in the Oophaga) all other food items being rejected over the course of larval development. I've never really bought into the argument that there is a magical property of Oophaga eggs that means only they are appropriate for growth. I think it's more likely to be an innate behavioural mechanism. Could well be wrong though - who knows!!!

Nick


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

DrNick said:


> That's (another ;-)) question I can't answer Stu - I'm certainly no expert on the Mantellidae!!
> 
> No, I actually didn't try them on live food which was a significant oversight...
> 
> ...


Nick live food for the dendro tads that we(Shaz and I to be clear) care for is so little used now that untill one sees the stimuli it provides ,i think it would be really easy to over look this,I don't really see that as an oversight,I think one needs to SEE how a tad actually reacts,to be aware,of how different their behaviour is. To my humble way of thinking we have all these easy options fish flake, deadicated tad diets etc etc,all man made all easier options, plus, they work. 

Phil on dart den ribs me about this,I take it in the spirit intended,his caymens are funny,BUT in all seriousness,this needs seeing by dart keepers,they miss out , i feel, on a fundamental behaviour and ability of these said detritivores. 

I've always been of the opinion that we in a microcosm(maybe tiny faction is better I'm shattered and english haunts me) of life ,compared to a rainforest always see life in water.So, what occurs in the tropics where the species of life are infintesimally higher than here: I would imagine lots more life in a tiny pool. 

But naturally this theorising goes against why oophaga...or for that matter egg eating Mantella should develop specialist feeding tendencies. To my complete embarassment I didn't ever think to try live grub on oophaga,I've witnessed what a tinc..auratus..bla bla does,and the penny never dropped here either,I look outside the box alot Nick,partially ignorance, partially leftfield brain. But you have made me ponder...do you know, or have ever read of anyone anywhere trying this,live grub with oophaga???? Probably just me being dim as usual:lol2:

With regards to feeder eggs,well I have a frog that you know about ,dart,that is able,seemingly(who knows) to switch from feeder to fertile back to feeder,unlike your mantella which are all fertile,is there a difference in yolks,I think there just might be ,for darts anyway.When I've completed my "experiment" maybe I'll have more laymans thoughts,but an early conclusion is,there is a difference,I'll bow out there until I have erm results:lol2: 

Nick, thanks for making me ponder, ha, and it is still a great post. thanks mate

best

Stu


----------



## Ron Magpie (Oct 11, 2009)

As usual, Stu, you ask the questions we all should and probably don't.


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

Ron Magpie said:


> As usual, Stu, you ask the questions we all should and probably don't.


:lol2:if only we knew why Ron,second time I've heard similar in a couple of weeks.

I'm utterly sure it's is simply down to others being thought provoking mate,no credit here. But tis good to ponder. We can find many studies done by boffins, in nature,but so little is known about the mechanisms behind what, how and why our amphibians do what they do,it is almost imperative (and a bloody joy) to work things through on an anecdotal level. Sure we might eventually be proved wrong. But I'm sure some of what we see is not recorded in the scientific domain,and eventually they will prove out or disprove our ponderings.

But for now, we, our hobby, are making slow but sure progress we learn discuss have a laugh and WONDER,ain't so bad is it buddy.

Eons back my boss caught me,sat in a field surrounded by birds,she bit into me,"what the bloody hell are you doing?" "I'm trying to work out by watching why they are doing X(damned if i can remember what had grabbed me)" was the reply,she smiled and said "Ahh time spent in observation is never wasted" and left me to it:2thumb:

Look hard and ponder why........ tis a life ethos for guys that keep "ickle aminals" Ron 

bring it on

Stu


----------



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

I agree with Ron - asking the questions is the key Stu!!

Anyway, no, I've never heard of anyone trying Oophaga tads with livefood; although obviously that doesn't mean that no one has... Sounds like a job for you!!

When I said infertile eggs, I meant unfertilised... The eggs will fertilise if the male gets on the job in time. I presume this doesn't/can't happen in dendrobatids because the female lays eggs into the water for feeding purposes so the male cannot fertilise them and they are, thus, unfertilised. I'm not sure if they have been shown to be infertile (i.e. cannot be fertilised?). Correct me if I've overlooked that!!!

Without any more information than that, I doubt that there is any compositional difference between the eggs that go on to be fertilised and those used for feeding (BEFORE the former are fertilised). The few studies I remember seeing compared fertilised eggs and unfertilised feeder eggs which will presumably show differences (one being fertilised...). What you need for comparison is eggs laid by a female for breeding before the male gets on them.

Also I always wondered if this is one of the reasons that harvested Ranitomeya eggs reportedly do not work for raising Oophaga tads - because the eggs easily harvested from vivs would be fertilised and developing. Just musing - probably a load of old rubbish.... 

But the live food thing - if I raise any more, I'll definitely try that!!!!

Nick


----------



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

Sorry Stu - just re-read your post (properly!!)

Are you saying that your frog lays eggs that CANNOT be fertilised and uses these for feeding? How do you know?

If that's the case, maybe they lay them for feeding before they complete maturation. I still find it doubtful that there is a significant compositional difference between those that go on to be fertilised and those used for feeding.... (but maybe that's just me being a fun-sapper!!!)

Nick

P.S. Don't worry about going off topic - the original topic was boring anyway


----------



## grizzlymonkyboy (Jan 15, 2011)

this is really interesting stuff, egg feeding is something I have been reading about recently, I have seen many discussions else where that some species of frogs that are considered egg feeders are not really and the parents are only depositing eggs on top of the tad not intentionally for feeding. I think the argument is only for facultative egg feeders so my limited info is no help for the pums 

just a quick question how many species are classed as obligate egg feeders?


----------



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

grizzlymonkyboy said:


> I have seen many discussions else where that some species of frogs that are considered egg feeders are not really and the parents are only depositing eggs on top of the tad not intentionally for feeding.


I'm not sure about larger dendrobatids, maybe someone else can elaborate, but as far as Ranitomeya are concerned there is a broad division (of those available in the hobby) between the imitator group (including vanzolinii, flavovitata etc.) most/all of which can/do deposit feeder eggs and the reticulata group (including fantastica, summersi, benedicta etc.) that generally do not. 

The Oophaga are considered all to be obligate egg feeders. It is likely that oophagy arose from clutches slipping into pools containing tads, so they are all probably all on a continuum from laying eggs a sensible distance from water for breeding to intentionally laying in water to feed tads. I don't think anyone can really claim a complete understanding. In the species under discussion here (M. laevigata) the boundary is somewhat blurred due to their habit of laying clutches directly into water, which does not usually happen in dendrobatids.

Cheers,

Nick


----------



## Ron Magpie (Oct 11, 2009)

I could be wrong here, but as I understand it, the eggs concerned with oophaga in particular are laid only by the female (ie unfertilised). As with all things frog-related, if I'm wrong, please correct me, though! :2thumb:


----------



## frogfreak (Jul 28, 2012)

DrNick said:


> I'm not sure about larger dendrobatids, maybe someone else can elaborate


Hi Nick,

Fantastic post! Kudos!

As far as Tincs go, I've never seen it happen and I tank raise a lot of them. I've never seen a female lay eggs close to the water. Always in the coco hut or buried in leaf litter.

Cheers,


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

grizzlymonkyboy said:


> this is really interesting stuff, egg feeding is something I have been reading about recently, I have seen many discussions else where that some species of frogs that are considered egg feeders are not really and the parents are only depositing eggs on top of the tad not intentionally for feeding. I think the argument is only for facultative egg feeders so my limited info is no help for the pums
> 
> just a quick question how many species are classed as obligate egg feeders?


pumillio
histrionica
slyvatica 
granulifera
speciosa
Lehmanni
arborea
vincenti
occulator
There might be more Dane I think that's all of them.
www. Dendrobates.org will give you the complete story
Nick, bare with me I'll reply soon, apologies

Stu


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

DrNick said:


> Sorry Stu - just re-read your post (properly!!)
> 
> Are you saying that your frog lays eggs that CANNOT be fertilised and uses these for feeding? How do you know?
> 
> ...


Nah, the original post was one of the best for a longtime,plus I learned abit more,so not boring at all.:Na_Na_Na_Na:

Nick sorry for not being clearer, I have tried feeding other frogs eggs to pums,but I think now it will end in failure,those eggs would have been pulled almost as laid,so all would have been fertilized,but hours or less than that into development. I guess one could hypothisise either the yolk is different in a feeder egg or just possibly the fertilization/males sperm is somehow affecting development(in oophaga). These tads in question grew like normal,but 2 have morphed with sls and the third is still growing. I'll leave the albumin out of this for oophaga as its not present in their feeder eggs from what i can see anyway.But it needs removing from the pulled eggs,for the youngest oophaga tads to eat.At least it looks that way from what I've observed.They really struggle with the albumin and give up if the yolk is not separated properly
very similar to your feeding video,but without the persistance.


What i was trying to say regarding the frog i referred to, is that, IF there is(I'm musing too buddy,no science or papers behind this) a difference in feeder eggs and the eggs that get fertilized in oophaga,then said frog is able to switch back and forth between the two and she can control this ability to choose what type of egg she lays. If the feeder eggs and fertilized eggs are the same the point is mute!! So I'm leaning towards you being a fun sapper:lol2:, ie there is a compositional difference. 

I can't really find another reason other than egg composition for my failure to morphout those 2 pums ,naturally though there could be a plethera of other causes for failure .But most i could probably rule out because under the exact same conditions the basti kids have all come good...almost acting as a control for this experiment. The only variable is what they have been fed and how they were incubated.

Does that make things clearer Nick?

Oh we see exactly what Glenn does regarding egg placement in larger dendros...always laid away from water film cans or coco huts are almost always chosen .

best

Stu


----------



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

Crystal clear - and very interesting!! Thanks Stu,

Nick


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

Nick just to illustrate a pum feeder egg I grabbed this for you tonight,mum must have deposited the tad and laid these today,this is about as good as I can get.
As you can see very different to eggs that get fertilised albumin completely absent to my eyes anyway


and just cause I'm soft with apologies for underexposure here's who will munch them shortly




Stu


----------



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

Stu - I bet you 10p and half a dead dolphin that there's albumin there and you just can't see it....

Cards on the table - my theory is that because dendrobatids lay eggs on land, the fertilized egg forms a thicker than normal 'fertilization membrane' (a natural toughening of the vitelline layer surrounding an ovum) post-fertilisation. This protects the eggs, but probably makes fertilised eggs difficult/impossible for Oophaga tads to get into and may have helped build the legend that there is something unique nutritionally about Oophaga eggs that means that no other eggs will do. 

I humbly suggest that if one were quick enough to extract e.g. R. imitator FEEDER eggs from a film cannister/brom before the tad got to them (or, alternatively, breeding eggs before the male got to them), and fed these to pumilio tads, the tads would develop just fine. 

I can't be the first to suggest this, it comes straight to mind if you have the background, but I guess the 'mother's milk' hypothesis has more of a romantic appeal... As always, could well be wrong - but at least it's testable if you have the time, patience and are in the country for more than a week at a time!!

Speaking of romantic appeal, I'm stuck in a Swedish university in freshers week, so must be off now.... 

Nick


----------



## Ron Magpie (Oct 11, 2009)

DrNick said:


> Stu - I bet you 10p and half a dead dolphin that there's albumin there and you just can't see it....
> 
> Cards on the table - my theory is that because dendrobatids lay eggs on land, the fertilized egg forms a thicker than normal 'fertilization membrane' (a natural toughening of the vitelline layer surrounding an ovum) post-fertilisation. This protects the eggs, but probably makes fertilised eggs difficult/impossible for Oophaga tads to get into and may have helped build the legend that there is something unique nutritionally about Oophaga eggs that means that no other eggs will do.
> 
> ...


Good so far as it goes- I'm happy to defer to greater knowledge on a group I have minimal knowledge of- but still, the *un*fertilised bit???


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

DrNick said:


> Stu - I bet you 10p and half a dead dolphin that there's albumin there and you just can't see it....
> 
> Cards on the table - my theory is that because dendrobatids lay eggs on land, the fertilized egg forms a thicker than normal 'fertilization membrane' (a natural toughening of the vitelline layer surrounding an ovum) post-fertilisation. This protects the eggs, but probably makes fertilised eggs difficult/impossible for Oophaga tads to get into and may have helped build the legend that there is something unique nutritionally about Oophaga eggs that means that no other eggs will do.
> 
> ...


You know damn well i can't take the bet...where on earth am I gonna find 10p:gasp:

Fascinating thoughts Nick,thanks for the insights. I appreciate the cards on the table I'm crap at hiding mine. Well almost hey mate:whistling2: 

OK serious head on. Explain to me why you think I didn't get the first two pums out of the water? 

They definitely fed well, I watched and was also able to perceive size differences after feeding,quite dramatic differences actually. So that sort of rules out albumin or my inadaquacies in removal there of. I use the same water for all and do ok,pums have been reared under the exact same conditions as these lived under,same everything period. I have seen no sls really since we started the vit A regime and the vit A was given time to work through to have an effect on embryo development. 

Nick , Im sure you know me well enough to know I'm provoking debate and interested in your view point.Utterly nowt else is going on here.Sometimes this medium compels me to point that out,as you know Eng lang ain't my cup 'o' char. This paragraph is probably totally unwarranted ,but me being me I need to be sure.

Nick, although my leanings are towards there being a difference,I'm not beaten by this yet in any way shape or form. I really want to persist and find another method to rear these frogs. I've long seen this malarky as deeply interesting, ok probably more than that. one of the bigger challenges to a dart keeper,naturally breeding a tinc i can put on a lead and take for walkies is one of the other biggies:whistling2Glenn's fault). I'm a bit soft,yeah ok I'll take that,but i don't really hold the romantic notion here, I'm just struggling to find a good reason for not getting this right,that's why the question is above and that mate, is why my leanings are towards a difference.

Oh buddy, "I'm stuck in a......" and your talking frogs...a word in your shell like....:gasp: 

Stu
ps I'm really quite surprised more haven't jumped in on the mantella post Nick


----------



## DrNick (Sep 20, 2012)

I don't know stu with regard to your two pums that didn't morph out right - it's a poser  As you said in your earlier post there could be any number of reasons, but certainly nutrition is the most obvious - and you (and everyone else) could well be right. 

It's entirely possible that there is an important component of Oophaga eggs that is absent from other amphibian eggs and all other food sources attempted, but there are in my opinion other more likely explanations that just don't seem ever to have been investigated. It's my nature, I'm paranoid of overlooking simple things, looking for a complex answer!

I don't know how quickly the bulk composition of eggs changes post-fertilisation - it would be incredibly difficult to say without knowing what you are looking for. But considering that you get cell division within minutes post-fertilisation, dramatic changes are certainly occurring and materials that would be available in unfertilised eggs are rapidly being used/re-assigned!

Who knows?! 

Ron - sorry if I'm being thick, I'm just not sure what you're asking?

Nick


----------



## Ron Magpie (Oct 11, 2009)

DrNick said:


> I don't know stu with regard to your two pums that didn't morph out right - it's a poser  As you said in your earlier post there could be any number of reasons, but certainly nutrition is the most obvious - and you (and everyone else) could well be right.
> 
> It's entirely possible that there is an important component of Oophaga eggs that is absent from other amphibian eggs and all other food sources attempted, but there are in my opinion other more likely explanations that just don't seem ever to have been investigated. It's my nature, I'm paranoid of overlooking simple things, looking for a complex answer!
> 
> ...


No, of course you're not being thick- this refers back to my previous question that oophaga types are known (or maybe just suspected, hence the question) to deliberately lay unfertilised eggs as food for the hatched tadpoles. An unfertilised egg would have a very different composition, I'd imagine.


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

Ron I'm racking my brains ,but i don't yet think I,or Shaz have actually witnessed oophaga laying feeder eggs...YET. But I am almost certain that although a male might be present and even call a female to a hungry tad,that is where his input stops. Ron as a side note somewhere in Life in cold blood,Sir Davids wonderful series,there is some wonderful footage of I think imitators(ranitomeya) actually feeding a tad.Slightly different group I know,but something you might want to look at. there is a section on pums too,but again I cannot remember if they show here actually laying eggs

It is possible one of the other guys here(Nick even) might be able to put a 100% stamp on the infertile eggs being laid.

Nick thanks for the reply,I suspected an answer along those line,but worth a punt. 

Ha your words about looking for complexity and overlooking the simple things made me smile,the simple things are all for me I guess my nature dictates that. We are going to be holding all young oophaga for a good while so maybe in time we'll be able to work on this in more detail once the kids grow up and reach maturity

thanks guys

Stu


----------



## frogfreak (Jul 28, 2012)

Check this out.

http://video.nationalgeographic.com...yer.swf?vid=frog_strawberrypoisondart_tadpole


----------



## soundstounite (Sep 6, 2009)

frogfreak said:


> Check this out.
> 
> http://video.nationalgeographic.com...yer.swf?vid=frog_strawberrypoisondart_tadpole


why thank you oh wise one...nearly called you teddy then:blush:

Glenn makes me wonder how the hell they get these shots,I can't get near a m tad in a brom for a pic,ruddy thing just disappears in to the depths,
hey ho
if at first.....

Stu


----------

