Rats vs. Mice: nutrition

[Hoomi]

Hi all, I finally made my way over here. I thought about asking this question over on the "other" forums, but sometimes answers don't always seem to be too terribly forthcoming. Anyway, it seems that a number of folks over "there" have made comments about switching to rats as soon as possible, and stating that rats are "more nutritious" than mice.

I've been checking out the books I have, as well as some articles in Reptiles Magazine from the past few years, and so far I have not found anyone in any of those sources making any statement that rats are preferable.

In fact, one article I read talked about a practice of "power feeding" snakes to get them to breeding size faster, and how this might actually be detrimental in the long run.

I have no current plans to breed, and my nearly 4 month old ball python seems healthy and happy, even if he might be smaller than someone's "power fed" BP of the same age.

So other than the basic concept that a rat of the same size as the mouse would be (theoretically) younger and possibly easier to digest, is there really ANY nutritional advantage to rats over mice?

Thanks.

[BallKingdom]

Well, I've heard figured stating they were higher in calcium. Then heard other state that was simply not true. So I'll be deleting the piece out of my caresheet some time.

Here's how they benefit your bp more. When a bp hits a certain size, say 28 inches. Mice, even jumbos simply become too small to fill them up properly. So by switching to rats at about this time you give them more food which is more nutricous over all. And feeding more then one mouse isn't a good idea. so over all rats are best. I've actually seen some small species of rabbit which could be eaten by bp's. At 10$ each it isn't really worth it. By the time your ball python hits 4.5 feet, if it does, even giant male rats can be too small. It's all about size ratios.


Welcome to the site. Thanks for avoiding bashing any forums. We will answer your questions, no worries there. And I simply won't stand for the "newbie bashing" I've seen at other places. But I also won't stand for forum bashing. I like to keep it peaceful, but not overly moderated. Welcome, how'd ya find us?

[Hoomi]

Yeah, I'm not inclined to bash the other forums. I've gotten a lot of good information over there as well, and if there is a hesitation to answer newbie questions over there, I can understand it to an extent. After you've answered the same question umpteen times, it gets kind of old. Granted, it's also a pain in the tuchas sometimes to search through the old posts to find the same question answered before, especially trying to decipher from subject lines, but such is life.

RPlank told me about these forums. Personally, I like this style of forum better than the style over there. I like being able to scroll down and see all the replies on one page, rather than having to click through to each reply. That's simply personal preference, but to me it just makes things easier.

[IMO]

I am new to this forum. I read extensively on the internet about every care sheet and at least 80 different web sites before getting my ball python. I've also read alot on the Kingsnake.com forum for ball pythons and this idea that rats are better than mice has been spoken about alot, but I've never seen any documented or even scientific proof that this is true. I've only read peoples anecdotals about the subject. Does anyone have a cite for a study on the subject. I can agree that a larger snake would require larger food sources, but the idea that one is more nutritionally complete that the other, well that is hard to understand. I can also agree that if you feed larger food items to snakes they will probably grow faster and maybe larger. I posting this because I would really like to see more evidence to this idea. Thanks.

[BallKingdom]

Yeah, that kind of does leave you wondering eh? People have all kinds of figured regarding this but really have no evidence. I'm not even sure what is true, but I've noticed a great improvement in size when Monty started rats. But then again, the rats were bigger then the mice.

I'll look into this.

[Addicted_2_Herps]

eh... My bp is almost 2 feet and was feeding on 2 adult mice and he has been feeding on rat pups now for 2 weeks and wooo weee its like it hit a stunt growth he is growing a little faster...I think he go in to shed mode after tomarrow (feed day)

[IMO]

[quote]Yeah, that kind of does leave you wondering eh?

What it leaves me wondering is the idea that one is more nutritionally complete that the other. "Nutritionally complete" being the operative words. Other than the obvious size difference that rats are bigger than mice and therefore may contribute to larger growth rates, I'm interested more in the notion that they are somehow more "nutritionally complete." This implies that there is something incomplete about mice.
Thanks for looking into it.

[BallKingdom]

Sorry, just a thought. If you've ever kept lizards you know how important gut-loading crickets is to their health. Wouldn't it be awsome if the same could be applied for snakes? If the sold a kit with a sort of siringe, and some jars of high nutrition jello stuff. Just stick it down the mouses throat, fill it up and feed. It's make healthier snakes, and those who eat less don't suffer from no nutrients.

I'm a genius.

[Kara]

Download this & read it...they use a fairly small sample size to gather data, but interesting nonetheless.

http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/zoo/Who...nal02May29.pdf

K

[IMO]

Thanks for the article. It was interesting. From what I've read, and speaking very generally, I've gathered several contributing factors to whether rats or mice are better.
1) The food that the rat or mouse was raised on will contribute to its overall nourishment for the snake.
2) The age of the rat or mouse at the time of consumption. As the rat or mouse ages from one stage to another there are greater or lesser degrees of certain nutrients.
3) Rats and mice metabolize some nutrients differently-Regarding vitamin E, "Clear species differences in vitamin E metabolism/utilization have been shown between laboratory mice and rats raised on the same diets,7,15 suggesting that species that have not been studied may have different requirements."

The tables provided at the end of the study at times indicates wide variation and at other times very small differences in nutrition, again depending on the age of the rat or mouse. It would seem to me that from this limited study, it would be hard to support the argument, across the board, that rats are nutritionally better than mice. Having said that though when it comes to convenience, cost, and keeping the python feed, it only makes sense to feed larger items, i.e., rats if possible. In My Opinion, they are both probably offer equal nutritional. We as purchasers of live or frozen rats or mice usually have no idea what food they were raised on, how they were euthanized, etc., and therefore have no idea what's under that fur coat. I think you have to look at what your buying and judge as best you can on appearance and behavior of the rat or mouse. (In the case of frozen, behavior is usually consistent, LOL). Initially, I don't think it matters which you serve up. When the snake gets larger, I would go for rats for the reasons mentioned above.