Why Should I Care?

[captainjack0000]

My BP has recently decided the eat only mice. For a while I could get her to take a rat but I had to offer a mouse first and prime her. She soon figured that trick out.
She eats f/t and I don't want to try live b/c I'm afraid she might grow fond of those.

So other than the cost, why should I care? Is there any serious harm in feeding 10% body weight in mice instead of in rat? Put another way, what is the difference between three or four 30g or 40g mice and two 60g rats?

Other notes:
She's a 1200g female, a 2011 hatchling, and I currently have no intentions to breed her.

[Mike41793]

Nope doesnt matter at all. As long as you dont care taking the time to thaw and feed her 6-8 (or however many) mice when shes full grown then i wouldnt worry about it.

[angllady2]

The only reason to let it bother you, is it can be tedious feeding that many mice at once. Which is neither here nor there. The only other reason is sometimes a mouser who needs to eat three or four in a sitting, will stubbornly stop at just one.

But, if you are like me, you don't worry overmuch about it. As long as they eat something on a regular basis, I'm happy.

Gale

[Gene Collins]

The guy at the local pet shop I get my live feeders from explained to me that rats have a slightly higher nutrition content than mice. Something to do with higher bone density making for more calcium. As I understand it snakes don't need calcium in high quantities like some other reptiles. I had been meaning to ask if anyone on here had heard anything similar to this info.

[Vasiliki]

The weight you get from 3-4 mice and 2 rats is going to be different because there is more 'stuff' in rats. With 3-4 mice, you have 3-4 sets of skeletons to digest, and more fur. With 2 rats, you get a higher density of food rather than more bones and fur.

I don't think it would be enough to really cause problems, but if you're asking the difference, there you go.

[rabernet]

There really is no need to care. I raised my founding females up to breeding weight on mice. They all are just as healthy as those raised on rats. It's not anything that any keeper should be stressing over. If she'll eat mice - then feed her mice!

[Egapal]

The weight you get from 3-4 mice and 2 rats is going to be different because there is more 'stuff' in rats. With 3-4 mice, you have 3-4 sets of skeletons to digest, and more fur. With 2 rats, you get a higher density of food rather than more bones and fur.

I don't think it would be enough to really cause problems, but if you're asking the difference, there you go.

I am not buying any of this. First, bones are food. The snake gets a lot out of the bones. I am not convinced that the total mass of fur is greater in mice vs the equivalent mass of rats. Even if I was I have yet to see any evidence, let alone conclusive evidence that a Ball Python will be healthier on one or the other. I think that the health of the prey animals is a much bigger consideration i.e. fat vs lean rat or mouse.

[ballpythonluvr]

My 2 year old male normal is only eating live mice and has been for over a year now. I can honestly say that he is just as healthy as any snake that is fed rats exclusively. Sure it is a pain in the butt feeding about three mice per feeding but I am just so happy that he is eating for me at all.

[Vasiliki]

I am not buying any of this. First, bones are food. The snake gets a lot out of the bones. I am not convinced that the total mass of fur is greater in mice vs the equivalent mass of rats. Even if I was I have yet to see any evidence, let alone conclusive evidence that a Ball Python will be healthier on one or the other. I think that the health of the prey animals is a much bigger consideration i.e. fat vs lean rat or mouse.

No need to be so defensive I didn't say it wasn't healthier. What I am stating is based on straight up math.

Take four spheres of a smaller diameter and cover them in fabric. Then take two larger spheres and cover them in fabric. Even though the two spheres are larger and require larger patches of fabric, the four spheres still require more fabric due to the fact that there are more spheres. So, the OP was asking what the difference was. The difference is, there is more fur on four mice to cover their bodies than on two larger rats. If you read the bottom of my post, I stated it was not enough of a difference to cause problems.

If you weigh 4 mice and 2 rats, the 4 mice are going to have more 'fur weight' than the 2 rats.

No need to fret or anything, haha. I didn't say one or the other was healthier. Just one has more fur and bones, compared to rats that are going to have less fur and bones. Meaning that if you are using the 10% rule for feeding your snakes, the mice are going to be slightly 'heavier' simply because of the increased quantity of fur and bones. Yes, bones are food, but they also require more energy to digest than just flesh.

So, no, it doesn't cause health differences. But, there is a difference between the two examples here (4 mice vs. 2 rats).

[captainjack0000]

Take four spheres of a smaller diameter and cover them in fabric. Then take two larger spheres and cover them in fabric. Even though the two spheres are larger and require larger patches of fabric, the four spheres still require more fabric due to the fact that there are more spheres.

It depends.


Surface area of a sphere =4 (pi) r^2

Lets say we have 2 spheres with a radius of 6. Our total surface area would then be about 904.78 units.

We can now say that 904.78/4 = 4(pi)r^2 which would tell us that 4 spheres with a radius of 4.243 would have the same surface area as 2 spheres with a radius of 6.

What does change is the ratio of suface area to volume. Volume is (4/3) (pi) r^3 and area is squared, so the proportion changes with increased (or decreased) size.

So the question is, what is the radius of a rat compared to a mouse?