ArticlePDF Available

How much UV-B does my reptile need? The UV-Tool, a guide to the selection of UV lighting for reptiles and amphibians in captivity. Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1): 42 - 63. http://www.jzar.org/jzar/article/view/150

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Guidance is almost non-existent as to suitable levels of UV lighting for reptiles and amphibians, or how to achieve satisfactory UV gradients using artificial lighting. The UV-Tool is a working document that seeks to address this problem, by considering the range of UV experienced by each species in the wild. The UV-Tool contains an editable and expanding database of the microhabitat requirements and basking behaviour of reptile and amphibian species, as derived from field studies, or inferred from observed behaviour in captivity. Since an animal’s UV-B exposure is determined by its behaviour within its native microhabitat, estimation of its natural range of daily UV-B exposure is then possible. The current version of the UV-Tool assigns 254 species to each of four ‘zones’ of UV-B exposure (Ferguson zones) based upon UV-index measurements. Once the likely UV requirement of any species of reptile or amphibian is ascertained, the next step is to plan safe but effective UV gradients within the captive environment. To do this requires knowledge of the UV spectrum and output of the lamps to be used. The UV-Tool therefore includes test reports and UV-index gradient maps for commercially available UV-B lighting products, and a guide to selection of appropriate lamps for use in vivaria and in larger zoo enclosures. There are reports on 24 different products in the current version of the UV-Tool. This document has been compiled by members of the British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquaria (BIAZA) Reptile and Amphibian Working Group (RAWG) with contributions from zookeepers and herpetologists from the UK and abroad. Further input is welcome and encouraged.
Content may be subject to copyright.
OPEN ACCESS JZAR Evidence-based pracce
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 42
OPEN ACCESS
Evidence-based pracce
How much UV-B does my reple need? The UV-Tool, a guide to the
selecon of UV lighng for reples and amphibians in capvity
Frances Baines1*, Joe Chaell2, James Dale3, Dan Garrick4, Iri Gill5, Ma Goetz6, Tim Skelton7 and Ma Swatman3
1UV Guide UK, Abergavenny, UK
2Reaseheath College, Nantwich, UK
3Chester Zoo, UK
4Marwell Zoo, UK
5Zoological Society of London, UK
6Durrell Wildlife Conservaon Trust, Jersey
7Bristol Zoo Gardens, UK
*Correspondence: Frances Baines, UV Guide UK, Greeneld, School Lane, Govilon, Abergavenny NP7 9NT, UK; aines@uvguide.co.uk
Keywords:
microhabitat design, UV-B, UV index,
UV lamps, UV requirements, vivarium
lighng
Arcle history:
Received: 9 July 2015
Accepted: 15 January 2015
Published online: 31 January 2015
Abstract
Guidance is almost non-existent as to suitable levels of UV lighng for reples and amphibians, or
how to achieve sasfactory UV gradients using arcial lighng. The UV-Tool is a working document
that seeks to address this problem, by considering the range of UV experienced by each species in the
wild. The UV-Tool contains an editable and expanding database of the microhabitat requirements and
basking behaviour of reple and amphibian species, as derived from eld studies, or inferred from
observed behaviour in capvity. Since an animal’s UV-B exposure is determined by its behaviour within
its nave microhabitat, esmaon of its natural range of daily UV-B exposure is then possible. The
current version of the UV-Tool assigns 254 species to each of four ‘zones’ of UV-B exposure (Ferguson
zones) based upon UV-index measurements. Once the likely UV requirement of any species of reple
or amphibian is ascertained, the next step is to plan safe but eecve UV gradients within the capve
environment. To do this requires knowledge of the UV spectrum and output of the lamps to be used.
The UV-Tool therefore includes test reports and UV-index gradient maps for commercially available
UV-B lighng products, and a guide to selecon of appropriate lamps for use in vivaria and in larger
zoo enclosures. There are reports on 24 dierent products in the current version of the UV-Tool. This
document has been compiled by members of the Brish and Irish Associaon of Zoos and Aquaria
(BIAZA) Reple and Amphibian Working Group (RAWG) with contribuons from zookeepers and
herpetologists from the UK and abroad. Further input is welcome and encouraged.
Introducon
The provision of UV lighng to capve reples and amphibians
is widely recommended (e.g. Rossi 2006; Carmel and Johnson
2014; Tapley et al. 2015). However, guidance as to suitable levels
of UV-B for dierent species, and how to achieve sasfactory
UV gradients, is almost non-existent. The aim of this project
is to create a working document that can be used as a guide
to suitable UV lighng for all reples and amphibians kept in
capvity. The project was iniated by the UV Focus Group of
the Brish and Irish Associaon of Zoos and Aquaria (BIAZA)
Reple and Amphibian Working Group (RAWG).
Every aspect of the life of a reple or amphibian is governed
by its daily experience of solar light and heat – or the arcial
equivalent, when it is housed indoors. All wavelengths
from infra-red to ultraviolet (UV) may be ulised by these
animals, and are received in amounts that depend upon their
microhabitat and their daily acvity paerns. Ultraviolet is a
normal component of sunlight. It is subdivided by wavelength;
natural sunlight consists of a short-wavelength fracon, UV-B
(290–320 nm) and a longer-wavelength fracon, UV-A (320–
400 nm).
UV-A from around 350 nm is within the visual range of many
reples and amphibians, which use it in recognising conspecics
and food items (Govardovskii and Zueva 1974; Moehn 1974;
Fleishman et al. 1993; Honkavaara et al. 2002); its provision
within the spectrum is therefore very important.
Short-wavelength UV-B (290–315nm) enables the conversion
of 7-dehydrocholesterol (7DHC), a sterol in the skin, to pre-
vitamin D3. In skin this undergoes a temperature-dependent
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 43
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
isomerisaon into vitamin D3, which is metabolised by the liver
and subsequently by the kidney into the vital endocrine hormone
calcitriol, controlling calcium metabolism. It is also metabolised into
calcitriol intracellularly throughout the body, where in mammals
it has been shown to perform mulple autocrine and paracrine
funcons, controlling transcripon of as many as 2000 genes
that inuence funcons as diverse as growth, insulin producon
and the immune system (Hossein-nezhad and Holick 2013).
Overproducon of vitamin D3 is prevented by the conversion of
excess pre-vitamin D3 and vitamin D3 into inert photoproducts by
UV-B and short-wavelength UV-A (range 290–335nm), eecvely
making this natural process, in sunlight, self-liming (MacLaughlin
et al. 1982; Webb et al. 1989). Although most research on vitamin
D3 has been carried out on mammals, studies conducted on other
taxa indicate that vitamin D pathways are similar in most terrestrial
vertebrates (Holick et al. 1995; Bidmon and Stumpf 1996; Antwis
and Browne 2009).
As well as its role in enabling and regulang cutaneous vitamin
D synthesis, UV has direct eects upon skin, which include
modulaon of the cutaneous immune system, strengthening of
skin barrier funcons and increasing pigment formaon. It also
smulates producon of beta endorphins, giving sunlight its
‘feel good’ factor, and induces nitric oxide producon, which has
localised protecve eects (Juzeniene and Moan 2012). Solar UV
is also an eecve disinfectant (McGuigan et al. 2012) that can
destroy bacteria, fungi and viruses on the surface of the skin.
Excessive exposure to UV must, however, be avoided. High
doses and/or exposure to unnaturally short-wavelength UV from
arcial sources can result in eye and skin damage, reproducve
failure or even the death of amphibians (Blaustein and Belden
2003) and reples (Gardiner et al. 2009), and in mammals, can
lead to the formaon of skin cancers (Soehnge 1997). Squamous
cell carcinomas have been reported in capve reples but the
signicance of their associaon with the use of arcial UV
lighng is as yet undetermined (Duarte and Baines 2009; Hannon
et al. 2011).
Species vary widely in their basking behaviours or lack of them
(Avery 1982; Taersall et al. 2006; Michaels and Preziosi 2013),
their skin permeability to UV radiaon (Porter 1967; Nietzke 1990)
and in their response to UV-B in terms of vitamin D3 producon
(Carman et al. 2000). These behavioural and morphological
characteriscs opmise their UV exposure for vitamin D synthesis
and the other benecial eects of sunlight, whilst simultaneously
minimising the risk of UV damage, but these adaptaons are only
relevant for the solar irradiaon they experience in their nave
microhabitat. Thus it would seem very important to match the
solar UV spectrum as closely as possible, and to recreate the levels
of irradiance found in this microhabitat, when providing reples
and amphibians with arcial lighng.
In nature the levels of UV irradiance at any one locaon vary
connuously, unlike the situaon in a typical vivarium, in which a
UV-B-eming lamp is either on or o. The greatest determinant
of irradiance is the solar altude – the height of the sun in the
sky – because at low solar altudes the rays must pass through a
thicker layer of atmosphere, which selecvely absorbs and scaers
shorter wavelengths. Under clear skies, the solar UV-B levels rise
from zero at dawn, to a maximum around noon, then fall again
to zero at sunset (e.g. Michaels and Preziosi 2013). Clouds scaer
and absorb all wavelengths, and may greatly reduce irradiance.
However, meteorological data cannot be representave of
condions within a microclimate. At any me of day, sunlight also
interacts with features in the animal’s environment such as trees,
rocks, plants and water, creang superimposed gradients of heat,
light and UV extending from full sunlight into full shade. Reples
and amphibians perceive these gradients and may use light
intensity as a cue for thermoregulaon (Sievert and Hutchison
1988, 1989, 1991; Hertz et al 1994; Dickinson and Fa 1997) and
in some cases for UV photoregulaon (Manning and Grigg 1997;
Ferguson et al. 2003; Karsten et al. 2009). The animal’s response
will determine its exposure within these gradients. Variaon in
behaviour creates enormous dierences in UV exposure between
species, ranging from mid-day full-sun baskers to nocturnal and
crepuscular animals, which may receive the majority of their
ultraviolet exposure from small amounts of daylight reaching
them in their diurnal retreats.
The creaon of similar superimposed heat, light and UV
gradients using UV-B-eming lamps, oen in combinaon
with other sources of heat and light, is possible because their
irradiance is proporonal to the distance from the lamp. The task
requires knowledge of (1) the range of irradiance appropriate for
the species and (2) the gradients created by individual lighng
products, which may be used individually or in combinaon to
produce the desired eect.
The range of irradiance appropriate for the species
Research on this topic is in its infancy, even with regard to
human beings. There is hardly any scienc data to back the
recommendaon of any parcular level of UV-B for any parcular
species. Unl very recently, no praccal methods existed for
recording ambient UV-B in the microhabitat of free-living reples
and amphibians. However, Ferguson et al. (2010) reported the UV
exposure of 15 species of reples in the eld during their daily
and seasonal peak of acvity, using the unitless UV index (UVI),
as measured with a Solarmeter 6.5 UV Index meter (Solartech
Inc., Harrison Township, Michigan, USA), and demonstrated
that knowledge of the basking/daylight exposure habits of any
species enables a reasonable esmaon of likely UV exposures to
be made. They allocated species into four sun exposure groups
or ‘zones’, which have since been designated ‘UV-B Zones’ or
‘Ferguson zones’ (Carmel and Johnson 2014; Ferguson et al. 2014).
For each zone, a range of gures was given for the mean voluntary
UVI exposures calculated from all readings (Zone Range), and for
the maximum UVI in which the animals were encountered. The
Ferguson zones are summarised in Table 1.
Any species can be assigned to one of the four zones based
upon its basking behaviour. The authors suggest that a suitable UV
gradient may then be provided in the capve animal’s environment
using these gures as a guide. Such a gradient should enable the
animal to self-regulate its exposure from zero (full shade) to the
maximum indicated for that zone, which would be provided at the
animal’s closest access point to the lamp.
Characteriscs
Zone range
UVI
Maximum
UVI
Zone 1 Crepuscular or shade dweller,
thermal conformer 0–0.7 0.6–1.4
Zone 2 Paral sun/occasional basker,
thermoregulator 0.7–1.0 1.1–3.0
Zone 3 Open or paral sun basker,
thermoregulator 1.0–2.6 2.9–7.4
Zone 4 Mid-day sun basker,
thermoregulator 2.6–3.5 4.5–9.5
Table 1. The Ferguson zones, summarised from Ferguson et al. (2010).
Species are grouped into four zones according to their thermoregulatory
behaviour and microhabitat preferences, with the UVB reference
guidelines determined from average irradiance of randomly encountered
individuals in the eld.
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201644
Baines et al.
The gradients created by individual lighng products
The suitability of any light source is governed by two main features:
its quality (the spectrum) and quanty (the irradiance received by
the animal). The template for the ideal spectral power distribuon
is the solar spectrum, under which life evolved and to which all
life on the planet’s surface is adapted. Direct comparisons of lamp
spectra with the solar spectrum are therefore required.
With regard to quanty, the irradiance at any given distance
from a lamp is a funcon of the output of the lamp and the way
the light is distributed, i.e. the shape of the beam. For example,
a uorescent tube that radiates a diuse, relavely low level of
UV-B from its enre surface will produce a very dierent UV-B
gradient and basking opportunity than a mercury vapour spot
lamp that emits a very narrow beam of intense UV-B light only
a few cenmetres across. The use of various lamp reectors,
shades or luminaires can also dramacally aect the shape of the
beam and the intensity of UV at any given distance. It is therefore
important to plot an iso-irradiance chart for each lamp, to assess
its eecveness. However, in previous studies the irradiance from
UV-B lamps has usually been measured at standard distances
from the lamp, regardless of the lamp type and the shape of its
beam (Gehrmann 1987; Gehrmann et al. 2004b; Lindgren 2004;
Lindgren et al. 2008).
A hand-held broadband meter is a praccal instrument
for measuring both solar UV irradiance in the eld and lamp
irradiance indoors. However, dierent brands and models of
broadband UV-B meters (range 280–320 nm) will have dierent
spectral responsivity. Unless they are specically calibrated for
the spectral power distribuon of a parcular lamp, each meter
may give a dierent reading from that lamp at any given distance
(Gehrmann et al. 2004a). In addion, only a very narrow band of
shorter wavelengths in the UV-B range (295–315 nm) contribute
to vitamin D3 synthesis; measurements including irradiance from
longer wavelengths may be misleading as to the eecveness of
a lamp.
Unlike broadband UV-B meters, which respond to the enre
range of UV-B wavelengths, the Solarmeter 6.5 UV Index
meter (Solartech Inc., Harrison Township, Michigan, USA) used
by Ferguson et al. (2010) has strong ltraon of the longer
wavelengths, resulng in a spectral responsivity with a 96%
overlap to the CIE pre-vitamin D3 spectrum (CIE 2006) from 290 to
400 nm (S. Wunderlich, pers. comm.). This enables a reasonable
esmate of the vitamin D-synthesising potenal of sunlight and
any arcial source. The readings are displayed in the unitless UV
index, which is benecial for interpretaon as it is a well known
measurement of ‘sun strength’ as determined by human erythema,
which has a similar, but not idencal, acon spectrum (CIE 1998)
to the pre-vitamin D3 spectrum. The Solarmeter 6.5’s spectral
response falls about halfway between the two (Schmalwieser et
al. 2006). When its UVI measurements were compared with data
provided by a Bentham spectrometer, a very accurate sensor used
for UV measurements, deviaons of only ±5% were found, which
are within the range commonly expected for scienc instruments
(de Paula Corrêa et al. 2010). This meter is therefore suitable for
measuring the irradiance from sunlight and from a lamp at specic
distances, and for plong the shape of the lamp’s beam, to create
an iso-irradiance chart.
Methods
A database was compiled of basic informaon on each species of
reple and amphibian held by the authors’ current instuons.
Each species was assigned to a Ferguson zone based on an
assessment of its basking behaviour, derived from published or
personal studies made in the eld if possible, but if not, from
observaons of the animal’s behaviour in capvity. Further
informaon on the animal’s natural microhabitat and thermal
requirements was added, to assist the keeper in choosing
appropriate lamp combinaons for creang a suitable lighng and
heang gradient within the enclosure. The database included the
following informaon:
Species (Lan name, common name)
Biome (Major biome or Terrestrial Ecoregion as dened by
Olson et al. (2001) and adopted by the World Wildlife Fund
(WWF 2015)
Ferguson zone
Photoperiod
Winter treatment, if any (cooling, brumaon or
hibernaon)
Basking zone temperature (substrate surface
temperature)
Dayme ambient (air) temperature (summer and winter)
Night ambient (air) temperature (summer and winter)
Microhabitat, including specialist requirements added as
‘comments’
A selecon of 24 widely available UV-B-eming lighng
products was fully tested by one of the authors (FB). The lamps
were switched on for 15 hours per day unl a total of 105 hours
was completed before tesng, approximang the industry
standard ‘burning-in’ period of 100 hours (IESNA 1999).
All measurements were carried out with the lamps in simple
xtures, with no shades or reectors, above a test bench, aer a
30-minute warm-up period. Recordings included:
Spectrograms (Ocean Opcs USB2000+ spectral radiometer
with a UV-B compable bre-opc probe with cosine
adaptor: Ocean Opcs Inc., Dunedin, FL 34698 USA)
UV Index (Solarmeter 6.5 UV Index meter: Solartech Inc.,
Harrison Township, MI 48045 USA)
Total UV-B: 280–320nm (Solarmeter 6.2 broadband UVB
meter: Solartech Inc., Harrison Township, MI 48045 USA)
UV-C (Solarmeter 8.0 broadband UVC meter: Solartech
Inc., Harrison Township, MI 48045 USA)
Visible light output (SkyTronic LX101 model 600.620 digital
lux meter: SkyTronic B. V., Overijssel, Netherlands)
Electrical consumpon (Prodigit power monitor model
2000M-UK: Prodigit Electronics, New Taipei City, Taiwan)
For those lamps eming UV-B in appropriate wavelengths for
vitamin D3 synthesis, as indicated by their spectral analysis, an iso-
irradiance chart mapping the UV index gradient was constructed
according to a method described previously (Baines 2015). The
ability of each lighng product to provide irradiances within the UV
index ranges appropriate to each Ferguson zone was documented
and guidelines draed regarding methods of lamp choice.
The species database, lamp test results and guidelines were
compiled into a dra Excel document. This was distributed to
the wider BIAZA RAWG community and to a small number of
herpetologists and private keepers with specialist knowledge.
All recipients of the dra document were requested to submit
reviews of the UV-Tool and data for addional species held in
their collecons, including references to their source material
where appropriate. The rst dra was distributed in December
2012, lisng 190 species from the ve zoological collecons to
which the co-authors were aliated. Between January 2013 and
October 2015 contribuons were received from a further nine
instuons and ten individual contributors, bringing the total up
to 254 species of reples and amphibians. This is sll a working
document. The database has been updated at regular intervals,
and is currently in its tenth edion, available for download from
the Internet (BIAZA RAWG 2015). New reviews, correcons and
submissions are welcomed.
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 45
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
UV-B lamp test results
Table 2 lists the lamps that were included in the trial, and
summarises their ability to provide irradiances within the UV index
ranges appropriate to each Ferguson zone, at praccal distances
beneath the lamp. Figure 1A–C graphs the UVI irradiances of
individual lamps at increasing distances from the surface of
the lamp, with the UV index meter posioned perpendicular to
the lamp, directly beneath its central point. Figures 2 and 3 are
examples of iso-irradiance charts and spectra for four disnct
types of UV-B-eming lamp: a standard-output T8 (25 mm
Results
Species database
The entries to date (254 species) are listed in full in the Appendix.
The contributors for each species and their recommended reading
and reference lists are not included owing to space limitaons,
but are present in the UV-Tool Excel working document available
online (BIAZA RAWG 2015). Further contribuons are sll being
sought, and the BIAZA RAWG Focus Group intends to edit and
expand the database as more informaon becomes available.
Table 2. Assessment of 24 lamps used in reple husbandry. Operang ranges also respect safe minimum distances. Fluorescent lamps eming less than
UVI 0.5 at 15cm are not considered to be suitable as the sole source of UVB even for Zone 1 species.
Ferguson zones which can be covered using the lamp (depending
upon distance)
Company name Brand name
Sample in
this report
Date sample
purchased
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4
using shade
method
using shade
method
using sunbeam
method
using sunbeam
method
Fluorescent tubes
A) T8 (1" diameter) tubes
Arcadia Natural Sunlight Lamp 2% UVB 60cm 18W 2008 with reector
Arcadia D3 Reple Lamp 6% UVB 60cm 18W 2008 with reector
Arcadia D3+ Reple Lamp 12% UVB 60cm 18W 2008 with reector
Narva BioVital T8 60cm 18W 2009
ZooMed Repsun 2.0/ Naturesun 60cm 18W 2008
ZooMed Repsun 5.0/ IguanaLight 60cm 18W 2005  
ZooMed Repsun 10.0 60cm 18W 2011 with reector
B) T5 (16mm diameter) tubes
Arcadia T5 D3 Reple Lamp 6% UVB 55cm 24W 2011 with reector with reector
Arcadia T5 D3+ Reple Lamp 12% UVB 55cm 24W 2011    
ZooMed Repsun 5.0 UVB T5-HO 55cm 24W 2012 with reector with reector
ZooMed Repsun 10.0 UVB T5-HO 55cm 24W 2012    
Mercury vapour lamps
Arcadia D3 Basking Lamp 100W 2012  
Arcadia D3 Basking Lamp 160W 2012  
ExoTerra Solar Glo 125W 2012-2013   ?
ExoTerra Solar Glo 160W 2012-2013  
MegaRay
PetCare Mega-Ray 100W 2014    
MegaRay
PetCare Mega-Ray 160W 2014    
Osram Ultravitalux 300W 2005-2011    
ZooMed Powersun 100W 2012-2013   
ZooMed Powersun 160W 2012-2013    
Metal halide lamps
Iwasaki EYE
Color Arc manufactured prior to
2011 150W 2009-2010   ?
Iwasaki EYE Color Arc manufactured aer 2011 150W 2009-2010
Lucky Reple Bright Sun UV Desert 35W 2012    
Lucky Reple Bright Sun UV Desert 50W 2008  
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201646
Baines et al.
diameter) uorescent tube, a mercury vapour lamp, a metal halide
lamp and a T5 (16 mm diameter) High-Output (T5-HO) uorescent
tube ed with an aluminium reector. Each of the full lamp test
results for all 24 lamps are accessible from links on the same
website page from which the Excel working document may be
downloaded (BIAZA RAWG 2015), as well as from links within the
UV-Tool itself. New lamp test results will be added to this website,
and their links will be added to the working document, as they
become available.
Discussion
Lamp test results
The UV output of lamps sold for use with reples and amphibians
varies enormously, not just from dierent types of lamp, but also
from dierent brands with similar specicaons. Although only
one lamp from each brand was tested in this trial, previous tests
(FB, unpublished data) have shown that considerable dierences
may exist between individual lamps of the same brand and
Figure 1. UV Index irradiance recordings. (A) UVB-eming uorescent tubes (T8 and T5 versions); (B) mercury vapour lamps; (C) metal halide lamps.
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 47
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
specicaons. This may be due to small dierences in manufacture
such as internal posioning of lamp elements, thickness of glass or
coangs, etc., but the UV-B output may also vary with external
factors such as uctuaons in the voltage of the electrical supply
and the ambient temperature. UV-B output also decays with
use, primarily due to solarisaon of the glass envelope under UV
bombardment, but also due to chemical changes in phosphors or
halide mixtures or the blackening of glass from spuering from
ageing electrodes. Ideally, lamp output should be monitored
regularly. Most products decay only slowly, however, aer the
inial ‘burning-in’ period. Included in the full lamp test results are
measurements taken from seven of the UV-eming uorescent
tubes from Arcadia (Arcadia Products plc., Redhill, UK) and
ZooMed (ZooMed Laboratories Inc., San Luis Obispo, USA), each
lamp represenng a dierent brand, put into use for at least a full
year (4000 hours of use at 10–12 hours per day). Aer burning-in
for 105 hours, the mean reducon in UVI, from new, was 12.6%
(range 6–23%). At the end of 4000 hours the mean reducon in
UVI, from new, was only 39.9% (range 30–48%). These results
suggest that some brands may not need replacement for at least
one year. Not all products have similar longevity. For example, one
brand sold by a dierent manufacturer showed a reducon in UVI
of 64% from new aer only 1000 hours’ use – about three months
at 10–12 hours per day. This product was therefore rendered
ineecve at any praccal distance aer only three months (FB,
unpublished data).
Spectral analysis reveals that none of the lamps in this trial
emit harmful non-solar UV-B radiaon (<290 nm). All of the
lamps emit at least some UV-B in the range required for vitamin
D3 synthesis, although the so-called ‘full spectrum’ uorescent
tubes, Narva Biovital (Narva Lichtquellen GmbH, Brand-Erbisdorf,
Germany), ZooMed NatureSun (ZooMed Laboratories Inc., San
Luis Obispo, USA), and the Iwasaki EYE Color Arc metal halide lamp
manufactured aer 2011 (Iwasaki Electric Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan),
emit insignicant amounts except at extremely close range.
Iso-irradiance charts
The iso-irradiance charts enable comparison of the UV gradients
between dierent lamps and reveal important dierences in
the surface area beneath the lamps that receives any specied
irradiance. For example, as indicated in Table 2, both the Arcadia
T5 D3+ Reple Lamp 12% UV-B uorescent tube (Arcadia Products
plc., Redhill, UK) and the Lucky Reple Bright Sun Desert 50wa
metal halide lamp (Import Export Peter Hoch GmbH, Waldkirch,
Germany) are able to produce a gradient suitable for a Zone 2
animal at a safe distance. However, the iso-irradiance charts
for these lamps indicate that the uorescent tube ed with a
reector provides a UV index range between 0.5 and 1.0 across
an area over 130 cm in diameter at a distance of 85 cm (Figure
3D), whereas the same zone of irradiance under the metal halide
lamp is achieved at 45 cm, but the footprint is less than 25 cm in
diameter (Figure 3C). The praccal uses for these two lamps will
therefore be very dierent. Eecve UV coverage needs to be at
least as wide as the whole body of the animal.
Mercury vapour and metal halide lamps emit signicant infrared
radiaon as well as UV and visible light. When creang a thermal
gradient, just as with a UV gradient, the whole of the animal’s
body must t within the opmum upper temperature zone. For
A B
C D
Figure 2. Full ultraviolet and visible light (UV-VIS) spectrum of samples of four types of UVB lamp. A mid-day solar spectrum with the sun close to the zenith
(Solar altude 85.4°) is overlaid onto each chart - but note the dierent irradiance scales. This enables comparison of the spectral power distribuon of
the lamp with that of natural sunlight, which has a completely connuous spectrum from a threshold around 295nm. (A) UVB-eming uorescent tube
(T8 version): ZooMed Repsun 10.0 UVB 18wa T8 uorescent tube. Distance 10cm. (B) Mercury vapour lamp: ZooMed Powersun 160wa lamp. Distance
30cm. (C) Metal halide lamp: Lucky Reple Bright Sun Desert UV 50wa lamp. Distance 30cm. (D) UVB-eming uorescent tube (T5 version): Arcadia T5-
HO D3+ 12%UVB 24wa T5 uorescent tube in aluminium reector. Distance 10cm.
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201648
Baines et al.
basking species, this means creaon of a basking area in which
appropriate UV, visible light and infrared radiaon cover the enre
body of the animal. Lamps with wide ood-type beams or mulple
lamps above the basking zone are oen necessary.
When lamps are installed in enclosures, any shades and
reectors, mesh guards, even nearby objects such as branches
and foliage will aect light and UV distribuon. Iso-irradiance
charts are no substute for in-situ measurements; they are merely
guides to aid lamp selecon.
Using the Ferguson zones
Figure 4 summarises the zone ranges recorded by Ferguson et al.
(2010) and illustrates the way in which we propose they might be
used to create suitable UV gradients for any species based upon its
thermoregulaon behaviour.
Ferguson et al. (2010) provide two sets of gures:
‘Zone ranges’: all the UVI readings for the microhabitats at 1.
the me and place the reples were found were averaged.
For example, the average exposure of crepuscular or shade
dwelling species fell in the range between UVI 0 and 0.7,
the ‘paral sun or occasional baskers’ were in a range from
0.7 to 1.0, and so on. This gure might be considered a
suitable ‘mid-background’ level of UV for the species in
queson.
‘Max UVI recorded’ refers to the highest UVI that the 2.
reples from each zone were found to occupy in this study.
Obviously this gure might reect a ‘one-o’ exposure – a
single reple found out in mid-day sun – but it gives an
esmate of the maximum levels this type of animal might
encounter naturally. This might be considered as a guide
as to the upper acceptable limit for the UV gradient to be
provided in capvity.
We suggest that a suitable UV gradient, chosen to match the
zone to which the reple or amphibian is allocated, may then be
provided in the capve animal’s environment, enabling the animal
to self-regulate its exposure. A full range of UV levels may be
provided, from zero (full shade) to the maximum suggested by the
zone assessment (at the closest point possible between the animal
and the lamp). We have used the informaon from the Ferguson
et al. (2010) study as a basis for our suggeson that there are two
ways of supplying UV to reples and amphibians kept indoors in
capvity.
‘Shade’ and ‘sunbeam’ methods
The ‘shade method’ provides low-level background UV over a
large proporon of the animal’s enclosure using the zone ranges
as a guide to appropriate ambient UV, with a gradient from the
Figure 3. UV Index iso-irradiance charts for samples of four types of UVB lamp. These charts are for the lamps with spectra illustrated in Figure 2. (A) UVB-
eming uorescent tube (T8): ZooMed Repsun 10.0 UVB 18wa T8 tube. (B) Mercury vapour lamp: ZooMed Powersun 160wa lamp. (C) Metal halide
lamp: Lucky Reple Bright Sun Desert UV 50wa lamp. (D) UVB-eming uorescent tube (T5): Arcadia T5-HO D3+ 12%UVB 24wa T5 uorescent tube in
aluminium reector.
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 49
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
highest zone range value close to the lamp, to zero in the shade.
This would seem to be the method of choice for shade-dwelling
animals and occasional baskers, i.e., those in zones 1 and 2. Most
amphibians, snakes and crepuscular lizards have been allocated to
these zones. Fluorescent T8 (26 mm diameter) UV-B tubes create
low levels of UV irradiance, similar to those found in outdoor shade
on a sunny day, over a relavely large area close to the tube, with
a gradient to zero at greater distances from the lamp. They would
therefore appear to be parcularly suitable for the shade method
in small enclosures and vivaria, where the maximum UVI required
would be no higher than UVI 0.7–1.0. In larger enclosures, high
output T5 (T5-HO) (16 mm diameter) UV-B uorescent tubes may
be used, as these can be posioned further from the animals, to
achieve the same low UVI at animal level.
The ‘sunbeam method’ is designed to provide a higher level
of UV for species known to bask in direct sunlight. The aim is to
provide UV levels in the basking area that are similar to those
experienced by a wild animal in direct sunlight in its natural
habitat during a typical early to mid-morning basking period. This
is the me when most basking species absorb solar radiaon for
long periods. In the tropics and sub-tropics, in open sunlight on
clear days between 8.30am and 9.30am local me, the UV index
is typically in the range UVI 3.0–5.0 (FB, unpublished data). This
higher level needs to be restricted to the basking zone (simulang
a patch of sunlight) with a gradient to zero into shade. This method
would seem appropriate for animals in zones 3 and 4, many of
which are diurnal reples, and for some paral sun/occasional
baskers from zone 2. Some mercury vapour lamps, metal halide
UV-B lamps and high output T5 (T5-HO) UV-B uorescent tubes
(16 mm diameter) can produce much higher levels of UV-B than
T8 uorescent tubes, up to levels typical of natural sunlight. These
lamps can be posioned to irradiate a brightly illuminated basking
zone with appropriate levels of UV-B for the enre photoperiod,
so that suitable UV exposure occurs whenever the animal chooses
to bask. We suggest that ‘Max UVI recorded’ should be a guide to
the maximum permied for each zone, with the excepon of zone
4. Although some zone 4 reples have been observed basking at
UVI 9.5 or above (Ferguson et al. 2010, 2014), even these spend
the majority of their basking me in the early morning and late
aernoon, when levels are around UVI 3.0–5.0. It follows that
the most appropriate levels for zone 4 animals, too, will be in
this range. We suggest that for safety, UVI 7.0–8.0 should be
considered the absolute maximum UVI at reple level for zone 4
reples under arcial sources of UV-B, since the UV spectrum
from arcial lighng is not the same as from natural sunlight.
If keepers do not have access to a UV index meter, the iso-
irradiance charts and irradiance tables to which the UV-Tool
is linked may be used to idenfy suitable distances at which
appropriate levels for both ‘shade’ and ‘sunbeam’ methods are
achieved by dierent lamps.
Special consideraons: nocturnal species
Tradionally, it has been assumed that nocturnal and crepuscular
species do not require UV lighng because their lifestyle precludes
exposure to daylight, and/or they obtain all the vitamin D3 they
require from their diet. Although carnivores may obtain sucient
vitamin D3 from the bodies of their prey, the natural diets of
insecvores are unlikely to provide any signicant amounts of the
vitamin (Finke and Oonincx 2014), making cutaneous synthesis
the most likely primary source.
More than 60 years ago, reports were collected of supposedly
nocturnal reples experiencing at least some exposure to
daylight, either by occasional dayme forays or by incidental
exposure to light in their sleeping places (Brastrom 1952). House
geckos, Hemidactylus frenatus and H. turcicus, are oen seen
in daylight around dusk and dawn (FB, pers. obs.) and Tarentola
mauretanica can regularly be seen basking in the sun for periods
throughout the day (MG, pers. obs.). Without evidence from 24-
hour observaonal eld studies, it cannot be assumed that any
nocturnal species receives no sunlight at all. Many snakes, such as
Figure 4. UV index esmates based upon the Ferguson zones. Columns 1 to 5 of the table idenfy the characteriscs of each zone as presented by Ferguson
et al. (2010). The original 15 species of reples studied in their natural habitat in Jamaica and south and west USA are shown in column 5. In the column
6 are examples of species commonly held in capvity, assigned to Ferguson zones based upon their known basking behaviour. Arrows link animals from
each zone to either shade or sunbeam methods of UV provision as proposed in the BIAZA UV-Tool (2012) and indicate typical lamp types suggested for
each method.
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201650
Baines et al.
the black ratsnake (Pantherophis obsoletus) vary their diel paerns
of acvity depending upon ambient temperatures, increasing
diurnal acvity in the cooler months (Sperry et al. 2013).
It has been speculated that crepuscular species may synthesise
vitamin D3 by emerging into sunlight at dusk and dawn. However,
when the sun is close to the horizon, the atmosphere lters out
almost all the UV-B wavelengths required for vitamin D3 synthesis;
species which can benet from such low levels of UV need skin
with very high UV transmission. Some nocturnal geckos, for
example, t into this category. Short wavelength UV-B has been
shown to be transmied through the full thickness of skin of the
nocturnal gecko Coleonyx variegatus to a depth of 1.2 to 1.9 mm,
in stark comparison with diurnal species such as the desert lizard
Uta stansburiana, in which transmission was restricted to between
0.3 and 0.9 mm (Porter 1967). In the same study, Porter found
that the skin transmission of seven species of snake reected
their behaviour, such that the highest transmission was seen in
the most completely nocturnal species, and the lowest in diurnal
species, with crepuscular snakes in between. This suggests one
way in which low levels of UV-B may enable adequate vitamin D3
synthesis in nocturnal species. Carman et al. (2000) demonstrated
that the skin of the nocturnal house gecko Hemidactylus turcicus
can synthesise vitamin D3 eight mes more eciently than skin
from the diurnal desert lizard Sceloporus olivaceous – suggesng
that this is an adaptaon either to lower levels of available
ultraviolet light in its microhabitat, or to very short exposure to
higher levels, during brief day-me emergences from shelter.
Leopard geckos (Eublepharis macularius) synthesised vitamin
D3 when exposed to low-level UV-B; 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 levels
in exposed animals were 3.2 mes higher than controls receiving
only dietary supplementaon (Wangen et al. 2013). Crepuscular
snakes such as the corn snake, Elaphe guata, have also been
shown to synthesise vitamin D3 in the skin when exposed to low
levels of UV-B from uorescent lamps (Acierno et al. 2008).
Mid-day UV-B ltering into the daylight sleeping places of
nocturnal animals may also be sucient to enable adequate
cutaneous synthesis. As far as we are aware, no published eld
studies exist recording the ambient UV-B in the dayme locaon
of inacve nocturnal animals. However, UVI meter readings
between UVI 0.1 and 1.2 have been recorded beside leaf-tailed
geckos (Uroplatus sp.) sleeping in daylight against tree trunks in
Madagascar (L. Warren, pers. comm.)
The vitamin D3 requirement of some nocturnal species may be
low; passive absorpon of dietary calcium by vitamin D-deprived
leopard geckos, for example, appears to be eecve enough to
prevent metabolic bone disease (Allen et al. 1996). However, the
paracrine and autocrine funcons of vitamin D3 are independent
from calcium metabolism; more research is needed to assess the
full eects of vitamin D deciency.
To summarise, some nocturnal animals clearly do have the
ability to synthesise vitamin D3 in their skin, and this would occur
naturally whenever they were exposed to daylight. So there would
seem to be no reason to withhold provision of full spectrum
lighng, provided that they are able to spend the daylight hours in
an appropriate retreat, with access to a UV-B component suitable
for a shade-dwelling or crepuscular species (i.e. Ferguson zone 1).
Hypopigmentaon
Extra consideraon is required when planning lighng for albino
and hypomelanisc specimens of any species, regardless of the
zone allocaon of that species. Melanin strongly absorbs UV
radiaon. A lack of skin and eye pigmentaon therefore increases
the transmission of radiaon into the body (Solano 2014). Such
animals are oen popularly reported to be more sensive to UV
and visible light (e.g. Dell’Amore 2007), and may be at increased
risk of UV-induced skin damage and cancer (Duarte and Baines
2009). They are therefore likely to need much reduced exposure
levels. Fortunately adequate vitamin D3 synthesis should sll
be possible despite lower UV exposure, since reduced melanin
pigment allows more UV-B to enter the epidermal cells.
Ontogenec changes
Consideraon should also be given to any ontogenec changes
in microhabitat and/or behaviour when allocang species to
Ferguson zones. Amphibians with both larval and adult life stages
are obvious examples, but juvenile reples of many species also live
more crypc lifestyles than the adults, inhabing more sheltered
microhabitats with relavely less ambient UV. A well-known
example of this is the Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis);
juveniles are arboreal, whereas adults are ground-dwellers
foraging across open savanna as well as in woodlands (Auenberg
1981). More eldwork is needed to idenfy dierences in the UV
exposure of immature animals, to determine whether they need a
dierent Ferguson zone allocaon from that of adults. Esmang
juvenile requirements was outside the remit of this project, but
these might usefully be added to the UV-Tool in the future.
General cauons
In applying these guidelines to the provision of UV lighng, some
general cauons must be emphasised.
Firstly, this is a very simplisc assessment, with very wide
interpretaons possible. This is intenonal; the concept is
designed to enable creaon of wide, safe UV gradients combined
with heat and light gradients, enabling reples and amphibians
to photoregulate and thermoregulate simultaneously, throughout
the day. This requires the sources of UV, visible light and infrared
radiaon to be posioned close together, simulang sunlight,
and creang a basking zone at least as large as the whole body
of the animal. Mulple lamps may be required in some cases;
the eects are addive for all wavelengths, so overlapping beams
must be used with cauon. It also requires provision of adequate
space and shelter, away from the lamps, for suitable gradients
to form. Provision of shade is vital for all species, regardless of
their Ferguson zone. Even zone 4 reples must have a UV gradient
falling to zero in shelters away from the light. All guidelines to date
are sll very experimental; the exact UV requirements of reples
and amphibians are sll largely unknown, and it is vital to monitor
the animals’ responses and record results.
Secondly, basking temperatures and ambient temperatures
must be suitable, to ensure basking behaviours – and therefore
UV exposure mes – are natural, neither abnormally short nor
prolonged.
Thirdly, lamps should always be posioned above the animal,
so the shape of the head, and upper eyelids and eyebrow ridges
when present, shade the eyes from the direct light.
Fourthly, all lamps present an electrical risk, and many also
present the risk of thermal burns and UV burns if the animal
can approach too closely. All bulbs should be inaccessible to the
animals; wire guards may be necessary. Wide wire mesh should
be chosen where possible, to maximise light and UV transmission
(Burger et al. 2007).
Finally, ordinary glass or plascs must not be placed anywhere
between the lamp and the animal, as these normally block
transmission of all UV-B. Some high-transmission glass and
specialised UV-transming acrylics will, however, allow a certain
proporon through, although even these materials selecvely
block shorter UV wavelengths. Spectral analysis conducted by
one of the authors (FB, unpublished data) indicated that 3 mm
UV-transming acrylic (Clear Sunbed Grade UV-T Perspex Acrylic
Sheet: Bay Plascs Ltd., North Shields, UK) permied 80.9%
transmission of UV-B at 300 nm. UV-transming twin-wall acrylic
roong panels (Plexiglas Alltop SDP16: Evonik Industries AG,
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 51
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
Essen, Germany) permied 58.8% transmission at 300 nm. For
comparison, a 4 mm sheet of high-transmission, low-iron glass
(Planibel Clearvision Glass: AGC Glass Europe, Louvain-La-Neuve,
Belgium) transmied 16.9% of UV-B at 300 nm, compared to only
0.4% transmission through ordinary 4 mm window glass.
Summary
Very few eld studies have been conducted on the natural UV
exposure of reples and amphibians. However, an esmaon of a
suitable UV range for any species may be made using knowledge
of its typical basking behaviour and its microhabitat. In indoor
enclosures, careful posioning of UV lamps enables creaon of a
UV gradient within this range, which can be incorporated into full
spectrum lighng to simulate sunlight.
The BIAZA RAWG UV-Tool is a working document in which species
are allocated to UVI ranges (Ferguson zones) according to their
basking behaviour. Informaon is also provided regarding suitable
temperature gradients, photoperiod and microhabitat, to assist
construcon of the photo-microhabitat. UV-B lamps vary widely
in output and beam characteriscs, but links to lamp test results
are available in the UV-Tool. Lamp choice will depend primarily on
the Ferguson zone of the animal, which determines the required
UV gradient, and the size of the enclosure, which determines the
distance at which the lamp can be placed. Final posioning of the
lamp (or lamps) is determined by using a UV index meter; if no
meter is available, the charts and gures published in the test
results may be helpful if the same lamps are being used.
Since this is a working document, we encourage submission of
new species data to the database, and updates of lamp test results
are planned.
Denions
Irradiance is the radiant power received by a surface per unit area.
The units are microwas per square cenmetre (µW/cm²).
Illuminance is the total luminous ux received by a surface per
unit area. This is a measure of the apparent brightness of an
illuminated area to the human eye. It is calculated from the product
of the spectral irradiance (µW/cm² per nanometre of wavelength)
with the human luminosity funcon, which represents the eye’s
response to dierent wavelengths. This weighng is required
because human brightness percepon is wavelength-dependent.
The unit is the lux. Since animal eyes have dierent spectral
sensivies, it is only a crude esmate of the brightness perceived
by any non-human species, but equivalent luminosity funcons
for reple and amphibian species are lacking.
The UV index (WHO 2002) is an internaonal standard measurement
of the intensity of human erythemally-acve (sunburn-producing)
UV radiaon. It is calculated from the product of the spectral
irradiance (µW/cm² per nanometre of wavelength) and the human
erythemal acon spectrum across the range of UV wavelengths.
This weighng is required because shorter UV wavelengths are
much more damaging than longer wavelengths. The UV index is
unitless.
Acknowledgements
We wish to thank the following contributors to the species
microhabitat assessments. Zoological instuons and organisaons:
Birmingham Wildlife Conservaon Park (Adam Radovanovic); Blue
Planet Aquarium (Joe Chaell); Bristol Zoo Gardens (Tim Skelton
and Adam Davis); Chessington World of Adventures (Keith Russell
and Rea Walshe); Chester Zoo (Ma Swatman and James Dale);
Cotswold Wildlife Park (Iri Gill); Durrell Wildlife Conservaon
Trust (Ma Goetz and Christopher Pye); Hadlow College, Kent
(John Pemberton); Living Rainforest (Lisa Cliorde and Rob Ward);
Marwell Wildlife (Dan Garrick); Newquay Zoo (Dan Garrick);
Sparsholt College (Steve Nash); Wildlife and Wetlands Trust (Jay
Redbond); ZSL London Zoo (Iri Gill, Ben Tapley and Sebasan
Grant) and members of the Three Counes Tortoise Group. Guest
contributors: Andy Beveridge; Chris Davis; Gary Ferguson; Greg
Fyfe; Jerey Lambert; Christopher Michaels; James Miller; Roman
Muryn; Jim Pether and Terry Thatcher.
References
Acierno M.J, Mitchell M.A., Zachariah T.T., Roundtree M.K., Kirchgessner
M.S., Sanchez-Migallon Guzman D. (2008) Eects of ultraviolet
radiaon on plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 concentraons in corn
snakes (Elaphe guata). American Journal of Veterinary Research 69:
294–297.
Allen M.E., Oedal O.T., Horst R.L. (1996) Remarkable dierences in the
response to dietary vitamin D among species of reples and primates:
Is ultraviolet B light essenal? In: Holick M.F., Jung E.G. (eds). Biologic
Eects of Light 1995. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 13–30.
Antwis R., Browne R. (2009) Ultraviolet radiaon and vitamin D3 in
amphibian health, behaviour, diet and conservaon. Comparave
Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular & Integrave Physiology
154: 184–190.
Auenberg W. (1981) The Behavioral Ecology of the Komodo Monitor.
Gainesville: University Press of Florida.
Avery R.A. (1982) Field studies of body temperatures and thermoregulaon.
In: Gans C., Pough, F.H. (eds). Biology of the Replia 12, Physiology C.
Physiological Ecology. London: Academic Press, 93–166.
Baines F.M. (2015) Make yourself an iso-irradiance chart. A simple
guide to mapping a UV index gradient. hp://www.uvguide.co.uk/
makingspreadcharts.htm (accessed 10 October 2015).
BIAZA RAWG (2015) Brish and Irish Associaon of Zoos and Aquaria
Reple and Amphibian Working Group UV-TOOL PROJECT. hp://
www.uvguide.co.uk/BIAZA-RAWG-UV-Tool.htm (accessed 10 October
2015).
Bidmon H.J., Stumpf W.E. (1996) Vitamin D target systems in the brain of
the green lizard Anolis carolinensis. Anatomy and Embryology 193:
145–160.
Blaustein A.R., Belden, L.K. (2003) Amphibian defenses against ultraviolet-B
radiaon. Evoluon & Development 5: 89–97.
Brastrom, B.H. (1952). Diurnal acvies of a nocturnal animal.
Herpetologica 8: 61–63.
Burger R.M., Gehrmann W.H., Ferguson G.W. (2007) Evaluaon of UVB
reducon by materials commonly used in reple husbandry. Zoo
Biology 26: 417–423.
Carman E.N., Ferguson G.W., Gehrmann W.H., Chen T.C., Holick M.F. (2000)
Photobiosynthec opportunity and ability for UV-B generated vitamin
D synthesis in free-living house geckos (Hemidactylus turcicus) and
Texas spiny lizards (Sceloporus olivaceous). Copeia 2000: 245–250.
Carmel B., Johnson R. (2014) A Guide to Health and Disease in Reples &
Amphibians. Burleigh, Australia: Reple Publicaons.
CIE (1998) Erythema Reference Acon Spectrum and Standard Erythema
Dose. Vienna, Austria: Commission Internaonale de l’Eclairage
(Internaonal Commission on Illuminaon). Publicaon CIE
S007E-1998.
CIE (2006) Acon Spectrum for the Producon of Previtamin D in Human
Skin. Vienna, Austria: Commission Internaonale de l’Eclairage
(Internaonal Commission on Illuminaon). Publicaon CIE 174–
2006.
de Paula Corrêa M., Godin-Beekmann S., Haeelin M., Brogniez C.,
Verschaeve F., Saiag P., Pazmiño A., Mahé E. (2010) Comparison
between UV index measurements performed by research-grade and
consumer-products instruments. Photochemical & Photobiological
Sciences 9: 459–463.
Dell’Amore, C. (2007) Albino alligator makes zoo debut. hp://news.
nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/070514-white-gator.html
(accessed 10 October 2015).
Dickinson H.C., Fa J.E. (1997) Ultraviolet light and heat source selecon
in capve spiny-tailed iguanas (Oplurus cuvieri). Zoo Biology 16: 391–
401.
Duarte A.R., Baines F.M. (2009) Squamous cell carcinoma in a leopard
gecko. Exoc DVM 11: 19–22.
Ferguson G.W., Brinker A.M., Gehrmann W.H., Bucklin S.E., Baines F.M.,
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201652
Baines et al.
Mackin S.J. (2010) Voluntary exposure of some western-hemisphere
snake and lizard species to ultraviolet-B radiaon in the eld: how
much ultraviolet-B should a lizard or snake receive in capvity? Zoo
Biology 29: 317–334.
Ferguson G.W., Gehrmann W.H., Brinker A.M., Kroh G.C. (2014) Daily
and seasonal paerns of natural ultraviolet light exposure of the
western sagebrush lizard (Sceloporus graciosus gracilis) and the dunes
sagebrush lizard (Sceloporus arenicolus). Herpetologica 70: 56–68.
Ferguson G.W., Gehrmann W.H., Karsten K.B., Hammack S.H., McRae M.,
Chen T.C.,
Lung N.P., Holick M.F. (2003) Do panther chameleons bask to regulate
endogenous vitamin D3 producon? Physiological and Biochemical
Zoology 76: 52–59.
Finke M.D., Oonincx, D. (2014) Insects as food for insecvores. In: Morales-
Ramos J.A., Rojas M.G., Shapiro-Ilan, D. I. (eds). Mass Producon of
Benecial Organisms. London: Elsevier, 583–616.
Fleishman L.J., Loew E.R., Leal M. (1993) Ultraviolet vision in lizards.
Nature 365: 397.
Gardiner D.W., Baines F.M., Pandher K. (2009) Photodermas and
photokeratoconjuncvis in a ball python (Python regius) and a blue-
tongue skink (Tiliqua spp.). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 40:
757–766.
Gehrmann W.H. (1987). Ultraviolet irradiances of various lamps used in
animal husbandry. Zoo Biology 6: 117–127.
Gehrmann W.H., Horner J.D., Ferguson G.W., Chen T.C., Holick M.F.
(2004a) A comparison of responses by three broadband radiometers
to dierent ultraviolet-B sources. Zoo Biology 23: 355–363.
Gehrmann W.H., Jamieson D., Ferguson G.W., Horner J.D., Chen T.C.,
Holick M.F. (2004b). A comparison of vitamin D-synthesizing ability
of dierent light sources to irradiances measured with a Solarmeter
Model 6.2 UVB meter. Herpetological Review 35: 361–364.
Govardovskii V.I., Zueva L.V. (1974) Spectral sensivity of the frog eye in
the ultraviolet and visible region. Vision Research 14: 1317–1321.
Hannon D.E., Garner M.M., Reavill D.R. (2011) Squamous cell carcinomas
in inland bearded dragons (Pogona viceps). Journal of Herpetological
Medicine and Surgery 21: 101–106.
Hertz P.E., Fleishman L.J., Armsby C. (1994) The inuence of light intensity
and temperature on microhabitat selecon in two Anolis lizards.
Funconal Ecology 8: 720–729.
Holick M.F., Tian X.Q., Allen M. (1995) Evoluonary importance for the
membrane enhancement of the producon of vitamin D3 in the skin
of poikilothermic animals. Proceedings of the Naonal Academy of
Sciences 92: 3124–3126.
Honkavaara J., Koivula M., Korpimaki E., Siitari H., Viitala J. (2002)
Ultraviolet vision and foraging in terrestrial vertebrates. Oikos 98:
505–511.
Hossein-nezhad A., Holick M.F. (2013) Vitamin D for health: a global
perspecve. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 88: 720–755.
Ibañez P. (2012) Solar water disinfecon (SODIS): A review from bench-top
to roof-top. Journal of Hazardous Materials 235: 29–46.
IESNA (1999) Guide to Lamp Seasoning LM-54-99. New York: Illuminang
Engineering Society of North America.
Juzeniene A., Moan J. (2012) Benecial eects of UV radiaon other than
via vitamin D producon. Dermatoendocrinology 4: 109–117.
Karsten K.B., Ferguson G.W., Chen T.C., Holick M.F. (2009) Panther
chameleons, Furcifer pardalis, behaviorally regulate opmal exposure
to UV depending on dietary vitamin D3 status. Physiological and
Biochemical Zoology 82: 218–225.
Lindgren J. (2004) UV-lamps for terrariums: Their spectral characteriscs
and eciency in promong vitamin D synthesis by UVB irradiaon.
Herpetomania 13(3–4):13–20.
Lindgren J., Gehrmann W.H., Ferguson G.W., Pinder J.E. (2008) Measuring
eecve vitamin D3-producing ultraviolet B radiaon using Solartech’s
Solarmeter 6.4 handheld, UVB radiometer. Bullen of the Chicago
Herpetological Society 43(4): 57–62.
MacLaughlin J.A., Anderson R.R., Holick M.F. (1982) Spectral character
of sunlight modulates photosynthesis of previtamin D3 and its
photoisomers in human skin. Science 216: 1001–1003.
Manning B., Grigg G. C. (1997) Basking is not of thermoregulatory
signicance in the “basking freshwater turtle Emydura signata.
Copeia 1997: 579–584.
McGuigan K.G., Conroy R.M., Mosler H.J., du Preez M., Ubomba-Jaswa E.,
Fernandez-Moehn L.D. (1974) The eect of quality of light on agonisc
behaviour of iguanid and agamid lizards. Journal of Herpetology 8:
175–183.
Michaels C.J., Preziosi R.F. (2013). Basking behaviour and ultraviolet
B radiaon exposure in a wild populaon of Pelophylax lessonae in
northern Italy. Herpetological Bullen 124: 1–8.
Nietzke G. (1990) Zur Durchlässigkeit von UV-Strahlen der Replien-
Hornhaut (Ordnung Squamata). Salamandra 26: 50–57.
Olson D.M. and 17 others (2001) Terrestrial ecoregions of the World: a new
map of life on Earth. BioScience 51: 933–938.
Porter W.P. (1967) Solar radiaon through the living body walls of
vertebrates with emphasis on desert reples. Ecological Monographs
37: 274–296.
Rossi J.V. (2006) General husbandry and management. In: Mader D.R. (ed.).
Reple Medicine and Surgery, 2nd edn. St. Louis, Missouri: Saunders
Elsevier, 25–41.
Schmalwieser A.W., Schauberger G., Grant W.B., Mackin S.J., Pope S. (2006)
A rst approach in measuring, modeling, and forecasng the vitamin
D eecve UV radiaon. Proceedings of SPIE, the Internaonal Society
for Opcs and Photonics Remote Sensing 6362–6389.
Sievert L.M., Hutchison V.H. (1988) Light versus heat: thermoregulatory
behavior in a nocturnal lizard (Gekko gecko). Herpetologica 1988:
266–273.
Sievert L.M., Hutchison V.H. (1989) Inuences of season, me of day, light
and sex on the thermoregulatory behaviour of Crotaphytus collaris.
Journal of Thermal Biology 14: 159–165.
Sievert L.M., Hutchison V.H. (1991) The inuence of photoperiod
and posion of a light source on behavioral thermoregulaon in
Crotaphytus collaris (Squamata: Iguanidae). Copeia 1991: 105–110.
Soehnge H., Ouht A., Ananthaswamy H.N. (1997) Mechanisms of
inducon of skin cancer by UV radiaon. Froners in Bioscience 2:
D538–D551.
Solano F. (2014) Melanins: skin pigments and much more – types, structural
models, biological funcons, and formaon routes. New Journal of
Science 2014: Arcle ID 498276. doi:10.1155/2014/498276
Sperry J.H., Ward M.P., Weatherhead P.J. (2013) Eects of temperature,
moon phase, and prey on nocturnal acvity in ratsnakes: an automated
telemetry study. Journal of Herpetology 47: 105–111.
Tapley B., Rendle M., Baines F. M., Goetz M., Bradeld K. S., Rood D.,
Lopez J., Garcia G., Routh A. (2015). Meeng ultraviolet B radiaon
requirements of amphibians in capvity: A case study with mountain
chicken frogs (Leptodactylus fallax) and general recommendaons for
pre-release health screening. Zoo Biology 34: 46–52.
Taersall G.J., Eterovick P.C., de Andrade D.V. (2006) Tribute to RG Boulier:
skin colour and body temperature changes in basking Bokermannohyla
alvarengai (Bokermann 1956). Journal of Experimental Biology 209:
1185–1196.
Wangen K., Kirshenbaum J., Mitchell M.A. (2013) Measuring 25-hydroxy
vitamin D levels in leopard geckos exposed to commercial ultraviolet
B lights. ARAV 2013: 42.
Webb A.R., DeCosta B.R., Holick M.F. (1989) Sunlight regulates the
cutaneous producon of vitamin D3 by causing its photodegradaon.
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 68: 882–887.
WHO (2002) Global Solar UV Index: A Praccal Guide. Geneva, Switzerland:
World Health Organisaon.
WWF (2015) Terrestrial ecoregions. Washington DC: World Wildlife
Fund. hp://www.worldwildlife.org/biome-categories/terrestrial-
ecoregions (accessed 10 October 2015).
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 53
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
Appendix: Microhabitat assessment
Key
Biome
WWF major terrestrial biomes: 01 Tropical and Subtropical Moist Broadleaf Forests; 02 Tropical and Subtropical Dry Broadleaf Forests; 03 Tropical and Subtropical Coniferous Forests; 04 Temperate Broadleaf and Mixed Forests;
05 Temperate Coniferous Forests; 06 Boreal Forests/ Taiga; 07 Tropical and Subtropical Grasslands, Savannas and Shrublands; 08 Temperate Grasslands, Savannas and Shrublands; 09 Flooded Grasslands and Savannas; 10
Montane Grasslands and Shrublands; 11 Tundra; 12 Mediterranean Forests, Woodlands and Scrub; 13 Deserts and Xeric Shrublands; 14 Mangroves.
Thermoregulatory behaviour
Ferguson zones:
1 - crepuscular or shade dweller; 2 - paral sun/ occasional basker; 3 - open or paral sun basker; 4 - mid-day sun basker.
Winter treatment:
Cooling: The temperature is reduced for a period, usually co-incident with winter. The animal reduces acvity and feeding may cease, but it does not necessarily go into an extended, torpid state.
Brumaon: The animal becomes torpid for a period which may last weeks. Co-incident with winter.
Hibernaon: The animal undertakes preparaon and goes in to a torpid state for an extended period - duraon in months. Physiological changes occur within the animal. Co-incident with winter and seen mostly in animals of
northerly latudes.
Aesvaon: The animal becomes torpid for a period of days or weeks. Co-incident with hoer weather.
Photoperiod (as usually given in capvity)
Tropical - 12h all year; Subtropical - 13:11h summer:winter; Temperate - 14:10h summer:winter
Microhabitat
A - Fossorial; B - Leaf lier; C - Forest oor; D - Rocks, crevices or burrows; E - Foliage or shrubs; F - Grassland or savanna; G - Semi-arboreal; H - Arboreal; I - Riparian or wetlands; J - Aquac.
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Crocodilia
Caiman crocodilus Spectacled Caiman 1 2–3 13:11 30–35 25–30 24–26 I
Crocodylus mindorensis Philippine crocodile 1 2–3 12:12 31–36 26–30 24–25 IJ
Crocodylus moreletii Morelet’s Crocodile 1 2 13:11 30–35 25–30 23–25 J
Osteolaemus tetraspis Dwarf Crocodile 1 2–3 12:12 35 25 >20 I
Paleosuchus palpebrosus Cuvier's Dwarf Caiman 1 2–3 13:11 30–32 25–30 24–26 I
Rhynchocephalia
Sphenodon punctatus Cook Strait Tuatara 4 3 14:10 Hibernation 30 13–20 12–17 12–15 6–9 D
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201654
Baines et al.
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Squamata: Lacertilia
Acanthosaura capra Two-horned Mountain Horned
Dragon 1 1 13:11 Cooling 30–32 23–28 18–22 18–22 14–18 G
Acanthosaura lepidogaster Rough-bellied Mountain Horned
Dragon 1 1 13:11 Cooling 30–32 23–28 18–22 18–22 14–18 G
Anolis carolinensis American Green Anole 4 2 14:10 Cooling 30–35 25–30 18–20 20–25 10–15 EG
Anolis grahami Jamaican Blue-pants Anole 1 2 12:12 30–35 25–30 20–25 EGH
Anolis lineatopus Jamaican Brown Anole 1 12:12 25–30 25–30 20–25 EG
Anolis roquet summus Martinique Anole 1 2 13:11 34–36 25–27 24–26 20–24 18–22 H
Anolis sagrei Cuban Brown Anole 3 12:12/13:11 30–40 25–30 20–25 EG
Basiliscus plumifrons Plumed Basilisk 1 2 12:12 30–35 25–30 24–26 CEI
Brachylophus bulabula Fiji Banded Iguana 1 1–2 12:12 30–32 27–32 20–25 H
Bronchocela cristatella Bornean bloodsucker/Green Crested
Lizard 1 3 13:11 30–32 26–30 20–24 EH
Brookesia superciliaris Brown Leaf Chameleon 1 1 12:12 30 21–26 15–20 E
Calotes versicolor Oriental Garden Lizard, Eastern
Garden Lizard, Bloodsucker 3 12:12 40 25–30 22–26 22–25 20–22 DEG
Calumma parsonii Parson's Chameleon 1 3 12:12/13:11 30–35 20–30 20–30 15–26 15–24 EH
Celestus warreni Giant Hispaniolan Galliwasp 2 2 13:11 35–45 26–28 24–26 24–26 21–23 ABD
Chamaeleo calyptratus Yemen Chameleon 13 3 13:11 35–40 25–35 23–25 EH
Chamaeleo melleri Meller's Chameleon 2 2 13:11 Cooling 29–32 25–37 17–27 10 H
Chameleo trioceros
quadricornis Four Horned Chameleon 1 2 13:11 32 20–30 15–20 H
Chlamydosaurus kingii Frilled Lizard 3 13:11 40 30 28 25–27 23–25 GH
Corucia zebrata Prehensile or Monkey-tailed Skink 1 2 12:12 30–35 27–29 25–27 23–25 20–23 H
Crotaphytus collaris Collared Lizard 04/05/
10/13 3–4 14:10 Brumation /
Hibernation 40–48 25–32 25–30; 10–15
(Brumation) 20–26 18–22; 5
(Brumation) DF
Ctenophorus nuchalis Central Netted Dragon 08/13 3–4 13:11/14:10 Cooling 40–45 30–35 26–30 24–28 20–22 DEFG
Ctenosaura bakeri Utila Iguana 14 4 13:11 40–50 30–35 30–32 24–28 22–25 H
Ctenosaura palearis Guatemalan Black Iguana 13 3 12:12 40–45 25–33 23–25 H
Cyclura cornuta cornuta Rhinoceros Iguana 7 4 13:11 40–50 30–35 28–32 25–28 22–25 DF
Cyclura nubila Cuban Rock Iguana 7 4 13:11 40–50 30–35 28–32 25–28 22–25 DF
Cyclura nubila caymanensis Cayman Brac Iguana/ Sister Isles
Iguana 02/07 3 13:11 40 28 26 21 20 D
Cyclura nubila lewisi Grand Cayman Iguana/ Blue Iguana 02/07 3 13:11 40 28 26 21 20 D
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 55
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Dipsosaurus dorsalis Desert Iguana 13 3 13:11 Cooling 50 25–35 15–25 20–25 10–15 D
Dracaena guianensis Northern Caiman Lizard 1 2 13:11 30–35 25–28 24–26 I
Egernia cunninghami Cunningham's Rock Skink 4 3–4 14:10 Cooling/
Brumation 35–40 28–32
24–28;
12 – 15
(Brumation)
20–24 18–20; 4–8
(Brumation) D
Eublepharis macularius Leopard Gecko 13 1 14:10 Cooling 32 25–29 15–20 20–24 10–15 D
Eumeces schneideri Berber Skink 13 3 12:12 Cooling 40 25–30 20–25 20–25 10–15 D
Furcifer pardalis Panther Chameleon 01/02 3 12:12/13:11 35–40 25–30 24–28 18–24 18–24 EH
Gecko gecko Tokay Gecko 01/02 1 12:12 35 30 25 H
Gerrhosaurus major Sudan Plated Lizard 7 3 12:12/13:11 None / Cooling 35–40 25–30 10–20 20 5–15 DF
Gonocephalus bellii Bell's Forest Dragon 1 2 12:12 32 26–29 22–24 H
Gonocephalus doriae Angle-headed Dragon 1 2 12:12 32 26–29 22–24 H
Gonocephalus grandis Angle-headed Dragon 1 2 13:11 Cooling 30–32 26–30 20–24 20–24 16–20 H
Heloderma horridum
exasperatum Rio Fuerte Beaded Lizard 2 2 13:11 35–40 28–32 26–28 24–26 20–22 DFG
Heloderma suspectum Gila Monster 04/13 2–3 13:11 Cooling 34–37 24–30 10–12 20–25 9–10 D
Hemisphaeriodon gerrardii Pink-Tongued Skink 01/04/07 2 13:11 35 25–30 20–25 20–25 20 AG
Holbrookia maculata Lesser Earless Lizard 8 4 14:10 Brumation 30–40 25–30 10–15 10–15 F
Iguana delicatissima Lesser Antillean Iguana 2 4 13:11 40–50 30–35 28–32 25–28 23–25 GH
Intellagama (Physignathus)
lesueurii Australian Water Dragon 1 2 14:10 Brumation 35 25–30 20–25 20–25 10–15 I
Lacerta agilis Sand Lizard 4 3 14:10 Hibernation ambient UK temps ambient UK
temps
ambient UK
temps DF
Laemanctus serratus Serrated Casque-headed Iguana 1 4 13:11 35–40 30–32 24–26 EH
Laudakia stellio
brachydactyla Painted Dragon (Starred Agama spp) 13 3–4 14:10 Brumation 30–40 25–35 5–15 10–20 5–15 DE
Leiocephalus carinatus Curly Tail Lizard 13 3 13:11 Cooling 40–50 30–35 27–30 23–25 20–22 DE
Leiolopisma telfairi Round Island Skink 7 4 14:10 35–40 27–32 24–28 24–26 20–24 BDEFG
Lepidothyris (Riopa) fernandi Fire Skink 1 2 12:12 35 25–30 20–25 A
Lophognathus temporalis Striped Water Dragon 2 3 12:12 35–45 26–30 24–28 22–24 18–22 G
Lygodactylus williamsi Electric blue day gecko / Turquoise
dwarf gecko 7 2–3 12:12 30–32 26–28 22–24 20–22 20 EH
Nactus coindemirensis Lesser Night Gecko 7 1 14:10 28–32 24–27 20–23 22–24 18–20 BD
Oeudura castelnaui Northern Velvet Gecko 7 1 12:12 None 28–30 25–27 H
Ophisaurus apodus Scheltopusik 08/04/12 2 14:10 Brumation 30 –35 24–28 2–6 16–22 2–6 ABCEF
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201656
Baines et al.
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Phelsuma klemmeri Yellow Headed Day Gecko 2 3 13:11 30–35 25–30 23–25 EH
Phelsuma madagascariensis
grandis Giant Day Gecko 1 3 13:11 30–35 25–30 23–25 EH
Phelsuma standingi Standing's Day Gecko 2 3 14:10 Cooling 35–45 30–35 25–28 25–30 22–25 H
Phrynosoma cornutum Texas Horned Lizard 08/13 4 14:10 Brumation 30–40 30–35 10–15 20–25 10–15 EF
Physignathus cocincinus Asian Water Dragon 1 2–3 13:11 Cooling 30–40 26–28 22–24 20–22 18–20 EGI
Plica plica Spiny-headed Tree Lizard 1 2–3 12:12 33 28 20 28 20 EGH
Pogona vitticeps Inland Bearded dragon 07/08/
12/13 3–4 13:11/14:10 Cooling/
Brumation 40–45 25–30 25–30; 15–20
(Brumation) 20–25 20–22;10–15
(Brumation) EFG
Rhacodactylus auriculatus Gargoyle Gecko 1 2 12:12 29 25–29 20–25 H
Rhacodactylus ciliatus Crested Gecko 1 1 14:10 Cooling 28 25–28 19–23 23–25 16–20 H
Rieppeleon brevicaudatus Bearded Pygmy Chameleon 01/10 2 12:12 25 18–20 11–16 BEH
Sauromalus ater Chuckwalla 13 4 14:10 Brumation 50 24–30 18–20 D
Sauromalus hispidus Angel Island Chuckwalla 13 4 13:11 Cooling 50 30–35 25–30 25–30 15–20 D
Sceloporus consobrinus
(Louisiana USA) Eastern Fence Lizard 4 3 14:10 Brumation 30–40 25–30 10–15 20–25 10–15 EG
Sceloporus graciosus Sagebrush Lizard 05/13 4 14:10 Brumation 30–40 25–30 5–10 15–20 5–10 DE
Sceloporus olivaceus Texas spiny lizard 8 3 14:10 Brumation 35–40 27–33 10–15 20–25 10–15 EGH
Sceloporus serrifer
cyanogenys Blue Spiny Lizard 7 4 14:10 35–40 28–35 24–28 24–26 20–22 DG
Smaug (Cordylus) giganteus Sungazer, Giant Girdled Lizard 10 4 14:10 Brumation 35 20–30 10–15 15–20 5–10 CF
Tarentola mauritanica Moorish Gecko 12 2 14:10 Cooling 30–32 27 22 D
Teratoscincus scincus Wonder Gecko 13 2 14:10 Brumation /
Hibernation 35 25–30 15–20 20–25 10–15 D
Tiliqua nigrolutea Southern or Blotched Blue-tongued
Lizard 4 2–3 14:10 Cooling/
Brumation 35–40 26–30 22–28 18–22 18–20 BCDF
Tiliqua rugosa Shingleback Lizard 04/08/
12/13 2–3 13:11/14:10 Cooling 35–40 28–32 24–28 20–24 18–22 DF
Tiliqua scincoides Eastern Blue-tongued Lizard 04/07/
08/12 2–3 13:11/14:10 Cooling 35–45 28–32 18–28 20–24 14–20 DEF
Tribolonotus gracilis Crocodile Skink 1 1 12:12 28–32 23–28 23–25 ABCI
Trioceros jacksonii Jackson’s chameleon 1 2–3 12:12 36 24–25 16–17 EH
Tupinambis merianae Black-and-White Tegu 01/02/04/
07/08 3 13:11 Brumation 35–40 25–30 5–20 20 5–10 ABCF
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 57
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Uromastyx aegyptia Egyptian Uromastyx / Mastigure/
Dab Lizard 13 4 14:10 Cooling 45–50 30–38 25–30 20–25 18–20 DF
Uromastyx geyri Saharan Uromastyx / Spinytailed
Lizard 13 4 12:12 Cooling 45–50 28–35 20–25 16–18 10–18 DF
Uromastyx ornata Ornate Uromastyx 13 4 14:10 Cooling 40–50 30 30 20 20 AD
Uroplatus henkeli Henkel’s leaf-tail gecko 01/02 1–2 12:12 Cooling 25–28 23–25 21–23 18–20 17–19 EH
Uroplatus phantasticus Satanic Leaf Tailed Gecko 1 1 14:10 Cooling None 20–25 16–20 18–20 15–18 BEG
Uta stansburiana stejnegeri Desert Side-blotched Lizard 13 3 14:10 Cooling 30–40 25–30 18–20 20–25 10–15 DE
Varanus beccarii Black Tree Monitor 1 3 12:12 40–50 28–35 28–30 23–26 21–23 H
Varanus cumingi Philippine Water Monitor 01/14 3 12:12 31–36 26–30 24–25 CGI
Varanus exanthematicus Bosc Monitor, Savannah Monitor 07/09 3–4 13:11 Cooling 55–65 30–40 28–35 23 23 ADFI
Varanus glauerti Kimberley Rock Monitor 7 3 12:12 35–40 25–30 22–25 20–24 18–23 DF
Varanus komodoensis Komodo Dragon 7 4 12:12 45 30–32 30–34 24–26 25–28 FG
Varanus macraei Blue Tree Monitor 1 2 12:12 35–40 28–32 26–30 24–26 22–25 H
Varanus prasinus Emerald Tree Monitor 1 2 12:12 35–40 28–32 26–30 24–26 22–25 H
Varanus salvadorii Crocodile Tree Monitor 1 2 12:12 35–40 26–32 22–26 H
Varanus spenceri Spencer’s goanna 7 3–4 13:11 Cooling 40 30–32 28 25–28 18–20 DF
Varanus timorensis Timor Monitor 2 3 12:12 40–50 30–35 28–30 23–26 21–23 G
Varanus varius Lace Monitor 04/07/08 3 12:12 34–36 28–30 25–27 CFG
Squamata: Serpentes
Acrantophis dumerili Dumeril's Boa 2 2 13:11 Cooling 40–45 30–35 25–30 24–28 22–25 C
Antaresia childreni Children's Python 7 1–2 12:12/13:11 Cooling 40–45 28–35 25–30 25–28 20–25 CDFG
Antaresia stimsoni orientalis Stimson's Python 13 1 13:11/14:10 Cooling 32 28–30 25–28 25–28 20–24 DF
Aspidites ramsayi Woma python 13 1–2 13:11/14:10 Cooling 32 28–30 25–28 25–28 20–24 ADF
Bitis gabonica Gaboon Viper 1 1 12:12 Cooling 29–30 25–26 28–29 23–24 BC
Bitis nasicornis Rhinoceros Viper 1 1 12:12 Cooling 29–30 25–26 28–29 23–24 BC
Boa constrictor Boa Constrictor 01/02 2 13:11 Cooling 28–30 24–30 20–26 18–24 16–22 BCEG
Boiga dendrophila melanota Banded Mangrove Snake 1 2 13:11 30–35 26–28 24–26 24–26 22–24 G
Bothriechis schlegelii Eyelash Viper 1 1 13:11 30–35 27–30 25–27 24–26 20–22 EH
Candoia carinata Solomon Island Boa 1 1 13:11 32 26 22 CDE
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201658
Baines et al.
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Cerastes cerastes Horned Viper 13 2 13:11 Night cooling 30–35 25–30 24–26 20–22 DF
Corallus caninus Emerald Tree Boa 1 1 12:12 26–30 24–26 H
Cryptelytrops albolabris White Lipped Viper 1 1 13:11 30–35 25–30 24–26 20–22 EH
Dendroaspis angusticeps Green Mamba 1 1–2 12:12 30–32 28–30 20–25 H
Dendroaspis polylepis Black Mamba 7 1–2 12:12 30–32 28–30 20–25 EFG
Epicrates angulifer Cuban Boa 2 1–2 12:12 Cooling 28–32 25–27 CG
Epicrates subavus Jamaican Boa 1 2 13:11 35–40 28–32 26–28 24–26 22–24 GH
Eunectes murinus Green Anaconda 01/07 1–2 12:12 35–40 28–32 25–27 IJ
Gonyosoma oxycephalum Red–tailed Ratsnake 1 2 13:11 30–45 26–32 24–28 22–26 20–24 H
Heterodon nasicus nasicus Western Hognose Snake 08/10 2 14:10 Cooling /
Brumation 28–30 24–30 14–18 20–24 14–16 ADEF
Lampropeltis triangulum
campbelli Pueblan Milksnake 2 1 13:11 Brumation 28–32 24–28 10–15 24–26 10–15 DF
Lampropeltis triangulum
sinaloae Sinaloan Milksnake 02/13 1 13:11 Brumation 28–32 24–28 10–15 24–26 10–15 D
Lampropeltis triangulum
stuarti Stuart's Milksnake 1 1 13:11 Cooling 30–35 24–28 22–25 20–23 18–21 C
Liasis macklotti savuensis Savu Python 07/02 2 12:12 30–35 25–30 24–26 DEFG
Morelia amethistina Amethystine Python 01/14 1–2 12:12 30–32 26–30 24–26 G
Morelia boeleni Boelens Python 1 2 13:11 Cooling 24–28 20–24 18–22 15–20 E
Morelia bredli Central Carpet Python/ Bredl's
Python 13 2 13:11/14:10 Cooling 30–32 28–30 24–28 26–28 22–26 DEGH
Morelia spilota spilota Diamond Python 4 3 14:10 Cooling 32 25–28 22–26 20–26 15–20 BCDEGH
Morelia spilota variegata Top End Carpet Python 7 1–2 12:12 34–36 28–30 25–27 DEFG
Morelia viridis Green Tree Python 1 1 12:12 26–30 24–26 H
Opheodrys aestivus Rough Green Snake 04/08 1–2 13:11 Cooling 30 18–32 10–12 18–20 10–12 EHI
Orthriophis moellendorf Hundred Flower Snake 1 1 14:10 Brumation 22–25 12–17 18–20 12–17 D
Pantherophis guttatus
guttatus Corn Snake 7 1–2 13:11 31 24–26 19 20 16 EF
Protobothrops mangshanensisMang Mountain Viper 01/04/05 1–2 14:10 Brumation 22–28 23–25 17–19 17–19 9–12 BCD
Python brietensteini Borneo Short–tailed Python 1 1 13:11 28–32 22–26 I
Python molurus bivittatus Burmese Python 01/02 1 13:11 28–32 22–26 DF
Python regius Royal Python 2 2 12:12 Cooling 35–40 28–30 27–29 24–26 22–24 CF
Python (Broghammerus)
reticulatus Reticulated Python 1 1 13:11 28–32 22–26 CGI
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 59
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Rhyncophis boulengeri Rhinoceros Rat Snake 1 2 13:11 Cooling/
Brumation 30–35 25–29 20–25 21–25 15–20 EGH
Sanzinia madagascarensis Madagascan Tree Boa 1 1–2 13:11 Cooling 40–45 30–35 25–30 24–28 22–25 EGHI
Thamnophis sirtalis
tetrataenia San Fransico Garter Snake 4 2 14:10 Cooling/
Brumation 30 22–28 16–20 18–24 14–18 I
Vipera berus Adder 04/05/
06/08 3 14:10 Brumation 30–35 18–24 2–6 10–16 2–6 BCDF
Chelonia
Agrionemys horseldii Horseld's Tortoise, Russian
Tortoise 08/10 3 14:10 Hibernation 35 25–30 5–10 20 14–18 G
Apalone mutica Smooth Softshell 4 2–3 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 14–18 G
Apalone spinifera Spiny Softshell 4 2–3 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 10–15 EG
Astrochelys radiata Radiated Tortoise 7 3 14:10 Cooling/ None 35–50 28–32 26–30 24–28 EGH
Astrochelys yniphora Ploughshare Tortoise 7 3 12:12 35–45 28–32 24–26 24–28 EG
Centrochelys (Geochelone)
sulcata
Sulcata Tortoise, African Spurred
Tortoise 13 3–4 13:11 45–50 30–35 28–30 25–28 18–22 H
Chelodina expansa Broad– shelled Turtle 04/07/
08/12 3 13:11/14:10 Cooling 35 28–30 24–28 22–24 EG
Chelodina longicollis Common or Eastern snake–necked
turtle
04/07/
08/12 3 13:11/14:10 Cooling 35 28–30 24–28 22–24 CEI
Chelodina mccordi Roti Island snake–necked turtle 1 2–3 12:12 Cooling 35–40 26–28 24–26 22–24 H
Chelonoidis denticulata Yellow footed Tortoise 1 2 12:12 Cooling 28–32 25–28 22–24 22 EH
Chelydra serpentina Common Snapper 4 2–3 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 E
Clemmys guttata Spotted Turtle 4 3 14:10 Hibernation 35 20–25 3–7 20–22 DEG
Crysemys picta ssp. Painted Turtle 4 3–4 13:11/14:10 Hibernation 35 20–30 3–10 15–24 EH
Cuora galbinifrons Vietnamese/ Flowerback Box Turtle 1 1–2 12:12 Cooling 30–34 25–31 20–28 22–28 21–23 ABD
Cuora mouhotti Vietnamese Keeled Turtle 1 2 14:10 Brumation 28–30 26–30 10–15 20–24 EH
Cuora trifasciata Golden coin Box Turtle 1 2–3 12:12 Cooling 30–35 26–28 24–26 22–24 10 H
Cuora zhoui Zhou's Box Turtle 1 2–3 12:12 Cooling 30 24–26 22–24 22–24 H
Emydura macquarii Murray Short–necked Turtle 04/08/12 3 13:11/14:10 Cooling 35 28–30 24–28 22–24 23–25 GH
Emys orbicularis European Pond Turtle 4 3 14:10 Hibernation 35 25–30 3–7 18 20–23 H
Geochelone carbonaria Red Foot Tortoise 01/07 1–2 13:11 30–35 27–30 25–27 24–26 18–22; 5
(Brumation) DF
Geochelone elegans Indian Star Tortoise 01/02/
07/13 3 12:12 30 20–25 20–25 20–22 DEFG
Geochelone gigantea/
Dipsochelys dussumieri Aldabran Tortoise 13 2–3 12:12 35–45 29–31 22–25 22–25 H
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201660
Baines et al.
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Geochelone nigra Galapagos Tortoise 7 4 12:12 35–45 28–32 26–30 24–28 H
Geochelone pardalis Leopard Tortoise 7 3 14:10 Cooling 40–50 28–32 26–30 24–28 22–25 DF
Geoemyda spengleri Black–breasted Leaf Turtle 1 1 13:11 Cooling 30 24–26 22–24 22–24 22–25 DF
Glyptemys insculpulata Wood Turtle 4 2 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 20 D
Graptemys ouachitensis Ouachita Map Turtle 4 3–4 13:11/14:10 Hibernation 35 25–30 3–10 20 D
Graptemys
pseudogeographica ssp
False, Mississippi, Northern Map
Turtle 4 3–4 13:11/14:10 Hibernation 35 25–30 3–10 10–15 D
Heosemys spinosa Spiny Turtle 1 1 12:12 35 25–30 24–26 24–26 I
Indotestudo elongata Elongated Tortoise 1 2 13:11 Cooling 35–45 24–30 20–25 20–25 18–20; 4–8
(Brumation) D
Kinixys belliana Bell's Hingeback Tortoise 02/07 3 12:12 35 25–30 20–25 10–15 D
Kinixys homeana Home's Hingeback Tortoise 01/07 1–2 12:12 Cooling 28–32 26–28 22–24 22 10–15 D
Kinosternon subrubrum Eastern Mud Turtle 4 2–3 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 18–24 EH
Malaclemys terrapin Diamond Back Terrapin 4 3 14:10 Hibernation 35 25–30 3–7 H
Malacochersus tornieri Pancake Tortoise 7 2–3 12:12 30–32 28–30 22–25 5–15 DF
Mauremys leprosa Mediterranean Pond Turtle 4 3 14:10 Brumation 35 25–30 14 H
Mauremys (Annamemys)
annamensis Annam Leaf Turtle 1 2–3 12:12 Cooling 30–35 26–28 24–26 22–24 H
Mauremys reevesii Reeves Turtle 4 3 13:11 Brumation 35 25–30 12 16–20 H
Mauremys rivulata Eurasian Pond Turtle 4 3 14:10 Brumation 35 25–30 14 20–22 DFG
Orlitia borneensis Malaysian Giant Pond Turtle 01/02 2–3 12:12 26–28 25–30 23–26 23–25 9–10 D
Phrynops geoffranus Side–neck Turtle 4 3–4 12:12 35 25–30 23–25 20 AG
Podocnemis unilis Yellow–spotted Amazon River Turtle 1 2–3 12:12 Cooling 30–35 26–28 24–26 22–24 10–15 F
Pseudemys concina ssp. Cooters 4 3–4 13:11/14:10 Hibernation 35 25–30 3–10 23–25 GH
Pseudemys nelsoni Florida Red Bellied Cooter 5 3–4 13:11 Brumation 35 25–30 15 10–15 I
Pseudemys rubriventris Red Bellied Cooter 5 3–4 13:11 Hibernation 35 25–30 3–10 DF
Pyxis planicauda Flat–tailed Tortoise 2 2 14:10 Cooling 35–40 28–32 24–26 24–26 EH
Rhinoclemmys pulcherrima Painted Wood Turtle 1 2 13:11 35 25–30 24–26 5–15 DE
Sternotherus carinatus Razorback Musk 4 2–3 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 20–22 DE
Sternotherus minor Loggerhead Musk 4 2–3 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 20–24 BDEFG
Sternotherus odoratus Common Musk 4 2–3 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 A
Terapene carolina Eastern Box Turtle 4 2 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 18–22 G
Terapene ornata Ornate Box Turtle 4 2 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–30 3–7 20 EH
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 61
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Testudo graeca ibera/ Testudo
ibera Spur–thighed Tortoise 12 3 14:10 Hibernation 35 20–30 4–7 10–15 18–20 BD
Testudo hermanni Hermann's Tortoise 12 3 14:10 Hibernation 35 22–26 4–7 10–15 H
Testudo kleinmanni Egyptian Tortoise 7 3 12:12 30–35 28–30 22–25 2–6 ABCEF
Testudo marginata Marginated Tortoise 12 4 14:10 Brumation 35 28–32 2–6 20–24 EH
Trachemys decorata Hispaniolan Elegant Slider 1 3–4 13:11 35–45 25–30 24–26 EH
Trachemys scripta elegans Red–eared Slider 04/05/08 3–4 13:11 Hibernation 35 25–30 3–10 22 22–25 H
Trachemys scripta scripta Yellow Bellied Slider 4 3–4 13:11/14:10 Hibernation 35 25–30 3–10 10–15 EF
Anura
Agalychnis callidryas Red-eyed Tree Frog 01/02/
03/14 1–2 14:10 Cooling 30 22–30
15–22
(winter); 22–
25 (spring)
17–20
14–16
(winter); 16–
18 (spring)
H
Agalychnis lemur Lemur Leaf Frog 1 1 13:11 Cooling 23–24 22–23 18–19 17–18 H
Agalychnis moreletii Black-eyed Tree Frog 1 3 14:10 Cooling 25 18–20 15–17 13–15 10–12 H
Alytes muletensis Mallorcan Midwife Toad 12 1 14:10 Cooling 24–28 8–20 18–14 8–12 DI
Alytes obstetricans Common Midwife Toad 04/08 1–2 14:10 Cooling 22 17 17 11 BDI
Atelopus spumarius
hoogmoedi Harlequin Toad 1 1 12:12 24–26 22–25 20–23 18–20 CI
Bombina orientalis Oriental or Chinese Fire-bellied
Toad 04/05/09 1–2 14:10 Brumation 25–30 23–25 5–10 16–18 5–10 I
Bombina variegata Yellow-bellied Toad 04/05/12 1 14:10 Cooling 26 18–26 3–8 (winter);
8–21 (spring) 11–14 2–8 (winter);
6–12 (spring) DEFIJ
Bufo bufo Common Toad 04/05/
06/12 1 14:10 Cooling 18–23 3–8 (winter);
8–21 (spring) 11–14 2–8 (winter);
6–12 (spring) DEFIJ
Bufo galeatus Bony-headed Toad 1 2 13:11 26–30 24–26 22–26 22–24 BDEGI
Bufo marinus Cane Toad 1 2 13:11 30–35 28–32 24–28 24–26 22–24 BDFI
Cruziohyla calcarifer Splendid Leaf Frog 1 1–2 12:12 Cooling 24–26 23–25 21–23 20–22 H
Dendrobates auratus Green and Black Dart Frog 01/02/14 1–2 12:12 30–32 24–28 22–25 20–24 20–22 BCEG
Dendrobates leucomelas Bumblebee Dart Frog 1 1–2 12:12 24–28 22–25 20–24 20–22 BCEG
Dendrobates tinctorius Dyeing Dart Frog 1 1–2 12:12 24–28 22–25 20–24 20–22 BCG
Dendrobates tinctorius /
azureus Blue Dart Frog 01/07 1 12:12 24–28 22–25 20–24 20–22 BCD
Dendrobates ventrimaculatus Amazonian Dart Frog 1 1 12:12 24–26 22–25 20–23 20–22 G
Dyscophus guineti Sambava Tomato Frog 01/02 1 13:11 Dry spell 24–28 22–24 22–24 BCI
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 201662
Baines et al.
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Epidalea (Bufo) calamita Natterjack Toad 04/05/12 1 14:10 Cooling 18–23 3–8 (winter);
8–21 (spring) 11–14 2–8 (winter);
6–12 (spring) DEFIJ
Epipedobates anthonyi Phantasmal Poison Frog 1 2 13:11 24–28 22–24 22–24 BCDE
Excidobates mysteriosus Maranon Poison Frog 01/07 2 13:11 Cooling 26–30 20–24 20–24 BDE
Leptodactylus fallax Mountain Chicken 2 2 13:11 30–35 25–27 24–26 24–26 22–24 BDI
Lithobates vibicarius Green-eyed Frog 1 2 14:10 Cooling 26 26–28 23–25 20–24 18–20 BC
Mantella aurantiaca Golden Mantella Frog 1 2 14:10 Cooling 24–26 22–24 20–22 18–20 BDI
Mantella viridis Green Mantella Frog 1 2 14:10 Cooling 24–27 20–24 17–19 16–17 BCI
Megophrys nasuta Long-nosed Horned Frog 1 1 13:11 24–26 22–24 20–22 18–20 BDI
Nectophrynoides viviparus Morogoro Tree Toad 7 2 14:10 30 24–26 18–22 20–22 10–18 BEFG
Oophaga pumilio Strawberry Poison Frog 01/02 2 13:11 24–28 22–24 22–24 BCEGH
Pedostibes hosii Borneo Tree Toad 1 3 13:11 30–35 26–30 24–26 22–26 22–24 HI
Pelodryas caerulea White's Tree Frog 02/07/
08/09 2 12:12 36 25 20 DEFHI
Phyllobates bicolor Black-legged Dart Frog 1 1–2 12:12 22–28 20–25 18 –24 16–20 BCH
Phyllobates terribilis Golden Poison Frog 1 2 13:11 26–28 22–24 22–24 BD
Phyllobates vittatus Golfodulcean Poison Frog 1 1 13:11 26–28 22–24 22–24 BD
Polypedates leucomystax Golden Tree Frog 1 2 13:11 30–35 24–28 22–25 20–22 18–20 H
Ranitomeya lamasi Pasco Poison Frog 1 2 12:12 Cooling 20–22 18–20 18–20 16–18 BC
Ranitomeya reticulata Reticulated Poison Frog 1 2 13:11 24–28 22–24 22–24 BCEG
Rhacophorus feae Feae’s Flying Frog 1 2 12:12 25 22 22 17 17 EH
Theloderma corticale Vietnamese Mossy Frog 1 1 13:11 20–26 20–24 18–22 18–21 G
Theloderma stellatum Bug-eyed Tree Frog 1 1 13:11 20–24 20–24 18–21 18–21 G
Trachycephalus resinictrix Amazon Milk Frog 01/02 3 13:11 32–40 28–32 26–30 24–26 22–24 H
Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 4(1) 2016 63
A UV-B lighng guide for reples and amphibians
Day – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Night – ambient (air)
temperature (°C)
Scientic name Common Name Biome
Ferguson
Zone Photoperiod
Winter treatment
(if any)
Basking zone – Substrate
surface temperature (°C) Summer
Winter (if
different) Summer
Winter (if
different) Microhabitat
Caudata
Euproctus platycephalus Sardinian Brook Salamander 12 1 14:10 Cooling 18–20 Dec-14 18–20 14–16 (winter);
16–18 (spring) H
Lissotriton (Triturus) vulgaris Smooth or Common Newt 06/04/
05/08 1 14:10 Cooling 18–23 3–8 (winter);
8–21 (spring) 11–14 17–18 H
Neurergus kaiseri Kaisers Newt 10/12 1 13:11 Cooling 24–30 Oct-15 22–25 10–12 H
Salamandra salamandra Fire Salamander 04/05/
08/12 1 14:10 Cooling 18–23
3–8 (winter);
8 –21
(spring)
11–14 8–12 DI
Triturus cristatus Great Crested Newt 06/04/
05/08 1 14:10 Cooling 18–23 3–8 (winter);
8–21 (spring) 11–14 11 BDI
Tylototriton verrucosus Himalayan Newt 03/10 1 14:10 Cooling 25–28 15–18 25–28 18–20 CI
Gymophiona: Caeciliidae
Typhlonectes natans Rio Cauca Caecilian 1 2 12:12 30–35 28–30 26–28 28–30 26–28 I
Typhlonectes spp. Aquatic Caecilian, Rubber Eel,
Caecilian Worm. 1 1–2 12:12 28–30 27–28 28–30 27–28 IJ
... Furthermore, because both under-and over-exposure to the UV spectrum can have deleterious effects, it is important for lizards to regulate that exposure (Hays et al., 1995;Blaustein et al., 1998;Ferguson et al., 2002;Gehrmann, 2006;Baines, 2008;Gardiner et al., 2009). Thus, knowledge of natural UV exposure levels is important when considering habitat availability and protections for wild lizard populations and to inform husbandry practices for lizards in human care, including conservation breeding programs for threatened and endangered species (Ferguson et al., 2010;Selleri and Girolamo, 2012;Baines et al., 2016). ...
... Data Collection and Analysis: for an unrelated project, UV index (UVI) readings were taken opportunistically from the exact location of basking lizards from 4-8 November 2019 in Matanzas Province, Cuba, and from 1-4 December 2019 on Grand Cayman Island (Tables 1, 2). Readings were taken using a Solarmeter Model 6.5R Reptile UV Index Meter (Solar Light Company, Glenside, Pennsylvania, USA), a tool found to be suitable for measuring the irradiance from sunlight as it pertains to the needs of reptiles (Baines et al., 2016). The range of appropriate Zones relates UVI to the physiological needs of the species, in particular to predict photoproduct conversion of provitamin D when exposed to UVB (Ferguson et al., 2010). ...
... Continuing to opportunistically collect UV exposure data for lizards could contribute towards much improving the provision of appropriate UV levels for lizards in human care, such as those involved in conservation breeding efforts. Currently, in the absence of natural exposure levels from which to derive captive standards, experts recommend that levels offered in human care be based upon a species' basking behaviour, skin permeability to UV radiation, and response to UVB in the context of vitamin D production (Baines et al., 2016). Species can then be assigned to Ferguson Zones for UV exposure levels in human care (Ferguson et al., 2010), which can then be used to inform conservation efforts such as conservation-breeding programs. ...
... The dimensions of the on-exhibit enclosure were 220 × 94 × 113 cm (length × width × height) (Figure 1), and half of the available height within the enclosure was furnished and therefore accessible to the animals. A full range of temperature and humidity gradients, UV provision (0 UVI in shade and up to 3 UVI at basking areas, based on FZ2; Baines et al. 2016) and multiple hiding places within rock crevices were provided within the enclosure. The glass viewing panels at the front of the enclosure allowed keepers to monitor behaviour of the individuals and adjust parameters where necessary to meet the putative needs of the species. ...
Article
Full-text available
Climatic seasonality has allowed species to evolve to use such variation to their advantage. Correct timing of breeding and parturition can be an essential factor in species survival, and adaptations to geographic seasonal changes can assist in preparation for a successful breeding season. The Gorongosa girdled lizard Smaug mossambicus is a little-known cordylid lizard from Mozambique, for which there is very limited information regarding its natural history and breeding habits. Through keeping this species at Drayton Manor Resort, UK, it was apparent that seasonal climatic changes may have an impact on the successful reproduction of this species. Using data collected at Drayton Manor Resort and additional data collected from both private and professional institutions via a questionnaire, the climatic factors affecting reproduction in this reptile were investigated. The results suggest that seasonal temperature variation may have some influence on captive breeding success, although this is likely to be in conjunction with other factors such as variance in photoperiod, humidity and rainfall. There is evidence of strictly seasonal reproductive behaviour by S. mossambicus, which corresponds with many other species from southern Africa: producing a single litter annually, breeding in winter with parturition in summer. Litter size varied between one and six individuals. Future research should focus on exploring further climate variables that may influence the breeding habits of S. mossambicus. This study builds a foundation for understanding the breeding behaviour of S. mossambicus and should aid in the successful maintenance and reproduction of the species.
... amphibians (Michaels et al., 2014b). Calcium metabolism is a case in point as it relies on the appropriate replication of sunlight (specifically UVB radiation and heat) and the provision of dietary calcium, phosphorus and vitamin D3 sources in appropriate amounts and combinations (Antwis & Browne, 2009;Baines et al., 2016). This is further complicated by the tendency for commercially raised invertebrate species to be calcium-deficient in both absolute terms and relative to phosphorus content (Barker et al., 1998;Finke et al., 2002;Jayson et al., 2018a). ...
Article
Full-text available
The mountain chicken frog (Leptodactylus fallax) is among the 42 % of amphibians threatened with extinction and is dependent upon ex situ populations to recover in the wild. Amphibian captive husbandry is not fully understood and empirical data are required to optimise protocols for each species in captivity. Calcium metabolism and homeostasis are areas of importance in captive husbandry research and have been identified as a challenge in maintaining ex situ populations of L. fallax. We trialled two frequencies (twice and seven times weekly) of calcium supplementation via dusting of feeder insects in two groups of L. fallax juveniles and measured growth and health effects through morphometrics, radiography, ultrasonography and blood and faecal analysis over 167 days, followed by a further 230 days of monitoring on an intermediate diet informed by the initial dataset. We showed that supplementation treatment did not affect growth or health status as measured through blood analysis, radiography and ultrasonography. More frequent supplementation resulted in significantly more radiopaque endolymphatic sacs and broader skulls. Frogs fed more calcium excreted twice as much calcium in their faeces. The intermediate diet resulted in previously lower supplementation frogs approximating the higher supplementation frogs in morphometrics and calcium stores. Comparison with radiographic data from wild frogs showed that both treatments may still have had narrower skulls than wild animals, but mismatching age class may limit this comparison. Our data may be used to inform dietary supplementation of captive L. fallax as well as other amphibians.
... amphibians (Michaels et al., 2014b). Calcium metabolism is a case in point as it relies on the appropriate replication of sunlight (specifically UVB radiation and heat) and the provision of dietary calcium, phosphorus and vitamin D3 sources in appropriate amounts and combinations (Antwis & Browne, 2009;Baines et al., 2016). This is further complicated by the tendency for commercially raised invertebrate species to be calcium-deficient in both absolute terms and relative to phosphorus content (Barker et al., 1998;Finke et al., 2002;Jayson et al., 2018a). ...
Article
Full-text available
The mountain chicken frog (Leptodactylus fallax) is among the 42 % of amphibians threatened with extinction and is dependent upon ex situ populations to recover in the wild. Amphibian captive husbandry is not fully understood and empirical data are required to optimise protocols for each species in captivity. Calcium metabolism and homeostasis are areas of importance in captive husbandry research and have been identified as a challenge in maintaining ex situ populations of L. fallax. We trialled two frequencies (twice and seven times weekly) of calcium supplementation via dusting of feeder insects in two groups of L. fallax juveniles and measured growth and health effects through morphometrics, radiography, ultrasonography and blood and faecal analysis over 167 days, followed by a further 230 days of monitoring on an intermediate diet informed by the initial dataset. We showed that supplementation treatment did not affect growth or health status as measured through blood analysis, radiography and ultrasonography. More frequent supplementation resulted in significantly more radiopaque endolymphatic sacs and broader skulls. Frogs fed more calcium excreted twice as much calcium in their faeces. The intermediate diet resulted in previously lower supplementation frogs approximating the higher supplementation frogs in morphometrics and calcium stores. Comparison with radiographic data from wild frogs showed that both treatments may still have had narrower skulls than wild animals, but mismatching age class may limit this comparison. Our data may be used to inform dietary supplementation of captive L. fallax as well as other amphibians.
... Laboratory-based research has shown the impact that light intensity, duration and wavelengths have on psychological and physical well-being (reviewed in Wulff et al. 2010;Ross and Mason 2017). The impact of lighting is one area of work that is gaining traction across a wide range of species in zoos (e.g., Baines et al. 2016;Fuller et al. 2016;Ross et al. 2013;Benn et al. 2019). With the increasing accessibility of technology to monitor sound and light levels (Fuller 2014;Kardous and Shaw 2014), this area seems poised for additional development with the potential for a positive impact on welfare. ...
Article
Full-text available
Research into the conditions that promote good animal welfare is essential to equip zoos and aquariums with the knowledge to create environments in which animals thrive. In order to collate the empirical information that is available regarding animal welfare in zoos and aquariums with regard to topics, methods and species, a systematic literature review was conducted of the primary peer-reviewed journals publishing zoo-based and welfare-based research. Journals included Animal Welfare, Animals, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, International Zoo Yearbook, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research, and Zoo Biology. The literature review spanned 2008–2017 and revealed that 7.6% (n=310) of reviewed publications (n=4,096) in these journals were zoo- or aquarium-based and animal-welfare focused. The main topics studied included enrichment, social conditions and enclosure design, while understudied topics included the welfare of ambassador animals, and the welfare impacts of sound and light. Behaviour was by far the dominant welfare parameter used and the use of hormonal measures declined over this period. Taxonomic representation in these publications was notably skewed. Mammals were the focus of 75% of studies, and 82% of studies were vertebrate-focused (great apes being the dominant taxa). This study considers potential reasons for these patterns and highlights research areas for future emphasis that could serve to fill gaps in current knowledge regarding zoo and aquarium animal welfare, including more research into affective states that underlie an animal’s welfare status.
... It remains unclear, however, to what extent UVB bulb outputs were monitored; this is important because the UVB emissions decay over time, and different products decay at different rates. 20 The second most popular response, at 18 per cent, was natural sunlight. Another 11 per cent each indicated that they use room lighting to provide light in the enclosure or a regular fluorescent bulb. ...
Article
Background A large number of snakes are kept as pets in Western societies. Few studies have been undertaken to assess keeping practices of snakes by private owners in Australia. Therefore, there is concern that some owners may not understand even basic husbandry requirements. The aim of this preliminary study was to identify the most common practices used by snake owners in Victoria, Australia. Method An online survey asked 251 snake owners to describe ways in which they attempt to meet their snake’s environmental, behavioural, dietary, social and health needs. Results Fewer than half of participants had an enclosure large enough for the snake to fully stretch out, and just over half had an enclosure large enough to meet the requirements in the Victorian Code of Practice. Only 60 per cent of owners correctly identified their snake’s activity patterns based on information about wild snakes of the same species. Conclusion Educational campaigns may help improve outcomes for snakes in the future, but more research is needed about captive snake husbandry, to provide an evidence base for informing snake management recommendations.
... However, 1.1% of keepers of adult tortoises kept them free within the house, where there was a lack of opportunity for thermoregulation and no UV light source, preventing natural behaviors such as basking and burrowing. More than 50% of respondents who kept their tortoises in terraria used HID lamps with electronic ballasts, which is the highest-quality UV source (Baines et al., 2016)-a finding that showed a high responsibility of Testudo spp. keepers toward their tortoises. ...
Article
Mediterranean and Russian tortoises (Testudo spp.) are popular companion animals (pets), despite ongoing controversy concerning privately keeping reptiles. The arguments used during these controversial discussions have often been based on outdated facts. Therefore, a survey was developed to evaluate the current population structure, husbandry conditions, diet regime, and health status of Testudo species in captivity. More than 75% of the 1075 respondents housed their tortoises in an outdoor enclosure containing a greenhouse or cold frame, which is considered the most species-appropriate way of husbandry. Of the respondents, 67.7% fed their tortoises with the optimum diet of more than 80% grasses and weeds during the summer vegetation period. Only 8.2% of respondents owned a tortoise with a diagnosed disease. According to the results, the likelihood of tortoises developing pyramidal growth syndrome, which can be used as an indicator of the quality of tortoise husbandry, was high in tortoises kept in a terrarium and/or fed a diet of less than 80% grasses and weeds in summer. This likelihood varied among species, with a higher incidence in Hermann’s tortoises (Testudo hermanni).
Article
Background: Amphibians are commonly kept in the UK but are afforded little time in veterinary curricula and are often grouped with reptiles in veterinary texts and continuing professional development resources. While the approach to the amphibian patient shares some similarities with how reptiles are approached, there are significant zoological, biological and clinical differences. A background knowledge of their anatomy, physiology, biology and husbandry is required in order to successfully diagnose and treat illness. Three orders of amphibian exist: the anura (frogs and toads), the caudata or urodela (newts and salamanders) and the gymnophiona (caecilians). Although the number of amphibian species kept and bred in captivity is vast, practitioners in the UK are likely to encounter some species more commonly than others. Aim of the article: This article outlines the veterinary approach to the amphibian patient, discusses some of the diagnostic and therapeutic options available and provides an overview of the most common conditions seen in these species.
Article
Metabolic Bone Disease (MBD) is a clinical sign of a disease called Nutritional Secondary Hyperparathyroidism (NSHP). This is when there is not enough calcium in the diet and incorrect/insufficient UVB provision, or the calcium:phosphorus (Ca:P) ratio becomes imbalanced, causing the calcium levels in the blood to decrease resulting in hypocalcaemia (low blood calcium). This decrease is detected by the kidneys and the parathyroid gland is alerted to produce parathormone to rebalance the blood calcium levels by removing calcium from the bones to increase the level in the bloodstream.
Chapter
Provision of appropriate lighting is a vital, but often neglected, part of good reptile husbandry. The infrared, visible light and ultraviolet (UV) components of natural sunlight, and their importance, are reviewed. Lamps must be combined to simulate the microhabitat appropriate for each species, and positioned within the vivarium to create superimposed gradients of heat, light and UV. UV-B is required for cutaneous synthesis of vitamin D3. The provision of UV-B lighting for all reptiles is discussed. The measured UV-B output of a range of lamps is provided. Allocation of species into four categories based upon their basking behaviour (‘Ferguson Zones’) assists estimation of suitable UV ranges within the vivarium. Measurement of the UV Index and substrate surface temperatures aids lamp positioning.
Article
Full-text available
Amphibians are facing catastrophic global declines under pressure from a variety of threats. Many of these are so acute and poorly understood that ex-situ conservation has been employed where in-situ efforts may be unable to act quickly enough to save species in the wild. However, our knowledge of the captive requirements of most amphibians is unknown or poorly understood and this knowledge gap jeopardises the success of ex-situ programs. A lack of data from the habitat of wild populations underpins many husbandry failures in captivity, as without it husbandry is based on best guess. Ultraviolet B radiation has been shown to be critical in the care of many reptile species, but its importance to amphibians is not well understood. We present the first data on UV-B exposure and basking behaviour in wild amphibians, using Pelophylax lessonae as a model species. We show that wild frogs inhabit a UV-B microclimate defined by physical features of their habitat and by the basking behaviour of the animals themselves. This data may encourage the future gathering of such wild environmental data, which could be fed directly into ex-situ programs.
Article
Full-text available
This review presents a general view of all types of melanin in all types of organisms. Melanin is frequently considered just an animal cutaneous pigment and is treated separately from similar fungal or bacterial pigments. Similarities concerning the phenol precursors and common patterns in the formation routes are discussed. All melanins are formed in a first enzymatically-controlled phase, generally a phenolase, and a second phase characterized by an uncontrolled polymerization of the oxidized intermediates. In that second phase, quinones derived from phenol oxidation play a crucial role. Concerning functions, all melanins show a common feature, a protective role, but they are not merely photoprotective pigments against UV sunlight. In pathogenic microorganisms, melanization becomes a virulence factor since melanin protects microbial cells from defense mechanisms in the infected host. In turn, some melanins are formed in tissues where sunlight radiation is not a potential threat. Then, their redox, metal chelating, or free radical scavenging properties are more important than light absorption capacity. These pigments sometimes behave as a double-edged sword, and inhibition of melanogenesis is desirable in different cells. Melanin biochemistry is an active field of research from dermatological, biomedical, cosmetical, and microbiological points of view, as well as fruit technology.
Article
Tokay gecko acclimatized to 25 ± 1°C and a LD 12:12 photoperiod exhibited significant diel cycles of temperature selection in a thermal gradient with either uniform light over the entire gradient (UL) or a point-source of light over the hot end of the gradient (LH). Both groups selected higher body temperatures at night than during the day. No diel cycle was observed in geckos exposed to the paradoxical condition of a point-source of light over the cold end of the gradient (LC). The UL and LH groups showed greater precision in thermoregulation during the scotophase than during the photophase. The opposite was found for the LC group. Light thus has a definite impact on thermoregulatory behavior that is distinct from the role that heat plays in thermoregulation. -from Authors
Article
This approved method prepared by the Subcommittee on Phosometry of Light Sources of the Committee on Testing procedures of the IES provides a guide to promote uniform seasoning of lamps intended to be used for measurement of photometric, colorimetric, or electrical characteristics. Lamps should be seasoned until those characteristics remain constant during the test to be conducted. This approved method applies to incandescent, fluorescent, high intensity discharge (HID) and glow lamps. Forced seasoning to reduce testing time for certain lamps is also discussed.