Cited by 63Amphibian and Reptile BiologyPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsComparative Animal Anatomy Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Voluntary exposure of some western‐hemisphere snake and lizard species to ultraviolet‐B radiation in the field: how much ultraviolet‐B should a lizard or snake receive in captivity?

Abstract

Studies of voluntary exposure to ultraviolet‐B (UVB) radiation from the sun in the field were conducted in the southern US and Jamaica for 15 species of lizards and snakes occupying various habitats. Species were sorted into four zones of UVB exposure ranging from a median UV index of 0.35 for zone 1 to 3.1 for zone 4. Guidelines for UVB exposure in captivity of these and species occupying similar light environments are presented. Data for most species were collected during mid‐day during the spring breeding season, which appeared to be the time of maximum exposure. For two species of Sceloporus studied more intensively there was significant variation of exposure among times of the day and among seasons. So, all‐day studies over the entire active season are necessary to fully understand the pattern of natural exposure for a particular diurnal species. Environmental and body temperature and thermoregulation as well as UVB/vitamin D photoregulation influences exposure to UVB. Regressions allowing the inter‐conversion of readings among some meters with different detector sensitivities are presented. Readings of natural sunlight predict the same photobiosynthetic potential for vitamin D as the same reading from artificial sources whose wavelength distribution within the UVB band of the source is comparable to that of sunlight. Research approaches to further increase our understanding of vitamin D and UVB use and requirements for squamate reptiles in captivity are outlined. Zoo Biol 29:317–334, 2010. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/zoo.20255

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. 10.2460/ajvr.67.12.2046 · DOI
  2. 10.2460/ajvr.69.2.294 · DOI
  3. 10.1007/978-1-4615-5051-8_17 · DOI
  4. Aucone BM, 2003, Comparison of two artificial ultraviolet light sources used for chuckwalla (Sauromalus obesus) husbandry, J Herpatol Med Surg, 13, 14
  5. Auffenberg W, 1988, Gray's monitor lizard
  6. Bernard JS, 1991, The response of vitamin D deficient green iguanas (Iguana iguana) to artificial ultraviolet light, Proc Am Vet, 1991, 147
  7. Blair WF, 1960, The rusty lizard
  8. 10.1093/icb/38.6.799 · DOI
  9. 10.1007/s00359-005-0014-4 · DOI
  10. Brames H, 2007, Aspects of light and reptile immunity, Iguana, 14, 18
  11. 10.1002/zoo.20148 · DOI
  12. 10.1643/0045-8511(2000)2000[0245:POAAFU]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/0955-2863(90)90067-U · DOI
  14. Chen TC, 1993, Biologic effects of light 1993, 28
  15. 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2361(1997)16:5<391::AID-ZOO2>3.0.CO;2-5 · DOI
  16. 10.2307/1565054 · DOI
  17. 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2361(1996)15:3<279::AID-ZOO7>3.0.CO;2-8 · DOI
  18. 10.1002/zoo.10054 · DOI
  19. 10.1086/374276 · DOI
  20. 10.1086/427055 · DOI
  21. 10.1038/365397a0 · DOI
  22. Gehrmann WH, 2006, Reptile medicine and surgery,, 463
  23. 10.1002/zoo.20014 · DOI
  24. Gehrmann WH, 2004, A comparison of vitamin D‐synthesizing ability of different light sources to irradiances measured with a Solarmeter model 6.2 UVB meter, Herpetol Rev, 35, 361
  25. 10.1002/1098-2361(2000)19:6<495::AID-ZOO2>3.0.CO;2-1 · DOI
  26. Haddad JG, 1999, Vitamin D: physiology, molecular biology, and clinical applications, 101
  27. Hays J, 1995, Differences in DNA repair activity and sensitivity to UVB light among egg and oocytes of declining and stable amphibian species, J Cell Biochem, 1995, 296
  28. Hibma J, 2004, Dietary vitamin D3 and UV‐B exposure effects on green iguana growth rate: is full‐spectrum lighting necessary?, Bull Chicago Herpetol Soc, 39, 145
  29. Holick MF, 1989, Science and animals: addressing contemporary issues, 63
  30. Holick MF, 1989, Vertebrate endocrinology fundamentals and biomedical implications, Vol. 3. Regulation of calcium and phosphate, 7
  31. 10.1007/978-1-4757-2861-3 · DOI
  32. 10.1093/ajcn/79.3.362 · DOI
  33. 10.1073/pnas.92.8.3124 · DOI
  34. Jones JR, 1996, Biological effects of light 1995, 49
  35. 10.1086/597525 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/S0305-0491(99)00081-4 · DOI
  37. 10.1638/1042-7260(2001)032[0342:TRFNST]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  38. Legler JM, 1979, The application of stomach‐flushing to lizards and anurans, Herpetologica, 35, 107
  39. Lindgren J, 2008, Measuring effective vitamin D3‐producing ultraviolet B radiation using Solartech's Solarmeter 6.4 handheld, UVB radiometer, Bull Chicago Herpetol Soc, 43, 57
  40. Loew ER, 2002, Visual pigments and oil droplets in diurnal lizards: a comparative study of Caribbean anoles, J Exp Biol, 205, 927, 10.1242/jeb.205.7.927 · DOI
  41. Lu Z, 1992, Biologic effects of light, 48, 10.1515/9783110856156-007 · DOI
  42. 10.1007/BF02556316 · DOI
  43. 10.1086/physzool.69.2.30164194 · DOI
  44. 10.2307/1942325 · DOI
  45. 10.1638/04-080.1 · DOI
  46. Tian XQ, 1996, Biologic effects of light 1995, 39
  47. Wallach JD, 1996, Hypervitaminosis D in green iguanas, J Am Vet Med Assoc, 149, 912
  48. Watters JL, 2008, Comparison of two diet collection methods in the lizards Sceloporus jarrovii and Sceloporus virgatus, Herpetol Rev, 39, 307
  49. 10.1210/jcem-68-5-882 · DOI
  50. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.10.018 · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Ferguson, G. W., Brinker, A. M., Gehrmann, W. H., Bucklin, S. E., Baines, F. M., & Mackin, S. J.
Affiliations
Texas Christian University (US)
Corresponding author
Ferguson, Gary W.
Venue
Zoo Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-05-29
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
317-334
ISSN
  • 0733-3188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2361
OpenAlex
W2103224610
Cited by
63
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Zoo Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Eppley Foundation for Research
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Amphibian and Reptile Biology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Physiological and biochemical adaptations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anatomy › Comparative Animal Anatomy Studies
Keywords
UV-B radiation, snakes, lizards, squamate reptiles, captive husbandry, UV index, Sceloporus, diurnal activity patterns, seasonal variation, body temperature, thermoregulation, artificial lighting
MeSH terms
Animals, Body Temperature, Ergosterol, Jamaica, Lizards, Regression Analysis, Snakes, Species Specificity, Sunlight, Ultraviolet Rays, United States, Vitamin D, Ecosystem

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review