The truth about Superworms?

[D_K]

So I have been doing a bunch of searching but what I have found is actually just confusing me more. To start at the beginning I have a pair of leopard geckos. One of them was very sick with parasites. To get him back to health I switched over to feeding my geckos crickets as their primary diet. Now that they are both rampantly healthy, I really don't want to keep dealing with keeping crickets. I have been considering using crickets as treats with either mealworms or superworms as their staple. The decision of which to use is where I got confused and now have the following 2 questions...

-Why do people here state that superworms are better than mealworms and yet most of the "what do you use as feeders" polls show that mealworms are the most popular?

-Why do people here state that superworms are nutritionally better then mealworms when the sheets that I can find show they that have a little less of the "good stuff" and a decent amount more fat?

I have been leaning towards using superworms but I want to make sure that they will keep my geckos healthy. :main_huh:

Thanks for any help that you can give!

*EDIT* Crud, how in the world did I stick this in the wrong forum? Can a mod please move this to the feeders forum? Sorry!

 

[acpart]

I can't tell you a whole lot about the nutritional aspects, but I'm sure Google can. Mealworms are more popular because I think that out of all the feeders they are the least "gross" to the average person and easiest to get. I have been using superworms for awhile for most of my adults (though I have fed superworms to geckos as small as 11 grams) and have never had a problem. I like them because I need fewer of them than mealworms to satisfy an adult, they don't pupate when together so they last longer, they move more than mealworms but run around less than crickets.

Aliza

 

[Mel&Keith]

I completely agree with Aliza and to add to what she said, I think price may also have something to do with it. A box of 1000 mealworms runs around $7 plus shipping while supers are $20 plus shipping. In the long run it probably works out to about the same when you consider how long they last or how fast you feed them but maybe some people with only a few geckos don't want the extra expense? Supers definitely harder to find in the pet store and half of the time they've accidently been put in the refrigerator. I think availability and the fact that you can throw mealworms in the fridge make them more popular. Personally, I'll stick to supers!

 

[ariana]

Personally, I'll stick to supers!

+1
i feed supers, u dont have to feed as many, theyre easier to handle (IMO) and they last FOREVER.

 

[ElapidSVT]

superworms have less chitin than mealworms due to less surface area per unit mass. many of the larger breeders use mealworms alone throughout the life of their animals and they look great!

 

[D_K]

superworms have less chitin than mealworms due to less surface area per unit mass. many of the larger breeders use mealworms alone throughout the life of their animals and they look great!

And it's stuff like that statement, that confuses the heck out of me! So if superworms have less chitin, why do breeders use mealworms?

+1
i feed supers, u dont have to feed as many, theyre easier to handle (IMO) and they last FOREVER.

That last part is EXACTLY the reason why I hate crickets. You loose so much money on the buggers because of the insane attrition rate!

 

[KelliH]

Nutritionally speaking, crickets are a healthier choice to feed your gecko. Superworms and mealworms are much higher in fat (especially superworms) but are also much more convenient for the gecko keeper.

 

[red_wall]

Okay I'm adding to the mass of questions here (sorry), but do superworms have any risk of impaction. Several people (somewhat inexperienced) have told me to not feed my Leo superworms because he'll get impacted... is that true?

 

[ariana]

Okay I'm adding to the mass of questions here (sorry), but do superworms have any risk of impaction. Several people (somewhat inexperienced) have told me to not feed my Leo superworms because he'll get impacted... is that true?

SOOO not true
but dont feed them supers until theyre big enough

 

[musick]

superworms have less chitin than mealworms due to less surface area per unit mass...

While this is true, the chitin is harder to digest due to its thickness than mealworms. That said, as long as their belly temps are warm enough, they will be able to digest either just fine.

I fed mine about 40% mealworms, 50% crickets, and the remaining 10% of the time is a mix of waxworms, superworms and roaches, all of them ALWAYS gutloaded for at least 48 hrs. I dont like giant mealies because they are fed hormones.

 

[roger]

Nutritionally speaking, crickets are a healthier choice to feed your gecko. Superworms and mealworms are much higher in fat (especially superworms) but are also much more convenient for the gecko keeper.

But crickets harbor more parasites bottom line.Superworms all the way.

 

[VoodooAlien]

but dont feed them supers until theyre big enough

And what would be considered "big enough"?

A year old?
At least 40g? 50g?

I'm very curious because our two girls seemed to have shied away from crickets lately. (not to mention the bad mortality rate of the ones we've been getting)

I was going to pick up some mealworms but may go for supers this round to possibly stimulate eating.

 

[sammer021486]

And what would be considered "big enough"?

A year old?
At least 40g? 50g?

I'm very curious because our two girls seemed to have shied away from crickets lately. (not to mention the bad mortality rate of the ones we've been getting)

I was going to pick up some mealworms but may go for supers this round to possibly stimulate eating.

I was feeding my 2 month old leo supers, I found the smallest I could and gave 1 or 2 with some mealies and crickets.

 

[Blacksupra94]

I think all insects have their pros and cons, granted some are much greater than others. IMO you should use all kinds of worms , roaches and crickets that you can get your hand on. It would really suck to eat the same thing everyday...

My gecko likes superworms a lot and they are easily accessible at the pet stores, but I think i'm going to switch to butter worms..

 

[Dama682]

If you don't have access to a variety of feeders (as variety will always be the number 1 way to go), superworms can go as a nice staple.

Crickets are more nutritious, but they can also harbor many parasites.

Mealworms are cheaper, and easy to breed. Out of mealworms, crickets, and superworms, mealworms are probably the least nutritious (per worm). Watch out for the breeding bit, if you keep them in a bin, you'll get only 1 pupa a week or so at first. Couple weeks later, you'll find yourself forced to spend time every day picking out 16 or so pupa every day.

Superworms are a bit expensive (compared to crickets and mealworms), but they're more active than mealworms and more nutritious. They do bite, however. I switched to superworms because if you keep them in a bin, they won't pupate. Only if you separate worms individually do the worms pupate. It's very convenient for me to be able to decide which individual superworm gets to become a beetle.


Finally, let me end my post by saying that neither mealworms nor superworms can eat through a leopard gecko's stomach.

 

[STUTFL]

Just an aside ... I was told today that superworms (labeled "super mealworms") are not capable of biting because their jaws are too small.

Aside from the fact that the things bite (I know the difference between their legs and their heads, I got BIT), I'm not sure what to make of the argument itself. Shouldn't the positioning rather than the size of the jaws determine whether (rather than how hard) an animal can bite?