Aquairum salt water in substrate, any benefits?

[~8-legz~]

oh ok.. Thanks Mich. So basically what I am reading now pertains to the environment. It seems to indicate that salinity in the soil leads to further erosion , so using a salinity in tarantula husbandry raises issues that are just kind of a controversial thing from many different areas. oooh.. ok I see now it becomes more of a moral issue than one directly pertaining to tarantulas, so it is one that could in fact upset people. I am sorry. I didn't know that salt was such a hot topic like this. I mentioned I was ignorant. So reading about rainfall patterns and salinity, evaporation.. Then it focuses on climate. oooh.. It is one of THOSE topics.. Oops? Never should of brought it up? Sorry if it upset anyone. I didn't know salinity was a huge topic. But you know what? I JUST learned something.

WHAT?

 

[micheldied]

WHAT?

Lmao what? I think DewDrop is coming up with a debate in his head.

The point that everyone here has put across is exactly one and the same; it's an unnecessary risk to the Ts, and it obviously isn't needed. You've got some of your facts wrong if you think that Avics or G. rosea are found anywhere near saline conditions.

This isn't a moral debate, you asked a question about your Ts and we're telling you what we think work best (or doesn't) for the Ts.

 

[Enn49]

Sadly when she eventually finds her Ts shriveled up she won't be coming on here to admit she was wrong

 

[DewDrop]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_rose_tarantula
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salar_de_Atacama
Ok.. Just as an example. we have established where, what and how to's.
http://www.almaobservatory.org/en/about-alma/location/atacama
A furthermore,
http://www.tarantulas.com/rosea.html
Here and the final *
http://www.microbiomejournal.com/content/1/1/28
So you can comfortably go by whichever, whatever and however you'd like.

As far as hurting my spider, no, I am not.

 

[DewDrop]

You're mixing up your geography Central Chile, the breadbasket of Chile, is the farming and aquaculture area, to moist and humid for the Rosea.

In a bowl surrounded by peaks of the Andes in northern Chile is where the salt flats are.

The geysers, or at least the largest group of vents, are across the salt flats higher up in the Andes.

For the G. Rosea to reach any of these they have to cross the Atacama Desert, the driest desert in the world. Rosea come from the southern edge of the Atacama Desert in Chile, and the desert/scrub regions on the edges of the Atacama in Bolivia and Argentina. Many many miles away from these geysers and salt plains. Rosea were found not to be nomads as first thought, in the wild they burrow and stick to an area, only moving in the event of natural "disasters" like fires, etc.

The point of all this is we don't want to see the spiders needlessly put in danger as others have posted. Salt is a poison to spiders, and used as an alternative pesticide. I'm dreading seeing a post saying your T's are suddenly not doing so well, i'm afraid your "expirement" of how salt benefits is actually an experiment on how long they can last exposed to salt.

It has been suggested that they are nomadic. Wikipedia says they are not, which, as we all know, could be false. There are salts in the Atacama Desert. http://www.microbiomejournal.com/content/1/1/28

 

[DewDrop]

gypsum is a soluble salt. http://serc.carleton.edu/vignettes/collection/36726.html ok The atacama desert is gypsum, fossil dirt.

 

[DewDrop]

One more thing, book lungs in spiders, they do excrete a little water. So, while there may be no significant water loss, it is the simple fact that they do breathe out a little water that suggests the environment should be humid and not bone dry, even if they come from the desert. They release Co2. Their lungs are not related to modern vertebrates that live on land. Hemolymph is composed of water, salts and organic compounds. The book lung of a spider are air pockets, tissue is filled with hemolymph . It is thought by scientists that book lungs evolved from book gills.

Reference site from
^ Foelix, Rainer F (1996). Biology of Spiders. Oxford University Press US. pp. 61–64. ISBN 0-19-509594-4.
^ Scholtz, G. & Kamenz, C. (2006) Zoology 109, 2-13; doi:10.1016/j.zool.2005.06.003
^ Kamenz, C. et al. (2008) Biology Letters 4, 212-215; doi:10.1098/rsbl.2007.0597
^ Bhamrah, H. S.; Kavita Juneja (2002). An Introduction to Arthropoda. Anmol Publications PVT. LTD. p. 316. ISBN 81-261-0673-5.

ON digplanet.com



Basically tarantulas need a little salt in their systems to survive. They are dependent on chloride, sodium, for cellular function. THAT** is WHAT I wanted to know.

NOT ALL spiders have book lungs, so salt would possibly be a bad thing for those who do not have book lungs.

If you can debate this simple fact of tarantula anatomy, please, bring it on.

 

[DewDrop]

reference from the above definition of hemolymph



^ Chapman, R.F. (1998). The Insects; Structure and Function (4th ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521578906.
^ Wyatt, G. R. (1961). "The Biochemistry of Insect Hemolymph". Annual Review of Entomology 6: 75. doi:10.1146/annurev.en.06.010161.000451.
^ Zachariassen, K. E.; Baust, J. G.; Lee Jr, R. E. (1982). "A method for quantitative determination of ice nucleating agents in insect hemolymph" (PDF). Cryobiology 19 (2): 180–184. doi:10.1016/0011-2240(82)90139-0. PMID 7083885.
^ Sowers, A.D.; Young, S.P.; Grosell, M.; Browdy, C.L.; Tomasso, J.R. (2006). "Hemolymph osmolality and cation concentrations in Litopenaeus vannamei during exposure to artificial sea salt or a mixed-ion solution: Relationship to potassium flux". Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology 145: 176–180.
^ Chapman 1998, p. 108.
^ Chapman 1998, p. 111.
^ Chapman 1998.
^ Chapman 1998, p. 114.
^ Bateman, P. W.; Fleming, P. A. (2009). "There will be blood: Autohaemorrhage behaviour as part of the defence repertoire of an insect". Journal of Zoology 278 (4): 342. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7998.2009.00582.x.
^ Genus Leptanilla Australian Ants Online

on digplanet.com

WHile the above does primarily concern itself with insects, in it's study, the point is hemolymph does involve salts, chloride, sodium,

The further on hemolymph since you all like wiki.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haemolymph



Please bring intellectual debate, it is welcomed and so is friendly forum chit chat, but please do not make a mockery of me for studying. I do not do that to you. I don't like to block people but if you are rude I will have to. SO I do apologize for blocking those I have. I just cannot tolerate being picked on like that.

 

[Enn49]

Is it possible that there is confusion here between the salt that we use as a condiment and mineral salts used in natural health products?

 

[Kymura]

Hi there, having a difference of opinion isn't picking on you.
I was going to try to avoid this thread, but..I do have a quick question. How do you know, without keeping T's without the salts, that they wouldn't do equally as well? Perhaps, not debating, just saying, perhaps your husbandry is good enough that they are doing well in spite of them?

 

[Thistles]

Please don't feel picked on. I think the issues here are mostly misunderstandings and people choosing not to listen to one another. Let's untangle this.

Your first post had a sense of curiosity and teachability, as when you said:

Is there anything to this saltwater or is it just assumption? My rose hair spiderling is active and seems do be doing great on a little salinity in it's substrate. I cannot find anything on the addition of salinity to the substrate written in books or in other educational or reference materials. It seems to help the pink toe shed so much smoother and quicker, but of course assumptions are not facts. So far so good.

You are absolutely correct to say that assumptions are not facts. My opinion is that you do not have enough data to say that the saline is either good or bad based only on your experiences. If you want a real answer you need to control for all the variables I mentioned earlier.

Just a little not too much. It sits in the gravel under the dry substrate just providing humidity. It isn't something the spider itself gets on it other than what is in the humidity. I don't want to have to correct you, however the avics do require humidity and so do the g. roseas, so while you say they are not moisture dependent, I have read otherwise.

Here are a few more confusing factors. First, most tarantula keepers don't use false bottoms. Due to their inclination to burrow, any attempt at a false bottom would soon be thwarted by little tarantulas reaching the water and gravel underneath. I suspect most of the people replying here are having trouble picturing your set up.

Secondly, "moisture dependent" has a specific connotation in tarantula keeping. All organisms are dependent on water to a certain extent. The difference here is that when we refer to a tarantula as being "moisture dependent" we mean that particular species needs damp substrate. That is not the case for most tarantulas, including Grammostola rosea.

Spiderlings all need some moisture in their substrate due to their undeveloped cuticle. As they age and their cuticle develops, most tarantulas become tolerant to a low humidity environment whether it is natural for them or not. The advantage to keeping them dry is the inhibition of pest organisms cohabiting with the tarantula. Dry substrate won't grow mold or harbor mites. This makes any further treatment to limit the growth of these organisms unnecessary.

I microwave the substrate for 5 to 10 minutes, every few months, so it isn't like anything harmful can live in that and the salt does help keep it clean. It really is a lot more active in a molt that is on a substrate with salinity. From what I have seen it isn't going to hurt the spider, even if it ingests small amounts. It has freshwater access at all times and does enjoy a mouthful.

Well I had some left over aquarium salt and did read that it inhibited pest organisms, so I decided to try it. ... Yet I am way too sensitive to mold and fungus not to add the salt as a preventative.

Microwaving the substrate is not only unnecessary and futile, but might also be harmful. Tarantulas naturally live in burrows that remain relatively undisturbed for their entire lives. Disrupting their burrow every few months is a huge upheaval for the animal. Spiderlings recover from this pretty quickly, but adult female fossorial tarantulas seem to have great difficulty in reestablishing their burrows, with some refusing to burrow and ultimately desiccating. As I said before, as soon as you feed the tarantula you have reintroduced mites to the enclosure. The trick is to learn how to manage this without uprooting the tarantula. Dry substrate does this. It is understandable that you might turn to saline to inhibit pests, but the preponderance of evidence here suggests that it is unnecessary. Some research here seems to indicate that it might be harmful, so I think what you are hearing from other members is that it isn't worth risking.

Since I am using microwaved peat moss after discovering soil mites the orbatid variety that can pass tapeworms to a horse if they contract it, that were not infective, thankfully, I figure hey, what's a little salt. Apparently the salt inhibited the orbatids for awhile, until it evaporated down to a useless amount of salinity. But after that experience, no more peat moss ever, ever again, for anything, for me. After 5 minutes in the microwave for the peat and ten for the gravel if anything is living in that substrate that isn't a tarantula, fondly placed back in the habitat once it was all cool and clean, it will be beyond my ability to comprehend.

Okay, there are a few assumptions in here that I can leave alone, like how you know what kind of mite you were dealing with, but let me reiterate that mites and tarantulas are very close relatives and any sort of difference in response to environmental factors is likely to be a matter of scale. Microwaving your materials initially is not necessary, but it also won't hurt anything. Carry on if it makes you feel better. I'll also reiterate that the salt does not evaporate. Only the pure water does. Any salt that you added will remain in the soil.

After this was that monster post that was all one paragraph and a bit of a bear to read. I think I adequately answered that in my monster post, but let's be careful not to take offense. At first you were curious, but now you have appeared to have doubled down and are insisting that what you are doing isn't hurting your tarantulas. It might not be. I don't think you know enough to make a definitive statement one way or the other, though.

With me so far? Now on to the new stuff.

No one is denying that tarantulas (and everything) need some salts in their bodies. What we question is the necessity, or even wisdom, of including saline in their environment versus just relying on their prey to supply the necessary salts. It clearly is NOT a necessity based on the millions of pet tarantulas that are thriving in captivity without it. I think a better question would be, "is it detrimental?"

Ok.. So.. Let's look at the G. Rosea natural environment. Dry.. Salt flats, plateau's, geysers, etc.. Low night time temps high day time temps, but not excessively high. Places in the desert that it has NEVER rained even. The place is salty. It is just that simple.

Don't confuse features of a huge area with being the tarantula's immediate environment. These animals live in perhaps a square meter of territory for their entire lives. I have never been to the Atacama and unfortunately data is rather lacking, but none of the pictures of wild G. rosea that I have seen have been in salt flats. Take another biome for example: you can say that manatees live in the Everglades. That does not mean that manatees live in every part of the Everglades, for example, on land. Does that make sense? The spiders don't live in geysers. We also have yet to define what is meant by "salt." What you are using is some form of mineral salt. I don't know what kind. What most people here are thinking of is sodium chloride. I don't know what kind of salt is present in the Atacama in general, much less in the vicinity of tarantula burrows in particular.

As far as the spiders being experiments, they are simply not as such. They are pets. Yes the fish salt is a freshwater tonic. Harmless. If I was inclined to experiment on a spider I'd be in college doing that and have no interest in subjecting the arachnids to an experiment.

Whether you call it an experiment or not, it is one. Any sort of deviation from established methods of husbandry is experimental. I don't say that as a criticism, but don't think that a label has any effect on reality. You also cannot definitively state that the salt you are using is "harmless." A better way to phrase that would be, "nonlethal at the current dose." I'm sure enough of it (or enough of anything!) could turn deadly. Just be careful about assumptions.

We aren't trying to pick on you, but what we see is someone keeping tarantulas unconventionally (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) who is not accounting for all factors when making sweeping claims. We're concerned about your tarantulas as well as the tarantulas of any new hobbyist who happens to see this and think, "hey, not a bad idea!" It might not be, but in my opinion it isn't worth the risk. Do what you like, but please be a little more circumspect. I think I got it all, but there was a lot. Again, my intention isn't to offend and I don't think any of the others are trying to hurt your feelings. We're all just misunderstanding one another and getting more entrenched and defensive.

 

[micheldied]

No one is mocking you, any criticisms made are about the subject at hand, not your person.

The Atacama desert is over 100, 000km squared in area. The Atacama salt flat is a measely 3000km squared in area. None of the links you've provided prove that G. rosea are found anywhere near the salt flats, or in them (and I'm pretty sure they aren't).

Yes, no tarantula should be kept absolutely dry, at 0 percent humidity (if there is such a thing). The microclimates in their burrows in the wild do hold some humidity, that is true. But you should also realize that a "bone dry" enclosure is also a small enclosed space that keeps in some amount of humidity, which acts similarly to a burrow would (very possibly a reason why many Ts do not burrow, like they would in the wild).

Bone dry, as used in the hobby, is relative. G. rosea can be kept much drier than many other species, that's all it means. It does not mean so dry that everything crumbles and any water content is non-existent.

The salt being used does contain regular salt, plus other mineral salts. So yes, there will be a build up of NaCl and other things, whether you microwave or not. The only way to get rid of it is to completely change the substrate, which, again, stresses out the Ts.

 

[SasyStace]

Please don't feel picked on. I think the issues here are mostly misunderstandings and people choosing not to listen to one another. Let's untangle this.

Your first post had a sense of curiosity and teachability, as when you said: You are absolutely correct to say that assumptions are not facts. My opinion is that you do not have enough data to say that the saline is either good or bad based only on your experiences. If you want a real answer you need to control for all the variables I mentioned earlier.

Here are a few more confusing factors. First, most tarantula keepers don't use false bottoms. Due to their inclination to burrow, any attempt at a false bottom would soon be thwarted by little tarantulas reaching the water and gravel underneath. I suspect most of the people replying here are having trouble picturing your set up.

Secondly, "moisture dependent" has a specific connotation in tarantula keeping. All organisms are dependent on water to a certain extent. The difference here is that when we refer to a tarantula as being "moisture dependent" we mean that particular species needs damp substrate. That is not the case for most tarantulas, including Grammostola rosea.

Spiderlings all need some moisture in their substrate due to their undeveloped cuticle. As they age and their cuticle develops, most tarantulas become tolerant to a low humidity environment whether it is natural for them or not. The advantage to keeping them dry is the inhibition of pest organisms cohabiting with the tarantula. Dry substrate won't grow mold or harbor mites. This makes any further treatment to limit the growth of these organisms unnecessary.



Microwaving the substrate is not only unnecessary and futile, but might also be harmful. Tarantulas naturally live in burrows that remain relatively undisturbed for their entire lives. Disrupting their burrow every few months is a huge upheaval for the animal. Spiderlings recover from this pretty quickly, but adult female fossorial tarantulas seem to have great difficulty in reestablishing their burrows, with some refusing to burrow and ultimately desiccating. As I said before, as soon as you feed the tarantula you have reintroduced mites to the enclosure. The trick is to learn how to manage this without uprooting the tarantula. Dry substrate does this. It is understandable that you might turn to saline to inhibit pests, but the preponderance of evidence here suggests that it is unnecessary. Some research here seems to indicate that it might be harmful, so I think what you are hearing from other members is that it isn't worth risking.


Okay, there are a few assumptions in here that I can leave alone, like how you know what kind of mite you were dealing with, but let me reiterate that mites and tarantulas are very close relatives and any sort of difference in response to environmental factors is likely to be a matter of scale. Microwaving your materials initially is not necessary, but it also won't hurt anything. Carry on if it makes you feel better. I'll also reiterate that the salt does not evaporate. Only the pure water does. Any salt that you added will remain in the soil.

After this was that monster post that was all one paragraph and a bit of a bear to read. I think I adequately answered that in my monster post, but let's be careful not to take offense. At first you were curious, but now you have appeared to have doubled down and are insisting that what you are doing isn't hurting your tarantulas. It might not be. I don't think you know enough to make a definitive statement one way or the other, though.

With me so far? Now on to the new stuff.

No one is denying that tarantulas (and everything) need some salts in their bodies. What we question is the necessity, or even wisdom, of including saline in their environment versus just relying on their prey to supply the necessary salts. It clearly is NOT a necessity based on the millions of pet tarantulas that are thriving in captivity without it. I think a better question would be, "is it detrimental?"

Don't confuse features of a huge area with being the tarantula's immediate environment. These animals live in perhaps a square meter of territory for their entire lives. I have never been to the Atacama and unfortunately data is rather lacking, but none of the pictures of wild G. rosea that I have seen have been in salt flats. Take another biome for example: you can say that manatees live in the Everglades. That does not mean that manatees live in every part of the Everglades, for example, on land. Does that make sense? The spiders don't live in geysers. We also have yet to define what is meant by "salt." What you are using is some form of mineral salt. I don't know what kind. What most people here are thinking of is sodium chloride. I don't know what kind of salt is present in the Atacama in general, much less in the vicinity of tarantula burrows in particular.

Whether you call it an experiment or not, it is one. Any sort of deviation from established methods of husbandry is experimental. I don't say that as a criticism, but don't think that a label has any effect on reality. You also cannot definitively state that the salt you are using is "harmless." A better way to phrase that would be, "nonlethal at the current dose." I'm sure enough of it (or enough of anything!) could turn deadly. Just be careful about assumptions.

We aren't trying to pick on you, but what we see is someone keeping tarantulas unconventionally (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) who is not accounting for all factors when making sweeping claims. We're concerned about your tarantulas as well as the tarantulas of any new hobbyist who happens to see this and think, "hey, not a bad idea!" It might not be, but in my opinion it isn't worth the risk. Do what you like, but please be a little more circumspect. I think I got it all, but there was a lot. Again, my intention isn't to offend and I don't think any of the others are trying to hurt your feelings. We're all just misunderstanding one another and getting more entrenched and defensive.

Kudos to this post very well stated and put together

 

[DewDrop]

Please don't feel picked on. I think the issues here are mostly misunderstandings and people choosing not to listen to one another. Let's untangle this.

Your first post had a sense of curiosity and teachability, as when you said: You are absolutely correct to say that assumptions are not facts. My opinion is that you do not have enough data to say that the saline is either good or bad based only on your experiences. If you want a real answer you need to control for all the variables I mentioned earlier.

Here are a few more confusing factors. First, most tarantula keepers don't use false bottoms. Due to their inclination to burrow, any attempt at a false bottom would soon be thwarted by little tarantulas reaching the water and gravel underneath. I suspect most of the people replying here are having trouble picturing your set up.

Secondly, "moisture dependent" has a specific connotation in tarantula keeping. All organisms are dependent on water to a certain extent. The difference here is that when we refer to a tarantula as being "moisture dependent" we mean that particular species needs damp substrate. That is not the case for most tarantulas, including Grammostola rosea.

Spiderlings all need some moisture in their substrate due to their undeveloped cuticle. As they age and their cuticle develops, most tarantulas become tolerant to a low humidity environment whether it is natural for them or not. The advantage to keeping them dry is the inhibition of pest organisms cohabiting with the tarantula. Dry substrate won't grow mold or harbor mites. This makes any further treatment to limit the growth of these organisms unnecessary.



Microwaving the substrate is not only unnecessary and futile, but might also be harmful. Tarantulas naturally live in burrows that remain relatively undisturbed for their entire lives. Disrupting their burrow every few months is a huge upheaval for the animal. Spiderlings recover from this pretty quickly, but adult female fossorial tarantulas seem to have great difficulty in reestablishing their burrows, with some refusing to burrow and ultimately desiccating. As I said before, as soon as you feed the tarantula you have reintroduced mites to the enclosure. The trick is to learn how to manage this without uprooting the tarantula. Dry substrate does this. It is understandable that you might turn to saline to inhibit pests, but the preponderance of evidence here suggests that it is unnecessary. Some research here seems to indicate that it might be harmful, so I think what you are hearing from other members is that it isn't worth risking.


Okay, there are a few assumptions in here that I can leave alone, like how you know what kind of mite you were dealing with, but let me reiterate that mites and tarantulas are very close relatives and any sort of difference in response to environmental factors is likely to be a matter of scale. Microwaving your materials initially is not necessary, but it also won't hurt anything. Carry on if it makes you feel better. I'll also reiterate that the salt does not evaporate. Only the pure water does. Any salt that you added will remain in the soil.

After this was that monster post that was all one paragraph and a bit of a bear to read. I think I adequately answered that in my monster post, but let's be careful not to take offense. At first you were curious, but now you have appeared to have doubled down and are insisting that what you are doing isn't hurting your tarantulas. It might not be. I don't think you know enough to make a definitive statement one way or the other, though.

With me so far? Now on to the new stuff.

No one is denying that tarantulas (and everything) need some salts in their bodies. What we question is the necessity, or even wisdom, of including saline in their environment versus just relying on their prey to supply the necessary salts. It clearly is NOT a necessity based on the millions of pet tarantulas that are thriving in captivity without it. I think a better question would be, "is it detrimental?"

Don't confuse features of a huge area with being the tarantula's immediate environment. These animals live in perhaps a square meter of territory for their entire lives. I have never been to the Atacama and unfortunately data is rather lacking, but none of the pictures of wild G. rosea that I have seen have been in salt flats. Take another biome for example: you can say that manatees live in the Everglades. That does not mean that manatees live in every part of the Everglades, for example, on land. Does that make sense? The spiders don't live in geysers. We also have yet to define what is meant by "salt." What you are using is some form of mineral salt. I don't know what kind. What most people here are thinking of is sodium chloride. I don't know what kind of salt is present in the Atacama in general, much less in the vicinity of tarantula burrows in particular.

Whether you call it an experiment or not, it is one. Any sort of deviation from established methods of husbandry is experimental. I don't say that as a criticism, but don't think that a label has any effect on reality. You also cannot definitively state that the salt you are using is "harmless." A better way to phrase that would be, "nonlethal at the current dose." I'm sure enough of it (or enough of anything!) could turn deadly. Just be careful about assumptions.

We aren't trying to pick on you, but what we see is someone keeping tarantulas unconventionally (which isn't necessarily a bad thing) who is not accounting for all factors when making sweeping claims. We're concerned about your tarantulas as well as the tarantulas of any new hobbyist who happens to see this and think, "hey, not a bad idea!" It might not be, but in my opinion it isn't worth the risk. Do what you like, but please be a little more circumspect. I think I got it all, but there was a lot. Again, my intention isn't to offend and I don't think any of the others are trying to hurt your feelings. We're all just misunderstanding one another and getting more entrenched and defensive.

You are thorough in explaining what it is you need to say. Thanks, that's nice. As you mentioned before in order for it to be an experiment it requires a control, which, there is not. Nitrate, iodine, lithium, sulpher, copper, silver, alluvial soil, mineral sediments from the Andes, thick fogs, mudslides, gypsum cement, hyperarid, fluvial deposits, paleosol, halite, saline minerals, no accumulation of calcium carbonate, no accumulation of clay minerals, basically a place that as you mentioned has a number of unknowns. Halite is salt a natural form of salt, generally found in arid regions, dissolves to brine which is increasing in the Atacama found in newer soils, also, sodium chloride. Gypsum is a salt, lithium a salt, and the fish water tonic salt is listed on it's lengthy data safety sheet as sodium chloride. Again sodium chloride is found in the newer soils of the Atacama not just in salt flats.

 

[~8-legz~]

((({=mind=blown=})))

 

[Thistles]

You are thorough in explaining what it is you need to say. Thanks, that's nice. As you mentioned before in order for it to be an experiment it requires a control, which, there is not. Nitrate, iodine, lithium, sulpher, copper, silver, alluvial soil, mineral sediments from the Andes, thick fogs, mudslides, gypsum cement, hyperarid, fluvial deposits, paleosol, halite, saline minerals, no accumulation of calcium carbonate, no accumulation of clay minerals, basically a place that as you mentioned has a number of unknowns. Halite is salt a natural form of salt, generally found in arid regions, dissolves to brine which is increasing in the Atacama found in newer soils, also, sodium chloride. Gypsum is a salt, lithium a salt, and the fish water tonic salt is listed on it's lengthy data safety sheet as sodium chloride. Again sodium chloride is found in the newer soils of the Atacama not just in salt flats.

Glad we figured out what's in the salt. I never bothered to look it up. Best of luck with your arachnid-keeping endeavors.

 

[DewDrop]

Thank you, Thistles.