Can You Imagine Them Yesterday? – Yesterday They Couldn’t Imagine Us
July 27, 2009
Wild coral reefs don’t think (if they could) in terms of ‘yesterday’ as we understand it. Yesterday could be a thousand years ago or more. This is the wild reef overall of course, not the multitudes of organisms that make it up. The ‘yesterdays’ in that case could be as ours.
We marine aquarists tend to think in terms of days, weeks and months. We wait for the bio-filter to ‘mature’. We watch as the captive reef settles and marvel at the incredible sights that Mother Nature created and we obtained. Slowly (in our terms) the captive reef changes and develops.
‘Yesterday’ is a direct literal word and also a suggestive one. Paul McCartney of the Beatles sang ‘Yesterday all my troubles seemed so far away’ and this could have been a literal yesterday or months or even years ago. In this case we’re talking of years, quite a few in fact, forty plus and more.
Marine aquarists then were a different bunch; they were generally patient and careful and had to be. The modern aquarist is but not in the same way. The grounding for this care and patience in bygone days was lack of knowledge.
The internet wasn’t even a possibility or an item of science fiction. Marine aquarium books, there weren’t any. It was word of mouth and hope. The hobby itself didn’t really exist, as to be a hobby as such needs a largish following. The early marine aquarists were really dedicated hopers, stumbling along from problem to problem. It was believed that clean salt water was the answer and as soon as any problem reared its ugly head seawater changes commenced, often to no avail. The seawater itself wasn’t as we know it, it was a very basic mixture of ingredients obtained from chemists and home mixed. All that were kept were a few fish and perhaps an invertebrate or two. Nothing seemed to last long, something clearly was wrong.
Then a Mr. Straughan (an Englishman I believe) came along. He also was concerned about seawater cleanliness and spent some time considering how this could be achieved without changing seawater quite so much. He recognized that there existed one item in the aquarium that would make a very good solids filter – the sand. Most aquariums of the time had coarse sand on the base. What he did was pump seawater down into the sand under a plate so that it flowed up again through the sand. The debris became trapped and the seawater was noticeably cleaner. The amount of seawater changing reduced.
The fish lived longer and Mr. Straughan was sure that the increased cleanliness was the answer. In a way he was correct, the seawater was cleaner but not only from debris – also from the toxics ammonia and nitrite. Bacteria had developed within the sand and were fed with oxygen laden seawater. Mr. Straughan as I understand it was never sure about the toxin reasoning but this was the case – he had created an under-gravel bio-filter. Who suggested the presence of bacteria I do not know, but it was correct of course.
It wasn’t long before the marine hobby started to grow now that such a barrier had been overcome. This was apparent because commercial under-gravel filters appeared so there had to be a market. Pet shops started to keep some colourful marine fish, often damsels, which really advertised themselves. Numbers of fresh water aquarists moved to the marine side.
It was at this point that I became involved, being one of those fresh water aquarists. I saw some damsels and.. well, the seed was sown.
The very earliest marine aquariums were glass held in place by angle iron (just think of the problems with salt water). Attempts were made to combat this with stainless steel. However, my aquariums were glass and silicone sealant thank goodness!
Those aquariums were successful for the most part, but fish only. Keep corals, don’t be silly, impossible! We should have known, it had been said earlier that keeping coral fish was impossible, at least for any length of time.
My fish only aquarium was decorated with a sand base (with an under-gravel filter) and dead bleached corals. How awful that sounds now. We used to put the dead coral skeletons in fresh water, perhaps with bleach in, to kill and remove any living or once living material so reducing the chance of pollution. After careful rinsing, into the aquarium it went. I thought it was so wonderful having these colourful fish and they seemed happy and healthy enough. Thank goodness I never suffered from the dreaded wipe-out when all fish died. This wasn’t from ammonia, nitrite or disease (though disease did claim a lot of fish) but something was obviously doing it – all fish wiped out in up to a week or so. It still isn’t known for sure what caused it at least to me; some argued it was algae causing toxicity (how?).
One day something magic happened – a protein skimmer came on the market. It was air driven and the bubbles travelled in the same direction as the flow of seawater, so contact time wasn’t brilliant. It worked though and the tank wipe-out became a thing of the past. So it seems dissolved organic matter could have had something to do with the wipe-out? Perhaps so.
Improvements continued in small ways, such as the under-gravel filter had its seawater flow reversed. In other words, instead of seawater being pumped down under the sand and then up through it, the seawater travelled down through the sand and then came up tubes. This lowered the under-gravel’s major problem which was the accumulation of detritus which could seriously reduce effectiveness because of less seawater flow, but it didn’t cure it.
Things moved on and gathered pace – as the marine hobby grew in popularity so more and more manufacturers recognized the potential market. Manufacturers are of course in competition so products became better. An example of this was (and is) the canister filter which had been in use in the freshwater world for many a year. This moved to marines and many bio-medias appeared, one of the best being sintered glass (this is the bio method I used, and still used until recently).
So here we are today. The hobby is at a point that would have made aquarists such as Mr. Straughan gasp in amazement. The fish we keep are so varied. Then the corals, what can be said? With a combination of both the captive reef is born.
In comparison to those early days we have a much easier life, even compared to when I began with marines. This is based on knowledge not necessarily in the grasp of aquarists but with manufacturers who are able to produce so much advanced equipment to maintain seawater quality. Lighting too, there are many choices of bulb or fluorescent tube tailored for corals, whose light requirements in those early days were unknown. Protein skimmers are mainly no longer air driven but use electricity, with seawater flowing through clouds of tiny bubbles achieving a high contact time. Then all the rest of the equipment available such as calcium reactors, aquarists don’t even have to top up the seawater if they don’t want to, they can use automation. Tap water isn’t good enough; we can super filter it with a reverse osmosis unit!
So when that beautiful captive reef is watched what a foundation it is built on. We have a great deal to thank those early pioneer aquarists for. The stress we modern aquarists feel from time to time really shrinks in comparison to the efforts, stress and frustration that must have existed then.
Reef Loss – Some Very Worrying Information!
July 21, 2009
It seems to me that if captive reef aquarists love their corals it follows that they love the wild coral reefs. Surely so, it’s where the corals, for the most part, came from.
We all know of the threat of global warming – no, don’t switch off, there isn’t yet another lecture coming. As far as coral reefs are concerned the potential increase in sea temperature is a threat to corals. In addition, because the seas are absorbing more carbon dioxide acidification is occurring (acidification means that the pH of the seawater is reducing), which is another threat to corals. If corals are threatened then it is said that fish species or many of them are also threatened.
It underlines the need to treat all imported corals and fish properly and to attempt to cultivate and breed them wherever possible. I’ve said before that along with public aquariums the thousands of home aquariums around the world could become a coral reef ‘seed bank’.
I’m not a scientist but most scientists are agreed on the truth of the global warming threat. When a respected scientist speaks who has a name reasonably well known to aquarists it carries more authority within the hobby. The name is Dr J. Veron (known generally as Charlie for some reason). Owners of the book ‘Aquarium Corals’ by Eric H. Borneman will recognize the name, as the foreword in that book is by him.
The point is that the probable future of wild coral reefs including the Great Barrier Reef has been made available on ‘The Times’ website (‘The Times’ is a highly respected UK newspaper).
The link is to that website and should make interesting but worrying reading for all. Click on the ‘Related Links’ and ‘Coral Bleaching Graphic’ as well (boxed on left-hand side of page), they’re interesting.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6652866.ece
Jellyfish
July 2, 2009
Jellyfish are usually recognized as those squishy things with trailing bits. There are few people with any in depth knowledge, particularly among aquarists. However, they are one of the oldest species in the seas and oceans.
Some jellyfish can be big, some small. Some have short stubby tentacles and others very long ones. Some can be dangerous, a fact well known to Australians.
Most contact with jellyfish is when a visit is made to a public aquarium where special tanks are often set up. Using specific lighting the jellyfish look really alien which attracts children in particular. My own local public aquarium uses actinic lighting to good effect.
Keeping jellyfish in a home aquarium is not unknown but very rare. Some, because of size and/or length of tentacles and/or danger are just unsuitable. Space is another problem, with a reef system there isn’t that much free seawater and a fish only system is usually fully stocked with, er, fish.
Nevertheless, jellyfish are fascinating creatures. The internet is a wonderful information resource and there’s a website that has as much information about jellyfish as anyone could want – species, food, predators, dangers and ‘what if you’re stung’ etc.
Have a look and learn something of these creatures from our seas and oceans:
The Bubble Coral
June 14, 2009
This coral adds to all the differing shapes and colours of corals that could be added to the reef aquarium. It belongs to the stony or hard coral type.
Besides bubble coral other common names are octocoral, bladder and grape coral. The proper name is Plerogyra sinuosa. It is not difficult to obtain and if seen in a store is easily recognized, as the name implies it is covered in inflated fairly large bubbles (or bladders or grapes). On sight the coral appears to be delicate but they are fairly tough. Nevertheless, handling and placement need some care.
The coral is often roundish with the bubbles emerging from the upper surfaces. The bubbles are inflated and it is reported could expand up to around 500%, leaving the wall of the bubble the thickness of one zooxanthellae.* Quite thin then!
The coral is expanded during daylight hours. At night the bubbles retract and tentacles appear which are used for feeding.
As already said some care is needed with handling and placement. Though the coral is tougher than it looks, handling should be minimized (as with all corals) and the chosen place on the reef should not be close to sharp pointed or edged rocks in case of damage to the coral, the bubbles could rub against the adjacent rocks in seawater currents. Ensure the coral is secure; a fall could damage it and lead to infection. The coral can be placed nearly anywhere on the reef as it does not require powerful lighting, however strong lighting does not appear to cause any trouble once acclimatized. A newly purchased coral should not be immediately exposed to very powerful light as they may have been used to low light in the wild and the stronger light could shock and damage it, so it is best to keep overly powerful light off the coral anyway. Reef quality lighting (spectrum) is required because of the zooxanthellae, it could be possible that the size of the bubbles is controlled by it, the lower the lighting strength the larger the bubbles to ensure there is enough light. What does mainly limit potential position is the strength of the seawater current, this should not be strong or the bubbles will be too violently shaken or will not expand to their fullest. The best seawater current strength is low to moderate. A final point on placement – it is capable of extending quite potent sweeper tentacles which could attack and damage adjacent corals, so maintain a good space between it and any neighbours. This is good practice with corals anyway.
The coral is not overly striking in colour as some are; though the colours vary they are not bright. This is not to say the coral is not attractive, it certainly is. It could be green, ivory, cream or white and some have bubbles that have clear colourless narrow stripes on them.
This coral does not present any feeding problems; there isn’t any need for suspension feeding. A small piece of de-frosted fish or similar can be gently placed on the coral and will be taken in, what could be easier? The coral is easy to feed and sometimes is overfed because of it. One feeding every other day, or longer intervals according to experience should suffice.
The bubble coral should not present any difficulty even to a moderately experienced aquarist, provided that seawater quality is high and attention is given to proper placement on the reef with regard to seawater current strength, security and lighting. The coral is yet another variation that Mother Nature has evolved which can be an attractive and interesting addition to a reef aquarium.
(*Reference: Aquarium Corals. Eric H. Borneman)
The first link is to photographs, click on it to enlarge. The second is a short video.
http://www.poppe-images.com/images/search_results.php?keyword_mh=Plerogyra+sinuosa&x=53&y=8
Large Aquarium!
June 5, 2009
Marine aquarists who have a successful system, no matter what the type, fish only or mixed reef, are mainly satisfied. A successful marine system can be stunning to see and this applies not only to aquarists who know ‘what goes on’ but to the uninitiated as well.
Big aquariums are not unusual nowadays. By big I mean really big. Most people have seen them, you know, the ones with the odd black tipped reef shark cruising about! They’re in public aquariums of course.
Home aquariums, though not on the scale as in the last paragraph, can also be big. Myself, I see ‘big’ as 6ft x 2ft x 2ft, but this size is not uncommon. Nowadays it goes considerably beyond that.
The link is to a video featuring an aquarium more than twice the length of the above. The measurements of the display aquarium are 13ft x 3ft x 2.5ft. Linked to the main aquarium are two others, a sump and a refugium. The sump measures 6ft x 5ft x 2ft, and the refugium 5ft x 1.5ft x 1.5ft. Some size system!
I’m too lazy to work out the seawater gallonage, but routine seawater change time must be quite something, somewhat more than a 5 gallon bucket!
There’s a lot of fish to be seen and some of them are quite big, however with an attached sump and refugium of those sizes the seawater quality should be high.
Many aquarists idly dream about a larger system, but the owner of this one didn’t mess about.
The Pulse Coral
May 25, 2009
The pulse coral belongs to the soft corals and is well known. It is often seen in local fish shops and though often at a higher price than many other soft corals, is not out of the reach of most aquarists.
These corals are attractive in general, but the main attraction is the pulsing of the polyps, they rhythmically open and close. There has been considerable argument over why this should be, and the most obvious answer held sway for quite a long time. This answer was that by pulsing the coral drew suspended food particles to it so that they could be captured. Watching the coral’s action this seems reasonable. However, the latest thinking that I am aware of is that the pulsing is to obtain more oxygen, in other words a breathing movement, more seawater is passed across the polyps thus more oxygen becomes available. Some aquarists automatically dismiss this as it is compared to the similarity of human breathing. Several authorities support the ‘breathing’ reason. I am not able to state the scientifically proven correct answer. Perhaps there will be scientific enquiry into the coral and facts will emerge. If they already have I’d be pleased to know.
Anyway, the attractive coral is upgraded to fascinating by the pulsing of the polyps. Sometimes in an aquarium the polyps cease to pulse, or only pulse weakly. Again, at least to me a definitive answer as to why this should be is not known. There has been argument, some saying that in an aquarium iodine is likely to be lacking and this causes it. However, some have measured for iodine and found it present at a correct level yet there isn’t any pulsing. Others have suggested that the aquarium may have saturation levels of oxygen and there isn’t a need for pulsing. The latter one could have some merit if the coral’s reason for pulsing is related to oxygen. (The respiration reason for pulsing is cited in some respected books.) Another reason suggested is that there is excessive nitrate in the seawater. If the polyps reduce their pulsing action nitrate is easily checked for, but unfortunately there doesn’t seem to have been any feedback from aquarists on this point (to my knowledge). Again perhaps science will come to our aid one day. The good thing is that even if the pulsing does reduce or cease, the coral does not seem to decline and remains attractive.
Pulse coral is the major common name, Xenia elongata or Xenia umbellata the proper ones (two separate types). There are other pulsing corals. They are suitable of course for a reef aquarium. The coral has a thick ‘trunk’ which leads to many ‘branches’, which in turn split off and lead to many polyps. The coral attaches to rock. It is important that the coral receives sufficient light as the flesh contains zooxanthellae which supply the majority of the coral’s food requirements. Ensure the light reaching the coral is direct and bright. Seawater movement should be moderate. Excessive seawater movement will have a detrimental effect.
The pulse corals are not difficult to keep and do well in an aquarium, provided of course that seawater quality is high and lighting is adequate. Placement seems to be one key to success (as with many other types), this could be a little problematic as placing the coral higher up the reef should provide sufficient light but perhaps too much seawater movement. When placed, watch the coral, does it expand properly and does the expanded coral look comfortable, that is not banging about in the current? It is easy to see when things are fine.
Having a pulse coral in the aquarium certainly adds to interest to state the least. If the pulsing action reduces or ceases, first be sure there isn’t excessive seawater movement. Then check for nitrate, if the level has increased reduce it by increasing the amount of routine seawater changes, at least temporarily. Investigate the reason for the nitrate increase and correct it. (The guideline for nitrate in a reef aquarium is 10ppm or less.) As a final check, all else having proved not to be the reason, check the seawater oxygen level, perhaps the seawater is carrying the maximum? Overall though, this coral should give little trouble.
The link below will give further information and photographs, just scroll down the page, lower down is a picture of a coral in action.
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-02/ac/feature/index.php
The Best Of Both Worlds?
May 11, 2009
The reef aquarium is the most popular within the marine hobby and there are considerable numbers of aquarists who keep fish only systems. I don’t know what the actual ratio is.
Keeping either type is fascinating and has advantages, the reef system with its beautiful corals and fish, or the fish only with larger fish or numbers. The reef system attracts because of the mixture of livestock and the fish only because fish that are predatory and/or larger and/or reef unfriendly can be kept.
A comment was made a good while ago in discussion about the different marine systems – I think it was at the local fish shop over coffee – that it would be terrific if both types could be kept. Well, of course they can however there is a larger demand on space. Two aquariums are required and maybe two sumps to go with them.
As the discussion developed the suggestion was made that perhaps the two types could be kept in one aquarium. ‘Err, how is that done then?’ was the general comment. The answer was to divide the aquarium down the middle front to back. It wouldn’t cost much, just some silicone sealant and a sheet of glass. It would be easier to do at the setting up stage, though with considerable upheaval it could be done later. It was agreed that a sump would be very desirable to increase the net gallonage of the total system, and the sump should be as large and as deep as possible.
The discussion was becoming quite excited as the idea was expanded.
The lighting and seawater circulation was sorted out, the lighting being suitable for a reef on the reef side and reduced lighting on the fish only side, understandably enough. The sump which was nearly as long and as wide as the display aquarium would contain a deep sand bed and all the heating equipment plus a protein skimmer. There would be two seawater return pumps in the sump for each side of the display aquarium.
The necessary size of the display aquarium caused some head scratching. ‘As big as possible’ was obvious, but what would be the minimum size? If too small the reef would not be very extensive, though it has to be remembered that there are some really good and interesting nano systems about. The size of the fish only side would dictate the type of fish that could be kept. Butterfly fish would be my choice and so about three feet. It was decided that six feet would be pretty good with four feet about the minimum.
Some paper was scrounged and the basic system laid out, it looked pretty impressive with the equipment shown plus overflows for seawater etc.
Two of us weren’t convinced. A bell was ringing in my head, ‘something wrong’. I stared at the paper and then it struck me. I said ‘I think we need three more items.’ This got attention, and feeling rather guilty I said the extra equipment would be another protein skimmer, another heater and another sheet of glass.’ The other aquarist who wasn’t convinced smiled and nodded. I went on that the extra sheet of glass would be to divide the sump so that in effect there were two, the extra heater and protein skimmer would go in the side of the sump that didn’t already have them. There was some realization of what I was getting at, but not overall.
I pointed out that the idea had effectively been made into two systems and the reason was that one thing had been overlooked, this was seawater quality. If the reef and fish only were combined within the sump then the seawater of each would mix. Fish only systems usually are more heavily stocked thus requiring more feeding, which in turn causes an increase in pollutants, the obvious ones being nitrate and phosphate. The seawater quality would reduce for the reef, though probably that in the fish only could be enhanced. Seawater quality is the number one requirement for both systems, with the reef requiring the highest quality.
The system with the extras would work, provided the aquarist had an aquarium big enough – meaning provided there was enough space available. It would certainly be pretty impressive and different. There wouldn’t be many aquarists though who would be willing to reduce the overall reef or fish only display. It was agreed that the way to ensure ongoing top-notch seawater in the original system with an undivided sump would be to increase the gallonage of the routine changes.
The shop owner offered another coffee and a laugh was had. The discussion was great. That’s a big part of the hobby, ideas, discussion and friendship.
Recent Comments