2 pairs of percular clowns in a 165 gallon aquarium?

[Angel*Fish]

I'm not specifically referring to clowns and perhaps this wasn't the place to express my concern. But if you go back and review the answers they were mostly unequivocal no's, not warnings, culminating in this post below. Taken at face value it could argued that even Bonsai didn't read the FAQ.

Can we create an automatic response bot, so that every time someone asks this same question, over and over, the site automatically responds? This is getting ridiculous.

And before I get flamed for being rude - who is ruder? Me? Or the person who refuses to read the FAQ, do a basic search, or for that matter, read threads that have been posted in the last two days. I mean really - the thread posted three down from this asks the SAME QUESTION! :[

Bonsai, I may be mistaken, but I don't think it's your job to answer any threads ever so why get so bothered? And my answer would be you are being ruder.

 

[Ron Reefman]

I'm not a scientist and I've only been in the hobby about 6-7 years. And it does bother me when even I see some advise given out here as if it were cast in concrete fact but even I know it's not. Example: I have a mated pair of Tomato clowns and Ocellaris clowns in a 180g reef. They did struggle to get settled for a month or so, but are doing fine now. And I have a friend who has also has 2 pairs of mated clowns in his 180g as well. In fact, it was after seeing his tank that I tried it despite the advise I got here from the 'experts'. So I take everything I read and hear with a grain of salt.

 

[velvetelvis]

I'm not a scientist and I've only been in the hobby about 6-7 years. And it does bother me when even I see some advise given out here as if it were cast in concrete fact but even I know it's not. Example: I have a mated pair of Tomato clowns and Ocellaris clowns in a 180g reef. They did struggle to get settled for a month or so, but are doing fine now. And I have a friend who has also has 2 pairs of mated clowns in his 180g as well. In fact, it was after seeing his tank that I tried it despite the advise I got here from the 'experts'. So I take everything I read and hear with a grain of salt.

I think it's unfair to disparage the input of the many experienced aquarists here who offer their advice based on many years of trial and error. They're not trying to be spoilsports or killjoys: they're trying to keep people from making the same costly mistakes that they themselves have often made. I'd be willing to bet that for every lucky reefkeeper who has somehow managed the more-than-two-clowns balancing act, there are many more who have tried it and failed.

 

[Toddrtrex]

I think it's unfair to disparage the input of the many experienced aquarists here who offer their advice based on many years of trial and error. They're not trying to be spoilsports or killjoys: they're trying to keep people from making the same costly mistakes that they themselves have often made. I'd be willing to bet that for every lucky reefkeeper who has somehow managed the more-than-two-clowns balancing act, there are many more who have tried it and failed.

My thoughts exactly. It is posts like "Ron Reefman" that have been making this forum so frustrating lately.

 

[deangelr]

I would most certianly attempt to house two pairs of clownfish in the same tank if I had a tank as large as the one in question here..

for many clownfish keepers this is an exciting and difficult goal

I would also post the question and talk about it here in this forum.. to assume one has a bad attitude or no experience is silly.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I'd be willing to bet that for every lucky reefkeeper who has somehow managed the more-than-two-clowns balancing act, there are many more who have tried it and failed.


IMO, it would be interesting to see actual statistics on such tries, broken down by tank size and species involved, maybe even by the presence or absence of natural host anemones also being present. That sort of info could show what combinations work out more often than not (if any), and which ones do not, and may better inform reefers as to their own chances of success.

 

[deangelr]

What constitutes success? co-habitation for a given period of time? breeding?

that would be a cool project

 

[Toddrtrex]

What constitutes success? co-habitation for a given period of time? breeding?

that would be a cool project

Given that clowns can live 20+ years, I would say spawning, doing so for 5+ years.

 

[deangelr]

Ya I would tend to agree.. although ive heard of clown pairs living in the same tank for 10+ years and not spawning.. in that case i would say success

 

[Toddrtrex]

Ya I would tend to agree.. although ive heard of clown pairs living in the same tank for 10+ years and not spawning.. in that case i would say success

Though I would wonder why they weren't spawning after all that time. I have yet to have a pair not spawn -- the longest being about a year and a half for my pink skunk pair to start.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I would say spawning, doing so for 5+ years.


Well, I would contend that such a high hurdle in a hobbyist survey would also probably indicate that keeping a single pair in a tank fails more often than not. I think the issue is understanding what chances there are of success in keeping two pairs in one tank, filtering out all of the factors that would take out a single pair or keep it from spawning for 5 years in the same tank (tank crashes, power failures, hobbyist quits and sells the tank, clowns sold to get a new coral for the tank, tank is replaced by a larger or smaller tank, eaten by an eel, hounded by other agressive species, anemone dies, etc).

So it might be a good measure of true long term success, but it isn't really answering the question at hand (IMO).

 

[MarineFlake]

will this be ok? 6 ft long by 22 by 24 inches. Would I need two anemones or just one? I want naked clowns and a pair of snowflakes.

To answer your question from personal experience with Ocellaris and Percula, yes it is possible. It was not pretty as in my experience, regardless of initial pairing, clowns seem to re-align themselves when new clowns are added. There is certainly a pecking order and clowns will fight in order to establish this order. It's what wild animals do in a lot of cases. In my case, the 'fighting' resulted in a couple of clowns jumping, the smaller clowns tend to do that. Having multiple BTA's seemed to help with the agression but I would highly recommend placing a top on the tank (I used egg crate) in the event some try to jump. If at all possible, add all the clowns at once. I suspect in such a large tank, that would help a lot in the fish setting up territories. In my case, I added additiona black Oc clowns to a well established pair of perc's.
As you can see from previous posts, people are heavily influenced by what they feel or read, I am only offering what I have personally experienced in my own tank. Best of luck whatever you decide.

 

[Toddrtrex]

I would say spawning, doing so for 5+ years.


Well, I would contend that such a high hurdle in a hobbyist survey would also probably indicate that keeping a single pair in a tank fails more often than not. I think the issue is understanding what chances there are of success in keeping two pairs in one tank, filtering out all of the factors that would take out a single pair or keep it from spawning for 5 years in the same tank (tank crashes, power failures, hobbyist quits and sells the tank, clowns sold to get a new coral for the tank, tank is replaced by a larger or smaller tank, eaten by an eel, hounded by other agressive species, anemone dies, etc).

So it might be a good measure of true long term success, but it isn't really answering the question at hand (IMO).

JMO -- it can't be considered a success if it was only for a year or two and/or if one of the pairs was NOT spawning for any length of time. IME with clowns they get a lot more aggressive with both age and spawning. So, if anyone kept 2 (( or more )) pairs in the same tank for only a year or 2 you are losing two of the huge factors that (( in my experience/opinion )) make keeping more then a pair a huge risk.

In the same light, if someone had kept an anemone for only (( yes only )) a year or 2 I would not consider that a success.

So, IMO, the question at hand can not be considered a success if only 2 years is considered success.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

it can't be considered a success if it was only for a year or two and/or if one of the pairs was NOT spawning for any length of time.

OK, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree since I do not see such a high hurdle being useful for answering the question if, on average, it may not even be true for a single pair, or perhaps not even a single clownfish in a hobbyist tank.

Do we know what the median length of time the average hobbyist has a particular clownfish (or pair, or any other fish type for that matter) in a single tank? I expect that is less than 2 years, for the many reasons described above.

Based on the very strong statements made by many members throughout this thread, a reader would walk away thinking that they quickly fight to the death, leaving only a single pair. That's quite different than saying that they may be there for a year or two as regularly spawning pairs and still not be considered adequately getting along.

FWIW, in my case, they did spawn for several years.

 

[Wolverine]

IMO, it would be interesting to see actual statistics on such tries, broken down by tank size and species involved, maybe even by the presence or absence of natural host anemones also being present. That sort of info could show what combinations work out more often than not (if any), and which ones do not, and may better inform reefers as to their own chances of success.

I agree, but it's extremely difficult to get reliable information of this kind. When I consider this question, I look at the many maintenance tanks I worked on when I worked at an LFS (the maintenance side did a lot better than the store in the time I was there). I did see a few tanks where it worked, but the vast majority of times, mixing clown pairs ended up with at least one pair dying, and this went up to some tanks over 300g. I recognize that there's likely some recall bias there, but it's the tanks where it was working that things stood out. I wasn't really interested in cataloging the tank sizes, etc for specific data. I was just trying to make things in each of those individual tanks work.
For that reason, when I jump into threads about this, I say that it can work, but usually doesn't; with the lack of definite data, I have to go with my experience.

I'm sure someone would be willing (and probably has, at some point) to start a poll about it. The obviously problem there, as has been noticed in many other polls, is the major reporting bias. Those with failures tend to report it less than those with success, for a variety of reasons.

Do we know what the median length of time the average hobbyist has a particular clownfish (or pair, or any other fish type for that matter) in a single tank? I expect that is less than 2 years, for the many reasons described above.

I agree. I'd bet it's less than 1 year, if you count all comers.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The obviously problem there, as has been noticed in many other polls, is the major reporting bias. Those with failures tend to report it less than those with success, for a variety of reasons.

Then, of course, there are those who vote just to support a "side" they like, regardless of having any actual experience.

I did see a few tanks where it worked

Of those that worked, did you recall any predominance toward more peaceful species (like ocellaris), or was it just seemingly random?

 

[Wolverine]

Then, of course, there are those who vote just to support a "side" they like, regardless of having any actual experience.

Also true.

I did see a few tanks where it worked

Of those that worked, did you recall any predominance toward more peaceful species (like ocellaris), or was it just seemingly random?

I would say that most involved ocellaris-type clowns as at least one pair. A few had skunks. There were two I can think of that included maroons as one of the pairs, and one with tomatoes. Of course, here we also have the confounder that ocellaris are much more common overall, so, while I would predict that the odds would be better with those more peaceful fish, I can't say that absolutely.

 

[Toddrtrex]

it can't be considered a success if it was only for a year or two and/or if one of the pairs was NOT spawning for any length of time.

OK, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree since I do not see such a high hurdle being useful for answering the question if, on average, it may not even be true for a single pair, or perhaps not even a single clownfish in a hobbyist tank.

Do we know what the median length of time the average hobbyist has a particular clownfish (or pair, or any other fish type for that matter) in a single tank? I expect that is less than 2 years, for the many reasons described above.

Based on the very strong statements made by many members throughout this thread, a reader would walk away thinking that they quickly fight to the death, leaving only a single pair. That's quite different than saying that they may be there for a year or two as regularly spawning pairs and still not be considered adequately getting along.

FWIW, in my case, they did spawn for several years.

We will, because I won't consider a year or 2 of having 2 pairs or more a success --- just isn't long enough, considering the life spans of clowns.

The obviously problem there, as has been noticed in many other polls, is the major reporting bias. Those with failures tend to report it less than those with success, for a variety of reasons.

Then, of course, there are those who vote just to support a "side" they like, regardless of having any actual experience.

I have never once mis-stated anything that has occurred in my tanks -- what would be the point? ?

Actually, no need to answer.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I didn't mean to claim anyone here misstated anything. For for the utility of a potential poll, I know some folks just like to vote in polls, whether it is meaningful or not. I've had that concern with many chemistry related polls I've run (Like a poll I ran about iron dosing and caulerpa sporulation), where I figured some portion of the responses were just to confound the interpretation, or were voting for what sounded good to them, etc.

 

[velvetelvis]

Then, of course, there are those who vote just to support a "side" they like, regardless of having any actual experience.

Including those who would claim success in keeping more than two clowns long-term whether they actually had or not, just because they resent being told that they shouldn't--not can't, just shouldn't--do something.