Biological question

[Saadatski]

I realized this one day. Since Anemones sting, and Clownfish have adapted to having scales that are impervious to the sting, they have built a symbiotic relationship.

Now, the Anemone gives protection to the clowns, and the clown feeds it. But but the Clown basically can just free load off of the Amemone and not feed it because the anemone cant do anything about it. Do you think in a couple 1000 years, Clowns will eventually develop an understanding of this and become a parasitic relationship?

 

[this is me]

Do you think in a couple 1000 years, Clowns will eventually develop an understanding of this and become a parasitic relationship?

Do you really think we have an answer to that?

 

[bradleym]

I don't believe in evolution, but since this is all hypothetical anyway I'll put in my 2 cents.

The clowns benefit from the safety of the anemone. So the bigger the anemone, the more the safety. If the clowns got smart they would realize they should feed them more.

Also, not all anemones will host clowns. So if it became a parasitic relationship, the nems may well change to a "non-hosting" type of sting like most other anemones.

 

[BonsaiNut]

(1) Clownfish scales are not impervious to anemone stings. They have a slime coating that matches that of the anemone. The reason they are always rolling in the anemone is keep themselves covered in slime. If you remove the slime, the clownfish will be eaten by their host.

(2) The primary benefit of clownfish / anemone is not food. It is protection. Anemones with clowns live longer in the wild than anemones without clowns. Clownfish need anemones to survive - in fact it is almost (but not entirely) impossible to find a clown in the wild that is NOT in an anemone.

There are a number of scientific papers on both these subjects if you are interested in reading further.

 

[garygb]

From my understanding, clownfish have a slimcoat that protects them from the anemone's sting, not the scales per se. The clowns definitely offer protection to the anemone by keeping butterfly fish, etc. from making a meal of the anemone. Even without the clownfish feeding the anemone, it is likely that the anemone benefits from clownfish waste in terms of increased food for their zooxanthellae. Studies have shown that anemones grow faster and larger with increasing numbers of clownfish using them as hosts. It behooves the clownfish to fiercely protect it's anemone, and in turn the anemone benefits from the protection and the increased nitrogen. It's speculative, but the movements of the clownfish may also benefit the anemone and stimulate it in beneficial ways.

 

[BonsaiNut]

I don't believe in evolution,

Bradley! Where are you going with this?! You own an aquarium and don't believe in evolution? I guess you don't believe in dogs? I'm not flaming you but I have heard of people saying this but never yet met one

 

[Rippinfrags]

My .02 cents: no I do not believe a parasitic relationship will ever come to be! Why would a clownfish neglect his/her home? Furthermore, from my understanding, anemones don't need help catching food and they acquire most of their food from sunlight. If anything I foresee anemones doing away with clownfish!haha jk!

 

[bradleym]

Bradley! Where are you going with this?! You own an aquarium and don't believe in evolution? I guess you don't believe in dogs? I'm not flaming you but I have heard of people saying this but never yet met one

Well, I didn't post here to start a debate, but basically, I have read enough debates from both sides to convince me the theory of evolution is still a THEORY because the irrefutable proof for it is based on assumptions that fill the gaps rather than complete and solid archeological evidence.

 

[125mph]

Clowns feed the anemone so that the anemone can live, grow, and protect them. If the clown doesn't feed the anemone and he dies, where will the clown go?.. Anemones are not plentiful to find in the wild.. It doesn't make sense for the clown to be a freeloader!

 

[garygb]

125mph, actually the vast majority of the nutrition an anemone needs is provided by the zooxanthellae. The clowns supplement that, but aren't responsible for most of the anemone's nutrition. And, many of the host species exist in huge numbers in the wild. I'm not aware of any that are endangered. In some locations, perhaps their numbers have been depleted, but in many locations they extremely numerous.

 

[deangelr]

The things clownfish eat in the wild are extremely small.. pods, other tiny crustaceans
and plankton.. Clownfish may or may not provide additional food to their host anemones in the wild, so far the behavior has not been observed.

 

[BonsaiNut]

Well, I didn't post here to start a debate, but basically, I have read enough debates from both sides to convince me the theory of evolution is still a THEORY because the irrefutable proof for it is based on assumptions that fill the gaps rather than complete and solid archeological evidence.

Hmmm... well I see evolution around me all day so I am always a little confused when people talk about "theory". To me it's like saying "the theory of sunlight is that it lights the Earth - but some people are not entirely convinced."

Certainly if you have seen any breed of domesticated animal, you have witnessed evolution. Chihuahuas and Great Danes all "evolved" from the same basic stock - and yet the breeds are only a couple of hundred years old.

Human evolution is as simple to witness. Are NBA players taller than average humans? No one would argue "no". Do NBA players on average have children taller than average? Of course. If playing basketball was a life-critical task, in that only good players got to survive or reproduce, would you expect that humans would get taller over time? Naturally.

I'm not sure where the great mystery in all of this is, unless some people have trouble with the logical leap of scale - i.e. if we see these kinds of changes in a couple of hundred years, imagine the changes we could see in a couple of hundred MILLION years

Hence clownfish (Like how I looped back to the subject of this thread?) Anemones are very old creatures (in the scope of Earth's history) and have been around for more than 6000 years (obscure Internet meme reference). Fish are younger. At some point, fish started hanging out around anemones and it was a positive experience. Some fish got closer and closer and "learned" that if they rubbed against the anemone they developed a slime coating that made them immune. Those fish lived longer, and had more offspring, than other related fish. You can even see this in "real time" because there are fish that hang out close to anemones for protection, but do not bathe in tentacles in the same way clowns do. Evolution.

 

[bradleym]

Hmmm... well I see evolution around me all day so I am always a little confused when people talk about "theory". To me it's like saying "the theory of sunlight is that it lights the Earth - but some people are not entirely convinced."

Certainly if you have seen any breed of domesticated animal, you have witnessed evolution. Chihuahuas and Great Danes all "evolved" from the same basic stock - and yet the breeds are only a couple of hundred years old.

Human evolution is as simple to witness. Are NBA players taller than average humans? No one would argue "no". Do NBA players on average have children taller than average? Of course. If playing basketball was a life-critical task, in that only good players got to survive or reproduce, would you expect that humans would get taller over time? Naturally.

I'm not sure where the great mystery in all of this is, unless some people have trouble with the logical leap of scale - i.e. if we see these kinds of changes in a couple of hundred years, imagine the changes we could see in a couple of hundred MILLION years

Hence clownfish (Like how I looped back to the subject of this thread?) Anemones are very old creatures (in the scope of Earth's history) and have been around for more than 6000 years (obscure Internet meme reference). Fish are younger. At some point, fish started hanging out around anemones and it was a positive experience. Some fish got closer and closer and "learned" that if they rubbed against the anemone they developed a slime coating that made them immune. Those fish lived longer, and had more offspring, than other related fish. You can even see this in "real time" because there are fish that hang out close to anemones for protection, but do not bathe in tentacles in the same way clowns do. Evolution.

This is called "adaptation" and I agree fully with that. Where I have trouble is filling the gap between species. The "theory" is that adaptation can cause the spontaneous production of completely unheard-of characteristics appearing to better suit the environment, i.e. wings instead of arms, or fins instead of tentacles, in this case.

I just can't picture Micheal Jordan growing feathers for a better jump shot.

 

[deangelr]

Characteristics do not spontaneously appear. They always are slight modifications of previously existing stuctures.. Over time the accumulation of changes can appear drastic..

 

[bradleym]

Characteristics do not spontaneously appear. They always are slight modifications of previously existing stuctures.. Over time the accumulation of changes can appear drastic..

Right, that's the assumed part. We've never seen it.

From here on out, if anyone else wants to "prove me wrong," please do it in another thread or a PM. Sorry for the derail OP, I never meant for this to happen.

 

[Saadatski]

OMG shut up!

if you would like to have a debate over Evolution, please do not do it here and get my thread locked!

I see now, i guess this shows how nature is so beautiful and smart.

 

[BonsaiNut]

OMG shut up!

Nice. I thought we were having a fun conversation here. I thought YOU were the one who started with the whole "clownfish adaptation" part. Up to this point, I thought everyone was being civil.

 

[m2434]

(1) Clownfish scales are not impervious to anemone stings. They have a slime coating that matches that of the anemone. The reason they are always rolling in the anemone is keep themselves covered in slime. If you remove the slime, the clownfish will be eaten by their host.

(2) The primary benefit of clownfish / anemone is not food. It is protection. Anemones with clowns live longer in the wild than anemones without clowns. Clownfish need anemones to survive - in fact it is almost (but not entirely) impossible to find a clown in the wild that is NOT in an anemone.

There are a number of scientific papers on both these subjects if you are interested in reading further.

Ding, ding, ding! In the wild many types of nems die within days, due to predation if their resident clowns die.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[m2434]

125mph, actually the vast majority of the nutrition an anemone needs is provided by the zooxanthellae. The clowns supplement that, but aren't responsible for most of the anemone's nutrition. And, many of the host species exist in huge numbers in the wild. I'm not aware of any that are endangered. In some locations, perhaps their numbers have been depleted, but in many locations they extremely numerous.

What is this 1970? Zooxanthellae mostly only provides carbon for energy. Most other nutrients come from feeding. So, as a lot more nutrients than carbon are required, the "majority" of nutrients comes from food.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BonsaiNut]

What is this 1970? Zooxanthellae mostly only provides carbon for energy. Most other nutrients come from feeding. So, as a lot more nutrients than carbon are required, the "majority" of nutrients comes from food.

First, I think your emphasis is misplaced. Photosynthate provided by zooxanthellae is rich in energy, though lacking in nitrogen and phosphorus. Therefore a majority of energy for zooxanthellate anemones CAN be provided by symbiotic algae - as has been seen in studies on zooxanthellate anemones kept in "starved" and "fed" conditions.

Additionally, it depends on your definition of "food" and whether this includes uptake of dissolved organic matter (DOM) from the water, absorption of organic matter from clownfish, etc. Keeping the discussion to aquariums, does food only mean supplemental direct feeding?

I will agree that clown anemones cannot be kept without ANY nutrients to supplement the photosynthate provided by zooxanthellae. In fact, if denied phosphorous and nitrogen, the zooxanthellae themselves begin to suffer and will eventually starve. But the question is whether or not these need to be ACTIVELY provided in a closed system. There are plenty of examples of anemones growing from small size to quite large without any supplemental feeding beyond that which occurs "passively" in a reef environment. Perhaps you think I'm splitting hairs here, but I think many people feel that if they aren't feeding their anemone a shrimp twice a week, it is going to keel over.

I believe that this helps explain how you can supplementally feed an anemone, and it will grow quickly (all other environmental conditions being kept optimal), but you can stop supplementally feeding it, and it will grow slowly, or stop growing, but rarely will it starve outright - as long as it is kept in a healthy reef environment.

Everything I have said above assumes clown anemones. Certainly there are non-zooxanthellate anemones that are wholly dependent on active food capture. Likewise there are other zooxanthellate anemones that are more reliant on their symbiotic algae than clown anemones - including fire anemones that have almost lost the ability to actively capture prey and whose strong sting is actually a protective mechanism. There are numerous anemone-like creatures (zooanthids, corallimorphs) that obtain the majority of their energy via photosynthate and passive nutritient uptake. I don't think anyone would argue that Ricordea need to capture sea critters in order to grow and thrive - though they will still do so if given the chance.

By the way thanks for the discussion - I enjoy it