Biological question

[Saadatski]

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.

Yes i started the thread on the adaptation of clown fish, not a discussion on evolution. Whatever anyone may believe, whether its evolution or creation, that has nothing to do with the title. I said maybe in a long time, the ADAPTATION of the species will change the relationship, not that it will evolve into a different species.

Everyone is being civl, actually except for you. Your very fake, sarcastic political statements are not helping the question. Most people would have ignored the statement the other poster said about evolution, and it was your mistake to jump on this statement and slightly offend him. Please, this thread is supposed to be for educational purposes, as im not asking for a debate or multiple points of view. I am merely asking WHY a clown fish doesn't do that. There are only facts here, not many opinion.

Im sorry about that. I want everyone to enjoy the thread.

 

[deangelr]

Yes i started the thread on the adaptation of clown fish, not a discussion on evolution. Whatever anyone may believe, whether its evolution or creation, that has nothing to do with the title. I said maybe in a long time, the ADAPTATION of the species will change the relationship, not that it will evolve into a different species.

Everyone is being civl, actually except for you. Your very fake, sarcastic political statements are not helping the question. Most people would have ignored the statement the other poster said about evolution, and it was your mistake to jump on this statement and slightly offend him. Please, this thread is supposed to be for educational purposes, as im not asking for a debate or multiple points of view. I am merely asking WHY a clown fish doesn't do that. There are only facts here, not many opinion.

Im sorry about that. I want everyone to enjoy the thread.

Are you serious? calm down.. Evolution will naturally come up when you are talking about the collections of adaptations over time.. As far as I am concerned that is evolution.. If you are asking hypothetical questions about how species will change in 1000's of years.. oh nevermind..


Comments like "shut up" and this "Your very fake, sarcastic political statements " are rediculous.. You are obviously still learning how to get along in the social world.. it will come dont worry..

 

[m2434]

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

Yes, passive feeding is fine. Actually, as an interesting tidbit, I don't believe any marine biologist has documented a clownfish feeding an anemone in nature.

Due to low phosphate, nitrate, amino acids etc.. The zoox nem still needs to get nutrients from other sources to utilize much of the carbon from the zoox. As you mentioned however, this could certainly be passive.

The emphasis was really more to shift the discussion a bit though. While I have my own opinions on evolution, I realize it's not an argument that will end without the moderators intervention unless people agree to disagree and move on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BonsaiNut]

Yes, passive feeding is fine. Actually, as an interesting tidbit, I don't believe any marine biologist has documented a clownfish feeding an anemone in nature.

Due to low phosphate, nitrate, amino acids etc.. The zoox nem still needs to get nutrients from other sources to utilize much of the carbon from the zoox. As you mentioned however, this could certainly be passive.

The emphasis was really more to shift the discussion a bit though. While I have my own opinions on evolution, I realize it's not an argument that will end without the moderators intervention unless people agree to disagree and move on

Yes, when I was talking about clownfish organics I was talking about waste - not active feeding. Uptake of free amino acids in seawater is an active (energy requiring) process, so it isn't really a "passive" activity on the part of the sea anemone. Rather it is an activity that doesn't require action on the part of the reef keeper

I'm not really all that hung up on evolution; people can believe whatever they want to believe. If people want to believe the world was created yesterday, I certainly can't prove them wrong. I was responding to the THEORY of evolution rather than a belief system. Guess it's the hot topic of the day Moving on...

 

[phender]

In the original post, you start off with an erroneous assumption. Clowns don't feed their anemones in the wild. The anemones may derive nutrition from the clown's feces or a clown may bring back a piece of food to hide it or tear it into smaller pieces, but even in aquariums clowns don't really feed the anemone and the anemone doesn't need the clown to feed it anyway. Clowns protect the anemone and the anemone provides a hiding place for the clown. There doesn't seem to be any driving force for this relationship to change unless the water conditions become such that anemones can no longer survive and clowns would have to become free living.

In any event, the clown would never become a parasite because it doesn't actually feed off of the anemone. The worst it could be would be commensal if the clown stopped protecting (or feeding if you want to go back to the original question) the anemone but still hid in the anemone.

 

[Saadatski]

You are obviously still learning how to get along in the social world.. it will come dont worry..

See now that was just uncalled for. Making a statement like that is just unnecessary in a Reef Forum. I don't even understand how you can derive something like that from what i have said. All i said was that there is no need to talk about such a sensitive topic in a thread like this. All i was asking is for an explanation on WHY the clown fish do that. I did not ask for HOW, so evolution can definitively not apply here. The question was more directed toward the relationship between clown fish and anemones, and i just wanted more details on their relationship and why they have a relationship.

Im not trying to control the thread. I just want people to post without getting ridiculed by others. Of coarse i cannot control what you may post.

 

[elegance coral]

WOW! The original question is asking how an animal may change over a couple thousand years, then the OP gets upset when someone uses the word "evolution". Unbelievable! You can not discuss how an animal may change over long periods of time, while ignoring evolution. It's simply impossible. If one chooses to ignore evolution, or to not believe, then there is no need for the original question. The fish and the anemone would remain exactly as they are today, with absolutely no change in behavior, or appearance.

This could have been such a cool thread. For what it's worth, Deangelr, Bradleym, and BonsaiNut, I think you all handled yourselves very well in this thread. JMHO

 

[m2434]

It's unfortunate that evolution is such a hot topic. I think whether you believe in it or not, is sort of irrelevant, if nothing else, it is a useful modeling technique and worth discussing. Unfortunately it is what it is, but is irrelevant here, as the OPs assumptions about the clownish anemone relationship are incorrect.

BonsaiNut, I think that's true in most systems. Some ULN systems seem to require more "Active" (on the part of the reefkeeper) feeding though. For a while I was keeping a BTA in a ULN system and it never did great. It split and I moved the clone to a more traditional system and it really took off. So, sort of depends on the water chemistry, but mostly I think that's true. They can do well in our systems passively due to the typically, relatively high nutrient composition of the water.

 

[deangelr]

It's unfortunate that evolution is such a hot topic.

^^+1 I wish we could talk about it.. It is something I am as curious and passionate about as clownfish

But best left for other forums.. I guess...

 

[garygb]

m2434 wrote: "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."

Not sure I understand the comment about 1970, but unless evolution has changed things since then (tongue in cheek), I think photosynthesis was and continues to be a primary source of food for host anemones, corals, zooxanthellate species in general. As I had mentioned in my first post, the waste of the anemone fish is how anemones in the wild appear to benefit, with more rapid growth correlated with the number of fish using them as host. The nitrogenous waste from the anemone and from the environment (fish waste and other free nitrogen) feeds the zooxanthellae which produce carbs that the anemone absorbs.

 

[Saadatski]

guys, whether or not i beleive in it, thats not the case, and i never denied its theory. I never said stop talking about it, and its a public thread, you guys can do whatever you want. I just felt bad for the other guy who said he didnt believe in it, and then he got ridiculed by another poster. i just felt bad for him, so i asked you guys to stop.

Im sorry i said shut up, that was completely unprofessional of me.
im sorry i made a comment about your post.

Guys, keep the thread going, as this is a very interesting topic. I would love to hear more about this. just try not to offend anyone and get it locked lol

 

[BonsaiNut]

I just felt bad for the other guy who said he didnt believe in it, and then he got ridiculed by another poster.

Since you're talking about me (again) I'll respond. I didn't ridicule anyone. The post is there for everyone to read. There are smiley faces and comments like "I'm not flaming you". Bradleym knows me - he's seen me around these boards - and if I hurt his feelings or if he felt ridiculed I think he could say something and I would happily apologize. I don't think he needs you to be his mommy.

I disagree with people all the time on this forum. In fact, I like to disagree with people - because a lot of the time I'm wrong and I learn something from it. If all I do is talk to people that I agree with... what's there to learn? So if I try to debate with someone on a topic, it is not personal. It is truly a debate - I want to hear someone else's opinion. I don't appreciate being told to "shut up" by someone I wasn't even talking to.

And no I'm not trying to start a flame war. But dude, you just need to DROP IT!

 

[Saadatski]

considered it dropped.

Ok, so can someone explain how the fish get the slime coating if they have to "roll in the anemone" like someone said? i dont get it, then can other fish do that?

 

[bradleym]

Bradleym knows me - he's seen me around these boards - and if I hurt his feelings or if he felt ridiculed I think he could say something and I would happily apologize.

We're good. :love1: But thanks for saying it all the same.

For the good of the cause, I would like to continue as though I did believe in evolution. There is no way to determine exactly what would happen whether it is fact or not. This is all hypothetical based on what he have in front of us today, and all the posts related to anemone health and the effects of the symbiosis have been very interesting for me to read.

OK, OK I know :deadhorse1:

I think I heard somewhere the slime coating is sugar based and that is somehow related to the way the clown tricks the anemone, but there's gotta be a better voice on that issue, cuz I know NADA.

 

[Saadatski]

I think I heard somewhere the slime coating is sugar based and that is somehow related to the way the clown tricks the anemone, but there's gotta be a better voice on that issue, cuz I know NADA.

would that not make it a symbiotic relationship, because i thought it had to be mutual. If the clown is tricking it, then the anemone doesnt have a choice?

 

[bradleym]

sym·bi·o·sis (smb-ss, -b-)
n. pl. sym·bi·o·ses (-sz)
1. Biology A close, prolonged association between two or more different organisms of different species that may, but does not necessarily, benefit each member.

As far as I can tell, the defining factor is more whether or not there is benefit vs harm. I don't think the "intentional participation" issue is taken into consideration.

From wikipedia:

"The definition of symbiosis is controversial among scientists. Some believe symbiosis should only refer to persistent mutualisms, while others believe it should apply to all types of persistent biological interactions (i.e. mutualistic, commensalistic, or parasitic)."

At this point we are refering to a mutualistic symbiosis. If the clownfish was using the anemone, but not abusing it, we could call it commensal symbiosis, as mentioned earlier. But nobody seems to give a crap if either party knows what's going on.

 

[elegance coral]

m2434 wrote: "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."

Not sure I understand the comment about 1970, but unless evolution has changed things since then (tongue in cheek), I think photosynthesis was and continues to be a primary source of food for host anemones, corals, zooxanthellate species in general. As I had mentioned in my first post, the waste of the anemone fish is how anemones in the wild appear to benefit, with more rapid growth correlated with the number of fish using them as host. The nitrogenous waste from the anemone and from the environment (fish waste and other free nitrogen) feeds the zooxanthellae which produce carbs that the anemone absorbs.

What I think m2434 was trying to say, is that anemones need more than just carbohydrates to survive, grow, and reproduce. They can not survive on photosynthesis alone.

 

[m2434]

What I think m2434 was trying to say, is that anemones need more than just carbohydrates to survive, grow, and reproduce. They can not survive on photosynthesis alone.

Yes, sorry, it was a lighthearted reference to a change in philosophy in the marine biology world, that started to occur around the early 80s. Led largely by a group of marine biologists, including the pioneer Leonard Muscatine and his colleagues. It started to become clear that inverts such as corals and anemones actually used all those mouths and didn't get all their nutrients form symbiosis as previously assumed. Actually, it has been shown that really zoox primarily only provides sugars (which are not considered nutrients) and is fairly deficient in most required nutrients. Although, for some reason, this concept hasn't caught on as much in the reef hobby world, probably because our closed systems have such high nutrient levels (although this belief likely also explains why some start to have such troubles with carbon dosing and lower nutrient levels).

Also, FWIW, here is an article on anemone feeding.
http://www.coralmagazine-us.com/content/anemone-feeding

 

[BonsaiNut]

would that not make it a symbiotic relationship, because i thought it had to be mutual. If the clown is tricking it, then the anemone doesnt have a choice?

I don't think free choice has anything to do with it. If both parties benefit, it is considered symbiotic.

Interestingly, the other important symbiotic relationship here is that between clown anemones and their zooxanthellae. Under certain conditions, zooxanthellae can actually become parasitic - i.e. it starts to absorb energy from the anemone instead of generate energy for it. When this happens, the zooxanthellae is actively expelled (the anemone bleaches). Anemones can bleach for other reasons as well - this is just a case where symbiosis can be ended when conditions change and one party kicks the other one out The zooxanthellae here doesn't have any say in the matter - it is just going along for the ride

 

[BonsaiNut]

Actually, it has been shown that really zoox primarily only provides sugars (which are not considered nutrients) and is fairly deficient in most required nutrients.

It isn't exactly the same, but I like to think of hydroponics and plants. Plants cannot live in distilled water. They need nutrients that cannot be provided by photosynthesis alone. Therefore hydroponics require nutrient solutions that include calcium, magnesium, and potassium (typically in cation form) and nitrogen, sulfur and phosphorous (typically in anion form). Combined with photosynthesis, these nutrients provide a complete "diet" for plants.

In the case of zooxanthellate anemones (anemones with symbiotic algae), nutrients can be absorbed from the water around the anemone, can consist of uptake of small food particles including detritus, waste from clowns, etc, or can consist of large food particles like captured fish. In the case of high nutrient water with lots of floating food particles (like many reef tanks) the later MAY NOT be necessary. But that doesn't mean that an anemone isn't "eating" - you just can't see it happening.

(ok the hydroponic analogy is a little weak because plants versus animals - but it directionally illustrates the point)