Bubble without bones

[thecoralreefer]

I have just had a Bubble and a small Lobo leave thier skeleton.
I do believe that this occurs when the algae have taken over and
this causes the animal to be evicted. ?
I found the body and it does respond to light and coverage.
So
It is alive ???
Will it grow new bones eventually???
Same with the Lobo but it has not completely detached. So I know that will take back the skeleton, sometimes

I really need some help on this issue. Please.

 

[elegance coral]

The bubble coral will not survive. It may appear well for quite some time, but it will never grow a new skeleton and continue life. The lobo will not survive unless you make some major changes to your system, or better yet, move it to another system. It sounds to me like you have a major phosphate issue. These problems can take a long time to fix. Your lobo probably doesn't have that much time.

 

[Sk8r]

This is called polyp bailout. I do have some who HAVE grown new skeleton, after being stressed: one frog and two hammer pieces. Look at my sig, imitate those parameters, and drip kalk to supply calcium. You can also help one survive by getting a clear glass shallow bowl that will prevent it from being blown under the rockwork, putting a little sand under it, and just letting it be in the light. My re-grows have both started to divide again, having gone from one popped head to 2 and then 4.

 

[elegance coral]

This is called polyp bailout. I do have some who HAVE grown new skeleton, after being stressed: one frog and two hammer pieces. Look at my sig, imitate those parameters, and drip kalk to supply calcium. You can also help one survive by getting a clear glass shallow bowl that will prevent it from being blown under the rockwork, putting a little sand under it, and just letting it be in the light. My re-grows have both started to divide again, having gone from one popped head to 2 and then 4.

Did you take any pic's, or document the growth of the new skeletons in a thread, or anything like that?

Did the polyps simply bail out due to health, or water quality issues, or was it caused by physical damage?

Corals build their skeletons by concentrating calcium, carbonates, and other trace elements in a very thin layer between the polyp and skeleton. When something interfere with this process, like high phosphate levels, the polyp may bail out. At this point, how can the polyp concentrate these elements when the area needed to accomplish this task is now open and exposed to the water of the tank?

 

[syrinx]

I have to agree with sk8r- i have seen it happen many times over the years- considered it common knowledge. Many times the animal will perish- generally due to the stress that caused the bail out to occour,but I even think I have seen it happen with elegance before. I will have to speak on that with my old partners. I know for a fact though all of the branching ham,frog,torch,caulstrea,and trachs will regrow skeleton. Takes a good bit of time and luck avoiding infection or damage of the polyp.

 

[elegance coral]

I have to agree with sk8r- i have seen it happen many times over the years- considered it common knowledge. Many times the animal will perish- generally due to the stress that caused the bail out to occour,but I even think I have seen it happen with elegance before. I will have to speak on that with my old partners. I know for a fact though all of the branching ham,frog,torch,caulstrea,and trachs will regrow skeleton. Takes a good bit of time and luck avoiding infection or damage of the polyp.

Any photos, any documentation of any kind? Maybe a link to a scientific study that supports this idea?????

 

[syrinx]

Nope- never saw the need for it. Still don`t really- outside of lab conditions and documenting its still anecdotal. If your interested look it up- I am sure fenner,calfo,and sprung all have commented on it before. I do know the last one I saw was a trach open brain with the elegance triangle style skel- the lady still has it- but it has a new skel now. I can check to see if she had taken any fotos while it was off- but then I would imagine there would be all the CSI about "oh thats a diffrent one".

 

[syrinx]

and to further blow your mind, often when the bail happens,months later a new baby will grow from the "dead " skeleton. I havent read this- but it might help-


-
"There is certainly plenty of reason and academic research to support the notion that polyp bail out is a response to stress (and method of asexual reproduction). Polyp bail out is when the soft tissue of a polyp detaches and drops out of the coral skeleton. If conditions are right, these dropped polyps will form new skeleton, and ultimately new colonies. (see "Polyp Bail-Out: An Escape Response to Environmental Stress and a New Means of Reproduction in Corals" by Paul W. Sammarco, published in Marine Ecology, Vol. 10: 57-65, 1982)."

 

[elegance coral]

Nope- never saw the need for it. Still don`t really- outside of lab conditions and documenting its still anecdotal. If your interested look it up-

"look it up" ???? I've been studying this stuff for 25 years. I believe you could say I've looked it up.

I am sure fenner,calfo,and sprung all have commented on it before.

Maybe look beyond aquarium authors to find factual information. Calfo is the one that made false claims of his abilities to propagate all ten host anemones by fragmentation. Aquarium authors make a living by getting people to listen to them. That surely doesn't mean that what they say is true, or that there is any known scientific fact to back them up.

 

[elegance coral]

and to further blow your mind, often when the bail happens,months later a new baby will grow from the "dead " skeleton. I havent read this- but it might help-

That doesn't "blow my mind". It's relatively common, especially in plate corals, for tissue to grow from seemingly dead skeletons. As long as the tissue is still attached to the skeleton, even a tiny portion of tissue can begin to regrow.

"There is certainly plenty of reason and academic research to support the notion that polyp bail out is a response to stress (and method of asexual reproduction). Polyp bail out is when the soft tissue of a polyp detaches and drops out of the coral skeleton. If conditions are right, these dropped polyps will form new skeleton, and ultimately new colonies. (see "Polyp Bail-Out: An Escape Response to Environmental Stress and a New Means of Reproduction in Corals" by Paul W. Sammarco, published in Marine Ecology, Vol. 10: 57-65, 1982)."

Here's a link to the article.
http://www.int-res.com/articles/meps/10/m010p057.pdf

I'm very familiar with this article. You may want to read it too. Comparing the processes taking place in this study to those in this thread is like comparing apples and oranges. They're completely different.

This study was done on Seriatopora hystrix (Birds nest coral). The coral divided into individule polyps while still on the skeleton. A process that did not take place with the OP's coral. In the study, the polyps seemed to go through a metamorphosis where the tentacles were no longer visible, and the polyps became "minute planula-like, non-ciliated bodies". These "planula-like" animals developed the ability of locomotion, and produced filaments used for settlement to solid surfaces. In these larger polyped corals, none of this takes place. The polyp goes through no metamorphosis, and does not attach to a solid surface. Without attaching to a solid surface, the animal is unable to produce a calcium carbonate skeleton. Corals concentrate elements in a thin layer between the polyp and its skeleton. This is how calcification takes place. When this area of the polyp is no longer attached to a solid surface, these elements can no longer be concentrated. They are simply diluted in the water around it. Stony corals MUST be attached to a solid surface for calcification to take place.

 

[syrinx]

As I said I did not read it. I am not going to defend this further- its common knowledge on a reef thread- not defending a doctorial thesis. Science often lags behind high tech hobbies, this is not uncommon. I do suggext you look at dick perins experiences- maybe check out eric bornmans polyp bailout articl on frogspawn. Maybe later I will do spme legwork for you- but its time to get paid for what to you is a hobby.

 

[Sharpie_]

...dick perins ....

I totally thought you were calling him {language deleted}


Back on topic:

I have seen bailout happen once in a small tank of mine that I neglected, the high phosphates I assume were the cause for the detachment. The polyps, despite being moved to a very healthy system perished.

 

[syrinx]

I totally thought you were calling him [language].


Back on topic:

I have seen bailout happen once in a small tank of mine that I neglected, the high phosphates I assume were the cause for the detachment. The polyps, despite being moved to a very healthy system perished.

too funny (the name) reminds me of when a wholsaler named dennis had called for me while I was out. The girl the took the message wrote "Denis called" in a real flowery script that looked like what you mistook.....

 

[syrinx]

"look it up" ???? I've been studying this stuff for 25 years. I believe you could say I've looked it up.



Maybe look beyond aquarium authors to find factual information. Calfo is the one that made false claims of his abilities to propagate all ten host anemones by fragmentation. Aquarium authors make a living by getting people to listen to them. That surely doesn't mean that what they say is true, or that there is any known scientific fact to back them up.

I don`t look to aquarium author for my information on this- I have seen it with my eyes. I don`t mind you calling myself,sk8r,dick perrin,bornman, and others liars-thats fine. Things exist without the benifit of scientific study, and they don`t cease to exist because science does make a study saying otherwise. We know what we know scientifically to be the facts until proven otherwise- which happens on a daily basis. I know you have worked hard on several aspects of study in the hobby- and you are a reasonable person- but you need to back off on the attitude on this one. Its not like the anemone butchering you guys have all lost your purse about. Are you going to demand a published bibliography from every poster commenting on their experiences from now on?

 

[syrinx]

I was incorrect about it being bornmans article on frogspawn- his are on other corals- this is exerpt of one on dicks.

Support for this latter hypothesis comes from the third type of asexual reproduction that I have witnessed in Euphyllia corals. In this type of reproduction, which I first observed at Dick Perrin's Tropicorium, miniature polyps of a large colony of Frogspawn Coral were "ejected" when the coral was gently agitated. These daughters then sealed off and settled to the bottom, where they attached to the substrate. After several weeks they began to excrete a skeleton and a new colony was started. This latter mode of reproduction appeared to produce the most offspring; Dick reported that this colony produced two or three new daughters every day. Unfortunately, he also said that the survival rate was not high because the current in these tanks often moved these daughters onto other corals where they were stung and killed.

 

[Sk8r]

Let me get a photo for you. I have the corals in question in my tank. I almost traded the frog off this last weekend, but decided against it, because I thought it was a bit of a curiosity. I've got 2 hammer frags as well. I've got my long sleeves on right now, and need some help to arrange the shot, with one hand for the camera, so it may take me a bit to organize it, but I'll try to get a good photo.

 

[greenbean36191]

As long as the coral has intact desmocytes and a calm place to settle, I don't see why it wouldn't, at least in theory, be able to build a new skeleton. In fact, Fine and Tchernov have shown that at least two species can resume building skeletons after their old skeletons have been dissolved completely away- though in their case the polyps remained attached to the substate at all times as their skeletons were slowly dissolved out from beneath them.

There's no hermetic seal between a coral and its skeleton. The skeleton is porous, so the calicoblastic fluid is in direct contact with seawater whether the coral is still in its old calyx or starting a new one. The Ca and CO3 ions don't immediately float away and get diluted because they're secreted into the boundary layer- the film of stagnant water that surrounds every surface in an aquarium and inhibits diffusion. As long as the coral has the ability to pump Ca and CO3 to increase concentrations within the boundary layer, it can precipitate CaCO3.

If the desmocytes are damaged and it can't precipitate CaCO3 or can't produce the protein filaments used to hold onto the CaCO3 it does precipitate, then it wouldn't be able to build a new skeleton.

 

[elegance coral]

I don`t look to aquarium author for my information on this- I have seen it with my eyes. I don`t mind you calling myself,sk8r,dick perrin,bornman, and others liars-thats fine.

I've called no one on this site a liar.

but you need to back off on the attitude on this one.

I'm not the one with the attitude.

Are you going to demand a published bibliography from every poster commenting on their experiences from now on?

I've asked for no bibliography. Have you read anything I've written in this thread?????? You made statements that I obviously don't agree with, so I asked for any proof you may have to substantiate those statements. You're unable to produce this evidence, so you get upset, you infer that I'm calling people names, and say I have an attitude. It's not my fault that you can't back up the claims you're making.

I was incorrect about it being bornmans article on frogspawn- his are on other corals- this is exerpt of one on dicks.

Support for this latter hypothesis comes from the third type of asexual reproduction that I have witnessed in Euphyllia corals. In this type of reproduction, which I first observed at Dick Perrin's Tropicorium, miniature polyps of a large colony of Frogspawn Coral were "ejected" when the coral was gently agitated. These daughters then sealed off and settled to the bottom, where they attached to the substrate. After several weeks they began to excrete a skeleton and a new colony was started. This latter mode of reproduction appeared to produce the most offspring; Dick reported that this colony produced two or three new daughters every day. Unfortunately, he also said that the survival rate was not high because the current in these tanks often moved these daughters onto other corals where they were stung and killed.

This is the second quote you've posted, believing that in some way it substantiates your claims. It doesn't. You are clearly confused and do not understand whats taking place here. The quote above is referring to "miniature polyps". The OP in this thread is referring to mature, adult polyps. The quote above explains that these "daughter" polyps "attached to the substrate". These adult polyps don't attach to the substrate. They lack the physical ability to do so. Only after they attached to the substrate and after several weeks did these miniature polyps "began to excrete a skeleton and a new colony was started". This has been my point through this whole thread. These corals need to be attached to a suitable substrate in order to produce a skeleton. There are several species of coral that produce tiny polyps, planula, larvae......... that drift or swim off to settle on a suitable substrate, and begin laying down a calcium carbonate skeleton. They always attach to a suitable substrate before they begin laying down calcium carbonate.

Like I said, I've called no one a liar. Claims have been made that large polyps have detached from the skeleton, and gone on to build a new one. In my second post of this thread, the first on after this claim was made, I asked if the original "bail out" was caused by health, water quality, or physical damage. So far, that question has been ignored. If the polyp and/or upper skeleton was physically damaged, or the polyp was somehow able to take a portion of the original skeleton with it when it left, a portion of the area responsible for calcification may have been preserved. In this case, at least theoretically, the polyp would be able to build on what ever skeletal material it has, and grow a new skeleton.

 

[elegance coral]

As long as the coral has intact desmocytes and a calm place to settle, I don't see why it wouldn't, at least in theory, be able to build a new skeleton. In fact, Fine and Tchernov have shown that at least two species can resume building skeletons after their old skeletons have been dissolved completely away- though in their case the polyps remained attached to the substate at all times as their skeletons were slowly dissolved out from beneath them.

.

Do you have a link to this study? I'm a little confused as to how they dissolved the skeleton out from under the coral while the coral remained attached to the substrate.
Off to work
EC

 

[syrinx]

I've called no one on this site a liar.



I'm not the one with the attitude.



I've asked for no bibliography. Have you read anything I've written in this thread?????? You made statements that I obviously don't agree with, so I asked for any proof you may have to substantiate those statements. You're unable to produce this evidence, so you get upset, you infer that I'm calling people names, and say I have an attitude. It's not my fault that you can't back up the claims you're making.




This is the second quote you've posted, believing that in some way it substantiates your claims. It doesn't. You are clearly confused and do not understand whats taking place here. The quote above is referring to "miniature polyps". The OP in this thread is referring to mature, adult polyps. The quote above explains that these "daughter" polyps "attached to the substrate". These adult polyps don't attach to the substrate. They lack the physical ability to do so. Only after they attached to the substrate and after several weeks did these miniature polyps "began to excrete a skeleton and a new colony was started". This has been my point through this whole thread. These corals need to be attached to a suitable substrate in order to produce a skeleton. There are several species of coral that produce tiny polyps, planula, larvae......... that drift or swim off to settle on a suitable substrate, and begin laying down a calcium carbonate skeleton. They always attach to a suitable substrate before they begin laying down calcium carbonate.

Like I said, I've called no one a liar. Claims have been made that large polyps have detached from the skeleton, and gone on to build a new one. In my second post of this thread, the first on after this claim was made, I asked if the original "bail out" was caused by health, water quality, or physical damage. So far, that question has been ignored. If the polyp and/or upper skeleton was physically damaged, or the polyp was somehow able to take a portion of the original skeleton with it when it left, a portion of the area responsible for calcification may have been preserved. In this case, at least theoretically, the polyp would be able to build on what ever skeletal material it has, and grow a new skeleton.

You may be correct that I may have taken your comments too seriously. No hard feelings. I am not confused- just was trying to quickly look for something to apease you.