Clams under PCs
- Thread starter dustin323
- Start date
jmaneyapanda
Commencing hatred
dustin- you wont get a straight answer on this. Some people say it will be fine, others (like me), say not to try it, because it will very likely fail. With PC's, I dont think the intensity is sufficient.
Farrmanchu
New member
What about a Derasa or Squamosa? I wouldn't try a Crocea, but the browner varieties of Tridacnid may work out.
jmaneyapanda
Commencing hatred
mbbuna- while I certainly agree with you that people too often "self agitate" when they get answers they do not want to hear. But in this case, I really DONT think he will get a straight answer. You know as well as I how many post that they have kept a clam under X watts of PC for 80 years with no problems (or whatever). Do I think this is realistic? Absolutely not. Do I think someone will eventually post that on this thread? Unfortunately, I think it's only a matter of time.
i agree,
my comment wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular.
i look at it this way. Croceas are found in very shallow(20'max,but mostly just a meter or 2), clear water. why arent they found at 30'? is the water too cold down there? too much current? not enough particulate food? or is the light not intense enough for them?
my comment wasn't directed at you or anyone in particular.
i look at it this way. Croceas are found in very shallow(20'max,but mostly just a meter or 2), clear water. why arent they found at 30'? is the water too cold down there? too much current? not enough particulate food? or is the light not intense enough for them?
Here is my crocea clam, which has been under 195w of PC lighting in a 29G tank for the past 6 months. During this time, it has maintained its color and new shell growth is evidient. Is this an act of God, a miracle, or luck........imho no, because there are basic scientific principles on why many have been able to maintain a crocea or maxima under lighting other than MH. And at the same time, there are scientific reasons on why many have failed.
Enough debate from me, this Doctor has said enough.
BTW...........I dont believe PC lighting has been existance for the past 80 years :>O
Enough debate from me, this Doctor has said enough.
BTW...........I dont believe PC lighting has been existance for the past 80 years :>O
jmaneyapanda
Commencing hatred
mbbuna- see, I told you.....
RFC, Please dont take this as an attack, because it is not, and is not intended to be so. I don't think 6 months is an accurate period to proclaim success. From your picture, your clam does look healthy, but we will see what the future will be. If you dont mind, what scientific principle are you practicing that allows you this animal under historically sub-par lights? I cannot imagine any husbandry and physical technique that can be applied to focus intensity of light to create a suitable PAR for such light loving organisms as a clam.
As I said, I am not attacking, or trying to discredit your account- if you are successful, so be it. Good job. But I feel you are simply dodging bullets, and it is a misleading interpretation to entice others to try to keep these animals in sub-optimal conditions.
RFC, Please dont take this as an attack, because it is not, and is not intended to be so. I don't think 6 months is an accurate period to proclaim success. From your picture, your clam does look healthy, but we will see what the future will be. If you dont mind, what scientific principle are you practicing that allows you this animal under historically sub-par lights? I cannot imagine any husbandry and physical technique that can be applied to focus intensity of light to create a suitable PAR for such light loving organisms as a clam.
As I said, I am not attacking, or trying to discredit your account- if you are successful, so be it. Good job. But I feel you are simply dodging bullets, and it is a misleading interpretation to entice others to try to keep these animals in sub-optimal conditions.
:lol: you still don't get it. i don't think any of us have said it CANT be done or it HASENT been done. what we are saying is its NOT a good idea, and that you are more likely to fail when you try to keep a high lighting clam under lights that aren't very intense. so you think everyone should say " you can keep clams under any light"? maybe we should, we could say " it could work, i saw a guy do it once", or i could take the 7 years of experience i have of keeping clams and try to keep people from making the same mistakes i did and try to save some clams.
care to explain these principles? if your going to tell me about CZAR please tell me how your measuring that.
RFC, so youve had the clam for 6 months right :lol:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=7912358#post7912358
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=7912358#post7912358
now look with an open mind, no one is trying to pick on you.
look at your photo of the clam when you first got it. look at the mantle extension
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=7905053#post7905053
now look at it here
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=8341439#post8341439
you even moved it a little higher and its still spreading as wide as it can to get light. now i know from my 7 years of uneducated and scientifically challenged experience with clams that this is a classic sign of a clam not getting the light it needs. i also know that it can take a year or so for a clam to slowly starve to death.
what will likely happen is the Zooxanthellae that the clam has now will not be able to keep up with the growing needs of the clam. with a reduced amount of light the zoox in time will not be able to provide the carbon energy that the clam needs(the zoox will keep it for its self). when this point is reached the clam will start to eat the zoox, but the lighting isn't strong enough for the zoox to reproduce fast enough to repopulate the clam.
many say" ill just add phytoplankton!" sure clams filter feed, but will they eat what you give them? and how much of what you give them will they actually "eat" and not reject? clams have a heterotrophic ability between 10% and 30%+- depending on species. were talking about Croceas right now and that # is about 10%. that doesnt look too good for the clam that has adapted for thousands of years to live off of light to suddenly try to sustain it self by filter feeding. sure it may prolong the inevitable but...
i wish you luck with you Crocea. adding the 65w bulb to your light will help
look at your photo of the clam when you first got it. look at the mantle extension
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=7905053#post7905053
now look at it here
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=8341439#post8341439
you even moved it a little higher and its still spreading as wide as it can to get light. now i know from my 7 years of uneducated and scientifically challenged experience with clams that this is a classic sign of a clam not getting the light it needs. i also know that it can take a year or so for a clam to slowly starve to death.
what will likely happen is the Zooxanthellae that the clam has now will not be able to keep up with the growing needs of the clam. with a reduced amount of light the zoox in time will not be able to provide the carbon energy that the clam needs(the zoox will keep it for its self). when this point is reached the clam will start to eat the zoox, but the lighting isn't strong enough for the zoox to reproduce fast enough to repopulate the clam.
many say" ill just add phytoplankton!" sure clams filter feed, but will they eat what you give them? and how much of what you give them will they actually "eat" and not reject? clams have a heterotrophic ability between 10% and 30%+- depending on species. were talking about Croceas right now and that # is about 10%. that doesnt look too good for the clam that has adapted for thousands of years to live off of light to suddenly try to sustain it self by filter feeding. sure it may prolong the inevitable but...
i wish you luck with you Crocea. adding the 65w bulb to your light will help
ezcompany
Premium Member
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/s...358#post7912358
once again, people are presenting to you facts based on their experiences. like many have said, clams also die a slow long death, and your clam is certainly not evidence for its labeled "good" condition under PC lighting. you even said you're a newbie in this hobby, so why do you have to refuse to accept the words and wisdom of more experienced individuals?
your stubborness and not to mention your conflicting words undermines any and all credentials you boast of having "doctor."
My apologies for being argumentative and insulting. After 10 years of college, I will admit, I am somewhat of an academic snob. I will take all views under advisement and kindly wish all of you the best in your future endeavors.
Regards
RFC
PS... I visited the state of Delaware a few years ago. I gave a presentation on Oral Microbiology at U of D. Nice campus and a big change from my life in NYC. The Hotel Dupont in Wilmington was a lot of fun !
PSS. purchased the calm on July 2nd according to my records. 6 days from now is the start of month 6.
PSSS . I have the following degrees. BS Biological Sciences, minor Chemistry, MS Molecular Biology, and D.M.D. from U of Penn
PSSS Current a practicing dentist who also does research on oral pathological microbiology
Regards
RFC
PS... I visited the state of Delaware a few years ago. I gave a presentation on Oral Microbiology at U of D. Nice campus and a big change from my life in NYC. The Hotel Dupont in Wilmington was a lot of fun !
PSS. purchased the calm on July 2nd according to my records. 6 days from now is the start of month 6.
PSSS . I have the following degrees. BS Biological Sciences, minor Chemistry, MS Molecular Biology, and D.M.D. from U of Penn
PSSS Current a practicing dentist who also does research on oral pathological microbiology
Rockhead21564
Member
You know this same thing happens all the time on RC. " I've done so and so and it's worked for me..blah,blah" Look for what we don't hear. Is RFC's tank by a picture window that is making up the difference in substandard lighting? Is something else helping?
RFC - Being a dentist does not make you a marine biologist. Hope you can get past your "education" to learn something here. Good luck to you.
RFC - Being a dentist does not make you a marine biologist. Hope you can get past your "education" to learn something here. Good luck to you.
Thank you Rockhead for the warm wishes. Honestly, I have no hidden agenda. My tank is in a little entry cubby hole by the front door, far away from my picture windows. And the drapes are closed during the day.
This is my tank -
This is my 24 feet long, ceiling to floor picture windows
For those who may be audiophiles, the speakers are Martin Logan Aerius I's, Scripts, and Cinema. Subwoofer is a paradigm which doesnt get much use (for my neighbors sake ). And electronics are sunfire amp/preamp. denon DVD. I need to update the TV sometime in the near future.
Regards
RFC
critterkeeper
New member
For the tenth time...
Here's why every once in a while someone shows up and says "My crocea is doing fine under PC/T5":
All croceas are not some sort of genetic clones of each other. I'd think a doctor would understand that. Under IDENTICAL conditions, I've seen some individuals that have grown over twice as fast as others on farms - and I'm talking about clams that came from the same parents.
It goes on from there - under identical conditions all croceas don't grow at the same rate, they won't all reach some magical maximum size, they won't all have the same girth, they certainnly won't all look alike, they won't all have the same size byssal opening, etc.
And they won't all have exactly the same metabolic rate or the same lighting requirements either.
If you look at them in the wild, almost all of them are found in very shallow water, as in less than 10 feet. However, there are occasional individuals (not many at all) that can live down to about twice that. They're the tough ones that didn't die as post-metamorphic larvae due to lake of illumination.
Tridacnids are spawners, and the larvae can be carried around by currents/waves for days before settling to the bottom, which means they settle to the bottom at all depths - not just in shallow water. If they settle at all depths, but almost all are found in less than 10 feet, what does that tell you about how much light MOST of them need?
RFC, would it make sense to you that your clam likely has the right genes to be one of those that can live at or near the species' maximum depth/lowest illumination?
Yes, if yours is living - you got lucky. You happened to get a "tough" clam.
This in no way implies that ALL croceas can tolerate the same lighting conditions that you have.
The only way I would ever even attempt to keep a crocea under fluorescents of any type would be under tightly spaced bulbs, and in a very shallow tank. No, I take that back, I wouldn't even try that. Croceas look best when viewed from above, not at a low angle. Kind of defeats the point of having one if you can't see it at a good angle...
Here's why every once in a while someone shows up and says "My crocea is doing fine under PC/T5":
All croceas are not some sort of genetic clones of each other. I'd think a doctor would understand that. Under IDENTICAL conditions, I've seen some individuals that have grown over twice as fast as others on farms - and I'm talking about clams that came from the same parents.
It goes on from there - under identical conditions all croceas don't grow at the same rate, they won't all reach some magical maximum size, they won't all have the same girth, they certainnly won't all look alike, they won't all have the same size byssal opening, etc.
And they won't all have exactly the same metabolic rate or the same lighting requirements either.
If you look at them in the wild, almost all of them are found in very shallow water, as in less than 10 feet. However, there are occasional individuals (not many at all) that can live down to about twice that. They're the tough ones that didn't die as post-metamorphic larvae due to lake of illumination.
Tridacnids are spawners, and the larvae can be carried around by currents/waves for days before settling to the bottom, which means they settle to the bottom at all depths - not just in shallow water. If they settle at all depths, but almost all are found in less than 10 feet, what does that tell you about how much light MOST of them need?
RFC, would it make sense to you that your clam likely has the right genes to be one of those that can live at or near the species' maximum depth/lowest illumination?
Yes, if yours is living - you got lucky. You happened to get a "tough" clam.
This in no way implies that ALL croceas can tolerate the same lighting conditions that you have.
The only way I would ever even attempt to keep a crocea under fluorescents of any type would be under tightly spaced bulbs, and in a very shallow tank. No, I take that back, I wouldn't even try that. Croceas look best when viewed from above, not at a low angle. Kind of defeats the point of having one if you can't see it at a good angle...
Similar threads
