There is a recent article in the July 2015 (Volume XVI) of Advanced Aquarist by Tim Wijgerde. (I seem to get into trouble everytime i post a link).
The article is a report of 2 experiments which was done to study feed/growth in various species of Dendronephthya corals (the species were not identified). The experiments were based heavily on studies done in 1995 by Fabricius, KE, on food intake of soft NPS corals.
The experiment consisted of a controlled setup where Phyto-feast, Roti-Feast, Oyster-Feast and Rhodomonas sp. (micro algae) were dosed in different volumes in a 80 x 40 x 28 aquarium with a total volume of 370 gallons with 8 Tunze stream 6085 powerheads and a DyMiCo (Dynamic Mineral Control) filter which acts as a jaubert system for nitrification and (supposedly) denitrification. (NB I have to say the lack of controls over the water quality in the experiment was a bit surprising). The difference in the two experiments was primarily the volume of foods being pumped in.
Both experiments showed a substantial decline in coral health and eventual degeneration over a 5 month period. Despite the steady decline there was asexual reproduction noted.
I duplicated the conclusion of the report below:
The preliminary experiments presented here reaffirm the prevailing opinion that Dendronephthya corals are highly difficult to maintain in aquaria. Even though water flow rates and patterns closely matched those found in the natural habitat of these corals, significant amounts of plankton were provided and water quality was maintained adequate, most corals quickly deteriorated. It remains to be determined what factor(s) determine the health and growth of Dendronephthya spp. Food quantity and quality remain key variables to be studied in the future. Future experiments may reveal differences in survival rates and growth between species within the Dendronephthya genus, as different polyp morphologies allow them to feed on different food items.
For now, I recommend that aquarists enjoy these corals in their natural habitat, rather than in a home aquarium. Still, if we are to learn more about the biology and husbandry requirements of these corals, especially their feeding preferences, we will have to continue conducting small scale aquarium experiments. One day, we may be able to truly replicate the biodiversity found on coral reefs, with thriving sponges, tunicates, bryozoans, bivalves, crinoids, (a)zooxanthellate corals and many other invertebrates. Such a reef display would be truly inspiring and have great educational value.
In terms of my personal thoughts, I don't find it surprising at all that a feeding regiment of oysterfeast, rotif-feast, phyto and micro-algae would fail. Many home aquarists (including myself) have tried similar feeding regimes on these readily available commercial foods and failed.
I can't say the main thrust of the article was of any scientific significance but there are some interesting collateral points (adverse effect of air exposure, asexual production even during coral decline). Worth a read.
The article is a report of 2 experiments which was done to study feed/growth in various species of Dendronephthya corals (the species were not identified). The experiments were based heavily on studies done in 1995 by Fabricius, KE, on food intake of soft NPS corals.
The experiment consisted of a controlled setup where Phyto-feast, Roti-Feast, Oyster-Feast and Rhodomonas sp. (micro algae) were dosed in different volumes in a 80 x 40 x 28 aquarium with a total volume of 370 gallons with 8 Tunze stream 6085 powerheads and a DyMiCo (Dynamic Mineral Control) filter which acts as a jaubert system for nitrification and (supposedly) denitrification. (NB I have to say the lack of controls over the water quality in the experiment was a bit surprising). The difference in the two experiments was primarily the volume of foods being pumped in.
Both experiments showed a substantial decline in coral health and eventual degeneration over a 5 month period. Despite the steady decline there was asexual reproduction noted.
I duplicated the conclusion of the report below:
The preliminary experiments presented here reaffirm the prevailing opinion that Dendronephthya corals are highly difficult to maintain in aquaria. Even though water flow rates and patterns closely matched those found in the natural habitat of these corals, significant amounts of plankton were provided and water quality was maintained adequate, most corals quickly deteriorated. It remains to be determined what factor(s) determine the health and growth of Dendronephthya spp. Food quantity and quality remain key variables to be studied in the future. Future experiments may reveal differences in survival rates and growth between species within the Dendronephthya genus, as different polyp morphologies allow them to feed on different food items.
For now, I recommend that aquarists enjoy these corals in their natural habitat, rather than in a home aquarium. Still, if we are to learn more about the biology and husbandry requirements of these corals, especially their feeding preferences, we will have to continue conducting small scale aquarium experiments. One day, we may be able to truly replicate the biodiversity found on coral reefs, with thriving sponges, tunicates, bryozoans, bivalves, crinoids, (a)zooxanthellate corals and many other invertebrates. Such a reef display would be truly inspiring and have great educational value.
In terms of my personal thoughts, I don't find it surprising at all that a feeding regiment of oysterfeast, rotif-feast, phyto and micro-algae would fail. Many home aquarists (including myself) have tried similar feeding regimes on these readily available commercial foods and failed.
I can't say the main thrust of the article was of any scientific significance but there are some interesting collateral points (adverse effect of air exposure, asexual production even during coral decline). Worth a read.
