Feed your clam

[this is me]

Because it does eat!
Intial feeding with 1.5 capful of DT's.

45mins later. It's almost clear!

So please feed your clams which are less than 3".

 

[critterkeeper]

Tridacnids are also known to clear water and then poop out every bit of what they ate a few hours later, completely undigested. In fact, they may dump out everything you give them - plus some excess zooxanthellae.

Clearing up some phyto in no way implies that they need the food, or are using any of it... No it won't hurt them, but may very well be a waste of time and money.

BTW - I still don't get the 3" thing. At three inches a crocea is half of its full size and maybe 3 or 4 years old, whereas a gigas is just getting started and may be only 1 or 2 years old. Why would they both suddenly be able to go without feeding at the same size (3")? The fact is, they can go from larvae to adult without ever eating a single particle of anything - other than some zooxanthellae to get their "internal culture" going.

 

[this is me]

From what I understand, the clams are too small to rely on light as only the only source of energy, So you need to feed it when they're small. Their mantle is not large enough to trap all the light and convert it into energy. I dont think it's a waste of money or time. PITA? yes, but I didnt buy a $60 2" clams and not feed it and watch it not doing well. I bought a 2" maxima a couple years ago and I fed it until it was about 2.5"-3". It's now about 5" now.

 

[mbbuna]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7412365#post7412365 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by critterkeeper
Tridacnids are also known to clear water and then poop out every bit of what they ate a few hours later, completely undigested. In fact, they may dump out everything you give them - plus some excess zooxanthellae.

I totally agree!!

BTW - I still don't get the 3" thing. At three inches a crocea is half of its full size and maybe 3 or 4 years old, whereas a gigas is just getting started and may be only 1 or 2 years old. Why would they both suddenly be able to go without feeding at the same size (3")?

i agree with you here also. The 2 1/2"-3" thing is a ruff estimation on when the clams mantle is developed enough(houses enough zoox) to support the clam from light alone. Every clam will be different but in general the smaller clams will need a little help (at least while in our little glass box's)

The fact is, they can go from larvae to adult without ever eating a single particle of anything - other than some zooxanthellae to get their "internal culture" going.

:lol: Do tell !!!!

 

[critterkeeper]

To put it bluntly - the whole "mantle is too small" thing is bunk.

I know who wrote that first - and I think they didn't really read the reference they cited... The paper "Relationships between size, mantle area and zooxanthellae numbers in five species of giant clam (Tridacnidae)" by Griffiths & Klumpp (1996) says no such thing.

To the contrary, it has been proven in controlled laboratory experiments that small clams (even just a few weeks old) can make it on zooxanthellae and direct nutrient absorbtion alone.

BTW - my tridacnid book is finally off to the printer (in Hong Kong) and will be out in September. FINALLY!!!! All of this nutrition stuff is covered in great detail and fully referenced in it (it takes up a whole chapter), which is going to change a lot of peoples' minds.

As a last thing to note - "This is me", I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but trying to give you something to think about: How can you be sure that your maxima wouldn't have grown the same amount with no feedings? Did you ever try to stop feeding for a few weeks and see a measureable decrease in growth rate?

I keep reading posts that say I fed my clam X, X times per week, and it has grown X - but I've personally kept a lot of clams that have grown very well - without feeding them anything at all... I think a lot of the problem is that small clams are categorically less hardy than large ones and are more likely to die in an aquarium - but that doesn't necessarily mean it's starvation. I do see a lot of people that I think are really pushing it when it comes to their lighting too for that matter.

 

[Fridmani]

I agree with critterkeeper. I've kept small clams for a long time without feeding them and haven't had too many problems. I do know that small clams are harder to keep than larger ones but I don't think it has any correlation to feeding or not feeding.

 

[venwu225]

there might be some technical inconsistency, but the behavior of what clams do in this thread is still very interesting.

Thanks for sharing

 

[gophia]

critterkeeper, good to hear that the new book is coming out. Can't wait. Hopefully it clears up some of the common misconceptions about clams, i.e. bowl feeding little clams which IMO probably does more harm than good.

My gf bought a ~2 inch crocea for me during the holidays and I have yet to bowl feed the little guy. So far it's grown three little scutes. I suspect some of the difficulties some people experienced with smaller clam are more due to the shipping stress rather than staving.

Anyways I'll give a hint to my gf about your book...birthday present

 

[ReefRacer]

I bought a Maxima that was less than 2" from a friend locally for $30. I put phyto in the tank twice (2 doses) until I ran out. I went to the LFS to get some and they only had the larger bottle for $38. I passed on the phyto. Several months later my clam is over 3". He is attached to the inside of a large oyster shell and is about to outgrow it. The interesting thing is I see clam poop in the oyster shell all the time. He is eating something but it's not phyto. I also have some clams that came on my live rock and they are doing well with no phyto. I'm not saying don't use phyto but I never saw any improvement in my pod population in the refugium, and the clam is growing with out it.