Peter Eichler
New member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8285098#post8285098 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Jabol75
greystreet41:
The first one is not AoG. The second could be if it is similar to the one:
HTH
Are you sure those are AoG?
Post "Zoanthid ID" questions HERE
- Thread starter MUCHO REEF
- Start date
Are you sure those are AoG?
Mr. Ugly
New member
As the original namer of AoG, I'll have to agree with Jabol75 here. If Jabol's are not AoG, they'd be the closest I've seen.
The ones on the previous page are not AoG, though a lot of people are selling and trading them as true AoG. The named zoa market has been getting almost flooded with those fakes.
The ones on the previous page are not AoG, though a lot of people are selling and trading them as true AoG. The named zoa market has been getting almost flooded with those fakes.
dragonladylea
New member
Greystreet -
I believe yours in the first pic to be Armaggedons if you reference ZOAID pic #5 under the Armaggedons you will see what I mean.
I believe yours in the first pic to be Armaggedons if you reference ZOAID pic #5 under the Armaggedons you will see what I mean.
Ryanqk
Active member
Wow everyone calm down lol. Listen i got what im told are RDE and fire and ice zoa's but how do i tell since i dont have MH like the original owners? i use PC's not nearly as strong so my zoa's will never look the same (which i knew b4 hand) I'm just gonna go with "they are very colorful and pretty"
greystreet41
In Memoriam
thanks everyone for sharing your thoughts. That's all I was after.
cheers,
casey
cheers,
casey
dragonladylea
New member
Greystreet -
It seems that more and more I see this argument that people think they have the "true" AOG or "true" Armaggedon and no one else does or cant possibly have them. IMO I believe yours are Armaggedons by ZOAID definition and pics. They may not look 100% exactly like the pics but as Ryanqk states lighting and tank parameters make a difference. And personally what I spend on a Zoa or Paly is determined by the beauty of the specimen not the "Fancy" name.
It seems that more and more I see this argument that people think they have the "true" AOG or "true" Armaggedon and no one else does or cant possibly have them. IMO I believe yours are Armaggedons by ZOAID definition and pics. They may not look 100% exactly like the pics but as Ryanqk states lighting and tank parameters make a difference. And personally what I spend on a Zoa or Paly is determined by the beauty of the specimen not the "Fancy" name.
Stixbaraca
New member
Here is my Armegeddons!! I know they are 100% Arms!
jessiesgrrl
In Memoriam
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8297187#post8297187 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Stixbaraca
Here is my Armegeddons!! I know they are 100% Arms!
Those are beautiful, Stix!
Laurie
Stixbaraca
New member
Thanks!!
gflat65
New member
I've been reading through this thread and have to laugh out loud at some of this. I understand the naming thing. I have the original garf purple bonsai and the original Mike Paletta Blue, but without a national/international registry or 'pedigree' system, there is no way to know who has what, aside from word of mouth comfirmation that it is from XYZ. Now, a garf PB will typically look the same as another Garf PB (though even here there are some variations in coloring), but in most corals, this is not the case. In our area, one of our local reefers supplied garf with the Mike Paletta Blues after they lost all of theirs (he got his originally from them). That coral was passed around to at least 10 different tanks in the area and in none of them did it look even remotely the same. When it comes to calling people out on naming based on color, there is very little foundation on which to stand. In some cases, it is obviously not the same morph, but in many others where the two are similar, you can't judge by coloring. I have Purple Deaths. They don't have the green skirts and aren't as purple as Creetin's, but they came from someone who got them from Creetin. Since they don't look the same as his pics, are they not the same? Should I say 'Purple Death II's Until They Color Up Like Creetin's'? Not only is that a long name, but that renaming is not gonna happen. I know we are a self righteous society and everyone is convinced of their superior intelligence in all subjects (seemingly human nature), but come on. Until there is a way to pedigree these things and track who sold what to whom, etc., it is all a guessing game or strictly for description. Now, if you know yours came from the originator of the name, that may give you more trading value, but that is up to the person you are trading with (many newbies don't know about the naming and lineage, so they just want something that looks cool, in most cases,and won;t pay extra for soemthing that has the correct lineage when they can get one that looks just like it with no lineage from someone else for less). Now, I'd like to have the originals that trace back (I am one of those, but not entirely a nazi at it), but that is not an option around here unless I find some nice people to trade with (which I've been lucky enough to do thanks to zoa forums). Until there is a way to track 'named' morphs, it is strictly speculation in many cases as to whether or not the other persons zoas are the actual named zoas or not. Anyone that says that a certain zoa is always going to look this way or that way regardless of husbandry techniques/choices obviously hasn't keep many tanks/zoas/corals, etc. under different flow and lighting conditions. Certain zoas may hold the ability to color up to a certain named zoa, but that certainly does not mean that when it doesn't look like that coral at this moment that it can't be that coral.
As I mentioned, I prescribe to the naming thing to some degree, but more than anything it should be used as a descriptor. Maybe we should thinknof it in terms of two different groups. Serious collectors and every day Joe's who want something that looks cool. Serious collectors that want the lineaged named zoa ask the person they are getting them from about the lineage (myself included, in some cases). These guys/gals will know immediately whether the lineage sounds right in many cases. If they don't care about he lineage, they just don't ask (i.e., every day Joe's). The biggest issue is that people may then try to screw some newbie out of money saying this is the real deal that everyone is paying top dollar for (green PPE's, etc.). My opinion there is that it is up to the newbie to do the research and determine if they want to pay for 'the real deal'. If they are willing to pay, they should be willing to do the research to see if the green PPE's are real PPE's, direct from Blane.lol I know this kinda bounces around alot, but this is not an easy topic, as there are so many that are passionate about what they believe. This is a broad topic that will never narrow until there is a way to track these things and put a registered set of paperwork with them. Isn't that why the AKC was created? Now, invariably, someone like CKC will come along and not worry about actual lineage (you can typically just register a dog with CKC by stating that it is a full blood instead of having the blood lines that AKC used to require for pedigree). This is also not to say that someone won't find a way to circumvent the system, if there were such a thing (once again, all unethical decisions made in life seem to be human nature), but it would be a start. Would it make everyone happy if people said 'XXX lookalike' instead of 'I have XXX'? There would be very few lineaged zoas being trade out there if that were the case. The lineaged zoas (and SPS, LPS, etc.) typically sell for much more, restricting the number of people that have them. Aside from that, typically only serious colectors have alot of the lineaged zoas/LPS/SPS. That will require alot of 'lookalike' nomenclature.
I understand trying to 'educate' someone on a topic, but when that education comes in the form of castor oil, most will not heed it and will spit it back up, only to never trust the spoon of castor oil again. Serious collectors (and I have loosely grouped myself in this category) need to realize that most people have not been doing this as long as some of us have, so a little tact in education will go along way. I know I didn't understand differential equations when I took the class-I had to watch and learn. If the professor hadn't taken a slow and helpful approach, I would not have done well in the class and may not be where I am now. It all begins with the foundation. If that foundation is filled with sand, it can't be sustained.
I'll step down off my soap box now and let everyone get a cup of coffee
. I don't mean to call anyone out here (and have been careful not too, as that would negate my purpose in this thread), but we all need to step back and see if we (on the individual level) are ultimately exascerbating the issue, or are creating some sort of path for understanding in the reefing community. One last thing to say-Vote Quimby
.
As I mentioned, I prescribe to the naming thing to some degree, but more than anything it should be used as a descriptor. Maybe we should thinknof it in terms of two different groups. Serious collectors and every day Joe's who want something that looks cool. Serious collectors that want the lineaged named zoa ask the person they are getting them from about the lineage (myself included, in some cases). These guys/gals will know immediately whether the lineage sounds right in many cases. If they don't care about he lineage, they just don't ask (i.e., every day Joe's). The biggest issue is that people may then try to screw some newbie out of money saying this is the real deal that everyone is paying top dollar for (green PPE's, etc.). My opinion there is that it is up to the newbie to do the research and determine if they want to pay for 'the real deal'. If they are willing to pay, they should be willing to do the research to see if the green PPE's are real PPE's, direct from Blane.lol I know this kinda bounces around alot, but this is not an easy topic, as there are so many that are passionate about what they believe. This is a broad topic that will never narrow until there is a way to track these things and put a registered set of paperwork with them. Isn't that why the AKC was created? Now, invariably, someone like CKC will come along and not worry about actual lineage (you can typically just register a dog with CKC by stating that it is a full blood instead of having the blood lines that AKC used to require for pedigree). This is also not to say that someone won't find a way to circumvent the system, if there were such a thing (once again, all unethical decisions made in life seem to be human nature), but it would be a start. Would it make everyone happy if people said 'XXX lookalike' instead of 'I have XXX'? There would be very few lineaged zoas being trade out there if that were the case. The lineaged zoas (and SPS, LPS, etc.) typically sell for much more, restricting the number of people that have them. Aside from that, typically only serious colectors have alot of the lineaged zoas/LPS/SPS. That will require alot of 'lookalike' nomenclature.
I understand trying to 'educate' someone on a topic, but when that education comes in the form of castor oil, most will not heed it and will spit it back up, only to never trust the spoon of castor oil again. Serious collectors (and I have loosely grouped myself in this category) need to realize that most people have not been doing this as long as some of us have, so a little tact in education will go along way. I know I didn't understand differential equations when I took the class-I had to watch and learn. If the professor hadn't taken a slow and helpful approach, I would not have done well in the class and may not be where I am now. It all begins with the foundation. If that foundation is filled with sand, it can't be sustained.
I'll step down off my soap box now and let everyone get a cup of coffee
. I don't mean to call anyone out here (and have been careful not too, as that would negate my purpose in this thread), but we all need to step back and see if we (on the individual level) are ultimately exascerbating the issue, or are creating some sort of path for understanding in the reefing community. One last thing to say-Vote Quimby.
Just keeping it alive.
well said gflat65
i totally agree with wat you said and just tobe repeatative
as we are now seeing similar morphs of certain varieties it seems somewat unfair for these morphs of a certain named variety to be questioned regarding wat they are, if i had a AOG morph similar to the "true" named morph and i named mine first then by the current rules all other similar morphs cannot be regarded as "true" and thats pathetic way to continue.
i use the words "morph" and "variety" purposely as i have above because if you lot cant see wats now very obvious regarding zoa morphs of a certain varieties then you will be arguing untill the cows come home.
a variety name is wats needed and the only way forward regarding zoa naming for the future of the naming game with an umbrella picture show of morphs from that variety.
i love the name game but its become a school playground argument and will be this time next year and the year after that until someone corrects the current rules of the game.
give me 10x AOG polyps and i will come back in a year with the same 10 polyps but they wont all look exactly the same anymore and you can all go at arguing over they not same strain.
infact as some of you guys here are from zoaid you should make some 5 polyp frags of some varieties AOG being one them and put them in different systems for 6 months and see it for yourself, then you WILL sort your site out to show this and help put a stop to wat you started lol (hey i know its all for fun but the fun is being lost as it is)
phew!!!!!! rant over
i totally agree with wat you said and just tobe repeatative
as we are now seeing similar morphs of certain varieties it seems somewat unfair for these morphs of a certain named variety to be questioned regarding wat they are, if i had a AOG morph similar to the "true" named morph and i named mine first then by the current rules all other similar morphs cannot be regarded as "true" and thats pathetic way to continue.
i use the words "morph" and "variety" purposely as i have above because if you lot cant see wats now very obvious regarding zoa morphs of a certain varieties then you will be arguing untill the cows come home.
a variety name is wats needed and the only way forward regarding zoa naming for the future of the naming game with an umbrella picture show of morphs from that variety.
i love the name game but its become a school playground argument and will be this time next year and the year after that until someone corrects the current rules of the game.
give me 10x AOG polyps and i will come back in a year with the same 10 polyps but they wont all look exactly the same anymore and you can all go at arguing over they not same strain.
infact as some of you guys here are from zoaid you should make some 5 polyp frags of some varieties AOG being one them and put them in different systems for 6 months and see it for yourself, then you WILL sort your site out to show this and help put a stop to wat you started lol (hey i know its all for fun but the fun is being lost as it is)
phew!!!!!! rant over
Last edited:
