Queen Angel in a SPS tank? Any experience?

melanotaenia said:
Science is all about experimentation. We experiment with animals all the time; this is nothing new. The idea that we may kill one or two fish (or more) in the process of learning about the fish and its care is just a natural part of the scientific learning process, and to say that doing this is a negative thing in our hobby is not entirely accurate, if in fact it is done in the name of science and research.
Click to expand...

what cave have you lived in?
 
rekn said:
what cave have you lived in?
Click to expand...

the one that helps create life saving drugs from learning about the behaviors these drugs have on mice, among other lab animals, that give their lives up in the name of science so that you, and millions of other individuals, can have the proper medications and treatment available for diseases. There are many trials that are not suited for humans; this is where the use of animals in science is merited.

But hey, if labs and hospitals across the country are doing this then I guess a lot of us researchers, according to you, must be living in caves.
 
rekn said:
i dont know what country you are from but i am from florida, a big portion of this fishes range, and i can say with upmost certainty that the species is common.

this isnt a counterpoint to you jmaney, i actually agree with everything you said, im posting to inform you of their availability.

.
Click to expand...


I was referring to them being kept in large reef tanks. I know they are abundant.
 
melanotaenia said:
the one that helps create life saving drugs from learning about the behaviors these drugs have on mice, among other lab animals, that give their lives up in the name of science so that you, and millions of other individuals, can have the proper medications and treatment available for diseases. There are many trials that are not suited for humans; this is where the use of animals in science is merited.

But hey, if labs and hospitals across the country are doing this then I guess a lot of us researchers, according to you, must be living in caves.
Click to expand...

to stay on topic- i wouldnt put a queen in a reef, especially if you want to add other fish later
 
melanotaenia said:
This statement I completely disagree with; I hardly believe that many people on here are trying to keep fish to puff up their egos, but rather learn about harder to keep fish, hone their husbandry skills, and expose other hobbyists to the success (and non-success) stories of certain species that are brought into the aquarium trade.

Science is all about experimentation. We experiment with animals all the time; this is nothing new. The idea that we may kill one or two fish (or more) in the process of learning about the fish and its care is just a natural part of the scientific learning process, and to say that doing this is a negative thing in our hobby is not entirely accurate, if in fact it is done in the name of science and research.

Sure, you are going to lose fish along the way; however, at some point, the losses decrease due to increased knowledge and information gained from those fish that died in the name of research. And they represent the first steps into a more successful keeping of that same fish later on down the line.

If after researching the husbandry of a particular fish, and successful keeping in the aquarium cannot be attained (such as in the case of many obligate coral feeding butterflies), then we, as the marine community, have documentation of certain fish that just do not belong in the aquarium trade, because for whatever reason, they cannot adapt to the artificial ecosystem we put them into.

As a side note, I am not really sure where you are referring to that Queen Angels are such a rare sighting. Here in the states, there are plenty of them, I see them at LFS all time. Additionally, I have many videos and pictures of tanks from over in Japan that keep Queen Angels as well. I think the beauty of the fish far outweighs the want of the hobbyist to own it because of it's "rarity" in certain fish markets.


But hey, I am a researcher, so I see animal experimentation, even in the aquarium trade, as a natural course of learning about the animal and how to care for it. Losing one or two fish in the name of learning how to keep hundreds later on down the line seems like a good thing for the research community.
Click to expand...

Again, here is my issue- what is being learned by these "experiments"? If I throw 5 powder blues in a tank, despite everyone elses advice, what is learned? Regardless of outcome. That it IS possible? Or that it IS with other considerations? Or that Im lucky? Or what? And how dopes that apply to the 50 million times its failed before?

And, per the queen reference, see my above comment. I am not speaking availability, but presence in large reef tanks.
 
melanotaenia said:
the one that helps create life saving drugs from learning about the behaviors these drugs have on mice, among other lab animals, that give their lives up in the name of science so that you, and millions of other individuals, can have the proper medications and treatment available for diseases. There are many trials that are not suited for humans; this is where the use of animals in science is merited.

But hey, if labs and hospitals across the country are doing this then I guess a lot of us researchers, according to you, must be living in caves.
Click to expand...

Comparing this, to putting incompatible fish in a tank is comparing apples and shoelaces.
 
jmaneyapanda said:
Again, here is my issue- what is being learned by these "experiments"? If I throw 5 powder blues in a tank, despite everyone elses advice, what is learned? Regardless of outcome. That it IS possible? Or that it IS with other considerations? Or that Im lucky? Or what? And how dopes that apply to the 50 million times its failed before?

And, per the queen reference, see my above comment. I am not speaking availability, but presence in large reef tanks.
Click to expand...

I see your point; there are many experiments done in tanks that are done purely to see if it "can" be done. But, there are still other experiments that I feel are worth undertaking. For instance, a new fish to the hobby, that is not something a lot of people know anything about. It would be good to try and house that fish, learns its husbandry, and see if it can indeed be kept successfully in the hobby. If after research, careful planning, and expert husbandry skills cannot sustain the fish, even in the most expert of hands, then the fish should be kept where it belongs....in the ocean.

Of course, it is not as cut and dry with fish behavior when it comes to coral destruction, but I think you get the idea.

It is the persistence, however, of some hobbyists with difficult fish that have allowed us now to keep these fish with much more ease, because we know the demands they require to be kept successfully. I remember how impossible it used to be to keep Rock Beauties, Regals, among other fish, and now people are having success with these fish, and I mean success in terms of having them not live for monts, but YEARS in their aquariums.

Interestingly, I seem to recall a similar lively discussion when a certain someone put similar tangs together into a rather large aquarium across the world. I am still watching that one!

I wonder what Mafia is doing to keep his Queen more passive than the negative reports from many on this particular thread.
 
melanotaenia said:
I see your point; there are many experiments done in tanks that are done purely to see if it "can" be done. But, there are still other experiments that I feel are worth undertaking. For instance, a new fish to the hobby, that is not something a lot of people know anything about. It would be good to try and house that fish, learns its husbandry, and see if it can indeed be kept successfully in the hobby. If after research, careful planning, and expert husbandry skills cannot sustain the fish, even in the most expert of hands, then the fish should be kept where it belongs....in the ocean.

Of course, it is not as cut and dry with fish behavior when it comes to coral destruction, but I think you get the idea.

It is the persistence, however, of some hobbyists with difficult fish that have allowed us now to keep these fish with much more ease, because we know the demands they require to be kept successfully. I remember how impossible it used to be to keep Rock Beauties, Regals, among other fish, and now people are having success with these fish, and I mean success in terms of having them not live for monts, but YEARS in their aquariums.

Interestingly, I seem to recall a similar lively discussion when a certain someone put similar tangs together into a rather large aquarium across the world. I am still watching that one!

I wonder what Mafia is doing to keep his Queen more passive than the negative reports from many on this particular thread.
Click to expand...

Agreed. There is a very fine, but VERY important line between doing things to advance the understanding and husbandry of our animals, and to just do it to say we did.

As per the reference to the large tank with the tangs, I, too, am watching it, and am a bit disheartened. If not mistaked, the attempts thus far have gone from 8 fish total attempted, down to four currently, and a very short time frame. I'd suggest thats not success. And, in the meanwhile, it is being reported the losses are from "no reason". To me, nothing is gained from this. Just someone doing it to say they can do it. And thus far, four fish have died for it.
 
One thing I will add -- all the experimentation with this fish want change the fact that it will get too big for about 99% of tanks out there -- IMO that is the biggest issue with the choice -- who cares if it will eat SPS or not, when it most likely won't fit in the OP's tank.
 
Be prepared to feed SPS to the Queen, if you know that going in, it's a great addition. You may get lucky (But i doubt it). It's more of an economics questions, regarding the coral investment to the appeal of a beautiful fish addition.


In my mind, worth the investment.......
 
We have a lot of preconceptions that were formed many years ago when this hobby was in its infancy. Back then a 180g tank was INSANE, food was poor, available coral was restricted. But now we have larger tanks, amazing food for our fish, and a huge abundance of corals. This is why we are seeing new successes with fish that were deemed the epitome of NO for reef tanks - Oxymonacanthus longirostris (Orange Spotted FileFish).

I remember Copps said once that there is no angel he wouldn't put in a reef. I don't think he keeps a Queen though, but I don't think it's reputation for eating coral is stopping him (maybe size and aggression).
 
That's right... there is no angel I wouldn't put in my SPS reef... I've kept all seven genera with sps and currently have about 40 angelfish... I keep the queens closest relative in my sps reef now... Holacanthus bermudensis... for those of you that remember that little all xanthic yellow and white blue angel I got that has now converted completely back...

There are so many dynamics to keeping angels in reef tanks... I do an entire one hour talk on it... but if I could give one sentence of advice to successfully keep any angel in an sps tank... it is "Keep your corals healthy!"

Copps
 
rekn said:
gofor, my previous post is on target.

"The more I research the more I think I am going to stay away.lol. I dont really have much LPS but worried about the SPS in the tank and even the aggresive issues I might face"
Click to expand...

Not sure how this is "on target" since the OP stated himself that he doesn't really have much LPS and but rather keeps mainly SPS, and your statement was that Queen Angels are "LPS destroyers"... but regardless...

I do agree with those that are saying that "experimenting because they can, and not trying to serve any particular purpose without first doing extensive research" is ridiculous. I don't think anyone on this forum would condone blindly putting a fish in a tank without first doing research and feeling comfortable with the results of that research (unless your a newb that gets bamboozled by a LFS employee). So to base your argument on that rationale is assuming that I am condoning this negligence... which I'm not.

I think with ANY fish, if after extensive research has been done, one finds that their tank is a suitable habitat, then why not try it (as long as you are willing to lose some/all of your corals in the process). That being said, I haven't done extensive research on the Queen Angel, in particular, but would assume that tank size would be one of the first considerations a person would take into account before determining whether they will add it (and any other fish) to a tank. Once that has been taken into account, the other inhabitants would then be the next "compatability box" to check off the list, probably making sure that the Queen Angel is the last to be added due to its bad reputation of being a bully. After all of that is reviewed, its diet and aquascape preferences should be considered to make sure it can be provided. If all of these environmental factors are taken into account, then I don't see a reason why someone who is willing to risk a few corals (or has a holding tank in case corals do get nipped) can't at least try a fish (whether it is a queen angel or some other fish). If you can't provide this, then don't keep the fish... bottomline.

I mean this is the ABC's of fishkeeping, so I don't think that I'm saying anything profound here... but I think that everyone is getting all "bent out of shape" for nothing because I think we all agree that this should be the process, its just that some people have already come to the conclusion (from personal experience???) that this fish will not work in an SPS dominated tank (which, let me remind you was the original question). If it is from personal experience, then why don't you tell us the environmental factors (i.e., the tank size, the corals it ate, what age the fish was approximately when placed into the tank, what age approximately the fish was when it started eating the coral/wreaking havoc, its diet, how frequently you fed it, etc.). That way, the OP could use this information to determine for him/herself whether it is a "safe enough gamble" to put this fish in his/her tank.
 
gofor, 5th post down.


"The more I research the more I think I am going to stay away.lol. I dont really have much LPS but worried about the SPS in the tank and even the aggresive issues I might face"
 
the tank size-125 6' long

the corals it ate-lps and a green stag

what age the fish was approximately when placed into the tank-it was rather young, maybe 3" max and chomped corals almost immediately

its diet, how frequently you fed it-formula 1 and 2 and 3x a day


just wanted to add that mine wasnt a slow grower in the slightest, its been awhile but i want to say it hit 6 to 7" its first year and was mean as hell from day 1. i ended up selling it to a friend at 10" and her cheak spines were nearly 1" long ( shes taged me a few times)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Q
Can Queen & Emperor Angel be added together?
Replies
4
Views
665
Queen_angel
Q
Q
What is the best way to add Queen Angel?
Replies
1
Views
602
wvned
wvned
Abyssopelagic
Multibar Angelfish Harems (In a 75 Gallon Deep Reef)
Replies
4
Views
449
Zionas
Z
J
Ideas for new stock for a 200L reef tank
Replies
6
Views
345
Uncle99
Uncle99
B
Ritteri Swollen Mouth
Replies
8
Views
624
Bakeman
B
Back
Top