tangs are not reefsafe

fish, like any other animal, will do anything to survive. Dussumeiri's get monster size, and eat more than any other reef fish we keep (except sharks and what not). Tangs particularly need to graze all day long, so its natural for tangs especially to start sampling other food sources that are available.

Keep them well fed, and most wont nip !
 
tangs are not reef safe

tangs are not reef safe

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/1r-_t4hos2A" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

this is becoming a silly thread

Yes, yes indeed. Boarding on Ludicrous!! :wildone:

Acanthurus dussumieri requires a large aquarium. Larger than a 240.
 
Not surprising, the large Acanthurus species are total beasts. I use to have a large Acanthurus xanthopterus that could eat more scallops in one sitting than I could. These guys should be in 10' 600+ gallon tanks, and the they will still make the tank look small.
 
the Duss i had were about 5 inches. like i said they were very well fed. it just seems the like to tear up fleshy LPS. just my 2 cents. others may have better luck. i also have an 8 inch vlamingii that eats everything thrown in the tank but a model citizen for the reef. it's like a pet dog lol
 
I have to agree. My Chevron likes to eat open brains and fungia plate coral so far. He was one of my first fish in the tank. Started off the size of a 50 cent piece. Now he is about 5" may be 6" in a years time. He is also fat and never touched lps before, but now he wont leave the brain or fungia a lone. So it is time for him to go.
 
interesting on the chevron... usually bristetooths are much more reliable in reefs.. Are you sure they were actually eating the brains and plates? Sometimes it looks like they are eating something but are actually picking between polyps.
 
interesting on the chevron... usually bristetooths are much more reliable in reefs.. Are you sure they were actually eating the brains and plates? Sometimes it looks like they are eating something but are actually picking between polyps.

Yep he does it right in front of me. He has almost killed the brain a couple of times so I have cage over it. Then he moved on to the plate coral. The evil tang even picked up the plate coral with his mouth and through it in to a cave :uhoh3: . But so far he leaves the scoly and acans alone. This all started after I gave the coral pellets :facepalm:
 
i feel you guys' pain. after a week now duss tang free, my brains and scoly are fluffy and happy again. i m sticking to pyramid butterflies lol
 
Write to Foster & Smith, who maintain a very good, frequently consulted compatibility list, and tell them this info.

Read their quick stats and compare them to the actual description. I've sent them a bunch of corrections. I told them to go through it and actually compare. Their response was, "just send us the corrections". Not to mention how they treat some of the smaller businesses trying to work with them. On the bright they seem to care about customers and genuinely care about their animals. So still a +1 to buying from them.
 
It is entirely dependent on the individual fish IMO, people keep large angels in reefs with clams and others with no issues, then someone else try's it and has a horrible experience. I have several tangs( desjardini, orange shoulder,tomini, and a Achilles) none of which even look twice at a coral. Keeping tangs well fed will also help with the picking I would think. I have had tangs throught this hobby for the past 15 yrs and have never had one eat or even nip at corals
 
I have a powder blue that eats torches. And I have heard of several hippo tangs that eat soft corals.
fwiw I have a Powder Blue that would pick on one specific type of torch coral no matter where I moved it in my aquarium. The same fish never bothered any of my other torch corals.

IME Hippos can be pure hell on many types of corals and (IMO/IME) are more intelligent than many other fish species.
 
It is entirely dependent on the individual fish IMO, people keep large angels in reefs with clams and others with no issues, then someone else try's it and has a horrible experience. I have several tangs( desjardini, orange shoulder,tomini, and a Achilles) none of which even look twice at a coral. Keeping tangs well fed will also help with the picking I would think. I have had tangs throught this hobby for the past 15 yrs and have never had one eat or even nip at corals

We need some pictures of that gold rim achilles.
 
fwiw I have a Powder Blue that would pick on one specific type of torch coral no matter where I moved it in my aquarium. The same fish never bothered any of my other torch corals.

IME Hippos can be pure hell on many types of corals and (IMO/IME) are more intelligent than many other fish species.

It does only pick at one specific torch, the other ones aren't tasty enough i suppose.

Fish are just weird. I had a copperband in my DT for over a year and one day it just decided to eat my acans. So I removed it and replaced it with the copperband I had in my frag tank, wich is also full of acans. Two minutes after entering the DT it started eating the acans. Back to the frag tank, and it didn't touch them.

And I used to have a bicolor dwarf, I had it for years in two different tanks, it came from my friend and it never touched a single thing in my tank. It became agressive towards new fish so I gave him to another reefer. In two days it destroyed every lps in the tank.

Every fish has the potential of being 'not reefsafe'. Except for anthias maybe, I have never heard of anthias eating corals.
 
but we really need to stop using the term "reefsafe". Generalizations lead to confusion.
Not trying to be snarky, just trying to understand. (though, in reading my post, it sounds like it. I can't convey tone in the words on the page, so I'm hoping noting it helps) Why is it that you think swapping the word "compatible" for "safe" in that phrase isn't a generalization... and really, isn't it just semantics here? I mean, most people who have spent time researching seem to understand the term as "for the majority of this type of fish, except for the rogues"
Again, not trying to call you out, trying to understand the impact you think changing the phrase would have...
 
good question- no bad taken

good question- no bad taken

Not trying to be snarky, just trying to understand. (though, in reading my post, it sounds like it. I can't convey tone in the words on the page, so I'm hoping noting it helps) Why is it that you think swapping the word "compatible" for "safe" in that phrase isn't a generalization... and really, isn't it just semantics here? I mean, most people who have spent time researching seem to understand the term as "for the majority of this type of fish, except for the rogues"
Again, not trying to call you out, trying to understand the impact you think changing the phrase would have...
"reefsafe". What does it mean?

If an animal occurs on or near a reef it eats something on or near a reef.

Compatibility. What does it mean? It's much more specific
ie: What reef animals are compatible? What eats what on or near a reef.

Example: Butterflyfish and Angelfish aren't "reefsafe". Actually a totally useless statement because of the two generics used.

<embed width="600" height="361" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullscreen="true" allowNetworking="all" wmode="transparent" src="http://static.photobucket.com/player.swf" flashvars="file=http%3A%2F%2Fvid7.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy270%2Fgary334%2FIMG_0560.mp4">
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top