No, I didn't take it like that. From the article I was getting the impression that the author was trying to say that it's pretty much impossible to keep nems for more than 2 years. I feel like survival would depend on the conditions in which nems are kept. In posting, I guess I was hoping to hear of the more successful anemone keepers.
True or False? Anemones life span less than 2 year?
- Thread starter jsharp1
- Start date
No, I didn't take it like that. From the article I was getting the impression that the author was trying to say that it's pretty much impossible to keep nems for more than 2 years. I feel like survival would depend on the conditions in which nems are kept. In posting, I guess I was hoping to hear of the more successful anemone keepers.
WDLV
Skunk Hybrid Freak
I don't think it is necessarily a fair assessment that ALL anemones live for hundreds of years. Especially those that do not reproduce via asexual reproduction. It seems pretty reasonable that a clone of an H. magnifica or a E. quadricolor could live for centuries before dieing out.
As for the burden of proof, I don't think that's an entirely fair request either. Prove the existance of a God. You won't be here when it starts and you won't be here when it ends. So that makes it a bit difficult now doesn't it.
Here's an exerpt from Fautin and Allens book Anemonefish and Their Host Sea Anemones, page 120.
"It is impossible to determine age of a sea anemone, except for one that has been raised in an aquarium or tracked continuously in the wild from first settlement. A small one is not necessarily young, for coelenterates grow only if well fed and shrink if starved. Individuals of species that harbour anemonefishes have been monitored for several years with no apparent change in size (although that is difficult to measure, due to the absence of a skeleton). However, studies on other species, in field and laboratory, have led to estimated ages on the order of many decades and even several centuries. There are scattered records of temperate anemones surviving many decades in commercial aquaria, and the life-span of a small sea anemone in New Zealand has been calculated, based on actuarial tables, to be over 300 years! From such data, it is likely that most individuals of the "gigantic" sea anemones we have encountered during our field work exceed a century in age. This is also consistent with the generalization that large animals of all kinds typically are long-lived.
Coelenterates are protected quite well by their nematocysts, but some predators have developed means of evading their effect. Small tropical anemones may be eaten by butterflyfishes (see chapter 5), but large ones appear to have few enemies, and we do not know what might ultimately kill them."
I don't want to infer that Dr. Fautin (or anyone else) is infallable but I think she makes a good arguement. I don't see anyone with a countering arguement that has much ground to stand on. It's impossible for one person to verify that a multi century lifespan exists but in contrast there are no studdies that I'm aware of that show them dieing of natural causes any earlier.
So, with all due respect BonsaiNut, I challenge you to prove otherwise.
As for the burden of proof, I don't think that's an entirely fair request either. Prove the existance of a God. You won't be here when it starts and you won't be here when it ends. So that makes it a bit difficult now doesn't it.
Here's an exerpt from Fautin and Allens book Anemonefish and Their Host Sea Anemones, page 120.
"It is impossible to determine age of a sea anemone, except for one that has been raised in an aquarium or tracked continuously in the wild from first settlement. A small one is not necessarily young, for coelenterates grow only if well fed and shrink if starved. Individuals of species that harbour anemonefishes have been monitored for several years with no apparent change in size (although that is difficult to measure, due to the absence of a skeleton). However, studies on other species, in field and laboratory, have led to estimated ages on the order of many decades and even several centuries. There are scattered records of temperate anemones surviving many decades in commercial aquaria, and the life-span of a small sea anemone in New Zealand has been calculated, based on actuarial tables, to be over 300 years! From such data, it is likely that most individuals of the "gigantic" sea anemones we have encountered during our field work exceed a century in age. This is also consistent with the generalization that large animals of all kinds typically are long-lived.
Coelenterates are protected quite well by their nematocysts, but some predators have developed means of evading their effect. Small tropical anemones may be eaten by butterflyfishes (see chapter 5), but large ones appear to have few enemies, and we do not know what might ultimately kill them."
I don't want to infer that Dr. Fautin (or anyone else) is infallable but I think she makes a good arguement. I don't see anyone with a countering arguement that has much ground to stand on. It's impossible for one person to verify that a multi century lifespan exists but in contrast there are no studdies that I'm aware of that show them dieing of natural causes any earlier.
So, with all due respect BonsaiNut, I challenge you to prove otherwise.
clowns101
Active member
I will have to agree with Todd on this!As he stated only 2 anemone species that Im aware of,split.Those two being the E.quadricolor,and the H.magnifica.
Actully anemones are born in a round about way.The anemones actully have eggs and sperm.The species E.quadricolor and H.magnifica have the ability to be able to produce asexually meaning that they can reproduce by division.
There have been cases where the species E.crucifer have "spawned" in captivity where the female anemone actully release the eggs.Male have done the same too by releasing a milky substance(sperm) into the tank.
Other anemones have also done similer things to the E.crucifer.Such as:
1).Haddoni
2).Malu
3).Bubble Tips
There may be more but they dont pop into mind at this point!
Hope this helps you under stand this better!
phender
Active member
First let me say that I am not an anemone scientist like Dr. Fautin. I am simply a hobbyist with a science background, but I have kept several anemones over 10 years and counting with one being over 17 before an equipment malfunction.
The above leap in logic is the part that I have trouble with. In my experience with anemones, even the "gigantic"(S. mertensii, S. gigantea, S. haddoni, H. magnifica, H. crispa) sea anemones, is that they can grow from small to full size in just a couple years. Why then would you assume that large anemones in the wild would be over 100 years old. I also don't think that adult anemones have no enemies on the reef. In a misguided attempt to rid one of my tanks of aptasia, I introduced a Klein's Butterfly fish. It got rid of the aptasia but also caused my 14" haddoni a great deal of damage before I could remove the fish. I figured for sure that a large haddoni with a wicked sting and a pair of sebae clowns to protect it would be fine. I figured wrong.
FWIW: Almost all the clownfish anemones seem to be capable of asexual reproduction. I have seen S. mertensii and S. haddoni in the process of splitting/budding. I have also seen pictures of H. crispa producing buds. In these cases the process seemed to take months as opposed to the days it takes a BTA. Of course they all reproduce sexually as well.
BonsaiNut
Premium Member
Fair enough.
Refer to the research I just posted on H. magnifica where a field study indicated an almost 50% mortality rate over 3 years on individuals in the wild that did not have clowns. Overall mortality rate (including anemones with clowns) was 29% over 3 years. If this is indicative of the average rate of mortality of H. magnifica in the wild, it is easy enough to run a regression analysis to ascertain the odds that any single anemone would live to 100 years of age. It's statistically zero.
However this does not include adjustments for asexual reproduction. In the study, the rate of asexual reproduction actually exceeded the rate of mortality
I am not going to argue that a colony of clones can self-perpetuate for over 100 years. I believe they can. I have an issue with the quotes that are mentioned in this thread (and the general tone when people refer to these quotes) which seem to indicate that any one individual anemone in the wild is likely to be very old, and large individual anemones are likely to be hundreds of years old.
Give me some time to dig up other references from other research in my files. I'll post what I find here...
I should also add that Dr. Anna Scott has been successful growing H. crispa and E. quadricolor from eggs to large adults in three years. Granted this is not in the wild, but it is at least proof that it is very possible for a large individual to be only a few years old.
Last edited:
WDLV
Skunk Hybrid Freak
Wow I'm a little intimidated. Two of the best aquarists on the site are in opposition to my stance. (no sarcasm.) :worried:
Let me just point out very quickly (pressed for time) that what happens in our tanks is a far cry from what happens/is happening out on the reefs.
The way anemones receive food on the reef does not compare to how they receive food in our systems. I have no doubt that we can grow an anemone very quickly in our systems. I have had some limited success with this myself.
As for predators, butterflies being the foremost I can think of; I have never seen during a dive sorkel or otherwise a butterfly just sit and devour an animal. Granted an anemone to a butterfly is like a boneless chicken wing but in the wild they have so many other options that do not involve a pair or a harem of anemonefish mercilessly attacking them while they try to eat. I'd think in the wild that they would tend to move on. In an aquarium where they have 6-8 ft to swim the temptation might be a little different.
Perhaps we see a natural life span a little differently. I can easily swallow that a host anemone can live as long as that if it is not killed by something else. I'm 300+ times the size of a clownfish and I still jump when they bite me. I just don't think natural predators are gonna get more than a nip or two before they decide it's just not worth the effort.
While being killed and eaten is natural, I don't consider that a natural end to a natural life span but then I might be comparing anemones to humans who overall have a pretty good chance of dieing of old age compared to those lower on the food chain.
BonsaiNut, I mostly thought you were a little hard on the guy with the quote. That's all.
Let me just point out very quickly (pressed for time) that what happens in our tanks is a far cry from what happens/is happening out on the reefs.
The way anemones receive food on the reef does not compare to how they receive food in our systems. I have no doubt that we can grow an anemone very quickly in our systems. I have had some limited success with this myself.
As for predators, butterflies being the foremost I can think of; I have never seen during a dive sorkel or otherwise a butterfly just sit and devour an animal. Granted an anemone to a butterfly is like a boneless chicken wing but in the wild they have so many other options that do not involve a pair or a harem of anemonefish mercilessly attacking them while they try to eat. I'd think in the wild that they would tend to move on. In an aquarium where they have 6-8 ft to swim the temptation might be a little different.
Perhaps we see a natural life span a little differently. I can easily swallow that a host anemone can live as long as that if it is not killed by something else. I'm 300+ times the size of a clownfish and I still jump when they bite me. I just don't think natural predators are gonna get more than a nip or two before they decide it's just not worth the effort.
While being killed and eaten is natural, I don't consider that a natural end to a natural life span but then I might be comparing anemones to humans who overall have a pretty good chance of dieing of old age compared to those lower on the food chain.
BonsaiNut, I mostly thought you were a little hard on the guy with the quote. That's all.
IIRC, the "hundred year" life span for sea anemones was attributed to some temperate anemones kept in a laboratory in England from around 1830 to just before WWII. I don't have the reference handy, but it seemed pretty solid. I have some lingering doubts about this - people have a difficult time keeping records over a few years, much less over multiple generations of researchers. Still - if you take it at face value, anemones can live that long.
We have some Actinia / Urticina coldwater anemones that were acquired as adults in 1983, making them over 27 years old - they are the same size and condition as when I first saw them 20 years ago - so I have no real difficulty extrapolating that out to at least 100 years.
We accepted a carpet anemone as a donation and it lived 16 years. We routinely cull our Entacmaea, so there is no way to know where the "parent" animal is, but the clones have been in cluture for at least 15 years.
That said, we all know that the mortality rate of aquarium animals is very high for some species - including giant anemones. I no longer will acquire carpets or H. magnifica for what is in my opinion, excessive mortality that I have not been able to routinely control.
Jay Hemdal
We have some Actinia / Urticina coldwater anemones that were acquired as adults in 1983, making them over 27 years old - they are the same size and condition as when I first saw them 20 years ago - so I have no real difficulty extrapolating that out to at least 100 years.
We accepted a carpet anemone as a donation and it lived 16 years. We routinely cull our Entacmaea, so there is no way to know where the "parent" animal is, but the clones have been in cluture for at least 15 years.
That said, we all know that the mortality rate of aquarium animals is very high for some species - including giant anemones. I no longer will acquire carpets or H. magnifica for what is in my opinion, excessive mortality that I have not been able to routinely control.
Jay Hemdal
BonsaiNut
Premium Member
I come across that way some time on these forums. It is my fault and my inability to type fast enough to be eloquent
Your comments about the difference between what happens in the wild and what happens in closed systems are very valid. It is why I posted the research about the impact the presence of clowns has on survivability and growth rates of host anemones. There are tons of variables impacting mortality in the wild that could be explored further. For example, water depth and proximity to the reef edge are both positively correlated to size and growth rates of H. magnifica. Shallower waters include many more individuals of smaller size and slower (statistically no) growth. What does this mean? Does it mean that juvenile H. magnifica that are fortunate enough to settle just inside the reef edge get the benefit of improved water flow and food access, so they are healthier and grow faster? Meanwhile, due to the calmer inshore shallow waters, the LIKELIHOOD that anemone larvae will settle closer to shore (in less optimal conditions) is actually greater. Based on this research, is it possible to conclude that the smaller, slower growing inshore anemones are actually OLDER than the larger, robust anemones in better environments?
Additionally, your thoughts about the CAUSES of mortality are interesting, but no one really knows. We assume that reduced mortality due to clownfish presence is due to clownfishes' defensive behavior, when in fact it may be due to the nutritive benefit. Why did the anemones in the study die? No one knows - just that they disappeared in the 3 month period between surveys. Does this mysterious mortality effect other anemone species at the same rate?
The reality is that mortality HAS to be high - at least for the anemones that asexually reproduce - otherwise the seas would be awash with E. quadricolors and H. magnificas.
(Since we know the asexual reproduction rates of these anemones to be high). I find it hard to believe that if mortality is high for those two species, it is very low for broadcast spawning species. It follows that mortality is high for all anemone species, and that random environmental "luck" and presence of clowns become the two deciding factors between whether an anemone lives for 10 years, or becomes some part of the food chain.
I am particularly sensitive to this subject because I have seen it before. Mass media in particular love to grab onto random factoids and hype it out of proportion. Perhaps you remember when giant clams were all supposed to be hundreds of years old... until they were able to prove you could grow a clam to 5" in a few years. Perhaps you remember when coral was supposed to take hundreds of years to grow a decent colony... until they were able to show that you could grow a basketball-sized clump in five years. Now I'm not trying to suggest that there is not some huge clam out there that is 100 years old, just like I'm not trying to suggest that some giant brain corals are not 100's of years old. But there seems to be no discrimination between what is the exception and what is the rule.
Yes, there are a few ponderosa pines that are over a thousand years old. For every one, there are easily a thousand (if not more) ponderosa pines that are not close to a thousand years old. Because it is relatively easy to ascertain a tree's age, no one would try to argue that all pine trees are a thousand years old. However this is what people are trying to do with anemones.
BTW it should be noted - the oldest trees are NOT the largest
Last edited:
Walt,
Yeah - we had to dismantle its display for major repairs and it did not adjust to being moved to a new system. This critter was a strange ranger - it had little to no zooxanthellae when we acquired it (back in the days when a twin tube shop lite was considered more than enough light). It never regained the algae despite us offering it better lighting, and we just stick fed it often to try and compensate.
Jay
WDLV
Skunk Hybrid Freak
BonsaiNut,
We could debate the particulars for some time to come but I think you and I are on the same page and I see your points. I suppose that I could concede a little and say that while I believe that it is very plausible that anemones CAN live several hundred years in the wild, that it is probably not the norm for the average host anemone and like most lower life forms the survival rate for the young is quite low... proving this concept in a way that I think we can all accept.
We could debate the particulars for some time to come but I think you and I are on the same page and I see your points. I suppose that I could concede a little and say that while I believe that it is very plausible that anemones CAN live several hundred years in the wild, that it is probably not the norm for the average host anemone and like most lower life forms the survival rate for the young is quite low... proving this concept in a way that I think we can all accept.
Last edited:
WDLV
Skunk Hybrid Freak
ygpm
BonsaiNut,
Just a couple of observations regarding the growth rates in your examples; the rate of coral growth in the wild (and their subsequent age) is pretty well known as they can be cored, and the rings counted similar to trees. In captivity, the rate is sometimes faster, and there is often a corresponding lack of skeleton density (think - a bolting Serissa foetida!). I never heard anyone attribute great age to branching SPS, but boulder corals can be ancient.
The clam analogy also has to looked at a bit more critically: there are all sorts of cases where juvenile growth rates for a species far exceed the rate of larger specimens - that is actually the norm. Two reasons - it behooves the clam to grow as fast as possible to a size large enough to rule out certain predators. The second reason has to do with length/mass. As an animal's length increases linearly, its mass goes up by the cube. Since it is mass that the clam is building, as it grows incrementally larger, it needs to produce a LOT more biomass. So - it does not take the same energy for a clam to grow from 2" to 3" as it does for it to grow from 3" to 4". Since the food is constant (light) it will take the clam longer to "add inches" as it grows. Things really slow down as the organism becomes more massive. Finally, there is the really old Tridacna at Waikiki Aq. that isn't nearly full sized yet, but I think it is like 30 years old.
Jay
Just a couple of observations regarding the growth rates in your examples; the rate of coral growth in the wild (and their subsequent age) is pretty well known as they can be cored, and the rings counted similar to trees. In captivity, the rate is sometimes faster, and there is often a corresponding lack of skeleton density (think - a bolting Serissa foetida!). I never heard anyone attribute great age to branching SPS, but boulder corals can be ancient.
The clam analogy also has to looked at a bit more critically: there are all sorts of cases where juvenile growth rates for a species far exceed the rate of larger specimens - that is actually the norm. Two reasons - it behooves the clam to grow as fast as possible to a size large enough to rule out certain predators. The second reason has to do with length/mass. As an animal's length increases linearly, its mass goes up by the cube. Since it is mass that the clam is building, as it grows incrementally larger, it needs to produce a LOT more biomass. So - it does not take the same energy for a clam to grow from 2" to 3" as it does for it to grow from 3" to 4". Since the food is constant (light) it will take the clam longer to "add inches" as it grows. Things really slow down as the organism becomes more massive. Finally, there is the really old Tridacna at Waikiki Aq. that isn't nearly full sized yet, but I think it is like 30 years old.
Jay
BonsaiNut
Premium Member
And obviously, REGARDLESS of how old they are in nature, the solution lies in:
(1) Improved understanding of their care needs, so that we can reduce mortality in captivity.
(2) Successful aquaculture to provide captive-raised individuals, as well as to recolonize natural areas that have seen native population declines.
davocean
Active member
Wow, lots to read here, but just tossing in my exp.
Had my crispa and my doreensis for 5 and a half years, and I'm sure they would still be fine and w/ me if I did not downsize and sell them w/ system.
I have read that they can live indefinitely, or similar to lifespan of say a tree just for example, but I can't say or prove anything to support this theory.
Had my crispa and my doreensis for 5 and a half years, and I'm sure they would still be fine and w/ me if I did not downsize and sell them w/ system.
I have read that they can live indefinitely, or similar to lifespan of say a tree just for example, but I can't say or prove anything to support this theory.
BonsaiNut
Premium Member
Jay, I think the issue is that people generalize, and then the media picks it up, and then it becomes "fact". You and I both know that boulder corals can be ancient and branching sps not so much, but go to any coral reef in the world, and people will quote (and remember) only the most outrageous facts. Thus, sps gets lumped together with boulder coral as being almost infinitely old, and the next thing you know the world has banned trade in sps corals because they are a fragile, ancient, and irreplaceable resource. (All my hyperbole) The reality can be very different, especially with the advent of coral "farming" where tips of sps colonies are removed and grown out as mini-colonies in separate facilities, while leaving the parent colony relatively unharmed out in the wild.
The same can be said for tridacnids. A few ancient individuals are found to be 200 years old, and the next thing you know all clams become "ancient" and all trade in them is banned (despite the fact that the primary pressure on their population is due to fishing). Suddenly a garage aquaculture operation starts up and low and behold - a marketable clam can be grown in a sustainable fashion in less than three years! Amazing what science can do once you shelve the urban legends.
I can see it coming... anemones are the new "protected species" because they "live for 100's of years" in the wild (no facts needed).
P.S. Don't get me started with Serissa foetida
clowns101
Active member
Jay, I think the issue is that people generalize, and then the media picks it up, and then it becomes "fact". You and I both know that boulder corals can be ancient and branching sps not so much, but go to any coral reef in the world, and people will quote (and remember) only the most outrageous facts. Thus, sps gets lumped together with boulder coral as being almost infinitely old, and the next thing you know the world has banned trade in sps corals because they are a fragile, ancient, and irreplaceable resource. (All my hyperbole) The reality can be very different, especially with the advent of coral "farming" where tips of sps colonies are removed and grown out as mini-colonies in separate facilities, while leaving the parent colony relatively unharmed out in the wild.
The same can be said for tridacnids. A few ancient individuals are found to be 200 years old, and the next thing you know all clams become "ancient" and all trade in them is banned (despite the fact that the primary pressure on their population is due to fishing). Suddenly a garage aquaculture operation starts up and low and behold - a marketable clam can be grown in a sustainable fashion in less than three years! Amazing what science can do once you shelve the urban legends.
I can see it coming... anemones are the new "protected species" because they "live for 100's of years" in the wild (no facts needed).
P.S. Don't get me started with Serissa foetida
Agree with just about every thing said!
WDLV
Skunk Hybrid Freak
Although we have managed to go slightly off topic here, I think the spirit in which this thread was started is still relavent.... If you really want to know what the life span is in captivity for anemones, do an advanced search in Google. Put "www.reefcentral.com" in the domain field and the words "help" and "anemone" in the word search field and see what you come up with. The point being that you can easily do a survey on anemone survival rates in captivity just by reading the outcomes on this site. Most result in death in the first few weeks or months....
The ones that don't start with "help" in the title start out with 'lookey here' and end up with warnings about bleached specimens and either they die or you never hear from the original poster again.
Then there are those who are skilled and those who are lucky. Those are the threads that get the most hits and (I think) contribute to the beginner thinking these animals are reasonable to keep one month into the hobby. They don't want to read about the guy who is struggling to keep one alive, though those threads often have very good advise about both what to do and what not to do.
The ones that don't start with "help" in the title start out with 'lookey here' and end up with warnings about bleached specimens and either they die or you never hear from the original poster again.
Then there are those who are skilled and those who are lucky. Those are the threads that get the most hits and (I think) contribute to the beginner thinking these animals are reasonable to keep one month into the hobby. They don't want to read about the guy who is struggling to keep one alive, though those threads often have very good advise about both what to do and what not to do.
