xenia problems

[MyFishHaveTat2s]

ok... never posted a help thread but... everything in my tank (29 biocube HQI) is doing great, all "newbie" softies are doing great... mushrooms, candy canes, frog spawn, cro? clam, green bubble tip, leather, and gsp... bought a pretty good size xenia (2 weeks) ... its doing horrible... hasnt opened in a few days, have moved all over tank thinking it was lighting... but dont know... havnt tested everything yet but what I know is as follows..
PH 8.2
Alk 12
calcium was a lil high, dont remember number...
Amon, trites and trates were at 0
havnt tested phos...
temp runs between 76-79 daily
photo period is 8-10 hrs.. not on timer (depends on when i get home from work)
Alk was low, calc a lil high... dosing w reef fusion 1 & 2... stopped calc, increased alk a lil bit about 5 days ago...
I do about 5 gal water change every 10 days or so.
any suggestions from the limited info I have given?
ty for ant insight you may have... Dean
oh yeah... fish are 2 o. clowns, 6line wrasse and pink spot goby fed w marine cusine 1/2 cube daily, some spot feeding on anemone and candy canes, but only 1/2 cube daily between everyone.
Did i just buy a bum....lol?

 

[reeffreak25]

Your Alk is a little high, I doubt your calcium is high too. I keep mine around 8 dKH. Are you dosing things like iodine too? Xenia are notorious for melting away when parameters get out of wack, and sometimes for no apparent reason at all. Your calcium demand may be low enough to avoid dosing completely. You might try stopping all of your dosing for a while and just keep your parameters in check with water changes. After you've been doing only water changes for a while, then check your alkalinity and calcium every few days to get an idea of how much calcium/alk you should be dosing and how frequently. Be careful manipulating alkalinity, it can cause a lot of problems, not just with stony corals. Some people go a little crazy trying to manipulate different parameters too much, doing more harm than good.

If your xenia just hasn't opened, put it low and leave it. You don't want to keep moving stuff around causing more stress. If it's melting, I'd pitch it. My xenia grows like Chaeto, want some?

Check this link out http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-05/rhf/index.php

 

[Rudolph]

I have mine high in my tank and they grow like crazy, however, I have T5's so with MH I would put them to the lowest level in your tank and leave it for a bit....two days is not a long time

....I just cut a couple of nice size ones and they floated away while I was distracted. I noticed them on the side of my tank just the other day and it looks like they are attaching to a couple of lose small rocks...if so, they are yours if you want them...but let me know within two weeks, otherwise they will hit be extracted...

 

[Mako Shark II]

Dirty your water up and skip a water change. Then see what happens. These things feed on less than perfect water.

Could be chemical warfare.

 

[reeffreak25]

Might be worth noting that my Xenia are tied in to the same system as my SPS. I don't run a ULNS but my water isn't dirty. I really think that alkalinity is the biggest issue here, but there may be other things contributing as well.

It's also worth noting that Xenia in general are very adaptable to a wide range of water conditions and light intensity. I have four different species that are thriving in my system. You're welcome to a piece of each, if you want.

 

[Rudolph]

Cubes are great, but while Jeff may be correct in that they thrive in many light conditions, I don't think they may like being a few inches from a MH. I have a 29 cube as well and it has the older T5 lighting. Many of my softies that do well in my 75 struggle in my cube and I am confident it is the intensity of the lighting. However you have an even more intense MH that basically sits on the top of your tank where many MH tank lights are several inches above the tank and they are used with much deeper tanks. And once you add any decent amount of LR, you can be a few inches from the top of the tank (larger tanks rarely go that high). I have taken some of my softies that were unhappy and moved them to the sand and some adjusted and did well and some still struggled. Then I fragged some (or took the whole coral) and put them in my 75 (and 6++ inches lower) and their color came back and they are growing again. So I would agree with Jeff on putting it in on the lowest level in your tank, or the sand if possible and give it some time to see how it does.

Second, go buy a timer for your light and get some consistency there so you can control your lighting period....:spin2:

 

[MyFishHaveTat2s]

ok, moved to the sand, gonna quit dosing all together for awhile and see what happens.... Thank you for your help, and offers for some replacements. hopefully mine will pull outta his funk...It doesnt seem to be melting, just not opening, so I think there is still hope...

 

[reeffreak25]

Xenia and Heteroxenia occur in 0-30 feet of water in the wild, so I wouldn't be so quick to blame the light. Not that it isn't a possible contributor...

 

[Water Tecn]

THIS IS FROM ANOTHER SITE, WHO JUST SUMMED IT UP BETTER THAN ME

had the chance to attend a most informative lecture by Michael Janes on effects of closed systems on Xeniidae.

to be brief, and bring most of his points to a conclusion here are some of his findings/notes:

issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . suggested points to investigate:

never pulses ----------------------->species, light intensity, water clarity, low alkalinity
pulses periodically ---------------->unstable water chemistry. activated carbon. additives.
stopped pulsing-------------------->temperature too high/low. low ORP. aggression.
detached from base--------------->algae overgrowth. physical damage or aggression. infection.
loss of polyps----------------------->parasitic macro-organism. fish population. aggression.
colony loss/melted----------------->coral mix / allelopathy. disease. stress from shipping.

that being said...the most interesting point that was mentioned, was that pulsification of xenia showed direct correlation to potassium levels in the water. xenia began to pulse when potassium was added. careful how you take that...I AM NOT SAYING NEITHER TO ADD OR NOT TO ADD POTASSIUM. anecdotally it seems to be a direct causation. also O2 and dissolved O2 seem to play an important role. some species of xenia do not pulse. nor do we have solid evidence of why pulsification occurs, though it is suspected that it is part of the photosynthesis process.

i personally think pulsification is taking place to build up energy transformed from the photosynthesis. by the pinnules trapping organic particulate matter and retracting it into the anthocodiae...we sometimes notice that the tentacles elongate and shrink often at different times during the day. putting all of this together, i personally think that as the xenia pulses, collecting zooxanthellae, pulls it down when it retracts from strecthing out, and by compacting it at the base for growth. though i have no scientific proof of this...it's a completely anecdotal "theory".

it's important to realize that pulsification has no bearing on coral health! a completely healthy species may never pulse...

after the lecture, i asked michael what affect or necessity the coral has of iodide/iodine...the answer...no one knows...but it's possible none at all. so many books out there suggest that "iodide levels are important to this coral." i believe it's more myth than fact. eric borneman happened to be sitting in on the session, and i feel he agrees that it's not known, so how can we support that iodide is or isn't a key factor in the health of xenia. there is no evidence that there is, so why are we always told to add iodide???

on that note, iodide levels in natural sea water is somewhere in the neighborhood of .06 ppm. honestly, concentrations in most synthetic salt mixes are higher than that, as well, natural food i.e. shrimp has natural level of iodine in it...so it's like dosing right there. so why should we have to add iodide anyhow?

if you have specific questions about the seminar, or would like to see Janes's notes he can be reached at: mjanes@aquatouch.com

 

[Rudolph]

Xenia and Heteroxenia occur in 0-30 feet of water in the wild, so I wouldn't be so quick to blame the light. Not that it isn't a possible contributor...

I am not sure how to extrapolate sun and 30 feet of water to MH and a few inches (slicer Jay probably could) but I can offer the benefit of what worked for me and what unscientifically appeared to be the largest contributor in my circumstances...light. I am sure there is a long list of other potential issues. So he can either give it a try, use some of the other suggestions, or go stick it back in the ocean somewhere between 0 and 30 feet.....lol

 

[reeffreak25]

I am not sure how that piece of information can be used nor how to extrapolate sun and 30 feet of water to MH and a few inches (slicer Jay probably could) but I can offer the benefit of what worked for me and what unscientifically appeared to be the largest contributor...light. So he can either give it a try, use some of the other suggestions, or go stick it back in the ocean somewhere between 0 and 30 feet.....lol

Point being, in general bright light is appreciated by Xenia. All new arrivals should be acclimated to lighting, but 150w HQI's are relatively weak and I don't think an initially healthy specimen would be phased by that light. He never stated he put it just inches from the bulb, so I didn't jump to that conclusion. I've taken it (X. umbellata and X. elongata specifically) from under 23w CF bulbs and put it under 175w 15k Iwasakis (very high PAR lamp)with no ill effects. He did state, however, that his alk was low five days ago and now it's high. He also said for the past several days it hasn't opened, so it's a logical conclusion based on the info that was given. But hey, for all we know he could have a gorilla crab poking at it every night.

 

[reeffreak25]

I didn't want to write an essay on my first reply here, but given there has been some debate about the cause, I figured I would go a little deeper...

I tried to base my reply off of the information provided and nothing else. In the parameters that were listed he said that his alkalinity was low and now it is at 12. Given that 7-11dKH are generally what is considered optimal, if it was low (< 7) and now it's at 12 (a significant swing in a short amount of time, even if alk was a little higher) this is a major cause for concern. To blame the light and not address a major alk swing would be a mistake. I mentioned putting it low in the very first reply because yes light could be a contributing factor, but again based on all of the info, this was surely not acting alone.

Kerry, I understand why you're defending yourself about the light, but are you certain that when you switched your corals to your 29 that other factors weren't coming into play? Maybe they hadn't had time to acclimate to the new water chemistry until you moved them, and maybe others never could make the switch due to some factor that was never determined. Some softies like Ricordea and Discosoma prefer lower light. Did you examine all of your water parameters and any other possible causes?

If my experience is coming into question, then all I can say is I've been keeping marine aquariums since 2002 and I've been reefing since 2005. Any info that I pass on is from reputable sources, not from stuff that I've read from random people on internet message boards. Any info based on my experiences is based on years of experience and not a few short months. Hopefully the pictures that I've posted and future conversations will prove that I'm worth my salt...

 

[Logiq]

hey reeffreak what does cheato look like when its dead and I tried it in my tank but got no growth maybe its the light im using idk. If you got some to get rid of let me know

 

[Mako Shark II]

THIS IS FROM ANOTHER SITE, WHO JUST SUMMED IT UP BETTER THAN ME

had the chance to attend a most informative lecture by Michael Janes on effects of closed systems on Xeniidae.

to be brief, and bring most of his points to a conclusion here are some of his findings/notes:

issue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . suggested points to investigate:

never pulses ----------------------->species, light intensity, water clarity, low alkalinity
pulses periodically ---------------->unstable water chemistry. activated carbon. additives.
stopped pulsing-------------------->temperature too high/low. low ORP. aggression.
detached from base--------------->algae overgrowth. physical damage or aggression. infection.
loss of polyps----------------------->parasitic macro-organism. fish population. aggression.
colony loss/melted----------------->coral mix / allelopathy. disease. stress from shipping.

that being said...the most interesting point that was mentioned, was that pulsification of xenia showed direct correlation to potassium levels in the water. xenia began to pulse when potassium was added. careful how you take that...I AM NOT SAYING NEITHER TO ADD OR NOT TO ADD POTASSIUM. anecdotally it seems to be a direct causation. also O2 and dissolved O2 seem to play an important role. some species of xenia do not pulse. nor do we have solid evidence of why pulsification occurs, though it is suspected that it is part of the photosynthesis process.

i personally think pulsification is taking place to build up energy transformed from the photosynthesis. by the pinnules trapping organic particulate matter and retracting it into the anthocodiae...we sometimes notice that the tentacles elongate and shrink often at different times during the day. putting all of this together, i personally think that as the xenia pulses, collecting zooxanthellae, pulls it down when it retracts from strecthing out, and by compacting it at the base for growth. though i have no scientific proof of this...it's a completely anecdotal "theory".

it's important to realize that pulsification has no bearing on coral health! a completely healthy species may never pulse...

after the lecture, i asked michael what affect or necessity the coral has of iodide/iodine...the answer...no one knows...but it's possible none at all. so many books out there suggest that "iodide levels are important to this coral." i believe it's more myth than fact. eric borneman happened to be sitting in on the session, and i feel he agrees that it's not known, so how can we support that iodide is or isn't a key factor in the health of xenia. there is no evidence that there is, so why are we always told to add iodide???

on that note, iodide levels in natural sea water is somewhere in the neighborhood of .06 ppm. honestly, concentrations in most synthetic salt mixes are higher than that, as well, natural food i.e. shrimp has natural level of iodine in it...so it's like dosing right there. so why should we have to add iodide anyhow?

if you have specific questions about the seminar, or would like to see Janes's notes he can be reached at: mjanes@aquatouch.com

Great Post ~! Thanks H2O Tech