Harlequinmania

Three penguin species that share the Western Antarctic Peninsula for breeding grounds have been affected in different ways by the higher temperatures brought on by global warming, according to new research. View the full article

Scientists have discovered four new species of the colorful Insulamon freshwater crab. But various mining projects on the island of Palawan pose a huge threat to these creatures. View the full article

Click through to see the images. Phosphate is an ion of great concern to reef aquarists. In fact, aside from calcium and alkalinity, it is probably the chemistry topic on which reef aquarists focus the most. Much of this concern is warranted, with phosphate potentially contributing to algae problems, poor coloration of corals and other invertebrates, and growth of most photosynthetic organisms. For these reasons, every reef should have a plan for export of phosphate in one or more ways, and the choices abound. Topics relating to desired target levels and the many export methods have been covered in detail by me and other authors in the past, and I won't dwell on them here. What I will focus on relates to the various sources of phosphate in reef aquaria, and how important each one actually is to an operating aquarium. There have long been numerous misunderstandings of these source issues, but in the last two years it seems that these misunderstandings have become more common and are sometimes driving aquarists to unwarranted actions. In part, I attribute this recent uptick in confusion to the newly available phosphate checkers from Hanna. Without getting into any discussion of their relative accuracy or the merits of using them, I think many aquarists are being lured into inappropriate actions by finding phosphate in various additives that they were not aware of previously. To paraphrase Field of Dreams: "Build it and they will find phosphate". In order for aquarists to interpret what these found values mean, they need to have an understanding of the overall phosphate balance in coral reef aquaria. This article strives to provide the understanding necessary to put phosphate issues into proper perspective. So just for starters, let's see how many of you would be concerned by each of these scenarios: My purified fresh water I use for top off has 0.05 ppm phosphate in it. Since I'm trying to keep my tank at 0.02 ppm, that's obviously too much. What should I do? I put a cube of my frozen fish food in a half cup of water and did a phosphate test on the water. I got a whopping value of 1.0 ppm!!! That's a huge problem, right? I put a teaspoon of my GAC (granular activated carbon) in a glass of fresh water, and then tested the water for phosphate. It was dark blue and I could not even get a reading there was so much. Time to look for another brand, right? I know I feed my fish and corals, but I carefully rinse my foods, use only frozen foods, and only feed enough that all is eaten. So I have no idea where my phosphate is coming from. Must be my RO/DI isn't working as there is no other possible source. Experience tells me that 95% or more of reef aquarists agree that the first three are problems to be solved, and at least half have the same feelings as expressed in number four. In reality, the first three are really not substantial issues at all and reefers need to understand why. Scenario four sums up the main point reefers need to understand: foods are the primarily source of phosphate in almost any aquarium that is being fed, regardless of the choice of foods and rinsing etc. In most aquaria, this source dominates all other sources by a factor of ten to a hundred or more, even if scenarios 1-3 are also true! Food Sources of Phosphate In order to begin to understand phosphate sources in aquaria, let's first look at foods. Contrary to what many suppose, phosphate is not something that can be avoided in a nutritious fish food. Phosphorus is present in many of the biomolecules of life, so every natural tissue that goes into a fish food will have substantial phosphorus in it. Phospholipids make up a substantial part of cell membranes. The genetic code of every organism is made of DNA, and that DNA contains a phosphate bridge between each base pair (Figure 1 shows how much phosphate is really in DNA). The way that all cells get energy is through conversion of ATP to ADP, and these molecules contain 3 and 2 phosphate moieties respectively (Figure 2). Figure 1. The structure of DNA as drawn by Madeleine Price Ball for Wikipedia. Phosphorus is shown in yellow. Figure 2. The structure of ATP showing the three phosphate moieties on the left hand side. Most importantly for nutritional aspects of foods and phosphate, proteins contain phosphate. Many budding chemists understand that proteins are made of amino acids, and none of the standard amino acids contain phosphate, so where does the phosphate come from? It turns out that organisms attach phosphate to the hydroxyl group of the amino acids threonine and tyrosine in proteins to turn on and off many types of protein functions. Consequently, proteins often contain a lot of phosphate, making it very hard to make nutritionally complete foods without substantial phosphate. The relationship between phosphate and protein is so tight that people who suffer from excess phosphate (typically those with kidney disease, and especially those on dialysis) are unable to get enough protein without getting too much phosphate. These patients take phosphate binders to bind dietary phosphate before it is absorbed from their small intestines because restricting dietary phosphate just is not effective enough. Quantitation of Phosphate in Foods How much phosphate is in foods? A lot, but it does depend on the food. Some aquarium foods state on the label a minimum specified amount of phosphorus (phosphorus is the atom, P, at the center of a phosphate ion, PO4---). Analyses of foods often quote an amount of phosphorus instead of phosphate as the unit of measure. Like feet and inches, these are just different units of measure of the same thing, and values of phosphorus are multiplied by 3.1 to get values to phosphate. For foods that are intended for human consumption (such as shrimp or clams), we can look up known data on phosphorus content. Unfortunately, many manufacturers of aquarium foods do not supply phosphorus values and they are complex mixtures of many ingredients which preclude us from looking them up. Perhaps some manufacturers are concerned about scaring aquarists about the phosphate content. Fortunately, Ron Shimek analyzed a variety of foods several years ago and this data set can also be used to understand how much phosphorus is in various commercial aquarium foods. Tables 1-3 contain data on the phosphorus and protein content of many aquarium foods, with Table 1 containing dry foods, Table 2 containing frozen foods, and Table 3 containing grocery store foods that are sometimes used in aquaria. These raw phosphorus values alone allow us to know how much phosphorus is entering the aquarium by feeding a certain food, and we will use these numbers in several analyses later in this article. One must be wary of relying too much on such numbers for comparative purposes, however, since some foods have substantially more moisture or fillers in the food, which serve to drop the percent phosphorus, but are not necessarily better choices from a phosphorus standpoint. One simply needs to feed more of a wetter food than a drier one to attain the same total nutrition, offsetting the lower claimed phosphorus value. One useful way to compare foods to each other is by comparing the phosphorus to protein ratio. In this crude way, we can eliminate effects due to moisture and fillers. Obviously this method has its own flaws since the nutritional value of foods is far more complex than a protein value alone provides, but it will allow us to understand among similar types of foods, which ones seem to provide more or less phosphorus. In order to help guide the reader, I have chosen to show the higher phosphorus to protein foods in red and the lower ones in green in Tables 1-3. The cutoff values I used are completely arbitrary, and one should definitely not make a choice of food based on this criterion alone. Nevertheless, several points are apparent: Dry and frozen foods vary substantially in phosphorus to protein content. There are high and low phosphorus foods in both categories. On balance, one could not say from this data that typical dry foods are any worse in this regard than are typical frozen foods. With the exception of seaweeds, grocery store foods do generally seem to have a lower phosphorus to protein ratio than many other choices, although several Ocean Nutrition frozen foods are similarly low. This presumes that one is using grocery store foods that are not treated with phosphate to preserve freshness in the processing plant, but that is a concern for many of these materials. Shrimp seem to be a standout in terms of a low protein to phosphorus ratio for grocery store foods. Fish with bones have a high phosphorus content, since bones are modified calcium phosphate, but whether these bones are fully digested or not probably depends on what eats them and how long one otherwise waits for them to decompose. Table 1. Phosphorus and protein content of some common dry aquarium foods. Food Protein (mg/g) Phosphorus (mg/g) Phosphorus/Protein(w/w) Source of Data Brine Shrimp Direct Golden Pearls 550 15 0.027 Shimek Brine Shrimp Direct Plankton Gold Flakes 490 8.3 0.017 Shimek Cobalt Aquatics Brine Shrimp Flakes 440 10 0.023 Label Cobalt Aquatics Spirulina Flakes 450 10 0.022 Label IO Marine Chips Herbivore 460 9 0.020 Label IO Marine Chips Omnivore 460 11 0.024 Label IO Marine Grazing Block 40 0.5 0.013 Label IO Marine Pellets Herbivore 440 10 0.023 Label IO Marine Pellets Omnivore 470 12 0.026 Label IO Seaweed Grazing Blocks 25 0.3 0.012 Label Nutrafin Max Marine Angel Sinking Pellets 440 8 0.018 Label OSI Marine Flake 470 6 0.013 Label TetraAlgae Vegetable Enhanced Crisps 460 10 0.022 Label TetraMarine Flakes 460 12 0.026 Label TetraMarine Granules 440 14 0.032 Label Vibragro Saltwater Staple 300 15 0.050 Shimek Table 2. Phosphorus and protein content of some common frozen aquarium foods. Food Protein (mg/g) Phosphorus (mg/g) Phosphorus/Protein(w/w) Source of Data Direct Tahitian Blend Cryopaste 44 1.4 0.032 Shimek Frozen Plankton/Krill Brine Shrimp 88 1.6 0.018 Shimek Gamma Foods Lancefish 180 4.4 0.024 Shimek Hikari Bio-Pure Clam On A Half Shell 32.9 3 0.090 Label Hikari Bio-Pure Clam On A Half Shell (meat only) 128.4 4.1 0.032 Label Ocean Nutrition Frozen Formula 1 160 1.1 0.007 Shimek Ocean Nutrition Frozen Formula 2 62 1.2 0.019 Shimek Ocean Nutrition Frozen mysis 52 0.1 0.002 Label Ocean Nutrition Frozen Prime Reef 130 0.9 0.007 Shimek Oregon Desert Brine Shrimp Company Silversides 42 4 0.095 Shimek San Francisco Brand Frozen Brine Shrimp 31 0.72 0.023 Shimek Table 3. Phosphorus and protein content of some common grocery store foods used in reef aquaria. Food Protein (mg/g) Phosphorus (mg/g) Phosphorus/Protein(w/w) Source of Data Broccoli 30 0.66 0.022 analysis Clams (no shell) 128 1.69 0.013 analysis Clams (no shell) 128 1.69 0.013 analysis Cod 179 1.74 0.010 analysis Cod 229 2.23 0.010 analysis Eel 184 2.16 0.012 analysis Eel 186 2.16 0.012 analysis Kelp 17 0.42 0.025 analysis Mackerel 186 2.17 0.012 analysis Mussel 119 1.97 0.017 analysis Nori 290 6.4 0.022 Shimek Octopus 149 1.86 0.013 analysis Oyster (no shell) 70 1.35 0.019 analysis Oyster (no shell) 71 1.35 0.019 analysis Salmon 204 2.4 0.012 analysis Sardine 209 3.66 0.018 analysis Scallops 168 2.19 0.013 analysis Shrimp 209 1.36 0.007 analysis Shrimp 210 0.7 0.004 analysis Spirulina 59 1.1 0.019 analysis Squid 156 2.2 0.014 analysis Wakame (seaweed) 30 0.8 0.027 analysis Impact of Foods on the Aquarium Phosphate Balance Now we come to the heart of the issue. The actual amount of phosphorus present in foods and what it means. In order to understand the effects of foods, we need to understand what happens to them when added to an aquarium. Some aquarists are under the misconception that eaten foods do not contribute to the free phosphate in the water. Many aquarists are told the mantra of feeding only as much as is eaten, and they confound this idea with the assumption that when doing so, one minimizes the phosphate release. That idea is simply untrue. A fish or other organism that eats foods takes in substantial phosphate, as shown above. But what happens to it? If the organism is not actually expanding in size (such as an adult green chromis, or a person), the phosphate that is taken in is almost entirely excreted back into the water. The only exception to that process is the very small amount of phosphorus that goes into eggs or sperm, and since in most aquaria those items are rapidly consumed by other organisms, the phosphorus will ultimately get into the water. Growing organisms do take up a small amount of phosphorus from the diet and retain it in their growing tissues, but the emphasis is on small. A study of a fish farm with rapidly growing rainbow trout in the ocean showed that 78-82% of the phosphorus feed to the fish was lost to the environment. A second aquaculture study using normal fish foods showed that 62% of the fed phosphate was released to the environment, with 35% being released as soluble phosphate available directly to algae, and 27% as phosphorus in fecal pellets (which if not removed, will break down in an aquarium releasing the phosphate again). Another study showed that 81.5% of commercial diet phosphate was released to the environment, but that with a "special" diet with low phosphate and low fish meal this could be reduced to 64% lost. A fourth study showed that growing fish fed slightly less phosphate than they need (to optimize theoretical uptake) take up and retain different phosphate sources differently. Using a purified protein diet, they observed retention of 72% of the phosphorus, 51% retention of phosphorus from added fish bone meal, and higher levels of uptake and retention for inorganic phosphate supplements (such as sodium phosphate). This sort of study is of concern in aquaculture settings due to environmental contamination due to the released phosphorus and nitrogen. To my knowledge, however, it has never been done in a reef aquarium. Such phosphorus balance studies have also been performed in people for many years. In adults it is clear that nearly all phosphate taken up is excreted, mostly in the urine and some in the feces. Even in young growing children, the amount of phosphorus retained from the diet is only 5-20% of that consumed, with 80-95% excreted in the urine and feces. While such studies are fairly far removed from reef aquaria, they do supporting the idea that organisms take in a lot more phosphorus than they retain, even when growing. Consequently, reef aquarists should expect that much of the phosphorus added to a reef aquarium in the form of foods ultimately ends up in the water as phosphate. Whether that portion getting into the water is 95% or 35% won't substantially impact the conclusions below that foods add a very large amount of phosphate. Quantitation of the Food Impact Aquarium Phosphate Using the assumption that most of the phosphorus present in foods ultimately ends up as phosphate in the aquarium, we can calculate roughly what that effect is. Even if the actual number is a half or a quarter of that added, getting the ballpark information is very useful to gauge the importance of this phosphate source. Obviously the calculated value depends on how much of what is fed to what size aquarium. Table 4 shows a variety of possible feeding schemes that an aquarist might use on a hypothetical 100 gallon (379 L; actual water volume) aquarium. Aquarists can decide for themselves how these regimens compare to their own feed schedules. Table 4. Phosphate additions to a 100 gallon actual water volume aquarium with different daily feeding regimens. Foods Fed Phosphorus Added Daily (mg) Equivalent Phosphate Added Daily (mg) Equivalent Phosphate Concentration Added Daily (ppm) 1 Prime Reef Cube 2.7 8.4 0.022 1 Prime Reef Cube1 Formula 1 Cube 6.0 18.6 0.049 1 Formula 2 Cube1 Mysis Cube 3.9 12.1 0.032 IO Marine Omnivore Chips (2 g) 22 68 0.18 IO Marine Omnivore Chips (1 g)Silversides (1/2 teaspoon)Nori (2.5 g = large sheet) 37 115 0.30 Obviously there is a big range depending on how much is fed. What is surprising to many folks, however, is how large that number is relative to typical target levels of phosphate in reef aquaria, which might be something like 0.03 ppm or less. Even the light feeding of a single cube of a relatively low phosphate frozen food to this aquarium supplied most of that target amount in a single feeding. Heavy feeding added ten times that amount in a single day. In short, this high daily addition rate is why phosphate control is often very difficult or reef aquaria. Rinsing Foods and the Effect on Phosphate Now that we have some information on the phosphate in foods, we can critically examine the concern that many aquarists have about foods, and specifically their rinsing of frozen foods before use. A typical test you see is someone taking a cube of fish food, thawing it, and putting it into a half cup of water. They then test that water for phosphate and find it "off the charts". Let's assume that means 1 ppm phosphate, which would give a very dark blue color in many phosphate tests. Bear in mind this is a thought problem, not an actual measured value, but it is typical of what people think the answer is. Is that a lot of phosphate? Well, there are two ways to think of the answer. The first way is as a portion of the total phosphate in that food. A half cup of water at 1 ppm (1 mg/L) phosphate contains a total of 0.12 mg of phosphate. A cube of Formula 2 contains about 11.2 mg of phosphate. So the hypothetical rinsing step has removed about 1 percent of the phosphate in that food. Not really worthwhile, in my opinion, but that decision is one every aquarist can make for themselves. The second way to look at this rinsing is with respect to how much it reduces the boost to the aquarium phosphate concentration. Using the same calculation as above of 0.12 mg of phosphate, and adding that to 100 gallons total water volume, we find that phosphate that was rinsed away would have boosted the "in tank" phosphate concentration by 0.12 mg/379 L = 0.0003 ppm. That amount washed away does not seem significant with respect to the "in tank" target level of about 50-100 times that level (say, 0.015 to 0.03 ppm), nor does it seem significant relative to the total amount of phosphate actually added each day in foods (which is perhaps 50-1000 times as much, based on input rates from Table 4. Again, the conclusion I make is that rinsing is not really worthwhile, in my opinion. Comparison of Food Sources of Phosphate to Other Sources What about other sources of phosphate, like the "crappy" RO/DI water containing 0.05 ppm phosphate? A similar analysis will show it equally unimportant relative to foods. Let's assume that the aquarist in question adds 1% of the total tank volume each day with RO/DI to replace evaporation. Simple math shows that the 0.05 ppm in the RO/DI becomes 0.0005 ppm added each day to the phosphate concentration in the aquarium. That dilution step is critical, taking a scary number like 0.05 ppm down to an almost meaningless 0.0005 ppm daily addition. Since that 0.0005 ppm is 40-600 times lower than the amount added each day in foods (Table 4), it does not seem worthy of the angst many aquarists put on such measurements. That said, tap water could have as much as 5 ppm phosphate, and that value could then become a dominating source of phosphate and would be quite problematic. Purifying tap water is important for this and many other reasons. The same sort of calculation applies to analyzing other phosphate issues, such as the GAC in scenario three. The issue of finding "high" phosphate in GAC soaked in fresh water was frequently quoted as a reason to use one or the other brand of GAC, and probably still is. But simple analysis as shown above for the food rinsing puts the lie to this being a big problem. One needs to consider how much GAC one will really use in the aquarium and how often it is added in order to interpret how important the added phosphate is. A typical recommendation might be 1 cup of GAC per 100 gallons of aquarium water, and to change it in 4-6 weeks. Let's assume we detect 0.5 ppm phosphate when a teaspoon is placed in a cup of water, and we get scared by the dark blue color during the test. Is this reasonable? That 0.5 ppm from a teaspoon in a cup of water translates to 0.015 ppm phosphate when a cup is used in 100 gallons. That 0.015 ppm may be significant, being a typical target concentration level for reef aquaria and amounting to about half to a twentieth of the amount added daily in foods, but remember, it is used for 4-6 weeks. During those 4-6 weeks before the next replacement, foods add 50-700 times as much phosphate. So while it is not unreasonable to look for another brand of GAC, to blame phosphate or algae issues in the aquarium on its use would stretch credibility because it is a very tiny portion of the total phosphate being added. Conclusion Foods are by far the most important source of phosphate in most aquariums. While there are big variations between foods, it does not appear in this analysis that dry foods are the nasties they are often made out to be, relative to frozen foods. There are better and poorer choices (with respect to phosphate) to be made within each food type. Avoiding foods with bones, however, might be worthwhile if delivering less phosphate is a goal. Additionally, fresh grocery store shrimp seems to be one of the best foods from this standpoint. In considering whether sources of phosphate other than foods are important, one must carefully look to the actual amounts involved to determine whether other sources are even worth trying to minimize. It can be scary to learn that your purified fresh water has phosphate in it, or that your salt mix has detectable phosphate, or that your supplements or whatever have some phosphate. But just because you detect something, and maybe you even detect a concentration far higher than in your aquarium, that does not by any means imply that those sources are significant enough to warrant some sort of corrective action. Our analytical tools have become fairly sensitive, allowing us to detect things which might sound like trouble, but really aren't. We need to understand the various dilution issues involved as well as the overall phosphate balance in a reef aquarium to evaluate the importance of different measurements. Just use some math and put it all into perspective, before using some dollars or time to chase a trivial "problem". Happy Reefing View the full article

Click through to see the images. The study Co-management of coral reef social-ecological systems by Joshua E. Cinner, Tim R. McClanahan, M. Aaron MacNeil, Nicholas A.J. Graham, Tim M. Daw, Ahmad Mukminin, David A. Feary, Ando L. Rabearisoa, Andrew Wamukota, Narriman Jiddawi, Stuart J. Campbell, Andrew H. Baird, Fraser A. Januchowski-Hartley, Salum Hamed, Rachael Lahari, Tau Morove, John Kuange appears in the journal the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS). Press Release One solution to global overfishing found A study by the Wildlife Conservation Society, the ARC Centre for Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, and other groups on more than 40 coral reefs in the Indian and Pacific Oceans indicates that "co-management"—a collaborative arrangement between local communities, conservation groups, and governments—provides one solution to a vexing global problem: overfishing. The finding is the outcome of the largest field investigation of co-managed tropical coral reef fisheries ever conducted, an effort in which researchers studied 42 managed reef systems in five countries. The team of 17 scientists from eight nations concluded that co-management partnerships were having considerable success in both meeting the livelihood needs of local communities and protecting fish stocks. The paper appears today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). The authors include: Joshua E. Cinner, Nicholas A.J. Graham, Andrew H. Baird, and Fraser A. Januchowski-Hartley of the ARC Centre for Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Australia; Tim R. McClanahan, Ahmad Mukminin, Stuart J. Campbell, Rachel Lahari, Tau Morove, and John Kuange of the Wildlife Conservation Society; M. Aaron MacNeil of the Australian Institute of Marine Science; Tim M. Daw of the University of East Anglia and Stockholm University; David A. Feary of the School of the Environment, University of Technology, Sydney; Ando L. Rabearisoa of Conservation International; Andrew Wamukota of the Coral Reef Conservation Program, Kenya; and Narriman Jiddawi and Salum Hamed of the University of Dar Es Salaam. "In an age when fisheries around the world are collapsing, fisheries experts have struggled to find the magic balance between livelihoods and conservation," said Dr. Tim McClanahan, a co-author on the study and head of the Wildlife Conservation Society's coral reef research and conservation program. "What we've found is that effective solutions require both top-down and bottom-up approaches with a foundation of community-based management." Team leader Dr. Josh Cinner of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and James Cook University, Australia explained: "We found clear evidence of people's ability to overcome the 'tragedy of the commons' by making and enforcing their own rules for managing fisheries. This is particularly encouraging because of the perceived failure of many open-access and top-down government-controlled attempts to manage fisheries around the world. More importantly, we have identified the conditions that allow people to make co-management successful, providing vital guidance for conservation groups, donors, and governments as to what arrangements are most likely to work." The team studied local fisheries arrangements on coral reefs in Kenya, Tanzania, Madagascar, Indonesia, and Papua New Guinea, using a combination of interviews with local fishers and community leaders, and underwater fish counts. The study's main finding is that co-management has been largely successful in sustaining fisheries and improving people's livelihoods. More than half the fishers surveyed felt co-management was positive for their livelihoods, whereas only 9 percent felt it was negative. A comparison of co-managed reefs with other reefs showed that co-managed reefs were half as likely to be heavily overfished, which can lead to damaged ecosystems. "However we also found that where fisheries are closest to big, hungry markets, they tend to be in worse shape," said Dr. Nick Graham of the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and James Cook University. "This strongly suggests globalized food chains can undermine local, democratic efforts to manage fisheries better. People often assume that local population size is the main driver of overfishing – but our research shows that access to global markets and seafood dependence are more important, and provide possible levers for action." One of the unexpected results of the study revealed that co-management benefits the wealthier people in the local community, although it is not detrimental to the poor. "In other words, the main benefits tend to trickle up to the wealthy, rather than trickle down to the poor," Dr. Cinner added. "Nevertheless, most people felt that they benefitted." The team found that the institutional design of the fishery management arrangement was vital in determining whether or not people felt they benefited from co-management and were willing to work together to protect fish stocks by complying with the rules. "It is really important to get the structure of the co-management arrangements right, if you want people to co-operate to protect their marine resources," Dr Cinner said. "Managers and donors can help build the legitimacy, social capital, and trust that foster cooperation by making targeted investments that lead toward transparent and deliberative co-management systems, where all participants feel their voice is being heard." According to the authors, the new study fills an important gap by providing fisheries managers with an example of how governments and local communities can work together effectively to protect local environments and food resources. "Finding and implementing solutions to over-fishing that work for impoverished coastal communities is critical for the long-term viability of our oceans and the people that depend on them," said Dr. Caleb McClennen, Director for WCS's Marine Conservation. "This study demonstrates that long-term investment in co-management regimes is essential for the sustained health and economy of coastal populations and their supporting marine ecosystems." Contact: John Delaney jdelaney@wcs.org 718-220-3275 Wildlife Conservation Society View the full article

Click through to see the images. Fluval's Press Release: Ocean’s Seven New Fluval SEA Marine Supplements Recreate Ocean-Like Conditions in Marine Aquariums MANSFIELD, Mass. – For many years, aquarium enthusiasts have turned to the Rolf C. Hagen (USA) Corp. for its Nutrafin Cycle and Aqua Plus supplements to improve the water quality and, thereby, the health of the fish in freshwater aquariums around the world. Now Hagen is building on the sterling reputation of Cycle and Aqua Plus with the development of its new Fluval SEA line of products specifically for marine aquariums using the purest, most contaminant-free ingredients available. Fluval SEA brings the same high level of research and expertise that goes into Hagen’s Nutrafin products to supplements that help fish, vertebrates and invertebrates in marine aquariums enjoy ocean-like conditions in their captive environment. The seven formulas of Fluval SEA Marine Supplements are made with only the finest, ultra pure ingredients that contain the necessary trace elements regularly depleted in marine aquariums, often by the large variety of corals housed within the habitat that can consume specific compounds faster than others. Because a marine aquarium is a closed environment, these elements are not endlessly replaced as they are in the ocean; Fluval SEA helps to replenish them and ensure that the water in marine aquariums is as close to the natural ocean as possible, which in turn helps to keep the fish and corals healthy. Rated for high purity, Fluval SEA Marine Supplements include: 3 Ions – Small doses of the three elements in 3 Ions – magnesium, calcium and strontium – help to conveniently ensure their presence in the aquarium. Trace Elements – Contains beryllium, chromium, nickel, copper and zinc, which play an important role in various metabolic and biologic processes of life in a marine aquarium. Strontium – This supplement is absorbed by corals for strong skeletal structure and tissue retention, yet does not affect the delicate ionic balance in marine water. Iodine – This powerful oxidizing agent can improve marine water conditions by supporting improved oxidation-reduction reaction (redox) potential. Iodine is quickly depleted, so regular supplementation is recommended. Magnesium – Helps to boost magnesium levels while not affecting the delicate ionic balance in marine water. Regular dosing is recommended to help offset ongoing depletion by coral absorption. Calcium – A critical ion in marine reef aquariums, calcium is a key element for uptake by corals, other invertebrates and coralline algae. Alkalinity – A concentrated compound containing sodium bicarbonate, sodium carbonate and sodium borate, it helps boost alkalinity in marine aquariums. It supports strong coral growth and buffers the pH balance in the water. All Fluval SEA Marine Supplements are free of gluconates, nitrates and phosphates, and have MSRP’s of $7.99-$57.99. They are available in three sizes: 237 mL bottles (pictured at top): 3 Ions, Trace Elements, Strontium, Iodine, Magnesium, Calcium and Alkalinity 473 mL bottles: 3 Ions, Trace Elements, Iodine, Magnesium, Calcium and Alkalinity 2 L jugs (pictured left): 3 Ions, Calcium and Alkalinity Fluval SEA Marine Supplements are available online and at pet retailers nationwide. For more information, visit www.hagen.com or call 1‐800‐225‐2700. View the full article

Since the explosion on the BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico in April of 2010, scientists have been working to understand the impact the disaster has had on the environment. For months, crude oil gushed into the water before the well was capped. A new study confirms that oil from the Macondo well made it into the ocean's food chain through the tiniest of organisms, zooplankton. View the full article

Since the explosion on the BP Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico in April of 2010, scientists have been working to understand the impact the disaster has had on the environment. For months, crude oil gushed into the water before the well was capped. A new study confirms that oil from the Macondo well made it into the ocean's food chain through the tiniest of organisms, zooplankton. View the full article

Click through to see the images. Tanked is a television program on the Animal Planet Network about the aquarium-building exploits of Wayde King and Brett Raymer, co-owners of Acrylic Tank Manufacturing. Here are some of the tank builds we'll see in the second season of Tanked: A jellyfish tank for a sub-freezing bar at Mandalay Bay A working pinball machine tank A 650 gallon headboard tank A mobile school bus tank A giant nail polish bottle/hand dryer fish tank for a manicure salon A refrigerator tank with a functional water dispenser A tank in the shape of the KISS band logo A shark tank for the home of actor and comedian Tracy Morgan along with builds for other celebrities and notable personalities In other Tanked news: Season 2 has been extended from the originally-announced 10 episodes to 20 episodes. Tanked is moving to Saturday nights (originally aired on Friday nights). Season 2 premieres on April 14, 2012 at 9pm (ET/PT). The refrigerator tank. Yes, there are fish in there. Tracy Morgan's giant shark tank. And yes, there is a giant replica shark head in there. A huge sit-around cube tank. View the full article

Click through to see the images. The P30 is available in both "full spectrum" 15,000K and 460nm blue. Visit Blue Moon Aquatics to learn more about the P30 or to place your order. Read Dana Riddle's review of the P30. Blue Moon Aquatics is an Advanced Aquarist sponsor. View the full article

Click through to see the images. Researchers traditionally restore coral reefs using specimens grown in offshore coral nurseries. Coral Restoration Foundation is one of several programs utilizing this time-tested technique; Acropora are fragged and grown in the ocean, then transported to reef sites in need of restoration. Starting in 2012, programs on opposite sides of the planet are introducing lab-grown animals back into the wild. In Florida, scientists from Nova Southeastern University's National Coral Reef Institute (NSU) recently transported Acropora cervicornis grown in an indoor lab to restore disease-ravaged reefs off of Fort Lauderdale. NSU believes they are the first to use captive grown staghorn coral to restock damaged reefs. In Pulau Gaya, Malaysia, scientists from the Marine Ecology Research Centre (MERC) will release 500 captive-spawned Tridacna sp. giant clams back into local waters. According to MERC: "Malaysia’s giant clams are fast disappearing. Two of Sabah’s seven wild species, including the biggest of them all, the Tridacna gigas (which can measure up to 4.6ft long) have been classified as ‘locally extinct’, the other being Tridacna derasa." Large scale Tridacna aquaculture operations are found at many tropical Pacific sites such as Marshall Islands. These operations serve the food industry, aquarium trade, and reef restoration efforts. Researchers from both programs will monitor the health of transported, lab-grown animals to gauge the feasibility of using indoor grow facilities to restore wild reefs. NSU is moving to a new facility large enough to grow 5,000 to 7,000 staghorn corals onsite. MERC has 2,000 juvenile giant clams ready for transport should the first trial prove successful. Tridacna clams are grown in controlled MERC labs [via The Sun Sentinel and The Borneo Post] View the full article

Click through to see the images. Everyone is welcome and there is NO ENTRANCE FEE!!! This is Free to attend. What is this swap about This is a true swap. You bring a coral and take a different one home. You do not have to bring a coral to swap, there will be specials from the host Store! How it will work If you want to participate in the swap activity (totally optional, but FREE) then bring 1 to 3 items/frags of something you want to put into the “pot”. Please bring something nice to swap Zoa’s, Shrooms, Acans, LPS, SPS, etc. For each item you bring, you get a number. If you bring 3 items you get 3 numbers, etc. We will have two separate areas, one for SPS and one for all other corals. You come up to the tank when your number is called and pick 1 item from the tank. You go home with something different then you came with. We will start the swapping at 1:00PM What optional items do you need to bring Frags, Storage Containers to take home your new frags, money in case you want to take advantage of the great Store Specials during the swap and for the raffle. View the full article

A new study indicates that "co-management" -- a collaborative arrangement between local communities, conservation groups, and governments -- provides one solution to a vexing global problem: overfishing. View the full article

A new study indicates that "co-management" -- a collaborative arrangement between local communities, conservation groups, and governments -- provides one solution to a vexing global problem: overfishing. View the full article

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are providing sea turtles with an ideal habitat for foraging and may be keeping them safe from the threats of fishing. (2012-03-19) View the full article

Patients with relapsing onset Multiple Sclerosis (MS) who consumed alcohol, wine, coffee and fish on a regular basis took four to seven years longer to reach the point where they needed a walking aid than people who never consumed them. However the study did not observe the same patterns in patients with progressive onset MS. View the full article

Click through to see the images. Read part one: "Improved husbandry of marine invertebrates using an innovative filtration technology - Part 1: DyMiCo " by Tim Wijgerde, M.Sc. As the marine ecosystems of our planet slowly dwindle, the demand for marine life from the aquarium industry puts evermore pressure on wild populations. With climate change wreaking havoc on coral reefs, and ocean acidification looming on the horizon, the importance of sustainable aquaculture is increasing rapidly. Fortunately, there are growing efforts to culture a myriad of marine and freshwater species. Some species, however, are lagging behind despite high demand from the aquarium industry. As detailed in part one, so-called filter and suspension feeding organisms that rely heavily on live plankton do not fare well in closed systems. These include many species of sponges, corals and echinoderms, which are interesting candidates for sustainable aquaculture. Filtration systems that are designed to maintain plankton populations and high water quality simultaneously may be an important step to increase the number of species that can be aquacultured. In part one I introduced DyMiCo (Dynamic Mineral Control) as an alternative to systems using foam fractionators or common biofilters, to allow the buildup of a plankton population. Several institutions have been using DyMiCo over the last decade, including Rotterdam Zoo and Wageningen University (The Netherlands), Antwerp Zoo (Belgium), and NAUSICAA (France). The systems at these institutions have been running for up to eight years straight, with flourishing marine life. In early 2011, two DyMiCo systems were set up as part of an experimental coral nursery project in Utrecht, The Netherlands (see www.ecocoral.eu). These systems each have a volume of 12 m3 or 3,158 USG and hold many invertebrates including approximately 3,000 scleractinian corals in total. One of these systems was stocked with several invertebrates whose husbandry has proven highly difficult, in order to assess their response to DyMiCo. These included sponges (Trikentrion flabelliforme), gorgonian octocorals (e.g. Guaiagorgia sp.), hydrozoans (Distichopora spp.) and Comatulid crinoids. Below I will give an overview of the observations on both systems, in terms of water quality, plankton abundance and the welfare of the aforementioned invertebrates. Water quality Various water parameters were measured once a week. Inorganic nutrients, i.e. ammonium, nitrate and phosphate, were measured with a spectrophotometer. ICP-AES and ICP-MS, short for inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy/mass spectrometry, were used to determine a wide range of chemical elements in the water. Most water parameters were quite stable throughout the year. This was most likely the result of low stocking densities. Inorganic nutrients were measured with a spectrophotometer (left). Alkalinity was measured with an automated titrator (right). Ammonium, nitrate and phosphate were low throughout the year, even though no water changes were performed. Calcium, magnesium and alkalinity were very high due to the DyMiCo reactor, which as described in part one functions as a calcium reactor. Several trace elements (i.e. metals) were present in concentrations which exceeded those of seawater (Spotte 1992), which was likely due to the chemical composition of the artificial salt used. These included potassium, barium, cadmium, cobalt, chromium, copper, iron, lanthanum, lead, antimony and tin. Although the aquarium industry heavily promotes the dosage of various trace elements to home aquaria, it seems that without the proper analytical methods, the home aquarist may overdose a wide range of potentially toxic elements. Strontium, boron, aluminium, manganese, arsenic, lithium, molybdenum, nickel and selenium were lower in concentration when compared to seawater, and some of these elements were below the detection limit of the mass spectrometer. Despite the imbalances measured, life in the systems flourished. This may have to do with the thriving plankton population, which is known to contain high amounts of trace elements next to organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus, as bacteria, algae and crustaceans accumulate elements from the seawater (Martin and Knauer 1973). This may also explain the concentration decrease of certain elements. It is promising to observe that without water changes, many water parameters such as calcium, magnesium, alkalinity, nitrate and phosphate remain stable around levels considered acceptable to marine organisms. The pH in both systems also remained fairly stable at 8.1±0.1, even though no foam fractionator or air stones were used. This was most likely the result of low stocking densities, a large water surface area and adequate surface flow, the latter two promoting gas exchange. Temperature was maintained around 26 degrees Celsius (79 degrees Fahrenheit) by heating or ventilating the room, depending on environmental conditions. Salinity was highly stable at 35 g L-1, resulting from an automated top-off system connected to a RO/DI unit. Representative measurements of ammonium, nitrate and phosphate in mg L-1 and alkalinity in mEq L-1 in the DyMiCo systems. Error bars show standard deviations (N=2). Overview of several elements measured in the DyMiCo systems, in mg L-1 (grey bars) and g L-1 (black bars). Error bars show standard deviations (N=2). Plankton abundance To spur the initial buildup of a plankton population, several commercial products were dosed three times per week. Although DyMiCo produces its own plankton, which is seeded by the introduction of live rock and corals, it is important to aid the system when grazing pressure is high. In other words, as the ratio between live animals and system water is increased to an unnaturally high level, the demand for food particles invariably follows suit. Products that were used included Phyto Feast live, containing five different types of live phytoplankton, Oyster Feast, a homogenate of oyster ovarian tissue and eggs, live adult Tigriopus californicus copepods and various frozen and dried feeds (Table 1). After several months, copepods and their nauplii swarmed throughout the system, especially at night. Small unidentified shrimps were also present. During several weeks, one system was dominated by ephyra larvae of an identified species, possibly a hydrozoan. This vibrant population of zooplankton indicated that phyto- and or bacterioplankton were available in sufficient quantities, as copepods and other crustaceans grew and reproduced. Copepods, here swarming in a DyMiCo system, form the bulk of natural zooplankton. At night, these zooplankters migrate to the water column and serve as a food source for marine invertebrates. One of the many small, unidentified shrimp roaming in the dark corners of the system. Such macrozooplankton (2-20 mm) constitutes an excellent food source for many species including fishes. Table 1. Overview of feeds dosed in the DyMiCo systems. Feed Type Amount (ml or g) Frequency (feedings system-1 week-1) Manufacturer * feedings system-1 year-1 Phyto Feast Live live 100 ml 3 Reed Mariculture, USA Oyster Feast refrigerated 100 ml 3 Reed Mariculture, USA Tigriopus californicus live 500 ml 3* Reed Mariculture, USA Rotifers frozen 21 g 3 Ruto B.V., The Netherlands Copepods frozen 21 g 3 Ruto B.V., The Netherlands Porphyra sp. dried 1.4 g 2 Granfood B.V., The Netherlands The invertebrates High water quality and a vibrant plankton population resulted in thriving invertebrates. The species discussed below usually wither and die in the gin-clear waters of heavily filtered systems. Although these animals have only been growing in this system for a year, the results have been tantalizing. Sponges Although different species of sponges have been growing in the system, there is one that is truly fascinating. This sponge is referred to by the scientific name Trikentrion flabelliforme, and was introduced deliberately. T. flabelliforme is a sponge that is becoming increasingly popular in the international trade. Known under the dubious trivial name Spider Sponge, this species is fascinating in the sense that it has formed a symbiosis with a hexacoral from the genus Parazoanthus (order Zoanthidea). T. flabelliforme belongs to the largest class within the phylum Porifera known as the Demospongiae, and is found in the Arafura Sea, a shallow body of water sandwiched between Australia and New Guinea. It is a typical filter feeder as it uses its choanocytes or collar cells to filter particles and dissolved substances from the seawater. Its coral symbiont is very likely Parazoanthus swiftii, as this species is the only coral known to associate with sponges from the order Poecilosclerida, to which T. flabelliforme belongs (Swain and Wulff 2007). P. swiftii is a suspension feeder as its polyps capture food particles from the water. Individual polyps are connected by common tissue known as coenenchyme or coenosarc, in the form of horizontal bridges or stolons. The tissue of Parazoanthus is connected to the skin or pinacoderm of its host sponge, with tissue integration varying between different combinations of sponge and coral species. The physical integration between T. flabelliforme and P. swiftii seems to be superficial, in contrast to Epizoanthus spp. which may penetrate deeper into sponge tissue. The latter morphology, according to researchers, suggests a mutualistic symbiosis from which both partners benefit. The exact nature of the symbiosis between T. flabelliforme and P. swiftii is not yet clear. Parasitism seems a likely option, where the symbiotic coral benefits at the expense of its host sponge. For example, the coral may impair the sponge's ability to pump water through its system, which is vital to sponge nutrition, waste removal and gas exchange. Commensalism is also possible, where the coral benefits while having a neutral effect on the sponge. Although many hobbyists have tried to maintain this sponge, its survival record in closed aquarium systems has been poor. This is most likely the result of malnutrition, as this sponge and its symbiont heavily rely on food particles and dissolved organic carbon. Sponges are known to filter the smallest food particles from the water, including viruses, bacteria and phytoplankton, which are all below 10 microns (µm) in diameter. For reference: a single Artemia nauplius, which already seems small to the naked eye, measures roughly 440 µm in length. Another major part of the sponge diet is composed of dissolved organic carbon or DOC (De Goeij et al. 2009). Picoplankton (0.2-2 µm) and nanoplankton (2-20 µm) may not be available in closed systems in sufficient quantities, possibly the result of foam fractionating and overstocking of invertebrates. The coral symbiont requires zooplankton or detritus in sufficient quantities, and may feed on rotifers (e.g. Brachionus plicatilis), copepods (e.g. Tigriopus sp.), Brine shrimp (Artemia salina) and their nauplii. T. flabelliforme has been growing in the system for a year now, and shows signs of health. Its symbiotic Parazoanthus polyps are often well expanded, especially after a batch of plankton is introduced. Although I have not been able to accurately measure growth, by e.g. determining specific growth rate, the two colonies I have observed seemed to gain volume. Due to reorganization of the system, I have kept this sponge under several distinct microenvironments; strong (> 10 cm s-1) or weak (< 5 cm s-1) water flow rates, with moderate or low light intensity. It seems to prefer stronger water currents, although I cannot substantiate this. The presence of light, at least moderate irradiances (< 100 µm m-2 s-1), do not seem to harm the sponge or its symbiont. However, fouling organisms such as algae and cyanobacteria may take hold over the colony when it is weakened or damaged. Therefore, shading this sponge from direct light may be favorable. This sponge (Trikentrion flabelliforme) hosting a symbiotic coral (Parazoanthus sp.) seems to thrive under strong water flow and high prey availability. Hydrocorals Next to sponges, hydrocorals have been growing in the system over the last year. These invertebrates are not too popular in the ornamental trade, which may have to do with their difficult husbandry. Hydrocorals are not true corals, which is why they do not belong to the Anthozoa class. They are placed in a completely different class within the phylum Cnidaria, namely the Hydrozoa. There are two families within the Hydrozoa that contain coral-like species; the Milleporidae or Fire corals, and the Stylasteridae or Lace corals. Hydrocorals are often mistaken for scleractinian corals because they have a hard, calcareous skeleton, but they are only similar in appearance. Unlike scleractinian corals, they have differentiated polyps with different biological functions. This phenomenon is also found amongst many octocorals. The gastrozooids or feeding polyps are dedicated to prey capture and nutrient acquisition, and the dactylozooids or defensive polyps use their powerful cnidocytes to defend the colony. The way these different polyps are organized spatially in a colony depends on species. A common arrangement is one gastrozooid that is surrounded by five to fifteen dactylozooids, the latter being much longer and thinner. Lace corals are shades of purple, pink or red and much more colorful than fire corals, which are typically yellow-colored. The difficulty surrounding the husbandry of these corals is, similar to the other animals discussed here, most likely stems from their feeding habits. Although members of the Milleporidae host symbiotic dinoflagellates to support their metabolism, Stylasterids such as Distichopora spp. do not. This causes them to quickly deteriorate in the average aquarium, their bare corallum quickly changing into a shade of green or brown due to algal fouling. I have had some fortunate experiences with several purple Distichopora specimens, of which I have not been able to determine their exact species. These specimens were introduced in good condition, and have remained healthy ever since their introduction in the system about a year ago. Their whitish, calcifying tips and continuous polyp expansion are indicators of health. Dactylozooids can be seen macroscopically. I also introduced a larger, blue specimen that was already deteriorating. Unfortunately, this colony did not recover and slowly died over the course of several months. This Distichopora sp. has been growing in the DyMiCo system for a year. Although its growth rate seems low, calcifying tips and polyp extension are signs of health. Photographs by Jeroen Beuk (top) and Tim Wijgerde (below). Gorgonian octocorals Gorgonians (subclass Octocorallia, order Alcyonacea) have become popular ornamentals over the last few years, with the advent of specialized aquarium displays. Their interesting morphologies and colors attract the attention of many aquarists and hobbyists. At this moment, gorgonians are classified into three suborders within the Alcyonacea order; the Calcaxonia, Scleraxonia, and Holaxonia. Although they are related to soft corals, and to a lesser degree scleractinian corals, their body plan is quite different. The inner core of their skeleton houses a proteinaceous rod composed of gorgonin and collagen fibers that provide the colony with stability (Fabricius and Alderslade 2001). Members of the Calcaxonia have rods that are reinforced with aragonite, a form of calcium carbonate or limestone that makes up the skeleton of scleractinian corals. The Scleraxonia suborder contains species that produce sclerites-tiny needles made from calcite, another form of calcium carbonate-that provide strength. The Holaxonia are characterized by a hollow inner core. Many aquarists have been successful at maintaining gorgonians from the Caribbean, including Plexaura and Plexaurella spp. (Holaxonia). This success is most likely due to the presence of zooxanthellae, which is reflected in their brown coloration. Other, more colorful azooxanthellate gorgonians, however, have been proven far more difficult to maintain for prolonged time. Examples are species from the genera Menella, Swiftia and Guaiagorgia (Holaxonia), and Diodogorgia (Scleraxonia). Gorgonian octocorals feed on a diverse array of particles, including zooplankton (e.g. copepods, rotifers), phytoplankton (e.g. diatom and dinoflagellate algae), protists (various microorganisms), protozoa (e.g. flagellates, ciliates) and detritus (particulate organic matter or POM). These particles range from approximately 1 to 2,000 μm in size, which underscores the importance of pico-, nano-, micro- and mesoplankton in the diet of azooxanthellate corals. Feeding preferences may greatly vary between species, where polyp size (diameter) may not be a good indicator of feeding preference, although it will determine maximum prey size a given species can ingest. Azooxanthellate gorgonians require intensive feeding with a wide variety of particles to meet their respiratory demands, including bacteria, protozoa, phyto- and zooplankton. Rotifers (Brachionus plicatilis), Artemia nauplii and small-sized copepods may be accepted by these corals, as well as various algae (diatoms and dinoflagellates). In the wild, predation on zooplankton by corals is often quite limited due to low zooplankton abundance (Palardy et al. 2006; Sebens et al. 1996, 1998). However, experiments have shown that feeding rates can be enhanced by providing high concentrations of zooplankton in the aquarium, with an approximate linear relationship between plankton concentration and feeding rate (Clayton and Lasker 1982; Lasker 1982; Lewis 1992; Ferrier-Pagès et al. 1998, 2003; Houlbrèque et al. 2004; Wijgerde et al. 2011). Although zooplankton concentrations on reefs are quite low, prey is available constantly. In addition, crepuscular zooplankton migration leads to elevated zooplankton concentrations at night, which can increase fivefold (Yahel et al. 2005). From this it becomes clear that small amounts of food items should be available throughout the day and night. This may be a major part of the successes obtained with DyMiCo. Several gorgonian species, including Guaiagorgia sp., were introduced in one of the DyMiCo systems. All colonies exhibited regular polyp expansion and clearly responded to feedings. Growth was discernible although growth rates were not determined. At this time, it seems these azooxanthellate corals can be succesfully maintained in aquaria equipped with DyMiCo. An Indo-Pacific Octocoral of the Menella genus (suborder Holaxonia, family Plexauridae). Each polyp is equipped with eight tentacles, from which fine structures called pinnula extend. These increase polyp surface area and filter efficiency. An unidentified specimen, possibly from the Scleraxonia suborder, with fine, densely packed branches and small polyps. Gorgonians from this group have well-developed sclerites that can be seen as white grains imbedded in the soft tissue of the corals. These provide the colony with strength so that it can withstand drag forces induced by water currents. Gorgonians such as these Diodogorgia nodulifera (suborder Scleraxonia, family Anthothelidae) specimens are octocorals that require adequate water motion and constant feeding with zooplankton to meet their metabolic demands. A beautiful Guaiagorgia sp. (suborder Holaxonia, family Gorgoniidae) with large, expanded polyps. An Astrogorgia specimen (suborder, Holaxonia, family Plexauridae) with well-developed sclerites and conspicuous yellow polyps. Crinoids The successful husbandry of crinoids has been an aspiration for many aquarists, and so far the results have been dismal. To the best of my knowledge, there are no reports of crinoids surviving for prolonged time in closed systems, let alone reproducing. It is evident that in the average aquarium, these specialized animals do not encounter prey items in sufficient quantities to survive. In most cases, these animals slowly lose their arms until only the center part or calyx of the body remains. This, in turn, slowly disintegrates until only bony fragments called ossicles are left. Crinoids are true suspension feeders and grab small food particles from the water by using their podia or tube feet. The podia secrete mucus to which food items adhere, after which they are propelled to the so-called ambulacral groove. These food grooves run along the animal's arms and are lined with cilia, tiny beating hair-like structures which transport mucus-imbedded food particles to the central mouth. Crinoids predominantly feed on nano- and microplankton, including unicellular organisms (e.g. foraminiferans), phytoplankton (e.g. diatoms) and zooplankton (e.g. rotifers, mollusk larvae and copepods) (Rutman and Fishelson 1969; Kitazawa et al. 2007). Crinoids actively filter food particles from the water, including zooplankton. Their survival rate in the aquarium is dismal at best. Crinoids seem to do well in DyMiCo-filtered aquaria. These specimens extend their arms after every plankton feeding. Three unidentified crinoids (order Comatulida) were introduced in one of the systems, after which their behavior and survival were recorded over a one-year period. These echinoderms seemed to thrive and had their arms extended throughout the day. At this time, they remain in good condition. Other observations Next to the observations described above, there have been other interesting developments. Azooxanthellate octocorals, e.g. Dendronephthya and Scleronephthya spp., seem to be promising candidates for future testing in DyMiCo. A few months ago, an almost completely withered red-colored Scleronephthya sp. was introduced in one of the systems. It slowly recovered into several small colonies with clearly expanded polyps. Although these results are preliminary, these octocorals may thrive provided that sufficient feeding with (live) phytoplankton cultures is maintained, as they are predominantly herbivorous (Fabricius 2005). Small Scleronephthya colonies, growing in a dim corner of the system. Although many aquarists have witnessed coral spawning and release of larvae (planula) in closed systems, this is usually unpredictable and sparse. Several months after the introduction of several small-sized Pocillopora damicornis colonies, a well-known scleractinian coral, I was happy to witness countless offspring on the system walls. These new colonies, also referred to as recruits, arose from the settlement of larvae that were released by the corals after the lights went out. The larvae, after having chosen a suitable spot, metamorphose into a so-called primary polyp that start dividing and grow their own colony. Although I was not able to determine whether these new recruits originated through self-fertilization or polyp bailout, the survival of planula in large numbers is promising. On the system walls, many unidentified sponges, polychaete tube worms, and other life started growing after several months, similar to what one might find in a dark filtration compartment. On the live rock that was introduced, different species of macro algae and Porites corals developed. Various unidentified species of nudibranchs were found as hitchhikers on the rock. Although these phenomena are common even in heavily skimmed Berlin systems, the explosion of life in these aquaria is remarkable. Final comments It is exciting to witness the health and growth of marine invertebrates which have proven to be notoriously difficult to maintain in aquaria. Their progress in DyMiCo systems will be monitored in the future, and hopefully these organisms will continue to grow and flourish. Perhaps, they may someday even reproduce sexually. Despite the complete lack of water changes, water quality of the DyMiCo systems remained high, adding to the environmentally friendly nature of DyMiCo. Although water analysis has indicated that supplementation of some trace elements including strontium may be required, most water parameters remained close to optimal values. It is not yet clear whether this technology functions properly in home aquaria, but if it does, it could potentially change the future of the marine aquarium hobby. In that case, the spectrum of marine invertebrates that can be maintained at home would be drastically increased. I would like to end part two of this article by expressing the hope that within several years, we will have mastered the husbandry and reproduction of many (in)vertebrates that are relevant to us as aquarists, hobbyists, scientists and breeders. This will prevent us from taking endangered species from their native habitats, which will relieve some of the pressure on wild populations. Exotic marine life captivates the minds of many - here, the author shows a piece of coral (Stylophora pistillata) to his family. Photograph by Jeroen Beuk. Acknowledgments I would like to thank Peter Henkemans at EcoDeco and Michaël Laterveer at Bluelinked for their support during the writing of this two-part article. Tim Wijgerde, M.Sc. is a Ph.D. candidate at Aquaculture and Fisheries, Department of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University. His research focuses on the heterotrophy of scleractinian corals. To find out more about the Dynamic Mineral Control technology, visit the official website at www.ecodeco.eu. References Clayton WS, Lasker H (1982) Effects of light and dark treatments on feeding by the reef coral Pocillopora dam- icornis. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 63:269-279 De Goeij JM, De Kluijver A, Van Duyl FC, Vacelet J, Wijffels RH, De Goeij AFPM, Cleutjens JPM, Schutte B (2009) Cell kinetics of the marine sponge Halisarca caerulea reveal rapid cell turnover and shedding. Journal of Experimental Biology 212:3892-3900 Fabricius K, Alderslade P (2001) Soft Corals and Sea Fans - A comprehensive guide to the the tropical shallow-water genera of the Central-West Pacific, the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. 264 p Fabricius KE, Genin A, Benayahu Y (1995) Flow-dependent herbivory and growth in zooxanthellae-free soft corals. Limnology and Oceanography 40:1290-1301 Ferrier-Pagès C, Allemand D, Gattuso JP, Jaubert J, Rassoulzadegan F (1998a) Microheterotrophy in the zooxanthellate coral Stylophora pistillata: Effects of light and ciliate density. Limnol Oceanogr 43:1639-1648 Ferrier-Pagès C, Witting J, Tambutté E, Sebens KP (2003) Effect of natural zooplankton feeding on the tissue and skeletal growth of the scleractinian coral Stylophora pistillata. Coral Reefs 22:229-240 Houlbrèque F, Tambutté E, Richard C, Ferrier-Pagès C (2004) Importance of a micro-diet for scleractinian corals. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 282:151-160 Kitazawa K, Oji T, Sunamura M (2007) Food composition of crinoids (Crinoidea: Echinodermata) in relation to stalk length and fan density: their paleoecological implications. Marine Biology 152:959-968 Lasker HR, Syron JA, Clayton WS (1982) The feeding response of Hydra viridis: effects of prey density on capture rates. Biol Bull 162:290-298 Lewis JB (1992) Heterotrophy in corals: Zooplankton predation by the hydrocoral Millepora complanata. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 90:251-256 Martin KH, Knauer GA (1973) The elemental composition of plankton. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta 37:1639-1653 Palardy JE, Grottoli AG, Matthews KA (2006) Effect of naturally changing zooplankton concentrations on feeding rates of two coral species in the Eastern Pacific. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 331:99-107 Rutman J, Fishelson L (1969) Food composition and feeding behavior of shallow-water crinoids at Eilat (Red Sea). Marine Biology 3:46-57 Sebens KP, Grace SP, Helmuth B, Maney EJ, Miles JS (1998) Water flow and prey capture by three scleractinian corals, Madracis mirabilis, Montastrea cavernosa and Porites porites, in a field enclosure. Mar Biol 131:347-360 Sebens KP, Vandersall KS, Savina LA, Graham KR (1996) Zooplankton capture by two scleractinian corals, Madracis mirabilis and Montastrea cavernosa, in a field enclosure. Mar Biol 127:303-317 Spotte S (1992) Captive seawater fishes: science and technology. J.Wiley & Sons Inc. 942 p Swain TD, Wulff JL (2007) Diversity and specificity of Caribbean sponge-zoanthid symbioses: a foundation for understanding the adaptive significance of symbioses and generating hypotheses about higher-order systematics Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 92:695-711 Wijgerde T, Diantari R, Lewaru MW, Verreth JAJ, Osinga R (2011) Extracoelenteric zooplankton feeding is a key mechanism of nutrient acquisition for the scleractinian coral Galaxea fascicularis. The Journal of Experimental Biology 214:3351-3357 Yahel R, Yahel G, Berman T, Jaffe JS, Genin A (2005) Diel pattern with abrupt crepuscular changes of zooplankton over a coral reef. Limnol Oceanogr 50:930-944 View the full article

Click through to see the images. Based on feedback from experienced reefkeepers, CAD Lights has updated their Conic Bio-Reactor with a new, simple-to-operate 3-way re-circulating valve. The new control valve allows users to adjust the flow rate of water entering the reactor, the effluent rate, and how much internal flow speed they desire in order to control the "tumble rate" of the bio-pellets. The inverted-cone design made a lot of sense to us, and the addition of the control valve As CAD Lights tells Advanced Aquarist: For the first time there is a FULLY controllable Bio-reactor unit that offers great performance and EASE of use, truly giving a hobbyist the control of their nitrate and phosphate removal in the twist of their wrists. Why it's good to have control: 1) No longer will the hobbyist get confused on ambiguously controlling portions for pellets/gallons/livestock. You can now put in as much pellets as you like and just set it at the speed you want the water to come out of the reactor and to recirculate within itself. 2) It helps avoid many of the common mistakes of overdosing, underflowing, overflowing etc. 3) Just monitor your parameters and adjust the speed of reaction you desire based on the flow control you allow it, giving you practically full control of how much nitrate and phosphate removal you desire at the speed you desire. 4) Extremely EASY to control flow in 3 directions. View the full article

Click through to see the images. The data is not definitive, but it is hopeful at least. In the PLoS ONE paper "Contrasting Patterns of Coral Bleaching Susceptibility in 2010 Suggest an Adaptive Response to Thermal Stress" by James R. Guest and others, they discuss if and how this might be possible. In 2010, a team of researchers led by Guest surveyed three reefs in South East Asia that had undergone bleaching episodes with these reefs having different bleaching and mortality histories. What they found was that even though the corals in these areas were subjected to very similar thermal conditions during the 2010 bleaching event, the coral species that bleached and died were very different. For corals surveyed in regions with similar thermal histories, there was very little difference in the coral species that bleached and died. However, regions with very different thermal histories showed a marked difference in the corals that bleached and died. Acropora and Pocillopora are typically key markers for coral bleaching as they are usually the first to be affected. Researcher James Guest wrote that "remarkably, Acropora and Pocillopora, taxa that are typically highly susceptible, although among the most susceptible in Pulau Weh (Sumatra, Indonesia) where respectively, 94% and 87% of colonies died, were among the least susceptible in Singapore, where only 5% and 12% of colonies died." Singapore as it turns out had had a severe bleaching event back in 1998 whereas Pulau Weh had not. So in areas where no previous bleaching had happened in 1998, Acropora and Pocillopora were highly susceptible to both bleaching and mortality. However in Singapore where a bleaching and mortality event happened in 1998, they were the least susceptible. "A growing body of evidence indicates that the capacity for adaptation and acclimatisation in corals has been underestimated" states Guest. "Selective mortality among individuals within populations suggests there is sufficient genetic variability upon which natural selection can act." That being said, "an adaptive response in certain [corals] at a few locations does not mean that the global threat to reefs from climate change has lessened. There are likely to be limits to thermal adaptation and acclimatisation, and these may incur costs in life history traits such as growth, fecundity and competitive ability." remarks Guest. "The results of the present study do indicate however that the effects of bleaching will not be as uniform as anticipated and fast-growing branching taxa such as Acropora and Pocillopora are likely to persist in some locations despite increases in the frequency of thermal stress events." (via ScienceNOW) View the full article

Click through to see the images. Visit Reef Relief to learn more about their conservation work. The auction ends March 15, 2012 around 3pm EDT. Time's ticking. Go bid on the "Rare Cheeto Seahorse" and save a reef. I guarantee you this will be the strangest and most delicious opportunity you will have to help reef conservation. The eBay listing description (a fun read!): I am pleased to again offer this rare CHEETO Seahorse to support REEF RELIEF. I wish to offer the most grateful thanks to Ebay member most*needful*of*things who was the previous high bidder with a winning bid of $10.50. This Ebay member instructed me not to ship and refused taking ownership. The member instructed me to relist it in an effort to raise more funds for REEF RELIEF. A simply spectacular Ebay member I can’t thank enough! Heck, I had this seahorse packed up in a little box with cotton, placed inside yet another small box with the member’s shipping address printed and taped on when I checked my Ebay messages and learned that the CHEETO SEAHORSE will have yet another shot to win the Triple Crown for REEF RELIEF! As all of you who followed the prior auction, my wife found this rare specimen in a bag of CHEETOS about a month ago. When she showed it to me my first reaction was to stuff it in my face and enjoy that salty, cheesy, crunchy experience that I just love but I didn't. Instead, I said this little Cheeto is capable of doing some good. We are again pleased to offer this fully preserved specimen for your enjoyment. That Chicken McNugget that received so much publicity and resembled George Washington sold for $8,100 on Ebay! Heck this CHEETO must be worth a fortune to those who seek the Seahorse on their dives and/or wish to contribute to all of our efforts to save the reefs that are dying at an alarming rate. Just as the last auction, this one-of-a-kind specimen is offered with FREE SHIPPING. 100% of the sale proceeds will be donated to the non-profit organization REEF RELIEF based in Key West, Florida that is celebrating its 25TH ANNIVERSARY this year. Please visit their website and learn of all the great things this organization does. Furthermore, I am placing an $8,000 buy-it-now price on this CHEETO and have notified FRITO LAY that it is available for immediate purchase. Maybe FRITO LAY wants to support REEF RELIEF as well! We’ll see. That chicken mcnugget just sold for $8,100! I ask FRITO LAY TO STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND BUY YOUR CHEETO BACK FOR A GREAT CAUSE! JUST CLICK "BUY IT NOW" Shipping insurance can be purchased by you for the amount of your winning bid in the event you are worried about mice/rats devouring this tasty treasure while it makes its way through the US postal system to your door. Bidding starts at $10.50 thanks to the last and most generous high bidder who declined taking ownership! Support REEF RELIEF! View the full article

You can check our sponsor section, which you will be spoil for choice

Click through to see the images. Researchers Santhanam, Gray,Jr. and Ram explain how in their paper "Thermoelectrically Pumped Light-Emitting Diodes Operating above Unity Efficiency" which was recently published in the journal Physical Review Letters. How did they do it? It has to do with how the researchers applied the voltage to an LED at a given ambient temperature. In order to achieve this greater than 100% efficiency, the researchers had to drop the power input to the LED into the picowatt range (10-12 watts) and warm the ambient air temperature. At 30 picowatts of input power and 135 C ambient temperature Santhanam and others measured 69 picowatts of light -- a 230% increase. Where was this added input power coming from? The ambient air temperature. What happens is that at these low power levels the LED actually absorbs heat from the environment and re-emits this heat as light. Thus the LED should be slightly cooled compared to the ambient temperature. While this technology won't be lighting your tank any time soon, it is a cool concept -- using the excess heat from your tank to make your LEDs more efficient. (via Physorg.com) View the full article

Thanks bro.. When is your new tank coming ? Keekee..

Click through to see the images. As far as protein skimmer designs go, the RLSS protein skimmers should look familiar to experienced reefkeepers. They share many design elements of high-performance needle-wheel skimmers such as Bubble Kings/Vertex and ATB: cast acrylic sloped body, built-in air silencers, bubble plate diffusers, twist-action or ball-valve water level adjustment, and silicone tubing. But it's not all your "standard" high-end fare. The most notable difference is the choice of pumps. RLSS skimmers employ H2O System's Waveline DC-5000 DC pumps to produce copious amounts of air with minimal electrical consumption. Users can adjust the RPM of the pump (six preset speeds) to tune their skimmer's performance. The pump's 10 minute feed mode allows easy shut-off and automatic reactivation of the skimmer for coral feeding. H2O Systems designed their special pinwheels with perforations to allow water to pass through the back plate in order to cool down the pump. In addition, the pinwheels have 2 levels of density which reportedly chops bubbles even finer than conventional needle-wheels. The RLSS skimmers also feature tapered, curved reaction chambers compared to the conventional straight-sided cones prevalent in other designs. Six models (3 internal and 3 external designs) are currently available. Smaller 5" and 6" skimmers using a smaller DC-2500 pump are also planned for the near future. Like the Waveline DC pumps, the RLSS skimmers are in production, available for sale in Canada and coming soon to the United States. Photos, details and pricing for the six models are provided below: R82 8" diameter external protein skimmer 17 x 16.5 x 23.5" (435 x 420 x 600mm) 1 x DC-5000 (40 watts) Air draw: 900-1800lph Rated for 264-528 gallons (1000-2000 liters) $699.99 R83 8" diameter internal protein skimmer 15.75 x 12.2 x 21.5" (400 x 310 x 550mm) 1 x DC-5000 (40 watts) Air draw: 900-1800lph Rated for 264-528 gallons (1000-2000 liters) $579.99 R102 10" diameter external protein skimmer 18.5 x 18.1 x 24.5" (470 x 460 x 620mm) 1 x DC-5000 (40 watts) Air draw: 900-1800lph Rated for 396-660 gallons (1500-2500 liters) $949.99 R103 10" diameter internal protein skimmer 18 x 18 x 21.5" (455 x 455 x 550mm) 1 x DC-5000 (40 watts) Air draw: 900-1800lph Rated for 396-660 gallons (1500-2500 liters) $799.99 R122 12" diameter external protein skimmer 25 x 20 x 25.5" (640 x 510 x 650mm) 2 x DC-5000 (80 watts) Air draw: 1800-3600lph Rated for 528-792 gallons (2000-3000 liters) $1,299.99 R123 12" diameter internal protein skimmer 24.5 x 20 x 22.8" (620 x 510 x 580mm) 2 x DC-5000 (80 watts) Air draw: 1800-3600lph Rated for 528-792 gallons (2000-3000 liters) $1,149.99 View the full article

A new study has found that red meat consumption is associated with an increased risk of total, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality. View the full article

Scientists report frequent loss of sweet taste in mammalian species that are exclusive meat eaters. Further, two sea-dwelling mammals that swallow their food whole have extensive taste loss. Many sweet-blind species eat only meat, demonstrating that a liking for sweets is frequently lost during the evolution of diet specialization. View the full article