Harlequinmania

Click through to see the images. While visiting a fish store during a recent trip to the mainland, I saw products claiming to hasten "cycling" of marine aquaria. I was intrigued by the possibility, purchased the products, and began formulating a testing protocol. These products are Brightwell Aquatics" MicroBacter7 and Continuum Aquatics" BacterGen.M. Successful reefkeeping depends upon natural cycles doing what they do, whether it involves cycling of carbon, nitrogen, or other elements. Perhaps the most important is the nitrogen cycle since it involves ammonia, which can be toxic to fishes at high concentrations. Ammonia is excreted by fishes and their waste products contain proteins that eventually degrade to ammonia. Ammonia is converted to nitrite (also toxic) by a certain group of bacteria (usually designated as Nitrosomonas species.) Nitrite is then converted to relatively non-toxic nitrate by another group of bacteria (generally referred to as Nitrobacter species.) Bacteria that convert nitrogenous wastes tend to be rather sensitive to environmental conditions (such as pH) and slow growing, hence it is critical that a newly set up aquarium be given sufficient time for bacteria involved in the aerobic portion of the nitrogen cycle to become established (it has been my experience that this requires about 30 days once an aquarium is inoculated.) Before beginning, let's define some of the terms used in this article. Glossary Aerobic: Condition where molecular oxygen (O2) is present. Anaerobic: Condition where no molecular oxygen is present. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD): A test that determines the amount of oxygen required to stabilize biodegradable wastes. Usually, the test duration is five days at a temperature of 20C (68F.) The formula is: (a - * c Where: a = initial oxygen concentration (mg/l); b = oxygen concentration after the 5-day incubation period; c = dilution factor. This test is sometimes incorrectly called biological oxygen demand . The answer is biochemical oxygen demand in milligrams per liter (or parts per million.) Carbonaceous: Of, like, or containing the element carbon. Conductivity : A measure of an aqueous solution's ability to conduct electricity. Pure water is a very poor conductor, while water containing, say, inorganic compounds is a much better conductor. It is reported in fractions of a Siemen (denoted as "s", which is the reciprocal of an ohm) - usually micro-S (uS) or milli-S (mS), and the distance between measuring probes is also reported (the standard is 1 centimeter), hence Conductivity might be reported as uS.cm. Denitrification: Biochemical conversion of nitrate to nitrogen gas, usually under anaerobic conditions. mg/L : Milligrams per liter, essentially the same thing as parts per million. Nitirification: Biochemical oxidation of ammonia to nitrate under aerobic conditions. Nitrogenous : Of, like, or containing the element nitrogen. Pathogenic: Able to cause ailment or sickness. ppt: Parts per thousand. Used to describe the degree of salinity in the context of this article. ppm: Parts per million. Spore, or Endospore: Walled, single- to many-celled reproductive bodies of an organism, capable of giving rise to a new individual. Bacteria capable of forming endospores number perhaps 100 genera including Bacillus , Sporolactobacillus , Clostridium , Sporosarcina , and others. Interestingly, nitrifying bacteria genera ( Nitrobacter and Nitrosomonas ) do not produce spores. Products Tested, and Comments MicroBacter7 TM Marketed by: Brightwell Aquatics Appearance: Turbid (cloudy) suspension Odor: Slightly sweet smell Manufacturer's Overview: "Complex system of non-pathogenic aerobic and anaerobic microbes...specifically formulated to establish biological filtration in new aquarium setups, and to enhance the rate of nitrification, de-nitrification, and organic waste degradation in marine and freshwater aquaria through complete nutrient remineralization." Recommended Dosage (marine and freshwater aquarium a startup): 5 ml for 25 US gallons (4 drops per gallon daily for 2 weeks.) BacterGen.M TM Marketed by: Continuum Aquatics Appearance: Turbid (cloudy) suspension Odor: Slightly sweet smell Manufacturer's Overview: "The addition of... BacterGen.M will cause a rapid increase in the population of beneficial microorganisms with a resulting increase in water clarity and a drop in unbeneficial nutrients, particularly ammonia and nitrogen compounds , as well as phosphates. BacterGen.M contains both aerobic and anaerobic microbes which will generate new populations and greatly increase existing bacterial populations to establish and accelerate nitrification and denitrification, lowering ammonia and nitrites, as well as lowering phosphates, nitrates, and organic pollutants significantly." Recommended Dosage (marine aquarium startup) : 5 ml for 25 US gallons (4 drops per gallon daily for 2 weeks.) Comparison of Lab Results for Brightwell and Continuum Products Preliminary testing of the two products (pH, conductivity, salinity, ammonia, and nitrate) found them to be remarkably similar. See Figures 1-4. Figure 1. pH of the two products was remarkably similar. Figure 2. Salinity of the Brightwell and Continuum products. Figure 3. Conductivity refers to these solutions" ability to conduct an electrical current. Figure 4. Ammonia content of the two products. Figure 5. Nitrate content (as NO3-N) of the two products. Biochemical Oxygen Demand Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) is an empirical test used to determine oxygen requirements (consumption) of bacteria in the stabilization of wastes. The test is performed under standardized laboratory conditions, and usually takes 5 days to complete, although this time period may be extended. BOD may be due to stabilization of carbonaceous wastes (where it is called CBOD), nitrogenous wastes (such as ammonia and nitrite), or both. If the products tested contained living aerobic bacteria, oxygen consumption after their introduction into a sterile hospitable environment containing food would confirm their presence. If these tests are conducted under controlled conditions, comparisons of the effectiveness of the two products can be made. In addition, a proper number of bacteria would be required to properly "seed" this sterile environment. To test for the presence of carbonaceous bacteria, the manufacturers" recommended dosages were made to a sterile environment (BOD bottles containing water treated by reverse osmosis and spiked with necessary nutrients such as iron, calcium, phosphate, magnesium, and so on.) This water also contained a small amount solution of known BOD strength. This target BOD would be 198 ppm after 5 days of incubation at 20C. As Figure 6 shows, both products contained enough bacteria to consume the amount of oxygen required over the 5 days to calculate "proper" BOD. Figure 6. Time - course oxygen demand of the bacteria and calculated biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) of the two products. Since the initial bottles and dilution water were sterile, this demonstrates that bacteria within the products were of sufficient number to exert a proper oxygen demand during the testing period. Figure 7 shows the time-course oxygen levels in the experiment's "sterile" controls and bottles containing the glucose-glutamic acid solution of known carbonaceous BOD strength and inoculated by the products" carbonaceous bacteria. Recall that both products contain ammonia (with the Continuum product having more) as well nitrifying bacteria (that also exert an oxygen demand.) Figure 6. Biochemical Oxygen Demand of the products, when the bottles were spiked with a solution of known carbonaceous BOD. Figure 7 shows time-course dissolved oxygen concentrations of the "sterile" controls and the samples inoculated with ammonia and the products" nitrifying bacteria. Figure 7. Oxygen demand (BOD) of solutions spiked with a known amount of ammonia (with some ammonia added by the content of the products.) Confirmation of the presence of ammonia oxidizing bacteria is confirmed by a reduced concentration of ammonia in the inoculated samples (with the control showing no reduction in the level of ammonia over the course of the incubation. See Figure 8. Figure 8. Ammonia concentrations of the control (practically unchanged) and those observed in samples (inoculated with Brightwell and Continuum products) after 16 days. Note that the two products added ammonia, hence true final ammonia concentrations would likely have been lower - perhaps much lower - than seen here. Results The goal of these experiments was to confirm the presence of living carbonaceous and nitrogenous bacteria. Both products apparently contain sufficient numbers of these bacteria to inoculate a sterile environment and begin carbonaceous and nitrogenous cycling. Other uses could include possible hastening of cycling when using conventional cycling methods (introduction of live rock, live sand, and/or a couple of hardy "starter" fishes, or inoculating an existing tank after some sort of upset has occurred. Comments on Dosing These Products Based on the testing performed during the investigation of these products" performance, and using the manufacturers" recommended dosages, these products do seem to have positive benefits in hastening carbon and aerobic nitrogen cycling. However, neither products warns against possible effects of drastic, accidental over-dosing (a possible scenario includes spilled most or all of a bottle's contents into a nano-reef containing a small volume of water.) Both products are acidic (pH values of slightly below 4.5 standard pH units) and overdosing in such a scenario would have immediate and negative effects on pH, alkalinity, calcium content and so on resulting in stressful (potentially fatal) consequences for fishes and invertebrates. Ammonia content in the products differed by a few parts per million (depending upon differences in the age of the products (?), since ammonia would "feed" bacteria within the bottle over the course of time) but meaningful (perhaps harmful) amounts of ammonia could be added as well. I would recommend testing for ammonia and nitrite as usual to confirm proper cycling even when using these products. Test Protocols In a perfect world, identical parameters could be maintained in aquaria with identical bioloads and meaningful comparisons could be made. Realistically, this is at best impractical (if not impossible) so alternative experimental protocols had to be established. Hence, testing consisted of time-course monitoring of oxygen consumption under controlled conditions in freshwater containing known amounts of carbonaceous and nitrogenous compounds and spiked with bacteria from the two products. These samples were tested for Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), pH, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, and total iron. All glassware were sterilized with a solution of sodium hypochlorite and de-chlorinated with sodium thiosulfate. Rinse water was analyzed for Total Chlorine using the DPD method and confirmed no residual chlorine. Standard 300-ml BOD bottles were filled with deionized water containing commercially available buffers (Hach "BOD pillows" containing essential compounds such as calcium, iron, phosphorus, etc.) For this reason, phosphorus reduction as claimed by a manufacturer could not be performed. A glucose/glutamic acid (GGA) solution was prepared. This adds a carbon source that biodegrades slowly (through addition of glutamic acid) while consuming oxygen and allows an estimation of carbon cycling. Use of this solution is a standard quality control method used in the BOD test. Many of the tests performed during product testing were colorimetric in nature. This sort of testing involves adding reagent(s) to a known volume of sample (usually 10 milliliters, sometimes 25 mL.) After a given reaction time, absorption is measured by a colorimeter (or spectrometer.) Absorption of light is proportional to the concentration of the substance tested for. Colorimetry is subject to a number things that can cause false high or low measurements (called interferences.) Many common interferences are listed by the manufacturer of the colorimeter. However, some interferences are uncommon, or unknown. With that said, testing followed the following protocols, and common interferences with the chemistries are listed. Ammonia Ammonia was determined by a Hach DR890 colorimeter using the salicylate method. Monochloramine is formed when ammonia combines with chlorine, and monochloramine reacts with salicylate to form 5-aminosalicylate. This, in turn, is oxidized in the presence of sodium nitroprusside to form a blue-colored compound. This blue color is masked by excess reagent to form a final greenish solution. Iron causes interference. Since iron was added to the BOD dilution water, its presence was analyzed to determine its content. Total iron (Hach FerroVer chemistry) found iron at 0.01 ppm (95% confidence level is 0.02 ppm) hence, for practical purposes, no iron was present. Conductivity Conductivity was determined through use of a Corning Model 311 conductivity meter. pH pH was determined through use of a Denver Instruments Model UB-5 UltraBasic pH meter calibrated to two points (4 and 7, using freshly prepared buffer solutions.) Iron (Total) Total iron was determined by a Hach DR2000 spectrometer using their FerroVer (1, 10 phenanthroline) chemistry. Minimum detection limit (MDL) is 0.02 ppm. Iron can interfere with the nitrate test. Nitrate Nitrate was determined by a Hach DR890 colorimeter using the cadmium reduction method. Cadmium reduces nitrate within the sample to nitrite, which reacts in an acidic environment with sufanilic acid. An intermediate diazonium salt couples with gentistic acid to form an amber colored solution which is proportional to nitrate content. Chloride levels exceeding 100 ppm will cause low results (chloride was determined to be less than 500 ppm in the Continuum product.) No correction for chloride concentration was attempted. Presence of ferric iron causes high results and therefore must be absent (total iron of the samples was found to be absent in straight samples of the two products. In the control (with buffers known to add ferric iron) total iron was reported as 0.01 ppm. The Minimum Detection Limit (95% confidence level) for this chemistry is 0.02 ppm. Nitrite Nitrite was determined by a Hach DR890 colorimeter using the diazotization method. Nitrite reacts with sulfanilic acid to form an intermediate diazonium salt. When coupled to chromotropic acid, a pink complex forms, which is proportional to the nitrite content. Nitrite results were at or below the MDL (minimum detection limit, which for this chemistry is 0.002 ppm.) Biochemical Oxygen Demand/Dissolved Oxygen Testing Oxygen content was determined through use of a Hach HQ40d dissolved oxygen meter and self-stirring BOD probe (luminescent technology). This device allows measurements to 1/100 th of a milligram dissolved oxygen. Samples were stored in a darkened incubator with a temperature of 20C (+/-1 C) until the oxygen content fell to about 2 ppm (ammonia samples) and 1 ppm (glucose-glutamic acid samples.) Controls : Three controls were set up. One was DI water only (except for added Hach buffers.) A second control contained DI water spiked with 6 ml of the GGA solution. None of the controls were spiked with bacteria. Chloride Chloride content was determined to estimate its impact on nitrate analyses (high chloride results in reports of low nitrate.) A 50 milliliter sample of the Continuum product was tested for chloride using the Silver Nitrate titration method. An endpoint could not be established, so 10 milliliters of the product was diluted by 90 milliliters of DI water. A clean endpoint was apparent and it was determined the product contains about 560 ppm chloride. Method Summary: Silver nitrate reacts with chloride to produce insoluble silver chloride. Continued addition of silver reacts with potassium chromate (previously added to the sample) to form a red-brown silver chromate. The appearance of this red-brown coloration marks the endpoint of titration. Adjustment of sample pH was not necessary. It is assumed interferences (such as iodide, bromide, sulfide, and sulfite) were not present. The Brightwell product was not tested for chloride. See Figure 10. Figure 9. Chloride content of the Continuum product. Dosing Protocols Brightwell: One drop of the Brightwell product (diluted in DI water to meet the dosing requirements established by the manufacturer) was added daily to 300 ml BOD bottles, containing a) 6 ml GGA solution, and DI water spiked with ammonium hydroxide to a concentration of 0.4 mg/l. A commercially available nutrient buffer (containing calcium chloride, magnesium sulfate, potassium phosphate (monobasic and bibasic), sodium phosphate (dibasic) and ferric chloride) was added at recommended concentrations to the deionized water in order to create a matrix suitable for bacterial growth. Continuum: One drop of the Continuum product (diluted in DI water to meet the dosing requirements established by the manufacturer) was added to 300 ml BOD bottles, containing a) 6 ml GGA solution, and the ammonium hydroxide solution with a NH 3 ; concentration of 0.4 mg/l. A commercially available nutrient buffer (containing calcium chloride, magnesium sulfate, potassium phosphate (monobasic and bibasic), sodium phosphate (dibasic) and ferric chloride) was added at recommended concentrations to the deionized water in order to create a matrix suitable for bacterial growth. Since the Brightwell and Continuum products are acidic, pH was determined of the water before and after the addition of the products. The pH was not significantly affected. See Figure 9. Figure 10. In the recommended dosages, these products, although acidic, will not significantly affect water pH. Reference Bhaskar, K.V., and P.B.B.N. Charyulu, 2005. Effect of environmental factors on nitrifying bacteria isolated from the rhizosphere of Setaria italica (L.) Beauv. African J. Biotech., 4:1145-1146. View the full article

Click through to see the images. Lauren Barbati wrote the following article for Advanced Aquarist. All photo credits belong to Juan Ayora Photography. Dive Bar Mermaid Aquarium Tenji, the team that designed the spectacular walk-through jellyfish aquariums Advanced Aquarist wrote about a couple of months ago treats us with another cool aquarium build. They recently created a stunning 7,500 gallon custom aquarium in one of Sacramento’s trendiest clubs. The aquarium at the Dive Bar appears to be magically suspended as it hangs cantilevered over the bar 15 feet off the ground. The elaborately themed tank looks like a bar aboard a sunken ship complete with antique-looking bottles and other casino artifacts. Brilliantly colored marine fish, including exotic French Angelfish, Batfish and Lookdowns, make the tank come alive. However, the main attraction in the aquarium is undoubtedly the pair of live mermaids that glide through the aquarium seducing patrons with their curvy tails. Completing this remarkable feat of aquatic engineering required extensive planning and design from Tenji. From the first drawing to adding the first fish took nearly 18 months. The 48ft long aquarium was so big that street traffic and the Sacramento City Light Rail System had to be stopped while the tank was lifted into the building. With water, the aquarium weighs a whopping 71,000 lbs! Coming up with a safe way to suspend all that weight 15 feet above the ground, in a busy night club, was one of the biggest challenges for Tenji’s three co-founders Andy Case, Mark Faulkner and Edward Seidel. Being situated in California, the aquarium and mounting system had to be engineered to withstand substantial seismic activity. Another unique challenge for the Dive Bar aquarium project was to design a filtration system that would keep the water clean and crystal clear for both fish and the regular mermaid performances. To address this, the aquarium has a total of 12HP of pumps that filter the entire water volume through an elaborate filtration system in the aquarium every 60 minutes. " height="383" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="680"> "> "> The three co-founders of Tenji were all once aquarists at the Monterey Bay Aquarium (MBA) before forming the company. MBA is renowned for being at the cutting edge of aquarium display techniques and husbandry skills. The Tenji trio had a hand in creating some of the facility’s most popular displays during their years working at the institution. Word is that Tenji is busy completing a number of exciting and innovative aquarium displays and we can’t wait see what they have in store. View the full article

Click through to see the images. The plants in this tank are a bit overgrown and probably due for pruning unless the aquarist is going for the wild growth look. This trivial commentary aside, the dual cascades over seiryu rock are some of the most spectacular, dramatic, and realistic we've seen. " height="383" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="680"> "> "> An Underwater Mirage Underwater "waterfalls" are really sandfalls to create an illusion of waterfalls. An air pump is used to carry very fine white sand (usually silica sand) up a tube where the grains cascades back down through the aquascape into a collection basin. It takes talent to create a sandfall that naturally mimics waterfalls - even more so when it is a multi-tiered cascade. Careful planning is also required to make sure the grains of sand all fall back into the collection basin. Otherwise, the sand will eventually build up where you may not want it to. Take for example this beautiful aquarium suffering from the design flaw where sand is pooling at the bottom front of the tank: " height="383" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="680"> "> "> Your turn! Want to try this yourself? Here is a step-by-step video about how to create an underwater waterfall: " height="383" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="680"> "> "> View the full article

My setting for Hydra 52 ; white : 65 Violet : 20 Red: 30 Green: 30 Blue: 80 Royal Blue : 80 D-Blue : 80 UV : 30 My light is about 16 " above the water level. Be careful about the white and UV setting as it might bleach your corals. Too much red and green and you will have algae issues especially for a new tank. Slowly increase the intensity up by 5-10% per week and observe the coral reaction to it.

Chaeto is still the best in refugium since it grow fast and dont turn sexual.

Generally, smaller size of angel fish tend to be more " Well behaved " . My queen doesnt touch my GSP and clove corals, but again this will depend on luck. If you feed your fish well, they will also have no excuse to touch your other corals lol.

i kept one large queen angel in my SPS tank, generally from my own experience angelfish is SPS safe except for zoas which it eat all of my zoas !!

Their natural diets is pods, so you must have a refugium to have them. The red dragonet is easier to keep compare to the rest Rudy.

Yap, that the downside of the apex fusion that it can't work with the apps.

I am using the apex as well. Sodium bicarbonate need to be mix with water to melt before being use since it is not easily soluble.Maybe using a dosing pump will be cheaper and better for topping up. Did you manage to use the Apex email notification setup ? It is very difficult to setup i feel, in the end i give up and just use the apex fusion.

Some of the bacteria might be killed when it pass through the UV chamber, but since most of the bacteria is house under our bio filtration ( Bio media ), hence the overall biological filter will not be affected much.

Click through to see the images. The species is observed in the Red Sea off the coast of Saudi Arabia. Specimens documented for study showed a significant range of morphological differences based on their size and where they were observed/collected (differences in light levels and currents). As reefkeepers know, corals can take on radically different appearances based on environmental conditions. The findings were published this week in ZooKeys. View the full article

Pm him

Mapetz carry all these

You Dont need a pH controller to run just a continuous stirrer . often use together with a auto water top up system to dose kalk .

Using kalk is similar to using a CR to provide kh, and ca. But it provide additional benefits as well to increase your pH, help to blind and remove phosphate ect.

Click through to see the images. From the Institute of Physics: Water-polluting anxiety drug reduces fish mortality A drug that is commonly used to treat anxiety in humans and which regularly finds its way into surface waters through wastewater effluence has been shown to reduce mortality rates in fish. The results, which have been published today, 8 August, in IOP Publishing’s journal Environmental Research Letters, may have significant implications for existing standard ecotoxicological tests, which predominantly focus on harmful effects of water contaminants and ignore the potential benefits. By improving the health of an aquatic organism, a certain pharmaceutical drug may alter the balance of species in an environment and have serious, cascading ecological consequences, according to the researchers from Umeå University in Sweden. Lead author of the paper, Dr Jonatan Klaminder, said: “Ecotoxicological tests were designed with traditional toxic contaminants in mind, such as heavy metals and dioxins, which have historically been the major apparent threat against aquatic organisms in surface waters. “Pharmaceuticals, which are designed to improve health, are a new group of contaminants that do not necessarily fit into the traditional view. “I think there is a ‘bandwagon effect’ within the research community, where the old test and the traditional view of a contaminant is routinely used without reflection about the conceptual flaw implicit in the methods.” In their study, the researchers retrieved two-year-old Eurasian perch from a lake in Sweden and randomly exposed them to high and low concentrations of Oxazepam. Oxazepam is a benzodiazepine which is commonly used to treat anxiety and insomnia in humans and regularly contaminates surface waters via treated wastewater effluent. The researchers have previously shown that the drug can increase the activity and boldness of Eurasian perch. In this study, the low concentration of Oxazepam was below that measured in treated effluent water in Europe. The researchers also collected eggs, or roe strings, from a separate population of perch and exposed them during the first nine days of embryonic development to three different concentrations of Oxazepam. After hatching, a random group of the fry were collected and analysed. Results showed that mortality rates were high among hatched fry — corresponding to mortality rates found among perch fry in natural populations — and relatively high among the two-year-old perch, but were significantly reduced by Oxazepam exposure in comparison to the control group of fish who were not exposed. In the hatched fry, mortality was lower in the high concentration treatment than in the control and low concentration treatments. In the two-year-old perch, mortality was lower in both the low and high concentrations compared to the control. Co-author of the study Tomas Brodin, who was the ecologist in the research team, said: “A therapeutic effect leading to increased survival of one species may generate a proportional increase in mortality of that species’ prey, which may have cascading ecological consequences that need consideration. “A new, conceptual view of ecotoxicological testing should include the possibility that a substance can improve the health of an organism and make individuals affected by contamination more competitive than non-affected individuals.” “Even though our study focused on one single pharmaceutical contaminant, it is possible that similar effects could be induced by exposure to a whole range of pharmaceuticals that find their way into surface waters, such as antibiotics, painkillers, anti-inflammatory drugs, hormones and antidepressants. Our conceptual view of a pollutant has, up until now, blocked us from testing for similar effects at environmentally relevant concentrations.” This paper can be downloaded from http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/9/8/084003/article View the full article

Click through to see the images. Description from the eBay listing: This is a beautiful Jewel "ART" Aquarium manufactured in the early 1930's in the arts & crafts style. Jewel was the prominent manufacture of art deco and other unique style aquariums during the deco era of 1920-30's. The company was sold in the 1940's and there aquariums were of a much simpler style after this time period. What is unique about this aquarium is it was the only cataloged Jewel tank that was "special order" only and you could request the style of stained glass "light boxes" you wanted on each end or in the case of this aquarium you could have beveled glass with a simple design on the front glass. In a conversation with the son of Hans Jensen (original owner of Jewel) he said they made 5 of these aquariums at the most. The aquarium itself is made of heavy iron with a thick marble base. The two stained glass sidelights light up of course and this aquarium sits on an it's original Jewel stand. All the glass and metal is original to the tank including the interesting pattern glass on the inside bottom/sides. Size: 48"L x 17 1/4"H x 18"W. Height with stand is 47". Also, I was asked what the inside tank dimension is that would hold water. It is: L 34 1/2" x W 14 1/2" x H 14 1/2". Total 31.4 gallons. Condition: All original including glass. If this sells I can re-seal the inside should you wish to use with tropical fish. Also, one stained glass panel has two cracks that I can have repaired (see photo) plus I would like to re-fasten the stained glass to the frames for safety. Please check out the photos and ask any questions. This is the rarest of the Jewel aquarium line!! View the full article

Click through to see the images. Since receiving this Madagascar pair in March there has been a lot of excitement. I initially had them set up in a 20g tall quarantine with a HOB filter, sponge filter, heater, and clay pot for shelter. After a day or so the female developed a swollen left eye. While swollen eyes are easy to recognize, they can be difficult to treat. Was it physical damage? Bacteria? A parasite? The correct diagnosis is critical to choosing the correct treatment and so I decided to leave them in quarantine for another couple of weeks and watch the situation. Although the eye did not get any worse, the female became pugnacious with her mate. After the male’s fins became extremely tattered and torn I had to do something. Reluctant to separate them (I know from experience how difficult it can be to repair fish after they have been separated), I decided to move them into a 40g tall anemone tank (where they currently are now). Ultimately I was worried about the male, and thought the tank was just too small for the pair to remain. Because I was already moving them, I decided (with helpful advice) to also give them each a three-minute dip in a freshwater bath in hopes to ameliorate the symptoms of the swollen eye. The bath contained a myriad of antibiotics and other medications. This was not an easy decision, and watching your new fish leaping in and out of a blue/green freshwater mixture is a gut-wrenching experience. After the bath, the fish were rinsed and placed into a new tank where they instantaneously engaged in symbiosis with their new anemone hosts. The stress level of the fish went down immediately and they almost instantly became comfortable in their new home. As far as I can tell (although there is some deliberation about that here), the eye is completely back to normal. You can take a look at the pictures and videos and make your own judgment; I’m certainly curious what others think. Weather the eye went down due to the medical treatment, or just from a stress free environment is also a debate. Photo, right: Water changes are performed slowly with a drip line in the larval tank The first spawn occurred on May 30th, which was reported previously here on Advanced Aquarist. Since then they have spawned six more times, and the average spawn period is just over 11 days. Although I was hopeful after each subsequent spawn, every batch of eggs was eaten again and again by the male. Finally, on July 14th, their 5th spawn was kept! The eggs were laid on a large rock, the only one in the tank, and removing it is not an option. Following knowledge and experience with other species of clowns we expected them to hatch on either night 8, 9 or 10. Going in on night 8, Vossen larval trap in hand, larval tank set up and ready to go, none of the eggs hatched. We showed up again on night 9 and around 10pm three eggs quickly released. Not wanting to risk losing these three larvae, they were collected and transported to a larval tank within a few minutes of being in the trap. We stayed until around midnight and no other eggs were released. I assumed (incorrectly) that the remaining eggs would hatch the following night. When I showed up the next morning, all the eggs were gone. An interesting note, about 10 days prior to the first spawn, I cross-fostered some eggs from an ocellaris pair into the Madagascar tank. I have tried this several times with other resident pairs and have had a decent success rate. Cross fostering involves taking a good batch of eggs from a known breeding pair and placing it in the tank of the pair you would like to breed. For unknown reasons it elicits parental behaviors and seems to engender future spawns. This was only a few weeks after their transition into the new tank, but I felt they seemed confortable. And while I have had other wild caught pairs in the past, this pair is unique. They are extremely territorial and even sitting in front of the tank will get them aggressive, biting the glass and performing interesting lateral and frontal displays. They also started breeding remarkably quickly. In the past, I’ve had pairs for years with no success. The next batch arrived right on time, July 26th, and was laid on a tile we had placed in the tank. This was an auspicious moment, they were keeping their eggs and we would be able to remove the tile to hatch eggs if needed. My plan was to go in with the larval trap on night 9, stay as late as I could and then remove the remaining eggs and place them above an air stone in the new tank. However, when I showed up the next day, the eggs were gone, presumably eaten again by the male. On August 5th, they laid their 7th clutch of eggs; again on the tile placed in the bottom of the tank. This time I planned to watch the male’s behavior very carefully for the next 36 hours making sure he wouldn’t eat all the eggs. After observing for 24 hours and finding about half the eggs missing, I decided to move the eggs out of their tank and place them with a good parenting ocellaris pair. This ocellaris pair always keeps all their eggs and I felt confident they would not eat the Madagascar clutch. It looks like the Madagascar male is eating the eggs in part due to a poor fertilization rate. I can tell that many of the eggs are not fertilized by the color after the second day. However, current as of today, there are about 40 eggs being meticulously cared for by the ocellaris pair. I am expecting them to hatch on Wednesday night. But wait; remember that batch from July14th where three larvae were collected? Well, after a day, two of the larvae didn’t make it. But one did! Breeding a rare species of clownfish has been a goal of mine for many years, and it seems fitting that after 7 batches and thousands of eggs I was able to achieve this with an ‘N’ of one! I am hopeful that the Madagascar pairs egg laying will stay consistent, fertilization rate increase, and egg eating go down, but…. you can never count your clownfish before they hatch. Fresh batch of eggs. These are much smaller in size when first laid than the eggs of A. ocellaris and also more red in color. A good parenting A. ocellaris male cares for the eggs of the Madagascar pair. Note that the brightly colored orange eggs are not fertilized. This is the female just minutes before laying her eggs. She is extremely gravid. These images show the broodstock tank and the pair preparing to spawn. From this batch of eggs laid July 14th, one offspring survived and was reared to the juvenile phase View the full article

You have to use this with great care as too fast a phosphate drop is stressful to corals and it might chock the gills of fishes. Mostly use with a fine micro sock filter to filter it out.

Hi, Under the new ruling you need to state your offering price when you sell something, or your thread might be removed.

Click through to see the images. Sure; last year's Shark Week was atrocious. The Megalodon show in particular was as abhorrent a fake "documentary" as anything we can remember. However, 2014's Shark Week shamelessly crosses the boundaries of intellectual decency and honesty. Frankly, we don't know if it's funny or disgusting. Here's a rundown of the shows viewers can look forward to (complete with Advanced Aquarist's commentaries): Lair of the Mega Shark: "Experts" "risk everything" to go searching for the "legendary" fabled "lord of the sharks." We almost exhausted the world supply of air quotes in one sentence. We think an erratum to the title is in order: "Liar of the Mega Shark." Zombie Sharks: While the title implies monumental stupidity, this show actually describes inducing tonic immobility, a well known shark phenomenon, in a Great White Shark. Unfortunately, we're sure that like the title, this show will be filled with sensationalism and misinformation. Monster Hammerhead: Tell us if you've heard this one already: Expedition to find a mythical killer shark. Alien Sharks: Return to the Abyss: Another stupid title with potentially educational content (we still aren't holding our breath): A shark researcher Paul Clerkin dives deep in the Indian Ocean to investigate deep water shark species, some possibly bioluminescent. Spawn of Jaws 2: The Birth: Yet another moronic title with potentially quality footage. Scientists follow a female great white and attempt to be the first to capture the birth of a baby great white shark. If the show fails to deliver on this premise, we may just have to right a strongly worded letter to Discovery. Yes; that's a threat. Great White Matrix: A show about an epidemic of great white shark attacks. Does anyone remember the early Shark Week shows that weren't all about fear ... shows that actually esteemed sharks as important animals in the world's ecosystems? Neither does Discovery. Air Jaws: Fins of Fury: Finally. An absurd title with equally absurd content. Viewers once again are invited to track down a legendary mega-shark (this cutie is named Colossus), but it's not just your average legendary shark hunt. No, sir. We are promised high tech underwater gadgetry. Crisis averted. Jaws Strikes Back: Strikes back at what? Marine biologists film the hunting behavior of "the largest great white sharks on earth" at Guadeloupe Islands. That's it!? Snooze. At least vote some sharks off the island. I Escaped Jaws 2: Shark Week 2013's "I Escaped Jaws" didn't induce enough panic in the masses. Hopefully the sequel will. Shark of Darkness: Submarine Returns: We just watched this show tonight. It was more fake footage interlaced with real footage to "prove" the existence of a legendary killer shark named Submarine ... the same story as 2013's Megalodon, just a different boogeyman. Megalodon: The New Evidence: Discovery is doubling down on its maligned 2013 show. I guess if you're the laughing stock of the scientific community, you might as well commit all the way. Breaking News! Advanced Aquarist has obtained top secret information about the shows slated for Shark Week 2015: Megalodon vs Submarine: A Fight to the Extinction: This Time It's Real Sharknado: Could It Really Happen? The Real Sharks of Orange County Hardcore Shark Auction Stars Shark Attack Preppers Ancient Shark Aliens Here Comes Mako Boo Boo Sharks at the Jersey Shore Understanding a Mass Murderer: Inside the Mind of a Killer Shark View the full article

Click through to see the images. Sure; last year's Shark Week was atrocious. The Megalodon show in particular was as abhorrent a fake "documentary" as anything we can remember. However, 2014's Shark Week shamelessly crosses the boundaries of intellectual decency and honesty. Frankly, we don't know if it's funny or disgusting. Here's a rundown of the shows viewers can look forward to (complete with Advanced Aquarist's commentaries): Lair of the Mega Shark: "Experts" "risk everything" to go searching for the "legendary" fabled "lord of the sharks." We almost exhausted the world supply of parenthesis in one sentence. We think an erratum to the title is in order: "Liar of the Mega Shark." Zombie Sharks: While the title implies monumental stupidity, this show actually describes inducing tonic immobility, a well known shark phenomenon, in a Great White Shark. Unfortunately, we're sure that like the title, this show will be filled with sensationalism and misinformation. Monster Hammerhead: Tell us if you've heard this one already: Expedition to find a mythical killer shark. Alien Sharks: Return to the Abyss: Another stupid title with potentially educational content (we still aren't holding our breath): A shark researcher Paul Clerkin dives deep in the Indian Ocean to investigate deep water shark species, some possibly bioluminescent. Spawn of Jaws 2: The Birth: Yet another moronic title with potentially quality footage. Scientists follow a female great white and attempt to be the first to capture the birth of a baby great white shark. If the show fails to deliver on this premise, we may just have to right a strongly worded letter to Discovery. Yes; that's a threat. Great White Matrix: A show about an epidemic of great white shark attacks. Does anyone remember the early Shark Week shows that weren't all about fear ... shows that actually esteemed sharks as important animals in the world's ecosystems? Neither does Discovery. Air Jaws: Fins of Fury: Finally. An absurd title with equally absurd content. Viewers once again are invited to track down a legendary mega-shark (this cutie is named Colossus), but it's not just your average legendary shark hunt. No, sir. We are promised high tech underwater gadgetry. Crisis averted. Jaws Strikes Back: Strikes back at what? Marine biologists film the hunting behavior of "the largest great white sharks on earth" at Guadeloupe Islands. That's it!? Snooze. At least vote some sharks off the island. I Escaped Jaws 2: Shark Week 2013's "I Escaped Jaws" didn't induce enough panic in the masses. Hopefully the sequel will. Shark of Darkness: Submarine Returns: We just watched this show tonight. It was more fake footage interlaced with real footage to "prove" the existence of a legendary killer shark named Submarine ... the same story as 2013's Megalodon, just a different boogeyman. Megalodon: The New Evidence: Discovery is doubling down on its maligned 2013 show. I guess if you're the laughing stock of the scientific community, you might as well go all the way. Breaking News! Advanced Aquarist has obtained top secret information about the shows slated for Shark Week 2015: Megalodon vs Submarine: A Fight to the Extinction: This Time It's Real Sharknado: Could It Really Happen? The Real Sharks of Orange County Hardcore Shark Auction Stars Shark Attack Preppers Ancient Shark Aliens Here Comes Mako Boo Boo Sharks at the Jersey Shore Understanding a Mass Murderer: Inside the Mind of a Killer Shark View the full article

Click through to see the images. For weeks after Steinhart Aquarium collected some of the first bargibanti pygmy seahorses for captivity, Steinhart biologists Matt Wandell and Richard Ross, like doting parents, kept vigil over the new residents tucked away in a dark private backroom at Steinhart. They watched. And watched. And watched. Then magic happened. The pair of pygmy seahorses got busy making miniature-r versions of themselves! Free Spirits? For the next three weeks, newborn Bargibants spent their days hovering in a special kreisel aquarium. However, unlike adult Bargibants who spend their lives anchored (and perfectly camouflaged; see photo above) to Murciella paraplectana gorgonians, the babies seemed to rebel by refusing to latch themselves onto the gorgonian placed in their kreisel. The gorgonian actually became so much of an obstacle in the kreisel that Steinhart biologists decided to remove it for concern that their baby pygmy seahorses would hurt themselves running into this barrier. This preference for drifting in the open ocean immediately after birth may seem counter-intuitive to the survival of bite-sized babies. Yet, this pelagic stage is not unlike those of most reef animal larvae, which helps with dispersal and overall survivability of a species. Sooner or later, we all have to grow up and settle down. This week (20-25 days after birth), the babies have finally decided to settle on Muricella sp. After the first three weeks of drifting in the direction of light, the baby bargibanti started to swim downwards. It was at this time the Steinhart staff decided to darken the kreisel and reintroduce the gorgonian, and this time the pygmy seahorses took to their new home. More remarkably, within 24 hours after settling, the once drab brownish-gray babies started to change their pigmentation to match the brilliant pink/orange gorgonian, including taking on the trademark knobby (tubercule) appearance of adult bargibanti! We are promised pictures soon; you'll just have to take our words on it for now. " height="383" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="680"> "> "> For anyone picturing Matt Wandell with a tiny pipette trying to target feed itty-bitty baby pygmy seahorses, we're sorry to disappoint you. Neither the adult nor baby seahorses are target fed. Instead, the biologists simply add a mixture of baby brine shrimps and copepods directly to the aquariums and let their tiny residents dine at their own leisure, and it's obviously working well. When gorgonians are in the system, Steinhart staff also adds Reef Nutrition OysterFeast, RotiFeast, PhytoFeast, and Shellfish Diet to the systems. Steinhart Aquarium collected these adult pygmy seahorses during their second Philippine scientific expedition (May 2014). In fact, it was Matt Wandell who surfaced with the breeding pair. Two month later, Matt is tending to over a dozen captive-spawned pygmy seahorses who are growing up fast. Awesome, no? View the full article

Click through to see the images. We tend to think of Caribbean reefs as the sparsely populated, inferior versions of their Pacific counterparts. It is true Indo-Pacific bio-diversity is unrivaled by any reefs, but Caribbean reefs weren't always the wastelands most are nowadays (as the video we share below will show). That is largely the fault of man. While warming oceans and acidification are serious concerns for long-term welfare, reefs demonstrate remarkable resiliency if man can temper our other destructive behaviors. The data published in a joint report on the status of Caribbean coral reefs by the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is impressive. The study shows us that reefs can be saved if people would stop overfishing (particularly parrotfish and other large grazers) and better manage coastline development for tourism and agriculture. This is unfortunately easier said than done. While reef management officials and scientists embrace the data and its policy recommendations, politicians are under heavy pressure by tourism and fishery lobbies, thus making any improvements from the status quo painfully slow (if at all) no matter how clear the science and recommendations may be. For those who prefer watching a video instead of reading a synopsis, you're in luck. VideoTakes shared this terrific video to complement the report. For those who prefer to read about the findings, here is the news release issued by the IUCN. You can read the full report at: http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/caribbean_coral_reefs___status_report_1970_2012.pdf The organizations also published a joint executive report (essentially a summary and recommendations to policymakers). From despair to repair: Dramatic decline of Caribbean corals can be reversed With only about one-sixth of the original coral cover left, most Caribbean coral reefs may disappear in the next 20 years, primarily due to the loss of grazers in the region, according to the latest report by the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The report, Status and Trends of Caribbean Coral Reefs: 1970-2012, is the most detailed and comprehensive study of its kind published to date – the result of the work of 90 experts over the course of three years. It contains the analysis of more than 35,000 surveys conducted at 90 Caribbean locations since 1970, including studies of corals, seaweeds, grazing sea urchins and fish. The results show that the Caribbean corals have declined by more than 50% since the 1970s. But according to the authors, restoring parrotfish populations and improving other management strategies, such as protection from overfishing and excessive coastal pollution, could help the reefs recover and make them more resilient to future climate change impacts. “The rate at which the Caribbean corals have been declining is truly alarming,” says Carl Gustaf Lundin, Director of IUCN’s Global Marine and Polar Programme. “But this study brings some very encouraging news: the fate of Caribbean corals is not beyond our control and there are some very concrete steps that we can take to help them recover.” Climate change has long been thought to be the main culprit in coral degradation. While it does pose a serious threat by making oceans more acidic and causing coral bleaching, the report shows that the loss of parrotfish and sea urchin – the area’s two main grazers – has, in fact, been the key driver of coral decline in the region. An unidentified disease led to a mass mortality of the sea urchin in 1983 and extreme fishing throughout the 20th century has brought the parrotfish population to the brink of extinction in some regions. The loss of these species breaks the delicate balance of coral ecosystems and allows algae, on which they feed, to smother the reefs. Reefs protected from overfishing, as well as other threats such as excessive coastal pollution, tourism and coastal development, are more resilient to pressures from climate change, according to the authors. “Even if we could somehow make climate change disappear tomorrow, these reefs would continue their decline," says Jeremy Jackson, lead author of the report and IUCN’s senior advisor on coral reefs. "We must immediately address the grazing problem for the reefs to stand any chance of surviving future climate shifts.” The report also shows that some of the healthiest Caribbean coral reefs are those that harbour vigorous populations of grazing parrotfish. These include the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary in the northern Gulf of Mexico, Bermuda and Bonaire, all of which have restricted or banned fishing practices that harm parrotfish, such as fish traps and spearfishing. Other countries are following suit. “Barbuda is about to ban all catches of parrotfish and grazing sea urchins, and set aside one-third of its coastal waters as marine reserves,” says Ayana Johnson of the Waitt Institute’s Blue Halo Initiative which is collaborating with Barbuda in the development of its new management plan. “This is the kind of aggressive management that needs to be replicated regionally if we are going to increase the resilience of Caribbean reefs.” Reefs where parrotfish are not protected have suffered tragic declines, including Jamaica, the entire Florida Reef Tract from Miami to Key West, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The Caribbean is home to 9% of the world’s coral reefs, which are one of the most diverse ecosystems on the planet. Caribbean reefs, spanning a total of 38 countries, are vital to the region’s economy. They generate more than US$ 3 billion annually from tourism and fisheries and over a hundred times more in other goods and services, on which more than 43 million people depend. Quotes from IUCN partners: "The Caribbean coral reefs thread along thousands of kilometres of coastline, providing a source of food and livelihood for millions. Unfortunately, these valuable ecosystems are under mounting pressures from human activities which contribute to the degradation and damage of sediment and pollution to coastal waters. Coral bleaching caused by the rising sea temperature adds to the challenge, weakening and killing corals in numerous locations," said UN Under-Secretary-General and UNEP Executive Director, Achim Steiner. "Coral reef degradation and mortality will significantly impact the region's economy through reduced habitat for fish and shellfish, diminished tourism and reduced capacity to protect the shoreline against rising sea levels," he said, adding: "We need strong collaboration at the local, national and regional levels to build resilience and reduce threats to coral reefs and the livelihoods of those who depend on them." "The decline in corals started long before climate change began to affect reefs," says Terry Hughes, author of the 1994 study that predicted the current problems due to parrotfish removal. “This report confirms that vigorous populations of grazing parrotfish are a common attribute of the healthiest Caribbean coral reefs. These ‘resilient reefs’ have strong local protections that are strictly enforced and double or triple the average coral cover of the 14% seen throughout the Caribbean.” View the full article