Distorted/mutant morphology in Acroporas radial and axial corallite structure.
- Thread starter C. Eymann
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Not nearly enough flow to cause damage, imo. I have corals sitting 7-8" in front of MP60s at 100% pulse mode. It just doesn't look like typical flow related altered growth.
I agree there can be too much flow for a coral. I just don't see it causing the bumpy growth or loss of structure with out it being very apparent that the coral is in too much flow. Lack of PE, color, thinning tissue etc..
I noticed this growth, actually on a big name vendors corals recently. It'd be interesting to know their general setup. I've seen their grow-outs in the past when they used MH and they were beautiful, but if I remember correctly they've been switching to mostly Radions.
So it’s just a coincidence that my 2 distorted branches are in flow hot spots?
Couldn’t disagree more. I have over 25 Tenuis in this tank and these 2 are receiving more linear flow than any of them and are the only ones exhibiting this irregular growth. Y’all are more than welcome to doubt and speculate and try to point some other reason but I’m 100% sure you’re wrong. And I call B S to anyone claiming to have an acro 6-8” directly in front of a mp60 at 100%
Didn't you have another thread not too long ago with another acro that had "bouncing" corallites at the tips? Maybe it was someone else, but I thought it was one of your Tenuis.
Flow is naturally occurring. Strong flow is naturally occurring. Strong linear flow is also naturally occurring. Observing thousands of corals in their natural waters I've never seen growth like this.
Certainly does not mean it's not possible, but I just don't see flow as a likely culprit, IMHO
Let us know how those specific pieces look in a few months when they've outgrown the hot spot areas.
I did have a bouncing corallite on a cherry bomb Tenuis but it seems to have resolved. Metal halide and T5 users have had bouncing acro corallites as well.
Great topic!
Just an observation, I have seen this almost exclusively in tenuis as well, but also in a few other extremely fragile Acropora like CC Voodoo Majick and Dreamcatcher, and typically when they are growing with extremely low density fragile skeletons (caused by who knows what....could be a ton of different variables interacting or some characteristic of the species/morph). Homewrecker seems most susceptible to this, and I wondered if it was water flow physically damaging the coral because it was so fragile causing the distortions. I suspect watcher chemistry fluctuations cause the low density growth, and I also see it in corals that have "stalled out" which are not actively building/repairing their skeletons.
Just an observation, I have seen this almost exclusively in tenuis as well, but also in a few other extremely fragile Acropora like CC Voodoo Majick and Dreamcatcher, and typically when they are growing with extremely low density fragile skeletons (caused by who knows what....could be a ton of different variables interacting or some characteristic of the species/morph). Homewrecker seems most susceptible to this, and I wondered if it was water flow physically damaging the coral because it was so fragile causing the distortions. I suspect watcher chemistry fluctuations cause the low density growth, and I also see it in corals that have "stalled out" which are not actively building/repairing their skeletons.
Here’s a post from the Bubbaque thread about putting a Tenuis too close to an mp40
www.reef2reef.com
Bubba's SPS Journey
Personally I think the secret to success with sps is having a good Tang to Arco ratio and ignoring numbers. Hmm not sure about the tangs, but ignoring numbers is the best starting point anyone can learn :)
www.reef2reef.com
Maybe TSA can chime in. They must watch tons of these corals (high end Tenuis) under go changes from fresh off the boat to aqua-cultured colonies. Looks like their more recent A. Tenuis colonies are showing signs of this growth. Wonder if they have any theories?
Can not say better than this!!! Bravo!!>>>>>>>>Metal halide and fluorescent are more of a continuous spectrum than an array of point sources of fixed wavelength
No, they are not, and this kind of disinformation really needs to cease.
Seriously....use google and look up the spectrums of reef based halides. I'll do it for you:
Underwater Light Field and its Comparison to Metal Halide Lighting
This article presents some data on the underwater light field on a reef and compares it to the artificial light field over our reef aquaria, along with discussion of other features of natural lighting that are often not simulated in our aquariums.www.advancedaquarist.com
Now go look up the published spectrums of any mainstream reef LED. Now show me again where the halide or T5 has a more continuous spectrum -vs- repeating what the guy at the reef store. The graphs are there......they can't be more obvious if they were in crayon. Seriously, show me a link to a halide or T5 with a continuous spectrum.
Metal halide and fluorescent like fixtures have NON-continuous spectrums while LED's have much more continuous spectrums . This is one reason why the mainstream lighting industry is banning and ditching conventional fluorescent and halide in favor of LED.
The reason SPS can grow weird under some LED sources is because you guys want small, hyper dense LED fixtures with the emphasis on software and wi-fi and other worthless features -vs- distributing the light more evenly. If you want to blast a Radion or Kessil on a long or wide tank with a radiating area measured in a mere few square inches then SPS will grow unevenly. If you distribute the light source more evenly, like using a bunch of black boxes or strips like most of my SPS friends on big tanks there is no issue.
OP
OP
C. Eymann
2500 Club Member
I have been reading a bit on calicoblastic epithelioma and coral neoplasia which is very similar to what have been observing in some systems however some of the corals showing this are growing and more than healthy, so I don't believe it's the same.
This thread was never intended to bash LEDs at all, In the past week especially, I have seen some of the most incredibly colorful acropora colonies I have ever seen in my life, some were being lit with radions only, others with a mix of radions, halides, T5s etc etc
Thing is, many of these colonies under all different lighting schemes and flow areas/patterns exhibit this same melting/mutated/irregular radial and axial corallite development. Again though, all very healthy, colorful and growing, and under a plethora of different lighting and flow conditions.
I had a lightbulb pop on over my head today. These corals have been through a very stringent QT process that involves multiple prophylactic dips.
Around the same time period that people started successfully keeping acropora under LEDs, which is around the same time I started noticing this "warped" morphology-
proper dipping/QT protocols, specifically Bayer dips started becoming more commonplace and religiously practiced among hobbyists too.
I would say that should be viewed as a possible variable at play here possibly? thoughts? ideas?
This thread was never intended to bash LEDs at all, In the past week especially, I have seen some of the most incredibly colorful acropora colonies I have ever seen in my life, some were being lit with radions only, others with a mix of radions, halides, T5s etc etc
Thing is, many of these colonies under all different lighting schemes and flow areas/patterns exhibit this same melting/mutated/irregular radial and axial corallite development. Again though, all very healthy, colorful and growing, and under a plethora of different lighting and flow conditions.
I had a lightbulb pop on over my head today. These corals have been through a very stringent QT process that involves multiple prophylactic dips.
Around the same time period that people started successfully keeping acropora under LEDs, which is around the same time I started noticing this "warped" morphology-
proper dipping/QT protocols, specifically Bayer dips started becoming more commonplace and religiously practiced among hobbyists too.
I would say that should be viewed as a possible variable at play here possibly? thoughts? ideas?
I don’t think at this stage anything can be ruled out... could a dip be responsible? I’m not sure how it could affect changes in the laying down of the skeleton, but these are sensitive and fragile animals so why not
OP
OP
C. Eymann
2500 Club Member
I wasn't talking about dips changing current skeleton structure, more so the dips / Bayer possibly effecting future growth/development.
Yeah that’s what I meant, when I said “affecting changes in the laying down of the skeleton”
OP
OP
C. Eymann
2500 Club Member
Maybe you misunderstood, I dont think dips will effect current skeleton structure at all.
I think dips like bayer could possibly affect future colony development/growth, causing these distortions.
Borneman describes coral neoplasia and
calicoblastic epithelioma as just that, cancer! as we all know cancer is caused by cell mutations that effect the regulation of cell growth/reproduction.
Exposure to repeated dips IMO could be a contributor and influencing variable that could affect future growth/growth mutations or the genetics tied to that. .
I'm not saying it absolutely is, but I dont think it's far fetched.
homer1475
Figuring out the hobby one coral at a time.
You 2 are saying the exact same thing in different wording. You think dipping could cause irregular growth, and so does he(laying down NEW skeleton).
OP
OP
C. Eymann
2500 Club Member
I see now, sorry, still slurping coffee and rubbing sleep out of my eyes, lol.
Similar threads
-
- AMS: Article
