mogurnda

Exciting news. I hope it becomes more common. Cute babies, too!

Looks like an eye behind it. Another vote for conch. Unless you don't have one, then it's something else.

I appreciate the frankness and candor of this post. I was sad when I saw the beginning of this thread, giving the fish about a month or two to live. When it was clear that you did not know the preferred food species, and then you stuffed a handful of fish into a pico, I got pretty unhappy with the level of apparent hubris. I understand the desire to be outside of the box in this hobby. The hobby advances when people ignore the common wisdom and try "dumb" things. My approach has been to research exhaustively, plan for months, and then get started. In the process, I am reminded of how much bad information is in the hobbyist literature, and even in scientific papers. Despite the planning, failures happen more often that I like to admit, but I try to learn from those failures. I almost feel like this thread should be a sticky, because it is both a good illustration to less experienced members as to why certain species should not be kept, and that we can learn from others' mistakes. This time the experiment didn't seem to work, but anyone reading the thread can get an idea of what might be needed for a serious attempt in the future.

#4: Cup coral, either Phyllangia or Corangia. Not a pest.

I can't see the tentacles or jaws on yours, but the body looks just like this two foot eunicid that I had for several years. It ate everything it could swallow (mushrooms, turtle grass!), and would be considered undesirable by most definitions.

Welcome back, Jacob!

I like the Evergrow S2. A bit pricey, but I get fast, dense growth.

I was using the sunscreen issue to make a point, and in fact it made the point that more scientific discussion is better than less. I am on the fence about sunscreens, and have no idea how they know what a "coral safe" sunscreen is. Alan, you are so totally right that there are probably people dying to collaborate with you. One of my colleagues was doing some very cool work with the effects of anesthetics on membranes with some people up there.

Anything from warm white (3500 K) on up is fine. Green plants use both red and blue, so high color temperature bulbs (>10000K) are not only more expensive but also counterproductive. The new LED fuge lights are strongly balanced toward red (they are basically re-purposed hydroponics lights), and most excellent for growth.

A couple of thoughts. First, the academic research does make its way to the hobbyist via the speakers we have. When Rick spoke yesterday about the effects of sunscreen on reefs, those observations came from academic research. Would it be better to hear from the people who did the original observations? Maybe, but a lot depends on the time pressures on the researchers and their ability to speak to the public. Putting together a talk for non-specialists is rewarding but very time-consuming. Second, I believe the links to academia could be stronger. At UM, we are encouraged to do outreach, and there are rewards for it. For example, when writing NSF grants, "broader impacts," which include community outreach, are increasingly important for securing funding. Also, this kind of thing looks good on the individual's annual report to the university. What is missing is the linkage between the hobbyist society and the academic world. With regard to the idea that the research is "too academic," I would argue that any research can be explained to any audience. I am not the world's best speaker, but last week I managed to have a room full of high school students actively engaged in discussing my research using fruit flies to study anesthesia, so anything's possible. Yes, it is easier to explain your work to fellow specialists, but talking to general audiences can often be a very useful exercise in stepping back and looking at the big picture. I don't have an easy solution, but I think this is worth devoting some energy to. As a club, WAMAS has taken leadership in the hobby on a lot of fronts, so can we play a role in making stronger links between hobbyists and scientists?

Would love to get some from you. Justin tried using the slugs on his system, but they are too dumb to stay put and get sucked into pumps. Will need to contact him. I thought he had defeated it.

That's the stuff! Num, num.

That should be fine. If the slug finishes off the Bryopsis, I will be happy to buy it from you. Be certain that it is really Bryopsis, which is nice and feathery, and not some other coarse hair algae.

BTW this was not intended as a dig at anyone. I am just fighting with red mushrooms and Anthelia right now.

It's looking about the same, except that Ochtodes has been growing like crazy. Cleaning that out this weekend. Only one E. crispata left from that batch of three, but she seems to be going strong. Focusing mostly on the slugs at work for the moment, but I will probably add some more crsipata later in the spring. Agree. Too bad they have both scaled back. I will remember that you dissed my tank, and remain bitter forever. May or may not work. Because they like to wander, any powerheads or propeller pumps not protected by sponges will quickly turn them into slug tartare. What's it growing on? I may be able to swap clean for infested.

As Alan says, I am culturing a few species of Elysia. The one I work with most, E. clarki, really, really likes Bryopsis. So far, the only times they have laid eggs on a regular basis have been when they have had tons of Bryopsis to eat. You will probably not be surprised to hear that the collectors I get other species of algae from will not collect Bryopsis. I understand why you would be puzzled that i would want such a pest. I ask myself the same question when people sell red mushrooms or Anthelia. One person's pest is another's pet. By the way, does anyone want to buy some red mushrooms or Anthelia? Lots available.

Whatever you have would be great!

I don't see a problem as far as N and P. Most of us probably add more nutrients when we feed than would come from tap water. My concerns would be that your nutrient levels would vary based on whatever's happening with the public water supply, and that there may be metals in the water that you don't want. You could deal with the metals, as well as the chlorine, using carbon. I could probably use tap water for the macroalgae/slug system, but I am currently using water from the still because I want to control the input.

In case someone has a good growth and would be willing to bring to the meeting. Always looking for a fresh supply.

+1. You need stability. Get a tub or a larger tank. Looks like a train wreck unfolding

Oops, I didn't read the part about your run-in with FAF. Use the version without silica unless you are culturing diatoms.

+1 on using Guillard's F/2 as a fertilizer. I use it to supply N,P, and traces for macroalgae in a fishless system. Helps the macros grow, but there is also a perpetual bloom of phytoplankton. Undesirable for me, but indicates how effective it is for microalgae. Trying to reduce it with skimming and filter feeders. I can send you some pdfs for recipes, but do yourself a favor and buy it from FAF as SethSolomon suggests. Too much work to mix it up on a small scale, and I always feel good about supporting Frank Hoff.

A quick repost of a photo of their good work. For most of the 14 years we have been diving in Bonaire, there has been little or no staghorn in the area near where we stay. Thanks to a collaboration between CRF and Buddy Dive, a whole new reef is developing in the shallows. It is exciting when a foundation like this can produce such concrete results.

We stopped by for a while, and it was great fun. Should have posted a link earlier. One thing we noticed was that they have an excellent auditorium. Has anyone checked about using it for a WAMAS meeting?

going on now!