View Full Version : organ pipe coral help please
terrible t
21-12-06, 15:07
I have recently purchased an organ pipe coral,unfortunately it was delivered a little later than i expected 9pm tuesday so it had been in transit for over 24 hours. The heat pack was bone cold and the water was freezing. I didnt think it would be wise to slowly acclimatise the coral so i chucked it straight in. for the last two days i have had no polyp extension at all. I am considering telling the supplier the coral was dead on arrival but i thought i would post a pic first and check with a few people who may have kept these before.
http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/7925/picture166vj5.th.jpg (http://img183.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture166vj5.jpg)
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1440/picture167ly5.th.jpg (http://img96.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture167ly5.jpg)
i was hoping it would look like this lol, its a nice and unusual piece so i hope you can understand my concern. May i also add that all my parameters are good and other corals are thriving.
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/2826/dscf54223ys7.th.jpg (http://img20.imageshack.us/my.php?image=dscf54223ys7.jpg)
instantsquid
21-12-06, 15:17
Hmmm... it doesn't look good does it? But there is still life in there as far as I can tell - the "tubes" look to still have tissue in them, even if the polyps are not expanded.
I would be inclined to leave it a little longer.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I don't think putting it straight into your tank was necessarily a great idea. Corals can survive drops in temperature and back again, provided it doesn't happen too quickly. Acclimatising it in the normal way, albeit over a relatively long period, would probably have been the best approach. Still, there's no point beating yourself up over it.
- Ian
terrible t
21-12-06, 15:29
yeah i was at odds with what to do with it,i have read on many occasions that corals that have been in transit for a long time should not be acclimatised because the ammonia can rise to a deadly level as the temperature increases. The coral should never have arrived stone cold anyway. I guess it just one of those annoying things you have to deal with over the xmas period. I really like the coral though its the only one i have seen in that colour. There deffinately is tissue in the tubes and it doesnt seem to be dying. thanks for your advice.
Ryan
yeah i was at odds with what to do with it,i have read on many occasions that corals that have been in transit for a long time should not be acclimatised because the ammonia can rise to a deadly level as the temperature increases. The coral should never have arrived stone cold anyway. I guess it just one of those annoying things you have to deal with over the xmas period. I really like the coral though its the only one i have seen in that colour. There deffinately is tissue in the tubes and it doesnt seem to be dying. thanks for your advice.
Ryan
exactly the advice that cyber aquatics give out to customers
Hi,
Hows the pipe coral now? Is it showing any polyps yet?
Jay
Hi they seem to do better in nutrient rich water. Maybe your tank water is the opposite
Those guys can sometimes take forever to come out ! and yeah there is some flesh left as others have said.If the tubes are hollow right through then its dead im afraid.Ive had one close up for well over a week :cool:
terrible t
12-01-07, 16:25
sorry for the late reply,i probably have about 40% of the polyps out,looks very patchy though! will new growth cover the old tubes? cheers
Ryan
It's a mystery. I myself have 3 hard to find colonies, which came out for a while, and then closed down for about a month. Now they are out, once again.
terrible t
14-01-07, 11:16
the polyps that have expanded are out all through out the lighting period. I just wonder if the dead tubes will be colonised again?
cheers
Ryan
I just wonder if the dead tubes will be colonised again?
No, the empty tubes will not be recolonised. However if the colony remains healthy then the way organpipes grow (in a type of lattice), they will overgrow the empty tubes with new tubes and fill in the gaps.
John
hahnmeister
21-01-07, 21:27
Keep it in a lower light area to get the polyps to extend. I made the mistake for a long time of trying to grow the stuff in areas with a PAR of higher than 200... this was a mistake. They are a low light coral... a PAR of 100 or less is fine. They also need constant flow to do well... a constant gentle flow is best.
If you have 40% of the polyps out, thats a good sign. But from the pics, you might have it too high in the tank. Keep it at the bottom, or under a rock or something. I had the same problem with pipe organs because they were getting too much light, so many days they just didnt come out, and they died off.
As soon as I put them in a dark corner with a good flow, they came back with a vengence!
Don't mean to disagree but Tubipora musica is not a low light level coral, although it may survive down to 100 ME (PAR) or even lower I would advise 200 ME or above (about what you would get 10" under a 250w halide a few inches off to one side).
This is a coral that I farm and I find that it is necessary (in my farming systems at least) to feed phytoplankton to get good growth rates. It will grow over the old dead skeleton and given time it can recover fully.
hth
instantsquid
06-02-07, 08:10
That's interesting Clayton - I bought a frag off you a couple of years ago and despite my best efforts I seem unable to kill it off :o
Seriously, it's been "accidentally" fragged a couple of times during aqua-scaping, buried under rockwork by my Regal Tang, heated to something silly when my tank overheated, and just seems to come back better each time! I don't feed phyto to my tank, and I guess the Tubipora is about 14" below the water surface under 250w MH lighting.
- Ian
hahnmeister
08-02-07, 00:54
I finally figured out how to keep pipe-organ... it took me a while. The good news is that once I figured out what I was doing wrong, it came back like a weed.
The water quality doesnt seem to be that important. If anything, more nutrient-rich water prolly just means more tint to the water... and less light reaching the polyps.
It turns out that although I was giving pipe-organs the right flow (a constant gentle breeze seems the most pleasing), the determining factor was the light. Even at the bottom of the tank, the PAR readings are still 150-200 across the whole bottom of the tank. Once I put some black mesh over where the coral sat, it came right back from the brink, and then-some. It turns out that this coral prefers very low lighting levels, perhaps lower than what many of our tanks can provide. PAR readings of 50-100 tops. Thats lower than mushroom territory.
Try moving the coral to the bottom, and maybe even under a partial overhang. Its been growing like mad since I figured out not to keep it in any light.
Strange, Tubipora musica is a coral that can be found on the top of reef flats that are exposed to air at low tide.
However I do know that it can tollerate lower light levels as there are polyps of it sprouting out of the gravel under the racks in the farming systems, however growth rates are higher with 200 ME or more.
This coral was considered very dificult to keep and impossible to frag only 10 years ago, strange how things change.
As far as feeding goes, T. musica will filter feed and take up organics from the water, my systems have very low nutrient levels due to low fish stocking so it is necessary to feed them additionally. A tank that is having fish food chucked in every day will be providing nutrients for the coral.
Don't mean to disagree but Tubipora musica is not a low light level coral, although it may survive down to 100 ME (PAR) or even lower I would advise 200 ME or above (about what you would get 10" under a 250w halide a few inches off to one side).
I have to agree with Clayton/Reefworks. This coral was grown from one of his frags - it was almost directly under a 400w halide and grew like a weed.
http://www.ultimatereef.net/uploader/2006Q4/Tubipora-musica.jpg
Keith
Nice Keith! Good to see the frags when they have grown up in peoples tanks.
Nice Keith! Good to see the frags when they have grown up in peoples tanks.
Yeah - unfortunately this is the tank that then got wiped out by a pump failure :( . Still I can at least include in the end credits 'No wild corals were hurt in the making of this aquarium'! Every coral in there (other than the zoos) originated from your farm.
Keith
hahnmeister
09-02-07, 05:04
While they may rely on certain amounts of nutrient uptake from the water, I dont think that they need water any more nutrient rich than NSW (and thats pretty sterile at that). Those recent articles on that (Advanced Aquarist was it?) very subject seemed to shed light on that 'myth'.
I just treat it like green star polyps. After all, GSP is really a pipe-organ coral as well (same order, related family). It makes me wonder if PE even needs to be fed, or if its like GSP and doesnt even have a mouth.
While they may rely on certain amounts of nutrient uptake from the water, I dont think that they need water any more nutrient rich than NSW (and thats pretty sterile at that). Those recent articles on that (Advanced Aquarist was it?) very subject seemed to shed light on that 'myth'.
I just treat it like green star polyps. After all, GSP is really a pipe-organ coral as well (same order, related family). It makes me wonder if PE even needs to be fed, or if its like GSP and doesnt even have a mouth.
Whilst that is possibly true in the ocean their is far more live plankton that are continually fed on (particularly at night) than in an aquarium. Corals are able to gain nutrition from a number of sources, light, live plankton and nutrients in the water. If one is in short supply or absent then many corals are able to adapt their physiology to utilise other sources to a greater extent. So in an aquarium with low light or live plankton this coral may be able to make more use of disolved organics and thrive. This coral does actively feed through it's mouth by filtering the water with pinules on the polyps, this can be easily seen when you observe them.
As a side point, coral reefs are far from sterile,in fact they are one of the most biodiverse environments on the planet (along with rainforests) and this is due to the vast aray of nutrition that is available. Corals have vast amounts of organics and nutrients constantly raining down on them from the huge aray of fish and other animals, these organics are rapidly taken up by the corals. It is quite easy to have a situation in an aquarium where usefull organics are quickly depleted by the corals in the tank.
hahnmeister
10-02-07, 05:25
Im talking about the water chemistry. Coral Reefs are like an oasis in a large desert. Their animal composition might be grand and diverse, but the water is still the same. The idea that some corals seem to prefer more 'nutrient rich' water over others (Im talking phosphates, nitrates, etc... not phytoplankton and living organisms in that water) seems to have been proven a myth. Just because you might feed phyto and such very well doesnt mean you have nutrient rich water. For most reefers, 'nutrient rich' means they have water that is rich in phosphates, carbons, nitrates, etc.
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-07/eb/index.php
And to suggest that nutrients can somehow make up for, or be used by a coral as a substitute for planktonic feeding is absurd. In most cases, excess nutrients results in calcification being blocked at the chemical level (and even soft corals use calcium), filtering of the light in the tank by 'yellowing agents', and reefs are generally sources of net export of nitrogenous compounds to oceanic waters. If corals are kept in high-nutrient waters for a long time, the result is often long, slow, and irreversible eutrophication of the coral. Corals are not plants. And for comparison, even the rather 'sterile' mega-skimmer, phosban using, low-fish population, ozone running SPS reef has much higher nutrient levels that NSW. According to Nilsen and Fossa, Pipe Organs require nutrient poor water or else their skeletons are prone to growing algae. According to Hargreaves book as well as the 'Corals of the World' 3-book set, this coral 'feeds solely on the production of its own zooxanthellae.
As far as... "This coral does actively feed through it's mouth by filtering the water with pinules on the polyps, this can be easily seen when you observe them."
No, I dont see it, and not because the authors I listed above say so. GSP is a type of pipe organ as well, and if you look close enough it also has pinules on the polyps. These are used in respiration, not for grasping food. I just tried putting my PO in a cloud of cyclopeeze and phyto, and the polyps couldnt care less. Something tells me that just like GSP, they dont actually have a mouth. Just because a coral has polyps with pinules doesnt mean it feeds on a physical food. Take Xenia for instance...
Hi, you've referenced an article by Bourneman so I assume you agree with what he says on Tubipora musica.
From his book Aquarium Corals...
Overall, Tubipora thrives in somewhat nutrient-laden, turbid conditions... it is also observed to catch prey with its polyps
You say Veron's Corals of the World supports your hypothesis that this coral feeds solely on the production of its own zooxanthellae. Can you give me a more specific reference? As I'm sure you know his series concentrates on scleractinian corals so it only seems to have cursory coverage of this non-scleractinian coral in Volume III (p. 406-407), and that makes no reference to its feeding habits?
Regards
OK, there is some confusion then on terminology, nutrient means anything that is providing nutrition for something. So in the case of the corals we are talking about phosphate, nitrate, amino acids and probably a whole host of other organics.
Obviously having nitrate and phosphate levels at levels much greater than those of NSW is not beneficial, I don't I have ever heard anybody say that it is beneficial.
"And to suggest that nutrients can somehow make up for, or be used by a coral as a substitute for planktonic feeding is absurd."
Actually it is not at all, corals are doing it all the time, there are loads of scientific papers showing this. Take the adaptions that corals make when they are moved from different light intensities. Also if we are going to continue this discussion please can you be a little bit more carefull how you write things, I thought that last comment was a little rude.
Also just because you have not observed a coral doing something (ie actively feeding) it does not mean that it does not happen.
Finally although I have the utmost respect for authors like Fossa and Nilsen I am sure they are the first to admit that some of the info needs to be updated.
Not quite sure what you disagree with about this coral, it can obviously aclimatise and adapt to a range of conditions and environments.
Im talking about the water chemistry. Coral Reefs are like an oasis in a large desert. Their animal composition might be grand and diverse, but the water is still the same. The idea that some corals seem to prefer more 'nutrient rich' water over others (Im talking phosphates, nitrates, etc... not phytoplankton and living organisms in that water) seems to have been proven a myth. Just because you might feed phyto and such very well doesnt mean you have nutrient rich water. For most reefers, 'nutrient rich' means they have water that is rich in phosphates, carbons, nitrates, etc.
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-07/eb/index.php
And to suggest that nutrients can somehow make up for, or be used by a coral as a substitute for planktonic feeding is absurd. In most cases, excess nutrients results in calcification being blocked at the chemical level (and even soft corals use calcium), filtering of the light in the tank by 'yellowing agents', and reefs are generally sources of net export of nitrogenous compounds to oceanic waters. If corals are kept in high-nutrient waters for a long time, the result is often long, slow, and irreversible eutrophication of the coral. Corals are not plants. And for comparison, even the rather 'sterile' mega-skimmer, phosban using, low-fish population, ozone running SPS reef has much higher nutrient levels that NSW. According to Nilsen and Fossa, Pipe Organs require nutrient poor water or else their skeletons are prone to growing algae. According to Hargreaves book as well as the 'Corals of the World' 3-book set, this coral 'feeds solely on the production of its own zooxanthellae.
As far as... "This coral does actively feed through it's mouth by filtering the water with pinules on the polyps, this can be easily seen when you observe them."
No, I dont see it, and not because the authors I listed above say so. GSP is a type of pipe organ as well, and if you look close enough it also has pinules on the polyps. These are used in respiration, not for grasping food. I just tried putting my PO in a cloud of cyclopeeze and phyto, and the polyps couldnt care less. Something tells me that just like GSP, they dont actually have a mouth. Just because a coral has polyps with pinules doesnt mean it feeds on a physical food. Take Xenia for instance...
hahnmeister
12-02-07, 19:07
This coral is part of a genus that doesnt capture solid food. Thats all Im saying. Every source I can find lists it as feeding off its own symbiotic algae... like the other relatives in its group... GSP, clove/glove polyps, etc.
Considering its rabid growth in my tank with no phyto dosing going on during the period where it went from dying to explosive growth, and it being in a relatively sterile tank (SPS and clam dominant), it would seem that feeding and nutrients take a back seat to flow and lighting for this species.
The lighting thing does confuse me though. Almost every source I see has it listed as a light-lover, yet mine cant stand a PAR higher than 150 it seems. Then again, there are 3 or more distinct species, so perhaps the neon-green/blue polyp species that I have is jjust a low-light exception.
I did a quick search on the web to make sure that I was not going mad when I watched T. musica feeding and found this on the first page:
Sorokin (1991) found that 130% of their metabolic need for carbon could be met by products of photosynthesis, 40% by predation (zooplankton), 38% from bacterioplankton and 13% from dissolved organic matter. Artemia nauplii should be readily accepted and the coral should do well in a nutrient rich aquarium.
Sorokin Y.I. (1991) Biomass, metabolic rates and feeding of some common zoantharians and octocorals. Aust. J. Mar. Freshwater Res. 42: 729-741
Here is a link to the website with a bit more info on the coral:
http://www.petsforum.com/personal/trevor-jones/Tubipora_musica.html
Hey, Clayton, that's 221%! :p One hungry coral......
:p Now you are going to go and confuse people! :D
clayton,
is this phytoplankton stuff the same as marine snow ?
cheers
Ump...
I bought one of these from a former UR member and it just keeps on growing relentlessly, now its about 18" high and the same across the top. Its now grown within an inch of the water surface, do you think it stop there and remain happy or do you think it will grow too close to the surface and die back? It has been directly under a 250 since its been in the tank. If you think there is a risk of loosing it I will have to do some rescaping.
Rich
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.