View Full Version : Red Candy Cane Sponge
Has anyone had experience with these?
photo taken from Jacksok's thread:
http://www.ultimatereef.net/uploader/2008Q1/20070722-candy-cane-sponge.jpg
Has anyone got a positive ID for them?
Hairyduck managed to narrow it down to Axinella damicornis (sponge) and an encrusting sea anemone Parazoanthus axinellae which live in association with the sponge.
http://www.ultimatereef.net/forums/showthread.php?t=199863&page=17&highlight=candy+cane
What does the sponge feed on? bacteria?
What does the anemone feed on? what sizes etc?
One thing I would look into is a gradual dosing of silicate. All sponges need it to grow, and aquariums tend to have very low levels of it, especially when using RO/DI for top-off. This might be one of the reasons people have had very limited success with sponges in aquaria. I've read elsewhere that these specific sponges are sensitive to bright light. Would probably be best to keep it in a shaded area or dimly lit tank. As far as food goes, I have no idea. I don't know if you guys in the UK have access to the stuff Chuck Stottlemire here in the States uses (Shellfish Diet) or something like it. That would be what I'd try for the sponge. Chuck has had explosive growth of a non-photosynthetic black barrel sponge while using it. Admittedly, that particular sponge seems fairly easy - it grew some in my tank before I started dosing Shellfish Diet. However, the growth in his tank is just incredible. It has become a weed. As a side note, one of the phytoplankton species in Shellfish Diet is Thalassiosira weissflogii (30%), which is a diatom. So, using it would include an indirect dosing of silicates. As far as feeding the polyps goes, it probably eats a meaty diet - something like cyclops eeze.
Hi Neptheid, welcome to UR!
I had the opportunity to buy the sponge/polyp animal but decided against it as I was not sure I would be able to keep the sponge alive and it was a little too expensive. I don't know much about sponges but I believe most sponges feed on bacteria. Claude Schuhmacher has built a sponge holding facility for a research lab which involved feeding huge amounts of bacteria and using huge filtration plants.
The Shellfish Diet looks very interesting. We have a UK distributor for Reed-mariculture so we should be able to get hold of it. Chuck has obviously been very sucessful with this product but I wounder if its down to the product itself, or how he uses it? By mixing shellfish diet with the rotifeast mix and using a feeder over 24hours you will get a lot of bacteria growth in the phyto and rotifers mix. Are the corals/sponges feeding directly on the phyto and rotifers? or is it the bacteria that is providing the bulk of the nutrition?
I use the same foods as Chuck does, but I don't dose them over 24 hours. I just add them to the tank 3 times per day. My sponge growth is on par with his. I've probably fragged my barrel sponge 30-40 times
Erik
apparantly growth in all silicate forming sponges is accelerated by increasing the levels of hydroxyl-rich polysaccharides and oligosaccharides... whatever they are... Adding silicate to the tank is useless, the sponges carry out biosilification by breaking down amino acids within the water, so a wide ranging amino acid mix may help. If you're feeling brave and you can find any silicon alkoxide is rumured to also increase growth, I doubt it's ever been tested in a reef tank though
Edit: description on polysaccharides here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polysaccharide and oligosaccharides: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligosaccharide
and the original scientific paper I looked at here: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=27641
i keep these, not got a postitive id but they are from aussie possbily stylaster species
they like lots of flow and feed on big food like cyclops/lobster eggs
not sure of the sponge though
reefscapeboy
28-02-08, 17:50
Hi Keith,
saw one last week as well. Didnt ask the price but it seemed to me that the biggest problem is the sponge. Feeding the polyps ok but the sponge looks very much like a red tree sponge and they....well die after 6 months unless you spend £££ on phyto. Saying that you would have more chance than most as you keep dendro and the like.
John.
I'd love to get some of that, haven't seen it forsale yet in the states
Erik
Hi Keith,
saw one last week as well. Didnt ask the price but it seemed to me that the biggest problem is the sponge. Feeding the polyps ok but the sponge looks very much like a red tree sponge and they....well die after 6 months unless you spend £££ on phyto. Saying that you would have more chance than most as you keep dendro and the like.
John.
The sponge was the only concern. If the price was lower I may have tried it as Jacksok has two and he says they are still alive. There seem to be several that have come into Europe from Australia so I still might be able to pick one up at a reasonable price.
Sponges don't feed on phytoplankton (as in the algae stuff)- i'm quite sure of this...they feed on bacteria and I don't know if my tank has enough to feed or the right types to keep this sponge. I've been doing a little bit of research into sponges recently and they're incredibly fascinating and complex animals!.. there are quite a few studies into trying to figure out what they eat and how they do it!
FYI - I have had the sponge confirmed as Axinella sp.
apparantly growth in all silicate forming sponges is accelerated by increasing the levels of hydroxyl-rich polysaccharides and oligosaccharides... whatever they are... Adding silicate to the tank is useless, the sponges carry out biosilification by breaking down amino acids within the water, so a wide ranging amino acid mix may help. If you're feeling brave and you can find any silicon alkoxide is rumured to also increase growth, I doubt it's ever been tested in a reef tank though
Edit: description on polysaccharides here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polysaccharide and oligosaccharides: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligosaccharide
and the original scientific paper I looked at here: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=27641
I don't quite understand how using amino acids is going to provide sponges with silicon, seeing as how silicon is not in any amino acid... Sponges uptake dissolved silica. This is a known fact. Adding sodium silicate to your water increases the concentration of dissolved silica. It has been shown that many/most reef tanks contain much lower levels of dissolved silica than natural sea water. Sure, amino acids are integral for sponges to make use of silica, but what good is that if there is insufficient silica available? Here is a good link:
http://advancedaquarist.com/issues/jan2003/feature.htm
I will grant you that lack of silica is certainly not the only reason why we have trouble keeping sponges. We still do not know why certain sponges are practically impossible to keep in aquaria. However, I would think it fairly logical that we would want to maintain natural sea water levels of a substance that sponges use, especially when we are attempting to discover why they are failing in our tanks.
As far as what sponges eat, it all depends upon the sponge. Some sponges eat bacteria, others have been shown to consume phytoplankton and zooplankton, and still others have actually been shown to consume larger organisms (like shrimp). So, one cannot really generalize on this.
I have seen a LFS with this species of fan, and the LFS owner mentioned that it required heavy dosing of phyto for the sponge combined with standing feeding of cyclops for the polyps for the nem.
It was stunning whilst open, but the LFS was good enough to mention that he had personal experience keeping one of these and found it very tough, and would only recommend it to someone keeping a dedicated sea fan/whip style tank.
Apparently the sponge/nem fan combinations are usually found in deep reefs, and are adapted for a very "soupy" almost none stop nurishment due to thier location on the reef.
Another point that was mentioned was that, the particular sponge has a tendancy to "burn/melt" if kept in very bright light. They themselves had it only under actinics.
Didnt really ask the price, as i was really just asking about sea fans in general due to problems with one of my current sea fans.
HTH
The problem is that nobody knows the complete process of biosilification, lots of top scientists have spend many years trying to work this out as making silicates using no heat and no pressure is somewhat of a holy grail in terms of manufacturing. It has however been shown that sponges can still create silicates in the absence of silicates in the water. It's very complex stuff something that the scientific paper I linked to just touches the surface on.
If you do a search on biosilification on google you'll soon see why I suggested feeding amino acids to sponges as an aid to biosilification...
I don't quite understand how using amino acids is going to provide sponges with silicon, seeing as how silicon is not in any amino acid... Sponges uptake dissolved silica. This is a known fact. Adding sodium silicate to your water increases the concentration of dissolved silica. It has been shown that many/most reef tanks contain much lower levels of dissolved silica than natural sea water. Sure, amino acids are integral for sponges to make use of silica, but what good is that if there is insufficient silica available? Here is a good link:
http://advancedaquarist.com/issues/jan2003/feature.htm
I will grant you that lack of silica is certainly not the only reason why we have trouble keeping sponges. We still do not know why certain sponges are practically impossible to keep in aquaria. However, I would think it fairly logical that we would want to maintain natural sea water levels of a substance that sponges use, especially when we are attempting to discover why they are failing in our tanks.
As far as what sponges eat, it all depends upon the sponge. Some sponges eat bacteria, others have been shown to consume phytoplankton and zooplankton, and still others have actually been shown to consume larger organisms (like shrimp). So, one cannot really generalize on this.
You're speaking of the biochemical processes involved in biosilification. While this area of study is fascinating, it doesn't directly translate to the care of sponges. We just are not at the stage yet where we can use lessons learned from the study of biosilification improve how we care for sponges. The approach of starting with biochemistry to try to piece together something so broad as captive maintenance is very tedious. Personally, I am far more interested in studies that actually examine these issues in terms of sponge growth. If you know of such studies, please point the way.
Most of the chemical species involved in biosilification, such as amino acids, are provided from some other metabolic means within the sponge cells. In their natural setting, sponges do not encounter free amino acids just floating in the sea. They no doubt produce them from the same source we do; from protein in food. Also, if there are no silicates in the water, where are the sponges deriving the silicon for the process of biosilification? Well, they could get it from their food, but besides that the only other way would be from breaking down their own skeleton.
The point is that very little is known about what we need to provide certain sponges for them to thrive. Perhaps directly adding amino acids to the water would help, has anyone actually measured this in regards to sponge growth? What I contend is that until we have a much better understanding of what works, the best strategy to try to replicate their natural environment. When there is a glaring difference between the levels of silicate in natural sea water and the levels in our tanks, one must look at dosing silicates as having potential for improving our chances for success.
Hi Neptheid,
I'm not going to pretend to know anything about sponges :) but I do have a few questions:
Why is it not possible for Sponges (or the bacteria inside them) to produce Silicates in the absence of silicate in the water?
If that is truly not possible...
Can bacteria provide sponges with silicates?
Wouldn't Bacteria be able to provide proteins (and carbohydrates)?
I'm just trying to get you all to look a little deeper into the chemistry of what's going on in try and improve the health and growth rates of such creatures :p You seem quite against the idea of looking beyond what's already out there and published on the web on fishkeeping sites... As far as I'm aware there are no published miracle foods etc that can keep many sponges alive so a maybe it's worth looking beyond what is already known!
That's not aimed at you by the way Keith
I've not had a issue keeping any sponges yet, In my experience there actually quite easy to keep compared to other non photo creatures. I'd say the growth rate of my barrel sponge is explosive, my blue sponge is moderate to high and my yellow one is appearing in alot of different locations in my tank.
Erik
Keith, what I'm saying is that sponges need to get silicon/silicate from somewhere. Silicon is an element, no metabolic process can make it. It has to come from somewhere. This could be either from dissolved silicates or from silicon present in food. Amino acids do not contain silicon, so their participation in the process of biosilification has to be in tandem with some source of silicon. On the question of whether bacteria could provide it, if the sponge metabolizes bacteria, then quite possibly. But the question is whether whatever food the sponge eats provides enough silicon or silicate for the sponge to maintain its health. We see an analogous situation with stony corals and calcium. If you have a deficit of calcium in the water, these corals do not thrive and may die. So, I'm just saying that maybe we should be looking at silicate in the same way we already look at calcium for reef tanks, in regards to sponge care.
Hairyduck, I am not at all opposed to reading and reviewing literature outside of the aquarium hobby. The question I have is whether there is any literature that deals with sponge growth in a laboratory setting. That is the literature I would focus on as it most directly applies to what we are trying to do. I read the article you posted. It was interesting in its own right, but I don't see how anyone could take any of the information in that article and come up with conclusions on how to care for sponges. Where in it did it talk about the "health and growth rates" of sponges. Did you read the article I posted? It is very informative and speaks much more directly to our issues.
Overall I would just say that there are clearly sponges we've had great success with, ie hitchhiker sponges. The black barrel sponge from Chuck's tank and some others seem to do well even when you don't do anything specific to care for them. I had the black barrel in my tank doing fairly well before I started dosing high concentrations of phyto. However, there still remain sponges that have had dismal success rates. If we're ever going to have success with these, we're likely going to need to try a multitude of approaches. A good place to start is mimicking their natural environment as best we can.
I'm probably getting a boost in growth due I used a bag of siilcate sand in my tank, maybe yes, maybe no?
Yes, I read the article, you're correct in that it's very good however he also says in there that after stopping dosing of silicates the groweth rate of sponges was unaffected which makes me wonder if there's another way of encouraging growth?
Shellfish Diet has somewhere around 30% diatoms in it, which is large source of silicate. I'm going to get a silicate test kit and see what I am at. I have noticed my diatom growth has increased quite a bit since I started using it, which is a good indicator. The silica play sand also works to increase silicate levels, so perhaps that has been adding to your success. No easy way to know really.
Randy, the author of the article, stated that he did not manage to keep the sponges alive despite dosing silicate. This doesn't mean that silicates aren't necessary/helpful, he just wasn't successful with his particular attempt. He still doses silicate in his tank. Are there other things necessary to promote growth? Absolutely, there has got to be. I don't think dosing silicate would be the magic ingredient in all this, but it is likely part of the puzzle.
anyone remember what price these were in there LFS?
you seen the one in trops? i didnt bother asking, likely to be £££££££££££££££
seen them for £60
paid alot for mine when i got mine last year
you seen the one in trops? i didnt bother asking, likely to be £££££££££££££££
seen them for £60
paid alot for mine when i got mine last year
were the ones for £60 tiny frags or good sizes?
dendro982RC
18-04-08, 13:56
I had seen full sized for E95 here (http://www.reefsuk.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=152990), they may order it on a regular basis, as our local store does. Here they are for CN$40, full sized.
BTW, how do you mount them?
They come unattached, just like on the picture in the link above. Being flattened, unlike the orange tree sponge, that makes attachment with wooden toothpick impossible, and just inserting in the hole in the rock gives too much strain on the load bearing structure.
Who has it, share experience, please.
IIRC, they retail from around 60 - 150 depending on which distributors they came in from
dendro, have you tried superglue gel?
Its not a sponge its a gorgonian. Its a non-photosynthetic coral that needs a constant supply of food with exememly small size. They have poor survival in captivity due to their demanding feeding needs. Expect only a few months. The heavy feeding regime necessary could also cause a nutrient problem.
Hi Leanne, the Red Candy Sponge is actually two animals living together in symbiosis (I assume - although I don't know what they mutually benefit from each other). The red body is a sponge and the white polyps are non-photosynthetic colonial polyps.
The feeding regime should be quite similar to non-photosynthetic gorgonians for the polyps but I would also think about the requirements of the sponge.
dendro982RC
21-04-08, 01:51
My sponge has very small contact area at the bottom to be glued: no widening, as some corals have. It will be like attaching sailing mast to the ship solely by glue :rolleyes: . So far I made the hole in the rock just right size, and inserted the bare end there. Not too happy with results, but will see.
leanne: What kind of gorgonian, that looks like candycane sponge, you are referring to? Can you post a link - I'm just curious and would like to learn more.
BTW, my sponge is plain orange, not red, and has less branches, then jacksock's one. Very similar to orange tree sponge, only even more fine and flattened, like a belt. Polyps - typical parazoanthus, just like yellow polyps, only white, small and softer.
Hi Dendro, I've mounted gorgonians with just a blob of superglue gell and it works well as long as the glue sets properly. Drilling a small hole and filling it with superglue, then putting the base of the frag in there would work better.
dendro982RC
22-04-08, 12:57
I did the same - with gorgonians, and it worked well, at least before knocking them.
But as density of the central rod of swiftia or a small polyped gorgonians differs from central core density of the diodogorgia, and the upper body mass it should hold - the same way the diodogorgia core differs from the sponge center, and the mass that it should bear differs much more.
My sponge has size as the part of hand - vertically index and middle fingers to the base to the hand, flattened, of course. All this should be able to resist moderate-high flow solely by being attached by ~5x8 mm of the porous and not hard material.
It could work, if the base was wider and had some sand or rock embedded in the body. Just like with diodogorgia: the mounting lasts much longer int his case, than with stripping to the core (or the rod, whatever :D ).
Sorry.
dendro982RC
25-06-08, 17:00
I found from where the gorgonian, instead of sponge, ID comes from: WetWeb (http://www.wetwebmedia.com/gorgidfaqs.htm), and logic behind it.
Just to bring this thread back to the top ;)
Its been suggested that this animal may be: Trikentrion flabelliforme - White Line Sponge
Don't know if this is correct - need to do some digging around
there's a couple in STM right now, though, that might be quite a drive from you now :laugh:
mariusz621
09-10-08, 09:47
there's a couple in STM right now, though, that might be quite a drive from you now :laugh:
Do they have the red sponge with white polips type? How many? Any other types of gorgonians at the moment?
:thanks:
yup. the one this thread is about. There were 2 in tank 1B a couple of days ago.
In tank 4T there were a few of those 'salt and pepper' gorgs. The blue polyps on the white branches.
Apologies, what I know about gorgs that aren't called 'pavlo' is quite hopeless.
mariusz621
09-10-08, 09:54
yup. the one this thread is about. There were 2 in tank 1B a couple of days ago.
In tank 4T there were a few of those 'salt and pepper' gorgs. The blue polyps on the white branches.
Apologies, what I know about gorgs that aren't called 'pavlo' is quite hopeless.
Many thanks Scoob. I would like at least see one as I have never come across one before...
dendro982RC
09-10-08, 14:21
The name Trikentrion flabelliforme along with photo of the same sponge, is listed on the exporter's website, and shipping lists of the local importer show the same.
Last suggestion from Italian reefer was Acanthella or spider sponge.
BTW, mine is already dead, but polyps are still alive.
mariusz621
09-10-08, 15:32
The name Trikentrion flabelliforme along with photo of the same sponge, is listed on the exporter's website, and shipping lists of the local importer show the same.
Last suggestion from Italian reefer was Acanthella or spider sponge.
BTW, mine is already dead, but polyps are still alive.
How long did you manage to keep the sponge alive? Were there any incidents which could possibly negatively affect the corals? Are the polyps doing well without the sponge?
:thanks:
Thought I ought to record that mine (pictured at the beginning of this thread) eventually faded away. The second type I had, which had a different orange sponge as the base has also receded a lot and is now on its way out. I had some flow problems (pump failure) which seemed to kick off the decline but even when corrected the decay continued so may well have been unrelated to that and just the result of inadequate nutrition.
keith how is your non photo tank doing generally?
Will do an update on the tank thread at some point, but I'm in the process of closing down that experiment and having a rethink as I wasn't happy with it. Have stripped out the remaining gorgonians and soft corals - some have gone into the 'no-rules' tank and seem happy enough, others were fragged and/or sold. Pinapple fish remains and has grown steadily. I will revisit this subject area when I have more time - but in the meantime I need the space to hold various LPS.
dendro982RC
10-10-08, 13:16
jacksok:
Can you post any observations and possible directions to try for this sponge and non-photosynthetic tank in general? Every bit of information counts. Thank you.
How long did you manage to keep the sponge alive? Were there any incidents which could possibly negatively affect the corals? Are the polyps doing well without the sponge?
Roughly half of year, and a couple of months polyps are alive, after sponge was dead.
I suspect either aiptasia sting (it was upside down in hard to reach crevice and retracted fast. Tried to kill it, but it returned every time) or:
- water quality (not measurable parameters, but consequences of frequent massive trials to eradicate aiptasia by Kalkwasser paste, with no drastic changes in pH or alkalinity),
- red cyano,
- particulates (NPS corals food) clogging sponge pores.
Polyps won't stay glued, and now are in the plastic cage in overflow. Opening and eating OK. They don't like nitrates above 20 and phosphates at all.
I wouldn't say they are well, because this is unattached mesh of polyps, that had to be kept somehow in flow and with supplied food. The mesh cage looks very unsightly.
keith how is your non photo tank doing generally?
Its been closed down as I've just relocated to Singapore ;)
Flibidib02
10-10-08, 15:37
I agree with the early links Hairyduck provided and I think it's a shame they were shrugged off. The process of Biosilification is obviously highly specialized in-keeping with these creatures being highly specific in their needs. I think it would be better to explore each avenue at one time and then you end up with a kind of reverse process of elimination, finding out what's uptaken that's not normally and what is depleted at a normal rate.
I also think it would be worth considering why tunicates often prosper in a tank's infancy and whether the presence of certain chemicals released in the cycling process could give a clue to requirements.
:)
Peculiar_Clown
10-10-08, 16:51
Its been closed down as I've just relocated to Singapore ;)
Hope the move went well and other issues are getting sorted. look forward to seeing your next tank.
sorry to bump and old thread but im interested to see how people are doing with theirs
i had one about a year and a bit ago and it slowly disintergrated. just wondering if other people have had sucess long term with these.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.