by Reef To Rainforest | Nov 20, 2013 | Corals, Fish, Science
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxXcTBmYW6w Checking back in on Nathan’s Mixed Reef Aquarium – 2013 Update Very impressive 210-gallon (795-liter) reef aquarium created by Nathan Gist, with narration by Than Thein of Tidal Gardens in Copley, Ohio. The same tank, one year earlier below. Says Than: “Nathan’s tank is a custom 210-gallon Aquarium Glass Exhibits (AGE) mixed reef. It measures 72″ x 30″ x 22″ and contains a wide variety of both fish and corals. Nathan has excellent taste in both fish and coral evidenced by a plethora of uncommonly seen inhabitants. There are some incredibly rare fish such as blue star wrasses and orange-spot file fish as well as some of the most interesting color morphs of beautiful corals such as Pavona, Leptoseris, and Blastomussa. “It is amazing that Nathan is a relative newcomer to the reef aquarium hobby having started only two years ago. I think most will agree that he has put together a wonderful display tank that is sure to be the envy of many a seasoned aquarist.” Credit: Tidal Gardens | YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpm9owuXT0U by Rising Tide | Jun 28, 2013 | Conservation, Fish
Working with Milletseed Butterfly’s (Chaetodon miliaris) has presented some unique challenges. After experiencing some issues during shipping and quarantine, we made some changes, and have a batch of 23 healthy, vibrant fish from Disney’s Rainbow reef, in Hawaii. The fish are eating very well and spawned twice during quarantine. However, due to the chemicals in the water during quarantine, the eggs were not viable. This gives us hope that we will soon have viable eggs to start working with since the fish are out of quarantine and the water free from chemicals. Eggs are approximately 710 microns in diameter, with a central oil globule. Fertilized eggs will float on the waters surface and are skimmed off the surface with egg collectors in the tank. Non viable eggs of milletseed butterfly's collected in the quarantine tank.We canulated the broodstock in an effort to determine what sex ratio and stage of maturity was present in our population. The results were quite shocking. Out of 19 fish that were cannulated only 1 was male. Shouldn’t he be in heaven! Having already spawned we do not think that this will be a major issue, however it may limit fecundity of the group. Our goal is to gather several more males and introduce them to the population. Oocyte samples taken by canulation of female milletseed butterfly's. Left shows primary growth oocyts. Right shows mature oocytes.Jon-Michael DegidioTropical Aquaculture LaboratoryUniversity of Florida by Reef To Rainforest | Jun 4, 2013 | Conservation, Fish, Science
A Banggai Cardinalfish book sneak peek – the opening spread for the Appearance & Anatomy chapter, featuring artwork by project artist Karen Talbot. A year ago, I was preparing for a trip to Indonesia to immerse myself in the world of a small reef fish called the Banggai cardinalfish with the intent of contributing to an important book on the species. Editor James Lawrence recently sent me a revised copy of the manuscript (including some absolutely stunning layouts shown here), and it has me thinking back over the past year and the places this project has taken me both physically and intellectually. It also has me thinking about getting the book into your hands! Taking the Time to Get it Right While travelling halfway around the world to better understand a fish and its relationship to its environment and the fishers who interact with it is something to which I am not unaccustomed in my line of work, there was (and remains) something different—something very special—about the Banngai cardinalfish project. For one, it has been a much larger project than any of us anticipated, and the challenges along the way have been significant. From lengthy delays in getting the science done right to dealing with our own losses of broodstock secondary to the very virus about which we were writing, everything seemed to take twice as long as expected. Having said that, what we have learned has reinforced the importance of embarking on the Project in the first place. We have made the internal decision to take the time to do it right, and while we know the delay is frustrating, we think the final product (which is now over 300 pages–about 35% more than projected!) will more than justify our decision. As you know, we had originally planned on having the book signed, sealed and delivered last September, a timeline that, with hindsight, seems absurd. Speaking for myself, I thought I had a pretty good handle on the species and the fishery. After all, I have been covering it since 2008. I knew I needed to get up to speed on the virus impacting the species and the current fisheries data, and I knew I’d need to dig a little deeper into the species-specific physiology (with the help of my scientific illustrator wife and her microscope, of course), but that wouldn’t take that long, would it? It did…and it has…and it continues to. Take a lot of time, that is. A Deep Sense of Responsibility to the Reader When I work on any project, be it a blog entry, a feature magazine article or a book, I feel a deep sense of responsibility to give the reader as full a picture as possible, not because I want to tell the reader what to think, but rather because I want the reader to have enough information on board to engage intelligently in the dialog. To me, promoting discussion on topics I think are important is my number one job as a writer. A Banggai Cardinalfish book sneak peek – Into the Banggai Triangle opening spread. When it comes to the Banggai project, we have found a space full of controversy and politics, conflicting information and strong emotions. Capturing the many facets of this story, while also trying to work with divergent groups and navigate a geopolitical minefield inhabited by NGOs, international fisheries managers and a marine ornamental trade dealing with a host of its own controversial issues (many of which are both directly and indirectly tied to the Banggai cardinalfish) has been one of the most complex assignments I have undertaken. Collaborating with international partners has proved logistically challenging but essential. Dealing with a story that keeps evolving (I just got a call last week that could have major implications on several key aspects of the book), can be exasperating. Following each twist and turn has meant travelling thousands of miles, reading countless pages, taking multiple notebooks full of notes, and shooting more images than I care to edit. In all this, I want you, the reader, to know you have been on my shoulder. Whether you are an aquarist, a diver, a biologist, a fisheries manager, an aquaculturist, or any number of other epitaphs of potential readers of this book, I have tried to keep you in mind—and my responsibility to you—throughout the process. All of us who have worked on the Project have gone way beyond the work for which we knew we would be compensated, because the work has become a passion—because we care so much about the role this book can play in promoting critical conversations. Attempting to package all of this into a book that will encourage intelligent and essential dialog about the species and its future has been an extremely difficult and yet an infinitely rewarding experience. As I work my way through the draft manuscript James sent me, I am growing increasingly excited to get this book—and more importantly—this information out into the world. As I look at the layouts the team at Reef to Rainforest in Vermont has put together, I become more and more enthused about what we have accomplished and how that will soon be handed over to you so you can take the next step. Nuts and Bolts So what does this all look like in pragmatic terms? It means we are woefully behind our original timeline, but it also means we are rapidly closing in on a publication date of a book about which we are very proud. As we have asked already, we continue to request that you indulge us. Those of you who subscribe to CORAL and AMAZONAS know the very high quality of production for which Reef to Rainforest is known, and producing a book of equal quality and beauty takes time, but we think it’s worth it. A Banggai Cardinalfish book sneak peek – opening spread for The Cardinalfishes chapter. As much of the work has now shifted to production and moving quickly toward presses running, Karen and I here in Maine are freed up to get the next set of rewards into the mail. Most of you should either have some of your rewards already in hand or have a tracking number that was emailed to you. For the higher-level donors, we need to hold off just a little bit longer (sorry!), as some of you are receiving original artwork that is also appearing in the book. We decided to send everyone who made any contribution to the project, a notecard set, including three notecards featuring a scientific illustration by Karen and three notecards featuring a photograph by me. Those will be coming via USPS in the next two weeks, so be on the lookout. If you have any questions about any of these rewards (or anything else), please feel free to email me directly at [email protected]. While we are eager to get these tokens of appreciation of your support into your hands, we want you to know we are also keeping our eyes on the prize and getting the best possible book published as soon as we are able. Source – The Banggai Rescue Website by Reef To Rainforest | May 14, 2013 | Fish, Invertebrates, Too Cute
Whelks, Anemones, and Sea Urchins I am back to continue with my posting after an unexpected absence due to bodily self-decomposition. A word to the wise, don’t get old. Or if you do, don’t let your body know. It might just not like the process. Anyway, on with my tales from the slimy lagoon… In an earlier discussion, I mentioned that aeons ago I saw large female whelks depositing egg capsule masses on one of my research sorties to “my” intertidal study site near Homer, Alaska. I found this to be very interesting, at the time I was casting around for some research to do, and here a potential easily-done project dropped into my lap. Normally I don’t trust to luck, but I wasn’t about to overtly examine the buccal anatomy of this presentation equine. I was able to identify the animals, but, at that time, there was no record of them depositing egg capsules in a mass or otherwise. In point of fact, virtually nothing was known about the natural history of these beautiful whelks, an artifact of being found in an out-of-the-way place where the accumulated knowledge of such critters was minimal. In fact the only reason I knew the whelks were at this area was that I had taken some students down to the site the previous autumn on a class field trip. Neptunea pribiloffensis whelks on the study beach. The substrate is sandstone, and the “fuzzy” clumps are masses of a feather duster worm which is one of the common prey of the whelks. Figuring that the presence of essentially unknown animals that I was interested in learning about would lead to an easy publication, the following spring I decided to do a little bit of basic research on the snails, and went down to the site to make some field observations as well as to collect a few animals for gut analyses. Having examined some other Neptunea, including some specimens for this species, I knew I had to look at the gut contents to determine what they were eating rather than simply examining their feces, which was a technique I had perfected for some other snails for my doctoral research. Fecal analysis is a much preferred technique when compared to gut analysis, as the animal is not harmed in the process. However, fecal analyses require that the animal’s foods leave some indigestible and identifiable trace in all the feces, and that was not the case with these animals. They could eat a wide variety of things, including carrion and animals possessing no hard parts at all, as well as some polychaete worms having chaetae, which would be passed through the gut undigested. It was during a trip for the collection of some specimens for the dietary study, that I noticed the ovipositing females. Several female Neptunea pribiloffensis depositing egg capsule masses near a large sea anemone. Obviously, this was an immediate serendipitous chance for some more and different research. As with every other aspect of Neptunea pribiloffensis life, virtually no aspects of their reproduction were known. I had budgeted a couple of days of “research” time on the beach. I figured I would need about fifteen minutes to collect all the animals I needed for the gut content work, but the site was beautiful and in the spring the weather was often gorgeous. I had been told that when the Russians owned Alaska, their anecdotal name for the Homer region was “летом земля or Summer land” for the nice climate- a distinct contrast to effectively everywhere else in the region. Consequently, I truly considered it a terrible hardship to have to make the four or five hour drive to Homer to do field work. Given how low the tides needed to be for my research, the field work time each day didn’t amount to much time being spent, which meant my assistants and I had plenty of time to work up our samples in the motel we stayed in while working there. After wandering around the study area on the couple of days I had budgeted for that research, for a total of maybe five hours of field work time. I came away from the site with some facts in hand. First, there were a number of old egg capsule masses in the area. Second, the new egg capsule masses were being deposited near the old ones. Third, most egg capsule masses were being deposited near individuals of large sea anemone, Urticina grebelnyi, referred to at the time as Tealia crassicornis. Egg capsule masses near a large sea anemone. Note the whelk to the upper right. And my experimental marker is indicated by the arrow. A couple of fundamental questions immediately presented themselves. Is there any benefit for the whelk to place its egg capsule masses near the anemones? Likewise, is there any benefit for the anemone to have a whelk egg capsule mass near it? Today, it seems obvious that the answer to either or both of these questions would almost certainly be yes, but in the late 1970s very little was known about boreal marine symbioses, in general, and specifically interactions between spawning whelks and anything, let alone anemones. At the time, there were no hard data either supporting or rejecting a hypothesis of benefit to either party for such an interaction. And here I was, standing plumb in the middle of a wonderful opportunity in a beautiful area with the chance to address this question. So!!! Boy-Scientist, at the ready! I grabbed some buckets, my camera, my voice-activated tape recorder, a meter-stick, and kazango! I was research bound! Obviously, I didn’t go into this situation as a naïve biologist. I had just spent several years working at a laboratory where many researchers were studying a wide variety of marine research topics. As one might expect, there was a lot of cross-pollination of information and ideas. For example, one of my acquaintances during that time was completing the scientific description of one of the larger, previously unknown, sea anemones from that region. He told me that it would be called “Tealia piscivora”, a name meaning “the fish-eating Tealia”, an apt name because specimens had been found with their gut cavity full of fish; herring, as a matter of fact. Those data told me that the nematocysts of a sea anemone closely related to the one I was seeing in Alaska could pack a really potent sting. And, therefore, the anemones might well be able to protect the snails’ developing progeny. Two egg capsules (white arrows) near a protective anemone are intact. The green arrow indicates my experimental marker. Also, I knew from other researchers that individuals of the sea urchin species, Strongylocentrotus franciscanus, would eat the egg capsules of other whelks, and that those whelks protected their spawn by attacking any urchins that approached their egg capsules. Given that the “green sea urchin” Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis was common in this Alaskan intertidal habitat, not only was it was possible, indeed, it was likely, that it would eat the egg capsules and the eggs they contained if given the opportunity. An egg mass that is about a year old. The top has been eaten off by sea urchins. My working hypothesis was that the snail obtained some benefit from depositing its egg capsules near the sea anemone. I anticipated that I would find that the sea anemone protected the egg capsules from predation by the sea urchin, and perhaps other predators as well. I thought it was also likely that the sea anemone would obtain some benefit from the situation; potentially it could benefit by eating sea urchins that would be attracted to or eating the snail eggs. I immediately set about collecting some animals and egg capsule masses, and setting up some experiments both in the laboratory and in the field. Some of the experiments were long-term, running about a year in the field and lab, others were of shorter duration. When I was finished with all of the work, I thought would be able to answer many of the questions necessary to be able to assess the hypotheses. An experimental egg capsular mass is completely gone after the anemone’s removal. All that is left is my marking washer. This Snail Has Babysitters!! I found a series of statistically significant results. First, the snails were more likely to deposit their egg capsular masses near the sea anemones. It takes about a year before the snails hatch from the capsular masses. At hatching times the capsular masses near sea anemones were bigger, had more capsules remaining in them, and fledged more juveniles than those capsular masses a short distance away from the anemones. The anemones could deter predation on the egg capsule masses in the laboratory experiments and certainly appeared to do so in the field. My lab tests showed that the anemones can protect the capsular masses from the sea urchin. Finally, the sea anemones can eat the sea urchins. In the lab tests and field observations indicate the major cause of capsular mortality is urchin predation. Lab and field experiments and observations support the hypothesis that the anemone babysitter protects the capsular masses from predation by urchins by eating the approaching urchins. Newly hatched whelks fresh out of the capsule. All six came from one capsule. And each “corncob” like mass would average about 50 capsules. The scale is mm. This neat little series of interactions started me down the road investigating a number of significantly more interesting anemone interactions that just happen to have some of the most beautiful animals in the world as the actors in the various plays. More on that in the near future. Reference: Shimek, R. L. 1981. Neptunea pribiloffensis (Dall, 1919) and Tealia crassicornis (Müller, 1776), On a snail’s use of babysitters. The Veliger. 24:62-66. by Reef To Rainforest | Apr 8, 2013 | Conservation, Corals, Fish, Industry, Opinion
06 Apr, 2013 Seeing red yet? Trade in maricultured and aquacultured corals may (or may not) have a chance. (ORA Red Goniopora / image Matt Pedersen) 11:59 PM EST April 5th, 2013 has passed and Regulations.gov appears to still be accepting public commentary, so you have another 11 hours or so to say your piece online. [Update, comment period has now closed, you can view the document and public commentary here] In light of this one last chance, Julian Sprung, well-known author, MASNA Aquarist of the Year, founder of Two Little Fishies, and a member of the CORAL Sr. Advisory Board, shares his opinions on why failing to speak up isn’t an option. Opinion by Julian Sprung Foreword to my commentary letter [download PDF of Sprung's public commentary] In early January Dustin Dorton and the owners of ORA organized a meeting at ORA with people from NOAA and a group of people from the aquarium industry, from PIJAC, from the University of Florida Tropical Aquaculture Laboratory, and the Florida Division of Aquaculture. I was also invited and was glad for the opportunity. It was an extremely informative meeting for everyone. There were a few key take-home messages. 1. It appeared that this train (ESA listing of corals) was not stopping. 2. The room for control in making a decision is set up by the structure of how ESA implementation works, not by any individuals at NOAA. As they put it, our agency (NOAA) does not have the discretion, only the ESA sets the rules. 3. Public commentary should focus on factual errors in the literature cited in the proposal, and should bring to light any new data from the scientific literature. Public commentary regarding the collateral impacts on industries affected by an ESA ruling have no influence on the decision, because that is the way the ESA is written. They put it this way: Our comments should focus only on whether a particular species is threatened or not. They should not focus on whether NOAA should or should not list. This of course puts the position of public commentary for the most part in the category of useless. Does the general public have the qualification to discuss the threatened or endangered status of specific coral species? 4. Although a read of online information about the ESA suggests that any listing of corals as endangered would make possession of them illegal, the representatives from NOAA assured us that a listing as endangered would not prohibit the keeping of those corals already in aquariums. It would not criminalize our hobby. What it would do is prevent the TRADE of corals listed as endangered. That means no import no export no sale. It was a little unclear whether that also meant no in-kind trading. Basically this threatened the farmers, shops, frag swaps, and any form of business engaged in the commerce of corals, in the USA. By contrast, a listing as threatened would not prevent commerce of those species. Given the conflicting information out there, what do you suppose would happen if corals were to be listed? 5. We were told that NOAA had the ability to control the activity of the US Fish and Wildlife Service at the USA ports of entry, so that FWS would not utilize any ESA listing as a reason to shut down coral imports. Do you believe that? Scientists have already pointed out a broad range of errors in the science used to support the ESA listing proposal, and the statistical methods used. New data has also been presented. Evidence from the scientific literature has been presented that shows the premise of the need for listing any corals is in error. Comments have already been submitted about the status of individual species proposed for listing. While it canʼt hurt to add more to that in the few hours that remain for public comment, and there is no shortage of areas to explore for finding error, I believe that enough is enough. I am not proud of the letter I wrote. There are many very good scientists at NOAA. I donʼt wish to offend them but I canʼt help but be offended by what is happening, and felt the need to call what I see. Why should NOAA tell us that we cannot question the use of the ESA for coral conservation? Who are we really talking to with this public commentary? The ESA is not an agency, NOAA is. Are their hands so tied by the ESA structure and the petition submitted by a litigious Center for Biological diversity? Craig Watson, who also was at the meeting at ORA, submitted a letter that pointed out the fact that using the effects of greenhouse gas emissions as a basis for listing corals that are not now threatened with extinction sets a terrible precedent and exposes the ESA to attack. After all, as he put it: “If the predictions on climate change used in the petition and the subsequent review are accurate, there is very little life on this planet that one could not argue would be equally ʻthreatenedʼ or ʻendangered’ …..If approved and adopted by NOAA, the precedent established by this use of the ESA will result in a list of endangered species that is so inclusive, there will be little to no meaning to the list of endangered life within the ESA program.” Do you support the premise of the Endangered Species Act? I do. What I donʼt support is misuse of the act, and misuse of science for a policy agenda. Aquarium hobbyists are encouraged to submit their written commentary to NOAA. - Julian Sprung Download or View Julian Sprung’s public commentary as submitted. PIJAC’s recommendations on how and what to submit - US NOAA Coral Species Listing
