Are there any resources out there that list Maximum, Minimum, and Ideal parameters for a given animal?
For instance something like:
Acropora Ficticia: Needs between 50 and 250 lumens with 200 lumens as the ideal. 5 to 15 tank volumes of flow per hour with 12 volumes per hour as ideal. etc.
Yes and no. Eric's book is by far the best coral book out there IMO. This book will not tell you, for instance, that Acropora ficticia needs conditions such as you've listed. The reason for this is that such a recommendation isn't possible for most corals. First, even if we did know the species we were dealing with in captivty (we don't >95% of the time) most species are so adaptable that designations such as this wouldn't be useful in most situations. Not only that, we don't have the slightest idea of what the fundamental tolerances are for most species of coral, not to mention all the regional variants of all the species.
Let me give an example: you might find Pocillopora damicornis growing in an intertidal position on a reef crest. The brightest light it recieves is 2000 umol/m2/s. The average amount of water flow it gets in this position is 20 cm/s, but at times is up to 1 m/s. You drop down the reef 30 m and find the same species, though a very different growth form. The brightest light this coral gets is 80 umol/m2/s. The average water flow is 10 cm/s with a max of 15 cm/s. There is no obvious differenc in health between either.
If in captivity we suggest that the acceptable range for lighting is 80-2000 umol/m2/s and water flow is 10 cm/s-1 m/s things are not going to go well because we haven't fully taken into account the other caveats that are important for the survival of these corals. The coral in shallow water is actually photoinhibited for half the day and does the lion's share of photosynthesis in early morning and late evening. It doesn't bleach because of the strong water flow--othewise it might. The coral in deep water is able to do well due to the high availability of food (since light isn't very highly available). Without enough food at lower light levels it starves.
You see, for most corals we just can't give particular ranges like this for various parameters because, even if we had established these ranges, other caveats which we don't necessarily consider are critical for these species. So, in my experience, it is better to get as best an idea as possible of a highly acceptable environment and to watch the corals.
For instance, there's no reason any coral at all (including Acropora) shouldn't do just fine under PCs, yet people often have better success under halides. Perhaps the problem is that we aren't feeding these corals enough. Under halides we get a bigger margin of error (due to the photosynthate provided by the zoox.) but in lower light they are forced to be more reliant on food. In nature this isn't a problem, but in captivity it is.
So, perhaps I'm rambling at this point. My suggestion would be to get as familiar as possible (Eric's book is the best one out there for this IMO) with a relatively optimal environment for each coral you're interested in and to observe them carefully in captivity. Keep corals together that 1. thrive in the same environments in nature and 2. are relatively likely to coexist peacefully.
No problem guys. As I was writing it I thought I rambled too much and wasn't sure I was making a coherent argument...but hey, if you guys understood it...
I for one, enjoyed your show and your other work/writing. You think, speak and write a lot like I do. So, selfishly, you are a very "easy" resource for me to use. Plus, after listening to your show, you say "absolutely" as often as I do You sure you are not my brother?
In any case, I appreciate your support of our site, your affiliation with the magazine and all you do for the hobbyist. Keep up the great work brother!
That's what makes the world go 'round... that's why I'm a "sociologist" at heart. People, in general, are awesome. All the 'particulars' are what make y'all special.
icon under there name and give them Reputation points
