Cleaner Wrasse? - Update

[reeferaddict]

OK... here I am inserting the spoon again... :mrgreen: Anyone want to share their opinions on these little critters? After 3 months, and some reading, I decided to try one of these to help clear up my Powder Blue tang of its ever-present light coat of ich. (Which though always present, the fish never stopped eating, and has in every other aspect appeared to be very healthy).

WOW! I put this little guy in the tank, and rather than go hide for a day or so like most other new fish, this guy went straight to my PB and started right away! The PB laid over and seems to enjoy this .... within 3 days, he was completely ich free. I was concerened that once that parasites were gone that the little guy might starve, but he eats everything, and I do mean EVERYTHING I put in the tank... even NORI... sometimes the PB gets a little frustrated at his antics and they do a little corkscrew chase around the tank, but the little wrasse keeps coming back and the PB usually lets him pick for a while before saying enough. It's quite comical behaviour, and he picks at the Copperband and Purple Tang as well. I'm no longer worried about feeding him, and would think that barring disaster, he will be a great addition to the community. I would have picked one up ages ago if it weren't for some of the stuff I read about reef conservation etc etc.

How have any of my fellow Canreefers made out with theirs? I decided to get mine as I read from a respected source, (Tullock) that there has never in fact been any evidence to support that collecting for the aquarium trade has had any impact on the reef except in the case of the Hawaiian Cleaner Wrasse which is not collected for the hobby. In other reef habitats, these fish aren't over collected and are reported to be in abundance on the reef. I can understand the conservation issue and the impact of removing commensual species from the reef, but I get that from the hobbyists, when I read the scientific opinions, they conflict.

So now that my little guy has settled in and is actually getting fat.... just wondering how the rest of you are doing with yours and if anyone has any info to confirm or deny what I have read.... there are just WAY too many conflicting reports.

Thanks.

[Snappy]

They tend not to last as long as other fish but sometimes you can get a good one. I don't hesitate to buy them on occasion and think it is worth it even if they only live a month. Their sacrifice of working hard and then to die an untimely death saves many other fish's lives in the process. The longest I had one last is 6 months but it really did a great job with the other fish and also ate all food I put in the tank including pellets and flake. Long story short I think they are a good investment.

[Bob I]

The only one I had lived exactly one year in my tank. While alive it ate everything I put into the tank as food. There was never a need for its cleaning services, as there was no problem. I have read that they are of no use for Ick control. :confused:

[reeferaddict]

Thanks guys... I've read that people find them useless for ich as well.... but my PB will disagree... he always had a light dusting on him... I've tried Qt and treating this before on previous PB's and I decided to not put this one through the stress and he's done just fine... then the cleaner wrasse just came in and cleaned him in no time... :biggrin:

[Snappy]

They worked for ich for me but it was a small infestation, that said I have always kept cleaner shrimp as well.

[Troy F]

They tend not to last as long as other fish but sometimes you can get a good one. I don't hesitate to buy them on occasion and think it is worth it even if they only live a month. Their sacrifice of working hard and then to die an untimely death saves many other fish's lives in the process. The longest I had one last is 6 months but it really did a great job with the other fish and also ate all food I put in the tank including pellets and flake. Long story short I think they are a good investment.

That may well be the most unethical statement I've encountered in almost eight years of reading the bbs and mailing lists. A healthy system will do a better job than any cleaner fish. I hope anyone reading this puts more value on the critters they bring home than that.

[reeferaddict]

Troy,

While I can appreciate your view, I also ask that you open your mind to the potential future of this hobby. According to Sprung, Delbeek, and Tullock, (the only ones I have read), there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that collection of "cleaners" for the hobby has any negative impact on the wild reef. All of these assumptions are presented by bleeding heart environmentalists that target our beloved hobby as being the most visible of the problems facing the natural reefs. As hobbyists, we share the responsibility of ensuring the proliferation of species both in the wild and in captivity. A single oil spill or a season of food fishing will decimate any reef many times more than the collection of specimens for us to study in our captive environments. The more we are able to studay and maintain these species, the better our chances are of captive propogation and self sustainment within the hobby.

As for a "healthy system" being the best treatment for disease, I tend to disagree. A healthy system will have scores of variety of organisms, including parasitic ones. Any time we add livestock to our tanks, the typical stress response is parasitic infestations of various types. My experience with quarantine systems has been abysmal at best, even though many expert aquarists swear by them. Even after successfully quarantining specimens, I have observed parasites upon transfer to the display tanks. On some specimens this is a temporary condition that goes away in time, but I have had others where it is persistent until the death of the animal. I have always kept cleaner shrimp, not only for cleaning, but because I enjoy their character and habits in the tank. Recently I have had a desire to keep a Powder Blue Tang. After acquiring my first specimen and quarantining, it died before I could get it transferred to the main tank, I suspect of starvation as it never grazed or picked at anything and I never saw it take food. My second specimen I added directly to the display tank, and he promptly developed a fine coat of ich, but would never use any of the cleaner shrimp to get cleaned. At the time I removed him he was eating heartily, swimming actively, and otherwise healthy. Upon placement in the treatment tank he stopped eating, and succumbed within 10 days. At this point I was distraught and pretty sure Powder Blues were not in my reefkeeping future. My LFS agreed to have one more brought in at a reduced price, and I decided that this would be my final stab at keeping one. I did with this one what I had done previously, put him right in the main tank, and to my chagrin he immediately developed that fine white powdery coat. Again, the cleaner shrimp had no effect on him, and as the previous one, he seemed otherwise healthy. I fed garlic diligently, hoping that it would disappear, which it didn't. Some days the coating seemed worse than others, but his behaviour was always that of a healthy fish, so I chose to leave him.

After a few months of reading everywhere I could find info on a cleaner wrasse, I decided I would try one. Almost every other fish I have added to any of my systems have had a period of 3 or 4 days of hiding before becoming comfortable. Not this little guy! He swam out of the net and made a beeline for the Powder Blue and within 2 days had him completely clean. He has been clean ever since, and the Cleaner Wrasse is actively foraging and eating any other food I put in the tank. I have every reason to believe he will be a long term tank inhabitant, but I will keep everyone posted.

My point here is that our closed ecosystems have to mimic nature as much as possible for us to have success. While we can certainly exclude predator species in our reefs, the biodiversity that we strive to maintain is only a fraction of what is available in nature. I can only think that the exclusion of species due to political reasons will only hamper our efforts. If someone can present a conclusive argument that proves a negative impact on natural reefs by the collection of these species, I will be the first one to NOT buy these species. Meanwhile, the fellow that buys a $10 cleaner wrasse to protect his $100 prized specimen just MAY be the person that discovers the real secret to maintaining and propogating these species.

[Troy F]

Cripes. I had three naps reading that ;-) .

Your justifications just don't quite do it for me. I'll have to dig those books out and have a look but can you perhaps quote where it says there's no collection impact? I know Scott Michael says that they should be left in the ocean (do to poor survivability and that their removal may have a chain effect on the health of other species.

I'm not debating that the fish has it's use just the implication that they are expendable.

[Bob I]

I did not have ONE nap reading it. IMHO it is one of the most lucid, well reasoned statements I have ever read on this board. Also free of bleeding heart sentimentality so prevalent on this board. :exclaim:

[Troy F]

The Hawaiian Islands are probably the only place on earth where reliable studies have been done on the impact of hobby collection. Last I heard they weren't good.

I don't hesitate to buy them on occasion and think it is worth it even if they only live a month.

Just for the record my problem with the above statement is what caused me to post. You'll never convince me that is one of the most lucid, well reasoned statements. It's one of the worst ever.

Bleeding heart sentimentality = ethical hobbyist???

[reeferaddict]

Good for free speech and opinion. Let's not lose that, it's a difference of those opinions that expand our collective horizons. It is in that spirit that I originally posted this.

I feel that we are all ethical hobbyists just by debating this in a civilized manner.

A bleeding heart environmentalist would be classified by me as some completely uneducated lobbyist that has read an environmental impact report that names the aquarium hobby as a destination for wild caught reef animals.

My reading of the Hawaiian Cleaner Wrasse issue, (several sources, Tullock, Natural Reef Aquarium, Coral Magazine June/July 2005, and too numerous online articles to mention), has brought me to this understanding; environmental impacts as a result of heavy overfishing, pollution, and careless tourism practices have had the largest impact on decreased numbers of this species. Collection of the species has been suspended pending the outcome of numerous studies that will determine the ecological impact as a result of the declining numbers. Captive behavioural studies have shown some traits of separate species reactions to the presence or lack thereof the Cleaner Wrasse in the captive environments, but have been inconclusive when it comes to comparisons in the wild. Studies in the natural environment will take years to be conclusive, and during this time I wholeheartedly agree with collection suspension.

Cleaners indigenous to other reefs have not seen their numbers dwindle like the Hawaiian Cleaner Wrasse, and are thus not subject to collection and/or importation restrictions. Interestingly, one of the traits observed in the Hawaii studies indicates that many species benefit from the services offered by cleaners in captive systems, and don't fare as well in systems where cleaners are omitted. That alone should be an indication that we would find these specimens a desirable addition to a system containing fish that benefit from them.

What we need to do as hobbyists is unlock the secret to reliably keeping, and eventually propogating, this and every other species we possibly can. When it comes to ethics in this hobby we can't overlook the fact that a great proportion of us have never seen a natural reef, much less understand the complexities of them. What we DO understand is that gorgeous fish or coral we want in OUR living room. Some hobbyists will never learn anything beyond the very basics they need to maintain a system or keep certain animals. It is up to more advanced hobbyists to observe, learn, and share their experiences with the rest of the hobby, and maybe one day rather than debating, we can say with some certainty that this is good and that is bad.

In my opinion - having one of these animals in my captive system has benefits that outweigh the negative impact that has yet to be proven in nature. I agree that this fish nor any other be considered "expendable". That's why I am asking for others observations, so we can collectively try to better accomodate this species in captivity and achieve higher survival rates. One of the greatest determinations of advancement throughout history has been our inquisition. I am asking for definitive proof and to have the ability to question why? We all must do that to some extent to move this hobby along.

Has anyone had any longer term success?

[Doug]

Also free of bleeding heart sentimentality so prevalent on this board. :exclaim:

Well, that will really help this thread along. :rolleyes:

[Doug]

If a cleaner of some kind is good for ich, why not use cleaner shrimp, that are long lived in comparison?

By the way, Rayjay, out of London, has some info on his site on cleaners.

[muck]

By the way, Rayjay, out of London, has some info on his site on cleaners.

Do you have a link to the info Doug?

[dunl]

Maybe we need to shift the focus a little bit - what is the actual lifespan of these animals? Not what you have experienced, but the actual, factual, lifespan?

[reeferaddict]

Rayjay's link - http://www.angelfire.com/ab/rayjay/cleaner.html

That's the kind of thing I am looking for... :mrgreen:

Doug, in my tank I have 3 cleaner shrimp, 1 fire shrimp and a peppermint shrimp, none of which my Powder Blue would let touch.

[marie]

rather then getting a fish that isn't overly hardy, and may last less then a month, wouldn't getting neon gobies(proven hardy and available captive bred) be better. Neon gobies are also cleaners and many people on this board have stated that the fish had started "earning their keep" within minutes of being placed in the tank. Just my 2 cents :biggrin:

[reeferaddict]

Good thought Marie. My research has in fact shown that juveneille neon gobies do display cleaning behaviour, though this diminishes as they mature. My purpose here is to have a long term biological solution to parasitic infestations. I had my hand in the tank this morning and the little guy comes up immediately and picks away at my hand... he does this regularly and I let him go at it. :smile:

[SeaHorse_Fanatic]

An update on my neon goby experience. If you get them small from the LFS, they may start cleaning fairly quickly, but I find them to be not very hardy. :cry: Both of mine from J&L disappeared within a week. :evil: If I ever do get another, it'll be a bigger one from someone's tank.

Anthony

[Doug]

Rayjay's link - http://www.angelfire.com/ab/rayjay/cleaner.html


Thanks. I forgot to post a link and then had to leave. :smile:

[Dabbler]

rather then getting a fish that isn't overly hardy, and may last less then a month, wouldn't getting neon gobies(proven hardy and available captive bred) be better. Neon gobies are also cleaners and many people on this board have stated that the fish had started "earning their keep" within minutes of being placed in the tank. Just my 2 cents :biggrin:

I got one when I got my PBT and he was all over the PB. I would see him check her over 2-3 times a day. I got him just for this purpose because I was told that a PBT is an ich factory...and she was. I had to give her to a larger tank because she was getting a little agressive in my 120. I have had my gobie for 1 1/2 years so far :biggrin:

[johnny rock]

not sure were you got all your info but any research I've done on RC shows that there IS an impact on the reefs by removing any type of cleaner wrasse.
as well, they have a VERY specialized diet [not ich] that we truly do not understand yet so therefore they 99% will die very shortly.
I've kept cleaner shrimp,neon gobies and wrasses [when I was ill informed] and I still have gobies that are not over a year old and cleaning all the time.
plus, most cleaner wrasses will harrase and even take bites of flesh as they get older [if they live] and this can intern cause other fish deaths.

[reeferaddict]

Can any of the research you've done on RC be scientifically supported? The only definitive research I have been able to find is on captive systems, and suggests that these systems indeed benefit from the presence of these fish. The only studies compiled in nature thus far are in Hawaii regarding the Hawaiian Cleaner Wrasse, and so far are inconclusive until further data can be collected. (If anyone can supply documented scientific information to the contrary PLEASE DO!) Due to initial observations, the collection of the species has been suspended until these studies are complete.

Please be aware that articles posted on RC or any other board shouldn't be taken as necessarily "expert" opinions. Observations by fellow hobbyists should be noted, as well as what environment specimens are being kept in. 15 years ago the cry was out that due to the failure rate we should leave keeping sessile invertebrates to public aquariums and educational institutes. Who would agree with that statement today?

I happen to know a marine biology researcher at our local university that tells me what I am doing is more advanced than what they are able to do in a lab that has a few hundred transient biology students. I asked her about picking up some courses and she advised me that other than the principles of biology, I would be wasting my time and probably feel somewhat underchallenged. She also notes that most of her research is done using dead specimens, while my goal is to keep things alive and thriving.

I am certainly not recommending that EVERYONE go out and get a Cleaner Wrasse. I run a reasonably large system with a complex, mature biodiversity, so obviously it has a better chance of being healthy than if enclosed in a 20 or even 50 gallon system. I would never have considered one of these if I were limited to such a small system and not be sure that I could offer a wide range of biodiversity to offer it's best chance of long term survival.

My Powder Blue Tang is the healthiest it has ever been. The little wrasse has moved on to my Copperband Butterfly which became covered in ich the minute I introduced him to my system. Since he started eating all the feather dusters, (the reason I got him in the first place), and the Cleaner Wrasse started picking away at him, he has come full circle and is totally healthy and eating prepared foods. I am of the opinion that without this service, he may have perished by now. The wrasse eats ANYTHING every time I put food in the tank. He swarms along with the rest of the "school" any time I approach the tank and they think food may be offered. When I have my hands in the tank he always comes up and starts picking at me... I'm sure this isn't in his natural diet, but the behaviour is fascinating. He'll pick away as long as I let him. :smile:

In short, please keep the observations coming, the more experiences we can share the better the chances are that we can keep these species thriving in our homes. As long as these specimens are being collected, people will buy them. People can cry until they're blue in the face about reef ethics, but people, most likely inexperienced hobbyists, will continue to buy. Let's use this window of opportunity not to argue ethics, but to learn the most effective methods so we can all enjoy for years to come.

[johnny rock]

even if, even if! there is no effect by taking them out of the ocean,,
you can't refute the evidence that out of say 100! wrasses, most will die in shipping! [they do not ship well at all].
the rest will die in peoples tanks! maybe 10 or 15 might make it but I've only heard/read dismall survival rates from allmost anyone whos try'd. is that not scientific enough for ya??
so keep buying them, the stores will keep supplying them and they'll keep diminishing. sorry, but the math says it all!
I also read many posts were the wrasses have pestered fish after awhile to the point of stress= ich.

[johnny rock]

and I could go on forever posting links to support not using these fish

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/labroide.htm

[reeferaddict]

Here is scientific...

Abstract The ecological significance of cleaner fish on coral reefs was
investigated. I removed all cleaner fish, Labroides dimidiatus, from eight
small reefs, measured the subsequent effect on the abundance and species
composition of all reef fish after 3 and 6 months, and compared it with
eight control reefs with cleaner fish. The removal of cleaner fish had no
detectable effect on the total abundance of fish on reefs and the total
number of fish species at both times. Multivariate analysis by non-metric
multidimensional scaling and ANOSIM pair wise tests based on 191 fish species
revealed no effect of cleaners on the community structure of fish. Similar
results were obtained using principal components analysis on subsets of the
data using the 33 most common fish species and the 15 most abundant species
(\geq5 individuals per reef ) with both log10 (x + 1) transformed data and
with fish numbers standardized for abundance. This study demonstrates that
the removal of cleaner fish for 6 months did not result in fish suffering
increased mortality nor in fish leaving reefs to seek cleaning elsewhere.

This is quoted right from your link. Please submit another quote you can find to the contrary.

Now how about economics? Before I purchased mine I asked about mortality. Of the 3 LFS I polled, all said pretty much the same thing. If only 10 or 15 out of a hundred shipped survived, they couldn't afford to sell them, and certainly not at $10 - $20.

Most suppliers are regulated by import/export regulations that have ecological impact requirements attached. I also noted that the writings that were referenced in the bibliography at the end of the article were at latest 1996 with some references going back to 1973. Anybody remember keeping SW fish in the 80's? A lot has changed since then, certainly our understanding of nature at least.

Please keep on this debate. It's healthy for everyone to voice their views, as the more we do, the sooner we can put this to rest one way or the other. Besides, I like a challenge. :mrgreen:

[johnny rock]

okay bud, you know better than the rest of us LOL :rolleyes:

I have a well established 500g system and try'd 2 years back when I was dumb. my friend ownes an LFS and won't even order them because why??? he has many suppliers who tell him the same thing.
what ever, do what ya want and learn the hard way! they always do and come back months later posting, ''what happened'' :rolleyes:

[johnny rock]

more info, like I said, the list go's on and on .

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=688779

[reeferaddict]

You know, if you want to jump on a thread to flame me, I have no problem with that, as long as you can back it up. Thus far, as we get deeper into this, your argument has in fact gotten weaker, so rather than just expressing your frustration over your ill-informed opinion, prove me wrong... please. At least I am open to reading the evidence.

What you have posted so far has produced an actual scientific observation from the University of New Queensland that contradicts your opinion. Thank you for being the first one on this thread to provide actual field observations. My condolences as unfortunately for you, it doesn't support your opinion. Now this thread you have just posted only goes to show further that hobbyists have had a degree of success in keeping them. I see as many if not more posts about people losing Neon Gobies as I do about these guys.

As for my experience in the hobby, I must admit that I feel like there is SO much to learn. Every day I look at my tanks and marvel at the growth and diversity, looking forward to reading and understanding more all the time. The reason I post here at all is to promote friendly discussions sharing views and opinions with other reefers. I don't come on here and "tell" others how to approach the hobby, and if I DO express an opinion I try to qualify it as just that, as I do not consider myself an expert, just an experienced reefkeeper. When something grows and thrives it is very rewarding. When the reverse is true it is very humbling. Humility taught me to research this hobby from top to bottom and become expert in the critical areas. This has turned my experience from one of frustration to one of fascination and enthusiasm.

I congratulate you on your prowess to be able to maintain a 500g system. I can only imagine the logistics of maintaining such a large water volume and the time and dollars involved. Would you be so kind as to share some of your positive experiences, and maybe show us some pictures? Once again I welcome your debate, I just ask that you tone down on the personal comments and allow yourself to communicate at everyone else's level. I guarantee you will receive more respect that way, both here AND RC.

Cheers,

Jim.

[j83]

Have kept them a couple times. Made sure they were in fact eating at the lfs and brought em home. It seems no matter ow much they eat, they NEED to eat parasites off fish to live. My guys ate lots, first time I thought something might have happened as he ate lots of mysis/flake you name it. I tried again when I had an outbreak - cleaned everyone up good, ate mysis then dissapearedone day.

In Fenners book he states that removal from Hawaii does impact the reef as a whole. Can't quote it right now as I am in Australia =). But there is a whole page on it.

It seems they need parasites to survive from what I have read and in personal experiences.

If they are to survive they need a huge tank with big fish that they can pick at throughout the day.

Good debate though, I just think that people should try other alternatives rather get a fish that has a dismal survial record.

[reeferaddict]

Lucky bugger! Hope you're getting to see the real thing when you're there... :mrgreen:

I have searched for diet info and again there's nothing conclusive besides they know they eat parasites, pods, and other mocrofauna.

What percentage of their diet needs to be this to maintain them is one of the things I think the hobbyist will have to observe, which makes a forum like this a perfect place to compare results... i.e. Fish population and type ratios & comparisons.

Mine only tends to clean my PB Tang, Purple Tang, Copperband, Flame Angel, and every once in a while a chromis. All the rest, (4 percs, 2 firefish, 6 line & Leopard wrasses, 2 gobies, and an Engineer goby), either don't need cleaning or go to one of the 3 cleaner shrimp. I have observed my Fire Shrimp cleaning both the PB and Purple tangs. It may be that I would need to add more tangs down the road, but time will tell I guess.

[Bob I]

I have searched for diet info and again there's nothing conclusive besides they know they eat parasites, pods, and other mocrofauna.

What percentage of their diet needs to be this to maintain them is one of the things I think the hobbyist will have to observe..

We need to remember that food is absorbed at the molecular level. Be it in fish, humans, or plants. Therefore any food eaten by an animal that has the necessary nutrients is fine to support the animal. The source of the nutrient is immaterial (that goes for the organic food freaks as well) Therefore the natural diet of parasites, dead skin etc. can very well be substituted by Mysis, or even flake food, as it all contains the same nutrients. IMO there is no such thing as an obligate feeder. If the animal will accept a substitute it will be fine.

This should keep the thread going. :rolleyes:

[reeferaddict]

OMG a different way of thinking! :razz:

I can't wait to see the comments on this. These are the things we hobbyists are responsible to observe. I read in Coral magazine that the last MACNA conference suffered greatly due to the suppression of unconventional thinking by the die hards.

I want more current information than 1973, even 1996... The amount that communication has grown alone in the past 10 years has led to an unprecedented amount of information exchange. Surely we must be able amongst ourselves be able to come to a definitive conclusion regarding this and other sensitive ecological issues in the near future.

[j83]

Bob, I would have to agree with what your saying as it makes complete sense. I just have seen it first hand that out of the blue they have just died. Maybe coincidental, who knows.

Reeferaddict, I agree that there should be more current info out there than what has been stated in the past. Dwelling on old info is not the best way to come to conclusions.

[Johnny Reefer]

This should keep the thread going. :rolleyes:

Ya got that right! :lol:

When it comes to the Cleaner Wrasse (Labroides dimidiatus), I think it's more than just providing nutrients within foods that the fish will accept. I think it's also more than providing nutrients from the parasites of other fishes. So, in short, it's more than providing nutrition. Period.

There is a social dynamic going on between the Cleaner Wrasse and the fishes it tends to. I'm not so sure that only one or two hosts to the Cleaner Wrasse can fulfill the social demands of the fish.

To qoute Scott W. Michael from "Marine Fishes", on the Cleaner Wrasse..."....this species will fare poorly unless kept with a large community of fishes from which it can browse mucus and parasites".

In the wild, I'm sure there is an element of trust between the Cleaner and it's hosts. Something along the lines of "I won't eat you, heck I may even protect you, if you clean these damn bugs off me".
This probably goes on all day long, with the Cleaner having numerous hosts.

Put a Cleaner in an aquarium with, say, two potential hosts and the Cleaner has them both spit polished in a day or two, with maybe only the odd parasite to nibble on from then on.

So now this full time worker is all of a sudden barely part time and probably feeling a tad inadequate and maybe even feeling vulnerable because the trust element isn't as strong.

Over a short period, the fish just says "I can't take this anymore. I need to Clean fish on a regular basis so that I can get my sense of security back." But of course that doesn't happen and the fish dies.

JMHO.

Cheers,

[albert_dao]

Did any of you even heed dunl's comment?

[reeferaddict]

Did any of you even heed dunl's comment?

Maybe we need to shift the focus a little bit - what is the actual lifespan of these animals? Not what you have experienced, but the actual, factual, lifespan?

Exactly... anyone with any info on this?

[Johnny Reefer]

Did any of you even heed dunl's comment?

Maybe we need to shift the focus a little bit - what is the actual lifespan of these animals? Not what you have experienced, but the actual, factual, lifespan?


Exactly... anyone with any info on this?

Sorry. I don't know. I would have to research that.
However, short of research, just because it is common knowledge that they die prematurely in captivity leads me to believe that they live longer than at least one year in the wild.

[albert_dao]

Well, you know something, I had one for over three years up until six months ago. This fish is NOT impossible to keep. But, that said, I do believe it should be purchased with the same amount of caution that one purchases other risky buys like Moorish Idols, Achilles Tangs and PBT''s (which, evidently, are ALSO not impossible to keep as once thought).

[christyf5]

http://www.aquariumofpacific.org/ANIMAL_DATABASE/animaldb.asp?id=69

Cleaner wrasses can live about four years in protected environments. Their lifespan in their natural environment is unknown.

[Cap'n]

The source of the nutrient is immaterial (that goes for the organic food freaks as well)

It's not the source that these "freaks" are concerned about, it's the residuals of enforced growth which are consumed along with the abundant nutrients.


Therefore any food eaten by an animal that has the necessary nutrients is fine to support the animal.

Also, by your logic it would be entirely acceptable to feed your cleaner wrasse peanut butter, just so long as it chose to eat what it was fed.

I also am interested in the lifespan of a wild cleaner wrsse. Is there info from the folks who try to breed them?

[reeferaddict]

Bob... I just gotta add that while I totally support your thinking outside the box, there is a chink in that theory...

Even though Tangs will greedily accept anything we feed them, if they don't get the fibre from the greens they can't process the proteins and will waste away anyways... I'm wondering what the key ingredient is of the Cleaner Wrasses diet and whether it's planktonic or parasitic, or if it's a nutrient carried within one of those groups?

[Bob I]

It is not really a chink in the theory. I thought I qualified my remark with the codicil "correct nutrients" :eek:

I also should mention the other codicil before someone else spots it. :rolleyes:

The animal needs to be physiologically able to digest the food provided in order for the nutrient to become avaliable. Therefore I don't think Tim's clever idea regarding peanut butter would work.

The above statement would also give more credence to the "obligate feeder" statements.

[reeferaddict]

Just an update - so far so good... alive & thriving always out, still picks at my hands, still eats EVERYTHING and is FAT... and best of all no ick on anyone! :mrgreen:

INSERTS SPOON....... STIRS! :razz:

[naesco]

Your cleaner wrasse will last about as long as your powder blue tang.

Both fish are almost impossible to keep.

The cleaner wrasse's diet is unknown and as a result it starves to death in our tanks.

The powder blue tang, prone to disease and infections and often caught with cyanide rarely survives as well.

While some reefers with large tanks and perfect conditions are lucky enough to keep them, the reality is most become ill for no apparent reason a few months after we put them in our tank. They get ich and other stuff, decline, die and frequently take many of their tankmates with them.

[Bob I]

The cleaner wrasse's diet is unknown and as a result it starves to death in our tanks.

.

I don't know about that. I had a Cleaner Wrasse that lived in my tank for one year. That tank was neither large, or special in any way. :mrgreen:

[Ryan7]

"Your cleaner wrasse will last about as long as your powder blue tang."


LOL

Sorry, but thats funny!

[reeferaddict]

Your cleaner wrasse will last about as long as your powder blue tang.

Both fish are almost impossible to keep.

The cleaner wrasse's diet is unknown and as a result it starves to death in our tanks.

The powder blue tang, prone to disease and infections and often caught with cyanide rarely survives as well.

While some reefers with large tanks and perfect conditions are lucky enough to keep them, the reality is most become ill for no apparent reason a few months after we put them in our tank. They get ich and other stuff, decline, die and frequently take many of their tankmates with them.

I understand what you are saying, and agree with you on most points. My Powder Blue is healthy and fat after 9 months, and the Cleaner is still thriving as well... maybe I should restate the purpose of the thread while it's up top...

I keep a 135 and a 72 reef - a 3 year project, and an "advanced" system by most standards. I work hard at this hobby and endevour to keep things living, corals, inverts and fish. I tend to hover on the edge of stuffing my fish and battling the inevitable algae, but my hard work keeps more or less ahead of things.

I'm not encouraging anyone with a 20g nano to run out and buy one of these, rather I am looking for comments and observations from people that have had successes keeping these critters so that we may unlock the secret and keep healthy specimens in the future. Remember a scant 20 years ago keeping ANY coral was virtually impossible. Hobbyists observations have now brought coral keeping, AND propogating to the masses - which may be good or bad... but the advent of maricultured and home aquacultured animals has me convinced we're on the right track, as does this thread, because I don't see LFS stopping importing these guys any time soon. So we might as well use this as a window to figure out whether or not we can keep these guys alive, and maybe even captive breed them one day....

Just my two bits... (.10 US)

Jim.

[naesco]

And a result of this trial and error experimentation by reefers seeking the answers as to how to keep that fish alive, millions of fish and coral have died and continue to die as newbies repeat the mistakes of the past over and over again.

Why don't you settle for keeping those fish and coral that we know we can keep as experts or newbies as the case may be.

Leave the 'experimentation' to the scientists who continue to seek the answers and to those experts equiped to do the job.

[reeferaddict]

And a result of this trial and error experimentation by reefers seeking the answers as to how to keep that fish alive, millions of fish and coral have died and continue to die as newbies repeat the mistakes of the past over and over again.

Why don't you settle for keeping those fish and coral that we know we can keep as experts or newbies as the case may be.

Leave the 'experimentation' to the scientists who continue to seek the answers and to those experts equiped to do the job.

Let me ask - do you have a problem with comprehension? Or just skimming instead of reading?

Your sentiments were exactly that of hobyists and scientists alike when it came to keeping stony corals 15 or 20 years ago... Are there any bleeding hearts out there now that want to burn flags in protest as we destroy the reefs by keeping a couple of ACROS in our tanks? Oh wait! I forgot - So MANY of them are now CAPTIVE propogated because a few BOLD thinkers dared to tread in uncharted waters to benefit the rest of us. I KNOW people in marine biology - and what hobbyists are doing DWARFS what funding is available to institutions and scientists. As for low survival rates during transit - do you honestly believe a retailer would pay for collection and shipping for a less than half survival rate? Not at $10 - $20 a fish - they'd be broke after a couple shipments. I have asked this of retailers, and they roll their eyes at that notion.

Please read through the post and offer any concrete evidence that supports or rebuts our continued keeping of these guys and I'm ALL ears... As for MILLIONS of fish... well there are a lot of other destructive practices on the reef that occur manmade OR natural. At least HOBBYIST's attempt to keep them alive...

[naesco]

Wow, pretty strong words for a newbie! But, a typical response by those who attempt to justify keeping almost impossible to keep species.

My friend, nothing justifies your keeping cleaner wrasse. You are neither an expert or a scientist. The idea that it is OK for you and others to experiment with these and other species with the hope that you will come up with the magic answer to their sustained care is dated thinking.

And blaming other destructive practices for the condition of the reefs is another typical response. You are part of our hobby and owe a duty to see that the best practices are performed by the industry. That includes insuring that fish and coral that have no or little chance of survival stay in the oceans. Don't buy them if they will not live!

[reeferaddict]

Great - that's your opinion - I have mine, (as of yet completely unformed as I have an open mind - if mine dies for any reason, I will be sure to post it back here with any further observations), and we agree to disagree in principle... now I ask that you kindly back yours up, as I have posted some very scientific arguments here to the contrary.

Unfortunately I was unable to find any scientific data or study results that support your theory, so here is your opportunity... DO read through the thread as I welcome the debate, OR eventual enlightenment if I am in fact, that ignorant.

I am not here to destroy the reef or fix this hobby, if you would rather I kept my observations to myself, then that is your right to feel that way... keep in mind that it is also every nanoreefer's right to plunk a pair of cleaner wrasses in a 6 gallon tank as well... so as long as they're shipped, they'll be bought, and if we all had that attitude, then YES, they will almost all assuredly succumb ... but if we people with the patience and resources to keep a larger tank endevour to study these and share our own personal observations at our own cost then why should someone jump down our throats because we dare to expand the envelope a little? It is backwards thinking like this that inhibits our own species from accomplishing our potential because it puts control of SO MUCH in the hands of SO FEW. If we all put our heads together at times instead of butting them, we might be able to accomplish things AND have a healthy impact on the ecology and environment on this precious planet.