BTA or not BTA is that a question?

[Acro]

Ok the other thread was all over the place. Very intresting stuff I might add. The whole id thing is intresting. Chris and I were talking last night about it. We both felt it's very odd a anemone would be called a bta that has never shown signs of bt's. Chris asked Sam about his in another thread and Sam said that at night the bt's were more promonent. Their for making the fact of it being a bta more clear. Chris now has a clone from Sam's anemone. Chris's has bt's all the time I believe. So I think we all agree it's a bta. Now the anemone that Emily and Bob have,if I understand it correctly has never shown the slightest signs of bt's. Am I correct? Do we know in total how many clones are alive? Ok so we do all agree that a bta is a Entacmaea quadricolor right? Is their other members in the Entacmaea family? The reason I ask is if the anemone in question is indeed from the Entacmaea family could it or should it be a different species? (After Emily's post I relize that what I wrote in bold print is incorrect.) Tony mentioned in a previce thread that one of the characters of a bta are the presence of verrucae on the column. This is also a character thats shared with Heteractis crispa (LTA). Again this is all in an attempt to learn more. My main intrest lies with Acropora and I understand how difficult it is to id these animals. The only positive id I end up with is what color they are. Are anemones easier?

[EmilyB]

Tony mentioned in a previce thread that one of the characters of a bta are the presence of verrucae on the column. This is also a character thats shared with Heteractis crispa (LTA).

Huh? :?

[Acro]

Woops, reread that. Sorry he only mentioned that was one of the determing characteristic that help you determin what type the anemone is. I geuss the E.quadricolor are lacking the verracue. Is that correct?

[Delphinus]

Er yes I meant the presence (or absence) of verrucae can be used as a distinguishing feature between species. Sorry if I was unclear and misled you there. So um yeah. E quad does not have verrucae on the column.

Kind of getting into that whole "common name" versus "latin species name" thing. There are so many common names for things, one species may have several common names and several species may share the same common name. Indeed yes, why call E quad a BTA if it doesn't have bubble tips?? My guess is only because BTA is universally accepted as a common name for E quad, so if you say BTA you know it's an E quad.

BTW, there are two forms of E quad. I'm not sure if they're considered different subspecies or not. There is a deeper water version that tends to be larger and solitary in nature, and a shallower water version that tends to be smaller and clonal/colonial in nature.

Fautin and Allen have this to say about the bulb tentacles :

Each long tentacle usually with bulb at or somewhat below end; tip of tentacle red (rarely blue), equator of bulb white. Bulb seems to be related to presence of fish, and can disappear; tentacle lacking a bulb has white ring where equator would form. Tentacles without bulbs are blunt-ended.

Don't know if there are any newer theories. I know other theories are amount of lighting, something to do with feeding (either more feeding ... or less feeding depending on who you talk to) or perhaps it's just some unknown factor of living in captivity ... I'm not sure any of the theories aren't just educated guesses though.

BTW I think there was a poll on RC recently on this topic. I actually ended up not participating though, because my situation doesn't show up as one of the options. Mine is "do not have bulb tentacles (anymore or currently anyways), I do have high light and I do feed regularly, but I have no anemonefish with it." But, interesting thread nonetheless..
http://www.reefcentral.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=117832

cheers

[EmilyB]

Weird...

My BTA DOES have bubble tips and I feed regularly, I have my anemone in high light, and I have anemone fish. 10 35.71%

My BTA DOES NOT have bubble tips and I feed regularly, have the anemone under high light, and have anemonefish. 10 35.71%

A moment in time, I'm sure....but very weird. :shock:

[Acro]

Tony,
Intresting poll. The one thing that did seem common in all but a couple cases was the fact that at one point the anemone did have bulbs. Also in the quote from Fautin and Allen that you mentioned they say the bulb can disappear. So I'm curiuos as to if the anemone in question can be traced back to ever haveing bulbs. Also how many clones are out their of this anemone. Who is the original owner and did it show signs of bulbs at purchase?

[Delphinus]

Just some additional food for thought. When I first had my BTA, the first year, I had no bubble tips on the anemone. The tank was a 50g with 4x40W NO lighting, so roughly 3wpg. Second year of the anemone was the time I upgraded to halides, but kept my NO's so it was .. um ... 2x175 + 4x40 so about 10wpg, and was bubbled up nearly 100% of the time. Year three, I had an issue with the insulation getting brittle on my NO lighting, so I pulled the NO's out of there, and went to just the 2x175W and upped the photoperiod from 6 hours on the halides to a full 12. So a longer halides photoperiod but less wattage overall (I fully meant to go back and reinstall the NO's and go back to a shorter photoperiod on the halides, but things were so happy with the longer bright period that I never ended up doing so). Now, here's where it gets kind of interesting. The anemone(s) suddenly started growing like stink (going from 3"-4" each to about 6"-8" each within a couple months ... [I say "each" because I actually had three at one point, because of splits and that I was not real quick to give away the new specimens]). But, despite the growth, this is where I saw variable "bubbling up." One them never bubbled up. One of them always bubbled up. One of them ... the part that was closest to the light had bubbles but not the bottom part farthest away from the light.

So, go figure. This seems to suggest that lighting is somehow a factor.

But, currently, the one BTA that I've kept for myself is now in my 75g under 2x250W Iwasaki + 2x110W actinic. It doesn't bubble up at all. So, I don't know if there's some kind of magical threshold that needs to be surpassed, or what (this is about, what, just shy of 10wpg) .... But then again, another thing that is different is that I don't have clownfish in this tank, so perhaps that is a factor.

So in conclusion, I haven't the foggiest clue as to why they sometimes do and why they sometimes don't. I used to have a theory, but, I'm not so sure of it any more. The lighting theory seems to be reasonable, the presence of clownfish theory seems to be reasonable, but perhaps neither theory is the complete picture.. perhaps it is somewhere in between.

Pocillapora, just curious, do you have clownfish in your tank with your BTA?

[Acro]

Tony,
Is Emily's a clone from your's?

[Delphinus]

Nope ... I've given away three clones to date, two were traded into an LFS so I have no idea who ended up with them, and one went to Tau2301. (Hey Kim are you out there reading this? Does your BTA have bubbled tentacles?)

[pocilipora]

Yes I do a Sebae Clown.