can you keep clams alive with 5wpg?

Caliloaner · 09/14/2007, 01:11 PM

I am looking at some lighting solutions for keeping a clam alive in a 37gallon... Its 22 inches deep and the total distance from the light to the bottom will be around 27". It puts out 198 watts total-1x150w metal halide w/ 2x24w actinic bulbs. 198 divided by 37gallons is 5.35wpg. But If I put a clam @ the bottom will he be ok in the long run??

gliebig · 09/14/2007, 01:16 PM

I would think you'd be fine. I have had a clam under PC's only going on 6 years. Happy as a clam.
I personally don't buy into this watts/gallon hoopla. I also have a 125gallon lit only by 3x150wt halides. My corals are doing great. My derasa clam grew incredibly fast in that tank.

papagimp · 09/14/2007, 01:18 PM

don't go off the watts per gallon rule, it's nice to get you in the general ballpark, but wattage does not indicate more lighting, just more electrical consumption. a PAR reading is more accurate, but most don't go off those. I'd think the clam would be fine with that lighting though. As for putting him on the bottom though, that will depend on the species, some clams, such as the crocea tend to live up in the rockwork more than on the substrate. As do several others but some like the deresa and squamosa live on the sandbeds. Also, if possible, get a clam larger than 3-4". the small ones do not have sufficient mantel yet to utilize zooanthellae to it's maximum potential and will require additional feedings of phytoplankton and other similar filter feeder foods.

Caliloaner · 09/14/2007, 01:18 PM

right on, but how far is your light from the bottom of the tank

papagimp · 09/14/2007, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by gliebig
Happy as a clam.

HA! too funny.

aquarius77 · 09/14/2007, 01:22 PM

WPG is basically meaningless, you could put 2000 watts of incadsesant lights above a 55g tank and still not have enough. PAR is a better measure.

mbbuna · 09/14/2007, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by papagimp
don't go off the watts per gallon rule, it's nice to get you in the general ballpark, but wattage does not indicate more lighting, just more electrical consumption. a PAR reading is more accurate, but most don't go off those. I'd think the clam would be fine with that lighting though. As for putting him on the bottom though, that will depend on the species, some clams, such as the crocea tend to live up in the rockwork more than on the substrate. As do several others but some like the deresa and squamosa live on the sandbeds. Also, if possible, get a clam larger than 3-4". the small ones do not have sufficient mantel yet to utilize zooanthellae to it's maximum potential and will require additional feedings of phytoplankton and other similar filter feeder foods.

i agree with what you said about not using WPG to determine if you have enough light. however all the clams we keep are most commonly found right up on the reef, you can place them anywhere you want as long as your lighting is strong enough. also clams can sustain themselves through photosynthesis alone at any size. even when they are little specks there mantles are large enough and contain enough zoox to support them just fine

arts007 · 09/14/2007, 03:01 PM

What kind of clam are you keeping, some are a little more tolerant of lower light. Such as the Deresa, Giga and Squamosa. Some require more lighting such as the Crocea and Maxima, and may change coloration can change due to lighting intensity.

papagimp · 09/14/2007, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mbbuna
also clams can sustain themselves through photosynthesis alone at any size. even when they are little specks there mantles are large enough and contain enough zoox to support them just fine

If you say so, I've been lead to believe differently but as we all know, in this hobby, information can be awfully misleading at times. I've always dosed phyto heavily so I can't say for certain how any of my clams would have done without the dosing. Either way, phyto additions sure woudln't hurt the little guys. I'll keep reading up on them, maybe I'll find some conflicting information to what i've already read. thanx for the info though, even if i don't agree right now, it's always good to get multiple opinions.

mbbuna · 09/14/2007, 03:36 PM

heres a good example http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=000...2-N&size=LARGE

that study was done to see how and what clams did with there zoox. the clams were kept in micro filtered water and except for there initial dose of zoox never received any particulate matter. these clams were very tiny and did just fine

papagimp · 09/14/2007, 04:10 PM

hmmm, intersting read. I did notice however it mentioned that specimens WITH zoonathelle did better than the ones without...so I guess as long as your clam already has the algae, it's good to go.

(I don't think I've ever seen a T. clam without zooanthellae though) definalty the types of articles i need to read, thanks for the link.

mbbuna · 09/14/2007, 04:16 PM

considering that zoox is the symbiotic algae that provides clams with there food through photosynthesis it only makes sense that they do better with it

PM me your e-mail if you want more links like that

papagimp · 09/14/2007, 04:22 PM

Pm sent, thanks again!

I'd like to mention to alot of newbies that may be reading this. This is another prime example of how one article, book, or whatever source of info can vary greatly from another. Always a good idea to get multiple opinions. If I had learned that lesson a long time ago, I would never had stuck a dominoe damsel in my 55g tank (my book said it was a great addition to any reef tank and peaceful....every other book said different, needless to say, i threw that book away and bought many more since)

09/14/2007, 01:11 PM	#1
Caliloaner Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: California Posts: 174	can you keep clams alive with 5wpg? I am looking at some lighting solutions for keeping a clam alive in a 37gallon... Its 22 inches deep and the total distance from the light to the bottom will be around 27". It puts out 198 watts total-1x150w metal halide w/ 2x24w actinic bulbs. 198 divided by 37gallons is 5.35wpg. But If I put a clam @ the bottom will he be ok in the long run??

09/14/2007, 01:18 PM	#3
papagimp COMAS Rocks! Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Oklahoma City, OK Posts: 8,185 Blog Entries: 2	don't go off the watts per gallon rule, it's nice to get you in the general ballpark, but wattage does not indicate more lighting, just more electrical consumption. a PAR reading is more accurate, but most don't go off those. I'd think the clam would be fine with that lighting though. As for putting him on the bottom though, that will depend on the species, some clams, such as the crocea tend to live up in the rockwork more than on the substrate. As do several others but some like the deresa and squamosa live on the sandbeds. Also, if possible, get a clam larger than 3-4". the small ones do not have sufficient mantel yet to utilize zooanthellae to it's maximum potential and will require additional feedings of phytoplankton and other similar filter feeder foods. __________________ 58g Softie & 75g Stoney Member, Central Oklahoma Marine Aquarium Society Current Tank Info: 58g Mixed Reef Project - Started June 2011

09/14/2007, 03:01 PM	#8
arts007 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Illinois Posts: 600	What kind of clam are you keeping, some are a little more tolerant of lower light. Such as the Deresa, Giga and Squamosa. Some require more lighting such as the Crocea and Maxima, and may change coloration can change due to lighting intensity. __________________ Genius is 1 percent inspiration and 99% perspiration, which is why engineers sometimes smell really bad. Current Tank Info: 120g SPS reef tank. 2x 400 watt Reeflux 12k on lumenbrights

09/14/2007, 04:10 PM	#11
papagimp COMAS Rocks! Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Oklahoma City, OK Posts: 8,185 Blog Entries: 2	hmmm, intersting read. I did notice however it mentioned that specimens WITH zoonathelle did better than the ones without...so I guess as long as your clam already has the algae, it's good to go. (I don't think I've ever seen a T. clam without zooanthellae though) definalty the types of articles i need to read, thanks for the link. __________________ 58g Softie & 75g Stoney Member, Central Oklahoma Marine Aquarium Society Current Tank Info: 58g Mixed Reef Project - Started June 2011

09/14/2007, 04:22 PM	#13
papagimp COMAS Rocks! Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Oklahoma City, OK Posts: 8,185 Blog Entries: 2	Pm sent, thanks again! I'd like to mention to alot of newbies that may be reading this. This is another prime example of how one article, book, or whatever source of info can vary greatly from another. Always a good idea to get multiple opinions. If I had learned that lesson a long time ago, I would never had stuck a dominoe damsel in my 55g tank (my book said it was a great addition to any reef tank and peaceful....every other book said different, needless to say, i threw that book away and bought many more since) __________________ 58g Softie & 75g Stoney Member, Central Oklahoma Marine Aquarium Society Current Tank Info: 58g Mixed Reef Project - Started June 2011

09/14/2007, 01:16 PM	#2
gliebig Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Bel Air, Md Posts: 380	I would think you'd be fine. I have had a clam under PC's only going on 6 years. Happy as a clam. I personally don't buy into this watts/gallon hoopla. I also have a 125gallon lit only by 3x150wt halides. My corals are doing great. My derasa clam grew incredibly fast in that tank.

09/14/2007, 01:22 PM	#6
aquarius77 Moved On Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Highland, Il Posts: 2,198	WPG is basically meaningless, you could put 2000 watts of incadsesant lights above a 55g tank and still not have enough. PAR is a better measure.

09/14/2007, 03:36 PM	#10
mbbuna Moved On Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 6,847	heres a good example http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=000...2-N&size=LARGE that study was done to see how and what clams did with there zoox. the clams were kept in micro filtered water and except for there initial dose of zoox never received any particulate matter. these clams were very tiny and did just fine

09/14/2007, 04:16 PM	#12
mbbuna Moved On Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 6,847	considering that zoox is the symbiotic algae that provides clams with there food through photosynthesis it only makes sense that they do better with it PM me your e-mail if you want more links like that