Great Clam Prices

[jmaneyapanda]

actually, Cam, the maxima require much more light than derasas. The are probably second only to croceas, and only a slight second. I actually think maximas are the most sensitive clams to keep. But live aquaria is a phenomenal company, so they are surely high quality. Just be forewarned, clams can die quickly, but clams can also die slowly, and a two week guarantee may not cover such a stress related slow death.

 

[mvm]

i'm in as well....I'm looking to get a few fish and will pay my part on shipping. When are you planning on placing an order?

 

[glxtrix]

great company and great prices but I think its wayyy to soon for me to start caring for clams again.

 

[gclackum]

Is someone planning a Group Buy? If so when is it going in?

 

[showtime305]

glxtrix;40712 wrote: great company and great prices but I think its wayyy to soon for me to start caring for clams again.

I'm kinda feeling the same way. I'm on the fence about the clams right now, that's why I may end up just going in on some frags. If I lose another clam I don't think I'll ever try keeping them again.

gclackum;40717 wrote: Is someone planning a Group Buy? If so when is it going in?

There's not an organizer right now. I would head this one up but I'm moving next week so I'll be pretty busy already.

 

[xyzpdq0121]

Cameron;40686 wrote:
I am not in on the liveaquaria order, but if we get a clam group buy from clamsdirect when he comes back I would get in on that.

I will see what I can cook up with this after the 15th. They are not shipping clams til then.

 

[cameron]

jmaneyapanda;40689 wrote: actually, Cam, the maxima require much more light than derasas. The are probably second only to croceas, and only a slight second. I actually think maximas are the most sensitive clams to keep. But live aquaria is a phenomenal company, so they are surely high quality. Just be forewarned, clams can die quickly, but clams can also die slowly, and a two week guarantee may not cover such a stress related slow death.

I will dig up the clam research I was reading. Someone did a study with about a dozen clams and found that Derasas and Croceas needed a higher minimum amount of light than Maximas. It was theorized that since Maximas feed on phyto that proper phyto supplementation allows people to keep them in lower minimal lighting. That said, the more light the better IMO. Oddly my Maxima turns away from the light while my Derasa turns toward it.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Cameron;40738 wrote: I will dig up the clam research I was reading. Someone did a study with about a dozen clams and found that Derasas and Croceas needed a higher minimum amount of light than Maximas. It was theorized that since Maximas feed on phyto that proper phyto supplementation allows people to keep them in lower minimal lighting. That said, the more light the better IMO. Oddly my Maxima turns away from the light while my Derasa turns toward it.

I would be very interested in reading this. Every piece of literature I have ever read has expressed that derasas are lower light clams due to their natural environment and physiology. Countless aquarist have also have "proved" this point with their clams. I would be VERY VERY interested in reading about claims that dispute that. All clams filter feed, and from what I directly recall, the gigas filter like 300% more than the other species, but I thought all the rest were comperable into the volume of "food" consumed. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE, that with clams, you cannot have too much light. There was actually a study done recently that showed while corals can reach saturation of light exposure, clams practically cannot, the more light they have, the better they thrive.

I will look up some of this info when I get home, and post it some time in the future.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Yep, nothing I can find says anything like that Cam, so let me know what this info is. The info I have found says derasas take almost no energy from filtration feeding (which you have mentioned), but does not anyway say that maximas take more than any others. In fact, the information I have says the top Tridacnids that gain energy filtration feeding are the gigas and hippopus. I could not find any scientific literature that mentioned anything of maximas feeding at all.
Maximas in the wild are primarily found at less than 7 meters, going no deeper than about 15 meters. Derasas, however, are found as deep as 25 meters, although they can be quite shallow also. But, the ability to live at almost double the depth as the maximas pretty clearly indicates that the derasas do not require as strong an illumination as the maximas.

I can link you the papers if you would like. But, at any rate, let me know the studies you have- I am extremely interested in it. Thanks.

 

[cameron]

jmaneyapanda;40830 wrote: Yep, nothing I can find says anything like that Cam, so let me know what this info is. The info I have found says derasas take almost no energy from filtration feeding (which you have mentioned), but does not anyway say that maximas take more than any others. In fact, the information I have says the top Tridacnids that gain energy filtration feeding are the gigas and hippopus. I could not find any scientific literature that mentioned anything of maximas feeding at all.
Maximas in the wild are primarily found at less than 7 meters, going no deeper than about 15 meters. Derasas, however, are found as deep as 25 meters, although they can be quite shallow also. But, the ability to live at almost double the depth as the maximas pretty clearly indicates that the derasas do not require as strong an illumination as the maximas.

I can link you the papers if you would like. But, at any rate, let me know the studies you have- I am extremely interested in it. Thanks.

I will hunt down the study when I have more time. They basically put clams under as little of light as possible until they died. Oddly Deresas died sooner under minimal light than the Maximas of the same size. The person doing the study theorized (but little proof) that the Maximas lived longer due to external nutritional support. Maximas gill structure is larger and more complex than a Derasas I think was the main reason. The person also noted that Maximas adjust to lower lighting faster than Derasas which could account for the longevity of the clam in poor lighting. It was one of those studies where the guy couldn't find any research on just how much lighting a clam needs so he did a home brew kind of thing. Some of his findings were quite interesting. His sample group was rather small, but he did find the maxima clams did better under lower lighting than derasas that died very quickly while one maxima actually survived one of his low light experiments.

Oh and something about a dark mantle helps the a clam live longer as well. He found that the darker the mantle the more resilient a clam was to poor lighting conditions as well as adapting faster.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Cameron;40925 wrote: I will hunt down the study when I have more time. They basically put clams under as little of light as possible until they died. Oddly Deresas died sooner under minimal light than the Maximas of the same size. The person doing the study theorized (but little proof) that the Maximas lived longer due to external nutritional support. Maximas gill structure is larger and more complex than a Derasas I think was the main reason. The person also noted that Maximas adjust to lower lighting faster than Derasas which could account for the longevity of the clam in poor lighting. It was one of those studies where the guy couldn't find any research on just how much lighting a clam needs so he did a home brew kind of thing. Some of his findings were quite interesting. His sample group was rather small, but he did find the maxima clams did better under lower lighting than derasas that died very quickly while one maxima actually survived one of his low light experiments.

Oh and something about a dark mantle helps the a clam live longer as well. He found that the darker the mantle the more resilient a clam was to poor lighting conditions as well as adapting faster.

Yeah, Cam- please do. At the very least, please let me know the author, so I can try to find it. To be honest, that whole "study" sounds quite bogus to me. The author has apparently made some atrocius conclusions that are not proven, nor correlated with any other findings. There are some "factually challenged" apparently made here. The claim that maximas have more developed and complex gill structures is not correct. The gill anatomy of maximas as compared to derasas is practically identical. The gigas clams have two sets of particle sifting grooves in the gills for particluar collection. All other tridacnids have one. Derasas actually will pump more water through there body cavity that an identically sized maxima. Does more water = more filtration feeding? I dont know, but if so, maximas filter less than derasas. But, surely less flow through does not equal more filter feeding.
Darkness of the mantle also has exceptionally little to do with autotrophic capabilities or resiliency. Quite honestly, some of those canary yellow gigas seen inpictures are found at near 20 meters, while the dull brown of hippopus clams are found no deeper than 5 meters- EVER. The light at 5 meters is exponentially stronger at 5 meters than at 20.

I can provide thousands of aquarist accounts (from other forums) that show that derasas can (and are) kept under standard fluorescents, while maximas almosts always suffer and perish under such conditions. So, why did this authors maxima live with low light when the derasa died? He got unusually lucky. 99.9999% of the time, the maxima dies, the derasa does better. As we have learned- there is a lot of things that can kill a clam, including stress.

This is just my opinion, which I have formed by reading everything I possibly could about tridacnids, but please look at other forums too, you'll see everybody agrees. Derasas are a lower light clam.

 

[kalkbreath]

I wish more scientists (and hobbyists) would also take into account where the test subject clams were collected.

Does it really matter were wild Derasa clams are found growing?
All Derasa for sale in this trade during the past ten years are farm raised.
Farm raised clams are grown in raceways as shallow as 16 inches.
....And many farms grow Derasa and Maxima clams side by side in the same grow out conditions.
Wild Derasa might be found in 25 meters, but the small derasa found for sale in this hobby have spent their whole lives in less then one meter of water.
There are some exceptions like when food farmed clams are placed in wire cages in deeper water to grow out in size. But these deep water raised clams are almost always sold at a min five to eight inches in size.
All clams are not the same. A clams background plays a key role in its ability to adapt to lab conditions.( or aquarium)
Derasa clams grown in a 16 inch farm vat are accustomed to far more sunlight then a wild Maxima collected out in the reef in 20 feet of water. While I agree that Derasa seem to be genetically more adapted to survive under less lighting , all too often scientists and hobbyists seem to over look the fact that a clams recent growing conditions can perhaps play an even greater roll then species genetic disposition.
Good scientists will keep Issues like these in mind when choosing suitable test clams for conducting studies.... Its disappointing that so few scientists working with tridacna clams seem to have a complete understanding of how the multitude of extraneously circumstances each batch of clams experience prior to finding their way into the scientists test tank, can and do effect the out come of their controlled tests.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Yes Kalk, absolutely true. Each and every clam with be quite different. Some croceas could probably survive in a closet. But how do we apply this to generalizations or advice? This principle can be applied to anything in this hobby. Is a tang reef safe? No, because a tang once ate corals. Etc etc, you get my point.
You asked does it really matter where these clams come from in the wild? Absolutely. This almost ties back to a thread you had posted a while ago. Even if these clams were bred in captivity, this does not domesticate them. There is millions of years of evolution and selection which has caused this species to have the traits and requirements that it does. We are questioning the species as a whole, not indivudal specimens. SO how do you answer, this question- what clam species will tolerate the lower lighting- maximas or derasas? I will always argue derasas, because their natural history is more allowing of it, AND the hobbyist track record has proven it in the vast majority. If the question is instead, what caused author X's maxima to survive low light, while the derasa died, then I will agree with your assessment. Perhaps, this individual derasa has adjusted to higher light, while the maxima has not (or vice versa, or whatever). I do not know, and cannot say, except for the generic statement- each and every clam is different. As I stated, I think this was likely an anomolous occusrance. But, if your contention is that derasas, AS A SPECIES, are somehow now a higher light needing organism because of ten years of captive breeding (from undoubtedly wild caught animals), I couldn't disgaree more.

This topic leads to far and away one of the greatest disservices I think forums can produce- misinformation through anomolous circumstance. Hobbyist A keeps 50 tangs in a 10 gallon tank- does this mean that this is sound advice? Absolutely not- it will fail horribly. Yet, hobbyist A still did succeed, but the specific conditions, history, and circumstances of that hibbyists scenario are unreplicateable, and the entire history of failure in similar circumstances is ignored completely.

 

[cameron]

I don't want to disclaimer every post I make and I don't want to get jumped on every time I give advice on something because I quick type a reply, but I realize this is the burden of posting and trying to help so in that spirit I will rephrase my original statement that started this:

Spot feeding 1" to 1.5" Derasa and Crocea clams have not proven effective and in some cases it is believed by some that this feeding can actually upset the clam by clogging the gill structures which in turn causes stress. It is believed by some that Maxima clams at this size do actually filter feed on phyto and thus don't need as much light as the other two to survive this time in their growth cycle. This is a controversial statement as some believe that Maximas at any size always require more light. What is generally considered true by most is that mature Maximas do require more light than a similarly sized Derasa.

jmaneyapanda;40947 wrote: To be honest, that whole "study" sounds quite bogus to me. The author has apparently made some atrocius conclusions that are not proven, nor correlated with any other findings.

The guy wasn't a scientist and was just a hobbyist trying a variety of things on some clams he received that were small. His sample group was small. I remember there being a rather large... this is what I found and I was suprised statement at the top. It was by no means proof just one of the FEW clam studies I have seen for clams in reef tanks. Few have actually studied clams for tolerences in aqauria. Few know why they die out from diseases and such as well. There just isn't a lot of research out there on clams in our environments. You throw around words like 99.9999% but you have zero proof that this is an actual truth. Just some number you pulled out. It could be right, probably is... I am just making the point that under a small study of small clams some suprising elements were found.

jmaneyapanda;40947 wrote: The claim that maximas have more developed and complex gill structures is not correct. The gill anatomy of maximas as compared to derasas is practically identical.

Well that is just poor wording on my part. How is this as a retraction statement: Small Maximas have a more open gill structure but is similar to the Derasa gill structure. It is theorized by some that that direct feeding a Derasa can actually cause the gill structure to clog. It is unknown as to what a Derasa or Maxima actually uses phto for. Some believe it is a protien source, some believe it helps carbonization and a variety of other reasons.

jmaneyapanda;40947 wrote: Darkness of the mantle also has exceptionally little to do with autotrophic capabilities or resiliency.

It is commonly believed the more brown a mantle is the less light a clam needs. This is commonly believed to be true for Maximas and Croceas to my knowledge. I believe the persons testing on this area was simply reaffirming that. IMO, extremely colorful mantles generally require more lighting.

jmaneyapanda;40947 wrote: I can provide thousands of aquarist accounts (from other forums) that show that derasas can (and are) kept under standard fluorescents, while maximas almosts always suffer and perish under such conditions. So, why did this authors maxima live with low light when the derasa died? He got unusually lucky. 99.9999% of the time, the maxima dies, the derasa does better. As we have learned- there is a lot of things that can kill a clam, including stress.

Yes, maybe, no. Don't know but again his was the first test where someone actually put two similarly sized small clams in a tank, hit them with strong PAR and started shading them over a period of time at least that I have read. His conclusions could be completely screwed due to his small sample size, method of clam collection, flow in the tank, etc. Truth is clams are much of a mystery to most of us including experts.

How many of those thousands of posts actually have both kinds of clams in their tank? I can at least say I have two very healthy clams in my tank. One is a Derasa and one is a Maxima. Doesn't make me an expert but at least I have some experience with this subject material unlike a large percentage of the thousands that probably have never had both in a tank at the same time and another percentage that probably has never kept a clam to begin with.

jmaneyapanda;40947 wrote: This is just my opinion, which I have formed by reading everything I possibly could about tridacnids, but please look at other forums too, you'll see everybody agrees. Derasas are a lower light clam.

Yep and until about a week ago I thought pointing my pumps at each other was the right way to go because most people told me that was the right thing to do. I am finding rather quickly few have done the studies, read the research and understand the science. This causes an almost cult like belief in what X says to Y.

All that said, this is my last post on the subject. You can PM me if you want to followup on this.

 

[kalkbreath]

jmaneyapanda;40990 wrote: But, if your contention is that derasas, AS A SPECIES, are somehow now a higher light needing organism because of ten years of captive breeding (from undoubtedly wild caught animals), I couldn't disgaree more.

When a clam is accustomed to growing in high light conditions.
The zooxanthella count inside the clam is usually low in number. Thats because under high light even a small number of zoox can provide enough nourishment for the calm . And too few is better then too many.
too many algae inside the clam and there will be too much biological activity (like respiration and sugar production) taking place inside the clam.
Excessive Toxic levels can build up and overwhelm the clam.
TO prevent too many or too few , the clam regulates the density of zooanthella inside its body to best suite its current growing situation.
Its not just the amount of available light which effects the clams' zoox density. Nutrient availability also plays an almost equal role.
When nutrient levels are low the zoox are less active. This complicates the process of to little or too many zoox and the clam must strike the perfect balance.
It also takes time for a clam to adjust to new conditions.
Expulsion of excess zoox or the act of increasing the count can take considerable time.
One should also consider the effects of inconsistent or random feeding food supplements and how this may future confuse the clam.
See in order for the clam to fine tune its metabolism...the clam must decide what its' new conditions or nutrient levels are. If this level is constantly changing , like when a hobbyist or scientist constantly changes the conditions inside the aquarium......the clam doesnt know what to think!
A clam trying to adjust to daily micro changes( like feeding one day and then not the next) is something a clam is not accustomed to confronting either in the wild or in the clam farms.

When a scientist subjects a newly received clam to battery of controlled lab tests ,
the calm may already be stressed simply trying to regulate its metabolism in the new aquarium.

I wish scientists would wait weeks or months to begin scientific process.

I dont see how we can learn much about clams until they (the researchers) learn that the controlled experiment begins when the test subject leaves the farm or the reef... not when it hits the scientists aquarium.

 

[kalkbreath]

So a farm raise Derasa grown in high light and high nutrient levels ..
Will have greater difficulty adjusting to low light conditions with low nutrients in a aquarium.

Then even a wild Maxima clam which was collected in twenty feet of water out on a low nutrient reef crest.

Because the Farmed Derasa must grow more zooxantella to adjust
While the wild Maxima already is adjusted to the lower light and nutrient levels.
Its like taking in a Sunday flick at the local movie house ...then after spending hours in the dark walking out into the bright Sunlight and sneezing your head off until your eyes adjust to the new conditions
.......only the clams spend a year or more growing under very un natural conditions. So you would need to spend months in the dark movie house then walk out into the sun to duplicate the scenerio.

 

[FutureInterest]

Hmmm... never thought of it that way before. Good post, +1.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Well, I just dont know what to say. I do not agree with much of what was claimed by in the past posts. To me, the natural world is the ultimate "research". Yet, natural histories are discounted. Past majority experinec is also discounted. All current available information shows that clam A needs more light than clam B, yet this is disputed.

My only intentions in this forum is to help to correctly inform other hobbyists. In this case, I think gross misinformation is occuring. I am not stating things stated were not factual, but I think they are immensily misinformative. It will lead to misunderstanding, misapplication,a nd livestock problems. I cant be a part of that. Good luck to you all.