Small maxima clams

[jdavid]

Maybe these pics will help the experts decide the species

alt="" />

alt="" />

alt="" />

alt="" />

AND, while I was snapping these I finally got a somewhat decent picture of my mystery wrasse, but it does the colors little justice (much like my other photos)

alt="" />

 

[jdavid]

After seeing this

Figure 7: The underside of a Tridacna squamosa specimen with a very small byssal opening.

alt="" />

Figure 9: The underside of a Tridacna maxima specimen with a relatively large byssal opening

alt="" />

I'm not going to flip the clam that's trying to put it's foot down for a photo, but I examined the underside thoroughly before adding it to the tank with my large maxima. It did reseble the photo of the maxima with the larger byssal opening.

Edit: From your trusted source, James W. Fatherree:

Tridacna squamosa

— most commonly available as 4 to 6 inch specimens
— maximum shell length is approximately 16 inches (typically 12 inches, or less)
— shell is strongly symmetrical in form*
— shell typically has 4 or 5 large, well-spaced distinct ribs
— ribs have numerous relatively large, well-spaced, heavy scutes*
— upper margin is strongly curved and each valve is symmetrical to the other*
— byssal opening is variable in size, being moderate to almost non-existent; typically smaller in larger specimens, as they rely more on their own weight to hold them in place rather than a byssus
— mantle extension can be well past the margin, completely hiding the shell and scutes
— incurrent siphon is ringed with numerous large and often elaborate tentacles*

Tridacna maxima

— most commonly available as 2 to 4 inch specimens
— maximum shell length is approximately 16 inches (typically 12 inches, or less)
— shell is strongly asymmetrical in form, typically being much longer than tall*
— shell typically has 5 distinct ribs
— ribs have numerous very tightly-spaced, but light scutes; however, these are typically eroded away by the burrowing activities of this species when in their natural habitat. Thus, specimens that have been collected "in the wild", typically have numerous scutes present only on the upper portion of the shell. Those raised in captivity are not provided the opportunity to burrow into substrates and thus retain most, or all of the scutes.
— upper margin is strongly curved and each valve is symmetrical to the other*
— byssal opening is variable in size, being moderate to relatively large
— mantle extension can be well past the margin, completely hiding the shell and scutes
— incurrent siphon is ringed with numerous small, simple tentacles*

In the photos you can clearly see that each valve is NOT symmetrical to the other, as far as where the scutes are.

Edit: I'd like to hear Jeremy's opinion. Everyone says he is the resident expert on clams.

 

[jdavid]

More from James W. Fatherree, from http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2012/2/inverts">this Advanced Aquarist article </a>

[QUOTE=]I'll also add that despite their attractiveness, availability, and relatively low price, really small specimens are even more likely to pass away. In fact, I experienced so many losses of small maximas back in my selling days that I outright refused to order/sell them after a while, and I've heard the same from many other vendors, too. They didn't tolerate shipping and acclimation to aquarium life very well at all, and it was common for more to die in the first couple of weeks than to live. Stick with larger specimens, as in at least few inches long, and you'll have much better odds of success.[/QUOTE]

Seems pretty consistent with my experiences.

 

[mvm]

It is without a doubt, a maxima clam. More bad info from the other guy...

 

[tbub1221]

Yea its definitely maxima I was wrong ....... Dun Dun Dunnn :whistling I'm use to being wrong , I'm in a relationship
Good looking wrasse
Is the MH over your Biocube now ?