| Delphinus |
10-07-2002 08:19 PM |
Hi, very quickly since I have to go catch a plane. BTA's can be without "bubble tips." Victor's link is to Daphne Fautin's and Gerald Allen's book (the online version of their book). This is a very worthwhile read if you have any interest in this topic beyond which we can talk about here. They are the world's foremost authorities on the topic of Pacific species of hosting anemones.
Anyways what makes a BTA a BTA and not a ritteri or a carpet. Things to look out for are the density of tentacles, ratio of size of oral disk to height of oral disk, taper of tentacles, presence of verrurcae on the pedal column, it's habit and choice of substrate. Colour hues can sometimes give a clue too, but that's VERY subjective (basically a "brown" BTA will be a different shade of brown than say a "brown" LTA). It's difficult to enumerate, but each species has its own subtleties that once you know what you're looking at, you can see it, but it is difficult to explain in a hurry (kind of like trying to explain how to "See" those 3-d images in those stereograms). The presence of bubble-tips is typically a clincher, but, the absence of them does not indicate it is not a BTA. Basically there are traits for each species that are sometimes there but not always. For example, LTA's can hold their tentacles in a spiral shape (which explains another common name for LTA which is "corkscrew" anemone). Looking at several example of each, it gets easier to understand what you're seeing. One particular problem I have, for example, is sebaes H. crispa vs. H. malu. I have seen so many photographs that I would swear are the same anemone but some labelled the one and others the other. It suggests to me that even the "experts" have to rely upon a subjective gut feeling at times, but ultimately it must still be guesswork at some level.
Jamie, I never meant to dispute what you said about lighting. When anyone looks at your setup, there can be no doubt in anyone's mind as to whether you know what you're talking about or not. For the record: I would never suggest to anyone that it's OK to use a two-year old bulb. If the animals are photosynthetic, then it's a game of Russian Roulette. Your (and Chris's) advice are sage: always keep your lights new. Unless you have a "Very Good Reason" not to (but as you say, it's an investment to eliminate "possible" damage from old lights.)
Anyways I really, really have to run, would like to talk some more on this topic but it will have to be tomorrow. Thanks guys, talk to you soon.
|
