The problem with keeping nudibranchs is to find enough and constant quantity of their extremely special food: usually each species of nudibranch only can feed on determinate species of cnidarian. And of course we can't find these cnidarians in animal food corporations! They must be harvested regularly directly from sea in order to keep the nudibranch alive.
True for the specialists, but there are also several less specialized species where this is not the case. For example, several aquariums keeps, or have kept,
Hermissenda crassicornis and the strange lion's mane nudibranch (
Melibe leonina). Neither of these have extremely narrow food requirements nor are they very hard to keep. There are really two main issues for nudibranches:
1. Many of the species that on occasion turn up in aquariums are from tropical regions and we often have absolutely no idea what exactly they feed on; sponges, corals, cnidarians, etc, are all known to be food items for various species. Being far from their native range it is typically impossible to do some food testing (collecting a few local potential food items) to figure out exactly what it feeds on. Consequently, most tropical nudibranchs that turn up in an aquarium are doomed. I know a few aquariums that got them by accident as unexpected hitchhikers on live rocks, but fortunately most public aquariums now have the common sense to not deliberately get them. In contrast to the tropicals, the food requirements for European and North American nudibranchs are typically known, and are often cnidarians or bryozoans. Some of these cnidarians are not particularly hard to find/culture and some of the bryozoans are very common. Nevertheless, very few extreme specialists have been maintained for longer periods. The Spanish shawl (
Flabellina iodinea) has been kept for longer periods in several places and it is a hydroid-eater. However, those hydroids are pretty common and not particularly hard to maintain. Arguably more remarkable, Monterey has kept their local species
Okenia rosacea, which only feed on very specific bryozoans.
2. Size. I could do a dive trip off Northern Europe and find one of several e.g. Flabellinidae species with relative ease. Most of these feed on very common hydroids that often are present in North European aquariums anyway. The problem: Those nudibranchs species may
exceptionally reach 4-5 cm (1.5-2 in) in length, but the typical individual is less than half that size. Stunningly beautiful, absolutely tiny! There are a few exceptions of course, and the Spanish shawl and
Hermissenda crassicornis are two of the northern ocean species that regularly reach 4-5 cm, making them the obvious choice for aquariums.
Finally,
Berghia stephanieae (sometimes in
Aeolidiella and often mislabelled as
Berghia verrucicornis) deserves a special mention. Many public aquariums keep this tiny species, but aquarium won't label it and in any case visitors are unlikely to see it. They are appreciated as the natural predator of
Aiptsia, a small stinging sea anemone that is a menace to saltwater aquariums (both private and public aquariums). In contrast, e.g.
Phyllodesmium and similar tiny nudibranchs turn up in aquariums fairly often as hitchhikers on corals, but are absolutely not appreciated as they feed on those corals!
Even some fabulous, very colorful flatworms (Pseudoceros, Pseudobiceros...) would be an easier substitute for nudibranchs.
They are typically as specialized as the most specialized nudibranchs. The brightly marked tropical marine flatworms are generally specialists on certain ascidians, which themselves are much harder to keep than the cnidarians many specialized nudibranchs feed on. For this reason alone, they would be harder to keep (feed) than most of the nudibranchs.