I'm the Silicon King: 2.85 ppm

[3_high_low]

I have more silicon in my tank than a trendy NYC nightclub:eek1:

I guess I need to service my R/O unit. In the mean time I've deployed a product called Phos-zorb. (It's supposed to remove silicates as well.) I hope this stuff doesn't have aluminum in it, they claim it's reef safe. (I read in Eric B's book some do have Al. I sent an e-mail to the mfg. but they never responded.) Meanwhile the problematic caulerpa and valonia growth has since slowed considerably:). After servicing the R/O unit and doing a few water exchanges I'll have my brother do another ICP test. I expect better numbers this time.

I've made some major changes in my tank equiptment and my husbandry techniques. I added a 29g sump, an Iwaki md55rlt return pump, a couple maxijet1200's, traded my Remora pro skimmer for a more powerful beckett bullet model, stopped with most chemical additives, added a Ca reactor, and I stopped doing so may water exchanges.

Ron, thanks for your work! You're an asset to our hobbie. The magazine was a big surprise. It's nice to see Randy involved too.

Cheers:beer:

[rshimek]

Hi Steve,

Yes, it is good to get Randy involved. I hope to have him critique the next manuscript before it gets fully submitted. Should remove a lot of the whiffle factor.

:D

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Mark:

You do have quite a lot (about 100 umolar), but the ocean still tops you in places (but not in many, and not on the surface:D )

Surface values, in the tropics and eslewhere, are far lower (almost none to maybe a tenth of what you have).

Your tank looks equivalent to the North Pacific at about 3,000 feet deep!

Anyway, if you don't have a diatom problem, count yourself lucky, and freely ignore the silica. The sponges and other things in the tank might actually like the elevated levels.

Ever check your top off water for silica?

[rshimek]

Hi Randy,

Since you brought it up :D

Attached is a photo I took in the N. Pacific at a depth of 1515 m.

The "glass sponges" are hexactinellids which have a skeleton of fused silica.

There was also a large solitary cup coral on the rock, but it isn't visible from this angle. It had a white stalk and deep violet disk.

Also common in the area were large pink carpet anemones and 3 m high sea pens.

:D

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Attached is a photo I took in the N. Pacific at a depth of 1515 m.

WOW!

How did you take the photo?

[rshimek]

Hi Randy,

The short answer is through the view port of the PISCES IV research submersible, using an Olympus 2n camera.

The long answer is that about 20 years ago, I was assistant director of the Bamfield Marine Station on Vancover Island, Canada. As part of my duties, I was "Chief Scientist" for 3 2week visits by this sub, mother ship, and crew. We did surveys and reseach in the area of Barkley Sound - on the SW side of Vancouver Id. I was on, maybe 25-30 dives, and arranged a total of about 60 dives. Most dives were done between 200 and 1200 feet (the depth limits in that fjord complex).

At the end of one of the 2 week legs, the sub's next stop was to go out about 80 miles offshore and calibrate some equipment on the bathyl plain at 5,000 ft depth. As they had room, the crew asked if I wanted to come along. I jumped at the chance.

So... the sub pilot and I spent a day on the bottom and in transit to and from (took about 1.5 hours, each way, to get down and up). Saw some truly amazing animals! Got pix of only a few of them (for some reason, my camera would not trigger the sub's strobes, so I missed a lot of the shots I wanted to take).

Anyway, we came across this boulder (dropped from the bottom of an iceberg, probably about 10,000 years ago) and I took these shots, and then we collected the boulder. I got to examine a lot of the stuff up close on ship board, but had no facilities to preserve or maintain it, unfortunately.

And... I thought the picture was appropos to your comment.


:D

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

And... I thought the picture was appropos to your comment.

It sure was!

Thanks for the interesting tidbit.

I hope you didn't get claustrophobic:D

[rshimek]

Originally posted by Randy Holmes-Farley

Hi Randy,

I hope you didn't get claustrophobic:D

Not in the least, but sometime I will have to tell about being in that sub with some folks that did. The inside of the sub was a 6 foot diameter titanium sphere crammed with equipment. You literally had to fit yourself into slots between banks of electronics... And then you were there for the duration of the dive.

The reverse of this experience is diving in the Johnson Sea Link subs from Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution. I have only done 4 or 5 dives in them, but the main sphere is plexiglas about 3 inches thick. Sitting in your seat, you have no impression of walls at all. Fortunately I don't acrophopic either.