|
01/03/2015, 01:40 AM | #276 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 308
|
Hi SantaMonica!
Can you elaborate your last sentence? Do you mean a commercial coral food instead of fish pee/poop? |
01/03/2015, 12:54 PM | #277 | |
Moved On
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 353
|
Quote:
I recall you're spot on though with a previous tank, had a skimmer, sandbed, rock.(no gfo though) That was pretty much a year and then a bloom. Lol ahhh yes, that was a mess. Lukcily I had only a frogspawn at the time. |
|
01/03/2015, 10:24 PM | #278 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
|
I meant that coral foods don't make the large amounts of urea that fish pee does. So for the same amount of coral food or fish food, the coral food will make less urea, because bacteria can't dissolve a chunk of food as fast as a fish.
|
01/14/2015, 10:50 PM | #279 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: West Chester OH
Posts: 109
|
Great read, thank you
|
01/14/2015, 11:15 PM | #280 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Papillion, NE
Posts: 56
|
Thank you for posting this. I'm new to the hobby and was suprised at well my corals are doing. Surprised to find my paramaters match closely to what you are recommending.
__________________
37 Gallon tall/Refugium S skimmer/Aquamana 165 watt LED light/2-WM circulation pumps |
02/26/2015, 09:35 PM | #281 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Miami FL
Posts: 434
|
very interesting
|
02/28/2015, 08:02 AM | #282 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 53
|
trying to learn and follow along here but you guys keep using these acronyms and I'm lost. what the heck is no3 po4
|
02/28/2015, 08:09 AM | #283 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lynchburg, Va
Posts: 2,963
|
Nitrate & phosphate
|
03/01/2015, 08:14 PM | #284 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Miami FL
Posts: 434
|
Following
|
03/01/2015, 08:46 PM | #285 | |||||
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 739
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
so the urea/ammonia/ammonium is not good, but the poo itself for the rest of the organisms? i thought your ATS was designed to be waste organic material powered. Quote:
rotting waste organic material will decompose into ammonia/ammonium. this is what helps to power your ATS. we are sill collecting poo in order to provide nutrients for an organism, that really does not do any good for us except let us know that we have a nutrient problem. --------------------------------- to break this down for those playing the home game: different corals need different sources of P and N. some need inorganic (testable), others need organic (in food)[simplified, but good enough for this conversation]. if your goal is SPS, then nutrient export should be your primary goal, with a good amount of feeding. the corals need food, but there needs to be a strong way for waste organic material to be exported. siphon that poo, it is toxic for them. if your goal is softies, than there needs to be a good amount of available inorganic nutrients for it to feed. keep that poo, it is healthy for them. here and here are some good threads to read through if one would like discussion on the topic. G~
__________________
Friends don't let friends use refugiums. Current Tank Info: Not dead yet. |
|||||
03/06/2015, 07:00 PM | #286 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 12
|
Informative read. Thanks
|
03/07/2015, 08:19 PM | #287 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Suffolk, VA
Posts: 195
|
Wow, what a great thread! This has really opened my eyes to several things that I've been doing wrong.
|
03/08/2015, 08:01 PM | #288 | |||||||||
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
|
Quote:
Quote:
When the rocks fill up and algae problems begin, then you have to double or triple your export, to make up for the original weak export, and to start pulling P out of the rocks. Or, cook the rocks, and loose the year or two of hard-won periphyton growth (in addition to tearing up the tank). Quote:
Quote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQaE0e0iD3s - Trophic Pyramids Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||||||
03/14/2015, 04:29 AM | #289 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 214
|
I thought fish release excess nitrogen as ammonia through their gills. Do they also release urea?
__________________
Interests in aquaculture of SPS and Zoa, aquarium automation systems, reef biochemistry http://www.cellpathway.com/ |
03/15/2015, 09:09 PM | #290 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
|
Good question, I'm not a fish person.
|
03/16/2015, 04:18 AM | #291 |
greybeard
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: MD
Posts: 893
|
Yep, they also release urea, and they aren't the only ones that do..
Ammonia and urea transporters in gills of fish and aquatic crustaceans http://jeb.biologists.org/content/212/11/1716.long And a little more reading which provides yet more insite: Ammonia Excretion and Urea Handling by Fish Gills: Present Understanding and Future Research Challenges http://legacy.wlu.ca/documents/30184...3,_284-301.pdf Cheers, Ray
__________________
The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination. Albert Einstein Current Tank Info: 360 degree walk around 300 DD island–4 300W & 2 165W ViparSpectra, 4 Kessil A350W, 2 A360WE, 3 XF150, 1 XF250, 1 XF350 Gyre along with 2 PP40 and 2 IceCap 3K gyre for robust current. Basement 150 gallon RubberMaid sump, SKIMZ skimmer, DCP18000 |
03/16/2015, 09:49 AM | #292 | |||||||
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 739
|
Quote:
Quote:
design the tank for detritus export, then all of these problems are avoided. last time i checked nobody is pulling out the natural reef shelf every X number of years to purge it. it seems to be doing just fine on its own. you are correct, it is not nearly as much, it is significantly more! this is why there is a growing biomass in the substrate. this is why after a very short period of time when you stir up a substrate there is detritus. this can occur even in an empty tank without and feeding. the bacteria are utilizing the P attached to the calcium carbonate. Quote:
of course that is the organisms, not the poo. the poo needs to be broken down (10%), then can feed the plankton (10%), then can feed the corals (10%). "so are we suppose to filter out the urea, but keep the poo?" but the urea is feedig bacteria, which is another part of the 10% necessary to feed the next link. Quote:
"i think it is easier to just siphon out the poo" Quote:
"rotting waste organic material will decompose into ammonia/ammonium." Quote:
"algae is a very poor nutrient export method." Quote:
as explained earlier in this post using the video. algae is not able to go after the source of the P, it has to wait for the P to become inorganic AND in solution. the bacteria in the rocks are having a field day and the algae on the LR is reaping the benefits. if the flow was strong enough to get the detritus out of the LR, then it will not be covered in algae. the test measure zero because they are not testing the water that is between the bacteria in the LR and the algae. of course the water would test zero, the algae is using it all up before it can get into the water column. this is why testing for inorganic compounds does not give a good indicator of nutrient levels of a system, yet looking at the total biomass does. as shown in the video. the more biomass, the more total nutrients in the system. the more calories necessary for supporting all of that biomass. Great Video, thanks for linking it. G~
__________________
Friends don't let friends use refugiums. Current Tank Info: Not dead yet. |
|||||||
03/16/2015, 04:24 PM | #293 | ||
Registered Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 949
|
Quote:
Quote:
just wanted to clarify for those that don't know. calcium carbonate can bind with phosphate. bacteria can liberate (separate, unbind, whatever) phosphate from the calcium carbonate structure. they then use this phosphate and incorporate it into their biomass. bacteria also die. this is where some of that detritus from the rock is coming from, the dead bacteria still have phos bound within it, remove that stuff or provide the flow to blow it away and your removing phosphate from the calcium carbonate. its the same with the substrate only the detritus only has one way to go, down. Might be a new talking point, but anything im about to say besides the bacteria liberating phosphate is speculation based off what ive read, just trying to connect the dots. My recent readings lead me to kindve draw a diagram of the different ways phosphates are moving about whithin the bacterial biomass. Once the bacteria liberate phosphates from the calcium carbonate structure they are then considered inorganic phos. this inorganic phos is floating around the enzyme that encases the bacterial biomass (EEBB). bacteria are then free to use this P. in the ATP process P is loaded and unloaded, P is always in motion, going from organic to inorganic P between the EEBB and bound with the bacteria all the time. The more iP within the bacterial enzyme the more bacterial biomass there is allowed to be. With an influx of P (lets say a phos filled rock added to a healthy, low nutrient system), maybe that new frag you just got the bacterial biomass will start liberating P from the structure at a rate faster then they can procreate. so the inorganic level within the EEBB goes higher. more total P for the bacteria, the more bacteria that can grow. I have also read a few things (back when I wasn't saving bookmarks sadly so I cannot provide a link.. but you ATS people might be able to provide something here, I santa monica I think you might have showed it to me, something about surface algae layer on the rocks, bacteria surface film that contained detritus among other things) that state algae can pull the iP from the EEBB. Its excess iP for the bacteria so there is no fight for it. Due to saturation, or 'leaching', the higher iP within the EEBB the more iP that's allowed to leach into the water column where we can test for it. That is my explaination for algae growing on rock that apparently has no detritus settling on it and how P gets from bound to the LR past the bacteria and shows as iP in the water column, such as in the case of cooking rock. |
||
03/16/2015, 06:41 PM | #294 |
greybeard
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: MD
Posts: 893
|
And that sounds like the foundation for a decent research paper, too. Provide the hypothesis, and take us down the path. I for one would be interested in reading it.
Cheers, Ray
__________________
The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination. Albert Einstein Current Tank Info: 360 degree walk around 300 DD island–4 300W & 2 165W ViparSpectra, 4 Kessil A350W, 2 A360WE, 3 XF150, 1 XF250, 1 XF350 Gyre along with 2 PP40 and 2 IceCap 3K gyre for robust current. Basement 150 gallon RubberMaid sump, SKIMZ skimmer, DCP18000 |
03/18/2015, 10:29 PM | #295 | ||
Registered Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
|
The best weekends I've every had were going through ReefBase.org and other sites, finding papers to read on these subjects. I guess for reefers, it's a "good thing" that climate change is making these papers more common and important. The new papers are harder to follow, however; I like the papers from the 1960's, which are before tracers and other difficult things for non-biologists. Interestingly, LA Fishguys has an old 1998 Macna video of Walter Adey that is going to be posted soon, and Adey talks for an hour about just this stuff.
Quote:
And real reefs recycle (re-circulate) almost all nutrients; there is very little "natural water change". Quote:
|
||
03/19/2015, 06:14 AM | #296 | |||
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 739
|
Quote:
"last time i checked nobody is pulling out the natural reef shelf every X number of years to purge it. it seems to be doing just fine on its own." Quote:
the outer reefs to hold onto some resources very tightly, but they still need some new resources. no organism, or symbiotic relationship is 100% efficient. even it if were, there would not be any increase in growth. new resources are necessary. Quote:
biology works the same whether it is in our tanks, in the oceans or in the forests. organisms tank in what they can, and expel what they do not need. corals do the same thing. they take in what they can (plankton, i will post articles on the importance of feeding corals, when i get to work). they produce waste, which provides resources for the zoax. the zoax then in turn provides other resources back to the coral. the rest, if not needed is expelled. the process starts somewhere. there still needs to be resources coming into the coral to provide growth for the coral and the zoax. G~
__________________
Friends don't let friends use refugiums. Current Tank Info: Not dead yet. |
|||
03/19/2015, 07:15 AM | #297 |
Registered Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 739
|
links.
Eutrophication & Coral Reefs The effects of eutrophication-related alterations to coral reef communities on agents and rates of bioerosion (Reunion Island, Indian Ocean) Eutrophication and coral reefs—some examples in the Great Barrier Reef lagoon Eutrophication and Changes in Algal Growth on Coral Reefs Aquarium Corals: Zooplankton Feeding by Corals Underestimated Feeding a Coral Reef Aquarium Feeding the Reef Aquarium, A New Paradigm Small polyps do capture zooplankton could not find a thread on RC about the Smithsonian tank crash. Smithsonian Tank Crash G~
__________________
Friends don't let friends use refugiums. Current Tank Info: Not dead yet. |
03/24/2015, 05:21 PM | #298 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 3,391
|
Quote:
Perhaps it's safe to presume no two tanks are exactly identical, therefore what methods balance one tank may not yield similar results with another. Guidelines are used to attempt and resemble closely 'similiar' setups. Many variables are interwined within one's enclosed system that even then there's no 'guarantee' any one method will alone be able to achieve desired results. I'm just now making myself aware of high PO4 in my system that my scrubber cannot handle alone. So GFO will be attempted to get parameters closer to what 'may' yield better results.
__________________
150g Bow: YWG,Flurry clowns, LMB, yellow tail, chalk bass, Bangaii ,powder brown. Current Tank Info: 110g mixed reef |
|
04/28/2015, 05:46 PM | #299 |
Registered Member
|
I've battled an algae outbreak for six months on a 39 gal that I maintain. I am convinced now that the rock is saturated with phosphates.
Can rock absorb phosphates deep into its pores? If so I am assuming that I can't cook the live rock(acid then chlorine baths) as I have done when I have been convinced that the phosphates are mainly bound up on the rock surfaces? So should I replace this rock entirely?
__________________
I prefer my substrates stirred but not shaken Current Tank Info: 150gal long mixed reef, 90gal sump, 60 gal refugium with 200 lbs live rock |
04/28/2015, 08:18 PM | #300 | |
Registered Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: NY,NY
Posts: 2,072
|
Quote:
My daughter has a 36 Nuvo and it has fabulous corals and my tank isn't too shabby either. I think if you have an algae problem it's no different than any other algae problem. You need to find a balance. Either you have too much input, not enough biology, or not enough export. It's not the rocks, or so that's what I think
__________________
Joe Peck TOTM Apr. 2013 Advanced Aquarist Featured Tank March 2011 Reef Hobbyist Magazine journalist, and all around SPS nut! Current Tank Info: 240 with 750 gal total system, ATI LED Powermodule, MTC-HSA 1000. MTC Pro-Cal.. |
|
|
|