Low nutrients, new tank, GHA bloom

[CTaylor]

Hi
I know that algae cycles are expected in a tank the first several months. But it's still confusing, as my nutrient levels are too low. Phosphorous (hanna ultra low tester) 2 ppBillion. Nitrates less than 0.5 ppm. Actually undectible on the low range for salifert. Mg 1350, Ca 420, All 10 dkh. I jumped the gun and already have some corals which are all looking really really good, even acros (mariculture) with super nice PE. GHA is all over the sand.

If the GHA is simply taking in the Phosph and Nitrate as soon as it's generated, then why do tanks with much higher amounts of that have no GHA? What is making this 'cycle' happen? Should I feed more to raise Phosph and Nitrate, but that will just feed the GHA. Its overwhelming my cheato in my fuge as well.

My tank has been cycled through the base cycle (NH4, NH2) for 2 1/2 months. this particular issue didn't happen until a few days after I added a 20# batch of LifeRock. That was at about the 2 month mark. I soaked them for 3 days prior to adding to tank. When I first added life rock at the 2 week mark, nothing like this happened.

Do I just wait this out? It's just weird to me that the phosph especially is pretty much absolute 0. and I feed twice a day.

I know slief will see this and say I went too fast.. and he's right . But still

[top shelf]

If your po4 and no3 are reading almost 0 the algae is using it up before you can test for it. We can only test for what's in the water column not what's bound up in corals, rock, or algae. It's possible your rock is leeching phosphates into the tank. The reason newer tanks are more susceptible to algae growth with higher nutrients is because there not as biologically stable as a more mature tank that's been running for years. They have a wider array of bacteria to process the extra nutrients that a newer system doesn't. There is more then just the nitrogen cycle there's also denitrifying bacteria that take longer to establish.

You could cut back on your feedings to once every other day, sounds terrible but your fish won't starve and will be ok. There are some that feed less then that. Right now you have more nutrients going into the system then coming out. You could also add some gfo, chemipure elite I believe is a good one without going all out with a reactor for such a new tank. It is a good sign that your corals are doing so well though.

[sfdan]

Originally Posted by CTaylor

Hi
If the GHA is simply taking in the Phosph and Nitrate as soon as it's generated, then why do tanks with much higher amounts of that have no GHA? What is making this 'cycle' happen? Should I feed more to raise Phosph and Nitrate, but that will just feed the GHA. Its overwhelming my cheato in my fuge as well.

I think the answer to this question is that people with low but measurable levels of nitrate and phosphate actually have low levels of nitrate and phosphates, levels where microalgae is generally outcompeted by corals, bacteria, macroalgaes, and whatever microalgae does grow is eaten by the clean up crew and you have a balanced system of nutrient import and export.

However, if you tank is full of GHA, you have high nutrient levels. Your tests show 0 because once your tank is full of GHA, you now have an extremely effectively nutrient sponge that is going to absorb those nutrients as soon as they are released, but they are there and your true levels are actually probably quite high.

How much live/dry rock is in your tank?
What kind of nutrient export do you have?

[CTaylor]

Tank has a layer on the sand, and some on the rock. So, not full yet , hopefully won't get there. You (sf) contradicted what you said, my levels are '0' but my true reading is high. It's not high in the water column. If you're right, and you probably are, then whatever amount is being released is just being taken in by the GHA, but in the actual water column is pretty much really close to '0' ppB.
Top, really good points also, but I can't run phosph remover bc that would really leave the corals with total 0. It would possibly strangle the GHA, but since the corals and fish are doing very well, I probably just want to ride this out for the next months.

I know there are the cycles past the nitrogen cycle, but I do believe I got a bad batch of LifeRock. Everything was really clean before I put that in. Some algae, but it would come and then go the next day. I used the Liferock as mentioned in this same tank no issues, and the soaking water it was in tested about 15 ppB from what I remember or less, otherwise I wouldn't have put it in. Same goes for the dry rock I used as a base. This last LifeRock batch I figured would be same as first. Maybe not. Should I pull it out and let it soak for a while?

**Maybe just burry the GHA in the sand? Mix it in, cover it up. I have only 15-20# in my 108 gallon tank. I purposely just have an area of it to compromise between sand and bare bottom . It's not a big deal to do, and I'll keep blowing the smaller amount off the rocks.

[outy]

Originally Posted by CTaylor

Hi
I know that algae cycles are expected in a tank the first several months. But it's still confusing, as my nutrient levels are too low.

Its a balance of bacteria, and the sand and rocks have very little on them so algae grows on it like weeds without enough bacterial growth on substrate to compete for what little nutrients are now being processed.


I have an established 25 year old reef and just rebuilt the DSB and although not having a cycle I went through 10 days of diatoms, then a GHA and bryopsis attack.

Used Fluc and ended that and now after a BHA attack its fading from large water changes.

I feel ya, 6 weeks in I'm almost out of the woods myself.

[CTaylor]

Outy,
thanks for chiming in, amazing 25 years
possibly analagous to you rebuilding DSB, I added that rock.
What is fluc?
If mine ends in 6 weeks I'll be very happy also, though I doubt that will happen. It isnt really spreading super fast, though, seems to be slowing. I'll probably just keep burring it in the sand and hopefully the chaeto can start to compete. Agressive skimming....
*do you have a link to your tank?

[sfdan]

Originally Posted by CTaylor

Tank has a layer on the sand, and some on the rock. So, not full yet , hopefully won't get there. You (sf) contradicted what you said, my levels are '0' but my true reading is high. It's not high in the water column. If you're right, and you probably are, then whatever amount is being released is just being taken in by the GHA, but in the actual water column is pretty much really close to '0' ppB.
Top, really good points also, but I can't run phosph remover bc that would really leave the corals with total 0. It would possibly strangle the GHA, but since the corals and fish are doing very well, I probably just want to ride this out for the next months.

The amount of nitrates and phosphates in the water column is just part of the story, a whole different data point is your tanks consumption of nitrates and phosphates per day. Knowing the level in the water is 0 doesn't tell you anything about the consumption other than it is higher than whatever the inputs are.

I fully agree with your point about the corals. I would never recommending changing anything in a reef tank quickly. Many people overcompensate after algae outbreaks, stuff their tank with GFO, change things too quickly and then bleach their corals. No need to over react to a little algae.

It sounds to me the most likely thing that is happening is that rock you just added had some phosphates built up and is releasing those. The GHA is happily soaking it up and growing quickly. This is not a big deal and pretty common. If I were you I wouldn't bury the GHA, I'd remove it. Its messy and annoying, but a very effective form of nutrient export. When you bury it, you aren't actually removing anything and new GHA will grow as the old GHA decomposes.

Out of curiosity, do you have a picture of the algae that is growing? I've grown a lot of different types of algae in my day and I can't recall ever seeing hair algae on the sandbed.

Fluc is Fluconazole, which is a medicine that kills bryopsis. If you don't have bryopsis than it won't do anything helpful.

[outy]

215G taken just as the GHA and bryopsis started all over DSB and coral.

The tank was overgrown with only 1" in front of glass with branching hammer. This was what made it through the die off

[outy]

Lobo is 30 years old I started with 3 heads of frogspawn and 7 heads of branching hammer. And 1 anemone.

[CTaylor]

All the branching hammers look really neat . I like you have a lot of water space also, not so overcrowded with rock. I'm trying to go for more water space compared to rock look myself. It looks very clean . Lobo looks happy :-D . My first reef was about that long ago, 1988, so almost (29 years)-- when elegances grew faster than mushrooms lol. My last reef (3rd overall) wasnt successful 'til after 5 years (took a while til I realized I had chloramine issues), most do in FL. I rushed THIS last tank in getting coral b/c I have nothing else . Irma killed my last one (therefore this one). Even with the GHA, the coral in THIS tank just looks even healthier than my last tank. Though nothing bad about my last one. I'll have to post a pic of my current, algae and all, once I finally get delivered my blue/uv filter for my phone camera. The pics looks like there are blue ghosts in the tank, not rocks or coral.
**My chaeto IS growing now. Skimmer is pumping out lots of sh*t . The chaeto has green algae. I actually dont think it's hair, it's a bit thicker, stringy, but not hair, and forms layers. But it's not hair. I'm going to leave the chaeto with the algae in it, and figure out how to clean it out once I have a large enough ball of the chaeto. Maybe I will win the new tank cycle battle.

[outy]

By the way for clean systems fluc = fluconazole. it works for GHA and bryopsis.

More for bryopsis but it did most of my GHA. I used 10 200mg capsules for 260G water. 15 capsules would have been better.