the secret to colorful,healthy corals....obvious to some,elusive to many

[horseplay]

Elegance coral, this is interesting. Do you have any source for this? I would like to know the cutoff level for PO4. It must be very low since my level is 0 with Hanna checker and I do not run GFO. When I was running GFO cheato was yellow. Maybe due to iron deficiency though.

[SantaMonica]

The algae-vs-iron proof is the same as the organic-vs-artificial label on bread; it says so therefore it must be

[elegance coral]

Originally Posted by horseplay

Elegance coral, this is interesting. Do you have any source for this? I would like to know the cutoff level for PO4. It must be very low since my level is 0 with Hanna checker and I do not run GFO. When I was running GFO cheato was yellow. Maybe due to iron deficiency though.

No, I don't really have a source for this. I'm sure the "cut off level" would vary with species and environmental conditions. (temperature, light, flow...... )

With things like this, I don't get to hung up on numbers I get from tests. I rely more heavily on bio markers. If algae is growing well, there MUST be PO4 available to it. If our tests are telling us there is no PO4 in the water, yet algae is growing, then something isn't right. The tests can't be giving us an accurate picture of whats actually taking place in the tank.

If light, flow, temp, and other parameters are relatively stable (as they should be) and nutrients aren't excessively high, then nutrient levels become the major controlling factor for algae growth. This is true of algae anywhere in the system.

Using algae on the front glass as an example. If we have to wipe the algae off the glass once every two weeks, the PO4 level is likely to be very low. If that changes, and we need to wipe the algae off more often, it's safe to assume the PO4 level has risen. If we change out our GFO, and we can go back to wiping off the glass every two weeks, it's safe to assume the PO4 level has dropped. All of this can take place while our test kits are telling us there is no PO4 in the water. If we get to know our corals, they too can become bio markers. Through controlling PO4 levels, we can cause our corals to become darker or lighter brown. Again, this can be done while our tests are telling us there is no PO4 in the water. We can have a refuge with large quantities of rapidly growing algae, a process that requires a substantial amount of PO4, and our test kits may tell us we have no PO4.

Once our PO4 drops to very low levels, our test kits become useless and bio markers become the most reliable means of determining PO4 levels. Mother nature may not give us numbers to go by, but she doesn't lie.

Peace
EC

[elegance coral]

Originally Posted by SantaMonica

The algae-vs-iron proof is the same as the organic-vs-artificial label on bread; it says so therefore it must be

So in other words, you were just making another false statement to support your ATS while attempting to discredit a competing method.

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Using algae on the front glass as an example. If we have to wipe the algae off the glass once every two weeks, the PO4 level is likely to be very low. If that changes, and we need to wipe the algae off more often, it's safe to assume the PO4 level has risen.

Or something else that was limiting the algae has been raised, such as nitrogen, iron, light, etc.

[dtum]

Originally Posted by Randy Holmes-Farley

Using algae on the front glass as an example. If we have to wipe the algae off the glass once every two weeks, the PO4 level is likely to be very low. If that changes, and we need to wipe the algae off more often, it's safe to assume the PO4 level has risen.

Or something else that was limiting the algae has been raised, such as nitrogen, iron, light, etc.

Nice

[elegance coral]

Originally Posted by Randy Holmes-Farley

Using algae on the front glass as an example. If we have to wipe the algae off the glass once every two weeks, the PO4 level is likely to be very low. If that changes, and we need to wipe the algae off more often, it's safe to assume the PO4 level has risen.

Or something else that was limiting the algae has been raised, such as nitrogen, iron, light, etc.

Always keeping me on my toes.

Yes, you are correct. Which is why I said, in the vary same post, "If light, flow, temp, and other parameters are relatively stable", and "I'm sure the "cut off level" would vary with species and environmental conditions. (temperature, light, flow...... )". I wouldn't have said these things if I thought PO4 was the only contributing factor. I assumed people would be able to fallow that, even if I left it out of one statement in the post.

The point I was trying to make, is that even after the PO4 drops below detectable levels for our test kits, and algae like chaeto will no longer grow, we can still get an idea of where our PO4 level is, and manipulate it with the help of GFO.

[Aquarist007]

Originally Posted by elegance coral

Always keeping me on my toes.

Yes, you are correct. Which is why I said, in the vary same post, "If light, flow, temp, and other parameters are relatively stable", and "I'm sure the "cut off level" would vary with species and environmental conditions. (temperature, light, flow...... )". I wouldn't have said these things if I thought PO4 was the only contributing factor. I assumed people would be able to fallow that, even if I left it out of one statement in the post.

The point I was trying to make, is that even after the PO4 drops below detectable levels for our test kits, and algae like chaeto will no longer grow, we can still get an idea of where our PO4 level is, and manipulate it with the help of GFO.

Great point and practical
One of the best tanks for coral growth that I look after has untraceable readings for nitrates and phosphates . However the glass is covered with brown algae within three days. How would you explain that

[reefgeezer]

Originally Posted by capn_hylinur

Great point and practical
One of the best tanks for coral growth that I look after has untraceable readings for nitrates and phosphates . However the glass is covered with brown algae within three days. How would you explain that

I have much the same issue. O nitrate, very low phosphate... and some brown algae that grows on the glass. I have to wipe it off every 4-5 days. I think there are strains of Cyano that can use the nutrients locked in organics pretty efficiently. When I increase vinegar, skim wetter, or add GAC the algae stops growing so fast but the corals don't do as well.

[SantaMonica]

One of the best tanks for coral growth that I look after has untraceable readings for nitrates and phosphates . However the glass is covered with brown algae within three days. How would you explain that

Nutrient flow. You have low nutrient levels, but high nutrient flow (from the fish pee --> glass)

[Aquarist007]

Originally Posted by SantaMonica

Nutrient flow. You have low nutrient levels, but high nutrient flow (from the fish pee --> glass)

Ie poor turn over rate in gph?

[Fibinotchi]

Originally Posted by capn_hylinur

Great point and practical
One of the best tanks for coral growth that I look after has untraceable readings for nitrates and phosphates . However the glass is covered with brown algae within three days. How would you explain that

It only makes sense that much ammonia conversion happens right in the display. Algae spores and bacteria that like feeding on the waste as soon as it is excreted, have the first shot at it, and are attached to the normal bacterial film that is on the surface of everything in the tank. Notice how the film on your glass smells when you are doing water changes and the tank level is down. It is mostly unavoidable unless flow happens to be near perfect.
Recap, waste happens in the display, bacteria and algae spores are right there as much as possible to convert immediately. We try not to let that happen by scraping the glass so that most of the conversions happen in the sump or filter.

[SantaMonica]

I don't think the nutrient flow/flux is as much a matter of water flow as it is a matter of microbe density. Otherwise folks with strong flow would get "no" growth on the glass. But everybody gets growth on glass, no matter what.

Just like in the open ocean where there are no "surfaces", nutrients are absorbed instantly by microbes/algae, and then re-mineralized into nitrogen, oxygen, carbon, etc, by the algae. This is the "microbial loop", and is what runs all the oceans and lakes.

[Bielaz]

Originally Posted by Tang Salad

Great information! Thank you for doing all the work to collect and post it.

Another variable that I'd like to see thrown into the equation would be flow within the tank. It's my humble belief that most reef tanks, nearly all beginner's tanks, and 99.9% of tanks with algae problems, simply do not have enough circulation. It's so easy to look at big GPH numbers and feel somehow that whichever number you've come up with is "enough". (3,000 GPH sure does sound like a lot!) Current in the ocean, especially on the reef crests, is tremendous. Even on calm days the movement of water is immense. It is difficult to understate.

We know that flow is important for nearly everything a coral does. As they're immobile creatures, they rely on flow to bring them what they need and, even more importantly, to take away what they do not need. Studies have shown that when facing rising temperatures, temperatures that often trigger bleaching events, increased water velocity can help corals cope and survive. IIRC the same goes for light. Too much light can cause over-photosynthesizing and can result in oxygen toxicity to the tissue of the coral. Increased flow can bring that O2 away from the tissue and keep it from getting burned.

Anyway, I don't mean to preach to the choir or sidetrack the thread. It's just something I thought could possibly be integrated into your formula at some point in the future.

Imagine that. A Grand Unified Theory of reefkeeping!

considering this, what would you recommend to be enough flow in a nano tank of ten gallons, and how would the flow be sculpted??? I want to improve a nano i have in my room and was thinking adding a hydor for it. but if i wanted to immitate natural ocean currents, what should the GPH be for it. ATM it is about 250-300 gph combined into canister filters and return pumps. what GPH rating do you suggest???

[dwebster86]

This is good information. Going to experiment with it on my new 180 SPS

[SGT_York]

Brief tyrade on accounting and books that applies to test kit numbers.

There is a number of a period of time and a number for an instant. Test kits only measure a specific instance. Like a balance sheet. You could have a million dollars in the bank or be dirt poor and still have no real idea on the company's profitability. Or in this case you may have low nutrients but significant phosphate introduction into your tank. Which is why you need an income statement for businesses. It will tell you how much revenue is coming in and how much is going out giving you total profitability. Unfortunatley there is no test kit to measure this and we can only really tell by changes between testings.

Just because there is no phosphate on the test kit does not mean that significant amounts were released and subsequently absorbed by algae. Then compare that to an ultra low nutrient tank that has no turnover in nutrients. The test kits would appear to be stellar but there would be no coral growth simply due to a lack of protein.

Test kits can tell you when things are going wrong, but they can't tell you that things are right.

In other words the numbers on your test kits are not absolute you will never be able to say this is the correct level because you are looking at a specific point in time. What the coral needs is phosphates over a period of time. Obviously there is a correlation between the two but it is not absolute.

[GroktheCube]

Originally Posted by SGT_York

Brief tyrade on accounting and books that applies to test kit numbers.

There is a number of a period of time and a number for an instant. Test kits only measure a specific instance. Like a balance sheet. You could have a million dollars in the bank or be dirt poor and still have no real idea on the company's profitability. Or in this case you may have low nutrients but significant phosphate introduction into your tank. Which is why you need an income statement for businesses. It will tell you how much revenue is coming in and how much is going out giving you total profitability. Unfortunatley there is no test kit to measure this and we can only really tell by changes between testings.

Just because there is no phosphate on the test kit does not mean that significant amounts were released and subsequently absorbed by algae. Then compare that to an ultra low nutrient tank that has no turnover in nutrients. The test kits would appear to be stellar but there would be no coral growth simply due to a lack of protein.

Test kits can tell you when things are going wrong, but they can't tell you that things are right.

In other words the numbers on your test kits are not absolute you will never be able to say this is the correct level because you are looking at a specific point in time. What the coral needs is phosphates over a period of time. Obviously there is a correlation between the two but it is not absolute.

I just finished taking an accounting course at the local community college (great resource to learn new skills!), and my brain immediately jumped to keeping special journals for food input :-p.

[navyfishguy]

elegance coral has it right your tank will tell you what going on if you can read the signs. However, I think everyone is bouncing around the well known and stated fact in this thread that algea uses P04 to grow. That being said the reason you have a ton of algea and you P04 is reading 0ppm is because the algea is using it to grow. If the algea in your tank is absorbing the available P04 then what are you going to read on a test kit.........0. You have to be able to read Q's from your tank in this hobby and not only test kits

[SantaMonica]

Yes the rocks covered in algae make a very good in-tank scrubber.

[doctorwhoreefer]

Interestingly enough, my corals responded better to a phosphate level of .1 than 0. Algae growth is minimal, back wall has some whitening at the top, rocks are all clean. I think I have to clean the front glass once a month, all the while the phosphate levels are around .1. The last tissue necrosis event I had on one coral turned around and healed within 4-7 days, I even fed more Nutricell plankton.(not advertising, for reference; didn't want to say I just fed more)
All the while my nitrates are 1-10 ppm. The most active phosphate range I have found, not nearing zero, is .05, and then going up as far as .22. After I cleaned the biopellet reactor(biodigest used monthly;1ml), gac (cleaned not replaced), replaced Poly-Filter, skimmer mechanical filtration sponge I had the tissue necrosis event. PO4 went from .22 to .05 in 24 hours. The little area on the frag was a little smaller than a pencil eraser top. I saw .05 po4 and instead of thinking 'phosphates?! I need zero' I decided to feed more, sure enough it turned right around and stopped the rtn.

Just wanted to share where I'm at. My tank has always done ok, but pretty nonexistent growth. After ignoring the thought of "I need zero phosphates" all of my corals are growing better including the sps. In addition to this I've started using red sea color colors and reef energy. It's been interesting with the lack of the ABC foundation stuff (I use kalk atm) but I would have to say it's been fairly rewarding. No stress during an rtn event, hell yes.

We've all seen those tanks that have elevated phosphates and they look at least halfway nice. So maybe there's something else we need to be looking at as an identifier than phosphates? I've been pretty shocked..

[SantaMonica]

After I cleaned the biopellet reactor(biodigest used monthly;1ml), gac (cleaned not replaced), replaced Poly-Filter, skimmer mechanical filtration sponge I had the tissue necrosis event. PO4 went from .22 to .05 in 24 hours

What this may have been, is a giant reduction in microbe activity. Microbes/periphyton collects on all surfaces from day one, and starts a new few chain. Your polyps grew according to that food. Then the food was gone when you cleaned all those surfaces. Thus the reduction in phosphate may have just been a coincidence.

Remember that microbial food is invisible, and is what causes the huge swarms/schools of fish to stay nears corals/rocks on reefs even when they are being chased by predators.

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by SantaMonica

What this may have been, is a giant reduction in microbe activity. Microbes/periphyton collects on all surfaces from day one, and starts a new few chain. Your polyps grew according to that food. Then the food was gone when you cleaned all those surfaces. Thus the reduction in phosphate may have just been a coincidence.

Remember that microbial food is invisible, and is what causes the huge swarms/schools of fish to stay nears corals/rocks on reefs even when they are being chased by predators.

Right, this thought came to me the other day, 'ambient levels of bacteria' coming from the pellet reactor especially.. Which kinda sucks as some state about 'well if you want to reduce phosphates, don't ADD phosphates' but I think dislodging the bacteria in the reactor and dumping the couple gallons is just as easy as many "filters" that require cleaning.. (I think cleaning individual items might be required instead of a mass cleanse of all filtration components)

Perhaps that's the way to do a true test for phosphates eh? Run water through the smallest micron filter you can find and then test the output? Maybe a .5 micron sediment filter will filter out bacterias?(with a carbon block you may or may not be adding/removing inorganic phosphates)

[Maximus]

This thread really hits home. Recently, I visited a friend of mine (TFP) and marveled at how healthy his acros were. His acros were vibrant and looked nothing like mine. While admiring his tank, I noticed how many fish he had and how much poop they were giving off. He had lots of tangs and other fish that were constantly "feeding" the corals. I asked him what his nitrates were and he said around 40. The epiphany did not set in until I got home.

As I started mounting some frags that he gave me, all of them were much more colorful than mine. Compared to his frags, mine were pale and lacking color. I was really blown away at the quality of his frags compared to mine and then it hit me. My nitrates have always been at 0 due to a Cermedia nitrate reducing block. I also only have 5 small fish in my tank and feed a pinch of pellets daily. I had realized that I have been starving my corals! What's real funny is that I have been reefing for over 20 years (on and off) and I used to have real colorful corals with fast growth rates. I never tested for phosphates or mg and rarely tested for nitrates until the past couple years. I suppose ignorance was indeed bliss! I immediately pulled my nitrate reducing block and started feeding the tank ( Acropower and Reef-Roids). I am prepared for an algae outbreak due to the excess feeding. I have already bought a lawnmower blenny (in TT atm) and will add a kole tang soon. I figure the tradeoff with the excess algae will be worth it if my corals deepen in color. I just hope I'm right!

[doctorwhoreefer]

Originally Posted by Maximus

This thread really hits home. Recently, I visited a friend of mine (TFP) and marveled at how healthy his acros were. His acros were vibrant and looked nothing like mine. While admiring his tank, I noticed how many fish he had and how much poop they were giving off. He had lots of tangs and other fish that were constantly "feeding" the corals. I asked him what his nitrates were and he said around 40. The epiphany did not set in until I got home.

As I started mounting some frags that he gave me, all of them were much more colorful than mine. Compared to his frags, mine were pale and lacking color. I was really blown away at the quality of his frags compared to mine and then it hit me. My nitrates have always been at 0 due to a Cermedia nitrate reducing block. I also only have 5 small fish in my tank and feed a pinch of pellets daily. I had realized that I have been starving my corals! What's real funny is that I have been reefing for over 20 years (on and off) and I used to have real colorful corals with fast growth rates. I never tested for phosphates or mg and rarely tested for nitrates until the past couple years. I suppose ignorance was indeed bliss! I immediately pulled my nitrate reducing block and started feeding the tank ( Acropower and Reef-Roids). I am prepared for an algae outbreak due to the excess feeding. I have already bought a lawnmower blenny (in TT atm) and will add a kole tang soon. I figure the tradeoff with the excess algae will be worth it if my corals deepen in color. I just hope I'm right!

I agree more nutrients helps a lot, I mean really lol. But I'm not sure I would just call it fish poop. I was housing a porc puffer(emergency housing that I hung onto for awhile), 2 clowns, a green wolf eel, a lawnmower, an urchin, and an army of hermit crabs for the puffer to hunt. I got a few sps, few lps, few softies. All levels were great, phosphates/nitrates were near 0, usually .04 to .07 for phosphate, 0.5-5 for nitrates. Everything was ok, but not growing very fast, fairly colorful though.

I got an apex controller, and an orp probe. I discovered something. Even though the nutrient levels looked ok according to test results, I discovered the orp was pretty flatlined around 200-215. That's horrendously low come to find out. So I decided the puffer was big enough to move along, since the 75 was getting cramped with a 7-8" puffer. I rehomed the eel and clowns as well, and just kept the hermits and lawnmower blenny and urchin. Within 2 days my orp skyrocketed to around 300. Another water change 350. Another wc, 400. Since then it's stayed around 410-420.

Since I've kept the nutrients the same, the food input comparable(I was feeding probably 1/32 of a pound of diy food a day) but the orp has risen so much, the tank has been AMAZING. Things colored up waaaaay more than they were before, and things seem rather livelier than they were. All I can figure is though the nutrient levels were acceptable to the corals, the constant drag effect of all the fish AND food waste was dragging things down. I mean obviously, the orp was just horrible.. lol

I never saw this before the orp reading came into existence for my system. All tests were ok, but something about the look of the tank was a little "off" in the ways of growth being slow. Ever since then things have been great, so I wonder if a lot of the issues out there is people's tanks orp's are flatlined horribly because of excess fish and their waste, but everything else appears normal.

Food for thought.. I thought I was doing a fine job of housing my creatures but indeed there was too much biological matter in the forms of fish that offset the entire system. I've been quite happy now and it seems taking care of the tank is a lot less tedious!

[SantaMonica]

I am prepared for an algae outbreak due to the excess feeding.

You'll have a year or so while the rocks absorb the phosphate.

As for the puffer, it's the large amounts of urea/ammonia/ammonium going to into the water which is probably causing the trouble. The same amount of nutrients, if supplied in coral food instead, would be much more welcomed