Bluemoon Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 In my maintenance business I have several combinations. This system does not have any place to grow macro algae or an algae scrubber and after what I have read about the different roles played by DOC released by algae and by corals I would not reccomend trying to use macro algae or algae scrubbers. But if you set on doing so cheato produces far less harmfull DOC than most other algae. I definitely would not use any form of carbon dosing, you're selectively manipulating the microbial populations and you cannot test what you are doing, same reason for not using skimmers. Regarding PO4 there has been a misconception for a long time, unfortunately endorsed by some prominant "Gurus", that just small amounts cause "poisoning" of the coral skeleton when in reality research shows coral growth is increased wiht increased PO4 levels. What is also rarely passed on is the average on reefs is .13 mg/l and upwellinf will expose reefs to as much as 2.0 mg/ and that phosphate is a limiting nutrient for corals to utilize ammonia and nitrate as a food source for their zooxanthellae. In my experienece I don't see any deaths I can attribute to PO4 until levels are at 7 or 8 mg/l. As far as nitrate, forget about it, you need really high levels, way in excess of 100 mg/l to cause potential problems. Corals are competing with algae for ALL forms of nitrogen, organic (amino acids and urea) and inorganic (ammonia and nitrate). So you can see there's a whole lot going on with nitrogen and phosphate we can't test for. Focusing just on one form of each often doesn't help solve any problems. Helping MFrame with hair algae, th PO4 and nitrate levels increased after we got rid of the algae. Trying to get rid of the hiar algae by reducing the PO4 and Nitrate only would have impacted the corals ability to compete and aggrevated the problem. I have to hop in with respectful disagreement on this one. Although many methodologies are applicable, and even independently validated in the extremely complex cycle of invertebrate growth - algae will uptake phosphates, and grow at a much faster rate than any coral skeletal structure that utilizes PO4. Which will deplete the valuable resources corals need. Just as there are different ideologies in plant growth, there are many in reef systems as well, and an aspiring reef keeper must take these into account when planning which livestock they intend to keep. By your reasoning, removing the algae from Mikes tank should have freed up more nutrients for corals to uptake, but in my experience only more of the rapid, more efficient algae strains are able uptake the high nutrient load, and again out compete the corals. Creating a cycle that will not end until the source of nutrients is diminished. While I agree that many of the crucial nutrients for our closed systems cannot be measured successfully - I do believe phosphates are one that can be quite useful. If you can selectively control these levels, as is done naturally through diffusion in sea water. Then you can effectively limit the amount of available nutrients for the much faster growing algae, and you can avoid the DOCs that you explained. Yes, you will most certainly not have the rapid growth that the gurus point out as terms of success, and may suffer short term effects of nutrient spikes - but you will have controlled stability by eliminating unwanted algae growth. Which I strongly believe is the only way to sustainably grow, and KEEP a large variety of small polyp stony corals. Although I have no where near the amount time Tim has put into these endeavors. I'm a firm believer in starting from zero , and getting to what your system needs will end up proving for a much more sustainable ecosystem then riding the rollercoaster of unwanted algae growths effect on available nutrients. It really depends on what you want to keep, and how. Keeping the systems nutrient levels sustainably low, without depleting them is much more time consuming and difficult, but that's why they're referred to as gurus. They have seemingly limitless time, resources and probably some magic fairy dust too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted May 13, 2017 Author Share Posted May 13, 2017 Well, where to start. Quote . . . By your reasoning, removing the algae from Mikes tank should have freed up more nutrients for corals to uptake, but in my experience only more of the rapid, more efficient algae strains are able uptake the high nutrient load, and again out compete the corals. Creating a cycle that will not end until the source of nutrients is diminished . . . Exactly, nutrients did increase after the hair algae disappeared. PO4 went from 3-4 to 8-10 and nitrate went from ~5 to ~20 mg/l. And I say "disappeared" since it stopped growing in the nooks and crannies and holes where neither I or the various algae eaters in the system could reach so the equilibrium shifted to a set of conditions that was adverse to nuisance algae (for the record I don't believe in fairy dust). There certainly are cases where a system is being overfed and reducing the feeding and/or measurable nitrate and PO4 would reduce nuisance algae. But in my experiences over the last 3 decades I was not seeing an association between PO4/nitrate and nuisance algae and coral growth and that prompted me into look a lot closer at the science since my experiences contradicted so many "gurus". I do expect to see nuisance algae to be the first to react when a system is started or disrupted. I have also seen systems correct themselves (3 times in 3 years in one system) without manual removal, just small weekly water changes and I found it fascinating the process pretty much follows the timeline Nilsen and Fossa laid out for new systems in VOL 1 of their "Modern Coral Reef Aquarium" series. (I suspect many aquarists would be far more successful if they followed Nilsen and Fossa's recommendation to use mostly or all wild live rock and leave a system alone for the first 10 months.) Manual removal of nuisance algae with small weekly or every other week water changes I've found to the most reliable way to shift the equilibrium of a system that favors corals over algae. In Mike's system the negative effects of the increased PO4 has been very slowed growth of the Sinularia spp which uses calcium crystals to give the colony rigidity, the stunted growth of Pocillopora damicornis and the death of green birdsnest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted May 13, 2017 Author Share Posted May 13, 2017 Couple small things: On 5/12/2017 at 11:01 PM, Bluemoon said: . . . coral skeletal structure that utilizes PO4. Which will deplete the valuable resources corals need. . . PO4 is not needed for a coral's skeleton per se, although it does seem to slow bioeroders that are trying to dissolve it when it gets incorporated into the skeleton. PO4 is a limiting nutrient for a coral to utilize inorganic nitrogen for it's zooxanthellae. The coral's symbiotic algae obviously needs it. Coral's also need phosphate to make their own DNA, RNA and proteins including the proteins that make their colors. If an aquarist strips out PO4 the corals have to be feed although if the fish load is large enough and well fed the corals should get their needed nitrogen and phosphate directly from the water before it's stripped out. On 5/12/2017 at 11:01 PM, Bluemoon said: . . . While I agree that many of the crucial nutrients for our closed systems cannot be measured successfully - I do believe phosphates are one that can be quite useful. If you can selectively control these levels, as is done naturally through diffusion in sea water. . . All the biological process that are crucial are beyond our ability to test. We can't test how much organic or inorganic nitrogen is being produced or consumed daily, we can test for any leftover nitrate but not urea or amino acids and we also can't test for nitrogen that's hidden in DOC. We can't test how much organic or inorganic phosphate is being produced or consumed in our systems just leftover inorganic phosphate. We can't test for the beneficial or harmful DOCs being produced. We can't test for beneficial or harmful microbial activity. And you need to clarify "as is done naturally through diffusion in sea water". Because natural diffusion of PO4 in the oceans shows reefs are sucking it up and dropping levels in waters around them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christyef Posted May 13, 2017 Share Posted May 13, 2017 [emoji122][emoji122]. LOVE this discussion! [emoji7]Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted May 21, 2017 Author Share Posted May 21, 2017 Just realized I hadn't posted these links here yet. The below links to the research by Feldman, et al, on activated carbon (GAC) skimming, skimate analysis, total organic carbon (TOC) and bacterial counts in reef systems I feel are important also. Granular Activated Carbon Pt 1http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/1/aafeature1 Granular Activated Carbon Pt 2http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/2/aafeature1 Total Organic Carbon Pt 1http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/8/aafeature3 Total Organic Carbon Pt 2http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/9/aafeature2 Protein Skimmer Performance, Pt 1http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2 Protein Skimmer Performance, Pt 2http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/1/aafeature Skimmate Analysishttp://www.advancedaquarist.com/2010/2/aafeature Bacterial Counts in Reef Aquarium Waterhttp://www.advancedaquarist.com/2011/3/aafeature And here's some thought provoking papers: http://jeb.biologists.org/content/214/16/2749.full http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/umrsmas/bullmar/1979/00000029/00000004/art00011 http://wap.aslo.org/lo/toc/vol_48/issue_6/2266.pdf 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted August 29, 2017 Author Share Posted August 29, 2017 I think I'm a little past due updating this thread. Alk 5.5 Ph 7.9 T 78 Salinity 1.027 Calcium 400 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 Looks great Tim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted August 29, 2017 Author Share Posted August 29, 2017 Thank you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesL Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 Beautiful! This is reminding me that I probably should add some leather corals into my tank And I love that huuuuuge cup coral! That was one of the first corals I had way back when in a tank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted September 2, 2017 Author Share Posted September 2, 2017 The Pagoda? It was a 3" colony in 2000. I'm guessing it's 35-40 lbs now. I'm not as fond of Sarcophyton and especially Sinularia as I was and try to keep them under 10% of the total coral biomass now (obviously I'm not followin that dictate religiously ). I've had several systems now where significantly reducing their biomass has noticably improved the growth of corals from other genus. I can't say if it's reduced competition for nitrogen and phosphate and calcium (Sinularia use a lot in the spiculules imbeded in their tissue) or if it's due to growth inhibitors (Sinularia is researched for ditripenes as cancer inhibitors) or probably more likely a combination of the two. Anthelia though is a scourge I would avoid with stony corals. After having it in this tank for over 1 years I got tired of it causing problems with some of the other corals I ended up losing a couple nice acros. However I can see Anthelia being used to great effect in a tank with a wave maker where a lot of movement is desired along with having fish that might prey on stony corals. (I've known aquarist to let Xenia take over and kill nice stony corals because they preferred the movement over the colors.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victoly Posted September 3, 2017 Share Posted September 3, 2017 10 hours ago, Timfish said: Anthelia though is a scourge I would avoid with stony corals. Preach! Anthelia though is a scourge I would avoid with stony corals. period Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Dogfish Posted September 3, 2017 Share Posted September 3, 2017 Great tank. I like the clam. Do they have any special needs? Is the foot in sand or is there coarse rubble underneath? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted September 9, 2017 Author Share Posted September 9, 2017 It's a Squamosa, easiest of the Tridacnas but not as colorful as Maxima or Derasa. This system has had a smaller clam species reproducing in it for a while and there is a small one that has attached itself to it. As far as care they don't get any special attention or feeding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Timfish Posted October 18, 2018 Author Popular Post Share Posted October 18, 2018 Definitely time for an update: 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RicordeaFreak Posted October 18, 2018 Share Posted October 18, 2018 Holy cow thats a big starfish. Great looking tank Tim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted October 18, 2018 Author Share Posted October 18, 2018 Thank you! The starfish is one of the original animals added the first year, as it was rehomed and already fairly large I'm guessing it's actual age is more like 25 - 30 years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christyef Posted October 19, 2018 Share Posted October 19, 2018 So, there are no powerheads? Where are the The bubbles coming from? Under sand filtration? Is there a sump? And what kind of lights are you using? How often do you do water changes? I went back to the beginning of this thread to make sure none of those answers were already there, but I didn’t see them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted October 20, 2018 Author Share Posted October 20, 2018 7 hours ago, Christyef said: So, there are no powerheads? Where are the The bubbles coming from? Under sand filtration? Is there a sump? And what kind of lights are you using? How often do you do water changes? I went back to the beginning of this thread to make sure none of those answers were already there, but I didn’t see them. No powerheads in quite awhile, there used to be three but as they wore out I didn't bother to replace them. The bubbles are from rigid airlines stuck under the rocks, about once a year they need to be cleaned as calcium builds up in the open ends. This tank has 12" wide glass top cross braces and the bubbles are positioned to bubble under them to minimize salt creep. No under sand filtration, in most places the sand is only about half an inch thick. Sump is a 75 gallon tank that runs about half full. Lights are a combination of BMLs and as they've died I've been replacing them with "PopularGrow" LED bars off Ebay. (They're not a direct replacement, each PopularGrow bar is about 2/3s the output of the same length BML.) Water changes are 15 gallons weekly, depending on evaporation an additional 5-15 gallons of RO is added before water changes. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christyef Posted October 20, 2018 Share Posted October 20, 2018 CouldI see a pic of the bottom as well? The sump, I meanSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted October 21, 2018 Author Share Posted October 21, 2018 Yup, here's a quick video taken 6 years ago: https://youtu.be/WDj0daKV2B8 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christyef Posted October 23, 2018 Share Posted October 23, 2018 CoolSent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted December 29, 2018 Author Share Posted December 29, 2018 Been meaning to post this for a while now. Since the first baby clam showed up in 2012 a couple more have shown up. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christyef Posted December 29, 2018 Share Posted December 29, 2018 Awe! Do clams produce sexually like flower nems? I know I could google it. [emoji6]Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted December 29, 2018 Author Share Posted December 29, 2018 Yes clams reproduce sexually. some species have separate sexes, some are hermaphrodites and some are sequential hermaphrodites. I haven't been able to verify the exact species I have in my tanks but my suspicion is they are hermaphrodites. Tridacna clams are sequential hermaphrodites starting off male and switching to females. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timfish Posted April 10, 2019 Author Share Posted April 10, 2019 Here's a current video: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.