A civil discussion about chemistry

[Rjmul]

I'm running a 65 gallon sumpless mixed reef.
Two hydra 32s
One ai prime
One bar light.

reef octopus bh1000 pulling black gunk
I dose 2 mil of nopox daily
20 mil of all for reef
1 mil of Acro power
And a few cups of saturated kalk every day just because.

What's the deal with phosphates ? And my tank is STUCK like chuck in the redfield ratio. 3ppm nitrate. .26 phosphate. That can't be a coincidence.

I've only started obsessing over this after watching Richard Ross talk about it for the 43rd time. About half of my acros are colored up. The other half brown. Is that kind of the way it goes with acros ? Should I even be trying to hammer these phosphates down ?

alk runs at 9
Calcium 430ish
And mag 1290ish
Zero algae anywhere to be seen. Little cyano but nothing to worry about.
What the heck. Should I even care ? I agree with Richard that I do not care about nitrates. Do we only care about phosphate because we can test for it ?

 

[HuduVudu]

Numbers from tests are measurements of the exact place and the exact moment that a test is taken from. Tests do not measure input of anything or output of anything. They give an equilibrium level. The information that they provide MUST be taken in context. Also there are many factors involved in "problems" in our aquariums. Pointing to a number and saying ahhh hah ... is simplistic and dangerous. It is better to view the numbers of test results in the context of the biome as a whole not the be all end all of what is truly happening.

This seems to be a common misconception of new reefers because they lack the experience that brings context to the numbers that they are seeing. Even with experienced guidance these things can seem disturbing. Add in the cacophony of people with little experience themselves and it becomes very frightening to watch things play out.

Also new reefers believe that everything is the end of the world. It isn't. Particularly if you have experience to know how to handle situations and what they look like as they progress through their phases. Much patience is needed to actually see things play out in this hobby. This is particularly hard when you don't know what to expect.

FWIW

 

[sde1500]

Numbers from tests are measurements of the exact place and the exact moment that a test is taken from. Tests do not measure input of anything or output of anything. They give an equilibrium level. The information that they provide MUST be taken in context. Also there are many factors involved in "problems" in our aquariums. Pointing to a number and saying ahhh hah ... is simplistic and dangerous. It is better to view the numbers of test results in the context of the biome as a whole not the be all end all of what is truly happening.

This seems to be a common misconception of new reefers because they lack the experience that brings context to the numbers that they are seeing. Even with experienced guidance these things can seem disturbing. Add in the cacophony of people with little experience themselves and it becomes very frightening to watch things play out.

Also new reefers believe that everything is the end of the world. It isn't. Particularly if you have experience to know how to handle situations and what they look like as they progress through their phases. Much patience is needed to actually see things play out in this hobby. This is particularly hard when you don't know what to expect.

FWIW

That was saying a whole lot while really saying nothing lol.

@Rjmul what level are you trying to target? I’d say my nitrates are around 10ish and no clue what phosphates are. No issues with acro colors IMO. Plenty of other ongoing issues but not acro color haha. Idk could pull more colors but they’re pretty fine. I’d think your level is fine. What are you running your lights at? They should suffice, but what intensity? Also how brown we talking here?

 

[flampton]

I'm running a 65 gallon sumpless mixed reef.
Two hydra 32s
One ai prime
One bar light.

reef octopus bh1000 pulling black gunk
I dose 2 mil of nopox daily
20 mil of all for reef
1 mil of Acro power
And a few cups of saturated kalk every day just because.

What's the deal with phosphates ? And my tank is STUCK like chuck in the redfield ratio. 3ppm nitrate. .26 phosphate. That can't be a coincidence.

I've only started obsessing over this after watching Richard Ross talk about it for the 43rd time. About half of my acros are colored up. The other half brown. Is that kind of the way it goes with acros ? Should I even be trying to hammer these phosphates down ?

alk runs at 9
Calcium 430ish
And mag 1290ish
Zero algae anywhere to be seen. Little cyano but nothing to worry about.
What the heck. Should I even care ? I agree with Richard that I do not care about nitrates. Do we only care about phosphate because we can test for it ?

Not sure because I'm seeing your phosphate move all over the place?? What are you meaning by stuck? Clearly some of this is measuring error as you have .25 on the 13th and then .14 on the 14th and then back to .25 on the 15th. There is other jumps like that I see in other places. These jumps in PO4 are not plausible. What test kit is this? Oh and what happened at the beginning of February? Change anything major that week?

Also Redfield ratio has nothing to do with it, it is just a fun little scientific fact that upwelling water from the deep ocean has the same C:N: P as the phytoplankton within the same region. So coincidental. And believe me you wouldn't want your organic carbon to be in Redfield with the N and P. Talk about a thick soup.

My personal opinion is less than 0.1 is a nice place to be but there are many reefs that don't care about my opinion, haha!!

 

[Rjmul]

Numbers from tests are measurements of the exact place and the exact moment that a test is taken from. Tests do not measure input of anything or output of anything. They give an equilibrium level. The information that they provide MUST be taken in context. Also there are many factors involved in "problems" in our aquariums. Pointing to a number and saying ahhh hah ... is simplistic and dangerous. It is better to view the numbers of test results in the context of the biome as a whole not the be all end all of what is truly happening.

This seems to be a common misconception of new reefers because they lack the experience that brings context to the numbers that they are seeing. Even with experienced guidance these things can seem disturbing. Add in the cacophony of people with little experience themselves and it becomes very frightening to watch things play out.

Also new reefers believe that everything is the end of the world. It isn't. Particularly if you have experience to know how to handle situations and what they look like as they progress through their phases. Much patience is needed to actually see things play out in this hobby. This is particularly hard when you don't know what to expect.

FWIW

My

Not sure because I'm seeing your phosphate move all over the place?? What are you meaning by stuck? Clearly some of this is measuring error as you have .25 on the 13th and then .14 on the 14th and then back to .25 on the 15th. There is other jumps like that I see in other places. These jumps in PO4 are not plausible. What test kit is this? Oh and what happened at the beginning of February? Change anything major that week?

Also Redfield ratio has nothing to do with it, it is just a fun little scientific fact that upwelling water from the deep ocean has the same C:N: P as the phytoplankton within the same region. So coincidental. And believe me you wouldn't want your organic carbon to be in Redfield with the N and P. Talk about a thick soup.

My personal opinion is less than 0.1 is a nice place to be but there are many reefs that don't care about my opinion, haha!!

the Drops are from lanthinum chloride. For about 6-9 months they were under .1 with zero effort on my part. What I posted is where they started getting strange. I changed nothing. A molly died, and I scooped it out. A wrasse jumped. And I added some rubble. That's it.

 

[flampton]

My

the Drops are from lanthinum chloride. For about 6-9 months they were under .1 with zero effort on my part. What I posted is where they started getting strange. I changed nothing. A molly died, and I scooped it out. A wrasse jumped. And I added some rubble. That's it.

Okay the LaCl experiment shows that you saturated the rock and sand with PO4. To lower it back to previous levels you'll either need to dedicate to LaCl dosing, use PO4 binders, or increase carbon dosing with added N (I prefer ammonium, but if uncomfortable can use aminos or nitrate).

 

[Thaxxx]

Numbers from tests are measurements of the exact place and the exact moment that a test is taken from. Tests do not measure input of anything or output of anything. They give an equilibrium level. The information that they provide MUST be taken in context. Also there are many factors involved in "problems" in our aquariums. Pointing to a number and saying ahhh hah ... is simplistic and dangerous. It is better to view the numbers of test results in the context of the biome as a whole not the be all end all of what is truly happening.

This seems to be a common misconception of new reefers because they lack the experience that brings context to the numbers that they are seeing. Even with experienced guidance these things can seem disturbing. Add in the cacophony of people with little experience themselves and it becomes very frightening to watch things play out.

Also new reefers believe that everything is the end of the world. It isn't. Particularly if you have experience to know how to handle situations and what they look like as they progress through their phases. Much patience is needed to actually see things play out in this hobby. This is particularly hard when you don't know what to expect.

FWIW

That was saying a whole lot while really saying nothing lol.

So much for being civil.....

 

[Rjmul]

Okay the LaCl experiment shows that you saturated the rock and sand with PO4. To lower it back to previous levels you'll either need to dedicate to LaCl dosing, use PO4 binders, or increase carbon dosing with added N (I prefer ammonium, but if uncomfortable can use aminos or nitrate).

How do you saturate anything with something inert ?

 

[sde1500]

The rock we use readily absorbs and releases phosphates. Ends up at some point creating an equilibrium, binding when available phosphates goes up, releasing bound as the number goes down. Need to continually pull it out by other means if a lot is bound in the rock

 

[Rjmul]

The rock we use readily absorbs and releases phosphates. Ends up at some point creating an equilibrium, binding when available phosphates goes up, releasing bound as the number goes down. Need to continually pull it out by other means if a lot is bound in the rock

I'm not following. I agree that rock can bind phosphate. But if these rocks have been wet for three years. And lived in a vat for another three before I got them. For arguments sake I have added some other rock over the years both wet and dry. BUT my understanding of lanthinum chloride is that once reacted with phosphate it becomes inert. So how would it be going back into the rock.

 

[mdb_talon]

How do you saturate anything with something inert ?

Clearly his point is the rocks were loaded with phosphate and being released. Whether it meets the scientific definition of saturate is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[sde1500]

It wouldn’t from the lathium. But what was bound in the rock would be released. So you drove it down to .1. But then stopped dosing. So more releases from the rocks to bring it higher.

 

[mdb_talon]

I have no idea whether your rocks are releasing phosphate, but assuming your test numbers are correct and you use lanthium chloride then phosphate is being introduced from somewhere. Either unbound from the rocks or through other means like feeding.

 

[Rjmul]

Clearly his point is the rocks were loaded with phosphate and being released. Whether it meets the scientific definition of saturate is irrelevant to the discussion.

This thread is getting tense and I'm not sure why.

I guess here are my two questions in a nutshell. I'm not sure how my phosphate could go from a steady .08 to a steady .27 when nothing changed.

second question being if the tank looks ok why do I even care ? Because someone told us .05 is a target ? Years before that .000000000 was the target

 

[mdb_talon]

This thread is getting tense and I'm not sure why.

I guess here are my two questions in a nutshell. I'm not sure how my phosphate could go from a steady .08 to a steady .27 when nothing changed.

second question being if the tank looks ok why do I even care ? Because someone told us .05 is a target ? Years before that .000000000 was the target

Some suggestions were made as to what could be the reason so i wont repeat those, but as far as whether you care only you can decide that. Based off what i have seen I now try to target between about .04 and 1. Years ago i tried to target zero(however hobbyist kits at that time were much less precise and more error prone). When I and many other hobbyists had great results at 0 we may have in reality been at .1

Maybe in 20 years enough scientific and anecdotal evidence will convince me .3 is a better target....but for now i can only go by what I believe to he the best available information I can find. FYI there are quite a few threads on here with some in depth scientific studies under different phosphate conditions...it is not necessarily just some guy coming up with a number.

Having said all that for the most part i am a big believer if it is working for you and you happy with results then why change it.

 

[HuduVudu]

I'm not sure how my phosphate could go from a steady .08 to a steady .27 when nothing changed.

Read my post carefully. If it isn't clear, I will try to follow up.