Algae release "useful proteins, carbohydrates and metabolites."

[Scrubber_steve]

I add algae water I grow or tank water to level on blender. I strain small pieces of macroalgae, dosing unit cannot work, if small pieces not removed.

If it is the DOC from the chaeto you want specifically, stressing the chaeto will cause more DOC to leak.
To stress the chaeto -
1. remove some chaeto from your fuge & let it dry out a bit- to replicate low tide.
2. Re-immersing the chaeto is another stress, especially in fresh cool water (RODI).
3. Leave the chaeto in the RODI for 30 minutes, & then blend, in the RODI water, & add the RODI water to the dosing solution.

 

[jduong916]

wow, this is still going on

 

[Jose Mayo]

Turning to the thread, denying evidence merely in the name of a philosophy does not persist in time nor does it help to understand reality.

From all that is read in the academic works (which are not carried out in reef aquariums, we already know, but in a natural and experimental environment), so far carried out, not all algae exudates are useful, be they proteins, lipids or carbohydrates .

The work of some algae in an aquarium can, yes, be useful, however and poorly compared to human food (just for example), we can eat some vegetables and some mushrooms, but we can not eat those that are toxic, under penalty of eat them only once.

I put here one more reference and I do not go beyond that and with this I do not defend either position regarding any method adopted, I only suggest to act with care:

Effects of Coral Reef Benthic Primary Producers on Dissolved Organic Carbon and Microbial Activity

Regards

 

[Want2BS8ed]

wow, this is still going on

...and still without comment from Triton no less.

 

[ALexandre Mazurque]

Jomana,

Please, start a thread with all details! Will be very usefull!!!

Thanks for sharing!

 

[Scrubber_steve]

Turning to the thread, denying evidence merely in the name of a philosophy does not persist in time nor does it help to understand reality.

Effects of Coral Reef Benthic Primary Producers on Dissolved Organic Carbon and Microbial Activity

Jose; this paper, again from Hass, is specifically concentrating on >>indirect coral-algal interactions - DOC / bacterioplankton relationship (seemingly your specific point of interest), rather than the well know physical contact & very close proximity scenarios.
Before I start, I'd like to point out: - On a normally functioning coral reef, unaffected by external forces, in the competition between coral & algae,,,,, coral always wins!

Hass et al states –
Indirect interactions have also been suspected to cause coral damage, yet much less is known about the potential mechanisms involved in these interactions. The primary hypothesis relating to indirect coral-algal interactions is that algae may release excess photosynthate into the water column in the form of DOC, which may serve as a food resource for microbes which in turn may increase in abundance on adjacent corals. The increased heterotrophic microbial production can lead to hypoxia and coral death. A few studies have specifically quantified and qualified DOC release rates from a select number of benthic reef algae. However, recent data on algal organic matter release, especially in coral reef ecosystems, are still rare and difficult to compare to earlier studies due to different incubation and analytical methods as well as different reference parameters. end

Hass, not only describes the “indirect coral-algal interaction” scenario as a hypothesis, the data he references, as well as his own data, are based on incubation and analytical methods (bioassay experiments). As made very clear by Vieira et al, in my post #168 “the question remains: what explains the inconsistency between field observations and bioassay experiments?”

And Hass himself – “Caveats of using bacterial yield measurements from incubation experiments to extrapolate in situ reef conditions include overestimation of bacterial growth because of the diluted cultures.”

In other words, conclusions based on lab tests can be worthless.

Hass cont -
The goals of the present study were to examine how benthic primary producers directly affect key aspects of seawater chemistry (DO and DOC) and to subsequently examine the impacts of released DOC on ambient reef bacterioplankton growth and respiration. A series of complementary experiments were conducted at the Gump research station in Moorea, French Polynesia, to examine differences in direct and indirect (microbially-mediated) alterations in water chemistry mediated by six common benthic primary producers. Samples of different macroalgae, turf algae, crustose coralline algae (CCA), and coral were subjected to a series of replicate incubations in order to assess: 1) DOC release rates among taxa, 2) connections between photosynthetic performance and DOC release rates and, 3) the growth and respiratory response of the ambient microbial community to primary producer-derived DOC.

Discussion
Variations in DOC quality and microbial response among algal exudates

Notably, bacterioplankton growth rates and yields were uncorrelated with DOC release rates, emphasizing that these patterns in efficiency were not solely driven by the absolute quantity of cells produced, but also by the utilization of the DOM exuded.

Among the algae, Turbinaria exhibited relatively low bacterial cell yields and specific DOC removal rates, despite having relatively high rates of DOC release, translating into significantly reduced bacterial growth efficiency.

In contrast, Halimeda exhibited one of the lowest rates of DOC production and much lower DOC release ratios than the other organisms, but the produced DOC exhibited relatively high bacterial yields translating into significantly higher growth efficiencies than the other treatments.

These patterns in the efficiency of production and removal of DOC together suggest that Turbinaria has relatively low-quality DOC (i.e. low growth efficiency)
and Halimeda relatively high-quality DOC (i.e. high growth efficiency) compared with other benthic producers examined here.

We also note that Amansia appeared to produce large amounts of highly labile DOC with low bacterial growth efficiencies, suggesting selection for a highly inefficient community growing on the rapidly exuded compounds
End


So Hass et al concluded that –

1. Only some algae species are relative when considering the “indirect coral-algal interactions” hypothesis.

2. Bacterioplankton - virulent bacteria - pathogens,,, population size - growth rates,,,, are uncorrelated with high algae metabolic rates, and large DOC release volumes and highly labile DOC.

All in all, I'd say good news for algae filtration

 

[Stigigemla]

As always a discusion of one topic raises new questions. The algae releases DOC but ist it in form of sugars or larger carbohydrates?
Is it in form of lipids?
Is it form of amino acids or proteins?
Is it in form of larger poisinous molcules?

I would guess that all is correct but is there research done of the composition?
And is the composition different from different algae?

Anyone having links to research on such topics?

 

[Scrubber_steve]

Considering phase shifts, from coral to algae on coral reefs, this paper really is worth reading.

Summary
Many coral reefs worldwide have undergone phase shifts to alternate, degraded assemblages because of the combined effects of overfishing, declining water quality, and the direct and indirect impacts of climate change [1–9]. Here, we experimentally manipulated the density of large herbivorous fishes to test their influence on the resilience of coral assemblages in the aftermath of regional-scale bleaching in 1998, the largest coral mortality event recorded to date. The experiment was undertaken on the Great Barrier Reef, within a no-fishing reserve where coral abundances and diversity had been sharply reduced by bleaching.

In control areas, where fishes were abundant, algal abundance remained low, whereas coral cover almost doubled (to 20%) over a 3 year period, primarily because of recruitment of species that had been locally extirpated by bleaching. In contrast, exclusion of large herbivorous fishes caused a dramatic explosion of macroalgae, which suppressed the fecundity, recruitment, and survival of corals. Consequently, management of fish stocks is a key component in preventing phase shifts and managing reef resilience. Importantly, local stewardship of fishing effort is a tractable goal for conservation of reefs, and this local action can also provide some insurance against larger-scale disturbances such as mass bleaching, which are impractical to manage directly.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982207008822

 

[Jose Mayo]

Jose; this paper, again from Hass, is specifically concentrating on >>indirect coral-algal interactions - DOC / bacterioplankton relationship (seemingly your specific point of interest), rather than the well know physical contact & very close proximity scenarios.
Before I start, I'd like to point out: - On a normally functioning coral reef, unaffected by external forces, in the competition between coral & algae,,,,, coral always wins!

Hass et al states –
Indirect interactions have also been suspected to cause coral damage, yet much less is known about the potential mechanisms involved in these interactions. The primary hypothesis relating to indirect coral-algal interactions is that algae may release excess photosynthate into the water column in the form of DOC, which may serve as a food resource for microbes which in turn may increase in abundance on adjacent corals. The increased heterotrophic microbial production can lead to hypoxia and coral death. A few studies have specifically quantified and qualified DOC release rates from a select number of benthic reef algae. However, recent data on algal organic matter release, especially in coral reef ecosystems, are still rare and difficult to compare to earlier studies due to different incubation and analytical methods as well as different reference parameters. end

Hass, not only describes the “indirect coral-algal interaction” scenario as a hypothesis, the data he references, as well as his own data, are based on incubation and analytical methods (bioassay experiments). As made very clear by Vieira et al, in my post #168 “the question remains: what explains the inconsistency between field observations and bioassay experiments?”

And Hass himself – “Caveats of using bacterial yield measurements from incubation experiments to extrapolate in situ reef conditions include overestimation of bacterial growth because of the diluted cultures.”

In other words, conclusions based on lab tests can be worthless.

Hass cont -
The goals of the present study were to examine how benthic primary producers directly affect key aspects of seawater chemistry (DO and DOC) and to subsequently examine the impacts of released DOC on ambient reef bacterioplankton growth and respiration. A series of complementary experiments were conducted at the Gump research station in Moorea, French Polynesia, to examine differences in direct and indirect (microbially-mediated) alterations in water chemistry mediated by six common benthic primary producers. Samples of different macroalgae, turf algae, crustose coralline algae (CCA), and coral were subjected to a series of replicate incubations in order to assess: 1) DOC release rates among taxa, 2) connections between photosynthetic performance and DOC release rates and, 3) the growth and respiratory response of the ambient microbial community to primary producer-derived DOC.

Discussion
Variations in DOC quality and microbial response among algal exudates

Notably, bacterioplankton growth rates and yields were uncorrelated with DOC release rates, emphasizing that these patterns in efficiency were not solely driven by the absolute quantity of cells produced, but also by the utilization of the DOM exuded.

Among the algae, Turbinaria exhibited relatively low bacterial cell yields and specific DOC removal rates, despite having relatively high rates of DOC release, translating into significantly reduced bacterial growth efficiency.

In contrast, Halimeda exhibited one of the lowest rates of DOC production and much lower DOC release ratios than the other organisms, but the produced DOC exhibited relatively high bacterial yields translating into significantly higher growth efficiencies than the other treatments.

These patterns in the efficiency of production and removal of DOC together suggest that Turbinaria has relatively low-quality DOC (i.e. low growth efficiency)
and Halimeda relatively high-quality DOC (i.e. high growth efficiency) compared with other benthic producers examined here.

We also note that Amansia appeared to produce large amounts of highly labile DOC with low bacterial growth efficiencies, suggesting selection for a highly inefficient community growing on the rapidly exuded compounds
End


So Hass et al concluded that –

1. Only some algae species are relative when considering the “indirect coral-algal interactions” hypothesis.

2. Bacterioplankton - virulent bacteria - pathogens,,, population size - growth rates,,,, are uncorrelated with high algae metabolic rates, and large DOC release volumes and highly labile DOC.

All in all, I'd say good news for algae filtration

So, my dear, plus an absolute faith that you present, that an algae haven does not represent potential (repeat: potential) risks to a reef aquarium, what else do you have?

Repeating and repeating that this evidence collected in field works does not apply to the purposes of a negative response to the claim contained in the Triton method's propaganda is easy, and even praiseworthy if you are paid or are indeed convinced of it, but ... this it's reality? Is this proven?

Note: my proposal is for caution, that's all.

Regards

 

[Scrubber_steve]

So, my dear, plus an absolute faith that you present, that an algae haven does not represent potential (repeat: potential) risks to a reef aquarium, what else do you have?

Repeating and repeating that this evidence collected in field works does not apply to the purposes of a negative response to the claim contained in the Triton method's propaganda is easy, and even praiseworthy if you are paid or are indeed convinced of it, but ... this it's reality? Is this proven?

Note: my proposal is for caution, that's all.

Regards

Jose, Jose,,,, you can just call me steve.

 

[Jose Mayo]

And another thing: Those who have to prove that they are right are those who affirm that "everything is useful", not who suspects that this may be wrong.

Convince me ...

Regards

 

[Lasse]

I promise not to jump in once again but excuse a youngster as we say in Sweden - who have claim that "everything is useful" ? Its a long way from saying release useful ..... to claim that everything is useful. IMO - to make that interpretationit from Tritons claim will give the same result as we get when the devil reading the bible.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Dr. Dendrostein]

If it is the DOC from the chaeto you want specifically, stressing the chaeto will cause more DOC to leak.
To stress the chaeto -
1. remove some chaeto from your fuge & let it dry out a bit- to replicate low tide.
2. Re-immersing the chaeto is another stress, especially in fresh cool water (RODI).
3. Leave the chaeto in the RODI for 30 minutes, & then blend, in the RODI water, & add the RODI water to the dosing solution.

You know my system replicates low tide inside DT and at refugium , didn't know you can stress it the way you mentioned. Big help, thanks.

 

[Scott.h]

As a user and believer of the triton system, it's my thought that the original question can't be answered because the statement related to the question was based on a feeling instead of an actual study. It would be nice if Triton would comment either way, even if that is the case.

When I started the method I often wondered the same thing. I also felt macro released toxins at some level that some corals were more sensitive to. (triton recommends multiple kinds. Humm) I felt that before I ever read anything related to toxins or triton. My first triton test ever confirmed this theory in my head. I had a large amount of 4 different macros in a small system. There were some corals that just would not survive long term. Not just sps or lps either. My first test confirmed there was absolutely nothing wrong with my water. But it did get me hooked on digging deeper and utilizing the method 100%. Then integrating the method into a second system, both of which are running great. Since then I have removed much of the macro except for chaeto. Test coral subjects since proved my theory to be correct as far as I can see. Another thought is that although macro may release toxins it may release beneficial carbohydrates at the same time that outweighs the negatives. Only a controlled experiment would answer this as well as Randy's question I suppose.

There are flaws in the system as there usually is in everything. Some of the ICP element testing isn't perfect like we once thought. But at the end of the day the system is still the easiest I've found from a maintenance perspective. Honestly I wish it had not caught on like it has because for the last 6 months I haven't been able to get many products (back order). It may force me to go back to raw three part dosing, as I don't want to continue to flip flop. It's in Tritons hands.

 

[Jose Mayo]

No one participating in this thread deserves to be described in such a demeaning fashon.

Try reading the papers you link, and others posts more carefully

Steve, Steve ... I was responding to the expression: "to make that interpretationit from Tritons claim will give the same result as we get when the devil reading the bible." (Lasse)

You understand?

Regards

 

[Jose Mayo]

Try reading the papers you link, and others posts more carefully

I put links, not "creative interpretations". Try to read more carefully you.

Regards

 

[Vaughn17]

As a user and believer of the triton system, it's my thought that the original question can't be answered because the statement related to the question was based on a feeling instead of an actual study. It would be nice if Triton would comment either way, even if that is the case.

When I started the method I often wondered the same thing. I also felt macro released toxins at some level that some corals were more sensitive to. (triton recommends multiple kinds. Humm) I felt that before I ever read anything related to toxins or triton. My first triton test ever confirmed this theory in my head. I had a large amount of 4 different macros in a small system. There were some corals that just would not survive long term. Not just sps or lps either. My first test confirmed there was absolutely nothing wrong with my water. But it did get me hooked on digging deeper and utilizing the method 100%. Then integrating the method into a second system, both of which are running great. Since then I have removed much of the macro except for chaeto. Test coral subjects since proved my theory to be correct as far as I can see. Another thought is that although macro may release toxins it may release beneficial carbohydrates at the same time that outweighs the negatives. Only a controlled experiment would answer this as well as Randy's question I suppose.

There are flaws in the system as there usually is in everything. Some of the ICP element testing isn't perfect like we once thought. But at the end of the day the system is still the easiest I've found from a maintenance perspective. Honestly I wish it had not caught on like it has because for the last 6 months I haven't been able to get many products (back order). It may force me to go back to raw three part dosing, as I don't want to continue to flip flop. It's in Tritons hands.

IMO, Triton has been commenting.

 

[Scott.h]

IMO, Triton has been commenting.

Who? I didn't read every post, but I didn't see a post from triton or an answer to the original question.

 

[Reefing Madness]

You guys want to get it back on track?!

 

[Jose Mayo]

IMO, Triton has been commenting.

I have this same thought ...

Regards