Ammonium dosing is a bit overrated

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

My assumptions are based on what has been written by yourself and others. As I said, I'm no expert and rely on what you all find, hence why I used the word "assume". Again, I'm only here to search for evidence to help guide us to better coral care when it comes to this topic.



What is that explanation? What is quantitively a low nitrate tank? Are we positive NO3 doesn't go undetected in these tanks? Does PO4 remain constant? Or is there a spike or dip to PO4 when tanks see low NO3 for the tank to suddenly show signs of stress?

If there is a simple explanation with evidence or strong theory, please share, we are eager to learn (at least I am anyway).

I describe my thoughts and justifications for these thoughts here:
https://www.reef2reef.com/ams/randy’s-thoughts-on-nutrient-target-ranges.1087/
Example From it:


3. Someone who claims a low level of nitrate works great should not be taken as evidence that you can lower it to that level and still be great. They may have far more of other N sources, such as ammonia, flowing through their system. There’s no simple way to test this, but folks who claim heaving feeding or who have lots of fish will necessarily have much more available ammonia than someone who feeds much less. Their corals may just be taking up the ammonia before it becomes nitrate. The same can be true of low phosphate and foods like phytoplankton or bacteria supplying P (and N) to corals.

 

[buruskeee]

I said happier looking sticks! Better colors and better polyp extension.. not to mention growth off the charts!

I understand that, but what is the coral doing differently with 10-20ppm that it wasn't with 5ppm? Not aesthetically from your perception, but biologically.

 

[areefer01]

I said happier looking sticks! Better colors and better polyp extension.. not to mention growth off the charts!

I do not mean this as a negative or directly at you so I apologize up front. But these are the buzz words that attract moths to the flame. Unfortunately it also helps sell product(s) and sets new trends.

 

[CHSUB]

Well, I think the best advice for someone asking is to ensure that there is adequate N, rather than giving them advice that assumes they have adequate amounts of sources other than nitrate.

I hope that is not the impression I give, I try to gather information about the tank and set up before giving my opinion. Personally, hobby testing is only confirmation of what it see. Many times I retest if I see a valve I did not expect. Example: healthy corals adequate nutrients, overgrowth of algae not a nutrient deficiency.

 

[rtparty]

So I guess everything published by Sprung, Borneman and many many others, studies, documents and research,100s of TOTM from Reef Central and anything else that differs from the current trend should just be tossed because of Mack’s Dino Group and “hobby” observations…hard pass.

Please show any studies or documents dealing with tanks of today and how things are run TODAY. I don't care for ocean research. Our tanks aren't the ocean. I don't care how corals evolved in the ocean. Most corals today have been in aquariums for many generations and have obviously adapted to our very unnatural environments.

Can you please provide all the research done on that?

 

[Troylee]

I understand that, but what is the coral doing differently with 10-20ppm that it wasn't with 5ppm? Not aesthetically from your perception, but biologically.

All 3 above! I’ve ran near zero with a zeo tank and you get pale, pastel colors, smaller polyps in my experience! I like dark, rich colors myself.. pe plays a very important role in sps if you ask me but that’s for another day! My experience has proven to me the bigger the polyps during the day the faster that coral will grow! I don’t know the science behind it but when they look fluffy that means happy and growth takes off! Maybe they absorb more food idk! Just what I’ve witnessed and learned! This coral was a 1” frag 18 months ago! It got fluffier by the day and I can’t keep it cut back anymore it’s a monster lol.:

 

[Troylee]

I do not mean this as a negative or directly at you so I apologize up front. But these are the buzz words that attract moths to the flame. Unfortunately it also helps sell product(s) and sets new trends.

I’m not selling nothing thou! Haha… but yeah I feel ya on that!

 

[areefer01]

Please show any studies or documents dealing with tanks of today and how things are run TODAY. I don't care for ocean research. Our tanks aren't the ocean. I don't care how corals evolved in the ocean. Most corals today have been in aquariums for many generations and have obviously adapted to our very unnatural environments.

Can you please provide all the research done on that?

Why does today matter? The books, magazines, and archived threads are still relevant. Or are we just picking and choosing to support ones opinion?

Not a challenge to you but I found the "today" part a bit curious is all.

 

[rtparty]

All 3 above! I’ve ran near zero with a zeo tank and you get pale, pastel colors, smaller polyps in my experience! I like dark, rich colors myself.. pe plays a very important role in sps if you ask me but that’s for another day! My experience has proven to me the bigger the polyps during the day the faster that coral will grow! I don’t know the science behind it but when they look fluffy that means happy and growth takes off! Maybe they absorb more food idk! Just what I’ve witnessed and learned! This coral was a 1” frag 18 months ago! It got fluffier by the day and I can’t keep it cut back anymore it’s a monster lol.:

Switching my small SPS frags from my 25g lit with Blades to the 100g NYOS with halides, the colors have all gotten much darker but super rich. N and P tests are basically the same last time I tested. Many of the SPS have tended to become a sinlge color as well. Could just be all the adjustment going on but it is interesting to observe

 

[Troylee]

Switching my small SPS frags from my 25g lit with Blades to the 100g NYOS with halides, the colors have all gotten much darker but super rich. N and P tests are basically the same last time I tested. Many of the SPS have tended to become a sinlge color as well. Could just be all the adjustment going on but it is interesting to observe

These were all grown under halides till 6 months ago, when I switched to meridians.. my colors have changed since the switch but for the better I believe.. growth is comparable which was surprising to me to be honest.

 

[rtparty]

Why does today matter? The books, magazines, and archived threads are still relevant. Or are we just picking and choosing to support ones opinion?

Not a challenge to you but I found the "today" part a bit curious is all.

I believe we are facing very different issues and the variables aren't even remotely close. Hard to look at a study from 1975 done off the coast of the Marshall Islands (made up example) to a 35g AIO started with dry rock, dry sand, LEDs, all in the middle of Nebraska

We have intoduced a ton of variables and my belief is corals and biomes have adapted to those differences.

Whether some want to believe it or not, the vast majority of tanks are not being started with ocean rock or ocean sand these days. That alone introduces a serious enough difference to warrant the situations aren't close enough to compare

 

[buruskeee]

I describe my thoughts and justifications for these thoughts here:
https://www.reef2reef.com/ams/randy’s-thoughts-on-nutrient-target-ranges.1087/
Example From it:


3. Someone who claims a low level of nitrate works great should not be taken as evidence that you can lower it to that level and still be great. They may have far more of other N sources, such as ammonia, flowing through their system. There’s no simple way to test this, but folks who claim heaving feeding or who have lots of fish will necessarily have much more available ammonia than someone who feeds much less. Their corals may just be taking up the ammonia before it becomes nitrate. The same can be true of low phosphate and foods like phytoplankton or bacteria supplying P (and N) to corals.

I've read that text by you.

I'm not sure how that correlates to lower NO3 levels (above detectible without dropping into undetected) vs higher NO3 levels. You're specifically talking about N, which we are in agreement, there are different N sources from one tank to another.

If someone is not providing N and ensuring there is a source for N, then low NO3 tanks will have to convert NO3 and possibly become deficient with N since there's not way of knowing off hand if the tank is lacking N.

What I'm claiming (more like searching for someone like you, or others like you in our reefing world, to substantiate), is provided someone is dosing some form of N, what difference would 1ppm versus 20ppm make since the coral is not likely to ever need convert NO3 to N.

Also, let's not fall in love with the 1ppm number I picked out. Let's go 5ppm so there's adequate buffer for N deficiencies. What I am asking, is assuming N is always in abundance (therefor creating enough NO3 byproduct to always remain above 0), what theoretical biological advantages are there to higher versus lower NO3 levels?

If the answer is none, I believe we should start recommending hobbyist with N dosing and just caring about consistently detectable NO3, so we can put all our focus in the more important nutrient P and PO4 levels.

My anecdote: Ever since dosing an N source (ammonia), I've never seen my corals change in appearance whether I'm testing lower or higher NO3. But when my PO4 changes, it's easily noticeable (and at times catastrophic).

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I understand that, but what is the coral doing differently with 10-20ppm that it wasn't with 5ppm? Not aesthetically from your perception, but biologically.

Getting more N is certainly a possibility.

 

[X-37B]

I believe we are facing very different issues and the variables aren't even remotely close. Hard to look at a study from 1975 done off the coast of the Marshall Islands (made up example) to a 35g AIO started with dry rock, dry sand, LEDs, all in the middle of Nebraska

We have intoduced a ton of variables and my belief is corals and biomes have adapted to those differences.

Whether some want to believe it or not, the vast majority of tanks are not being started with ocean rock or ocean sand these days. That alone introduces a serious enough difference to warrant the situations aren't close enough to compare

Interesting perspective.
I tend to forget how many systems are started with dead rock these days.
I loved my Marshall island rock in the 90's. You did not need moonlight as the tank just glowed when the lights were off, lol

 

[buruskeee]

I’ve ran near zero with a zero tank and you get pale, pastel colors, smaller polyps in my experience!

What was your N source? Were you N deficient? Were you dosing ammonia or another source of N?

My statements are based on the fundamental part that there is adequate N (which is typically observed when you are consistently testing a detectable NO3 number while providing N to the tank).

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

My anecdote: Ever since dosing an N source (ammonia), I've never seen my corals change in appearance whether I'm testing lower or higher NO3. But when my PO4 changes, it's easily noticeable (and at times catastrophic).

Which may merely mean your tank supplies enough N at 1 ppm nitrate, while others may not.

 

[buruskeee]

Getting more N is certainly a possibility.

See above separate replies where I lay the fundamental assumptions to everything I've been saying about NO3 by stating there is an N source.

Which may merely mean your tank supplies enough N at 1 ppm nitrate, while others may not.

If I'm dosing N and the by increasing and decreasing the N supply I can see that 1ppm NO3 number change, then what?

 

[Troylee]

What was your N source? Were you N deficient? Were you dosing ammonia or another source of N?

My statements are based on the fundamental part that there is adequate N (which is typically observed when you are consistently testing a detectable NO3 number while providing N to the tank).

Aminos with zeo.. no ammonia

 

[CHSUB]

Please show any studies or documents dealing with tanks of today and how things are run TODAY. I don't care for ocean research. Our tanks aren't the ocean. I don't care how corals evolved in the ocean. Most corals today have been in aquariums for many generations and have obviously adapted to our very unnatural environments.

Can you please provide all the research done on that?

My tank today more closely resembles my tank from 2001 than my tank from 2017 and all three are very similar.

Here is a quote from a paper where the results are backed in the lab. Regardless, I don’t believe success is achieved because a Salifert Nitrate Test Kit shows pink vs clear.

‘Increased input of inorganic nutrients, in particular dissolved inorganic nitrogen (DIN), has also been associated with reef decline. Numerous field observations and laboratory simulations have shown adverse effects of nitrogen enrichment on coral growth and calcification (Silbiger et al. 2018), coral heat resistance (Wooldridge et al. 2013), the resilience of individual species of corals (Hall et al. 2018), and incidence and severity of coral disease (Vega Thurber et al. 2014)’

 

[areefer01]

I believe we are facing very different issues and the variables aren't even remotely close. Hard to look at a study from 1975 done off the coast of the Marshall Islands (made up example) to a 35g AIO started with dry rock, dry sand, LEDs, all in the middle of Nebraska

We have intoduced a ton of variables and my belief is corals and biomes have adapted to those differences.

Whether some want to believe it or not, the vast majority of tanks are not being started with ocean rock or ocean sand these days. That alone introduces a serious enough difference to warrant the situations aren't close enough to compare

In broad terms what is a very different issue today compared to 25 years ago?