Anecdotal information has surpassed formal peer review for reefing procedural influence

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Do you feel this is true or false


what major reefing practices do have formal published paper backing?



which ones don’t?

ever seen a Harvard study on Pico reefs? Pls link that if so


one off anecdotes are common, prone to error, completely prone to assessment bias on both ends as the typist and reader try and communicate a best means


but what happens if you can pattern an anecdote in ten thousand reefs, does that inch the meter towards legitimacy or just not until Harvard says so?



so many subjects can be reviewed in this context


using just the lowly pico reef, the formal vs anecdotal breakdown went like this irl:


1. you cannot keep mixed lps and sps in a pico reef, they’ll die due to allelopathy (links ten formal studies proving allelopathy exists and how it kills, from the ocean)


2. a few tiny systems popped up online twenty years ago. The initial response was ‘fake’ or ‘plumbed‘ and then forty reefs arose. Nano-reef.com arose and began patterning out small reefs, were all the hobbyists aligned to lie in pattern, or were they simply reporting alternate findings because the context of study changed?

3. after pico reef #200,471 was posted we can clearly see anecdote beat the pants off slow but highly, highly accurate peer review in at least one niche of reefing.






what about curing dinoflagellates in a reef tank. Any formal peer reviews using reef tanks? I know there are ocean studies galore


but in context and in a home reef tank, Im thinking any Harvard biology teacher who owns a reef tank with a dinos issue is seeking forum pattern anecdote in the matter for their best possible recourse.

Is the wikipedia form of reefing actually better at making discoveries in context than professional writers and researchers?
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Did NOAA affect the forums, or did the forums affect NOAA/the US government?

:)



three things I enjoy from that read:


one, the pico bowl you can plainly see in the worlds best reef lab.



two, Randy has influenced NOAA


three, even NOAA knows to be skeptical about api and a .25 ammonia reading.


if this isn’t anecdote surpassing formal study in influence then I don’t know what is. I believe this makes the case that what reefers find, discover and post about becomes real science once a certain threshold for repeats is exceeded.
 

Lowell Lemon

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
May 23, 2015
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
16,526
Location
Washington State
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So in your world observation and experience have no context unless it is peer reviewed. Just a reminder this is a "hobby" and all that entails. Who is going to fund the "science"?

Perhaps you should find another hobby like physics, chemistry or politics....haha.

Love how you just gave fish advice to someone and admitted that you have never kept fish. How is that for peer review?
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I posted a clear link and example for claims made, care to respond in kind? Got anything specific, pro or con, that answers the question or illuminates in a neat way? Something that shows thought or insight into this enduring conflict / link pls


easily there are twenty ways that informal discovery has outpaced formal discovery, the easy ones have been covered.


for sure formal science and discovery brings us core chemistry methods and is an important aspect of claims verification



but by typing the word surpassed in the title, was hoping to discover ratios at work…. contribution percentages that may have flipped recently, and any links or findings you may have to highlight any changes in referencing procedure whatsoever


though unclear it seems by design, I take your angle to mean you think the statement is very false.
 
Last edited:

Lowell Lemon

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
May 23, 2015
Messages
3,929
Reaction score
16,526
Location
Washington State
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I posted a clear link and example for claims made, care to respond in kind? Got anything specific, pro or con, that answers the question or illuminates in a neat way? Something that shows thought or insight into this enduring conflict / link pls


easily there are twenty ways that informal discovery has outpaced formal discovery, the easy ones have been covered.
Oh snap. I guess you told me haha! Observation and experience go a long way in the world not just aquariums.

Data is only as good as the source. Science is only useful if it provides repeatable results.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Im fascinated at the lack of credit given to informal / anecdotal discoveries and want to discuss it. I still can’t get anything specific from your second post.


how about this option: anyone interested in studying these ratios and influence, post another aspect of major reef tank procedure that was proofed in forums vs a lab, thats what we are highlighting here it’s not a revolt against formal study lol. It’s a study on whether formal discovery and documentation provided all or just some of today’s market-influencing reefing procedure.


here’s one for formal science: forums didn’t discover at all what the upper limit nitrite carry can be for a set of clownfish, formal lab studies did. It’s because of formal lab studies we know how many grams per liter it takes for a massive abnormal dose of nitrite to become lethal, you can’t find that info in forums other than as links back to formal study.




and now the flip side, the context: in forums, not a single event exists to document one loss to nitrite in any reef tank…and especially no plural patterned linkable proofs exist for nitrite lethality. It took forums to proof out that no arrangement in reefing can produce toxic nitrite levels, even though a lab proved that 25mg/l will kill fish for sure.



forums provide a powerful, astounding market balance. Worth discussing productively imo

changing the context changes the discovery outcomes, it’s why so many formal links can’t be applied to reefing challenges.

it will be neat as more and more formal studies are done using reef tanks and then reviewed by discerning peers

I can think of several posters here who guide the balance between formal discovery and anecdote very well, they really do see some validity in web patterns without having to lose the contextual contribution of published materials and means.

you will see there’s a tendency to outright devalue anything that isn’t formal but if that’s true then 15 gallons would still be the smallest reef we could own.


Dan_P and Taricha and MNFish1 and Randy are some stand outs I see willing to accept informal data as a legit contribution to reefing and then work their ability for staunch scientific procedure into evaluations. They work the balances well.


for example, Dan and T just made quite a convincing finding in the chemistry forum, using convincing lab procedure, that one of the most- used and most- purchased additives in reefing may not be doing what the label says.


they rose well above the basic anecdotal statement + await for forum copy and feedback/ and went into repeatable lab study to make a big finding, they’re both running separate studies and methods are clearly posted / they’re finding similar outcomes

thats the patterning working itself out…they’ll influence market and procedure eventually if it catches on.


the intersection and resulting ratio between formal and informal procedural influence in the hobby is by extension also a powerful market study. What I’d read and been told for years was that anecdotal discoveries are completely useless.


anecdoters seemed to have elbowed a way in


anyone got any formal reviews for 3% peroxide dosed into reef tank impacts, in the reef tank not a lab beaker, context matters, prior to 2011?

what was Troylee able to accomplish before written permission existed?

Troy saved reef tanks with that post, well before current dinos methods were in place and to this day I can source you a hundred posters who will state that peroxide dosing solved their dinos with no downside


In that case, basic anecdote patterning saves thousands of dollars in reef life during a time where formal discovery had zero ability to do anything helpful. Peroxide use is an example where solely anecdote was used to make a profound influence in reefing…after all on paper, out of context, how bad does dosing peroxide sound to a chemist? It sounds horrible, why not just blowtorch the entire system :)

does Troylee’s informal thread showcase loss or gain?

On the flip, sometimes anecdote patterns provide a fact check on formal scientific claims by using reef tank context as the alignment requirement for the study.


where is Troylee anyway, you deserve to have a crystal bust mounted in the welcoming hall of Reef2Reef university for doing your fifty pages of work. That’s the oldest and best peroxide work thread I’ve ever seen. Mods if you ever unsticky that work you will be committing a crime against science.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Lowell you’ve readily contributed to topics today.




the study of fish disease preps and prevention, formal vs informal findings is appropriate to our study



The means we use for fallow and quarantine do have formal studies and what Jay applies in the fish disease posts seems a powerful blend of science and personal patterning.


Fish loss, wasted unnecessarily to common malady, is the number one loss cause for fish in the home. Its never a cycling issue, rarely a hardware issue, and most commonly a delayed disease issue with marked symptoms. that’s one of the top pressing issues for this hobby.

With fish prices increasing, market impacts changing availability, we’d better improve current retention abilities. Having lots of keepers willing to test formal patterns will help drive down disease rates and wasting loss.
 
Last edited:

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
5,017
Reaction score
5,855
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@brandon429 im very confused with this thread. I’ll give you my take without your explanation;
a) Biologists never agree, there’s a scientific principle where 50% of facts are disproved every 2 years

b) It rarely applies to a glass box in someone’s living room

c) I need a beer
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
That’s fair input I’ll accept the bump.

I clearly mentioned major topics in reefing and their origins, some discovered in tiny apartments informally
and some discovered in the lab at universities - some are long standing concepts of chemistry and biology. I expect only six percent of future comments to reflect anything on the matter.


many readers de value informal findings to the point of rude dismissal…without any discussion about alternate origins. So it’s fun to point out something like peroxide dosing that met a core need in reefing that nobody bothered to study formally while it was in development in thousands of willing participant homes.

at minimum, you can see noaa enjoys replicating thread work…even the most topical consideration glance of anything written can see that’s a rare thing for scientists to reference in formal papers. Forums dont always get the ideas for what they do from published papers, looks like published papers sometimes reflect forum post trends.


For example, I’ve never seen a formal peer reviewed paper list a doubt in the accuracy of api ammonia tests. me repeating something linked above isn’t going to increase understanding, this is apparent, but to save future recap



so the next time we find ourselves stating in a reefing debate “there’s no formal study for that claim” that may actually be because the finding doesn’t come from formal studies. Formal studies might be taking notes from the post patterns.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Thank you. For sure that happened in 2006 ish
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
you can press over and over off topic, it’ll never sub for creative thought. Heck I’m still waiting for you to outline some disease options in that other thread, I noticed you werent as quick to respond there.


sometimes if you don’t have any real input, it’s best not to try and mislead/derail but there’s always going to be a few. To this minute I cannot discern any stance whatsoever from Lowell’s posts, it’s a totally evasive and hard to pin down writing style.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
On topic: I’d appreciate finding out who discovered fluconazole dosing for algae specifically for the reef tank


was it forum aquarists or veterinarians or university studies on ponds etc?

why is it like pulling teeth to simply get a discussion going on the origins of major reefing concepts and trends…it wouldn’t be offensive if someone added another creative thought
 

stacksoner

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
810
Reaction score
1,163
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
That’s fair input I’ll accept the bump.

I clearly mentioned major topics in reefing and their origins, some discovered in tiny apartments informally
and some discovered in the lab at universities - some are long standing concepts of chemistry and biology. I expect only six percent of future comments to reflect anything on the matter.


many readers de value informal findings to the point of rude dismissal…without any discussion about alternate origins. So it’s fun to point out something like peroxide dosing that met a core need in reefing that nobody bothered to study formally while it was in development in thousands of willing participant homes.

at minimum, you can see noaa enjoys replicating thread work…even the most topical consideration glance of anything written can see that’s a rare thing for scientists to reference in formal papers. Forums dont always get the ideas for what they do from published papers, looks like published papers sometimes reflect forum post trends.


For example, I’ve never seen a formal peer reviewed paper list a doubt in the accuracy of api ammonia tests. me repeating something linked above isn’t going to increase understanding, this is apparent, but to save future recap



so the next time we find ourselves stating in a reefing debate “there’s no formal study for that claim” that may actually be because the finding doesn’t come from formal studies. Formal studies might be taking notes from the post patterns.
This forum exists because there is almost no academic research about ornamental marine life.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,498
Reaction score
23,578
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Excellent


beyond taxonomical work references run mighty thin


its fun that forum posters are the most likely to discover and implement major trends in coming years too
 

Goaway

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 17, 2020
Messages
16,180
Reaction score
55,493
Location
Illinios
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Anyone remember when having any detectable Nitrate and Phosphate was considered bad husbandry?
That was a big no no even up to 2016. All these anecdotal stories of people saying "I have 20 nitrates and .2 phosphates" started making people question if you needed pristine reef aquariums.

I don't need science or harvard to figure out if my s*** stinks.
 

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
5,017
Reaction score
5,855
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
you can press over and over off topic, it’ll never sub for creative thought. Heck I’m still waiting for you to outline some disease options in that other thread, I noticed you werent as quick to respond there.


sometimes if you don’t have any real input, it’s best not to try and mislead/derail but there’s always going to be a few.
That’s the shortest response I’ve seen from you. I consider
you can press over and over off topic, it’ll never sub for creative thought. Heck I’m still waiting for you to outline some disease options in that other thread, I noticed you werent as quick to respond there.


sometimes if you don’t have any real input, it’s best not to try and mislead/derail but there’s always going to be a few. To this minute I cannot discern any stance whatsoever from Lowell’s posts, it’s a totally evasive and hard to pin down writing style.
1) can you stop fundamentally editing your replies, it makes it look like folks are agreeing.

2) you know nothing about fish aqu
you can press over and over off topic, it’ll never sub for creative thought. Heck I’m still waiting for you to outline some disease options in that other thread, I noticed you werent as quick to respond there.


sometimes if you don’t have any real input, it’s best not to try and mislead/derail but there’s always going to be a few. To this minute I cannot discern any stance whatsoever from Lowell’s posts, it’s a totally evasive and hard to pin down writing style.
There’s
Excellent


beyond taxonomical work references run mighty thin


its fun that forum posters are the most likely to discover and implement major trends in coming years too
but you accept no view apart from your own unless it’s accompanied by peer reviewed scientific papers. Even then you say they are wrong. Baffles the crap out a me.
 

Mastering the art of locking and unlocking water pathways: What type of valves do you have on your aquarium plumbing?

  • Ball valves.

    Votes: 76 51.0%
  • Gate valves.

    Votes: 76 51.0%
  • Check valves.

    Votes: 37 24.8%
  • None.

    Votes: 33 22.1%
  • Other.

    Votes: 9 6.0%
Back
Top