carbon dosing and microalgae

[Faulkner’s maze]

can you carbon dose and keep microalgae (ulva?) -as soon as I started carbon dosing the ulva died off-and not for lack of nutrients. Mainly I was keeping it for the copepods. My PO4 is still at .4 The microalgae was not sufficient to keep down the nutrient levels.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

can you carbon dose and keep microalgae (ulva?) -as soon as I started carbon dosing the ulva died off-and not for lack of nutrients. Mainly I was keeping it for the copepods. My PO4 is still at .4 The microalgae was not sufficient to keep down the nutrient levels.

What about nitrate?

 

[Faulkner’s maze]

What about nitrate?

somewhere between 15-20 last I checked (week ago). I never lack for nitrate.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Then I expect it is coincidence, you the added organic carbon drove some trace element down that the ulva needed. Do you dose any trace elements such as iron and manganese?

 

[Faulkner’s maze]

Then I expect it is coincidence, you the added organic carbon drove some trace element down that the ulva needed. Do you dose any trace elements such as iron and manganese?

Could be- I started dosing Seachem's reef plus couple weeks ago due manganese not being detected at all and iodine being 50% of ICP's recommendations. I am also dosing all for reef and the TM's bacto balance -which has trace elements in it-but obviously not enough. Not sure if I will keep it going if I don't see much of a benefit over month. Most of the corals are looking pretty good as is.

See what the next ICP test brings.

 

[Faulkner’s maze]

@Randy Holmes-Farley -coming back to this almost 2 yrs later I guess my question is-whether besides reduction in phosphate-is there any benefit to doing both?

For ulva-there is copepod generation, helping with PO4 reduction and PH balance i am after -

For carbon dosing it also reduces PO4 but has other benefits but unclear if it offsets microalgae or even necessary (or just make things more complicated).

Thanks

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

@Randy Holmes-Farley -coming back to this almost 2 yrs later I guess my question is-whether besides reduction in phosphate-is there any benefit to doing both?

For ulva-there is copepod generation, helping with PO4 reduction and PH balance i am after -

For carbon dosing it also reduces PO4 but has other benefits but unclear if it offsets microalgae or even necessary (or just make things more complicated).

Thanks

I'd use both carbon dosing and a refugium if one alone at reasonable levels was not meeting the nutrient reduction needs. That may be easier than expanding either one alone, and they have some offsetting effects (e.g., O2 addition vs O2 consumption, pH raise vs pH lower).

But both have potential drawbacks as well (as do all nutrient reduction methods), including trace element consumption, boosting of things like cyano that may thrive on organics added or released from the macroalgae, and changes to the tank microbiome.

They also each have somewhat different benefits aside from nutrient consumption, such as bacteria from organic addition boosting filter feeders, the refugium can house pods and other microorganisms that make their way tot eh display, algae from it can be used to feed fish, etc.

Everyone has to decide for themselves what makes most sense in their system. Some folks use neither and think the cons outweigh the pros, which is not easily disproven.

 

[Faulkner’s maze]

I'd use both carbon dosing and a refugium if one alone at reasonable levels was not meeting the nutrient reduction needs. That may be easier than expanding either one alone, and they have some offsetting effects (e.g., O2 addition vs O2 consumption, pH raise vs pH lower).

But both have potential drawbacks as well (as do all nutrient reduction methods), including trace element consumption, boosting of things like cyano that may thrive on organics added or released from the macroalgae, and changes to the tank microbiome.

They also each have somewhat different benefits aside from nutrient consumption, such as bacteria from organic addition boosting filter feeders, the refugium can house pods and other microorganisms that make their way tot eh display, algae from it can be used to feed fish, etc.

Everyone has to decide for themselves what makes most sense in their system. Some folks use neither and think the cons outweigh the pros, which is not easily disproven.

Thanks - for trace fortification -better with something like chaetogro that has a lot of iron and manganese or standard trace elements such as A & K for corals?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Thanks - for trace fortification -better with something like chaetogro that has a lot of iron and manganese or standard trace elements such as A & K for corals?

if the goal is to offset demand from macroalgae, I'd use an iron and manganese heavy supplement. I use AFR and add those two as extra. I'm not 100% certain how to best supplement against bacterial uptake. A&K has things neither bacteria nor macroalgae use, such as those things that get into skeletons (useful or not), such as fluoride, strontium, barium.

 

[Faulkner’s maze]

if the goal is to offset demand from macroalgae, I'd use an iron and manganese heavy supplement. I use AFR and add those two as extra. I'm not 100% certain how to best supplement against bacterial uptake. A&K has things neither bacteria nor macroalgae use, such as those things that get into skeletons (useful or not), such as fluoride, strontium, barium.

Thanks