Carbon Limited VS Carbon Balanced - Ugly Stage

[Dan_P]

Just as a side note you should know that once I’m happy with the initial results I can stop dosing organic carbon and silica and observe the difference, meaning that this tank will become a control,

Nope, this system won’t function as a control but will be another experimental starting point with an incompletely defined initial state with all the short comings of the first study. The plan is more like a meandering path through factor space with most of the factors unknown, uncontrolled and unmeasured.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Nope, this system won’t function as a control but will be another experimental starting point with an incompletely defined initial state with all the short comings of the first study. The plan is more like a meandering path through factor space with most of the factors unknown, uncontrolled and unmeasured.

In your opinion?

 

[Dan_P]

In your opinion?

Nope, it is the standard way good experiments are designed. I think you have already pointed out that what you are doing is not an an experiment but a let’s-see-what-happens exercise. This short of fishing exercise is sometimes a first step, or a way to get your feet wet.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Nope, it is the standard way good experiments are designed. I think you have already pointed out that what you are doing is not an an experiment but a let’s-see-what-happens exercise. This short of fishing exercise is sometimes a first step, or a way to get your feet wet.

Algae Growth. Dead v Live Rock

This is just an interesting demonstration. I placed 200 mL aquarium water in each of two identical plastic 0.25 L containers. In one container I placed a piece of clean aragonite rubble and in the other a piece of aragonite rubble that has been in my aquarium some months. The containers were...

www.reef2reef.com

From all folks posting I did expect more from you, if you would like to see a idea of how a control would look like this link should illustrate that. Just as this thread they both share a fishing exercise.

 

[Dan_P]

Algae Growth. Dead v Live Rock

This is just an interesting demonstration. I placed 200 mL aquarium water in each of two identical plastic 0.25 L containers. In one container I placed a piece of clean aragonite rubble and in the other a piece of aragonite rubble that has been in my aquarium some months. The containers were...

www.reef2reef.com

From all folks posting I did expect more from you, if you would like to see a idea of how a control would look like this link should illustrate that. Just as this thread they both share a fishing exercise.

I think this post is good lesson for you about how to take advantage of questions and challenges. This is also a good example of how limited the knowledge you obtain from these types of demonstrations. It was any early step, just did not learn much except from the questions and critiques.

 

[sixty_reefer]

I think this post is good lesson for you about how to take advantage of questions and challenges. This is also a good example of how limited the knowledge you obtain from these types of demonstrations. It was any early step, just did not learn much except from the questions and critiques.

We’ll leave the discussion here for now, let the results speak for itself.

Just as a recap.

I’m going to avoid the ugly stage altogether while maintaining a high nutrient system, nitrates 10mg/l phosphate 0.4 mg/l and strong light, I’m going to do it by using nutrients to influence biological pathways of my choosing that affect mainly non-nitrate nitrogen compounds.

The criticism is not really going to stop this experiment from being completed.

 

[twentyleagues]

We’ll leave the discussion here for now, let the results speak for itself.

Just as a recap.

I’m going to avoid the ugly stage altogether while maintaining a high nutrient system, nitrates 10mg/l phosphate 0.4 mg/l and strong light, I’m going to do it by using nutrients to influence biological pathways of my choosing that affect mainly non-nitrate nitrogen compounds.

The criticism is not really going to stop this experiment from being completed.

Criticism shouldn't stop an experiment. It could/should help define it though.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Criticism shouldn't stop an experiment. It could/should help define it though.

True, although the only positive criticism I’ve had is lack of control. But is a control really that important once there is plenty of examples of what a control would look like?



There’s 12 examples of what a control could look like above, although I would argue that all of them could of had positive results if nutrients were to be taken into account.
Rock that has phosphate bound to it will always outperform rock that doesn’t bind phosphate such as man made live rock and some dead rock.

The same happens with aquabiomics test on live rock, from the Nitrate chart given, I can identify were live rock a had a possible phosphate depletion.
That translates to less bacteria in the final result.

 

[Dan_P]

We’ll leave the discussion here for now, let the results speak for itself.

Just as a recap.

I’m going to avoid the ugly stage altogether while maintaining a high nutrient system, nitrates 10mg/l phosphate 0.4 mg/l and strong light, I’m going to do it by using nutrients to influence biological pathways of my choosing that affect mainly non-nitrate nitrogen compounds.

The criticism is not really going to stop this experiment from being completed.

Don’t play the martyr. No one is trying to discourage your curiosity.

The below is the clearest description of your intent so far. The last sentence is unnecessarily vague and not completely correct since there is 10 ppm nitrate present.

I’m going to avoid the ugly stage altogether while maintaining a high nutrient system, nitrates 10mg/l phosphate 0.4 mg/l and strong light, I’m going to do it by using nutrients to influence biological pathways of my choosing that affect mainly non-nitrate nitrogen compounds.

Good luck and looking forwards to the results.

 

[Dan_P]

True, although the only positive criticism I’ve had is lack of control. But is a control really that important once there is plenty of examples of what a control would look like?

No, you’ve garnered criticism beyond not having a control, which include but not limited to making things up, not controlling factors in the experiment, avoiding discussing short comings in the experiment design and your logic.

There’s 12 examples of what a control could look like above, although I would argue that all of them could of had positive results if nutrients were to be taken into account.
Rock that has phosphate bound to it will always outperform rock that doesn’t bind phosphate such as man made live rock and some dead rock.

The same happens with aquabiomics test on live rock, from the Nitrate chart given, I can identify were live rock a had a possible phosphate depletion.
That translates to less bacteria in the final result.

You site two good examples why whole aquarium studies never provide clear cut results. They are not replicated, do not have proper controls, fail to control important factors in treatment systems and the results have never been shown to be repriducubke. The amount of hand waving needed to make sense of the results from theses demonstrations is ridiculous. And just as important is the issue of conflict of interest in both cases. Both conveniently produce experimental results that support selling products.

 

[twentyleagues]

True, although the only positive criticism I’ve had is lack of control. But is a control really that important once there is plenty of examples of what a control would look like?



There’s 12 examples of what a control could look like above, although I would argue that all of them could of had positive results if nutrients were to be taken into account.
Rock that has phosphate bound to it will always outperform rock that doesn’t bind phosphate such as man made live rock and some dead rock.

The same happens with aquabiomics test on live rock, from the Nitrate chart given, I can identify were live rock a had a possible phosphate depletion.
That translates to less bacteria in the final result.

To be a true experiment? Yes. To be an "experiment" no. I think like other have said you will see something happen. What is actually happening though? If in the end you dont have a bad or any "ugly stage" you hit your goal.
jfyi I have had the same outcome using dry rock/sand tank started in january no ugly stage. I did not do anything special or crazy and my n and p never bottomed out other than at the very beginning obviously.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Don’t play the martyr. No one is trying to discourage your curiosity.

The below is the clearest description of your intent so far. The last sentence is unnecessarily vague and not completely correct since there is 10 ppm nitrate present.

I’m going to avoid the ugly stage altogether while maintaining a high nutrient system, nitrates 10mg/l phosphate 0.4 mg/l and strong light, I’m going to do it by using nutrients to influence biological pathways of my choosing that affect mainly non-nitrate nitrogen compounds.

Good luck and looking forwards to the results.

It’s a shady area at the moment, I’m not sure if you remember from the dark test that as nitrate was reduced alkalinity increased and as nitrate was maintained alkalinity stayed stable.

I am suspecting at the moment (can’t prove) that the current implementation is only using non-nitrate nitrogen (ammonia and organic nutrients) only once those get depleted they start reducing Nitrate and by effect raising alkalinity.

It’s possible that non-nitrate nitrogen is not being converted into nitrate, hence maintaining a stable parameter

 

[sixty_reefer]

To be a true experiment? Yes. To be an "experiment" no. I think like other have said you will see something happen. What is actually happening though? If in the end you dont have a bad or any "ugly stage" you hit your goal.
jfyi I have had the same outcome using dry rock/sand tank started in january no ugly stage. I did not do anything special or crazy and my n and p never bottomed out other than at the very beginning obviously.

The goal here is to remove some of the guessing.
As you may have observed in your tank, the rock itself may have little to no influence on the ugly stage.

 

[sixty_reefer]

No, you’ve garnered criticism beyond not having a control, which include but not limited to making things up, not controlling factors in the experiment, avoiding discussing short comings in the experiment design and your logic.



You site two good examples why whole aquarium studies never provide clear cut results. They are not replicated, do not have proper controls, fail to control important factors in treatment systems and the results have never been shown to be repriducubke. The amount of hand waving needed to make sense of the results from theses demonstrations is ridiculous. And just as important is the issue of conflict of interest in both cases. Both conveniently produce experimental results that support selling products.

If they were to have presented a full description of phosphate and nitrate a more clear picture would have been made from that experiment. The DNA results alone couldn’t tell much of what’s happening.

 

[twentyleagues]

The goal here is to remove some of the guessing.
As you may have observed in your tank, the rock itself may have little to no influence on the ugly stage.

Yes in my circumstance it had no influence on the ugly stage. While a tank I set up using lfs live rock (that was in sumps for years) had a large ugly stage in another tank. There was no special testing or procedures done with either tank and no control to judge against, so I can not say that the live rock crowd is not correct about lr being the only real way to stop the ugly stage.

 

[BeanAnimal]

We’ll leave the discussion here for now, let the results speak for itself.

Just as a recap.

I’m going to avoid the ugly stage altogether while maintaining a high nutrient system, nitrates 10mg/l phosphate 0.4 mg/l and strong light, I’m going to do it by using nutrients to influence biological pathways of my choosing that affect mainly non-nitrate nitrogen compounds.

The criticism is not really going to stop this experiment from being completed.

There has been no real discussion here. You have consistently avoided addressing any of the points raised by others.

What exactly does this mean?
“I’m going to do it by using nutrients to influence biological pathways of my choosing that affect mainly non-nitrate nitrogen compounds.”

The term "non-nitrate nitrogen compounds" is ambiguous at best and meaningless at worst. What biological pathways are you referring to? Ignoring the deflections and other issues with this thread...

Without introducing new terms, or for that matter, using any scientific jargon, can you describe your "experiment" step by step?

For example:

1. I am going to feed this food this many times a day.
2. I am going to add these invertebrates and this much live rock.
3. I am going to test for these parameters after I do this.
4. I am going to observe this specific behavior or change this many times per day.

Finally, I still fail to see how any conclusion can be drawn without some form of control system alongside it.

 

[Subsea]

@sixty_reefer



From what I have read on this thread is that “you like to argue”. When knowledgeable hobbyists & scientist all say the same thing, instead of considering what is said, your response is to double down.

You are confusing the Pilgrims. Good fortune on that journey.

Post in thread 'Carbon Limited VS Carbon Balanced - Ugly Stage'
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/carbon-limited-vs-carbon-balanced-ugly-stage.1083725/post-13067035

When I read this post, I unfollowed the thread.

Your word salad with established definitions does not warrant me following it. I suspect that you are only interested in being controversial so that you can accumulate more post and establish your hierarchy.

 

[sixty_reefer]

The term "non-nitrate nitrogen compounds" is ambiguous at best and meaningless at worst. What biological pathways are you referring to? Ignoring the deflections and other issues with this thread...

As it implies non-nitrate nitrogen compounds it’s a good word to describe all forms of Nitrogen excluding Nitrate. (Ex. Ammonia, urea etc…)

Non-nitrate nitrogen compounds it’s what fuels algae growth and per effect the zooxanthellae in coral.

 

[BeanAnimal]

As it implies non-nitrate nitrogen compounds it’s a good word to describe all forms of Nitrogen excluding Nitrate. (Ex. Ammonia, urea etc…)

The term “non-nitrate nitrogen compounds” might sound like a “good word” to you, but as I already said, it is broad and ambiguous and only serves to confuse matters. It feels more like a forced attempt at sounding scientific and informed -- and fitting to the analogy -- an excuse to bring in more important sounding but irrelevant terms such as "urea".

Non-nitrate nitrogen compounds it’s what fuels algae growth and per effect the zooxanthellae in coral.

You are back to gross oversimplifications of complex relationships. Nitrogen in all its forms can fuel growth. So again, what is the mechanism to qualify, quantify and control these compounds?

Are you going to move beyond vague terminology and deflections and start defining what you’re actually testing and observing, or just keep digging a deeper hole?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

N2 is present in substantial quantities but does not provide N to any algae.