- Joined
- Sep 5, 2014
- Messages
- 66,535
- Reaction score
- 62,825
Maybe it’s Alga that are the bigger consumers of ammonia than bacteria in some tanks.
Algae, corals, anemones, etc. all may be bigger users. Anything that photosynthesizes might be a user.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Maybe it’s Alga that are the bigger consumers of ammonia than bacteria in some tanks.
This is one of those times where the data doesn't seem to support the realities. Basically something seems off. A small 20 gallon low light, minimal algae system with 12 sloppy heterotrophs suggests highly efficient nitrification. I'm not sure two small rocks would cut it so did it have a filter? e.g. a cascading HOB? If so that may be where the nitrifiers are at. If not...So I went to the LFS to shop for some nitrifying sand
I picked a tank that had like a dozen small clowns in a 20 gallon, good flow across the sand, minimal visible algae. The water was recirculating in the tank itself, not pumped through a central filtration system. There was a tiny dusting of brown diatoms on one side of the sandbed. I got some sand from the other side. No other algae, corals, etc in the tank. only two small rocks in the tank.
Ought to be the best case scenario for sandbed nitrification right??
(LFS sand data in gray triangles).
It's more of the same. Very much like the results I get from my own sandbed.
Is this really close agreement just (another) coincidence? Did I catch the sandbed at a bad time? Maybe it was very new. Or maybe this is just what sand does.
The hunt for high nitrification sand continues. But I wonder if there is something fundamental here, that makes it harder for larger nitrifier capability to persist in a sandbed long term.
Hadn’t had a proper cup of coffee yetDid I catch the sandbed at a bad time?
yeah, I think there are a couple of likely options.A small 20 gallon low light, minimal algae system with 12 sloppy heterotrophs suggests highly efficient nitrification. I'm not sure two small rocks would cut it so did it have a filter? e.g. a cascading HOB? If so that may be where the nitrifiers are at.
yea, the rest is correct, but 100mL of my tank water (new I.O. tests at a few tenths ppm ammonia, so I avoid it for this) - it tests 0.0 ammonia, NO3.I want to make sure I have the experiment straight.
100ml of new saltwater at ?ppm
1, 2, or 5 ml of sand
add ammonium chloride to 0.5ppm TAN
rock at 70rpm for 24 hours
retest sample for TAN.
Is all the above correct?
I have a question regarding ammonia fixation in plants
was unaware of a mechanism whereby plants continually uptake ammonia and it doesn’t go to mass / new growth / shoots
meaning to fulfill a resting metabolic demand— seems like such a low demand rate I struggle to locate what machinery in plant cells burns through daily / per minute ammonia from fish without turning into actual visible plant material we can see as obvious mass. Not all reefs trend towards obvious plant growths, mine certainly aren’t allowed to, the surfaces are high flow coralline areas but not plants other than microscopic ones I can’t readily see.
if I’m not misreading, algae we cannot see is attributed to uptake that outpaces nitrifiers...consider how funky ats crews must grow the screen beard to get true measured uptake
before the algal scrubber grows in, param control is low
how are my invisible algae doing the workhorse loading here in that context
should we be able to see algae and see it’s mass forming on rocks before we can be sure plant uptake factors heavily against bac command for free ammonia or total ammonia in reefs?
lots of sandbed work critics were too hyperfocused it isn't all that bad of a risk apparently. blasting them clean will clear out worms and pods and foodstores but not at the expense of ammonia control at least.
The theory was that ammonia could defuse across the cell membranes without an actual mechanism, just using the gradient of ammonia. Nitrate it seems needed a transport mechanism to get it into the cells via a nitrite ammonia reduction system. But if I told you I totally understand that I would be lying. Perhaps one of the chemistry folks could help.I have a question regarding ammonia fixation in plants
was unaware of a mechanism whereby plants continually uptake ammonia and it doesn’t go to mass / new growth / shoots
meaning to fulfill a resting metabolic demand— seems like such a low demand rate I struggle to locate what machinery in plant cells burns through daily / per minute ammonia from fish without turning into actual visible plant material we can see as obvious mass. Not all reefs trend towards obvious plant growths, mine certainly aren’t allowed to, the surfaces are high flow coralline areas but not plants other than microscopic ones I can’t readily see.
if I’m not misreading, algae we cannot see is attributed to uptake that outpaces nitrifiers...consider how funky ats crews must grow the screen beard to get true measured uptake
before the algal scrubber grows in, param control is low
how are my invisible algae doing the workhorse loading here in that context
should we be able to see algae and see it’s mass forming on rocks before we can be sure plant uptake factors heavily against bac command for free ammonia or total ammonia in reefs?
The theory was that ammonia could defuse across the cell membranes without an actual mechanism, just using the gradient of ammonia. Nitrate it seems needed a transport mechanism to get it into the cells via a nitrite ammonia reduction system. But if I told you I totally understand that I would be lying. Perhaps one of the chemistry folks could help.
Mission - learn one thing every day, accomplishedI do not know if this is actually how organisms take up ammonia, but it does readily diffuse across cell membranes in the uncharged NH3 form.
Neither nitrate nor nitrite can diffuse across cell membranes since both are charged (charges cannot readily get across the very hydrophobic part of a cell membrane), so organisms taking it up will need a specific transporter of some sort to do so.
Yeah, that's another thought I had. I'd no longer discourage anyone from ripping out a sandbed, temporarily or longer.@brandon429 - If I understand what I'm reading here, this also helps to confirm your 100% RIP tank move/clean procedure. If only a small part of ammonia in my tank is being processed by the sand bed, then removing it and rinsing out the detritus before returning it to my tank will have very little to no negative effect on the tank due to ammonia process being done else where.
So the general consensus is that sand beds are purely aesthetic in reef tanks?Yeah, that's another thought I had. I'd no longer discourage anyone from ripping out a sandbed, temporarily or longer.
The pro/con list for a sandbed that was in my head when I first put it in
vs
The pro/con list for a sandbed based on things I know now is very different.
The Pro list has gotten much much shorter. It now basically is:
I like the look
shrimp/goby pairs, or jawfish, or wrasse that bury
aragonite PO4 stabilizer
For kicks, check out Nitrate Reductase - what's generally responsible for getting through the slowest step in the NO3 reduction to usable N for algae etc.Nitrate it seems needed a transport mechanism to get it into the cells via a nitrite ammonia reduction system.
-Iron-mediated effects on nitrate reductase in marine phytoplanktonThe reduction of nitrate to ammonium requires large quantities of reducing power (8 mol e- / mole N), as well as the enzymes nitrate and nitrite reductase, both of which need iron. Therefore, effects of iron on nitrogen metabolism in (marine) phytoplankton have received much attention
When things get this confusing I generally sit back and drinkFor kicks, check out Nitrate Reductase - what's generally responsible for getting through the slowest step in the NO3 reduction to usable N for algae etc.
and there's a fun rabbit-hole in the connection to Iron here as well.
-Iron-mediated effects on nitrate reductase in marine phytoplankton
Chem is an acquired taste for me, but the picture generally is that ammonia (in the right doses) is by far preferable to NO3 / NO2 for just about anything that needs N.
That can be good and bad.
Certainly not "general consensus". I'm not even sure I've convinced myself.So the general consensus is that sand beds are purely aesthetic in reef tanks?
It seems ridiculous that crushed up rock can’t do the job of rock. It should do it better. I would say that I recently dismantled some live rock to make rubble for frags and it oozed liquid.Certainly not "general consensus". I'm not even sure I've convinced myself.
But if you pressed me right now to come up with something chemically biologically necessary to a reef tank that happens in my sandbed... I'd have to think a long time.
(If I had high NO3, I would want anaerobic space where denitrification might be accelerated)