Elements with No Known Biological Role

[Reefahholic]

Detecting elements in coral skeletons is zero evidence of biological role or utility. Many ions, perhaps nearly all, get accidentally incorporated into depositing calcium carbonate, whether it is done by a coral or simple abiotic (nonbiological) precipitation.

Even plutonium is incorporated into coral skeletons.

Do we need a biological role? What about observations?

Yes, I do understand corals have certain elements in their skeletons but at what amounts. Like I mentioned above, we’re taking bottles! Not just a minimal amount. :-)

 

[Reefahholic]

how else would you get those fluorescent greens ;)
….shhhh , maybe repackage nuclear waste and dose it as “Vibrant” or sumthin

This was after a few plutonium doses. Joke! Iron!

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Do we need a biological role? What about observations?

Yes, I do understand corals have certain elements in their skeletons but at what amounts. Like I mentioned above, we’re taking bottles! Not just a minimal amount. :)

Repeatable observations of some effect that one knows one wants to happen in their tank is a fine reason to dose something to NSW levels.

Even the hint that it does something that you want may be reason enough to dose something to natural levels just to hedge your bets.

The first is typically lacking for anecdotal reports of benefit from something like lithium, barium, or rubidium.

That said, the hobby is filled with misinformation. High or low levels in a skeleton are especially meaningless. In many cases, it is just an indication of the amount of that chemical in the water, and its propensity to substitute for calcium or carbonate in calcium carboante.

For example, there is a lot of very well studied strontium in coral skeletons. There is an equal amount of very well studied strontium in simple abiotic precipitation. It is studied so much because the amount incorporated is temperature dependent and is looked to as a historical indicator of seawater temperatures. There is zero convincing evidence that I have seen from any of these studies that it is useful to the coral to have strontium present, and plenty of contrary evidence based on reefers with low strontium having fine reef tanks.

 

[Reefahholic]

Algae is a big user of iodine, as is obviously proven by the fact that seaweeds of many sorts are a big source of dietary iodine.

However, in my experiments, I could not get a statistical difference in either chaeto or caulerpa racemosa growth with and without detectable iodine in the water.

In many tanks, including my own, supplemental iodine did not seem to make any apparent visible difference.

I feel like a depleted Iodine level may cause some STN/RTN issues, but I can’t prove it. All I know is keeping it higher I haven’t had one issue, but that could be from all the other elements as well.

Surprisingly I’ve seen iodine very high 500-600 ug/L and no SPS losses.

 

[Reefahholic]

I’ve dosed lanthanum, and my 6 maxima clams are doing great.

You may be the exception, but usually they survive short-term from what I’ve heard. Have you had them a long time? Or under a few years. I think having them long-term will be the test.

 

[Reefahholic]

Repeatable observations of some effect that one knows one wants to happen in their tank is a fine reason to dose something to NSW levels.

Even the hint that it does something that you want may be reason enough to dose something to natural levels just to hedge your bets.

The first is typically lacking for anecdotal reports of benefit from something like lithium, barium, or rubidium.

That said, the hobby is filled with misinformation. High or low levels in a skeleton are especially meaningless. In many cases, it is just an indication of the amount of that chemical in the water, and its propensity to substitute for calcium or carbonate in calcium carboante.

For example, there is a lot of very well studied strontium in coral skeletons. There is an equal amount of very well studied strontium in simple abiotic precipitation. It is studied so much because the amount incorporated is temperature dependent and is looked to as a historical indicator of seawater temperatures. There is zero convincing evidence that I have seen from any of these studies that it is useful to the coral to have strontium present, and plenty of contrary evidence based on reefers with low strontium having fine reef tanks.

I’ll respond to this later when I wake up. Busy night at work. Need to get some sleep.

I do appreciate everybody’s comments. These kind of things keep me up at night.

 

[Gumbies R Us]

I'll follow along and read along to this thread, but this is way past my knowledge with reefing haha

 

[Rocketfish]

The best advice I heard early on that I did not follow was this:

NEVER DOSE ANYTHING YOU DON'T TEST FOR!

After 2 years of moderate success, I switched to the Moonshiners Method. The first thing I discovered when I got my first ICP test back was that the Strontium and Iron I had been dosing was not nearly enough, and the Iodine I was dosing was way too much. I mean like 1400+! It took 6 months of biweekly water changes and the nominal coral consumption to get back down to a normal range. When I did get there though, everything evened out tremendously.

The caveat is that I only have a 30-gallon Nano tank with a ton of SPS in it, and a Gen 5 XR15 Light that really was the original piece that helped everything take off. Being such a small tank I was able to make these adjustments without a significant amount of effort. It is a bit of a pain to do the daily dosing of 6 or 7 different things aside from the Calcium, alkalinity, and Magnesium, but you get used to it after a while.

That said, you can get away with doing little to no trace mineral dosing "IF" you do very regular water changes, AND you don't have a ton of coral in your tank for the number of gallons represented. The thing I like about the Moonshiner Method is that I have probably not done a water change in 6 months, and things have stayed quite nice and continued growing too well through all that time.

Ultimately it's to each his own. For smaller tanks, mainly nano, just change a few gallons a week and you will do well with most stuff. When your SPS starts growing too fast, pull the light back and reduce the Calcium and Alkalinity to slow it down, and do quarterly ATI tests to verify everything else. $60 every 3 months is really a small expense all things considered to absolutely know where you stand.

This hobby will serve you best when you don't assume, and you don't guess! Even with a nano tank!

The "After" photo is about a year old. I have since Fragged the big WWC Yellow Tips, and experienced an STN event. I am pretty sure the STN event was from the excessively high Iodine. Growth was great after that, and I have not had another STN event since.

 

[Reefahholic]

There is so much about this world and it’s interconnectedness that we’re only beginning to scratch the surface of understanding.

It’s most likely that we just don’t yet understand what is consuming those trace elements and its importance to the entire system.

100% agree. My gut instinct is to not leave many of these elements lacking. I think they play a crucial role, but I can’t prove it. I just know I’m having much more success and no issues with SPS. My system literally just shook off a 0.61 PO4 swing from a auto feeder incident. I’d bet if the chemistry was weak several corals would have checked out.

Repeatable observations of some effect that one knows one wants to happen in their tank is a fine reason to dose something to NSW levels.

Agreed. It is hard though with so many variables at play.

Even the hint that it does something that you want may be reason enough to dose something to natural levels just to hedge your bets.

Absolutely, or at least keep dosing for a while and keep observing.

The first is typically lacking for anecdotal reports of benefit from something like lithium, barium, or rubidium.

I honestly will never dose Lithium because it seems to make it in no problem.

Barium is heavily consumed. I mean heavily consumed in some systems. It would be hard for me to understand what would be consuming Barium to this extent other than corals.

High or low levels in a skeleton are especially meaningless. In many cases, it is just an indication of the amount of that chemical in the water, and its propensity to substitute for calcium or carbonate in calcium carboante.

I agree if the levels are low, but if the levels are high I’d need to look into that further. It may be that way in many cases, but what about all cases? We just don’t know. Different environmental factors likely play a role with a lot of this, but I don’t want to assume that for all cases in different conditions.

For example, there is a lot of very well studied strontium in coral skeletons. There is an equal amount of very well studied strontium in simple abiotic precipitation. It is studied so much because the amount incorporated is temperature dependent and is looked to as a historical indicator of seawater temperatures. There is zero convincing evidence that I have seen from any of these studies that it is useful to the coral to have strontium present, and plenty of contrary evidence based on reefers with low strontium having fine reef tanks.

This is a very interesting point here. It does bring to mind that some elements are said to protect from Thermal Stress which may or may not play a role here, but is fascinating! I do not know if Strontium is very useful. My tank does consume it regularly so I’d say most likely. Something likes it and wants it every month. I doubt this would be the case with Lithium or Antimony if I started to dose them. For me, consumption paints a bigger picture. I just know that rock and sand can bind phosphorous, so I have to wonder if it can bind other elements of if things in the tank can absorb certain elements. Just trying to keep and open mind here. Honestly, I don’t see much difference from dosing Rubidium to 100 - 300 ug/L. If I stopped dosing any element or had to question one element it may be that one, but it is being consumed consistently so I keep dosing it. It’s definitely not hurting anything.

 

[Reefahholic]

The best advice I heard early on that I did not follow was this:

NEVER DOSE ANYTHING YOU DON'T TEST FOR!

This hobby will serve you best when you don't assume, and you don't guess! Even with a nano tank!

100% man. I remember back in the day I did water changes, never tested, and hoped for the best. Constantly had problems. Like you said…even just 3-4 ICP tests a year can really increase your success and guide your tank into the right direction. Solid data leads to smart decisions.

 

[rtparty]

One thing many need to learn is that water changes do not replenish trace elements to their original level or even to NSW. I don’t know of a single salt that matches NSW consistently. I would go as far as to say this is impossible.

Let’s do some very simple math and assume trace element X is actually used by corals. Element X starts at 100ppm and your tank consumes 10ppm weekly. So you’re at 90ppm. You do a 10% water change with element X at 100ppm again. Your tank only goes back to 91ppm. Next week it consumes another 10ppm and you drop to 81ppm. Water change again and you bring it back up to 83ppm. Again, very simple math to illustrate a point. It’s not perfect and has lots of assumptions.

My bet is at some point there isn’t “enough” of element X and it’s no longer used. What then? Death? Loss of color? Remember in the ocean corals are their brightest colors right before they die. Chasing Coral anyone?

 

[Reefahholic]

The "After" photo is about a year old. I have since Fragged the big WWC Yellow Tips, and experienced an STN event. I am pretty sure the STN event was from the excessively high Iodine. Growth was great after that, and I have not had another STN event since.

That is great growth for a Nano tank. I don’t see how you guys do it!

Also, how long after that Iodine spike did you see the STN/RTN event.?

 

[Reefahholic]

One thing many need to learn is that water changes do not replenish trace elements to their original level or even to NSW. I don’t know of a single salt that matches NSW consistently. I would go as far as to say this is impossible.

Correct. You may get them close, but it would take some large volume changes to get them there. I hear guys all the time thinking they can maintain Moonshine levels with 100% consistent water changes alone. This is not true at all, because our elements are all elevated. As you know, every salt brand is completely different. You need to know what elements are in there in the first place, and at what levels. If they’re smart like you they will send a few quality ICP tests off to be sure of what’s being added if water changes are their only means of supplementing elements back. @jda spoke some truth about mixing the entire bucket or bag at one time. If you’re only taking cups from the top of a bucket the bottom is likely to have much different chemistry.

 

[Reefahholic]

Let’s do some very simple math and assume trace element X is actually used by corals. Element X starts at 100ppm and your tank consumes 10ppm weekly. So you’re at 90ppm. You do a 10% water change with element X at 100ppm again. Your tank only goes back to 91ppm. Next week it consumes another 10ppm and you drop to 81ppm. Water change again and you bring it back up to 83ppm. Again, very simple math to illustrate a point. It’s not perfect and has lots of assumptions.

This is a very good analogy! You almost sound like Ryan at BRS. Haha.

Look the goal for all of us here is to try to spread good information. I don’t tell anybody anything that isn’t helping my tank, and I appreciate information like this because a lot of guys rely solely on water changes. I think they are great for reducing or removing pollutants, and also adding back some trace elements, but as @rtparty points out here, make sure you do some simple math and know what’s going back in for sure because you will have much more success this way.

 

[Reefahholic]

I'll follow along and read along to this thread, but this is way past my knowledge with reefing haha

It all starts somewhere. Much of this stuff is way over my head, but that is why we give the Tough Questions to Dr. Farley and Dr Hans-Werner.

 

[Miami Reef]

One thing many need to learn is that water changes do not replenish trace elements to their original level or even to NSW. I don’t know of a single salt that matches NSW consistently. I would go as far as to say this is impossible.

Let’s do some very simple math and assume trace element X is actually used by corals. Element X starts at 100ppm and your tank consumes 10ppm weekly. So you’re at 90ppm. You do a 10% water change with element X at 100ppm again. Your tank only goes back to 91ppm. Next week it consumes another 10ppm and you drop to 81ppm. Water change again and you bring it back up to 83ppm. Again, very simple math to illustrate a point. It’s not perfect and has lots of assumptions.

My bet is at some point there isn’t “enough” of element X and it’s no longer used. What then? Death? Loss of color? Remember in the ocean corals are their brightest colors right before they die. Chasing Coral anyone?

This doesn’t take into account the majority of trace elements added by FOOD!

 

[Reefahholic]

This doesn’t take into account the majority of trace elements added by FOOD!

That is true.

I wouldn’t count on food to bring them in though, because just like the salt you would need to know what and how much. Let’s say it’s adding a small to moderate amount of 5 elements, even then in a thriving acro system… food will not be enough to keep up with most elements.

 

[Nburg's Reef]

Detecting elements in coral skeletons is zero evidence of biological role or utility. Many ions, perhaps nearly all, get accidentally incorporated into depositing calcium carbonate, whether it is done by a coral or simple abiotic (nonbiological) precipitation.

Even plutonium is incorporated into coral skeletons.

Logic that "if its in the skeleton, its important", then one could deduce that lead was important in a child from the 60s and 70s diet, before lead paint was banned. lol.

For every amazing reef that doses trace elements, you can find one that is just as good without.
Sometimes I wonder if the compounding factor is simply better husbandry. If someone is motivated to get better colors by spending time and money investing in trace elements, what other husbandry improvements are they making that could also be a confounding factor.

And lets not even talk about the accuracy, or the analytical error of ICP testing without a standardize testing method or independent QA/QC organization to verify error rates. There is probably a reason that the air sample ICP analyses costs $150-200 sample vs $20-$50 for sea water which I am told is much harder to calibrate to.

I think there could be something to traces, but there needs to be some work on 1) what traces are necessary and some evidence to back up such claims, and 2) some sort of method and verification method for ICP testing. I know there are some already documented that corals need, but how much can they get from food particles in the water and how much is replenished from simple water changes. I will stick to 10% weekly water changes until there is better data and testing methods.

Just my 2 cents on it... FWIW, I dose a few drops of manganese and molybdenum to my water change water cause I have them lol. I don't test, just enough to maybe do something but probably neve measurable.

 

[rtparty]

This doesn’t take into account the majority of trace elements added by FOOD!

Yes, food adds trace elements. I believe Randy has stated food itself likely provides quite a few trace elements but hard to test or measure that.

My point was simply that water changes won’t replenish trace elements. It’s been claimed by quite a few in this thread but it’s simply not true for the majority of us. Water changes are important in other ways though and if you gave me 50 hobbyists doing water changes vs 50 hobbyists not doing water changes…I’ll take the 50 doing them every time to have more long term success.

 

[rtparty]

Just my 2 cents on it... FWIW, I dose a few drops of manganese and molybdenum to my water change water cause I have them lol. I don't test, just enough to maybe do something but probably neve measurable.

Good news is almost every salt mix out there has elevated manganese when newly mixed.

I question if the elevated iodine or manganese isn’t part of the “water change sparkle” so many claim to see after a water change