gha fades with nitrate and phos dosing

[Lasse]

Corals are very efficient at recycling nitrogen and have simbiotic diazotrophs that can convert N2 or free nitrogen into nitrates if needed

First time I have heard this - any links? It is interesting because I thought that nitrogen fixation only can take place in anaerobic compartments and they are hardly to find near photosynthetic corals (corals with zoox) Would love to see these links.

I'm not surprised at all. Reef ecosystems are very complex and there's A TON MORE going on than just nitrates and phosphates. Nilsen and Fossa's "The Reef Aquarium" Vol 1 documents pretty much what you've seen in your system. My own experiences also echo the decline of algae with nitrate and phosphate staying stable or increasing. If it was my tank I would not be dosing other than to keep phosphate above .03 mg/l. Corals are very efficient at recycling nitrogen and have simbiotic diazotrophs that can convert N2 or free nitrogen into nitrates if needed. You should also be aware sponges and biofilms (and just about everything else) are messing with nitrogen and phosphates and can be manipulating the numbers showing up on test kits just like corals and algae do. ANd be aware dosing nitrates might make corals more colorful but research has shown it has a more severe negative impact on calcification than phosphate. Here's fig. 3 from Shantz and Burkpile's review of almost 4 dozen research papers:

I have seen this article before and i don't really know what I should think about it - they report this and this is in NO3 concentrations below 1 ppm NO3. And after that I look at my aquarium that runs at 6 ppm the last month - and I see this

​

I do not know if the conclusions in the article are wrong or right - but for me this calcification could not be better during a month

Sincerely Lasse

 

[mindme]

I'm not personally sold on the idea that Nitrates and Phosphates = algae.

I started out with reef tanks and now I do reef tanks again. However about 4 years ago I took a small detour over into the planted tank. My tank is what you would call "high tech". I dosed Co2 with an atomizer, dosed lots and lots of nitrates/phosphates and basically never got algae.

Rather than trying to keep my nitrates and phosphates at a certain level, I would do a method where I would just dose way more nutrients than the plants could use, but then I would do water changes every week to "reset" things back. The plants would thrive, and there was usually not any algae.

Adding fish however = algae most of the time. High nutrients and no fish = no algae, just good plant growth. High nutrients with fish = algae.

Another thing that would trigger algae was nutrients not being balanced. AKA low nitrate + high phosphates = algae.

As such I came to the conclusion that there is more to algae growth than just high nitrates and phosphates. What those things are - I have no idea. I just thought it was so weird how different algae worked with my 2 tanks.

 

[Lasse]

Adding fish however = algae most of the time. High nutrients and no fish = no algae, just good plant growth. High nutrients with fish = algae.

I have heard exactly these argues from other fresh water enthusiasts. They dose nitrate because NH3/NH4 will favour microalgae. Adding fish = adding NH3/NH4. However there is no reports of this in saltwater - even if it could be exactly the same way. See this about freshwater plant and Tom Barrs method

Another important method is the one developed by Diana Walstad in the book Ecology of the Planted Aquarium

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I'm not personally sold on the idea that Nitrates and Phosphates = algae.

I do not think that is the accepted idea, so it's good to not be sold on it.

Algae needs all manner of different chemicals in the water, including a ready source of N and P, but also iron, manganese, zinc, etc.. It also needs lots of other things to grow unchecked, including a place to attach, freedom from predation, appropriate flow rates, etc.

If ANY ONE of those things are missing, algae will not flourish. Predation by herbivores is a big one in many tanks (like mine was) but simple lack of other elements can limit algae.

 

[mindme]

I have heard exactly these argues from other fresh water enthusiasts. They dose nitrate because NH3/NH4 will favour microalgae. Adding fish = adding NH3/NH4. However there is no reports of this in saltwater - even if it could be exactly the same way. See this about freshwater plant and Tom Barrs method

Another important method is the one developed by Diana Walstad in the book Ecology of the Planted Aquarium

Sincerely Lasse

Yep, that is the method I used. It worked really well. Before trying his method I was trying to keep my nutrients at certain levels and when they would get out of balance, I'd get algae and my plants wouldn't grow well. Algae would take over and my plants would die.

Using that method my plants grew so fast it ran me out of the hobby. Having to prune plants constantly was more than I wanted to do. Reef tanks may take longer to grow, but it's way less maintenance.

 

[mindme]

I do not think that is the accepted idea, so it's good to not be sold on it.

Algae needs all manner of different chemicals in the water, including a ready source of N and P, but also iron, manganese, zinc, etc.. It also needs lots of other things to grow unchecked, including a place to attach, freedom from predation, appropriate flow rates, etc.

If ANY ONE of those things are missing, algae will not flourish. Predation by herbivores is a big one in many tanks (like mine was) but simple lack of other elements can limit algae.

I dosed a good bit of iron because I had and wanted red plants. Also lots of other trace elements. For whatever weird reason it was like either my plants grew, or the algae did. Rarely did it seem like both would grow and thrive at the same time.

 

[t5Nitro]

Glad to see there are still some discussion going in this thread. As an update, my tank runs a constant 5plm no3 and 0.03 to 0.05 po4 and the hair algae is outta this world grows like mad. Corals like it though from what I can tell. It is no longer where dosing reduces the algae. Im only dosing phosphates, no nitrate dosing.

I also disagree with the above statement that high nutrients and fish = algae because there are plenty of very successful sps reefs on this board with loads of fish, heavy feeding and pristine rocks and tanks. I think thats a simplistic statement with a much more complex nature.

 

[92Miata]

Glad to see there are still some discussion going in this thread. As an update, my tank runs a constant 5plm no3 and 0.03 to 0.05 po4 and the hair algae is outta this world grows like mad. Corals like it though from what I can tell. It is no longer where dosing reduces the algae. Im only dosing phosphates, no nitrate dosing.

I also disagree with the above statement that high nutrients and fish = algae because there are plenty of very successful sps reefs on this board with loads of fish, heavy feeding and pristine rocks and tanks. I think thats a simplistic statement with a much more complex nature.

My guess is that keeping nitrates and phosphates a little higher allows corals to use up all of something else (whether that's iron, or whatever) - which limits the algae. IE - organisms that have other means of acquiring nitrogen and phosphorus do really well in situations when coral/coralline is nitrogen and phosphorus limited.


My experience in my tanks is that when I drive N and P low - I get bad algae. When I keep them reasonable - I get film on the glass - but the tank behaves itself.

 

[t5Nitro]

My guess is that keeping nitrates and phosphates a little higher allows corals to use up all of something else (whether that's iron, or whatever) - which limits the algae. IE - organisms that have other means of acquiring nitrogen and phosphorus do really well in situations when coral/coralline is nitrogen and phosphorus limited.


My experience in my tanks is that when I drive N and P low - I get bad algae. When I keep them reasonable - I get film on the glass - but the tank behaves itself.

In my case you would bump no3 and po4 higher if possible? Maybe goal no3 5-->10 and po4 0.05-->0.1?

 

[Lasse]

I also disagree with the above statement that high nutrients and fish = algae because there are plenty of very successful sps reefs on this board with loads of fish, heavy feeding and pristine rocks and tanks. I think thats a simplistic statement with a much more complex nature.

I think this was valid for fresh water - it is a little bit trickier there - you have few organisms that can serve as grazers in freshwater.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[jda]

First time I have heard this - any links? It is interesting because I thought that nitrogen fixation only can take place in anaerobic compartments and they are hardly to find near photosynthetic corals (corals with zoox) Would love to see these links.

We have had this conversation before... kind of. I read this in a Veron book where corals can recycle building blocks for their symbionts. He stated that once a coral get some building blocks that they don't let them go under normal circumstances - they only need new ones to grow and not just to maintain. This is why an event such as bleaching or other zoox expulsion was so harmful and why zoox was so slow to repopulate later and one reason (among many) that most stonies suffer so much after bleaching. This was especially helpful to corals in the open ocean where building blocks are very scare, but only needing very little to grow ended up working - they don't act like an oligotrohph even in an oligotrophic environment.

Unfortunately, like I have said before, there are no links or studies, but I still have most of my books and if I ever read them again, I will take some photos (if that is even allowed with copyright stuff).

Concerning algae... I have N of about .1 and P of 1-3 PPB and algae would overtake my tank if I did not have snails, urchins, etc. and some occasional manual removal.

 

[Lasse]

@jda - in another thread - a link to this was published - it seems to give you right but the article was published last year and the authors claim (my bold)

anaerobic bacteria isolated from the coral skeleton were cultured for the first time to experimentally clarify the role of these GSB. This characterization includes GSB's abundance, genetic and genomic profiles, organelle structure, and specific metabolic functions and activity.

Did not know that you are clairvoyant

Concerning algae... I have N of about .1 and P of 1-3 PPB and algae would overtake my tank if I did not have snails, urchins, etc. and some occasional manual removal.

It is not metal halide contra LED here - according to the importance of grazers - I´m 110 % with you


Sincerely Lasse

 

[t5Nitro]

I personally just added a handful of small tuxedo urchins. How many snails would you all be comfortable adding in one sitting on a 75g? I'm looking at about 88 snails, 40 of which are dwarf ceriths in order to get free shipping. Assuming the ceriths don't significantly add much bioload.

 

[jda]

That paper is way over my head - I am pretty simple after all. If I am clairvoyant, I need to put that to a good use. I have always experienced that NSW levels of N and P were absolutely no issue in the home aquarium as long as the throughput/availability was high - heavy feeding (ammonia/ammonium), some available P and heavy export. Never found 1 ppb of phosphate to be growth limiting to corals, but it is with other things. Ocean in the areas where acropora come from is about about .005-.01 according to Dr. RH-F.

I would get full size ceriths if you can. They seen to fend off the hermits better. They are terrific algae eaters once acclimated. The urchins are great too. If you lose snails, throw the shells behind the rocks so that hermits can find new homes without killing some of your snails. The ceriths will eat on leftover food, detritus and algae. The urchins will eat coralline if the soft algae is all gone, which is fine with me since it grows so fast. They are both hardy.

Snails and urchins do not add bio load. You did that at feeding time. They can convert some things bound in algae, bacteria and dinos into waterborne organic (and some inorganic) forms again... but no new bio load. Should you run out of algae and have to feed them, then that could add some new, but who cares since having no algae is the goal and at that point your tank might need some additional available building blocks. You can always get rid of some if they do their job too well.

 

[t5Nitro]

Appreciate it. Will be placing a large order for the larger ceriths, trochus, astrea and turbos then. Imagine some new sod that you keep well watered and fed, then drape it over some live rock. Thats my cool tank haha.

 

[jda]

Get out your water change hose and siphon out as much as you can every week or two. Rub the hose over the rock as you go and you can even put a small brush on the end. It really helps. The snails and urchins will eat it down to the roots if they can, but sometimes you have to help them.

 

[Timfish]

First time I have heard this - any links? It is interesting because I thought that nitrogen fixation only can take place in anaerobic compartments and they are hardly to find near photosynthetic corals (corals with zoox) Would love to see these links.


I have seen this article before and i don't really know what I should think about it . . . I do not know if the conclusions in the article are wrong or right - but for me this calcification could not be better during a month

Sincerely Lasse

Here's a scholar.google search for "Corals Diazotrophs Nitrogen" (The first half dozen papers should give info overload. )

We need to keep in mind coral growth and calcification are not in lock step with each other. Dunn, et al, (looking at the effect of PO4) points out "increased coral growth (is) a poor indicator of reef health." (In the above paper, Shantz & Burkpile show PO4 amiliorates the negative effect of nitrate.) If you spend any time digging into the research and chasing links this subject gets pretty complex. This paper by Denis, et al, for example shows increased coral growth, what most of us aquarists would consider to be a good thing, can have negative impacts on a coral's immune system. And this paper, Elahi & Edmunds, shows polyp age might be a factor also.

For myself I've tried in a few instances to track growth and weight and it's just not worked out, I'll forget or be too busy, but I have had some instances of seeing noticable differences in the skeletons of specimans of the same clone line in different systems. Attached is one example of two different colonies of the same frogspawn clone line, the left one is from one of my systems which was roughly 20 years old, the right was from a friends tank. The left one has three polyps in the process of splitting and the right had 4 polyps that were not. PAR levels I remember were similar but the left one was under t%s and DIY LEDs and the right was under 400 MH so that certainly would have been a variable. Sorry, but nitrates and PO4 were not measured however the right one was in an ULNS system feed heavily everyday with frozen foods. Left one the sytem is fed pellets.

 

[Lasse]

Is it in gram? In that case - it indicates a more solid skeleton in the left case and its funny - a ULNS system should mimic natural water and conditions but in this case you got larger but more fragile skeleton.

Thank you for the links

Sincerely Lasse

 

[loli2010]

How's it going? Did you beat the algae?

 

[t5Nitro]

How's it going? Did you beat the algae?

Hey, no, its still rampant in there. For some interval updates, I no longer dose nitrate or phosphate. I added an algae scrubber about 3 weeks ago. I would say the gha is stable but not on the decline. Im adding about 6ml of vibrant weekly on 75 gallon display. Im not sure it helps too much but it definitely makes the water crystal clear. Tried ordering 10 turbo snails in from RC which all arrived dead. I will have to wait on beefing up the CUC until warmer weather. Shipping is high risk at this time of year.