Velcro
2500 Club Member
Isn't 35 ppt = 1.0267 ?
How to successfully keep SPS Corals!
- Thread starter revhtree
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Isn't 35 ppt = 1.0267 ?
Velcro
2500 Club Member
Half the time the scales don't even match up corrctly on refractometers.
Tek
Well-Known Member
Some softies such as leathers slime often and it affects SPS while other softies enjoy dirtier parameters. Some people run activated carbon to counter slime/toxins but I have found running carbon 24/7 to be detrimental to SPS.
I keep a mixed tank with SPS parameters, but I feed the fish more heavily to keep the softies/LPS happy with extra N03.
Scott.h
Valuable Member
I respectfully disagree with Red Sea. I would never keep my alk that high, even if my nitrates were 70. Also if I kept my nutrient levels where they suggest, and went a day without dosing nitrate or phosphate, it would end up zero in a hurry. I would also end up creating an imbalance swing trying to chase that number.
2-4/.018 would be far better knowing it is always present.
Although I would assume there is some knowledge behind the company, don't forget they benefit by selling product. To this day my LFS tries to push product at me when I walk in to buy fish food. It's their job.
mcarroll
10K Club member
Never heard of a refractometer conspiracy....and ours come from all over the place, including other industries. I think they match (mine is fine and not a fancy one), but folks may have a tough time visually lining up the readings. I dunno....a guess. ;)
Remember that the "low alk" thing is only connected to carbon-source dosing. All kinds of tanks used to run their alk at around 11 dKH....it was considered the ideal for stony coral tanks.
Not because 11 is a magic number or because corals "just like 11", but because it gave us plenty of reserve alkalinity to keep everything stable until the next dose or next water change. No carbon source dosing back then AND no dosers. (For the most part.)
I "only" ran my stony tank this way for around 7 years. ;)
Scott.h
Valuable Member
It's possible that other factors com into play. My sps tank is very basic. I've never Carbon dosed that tank. No granular carbon, no gfo (ever), no water changes, and I daily add liquid phosphate and nitrate. In fact if I didn't need the benefit of the outside air I wouldn't even run a skimmer 24/7. I can tell when my alk creeps higher then 7.4 in this system just my looking at the pigment in the tips and base of the coral. If I ran it higher then 8.5 I'd bet I'd lose 1/3. It's not a uls, nor would I strive for that. But that's my experience. I believe that many run their tanks considerably higher then I do with great success, but for some reason something I'm doing makes this my experience, even before this specific system.
mcarroll
10K Club member
Not that I would get reactionary about it, but to the extent that you care/wonder about it, I would definitely consider that abnormal and to be a problem.
Compare with some older tanks that kept 11 dHK to see what the differences are and I'm sure something will jump out at you.
BTW, if you run a really high pH (if you track it, where does it peak during day and night?) then your corals may be starving for CO2. A sure way to mess up their photosynthetic gear – which would lead to bleaching.
A skimmer's main function (IMO, at least) is aeration....and though it's a big fad to run an airline and boost your pH, don't forget there are ramifications to everything and they are rarely as simple as advertised. ;) CO2 is more or less a nutrient like anything else corals require.
Lemme know what you think!
mcarroll
10K Club member
@Scott.h check out Light, Alkalinity, Nutrients. The CO2 subject gets a decent treatment there.
If there's anything else "too modern" or "not old-school" about a set setup, these are the things I tend to look at with a hairy eyeball.
If there's anything else "too modern" or "not old-school" about a set setup, these are the things I tend to look at with a hairy eyeball.
Scott.h
Valuable Member
I was thinking it could be related more to (high co2) lower ph then anything. I do track ph in both my home tanks. Both tanks have about a 1.5 daily swing, but due to this being a cold temperature state, my (smaller) house is pretty air tight. My mixed reef tank occasionally dips below 7.8 due to vinegar, but my sps stays around the 8.0 mark. Which really isn't high or low. In the summer when I'm able to crack windows I'll see 8.2ish. I never paid attention to any signs of rtn setting in, if it was indeed during this state. But typically when I see high ph I have to bump my doser to raise my alk. Typically when I have my alk creep up higher then I'd like -around the 7.5 mark, it's when the family has spent more time (breathing) inside the house hence lowing ph/raising alk. Anything is possible. I did read that thread back a few months ago and found it interesting he had that 2.0 alk swing and seen no adverse effects. I've never had a swing that high and also why I'm more apt to stick with a combo of kalk and two part. Everyone at some point seems to have something to wrong with reactors.
Elegance Coral
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2014
- Messages
- 560
- Reaction score
- 673
300 gallon display. 8'x3'x20"
100 gallon sump.
Skimmer. Modified old school marine solutions SWC 300. 12" diameter by 24" tall. Powered by two old school psk 2500's and one modern psk 1000
Apex controler
Lighting. Two 400w radiums in large Luminarc Reflectors, and two 250w 20k mh's. 12 hours on the 250's and 11 hours on the 400's.
BRS dosing pumps for cal and alk. I really need a calcium reactor........
2 Nextreef reactors. One GAC and one GFO
100 micron socks. 50 micron for a day after maintenance.
Dart return pump
ATO. Switches from Autotopoff.com and aqualifter pump.
kalkwasser stirrer.
Parameters
PO4 always undetectable
NO3 undetectable. Okay, to be honest, NO3 creeps up a tad from time to time, when/if I don't change my socks....
Cal. ~490
Alk. ~12
Mag ~1400
Specific gravity. 1.026
Salt RC
Temp 82
Tank is ran BB with return pump pushing across bottom of tank, away from overflow, to keep detritus from settling. Minimal rock placed on 1" pieces of 1" PVC pipe, to allow water flow under the rocks. 5 powerheads pushing across surface towards overflow. Socks changed daily, when possible. 100 gallon water change every two or three months. Carbon and GFO changed with water change. Lots of fish fed heavily.
I run my system with the idea that I can run very, very, very, low levels of inorganics, like PO4 and NO3, if I provide my livestock plenty of nitrogen and phosphorus in the form of organics (food). Organic particles don't remain in my system long enough to rot/decompose and produce inorganics. Other than the inorganics produced by the fish themselves. The zooxanthellae in my corals are forced to sustain themselves on the waste produced from the food my corals eat. Not on PO4 and NO3 in the open water of the system. As is done in nature. IMHO, it is the food I'm providing that allows me to maintain high alk and low NO3 and PO4 without burning tips. I'm not saying my method is for everyone, or that it comes without risk. My corals are pushed to grow at a very rapid pace. If I slack on feeding, or bump the ALK a little to fast/high, the growing tip will outpace the nutrition supply, and I will end up with burnt tips. I am walking a tight rope, and I know it. I just love seeing those white growth tips........
Peace
EC
mcarroll
10K Club member
Why no water changes? IME it's not something to be all that strict about....some of my tanks best periods were when I was doing a 5% water change every morning. :) (Although things are fine now and it's been a years since I did regular water changes.)
Try disconnecting the outside line and let CO2 match your house level for a month. If that turns out to be a non-issue, then try raising alk to 8.0 and see what happens. (Corals should just grow more....there should be no downside.)
Awesome tank! And don't change a thing – but corals do "eat" plenty of dissolved nutrients in the wild. Nothing bad or even abnormal about it. :)
(I bet you'd be surprised at how much your corals consume in your tank if that was something we could know.)
Scott.h
Valuable Member
Ultimately what is your reason for doing water changes? I realize some need to, although I've converted a high nutrient system over to no water changes with great success. I personally don't see a need for water changes as long as there is adiquate filtration. Have you ever tried going for a long period to see how it plays out? If you did the "standard" of a 10% weekly water change and monitored alk closely (like 10 times a day) or with a kh guardian what you might find (at least what I seen) is that changing out saltwater could be enough to stunt corals from absorbing alk for a day or so. Not to the point you can see it, but if they go a bit without absorbing it's enough for them to notice the change you made. It's all about consistency and stability, right?
The second thing I've found is no matter what brand of salt you use none of them contain what I consider minor trace elements. None of which are vital to keeping things alive and growing, but can produce a noticeable difference in coloration. So if I were to do a water change I'd just be removing some of the elements I just added in previous. I'd have to test and then re add. If I can convert a system hat used to run nitrates at 65 with 17% weekly water changes to the point I have to stop carbon dosing and having to actually add liquid po4 and no3 then I truely see no reason for it. If you know what's in your water, learn what those specific corals consume on a weekly basis, and leave it alone.. not only is it easier but I've had better success going this route then I have before.
Here is a link to my 100 gallon mixed reef high nutrient conversion.
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/m...trate-system-converted-to-full-triton.325865/
mcarroll
10K Club member
Lots of reasons for doing them, but none of them ultimate. ;)
Mostly you can get my thinking on them from here: Water Changes in Reef Aquaria (check out the links and references on that article too).
I don't really see water changes as a substitute for filtration or vis versa.
If used properly I think water changes, in a nutshell, aid overall stability. They are a good tool.
That doesn't mean they are required – just that I wouldn't buy into any no-waterchange hype that contradicts that.
(It's probably worth stating that I know some folks are absolutely dedicated to hyping no-water changes. That's fine as folks hype lots of things in this hobby. ;))
Personally...
I don't really follow a "method". Maybe you would count The Berlin Method, but even that might be a stretch for me to say I really follow. I do have live rock and a protein skimmer as the backbone of my system. :rolleyes:
I have no time for water changes right now even if I wanted to do them.
If/when I start doing water changes again, I'd most likely setup an auto-water change system with some kind of dosing pump .
Right now, I dose food with an Eheim Autofeeder and Recipe 2 with a Jebao 3-head peristaltic doser – that's it. Pretty easy. Plus the DIY salts cost next to nothing.
I've done about one big water change in the last 4-5 years....basically since my A Water Change A Day... thread ended. Someday you should try daily water changes – an easy way like I did them! – and see how you like it. ;)
Besides notes on that last water change, there may be a little other interesting stuff in my build thread too: mcarroll's 100 Gallon System
What element would you say is missing? For example from Instant Ocean or Reef Crystals?
There's this as sort of a guide: Abundance of Elements x Periodic Table (fwd to post #4).
(I always keep in mind the AMAAAAZING tanks that have been raised and photographed through the last 20 or more years using nothing but IO salts.....my own tank included. ;) From nano's to public aquariums and every type of reef in between.)
That sounds like progress! :)
DIY salt? What????
mcarroll
10K Club member
Salts. :) As in calcium chloride, magnesium chloride, magnesium sulfate and sodium bicarbonate for Recipe 2. :)
Although you can make your own artificial salt mix!
The formula is actually quite old (originating in the 1940's, with updates) and it's even on Wikipedia and has an ASTM standard number.
- Artificial seawater - Wikipedia
- http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.4319/lo.1967.12.1.0176/abstract will get to a PDF of "PREPARATION OF ARTIFICIAL SEAWATER" by Kester, et al.
Scott.h
Valuable Member
From the article:
"Water changes can typically accomplish two things. These are:
- To raise the concentration of a depleted "something" that is at a higher concentration in the new water
- To reduce the concentration of an elevated "something" is at a lower concentration in the new water"
Beyond those specifics, some feel like removing the detritus will remove future potential issues, lower nitrates, replentish ca mg kh, and other "trace" elements. Some do it just because everyone else does it. I'm not saying someone shouldn't change water, but just know why you are doing it. Someone may have a small tank with a hang on the back filter. A 50% water weekly change may be necessary. So be it. But if we have the technology to strip nutrients out of the water to the point of having to add them back in, being able to test for elements that we couldn't test for 6 years ago, why do it? You made mention of public aquariums. I questioned 2 public aquariums that I have visited. They don't do water changes. It would take so much water!
I'd be careful making homemade salt only because of the purity of the raw elements. I like IO. In fact I have a bag on hand now. Just in case my kid throws lead based paint chips in the tank ;)
Paletta, sonjay, jason fox use it. Good enough for me! What I was referring to is the minor trace elements. Things like zink and Vanadium are found in natural seawater in low concentrations. Synthetic salt mixes don't have elements like those. Take IO for example. One bucket may have mg at 1150 while another may be at 1400. The same variation could be said about calcium in another brand. If the salt companies had that kind of variation with zink it would wipe out a tank. Although those elements aren't critical, there is a benefit to add them (and many others) in. It's part of the secret of zeovit, but the bottles are "mystery" bottles. But if someone is going to take the time to measure and control those things, I feel it's pointless to suck them out on a weekely basis. Here is a screen shot of what I'm referring to with trace elements in (my) new salt mixed mixed at 35 ppt:
Last edited:
mcarroll
10K Club member
I'm not sure what secret you're referring to?
Do you mean there's a theory on what some or any of these trace elements actually do?
Do tell! :)
(I'm looking over the scholar to see if there's anything out there.)
Scott.h
Valuable Member
At one point I wanted to go zeo. I admired what a zeo tank could achieve and did some research on the system. Granted I think one could figure it out and be successful no matter the "system". But they have all those little blue bottles with unknown elements inside, hence me referring to the fact that they don't want you to know what's in them. Basically just trust their dosing regimen. Btw.. also the part that swayed me away.. I don't like the fact that they run the tank at zero nutrients as to me that's running a risk I don't want to take. But as far as the bottles go.. at least some are said to be trace elements. I theoretically do the same thing but my bottles are just labeled as what element they are. And instead of "dosing 3-5 drops of bottle x per day per 100 gallons" of water it makes more sense to me to test and add accordingly instead of hoping I got it right with drops.
As far as the benefit of adding tiny doses of several trace elements.. first off I can't say I can't tell a difference in growth. But what I can say is that they tend to look about 20% more vivid in color. For lack of a better reference it's like buying a frag on line at its best appearance, best lighting, etc but when you put it in the tank it's never has quite the same look as that picture. I've seen some color pop under regular t5 (not blue led they automatically tend to make them pop) that looks pretty dang impressive compared to what they looked like when I bought them. For awhile I backed off on my weekly dosings. I'll admit it it can be a pain after awhile. I thought without doing water changes and testing often, the elements may stay in there. I didn't want to OD either. After awhile corals started lightening up. Tested, and most were zero again. I just feel it makes a noticeable difference in appearance, basically.
