I was Wrong

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

It's an interesting read, but I'm really struggling to see how this applies to aquariums or towards what you are claiming in regards to water changes being needed to "fix" it.

The experiment in the links you provided happened in a matter of days. And I see nothing about carbons that can't be removed by a skimmer and so on. They purposely dosed carbon in excess to get the different responses. Seems like it's just an experiment of what happens when you overdose your carbon dosing as far as our tanks go.

The first link is about disease. I think this is understood about carbon dosing in general, when you carbon dose you are feeding all the bacteria in the tank, rather than just the ones that are beneficial. However, you can dose bacteria also. I dose biodigest every 2 weeks for example. And wouldn't the disease bacteria need to be present in the system to start with?

Also, if this carbon is a food source for the diseases in your link, how does it build up in the system to start with? You keep saying a build up liable doc, and I don't understand how it can be liable doc and also build up over time.

it may not happen in tanks, but your arguments are not convincing reasons it does not.

The organics tested are unlikely to be the ones accumulating in a reef tank, but those tested, for example in the article I posted, will not be skimmed out or bound to GAC.

I think it is a valid and unanswered question whether and how organics impact reef aquariums differently when there are water changes vs when there are not.

 

[mindme]

I theory, that's sensible (at least if you do it often enough).

In practice, I think it only works because corals do not care very much about exact levels because ICP analysis is fraught with inaccuracy. And if that's true, how much is the ICP really helping vs dosing of the same elements based on other measures, such as visual observation or average dosing rates?

Anyone considering ICP testing out to see this thread and the comparative data it contains:

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/h...lts-of-unknown-accuracy-and-precision.910650/

Yeah, I don't think it's about getting exact levels, but rather in range. My worry is about elements going out of that range, such as trending up or down. On some elements, they don't even show up and if they do, it means you've dosed too much. Other elements, I just want to make sure it's not constantly trending up/down.

No doubt some inaccuracy can change the doses test to test, but as long as I'm catching the trends before they get out of control, it doesn't seem to be a big deal. As an example, 3 months ago, 0 copper, 2 months ago a test showed a tiny amount of copper, this month 0 copper again without doing anything. The copper reading was bogus.

Some of them only get dosed once a month, so I'm sure they are changing levels over the month.

I have seen the visual aspects many times previously when trace elements ran low. When I set up this 180g and decided to give no water changes a try, I expected trace elements to take like 6 months or so to run out. Surprisingly, it took less than 2 months. I was dosing tropic marine a/k and it helped and i saw things reverse, however since it's many elements in 2 doses, you can't control the ranges of them. I was already doing ICP tests every 3 months just to keep track of trace elements, and I could see trends starting.

I don't know all the science about how coral take in the minerals, or even if all of them are useful. I suppose I could try them individually and test etc, but honestly I just know that it's working and I don't want to turn my tank into an experiment. I have no doubt my coral are much much more colorful. I can finally see the green under the orange polyps on my digi for example. Previously the orange polyps came out and extended well, they seem mostly the same, but the color under them was so pale it was near white. And the growth has noticeably increased.

 

[mindme]

it may not happen in tanks, but your arguments are not convincing reasons it does not.

The organics tested are unlikely to be the ones accumulating in a reef tank, but those tested, for example in the article I posted, will not be skimmed out or bound to GAC.

I think it is a valid and unanswered question whether and how organics impact reef aquariums differently when there are water changes vs when there are not.

It is a valid question and I'd love to know a way to tell if it is happening in a reef tank.

 

[Timfish]

Hey @Timfish - I'm on team water change and won't claim to understand much of what has been posted . . .

Yeah, it doesn't help new research only adds to the complexity of reef ecosystems including showing there's not only species specific but genotype specific stuff. :beaming-face-with-smiling-eyes: I started really digging into DOC a decade ago after posts about labile and refractory DOC to help understand better what's happening in my systems. About that time I stumbled across Rower's book which is still the best introduction I've found.

Hey @Timfish - I'm on team water change and won't claim to understand much of what has been posted... but... wouldn't the water change reduce much of the microbiome by approximately the same as the labile DOC?

Of course, but the DOC corals and algae release are differentially promoting the microbiomes in the water. (My thinking about microbial stuff was shifted in a conversation with the director of infectious diseases of a local hospital in '97 but PaulB certainly deserves kudo's for bringing up the subject a long time ago on some of the forums.) Water changes will lower the number of microbes detrimental to corals along with detrimental DOC. Ideally, corals will be able to replenish more of the beneficial stuff in the water than the alage does the detrimental stuff. Also, coral DOC largely stays in the coral's mucus layer hopefully promoting the beneficial bacteria that are a critical components to coral immune systems whereas algae DOC promotes increased microbial loads in the water allowing microbes to utilize refractory DOC as a food source not normally available. Surprisingly, one counter intuitive finding is the increase algae DOC production results in lower and in extreme situations no DOC, labile or refractory, in a reef system (Andreas Haas, presetation to Austin Reef Club frag swap, 2015). Here's some of the links I've collected over the years:

These first five do an excellent job of introducing the subject of DOC, corals, algae and microbes and is probably all anyone planning on keeping a reef going for decades needs. Rest is mostly for obsesive types like me:

Total Organic Carbon Pt 1
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/8/aafeature3
Total Organic Carbon Pt 2
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/9/aafeature2
Bacterial Counts in Reef Aquarium Water
https://reefs.com/magazine/bacteria...ing-and-granular-activated-carbon-filtration/
"Coral Reefs in the Microbial Seas" This video compliments Rohwer's book of the same title (Paper back is ~$20, Kindle is ~$10), both deal with the conflicting roles of the different types of DOC in reef ecosystems. While there is overlap bewteen his book and the video both have information not covered by the other and together give a broader view of the complex relationships found in reef ecosystems



Here's a data bomb on microbes and doc and sponges. If it seems overwhelming keep in mind I've taken over 10 years to collect the links so don't feel you need to read or watch them all by the end of the month. Some have to be purchased to read the entire paper but the abstract will have some essential points. (And don't think I've bought all the ones needing purchase. ;) )

Changing Seas - Mysterious Microbes


Nitrogen cycling in hte coral holobiont


BActeria and Sponges


Maintenance of Coral Reef Health (refferences at the end)


Indirect effects of algae on coral: algae‐mediated, microbe‐induced coral mortality
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00937.x
Influence of coral and algal exudates on microbially mediated reef metabolism.
Coral DOC improves oxygen (autotrophy), algae DOC reduces oxygen (heterotrophy).
https://peerj.com/articles/108/?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_campaign=PeerJ_TrendMD_0&utm_medium=TrendMD
Role of elevated organic carbon levels and microbial activity in coral mortality
http://www.int-res.com/articles/meps2006/314/m314p119.pdf
Effects of Coral Reef Benthic Primary Producers on Dissolved Organic Carbon and Microbial Activity
Algae releases significantly more DOC into the water than coral.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0027973
Pathologies and mortality rates caused by organic carbon and nutrient stressors in three Caribbean coral species.
Starch and sugars (doc) caused coral death but not high nitrates, phosphates or ammonium.
http://www.int-res.com/articles/meps2005/294/m294p173.pdf
Visualization of oxygen distribution patterns caused by coral and algae
https://peerj.com/articles/106/
Biological oxygen demand optode analysis of coral reef-associated microbial communities exposed to algal exudates
Exposure to exudates derived from turf algae stimulated higher oxygen drawdown by the coral-associated bacteria.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3719127/
Microbial ecology: Algae feed a shift on coral reefs
https://www.nature.com/articles/nmicrobiol201661
Coral and macroalgal exudates vary in neutral sugar composition and differentially enrich reef bacterioplankton lineages.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23303369
Sugar enrichment provides evidence for a role of nitrogen fixation in coral bleaching
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gcb.13695
Elevated ammonium delays the impairment of the coral-dinoflagellate symbiosis during labile carbon pollution
(here's an argument for maintaining heavy fish loads if you're carbon dosing)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166445X19307192
Excess labile carbon promotes the expression of virulence factors in coral reef bacterioplankton
https://www.nature.com/articles/ismej2017142
Unseen players shape benthic competition on coral reefs.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22944243
Allelochemicals Produced by Brown Macroalgae of the Lobophora Genus Are Active against Coral Larvae and Associated Bacteria, Supporting Pathogenic Shifts to Vibrio Dominance.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27795310
Macroalgae decrease growth and alter microbial community structure of the reef-building coral, Porites astreoides.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22957055
Macroalgal extracts induce bacterial assemblage shifts and sublethal tissue stress in Caribbean corals.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23028648
Biophysical and physiological processes causing oxygen loss from coral reefs.
https://elifesciences.org/articles/49114.pdf
Global microbialization of coral reefs
DDAM Proven
https://www.nature.com/articles/nmicrobiol201642
Coral Reef Microorganisms in a Changing Climate, Fig 3
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7096749/figure/fig3/
Ecosystem Microbiology of Coral Reefs: Linking Genomic, Metabolomic, and Biogeochemical Dynamics from Animal Symbioses to Reefscape Processes
https://msystems.asm.org/content/msys/3/2/e00162-17.full.pdf
Here's stuff on sponges which I think have been badly overlooked as sponges are integral to processing DOC in reef ecosystems. Steve Tyree certainly deserves kudos for promoting them. Sponges are essential recyclers in reef systems but are a double edge sword as they process DOC from corals differently than algae. To some extent they are protecting aquarists who carbon dose from the negative effects of excess labile DOC but research has shown as reef ecosystems are impacted by stressors they can form a positive feedback loop favoring algae hastening phase shifts detrimental to corals.

Element cycling on tropical coral reefs.
This is Jasper de Geoij's ground breaking research on reef sponge finding some species process labile DOC 1000X faster than bacterioplankton. (The introduction is in Dutch but the content is in English.)
https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/files/14555035/13completethesis.pdf
Sponge symbionts and the marine P cycle
https://www.pnas.org/content/112/14/4191
Processing of Naturally Sourced Macroalgal- and Coral-Dissolved Organic Matter (DOM) by High and Low Microbial Abundance Encrusting Sponges
https://www.frontiersin.org/article...nalName=Frontiers_in_Marine_Science&id=640583
Phosphorus sequestration in the form of polyphosphate by microbial symbionts in marine sponges
https://www.pnas.org/content/112/14/4381
Differential recycling of coral and algal dissolved organic matter via the sponge loop.
Sponges treat DOC from algae differently than DOC from corals
https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1365-2435.12758
A Vicious Circle? Altered Carbon and Nutrient Cycling May Explain the Low Resilience of Caribbean Coral Reefs
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/66/6/470/2754308
Surviving in a Marine Desert The Sponge Loop Retains Resources Within Coral Reefs
Dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen are quickly processed by sponges and released back into the reef food web in hours as carbon and nitrogen rich detritus.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279061640_2013_deGoeij_Science_Sponge_loop
Natural Diet of Coral-Excavating Sponges Consists Mainly of Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3934968/
The Role of Marine Sponges in Carbon and Nitrogen Cycles of COral Reefs and Nearshore Environments.
https://search.proquest.com/openvie...9d1e5/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
BActeria and Sponges


A Vicious Circle? Altered Carbon and Nutrient Cycling May Explain the Low Resilience of Caribbean Coral Reefs
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/66/6/470/2754308

 

[Timfish]

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/what-causes-fish-corals-to-die.858060/#post-9349546
The others are easily solvable, but this one is interesting. How many years does it take for this to happen?

It's an interesting read, but I'm really struggling to see how this applies to aquariums or towards what you are claiming in regards to water changes being needed to "fix" it.

The experiment in the links you provided happened in a matter of days. And I see nothing about carbons that can't be removed by a skimmer and so on. They purposely dosed carbon in excess to get the different responses. Seems like it's just an experiment of what happens when you overdose your carbon dosing as far as our tanks go.

The first link is about disease. I think this is understood about carbon dosing in general, when you carbon dose you are feeding all the bacteria in the tank, rather than just the ones that are beneficial. However, you can dose bacteria also. I dose biodigest every 2 weeks for example. And wouldn't the disease bacteria need to be present in the system to start with?

Also, if this carbon is a food source for the diseases in your link, how does it build up in the system to start with? You keep saying a build up liable doc, and I don't understand how it can be liable doc and also build up over time.

Pathogens are as ubuquitus as the beneficial stuff in our systems. Sorry if I wasn't clear about labile DOC building up since that's being consumed pretty much as fast as it's released. The problem is it's promoting shifts in the microbiomes in the water and in the coral microbiomes that are potentially pathogenic or may cause coral death by suffocation. None of the research I've read suggests any addition of labile carbon can beneficial. See my post post #56 for additional research and comments.

It is about causing diseases in our corals. From a video refferenced in this thread and in the thread you linked in an earlier post Forest Rohwer made these points:

@ ~6:30 Less than 2% of the microbial stuff can be cultured

@ ~11:30 running experiments similar to the one I posted before the only thing that killed corals was the addition of DOC, nutrients, heat and anything else they tried didn't kill corals.

@ ~24:12 All stressors, DOC, temperature, pH, and nutrients promote the realative proportion of pathogenic microbes.

 

[Garf]

Pathogens are as ubuquitus as the beneficial stuff in our systems. Sorry if I wasn't clear about labile DOC building up since that's being consumed pretty much as fast as it's released. The problem is it's promoting shifts in the microbiomes in the water and in the coral microbiomes that are potentially pathogenic or may cause coral death by suffocation. None of the research I've read suggests any addition of labile carbon can beneficial. See my post post #56 for additional research and comments.

It is about causing diseases in our corals. From a video refferenced in this thread and in the thread you linked in an earlier post Forest Rohwer made these points:

@ ~6:30 Less than 2% of the microbial stuff can be cultured

@ ~11:30 running experiments similar to the one I posted before the only thing that killed corals was the addition of DOC, nutrients, heat and anything else they tried didn't kill corals.

@ ~24:12 All stressors, DOC, temperature, pH, and nutrients promote the realative proportion of pathogenic microbes.

Folks don’t understand all these things are washed away in the sea. Tanks are not the sea.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Just as an fyi, I worry about toxins that may accumulate in no water change systems if they are not removed by other methods. Creatures in our tanks spend a lot of effort trying to make themselves or their nearby environments toxic to other creatures.

The often do this by making nasty compounds that they may store up (and release when they die) or secrete into the water.

 

[mindme]

Pathogens are as ubuquitus as the beneficial stuff in our systems. Sorry if I wasn't clear about labile DOC building up since that's being consumed pretty much as fast as it's released. The problem is it's promoting shifts in the microbiomes in the water and in the coral microbiomes that are potentially pathogenic or may cause coral death by suffocation. None of the research I've read suggests any addition of labile carbon can beneficial. See my post post #56 for additional research and comments.

It is about causing diseases in our corals. From a video refferenced in this thread and in the thread you linked in an earlier post Forest Rohwer made these points:

@ ~6:30 Less than 2% of the microbial stuff can be cultured

@ ~11:30 running experiments similar to the one I posted before the only thing that killed corals was the addition of DOC, nutrients, heat and anything else they tried didn't kill corals.

@ ~24:12 All stressors, DOC, temperature, pH, and nutrients promote the realative proportion of pathogenic microbes.

Yeah, I'm just not following how something can be a fuel for something, and build up at the same time long term.

I can understand maybe something triggers the shift suddenly, such as eating too much sugar in our own diets can cause bad bacteria to grow.

So what you are telling me is that there is bacteria(and other such things) in my tank right now that is bad. And it's somehow staying alive in low numbers, but at the same time it's food source is building up over time, which leads to disease in my coral.

It makes no sense to me, I'm sorry. If the food source is present long enough to build up...then why isn't it being taken in the entire time? It's not like the bacteria and such in my stomach is sitting around going - well I see all that sugar over there, but I need to see more of it before I decide to eat it and multiply. Instead, they eat and consume based on the nutrients availability.

So where is this shift coming from? Your experiment added and basically overdosed a carbon source. That was the cause of the shift in the experiment, not this long term build up that you claim can only go away with water changes.

And it's the same thing with the ocean. There are events that trigger those things. Too much of one or more factors combine with the existing conditions, not just because "well it's been 100 years, time for this to trigger".

I can see where we might add too much of something etc to our tanks and spur a shift of sorts, but that wasn't the discussion.

It sounds mostly like you are talking about old tank syndrome, but that happens to people who do water changes also. Adding in bacteria can seem to help in that area.

 

[mindme]

Folks don’t understand all these things are washed away in the sea. Tanks are not the sea.

Well I think that's a two way street for starters. Our tanks do not have the diversity or the complexity of the ocean. The environment doesn't change causing our skimmers to cut off, or our nutrients to stop coming in or out. We are able to maintain ideal temperatures, rather than having weeks of excessive uncontrollable heat. We don't have uncontrolled nutrients being dumped in our tank from fertilizers run offs, and we are able to keep our tanks pollutant free for the most part.

So while we don't have the luxury of the way nature deals with many things, at the same time if we could control the elements in the oceans coral reefs as well as we can our own tanks, there wouldn't be a need to study coral bleaching to start with.

 

[mindme]

Just as an fyi, I worry about toxins that may accumulate in no water change systems if they are not removed by other methods. Creatures in our tanks spend a lot of effort trying to make themselves or their nearby environments toxic to other creatures.

The often do this by making nasty compounds that they may store up (and release when they die) or secrete into the water.

Coral warfare is certainly a concern. I am running activated carbon right now because my mixed tank contains a few sps and also leathers. I've read that the leathers can cause issues for the sps. I hope the carbon will help but I don't know. I'm not having issues so that's a good sign.

I'll probably move my leathers to my 29g tank in the next month or 2. I'll miss having my finger leather in there, but the toadstool needs more room anyway. I didn't really plan for it, was just something I had to throw on for an IPSF order, plus I like them a lot. I'm moving the clownfish/pair and the RBTA's into a 24g cube I'm redoing, so I'm thinking I will just turn the 29g into a low maintenance softie tank.

Another thing I worry about is die off. Not because of not doing water changes, but rather because my coral are in a few places growing over each other. I'm straight up going to lose a favia for example because I have another encrusting coral that is growing over it. I tried to remove the favia from the rock, but it was too late, it had already grow on it and wouldn't come off. It's already half way grown over at this point. And then in my zoa/paly garden I messed up and put a bigger than I realized polyp, and it's growing over everything. Who knows what those things release into the water. But for now, all of them are growing like crazy, they even covered the under parts of the ledges.

But is doing water changes really going to combat this? 20% of the toxins being removed every 2 weeks doesn't sound like a formula to success for me. I think if this is an issue, it's going to need to be addressed in other ways.

 

[jda]

But is doing water changes really going to combat this? 20% of the toxins being removed every 2 weeks doesn't sound like a formula to success for me. I think if this is an issue, it's going to need to be addressed in other ways.

If you start with 100 units of an imaginary toxin, just 10 water changes at the hypothetical 20% get this down to 10.7 units. A year at 20% every 2 weeks (26 water changes) is well below 1 unit. Assume that it took 12 months for those toxins to develop (so 8 units a month), then the no water change tank is at 200 units and the water change tank is still below 1 after another year.

I saw something once that even 10% monthly water changes was like 50x less toxic than doing nothing and letting accumulate, along with the increase. 50x! 10% a month is quite sustainable for most folks.

Some don't feel compelled that toxins are a thing, but you are inclined to think that they are, then water changes do indeed make a HUGE difference. Exponential stuff is powerful.

Edit: the part that Dr. RFH was saying about tank buildup and corals store up is important... if you are already at a low level, then a larger dump has a better chance to be harmless than if you are already near the tipping point with accumulation. This can be true with death as well as just cyclical/seasonal toxin dumps.

 

[mindme]

If you start with 100 units of an imaginary toxin, just 10 water changes at the hypothetical 20% get this down to 10.7 units. A year at 20% every 2 weeks (26 water changes) is well below 1 unit. Assume that it took 12 months for those toxins to develop (so 8 units a month), then the no water change tank is at 200 units and the water change tank is still below 1 after another year.

I saw something once that even 10% monthly water changes was like 50x less toxic than doing nothing and letting accumulate, along with the increase. 50x! 10% a month is quite sustainable for most folks.

Some don't feel compelled that toxins are a thing, but you are inclined to think that they are, then water changes do indeed make a HUGE difference. Exponential stuff is powerful.

Edit: the part that Dr. RFH was saying about tank buildup and corals store up is important... if you are already at a low level, then a larger dump has a better chance to be harmless than if you are already near the tipping point with accumulation. This can be true with death as well as just cyclical/seasonal toxin dumps.

Why would the imaginary toxin stop being added to the tank?

I think your post mostly highlights how ineffective water changes would be at dealing with them. 10 water changes for me at 40g a water change is 400 gallons of water to fix a problem in a 200g tank, of which would take nearly 5 months to complete.

And again, that's only if the toxin is no longer being added.

 

[mindme]

Yeah, it doesn't help new research only adds to the complexity of reef ecosystems including showing there's not only species specific but genotype specific stuff. :beaming-face-with-smiling-eyes: I started really digging into DOC a decade ago after posts about labile and refractory DOC to help understand better what's happening in my systems. About that time I stumbled across Rower's book which is still the best introduction I've found.




Of course, but the DOC corals and algae release are differentially promoting the microbiomes in the water. (My thinking about microbial stuff was shifted in a conversation with the director of infectious diseases of a local hospital in '97 but PaulB certainly deserves kudo's for bringing up the subject a long time ago on some of the forums.) Water changes will lower the number of microbes detrimental to corals along with detrimental DOC. Ideally, corals will be able to replenish more of the beneficial stuff in the water than the alage does the detrimental stuff. Also, coral DOC largely stays in the coral's mucus layer hopefully promoting the beneficial bacteria that are a critical components to coral immune systems whereas algae DOC promotes increased microbial loads in the water allowing microbes to utilize refractory DOC as a food source not normally available. Surprisingly, one counter intuitive finding is the increase algae DOC production results in lower and in extreme situations no DOC, labile or refractory, in a reef system (Andreas Haas, presetation to Austin Reef Club frag swap, 2015). Here's some of the links I've collected over the years:

These first five do an excellent job of introducing the subject of DOC, corals, algae and microbes and is probably all anyone planning on keeping a reef going for decades needs. Rest is mostly for obsesive types like me:

Total Organic Carbon Pt 1
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/8/aafeature3
Total Organic Carbon Pt 2
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/9/aafeature2
Bacterial Counts in Reef Aquarium Water
https://reefs.com/magazine/bacteria...ing-and-granular-activated-carbon-filtration/
"Coral Reefs in the Microbial Seas" This video compliments Rohwer's book of the same title (Paper back is ~$20, Kindle is ~$10), both deal with the conflicting roles of the different types of DOC in reef ecosystems. While there is overlap bewteen his book and the video both have information not covered by the other and together give a broader view of the complex relationships found in reef ecosystems



Here's a data bomb on microbes and doc and sponges. If it seems overwhelming keep in mind I've taken over 10 years to collect the links so don't feel you need to read or watch them all by the end of the month. Some have to be purchased to read the entire paper but the abstract will have some essential points. (And don't think I've bought all the ones needing purchase. ;) )

Changing Seas - Mysterious Microbes


Nitrogen cycling in hte coral holobiont


BActeria and Sponges


Maintenance of Coral Reef Health (refferences at the end)


Indirect effects of algae on coral: algae‐mediated, microbe‐induced coral mortality
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00937.x
Influence of coral and algal exudates on microbially mediated reef metabolism.
Coral DOC improves oxygen (autotrophy), algae DOC reduces oxygen (heterotrophy).
https://peerj.com/articles/108/?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_campaign=PeerJ_TrendMD_0&utm_medium=TrendMD
Role of elevated organic carbon levels and microbial activity in coral mortality
http://www.int-res.com/articles/meps2006/314/m314p119.pdf
Effects of Coral Reef Benthic Primary Producers on Dissolved Organic Carbon and Microbial Activity
Algae releases significantly more DOC into the water than coral.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0027973
Pathologies and mortality rates caused by organic carbon and nutrient stressors in three Caribbean coral species.
Starch and sugars (doc) caused coral death but not high nitrates, phosphates or ammonium.
http://www.int-res.com/articles/meps2005/294/m294p173.pdf
Visualization of oxygen distribution patterns caused by coral and algae
https://peerj.com/articles/106/
Biological oxygen demand optode analysis of coral reef-associated microbial communities exposed to algal exudates
Exposure to exudates derived from turf algae stimulated higher oxygen drawdown by the coral-associated bacteria.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3719127/
Microbial ecology: Algae feed a shift on coral reefs
https://www.nature.com/articles/nmicrobiol201661
Coral and macroalgal exudates vary in neutral sugar composition and differentially enrich reef bacterioplankton lineages.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23303369
Sugar enrichment provides evidence for a role of nitrogen fixation in coral bleaching
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gcb.13695
Elevated ammonium delays the impairment of the coral-dinoflagellate symbiosis during labile carbon pollution
(here's an argument for maintaining heavy fish loads if you're carbon dosing)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166445X19307192
Excess labile carbon promotes the expression of virulence factors in coral reef bacterioplankton
https://www.nature.com/articles/ismej2017142
Unseen players shape benthic competition on coral reefs.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22944243
Allelochemicals Produced by Brown Macroalgae of the Lobophora Genus Are Active against Coral Larvae and Associated Bacteria, Supporting Pathogenic Shifts to Vibrio Dominance.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27795310
Macroalgae decrease growth and alter microbial community structure of the reef-building coral, Porites astreoides.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22957055
Macroalgal extracts induce bacterial assemblage shifts and sublethal tissue stress in Caribbean corals.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23028648
Biophysical and physiological processes causing oxygen loss from coral reefs.
https://elifesciences.org/articles/49114.pdf
Global microbialization of coral reefs
DDAM Proven
https://www.nature.com/articles/nmicrobiol201642
Coral Reef Microorganisms in a Changing Climate, Fig 3
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7096749/figure/fig3/
Ecosystem Microbiology of Coral Reefs: Linking Genomic, Metabolomic, and Biogeochemical Dynamics from Animal Symbioses to Reefscape Processes
https://msystems.asm.org/content/msys/3/2/e00162-17.full.pdf
Here's stuff on sponges which I think have been badly overlooked as sponges are integral to processing DOC in reef ecosystems. Steve Tyree certainly deserves kudos for promoting them. Sponges are essential recyclers in reef systems but are a double edge sword as they process DOC from corals differently than algae. To some extent they are protecting aquarists who carbon dose from the negative effects of excess labile DOC but research has shown as reef ecosystems are impacted by stressors they can form a positive feedback loop favoring algae hastening phase shifts detrimental to corals.

Element cycling on tropical coral reefs.
This is Jasper de Geoij's ground breaking research on reef sponge finding some species process labile DOC 1000X faster than bacterioplankton. (The introduction is in Dutch but the content is in English.)
https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/files/14555035/13completethesis.pdf
Sponge symbionts and the marine P cycle
https://www.pnas.org/content/112/14/4191
Processing of Naturally Sourced Macroalgal- and Coral-Dissolved Organic Matter (DOM) by High and Low Microbial Abundance Encrusting Sponges
https://www.frontiersin.org/article...nalName=Frontiers_in_Marine_Science&id=640583
Phosphorus sequestration in the form of polyphosphate by microbial symbionts in marine sponges
https://www.pnas.org/content/112/14/4381
Differential recycling of coral and algal dissolved organic matter via the sponge loop.
Sponges treat DOC from algae differently than DOC from corals
https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1365-2435.12758
A Vicious Circle? Altered Carbon and Nutrient Cycling May Explain the Low Resilience of Caribbean Coral Reefs
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/66/6/470/2754308
Surviving in a Marine Desert The Sponge Loop Retains Resources Within Coral Reefs
Dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen are quickly processed by sponges and released back into the reef food web in hours as carbon and nitrogen rich detritus.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279061640_2013_deGoeij_Science_Sponge_loop
Natural Diet of Coral-Excavating Sponges Consists Mainly of Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3934968/
The Role of Marine Sponges in Carbon and Nitrogen Cycles of COral Reefs and Nearshore Environments.
https://search.proquest.com/openvie...9d1e5/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
BActeria and Sponges


A Vicious Circle? Altered Carbon and Nutrient Cycling May Explain the Low Resilience of Caribbean Coral Reefs
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/66/6/470/2754308

While there are certainly some interesting videos in this link dump you've posted, what you've actually done is responded with a logical fallacy known as Gish Gallop.

Where by you simply post a bunch of information that really has little to do with the topic as a means to overload the debate with irrelevant information.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop

 

[jda]

I don't care if people change water, or not. However, not just with this issue, but you probably need to open your eyes to new ideas and maybe even comprehend a bit more of what people are tying to tell you. I totally outlined a scenario where the toxin was still being added and the numbers were like 200 to less than 1 with the water change that you outlined. If you think that is an argument for ineffectiveness, then it might be a good idea not to keep live creatures in your home. 200x less is pretty effective.

It is far more likely that the post was either skimmed or just some bias is not allowing you to see what is being typed. Either way, something of value was missed.

 

[mindme]

I don't care if people change water, or not. However, not just with this issue, but you probably need to open your eyes to new ideas and maybe even comprehend a bit more of what people are tying to tell you. I totally outlined a scenario where the toxin was still being added and the numbers were like 200 to less than 1 with the water change that you outlined. If you think that is an argument for ineffectiveness, then it might be a good idea not to keep live creatures in your home. 200x less is pretty effective.

It is far more likely that the post was either skimmed or just some bias is not allowing you to see what is being typed. Either way, something of value was missed.

Yes, I did miss where you added more. Sorry.

I've done the same math before, but for nitrates rather than toxins. Same principle though. But just like nitrates, if you have more being added constantly, the water changes do not keep up. The assumption in the math is limited amounts of the pollutant we want to remove. Change the 8 to a higher number and it can't keep up.

So yeah it works to an extent on things. But I still think waiting 5 months is a long time if your tank is being affected by toxins.

 

[WVNed]

I have watched these debates for more than a decade.
I surrendered. You have all convinced me. I do it all. AWC, dosing trace elements, LaCL, biopellets, sulfur nitrate reactors, ozone and skimming.
I don't recommend what I am doing to anyone but it works for me.

Feels more like witchcraft than science anymore. I would use salt but I have spilled enough I am sure there are no evil spirits here. If you feel something touching you in the dark you are by the sump and it's a large crab looking to eat.

 

[mindme]

I have watched these debates for more than a decade.
I surrendered. You have all convinced me. I do it all. AWC, dosing trace elements, LaCL, biopellets, sulfur nitrate reactors, ozone and skimming.
I don't recommend what I am doing to anyone but it works for me.

Feels more like witchcraft than science anymore. I would use salt but I have spilled enough I am sure there are no evil spirits here. If you feel something touching you in the dark you are by the sump and it's a large crab looking to eat.

If I ever start doing water changes again, I will still keep dosing elements too.

Do you find you have to dose more or less due to the water changes?

 

[WVNed]

If I ever start doing water changes again, I will still keep dosing elements too.

Do you find you have to dose more or less due to the water changes?

I decreased the amount slightly. I am also using TM A+ and K-.

 

[jda]

Quick math and with a monthly add of the imaginary 20, the numbers after the second year are 340 to 22. There is no argument that dilution works.

Again, not saying that it matters, but it is worth remembering when the time comes.

 

[mindme]

Quick math and with a monthly add of the imaginary 20, the numbers after the second year are 340 to 22. There is no argument that dilution works.

Again, not saying that it matters, but it is worth remembering when the time comes.

Yeah, I would just do the water changes one after the other than over time. The only time I've done a water change in the past 1 and 1/2 years it was 4 water changes in less than a week for all of them. Specifically to lower the amount of aluminum in the water. Helps most with the bigger numbers, then it gets to where I don't find them all that effective.