I was just thinking that myself! There is so much science behind all of this. Truly fascinating.I had never considered how the structure of the coral could promote flow within itself. So many fascinating aspects to reef keeping!
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.
I was just thinking that myself! There is so much science behind all of this. Truly fascinating.I had never considered how the structure of the coral could promote flow within itself. So many fascinating aspects to reef keeping!
Although long out of fashion with the folks who tout flow GPH numbers like it is ***** size, a true wavebox will get flow and water between every branch, crevice, nook and cranny that flow pumps cannot reach and nothing is untouched. You get back and forth scrubbing 24x7. I will never have a tank without one... and that is saying something since I am calculating that the new tank will require 4x Tunze 6100s in a box to get a 1" wave.
I'm a big fan of Tunze products, and it has been my intent to compare calcium sulfate dissolution rates (the 'clod' method) when using a Wave Box and an appropriately sized propeller pump. I suspect the prop pump will beat the wave box, but if I knew the result ahead of time I could simply skip the experiment. But it really depends upon the animals being maintained and their water velocity saturation rates.Although long out of fashion with the folks who tout flow GPH numbers like it is ***** size, a true wavebox will get flow and water between every branch, crevice, nook and cranny that flow pumps cannot reach and nothing is untouched. You get back and forth scrubbing 24x7. I will never have a tank without one... and that is saying something since I am calculating that the new tank will require 4x Tunze 6100s in a box to get a 1" wave.
A coral colony large enough to self-shade also has the ability to restrict flow.
I'm a giant proponent of increasing water motion within an aquarium, but my experience with using only *a* Wave Box as the motive force resulted in failure of Porites corals to extend their polyps after a few months' time. I know of at least two other aquarists who were unable to maintain SPS corals for extended periods of time using only devices that generate oscillating water motion. Were these issues due to water motion or some other factor? That's the reason I feel the experiment has some merit. This idea has been fermenting for a while, see here:Dana - skip the experiment and use both. Inside polyp extension is much more significant with the wavebox and it does a great job of working debris both in and out of the colonies without letting it settle... then you need a flow pump to move it away. The same thing happens in the rock structure.
My goal is for hobbyists to maintain the highest rate of success, hence the experiments. Oscillating flow has been shown to promote the highest rates of photosynthesis in some turf algae species. Does the same apply to corals? If so, at what rate? I have no doubt that increasing water motion, up to a point, is beneficial. Glad to hear of your successes!If you do decide to experiment, I would not treat them as mutually exclusive since there is no need in practice. Of all the people that I know who swear by wave boxes, they still have substantial flow pumps as well. If I had to choose, I would keep my flow pumps and get rid of the wave box, but it is impossible now that I have seen what it can do in combination.
the folks who tout flow GPH numbers
Oscillating flow has been shown to promote the highest rates of photosynthesis in some turf algae species.
At supersaturating light intensities, photosynthesis was less inhibited by flicker light than by constant light.
Due to the lens effect, light intensity in shallow-water environments sometimes reaches more than 9,000 [PAR], corresponding to 300 to 500% of the surface light intensity (Schubert et al. 2001, in shallow estuary).
That's relatively inexpensive. The Marsh-McBirney Flo-Mate 2000 I have was 5 grand when I bought it in the late 90's. That model has been discontinued and its replacement is much more. The clod method only costs a $100 or so, including the purchase of the scale....just haven't heard about CPS/FPS – aka flow velocity. (See: Tunze flow vs turbulence video)
Too bad it costs >$x,xxx to measure flow velocity.
Anyone have a used Swoffer 2100 setup for sale?
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/5/aafeatureNot quite specific to shading, but so-called flicker light (vs continuous light) apparently has a similar effect on photosynthesis.
Flicker Light Effects on Photosynthesis of Symbiotic Algae in the Reef- Building Coral Acropora digitifera (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Scleractinia).
(emphasis mine)
The effects of light and flow on photosynthesis are not mutually exclusive. A coral colony large enough to self-shade also has the ability to restrict flow. I published this info back in the 90's when Aquarium Frontiers was still around, but here's a primer. Coral colonies (or any benthic object for that matter) restrict flow and create an area of high pressure (such as a ship's bow creates high pressure when moving through the water. Of course, for our purposes, it is flow moving against a stationary object.) Water moving over the top of the colony picks up speed and creates an area of low pressure (according to Bernoulli's Principle) hence water moves from the area of high pressure upwards to the area of low pressure. This is the reference:
Chamberlain, J. and R. Graus, 1975. Water flow and hydromechanical adaptations of branched reef corals. Bull. Mar. Sci., 25(1):112-125.
Crude drawing of the principle:
I'm of the opinion that crashes of mature coral colonies in aquaria are due to impacts of poor flow and, yes, light (but to a lesser degree.)
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/5/aafeature
I must add I haven't read the reference mcarroll posted. Too late in the evening for an old man (me.)
I still think we're getting too hung up on the light source verse the shading itself. Shade is shade right? If PAR is equal in the shaded areas (impossible to know in these examples but they're both obviously shaded), what does it matter if it were created by T5/florescent, MH, LED, or the sun?
Why are these two corals growing into areas of shade...
... but this one isn't?
What is responsible for that difference and how do we promote it to continue happening? I don't use amino acids, phytopheast, or any other products in the tank. I don't set wavemakers to feed mode, I don't turn off the skimmer, carbon reactor, or return pump. I generously feed LRS (Reef and Herbivore Frenzy) twice a day; it takes about five minutes for the food to be consumed by the fish and/or sump after a feeding.
Experience. There are some thing that you need to see for yourself and not just read about or watch on a video...