Nitrate Issue Turned Emergency
- Thread starter ccombs
- Start date
- Tagged users None
OP
OP
ccombs
Valuable Member
Thank you everyone for your advice. At this point I am receiving a lot of conflicting advice so I am settling on my first plan of attack and will not deviate from it until it is 100% complete. If that ends up not working I will circle back and try the conflicting ideas lol.
This process will need some time, so I will get back to you with how this ends up going.
Thanks!
This process will need some time, so I will get back to you with how this ends up going.
Thanks!
I don't think he or anyone knows why the Chromis died. He's positing a valid theory. One I happen to agree with. Obviously, it's your tank. If you saw them being actively attacked by another fish, then the Uronema theory is pointless. However, up to now, you've said only that they "met an untimely death when they were attacked by something". Since you don't state that you saw the something that attacked them, I still feel that Traian's theory is valid. Again, just trying to help. If you know differently, please tell us, so we can rule some things out.
OP
OP
ccombs
Valuable Member
Oh, I misread it then. I didn't read as a theory but that it was confirmed by something else in the thread that I had said.
Blenny was picking on them non stop, like darting at them and swimming away quickly. When I stated that something attacked them, I was referring to a fish, most likely the Blenny.
I don't think there's too much conflicting advice here. One piece of advice that's been given multiple times is to get some professional testing done (ICP and/or N-DOC). That's harmless. There's no requirement that you make any changes, only that you get some testing done to further an understanding of where you are at right now. If everything turns up fine with that testing, no harm, no foul. Proceed with your plan. However, if something does turn up, it might point to a better course of action which you can decide to take or not.
I'm a firm believer in making informed decisions. Right now, you and everyone else agrees that something is wrong, causing your rocks to still look pristine, when they should look much different, covered in biofilm. A few simple tests could reveal the cause of that (heavy metals, etc.). Why wouldn't you want to do this? Without this, everything else here is just a theory, mine included.
Got it. Then disease might be less likely. I still wouldn't rule it out, since the stress of being picked on could have allowed the disease that was already present to flourish and ultimately kill the Chromis. Regardless, they died, unfortunately. Did you remove them quickly?
Final point about conflicting information. One reason I don't think anything here is really conflicting is that nearly everyone is pointing out a form of what I said earlier in my post. Nitrogen, Phosphorous, and Carbon (and their associated compounds) need to exist in a delicate balance in a closed system that is a confined saltwater aquarium. Too much N, in the form of NH3 / NH4, then later NO2 / NO3 is one symptom, but it may not be the cause. Adding C (NoPox) or subtracting P (using GFO) can exacerbate an imbalance. Young tanks, and particularly small young tanks can have violent swings in this balance until they settle out. I know this from experience. My first tank was similar in size to yours. I struggled finding that balance for the first year, always trying to correct. Finally, I stopped trying to fix everything, and let nature take it's course (nudged GENTLY sometimes). The tank found it's happy point, then I tore it down and upgraded... The new larger tank has been far easier, but not perfect. All I'm trying to say is I think you are generally on the right course - stop trying to correct too much and possibly over-correct. That said, knowing nothing is fatally flawed could be helpful. As much as I struggled my first year, by 6 months, my rocks were very dirty, and not pristine as yours are. There is something amiss with that.
Belgian Anthias
Valuable Member
If this is correct I am badly informed and I have to review some articles about ammonia poisoning! Do you have references supporting this statement?
See Ammonia production, excretion, toxicity, and defense in fish: a review by Yuen K. , and Chew F.
The ammonia level in the water column may effect the presence of ammonia in the bloodstream. A high TAN ( Total Ammonia Nitrogen NH3 +NH4) level of +- 0.4mg/l may become a problem ( this is only +- 0,0045 mg/l NH3-N at 25° pH 8) When fish has to swim in such water for a certain period of time fish may show respiration problems and may not recover.
Many fishes are ammonotelic but some species can detoxify ammonia to glutamine or urea.
Certain fish species can accumulate high levels of ammonia in the brain or defense against ammonia toxicity by enhancing the effectiveness of ammonia excretion through active NH + 4 transport, manipulation of ambient pH, or reduction in ammonia permeability through the branchial and cutaneous epithelia (ref:YuenK. and ChewF2010)
There is no general rule but in closed marine aquaculture systems 0,4 ppm TAN is considered critical for growing fish. As in aquaculture fish is harvested after a relative short time these limits are set to avoid acute problems. Growing 80kg fish or shrimp/1000l from larvae till maturity needs a different approach and a very effective ammonium reduction system.
In an aquarium, a live support system, we try to keep a few fish alive as long as possible, a complete different approach, also for determining toxicity accumulation. As the bio-load is very low an acute problem may be solved but long term ammonia poisoning will take place without notice.
Ammonium does accumulate in tissue, brain cell membranes etc, and may kill a fish on the long term of slow poisoning., just that little bit to much.
Slow ammonia poisoning is about Ammonia accumulation between cell membranes in the cell wall , it may not to be removed by respiration as it may not enter the blood stream. It may accumulate from the day the fish was born, was captured and was prepared to be transported, during transport etc.. everywhere where it is confronted with free ammonia, The accumulation may continue until it becomes critical and the fish will die to young from old age symptoms. No need for high levels, contact time is enough.
This means an effective carrying capacity, the capacity to reduce ammonium, should be installed at all time. As most home reef aquaria have banned the bio the installed carrying capacity may be very limited.
Nitrate should not be considered a problem as the nitrogen content is easy to master.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rick.45cal
2500 Club Member
I think doing an ICP-OES test would probably help your situation out, If not only to rule out a chemistry issue. I’m about to do one for my system. There’s Triton and there’s ATI. ATI will give you a nitrogen and phophorus reading and Triton doesn’t, ATI also tests your DI water for you and will tell you what’s in it too. You just fill a couple vials and mail them in with the included envelope, postage is already paid.
Pay close attention to Lasse’s comments, I think he’s likely right.
I had another thought that’s popped up in my head, between Lasse and you mentioning copper, you haven’t dumped, or accidently gotten any of the water from the fish store into your display have you? Copper contamination would explain some of this.
I’m in the phosphate deficiency camp, I suspect it’s been that way since the get go of the tank, which is why nothing has changed. GFO is stuff that needs to be used super carefully/sparingly (my opinion).
Pay close attention to Lasse’s comments, I think he’s likely right.
I had another thought that’s popped up in my head, between Lasse and you mentioning copper, you haven’t dumped, or accidently gotten any of the water from the fish store into your display have you? Copper contamination would explain some of this.
I’m in the phosphate deficiency camp, I suspect it’s been that way since the get go of the tank, which is why nothing has changed. GFO is stuff that needs to be used super carefully/sparingly (my opinion).
OP
OP
ccombs
Valuable Member
I wasn't trying to call anyone out of say anyone was wrong. I was simply stating that there have been a few conflicts in steps to move forward. Sorry if it came across that way.
I was just informing everyone that I was provided with extremely useful information and letting everyone know that instead of going from one thing to another, I have established my plan of attack and I am going to see it through because a slow, subtle adjustment will be better than trying different things every day.
Once I see if my plan works out I will get back to y'all with results! Sorry if my previous comment about conflicting info came across the wrong way, it certainly was not my intention or what I was thinking as y'all have been super helpful!
Last edited:
OP
OP
ccombs
Valuable Member
Yes, I removed them first thing in the morning when I found them that way. I do not sleep too well and often look at the tank late at night and I know I saw them pretty late into the evening (even though I can barely see it in the dark hahaha). Worst case the Chromis had been in there dead for 6 hours.
In regards to the spots, I certainly could have missed them, but I try to make informed fish decisions and research what they should/shouldn't look like when I pick them up from the store, these fish looked as healthy as could be.
SeaDweller
2500 Club Member
I thought about your situation today as I was epoxy’ing some acros in my tank... I have new Marco rock that I added into my tank to fill up some space and it’s barely 4 days into the tank and it’s already getting the brown film algae on them. If your rock looks that clean from day one until now, I’m really curious to see what’s up with your tank because they shouldn’t be that clean for a fully cycled, 7 month old tank. I’ll look out for your updates.
OP
OP
ccombs
Valuable Member
One thing that has been on my mind since I wrote up my tank build progression the other day is my lighting, because yes, even with all my mistakes along the way, it should be cycled.
Before the fish, before the dosing, before the UV filter, before the RODI, etc. I have never had growth on the rocks really. Just a little fuzz here and there. The only things that have been with me since Day 1 are the tank, sand, rock, lighting and Clownfish. That being said, my lighting is insufficient by a very, very long shot. I won't get into detail but I tried to outsmart the system, and while it looks good, it doesn't function too well. (You can see my tank build thread if you want to laugh at my blissful ignorance with lighting https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/ccombs-first-reef.562999/ go to post #9).
I have some Kessil 160we lights headed my way that I decided to purchase because I have invested so much time and money everywhere else, why was I skimping on something as important as lighting?
I am interested to see what my tank does overall with the new lighting, not just in regards to coral growth. It will probably be hard to narrow down the effects of just lighting as I implement my whole new approach to fixing this issue, but I am excited to see the results as a whole!
Hemmdog
10K Club member
Good idea. Like @Rick.45cal was saying, when you added any of your fish, did you ever just let the bag water into your tank to let the fish go? A lot of shops have their fish in medicated systems. This is just puzzling, we can all learn from this.
What’s your plan of action that you settled on besides the sweet new kessils?
OP
OP
ccombs
Valuable Member
I never dumped the water out of the bag and always used a net. The LFS I go to uses copper medicated tanks for pretty much everything but inverts obviously.
There have been slight spills, etc. but most of the water stays in the bag.
Hemmdog
10K Club member
Nice nice. Hmmm. ;Shifty
OP
OP
ccombs
Valuable Member
Plan of Action:
Day 1.
-Install Refugium with Chaeto
-Install Kessils
-Remove GFO
-Run Full Tests on RODI Water Again, Including TDS now that meter arrived.
-Test for metals/chlorine in tank and RODI sample when I get those tests
I will let that sit for probably a week or so before I do anything else.
Day 8.
-Begin to lower dose of No Pox (hoping that refugium will add stability so I can lose NoPox for good)
-Start Acquiring Hanna Checkers
Sit and wait some more.
Day 15.
-Hopefully Not Using NoPox By Now
-Slowly Begin Adding Beneficial Bacteria
Sit Back and Wait....
Day 22.
-MAYBE introduce some coralline into tank, depends on how the rest goes.
-MAYBE introduce pods into refugium. I had previously researched their benefits, especially because I have loved Mandarins since day 1 and would love to eventually have one, but only when tank is ready. It might even be years down the road when I have a whole new tank. I think I want pods in the system even if I don't have Mandarins until way later on, but the jury is still out.
If things don't get better or get out of hand, I will send in samples to ICP. If things do get better, I am still going to get water tested by them once this all settles out and I can get a better overview of my water.
Rick.45cal
2500 Club Member
I just read your tank thread and since you have a cleaner shrimp and peppermint shrimp and they are doing well that pretty much rules out Copper as being the culprit, because they would have been the first to go.
You might be onto something with regards to your lighting being inadequate, coupled with extremely low phosphates you might have found the perfect way to keep reef rock sparkling white. Though in my experience improper/inadequate lighting with the wrong spectrum tends to grow lots of single cellular organisms quite well. (Dinos, green algae, anything you don’t want). I don’t think NoPOx is bad, but you’re using nearly the same daily dosage as I use on my fully stocked 160gallon reef tank (which continually wants to have undetectable nutrients unless I dose NO3 and PO4).
I’ll be following to see what happens as you implement your plan of action. You definitely have a perplexing problem, but I also know there’s an answer somewhere.
You might be onto something with regards to your lighting being inadequate, coupled with extremely low phosphates you might have found the perfect way to keep reef rock sparkling white. Though in my experience improper/inadequate lighting with the wrong spectrum tends to grow lots of single cellular organisms quite well. (Dinos, green algae, anything you don’t want). I don’t think NoPOx is bad, but you’re using nearly the same daily dosage as I use on my fully stocked 160gallon reef tank (which continually wants to have undetectable nutrients unless I dose NO3 and PO4).
I’ll be following to see what happens as you implement your plan of action. You definitely have a perplexing problem, but I also know there’s an answer somewhere.
Rick.45cal
2500 Club Member
I would plan on doing several ICP-OES tests spread out over a period of time. Like one now, one in a month or a couple months (depending on how things are looking), and possibly another down the road. That way you have a baseline by doing one now. If you don’t know where you are starting from then it will make it harder to ascertain what actions you have taken have led to the correction of the problem. The ones down the road (presumably when things are doing better) won’t be able to tell you where you’ve been. Just something to think about. :)
OP
OP
ccombs
Valuable Member
Hmmm. Did I misread the dosing info? or are you just doing a low dose for your tank? I estimate I have 25 gallons of actual water in the tank and more than 10 NO3, so I went the 3ml route.
I originally started off with 5ml/day when I was at 160ppm. Red Sea doesn't recommend this, but I researched other types of dosing that work in a similar fashion and found some instances where you could do an 'emergency' dose of a large amount short term. Based on that I dosed 5ml for a little bit before coming down to 3ml.
I don't know too much about shrimp behaviors. But I do know they are very active, they move around and look for food all the time, and they aren't molting excessively, so that is what I am basing my 'they are doing well' conclusion off of.
Recently I read that excess molting by shrimps is a sign of them trying to remove toxins from their bodies. I would think that would mean that I do not have a chlorine or other metal problem since they are molting on schedule so far. I am still going to test to be sure, but that gives me a bit of hope on that front.
Similar threads
