Nutrient´s ratio - of importance or not?

[Lasse]

lasse, so many triton users report coral staving no3 po4 levels that we're starting to feel there's some carbon dosing built-in triton core7.

we must dose both no3 and po4 or we go to zeros within 24 hours. both our solutions are autodosed. do a search, there are many recipies for both on this site.

keeping proper po4 levels have been our biggest reefing struggle. much harder than alk... and it goes to zero in our frag tank #2 often. this po4 parameter is so critical for us that it literally controls our alk.

our no3 is stable at 10ppm -- we are currently trying for 0.02 to 0.9ppm po4.


we are waiting for ghl to save us lol... iondirector reserved spot @Vinny@GHLUSA

I do not think that Triton have add any carbon source in their Core 7 but a refuge is an important part of the Triton method. In my case - it is probably the refugium that "eat" my NO3 (and PO4) because my NO3 concentration tend to rise every time I have harvest the refugium. A hardcore Triton user do not harvest - but I do. If you have a refugium - one way should be to lower the illumination of the refugium. Run it 8 hours during night instead of 12

Sincerely Lasse

 

[living_tribunal]

I am not a fan of ratios as target levels. If both are independently targeted to proper levels, there is no need to think about ratios.

I don’t deny that off optimal values may cause different types or extents of problems depending on the other, so a ratio has importance, but not as a target.

I think it’s a combination of both with the absolute levels of the nutrient respectively being more important.

High N can indirectly cause P starvation from the growth of algae. Whether high N can directly stunt coral growth via disruption of the symbiotic algal relationship is still inconclusive and debated amongst scientists I believe. High phosphorous can only aid coral growth to the extent that nitrate availability permits and of course various ratios create better environments for nuisance algae/bacteria/planktonic life.

Ratios matter but absolute levels and availability matters more in my opinion.

 

[Lasse]

I like the “low PO4 level triggers nuisance organism growth” narrative. It just does not have much support.

The phosphate level of the bulk water does not adequately describe the environment where benthic nuisance organisms grow. This is likely why nuisance organism growth is paradoxical. Phosphate levels in the bulk water are likely to be lower than at the substrate surface or in the pore water. Also, other sources of phosphorous exist that we do not measure and that can be fueling nuisance organism growth. Therefore, a tiny change in the bulk water is unlikely to be noticed by benthic organisms.

Is there even a link between low PO4 level and the proliferation of dinoflagellates and cyanobacteria? I doubt it at this time because very few people who report it can positively identify the nuisance organism, nor have they adequately observed and recorded aquarium conditions to validate the observation that the nuisance organism proliferation happened near the time of PO4 depletion. The case is just not that strong once you remove this information. Mass hysteria might be a better explanation for why we see a connection between low PO4 and nuisance organism growth.

A lack of data and knowledge of the benthic environment in an aquarium means we are making things up to explain benthic nuisance organism growth. And this is not helping us solve the problem. Fortunately, the purported remedies are not harmful and relieve the need we have to “do” something to fight the invasion. I am pretty sure in another 5 years the “low PO4“ narrative will be replaced, possibly, with the “biodiversity” narrative to explain nuisance organism growth.

If we concentrate on the PO4 - orthophosphate is - as I know it - the only P source for organism using photosynthesis (with maybe one exception - the purple bacteria) All other forms of both inorganic and organic P most be transferred to orthophosphate before it can used by photoautotrophs. Metals as calcium, magnesium, iron and others can bind PO4 in the substrate and this can be used as storage - free PO4 can go back an forth in many cases. However the producers of PO4 is mainly heterotrophic bacteria that mineralize organic matter. This process take place in the substrate - often in the part that is named pore water - it is right - the surfaces and the poor water should have higher concentration compared with the water column but in our cases - with the high water movement and high mixing rate - I suspect that free orthophosphate is rather even distributed in the water column, substrate surface and poorwater. According to the most common benthic cyanobacteria in aquarium - these from the genus Oscillatoria - they are always present but something make them form these mats.

The exact mechanisms for triggering mat formation among some Oscillatoria species I do not know - but in 90 % of the cases I have seen - the nutrient levels are very low. During many years I thought that mainly the NO3 concentration was critical because in most cases - rising of the NO3 concentration and time normally fixed the problem. Today - I lean more towards that the formation of the mats is more about securing the supply of phosphorus. The last experiences I got was from my own aquarium - it just stop growing and I got cyanobacteria in some places of my aquarium - not at the sand but in other places there it was dead organic matter. My NO3 levels was fine and I thought that my PO4 concentration was good. My new Hanna HI-774 show around 0.06 - 0.1 ppm. However - a Triton test show a much lower PO4 concentration - around 0.018. Taking away the Phosphate remover and dosing up to 0.08 ppm a day turn around my aquarium to bee good again with very good growth. And the cyano is gone - even in the surface of my refugium ( the chaeto grow from the bottom up to the surface and there is a very low water mix up there) My PO4 concentrations for the moment is around 0,05 to 0.8 if I compensate for wrong Hanna result (make it more in line with my Triton results)

But - let us leave the Cyano discussion in this thread and concentrate on the question if there is a ratio that´s important for coral health. My present point of view is that if you want ultra low levels of PO4 ( below 0.03 ppm) - you need to have a keen eye on your levels of nitrogen. If you accept PO4 levels above 0.05 (read on a good Hanna ULR checker) - you can let the Nitrogen concentration rise.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Nicholas Dushynsky]

Can I ask what you used to raise P04, I'm using potassium phosphate.

 

[MabuyaQ]

If we concentrate on the PO4 - orthophosphate is - as I know it - the only P source for organism using photosynthesis (with maybe one exception - the purple bacteria) All other forms of both inorganic and organic P most be transferred to orthophosphate before it can used by photoautotrophs. Metals as calcium, magnesium, iron and others can bind PO4 in the substrate and this can be used as storage - free PO4 can go back an forth in many cases. However the producers of PO4 is mainly heterotrophic bacteria that mineralize organic matter. This process take place in the substrate - often in the part that is named pore water - it is right - the surfaces and the poor water should have higher concentration compared with the water column but in our cases - with the high water movement and high mixing rate - I suspect that free orthophosphate is rather even distributed in the water column, substrate surface and poorwater. According to the most common benthic cyanobacteria in aquarium - these from the genus Oscillatoria - they are always present but something make them form these mats.

The exact mechanisms for triggering mat formation among some Oscillatoria species I do not know - but in 90 % of the cases I have seen - the nutrient levels are very low. During many years I thought that mainly the NO3 concentration was critical because in most cases - rising of the NO3 concentration and time normally fixed the problem. Today - I lean more towards that the formation of the mats is more about securing the supply of phosphorus. The last experiences I got was from my own aquarium - it just stop growing and I got cyanobacteria in some places of my aquarium - not at the sand but in other places there it was dead organic matter. My NO3 levels was fine and I thought that my PO4 concentration was good. My new Hanna HI-774 show around 0.06 - 0.1 ppm. However - a Triton test show a much lower PO4 concentration - around 0.018. Taking away the Phosphate remover and dosing up to 0.08 ppm a day turn around my aquarium to bee good again with very good growth. And the cyano is gone - even in the surface of my refugium ( the chaeto grow from the bottom up to the surface and there is a very low water mix up there) My PO4 concentrations for the moment is around 0,05 to 0.8 if I compensate for wrong Hanna result (make it more in line with my Triton results)

But - let us leave the Cyano discussion in this thread and concentrate on the question if there is a ratio that´s important for coral health. My present point of view is that if you want ultra low levels of PO4 ( below 0.03 ppm) - you need to have a keen eye on your levels of nitrogen. If you accept PO4 levels above 0.05 (read on a good Hanna ULR checker) - you can let the Nitrogen concentration rise.

Sincerely Lasse

My experience as well that absolute value of PO4 and ratio of NO3 against this absolute value, especially at the lower end is what controls a healthy reef. I believe it is what creates a healthy stable , possibly diverse, bacterial biome that keeps algae, dino's and cyano under control through natural competition. Creating a healthy environment for corals as well.

 

[AquamanE]

This is a very interesting topic as I have been having issues in my own tank.

Coral health seems fine as I get decent growth and colors (SPS dominant 200G), but I have an area of the tank with mats of GHA. Plenty of flow in he area BTW. I haven’t had GHA in at least a decade. I keep my PHO4 at less than 0.1with an ULR Hanna test kit. However I can not get NO3 above 0. Can this crazy ratio have anything to do with it? Ive recently bought Brightwell Nitrate supplement but haven used it yet.

I know this is different than the current topic but it relates to the “ratio” question.

thanks

 

[Lasse]

Can I ask what you used to raise P04, I'm using potassium phosphate.

The same here

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Nicholas Dushynsky]

The same here

Sincerely Lasse

Can I ask what mix ratio you use and what dose you use, from what I understand you dose upto about 0.08 daily, and that is a safe amount to raise it per day?

 

[bar|none]

These are my values/ratios. I test everyday thanks to reefbot.

NO3 5ppm PO4 .04
NO3 10ppm PO4 .08
NO3 20ppm PO4 .12

I like the middle the best. So far SPS are good with the first but my LPS hate me unless in 2nd to 3rd.

Full Triton with fuge.
Carbon dose when nitrate too high.
Feed a lot.
GFO as well (rowaphos in reactor)

Only dose N or P if they tank.

Currently between first and second

 

[pigmo]

I do not think that Triton have add any carbon source in their Core 7 but a refuge is an important part of the Triton method. In my case - it is probably the refugium that "eat" my NO3 (and PO4) because my NO3 concentration tend to rise every time I have harvest the refugium. A hardcore Triton user do not harvest - but I do. If you have a refugium - one way should be to lower the illumination of the refugium. Run it 8 hours during night instead of 12

Sincerely Lasse

really? lessen fuge photoperiod? no duh. infuriating.

for everyone else that needs this:

Amazon.com

 

[Lasse]

Can I ask what mix ratio you use and what dose you use, from what I understand you dose upto about 0.08 daily, and that is a safe amount to raise it per day?

I use 4.3 gram KH2PO4 to 1 liter of water. 1 ml of this will raise 100 l with 0.03 mg/l. I´dose during the DT:s light period and once during late night for the refugium. Analyze the PO4 in the morning - before dosing.

In this way - I guarantee that I have a throughput of PO4 during the photoperiod of my DT and I think it is more important than the left over (the figures). I can accept low concentrations if I have a throughput - I just notice if the left over is constant, rising or decreasing. If you have run very low (without adding) for a while - all your storage of other forms of inorganic PO4 can be empty and some of the added PO4 will be stored instead of consumed. There can be a "ketchup" effect. Nothing, nothing, nothing and suddenly everything. Start to dose carefully and monitor your organisms. If the organisms answer your adding (show better health and growth) just keep on and rise slowly if you want to reach a "safety" concentration. If you suddenly get a unaspected rise - IMO you can stop the dosing - the reserves is filled up and reading low left over is not so critical - you have time ti dial in the dosage again. Because the limitations of our measurements (even with Hanna) I prefer to have a safety level between 0.05 and 0.1 mg/l. I was running my tank as @bar|none before but have for the moment stop to use GFO/Al based media. I have some denitrification in my remote reversed flow DSB. Hope this help you.

really? lessen fuge photoperiod? no duh. infuriating.

My understanding of american language is not as good as I fully understand your tone in this comment. But for me it is rather clear - light can be limited for growth (read needs of inorganic nutrients) too - lesser light period - lesser growth (read PO4 and N consumption). The same is if you harvest - lesser biomass - lesser PO4 and N consumption. Because the biomass growth is exponential - the consumption of PO4 is that to. If you take away half the biomass - the daily rise of PO4 (and N) consumption will decrease more than 50 %. IMO - it is easier to calculate the PO4 consumption by lesser photoperiod compared with harvest.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Nicholas Dushynsky]

Thank you Lasse for the insight, I just dont want to go too far the other way. I have been reefing for 14 years or so now, not the same tank but the same rock and had never had issues until last year where my sps started getting pale and stn, lps looked annoyed and not as fluffy. I went down other routes thinking lighting was the issue, then I got cyano and got directed to a neutrients issue cyano cleared up now I have a little dino. I just to go back to when it was thriving and have known the issues at the start.

 

[Frogger]

I have some experiences with fluctuating NO3 and PO4 in my tank. I have several tanks and been keeping reefs for over 20 years. I have a new tank I set up 4 years ago. Since the beginning I have had nothing but troubles in stabilizing my PO4 and NO3. In the beginning I had really high PO4 and no NO3, corals (acros) were pale and lacked colour although they still grew. I tried to control the PO4 but could not put a dent in it. I started adding NO3 about 3 years ago. The corals immediately coloured up and the PO4 dropped to zero. I continued to add NO3. Within about 3 months the acros started showing signs of stress and I lost a few of them. I started adding PO4 to the tank and it helped fix things.

All this time I started to get hair algae growth although my yellow tang seemed to keep it in check. When my yellow tang died the hair algae started to grow much faster. All this time I was having to measure PO4 and NO3 almost daily because I could get huge swings during the day. If I didn't watch it the PO4 could go from .04 to zero in a day if I added too much NO3. This was playing havoc on the corals they would grow like crazy for 4 months only to crash for 2 months. The algae growth kept getting worse I also started to get Cyano.

I would go through periods where the cyano was growing so fast. I removed the sand, basted the rocks daily, syphoned the cyano out twice a week, taking the rocks out and scrubbing them. I tried chemi-clean twice but the results were not very long lasting. Eventually I got the cyano under control through the intensive cleaning.

All while this was happening the PO4 and NO3 were jumping up and down and I had to modify the amount I was adding to the tank at least 3 times a week. The hair algae was managed through pulling it out every week and scrubbing the rocks.

Like I said I have multiple tanks, the other tanks are fine and have been keeping tanks for a while. About 6 months ago I got another crash that killed about half of my acros. About 3 months ago I finally gave in and used fluconazole to treat the hair algae. It killed it off. Once the algae was gone the PO4 and NO3 stabilized. I only had to add NO3. However the cyano was starting to get bad again. So I continued with the cleaning. Finally about 2 months ago I decided to give chemiclean one more try. Immediately the NO3 and PO4 balanced. The NO3 is at 5ppm and the PO4 is between .01 and .03. I does not change daily. I have not had to add any PO4 or NO3 since I added the chemiclean for the last 2 months. I only check my phosphates once a week and my nitrates every other week. I had a small patch of Cyano start to grow about 2 weeks ago. I vacuumed it out and scrubbed that part of the rock. I have not seen any since.

Unfortunately the last 6 months have not been kind to my acros as I have lost all but 4. Things are starting to grow again and the monitpora is starting to colour up. The other corals in the tank, the LPS and the zoas have been completely unaffected by this whole affair.

I am hopeful that it was the algae that was causing the instability in the nutrients and likely resulted in most of my problems. I really didn't want to resort to chemicals but it was my last viable option.

All the while I have sent samples off to ATI labs and there never has been an issue with my tank other than the PO4 and the NO3.

 

[Stigigemla]

I believe that sadly we are discussing different topics here.
I believe that there are best values for clearwater Acroporas.
I believe that there is other best values for corallimorphs and some Zoanthus.
I believe that there is other best values for other Zoanthus and Xenia.
I believe that there is still other best values to fight some cyanos.
I believe that there is other best values to fight other kinds of cyanos
I believe that there is another best values to fight dinos.

In the nature we often have very low values. But we have a more or less constant change of water that does refill the supply of substances that are in low concentrations. If the current is 1 cm/second it is to compare with a 10% water change every 12 seconds in a 24 x 24 x 48 inch tank. 1 cm/s current is so low we normally dont notice it in the nature.
I believe we can not have natural values in a reef tank because NO3 and PO4 values will swing much to much. So we need a safety margin to get down the swinging of the values.

And there is also the question. Shall we optimize our values for the needs of the corals or to stay out of pests like cyanos or dinos?

 

[Lasse]

Shall we optimize our values for the needs of the corals or to stay out of pests like cyanos or dinos?

I believe that we should be able to fix both of these goals and the articles I linked to strengthen my believies. If you run below 0.02 ppm PO4 - ju must run low in "photo" available N too. in this low values - IMO - the risk for cyano/dino is high. If you run the PO4 above 0.04 - you can run higher concentrations of "photo" available N (and IMO run the cyano critical NO3 around 2 ppm)

With "photo" available N - I mean amino acids NHX and NOX that can be used as a nitrogen source for the photosynthesis.

If I didn't watch it the PO4 could go from .04 to zero in a day if I added too much NO3

This strongly indicate that your aquarium was N limited at that moment. I can have changes with more than 0.06 ppm in PO4 between end of photoperiod and the start of it with NO3 at 2-4 ppm.

Your exemple is also a strong indicator that grazers are very important IMO

Sincerely Lasse

 

[afuel]

I like the “low PO4 level triggers nuisance organism growth” narrative. It just does not have much support.

The phosphate level of the bulk water does not adequately describe the environment where benthic nuisance organisms grow. This is likely why nuisance organism growth is paradoxical. Phosphate levels in the bulk water are likely to be lower than at the substrate surface or in the pore water. Also, other sources of phosphorous exist that we do not measure and that can be fueling nuisance organism growth. Therefore, a tiny change in the bulk water is unlikely to be noticed by benthic organisms.

Is there even a link between low PO4 level and the proliferation of dinoflagellates and cyanobacteria? I doubt it at this time because very few people who report it can positively identify the nuisance organism, nor have they adequately observed and recorded aquarium conditions to validate the observation that the nuisance organism proliferation happened near the time of PO4 depletion. The case is just not that strong once you remove this information. Mass hysteria might be a better explanation for why we see a connection between low PO4 and nuisance organism growth.

A lack of data and knowledge of the benthic environment in an aquarium means we are making things up to explain benthic nuisance organism growth. And this is not helping us solve the problem. Fortunately, the purported remedies are not harmful and relieve the need we have to “do” something to fight the invasion. I am pretty sure in another 5 years the “low PO4“ narrative will be replaced, possibly, with the “biodiversity” narrative to explain nuisance organism growth.

This isn’t scientific evidence because of the unknowns that you mention but I have recordings on paper that show what happened in my tank. I lost all coral due to a ice storm and loss of power for 5 days. A few fish survived and a couple lived to 14 yrs old as I just went with a fish only for the next decade. In March of 2018 I upgraded from a 120 gallon to a 200 gallon 4’x3’x27” tank. Wanting to keep my rock which had been aquired in the 1980’s from Fiji, Marshall and Solomon Islands but had grown extremely dirty and had multiple extremely large and unknown worms I chose to dry the rock out and restart with dry. I will give averages of tank parameters that were monitored and recorded weekly with the exception of phosphate which was high for a very long time and the one I was trying to change slowly since inhabitants in the tank were doing fine. Calcium was maintained at the 450 ppm target range Alk 8-9 Mag 1350-1400 Salinity 35ppt phosphate in the begin being 2.5 nitrate zero. Nitrate remained at 0 up till my problems began in May of 2019. Phosphate was dropped slowly over that time using GFO but not aggressively chasing a low number. Around October of 2018 it was down to 0.2 not reaching 0.1 until March of 2019. Still running GFO I hit phosphate of 0.8 in May 2019 and thought that was great. Here is a picture of 1 Acro in May of 2019 that took the biggest blow

 

[afuel]

I don’t know how to follow that picture with more story so I’ll continue here. A week later in May of 2019 phosphate hit 0.4 a lower number than I wanted so I took the GFO offline. 1 week later phosphate hit 0.0 all other parameters had stayed the same including 0 nitrates an Dino’s appeared. At first I didn’t know what they were having never had or seen them in 30 years. Here is a pic of that same Acro within a few days of 0 phosphate

 

[afuel]

I still haven’t figured out how to continue after attaching pic since I’m technically challenged in that dept. Here is a pic of that same Acro today luckily it survived but it’s been a long road recovering from that Dino attack. Now I don’t have a microscope so I can’t identity what type I had and I can’t say with certainty that they started from 0 phosphate but in my mind I believe that was the cause. This is early morning in my tank all blue lights and even with filter this pic is tough too look at I know but the point being it survived but barely.

 

[afuel]

I think Lasse has a great thread going here and I don’t know if chasing a ratio is important or not but I will run away from the double zero nitrate and phosphate any day using dosing in the future. I don’t dose nitrate or phosphate now to keep my numbers up but do that with better and higher amount feeding habits. However I do have liquid phosphate and nitrate in my cabinet to use immediately if I ever see a zero in either of those

 

[Dennis Cartier]

I don’t know how to follow that picture with more story so I’ll continue here.

To continue with text after embedding a photo, click down near the bottom corner of the photo and then hit Enter a couple of times until you see your cursor flashing below the photo. Then you can continue on with your text. After you do it once, you will get the hang of it.