Nutrients vs Nutrition

[SantaMonica Verified Sponsor]

Let's talk nutrients

The words "nutrient" and "nutrition" are commonly confused when talking about reefs. "Nutrition" is just like food; it feeds the fish and the corals and the microbes. Nutrition include fish waste, coral slime, leftover food particles, algae, vitamins, and amino acids. This nutrition can be in the form of pieces or particles that you can see, or very small particles that you cannot see, called dissolved organic carbon ("DOC"). All this nutrition feeds some animal or microbe somewhere in your system, and it is the carbon in this nutrition that is being sought.

"Nutrients" however are different; they are Nitrate, Nitrite, Inorganic (Ortho) Phosphate, Ammonia, and Ammonium, i.e., the things your test kits test for. There is no carbon in these; just nitrogen, phosphorus, oxygen and hydrogen. Nutrients are what remain after the food chain does it's work, all the way down to the last bacteria. This is also called "re-mineralization", because all the organic particles have had the carbon removed such that only the "minerals" (nitrogen etc) remain.

 

[Peace River]

Similar words, but important differences! Thanks for sharing!

#reefsquad - let's continue this discussion and share these ideas to extend the conversation - thanks!

 

[Fish Styx]

I agree in that there is an important distinction between the two, but feel that this is a bit oversimplified, because corals absolutely use "nutrients", or inorganic NO3 and PO4 to fuel growth. As precursors to amino acids and other compounds, they are essential for any number of critical biological functions.

 

[SantaMonica Verified Sponsor]

True. The reason for the simplification is for newer people to understand how feeding turns into ammonia etc.

 

[Project1004]

I’ve use the word nutrients (for maintaining) and supplements (adding to improve). I don’t know if it’s any better. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[tbrown]

While I understand that Nutrients and Nutrition are technically different I also feel like, in this case, trying to break them apart from each other may not be correct. Nutrients can be nutrition while nutrition provides nutrients.

While nutrients typically points at nitrates and phosphates (and ammonia and nitrites), nutrition is gained through nutrients. Nutrition requires nutrients but you can have nutrients and not have nutrition?

The square is a rectangle but not every rectangle is a square?

 

[tbrown]

That's worded weird but oh well.

 

[Fish Styx]

That's worded weird but oh well.

The square is a parralellogram, but not every parallelogram is a square?

 

[Peace River]

I still think this important so let me try to explain in a different way:

Nutrients are the stuff in the water
Nutrition is how organisms use that stuff to develop, live, etc.

It is possible to have good nutrition and either high or low nutrients, and,
it is possible to have poor nutrition and either high or low nutrients.

A fish or other organism is not always able to use the available nutrients.

Therefore these similar sounding words are different and IMO that difference matters to our reefs.

 

[56longroof]

The square is a parralellogram, but not every parallelogram is a square?

You guys think too much.

 

[Peace River]

You guys think too much.

 

[tbrown]

I still think this important so let me try to explain in a different way:

Nutrients are the stuff in the water
Nutrition is how organisms use that stuff to develop, live, etc.

It is possible to have good nutrition and either high or low nutrients, and,
it is possible to have poor nutrition and either high or low nutrients.

A fish or other organism is not always able to use the available nutrients.

Therefore these similar sounding words are different and IMO that difference matters to our reefs.

This is basically what I sorta tried to kinda say. Ish. But different?

 

[ReneReef]

or very small particles that you cannot see, called dissolved organic carbon ("DOC").

DOC are molecules not particles.
Particles can be in suspension they are not dissolved.

and it is the carbon in this nutrition that is being sought.

Really? Only carbon?

"Nutrients" however are different; they are Nitrate, Nitrite, Inorganic (Ortho) Phosphate, Ammonia, and Ammonium, i.e., the things your test kits test for. There is no carbon in these; just nitrogen, phosphorus, oxygen and hydrogen.

Not being able to test for something does not mean its not a nutrient.

We can’t test for DOCs, but they are nutrients none the less.

Nutrients are what remain after the food chain does it's work.

That is downright wrong. It may apply to some nutrient.

Proteins, fats, carbohydrates, vitamins are all nutrients.

If this is your definition for the purpose of this post, than please make that clear in the text.

True. The reason for the simplification is for newer people to understand how feeding turns into ammonia etc.

It is not more understandable, there are several factually wrong statements in there that only confuse.

If you meant to express your opinion in stead of fact, that is not made clear in the text.

 

[Fish Styx]

This is basically what I sorta tried to kinda say. Ish. But different?

 

[Peace River]

It is not more understandable, there are several factually wrong statements in there that only confuse.

If you meant to express your opinion in stead of fact, that is not made clear in the text.

...and this is why we are having a discussion. The fact that someone opened the space for others to add informative information is a positive. Thanks for jumping in and sharing your thoughts!

 

[tbrown]

informative information

I like this!

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

it is possible to have poor nutrition and either high or low nutrients.

What is an example of high nutrients but poor nutrition?

 

[Peace River]

What is an example of high nutrients but poor nutrition?

Randy, thanks for chiming in! Here is how I am thinking about the difference between nutrients and nutrition. One example might be a tank with high nitrate and phosphate because waste and detritus have built up over time, but there is not much high-quality food available for the animals. In that case, the nutrient numbers are high, but the fish and corals may still not be getting everything they need to grow and stay healthy. Thoughts?

 

[sixty_reefer]

I’ve always found it a bit strange how often we use “nutrients” as shorthand for nitrate and phosphate.

To me, nutrients are anything an organism needs to stay alive. Nitrate and phosphate are part of that picture but they’re only a small part of it.

It also depends on the organism in question. What counts as an important nutrient for one organism may not be nearly as important for another and different organisms obtain what they need in different ways.

 

[tbrown]

I’ve always found it a bit strange how often we use “nutrients” as shorthand for nitrate and phosphate.

To me, nutrients are anything an organism needs to stay alive. Nitrate and phosphate are part of that picture but they’re only a small part of it.

It also depends on the organism in question. What counts as an important nutrient for one organism may not be nearly as important for another and different organisms obtain what they need in different ways.

I think that was actually part of the point Santa Monica was making - nutrients vs nutrition. You're describing nutrition, not nutrients.