Phosphate Vs Acropora

[Pod_01]

I'm running 2 filter rollers, a skimmer, an algae scrubber, a UV and ozone.

I suspect you are overdoing it on this side. In my reef I only use skimmer and activated carbon (30ml per 100L that I change every 4-6 weeks). I have. No fleece, fuge, GFO etc…. When I had those or multiple of those methods I was looking at nice dead corals and lot of algae.
If you started with non live rock / substrate you need to build up your biofilm. If you remove all of your PO4 and kill all the bacteria your biofilm will not function properly and algae will take over. Also I suspect your trace elements need to be adjusted, again dead rock will mess with your trace elements and scrubbers will remove what is left over.
My suggestion is to reduce your export. Consider dosing TM Plus NP or TM Bacto Ballance to build up your biofilm. This is carbon dosing not for nutrient control but to build up your bacteria/biofilm and it contains trace elements that bacteria needs. Start with 1/4 dose of what TM recommends. Other products might work but I can only comment on what I tried and what worked for me.
Try that for few weeks to a month and see if there is improvement.
Also consider to perform ICP test from reputable company (I use FM Total ICP) to figure out what your water chemistry is and what might need to be adjusted.

Good luck,

 

[ReefDreamz]

I suspect you are overdoing it on this side. In my reef I only use skimmer and activated carbon (30ml per 100L that I change every 4-6 weeks). I have. No fleece, fuge, GFO etc…. When I had those or multiple of those methods I was looking at nice dead corals and lot of algae.
If you started with non live rock / substrate you need to build up your biofilm. If you remove all of your PO4 and kill all the bacteria your biofilm will not function properly and algae will take over. Also I suspect your trace elements need to be adjusted, again dead rock will mess with your trace elements and scrubbers will remove what is left over.
My suggestion is to reduce your export. Consider dosing TM Plus NP or TM Bacto Ballance to build up your biofilm. This is carbon dosing not for nutrient control but to build up your bacteria/biofilm and it contains trace elements that bacteria needs. Start with 1/4 dose of what TM recommends. Other products might work but I can only comment on what I tried and what worked for me.
Try that for few weeks to a month and see if there is improvement.
Also consider to perform ICP test from reputable company (I use FM Total ICP) to figure out what your water chemistry is and what might need to be adjusted.

Good luck,

Thanks for the advice! My tank is 10 months old, I did start with dry rock and dry sand. Everyone says that when you have an algae problem and nutrients test low it's because the algae is uptaking the nutrients quickly and nutrients are not truly low, they just test low.

If I reduce nutrient export and dose Plus NP wouldn't that just fuel the algae? Also, since Bacto Balance reduces nutrients wouldn't it be counter productive to dose Bacto Balance and Plus NP at the same time?

As of now, I sporadically dose Microbacter7, Prodibio Biodigest, and most recently started dosing Fauna Marin Bacto Reef Blend. Although I have slowed my dosing of these bacterial additives since they claim to help reduce nutrients and my nutrients are already low. I also was doing the Reef Moonshiners program for the first 8 months. I only stopped once the algae problem started getting worse because I wanted to try doing regular weekly water changes instead of dosing traces. This is my latest ICP, I do them monthly. Iron and Manganese are low on purpose because they fuel algae so I stopped dosing them. Also added some pics of my algae problem.

 

[Dburr1014]

Thanks for the advice! My tank is 10 months old, I did start with dry rock and dry sand. Everyone says that when you have an algae problem and nutrients test low it's because the algae is uptaking the nutrients quickly and nutrients are not truly low, they just test low.

If I reduce nutrient export and dose Plus NP wouldn't that just fuel the algae? Also, since Bacto Balance reduces nutrients wouldn't it be counter productive to dose Bacto Balance and Plus NP at the same time?

As of now, I sporadically dose Microbacter7, Prodibio Biodigest, and most recently started dosing Fauna Marin Bacto Reef Blend. Although I have slowed my dosing of these bacterial additives since they claim to help reduce nutrients and my nutrients are already low. I also was doing the Reef Moonshiners program for the first 8 months. I only stopped once the algae problem started getting worse because I wanted to try doing regular weekly water changes instead of dosing traces. This is my latest ICP, I do them monthly. Iron and Manganese are low on purpose because they fuel algae so I stopped dosing them. Also added some pics of my algae problem.

Close up on the algae, looks almost like bryopsis.

 

[ReefDreamz]

Close up on the algae, looks almost like bryopsis.

It's Derbesia.

 

[jda]

You don't even have to have higher no3 and po4 numbers. The algae can get nitrogen from ammonium, too... and can use many forms to get phosphorous. The only want to get rid of algae is to have consumers - your CUC will get it eventually and just keep on pruning by hand and move those tuxedos to the hairy spots. Chitons and Limpets stay on the hair better than snails, IMO.

 

[Pod_01]

If I reduce nutrient export and dose Plus NP wouldn't that just fuel the algae? Also, since Bacto Balance reduces nutrients wouldn't it be counter productive to dose Bacto Balance and Plus NP at the same time?

I do not use carbon dosing for nutrient control. I prefer corals to do that, they are best to filter your system.
That is why I said start with 1/4 dose of Plus NP and see if it improves things. There is phosphate in it but it is different type that does not bind to rock and should not fuel the algae but is easier for corals and biofilm to get to it. Also PlusNP uses long chain polymers so it theoretically targets preferable bacteria. Other carbon sources promote opportunistic bacteria and these ones can deposit the nutrients into rock and you are back to algae on the rock. I would start with PlusNP and once PO4 is at 0.08-0.1 transition to Bacto Balance. Unfortunately you will need to use elbow grease and keep manually removing the algae for now and maybe replace some of your sand as well. I kept removing mine.

The idea is to improve corals and slowly reduce the algae. But during this time you will need to reduce your ozone/Uv/scrubbers/fleece so the bacteria can do it’s thing. Your PO4 will increase I had mine at 1 for a bit but it should come down as the corals and biofilms starts to do what they needs to do.

From your ICP I would increase Flouride to 1.3, Zinc to 4-5, Bromine to 65 (optional) or you will have Dino outbreak. You might have it and the UV is keeping them at bay, so maybe keep UV on.

Starting from dead rock and sand is not the same as going from live rock (something the long time reefers used and know). From my experience everything takes 2-4 times longer and it messing up all the elements. It binds some releases other etc… Low to non existent PO4 / NO3 in dead rock reef is going to lead to algae and dead corals, I tried that didn’t work. You need to feed the bacteria/ biofilm and the corals.

My reef that started from dead rock had every type of algae and still has some of it, but less and less each day. Sometimes I had to take each rock out and scrape the algae on table and rinse and repeat few weeks later. I was beginner and made every mistake possible.

 

[ReefDreamz]

I do not use carbon dosing for nutrient control. I prefer corals to do that, they are best to filter your system.
That is why I said start with 1/4 dose of Plus NP and see if it improves things. There is phosphate in it but it is different type that does not bind to rock and should not fuel the algae but is easier for corals and biofilm to get to it. Also PlusNP uses long chain polymers so it theoretically targets preferable bacteria. Other carbon sources promote opportunistic bacteria and these ones can deposit the nutrients into rock and you are back to algae on the rock. I would start with PlusNP and once PO4 is at 0.08-0.1 transition to Bacto Balance. Unfortunately you will need to use elbow grease and keep manually removing the algae for now and maybe replace some of your sand as well. I kept removing mine.

The idea is to improve corals and slowly reduce the algae. But during this time you will need to reduce your ozone/Uv/scrubbers/fleece so the bacteria can do it’s thing. Your PO4 will increase I had mine at 1 for a bit but it should come down as the corals and biofilms starts to do what they needs to do.

From your ICP I would increase Flouride to 1.3, Zinc to 4-5, Bromine to 65 (optional) or you will have Dino outbreak. You might have it and the UV is keeping them at bay, so maybe keep UV on.

Starting from dead rock and sand is not the same as going from live rock (something the long time reefers used and know). From my experience everything takes 2-4 times longer and it messing up all the elements. It binds some releases other etc… Low to non existent PO4 / NO3 in dead rock reef is going to lead to algae and dead corals, I tried that didn’t work. You need to feed the bacteria/ biofilm and the corals.

My reef that started from dead rock had every type of algae and still has some of it, but less and less each day. Sometimes I had to take each rock out and scrape the algae on table and rinse and repeat few weeks later. I was beginner and made every mistake possible.

Ok this makes sense. Unfortunately, it appears that the TM Plus NP is a discontinued product and is not available in the US. I can at least try letting my skimmer cup drain into the sump instead of collecting skimmate. BTW I did dose Fluoride, Zinc, and Bromide after that ICP test. I'm still dosing the RM elements as best I can while doing weekly water changes. I know what you mean about dead rock vs live rock. I had a reef in 2008-2011 and started that tank with all live rock direct from the ocean shipped in water. I never had algae problems in that tank.

 

[Troylee]

How do people deal with having low nutrients but lots of hair algae? I have low nutrients 0.03 PO4 and 3.6 NO3 and my LPS are suffering from it so I want to raise my nutrient levels but I have a hair algae problem. I have to spend 4 hours every 2 weeks carefully scrubbing my rock and siphoning algae. Meanwhile I'm losing acans, scolys, and torches. Not to mention zoas which are being smothered by the algae. I'm running 2 filter rollers, a skimmer, an algae scrubber, a UV and ozone. I have a 150 with probably 50 scarlet hermits, 3 emerald crabs, 10 tuxedo urchins, lots of Astrea and Trochus snails, 4 Turbo snails, and 4 tangs.

What’s your mag sitting at? Try raising it up to 1500 ish..

 

[ReefDreamz]

What’s your mag sitting at? Try raising it up to 1500 ish..

It's 1415 currently.

 

[Troylee]

It's 1415 currently.

Not bad.. LPs loves 1450ish and people have had good success with getting rid of hair algae with elevated levels close to 1500

 

[Timfish]

I don't think that anybody ever has said that limiting phosphorous to living tissue is a good idea.

Seems to me, with Southampton's research showing PO4 levels below .03 mg/l can cause harm to corals by subjecting them to a PO4 deficiency, any recomendation below thier threshold number could be argued is harming corals.

I still do not know any reason or have any idea why having residual po4 of .30 is better that .03.

If .03 is having 3 entrees and sides on the table to eat, then .30 is having 30. You still can only get so full. Even 1 entree on the table is enough.

Nobody is saying that having 0 entrees is good. I understand that new tanks can have some instability with aragonite binding at first, but once that stabilizes, then having .03 in the water is like having 3 entrees on the table and an unlimited amount back in the kitchen ready to be brought out if one entree gets devoured.

Does anybody have an actual answer for how more of a surplus is better? I am not really talking about in hobby tanks since I can show you real examples where more of a surplus not better for some corals, whereas other corals do not care at all. In no other circumstances can I find that elevated levels of constant N and P are a good idea - with plants, you need N and P in small batches frequently, for example and too much can cause slowed growth and death which anybody who over-fertilized their lawn knows as grass yellows and can die.

"When I see the colors of some of these low nutrient tanks, I can't help but be reminded of bleached coral reefs. It should therefore not come as a surprise that feeding corals in such systems becomes a very important component in these systems. Though reefs are often catagorized as nutrient "deserts" the influx of nutrients in the form of particulates and plankton is quite high when the total volume of water passing over a reef is taken into consideration.

Our crystal-clear aquaria do not come close to the nutrient loads that swirl around natural reefs. And so when we create low-nutrient water conditions, we still have to deal with the rest of a much more complex puzzle. Much like those who run their aquarium water temperature close to the thermal maximums of corals walk a narrow tight rope, I can't help but think that low-nutrient aquariums may be headed down a similar path." Charles Delbeck, Coral Nov/Dec 2010, pg 127

"Imported nutrients are usually transported to reefs from rivers; but if there are no rivers, as with reefs remote from land masses, nutrients can only come from surface ocean circulation. Often this supply is poor, and thus the vast ocean expanses have been refered to as "nutrient deserts". The Indo-Pacific has many huge atolls in these supposed deserts which testify to the resilience of reefs, but the corals themselves may lack the lush appearance of those of more fertile waters. Many reefs have another major supply of inorganic nutrients as, under certain conditions, surface currents moving against a reef face may cause deep ocean water to be drawn to the surface. This "upwelled" water is often rich in phosphorus and other essential chemicals." J. E. N. Veron "Corals of Austrailia and the Indo-Pacific" pg 30


Because that's what's normal for coral reefs. Kleypas, et al (1999) looked at nutrient levels on ~1000 reefs and the average PO4 level is .13 mg/l and the standard deviation is .08 so most reefs are between .05 - .21 mg/l. The upwelling Veron points out exposes corals to ~.3 mg/l

Using your "entree" allegory, it's not one, two or three individuals sitting down to dinner. It's an all you can eat Smörgåsbord for a huge crowd. And some of the crowd are taking multiple entrees and stashing them. Running out of one type of entree could have serious ramifications. A partial guest list includes fungia, biofilms (which alter the sorbtion qualities of surfaces they grow), sponges (some make and store polyphosphate crystals), bacterioplankton, all kinds of pods, all kinds of worms, CUC , various alga and some corals. Sure, some may use particulate phosphorus and some may use dissolved organic phosphorus (phospholipids are an important DOP class). But we can't easily test for those. So if we heed Delbeek's warning keeping PO4 in the range average or most reefs experience seems reasonable.

 

[jda]

I have read all of this a million times, but it still does not address the question. If po4 never hits zero, then how could they ever be growth limited?

Look at the corals in my build thread at 1-3 ppb of phosphate. Look at any ZeoVit tank. Does these look starved for anything?

Also, the po4 in cancun, hawaii and in the coral sea was about 1 ppb - tested myself. I have only ever seen recorded po4 above this in lagoons and tidal pools. Millero showed the average reef po4 at .005 ppm in 2000.

I have NEVER, and I mean NEVER tested tank po4 at zero and I run at 1-3 ppb. Not even a stray test with hannah. There is next to no chance that the tank inhabitants can use up po4 faster than aragonite can release it, IMO. Browse through the build thread and see corals grow to dinner plate in a year, or 18 months, throw away 5 gallons of chaeto ever

I agree that the upwell is high in phosphorous, like Veron said. This phosphorous is bound into zooplankton and not in the form of po4, if you continue to read the book. Somebody only took what he wrote at half-measure. Besides, the was talking about the GBR and not all reefs, which he makes clear, and mentions in other books.

Lastly, who do people constantly mention how a natural reefs have all kinds of nutrients being added and act like nothing is ever added to a reef tank? I would think that any natural reef would like 5x Ehiem auto feedings of NLS pellets, mysis, chunky meat mix from Brine Shrimp Direct, flake food, etc. It is not like people set up a reef tank, never add anything and let all of the stuff in there fight each amongst each other for the scraps.

EDIT: I just calculated this roughly, and my reef gets just under 5 lbs of NLS pellets and about kilos combined of Mysis, Caribbean Mix and Pacific Plankton a month. I think that the ocean would love to have this kind of import per 300ish gallons of natural reef. I still have 1-3 ppb of phosphate.

 

[Reefahholic]

I have to catch up on this thread tonight, and go back through it on the last 2 pages.


@jda Here’s an interesting reply by a moderator (Danny Berglan) in one of the big dino groups on Facebook:

Dinoflagelate algae has a resting cyst stage in its life cycle. it's a double walled cell that holds its own water and can hibernate indefinitely. it checks constantly for optimum conditions. optimum conditions is more than just temperature and water conditions and parameters. it also checks for absence of other life within the biome.

for this reason, it's not possible to poison them or rob them of light to kill them. the resting cysts will simply wait in hibernation for optimal conditions to return.

the goal is to fill the system with so much life that the resting cysts are forced to stay in hibernation and allow the swimmers to die off without being replaced.

phyto =more life. PO4 feeds algae so more life. silicate feeds diatom which is more life. Cyano forms from the incorrect ratio between NO3|PO4 which is more life. adding bacteria is more life. allowing the algae to grow instead of cleaning it or putting snails in to eat it =more life. eventually there's enough other life that the resting cysts decide to hold up and remain in stasis.

My current working theory is that dino and cyano are using up the Ammonia which causes bacteria to die back. the first casualty is the organism responsible for creating trace amounts of silicate which causes diatom to die off which in turn creates space for dino within the biome. since they multiply faster than everything else in the system an outbreak is eminent though it isn't evident for sometimes months.

 

[Reefahholic]

This is my latest ICP, I do them monthly. Iron and Manganese are low on purpose because they fuel algae so I stopped dosing them.

Good to see you’re doing ICP-MS. Can you share the ICP before this one. I’m pretty sure your algae problem is due to low PO4. Is the tank under 15 months? Try to remove all the GHA, because it’s competing with your corals and biome for phosphate.

 

[ReefDreamz]

Good to see you’re doing ICP-MS. Can you share the ICP before this one. I’m pretty sure your algae problem is due to low PO4. Is the tank under 15 months? Try to remove all the GHA, because it’s competing with your corals and biome for phosphate

Appreciate the reply. Tank is 10 months old. For the rocks that are too big to remove I remove all the GHA every 2 weeks by scrubbing the rocks with a brush zip tied to a siphon tube going to a filter sock in the sump. For the smaller rocks I take them out and scrub off the GHA in a bucket. It takes about 4 hours to do this job well. These are my PO4 readings (Hanna Checker) throughout the life of my tank.

The GHA started showing up around February.

This is my ICP 2nd to last ICP from April (the one before the last one I posted):

 

[JCOLE]

I have to catch up on this thread tonight, and go back through it on the last 2 pages.


@jda Here’s an interesting reply by a moderator (Danny Berglan) in one of the big dino groups on Facebook:

Dinoflagelate algae has a resting cyst stage in its life cycle. it's a double walled cell that holds its own water and can hibernate indefinitely. it checks constantly for optimum conditions. optimum conditions is more than just temperature and water conditions and parameters. it also checks for absence of other life within the biome.

for this reason, it's not possible to poison them or rob them of light to kill them. the resting cysts will simply wait in hibernation for optimal conditions to return.

the goal is to fill the system with so much life that the resting cysts are forced to stay in hibernation and allow the swimmers to die off without being replaced.

phyto =more life. PO4 feeds algae so more life. silicate feeds diatom which is more life. Cyano forms from the incorrect ratio between NO3|PO4 which is more life. adding bacteria is more life. allowing the algae to grow instead of cleaning it or putting snails in to eat it =more life. eventually there's enough other life that the resting cysts decide to hold up and remain in stasis.

My current working theory is that dino and cyano are using up the Ammonia which causes bacteria to die back. the first casualty is the organism responsible for creating trace amounts of silicate which causes diatom to die off which in turn creates space for dino within the biome. since they multiply faster than everything else in the system an outbreak is eminent though it isn't evident for sometimes months.

This is what I was getting at earlier. Dinos are in systems at all times. They just stay dormant if your Biome is large and well maintained.

I believe, this is why you really don't see any tanks with dinos that are established. I had no dinos in my DT, but once I added two new tanks at separate times to the system, I got dinos in those tanks only. I believe the reason for this was because the new tanks did not have any established colonizing bacteria on the walls, etc. This allowed the dormant dinos in the DT to enter the sterile tanks and take over. Manual removal over the course of a month caused them to disappear, and I have not seen dinos in years.

This is why dinos are very high these days in new tanks with dry rock. The dinos establish themselves before the good colonizing bacteria can take hold.

Now with PO4 and Dinos, I believe dinos thrive in lower nutrient systems with an unestablished biome because other algae and bacteria are not present due to low nutrient levels to compete with them. This is why most dose nutrients to cause dinos to go away. When nutrients are added then the algae/bacteria will start growing and outcompete the dinos.

Also, just to clarify. I am not saying low nutrients cause Dinos. I am saying that a low to non existent biome with low nutrients seem to trigger Dinos.

 

[jda]

I do not think that it is arguable that dinos multiply faster and can colonize sterile area before anything else. They also cannot seem to grab hold of land if something else is there. However, they also don't like to give up the land. If you don't raise po4 in your tank above 0.10 (this seems to be the minimum), then the dinos can stick around for a long time. No matting or film bacteria, coralline, other algae, etc. cannot thrive at 0.10, but the dinos will still not let go until you raise po4 higher.

I have a note into a pHd at Scripps. They all get stuck on raising po4 a little, which obviously helps them since this is what they are studying in nature with terrestrial fertilizer runoff and coastal algae blooms. None of them seem to think about raising it high enough to growth-limit them, although they did mention a few studies (that I linked above.) They understand what I am asking now and do agree that no living tissue, and especially such low-complexity organisms are immune from cell damage and inhibited cellular function of high building blocks. They have seen cases where hosts can shield dinos (zoox, in this case) from high building blocks. They are going to do some digging and get back to me. They do have other jobs, yeah? Worst case, I might stop in and get a tour when I take the kid back for the Fall Quarter.

Even if dinos just go dormant in the face of higher po4 levels, that is a win. Who cares why, right, as long as they die back?

 

[JCOLE]

Yes, I believe that once the biome is truly established in a mature tank, it doesn't necessarily matter where your nutrients are for dinos, as they should remain dormant due to the competition.

Even if dinos just go dormant in the face of higher po4 levels, that is a win. Who cares why, right, as long as they die back?

I 100% agree. As long as what happens keeps them dormant, then it is a win.

 

[Reefahholic]

Appreciate the reply. Tank is 10 months old. For the rocks that are too big to remove I remove all the GHA every 2 weeks by scrubbing the rocks with a brush zip tied to a siphon tube going to a filter sock in the sump. For the smaller rocks I take them out and scrub off the GHA in a bucket. It takes about 4 hours to do this job well. These are my PO4 readings (Hanna Checker) throughout the life of my tank.

The GHA started showing up around February.

This is my ICP 2nd to last ICP from April (the one before the last one I posted):

Yes, I’d bring the Phosphate up a little higher. It may seem counterintuitive, but it will fade out as long as it’s not over like 0.2 or so. It will start to fade more and more as the tank ages. Your ratio is great though. Don’t fret over the GHA, it’s easily eradicated later. Just keep pulling it out so it’s not competing with the corals and biome. Use your thumb on the end of the siphon tube. Siphon it into the tube, pull with your thumb. I wouldn’t even scrub the rocks. It will affect the microbiology becoming established on the rocks. Throw about 50 Astraea’s in there and they will naturally handle it when it’s short.

 

[BranchingHammer]

What is the root cause of a dino outbreak? Dinos are in all tanks but are unable to thrive due to other bacteria and algae competing with them. Has anyone had dinos in an established system out of nowhere? The only time I or others I have seen with an established system get dinos is when they add on to the system.

I installed a fuge tank and, for a month, battled dinos in that tank. Then I installed a frag tank, and dinos took over in the frag tank. During this time Dinos did not affect the DT. Daily manual removal for a couple of weeks rid the tanks, and I've never seen dinos since.

I believe that once your good bacteria populate the system, they will outcompete the dinos, and they will not appear.

If your Biome is out of whack, then I believe nutrients such as PO4 will fuel dinos. If PO4 was the root cause of dinos, then someone like Rich Ross would have a DT of dinos like we have yet to see.

This is what I was getting at earlier. Dinos are in systems at all times. They just stay dormant if your Biome is large and well maintained.

I believe, this is why you really don't see any tanks with dinos that are established. I had no dinos in my DT, but once I added two new tanks at separate times to the system, I got dinos in those tanks only. I believe the reason for this was because the new tanks did not have any established colonizing bacteria on the walls, etc. This allowed the dormant dinos in the DT to enter the sterile tanks and take over. Manual removal over the course of a month caused them to disappear, and I have not seen dinos in years.

Also, just to clarify. I am not saying low nutrients cause Dinos. I am saying that a low to non existent biome with low nutrients seem to trigger Dinos.

This is exactly what I experienced in my system. My main reef is now 6 years old, and I've never had a dino outbreak. Last year, I plumbed in a new shallow acro tank into this system with dry rock and live sand, and I saw dinos for the first time colonizing the rocks. There were even some dinos in my main reef that were clinging to the glass. There wasn't much that I could do since I'm at college most of the time and away from my tanks, so I decided to let time fix things as much as possible along with a bit of manual removal and nitrifying bacteria dosing (which I don't think did anything). The dinos ended up receding after a few months, and I haven't seen them since. I don't test often for nutrients, but my system is almost always at the lowest detectable range for nitrate and phosphate. I grow acros, other SPS, LPS, and clams fine with these levels.

@jda, what do you think made the dinos go away without increasing nutrient levels? I understand the maturation process of the microbiome, and the rocks in my added acro tank are much more mature now with a variety of organisms and biofilm. Do you think the microorganisms from the mature main reef slowly established more hold in the new acro tank since they are plumbed together? I guess my question is, how and why would the dinos let go of their hold on the dry rock and let a more mature and diverse biofilm develop? I still struggle with a bit of cyano in that newer tank but I'm expecting it to go away with time too.