Sixty’s Understanding of Nutrient Ratios

OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Sure.

A lot of limitation studies are also published, and they do not make assumptions based on ratios. They test it by adding N or P or both and see what happens to growth. In the same water, different organisms can have different limiting factors, and in some cases, something else such as iron is limiting.

You might send a pm to Thales here at REEF2REEF.
That’s the thing Randy, you looking at trying to calculate the particular needs of one living being inside a large system with several others, trace can be a issue for particular beings living inside our systems. This method or ideology not sure how to describe it, it’s aimed at the hole system needs of C N and P that can be read by shifts on the no3 and po4 concentration, giving you a indication of what’s being depleted or in abundance for the hole system, this includes all species of different bacteria nutrient needs that live in our systems, that in a way are the only reason we are able to keep a system running. Redfield ratio if looked with more detail is very similar to the rate that bacteria in collective deplete nutrients in a closed system and most likely in most of our oceans ecosystems.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think the question by now should be:

If redfield and ratios are so useless for the hobby, why can I answer so many questions on nutrient limitation using only redfield and no3 and po4 shifts.

Surely this must be known to oceanographers and other scientists that work in the field. I can’t be the first doing the connection really.
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@KimG have you ever analysed or calculated the carbon content of a particular fish food? I remember that you were quite knowledgeable on this field from the other thread about nitrifying bacteria.
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Hi @sixty_reefer No, unfortunately not, my main work is with water quality in aquaculture, so mainly commercial feeds for trout and salmon. I will try to go over the thread tomorrow
Thank you
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
66,553
Reaction score
62,861
Location
Arlington, Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think the question by now should be:

If redfield and ratios are so useless for the hobby, why can I answer so many questions on nutrient limitation using only redfield and no3 and po4 shifts.

Surely this must be known to oceanographers and other scientists that work in the field. I can’t be the first doing the connection really.

Lol

What makes you assume you gave accurate answers?
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Lol

What makes you assume you gave accurate answers?
What makes you think that I didn’t gave a accurate answer, I’ve asked you for a test that you already know the answer to verify. If Thales got the data why not put it to the test?

basically you saying that no one made the connection yet? I really thought all this years that what I’m saying is common knowledge.
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
66,553
Reaction score
62,861
Location
Arlington, Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
What makes you think that I didn’t gave a accurate answer, I’ve asked you for a test that you already know the answer to verify. If Thales got the data why not put it to the test?

basically you saying that no one made the connection yet? I really thought all this years that what I’m saying is common knowledge.

I gave you two N : P ratios that I knew the answer for multiple organisms and you declined to say what was limiting because you wanted more info. Hence, ratios are apparently not adequate for your method.

then you made some predictions of what was limiting for a reefer who posted, but no one knows if the prediction is better than a coin flip since the answer isn’t known for his tank.

Do your prediction have merit? No one knows. There’s no supporting data of any kind.
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I gave you two N : P ratios that I knew the answer for multiple organisms and you declined to say what was limiting because you wanted more info. Hence, ratios are apparently not adequate for your method.

then you made some predictions of what was limiting for a reefer who posted, but no one knows if the prediction is better than a coin flip since the answer isn’t known for his tank.

Do your prediction have merit? No one knows. There’s no supporting data of any kind.
I can’t answer your question simply because Redfield can’t be used in your questions, redfield can only be used to determine C N P in a ecosystem or a closed system, if you were to give me the particular no3 and po4 shifts of a ecosystem, I can answer that, unfortunately I can’t use it to determine limitations in just one particular inhabitant of a ecosystem using redfield
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@Hans-Werner wend control was designed was the subject of this discussion taken into account? You will have more knowledge than us on nutrient limitation
Does C N P import have direct effects on no3 and po4 concentration?
 

JCM

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
1,342
Reaction score
1,646
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I can’t answer your question simply because Redfield can’t be used in your questions, redfield can only be used to determine C N P in a ecosystem or a closed system, if you were to give me the particular no3 and po4 shifts of a ecosystem, I can answer that, unfortunately I can’t use it to determine limitations in just one particular inhabitant of a ecosystem using redfield

So it can't be used to determine limitations of a specific inhabitant, and according to Randy different organisms have different limitations. So what good is it?

This isn't me throwing shade as this is all over my head. Genuinely curious
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So it can't be used to determine limitations of a specific inhabitant, and according to Randy different organisms have different limitations. So what good is it?

This isn't me throwing shade as this is all over my head. Genuinely curious
Let me answer you with a question, what good is for us, as reef keepers to know the particular nutrient needs of a single inhabitant of our system, wend we can know the nutrient needs of all our tank inhabitants in a easy and simple way?

As reef keepers wend we feed our fish we don’t just feed the fish, we feeding the coral we feeding the algae beds and mostly important are feeding all different species of beneficial bacteria that colonised our systems surfaces.

what good is for us to know what are the nutrient needs of a particular species of bacteria that lives in our system? Could we just feed one species of bacteria in our systems?

The guidance from the redfield ratio a-low us to determine if a full system has nutrient in the correct balance as our systems require, avoiding nutrient build up or nutrient limitations, accounting with all the needs of the system inhabitant including microbes, why waste time in trying to figure out what’s the needs of a single Zoa polyp or the needs of our algae bed, is the maths required even possible?

edit: one more question, do you think that wend you are testing your tank with your home po4 test kit that you are measuring the po4 that your tank is producing or are you testing the current concentration of po4 at the given time you tested?
This question is very important to understand redfield
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Ok...I have a headache and do not think the last 30 minutes were used productively. I think I will just go clean my skimmer.
Is not that complicated although cleaning the skimmer at this point sounds more fun :)
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Just a quick add up to anyone that is still following this thread, phosphate medias are also a way to fix ratios in a closed system, the only adverse would be that the biological filter wouldn’t be working to his full potential. I will answer any questions regarding nutrient limitations using redfield as a guidance if anyone curious to test me. As long as redfield can be applied I will try my best to answer.

has anyone following this thread has ever considered or thought why some thanks of the month can run at 0 no3 and 0 po4 and still look amazing and healthy, And most that try and run they’re tanks at 0 no3 and 0 po4 fail?
I can answer that with redfield too

why do we all have different stable parameters and still can grow coral?

I can answer that with redfield too
 
Last edited:

JCM

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
1,342
Reaction score
1,646
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Let me answer you with a question, what good is for us, as reef keepers to know the particular nutrient needs of a single inhabitant of our system, wend we can know the nutrient needs of all our tank inhabitants in a easy and simple way?

As reef keepers wend we feed our fish we don’t just feed the fish, we feeding the coral we feeding the algae beds and mostly important are feeding all different species of beneficial bacteria that colonised our systems surfaces.

what good is for us to know what are the nutrient needs of a particular species of bacteria that lives in our system? Could we just feed one species of bacteria in our systems?

The guidance from the redfield ratio a-low us to determine if a full system has nutrient in the correct balance as our systems require, avoiding nutrient build up or nutrient limitations, accounting with all the needs of the system inhabitant including microbes, why waste time in trying to figure out what’s the needs of a single Zoa polyp or the needs of our algae bed, is the maths required even possible?

edit: one more question, do you think that wend you are testing your tank with your home po4 test kit that you are measuring the po4 that your tank is producing or are you testing the current concentration of po4 at the given time you tested?
This question is very important to understand redfield

So basically just maintain a 16:1 ratio of nitrate to phosphate? I don't disagree with that necessarily but I don't feel it's giving the whole picture either. Phosphate at 10 and nitrates at 160 satisfies that ratio, but wouldn't make for a happy tank. That's also neglecting carbon, are we just assuming it's plentiful enough in all tanks? It's not easily measured I don't believe.

That ratio is also derived from the ocean, plenty of data suggests our tanks don't well represent natural reefs. Natural reefs have an abundance of varied food sources we can't replicate in our tanks. Keeping nutrients at NSW levels has proven risky in tanks.

Edit: to answer your questions. It seems relevant because most people would want that zoa polyp to flourish, not so much the algae. And a home po4 test is measuring the free po4 in the water column, not the total phosphate in the tank.
 

Nano sapiens

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 25, 2010
Messages
2,493
Reaction score
3,677
Location
East Bay, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Personally, I think that a lot of angst can be avoided by not getting hung up on the Redfield ratio as 'optimal' for reef aquaria.. Our systems are not the ocean as can be seen by the many successful reef aquariums with consistent C:N:'P' ratios that deviate substantially from the Redfield ratio. Actually, any set ratio touted as optimal just doesn't hold water (pun intended) across all systems as it's really just a way of saying 'this ratio worked well for a specific grouping of reef aquaria'.

My current old system has been successful from a range of N:'P' of 50:1 to 500:1. I look at the numbers as being much more important than any ratios and let the system reach it's own equilibrium (as long as the numbers stay within reef keeping norms).
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
So basically just maintain a 16:1 ratio of nitrate to phosphate? I don't disagree with that necessarily but I don't feel it's giving the whole picture either. Phosphate at 10 and nitrates at 160 satisfies that ratio, but wouldn't make for a happy tank. That's also neglecting carbon, are we just assuming it's plentiful enough in all tanks? It's not easily measured I don't believe.
That’s where everyone is failing at understanding redfield, keeping a relationship of the concentration of po4 to no3 at 1:16 is useless, every one is looking at concentration instead of looking at import of food to the tank. The ratio is on the import of food that can’t be Quantified at the moment we can’t look at the concentration of phosphates and nitrates to implement the ratio but we can look at phosphates and nitrates to see if the ratio is working fine.

do you see the difference
That ratio is also derived from the ocean, plenty of data suggests our tanks don't well represent natural reefs. Natural reefs have an abundance of varied food sources we can't replicate in our tanks. Keeping nutrients at NSW levels has proven risky in tanks.

the thing is that we can, if you understand my answer above you will see that it answers this question also
Edit: to answer your questions. It seems relevant because most people would want that zoa polyp to flourish, not so much the algae. And a home po4 test is measuring the free po4 in the water column, not the total phosphate in the tank.

if the ratio is stable there won’t be ammonia available for pest algaes to thrive
 
OP
OP
sixty_reefer

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,523
Reaction score
7,833
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Personally, I think that a lot of angst can be avoided by not getting hung up on the Redfield ratio as 'optimal' for reef aquaria.. Our systems are not the ocean as can be seen by the many successful reef aquariums with consistent C:N:'P' ratios that deviate substantially from the Redfield ratio. Actually, any set ratio touted as optimal just doesn't hold water (pun intended) across all systems as it's really just a way of saying 'this ratio worked well for a specific grouping of reef aquaria'.

My current old system has been successful from a range of N:'P' of 50:1 to 500:1. I look at the numbers as being much more important than any ratios and let the system reach it's own equilibrium (as long as the numbers stay within reef keeping norms).
Sorry you got it so wrong, there’s no ratio between the concentration of po4 and no3. That’s why we all have success with different parameters/ concentration

the real redfield relationship is on the import export relationship in our tanks that can’t be quantified, but it is very similar in all of our different systems.
The po4 and no3 that we can measure is the left over dinner from all thank inhabitant at the point the environment is tested. We can’t make a ratio out of left over diner but we can make a ratio on what the tank depleted. If you can understand what I just said you can understand redfield correctly.
 

Dan_P

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
6,573
Reaction score
7,031
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
If redfield and ratios are so useless for the hobby, why can I answer so many questions on nutrient limitation using only redfield and no3 and po4 shifts.
Interesting discussion. Not sure any questions have been answered though.

Some important information missing from this conversation so far is an actual calculation of C:N:p for a system before and after a visually observable problem is resolved, for example, nuisance algae growth. That would really be interesting. Even showing how changing the C:N:p ratio of the food solved a nuisance algae problem.

The notion of nutrient balance is well known in aquaculture where closed systems are used. In this case, carbon is added to the feed to ensure that all the nitrogen can be converted to biomass, such as bacteria, rather than accumulate as nitrate in the water. Sound like carbon dosing?
 
Back
Top