The Future and Far Future of Reef Keeping

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
67,516
Reaction score
63,948
Location
Arlington, Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I thought I'd start a discussion of where I see the future frontiers of reefkeeping.

Obviously, there will be technological advances in areas that we currently have some understanding of, such as ways to create light, flow, dose, measure, build aquascapes, control nutrients, control temperature, and even build aquariums.

What I'm focusing on here are certain aspects of the reef ecosystem that surround and impact our cherished organisms, but which we have a relatively poor understanding of at the moment.

Listed in the order that I think a much improved understanding of the field will come in the future, these are my thoughts:

1. Specific wavelengths of light
2. Trace elements
3. Organics
4. Bacteria
5. Viruses

1. Issues relating to light are probably the closest in the above list to becoming understood, but there's a long way to go to claim a full understanding of how light wavelength, intensity, and timing impacts the growth, color, health, and reproduction of all of the organisms we keep. Are there specific wavelengths at specific intensities for specific times that can be used to enhance certain aspects of these organisms (say, pigments to produce certain colors) and how is that best applied? Can it be provided by a single wavelength at times when the appearance of the tank is not important? Or some combination of wavelengths? Does wavelength and intensity impact other processes, such as allelopathy/toxin production? Growth of microalgae vs growth of macroalgae or coral? Growth of dinos vs growth of green algae?

2. Trace elements. ICP has been used for decades on reef aquaria to measure the total amount of each element, but has only been widely available in the past few years, and ICP only begins to scratch the surface of understanding trace elements in a reef tank. Each trace element can often take multiple forms (e.g., Fe++ and Fe+++), and those forms might or might not be complexed to any of a huge variety of organic and inorganic compounds. All of those aspects impact bioavailability/toxicity. Even for a well studied system such as iron in the ocean for a specific single organism, it is often not understood which form is actually taken up by the organism, and in some cases, it may reflect only a very tiny fraction of the total forms of the element present. Many things we do in a reef tank will impact the forms of trace metals. Any oxidizer (e.g., ozone, hydrogen peroxide, Lugols, etc.) and any reducer (e.g., vitamin C) will impact the relative amounts of, say, Fe++ and Fe+++ in the water.

We have a lot to learn as to what ranges of concentrations and types of each trace element are needed and/or desirable for any given organism. And we have lots of organisms. Do we always want our organisms to have "enough", or are there reasons to make them work harder to take them up? Can we control pests such as dinos or problem algae by trace element control without undue harm to organisms we like to keep? Which elements? How?

3. Organics are almost completely a dark area of reek keeping. There are a few studies of total organic carbon in the water and how certain processes such as skimming impact them, but to think that tells the story is akin to saying you understand the human diet based only on the number of calories you eat each day. There are vast numbers of organic compounds in a reef aquarium (dosed, in foods, or naturally created in situ). Some are foods, some are toxins, some impact the bioavailability and toxicity of trace metals, some bind to calcium carbonate surfaces and prevent abiotic precipitation, and the list goes on. Ways to study organics are not generally hobbyist studies, and even scientists studying the ocean have a poor understanding of all of the organics present and how they all go through various cycles.

4. There are vast numbers and species of bacteria in the ocean, and we can extrapolate that they are by far the most numerous organisms in our reef tanks (with the possible exception of viruses if you consider them organisms). How do these bacteria impact reef tank health? Nutrient and trace element cycling? Even colors of corals. At present, we know little more than some estimates of bacterial populations in the water itself, and some scientific studies of bacteria on corals. How do they impact reef aquarium systems? Can we control bacteria? Or at least keep them within certain desirable ranges?

To understand these issues to any significant degree is pushing pretty far into the future. At the moment, hobbyists can do little to understand the numbers and types of bacteria in their aquaria, and how their husbandry techniques impact them. Bacteria dosing products may help some processes, but how and why exactly? What species? How long do they persist in reef tanks? Why not longer?

5. There is almost nothing we know less of in a reef tank than the huge numbers of viruses present. In the ocean, viruses far outnumber bacteria. What are they doing in our tank? Are some problems we experience due to viral infections? Do corals, sponges, snails, tunicates, sea cucumbers, crabs, etc. get viral infections? Why wouldn't they? If viruses do nothing more than impact the bacterial populations, that in itself is a big issue. IMO, this is a very far future issue.

Looking forward to any comments...

Happy Reefing!
 

chipmunkofdoom2

Always Making Something
View Badges
Joined
Jun 6, 2017
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
4,498
Location
Baltimore, MD
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm really hoping we can get a better understanding of biodiversity.

Since we started switching to dry rock as a hobby, there have been many cases of reefers battling strange issues. One of them is Dinoflagellates, a nuisance organism that appears to thrive on nothing and is incredibly difficult to eradicate. Another is poor success with SPS, even when conditions appear to be ideal for SPS. Mike Paletta is a well-documented example of this. He started a tank with dry rock and had nothing but poor results for the first 12 months. SPS wouldn't grow and he suffered constant cyano or dino outbreaks. At around the 12 month mark, he added some established live rock from another system and almost overnight, stony corals started to flourish. Three months after that, his tank was full of growing, healthy SPS. Mike made a few other changes to the system around the time that he introduced the established rock, so one of those might have contributed to the change as well. But still, the setup that "didn't work" was remarkably common: dry rock, skimmer, media reactors, and the Triton method. More interestingly, the Triton tests never showed any problems with water quality. So everything in the tank was perfect, except SPS wouldn't grow and the tank was ruled by cyano and dinos.

Some people have decent success with dry-rock started tanks. But, others don't. I think we really should be more interested in why this is. Clearly it has something to do with biodiversity. It looks like adding "established" live rock helps solve some of these issues, but what does "established" even mean in the context of live rock? What makes it established? Is it the sponges? Is it the bacteria? Is it the microfauna or flora? What about this "biodiversity" makes SPS thrive and keep cyano/dinos at bay? At the end of the day, we just don't know. I think we should be more interested in why this is.
 
Last edited:
U

User1

Guest
View Badges
Some people have decent success with dry-rock started tanks. But, others don't. I think we really should be more interested in why this is.

If I had to guess I would say those that don't have success using dry rock is due to patience. The formula and timeline is there for all to use much like a cooking recipe. Of course I'm probably over simplifying it but after just cycling a 2nd tank using dry Pukani I followed what I learned 18+ years ago and it was applicable today. I think the only thing I did a bit different was using bleach and lanthium chloride to clean up the rock a bit more but other than that the timeline didn't change even using Dr. Tim's product.

The rest - I don't know or have an answer. My interest lies in additives and no water changes mostly because I live in Ca and water eb and flows although politics can get in the way of using RI/RO and its waste. That is another story but why I'm interested in zero or less water changes. That and I'm lazy - I need to be honest there also :D
 

chipmunkofdoom2

Always Making Something
View Badges
Joined
Jun 6, 2017
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
4,498
Location
Baltimore, MD
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
If I had to guess I would say those that don't have success using dry rock is due to patience. The formula and timeline is there for all to use much like a cooking recipe. Of course I'm probably over simplifying it but after just cycling a 2nd tank using dry Pukani I followed what I learned 18+ years ago and it was applicable today. I think the only thing I did a bit different was using bleach and lanthium chloride to clean up the rock a bit more but other than that the timeline didn't change even using Dr. Tim's product.

The rest - I don't know or have an answer. My interest lies in additives and no water changes mostly because I live in Ca and water eb and flows although politics can get in the way of using RI/RO and its waste. That is another story but why I'm interested in zero or less water changes. That and I'm lazy - I need to be honest there also :D

I don't think it's fair to say it's all about patience. Patience is a part with any reef aquarium, but I don't think we should be advising reefers to just sit tight and wait for things to fall in place. Especially if they've had 12 - 24 solid months of failure with a dry rock system. I've been having issues with my dry rock system for over two years now (it'll be 2.5 years in July 2018). Mike Paletta's Elos system also went from failure to success virtually overnight after just adding some live rock into a dry rock system. And that's after a solid year of failures. Could you wait long enough to the point where any dry rock system would be able to grow corals? Probably. But why wait years when you can add some live rock and be successful in a month or two?

EDIT: Additionally, patience is a "what" more than a "why." You might be able to get a dry rock system to be more stable by being patient (waiting for 1 - 2 or more years). But again, why is that wait necessary? Why does the rock need that time? What is happening? As we've already discussed, many people have success with dry rock, but many do not. Why? What is the difference? What causes one tank to be successful right off the bat, while others need years to mature? We don't have these answers. Patience may solve the problem, as might live rock. But it doesn't get us any closer to understanding what's actually going on. That is what I was lamenting in my first post. I want to understand the unknowns, not just what I need to do to get around them.
 
Last edited:
U

User1

Guest
View Badges
I don't think it's fair to say it's all about patience. Patience is a part with any reef aquarium, but I don't think we should be advising reefers to just sit tight and wait for things to fall in place. Especially if they've had 12 - 24 solid months of failure with a dry rock system. I've been having issues with my dry rock system for over two years now (it'll be 2.5 years in July 2018). Mike Paletta's Elos system also went from failure to success virtually overnight after just adding some live rock into a dry rock system. And that's after a solid year of failures. Could you wait long enough to the point where any dry rock system would be able to grow corals? Probably. But why wait years when you can add some live rock and be successful in a month or two?

EDIT: Additionally, patience is a "what" more than a "why." You might be able to get a dry rock system to be more stable by being patient (waiting for 1 - 2 or more years). But again, why is that wait necessary? Why does the rock need that time? What is happening? As we've already discussed, many people have success with dry rock, but many do not. Why? What is the difference? What causes one tank to be successful right off the bat, while others need years to mature? We don't know these answers. Patience may solve the problem, as might live rock. But it doesn't get us any closer to understanding what's actually going on.

With regards to waiting it was more of an answer to a vague question. I read it, and replied, on a simple level of starting a tank using dry rock. There is a timeline more or less for a tank to cycle. In my head I was referencing Moe's marine handbook beginner to breeder or whatever exactly it is called - I probably wasn't clear in jotting that bit down. He laid out the nitrogen cycle pretty clear with a timeline. So that was more or less my thought. So by patience I was more or less coming that failures start by trying to rush the process. Or, after the process trying to rush and place stuff in there be it fish, coral, or anything else. Sort of like NASA counting down to launch, right? 9 out of 10 times they are successful reaching low earth orbit or beyond. Few times they stumble and catastrophic things happen. Same with reentry. We can fail even by checking all the boxes...
 

Sierra_Bravo

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 29, 2017
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
4,042
Location
San Antonio, TX
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@Randy Holmes-Farley: This is a bit outside of the intent of the discussion, but I would like to know what thoughts you have regarding any possible genetic modification in the hobby? Throwing aside the argument of whether or not it would be profitable at the moment to sequence all the species involved, it seems to me that the desire for certain characteristics, i.e. color, shape, fluorescence, hardiness, or even disease resistance, could possibly spur research into obtaining those traits through engineering. The success of Glowfish (apparently 10% of aquatics sales! :eek: ) and the growth of the clown fish "designer" lines seem to be indicators that this could be a potential area of future coral research and development.

I would also like to see more understanding on what it would take to successfully reproduce corals through artificially triggering spawning and would guess that would follow after having a better understanding of the first two or three of your list.
 

tripdad

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
1,909
Reaction score
4,265
Location
Chicago suburbs
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I for one don't buy that "patience" or lack thereof explains anything. I have been keeping marine fish since 1983 and never had as hard of time establishing a "clean" tank, one free of dino's and cyano, as I have this time around using all dry rock. I'm at 2.5 years now and finally getting to where I want to be regarding disruptive issues. Is it just patience? I think not. There are too many similar stories out there. I think we are finding out just how ignorant we are as to "why" our reefs work and thrive. I feel that we are too arrogant thinking we can just "do" what has taken eons of evolution to accomplish in nature. Can we? Probably, we are a resourceful lot us humans. Is it easy? I think we're finding out that we still have much to learn. Mother nature I think is a lot smarter than we give her credit for. MY .02
 

hart24601

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
6,579
Reaction score
6,633
Location
Iowa
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Virus are a very interesting topic, and I think will be interrelated with bacteria discussions at some point. It has been a year or two ago since I worked on some environmental genome sequencing of bactiera, but what we found were huge amounts of bacteriophage DNA and that might be what separated the phenotypic differences between bacterial strains. This was all done in industry, not academia, so the results were not published, but I suspect it will eventually get there if not already.
 

ca1ore

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 28, 2014
Messages
13,915
Reaction score
19,765
Location
Stamford, CT
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Interesting. I guess my broader question is whether there is credible research (i.e. not hobbyists) into any of these things beyond lighting. or are we to be limited by unscientific lay opinions (just look at the still going micro bubbles thread ;Yuck)? I remain of the opinion that reef lighting is still a poor approximation of the real thing. Last dive trip I took was a stark reminder of how different the sun looks on shallow water corals than my radions :(). I'm actually more interested in the environmental implications on our hobby in the future. Corals are largely sustainable, but fish still have a long way to go.
 

siggy

My Aquariums Going Again
View Badges
Joined
Feb 16, 2017
Messages
7,123
Reaction score
21,418
Location
MI
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The rest - I don't know or have an answer. My interest lies in additives and no water changes mostly because I live in Ca and water eb and flows although politics can get in the way of using RI/RO and its waste. :D
I see Triton as a salt free WC but think that the practice will uncover new discovery's, as for RO waste, Before what is now common Home RO/DI I would get my water from the LFS, he had a 100lb cylinder of DI resin and that's still how HE & I (5-stage) still do it today. Yes you will burn thru more resin...What is your Saturday worth ?


I see the future frontiers of reefkeeping.
I see the most shared knowledge of Aquaculture coming from NASA or its contractors. Big pharmaceuticals I believe have been tinkering with these variables but I doubt they will share much.
 
OP
OP
Randy Holmes-Farley

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
67,516
Reaction score
63,948
Location
Arlington, Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
@Randy Holmes-Farley: This is a bit outside of the intent of the discussion, but I would like to know what thoughts you have regarding any possible genetic modification in the hobby? Throwing aside the argument of whether or not it would be profitable at the moment to sequence all the species involved, it seems to me that the desire for certain characteristics, i.e. color, shape, fluorescence, hardiness, or even disease resistance, could possibly spur research into obtaining those traits through engineering. The success of Glowfish (apparently 10% of aquatics sales! :eek: ) and the growth of the clown fish "designer" lines seem to be indicators that this could be a potential area of future coral research and development.

I would also like to see more understanding on what it would take to successfully reproduce corals through artificially triggering spawning and would guess that would follow after having a better understanding of the first two or three of your list.

While I've never done such work myself, it might not be that hard (at least in the realm of what is hard in genetic engineering, such as getting genes into enough human cells to treat diseases) to put new pigment genes into corals, especially since we can grow them by fragging. Even if the trait had a strong negative survival impact (e.g., it made the leather coral blue and that blue pigment interfered with light penetration into it for photosynthesis, but it could still get enough to survive), folks might still want it and might get it to grow.

Would I want one? No. And I wouldn't be a big fan of folks doing it, but I can easily see it happening at some point.
 

Gareth elliott

Read, Tinker, Fail, Learn
View Badges
Joined
May 7, 2017
Messages
5,468
Reaction score
6,935
Location
NJ
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
While I've never done such work myself, it might not be that hard (at least in the realm of what is hard in genetic engineering, such as getting genes into enough human cells to treat diseases) to put new pigment genes into corals, especially since we can grow them by fragging. Even if the trait had a strong negative survival impact (e.g., it made the leather coral blue and that blue pigment interfered with light penetration into it for photosynthesis, but it could still get enough to survive), folks might still want it and might get it to grow.

Would I want one? No. And I wouldn't be a big fan of folks doing it, but I can easily see it happening at some point.

There is already reserach on recombinate DNA and corals for battling the effects of global warming. There was one group looking at the ability of porites to regulate internal Ph. How far any of this progressing i have no idea.
 

Gareth elliott

Read, Tinker, Fail, Learn
View Badges
Joined
May 7, 2017
Messages
5,468
Reaction score
6,935
Location
NJ
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I have contemplated using a 3d scanner, and limited computer modeling similar to what is done on cars for drag or buildings for wind force resistance. Applying these tools to aquascaping. Where form and function could be plotted and flow estimates given.

No idea if this would ever be a practice the hobby or a producer of artificial rock would ever use.

Also could be the fact i spent my first 3 years at college as an architecture major.
 

norfolkgarden

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
2,695
Reaction score
7,094
Location
Norfolk, Virginia, USA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm really hoping we can get a better understanding of biodiversity.

Since we started switching to dry rock as a hobby, there have been many cases of reefers battling strange issues. One of them is Dinoflagellates, a nuisance organism that appears to thrive on nothing and is incredibly difficult to eradicate. Another is poor success with SPS, even when conditions appear to be ideal for SPS. Mike Paletta is a well-documented example of this. He started a tank with dry rock and had nothing but poor results for the first 12 months. SPS wouldn't grow and he suffered constant cyano or dino outbreaks. At around the 12 month mark, he added some established live rock from another system and almost overnight, stony corals started to flourish. Three months after that, his tank was full of growing, healthy SPS. Mike made a few other changes to the system around the time that he introduced the established rock, so one of those might have contributed to the change as well. But still, the setup that "didn't work" was remarkably common: dry rock, skimmer, media reactors, and the Triton method. More interestingly, the Triton tests never showed any problems with water quality. So everything in the tank was perfect, except SPS wouldn't grow and the tank was ruled by cyano and dinos.

Some people have decent success with dry-rock started tanks. But, others don't. I think we really should be more interested in why this is. Clearly it has something to do with biodiversity. It looks like adding "established" live rock helps solve some of these issues, but what does "established" even mean in the context of live rock? What makes it established? Is it the sponges? Is it the bacteria? Is it the microfauna or flora? What about this "biodiversity" makes SPS thrive and keep cyano/dinos at bay? At the end of the day, we just don't know. I think we should be more interested in why this is.
The latest popular medical press is going to the study of the "human biome".
Discussing the millions of bacteria that live in and on our own system and what different strains mean in the general health of different people.
Ready for a "poop implant" to gain some healthy bacteria in your colon?
Which may or may not cure some forms of depression, among other disorders.
That is one of the new frontiers of medicine.

Who's to say the dry rock cycling method isn't missing some beneficial bacteria that finally show up when someone introduces the right inoculated frag plug into a tank?

Watching the popular medical press over the decades, the latest piece of the puzzle solved gets all the attention for a year or 2. Then off to the next exciting partial answer.

We have a lot to still discover. Here's looking forward to the future!
 

Robert Scott

Community Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 18, 2016
Messages
46
Reaction score
38
Location
Grand Blanc, Michigan
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
How many time have we heard "I just can't keep coral X in my system and all my parameters are good" Even though his reef buddies have no problem. Bacteria, virus, bio diversity...?
 

Ento-Reefer

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 30, 2017
Messages
771
Reaction score
930
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I don't think it's fair to say it's all about patience. Patience is a part with any reef aquarium, but I don't think we should be advising reefers to just sit tight and wait for things to fall in place. Especially if they've had 12 - 24 solid months of failure with a dry rock system. I've been having issues with my dry rock system for over two years now (it'll be 2.5 years in July 2018). Mike Paletta's Elos system also went from failure to success virtually overnight after just adding some live rock into a dry rock system. And that's after a solid year of failures. Could you wait long enough to the point where any dry rock system would be able to grow corals? Probably. But why wait years when you can add some live rock and be successful in a month or two?

EDIT: Additionally, patience is a "what" more than a "why." You might be able to get a dry rock system to be more stable by being patient (waiting for 1 - 2 or more years). But again, why is that wait necessary? Why does the rock need that time? What is happening? As we've already discussed, many people have success with dry rock, but many do not. Why? What is the difference? What causes one tank to be successful right off the bat, while others need years to mature? We don't have these answers. Patience may solve the problem, as might live rock. But it doesn't get us any closer to understanding what's actually going on. That is what I was lamenting in my first post. I want to understand the unknowns, not just what I need to do to get around them.

I am very interested in this myself. My new tank was started with about 95% dry rock. This is my first time using it and I have been pleased with how the tank is progressing. I went through the diatom stage very quick, and never had cyano, hair, or any other nuisance algae in the display. I did seed the tank with some rubble and a couple of cups of sand from my 95, and a few of the corals I moved over were attached to smaller rocks. I also added mud, live sand activator, and chaeto from Indio Pacific Sea Farms, and also some sand from my LFS. I wanted to add as much bio-diversity as I could to help the dry rock become live rock.

I stocked this tank fairly quickly as I moved all of my corals and fish from my 95g so I could take it down. Every coral I have added to the tank is doing really well and growing, SPS included. The tank is just about 3.5 months old and I just started adding a few frags of the more delicate sps this week, and so far no issues. I have always used live rock in the past, but I wanted to see what I could do with dry rock, and I was curious if I would experience the issues you have brought up. Could it be that the tanks that have problems weren't seeded well enough with sand/rock from healthy established systems/ocean? Is it some species of bacteria that is missing from some tanks?
 

Jorge Linares

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 21, 2017
Messages
181
Reaction score
103
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The dry rock debat is an interesting one and I for one am struggling with my 6 month old tank started from Pukani. I’ve added three different brands of bacteria in a bottle and have started dumping the lfs water in when I add livestock for good or bad.

I think the future will be the trace elements, bacteria and viruses. The little things will make the biggest difference.
 

PhreeByrd

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 7, 2017
Messages
476
Reaction score
426
Location
Indiana
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I believe that our lack of appreciation and understanding of the diversity of the natural oceans is our greatest failure. Bacteria, viruses, and other microbes all must play some very large but mostly unknown role in the overall scheme of natural aquatic life. They are near the bottom of the food chain as well as potentially huge in their affect on the health or diseases of other aquatic life. Fact is, we really only know a little about a few of these organisms, and the importance of more knowledge about more of them and how they interact with higher life forms can't be understated. Which are beneficial, and why? Which are harmful, and why, and to what degree?
Unfortunately, I do not foresee research for the hobby moving in this direction anytime soon. There is little cash to milked from that cow until established, unprofitable, and costly research is done by those for whom the goal is knowledge for its own sake.
I think the ultimate goal in this hobby should be to replicate, as accurately as possible, natural ocean life and processes. We, as human beings, however, often fail to appreciate the millions of years of evolution and change that it has taken to make the extraordinarily complex natural reefs what they are today. Our brief lives are but a spark, and we want the world given to us today, and to heck with tomorrow. Unfortunately, by the time we understand how things work and how to work with the oceans, we are likely to have damaged them beyond repair through our ignorance, impatience, and greed. Unless something in our collective attitudes changes, the far future of the hobby is something I don't envision going well, if at all.
 

bonefish

New Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
9
Reaction score
3
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think that greater understanding of all of the topics Randy raised should have the ultimate goal of making the hobby sustainable far into the future.

This understanding should improve the ability to culture our own corals and other animals and reduce the need to collect these organisms from the natural ecosystem.

Will the hobby ever become a refuge of reef biodiversity?
 

tripdad

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
1,909
Reaction score
4,265
Location
Chicago suburbs
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Personally I think the key is in the feeding of our reefs. Once we get to where we understand all the moving parts, microbes, bacteria, lighting, sponges, algaes , tunicates , filter feeders, etc.. How do we give them such a broad range of nutrients to keep them all alive and not pollute our tanks or break our bank accounts? It seems to me that if we get it figured out fully that we should be able to create a self sustaining biosphere , biotope (?) to some degree? One with a fully formed food web. Wouldn't that be just awesome?
 

When to mix up fish meal: When was the last time you tried a different brand of food for your reef?

  • I regularly change the food that I feed to the tank.

    Votes: 32 27.1%
  • I occasionally change the food that I feed to the tank.

    Votes: 38 32.2%
  • I rarely change the food that I feed to the tank.

    Votes: 36 30.5%
  • I never change the food that I feed to the tank.

    Votes: 8 6.8%
  • Other.

    Votes: 4 3.4%
Back
Top