Theory on nutrient ratios and algae/bacteria

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,036
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
My interest in this started when I learned about the Redfield Ratio where oceanic phytoplankton has a nitrogen to phosphorus ratio of 16:1. Unfortunately, I had no idea what to do with this knowledge so it was pretty worthless. Of course, I found out about this because of research I was doing to combat an algae problem.
I'll spare you guys the joys of my battle that took me from algae to cyanobacteria and from cyanobacteria into dinoflagellates. Through these battles I learned a lot about the role of nutrients in my tank. This is what I think I have found and how the N: P ratio can be used by reefers who aren't purposely running low nutrient systems.

A balanced and healthy system will have a N: P ratio of between 5:1 and 35:1

Non harmful marine bacteria with a typical N: P ratio of 50:1 so it will consume nitrates faster than phosphates. This is the bacteria whose growth is encouraged through carbon dosing. This means people who carbon dose are likely to need a phosphate reducer, also. Too much carbon dosing can lead to cyanobacteria.

Cyanobacteria has a N: P ratio of between 1:1 and 5:1. This gives it an ability to thrive in a low nitrate environment. To combat cyano, either add a phosphate remover or add nitrates.

Dinoflagellates have an N: P ratio that is all over the board. One thing they have in common is a high need for Nitrates. They have unique ways to acquire and store nitrates which does mess up the N: P ratio. If you do have them one possible way to combat them is dosing phosphates. Another option is to add silicates which will shift production from dino's to diatoms. Carbon dosing will be slow, but should also be effective.

If you have Cyano and/or Dino's and have detectable levels of both NO3 and PO4 I would suggest adding an Iron supplement. A reef tank will want to grow algae. If you have both nutrients the missing link may be the iron needed to support the algae growth. Especially if you have a system that was growing algae well and then tapered off.

Of course, most of us don't want algae growing in our tanks which is where a refugium or ATS comes into play. This is another complete topic but keep this in mind. Algae in your display tank is under high powered lights and will have high PAR. To grow the algae in your fuge instead you need more PUR either through spectrum, intensity, or distance.


I want to throw this out there for people to tear apart. Keep in mind that these are only my theories with some practical application in my own limited experience. Please don't take this as settled science!
 

jsker

Reefing is all about the adventure
View Badges
Joined
Apr 11, 2015
Messages
24,974
Reaction score
79,741
Location
Saint Louis
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Great write up and read.
 

saltyfilmfolks

Lights! Camera! Reef!
View Badges
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
28,739
Reaction score
40,932
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Great topic Brew.
To be blunt. I think it's wrong.


Yes , if one or the other is imbalanced it will cause problems in a system due to limitation, not balance. No po4 will let organizims thrive that do well under those conditions while other benificial organisms that need Po4 die. Dino's are oft refernaced in this scenario.

On pice of evidence that tells be this balancing act is incorrect is , we use hobby grade tests.

Full stop. Our tests cannot correctly determine a balance due to test error. If one were to say there's some flexibility there in consideration of that error. , well that wound only prove the point.
You can't balance 2.5 ISH ,the test error amount.

I'm learning too. I could be wrong. But in all of my reading over the years on this issue of this balance theory it seems a commonly reoccurring Fad theory that is then debunked or fades. Like metal halides not being a suitable light for corals.

Yes. Limitation , imo , is a problem , balance no.

Cyano in a new dry rock tank causing problems becuse it's actually curing in the tank while adding fish and corals? Common.

Good talk.

Who's next?
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,036
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Great topic Brew.
To be blunt. I think it's wrong.
Ouch! You hurt my feelings!

Ok, maybe not! :p

Yes , if one or the other is imbalanced it will cause problems in a system due to limitation, not balance. No po4 will let organizims thrive that do well under those conditions while other benificial organisms that need Po4 die. Dino's are oft refernaced in this scenario.

On pice of evidence that tells be this balancing act is incorrect is , we use hobby grade tests.

Full stop. Our tests cannot correctly determine a balance due to test error. If one were to say there's some flexibility there in consideration of that error. , well that wound only prove the point.
You can't balance 2.5 ISH ,the test error amount.
I think we actually agree on this. I may not have done a great job explaining it but my intent wasn't to try and get people to maintain a proper N: P ratio in their systems. That would be beyond difficult for almost every reefer even with lab grade test kits. The N: P ratio is not a ratio of NO3 to PO4. For instance, some Dino's consume NH3 and NH4 directly which would be part of the N: P ratio. Some Dino's can thrive in what appears to be a P free environment by consuming other bacteria.

Yes. Limitation , imo , is a problem , balance no.
This is actually what I was trying to get at with my post. Using the N: P ratio to explain why hitting a nutrient limit to one side or the other will cause a problem.

Oh.. And if you type out N: P ratio without the space it give comes out with this N:p emoji. o_O
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
67,622
Reaction score
64,078
Location
Arlington, Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I would just add a few things:

1. The ratio in an organism is just the ratio they need to take up, not the ratio they "need" in the water. Organisms can often do fine with an excess of one or the other, as long as they have "enough" of both N and P.

2. the issue in a reef tank is often one of competition (for space, nutrients, trace elements, etc.) and all of these come into play. This aspect greatly confounds thinking about ratios like the Redfield ratio.

With regard to nutrient ratios, whatever explanation folks have, if an organism thrives at a certain concentration of N and P, then it will almost certainly thrive as well or better at a higher N or P. It is almost never the case that elevating one (or both) of N or P will make it grow more slowly.

What does happen, is that something else that is less efficient at taking up nutrients and thriving at the original concentration may now be able to thrive, and may outcompete the original organism.
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,036
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
With regard to nutrient ratios, whatever explanation folks have, if an organism thrives at a certain concentration of N and P, then it will almost certainly thrive as well or better at a higher N or P. It is almost never the case that elevating one (or both) of N or P will make it grow more slowly.

What does happen, is that something else that is less efficient at taking up nutrients and thriving at the original concentration may now be able to thrive, and may outcompete the original organism.
Thank you Randy, I need to work on my writing skills. :oops:

That was actually the main point I was trying to make.

If we are nitrogen limited we are more likely to grow cyanobacteria. We can either reduce the phosphates available to reduce cyano growth or increase nitrogen to allow algae to out compete the cyano. If we are phosphate limited we are more likely to grow dinoflagellates. We can either reduce nitrogen to reduce the amount of dino's growing or add phosphates to allow algae to out compete them. We can use visual clues in our tank to determine if our systems are balanced. If they are balanced and we still have these issues then it is likely we are missing a trace element such as iron or manganese.
 

saltyfilmfolks

Lights! Camera! Reef!
View Badges
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
28,739
Reaction score
40,932
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
^^^that^^^ is why I don't buy the strict ratio and
That's why I don't test anything :rolleyes::eek:;)
hehehehe I kid! Very good write up guys :) keep it up!
Why I Do this.

Unless I have a question or am playing with levels for coloration. As some we know will go brown.

Ouch! You hurt my feelings
I traded mine for coral.
Willing to get as much as ingive brother.
It's a really good topic. IMO the strict systemic ratio makes folks think there's a set requirement. And I've seen to much to belive that's true.
 

saltyfilmfolks

Lights! Camera! Reef!
View Badges
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
28,739
Reaction score
40,932
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Thank you Randy, I need to work on my writing skills. :oops:

That was actually the main point I was trying to make.

If we are nitrogen limited we are more likely to grow cyanobacteria. We can either reduce the phosphates available to reduce cyano growth or increase nitrogen to allow algae to out compete the cyano. If we are phosphate limited we are more likely to grow dinoflagellates. We can either reduce nitrogen to reduce the amount of dino's growing or add phosphates to allow algae to out compete them. We can use visual clues in our tank to determine if our systems are balanced. If they are balanced and we still have these issues then it is likely we are missing a trace element such as iron or manganese.
It won't really show on a test though. Our tests imo are an indication.
 

saltyfilmfolks

Lights! Camera! Reef!
View Badges
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
28,739
Reaction score
40,932
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I may not have done a great job explaining it but my intent wasn't to try and get people to maintain a proper N: P ratio in their systems. That would be
It's easier to just over feed a bit and live with the uglies. Becuse we know they will go away.
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,036
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
IMO the strict systemic ratio makes folks think there's a set requirement.
Even though the Redfield ratio has been fairly defined at 16:1 it seems like that is an average value. A study I was reading showed that it varies by sunlight, among many other factors. In a brightly lit reef tank it could easily hit over 30:1.

It won't really show on a test though. Our tests imo are an indication.
I think some tests are great, such as Alk and Calc. I've come to look at NO3 and PO4 as a go/no go test. For instance, the last few weeks my tank has pretty much been zero on both yet I feel like I run a high nutrient system. I pull a crazy amount of algae out of my fuge each week.

It's easier to just over feed a bit and live with the uglies. Becuse we know they will go away.
Or even better, create better conditions for the uglies to grow in a fuge or ATS so they grow more there than in the DT.
 

Yuki Rihwa

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2017
Messages
751
Reaction score
853
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
We all hate brown algae, diatom, hair aglae...etc
TBH I don't mind this type of green algae cover my rock scape. (picture from google - China Beach), It look nature and kinda cool :) Sorry I'm off topic!
green algae.jpg
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,036
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
We all hate brown algae, diatom, hair aglae...etc
TBH I don't mind this type of green algae cover my rock scape. (picture from google - China Beach), It look nature and kinda cool :) Sorry I'm off topic!
green algae.jpg
They may need to do some carbon dosing and add some GFO! :eek::p

I saw a special on that place. The amount of algae growing in the water from fertilizer run off is unbelievable!
 

saltyfilmfolks

Lights! Camera! Reef!
View Badges
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
28,739
Reaction score
40,932
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Even though the Redfield ratio has been fairly defined at 16:1 it seems like that is an average value. A study I was reading showed that it varies by sunlight, among many other factors. In a brightly lit reef tank it could easily hit over 30:1.


I think some tests are great, such as Alk and Calc. I've come to look at NO3 and PO4 as a go/no go test. For instance, the last few weeks my tank has pretty much been zero on both yet I feel like I run a high nutrient system. I pull a crazy amount of algae out of my fuge each week.


Or even better, create better conditions for the uglies to grow in a fuge or ATS so they grow more there than in the DT.
Redfield is orgism uptake. Not system or in the water i.e. availability.

How many threads are there with a guy with three no3and Po4 tests that don't match is triton.


Read the Red Sea maturation method. It's actually exactly what you describe.

And buddy if you haven't pegged .75 Po4 , you haven't lived.


Sorry my quote thing isn't working.
Alge , coral ? yea. iPhone. No
 

saltyfilmfolks

Lights! Camera! Reef!
View Badges
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
28,739
Reaction score
40,932
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
We all hate brown algae, diatom, hair aglae...etc
TBH I don't mind this type of green algae cover my rock scape. (picture from google - China Beach), It look nature and kinda cool :) Sorry I'm off topic!
green algae.jpg
That's my fuge.
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,036
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Redfield is orgism uptake. Not system or in the water i.e. availability.
True, and most of the uptake is from what is available in the water. If one nutrient isn't available it can no longer take in the other. This creates an unbalanced condition allowing a harmful bacteria to thrive.

On a side note... harmful and non harmful bacteria are scientific terms. No joke. Most of the research I have read on this comes from studies on algae/bacteria blooms.
 

saltyfilmfolks

Lights! Camera! Reef!
View Badges
Joined
Feb 25, 2014
Messages
28,739
Reaction score
40,932
Location
California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
True, and most of the uptake is from what is available in the water. If one nutrient isn't available it can no longer take in the other. This creates an unbalanced condition allowing a harmful bacteria to thrive.

On a side note... harmful and non harmful bacteria are scientific terms. No joke. Most of the research I have read on this comes from studies on algae/bacteria blooms.
You did say available. So as long as it's available it doesn't matter the amounts in general. And def not balance of the two.

(That's why a 56, 14k bulb works as well as a 20k too)

And yea, I know about the terms.
I'm a life long ocean and science guy. Just "new "to Reefing.
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,036
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
You did say available. So as long as it's available it doesn't matter the amounts in general. And def not balance of the two.
Yup, it is only the availability that matters. Understanding the balance helps explain the impacts of hitting a limit on one or the other.
 
OP
OP
Brew12

Brew12

Electrical Gru
View Badges
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
22,488
Reaction score
61,036
Location
Decatur, AL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
And yea, I know about the terms.
I'm a life long ocean and science guy. Just "new "to Reefing.
I just found the term "good" and "bad" to be very unscientific. It seems like they are passing a moral judgement on the bacteria.
 

Tentacled trailblazer in your tank: Have you ever kept a large starfish?

  • I currently have a starfish in my tank.

    Votes: 24 30.0%
  • Not currently, but I have kept a starfish in the past.

    Votes: 18 22.5%
  • I have never kept a starfish, but I hope to in the future.

    Votes: 21 26.3%
  • I have no plans to keep a starfish.

    Votes: 17 21.3%
  • Other.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
Back
Top