Utilizing Macroalgae to Stop Nuisance Algae?

[Raul-7]

One thing we used to practice in FW planted aquariums, when starting a new aquarium we would use fast growing plants like Hygrophila sp., Ludwigia sp. and floating plants for first 1-3 months to give the chosen plants time to develop their roots, bacteria to establish, parmeters to stabilize, etc. At the end of this initial phase, the fast growing plants are removed.

This often prevented microalgae from dominating the aquarium during that fragile initial phase.

Why not apply this same logic to reef aquaria? Use macroalgae from day 1 to soak up the excess nutrients and allow the bacterial colonies to become established. In fact I would presume you could float them in the main display to blanket a lot of the light from reaching the bottom and preventing the microalgae from taking hold early on.


Thoughts?

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

One thing we used to practice in FW planted aquariums, when starting a new aquarium we would use fast growing plants like Hygrophila sp., Ludwigia sp. and floating plants for first 1-3 months to give the chosen plants time to develop their roots, bacteria to establish, parmeters to stabilize, etc. At the end of this initial phase, the fast growing plants are removed.

This often prevented microalgae from dominating the aquarium during that fragile initial phase.

Why not apply this same logic to reef aquaria? Use macroalgae from day 1 to soak up the excess nutrients and allow the bacterial colonies to become established. In fact I would presume you could float them in the main display to blanket a lot of the light from reaching the bottom and preventing the microalgae from taking hold early on.


Thoughts?

We DO use this same logic in saltwater... it's called a refugium. But...

There's a big difference between starting a freshwater tank and starting a saltwater tank. Unless you are using mature (usually ocean maricultured) live rock, a saltwater tank WILL go through the "algae cycle" (aka the uglies) as part of the maturation process. It will probably go through some uglies even with true live rock. We actually want this to happen so we end up with a robust algael/bacterial/archaeal biome to sustain and stabilize the tank long term.

 

[Raul-7]

We DO use this same logic in saltwater... it's called a refugium. But...

There's a big difference between starting a freshwater tank and starting a saltwater tank. Unless you are using mature (usually ocean maricultured) live rock, a saltwater tank WILL go through the "algae cycle" (aka the uglies) as part of the maturation process. It will probably go through some uglies even with true live rock. We actually want this to happen so we end up with a robust algael/bacterial/archaeal biome to sustain and stabilize the tank long term.

But it isn't a must? If you fill the display with macroalgae for that initial period, it should prevent the microalgae from gaining a foothold in the aquarium.

Macroalgae have more developed cell structures than microalgae and hence can quickly out-compete them for nutrients.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

But it isn't a must? If you fill the display with macroalgae for that initial period, it should prevent the microalgae from gaining a foothold in the aquarium.

Macroalgae have more developed cell structures than microalgae and hence can quickly out-compete them for nutrients.

Just, no.
Salt is different than fresh. You don't WANT to prevent the macroalgae cycle (micro is phytoplankton) for the reasons already stated.
Macroalgae = diatoms, gha, cyano, dinos... it also includes "good" macros like chaeto, caulerpa, and more decorative algaes.

Look at it this way, assuming you want to keep coral - dinoflagellates live inside coral and they need it to survive. You WANT conditions that are good for algae to grow, you just have to let the tank mature and find a balance. (Your choice of clean up crew is also important). No reef tank has long term success without "reef" (macro) algae.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

If you fill the display with macroalgae for that initial period, it should prevent the microalgae from gaining a foothold in the aquarium.

To go a step further, if you use the method above, you will just delay the normal algae cycle, not prevent it.

 

[Raul-7]

Just, no.
Salt is different than fresh. You don't WANT to prevent the macroalgae cycle (micro is phytoplankton) for the reasons already stated.
Macroalgae = diatoms, gha, cyano, dinos... it also includes "good" macros like chaeto, caulerpa, and more decorative algaes.

Look at it this way, assuming you want to keep coral - dinoflagellates live inside coral and they need it to survive. You WANT conditions that are good for algae to grow, you just have to let the tank mature and find a balance. (Your choice of clean up crew is also important). No reef tank has long term success without "reef" (macro) algae.

My apologies, I meant good macroalgae vs bad/unwanted macroalgae.

I understand coral utilize photosynthesis and need light, nutrients, etc. But in the initial phase I assume you only have liverock, water and nutrients. Then you wait until the aquarium cycles, bacteria is established and parameters stabilize.

But why not use good macroalgae during this phase? I do NOT see the harm it is causing? You have no coral, so it's not competing with the coral. It's only competing with the bad macroalgae. Then it's giving the aquarium a better chance at stabilizing without having to deal with nuisance algae.

Then once you are ready to add coral, you remove the marcoalgae from the display and move it to the refugium.

What is the good macroalgae harming? It's merely competing with the bad macroalgae. The conditions that allow GHA, diatoms and cyano to grow are the same conditions that good macroalgae need to grow.

 

[JoJosReef]

From my point of view, it all comes back to your starting point. Ocean live rock that comes in with a complete biome or sterile dry rock. You can load up a tank with macros to prevent the uglies in a dry rock system, but what is going to take up all of that real estate? Bacteria will grow all over everything, but that's not going to stop GHA from rooting and Valonia could care less what kind of slime layer is on the rocks. Eventually nuisance algae is going to take up real estate or maybe bottom out nutrients and have dinos all over. You might hope for coraline to fill in the space, but that coraline is going to be competing for the same nutrients as the macros. It would also be tough to cover everything with frags of corals because the corals wouldn't have the nutrients to take off.

Note, I like the idea of adding macros at the start of a tank, but not for nutrient control so much as diversifying the sterile environment. I'd also be adding loads of soft corals, easy SPS, sponges and other things right off the bat to jump start the maturation process.

Moot point because I will only ever start new tanks with live rock because it's worth every penny to me

 

[JoJosReef]

My apologies, I meant good macroalgae vs bad/unwanted macroalgae.

I understand coral utilize photosynthesis and need light, nutrients, etc. But in the initial phase I assume you only have liverock, water and nutrients. Then you wait until the aquarium cycles, bacteria is established and parameters stabilize.

But why not use good macroalgae during this phase? I do NOT see the harm it is causing? You have no coral, so it's not competing with the coral. It's only competing with the bad macroalgae. Then it's giving the aquarium a better chance at stabilizing without having to deal with nuisance algae.

Then once you are ready to add coral, you remove the marcoalgae from the display and move it to the refugium.

What is the good macroalgae harming? It's merely competing with the bad macroalgae. The conditions that allow GHA, diatoms and cyano to grow are the same conditions that good macroalgae need to grow.

If you are starting with live rock, you can probably assume little to no cycle, depending on the quality of the rock. Forget bottled bacteria, use what's already there. I wouldn't hesitate to add hardy corals, nems (RFAs), and some macros. Get them taking up the real estate and sucking up the nutrients (and growing), instead of the nuisance algae. Farming macros before doing this seems like a waste of time.

 

[Raul-7]

But macroalgae would introduce good bacteria as well along with the live rock.

But if the good macroalgae is floating on the surface; it will naturally block light from reach the bottom where the nuisance algae will typically grow?

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

But macroalgae would introduce good bacteria as well along with the live rock.

But if the good macroalgae is floating on the surface; it will naturally block light from reach the bottom where the nuisance algae will typically grow?

I'm not sure why you keep asking the same question when you've received the answer from several people already. If you don't believe us, start a thread on the Research and Experiments forum and document your success, or lack thereof, as you run your new tank this way.

 

[slingfox]

Try it out on a new tank setup. See what happens and report back!

 

[Diastro]

Didn't work for me. In both macroalgae tanks I set up the macroalgae failed to stop cyano from forming. Both times there was macroalgae since the first week. For tank #1 I had caulerpas brachypus and cheato in a 8 gallon. It was a large clump and it took off. It was from a well established Lfs tank and brought bristle worms, copeopods, snails etc for diversity. A layer of slime still formed over the whole tank and refused to leave until I used chemiclean. And diatoms as well.

In my second macroalgae tank it's a similar story. 22 gallon with at least 5 different varieties in the beginning. Some slower and some faster than others. Still no luck keeping the cyano at bay. It smothered some of my macros and they're currently re populating. There is definitely a lot more diversity in their tank. I bought a variety of snails, 10+ macroalgae types, hermits, feather dusters, etc. Again I chose to chemiclean the tank as the cyano was going to kill my macros. Now there is still nusiance algae. Stubborn green patches on the glass, but no cyano anymore.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

Didn't work for me. In both macroalgae tanks I set up the macroalgae failed to stop cyano from forming. Both times there was macroalgae since the first week. For tank #1 I had caulerpas brachypus and cheato in a 8 gallon. It was a large clump and it took off. It was from a well established Lfs tank and brought bristle worms, copeopods, snails etc for diversity. A layer of slime still formed over the whole tank and refused to leave until I used chemiclean. And diatoms as well.

In my second macroalgae tank it's a similar story. 22 gallon with at least 5 different varieties in the beginning. Some slower and some faster than others. Still no luck keeping the cyano at bay. It smothered some of my macros and they're currently re populating. There is definitely a lot more diversity in their tank. I bought a variety of snails, 10+ macroalgae types, hermits, feather dusters, etc. Again I chose to chemiclean the tank as the cyano was going to kill my macros. Now there is still nusiance algae. Stubborn green patches on the glass, but no cyano anymore.

Yep. You can run but you can't hide...

 

[Raul-7]

I'm not sure why you keep asking the same question when you've received the answer from several people already. If you don't believe us, start a thread on the Research and Experiments forum and document your success, or lack thereof, as you run your new tank this way.

Just to keep the discussion going, I'm not denying your experiences. Just trying to understand better.

 

[JoJosReef]

Just to keep the discussion going, I'm not denying your experiences. Just trying to understand better.

Well, I think that what @Diastro said is a good anecdote. Given the opportunity, these nuisance algaes (and bacterias) will find a way to establish themselves. If the macros are depleting all of the nutrients, you might run into bigger problems like dinos. Otherwise, there is going to be enough for the nuisance algae to get a start in a new system. I think it is much harder than most realize to completely deplete a system of nutrients. I believe that the refugiums and ATSs probably show the best results when they aren't the only source of competition, i.e., part of a larger, complete biome. I bet if you put a system with live rock only and a refugium (ignoring dry rock for now) next to an equivalent system of live rock and refugium but added a bunch of corals, sponges, tunicates, nems and maybe display macros, the former would have worse algae problems then the latter. I can't run that kind of experiment, but would be interesting!