What are the root causes of Cyano?

[jsker]

Interesting, I have had a similar experience. My tank is running nitrate and phosphate limited (NO3 and PO4 not measurable on testing kit). I saw my sps were losing color. I also have cyano mats on my rock and sand. I decided to start dosing 2ml of sodium nitrate solution I mixed in an attempt to raise nitrates. I could not get a reading for nitrate so I started to increase my dosage to 2x daily and eventually went to 2ml 2x daily. I could never get a NO3 reading but what I did get was my sps started to show signs of tissue loss. I have stopped dosing and still have cyano and no measurable NO3 or PO4.

I bought some Flourish Nitrogen by Seachem which does contain urea but it also has potassium nitrate. From your conclusions it sounds like I may end up with the same results.

Reading on doing some produce source research I found Urea .99% pure link

 

[jsker]

Question: Is PH a factor also?


I have been dealing with cyano for sometime on and off. I have been letting the N and P balance out, but the PH is still low

 

[brandon429]

Cyano has been found in countless posts online in tanks with elevated po4 and no3 how does that tie into these pages

+1 confound:
TW shows in threads we assume cyano when it's spirulina, microscopy needed or other reducing tests to ID

If these posts are spirulina I think the posted biochemistry might not apply.

anyone can post a cyano challenge in the sand rinse thread for more practice for us. I claim natural vectoring presents monera constantly in any moist environment, so the actual cause isn't a chemical issue it's a physical vectoring we can't help issue. Agreed certain n and p ratios are shown to suppress cyano, but old fashioned removal plus feed removal generates the after pics nicely. Nature tends to hold nutrients rather steady, better than us at least, in the water, and uses grazers for control

It's already interesting they'll be sandbed tanks and not bb tanks presenting...however many roads it takes to illustrate the role of good ole poo in cyanolina issues, we'll show them in after pics.

 

[Brew12]

TW shows in threads we assume cyano when it's spirulina, microscopy needed or other reducing tests to ID

If these posts are spirulina I think the posted biochemistry might not apply.

Spirulina is a strain of cyanobacteria FYI.

 

[brandon429]

Yes but that doesn’t just keep the same pathways alive either, I didn’t bother to dig but it’s a rule in speciation to differ, the treatments for the two sure vary with the other common approaches. perhaps it’s the same across monera

Mainly I’m a proponent of just fixing it and keeping after pics handy. People are reporting tank turnarounds off nutrient adjusts its valid system and very handy for large tankers

 

[Nano sapiens]

For what it's worth...

In nearly 40 years with saltwater (30+ with reef aquaria), I've only encountered thick sand bed cyanobacteria mats once. This was in a 1990's era 55 gallon mixed reef tank, no skimmer, no mechanical filtration, low flow by today's standards, lightly stocked with four 3-4" fish, minimal water changes (~10%/year) and no disturbance of the shallow 1-1/2" sand bed for ~3-4 years. Physical removal of the mats was helpful, but they would return in a few days. A weekly process of thoroughly stirring and vacuuming one portion of the tank at a time (which also meant ~20 -30% water change over the total time period) was successful in eliminating the bloom. Once a month sand stirring/vacuuming was then implemented to keep the tank cyano mat free for another half a decade.

While the example above is anecdotal, I believe that it does indicate a relationship between nutrient sinks (sand bed in this case) and cyano bacterial mats.

My current 9+ year old small mixed reef aquarium has some localized cyano, but only in those areas where one coral is killing and overgrowing another. The localized areas have a high level of decaying material that is continually being produced by the coral warfare. Once the warfare ceases, the little cyano strips slowly disappear. Once again it seems, high nutrient areas are contributing to cyano proliferation.

Ralph.

 

[Sallstrom]

Interesting, I have had a similar experience. My tank is running nitrate and phosphate limited (NO3 and PO4 not measurable on testing kit). I saw my sps were losing color. I also have cyano mats on my rock and sand. I decided to start dosing 2ml of sodium nitrate solution I mixed in an attempt to raise nitrates. I could not get a reading for nitrate so I started to increase my dosage to 2x daily and eventually went to 2ml 2x daily. I could never get a NO3 reading but what I did get was my sps started to show signs of tissue loss. I have stopped dosing and still have cyano and no measurable NO3 or PO4.

I bought some Flourish Nitrogen by Seachem which does contain urea but it also has potassium nitrate. From your conclusions it sounds like I may end up with the same results.

Maybe by adding NO3 the phosphate decreased to levels that was too low for the Montipora to handle?
Specially with carbon source it's possible to get to low phosphate. We had have to add PO4 a couple of times to get the corals "back to life".

/David

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The assimilation of nitrate raises the internal pH of corals (the same in algae or cyanobacteria). Assimilation of NO3- by organisms means formation of amino groups from NO3-. This process consumes protons. It is balanced by the uptake of protons from the aqueous solution or the excretion of OH- into the aqueous solution. As you know the removal of H+ from an aqueous solution or the excretion of OH- means raising pH.

If you grow plants and you take either NH4+ or NO3- as fertilizer you will notice that their mode of action is quite different.

To describe the cyano problem for the whole tank it is a P-deficiency that can be observed. I think it is reduced competition of corals and coralline algae for iron that causes the cyano bloom but it may also be another mechanism of competition.

But is there actual evidence that internal pH actually rises in response to nitrate levels?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

But is there actual evidence that internal pH actually rises in response to nitrate levels?

The reason I ask is two fold.

Yes, the conversion of nitrate into biochemicals does consume H+, and if nothing else happened, that process would raise pH.

But, intracellular pH is usually rightly controlled in most organisms, so any tendency for pH to vary is usually quickly overpowered by regulatory mechanisms.

Second, how exactly the nitrate is taken up may also impact pH. There are a variety of nitrate transporters around, but one in plants, for example, takes in H+ along with the nitrate, so the uptake itself can impact pH (and in this case, in a downward direction). That might not be an optimal mechanism when the external pH is already higher than the internal pH, and may not be used, but the papers I just checked out didn’t clearly understand the ion transport aspects of nitrate in marine Cyanobacteria.

 

[Ehunforfun]

Yes and to even go a step beyond when possible, see this gentleman’s interception page 3

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/simple-nano.230757/page-3

No chems
No tinkering with nutrient chasing

Just rip the bed out, clean it, put back, handles all issues at once

Our sandbed rinse thread is a collection of these events to show we simply can instantly stop cyano if the bed is accessible

Hard to do in larger tanks vs nanos, but same outcome every time. We talk about and document how to take apart any reef tank, blast it clean, and reinstall without losing anything.

More importantly, HOW DID YOU KILL THE GSP?!?! that stuff is tougher than red cyano...

 

[Lasse]

Cyano has been found in countless posts online in tanks with elevated po4 and no3 how does that tie into these pages

+1 confound:
TW shows in threads we assume cyano when it's spirulina, microscopy needed or other reducing tests to ID

If these posts are spirulina I think the posted biochemistry might not apply.

anyone can post a cyano challenge in the sand rinse thread for more practice for us. I claim natural vectoring presents monera constantly in any moist environment, so the actual cause isn't a chemical issue it's a physical vectoring we can't help issue. Agreed certain n and p ratios are shown to suppress cyano, but old fashioned removal plus feed removal generates the after pics nicely. Nature tends to hold nutrients rather steady, better than us at least, in the water, and uses grazers for control

It's already interesting they'll be sandbed tanks and not bb tanks presenting...however many roads it takes to illustrate the role of good ole poo in cyanolina issues, we'll show them in after pics.

Sorry for late respons

I´m rather sure that there are the same mechanism for spirulina (a benthic species of cyanobacteria with normally a spiral shape) as for other benthic cyanobacteria (with a straight shape) But of cause – you can be right – I can´t rule that out for the moment

Hoe do I explain forming of Cyanobacteria mats during high P and N scenarios?

If the forming of the mats is caused by the fact that there is two in some way Independent system – the photosynthesis producing sugar as stored energy – and the processes involved in the building and maintenance of the bacteria cells ant its processes. The theory that I have in my head is that if something that is needed in the second process (building and maintained) the first process – photosynthesis can continue, and the resulting sugar will be stored extracellular (in means outside the cell) and hence be the base of the mats (jelly). After the formation of the mats – the cyanobacteria can start get advances of the environment it has create between the mats and the substrate. Organic matter in this space will not make the situation better. I can´t either rule out that organic matter itself can be a trigger for the mats but its surly in some way will decide where the spots of mat starts in many cases.

That N-starvation can be one reason for the starts of the mats is clear – the other reasons is speculations from me based on own experiences and others.

However - the crucial point is – what start the storage of extracellular sugar – the storage we call cyanobacteria mats – the cyanobacteria are always in our water but not associated with mats – suddenly they start to form mats (and sometimes these mats disappear as suddenly as they appear). If we can isolate that trigger(s) – we will have a tool to defeat the buildings of the mats and let the cyanobacteria cells be there – doing their job without disturbing us and our corals

@aeras1131

Is it OK to continue Hans Werner´s discussions about urea as nitrogen source instead for NO3 in this thread or should we start another thread about this? I think this was an interesting turn in terms of the addition of nitrogen.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Nano sapiens]

Just a thought, but could it be that different cyanobacteria species can form similar looking mats under vaying environmental conditions? Might provide an explanation as to why we see mats in systems that are nitrogen/phosphate limited as well as systems that have nitrogen/phosphate in excess.

Ralph.

 

[Hans-Werner]

The reason I ask is two fold.

Yes, the conversion of nitrate into biochemicals does consume H+, and if nothing else happened, that process would raise pH.

But, intracellular pH is usually rightly controlled in most organisms, so any tendency for pH to vary is usually quickly overpowered by regulatory mechanisms.

Second, how exactly the nitrate is taken up may also impact pH. There are a variety of nitrate transporters around, but one in plants, for example, takes in H+ along with the nitrate, so the uptake itself can impact pH (and in this case, in a downward direction). That might not be an optimal mechanism when the external pH is already higher than the internal pH, and may not be used, but the papers I just checked out didn’t clearly understand the ion transport aspects of nitrate in marine Cyanobacteria.

The pH ist just a theory to explain the observation that nitrate seems to interfere with phosphate nutrition in corals. In plants nitrate is known to interfere with iron supply. The mechanisms may be similar and pH related. As you have stated already the intracellular pH elevation due to nitrate assimilation ist externalized to the sites of calcification where it may precipitate more phosphate than lets say with ammonium assimilation. Finally new scientific papers confirm that nitrate seems to be detrimental to corals under certain conditions.

 

[Lasse]

First, I must state - I´m not a scientist of occupation – my background and interest are more towards Ecological Engineering and hence (in best case or I want to believe that by myself at least ) have a more holistic point of view compared with scientist that´s are specialized in one field.

What I have learned during all my years trying to manipulate biological systems can be summarized in some few sentences and some of the most important (for me) will following here

1. The nature is energy conservative – it will in the first place chose the pathway there the organism gains most and with the lowest energy input. However, one important organism exclusion – human beings of today
   
2. If there is a lack of a needed (in the growth or survival process) off certain compound or substance in our measurements – that compound or substance is the limited factor and/or the form that will be used in first place
   
3. The processes of nature are logical and understandable – when we do not see that – it’s a lack of logic and understanding in our heads.
   
4. The evolution is not primary based on which genes or behaviour that suit the organism best in a given environment – its instead based on which genes or behaviour that can give any disadvantages in a given environment – those the evolution can happen very fast because these genes or behaviour can be lethal during new or changed environment.

I always try to have these four – for me important sentences – in my head when I run into problems or questions that I have not crashed into before. (Yes – it’s the right word because these situations mostly appear in chaotic situations )

I have also work in the education processes including children and low educated grown ups (in a folk college and at a science centre) – therefore I try to use a logical way of expression and not use too complicated scientist expressions. It’s difficult in my native language (Swedish) and we should not talk about to do it in a foreign language like English (and sometimes I have difficulties to understand other person point of view when they use linguistic references and expressions that are unfamiliar to me. In my turn - I sometimes use words and expressions that are not dirty in Swedish culture, but which causes a lot of ****** in my English text - so excuse me if this happens and if I misunderstand people)

With this in my mind it´s easy for me to accept that NH4/NH3 is the preferred nitrogen species for zooxanthella’s (and other algae) but it’s also understandable that NO3 can work as a nitrogen source for zooxanthella because it´s naturally the most common inorganic nitrogen species in our oceans (with exception for N2 gas) and normally follow the pattern with low levels NO3 and high levels of chlorophyll. Yes, I know there it is some part of the ocean there this pattern is not true – but it seems like this area instead are growth limited by iron. Here is a very god review of the nitrogen cycle in the oceans.

However – what I´m not understand is how it (by itself) can be toxic for some coral species. Certain concentrations – yes but the molecule by itself? I have been told many times that NO3 is toxic for corals – but never seen any evidence of this. If there are new studies showing this – I would love to see these and to see during which circumstances.

@Hans-Werner By the way -for me it seems a little bit odd to use urea as a nitrogen source in a coral system. In a aqueous solution (together with bacteria) urea (CO(NH2)2 is one of the most pH rising nitrogen containing substance I know. It will rapidly be breakdown to carbon dioxide and NH4/NH3 by heterotrophic bacteria and hence rise the pH. Rising pH – more toxic NH3 will be formed.



Sincerely Lasse

 

[Hans-Werner]

Lasse, nitrate is not toxic to corals but there are scientific papers that nitrate enrichment of water is detrimental to corals. In reefs the dominant N forms are ammonium and organic N. These forms are "recycled N" which means they come directly from excretions and decay of organisms while NO3 in reefs is the "new N" which means it comes mainly from terrestrial runoff and upwelling deep water into the reef. Because in reefs the nutrients are permanently recycled nearly no nitrification occurs.

Urea does not hydrolyze spontaneously (only very very slowly) but it is very rapidly hydrolyzed by the enzym urease for example by bacteria. But bacteria, corals or other organisms with the enzyme urease only produce enough enzyme (it is a protein so why produce more than enough of it?) and hydrolyze only enough urea to satisfy their N needs. So no toxic ammonia is released. Besides this the dosage of urea I applied was so low it would not have been toxic even if it had been hydrolyzed to ammonia completely. If you are careful you even can dose ammonium chloride. The corals will take it up very rapidly if they are in short supply of N. The effect will be better than dosing nitrate.

 

[Lasse]

Hi Hans Werner

Its fun and interesting to have these discussions with you even if it maybe is in the outskirts of the question raised by OP. But I still think that nitrogen defiency many times can trigger the forming of cyanobacteria mats, so it can be of some concern to figure out the best source for this nitrogen additive. In the case of the Cyanobacteria mats – I think that NO3 plays some other rolls too – not only as an nutrient source

The fertilization power of urea is rather well known for me - especially the form I produce by myself . I have with help of that form cultivated both freshwater and saltwater phytoplankton with great success . Also – I have produce the best tomatoes ever with this form of urea that I can produce by myself . Maybe I will test that substances as nitrogen source in my reef one or another day .

But I am not with you when you say that it’s a slow process and that its self regulated in pH below 9.5. My experiences are that most bacteria – especially faecal bacteria are able to breakdown urea rather fast with help of urease and its not stop before a pH around 9.5. The process seems not be regulated as a nutrient resource for the bacteria. IMO - have it start - it will continue untill all urea is altered

I´m also a little bit wondering to the findings of urease in corals of evolution reasons. Urea is not a common nitrogen source in the sea – saltwater fishes does not pee, and the sharks and rays are so few, so their urea production does not matter. But that does not mean that corals can´t take advantages of urea as a source because the bacteria associated with their outside probably have this enzyme. But the coral itself can also have genes that not harm the organism today (or have done it before) therefore they are still there as a resource – so I do not really know.

I do think that the run-off of fertilizers make harm for corals in coastal water but in the ocean NO3 probably are the main inorganic sources of nitrogen for most green algae, diatoms and some photosynthesizing bacteria. Some dinoflagellates may have other sources. The source for this NO3 is mainly from upwelling areas and there are coral reefs that take advantages of the resources from upwelling in different places.

Yes, I think that NH4/NH3 is the preferred nitrogen source for zooxanthella because it do not cost extra energy but I´m also sure that nitrification rate is rather high in a natural reef system. Lot of oxygen, lot of surfaces, low ratio of organic carbon and lot of carbonate – dream scenario for a nitrification system. And you know what people say – the nitrification in a reef aquarium happens with help of the bacteria population on the rocks. However – I´m not so found of that idea in a aquaria (enough nitrification only with help of LS) – but that´s another question for another thread

Sincerely Lasse

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

Question: Is PH a factor also?


I have been dealing with cyano for sometime on and off. I have been letting the N and P balance out, but the PH is still low

I belive the look at ph in cyano treatments is to limit another "food source". Co2.

As was discussed in the other thread , breaking the cycle that helps create the ideal conditions for these organisms is part of a multi pronged approach to controlling a population, most seem to exhibit an ability to create a "micro climate"
In early effected spots as Lasse was indicating with my cyano examples. .

 

[Hans-Werner]

Hi Lasse, I like your contributions and it is fun to discuss with you.

Nitrification is not important in reefs because there is not enough ammonium and nitrite for nitrification. NH4 is very efficiently taken up by corals and also algae. The nitrite ions seems to be quite similar to chloride ions that freshwater fish mistake nitrite for chloride and enrich it to toxic levels. Nitrifying bacteria seem to have the same problem vice versa. This is the cause why nitrite can quite frequently be found in reef aquaria, especially in ones that have nitrate reductors. Imagine only the extreme difference in the concentrations of nitrite and chloride in the reefs.

The formation of ammonia from urea or glutamin via urease or glutaminase is important in calcification processes in molluscs and most likely also in corals. At least an urease has been found in corals. As far as I know urea is formed by bacteria in the oceans.

As I already mentioned above in plants the nitrate assimilation interferes with iron uptake and may cause iron deficiency chlorosis. Cyanobacteria are said to have a high demand for iron. Maybe it is a similar process that precipitates iron in the presence of nitrate in reef aquaria too inhibiting cyanobacteria.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

Lasse, I like your contributions and it is fun to discuss with you.

Nitrification is not important in reefs because there is not enough ammonium and nitrite for nitrification. NH4 is very efficiently taken up by corals and also algae. The nitrite ions seems to be quite similar to chloride ions that freshwater fish mistake nitrite for chloride and enrich it to toxic levels. Nitrifying bacteria seem to have the same problem vice versa. This is the cause why nitrite can quite frequently be found in reef aquaria, especially in ones that have nitrate reductors. Imagine only the extreme difference in the concentrations of nitrite and chloride in the reefs.

The formation of ammonia from urea or glutamin via urease or glutaminase is important in calcification processes in molluscs and most likely also in corals. At least an urease has been found in corals. As far as I know urea is formed by bacteria in the oceans.

As I already mentioned above in plants the nitrate assimilation interferes with iron uptake and may cause iron deficiency chlorosis. Cyanobacteria are said to have a high demand for iron. Maybe it is a similar process that precipitates iron in the presence of nitrate in reef aquaria too inhibiting cyanobacteria.

Isn't ammoina constantly being supplied to the system by decay of organics and fish / animal waste?

 

[Hans-Werner]

Isn't ammoina constantly being supplied to the system by decay of organics and fish / animal waste?

Yes, it is but it is just as constantly taken up by corals and algae and in this way the concentration stays very low. Too low for much nitrification.