2 hydra 52s and 1HD prime puck. AI schedule...like ramping up and down?Beauty
What’s your AI schedule? What model AI’s are you using?
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
2 hydra 52s and 1HD prime puck. AI schedule...like ramping up and down?Beauty
What’s your AI schedule? What model AI’s are you using?
2 hydra 52s and 1 HD prime puck. AI schedule...Like what time they ramp up and down??
Settings schedule?2 hydra 52s and 1HD prime puck. AI schedule...like ramping up and down?
Cool
I do supplement with 4 t5 super blue bulbs..Cool
Thanks
That’s uhh....an interesting schedule. Very interesting.
Do you supplement with T5’s or just straight hydra 52 HD’s?
And just in case you’re curious why I’m so curious
That’s what I thoughtI do supplement with 4 t5 super blue bulbs..
I found a video that does a really great job of describing the theory above. The more I learn, the more this makes sense to me...I think many in the hobby forget to realize that the no3 and po4 that we measure is what your export system is not exporting.
I feed heavy, monitor both, and have 14 fish in my 120.
My ideal range for both my systems is:
No3 <5
Po4 < .06
My range is:
No3 5-10
Po4 .02-.1
Within these ranges I have no algae at all, good growth, and color.
If I feed to much pellet food both levels go up.
When levels go up I stop feeding pellets and it comes down.
This works for my systems.
Those dynamics sound perfect to me but can yield completely different results (acro death) for a hobbyists with less fish and less feeding. Even if their no3/po4 test residuals are higher. The stress issues will be compounded when the hobbyists attempts to lower them even more bc of the preached “ideal” formula. IME Hobbyists are more likely to kill sps lowering no3/po4 than they would just letting them remain higher in the first place.I think many in the hobby forget to realize that the no3 and po4 that we measure is what your export system is not exporting.
I feed heavy, monitor both, and have 14 fish in my 120.
My ideal range for both my systems is:
No3 <5
Po4 < .06
My range is:
No3 5-10
Po4 .02-.1
Within these ranges I have no algae at all, good growth, and color.
If I feed to much pellet food both levels go up.
When levels go up I stop feeding pellets and it comes down.
This works for my systems.
I came across this paper this morning & I'd be interested to know if there's anything new in there that might affect your thinking on the subject: https://www.int-res.com/articles/meps/68/m068p065.pdfNitrate is not useless to the tank as a whole, but excess mostly is. Macro algae will love it. You can poison dinos and sometimes cyano with higher levels of it. You need no3. You just don't need much of it. Everything needs nitrogen, but not everything can get nitrogen from no3 - this is where ammonia/ammonium come into play.
Throughput - heavy import of foods and heavy export of no3 and po4 is the goal. Lots of availability running through the tank at any given time, but low residual levels.
I think this is from dec 2020;I’ll be the first in line to read any study performed in an actual aquarium environment after 2010.
And with references from 1969,1971, and 1986 etc.I think this is from dec 2020;
edit: oops I thought it saw dec 2020 when I did the search.
I see now that it actually says published 1990
And I wasn’t knocking you or your specific study. Every study I’ve glanced at is either from the 1990s or don’t apply to the average hobbyists conditionsI think this is from dec 2020;
edit: oops I thought it saw dec 2020 when I did the search.
I see now that it actually says published 1990
lol no worries. I was just clarifying why I thought it was relevant to bring it up.And I wasn’t knocking you or your specific study. Every study I’ve glanced at is either from the 1990s or don’t apply to the average hobbyists conditions
Youuuuuuu..Don’t think testing equipment has gotten better since 1990?? Since 1979?? Since 1969??? Testing is kinda the most important part of any studyIIRC there were a few studies with A. Palmatta that peer reviewers dismissed on a few accounts, but one was that they were a stressed species that often expelled zoox (bleached) and did not need a normal amount of N. Most hosts can recycle N for their symbionts to use, which means that healthy corals usually need new N to grow and not just to maintain (not completely, but close enough for this). Corals that bleach need to accumulate the building blocks that they expelled, which can really be hard and why established bleached reefs are so slow to recover but some smaller corals do OK and grow. It has been a while since I have heard anybody speak on this, so my memory is probably not great on the topic. In any case, A. Palmata is probably not a great subject for a captive study since you need permits to keep the threatened or endangered species (not sure what it is anymore).
I don't know what time has to do with much, unless testing equipment has gotten better. It is not like biology or chemistry has changed since most on this board have been reefing. Hubris of man to think that once one becomes more aware that nature/environment somehow changed because of it.