What if we had it wrong all the time?

[LC8Sumi]

Hello!

I was wondering how sure the algae issues are directly a result of PO4/NO3 levels in tanks.
I've seen way too many tanks that have high levels of both PO4 and NO3, yet no nuisance algae in them. Poor coral colors, yes, but no algae. I've seen people (all my LFS for exmaple) dumping in loads and loads of mixed frozen foods in their systems, and not a single strain of algae can be seen in their tanks - even though their nitrates and phosphates are both admitted to be sky-high.
That said, I've also seen a lot of tanks with close to zero levels of NO3 & PO4, really nursed and babied, yet with algae issues. I understand that the current fashion dictates to say that the algae are sucking up the nutrients from the water column & that is why the test won't show it, but is this really the case? Do our algae really feed on NO3 & PO4 (and light) only? Or can it be something else, yet to be discovered? Thinking of a combination of bacteria or something else present in one tank and not in the other or such?

Cheers

 

[Katrina71]

Supply/demand. Imo.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Hello!

I was wondering how sure the algae issues are directly a result of PO4/NO3 levels in tanks.
I've seen way too many tanks that have high levels of both PO4 and NO3, yet no nuisance algae in them. Poor coral colors, yes, but no algae. I've seen people (all my LFS for exmaple) dumping in loads and loads of mixed frozen foods in their systems, and not a single strain of algae can be seen in their tanks - even though their nitrates and phosphates are both admitted to be sky-high.
That said, I've also seen a lot of tanks with close to zero levels of NO3 & PO4, really nursed and babied, yet with algae issues. I understand that the current fashion dictates to say that the algae are sucking up the nutrients from the water column & that is why the test won't show it, but is this really the case? Do our algae really feed on NO3 & PO4 (and light) only? Or can it be something else, yet to be discovered? Thinking of a combination of bacteria or something else present in one tank and not in the other or such?

Cheers

There’s a good post on the forum that it says it’s all to do with available carbon and amônia, I tend to support that view. Imo the best way to control algae outbreaks it’s with strains of bacteria to outcompete the algae for food ( carbon, amônia etc ). also can be noticed that thanks are more subjective to algae outbreaks during the first two years wend a tank is still trying to stabilise its microbe community. Algae outbreaks in stablished reefs is very rare. My tank runner once at 1,9 po4 with virtually no algae.

 

[Paul B]

I have been saying this for decades. Algae and nutrients are a farce.

You can take distilled water and put it in the sun for a few days and it will grow algae. Not much, but some.
My reef had nitrates of 160 and everything else was off the chart for years and I couldn't get algae to grow. Then all of a sudden, I have a produce stand.

Algae knows this annoys us so it keeps doing it until we go crazy.

 

[LC8Sumi]

There’s a good post on the forum that it says it’s all to do with available carbon and amônia, I tend to support that view. Imo the best way to control algae outbreaks it’s with strains of bacteria to outcompete the algae for food ( carbon, amônia etc ). also can be noticed that thanks are more subjective to algae outbreaks during the first two years wend a tank is still trying to stabilise its microbe community. Algae outbreaks in stablished reefs is very rare. My tank runner once at 1,9 po4 with virtually no algae.

I wonder where such bacteria could be obtained from? My tank is 3 years old, and still have algae issues (it never went away after the initial stage):

I’ve tried 0 NO3, 0 PO4, high nitrates, high phosphates, and every possible permutation to no avail. I also test for silica (0) & had my rodi tested twice with ICP to come out pristine. I’ve tried rowaphos in a reactor, chaeto, really everything that is on the table nowdays reefing wise, but non seems to make a difference. I’m now experimenting with Vibrant & also have Reeflux on the shelf after the Vibrant experiment ends (I don’t believe it is going to be successfull tbh).

So after 3 years and all the experimenting, I start questioning the nutrient thing as the main reason for algae.

 

[Phyber]

I'm going to pick up some bacteria in a bottle today to try and kick my cyano out. I constantly maintain a low no/po reading despite heavy feeding and amino dosing and lax water change schedule.

 

[sixty_reefer]

I wonder where such bacteria could be obtained from? My tank is 3 years old, and still have algae issues (it never went away the initial stage):

I’ve tried 0 NO3, 0 PO4, high nitrates, high phosphates, and every possible permutation to no avail. I also test for silica (0) & had my rodi tested twice with ICP to come out pristine. I’ve tried rowaphos in a reactor, chaeto, really everything that is on the table nowdays reefing wise, but non seems to make a difference. I’m now experimenting with Vibrant & also have Reeflux on the shelf after the Vibrant experiment ends (I don’t believe it is going to be successfull tbh).

So after 3 years and all the experimenting, I start questioning the nutrient thing as the main reason for algae.

I don’t have an answer for it, if I did I would have a big fat bank account by now. I do have a theory that might not do any sense for most, imo I believe that wend we stripe all the nutrients po4 and No3 we actually starving the beneficial bacteria causing a die off on the one thing that could help the outcompete the algae. This may sound ridiculous but my way to fight algae would be to let No3 around 5 and po4 around 0.03 and dose beneficial bacteria once a week.

 

[LC8Sumi]

I don’t have an answer for it, if I did I would have a big fat bank account by now. I do have a theory that might not do any sense for most, imo I believe that wend we stripe all the nutrients po4 and No3 we actually starving the beneficial bacteria causing a die off on the one thing that could help the outcompete the algae. This may sound ridiculous but my way to fight algae would be to let No3 around 5 and po4 around 0.03 and dose beneficial bacteria once a week.

That’s plausible, if not in this exact way maybe. I don’t think the largest bacteria populations in our tanks would be NO3 consumers, but amonia and nitrite, maybe something that has to do with sulphur. Still there is a population, but probably not as large as for the other two types. I don’t have a clue though what bacteria consumes how much PO4, thus how phosphate levels impacts their population, and more importantly probably: what else, apart from these two impact them. I think it is very obvious that there is something else as well in the equation that we don’t know about yet

 

[mta_morrow]

I find it hard to correlate as well. For 18 months my tank was stable and no algae running 10-16 nitrates and .03-12 phosphates. Then a couple months ago I got a diamond goby. Totally turned over my sand bed and nutrients wen to 60+ nitrates and .28 phosphates. Still no algae. It has taken me 6-8 weeks to get back to close to normal. I even started a thread on this issue as well. I will add the link in a sec.

High nitrates and phosphates but no algae? Why not?

So for 17 months or so, nitrates and phosphates have been steady. NO3 10-16, PO4.03-.1. No algae. about a month ago I added a diamond goby. Dyson has been a good goby and has has exceeded my expectations! My sand bed is pristine! But all that digging up of a 17 month old sand bed now has...

www.reef2reef.com

 

[mta_morrow]

I find it hard to correlate as well. For 18 months my tank was stable and no algae running 10-16 nitrates and .03-12 phosphates. Then a couple months ago I got a diamond goby. Totally turned over my sand bed and nutrients wen to 60+ nitrates and .28 phosphates. Still no algae. It has taken me 6-8 weeks to get back to close to normal. I even started a thread on this issue as well. I will add the link in a sec.

High nitrates and phosphates but no algae? Why not?

So for 17 months or so, nitrates and phosphates have been steady. NO3 10-16, PO4.03-.1. No algae. about a month ago I added a diamond goby. Dyson has been a good goby and has has exceeded my expectations! My sand bed is pristine! But all that digging up of a 17 month old sand bed now has...

www.reef2reef.com

And I also run 12K spectrum, very white. 12 hrs per day includes 4 hour ramp up and down.

 

[sixty_reefer]

That’s plausible, if not in this exact way maybe. I don’t think the largest bacteria populations in our tanks would be NO3 consumers, but amonia and nitrite, maybe something that has to do with sulphur. Still there is a population, but probably not as large as for the other two types. I don’t have a clue though what bacteria consumes how much PO4, thus how phosphate levels impacts their population, and more importantly probably: what else, apart from these two impact them. I think it is very obvious that there is something else as well in the equation that we don’t know about yet

Agree I believe most bacteria would be consuming NH4 imo is at this stage that the outcompete happens they will consume/transform the Nh4 before the algae got the chance to get any.

 

[sixty_reefer]

In addition I also believe that different algae’s would rather different food sources nh4 could be the favourite for GHA for example, they seem to thrive in pod cultures were normally there’s no method of filtration in place.

 

[Jon Fishman]

I feed all frozen, and overfeed a LOT. No algae. I also feed tons of roids


I think every system is different, so nutrient export matters too

 

[Dan_P]

Hello!

I was wondering how sure the algae issues are directly a result of PO4/NO3 levels in tanks.
I've seen way too many tanks that have high levels of both PO4 and NO3, yet no nuisance algae in them. Poor coral colors, yes, but no algae. I've seen people (all my LFS for exmaple) dumping in loads and loads of mixed frozen foods in their systems, and not a single strain of algae can be seen in their tanks - even though their nitrates and phosphates are both admitted to be sky-high.
That said, I've also seen a lot of tanks with close to zero levels of NO3 & PO4, really nursed and babied, yet with algae issues. I understand that the current fashion dictates to say that the algae are sucking up the nutrients from the water column & that is why the test won't show it, but is this really the case? Do our algae really feed on NO3 & PO4 (and light) only? Or can it be something else, yet to be discovered? Thinking of a combination of bacteria or something else present in one tank and not in the other or such?

Cheers

Yes, water chemistry is a poor predictor of nuisance organism growth, but we have nothing else to use, so, we use it. We are also suffering from selection bias. We tend to remember the instances when high nitrate and phosphate levels support this water chemistry narrativeabout what encourages nuisance organism growth.

There are some missing ideas in this discussion and debate that prevent it from evolving to something more useful. The first idea is that high growth rate requires a high nutrient level. Even in nature, you cannot get something for nothing. The second idea is that most if not all nuisance organisms tend to be associated with a surface, such as the substrate, rock surface, pipes, and glass. Even free swimming dinoflagellates accumulate on surfaces turning them brown. Who was ever troubled with golden brown water? The last idea is that solid organic matter or particulate organic matter (POC) continually rains down in surfaces. This last idea explains how surfaces in limited locales can supply high nutrient levels that are not detected by measuring nitrate and phosphate. Maybe two more ideas are needed to make this even clearer.

Suspended particles no matter how buoyant, slow down and approach a surface when water flow slows while changing direction or encountering an obstacle. At the scale being discussed, a grain of substrate is an obstacle. And that surface is covered in slime. All aquarium surfaces are covered with biofilms that can trap a moving particle. This scenario is how POC’s become concentrated in biofilms where they are digested by bacteria which then release oganic and inorganic material at high concentrations to the surroundings. If a nuisance organism happens to be near these waste attracting and digesting locales, it is washed with a stream of high nutrient water. But if it is several mm or cm away, it does not grow to visible quanitites. And when you sample the aquarium water, any nutrients produced in these locales are so highly diluted, they are not detectable.

The concentration of POC on aquarium surfaces and digested by bacteria produce the necessary high levels of nutrients for nuisance organism growth. What is the connection between this idea and the observation that low nitrate and phosphate levels seem to encourage nuisance organism growth? And what about adding bacteria to fight nuisance organisms? I will leave these two questions unanswered as study questions

Dan (sorry about typos, I need to walk the dogs)