mr.wilson
.Registered Member
I agree that the sand being used may be rich in phophates and all kinds of other "junk". Isolating the sand as a causitive factor of bad water quality & clarity can easily done by starting off with reverse osmosis/deionized or distilled (pure) water. Then add some sand to a bucket of this water and test the water 24 hrs later for phosphate and nitrate. It should be obvious if stiring the sand causes turbidity (cloudy water). It is possible that the sand may need to be scrapped.
Oyster or scallop shells will act as a cost effective absorbent for phosphate and other "bad stuff" in the sand. Ferric oxide-based exchange resins are a faster, more expensive remedy, but not worth the trouble until a known quantity and source of the phosphate is established. If this is the problem at all.
Our standard for ultra-low nutrients for our closed system sps tanks is not necessary for a soft coral open system. We can only aim for optimum water quality to limit the chance of failure.
Nuisance algae needs a few things to priferate. Shallow water with a subsequently lower colour temperature lighting is a good start. Nahham doesn't have the luxury of deep water to refract the light. Light intensity/par is also much higher than what one would find on a typical 10m + deep reef. Slow flow through and feeding (nutrient import) will increase organic nutrient (algae food) levels. These nutrients are not completely free to dilute into the sea so some form of refugium is a big plus. Macro algae growth is much more efficient than mangroves, and should be set-up as large shallow trays or raceways (water flows through a zig-zag maze of chanels).
The final piece of the photosynthetic puzzle for nuisance algae to take over is Co2. Until the prop pumps go in, there is limited gas exchange so the water below the surface will low in oxygen and rich in Co2.
The fish farm is an excellent meterstick here. It appears that Nahham has not had problems with algae blooms in the farm pool. The reef display should be better, but I'll admit that some of my best efforts have fallen short of the success rate of chance
Oyster or scallop shells will act as a cost effective absorbent for phosphate and other "bad stuff" in the sand. Ferric oxide-based exchange resins are a faster, more expensive remedy, but not worth the trouble until a known quantity and source of the phosphate is established. If this is the problem at all.
Our standard for ultra-low nutrients for our closed system sps tanks is not necessary for a soft coral open system. We can only aim for optimum water quality to limit the chance of failure.
Nuisance algae needs a few things to priferate. Shallow water with a subsequently lower colour temperature lighting is a good start. Nahham doesn't have the luxury of deep water to refract the light. Light intensity/par is also much higher than what one would find on a typical 10m + deep reef. Slow flow through and feeding (nutrient import) will increase organic nutrient (algae food) levels. These nutrients are not completely free to dilute into the sea so some form of refugium is a big plus. Macro algae growth is much more efficient than mangroves, and should be set-up as large shallow trays or raceways (water flows through a zig-zag maze of chanels).
The final piece of the photosynthetic puzzle for nuisance algae to take over is Co2. Until the prop pumps go in, there is limited gas exchange so the water below the surface will low in oxygen and rich in Co2.
The fish farm is an excellent meterstick here. It appears that Nahham has not had problems with algae blooms in the farm pool. The reef display should be better, but I'll admit that some of my best efforts have fallen short of the success rate of chance
