Algae problems!!

blindskater02

Premium Member
Ok guys I have had my sps tank running for about 4 months now. Not including the 3 month cycle time. And now I have this greenish brown hair algae growing all over. I also have other types of weird algae growing in there as well. Any suggestions on what I should do??? I have a 2-4 inch sandbed. And all of my levels check out perfect. I am getting great growth and color out of my corals. The only problem is the stupid algae PLEASE HELP!!!!!
 
Weekly WC's if you arent already doing so

RO/DI is a must but you know that...test the TDS to make sure your unit isnt exhausted

you may be overfeeding

what is your fish load like?

Have you considered running a GFO in a phosban reactor?

test for nitrates and phosphates and post your test results....that is crucial

do you have a fuge?

so is it 2 or 4"SB...big difference one may qualify as DSB and the other SSB thus you have two markedly different functions

What is the flow like on your tank? I am willing to bet it isnt enough

and finally you can always go BB and end this right now

oh yeah and what skimmer are you running on your 65?
 
LOL damn thats a list of questions!! But here we go!!

I only use a ro/di unit I ordered from purely H20, The tds reads 7ppm incoming 0ppm to the tank, bucket, whatever i am filling. I also double check it with a hanna tds meter which also reads 0ppm.

Feeding is every other day, sometimes every 2 days.

I will admit to having a lot of fish. I have a tomini tang, pair of blue throat triggers, midas blenny, six line wrasse, and a flame hawk. all under 5 inches.

I am running both a fuge with cheatomorpha and a phosban reactor with phosban in it.

The sand bed is prolly about 4 inches with an even spread.

Water flow i know i have enough.... I have 2 tunze 6000's in the upper corners pulsing at 100%

I also have a ps-2000 recirculating skimmer on my 65.

I have been thinking of pulling some rocks and recuring them and also going bare bottom. You think this would help??

Oh also I just tested my nitrates and phosphates as you suggested and both are zero.

I am only running my lights 7 hours. Which are 2 250w 14k phoenix bulbs in lumenmax 3 reflectors.
 
I am also in the same boat, however I hope to be getting out of shortly.

Ran RODI with 0 TDS
Ran ROWA Phos
Feedings were 4-5 days apart
have 4 fish in a 90G tank
Regular Water Changes of 25% per week
Phosphates reading 0 with Salifert Test Kit

Still had hair algae that I would have to prune with my hands or it would encroach on my SPS.

I got tired of the Turbos knocking over my corals so I just bought a Sea Hare and in the past week, he has put a decent dent in the hair algae. Fingers crossed that he keeps this up.

Maybe someone else will chime in with their experiences with the Sea Hares
 
When you have alot of algae and a lot of light you will never have any nitrate or phosphate. The system will use it as fast as it is created. I had a horrible hair algae problem in my 75G. Tried alot of stuff but never really got rid of it. It turned out large portions of my sandbed had hardened and it was down hill from there. The system was only 8 months old.

Your equipment is all fine but as far as flow goes is there any moving in back of the rock. You can have all the flow in the world on the front side of the rockwork but if there is nothing in back or in the rock work all the detritus from all those fish are going to build up in the rock work.

Could you post picture of the rock work and the algae?

You need to get a grasp on the root causes of your algea problem before throwing herbivores at it. If you don't you will not have solved the nutrient issue and you will still have issues with SPS health, color, and growth.

When I did solve my issues the hair algae disappeared on it's own in under a week.
 
Yeah I have 3 sea hares and no signifacant dent at all. Im very disappointed to say the least. Im about ready to start the whole tank over from scratch unless someone can help me with this issue. Im looking into rock cooking threads, and thinking about cooking my rock in 2 seperate intervals, I have about 90 lbs in my 65. And also removing my sandbed.
 
IMO/E, algae is a part of a young tank's life. Every single tank I've run (7) has had algae, and every run has grown out of it within a year. The ecosystem takes a good while to establish, and during this time, algae succession (replacement of one algae form with another) proceeds until all the useable nutruients are locked up in non-encroaching algae (eg. coralline). Having herbivores helps, too: my 140 is still technically in the algae phase, but the tangs/rabbitfish keep the algae cropped completely down to the rocks.

Just continue what you are doing - water changes, moderate feeding, regular cleaning of skimmer (that's a big one; we recently ran skimmate through a chem lab and got readings of 7500+ ppm), etc. - and algal succession will take care of the rest.
 
When the tank started and most of the things where introduced there were no signs of algea! But ill post a couple pics from my first couple acros to what it looks like at this present moment.
 
Here is the picture of the tank when the first corals were intoduced.....
IMG_0284.jpg


and here is the tank as of a few minutes ago =( ..........
IMG_0336.jpg
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8313737#post8313737 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by blindskater02
When the tank started and most of the things where introduced there were no signs of algea!

There were no visible signs of algae. Like most ecosystem cycles, algal succession starts at the microscopic level and works up slowly from there. But I don't think anyone cares much for an ecology lecture...

Having algae is not a sign that something is wrong, especially in very young tanks (under a year). Of course, chronic algae is potentially troublesome, but I've seen only three cases of truly chronic algae. Water changes, regulated feeding, and careful use of additives (if any - less is more) are the most extreme measures I use against algae. In fact, I have one tank into which I've been adding fertilizer (uneaten food) to keep the algae levels high enough to sutain the ecosystem!

PS. I just noticed your pictures, and you do not have bad algae at all (people would be terrified with some of the tanks I've dealt with :)). I would definitely not do anything dramatic.
 
well im up for the lecture so have out with it. i love learning about this stuff. and and far as helping reduce and get rid of this what would you reccomend?
 
When I started out 2 years ago I had explosive growth of brown algae even up to the 1 year mark. I remember reaching in the tank and hand harvesting a bowl of algae almost every other week. The alarm on my TUNZES would go off becuase they were clogged with seaweed. My algae was dictyota (sp?)I could never detect any nitrate or phosphate in my system.
I added phosguard and suddenly it disappeared and never returned. My tank way still developing. I was advised that the alluminum based phosphate remover is not the best for stony coral so I have since changed to phosban - iron based media. I know it can drive you crazy but since your tank is still new I would just be patient and give it a year or so as well as follow some of the suggestions that were given earlier. I would NOT recommend that you start over. BE PATIENT - your tank is still new.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8313876#post8313876 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by blindskater02
well im up for the lecture so have out with it. i love learning about this stuff. and and far as helping reduce and get rid of this what would you reccomend?

I'm going to try and do this on my own, but if anyone better with a computer can find it, there is an old thread with Eric Borneman that treats this subject in much more authoritative detail.

(Note: just to make things simple, I'm going to assume uncured LR non-rock-washing/cooking or anything like that; also makes things more interesting).

When you first get your live rock, it's covered with and contains a great deal of dead/dying material. As this dies, the nutrients it releases provide the spark which ignites the succession(s) of bacteria, algae, and other things. At first, the levels of items such as ammonia/-ium are too high for any but the hardiest of life, which happens to be cellular life (bacteria and truly "micro" microalgae). This life is always the first to move in, due both to its rapid rate of reproduction and its inherent survivability.

As the microlife grows, it rapidly consumes the limited pool of nutrients (remember, the nutrients came from decay, so there is a fixed amount that can be released). This causes the microlife to die and release their bound nutrients. These nutrients then go on to fuel either another bloom of microalgae or higher-up (=visible) algae which has recovered from transit or been added to the tank. These algae in turn burn up the nutrient pool and die.

The cycle continues, each time moving up on the level of algae sophistication, finally reaching a pinnacle with very advanced algae such as coralline or what we call macroalgae (which is actually an illegitimate biological distinction). Assuming a balance between nutrient input and uptake, the coralline or other "pinnacle algae" will remain the dominant form. However, if something disrupts the coralline, then the cycle can repeat with another form of algae. This is one possible explanation of tanks which experience an algae bloom after a few years: the nutrient levels actually get so low that coralline populations collapse and feed other forms of algae. Of course, that's just a theoretical idea at this point.

Also, please note that this cycle assumes either no input of nutrients during this period (which can last up to a year) or a balance between input (feeding) and uptake (by microalgae, corals, fish, other organisms, or water changes).

So, as far as reducing algae, you can make sure that the uptake (especially with refugia) matches or (better) exceeds input (limiting feeding helps as well, but don't starve the tank). More herbivores also help, and this is actually the dynamic on the reef (algae grows on the reef faster than in our aquariums, but the herbivores make such short work of it we never notice). To me, that's more fun, but each aquarist has a different approach.

Well, that's the best I can do. Reef Invertebrates has a very excellent section on the principles of algal succession, for anyone still interested.
 
Wow this took off before I could read your answers...but i am going to address what i asked then go back and read what everyone else said!

----you DO have a HIGH fish load....this is where the algae is coming from.....you can address this as you feel but until you do you will always be battling nutrients if not algae...If II were YOU i would move the tang and blue throat triggers to a larger tank as they cause a lot of polution in a 60 something gallon tank...trust me i have worked with 55-75 g tanks to a great deal and learned this lesson myself

Does your hawk not eat at invertebrates? Thats why i dont keep em but if you dont care keep him!

----Good you are using a fuge and GFO so you should probably be on the right track. Keep that GFO replaced and bumping...but not to shock the system of course
DO YOU RUN A GOOD CARBON? I WOULD IF YOU ARENT TO HELP REMOVE DOC'S

----KEEP THE CHAETO CLEANED OUT----SHAKE IT UP REAL WELL EVERY COUPLE OF DAYS ALSO TURKEY BASTE YOUR LIVE ROCK OCCASSIONALLY TO GET DEITITRUS IN SUSPENSION

---yes BB and GREATTTTTTT FLOW willl really help your situation it did mine...i might post some pics to show you how clean the tank looks and free of algae and BB with good flow and a GFO and husbandry did it

---make sure you clean your skimmer 1-2 times weekly to make sure it operating efficiently...HOW MUCH SKIMMATE ARE YOU GETTING OVER A WEEK? YOU SHOULD GET LOTS OF IT

---YES CURING YOUR ROCK AND EVEN A VINEGAR BATH FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS WILL REALLY HELP YOUR LIVE ROCK IF YOU WANT TO START OVER AND GO BB----consult Randy's chemistry forumn and ask about the vinegar treatment(it even removes copper from rock) and research it there if you want to go all out on the algae attack I WOULDNT DO THIS JUST YET

25% WC' weekly is too much-----10-15% is better----shocks the system somewhat weekly at 25% and doesnt allow good bacteria to populate as much and as quickly

---you dont say anything about wc's so when and how frequently and how much at a time do you do them???this is CRUCIAL

-----HOW OLD IS YOUR NITRATE TEST KIT AND WHAT KIT IS IT? I EXPECT IF YOU HAVE ALGAE GROWTH AND RUN A GFO THE ALGAE IS COMING FROM NITRATES IN WHICH YOU BATTLE VIA FUGE AND WC'S---(but you dont say anything about wc's so i am suspect of no3 and wc's with your situation)

---LISTEN TO COVEY THAT CAN EXPLAIN THE TESTS FOR P04 AND NO3 AS WELL AND THE FLOW NEEDS TO BE THROUGHOUT THE TANK SO THE NOTHING BUILDS UP

----WHAT IS YOUR PH AND TEMP----algae doesnt thrive as well in high ph and lower temps----i bet your temp is about 80-84 degrees and your ph is around 8-8.1....KALKWASSER will raise your ph and precipitate phosphates but you need to research how to go about dosing it in another thread(as you can see i am writing enough) those halides got it hot i bet as well...aim for 78-81 via fans(but what is your temp?)

---looking at the pics its your rockwork that is obstucting flow throughout the tank and you SB is NOT 4 inches...either do a DSB or BB you are having a nutreint buildup because deitrus is building up and not being exported via biological(DSB) or mechanical export(BB)

---your flow is in FRONT OF THE ROCKS and not ALL AROUND IT

---ANOTHER SUGGESTION ----FILL YOUR FUGE WITH A FEW XENIA STALKS AND WATCH IT OUTCOMPETE THE HAIR ALGAE(mark my word on this)


---EVERYONE else offers great advice particularly the one about being PATIENT...hang in there and consider some of my suggestions...use them all or combinations with anything esle you decide to do but dont do anything crazy(i know how you feel) like starting all over yet
 
Yeah I have been thinking about getting rid of the 2 blue throats and the flame hawk. Although the flame hawk has been an awesome citizen and has not touched a single snail nor either of my cleaner shrimps. As far as water changes go. I change out 10 gallons every tuesday using a 50/50 IO/Oceanic mix. I also have a ca reactor with ARM media that runs 24/7 and an old MRC kalk reactor that doses kalk into the system via a tunze osmolator. As far as pH goes it is anywhere from 8.4 to 7.9 over night and it still boggles me that i cannot get that to remain stable. Cleaning of the collection cup takes place every other day. As I know a clean skimmer is an effective skimmer. As far as my nitrate kit it is only 2 months old and is a haagen test kit. (poor college kid due to the hobby, still saving for salifert lol). So to say the least I would have to agree with you on the high fish load. And am considering removing my sand bed and reconstructing the rock structure to create more uniform flow. I might also build a spray bar to set against the back wall of the tank to keep the bottom free of ditritus. If I was to remove the sandbed how much should I remove at one time as to not shock the system?? Also would it be benifical to lay down starboard as a preventive measure from rock tumbles? Also where could a procure a piece? Thanks for all the advice guys I am going to keep reading on the situation and look forward to more criticism and advice.

PS. Post the pics of your BB!!
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8318223#post8318223 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by blindskater02
As far as pH goes it is anywhere from 8.4 to 7.9 over night and it still boggles me that i cannot get that to remain stable.
What is your alkalinity? Low alkalinity allows for more dramtic pH swings, so you might want to test that.
And am considering removing my sand bed
This is sort of a pet peeve of mine (one of my resarch interests as well), but the confidence in the ability of BB methodology to inherently limit algae is slightly misplaced. In lab tests (though we are still finishing them up), there have been hardly any differences in nutrient levels between otherwise identical BB and DSB systems. The main difference, IME, is that many BB systems also feature much stronger water movement and filtration than their DSB counterparts. I don't want to bash anyone's method, but simply switching to BB without any other changes is likely not going to fix any underlying problems. That said, it is really the other changes which help correct any issues.
 
I agree with Amphiprionocellaris. Although I have a BB tank, simple just going BB by taking out the sand is not going to help with algae/nutrient problems.
You can have a BB tank and have it full of algae if you don't make sure you're not introducing too much nutrients and removing nutrients efficiently though skimming, water changes, etc.
 
The main difference, IME, is that many BB systems also feature much stronger water movement and filtration than their DSB counterparts. I don't want to bash anyone's method, but simply switching to BB without any other changes is likely not going to fix any underlying problems. That said, it is really the other changes which help correct any issues.

The sand really does have alot to do with it. you could do what you propose wont work with a siphon alone, all you have to do is get the piles of detritus out. The sand bed is a huge nutrification site. You limit nutrification and there is alot less raw materials for algae to grow.

Fact is that even with a marginally equipped bare bottom tank, it's really easy to keep an algae free tank. Equip it right and there won't eben be algae to clean off the glass.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8322184#post8322184 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Mike O'Brien
The sand really does have alot to do with it. you could do what you propose wont work with a siphon alone, all you have to do is get the piles of detritus out. The sand bed is a huge nutrification site. You limit nutrification and there is alot less raw materials for algae to grow.
The research I'm doing (in labs and in primary literature) is throwing serious doubt onto the assertion that sand beds are as rife with nutrification as we say they are. With steady levels of life, the end-products (nitrogen compounds, phosphate compounds, DOC, etc.) are about as equal in concentration as they are with BB (close to 0 in both). Of course, the experiments are still running, but the "phosphate sink" idea is just as likely to occur with live rock as it is with sand (if you look at the chemistry of it), so I don't expect any differences there.

The one thing I have yet to deal with is why shallower sand beds tend to have more algal growth than either DSB or BB. However, until that statement gets some experimental backing, it remains just an anecdote.

Fact is that even with a marginally equipped bare bottom tank, it's really easy to keep an algae free tank. Equip it right and there won't eben be algae to clean off the glass.
This is true, but the same can be said of well-prepared DSBs as well. With adequate levels of macro- and micro-life, the nutrient chain does not end with excessive amounts of free nutrients floating around. Nitrogen is especially effectively dealt with, but phosphate forms are handled pretty well also (though not as directly as nitrogen). I'm not saying BB's don't have the potential to work well, I'm just saying that properly run DSBs have the same promise.
 
What are you doing in the study ? In real life the result's are clear and repeatable. Many many people are running algae free tank's without sand, alot of wich were once DSB tank's with great equipment to begin with.

I've had a DSB tank, a true BB tank, and a BB display with a DSB in the refugium currently. Speaking from my experience it's really easy to not be able to grow algae. IMO it may be too easy to over do it also, that's why i prefer the sand in the sump with glass in the display. I can have the flow and the skimming and have some sand to add a steady stream of nutrient's to the system. And that's exactly what it does.
 
Back
Top