Anemones, Corals, Water Flow and Aquascaping

WDLV

Skunk Hybrid Freak
Anemones, Corals, Water Flow and Aquascaping.

I have been observing reef tanks for about 11 years now. I mean to include those in my own home, other’s homes and on multiple discussion forums. One of the biggest things that I have noticed that will hurt a system is human intervention. By this I mean our seemingly inherent need to always tweak this or that for our own viewing pleasure. Every change that we make inside a reef tank will have a consequence. By "inside" I mean within the main area inhabited by animals. I know there are other external variables but they are not the focus of this article. I believe that any change that you make to the aquascape inside a reef tank will have some negative effect.

Corals
I've noticed that new coral colonies have a much higher mortality rate than frags. I don't know if this is just because it has cost me more money every time I loose one or if I am right in my assessment. I believe Eric Borneman also touched on this in his book. But it seems like the logical reasons are food availability, the ability to have decaying organic matter rinsed off its tissues and oxygen supply. If a large colony is placed in a new system, it is highly likely that the flow in that system is not exactly the same as that of its previous environment. This means that all the adaptations is made in the year or years leading up to the day you inherited it are now null and void. The tendency is for dead spots to exist in places that used to receive good flow. This will cause RTN or STN. Your best bet is to break the colony up and place it in various places in your system or to place it so that it will eventually grow back together.

Anemones
Anemones are a lot like corals in that they become accustomed to and adapt to their environment, but they do it a lot faster because they are mobile. They also have the added feature of not having an endoskeleton. This means that they can live on their own tissues and shrink during the process if they are unable to catch (or make) food.
At this point in the hobby, when an anemone becomes sick it's usually a death sentence. I have on one occasion been able to "save" a Haddon’s anemone that had shrunken in another hobbyist’s taken from about 12" to about two inches. I thought it was a hairy mushroom! It is currently between 6"-8" depending on its mood.

Flow Dynamics
I recently sat in on a lecture by a Jake Adams who was very passionate about what he called linear flow. There are different ways to obtain this but the basic idea is this… Visualize a long tank (like a 180 gallon) with a partition that lies horizontally in the center of the tank and extends most of the length of the tank. There are a couple of inches on each side that are not partitioned. If you were to take a powerhead, closed loop or other water moving device and place it on the top left of the tank, you would have essentially a clockwise water motion as viewed from the front. The water above the partition moves from left to right and the water under the partition moves right to left.
This was something I’ve been doing and observing in my own system for the last two years but never had a name for it until the lecture. Linear flow enables a consistent directional flow with a very low amount of energy used to keep it in motion. The water slowly builds then maintains its own inertia. I have not done a lot of SCUBA diving or snorkeling but I have done enough to notice that there are currents on a reef. These currents are the same day in and day out. Whether that means that they go opposite directions during low and high tides or follow a huge ocean current like the East Australian Current or the North Atlantic Current. Those of you who have ever done a drift dive will be familiar with this phenomenon. Imagine a current that is moving at a speed of about 5 knots. It doesn’t sound like a lot until you try to swim against it.
I don’t want to discount the need to have a “storm” once a day or so that will break up the flow long enough to get any collected detritus re-suspended. This is something that Joe Yaillo of the Atlantis Aquarium taught me both during his lectures and while observing his 20,000 gallon reef.
I believe that in a reef tank the corals that inhabit reef aquariums are like any other in the ocean. Once in a niche they adapt to it. This seems far more prevalent in corals like Acroporas. I think the tighter the branching the less adaptive they are if moved and more likely they are to sustain damage if their current direction of water flow changes.
Current direction in a reef aquarium can be changed by something as seemingly harmless as the moving of an adjacent coral or piece of liverock. This can also cause problems with shading whether that be a sudden exposure to intense light or a sudden decrease in light. If a coral has gradual changes in current (like the growth of its neighboring corals) it will be able to adapt by growing in another direction, stinging and growing over the adjacent coral or altering it’s growth pattern. Competition in this way seems to actually make corals grow faster. In my own system I witnessed a Montipora digitata being overtaken by a particularly fast growing colony of zoanthids. A couple months later the Montipora had grown a flat horizontal projection that effectively shaded the zoanthids and halted their encroachment.
This goes for anemones too. But because they are able to move immediately, rather than having to change their physical appearance they can reek havoc on a reef tank’s other inhabitants as they move around trying to find the right niche. There’s also the risk of them getting sucked into a powerhead or closed loop intake while they’re looking for the right spot. The good news is that once they’ve found it they seldom move unless something in the system changes.

In summary, I am a proponent of consistent strong currents in reef aquaria. They wash away deposits of detritus before they start, feed corals with said detritus and provide a constant source of gas exchange. I am also in favor of constructing a rockscape that will allow maximum flow over, under and through it when you first set up your system. This provides not only a coral mounting platform but also a way to nourish those same corals and the cryptic or (dark) zone inhabited by sponges, tunicates and other non-photosynthetic, nutrient absorbing organisms. It also reduces or in my case eliminates the need for target feeding corals or otherwise increasing the bio-load of the system through excessive feeding.

There are many ways to run a reef system “right” this just happens to be my way. For me, most of these concepts were hard won. Hopefully someone can benefit from this and incorporate it into his own reefing style.
Happy Reefing
 
Another guy posted a PM, but his mailbox was full so I'll respond here.
My 75g is set up effective today! I used LR and LS that i'd bought and kept alive in a 55 (although I'm sure some bacteria has died off, I think we kept most alive...or maybe kept the density high? :) ) We also used tank water from the original tank to help fill it.

My tank will be dominated by BTAs, zoos, mushrooms and perhaps the random acan or acro (some of the gobies i've seen are obligate acro dwellers...so if i can grow some i will).

Lights are the outer orbit 2x150 mh 10k 4x54 t5 actinic. Flow is two koralia 4s and one 1200 gph generic powerhead, plus about 400 gph from the return. skimmer is reef octopus nw-110. 55 gallon sump with about 40-45 gallons in it, about 20 pounds of sand, 20 pounds of rubble, cheato.


whew!


so i want to start aquascaping tomorrow, and i would like to know what advice you have for that as well as if i need anymore flow. if so, how/what?

i would like to have to major mounds in each corner spreading out towards the center, with a large sand area between the two.

if i can put all the PHs on the left side of the tank, that helps my office logistics immensely.

great article!

If I had mine to do again I would set up a tank with a sheet of home made LR and and essentially two pillars on each side to support it. Surely you don't have time to make and cure such a structure. I think that your idea will work but do know that you will tend to build up a lot of detritus under those mounds of LR. Personally I would make two ro three islands in the center. This will trap a little less detritus. I think having your powerheads on one side will be to your advantage, but you should have some other powerheads on a timer either in the middle facing foreward or facing from the right. This will give you the "storm" needed to stir up that detritus once or twice a day.
Walt
 
I understand the gyre concepts & believe this would work best for sea fans & gorgonian type corals, with the specific wall design you mention. I keep reading & hearing how wonderful this is but virtually no one has any track record of success running linear flow in Sps sytems.

I'm interested if this concept can be done without placing a wall inside the tank. Could you explain how this would work in a standard rectangular tank? We'll use my 120g as the exampe ,48x24x24. It would be easy to get the water moving in a circular direction with a few pumps, but how does flow get the the corals in the middle of the tank without other outlets or pumps interfering the linear flow & getting flow to the corals. I could also see detritus settling in the center of the tank.

It seems the wider the tank the less effective this concept would be.

I want my aquascape to be pleasing to the eye & not a center wall with corals attached to the sides of the center wall.
 
The gyre setup is really effective for creating linear (laminar, unidirectional) flow. However, how many people want a huge partition in the center of their tank? The horizontally positioned one is just ugly, and the vertically positioned one cuts already narrow tanks down to way too thin. Plus, if you have something like a center overflow or other big obstruction, much of the efficiency is lost.

A much better method is to use a closed loop where the intake is on one end of the tank and the outlet is on the opposite. It is best that both the intake and outlet are spread out in something like a large spraybar manifold. This creates the same effect of unidirectional laminar flow, but you don't have to cut your tank in half to do it. It also has the benefit of being more controllable in terms of flow speed (adjustable by using a simple valve).
 
Mine is not a perfect example because the bottom flow is broken up somewhat by the rockwork. So the return to the left side along the bottom is a bit slower than if I were to I do a traditional gyre style tank. However run my reeflo barracuda closed loops one at a time for the linear flow or together for a storm. For pics and further details cut and paste the link in my signature. Keep in mind it is not a true gyre tank, though some of the same principals are applied.
 
Left side
In this shot the pump on the left is on. You can see that the water is returning by the position of the tentacles of the large anemone in the center.
Jan122008002.jpg

Right side
Jan122008003.jpg

You can see the outputs on the opposite side of the tank in this shot.
Jan122008013.jpg
 
Just a small point: even if the mean water flow is in a given direction, this is turbulent flow, not laminar flow. Think of a fast-flowing river: it is flowing in one direction, though the water is turbulent and mixing as it flows. In a river that is flowing so slowly it is barely perceptible you can get legitimately laminar flow. In this case the water really is just flowing in one direction and there is not mixing within the water column as it flows. With turbulent flow the water column mixes as it flows (little eddies form), even if net flow is in a given direction.

To really characterize the flow environment one has to consider the Reynolds number for the system, but suffice it to say that fast water flow and large spatial scales give turbulent flow whereas very slow water flow or very small spatial scales (e.g., smaller than copepods) gives laminar flow.

The important function that water flow satisifies is mass transfer: literally the transfer of mass (or energy like heat in engineering lit) from a surface to a fluid. We want to maximize mass transfer, or at least have sufficient mass transfer. The things than need to be transferred are things like O2, waste, food, etc. Mass transfer is affected by multiple parameters, but the amount of turbulence (e.g., shear forces, drag) and rate of water flow are important. Also of great importance is the thickness of the diffusive boundary layer (and momentum boundary layer).

Unfortunately unidirectional flow, even when turbulent, creates a thicker boundary layer than flow of the same speed that alternates in direction (e.g., surge produced by waves). If there were a good way to replicate wave action in an aquarium, I think that would be the preferable way to go (experimental evidence has demonstrated that waves increase mass transfer to coral tissue at any given flow speed), but good options don't really exist right now. The closest we can get are surge devices, which I do think are extremely useful, and maybe Tunze's wavebox. Practically speaking though, I think the best most folks can really do now is to maximize mass transfer by maximizing flow velocity, so I think that Jake raises some very good points.
 
I made the mistake of using the word "laminar" in a subsequent post after the initial post but meant to say "linear." I didn't realize it until an hour after I made the mistake. So, I couldn't correct it.
Sure, it's a tried and true method to use a wavemaker in a reef tank and yes it's true that some corals are found in such a zone, but the vast majority (from my limited diving experience) are not.
As I said before:
There are many ways to run a reef system “right” this just happens to be my way. For me, most of these concepts were hard won. Hopefully someone can benefit from this and incorporate it into his own reefing style.
So, by all means if you are doing something that's working for you, please continue. This is just another way to do it that some people who are about to set up a system may want to try. It is less expensive on equipment and electrical usage but it takes a lot more forethought to plan your rockwork to make it both functional and aesthetically pleasing. Each method will have it's drawbacks.

I think your idea of having a wavemaker could be made to work with existing technology. A wavemaker box would work well for your concept but with most stock tanks the frequency is too high. However if one were to constrict a tank that was about 20' long I think it could work very well. You might get a wave speed of one every 2-3 seconds.
 
Last edited:
That's right Wetsleeves, the vast majority of the colorful corals we keep are not subjected to surge, but mainly currents that flow in one direction and then the other for hours at a time. With short, random flows in a reef tank it's difficult to actually move much water in smooth manner. To really move the water it's better to let the flow go in one direction for a minute or three at least.

This is a main reason why I've stopped using my redsea wavemaker in favor of a Chauvet 4005 timer($30).
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11758190#post11758190 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by WetSleeves
I made the mistake of using the word "laminar" in a subsequent post after the initial post but meant to say "linear." I didn't realize it until an hour after I made the mistake. So, I couldn't correct it.
Sure, it's a tried and true method to use a wavemaker in a reef tank and yes it's true that some corals are found in such a zone, but the vast majority (from my limited diving experience) are not.
As I said before:

So, by all means if you are doing something that's working for you, please continue. This is just another way to do it that some people who are about to set up a system may want to try. It is less expensive on equipment and electrical usage but it takes a lot more forethought to plan your rockwork to make it both functional and aesthetically pleasing. Each method will have it's drawbacks.

I think your idea of having a wavemaker could be made to work with existing technology. A wavemaker box would work well for your concept but with most stock tanks the frequency is too high. However if one were to constrict a tank that was about 20' long I think it could work very well. You might get a wave speed of one every 2-3 seconds.

With any but really small waves you can typically feel surge down to at a good 10-15 m. Below ~20 m there's relatively little influence from waves though (unless there's a hurricane or something ;) )

Natural does not necessarily imply optimal though. For optimal mass transport the ideal water motion seems to be rapidly oscillating flow; said another way that's waves with a short period.

There aren't good options to create waves in aquaria though. A "wavemaker" that switches powerheads on and off ever few minutes doesn't even come close. The closest thing I know of is the Tunze wavebox, but it creates pretty small waves (wave height of a few inches). That simply doesn't get the water moving that fast.

If we could create realistic waves in terms of height we'd be getting better mass transfer for any given flow speed relative to what we can get from just unidirectional flow, but right now we simply can't get enough wave height to have high flow speeds, as least without going to a piston system like many public aquaria use, but that isn't practical for home use. If such a system were available, a fast period, even if it looked strange, would actually be more ideal for improving mass transfer. A good bit of work has been done on this in the last few years by a group at Stanford and others.

Because of these limitations I think it is best to focus on getting reasonably high flow speeds to obtain sufficient mass transfer. It doesn't particularly matter how we attain the mass transfer, just so long as we do it.
 
That's right Wetsleeves, the vast majority of the colorful corals we keep are not subjected to surge, but mainly currents that flow in one direction and then the other for hours at a time.

I'm not so sure about that ;) Most corals in less than ~15 m of water will experience significant surge much of the time. Of course the intensity depends on wave action--reefs in sheltered locations or when there are doldrums won't be subject to as much surge. The question should not be strictly "what is natural?" but rather we should probably think about "what is optimal?" Oscillating flow with a short period (< 5 sec) at a given speed increases mass transfer relative to unidirectional flow. We just don't have good ways to create rapidly oscillatory flow, thus rapid unidirectional flow is probably a good route to take.

With short, random flows in a reef tank it's difficult to actually move much water in smooth manner.

Not if you're creating waves with sufficient wave height ;)

To really move the water it's better to let the flow go in one direction for a minute or three at least.

Again, the problem is that doing so allows thicker diffusive and momentum boundary layers to form. Doing as you suggest works, as long as the velocity is high enough, but it is less efficient than if we were able to produce real waves. The inability to produce real wave action may be one of the reasons corals like Acropora palmata, which is exclusively found in the first few meters of water, have proven very difficult to keep alive and grow in captivity. For larger colonies (though still miniscule compared to wild colonies) we may not be able to get enough mass transfer without real honest-to-goodness waves.
 
OK. So, you're saying that what I'm suggesting in this thread is not the best possible way to create flow in a reef tank but in the same breath saying that the technology does not exist to do it better (or at least how you would do it.) So, what's the point splitting hairs? I'm trying to give people an alternative to what they've seen year after year in reef aquaria. Personally I think the linear flow or gyro tanks are the best thing going and relatively unknown to hobbiests or I wouldn't have taken the time to post this....
Do you have a better suggestion for the average aquariest to acheive water motion that is stronger, or more energy efficient or takes less equipment to operate?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11759339#post11759339 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by WetSleeves
OK. So, you're saying that what I'm suggesting in this thread is not the best possible way to create flow in a reef tank but in the same breath saying that the technology does not exist to do it better (or at least how you would do it.) So, what's the point splitting hairs? I'm trying to give people an alternative to what they've seen year after year in reef aquaria. Personally I think the linear flow or gyro tanks are the best thing going and relatively unknown to hobbiests or I wouldn't have taken the time to post this....
Do you have a better suggestion for the average aquariest to acheive water motion that is stronger, or more energy efficient or takes less equipment to operate?

Well I suppose my intention is to distinguish between what is close to the best that is currently practical and the best that is theoretically possible. New and better technologies are made available all the time (think of the revolution in water flow in the last 5 years). If people have an idea of what a better system is they can start working on figuring out a way to produce it.
 
I do believe it's out there and the technology is pretty old.... Think wave pools at amusement parks. The problem is that it's just not practical for a small tank.
I do appreciate your sharing your thoughts as they have envoked thought for me.
I am tearing down my main system this Saturday so I can free up some money and enable myself to refinish my basement where the tank currently resides. I'd like to sell this house and right now the tank is somewhat hindering that ability.
Like many of the people who surf these boards I am already planning my next system and have been since before this one was even set up. My ideas for the next system in the 3-5,000 gallon range still have energy efficiency at forefront of my thoughts, but I know more now than when the curent system was set up. I also have a much better network of public aquariests and hobbiests from whom I can draw knowledge.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11758469#post11758469 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by WarrenG
That's right Wetsleeves, the vast majority of the colorful corals we keep are not subjected to surge, but mainly currents that flow in one direction and then the other for hours at a time. With short, random flows in a reef tank it's difficult to actually move much water in smooth manner. To really move the water it's better to let the flow go in one direction for a minute or three at least.

This is a main reason why I've stopped using my redsea wavemaker in favor of a Chauvet 4005 timer($30).
Does this model ramp down the powerheads without stopping them? That has always been a deterrant for me. I don't like that the pumps have to start back up from a dead stop. Not only is it hard on the pumps but it draws a lot more electricity having to start up from a dead stop. Here in MD our electric company has us by the short and curlies and they keep getting more audacious with customers and with legislators. It's really not a good scenario.
I have done it that way before with a SCWD, but that was on a 58 gallon tank. It worked OK and I guess I could use an actuating ball valve with my sequence pumps, but I don't think I'll go back after seeing the success I have found with this current system.
Ask me again in three to five years when someone comes up with something better. :)
 
The Chauvet timer doesn't ramp down/up. A modded MJ handles this fine though and the flows are very good. I'm using the SureFlow mods on mj600's because I think the 1200's I have would be too much flow with the mod.

The best sps reefs I've seen were in Fiji (Bligh Waters and Kadavu) and the reefs were not close to shore. The more colorful stuff we keep was at about 15-45 feet deep. At 20+ feet deep there really was no surge, but you could watch the particulate matter moving in the currents. The eddy currents around corals and individual fingers of corals are significant.
 
The best reefs I've seen were in Australia. I hear the ones in Fiji are very nice. My dream destination right now is Papua New Guinea. There are plenty of reef types to choose from. I guess to an extent my goal is to recreate those that are least expensive to do. Deeper reefs with linear flow are the most prominent type and the least expensive to replicate. Visualize a mountain. If you cut it into three sections, top middle and bottom, the top will have the least surface area, the middle will have significantly more and the bottom even more still. as we know the corals are going to be most abundant and diverse in the mid zone where there's the least damage from storms and still plenty of light to provide photosynthesis. At the tops and bottoms of the reef there will be more specialized corals than in the center. For most of the TOTMs types on this forum people may tend to want to replicate the top reef zone where SPS are the dominant corals. So maybe the mindset is WAVES WAVES WAVES, but that's not the only way to do things.
I'm hesitant to write off the "beginner corals." Beginners are drawn to them for a reason other than their ease of care. They're beautiful! I love a mixed reef. To me a SPS system is akin to the JA that pulls up next to you with that booming bass stereo, but he didn't go the extra mile to get his mids and tweets. So what is he really listening to? A mere portion of the entire song.
 
Back
Top