Caribbean Biotope Seagrass Tank

[redlobstor]

I could be wrong but I think seagrasses are more temperature dependent than salinity dependant. Most species of animals can adjust to conditions outside of what they prefer.

Jason

Sent from my P00I using Tapatalk

 

[Michael Hoaster]

...

 

[sam.basye]

Aiptasia are great mechanical filters which in turn keeps particulate matter from breaking down and they are able to uptake nutrients directly from the water column. Their only downside is their ability to sting other live stock but in my tank that has not been an issue and I have some that are pretty good size. Matter of fact, I have removed some from the sand by hand, no gloves, and have yet to get stung.

Lol about being in denial. I get what your saying but I think some of it is due to us being programmed, for lack of a better word, to think Aiptasia are unsightly and evil. For example, would you be tired of seeing them if they were say a rock flower anemone instead of a glass anemone? I also get what your saying about then being plagues. Mine have not multiplied to that extent, maybe because I leave them alone. Maybe they prefer to uptake nutrients from the water and they multiple so much as a survival defense because most reefers strive so hard to keep water quality almost sterile, so to speak.

I know I'm weird! I don't settle for something happening I want to know why is it happening.

Hey Jason, question for your aiptasia theory..

This is going along with you comment regarding aiptasia up-taking nutrients, thus clarifying the water column.

I personally think aiptasia aren't very attractive, especially in large numbers, and they sting more attractive coral. I assume they are usually hitchhiked in on live rock so they multiply all over the tank.

With that in mind, if they process all these nutrients like you say, why would I want 200 of these (average sized small ones), or a handful of larger ones like you have, in my tank when I can have two 6" bubble tip anemones, or a few rock flower nems, which by proportion should be able to uptake the same quantity as say 200 small little aiptasia's and have a more attractive coral with the ability to place more coral throughout the tank without worry of an aiptasia stinging it?

How much uptake can an aiptasia ingest? I feel like it wouldn't be noticable even with a ton of aiptasia's of any size. That's my completely uneducated opinion without any backing proof. Lol

Just curious to your rationale.

 

[JZinCO]

Thanks for the thoughts Michael.

Regarding aiptasa, reminds me of advocates for the 'duplex sump' or 'benthic zone' concept.. which seems more conjecture than anything else.
Though I leave the aiptasia in my sump alone, I would guess that the macroalgae and xeniids in my sump are more effective at removing excess nutrients. At least I can effectively export those

 

[redlobstor]

I did not mean to offend anyone and I'm not saying you are programmed Michael. I know the info is not new but what other ways are there for an organism to help with water quality than to absorb nutrients and remove matter before it has a chance to break down.

One mans junk is another mans treasure. There are people out there that hate algae of any kind including macros, yet they can greatly help with water quality as well. I think Aiptasia have their place and can be effective at nutrient control to a certain degree yet I also understand they can be a nuisance and unsightly to most people.

Jason

Sent from my P00I using Tapatalk

 

[redlobstor]

Hey Jason, question for your aiptasia theory..

This is going along with you comment regarding aiptasia up-taking nutrients, thus clarifying the water column.

I personally think aiptasia aren't very attractive, especially in large numbers, and they sting more attractive coral. I assume they are usually hitchhiked in on live rock so they multiply all over the tank.

With that in mind, if they process all these nutrients like you say, why would I want 200 of these (average sized small ones), or a handful of larger ones like you have, in my tank when I can have two 6" bubble tip anemones, or a few rock flower nems, which by proportion should be able to uptake the same quantity as say 200 small little aiptasia's and have a more attractive coral with the ability to place more coral throughout the tank without worry of an aiptasia stinging it?

How much uptake can an aiptasia ingest? I feel like it wouldn't be noticable even with a ton of aiptasia's of any size. That's my completely uneducated opinion without any backing proof. Lol

Just curious to your rationale.

Sam.basye,
I am just theorizing as to why they are a pest to most and not to all. Especially with regards to how prolific they are. I have a bunch of Aiptasia but they are not multiplying rapidly. I may get a few new ones on occasion and I am trying to understand why. In theory if the rate of multiplication is 10 new ones every month and i start with 30 then in 1 month I should have 300 but that's not the case. I am just picking numbers off the top of my head. I maybe have 30 but I started off with around the same number and I have had this tank for almost 2 years.

Also in theory what you say about the bubble tips may be true and I know you were just using them as an example but the question of the day is what is their preferred way of obtaining nutrients? My guess is most corals get their nutrition from photosynthesis of the zoos living in them and not from nutrient uptake of the water column. If this is true then 1/2 inch aiptasia could remove more nutrients than a 6 in bubble tip.

I know that Aiptasia does not need light to survive as I have had some growing in my sump from day one and I just recently added a light and some macros.

Jason

Sent from my P00I using Tapatalk

 

[redlobstor]

Thanks for the thoughts Michael.

Regarding aiptasa, reminds me of advocates for the 'duplex sump' or 'benthic zone' concept.. which seems more conjecture than anything else.
Though I leave the aiptasia in my sump alone, I would guess that the macroalgae and xeniids in my sump are more effective at removing excess nutrients. At least I can effectively export those

I agree macros are probably more efficient and probably remove more nutrients than most anything. I am not advocating keeping Aiptasia just pointing out that they can be useful. To what degree they help I have no idea. Maybe I'm just fortunate but I have seen no ill effects of keeping them.

Jason

Sent from my P00I using Tapatalk

 

[Michael Hoaster]

...

 

[redlobstor]

redlobstor, you never answered my question. This leads me to believe you don't know the answer (which you confirmed in the post just above), which may mean you have made a baseless statement here, on my thread. Then you did it again, saying you thought seagrasses were more affected by temperature than salinity. Someone visiting my thread might go away thinking that aiptasias are good for nutrient control, and salinity is less important than temperature range for seagrasses. I disagree with both of those statements. I am very careful not to make blanket statements like that, without researching it first. I certainly wouldn't do it on someone else's thread. Please don't do it on mine. I don't want people getting bad information here. Not from me. Not from you. A number of people come here for helpful info. I take that as a very serious responsibility.

Good luck with your tanks! I look forward to reading of your progress, and any ideas you have - on your thread.

Michael,
Let me start by saying I hope you have a nice life and good luck with your tank.

The question you asked me was how does Aiptasia help to control water quality? I did answer this question by stating 2 different ways. They are best used as mechanical filters, which is a form of filtration, and by absorbing dissolved nutrients. These are not baseless nor blanket statements and can be backed by my own observations and from others. Sorry that I do not know the rate of absorption but can anyone place a number on how well macros uptake nutrients. There are many variables that affect nutrient absorption for all animals. The rewards may not outweigh the risks but that doesn't mean there is nothing to be gained. A strong UV light placed on the return line can kill any Aiptasia that makes it through the pump plus animals that eat Aiptasia can be placed in the main display to kill any that may make it through, although with an UV that shouldn't be an issue.

About the seagrass. I want to make sure you understand what I am saying as I reread what I stated and don't want to be misunderstood. I am saying that the seagrasses that one is likely to get from the Caribbean will tolerate a wider range of salinity than temperature. Again this is NOT a baseless nor blanket statement. I am basing this off of credible information I have read from articles about seagrass and the article I linked earlier supports this. Ruppia species may be the one exception as they can be found as far north as Canada and with regards to salinity Ruppia maritima*has been found in water ranging from fresh to 32 ppt salinity, but is generally found in waters of 25.0 ppt or less (Phillips 1960).

With regards to Turtle grass: Temperature probably limits the northern distribution of*Thalassia testudinum*in Florida. In the Gulf of Mexico,*T. testudinum*is apparently capable of enduring a warm temperate climate; however, this is not the case along Florida's east coast where temperatures of 35.0 - 40.0 °C will kill the leaves of*T. testudinum*(Glynn 1968).

Phillips (1960) speculated that water temperatures between 20 - 30 °C are most inducive to*T. testudinum*leaf growth and that temperatures above or below this range may cause leaf mortality. Zieman (1975) also reported a temperature optimum of 30 °C for turtle grass.

Phillips (1960) reported salinity ranges for*T. testudinum*from various sources: 35.0 - 38.5 ppt in the Dry Tortugas; 28.0 - 48.0 ppt in Everglades National Park; and 25.0 - 34.0 ppt in bays along Florida's west coast. The maximum and minimum salinities reported for*T. testudinum*were 48.0 ppt in Florida Bay, and 10.0 ppt in Crystal Bay (on the west coast of Florida).*

In a salinity tolerance study of seagrasses from Redfish Bay, Texas,*Thalassia testudinum*showed less tolerance than*Halodule(Diplanthera)*wrightii. When salinity was increased in temperature controlled tanks,*Thalassia's*growth was limited at 60 ppt. In outdoor ponds, little growth was seen past salinities of 67 ppt. (McMillan & Moseley 1967).

With regards to shoal grass: Given its distribution throughout the tropical and subtropical Atlantic Ocean as far north as North Carolina, Halodule wrightii can be considered*eurythermal.* Optimum temperatures for*H. wrightii*are likely similar to those of*Thalassia, and range between 20 - 30 °C (Phillips 1960).

Halodule wrightii*is probably more*euryhaline*than*Thalassia, and was observed to withstand fresh water in the St. Lucie River for an unknown time, although it did not survive prolonged fresh water coverage. In the Indian River Lagoon, near St. Lucie Inlet, dense stands of*Halodule*were found in salinities of 35*ppt. In Florida,*Halodule*has been reported in abundance in salinities ranging from 12.0 - 38.5 ppt (Phillips 1960). In the upper Lagune Madre, Texas,*H. wrightii*was reported to be the most abundant seagrass in salinities ranging from 1.0 - 60.0 ppt and the only attached vegetation in salinities above 45.0 ppt (as cited in Phillips 1960).

With regards to Manatee Grass: Syringodium filiforme*is considered a tropical species because it occurs throughout the Caribbean. However, because of its distribution in northern areas of Florida, it can be considered*eurythermal. Leaf kill in*Syringodium*occurs when temperatures drop to approximately 20°C. The effect of cold water on rhizome growth is not known (Phillips 1960).

Along Florida's east coast,*Syringodium*does not occur north of Cape Canaveral. In the Indian River Lagoon, occasional growth of*Syringodium*was seen in Brevard County and dense patches were reported from near Sebastian, and between Sebastian, Fort Pierce and St. Lucie Inlets (Phillips 1960). Cold winter water in the Tampa Bay area can cause leaf damage in*Syringodium filiforme*but leaf kill occurs less frequently in deeper Gulf waters (Phillips 1960).

Syringodium filiforme*is*euryhaline. In the Tampa Bay region where salinity is usually under 25*ppt,*Syringodium*was found in dense stands and*Thalassia*was sparse. Phillips (1960) speculated that dense stands of*Thalassia*probably force*Syringodium*into lower salinity areas. In the Indian River Lagoon,*S. filiforme*formed dense beds in salinities of 22.0 - 35.0 ppt where*Thalassia*occurred only rarely (Phillips 1960).

Syringodium filiforme does not occur in fresh or low salinity water, although it can withstand periods of low salinity (10 ppt) (Phillips 1960). In Brevard county,*Syringodium*was found in a salinity range of 20.1 - 20.6 ppt. From Sebastian to St. Lucie Inlet,*Syringodium*was found in a salinity range of 22.0 - 35.0 ppt (Phillips 1960). Optimum salinity for*Syringodium*is probably 20.0 - 25.0 ppt and over. Phillips (1960) did not observe persistent growths of*Syringodium*in areas where average salinity was under 20.0 ppt.

In a salinity tolerance study of 5 seagrasses from Redfish Bay, Texas, including*Syringodium filiforme, Thalassia testudinum, Halophila engelmanni, Halodule (Diplanthera) wrightii*and*Ruppia maritima, Syringodium*showed the least tolerance when salinity was increased. Under controlled conditions, growth of*Syringodium*ceased when salinity reached 45 ppt (McMillan & Moseley 1967).


Unless you ask me a question this will be my last post on your thread and I hope all goes well with your endeavors.

Jason

Sent from my P00I using Tapatalk

 

[JZinCO]

I've read those sources and, while somewhat helpful, the results provide no guidance because their sampling designs limit inference. The paucity of quality study of seagrasses owes itself to the difficulty in establishing the plants in aquaria for better designed experiments (unlike macroalgae).
The point I am making is that the collective hobbyist experience in seagrasses keeping is limited, we are limited to anecdotes and don't have research to rely on. We're in the stoneages compared to reef keeping. For that reason, it's best we all get along to facilitate knowledge exchange.
If we have disagreements, maybe best to start a dedicated discussion rather than on a tank's log thread.
So.. what's new with the tank today?

 

[Chasmodes]

Yeah, we wanna know whassup with the tank today too!​

/

 

[McPuff]

If you have only a few aiptasia, then simply snuff them out with some putty. I've had to do this a couple times and it works as long as you cover the whole thing. There is no way for it to survive this, especially if you combine super glue gel with the putty. I suggest using the pink stuff so you don't end up with a bunch of white spots in your tank. :0)

 

[Michael Hoaster]

Thanks JZinCO, I agree. Sometimes, things don't go as we'd hope, and unfortunately, arguments do occur. Hopefully, we have put this unpleasantness behind us, as redlobstor and I have agreed to stay out of each others' way going forward.

I apologize to all that were made to feel uncomfortable. That is absolutely the last thing I want to happen here. I hope that this is a place to share info and encourage each other through the good and the bad, as we grow together as aquarists.

Not much to report on the tank today. It's pretty much a repeat of what I've been posting lately. I've made a good dent in the aiptasias and there are fewer sea hares. It's boring, but it's good!

 

[Michael Hoaster]

Great pic Kevin! That makes my day.

My wife and I got a great nature show, a couple of nights ago. The non-dominant male sailfin blenny, whom my wife named Perceval, approached Leroy in his barnacle, getting bolder and bolder. Leroy went into full threat mode, even turning a gorgeous shade of metallic blue-especially in the dorsal fin. They circled each other with mouths agape in a tense standoff, keeping us entertained for around a half hour. Fortunately no-one got hurt, as they never actually touched each other. The female, whom I've named Sheila, stayed well out of the way at the other end of the tank. So these these rather drab fish have now gotten more interesting! Stay tuned!

 

[Michael Hoaster]

Thanks McPuff, I'll keep that in mind if my other methods fail. I think whatever method is chosen, persistence is key. I was hoping the boiling water method would work, but it seems the water cooled enough between the pot, the syringe and the tank, that it merely injured them a little. Aiptasia-X is similar to your method, without leaving anything behind. It plugs up the oral disk, so no planula can be ejected. I was surprised how well it worked, once I finally followed the directions to the letter.

I'm getting close. Wish me luck!

 

[JZinCO]

Hey Michael, since I went AWOL, I went through the last few pages of your thread for an update. I got some tidbits but I'm wondering about the big picture.
If it's not too much trouble can you recap the lessons learned over the Fall and describe your goals for the winter/spring?

 

[Michael Hoaster]

Good question, JZ. The biggest lessons I learned are not to impulse-buy fish that are beat up to begin with. Be very strict with quarantine. When deciding on major changes or treatments on the display tank, be very careful to consider it from all angles, including what happens afterwards and what I want to happen afterwards. Looking at it from desired end result backwards would have been helpful. All of this refers to buying the Look Downs, my tank getting ICH, and my decision to treat my display with hypo salinity. I truly hope I have learned several valuable lessons from this experience! And I hope sharing it will help others to avoid my mistakes.

As for my goals going forward, I hope to get my tank back at least to its former glory, pre Look Downs. I'm especially excited about the prospects of getting my seagrasses to a new level. I have gotten rid of the Turtle Grass, which I didn't like, with the thin-bladed Manatee Grass and Shoal Grass. I have spoken to a Florida collector that can get me some Manatee Grass. I'm really looking forward to these two, beautiful grasses swaying in the current!

On inverts, I'll continue adding to the bottom of the food chain, with the goal of having a sand bed that can process and balance with detritus production levels. I have recently added a gorgonian that's supposed to be easy, and appears to be doing quite well. I've taken another stab at a small tree sponge that looked pretty iffy on arrival, but seems OK for now. There is a mystery anemone just on the outside of the overthrow weir. It appears that it may be my long lost purple condylactis. I'm hoping it will migrate out into the display whenever it's ready. I'm avoiding trying to move myself. If I were to fumble it, it would go right into the intake of my main pump. I also hope to promote the growth of several encrusting sponges that have popped up here and there.

For fish, I'd like to get a few more small guys, before rebuilding a harem of royal grammas again. I'll continue to consider larger fish, but I would happily just keep smaller ones. Small fish in a big tank looks very natural and low stress for the fish. I'm not crazy about watching big fish swimming back and forth, in an obviously unnatural manner.

Well that about wraps it up! Thanks for forcing me to think about this stuff! Now I'd like to return the favor ask you the same: what have you learned, and what are your goals?

This is a great exercise! I'd encourage all of you out there to give this a go!

 

[JZinCO]

That's great to hear. I've gone through the consequences of impulse buying myself.
-So for 9 months or so, I have had a consolidated tank that included my 20 gallon macro/seagrass attempt and 55 gallon reef into a 125.
-My twin-spot goby (obligate sand sifter), which my SO and I got on a whim, finally perished two months ago while my diamond sandsifter (sand sifter but can pick at glass and rocks for pods) has been healthy. The twin-spot did live for a year which is the typical lifespan for "successful" captivity of the fish, but in the wild they live for 2ish years so we can do better.
-My transplanted turtle grass and macroalgaes like shaving brush, halimeda, etc slowly disappeared. I have only a few reds that are hanging on for dear life. Crabs have done quite a number on all the macroalgae.
-My involvement in macros are now the typical use: nutrient export in the sump. And of the dozen species or so that I had, most of the biomass consist of a few varieties of caulerpa. So, it's now just a jumble of green and not much to look at.
-My mangrove in the sump does its thing but doesn't grow much.
-A reefer friend also came back from San Diego with some eel grass and another variety. I turned the tank temp down to 70F but it was still too warm (60-65 would have been ideal) and the eel grass died. The only benefit is that the roots are still in the sand which is nice because it gives some stability considering all the sand sifting that goes on.

So in all, my experiment on the plant side of aquatics is a failure. Few have made it work (practically and aesthetically) which is why your experience is impressive and you are the de facto expert on RC, even if you want to shirk the label . On the other hand, my coral are doing better than ever so the tank is constantly amazing me. I've been very passive with it and buying very little because it is filling in slowly and surely. Because I use no active or passive means of managing the tank (no skimmer, no reactors), I often question the use of a sump. However, I have learned that it is difficult to integrate coral management and plant management in one tank and like to use the sump to keep some green matter alive.

I do still have future plans as I often mention.
In the short term: This summer I plan to buff out the scratches on a beautiful custom acrylic 150 gal cubish tank. I will move my reef into that, rid myself of the 125. I'll probably keep a 'sump' going but set it up like a display tank. Seeing it on a daily basis might motivate me to tend it better. Thinking a simple set up with a few mangroves, (maybe) turtle grasses again, rock flower nems. A simple Caribbean touch.
In the long term: The 270 gallon is waiting in the garage to be turned into a giant aquatic potted planter. 9" of mud and sand, many mangroves, a patch of Tampa Bay reef life, Caribbean fish (mostly small gobies) and seagrass. Knowing what I know now, my 125 would look like this (sans mangroves because it's smaller) but I can't rid myself of coral that I've been collecting since I got into the hobby. Hence I intend to keep the 150 cube mixed reef around. I'm excited at the prospect of having two good-sized tanks side by side. It will take some time before I set it up but that gives me time to think things through and reject ideas before I set something up that I would be "stuck" with for years.

 

[JZinCO]

Back to your thoughts though, it was hard to see the tragedy of the lookdowns. I have to say I loved how it looked prior to that incident but I'm anticipating seeing what this iteration evolves into it.
I'm glad you finally got a gorg. Mine are among the best growing coral that I have. I already have two showpieces. One that is 16" or so, tall and wavy, and one that is 8" but grows bushy. I can't wait to see how large I could grow them in the 270. I think they are seriously underrated in the hobby and you'll be satisfied (and want more).
Small fish, big tank, I'm all about that. Nothing better than that in my opinion. My SO has a 16" Oscar in a tank with 2' tall amazon swords. I like the fish but I can't help but wonder what the tank would look like with a bunch of 2" fish swimming in shoals.

 

[Chasmodes]

Cool stuff guys. I find it interesting to recap and regroup, so I'll bite...

Well, I'm still learning from my past experiences but also learning from you guys, with a long way to go. I think that if I incorporate what I've learned so far (good and bad) with my plan with my final build, I'm further along than if I had waited to start collecting and keeping fish.

It's kind of weird how things are going. On one hand, I have the 20g long where the fish and inverts are doing great, as well as the ever increasing detritivore community size, but the macros tend to die off. On the other hand, with my 20g high, the inverts and macros are doing OK (surviving but not dying off), but this tank went through a bad disease and killed off all of my favorite fish (probably velvet) leaving my least favorite but hardy diseased and alive. I will get these mummichogs out of my tank and into a quarantine tank and treat them (once they are well, I will donate them to a public aquarium). I'm not doing this so much for the benefit of the fish, although I feel obligated to do so because it was my fault that they're in the tank, not their's, but rather, so I can run this tank fallow for a long time (inverts and macros only) and get rid of the parasites. Everything from both tanks will go into the 100g.

So why the difference between the macro growth in the two tanks? The 20g high has plenty of light and it does well, while the 20g long has a nice FW LED fixture for fish color and appearance, but apparently the macros don't like it. For my 100g, the lighting is extremely adjustable, automated, controllable and as powerful as I'd want it to be, so I'm not that worried about the lighting. I'd need to learn about what to dose and what not to dose, etc., something that I can't experiment with right now.

I also learned how not to do a hypo QT and will be more careful next time when dropping the SG.

Another thing is that I introduced fish in to my display that I really didn't want. They were "there", so I added them. From now on, I want to be picky about the species that wind up in my tank. I'm specifically talking about the mummichogs. Why? Although they're more colorful than I thought that they'd be, and they're personable and very hardy, they tend to be disease carriers. I don't want a mid water fish just for the sake of it. I want one that will make me sit there in awe for hours as I watch it, just like my benthic fish do.

As far as my reef construction goes...lesson learned would to not go sparingly on the Gorilla Glue. Any excess glue blobs that are still there look almost like a sponge or other filter feeding organism once a little algae gets on them. Plus, it may also strengthen the structure more than trimming it off.

What to learn? How to grow grasses in the 100g tank, specifically eelgrass or perhaps widgeon grass, because I've had zero luck with that. Also, how to bring and maintain the entire ecosystem over the long haul. 6 months in and things are going well...I wanna keep em that way.

Michael, as far as your decision to go hypo, I wouldn't be so hard on yourself. At the time, it seemed like the best solution especially since you had such a hard time catching your fish. What other option did you have other than letting the fish die? Our first instinct as aquarists is to give all of our organisms the best chance to beat the disease. Hind sight is 20-20. If it had worked, your success might have been groundbreaking for others attempting a similar tank.