MiddletonMark
Premium Member
I agree.
For someone who claims that the focus on stability is a misconception ... I'd think your tank would show that stability is over-rated. But it doesn't sound like that from what I read.
Common Misconceptions In the Hobby
- Thread starter Peter Eichler
- Start date
For someone who claims that the focus on stability is a misconception ... I'd think your tank would show that stability is over-rated. But it doesn't sound like that from what I read.
Peter Eichler
New member
I have corals that I suspect would ingest a piece of cardboard. Does that mean I should use cardboard to feed my corals? Find me a coral biologist that feels that phytoplankton is an important food source for more than a very small percentage of corals. I think by arguing this point you're the one perpetuating a misconception. Phytoplankton is not a good food source for an overwhelming majority of corals, period.
Last edited:
Peter Eichler
New member
C'mon
It's a long reach to equate saying temperature stability is "over-rated" to claiming he implied stability as a whole is overrated. Show me one quote from this entire thread where someone has claimed that nothing in an aquarium should remain stable. All we've done is point out a couple parameters where stability isn't as important as was once thought.
RichConley
New member
No, my tank doesnt look like crap because of instability.
My tank looks like crap because of poor water quality, and bad conditions.
At some point, "stability" got confused with "maintaining water parameters within reasonable limits"
My alk can fluctuate between 8 and 10 and not have any problems, but if I hit 7, things start receding. Thats not stability, thats maintaining parameters within a reasonable range. Theyre different things.
Aquarist007
New member
what do you do for large polyp corals.
Recapping for some of the other dumb shumcks like me that might be trying to follow:
clams don't need to be feed at all if they are adult
corals don't eat phyto
that rules out DT---so gone with that expense and possibility of raising the DOC's of the tank
corals eat cyclopeeze
spend the savings on a big mother skimmer
have I got that right:smokin:
MiddletonMark
Premium Member
But saying they all prefer larger, meaty prey isn't correct either.
Honestly, I was responding to the proposed misconception that corals don't/cannot eat phyto.
That is not a correct statement, and I sought to counter it.
May I say - find me one coral biologist that says that corals of all sorts do not eat phyto, and not a single one finds significant nutrition from it.
I was responding to the claim `corals don't eat phyto'. As you admit, some do. And if ingestion isn't a standard for judging feeding [which is likely a correct assumption] ... I think quite a few folks will argue with the claim that cyclops-eeze is a good coral food. Just go into the SPS forum and ask ... and I'm sure folks will strongly disagree based on their repeated experiences.
I think by bringing up things that are not clear cut, folks are perpetuating misconceptions.
After all, I'm just responding to what I read here, and the sweeping generalizations others have made. I think the burden of proof should lie with those claiming the misconception.
As far as I've seen, one has to defend challenges to proposed misconceptions - but not a claimed misconception. Seems odd to me.
From what I've seen online over the years, that means in a few years we'll have another one of these threads as we will need to clear up the misconceptions we're creating here. JMO, though.
Aquarist007
New member
you seem hung up on the word "misconception"------so why not call the thread
"tips that work for me " or tips from the experinced" or even "show and tell"
now I am of an inquiring mind and that would work for me so it is just an opinion---I am the kind that see something working really well and want to try it--I do have another 30 gal reef(suppose to be a qt) for that reason---and I would think there are alot more reefers out there like me
Paul B
Premium Member
I don't think I agree with this. Of course if you are the type of person with a little experience and are not quite sure of what you are doing, you should stick to tried and true methods but if it were not for experimenters there would be no hobby.
When this hobby started in 1971 we all had to experiment because there was nothing made specifically for salt water.
There were no salt medications, skimmers, sumps, Ozone, UV sterilizers etc. Me and a lot of other "Older people" made our own medications along with skimmers Ozonizers, lights and filters. We also had to collect our own rock, gravel and water.
We cured ich with copper pennies (20 pennies to the gallon)
To this day I still experiment, my reef is and always has been an experiment. It is the oldest reef here and it is due to experimentation. Even now I have an algae tray above the water under the lights to grow algae. I fed my moorish Idol for 5 years in a dish that had food automatically dropped into. My RUGF has been adapted to run efficiently with almost no maintenance for over 30 years. I treat NSW with Clorox. These things you will not find in a book by Sprung or Delbeak. They diden't have tanks then.
We learned through our mistakes, and we made alot.
As for clams needing plankton, bacteria or whatever, this guy grew from an inch to about 5" in two years with nothing but light and whatever else he filtered in the tank. I never dosed anything and I have been keeping these clams since they became available about 20 years ago.
Have a great day.
Paul
Aquarist007
New member
well said Paul, but like I mentioned above--I have a 30 gal "qt" tank for trying new methods of feeding etc--and because of my lack of experience but genuine curiosity it solves my need to experiment without using the main tank.
MiddletonMark
Premium Member
Sure, but I didn't start the thread ... and given what I saw was an attempt to `mythbust' ---- I guess I was hoping to have more backup for the `busted myths'.
IMO, asking for correct statements and information [beyond anecdote] to back up claims I don't think is out of line.
Sure, I am hung up on it ... mainly because after a few years of answering questions in the New to the Hobby forum - I got frustrated with unqualified statements generalizing livestock that were passed along to folks learning.
Aquarist007
New member
don't underestimate the value of doing that for the hobby, and the appreciation by the majority of us for you doing that.
Alot of us are not college kids trying to make a federal case out of a word or two that might be taken with different connotations then it was meant to be or delight in challenging the hell out of your patience with trite arguments.
In other words I think your experience speaks volumes of support for your words--you don't need to back it up with a pHd finding.
I am getting alot out of this forum simply because it brings alot of different view points from a lot of varied experienced reefers to gether in one thread or forum(that's what it should be IMO)
I'm not looking for you and the other experts to prove your credibility--the pictures of the tanks you show, the posts you make(not the volume) and the tireless hours you put on this site--speak volumes for myself and others I am sure.
Aquarist007
New member
.....to further add before I was cut off--maybe what is wrong with the thread is that it is trying to explain the concept of misconceptions by use of a dichotomy of thinking--I right your wrong--not grey areas.
Reef keeping is science, no misconception, and with are tanks all being individual ecosystems is there may be no direct answers for some of these questions--rather a scale with grey areas for and against.
this is why I suggested above to take away the connotation of misconception wiith something like "show and tell" and leaving it to the inexperienced to look and make a decision where they feel confortable with the concept.
at any rate the debate between the experienced is excellent and is very challenging to a scientific mind and I feel humbled to even be able to have a dialogue with you guys.
Reef keeping is science, no misconception, and with are tanks all being individual ecosystems is there may be no direct answers for some of these questions--rather a scale with grey areas for and against.
this is why I suggested above to take away the connotation of misconception wiith something like "show and tell" and leaving it to the inexperienced to look and make a decision where they feel confortable with the concept.
at any rate the debate between the experienced is excellent and is very challenging to a scientific mind and I feel humbled to even be able to have a dialogue with you guys.
MiddletonMark
Premium Member
Don't be humbled, you're one of us
Every single person in this hobby started at one time, experienced the learning curve ... and if I may venture a guess, everyone on this thread feels like they aren't done learning yet.
Heck, we probably both have about the same amount to learn ... esp given every tank seems to be a new adventure and that corals stretch across wide areas of the ocean and the livestock we keep is equally varied.
And as Paul has eloquently stated, there's folks with decades in the hobby who still are here to learn. And figuring the wide range of subjects [livestock, biology, aquaria-science] discussed - no one knows everything about everything IME.
FWIW, I've kept between 2 and 4 tanks going for a few years now [down to 2 neglected tanks after my last work promotion] ... and would highly recommend it.
A non-display tank can be anything, doesn't need to be highly stocked, doesn't need to be pretty ... and I've found them great to experiment with frags and such - just in terms of maintenance-efficiency ... I can change water way faster now :lol:
Last edited:
Aquarist007
New member
Paul, I knew that --I just thought you had missed my post where I was saying the same thing as you.
The fact of having the experience and doing the things you did point out to what I said--in I don't think you guys need to have a phD to have credibility in what you say here.
Aquarist007
New member
IMO---you do your job in educating us middlepeople and let us deal with the apprentices.
eg
I like to give back some of what I take----therefore I try to make it a point to help out in the new to the hobby forum when I can.
I know I am doing a good job when I get corrected less because I know you guys are looking on----I seem to get corrected less and less so I guess I am learning
I have had the same experience only in other forums like the SPS forum and this one.....it's definately frustrating and time consuming. The main reason I get involved in threads like this is to put in another voice that can make newer people realize it's not all cut and dry and to take things with a grain of salt. I've already spent too much time in this one
Yall take care, Chris
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10663523#post10663523 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fishdoc11
That's stability within certain limits Rich which is exactly what I said earlier that you contradicted
Obviously Rich's point is that stable, defined as not changing, isn't necessary, since a range of 8-10 is changing (9.00 +/- 0.01 would be not changing).
Last edited:
Similar threads
