Peter, for reference here is a good article on quarantining new arrivals...
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-10/sp/feature/index.php
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-10/sp/feature/index.php
Coral Tank from Canada (1350gal Display Tank)
- Thread starter nineball
- Start date
- Status
This is my favorite reef tank, 20,000 gallons, I met Joe and heard him speak about his reef, very impressive to say the least. By the way he keeps it at 74-78 degrees.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/2/aquarium
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/2/aquarium
We aren't keeping corals from the Atlaltic ocean or Caribbean Sea so the average temp isn't accurate for our South Pacific, Australian and Indo Pacific corals. I'll look it up when I get the chance, but I doubt the temps where our corals come from go below 80F.
Maybe some of our Australian friends here can inform us. One of them is in the coral collecting business. I'm sure he can stick anaquarium thermometer on his wetsuit
I am a avid diver and underwater photographer, certified in 1972 and have dove all over the world. For the most part my dives have been in rather warm water, 80-85, I can't remember a dive above 85, however I do remember many dives between 78-80, feeling a little chilly after a while in my thin lycra suit, however I tend to visit during the nice part of the year when it's not stormy with resulting cooler water temperatures, if I had to guess I'd say the average temperature over about 40 years of diving was probably around 82, which is what the book says, how bout that?
Regardless, I would not keep my reef tank at 82, I did that in the past and had rather poor results compared to the cooler temperatures of 76-78 I now keep.
Nineball, why do a tour like this?
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17287269&postcount=234
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=17287269&postcount=234
You are very welcome Peter. And happy to talk cars which is my other great interest :spin3: In fact, I'm planning to head down to California for the Monterey historic races in August. Should be a fantastic array of vintage machinery there as they are celebrating both Bugatti and 60 years of F1.
I understand you are using a custom set up of Philips LEDs but the emitters (the actual LED chips) are most likely from one of their known Lumiled product lines. So it is important to know exactly what you are getting. You should ask for data sheets on the LEDs themselves and for bin info (they separate LEDs into both brightness bins and colour bins as there is always some variability in output and colour temperature when they manufacture batches of chips) on the emitters used in the arrays you are looking at. This will tell you about the output and efficiency of the individual LED emitters as well as their colour temperature/emitted wavelengths. You can build very bright and powerful arrays out of many brands of LEDs, be it Phillips, Cree, SemiLed, Edison opto etc. You can also build very bright multichip emitters such as some of the 20W, 30W or even 100+ watt LEDs you see sometimes. However, those high wattage LEDs, while generating a very bright point light source, are actually much less efficient in terms of lumens/watt then the top of the line 3W LEDs. What you are looking at sounds more like a custom electronic configuration for combination of LEDs into arrays and control of those arrays but does not give much information about the actual LEDs being used in the arrays which is something you will probably want to know.
Sorry to throw a bunch more technical consideration into an already complicated mix :spin2: I will be happy to help and advise when you are ready to tackle the LED part.
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
There are a few things to keep in mind when deciding your optimum temperature. As I mentioned earlier, you don't want to sit at the margin of the safety zone. Find a spot in the middle where you have room for error minor temperature swings. Temperature drops at the bottom of the safe margin are more dangerous than increases at the top of the margin.
The other issue to take into consideration is your corals need to have all of their needs fulfilled before you raise the temperature (or any parameter for that matter) to the natural optimum level. You can compare it to what a healthy diet for an athlete would be compared to an aquarium designer who chats on a forum all day I certainly have no business consuming the caloric intake of a marathon runner. Corals must have adequate light, carbon source, nutrient levels, major & minor salts and temperature. In the wild, corals will grow best at 84F, but this isn't necessarily the experience an aquarist will find in their tank, particularly if they cannot maintain dissolved oxygen rates near saturation levels. Warm water holds less oxygen, so good flow volume and dynamics are vital.
The Shimek article pretty much covers any questions. He claims keeping corals at the low end of tolerance is a common mistake. Calcification ceases at the low end so running chillers to maintain unsafe levels is a poor practice. If/when those chillers fail, you lose stability and increase stress as the water heats up. If your tank naturally runs at 81-82F with no heater or chiller running, why expend unnecessary resources to lower it if growth and health is better at 84F.
From Shimek's article...
"in reality relatively few coral species persist at temperatures much below 24°C (75.2°F)"
"The most rapid growth of most corals is generally around 27°C to 29°C (80.6°F to 84.2°F) (Barnes et al., 1995; Clausen and Roth, 1975; Weber and White 1976; Coles and Jokiel, 1977, 1978; Highsmith, 1979a, b; Highsmith, et al., 1983)."
"the no growth lower limit of zero calcification occurred at 23.7°C (74.7°F) in corals from the Gulf of Mexico and at 25.5°C (77.9°F) in corals from the Caribbean Sea."
"The most diverse coral reefs are found in a band running from New Guinea and Northern Australia in the west to Palau in the Western Caroline Islands up through the Philippines and Indonesia in the east (Veron, 1986). In this area, prior to the recent period of global warming, the atoll water temperature averaged around 84 ° F and probably never got as low as 80 ° F. "
"At 10°C below the optimal temperature, the metabolic rate would be reduced by about 96%, or put another way, it would only be 4% of normal. Under these sorts of conditions most animals die. In fact, most organisms will die if maintained for extended periods under conditions that constrain their metabolic rate to one half of normal. Even metabolic rate reductions to about 75% of optimal may cause significant problems or death (Withers, 1992). A reduction of this magnitude will be caused by keeping an animal with an optimum of about 82 ° F at a temperature of about 77 ° F."
"Both the temperature and salinity of many reef aquaria are kept near or even somewhat below the lower normal survival limit of physiological tolerance for many of the common animals. This results in substantial and unnecessary mortality. In effect, these mini-reef systems keep the animals just healthy enough that they die slowly." - Dr. Ronald Shimek
The other issue to take into consideration is your corals need to have all of their needs fulfilled before you raise the temperature (or any parameter for that matter) to the natural optimum level. You can compare it to what a healthy diet for an athlete would be compared to an aquarium designer who chats on a forum all day
I certainly have no business consuming the caloric intake of a marathon runner. Corals must have adequate light, carbon source, nutrient levels, major & minor salts and temperature. In the wild, corals will grow best at 84F, but this isn't necessarily the experience an aquarist will find in their tank, particularly if they cannot maintain dissolved oxygen rates near saturation levels. Warm water holds less oxygen, so good flow volume and dynamics are vital. The Shimek article pretty much covers any questions. He claims keeping corals at the low end of tolerance is a common mistake. Calcification ceases at the low end so running chillers to maintain unsafe levels is a poor practice. If/when those chillers fail, you lose stability and increase stress as the water heats up. If your tank naturally runs at 81-82F with no heater or chiller running, why expend unnecessary resources to lower it if growth and health is better at 84F.
From Shimek's article...
"in reality relatively few coral species persist at temperatures much below 24°C (75.2°F)"
"The most rapid growth of most corals is generally around 27°C to 29°C (80.6°F to 84.2°F) (Barnes et al., 1995; Clausen and Roth, 1975; Weber and White 1976; Coles and Jokiel, 1977, 1978; Highsmith, 1979a, b; Highsmith, et al., 1983)."
"the no growth lower limit of zero calcification occurred at 23.7°C (74.7°F) in corals from the Gulf of Mexico and at 25.5°C (77.9°F) in corals from the Caribbean Sea."
"The most diverse coral reefs are found in a band running from New Guinea and Northern Australia in the west to Palau in the Western Caroline Islands up through the Philippines and Indonesia in the east (Veron, 1986). In this area, prior to the recent period of global warming, the atoll water temperature averaged around 84 ° F and probably never got as low as 80 ° F. "
"At 10°C below the optimal temperature, the metabolic rate would be reduced by about 96%, or put another way, it would only be 4% of normal. Under these sorts of conditions most animals die. In fact, most organisms will die if maintained for extended periods under conditions that constrain their metabolic rate to one half of normal. Even metabolic rate reductions to about 75% of optimal may cause significant problems or death (Withers, 1992). A reduction of this magnitude will be caused by keeping an animal with an optimum of about 82 ° F at a temperature of about 77 ° F."
"Both the temperature and salinity of many reef aquaria are kept near or even somewhat below the lower normal survival limit of physiological tolerance for many of the common animals. This results in substantial and unnecessary mortality. In effect, these mini-reef systems keep the animals just healthy enough that they die slowly." - Dr. Ronald Shimek
with that being said-
does my tank require any additional safeguards if it naturally stays between 80-84*F? i have been having a really hard time keeping a 25g below 80*. i figured this whole time that a tank running at 84-86* would be bad, but it is more common and less dangerous than running at 74-76*. i have an RKL maintaining temps in case of overheating. it is set to shut off the light at 86.1*, would that be a bad setting?
does my tank require any additional safeguards if it naturally stays between 80-84*F? i have been having a really hard time keeping a 25g below 80*. i figured this whole time that a tank running at 84-86* would be bad, but it is more common and less dangerous than running at 74-76*. i have an RKL maintaining temps in case of overheating. it is set to shut off the light at 86.1*, would that be a bad setting?
jackiechandc
Canadian Reefer
Still have to disagree with the high reef temps. If warmer water holds less oxygen and in order to make up for it, one has to increase flow, wouldn't it be better to just decrease the temp so more oxygen is available not only for the corals but for the fishes as well?
I have yet to meet a SPS reefer who keeps his tanks at 86F or even 84F and have a successful SPS dominant tank. Virtually every tank on RC or other forums have insane growth and keeps there temps in the high 70s to low 80s range.
Personally, I would just run Peter's system with all the lights and pumps on for a week or two and see if an extra titanium heater or two would be required. As long as the room temperature is within reason, I highly doubt a heater would be required at all.
Wei
I have yet to meet a SPS reefer who keeps his tanks at 86F or even 84F and have a successful SPS dominant tank. Virtually every tank on RC or other forums have insane growth and keeps there temps in the high 70s to low 80s range.
Personally, I would just run Peter's system with all the lights and pumps on for a week or two and see if an extra titanium heater or two would be required. As long as the room temperature is within reason, I highly doubt a heater would be required at all.
Wei
There are a few things to keep in mind when deciding your optimum temperature. As I mentioned earlier, you don't want to sit at the margin of the safety zone. Find a spot in the middle where you have room for error minor temperature swings. Temperature drops at the bottom of the safe margin are more dangerous than increases at the top of the margin.
The other issue to take into consideration is your corals need to have all of their needs fulfilled before you raise the temperature (or any parameter for that matter) to the natural optimum level. You can compare it to what a healthy diet for an athlete would be compared to an aquarium designer who chats on a forum all day
The Shimek article pretty much covers any questions. He claims keeping corals at the low end of tolerance is a common mistake. Calcification ceases at the low end so running chillers to maintain unsafe levels is a poor practice. If/when those chillers fail, you lose stability and increase stress as the water heats up. If your tank naturally runs at 81-82F with no heater or chiller running, why expend unnecessary resources to lower it if growth and health is better at 84F.
From Shimek's article...
"in reality relatively few coral species persist at temperatures much below 24°C (75.2°F)"
"The most rapid growth of most corals is generally around 27°C to 29°C (80.6°F to 84.2°F) (Barnes et al., 1995; Clausen and Roth, 1975; Weber and White 1976; Coles and Jokiel, 1977, 1978; Highsmith, 1979a, b; Highsmith, et al., 1983)."
"the no growth lower limit of zero calcification occurred at 23.7°C (74.7°F) in corals from the Gulf of Mexico and at 25.5°C (77.9°F) in corals from the Caribbean Sea."
"The most diverse coral reefs are found in a band running from New Guinea and Northern Australia in the west to Palau in the Western Caroline Islands up through the Philippines and Indonesia in the east (Veron, 1986). In this area, prior to the recent period of global warming, the atoll water temperature averaged around 84 ° F and probably never got as low as 80 ° F. "
"At 10°C below the optimal temperature, the metabolic rate would be reduced by about 96%, or put another way, it would only be 4% of normal. Under these sorts of conditions most animals die. In fact, most organisms will die if maintained for extended periods under conditions that constrain their metabolic rate to one half of normal. Even metabolic rate reductions to about 75% of optimal may cause significant problems or death (Withers, 1992). A reduction of this magnitude will be caused by keeping an animal with an optimum of about 82 ° F at a temperature of about 77 ° F."
"Both the temperature and salinity of many reef aquaria are kept near or even somewhat below the lower normal survival limit of physiological tolerance for many of the common animals. This results in substantial and unnecessary mortality. In effect, these mini-reef systems keep the animals just healthy enough that they die slowly." - Dr. Ronald Shimek
Mr. Wilson, based on your previous posts on this forum it is obvious you have a great deal of knowledge. What you are saying makes sense in nature. However a closed system is entirely a different matter since many variables are at play, most of which we really don't understand well. Higher temperatures may result in faster growth however at the expense of much tighter oxygen tolerances, which is a poor trade in my mind. I'd rather have less growth and more oxygen! Based on the collective experience of reefers around the world I'd put my money on lower temperatures, in the 76-78 range, especially if I were setting up a very large reef like Peters. IMO
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
Mr. Wilson, based on your previous posts on this forum it is obvious you have a great deal of knowledge. What you are saying makes sense in nature. However a closed system is entirely a different matter since many variables are at play, most of which we really don't understand well. Higher temperatures may result in faster growth however at the expense of much tighter oxygen tolerances, which is a poor trade in my mind. I'd rather have less growth and more oxygen! Based on the collective experience of reefers around the world I'd put my money on lower temperatures, in the 76-78 range, especially if I were setting up a very large reef like Peters. IMO
We're talking about a variety of variables that all intertwine. If the question is "what temperature should I keep the coral at?", then the answer is 84F. If the question is "what temperature should I keep my tank at?", then the answer may differ.
It's possible that more nuisance algae would grow at a higher temp. It's also possible that there is less dissolved oxygen, but I think the difference between 76F and 84F is negligible with regard to oxygen saturation. My point about flow rates earlier was simply a warning that if you have a problematic tank with inadequate flow then you don't have room for higher temps.
Fish are more active at a higher temp. They eat more and grow faster. They would not have a problem at 84F as this is what they experience in their natural habitat.
The point that Ronald Shimek is making is that it is foolish to keep the temp at the absolute bottom of the safety zone.
I just visited a very nice 1350 gallon reef tank at Shotank in Chicago today. I looked at his thermometer and it read 84F. He says it goes down to 76 in the winter. I should have asked which season the tank grows better. The tank doesn't have a chiller. I didn't ask about a heater.
We need some optical stimulation!!
We need some optical stimulation!!
OK it's been 11 days and almost 300 posts since we last saw a picture, you can't tell me that there is not a thing you can show us. My eyes are getting tired of all the reading and not a single picture in site... anything? Maybe another car perhaps would do. :fun5:
Cheers,
Mike
We need some optical stimulation!!
OK it's been 11 days and almost 300 posts since we last saw a picture, you can't tell me that there is not a thing you can show us. My eyes are getting tired of all the reading and not a single picture in site... anything? Maybe another car perhaps would do. :fun5:
Cheers,
Mike
noobtothereef
New member
wow for being a noob you make a very valid point....wheres the pics?? On the othe hand, i have designed my basement in my house that e are building around this exact thread,....... love the angles and the led accent lighting.....
dave.m
Active member
I'm thinking Peter could issue some line drawings of what is happening currently with this build. We can each of us then print these off and colour them in. I don't know if a competition would be in order of the results, but it would certainly keep us occupied until further pics become available.
Dave.M
Dave.M
- Status
Similar threads
