Guess the Phosphate level

Is it safe to say that there is an exception to every rule? This is one of them but not the only one. At the end of the day the rule is based on what happens in the majority of situations.

Back in the old days I would not run GFO and test for phosphates. Everybody would always complement me on how good my colors were and how thick my acros were. However, my polyp extension was never as good as most other reefers. But then again, why would a person walk around with it's mouth wide open, trying to catch a bug when it's belly is full.
 
acroholicreefer said:
Is it safe to say that there is an exception to every rule? This is one of them but not the only one. At the end of the day the rule is based on what happens in the majority of situations.
Click to expand...

Maybe. At the same time, what is the rule actually based on? Mostly post hoc ergo propter hoc, which is not always a great way to make rules. The .03-.05 range came mostly out of thin air and was quickly bolstered by the idea that coral became 'weaker' (which I have never actually seen defined, and may not actually matter and may be due to increased growth), that colors got 'worse' (which is anecdote and subjective by nature), and incredible algal growth (which has never been always true). In the past, we had rules about inches of fish per gallon, watts per gallon, do feed corals, don't feed corals, the amount of bioballs necessary to run a healthy reef, which additives were 'necessary' (we still have issue with this today), and more - many of these have been replaced with better study, evidence and understanding. Perhaps our terror of phosphate is something we can calm down about. Perhaps it isn't. Perhaps the tanks I mention in the article (and more) that run at 'higher' phosphate levels are all anomalies, perhaps they aren't. I also think that there are a lot of reefs out there that run at higher phosphate, we just don't hear about them for various reasons. Again, in no way am I saying people should run out and ditch their current methodology, just that it seems that our current thinking on phosphate seems to warrant a closer look.

Back in the old days I would not run GFO and test for phosphates. Everybody would always complement me on how good my colors were and how thick my acros were. However, my polyp extension was never as good as most other reefers. But then again, why would a person walk around with it's mouth wide open, trying to catch a bug when it's belly is full.
Click to expand...

You bet. I am not aware of any literature/evidence that polyp extension during the day is an indication of coral health. I understand that some people like it, but that doesn't mean it is any healthier than acros without long polyp extension. This is yet another area that we could use some good evidence/science/trials/study.
 
Savoie83 said:
What is you alk lvl?? It must be high.
On what I usualy see here, sps with low phosphate love low alk.
Click to expand...

I think the opposite, that the low alk will be problematic and that higher alkalinity helps calcifying corals in 'higher' nutrient enviornments. In October my alkalinity was 4.8mg/L which is way high and was because of a user error with a calcium reactor controller. Seemed to have no effect on the corals. In December after some adjustment, the alk had dropped to 2.88mg/L which also made me nervous as being to low. I like to run around 3.5mg/L.

The most recent test I have is from December 10. PO43 tested with the Hach ascorbic acid molybdate method 1.134, Alk, 2.88. I should prolly test again and see where the tank is holding now. I'll see what I can do this week.
 
Awesome thread and tank =).

I have experienced sort of the same thing with my old 45g it was going on 13 years old simple but effective and p04 and n03 levels were high and colors/growth were great.

Fast forward to my new technological marvel of a tank with all the expensive equipment and ways to completely control nutrients and my colors aren't bad But they Def aren't as good as before maybe just needs some time to mature.

I am focusing on raising my nitrates now as its running too clean under 5 and colors suffered after I dropped them. I think I'll play around loosely with the p04 also without getting out of hand and see if it plays into my color game. I did have algae issues in the old tank though. Not hair algae just the plague of bryopsis.

Are you in the Sf bay area? Good to see some more awesome tanks in this part of Cali=).I like the thread/conversation and I'm gonna follow along and also read the links posted earlier..
 
I think there's another tank in another forum that shows incredible SPS growth, coloration, and overall tank health with extremely high Po4 and nitrate levels. I don't think I'm allowed to link so I won't.

THE common denominator for what I've noticed is tank or rock maturity. I can't say this is the cause though because impressive reefs aren't built by newbies.
 
dvanacker said:
It would also seem that more people became able to keep nice SPS when good nutrient reduction methods became more economical as well.

To a point I agree......but it has gone too far the other way now and there are more issues with people starving/bleaching corals. It's been pounded into peoples heads so hard they need zero nutrients that there's been an unhealthy obsession with it.

Chasing numbers requires no patience..............you can get to zero in a few weeks, but it takes the bacterial population and more importantly the corals months to adjust.

We know zoo-x is a plant and we know nutrients like PO4 and NO3 are great at growing plants. We also know that an over abundance of zoo-x will stunt a corals growth and make it brown. So we can easily draw the connection that higher NO3 and PO4 levels will brown corals and affect growth. This is even witnessed in natural reefs when nutrient levels rise from human interference and run off. The cleanest, untouched waters usually produce the nicest corals.

Also I can witness myself phases of heavier feeding and browner corals vs. lighter feeding and lighter colors in some corals.

If nutrients like PO4 and NO3 are not responsible for such events, please explain?

Corals are amazing animals and able to adapt over time.............maybe your's browned because they were used to and balanced to the sysem you were running. A similar system that runs a bit higher will suffer and bleach short term if the nutrients went down quickly.

I think one has to also look at what is considered "high" levels in reference to actual numbers. For example, PO4 at .25 may not affect colors when N03 is zero. If NO3 is at 2.5 then they may brown out at the .25 PO4 level.

That's why I don't chase the numbers and just watch the corals...............it's easy to get caught up and obsessed with the numbers. People will chase down those numbers with chemicals and additives and never give the corals and the system a chance to balance out.

Today's society is all about instant gratification and there is no patience anymore. Any kind of change in a sytem should be measured in months on resuts, not a week.

Similarly I believe there is relation between light levels and the amount of NO3 and PO4 a system can handle. A system with a powerful lighting system seems to be able to handle more NO3 and PO4 with out the zoo-x populations getting out of control. Similarly to a system bleaching or lightening a coral up with a change from weak to strong lighting. Also good to note that some SPS are better suited to high NO3 and PO4 levels while others will brown out quick.
Click to expand...

Agreed............and that's why theres no right anwser to the perfect system. There are also different opinions of what looks good pastel or darker colors.
I don't advocate people run their systems a certain way.................if they ask, I commuicate what I do and what my personal experiences have been.

Just think about the coral that looks fantastic in your friends system and it's an ugly nub in your's that never colors up. There are just way too many variables at work to put numbers on a test kit as the end all to good colors.

The one example I try to convey is, if a tank has zero PO4 and NO3 and two fish and a tank has 8 fish and zero PO4 and NO3, do you think the corals will look the same?

 
Last edited:
what I find really interesting/funny is the new techniques to make SPS color up, and grow, which are making it ever harder for new reefers ....

like some who I wont name, they claim corals look their best at po4 of xx.x and NO3 of xx !!!! so they advice daily testing of these parameters, and "adjusting" them ! that makes no sense to me what so ever to go based on a hobby grade test kits !

these mis-information, cause ppl on here and other sites to start advising reefers with problems to "adjust" the nutrients ! up and down ! which again makes no sense to me ... how will one reach a balance if daily you are testing and adding or removing no3 ? how will the bacteria colonize to equilibrium ?!

now Ed made an excellent point above. zero no3 and po4, filtered via bacteria and organic carbon lets say .... one tank has 2 fish and pale corals, another has 18 fish and colorfull corals ! I think explanation would be in the number of bacteria, which needed to make N and P zero with so much fish , which in turn means alot more food for the corals.

thanks for letting me rant :D
 
Just to get it up front, I am far from any kind of expert on SPS or reefing in general.That said I was in the hobby when we used undergravel plates as poor man plenums and canister filters as accidental bacteria farms and managed to keep animals alive. What I am getting from this thread and it's OP is that we shouldn't get stuck thinking there is only 1 way to be succesful and to think for ourselves. I have achieved decent growth and colors finally but I sure haven't done it by throwing money in additives and equipment at it.I have a skimmer, light bulbs and fish poo as I have three kid's in college right now. That said I admire the "big guy's and gal's" reefs on here as much as anyone. I have a long way to go to meet my expectations, I'll get there, just might be a goofy trip gettin' there. Meanwhile let's have fun and try keeping from spending ourselves out of a hobby we love. Just my .02:hmm5:
 
When i was in this hobby years ago i kept SPS dominant reefs and there was no talk of phosphate to any large degree. I and most reefers were using DSB's and basic Berlin methods with heaps of live rock and heavy skimming. My tanks were ridiculously rich in micro life which i ignored for the most part as all i cared about was colorful acros.
I've never kept any fish such as wrasses etc that eat pods and the like to a large degree and always stocked fish lightly. The odd manadarin never makes a dent on a well populated reef so i have kept one of those in every tank. I always had algae and controlled it with large numbers of turbo snails rather than trying to sterilise the system of it. I kept zero nitrates always with the DSB and never tested phos so i assume in hindsight that most of my algae was phosphate driven and hence i likely had who knows what level in the water.
I returned to the hobby and after reading the SPS forum i thought, ' ok nothing much has changed but phos is super important apparently so i better add it to my critical parameter list. As i always try to keep NSW conditions i tested my LFS's natural sea water and it came up zero on my Hanna, therefore i decided to aim for the same rather than 0.03 which is not what my water tests at. I saw no good reason after reading lots of threads as to where the 0.03-05 phos level had been shown to be the sweet spot it was being routinely suggested as to new SPS reefers.

The point i wish to make is this, i'm sure i had phos levels in my previous tanks as i fed the reef heavily always to promote as much life as possible and used lots of unwashed pulverised mysis daily as there were no real coral foods available in Aus back then other than the bottled water 'snow' type rubbish.
If i had returned and read these forums and everyone had been saying 0.1 phos levels would give me great colors etc i would have thought ok that's a long way from NSW but i would have adjusted my tank keeping to achieve that level and most likely upped the alk etc to level the water out. All my tanks have been healthy colorful SPS displays despite the different method of no DSB and prob 30% of the LR i would normally have used - i only went light on the rock after seeing the great look of the minimalist SPS tanks now in fashion.
You can have success with many different parameters as long as you 'balance' your water to keep everything from nutrients to algae growth in control. I firmly believe the successful trend associated with measurable nitrates and phos has nothing to do with those levels actually being required - it is the increased feeding to raise those levels that is fuelling the reef as a whole and 'enriching' the water if you like to provide the acros with the food they need to look the way we want them to.

Sorry for the lengthy post.
 
Wonderful thread! I really enjoyed reading what people think about this subject. As a biologist I have learned just how complex Mother Nature is. I'm only really a noob with a few years of hobby experience, so I'm not qualified to do this but I think there should be much more emphasis on the concept of a reef tank as a balanced system. It can be hard to digest in so many words, does anyone know of any diagrams or the like that may help? It may sound weird, but a pic is worth...
 
I just so happens that i'm quite adept at paint Dolmo................ i bet you want one with lots more writing don't ya ;)

a_zpsa6725bc4.png~original
 
biggles said:
I just so happens that i'm quite adept at paint Dolmo................ i bet you want one with lots more writing don't ya ;)

a_zpsa6725bc4.png~original
Click to expand...

Funny, goofy and true!
Thanks for the comedy relief!

It's crazy how one can get really uptight and stressed depending on which threads on chooses to read on reef central.. Or any forum I suppose..
If one seeks out too many low nutrient success story threads, one could go bonkers. But by the same token, one could follow this thread and turn their tank into an algae box with 'turd' coloured corals..... Or not!
It is all about balance..
When I got back into this hobby last year after a couple of years off, I set up my new tank with the old methods I new worked for me: strong skimming lots of flow, bare bottom with remote dsb/cheato sump..
This time, however, I was testing for po4.. The tank looked great but this time I knew my p was high.. So after looking into the relationship between carbon sources like pellets or vodka/sugar/vinegar and n/p levels (and following a very interesting, if somewhat stressing thread called 'dosing nitrate to reduce phosphates) I pulled out the sand bed which was keeping n at zero, added a carbon source and started dosing calcium nitrate to pull down my po4.. I was chasing the numbers!!! I even tried dosing some iron...
The tank suffered!
Because po4 tests are practically useless anyways and because these new techniques weren't working for me, I have begun reintroducing the dsb, reducing the carbon dosing and I've increased my fish load.
I did increase skimming and do run some gfo fairly regularly.. I'm finding a better balance for the tank and my sanity..
My corals are looking better, I'm less stressed and I'm not certain what my p is but I do know that n is very low... This seems to work for me..
I'm still shocked by the elevated levels in Thales' tank but there is no denying that the tank looks great..
This thread continues to be very thought provoking!
 
I've been thinking about this thread, today and the concept of 'balance'
it seems to me that there are two different concepts of balance at work… maybe more, but two of the most basic 'balances' that we need to achieved in a reef are; 1 the balance of nutrient import and nutrient export and 2 a microbial/bacterial balance.. these two would seem to be closely linked to each other.. (not to mention the required calc/alk balance..)
Clearly, Thales' tank has achieved a balance on the bacterial/microbial level since he has such elevated nutrient levels and yet has an algae free, robust and healthy looking tank. but i would argue that his nutrient import/export balance is way off..
if i were to use natural sea water as a baseline goal for water parameters (i think this is not an unreasonable goal…) then looking at the n and p in his tank, it stands to reason that the balance has been skewed towards too high nutrient input and too low export..
so i have to ask: is biggles' sketch really accurate?
it would seem that Thales' tank should sit over the 'turd factory' scale, yet it actually looks more like the rainbow scale.
Thales what made you test for n and p for the first time? without brown corals and algae, what motivated you to test in the first place? simple curiosity?
what did you think/do when you first saw your levels?
 
I would wager, besides nitrates and po4, there are lots of other variables we're not measuring and we simply down know of yet that affect coral growth and color more but we're in a cycle of chasing numbers despite clear research that tells us facts contrary to popular belief.
 
I don't know if the idea of balance makes much sense. Balance what? To what what level? How many things and in what amounts? Perhaps the idea of balance is an over simplification of a very complex and not understood group of processes. If you are going to use NSW as a goal, you need to choose which testing area you are going to mimic and that is a bit arbitrary. We go into this a bit in the upcoming article.

I would test from time to time and didn't see much of a difference in the animals regardless of what the number were, and I learned a long time ago the futility of chasing numbers. The nitrate doesn't worry me at all...I wouldn't worry unless it was creeping up on 20, but I know of some fantastic tanks that had nitrate in excess of 50 and no problems. The phosphate has jumped around over the years, and I used to fight it with GFO, LC or water changes - lots of work and money without lasting benefits. It reminded me of trying to control pH in saltwater by addition of buffers which is a lesson in futility. All that work, so I decided not to worry. The idea about high phosphate came up at work, and on a 200,000 gallon tank the cost of buying GFO is daunting, so I started testing my home tank to compare to what was going on at work and initially got .95. Everything was doing fine, so I started testing more often and the phosphate kept going up. I didn't do anything differently because there seemed to be no reason to change anything.

Again, I am not recommending anything, but more advocating critical thought. If you are spending time and money adding or taking something away from your tank, and you stop adding it or taking it away and there is no difference, why continue adding it?
 
Apologies for posting the silly pic and going off topic in your thread mate, anything that prompts reefers to stop being sheep is a good thing so i'll read with interest what you guys discuss and how it can benefit the hobby in general hopefully :thumbsup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Phosphate flow out of live rock
Replies
0
Views
121
SantaMonica
S
griss
Anyone Dosing Phosphate?
Replies
3
Views
59
griss
griss
U
Problems testing Phosphate
Replies
6
Views
579
Timfish
Timfish
Jyetman
Help leveling New 32 Gallon Tank
Replies
2
Views
158
griss
griss
DjPhato
90gal reef cycling
Replies
8
Views
595
griss
griss
Back
Top