Guess the Phosphate level

[Thales]

I feed a lot.

 

[cugly]

I dont remember reading it anywhere but what brand water are using?...cant wait to read your article this is very interesting. ..maybe someday will have a solid answers to what really makes them color up and thrive and grow..

 

[GroktheCube]

Interesting. I know I've seen controlled experiments where elevated PO4 caused marked reduction in calcification. That makes me wonder if it's actually PO4 + "X" that causes problems, and whatever that "X" is isn't in your system. Or perhaps the other way around, in the presence of "X", PO4 no longer causes problems.

It's also interesting that you have seemingly little algal growth, despite high levels of dissolved inorganic nutrients. That also suggets to me that there is an unknown chemical or biological factor at play. Either an absent potentiating factor, or a present mitigating factor.

If you ever feel adventerous, it might be enlightening to take a sample of cyano, bryopsis, or something else along those lines, and measure its growth over time in your water vs someone else's water with identical lighting. Not enough to draw a firm conclusion on its own, but I'd be curious to see if there's something special about the water itself that discourages problem algae.

 

[Ssteve]

Is there a thread or write up somewhere on as many details of your tank as possible? Salt, lights, equipment etc?

 

[Thales]

Is there a thread or write up somewhere on as many details of your tank as possible? Salt, lights, equipment etc?

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=22263887&postcount=21

 

[Thales]

I dont remember reading it anywhere but what brand water are using?...cant wait to read your article this is very interesting. ..maybe someday will have a solid answers to what really makes them color up and thrive and grow..

Thanks. I usually use a combo of IO and RC, I recently got 5 buckets of Tropic Marin Pro so now a mix of the three. When the TP is gone, I'll got back to just IO and RC due to the expense of TM and the always availability of IO and RC.

 

[Thales]

Interesting. I know I've seen controlled experiments where elevated PO4 caused marked reduction in calcification. That makes me wonder if it's actually PO4 + "X" that causes problems, and whatever that "X" is isn't in your system. Or perhaps the other way around, in the presence of "X", PO4 no longer causes problems.

There have been recent studies that show increased growth at higher phosphate levels - 'less dense' skeleton seems to be a result but that also seems to occur from increased growth and not necessarily from the calcification inhibition.

It's also interesting that you have seemingly little algal growth, despite high levels of dissolved inorganic nutrients. That also suggets to me that there is an unknown chemical or biological factor at play. Either an absent potentiating factor, or a present mitigating factor.

I think it is a combination of coral cover, flow and herbivory. Though caulerpa doesn't seem to grow well in the sump - that could be issues of the temp difference between the sump and the DT as the sump is in the crawlspace under the house. At the same time it could easily be some unknown factor.

If you ever feel adventerous, it might be enlightening to take a sample of cyano, bryopsis, or something else along those lines, and measure its growth over time in your water vs someone else's water with identical lighting. Not enough to draw a firm conclusion on its own, but I'd be curious to see if there's something special about the water itself that discourages problem algae.

I have some stubborn patches of bryopsis that I haven't yet smothered and that the rabbitfish weren't eating. I just removed the rabbitfish so we'll see if the yellow tang can keep up with the other algae. I have to clean my glass every 4 or 5 days.

 

[miggs76]

Great thread. For over a year I was obsessed with getting my nitrates and phosphates at zero. I succeeded but my tank looked bad--like a bunch of ghost corals. In the last few months I have fed very heavily. My nitrates are up (a bit) and my phosphates are at .1
My tank is thriving now. My purple stylo looks wonderful and all of my other colors are deep. I had a large BROWN plating montipora that is now purple. I used to test nitrates and phosphates weekly. I'm going to do it monthly just for observation.

 

[mess7777]

Interesting discussion going on here. My tank is 2 years old and I have never found a level of success adequate to my liking. I have had high phosphates, low phosphates, high nitrates, zero nitrates, no stability, good stability....and made a lot of dummy moves along the way.

I always figured once I got my parameters under control that things would improve colorwise. I also thought I'd finally get that awesome looking polyp extension.

Things were going kind of ok, some color, some polyp extension. Then I overcleaned my ATS which led to a phosphate spike. I went from 0.0 to .22 on my Hanna checker. Corals became pale(more so), and I lost most polyp extension. Other stuff not doing well showed no improvement.

I have been doing this thing 2 years and still have no clue what I am doing. It blows my mind how people are successful with all kinds of parameters and others just can't have success. This is why we read on these forums hoping to find some ideas that make sense.

Thanks for sharing your story and reminding us that in the world of reefing there is not "tried and true" methods that are going to guarantee success.

 

[Thales]

What kind of corals do you have. I am not yet sold on ATS as there is some evidence that algae can wage allopathic war on corals which could have been released by your 'overclean'.

 

[edmondspl]

Maybe it has a lot to do with the type of acros we keep. I know that we often want them all to be the same but each coral has its own needs. Maybe some are better off in low or high nutrient tanks. Maybe stability on either side is what matters once the corals adapt. I believe the OP said that he tended to keep only the corals that were doing well. Don't quote me on that because I'm not going to re-read everything. It would be nice to have a fact vs personal observation thread.

 

[Thales]

Maybe it has a lot to do with the type of acros we keep. I know that we often want them all to be the same but each coral has its own needs. Maybe some are better off in low or high nutrient tanks. Maybe stability on either side is what matters once the corals adapt. I believe the OP said that he tended to keep only the corals that were doing well. Don't quote me on that because I'm not going to re-read everything. It would be nice to have a fact vs personal observation thread.

The OP did not say he tended to keep only the corals that were doing well. Though, kind of by definition, that is how all of our tanks end up.
Right now there are no facts, we simply don't know and not enough science has yet been done.

 

[edmondspl]

I'm sorry for misquoting. I just thought I remembered something to those lines:spin1:.
Still I do know that out of every tank I have had everything was always different from tank to tank. I could not treat them all the same or my corals would suffer. But again that is from personal experience.

 

[FlyPenFly]

What kind of corals do you have. I am not yet sold on ATS as there is some evidence that algae can wage allopathic war on corals which could have been released by your 'overclean'.

I think if you run ozone, uv, or carbon, the potential allopathic properties of green hair algae can be large mitigated. I run my ATS with a large strong aggressive bag of carbon directly on the output.

So far, I have not see any research to indicate green hair algae produces harmful substances that can damage coral into the water column. Sure, GHA can become invasive when it's physically next to coral but that seems like all the more argument FOR a ATS. This will keep GHA out of the display and in a controlled area where it can be removed. With the proper mix of lighting, flow, and gas, GHA in an ATS will easily outcompete GHA in the tank if it comes down to a nutrient absorption war.

 

[Thales]

I think if you run ozone, uv, or carbon, the potential allopathic properties of green hair algae can be large mitigated. I run my ATS with a large strong aggressive bag of carbon directly on the output.

Prolly. I am not sold that ATS is needed, especially if you need to run other stuff to counter what it may be releasing. Please note that I am not saying that they don't work!

So far, I have not see any research to indicate green hair algae produces harmful substances that can damage coral into the water column. Sure, GHA can become invasive when it's physically next to coral but that seems like all the more argument FOR a ATS. This will keep GHA out of the display and in a controlled area where it can be removed. With the proper mix of lighting, flow, and gas, GHA in an ATS will easily outcompete GHA in the tank if it comes down to a nutrient absorption war.

Its not the GHA that I was saying was the problem, but potentially the turf algae.
http://phuckitphage.org/coral_research.php
http://coralandphage.org/

This one is yummiest:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16796574

 

[FlyPenFly]

Thanks for the links, I could only read the abstract on the last one. It seems to indicate that it's through microbial activity when "fleshy" algae starts touching coral that causes harm?

 

[GroktheCube]

There have been recent studies that show increased growth at higher phosphate levels - 'less dense' skeleton seems to be a result but that also seems to occur from increased growth and not necessarily from the calcification inhibition.

Interesting. I haven't heard anything along those lines before. I'll have to poke around a bit looking for specifics later.

I think it is a combination of coral cover, flow and herbivory. Though caulerpa doesn't seem to grow well in the sump - that could be issues of the temp difference between the sump and the DT as the sump is in the crawlspace under the house. At the same time it could easily be some unknown factor.

What herbivores do you employ beyond the rabbitfish and tang? My apologies if this was stated earlier in the thread and I missed it.

I'm curious because despite fairly low directly measurable nutrient levels, I've had some cyano here and there getting on my nerves for the past couple months. I stopped using bio pellets, which has helped a bit, but I'm now seeing a few patches of other pests like bryopsis popping up here and there. I'm trying to get a sense of how different people approach algae issues, as I feel like I may need to modify my approach.

I have some stubborn patches of bryopsis that I haven't yet smothered and that the rabbitfish weren't eating. I just removed the rabbitfish so we'll see if the yellow tang can keep up with the other algae. I have to clean my glass every 4 or 5 days.

Do you have any theories about why film algae growth is seemingly slow relative to the nutrient levels in your tank? There are always a large number of variables between one system and another, so I know it can be kinda tough to nail down.

 

[dvanacker]

Just for the sake of people thinking that you need high levels of phosphate to achieve healthy, growing and colorful SPS I've compiled a list of TOTM tanks and their listed PO4 levels. Could you imagine if all these guys posted a thread titled guess phosphate level?

DEC 2013 / PO4 0.01 - 0.03 ppm
http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/141-tank-of-the-month

NOV 2013 / "¢Phosphate: 0.01 - 0.04
http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/139-tank-of-the-month

OCT 2013 / "¢Phosphate: 0
http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/138-tank-of-the-month

JUNE 2013 / "¢Phosphate: 0.03
http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/134-tank-of-the-month

MAY 2013 / "¢Phosphate: 0-0.02 (Hanna)
http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/133-tank-of-the-month

MARCH 2013 / "¢Phosphate: undetectable
http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/130-tank-of-the-month

That was just last year. Those not listed didnt mention phosphate. I'll throw mine on the list too.

DEC 2012 / "¢Phosphate: 0 - 0.05 ppm
http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/128-tank-of-the-month

Now couple that data with the fact that beautiful, natural stony reefs do not live in water with the kind of elevated PO4 and NO3 levels Thale is talking about, but in water with trace amounts, and we can easily see elevated levels of these nutrients are not needed.

I maybe could have come along with an argument that phosphate elveated into the 1ppm+ is not the devil we once thought and/or corals can adapt etc. but I have to stop the argument when people assume that elevated PO4 maybe good after seeing one decent tank (sorry Thale but all the TOTM tanks are nicer) with reported elevated PO4 levels.

 

[Ssteve]

I find it odd that it's seems to be a trend that people think there's a argument being made for high phosphates in this thread.

 

[Dukester]

I find it odd that it's seems to be a trend that people think there's a argument being made for high phosphates in this thread.

i dont find it very odd at all, while the OP might not have said this directly, he has hinted over and over again that this is in fact his belief.