Craig Lambert
Premium Member
Is it based strictly on keeping Nitrates at 0, and PO4 in check? (.03 or lower). What other measurements quantify whether or not a tank is low in nutrients?
How do we define a "low nutrient" tank?
- Thread starter Craig Lambert
- Start date
Kolognekoral
New member
Craig,
a very good question! We banter the phrase about, but what actually constitutes 'low nutrient'.
For myself, I've been striving to maintain the PO4 below 0.04 and the nitrates at about 1-2. In actuality my NO3 is 0! My DSB sucks up all the ammonia and nitrate. The phosphate is another issue. Other than macro algaes, most aquariums have no big takers on PO4. Certainly the zeolith plus bacteria systems are addressing the matter, but I am not convinced of a specific number as being the magic one.
I think what we are striving for in a nutrient poor environment is not simply low nutrients, rather an efficient system of nutrient utilization which maintains a process whereby the influx of nutrients/wastes is efficiently assimilated to leave only a bare minimum for life to continue and flourish. Perhaps this is actually a heavy bioload situation, with extremely efficient biological assimilation of all waste products leaving only the nitrogen to escape into the atmosphere? It's abit like a motor with a gear box. It starts slow and shifts up to maintain heavy loads. Its establishment is the key.
Am I going too far off into left field?
a very good question! We banter the phrase about, but what actually constitutes 'low nutrient'.
For myself, I've been striving to maintain the PO4 below 0.04 and the nitrates at about 1-2. In actuality my NO3 is 0! My DSB sucks up all the ammonia and nitrate. The phosphate is another issue. Other than macro algaes, most aquariums have no big takers on PO4. Certainly the zeolith plus bacteria systems are addressing the matter, but I am not convinced of a specific number as being the magic one.
I think what we are striving for in a nutrient poor environment is not simply low nutrients, rather an efficient system of nutrient utilization which maintains a process whereby the influx of nutrients/wastes is efficiently assimilated to leave only a bare minimum for life to continue and flourish. Perhaps this is actually a heavy bioload situation, with extremely efficient biological assimilation of all waste products leaving only the nitrogen to escape into the atmosphere? It's abit like a motor with a gear box. It starts slow and shifts up to maintain heavy loads. Its establishment is the key.
Am I going too far off into left field?
gary faulkner
New member
Re: How do we define a "low nutrient" tank?
I think you hit the nail on the head.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
gary faulkner
New member
Phosphate reactors and removal media.
Lot of SPS keepers running this.
toothman
Premium Member
At this time I agree with the nutrient utilization theory. My acros never look better than when I feed heavy. I Now think good strong feeding, good skimming, good qty of fish will yield the best environment. The trick is a lot of food but keep nitrate and phosphate down. The best way to accomplish this is by water change and 0.0 top off.
Craig Lambert
Premium Member
Maybe I should have titled the thread "how do we define a low nutrient system" rather than tank. Jamie touched on a number of points that make me think of this in terms of an ongoing system rather than just a "snapshot" of current water parameters.
Jamie, I believe runs a Zeovit system which is by design a low nutrient system. Over the past 4 months I have been working at creating a low nutrient environment, and so far I feel that the best thing I've done to achieve this is to add a Phosban Reactor. (As Gary mentioned). One of the significant things that has happened since adding this is that I do not have to clean the glass nearly as often as I did in the past. I have come to believe that one of the best measures of a low nutrient tank/system is simply how often the glass must be cleaned. (I'm a stickler about clean glass). I recently ordered a colorometer to accurately monitor my phosphate levels.
toothman- Most every time I see a thread where someone mentions low nutrients they also talk about heavy feeding, and quick export. So to me this indicates the need for some serious skimming. I assume the heavy feeding is in an effort feed corals via fish poop, correct? I've also been doing 15% weekly water changes.
Jamie, I believe runs a Zeovit system which is by design a low nutrient system. Over the past 4 months I have been working at creating a low nutrient environment, and so far I feel that the best thing I've done to achieve this is to add a Phosban Reactor. (As Gary mentioned). One of the significant things that has happened since adding this is that I do not have to clean the glass nearly as often as I did in the past. I have come to believe that one of the best measures of a low nutrient tank/system is simply how often the glass must be cleaned. (I'm a stickler about clean glass). I recently ordered a colorometer to accurately monitor my phosphate levels.
toothman- Most every time I see a thread where someone mentions low nutrients they also talk about heavy feeding, and quick export. So to me this indicates the need for some serious skimming. I assume the heavy feeding is in an effort feed corals via fish poop, correct? I've also been doing 15% weekly water changes.
toothman
Premium Member
That is a question I am thinking about now fish waste or just super small particles of the formula frozen food. What does coral really eat bacteria? There was a good 7 part article entitled the food of reefs. This article really stressed that acros do need food, seems like a no brainer. I recently had my water tested by aquariumwatertesting.com and got the following:Water Test Summary
Ammonia (NH3-4) ........................Good ......................................... 0.005
Nitrite (NO2)................................Good ......................................... 0.006
Nitrate (NO3)...............................Good .............................................0.4
Phosphate (PO4) ..........................Good ........................................... 0.01
Silica (SiO2-3) ............................. High..............................................1.5
Potassium (K) ...............................Low............................................. 243
Calcium (Ca)................................Good ............................................ 408
Boron (B) ....................................Good .............................................5.6
Molybdenum (Mo)......................... High..............................................0.2
Strontium (Sr) .............................Good .............................................8.1
Magnesium (Mg) ...........................Low........................................... 1095
Iodine (Iรโรยฏ)...................................Good ........................................... 0.03
Copper (Cu++) ............................Good ........................................... 0.01
Alkalinity (meq/L).........................Good ........................................... 2.94
The above water test is a result of a 5% weekly water change, refugium, good skimmer. Most importantly I really feed about 10 to 16 oz a month of food.
I have tried to feed minimally and everything looked slightly bleached or just not vital.
Ammonia (NH3-4) ........................Good ......................................... 0.005
Nitrite (NO2)................................Good ......................................... 0.006
Nitrate (NO3)...............................Good .............................................0.4
Phosphate (PO4) ..........................Good ........................................... 0.01
Silica (SiO2-3) ............................. High..............................................1.5
Potassium (K) ...............................Low............................................. 243
Calcium (Ca)................................Good ............................................ 408
Boron (B) ....................................Good .............................................5.6
Molybdenum (Mo)......................... High..............................................0.2
Strontium (Sr) .............................Good .............................................8.1
Magnesium (Mg) ...........................Low........................................... 1095
Iodine (Iรโรยฏ)...................................Good ........................................... 0.03
Copper (Cu++) ............................Good ........................................... 0.01
Alkalinity (meq/L).........................Good ........................................... 2.94
The above water test is a result of a 5% weekly water change, refugium, good skimmer. Most importantly I really feed about 10 to 16 oz a month of food.
I have tried to feed minimally and everything looked slightly bleached or just not vital.
Craig Lambert
Premium Member
Warner Marine makes a Potassium suppliment. Marine Depot carries it.
Kolognekoral
New member
Craig,
yes, Jamie does run a Zeovit system, under my own terms, of course.
I have a zeolith filter, dose the classic elements, such a Zeobak, ZeoFood7, ZeoStart2, plus I have started with the Coral Snow, and Sponge Power, which are usable outside of the Zeovit system. I, also, run a DSB in a large refugium under T5 lighting. The original idea of the refugium was to reduce wastes while providing fine live food for the corals and filter feeders. Essentially, this worked until I stopped using the Skimmer (this had little impact, other than the algae grew much slower with the skimmer), switched from a kalk reactor to a suppliment system. After 6 months the PO4 took a sudden jump. Apparently I had been binding the excess PO4 via the calcium supplements and it reach implosion and was no longer to keep under control. Another lesson learned. But I never had nitrates!
I switched the sand in the reef, but kept the sand in the DSB and returned to the reaktor and skimmer, plus the Zeovit system. It has taken 2 months to get the PO4 stable, but it is still not as low as it should be, tending to spike to 0.14, when I want 0.01. I have assumed that the rocks still have a backlog on PO4 to release and it will take another few months to completely stabilize. However, the corals and fish have never looked better and the growth rates are amazing.
Montiporas, Favids and Tubastrea are growing like mad, while the Acros are doing better, but really want less PO4.
Again, as I wrote in the earlier mail, I believe it is the balance of the system and not so much the 'snapshot' parameters that count. I've had the nutrients low before, lower than now, but the inhabitants were clearly not as happy. A certain influx of nutrients is necessary, but every aquarium will be a little different. An original piece of artwork, so to speak.
Under the zeolith systems, the idea is to use a mixture of zeoliths in a multipurpose effect. The zeoliths are actually ion-exchange vehicles, which absorb preferentially ammonia, phosphate, etc. This captured ammonia, etc. is then a food source for bacteria living on the surface of the zeoliths (and other surfaces). Essentially the zeolith works as a collecting station for wastes and the bacteria are the workers that neutralize it.
With all of these 'extreme' filtering systems we are truly stripping the water of many organics, some that are required by the inhabitants of the reef. This is why we need to resupply nutrients for the specific inhabitants. Such a system should not be starved, rather selectively fed. Corals require different food stuffs as, say, shrimps or fish. Gorgonians and azooxanthellate soft corals require still other foods. Some of these foods will be taken up by other organisms, therefore we tend to overfeed the system to assure that our charges actually get sufficient nutrition.
We are finally realizing that zooxanthellate corals require nutrition in addition to that their symbiont provide. Actually, the symbionts are less necessary than we previously understood. Due to their brown colouration, they are masking the basic pigments of the corals, making them efficient, but brown, food machines. When we reduce the zooxanthellae via a low nutrient environment we allow the basic colouring to shine, however we must now feed the coral with absorbable nutrients to cover the deficit.
Corals are amazing animals that have developed various methods of aquiring nutrients. Understanding and supporting this mechanism is what makes marine aquariums so fascinating.
yes, Jamie does run a Zeovit system, under my own terms, of course.
I have a zeolith filter, dose the classic elements, such a Zeobak, ZeoFood7, ZeoStart2, plus I have started with the Coral Snow, and Sponge Power, which are usable outside of the Zeovit system. I, also, run a DSB in a large refugium under T5 lighting. The original idea of the refugium was to reduce wastes while providing fine live food for the corals and filter feeders. Essentially, this worked until I stopped using the Skimmer (this had little impact, other than the algae grew much slower with the skimmer), switched from a kalk reactor to a suppliment system. After 6 months the PO4 took a sudden jump. Apparently I had been binding the excess PO4 via the calcium supplements and it reach implosion and was no longer to keep under control. Another lesson learned. But I never had nitrates!
I switched the sand in the reef, but kept the sand in the DSB and returned to the reaktor and skimmer, plus the Zeovit system. It has taken 2 months to get the PO4 stable, but it is still not as low as it should be, tending to spike to 0.14, when I want 0.01. I have assumed that the rocks still have a backlog on PO4 to release and it will take another few months to completely stabilize. However, the corals and fish have never looked better and the growth rates are amazing.
Montiporas, Favids and Tubastrea are growing like mad, while the Acros are doing better, but really want less PO4.
Again, as I wrote in the earlier mail, I believe it is the balance of the system and not so much the 'snapshot' parameters that count. I've had the nutrients low before, lower than now, but the inhabitants were clearly not as happy. A certain influx of nutrients is necessary, but every aquarium will be a little different. An original piece of artwork, so to speak.
Under the zeolith systems, the idea is to use a mixture of zeoliths in a multipurpose effect. The zeoliths are actually ion-exchange vehicles, which absorb preferentially ammonia, phosphate, etc. This captured ammonia, etc. is then a food source for bacteria living on the surface of the zeoliths (and other surfaces). Essentially the zeolith works as a collecting station for wastes and the bacteria are the workers that neutralize it.
With all of these 'extreme' filtering systems we are truly stripping the water of many organics, some that are required by the inhabitants of the reef. This is why we need to resupply nutrients for the specific inhabitants. Such a system should not be starved, rather selectively fed. Corals require different food stuffs as, say, shrimps or fish. Gorgonians and azooxanthellate soft corals require still other foods. Some of these foods will be taken up by other organisms, therefore we tend to overfeed the system to assure that our charges actually get sufficient nutrition.
We are finally realizing that zooxanthellate corals require nutrition in addition to that their symbiont provide. Actually, the symbionts are less necessary than we previously understood. Due to their brown colouration, they are masking the basic pigments of the corals, making them efficient, but brown, food machines. When we reduce the zooxanthellae via a low nutrient environment we allow the basic colouring to shine, however we must now feed the coral with absorbable nutrients to cover the deficit.
Corals are amazing animals that have developed various methods of aquiring nutrients. Understanding and supporting this mechanism is what makes marine aquariums so fascinating.
gary faulkner
New member
I also have recently begun to run GFO and I agree that less cleaning of the glass is evident but best of all my SPS coral have really started to color up. I still have some brown coral but at least half have turned green, purple, and blue.
I have had some frags for about 1-1.5 years that haven't grown at all. Now they all are exploding with growth. I don't know if this is because of lower nutrients or something else.
Also the chaeto in the sump has almost stopped it's growth.
The only thing that I have changed in the last 2-3 months is the use of GFO.
Big E
Premium Member
Well said it's all about a balance ,that probably isn't measured in test kits or photometers, but the growth & color of the corals.
Every reefer will have a different view as to what constitutes this as great color is very subjective.
This is when you have gone too far....the export system works too well. You don't necessarily have to feed.......you can adjust your system back in balance. There a number of variables that can be changed, run a dryer skimate, less water changes, less PO4 meadia, ect.,& on & on.
Now, if I was selling a product, I'd design it so it would strip & starve the system & then sell a myriad of products(food) to get it back in balance. That way I'd make more money. Even if I knew the sweet spot with just the export ingredients, why just sell that? Then I would keep adding new variation/generations of the export products to manipulate the system again in a different or more efficient way & then sell more new miracle(food) products to fix that.................but that's just me.
Last edited:
Kolognekoral
New member
Ed,
I was previously also of the opinion that one can simply aim for the better balance and not work with addatives. I have since accepted that, although possible on paper, it doesn't seem to work in reality (not for me, anyway) I read, also, an enlightening bit about coral physiology. The sybiotic relationship with the zooxanthellae is a two way street, but the corals have always enjoyed the ability to play traffic cop. In a low-nutrient environment they are able to control the flux of nutrients to the zooxanthellae, thus controling their numbers in their tissues. This is why corals coming from very clean waters always show the best colours. The coral has limited the nutrient availability and thus the zooxanthellae population. Now, in a less clean reef, as we find in the areas populated by man, the coral cannot completely control the nutrients, which are simply available in the surrounding water and the zooxanthellae can absorb nutrients direct, thus increasing their numbers in the tissue. This is where we see the browning of colours on the natural reefs. In the aquarium, there is even less control and much more fluctuation of the nutrient level. The algae have a free reign and reproduce well over the needed number to support the coral. Possibly they become problematic to the coral?
As I see it, with a zeolith system, we may attempt to create a balance, but in order to maintain it, we must not allow the bioload to change significantly. This would mean the fish must not grow, the corals should remain to a certain size, etc. By modifying the parameters with nutrient additives, we gain a better control of the changing environment and are able to tweek the system as it evolves (or we decide we simply cannot live without that special additional fish, coral, etc.)
I suppose it is finally a personal choice. I personally loose interest in a static environment, which for me is not the same as a stable environment. I do not see zeolith systems as abusive to the purchaser. (cash cows) Certainly, any developer/manufacturer must make a profit, but I do not see much room for calculation of the market. What I do see is a constant developement based on knew understanding of marine systems. As I personaly have met a few of the people developing such products, I do have a good idea of the people behind some of it. I have a priviledged window which has buffered my normal tendency to doubt. I've come to share their enthusiasm. (and that wasn't overnight, either!)
In the end, this is certainly only one of quite a few valid methods to achieve a beautiful aquarium.
I was previously also of the opinion that one can simply aim for the better balance and not work with addatives. I have since accepted that, although possible on paper, it doesn't seem to work in reality (not for me, anyway) I read, also, an enlightening bit about coral physiology. The sybiotic relationship with the zooxanthellae is a two way street, but the corals have always enjoyed the ability to play traffic cop. In a low-nutrient environment they are able to control the flux of nutrients to the zooxanthellae, thus controling their numbers in their tissues. This is why corals coming from very clean waters always show the best colours. The coral has limited the nutrient availability and thus the zooxanthellae population. Now, in a less clean reef, as we find in the areas populated by man, the coral cannot completely control the nutrients, which are simply available in the surrounding water and the zooxanthellae can absorb nutrients direct, thus increasing their numbers in the tissue. This is where we see the browning of colours on the natural reefs. In the aquarium, there is even less control and much more fluctuation of the nutrient level. The algae have a free reign and reproduce well over the needed number to support the coral. Possibly they become problematic to the coral?
As I see it, with a zeolith system, we may attempt to create a balance, but in order to maintain it, we must not allow the bioload to change significantly. This would mean the fish must not grow, the corals should remain to a certain size, etc. By modifying the parameters with nutrient additives, we gain a better control of the changing environment and are able to tweek the system as it evolves (or we decide we simply cannot live without that special additional fish, coral, etc.)
I suppose it is finally a personal choice. I personally loose interest in a static environment, which for me is not the same as a stable environment. I do not see zeolith systems as abusive to the purchaser. (cash cows) Certainly, any developer/manufacturer must make a profit, but I do not see much room for calculation of the market. What I do see is a constant developement based on knew understanding of marine systems. As I personaly have met a few of the people developing such products, I do have a good idea of the people behind some of it. I have a priviledged window which has buffered my normal tendency to doubt. I've come to share their enthusiasm. (and that wasn't overnight, either!)
In the end, this is certainly only one of quite a few valid methods to achieve a beautiful aquarium.
jay24k
Active member
Reading some of this really just points out that people go to huge extremes to bring their tank to a pristine environment. I feel like I am in the opposite end where I feel water changes, calc, alk, feeding, and the use of a good skimmer is all you really need. I've never used any of the things discussed here including gfo and have had no issues. with color or growth.
Beside the color of the corals, what exactly is the goal of people here who add all these additives? I am not trying to sound negative at all.
Beside the color of the corals, what exactly is the goal of people here who add all these additives? I am not trying to sound negative at all.
Big E
Premium Member
Hi Jamie,
I've been able to manipulate my system from very low starving to high nuturent levels & back without commercial additives. The more livestock you have outside of the SPS themselves makes it more of a challenge but doable. And with each variable you add it becomes more daunting, but the fact of the mattter is we see many TOTM's doing it many different ways.
It's all about a balance between import/export.......it's that simple. The bacteria will equalize whatever that imprt/export level is & that is what we see in algae, coral growth, ect. There are data points all along there & when the system sways too far one way or the other that is what we see visaully in the corals. If you change the bacteria populations by skewing that balance then certain results will follow.........continue to skew those populations a certain way(by contnually adding certain bacteria to shift the balance) & you can starve the system.
That's fine, but I'm not naive about the industry. Just look at the price of some of those products. I'm definately not sigaling out Zeo, this happens across the industry whether we're talking about skimmers, additives, ect. You may have talked to some of those developers but you probably haven't talked to their marketing & financial people. Zeo is just the tip of the iceberg. They aren't doing anything that any manufacturing company wouldn't do. For example, why does every manufacturer now sell amino acids? Did we all of a sudden realize we "need" them? The anwser is easy...........no.
The pet industry is notorious for trying to sell people specialized products that are used in other areas everyday. Like the special dog food bin that cost $20, but I can buy at Home Depot for $5 as a grabage can. The only difference is the shape & name. The tropical/ marine industry are the worst abusers imo.
I don't want to get off topic here, but when the thread starts becoming a subtle advertisment for these biological commercial systems as "the" way to do it, I say bunk. I'll leave it that, as I don't want to throw the thread off track.
johnnybravo234
New member
I agree with you guys. The best setup is high bio load and feeding but good methods of export. The acros do really need a good ammount of "dirt" in the water. The trick is to have a constant supply but also remove it before it breaks down in the water. Also, IME having high phosphate doesnt have as much to do with colors as most think. At the lfs I work at one of the new systems is loaded with phostphate but the corals still have nice color. They just arent growing.
Kolognekoral
New member
Jay,
I don't find it at all negative of you. In principle, I agree, one can get on with just the basics and have a very beautiful aquarium. I've been at this over 30 years and have had many successes, add to this a few crashes, as well. I do not regret it, it is part of the exploration process. I, also, do not feel it need to be justified one way or the other.
Now, something that I believe many misunderstand is that 'all these additives' makes it sound like one runs a small chem lab in their livingroom. Not at all the case. Any aquarium requires certain filtration, such as carbon, filter floss, sponges, etc. There are also additives, whether this is simply various foods or trace elements, supplements. With a zeolith system, one has simply changed the parameter of required products. An example, before I ran a canister filter with a classic medium plus live rocks. Now, I use zeoliths. Before I used to mix lots of foods for specific inhabitants, now I have a few frozen products and flakes (the biofilm produced on the zeoliths becomes an additional food for the corals). Before I used to add small amount of trace elements and make less frequent water changes. Now, I am doing weekly waterchanges and add a few DROPS of nutrient products. I no longer use Phos-ban, etc. Certain things are the same, kalk reaktor, skimmer, heater, HQ + T5 lighting, excellent water circulation.
One advantage that is hard to explain has to do with many of my azooxanthellate charges. Before I needed to target feed them daily and then it was a struggle, not only to keep them alive, but to maintain acceptable water quality. Since I have started working with zeoliths, I find these corals benefit from the system in general and require less direct feeding. Don't get me wrong, they cannot be ignored, but I find this system offers more than just another solution to aqaurium, it seems to get closer to allowing an imitation of a reef environment. Tunicates and sponges are sprouting all over the place.
I must confess I was not convinced at first, but the more I work with the Zeovit system, instead of other zeolith systems, I find I am confortable and truly enjoy my aquarium once again. This is, for me, very important. I get the feeling I can push the envelope with this type of filtration.
Again, to each his own, but the system is not as fussy as some would like to have it! Then again, if your system is not broke, don't try to fix it! If you are unsatisfied, then look this way.
I don't find it at all negative of you. In principle, I agree, one can get on with just the basics and have a very beautiful aquarium. I've been at this over 30 years and have had many successes, add to this a few crashes, as well. I do not regret it, it is part of the exploration process. I, also, do not feel it need to be justified one way or the other.
Now, something that I believe many misunderstand is that 'all these additives' makes it sound like one runs a small chem lab in their livingroom. Not at all the case. Any aquarium requires certain filtration, such as carbon, filter floss, sponges, etc. There are also additives, whether this is simply various foods or trace elements, supplements. With a zeolith system, one has simply changed the parameter of required products. An example, before I ran a canister filter with a classic medium plus live rocks. Now, I use zeoliths. Before I used to mix lots of foods for specific inhabitants, now I have a few frozen products and flakes (the biofilm produced on the zeoliths becomes an additional food for the corals). Before I used to add small amount of trace elements and make less frequent water changes. Now, I am doing weekly waterchanges and add a few DROPS of nutrient products. I no longer use Phos-ban, etc. Certain things are the same, kalk reaktor, skimmer, heater, HQ + T5 lighting, excellent water circulation.
One advantage that is hard to explain has to do with many of my azooxanthellate charges. Before I needed to target feed them daily and then it was a struggle, not only to keep them alive, but to maintain acceptable water quality. Since I have started working with zeoliths, I find these corals benefit from the system in general and require less direct feeding. Don't get me wrong, they cannot be ignored, but I find this system offers more than just another solution to aqaurium, it seems to get closer to allowing an imitation of a reef environment. Tunicates and sponges are sprouting all over the place.
I must confess I was not convinced at first, but the more I work with the Zeovit system, instead of other zeolith systems, I find I am confortable and truly enjoy my aquarium once again. This is, for me, very important. I get the feeling I can push the envelope with this type of filtration.
Again, to each his own, but the system is not as fussy as some would like to have it! Then again, if your system is not broke, don't try to fix it! If you are unsatisfied, then look this way.
