importance of nutrient import with ulns's

[dieselgrk]

IMHO"¦"¦
There seems to be a common misunderstanding about the effects of carbon and bacteria dosing on a reef system. Since becoming a trend which has been backed by BEAUTIFUL pictures of systems being ran by the likes of korallen zucht'es zeovit, brightwell's neozeo, ect, all too often you hear horror stories of people who have begun added a carbon and bacteria source to their system only to have their corals either fade in color, or worse, stn and die.

It is understood by most that carbon and bacteria additions as well as efficient skimming increases a reef aquariums ability to export nitrates and phosphates. What I believe is misunderstood is that carbon and bacteria additions as well as efficient skimming improves a reef aquariums ability to export nutrients. Nitrates and phosphates are bad nutrients which we commonly test for and desire to remove from our aquariums, but what about the desirable nutrients which we don't test for? Guess what? Those are being removed as well! So here we are increasing our systems ability to export nutrients, but what about nutrient IMPORT????

It is my understanding that, simply put, a carbon and bacteria driven system is one that EXPORTS all nutrients (I use the word "œall" very loosely) so that we can IMPORT only what is needed for proper coral husbandry. It is this lack of nutrient IMPORT that I feel is leading to so many people's problems and failed attempts at maintaining a bacteria driven system.

If you're going to improve your systems ability to export nutrients via additions of carbon and bacteria as well as efficiently skimming, then improve your systems nutrient import as well. Whether you are incorporating a balling or balling light dosing regimen, a full line of ulns regimens such as the zeovit line, or simply doing water changed every week rather than monthly or bimonthly with a high quality salt mix, some how you have IMPORT those positive nutrients you're EXPORTING!

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I actually think that most readers of the reef chemistry forum are pretty familiar with the need to replace depleted ions somehow, and I typically recommend regular water changes to replace depleted ions (and to export those that accumulate). The big problem is that we do not generally know which minor and trace ions are depleted, and which accumulate, and just adding stuff is not the best way to deal with things that are not actually depleted in the first place.

But I would make a few comments:

1. Nearly all of the nitrate (N) and phosphate (P) typically comes in with fish foods, and assuming it is as organism tissues (fish, shrimp, nori, etc) which themselves contain minor and trace elements, what evidence do you have that bacteria, when they use that exact same amount of N and P to make their own tissues, actually cause export of more trace elements in their bodies than the foods brought in? In many cases, it may actually be the other way around, and build up is the concern.

2. I'm not convinced that bacterial export of elements is any more significant than is macroalgae doing the same job, although I do agree that some folks may drive the bacterial process harder than most do with macroalgae (due to space and lighting constraints in refugia).

FWIW, I like to change my water 1% daily. I use Instant Ocean for that.

 

[Mike O'Brien]

Nitrates and phosphates are bad nutrients which we commonly test for and desire to remove from our aquariums, but what about the desirable nutrients which we don’t test for? Guess what?

Well those are desirable, just not at elevated levels.

Actually if you take a closer look at most of these methods. They offer products to do exactly what you are saying.

 

[chuckreef]

I sure would like to see this list.
---> "IMPORT only what is needed for proper coral husbandry..."
If you have it handy.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

If you have it handy.

:lol:

I assume that was sarcastic, and was quite funny if so, but in case not, there is not such a list that has general acceptance. It is actually quite a hard thing to generate (perhaps impossible since even measuring concentrations does not tell you bioavailability of organic bound trace elements), and it will vary from tank to tank with different husbandry techniques.

 

[chuckreef]

Yes, it was.
I think we (or, at least I know, "I") don't know enough about what nutrients to add, especially in terms of those that are absolutely essential for cora health. (I think we can shotgun it (give a little bit of everything).

It is agood post though, to me the point is: The dosing regimes are very powerful tools; a reefer can reduce the nutrient levels too far (too low) with these dosing regimes.

 

[dieselgrk]

I sure would like to see this list.
---> "IMPORT only what is needed for proper coral husbandry..."
If you have it handy.

here's my list:
b-balance
sponge power
k+
pohls xtra
jod complex
coral snow
zeofood7
coral vitalizer

...hope that helps :rollface:

 

[dieselgrk]

Yes, it was.
I think we (or, at least I know, "I") don't know enough about what nutrients to add, especially in terms of those that are absolutely essential for cora health. (I think we can shotgun it (give a little bit of everything).

It is agood post though, to me the point is: The dosing regimes are very powerful tools; a reefer can reduce the nutrient levels too far (too low) with these dosing regimes.

exactly

 

[dieselgrk]

also, i posted this in the sps forum but it was moved here. this was just my answer/opinion/response to the dozens of people who post new threads weekly in the sps forum about how they started adding vodka and bacteria to there systems and were not seeing positive results.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

..hope that helps

That isn't science. That's marketing. :lol: (presumably you do not sell them?)

Unfortunately, it doesn't help, , since almost none of them tell you what they are. It is more like product pushing. You also are not championing them because you know they add something useful, are you? Have you actually tested each individually and found them useful? For what circumstances?

I have no doubt that some ingredients in some of these products may be useful. Some might even relate to bacterial export. But the very best that supporters can say is that in their personal systems (or however many that have knowledge about) such products help, for reasons that they do not understand because they neither know what they are adding nor what is truly needed in the aquarium.

I also disagree with the only one that I think I know what it is, the K+. Potassium depletion is not a general result of bacterial growth, IMO. More often, IMO, it is the result of a flaw in the zeovit process of using a media surface that binds potassium. A potentially poor choice, IMO. It just hooks you on more supplements.

I dose more organic carbon than most, and I've not experienced potassium depletion.

 

[teesquare]

Randy -
Is it possible that the nutrient up-take, and thus nutrient input required is extremely different in SPS tanks - vs the soft coral tanks, like yours?
And, is there research to help us at least generalize those differences? Obviously, Calcium usage is going to be higher in SPS tanks, but there must be several differences in the two types of aquaria that would apply?
Thanks!
T

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Is it possible that the nutrient up-take, and thus nutrient input required is extremely different in SPS tanks - vs the soft coral tanks, like yours?

In reference to my comment about potassium? I don't see why my tank would be different. No one is claiming the SPS themselves take up the potassium. If the demand comes from bacterial export, my tank should be a good case since I dose huge amounts of organic carbon. Far more than anyone I've ever heard from, and no apparent potassium depletion. IMO, some folks are fooled into thinking they have depleted potassium by inaccurate kits, and some may have real depletion, espe3cially those using lots of zeolites.

The needs may be different in different tanks with different organisms and different husbandry techniques, absolutely.

But none of my comments, aside from my experience with potassium, relate to my aquarium.


FWIW, I would not characterize mine as a soft coral tank. I have a lot of LPS and anemones in addition to soft corals. IMO, it is a mixed reef.

 

[teesquare]

Oh, I was not trying to insult in any way - just did not notice the other corals in your tank. Memory ( which is not my best suite!) told me it was very soft coral dominate Randy - my apologies. And again, what aquaiums do your comments relate to if not your own? I ask, because - I really cannot advise anyone about anything other than what has worked for me. But am always interested about how to accrue more knowledge from others experiences with their aquariums tho.
Thanks for the input!
T

Oh - and, no, my question was not about potassium in particular, but a host of known chemical constituents in waht we all lump together as "salt water". Are you thinking that there are no real differences in utilization based on "type" of aquaria? Maybe I am not comprehending this well...?

 

[dieselgrk]

..hope that helps

That isn't science. That's marketing. :lol: (presumably you do not sell them?)

Unfortunately, it doesn't help, , since almost none of them tell you what they are. It is more like product pushing. You also are not championing them because you know they add something useful, are you? Have you actually tested each individually and found them useful? For what circumstances?

I also disagree with the only one that I think I know what it is, the K+. Potassium depletion is not a general result of bacterial growth, IMO. More often,, it is the result of a flaw in the zeovit process of using a media surface that binds potassium. A potentially poor choice, IMO. It just hooks you on more supplements.

I dose more organic carbon than most, and I've not experienced potassium depletion.

i do not sell anything reef related. i am a landscape contractor and sell landscape services, not reef products. as for science, i speak from a practical, non scientific based, hobbiest point of view. that's why as i explained above, i originally posted this in the sps forum but my thread was moved here. the 'list' i listed is simply what i choose to import to my aquarium and for me it works very well. true, thomas pohl does not inform us what is in his products however his product seem to compensate well for what ever it is that we are exporting out.

one thing i did mention in my original post that you are overlooking randy is efficient skimming.as far as potassium goes, i never had to supplement potassium till recently when i upgraded to a powerful needle wheel skimmer. i was using for sometime a KZ Revolution S which is nothing more then a Beckett skimmer. i was not happy with its performance however while using it, i never had to supplement k+ and was consistently in the 380-400 range. within 2 months time after introducing a new needle wheel skimmer, my k+ dropped to 300. it has been stated by many that needle wheel skimmers precipitate k+ and although i cant back that statement up with scientific evidence, my experience in the matter would prove the statement to be correct.

not sure if you are running a skimmer with your system randy, however not having to supplement k+ may have more to due with what, if any, skimmer you are running with your system, your corals you choose to house in your system, and the fact that you change 1 gal of water a day. it may have less to due with the fact that you "dose more organic carbon than most".

all products, science, and bashing aside; my simple point i'm trying to make is nutrient export should be, to some extent or an other, followed by some sort of nutrient import. it is this concept that many reefers are not understanding in my opinion. in your case randy, with out knowing much about your system, i would say it is your daily water changes that are importing needed nutrients into your system which is compensating for what nutrients are being removed via filtration and animal/coral consumption. that in itself coincides with the point i'm trying to make here.

....boy, you chemists are hard to keep up with! lol

 

[luther1200]

Does anybody really think even the most rigorous ULNS has lower nutrients than an actual coral reef? I for one do not. I am still convinced there is too much of most of the different elements and nutrients, and maybe too little of a few. Which ones are any body's guess. If for no other reason than the salt mixes we use for WC's has much higher concentrations than does a real coral reef, add on top of that all the food we feed and I can't imagine there being too little nutrients. I believe we are still just barely scratching the surface of what is actually going on when we carbon dose and other things we do. But this is just my opinion of course

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

And again, what aquaiums do your comments relate to if not your own?

Which comments? Any in this thread are general enough relate to any reef aquarium.

In other threads and articles, I have detailed specific needs for specific practices. Like iron dosing to support macroalgae, and silicate dosing to support sponges. i do both in my system, but it pertains to any that houses those organisms. Iodine can be useful for certain gorgonia, but I do not keep them so do not dose it as it is not useful for much else (IMO).



Are you thinking that there are no real differences in utilization based on "type" of aquaria?

No, certainly not. The husbandry practices and the tank inhabitants determine what gets imported and exported, and the tank inhabitants determine what is needed and what might be undesirable as it builds up. I discuss the latter two here:

The "œHow To" Guide to Reef Aquarium Chemistry for Beginners, Part 2: What Chemicals Must be Supplemented
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-04/rhf/index.php

The "œHow To" Guide to Reef Aquarium Chemistry for Beginners,
Part 4: What Chemicals May Detrimentally Accumulate
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-09/rhf/index.php

When it comes to trace elements, the data is very sketchy as to was is needed to add and what is not, and under what circumstances. Some certainly may be useful. Others likely are not. I comment pretty strongly about trace element cocktails in the first article above.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

it has been stated by many that needle wheel skimmers precipitate k+

I'll presume that is just a laymen's accounting for reduced potassium that someone measured, because it does not precipitate from seawater. Export more bacteria, then maybe it will decline. Same input and more export, and many things will drop.

By the same token, more input and same export, and things may rise.

my experience in the matter would prove the statement to be correct.

There are hundreds of threads here where folks have made all kinds of measurements which cannot be explained. Inaccurate testing, aspects of the experiment they fail to report because they forgot or did not think it important, etc. Yes, it might be true. Or it may be something else, or something very specific to your system.

one thing i did mention in my original post that you are overlooking randy is efficient skimming

I don't know why you assume anything about my system or how much bacteria I export? I'm almost certain I dose way more organic than you do. If you do not believe I am exporting the bacteria, where do you suppose the N and P they incorporated is going that the potassium they also incorporated somehow is not?

as for science, i speak from a practical, non scientific based, hobbiest point of view. that's why as i explained above, i originally posted this in the sps forum but my thread was moved here.

Fair enough. I appreciate the debate.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Let me just reiterate one final time so there is no mistake. I do not deny that some things get depleted, organic carbon dosing or not. Some very advanced aquarists have told me they benefitted (their SPS, for example) from a trace element cocktail, even without organic carbon dosing. That does not tell us what it is that helped, or why, but there may be benefits for some folks from such supplements, even if I do not like they way they are made or sold.

 

[dieselgrk]

randy i have not "assumed" anything about your system. im not sure where you get off saying i have. i also have never claimed to dose more carbon then you, thus your comment, "I'm almost certain I dose way more organic than you do" seems to me like you're attempting to turn this whole thing into some sort or a peeing match rather then friendly reef chat in which we can all learn and take something from. i feel from the get go here you have come off overly defensive and unnecessarily harsh on all that have contributed to this thread. in my previous post i was trying to make the point that you not having to dose k+ may have something to do with your daily water changes and perhaps a less aggressive skimmer.

 

[Nanook]

I moved your thread to the Chemistry Forum because it seemed like a better fit. While many SPS hobbyists utilize ULNS, these types of threads are better kept honest in the Chemistry Forum where the science can overrule the claims about what works and what doesn't.