Learning/rebuilding from my epic fail

Hey Matt,

I have no answers but love to read the questions. :lolspin:

My PO4 hit .16 and I've had a few epic brown outs as a result, HOWEVER my N hit 10 or 12 as well. While I know we want P lower this gives me some confidence that I should look to getting N down first.

My nutrients rose without a big cyano outbreak, why? Is it because N rose at the same time P did?

Your corals look super healthy and that's what matters IMO.

Your pinch a day, just in front of a powerhead? I've been doing a lot very 3 days but haven't tried a pinch a day yet.

Oh, and a Foxface is the only thing that reduced bubble algae for me, wherever he can't reach I see bubbles. I would not worry about bubble algae for the time being, the acros look fantastic.

Mark your question about nutrients rising at the same time is very interesting!! Good question..
Yes, a pinch a day in front of my gyre before lights out . The stuff tends to float which is useless so I try to get it soaked between my fingers and then blown off..
As for a foxface, I actually have a very nice Fiji foxface in my frag tank.. I hesitate to add a foxface because I have so often seen them eating lps.. Of which I have a few..
You have a regular foxface?

The detail on the macro shots is insane.

I would fluidise very small amount of GFO to bring down PO4 and observe how the reduced levels will impact on velonia, cyanobacteria and byropsis. Assuming that you meant PO4 by "P" as opposed to phosphorus, I would bring PO4 down very slowly from 0.16-0.18 mg/l down to 0.092 mg/l (PO4) or (0.03 mg/l Phosphorus) initially. I think this may be the least risky option because you can measure PO4 levels and do not change any bacterial balance in the tank, and the impact of reduced phosphates should hopefully be visible quickly. I get worried that when you dose iron or organic carbon, you may get STN at some point unless you do it very slowly.

Bulent.. Noooooooooooooo!! Don't make me use gfo!! I don't wanna!! It just seems unnecessary and potentially damaging..
The plan is to go slow for sure.. Don't you think adding both kno3 and vinegar to the existing amount of kno3 that I am already adding would have the exact same effect? I can start with as small an amount of vinegar as I want.. I could start at 5 ml a day.. The effect would be extremely gradual..

Yes, you make a good point.. I meant po4.. I should write it that way.. I get lazy and just write p but I mean Po4.
You bring up bacterial balance.. I wonder what balance I actually have right now with two treatments of antibiotic in 3 months..

After spending a good hour shoveling and snow blowing my driveway and walkway, the oxygen did me some good..
I was thinking about after the my first cyano treatment... I had similar readings and asked a similar question then..
The consensus was pretty much do nothing.. Let the tank sort itself out..
Maybe I should give the tank a bit more time, this time around as well..

Bulent, I do appreciate your input. Even if I don't actually act on what you say.. You have spent some serious amounts of time giving me some very detailed responses. You take the time to lay out your thoughts. It is a respectable thing you do. I appreciate you putting yourself out this way! It always makes me think beyond where I was going with my thoughts..

I think I will just hold off until after the holidays and then see what the tank has to tell me..

And one last shot.. This guy continues to grow out at the base..
 
Matt, I read your long post. First I am happy ciano is gone. Second, how many Cheato do you prune and its frequency. Pruning means nutrient export. Pruning allows space and stimulate new growth.....hence nutrient uptake. And the frequency tells you if the system is working. I prune every 2 weeks.

The lack of a good green can be too much light. Happened to me and if you think in the biology, more light, less photsynthetic pigments the algae needs, so less green. I had to reduce the light in my fuge to get a nice green.

Another factor, for a low P reduction, could be that the space for macro growth you have is not enough to support the bioload and food that you are using. My cage with macros inside of my new fuge has almost the size of the old 20G fuge. For a total real volume of ~ 90 G that means I have in macro a little more than 20% of the system volume.

Plus, I have a LOT of Matrix in the system providing real state for bacteria growth. Impossible to have that with live rocks.

Well, this is just food to think. Not suggestions for changes.

Cheers
Daniel

Ps : my mangroves are in a HOB filter. I provide light to them using a small hydroponic LED Light. I have added now to my fuge a 24 W grow LED light (Amazon) for hydroponic pointing to the side of the macro cage. And macro are growing very well !!!! Look for my thread later. I will post pictures.
 
Last edited:
Hey Dan. Thanks for the input. The lighting over my fuge is an interesting question..
First, though, to clarify one thing. As cheato grows, it binds nutrients. Whether you remove it or not, the nutrients are bound unless it dies. So, yes pruning and removing does remove the nutrients from the system permanently but growing algea removes nutrients whether you remove it or not..
I probably have been pruning and removing once a month or so- growth has been slow..
What you said about lighting got me thinking. I had better growth before removing the biopellets when I was in a shorter daily light cycle.. When the biopellets were removed, I increased the amount of light (from a single AI Sol- on for about 12 hours, to the AI sol and a 65w compact fluorescent bulb- both on for 18 hours) when I made this change, cheato growth slowed dramatically but I never thought it could be because of too much light..
I always assumed more Light is better- to a point..
I will go back to using only the AI Sol and go back to 12 hours of light..
Here's a pic of my cheato fuge.. It's a 60 custom gallon tank 30x30x12.. I use half of it for cheato..

I just did a big detritus siphon and pruning last night..

Thanks for the ideas, Dan!

Forgot to mention.. Denitrification is not a problem for me.. I am adding nitrate daily to keep a decent nitrate reading. If I stop dosing n, it will drop to below 1 ppm..
 
Matt, the corals look amazing no matter what the numbers say! That Aussie frag is a beauty.

Trying to beat Bubble Algae by nutrient control is not the best approach imo. Unless you're aiming for ULNS which I'm not really getting the sense you are. Bubble Algae is the last algae to disappear in Zeovit tanks or other ULNS. That being said, Bubble Algae lives on hopes and dreams! I've found the best solution is a herd of Emerald Crabs or ULNS. I always pick out females since the males get big pincers and can catch small fish. Why don't you jump on the Siporax train? :D
 
Hey Mindy. Thanks!
I have had 6 liters of matrix in the system for about 3 months- it was part of my 'my system can handle itself without a Carbon source' changeover.
But like I said, no3 is not my problem.. I am dosing potassium nitrate daily to keep n at 4-5 ppm.
It's not only the bubble algea I'm trying to control, it's all algea. I have cyano, bubble and bryopsis at all times.. Atm, bubble is the big one though..
All of these algeas have 'optimum conditions' which make them happy.. I don't think one needs an ulns to beat them, one just has to alter the system enough to make them unhappy..
I just added 7 female emerald crabs last night, actually. It was all I could find at Aquatica yesterday. If I can get more, I will add them as well.
No, I'm not really going for a ulns.. I'd like to get po4 don't to a stable .02-.04, though..
 
Matt, you are correct about nutrient export. Phosp will only go back to the tank if algae die. Sorry I expressed my idea in the wrong way. I was thinking that if we do not prune then growth could be slower. I am not really sure about this last, but my guts tell me that more compacted is the algae mass, less light get the ones that are below. So, when my system achieve a critical mass I prune. In general is every 2-3 weeks. As an example I am pasting now a picture of my "Macro Box" within the fuge. It will be almost 4 weeks since I moved the macro there and only 3/4 was filled. Now I will need to prune this weekend.

I am also pasting a short video I just did for you. You can see very fast my setup. I will provide more details later in my thread.

Zoom the picture to see how compacted are the MACRO. Do you see that the cheato under the LED is more clear than the cheato that is in the upper right corner of the box.




Here is the VIDEO :

https://youtu.be/mxGtTi7M43E

Cheers
Daniel

Ps: As Mindy said no mater what is going on on your tank, those corals are breathtaking. ........ they are amazing...... and that is the final objective !!!!!
 
Last edited:
Great coral pics Matt. They sure do glow. I know how the algae can be annoying...... But those colors are killer! The emeralds should do a good job on the bubble. The tank in my office at work (small 30 gallon cube) was covered in them (along with other types) added an army of emeralds and now about a month later at least the bubble algae seems to be gone.
 
Hey Mindy. Thanks!
I have had 6 liters of matrix in the system for about 3 months- it was part of my 'my system can handle itself without a Carbon source' changeover.
But like I said, no3 is not my problem.. I am dosing potassium nitrate daily to keep n at 4-5 ppm.
It's not only the bubble algea I'm trying to control, it's all algea. I have cyano, bubble and bryopsis at all times.. Atm, bubble is the big one though..
All of these algeas have 'optimum conditions' which make them happy.. I don't think one needs an ulns to beat them, one just has to alter the system enough to make them unhappy..
I just added 7 female emerald crabs last night, actually. It was all I could find at Aquatica yesterday. If I can get more, I will add them as well.
No, I'm not really going for a ulns.. I'd like to get po4 don't to a stable .02-.04, though..

But Matt, your true nitrate level is higher than the testing because there is algae present which is uptaking nitrate (and phos). Your true phos numbers are also higher.

I don't know the magic bullet for Bubble Algae besides ULNS and Emerald Crabs. That stuff is persistent! I've always had it in my own tanks from plague to minimal, though none of my clients have it. Hmm...

Oh and don't you know that Siporax is more efficient than Matrix? Jeez...you're either on the wagon or not! ;)
 
Matt, you are correct about nutrient export. Phosp will only go back to the tank if algae die. Sorry I expressed my idea in the wrong way. I was thinking that if we do not prune then growth could be slower. I am not really sure about this last, but my guts tell me that more compacted is the algae mass, less light get the ones that are below. So, when my system achieve a critical mass I prune. In general is every 2-3 weeks. As an example I am pasting now a picture of my "Macro Box" within the fuge. It will be almost 4 weeks since I moved the macro there and only 3/4 was filled. Now I will need to prune this weekend.

I am also pasting a short video I just did for you. You can see very fast my setup. I will provide more details later in my thread.

Zoom the picture to see how compacted are the MACRO. Do you see that the cheato under the LED is more clear than the cheato that is in the upper right corner of the box.




Here is the VIDEO :

https://youtu.be/mxGtTi7M43E

Cheers
Daniel

Ps: As Mindy said no mater what is going on on your tank, those corals are breathtaking. ........ they are amazing...... and that is the final objective !!!!!

Thanks Daniel, I love the variety of macro algae you have growing and how healthy it is.. and not a spot of gha growing.. THAT is a healthy fuge. I see what you mean by the cheato that is to the upper right.. looks darker..
We will see if my cheato does better with less light.. At the moment, I have only lowered the intensity but not the 18 hour photoperiod.. I may reduce that in the near future as well..
I would suspect you are right that as the cheato grows and thickens, the cheato underneath will become shaded and may begin to die.. regular thinning is definitely the way to go..

Great coral pics Matt. They sure do glow. I know how the algae can be annoying...... But those colors are killer! The emeralds should do a good job on the bubble. The tank in my office at work (small 30 gallon cube) was covered in them (along with other types) added an army of emeralds and now about a month later at least the bubble algae seems to be gone.

Thanks Mike! As soon as I can get more Emerald crabs- like Mindy, I try to only use the females- I will add an ARMY! The 7 I added won't do much, I don't think..
I have to find ways to starve the algae but keep the corals fed.... That's the goal..

Matt,

I have the one spot Foxface, the regular big yellow one. :)

Thanks Mark, I decided to go ahead and add my Fiji foxface.. they are nice fish and maybe, just maybe, he'll eat a bubble or two..
 
But Matt, your true nitrate level is higher than the testing because there is algae present which is uptaking nitrate (and phos). Your true phos numbers are also higher.

I don't know the magic bullet for Bubble Algae besides ULNS and Emerald Crabs. That stuff is persistent! I've always had it in my own tanks from plague to minimal, though none of my clients have it. Hmm...

Oh and don't you know that Siporax is more efficient than Matrix? Jeez...you're either on the wagon or not! ;)

Mindy, I want to clarify the first point you make above..
Although I get the concept you are pointing out, I think that it is a dangerous way of saying it.. I feel that reefers who are new to the hobby may take it the wrong way and think that when they get readings for no3 or po4, they can't trust them or feel as though they still have to fight to lower them.

I'll make an analogy to calcium reactors (or ca dosing..) and ca levels in the tank.. When we dose calcium to maintain a certain ca concentration in a tank, we test the water to tell us how much calcium is staying in the water, even though the corals are growing and consuming some. If we dose a certain amount of calcium and we find that ca is low or that multiple tests show that it is dropping, then we know we must dose more to keep up with demand from the corals. We are trying to balance the tank's demand for calcium with our input of calcium. When we achieve a consistent reading, we have balanced demand with consumption... This is true when ca is tested consistently at 420 or 500 or 350 or any number for that matter.. If the reading is consistent then demand is met.. This obviously ignores the fact that natural sea water is closer to 420 and therefor around this number is what we should be trying to maintain..
The same principle applies to nitrate and phosphate.. If I test my system after dosing nitrate and get a reading of 4 ppm, this is the actual level of nitrate in the water- it is not higher than this reading. Yes, this reading does not tell me how much nitrate is being consumed or by which (good or bad) organisms, in the aquarium but it does tell me the actual amount of nitrate dissolved in the tank water.
Like calcium, we have a number we want to achieve- for me, its around 4ppm. When I dose nitrate to keep the tank at 4ppm no3, I am feeding every animal, bacteria and plant in the tank that may consume nitrate. So, if i suddenly removed my cheato and/or my dsb and/or matrix, I would expect a corresponding increase in nitrate due to a reduction in demand (or consumption).. unless I reduce the amount added. I have to keep trying to find the best balance for happy corals, despite whichever nasties might also be getting happy from the additions..
So, imo, my true no3 and po4 readings are exactly what my test kits tell me they are.. HOWEVER, they are at those levels because (if they are consistently the same) there is a balance between nutrient input and nutrient export.
This is why I had such a nutrient spike after each dosing of cyano killer. The minute the cyano was killed, it released some bound no3 and po4 but it also stopped up taking these nutrients, thus changing the balance of export and input.
One hopes that other things like denitrifying bacteria and a macro fuge will pick up the slack instead of a resurgent cyano or bryopsis or bubble algae..

When we get a 0 reading for no3 or po4, it does mean that there is 0 no3 and po4 in the water column, but it does not mean that there is no available no3 and po4 in the system, it just means that it is all being consumed by plants, animals and bacteria..

If somebody is adding nitrate and getting 0ppm readings and they add more nitrate and still get 0ppm readings, the nitrate is not hidden in the tank, it was consumed- whether it gets consumed by cyano, bryopsis or bubble algae or corals or whatever.. it is removed from the water column..

So, there is the 'trick' and the 'balance' to achieve.. the trick is to only feed the things you want fed and the balance is feeding just the right amount...
And then there is the magic! This is when the trick and the balance work together the only thing that thrives in the tank is the corals..

I hope this makes sense......
 
Mindy, I want to clarify the first point you make above..
Although I get the concept you are pointing out, I think that it is a dangerous way of saying it.. I feel that reefers who are new to the hobby may take it the wrong way and think that when they get readings for no3 or po4, they can't trust them or feel as though they still have to fight to lower them.

I'll make an analogy to calcium reactors (or ca dosing..) and ca levels in the tank.. When we dose calcium to maintain a certain ca concentration in a tank, we test the water to tell us how much calcium is staying in the water, even though the corals are growing and consuming some. If we dose a certain amount of calcium and we find that ca is low or that multiple tests show that it is dropping, then we know we must dose more to keep up with demand from the corals. We are trying to balance the tank's demand for calcium with our input of calcium. When we achieve a consistent reading, we have balanced demand with consumption... This is true when ca is tested consistently at 420 or 500 or 350 or any number for that matter.. If the reading is consistent then demand is met.. This obviously ignores the fact that natural sea water is closer to 420 and therefor around this number is what we should be trying to maintain..
The same principle applies to nitrate and phosphate.. If I test my system after dosing nitrate and get a reading of 4 ppm, this is the actual level of nitrate in the water- it is not higher than this reading. Yes, this reading does not tell me how much nitrate is being consumed or by which (good or bad) organisms, in the aquarium but it does tell me the actual amount of nitrate dissolved in the tank water.
Like calcium, we have a number we want to achieve- for me, its around 4ppm. When I dose nitrate to keep the tank at 4ppm no3, I am feeding every animal, bacteria and plant in the tank that may consume nitrate. So, if i suddenly removed my cheato and/or my dsb and/or matrix, I would expect a corresponding increase in nitrate due to a reduction in demand (or consumption).. unless I reduce the amount added. I have to keep trying to find the best balance for happy corals, despite whichever nasties might also be getting happy from the additions..
So, imo, my true no3 and po4 readings are exactly what my test kits tell me they are.. HOWEVER, they are at those levels because (if they are consistently the same) there is a balance between nutrient input and nutrient export.
This is why I had such a nutrient spike after each dosing of cyano killer. The minute the cyano was killed, it released some bound no3 and po4 but it also stopped up taking these nutrients, thus changing the balance of export and input.
One hopes that other things like denitrifying bacteria and a macro fuge will pick up the slack instead of a resurgent cyano or bryopsis or bubble algae..

When we get a 0 reading for no3 or po4, it does mean that there is 0 no3 and po4 in the water column, but it does not mean that there is no available no3 and po4 in the system, it just means that it is all being consumed by plants, animals and bacteria..

If somebody is adding nitrate and getting 0ppm readings and they add more nitrate and still get 0ppm readings, the nitrate is not hidden in the tank, it was consumed- whether it gets consumed by cyano, bryopsis or bubble algae or corals or whatever.. it is removed from the water column..

So, there is the 'trick' and the 'balance' to achieve.. the trick is to only feed the things you want fed and the balance is feeding just the right amount...
And then there is the magic! This is when the trick and the balance work together the only thing that thrives in the tank is the corals..

I hope this makes sense......
+1 on this. I have heard this a lot as a concept and I think you clarified it very well.
 
Hi Matt,
I read only partially the topic. It struck me. I re-lived much of my past.

I spent my aquarium life playing with carbon sources, nitrogen and phosphorous.
I nearly lost my previous 150 gal tank and I've started a 350gal 1 year ago. SPS only, as always.

I decided to write here some of my experience because it could be helpful to You and to all other readers.
I think it is too hard to explain the whole path that lead to my actual thoughts, it surely would be too long and incomplete.
So I will write my thoughts only, and let You decide if asking for details.

In the water there is a need to balance bacteria and algae. Without algae (read also microalgae, algae film, not green hairy or macros), bacteria are free to grow up uncontrolled and destroy everything.
Algae (and corals) need inorganics. Inorganics are ammonia, nitrate and phosphate.
If inorganic N or P is zero, bacteria get advantage and grow up too fast. In this case bacterial film appears on glass panes (that whitish powder-like that forms in few hours, and is so tiny that a fish passing in proximity leave lines on it) and in the worst of case happens a bacterial bloom, in particular if adding carbon sources, even in minimal doses.
The balance between the fish population and light determines the amount of inorganics. The larger the fish population and the lower the power and duration of light, the higher will be the inorganics, and vice versa of course.

Organic carbon sources do not act on inorganics. Heterotrophic bacteria act on organic compounds. The skimmer too acts only on organics compunds. They both do anything on inorganics.

Organics mostly (not in absolute and only) determines zoox concetration in corals.
Inorganics determines growth and health of SPS.

When N is zero and P is high, there is N deficiency. Add N or remove any P remover.
When N is high and P is zero, there is P deficiency. Add P or remove N remover (do not even know if they really works in seawater).

SPS love near-zero organics and enough inorganics. If we add food (any kind of food), we add organics. If we add fishes (but not their food), we add inorganics; so if You want to increase inorganics, add fishes, and give them the food they need to live, not any more.
Increasing organics hurts SPS.

Some months ago I had 0,2ppm NO3 and 0,02ppm PO4. I added a second skimmer, I added and doubled GAC. I started using NBP in a small dose and progressively increased the volume to 1,5 liter. I started adding daily 4 drops of pure acetic acid and increased to 8 drops/d. I still have 2 skimmer, 2 liters GAC, 1,5l NBP and add 8 drops/d acetic acid.
My fish population remained the same and I kept the same amount of food I was giving. I continued changing the same amount of water every week, with the same salt.
I do not add anything else to my tank.
Ny nitrate remains 0,2ppm and PO4 0,02ppm.
My corals have improved greatly, but growth is scarce.

In the last two weeks, I started adding inorganics boluses. I add a dose of NaNO3 and a dose of NaH2PO4 (about +1,5ppm NO3 and +0,05ppm PO4). In a couple of days, NO3 get back to 0,2 and PO4 to 0,02ppm and I add another bolus. PE is increasing, tissues appears brighter, more brilliant and thick and new branches are appearing.
It seems to me boluses every few days is better than keeping constant higher levels (I tried that too previously).

I hope it can be useful. Do any question, if You feel.

Luca
 
Luca, thank you for taking the time to post such a detailed response to the current discussion.. I think you might have contributed to that great thread "dosing nitrate to control phosphate"
I have many, many questions from what you have written. I must be honest some of it I just don't understand..
I hope you have the courage to come back! :)
I will put my questions and comments directly below your text in your quote below..
Sorry.. My grasp of this type of reef biology is very weak, so there will be many questions...

Hi Matt,
I read only partially the topic. It struck me. I re-lived much of my past.

I spent my aquarium life playing with carbon sources, nitrogen and phosphorous.
I nearly lost my previous 150 gal tank and I've started a 350gal 1 year ago. SPS only, as always.

--Briefly, what was the cause of almost losing your first tank? ( Optional. :) )

I decided to write here some of my experience because it could be helpful to You and to all other readers.
I think it is too hard to explain the whole path that lead to my actual thoughts, it surely would be too long and incomplete.
So I will write my thoughts only, and let You decide if asking for details.

In the water there is a need to balance bacteria and algae. Without algae (read also microalgae, algae film, not green hairy or macros), bacteria are free to grow up uncontrolled and destroy everything.
--I'm not sure I understand why this is... I assume that this is the case because without algea, the bacteria has no competitors for nutrients and can grow unchecked?

Algae (and corals) need inorganics. Inorganics are ammonia, nitrate and phosphate.
--don't bacteria need these things as well? As well as iron, I guess

If inorganic N or P is zero, bacteria get advantage and grow up too fast. In this case bacterial film appears on glass panes (that whitish powder-like that forms in few hours, and is so tiny that a fish passing in proximity leave lines on it) and in the worst of case happens a bacterial bloom, in particular if adding carbon sources, even in minimal doses.
--I don't understand this process.. How do bacteria get the advantage when n or p are zero.. Like you mention below, isn't this when the tank becomes 'limited' and we get either n or p rising out of control?

The balance between the fish population and light determines the amount of inorganics. The larger the fish population and the lower the power and duration of light, the higher will be the inorganics, and vice versa of course.
-- interesting but I don't really understand this.. Yes there is much discussion about nutrient starved corals getting stressed by intense light (mostly when dealing with LEDs) but I don't think you are really taking about this..
-- I really don't see the causal relationship between large fish population, low light and high organics- are you saying that the corals will absorb more nutrients when light is more intense and longer photoperiod? What about all the other non photosynthetic organisms consuming n and p?
---- I really don't think I understand that statement... Unless you are referring to nutrient uptake by the corals..

Organic carbon sources do not act on inorganics. Heterotrophic bacteria act on organic compounds. The skimmer too acts only on organics compunds. They both do anything on inorganics.

-- ok I really need a clinical explanation of the difference between organic and inorganic. Above you say that inorganic compounds are nitrate, phosphate and ammonia.. I thought that this is exactly what bacteria feed on and I also thought that a skimmer, by removing solid waste from the aquarium does indeed play a part in reducing n and p and ammonia by removing solids that would otherwise be broken down into said nutrients...

Organics mostly (not in absolute and only) determines zoox concetration in corals.
Inorganics determines growth and health of SPS.
--- I also do not understand this distinction.... I guess because I don't really understand the difference between 'organic' and 'inorganic'... Sorry.. Again I need some explanation...... I never got very far in biology class in high school.. :( I wish I had... It would make reef keeping easier!!

When N is zero and P is high, there is N deficiency. Add N or remove any P remover.
When N is high and P is zero, there is P deficiency. Add P or remove N remover (do not even know if they really works in seawater).
--yes!! :) this I get!

SPS love near-zero organics and enough inorganics. If we add food (any kind of food), we add organics. If we add fishes (but not their food), we add inorganics; so if You want to increase inorganics, add fishes, and give them the food they need to live, not any more.
--ok, so fish poo is inorganic- solid stuff??

Increasing organics hurts SPS.
-yes, this seems to be conventional wisdom... Don't tell Richard Ross.. he'll make you guess his phosphate level!
-- my no3 is 6ppm (due to kno3 additions) and my po4 is .16 and my corals have NEVER looked better. Growth is increasing weekly as well.. I have about 25 fish in the tank and I feed them and I add coral foods as well.....

Some months ago I had 0,2ppm NO3 and 0,02ppm PO4. I added a second skimmer, I added and doubled GAC. I started using NBP in a small dose and progressively increased the volume to 1,5 liter. I started adding daily 4 drops of pure acetic acid and increased to 8 drops/d. I still have 2 skimmer, 2 liters GAC, 1,5l NBP and add 8 drops/d acetic acid.
-- to me, I read above that you had extremely low nutrients and you attempted to aggressively lower them even more... Is this correct? Do you consider .2 ppm n and .02 ppm po4 to be high?

My fish population remained the same and I kept the same amount of food I was giving. I continued changing the same amount of water every week, with the same salt.
I do not add anything else to my tank.
Ny nitrate remains 0,2ppm and PO4 0,02ppm.
My corals have improved greatly, but growth is scarce.
-- so, you increased nutrient export dramatically but nutrients did not drop at all?

In the last two weeks, I started adding inorganics boluses. I add a dose of NaNO3 and a dose of NaH2PO4 (about +1,5ppm NO3 and +0,05ppm PO4). In a couple of days, NO3 get back to 0,2 and PO4 to 0,02ppm and I add another bolus. PE is increasing, tissues appears brighter, more brilliant and thick and new branches are appearing.
It seems to me boluses every few days is better than keeping constant higher levels (I tried that too previously).
-- so ultimately, in very basic unscientific terms, it seems to me that you are saying strip the water column of all nutrients and then blast the corals with large (controlled) doses of nitrates and phosphates on a periodic and irregular basis..

I hope it can be useful. Do any question, if You feel.

Luca

Luca, I'm sure you could write a book based on the questions I just asked.. I hope you have the strength to help me understand!
Since it is New Years, I won't expect a response until we have all finished celebrating!!
All the best, Luca and happy New Years to everyone!
 
Back
Top