My wolrd is crumbling.. SPS .5 Phosphates!! Not .03?!!?!?!?!

MammothReefer

MammothReefer

Active member
"Acropora corals are a mysterious creature with complex needs and one of those that we thought we’d nailed long ago was their “need” for minimal phosphate concentration in the water. A new study by Dunn et. al. which will be published in January 2012 in the Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology showed that Acropora muricata (A. formosa) grew significantly faster at phosphate concentration of 0.5 mg/l (ppm) than at 0.2 or 0.09 mg/l."

Click Me
 
That's not a suprise.............everyone ten plus years ago were growing brown healthy corals.
 
Big E said:
That's not a suprise.............everyone ten plus years ago were growing brown healthy corals.
Click to expand...

Your not really serious are you ? lol

It is very interesting on the A. formosa study though.
Looking forward to seeing the release of the study.
 
Last edited:
10 years ago, people were growing healthy decent looking corals. Not everything was brown, but even so to this day. Who here DARES running there tank @ .5 phosphates?

I know if I did that it would be green boring algae central. I personally have seen stunted growth for higher levels of nutrients with my sps tanks, colour aside. Maybe it's how I was adding the phosphates, or other things that go along with high phosphates in a "reef tank" setting vs a "lab setting". Which is why I find this interesting. I really don't think I could keep my acropora alive @ .5. Maybe some would live a short while.. I donnu, who here runs there tank with phosphates that high?

If there was a way for me to "grow out" my frags quicker then colour them up afterwords (in my display) by adjusting my phosphate levels.. that would be worth looking into, imop.
 
It is believed that these Acropora grew faster with increasing phosphate level due to a higher concentration of zooxanthellae, which was also noticeable in the coloration of the corals in the separate treatment groups.
Click to expand...

That seems like a good way to sum it up :) .

In our systems, there is a constant battle of surface area between the acropora's tissue and algae from high levels of phosphates. Every coral can "out compete" algae at different levels of phosphates. You can think of it like walking the line the other way. The only difference is that the line is much wider and if you cross it, the consequences are much less severe.

-Phosphates grows the algae.
-The Algae feeds the pods.
-The gametes from the pods contribute to the zooxanthellae concentration.
-The zooxanthellae feeds the acros.
-The waste from the corals contributes to the phosphates.

The circle of life continues...
 
acroholicreefer said:
That seems like a good way to sum it up :) .

In our systems, there is a constant battle of surface area between the acropora's tissue and algae from high levels of phosphates. Every coral can "out compete" algae at different levels of phosphates. You can think of it like walking the line the other way. The only difference is that the line is much wider and if you cross it, the consequences are much less severe.

-Phosphates grows the algae.
-The Algae feeds the pods.
-The gametes from the pods contribute to the zooxanthellae concentration.
-The zooxanthellae feeds the acros.
-The waste from the corals contributes to the phosphates.

The circle of life continues...
Click to expand...
Huh?

Wouldn't...

-Phosphates grow the algae (which includes zooxanthellae)
-The zooxanthellae feeds the acros

Make much more sense? Also I don't think that the waste from the corals will add much to the phosphates, considering their addition to the bioload is very negligible. :hmm5: I also don't think the pod population has too much to do with zooxanthellae, but I could be wrong.
 
Your not really serious are you ?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm serious............the results of this study are old hat to anyone that has kept acros for 10-15 years.

So what, they grow faster.............go measure the nutrients in the water these corals come from in the wild & it's not going to be that high in phophates.
 
JaneG said:
Huh?

Wouldn't...

-Phosphates grow the algae (which includes zooxanthellae)
-The zooxanthellae feeds the acros

Make much more sense? Also I don't think that the waste from the corals will add much to the phosphates, considering their addition to the bioload is very negligible. :hmm5: I also don't think the pod population has too much to do with zooxanthellae, but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

Makes sense to the me. Either way, phosphates are directly proportional to zooplankton levels. Algae feeds the pods and the pods feed the acros. Too much of a good thing does equal a bad thing. I don't have any documentation to back this up but old salts use to tell me that on the average, an acro colony produces more waste than most reef safe fish. Of course, there are exceptions to every rule.

nonstopfishies said:
I would say in that step by step the gametes feed the acros. I think that is separate from the algae/zoo side to an extent.
Click to expand...

They are seperate but acros cannot survive without the pods.

Big E said:
Yes, I'm serious............the results of this study are old hat to anyone that has kept acros for 10-15 years.

So what, they grow faster.............go measure the nutrients in the water these corals come from in the wild & it's not going to be that high in phophates.
Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said but I'll add this. It boils down to the measure of carbonate life, aka carbonate alkalinity. Most of us only measure total alkalinity, without measuring carbonate and borate alkalinity.
 
Last edited:
Big E said:
Yes, I'm serious............the results of this study are old hat to anyone that has kept acros for 10-15 years.

So what, they grow faster.............go measure the nutrients in the water these corals come from in the wild & it's not going to be that high in phophates.
Click to expand...

I disagree I've been keeping acros since '03. High phosphates / nutrients has always results in death (green boring algae) or stunted growth in my experience. I've always found the people who were able to keep nutrients down (with a ton of work or a very low bio loaded tank prior to GFO, and Carbon Dosing). Had the best looking, and quickest growing acros.

Since GFO/Carbon dosing we've found we can feed heavier and keep our waters clean which has been a plus.. This article is saying keep it dirty!? Personally I'd like to know how they were adding the phosphates.
 
Effects of phosphate on growth and skeletal density in the scleractinian coral
Acropora muricata: A controlled experimental approach.

Abstract :
"Phosphate contamination can negatively affect corals, modifying growth rates, skeletal density, reproduction,
mortality, and zooxanthellae. We determined the effects of elevated phosphate on coral growth and density.
Genetically distinct colonies of Acropora muricata were sub-divided and distributed among three 110-L aquaria,
and exposed to phosphate levels of 0.09, 0.20, and 0.50 mg L−1 for four months. Total skeletal length, living
tissue length,weight, branch production, and polyp extension were measured. Linear extension and tissue growth
increased under all conditions. Growth rates were highest at a phosphate concentration of 0.50 mg L−1. Weight
increased through time, graded from low to high with phosphate concentration. Density decreased through
time, and was significantly lowest in the high phosphate treatment. Phosphate concentration produced no visible
effects of stress on the corals, as indicated by polyp extension and lack of mortality. It is suggested that the phosphate
enhanced growth was due to increased zooxanthellar populations and photosynthetic production within
the coral. Skeletal density reduction may be due to phosphate binding at the calcifying surface and the creation
of a porous and structurally weaker calcium carbonate/calciumphosphate skeleton. Increased phosphate concentrations,
often characteristic of eutrophic conditions, caused increased coral growth but also amore brittle skeleton.
The latter is likely more susceptible to breakage and damage from other destructive forces (e.g., bioerosion) and
makes increased coral growth a poor indicator of reef health."


if anyone wants the full copy you can email me, there is a thread about it on chem forums too.
 
to continue from the same paper :
To summarize, we suggest that a phosphate-induced increase in
zooxanthellar populations may cause an increase in photosynthate
and expendable energy reserves, and in turn permit increased calcification/
growth. The increased photosynthesis would create a higher
demand for carbonic anhydrase, thus increasing the pH in the intracoelenteric
space. This would also create a deficit of carbonate available
for calcification which in turn would allow the phosphate ions
to be used as a supplement to the carbonate ions while simultaneously
helping to maintain an optimum pH. A lighter skeleton containing
higher levels of calcium phosphate may then be formed, resulting in
an increase in coral skeletal porosity.


enjoy :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DiscusHeckel
My Reading List
Replies
11
Views
5K
thenewguy997
thenewguy997
Back
Top