No ammonia/high nitrites/low nitrates -- what's going on?
- Thread starter Dag
- Start date
Anthony Calfo
New member
Good to hear abou the feeding my friend. Indeed, Trachyphyllia are one of the hungriest corals known. Even under natural sunlight, they still need over 20% of their daily "nutrition" from sources other than the products of photosynthesis/translocation of carbon. Point blank: over 20% of their food daily must come from organismal feeding or absorption even if you could have "perfect" lighting.
Regarding the skimmer installation, yours could be vastly improved. The problem is that proteins that overflow from above are allowed to stratify and dilute in the extended path of the sump (rather than concentrate and be promptly skimmed in a primary catch basin/partition). And by static water level - I mean a stable, unchanging depth of water to pull from (like a dam sealed into the sump as the first overflowing partition.
Fluctuations in water level however small affect the head pressure and subsequent flow rate of already variable mag drive pumps that feed our skimmers. The sligt variations in water flow affect (neg.) the water level and skimmate production in any skimmer... making them less consistent.
And if the surface of that water flow is choppy (dicturbing the accumulation/conc. of proteins) then the skimmer is further handicapped.
I believe the placement of your skimmer after a settling chamber and baffles is a flaw my friend. And your weak skimmate production from an excellent skimmer (IMO) does not discount this belief
It is normal though to adjust the gate valve on even good skimmers several times weekly (especially if they are placed in an open sump - arghhh). It is necessary to maintain a steady level of active foam in the neck, is influenced by barometric pressure from weather fronts (bubble size produced), etc/
Food for thought
Anthony
Regarding the skimmer installation, yours could be vastly improved. The problem is that proteins that overflow from above are allowed to stratify and dilute in the extended path of the sump (rather than concentrate and be promptly skimmed in a primary catch basin/partition). And by static water level - I mean a stable, unchanging depth of water to pull from (like a dam sealed into the sump as the first overflowing partition.
Fluctuations in water level however small affect the head pressure and subsequent flow rate of already variable mag drive pumps that feed our skimmers. The sligt variations in water flow affect (neg.) the water level and skimmate production in any skimmer... making them less consistent.
And if the surface of that water flow is choppy (dicturbing the accumulation/conc. of proteins) then the skimmer is further handicapped.
I believe the placement of your skimmer after a settling chamber and baffles is a flaw my friend. And your weak skimmate production from an excellent skimmer (IMO) does not discount this belief
It is normal though to adjust the gate valve on even good skimmers several times weekly (especially if they are placed in an open sump - arghhh). It is necessary to maintain a steady level of active foam in the neck, is influenced by barometric pressure from weather fronts (bubble size produced), etc/
Food for thought
Anthony
Dag
Premium Member
You were good enough to identify the error of my ways; I now beseech you to counsel me on a remedy, if there is one. Here are two overview pictures:
Here the feed from the overflow upstairs, it's the clear pipe (with salt on it) that goes into the corner:
The water then travels down the chamber on the left (which has two baffles):
Here the feed from the overflow upstairs, it's the clear pipe (with salt on it) that goes into the corner:
The water then travels down the chamber on the left (which has two baffles):
Dag
Premium Member
There are two 1" bulkheads at the final baffle from which these pipes pull the water to feed the sump pumps:
Here is the pipes carrying the water to the pump inlets:
The water then gets discharged from the skimmer into the chambers constituting the right row below (with two baffles):
The theory of this design is that the water from the overflow would only get skimmed once.
Can you think of anything to fix/improve this?
Here is the pipes carrying the water to the pump inlets:
The water then gets discharged from the skimmer into the chambers constituting the right row below (with two baffles):
The theory of this design is that the water from the overflow would only get skimmed once.
Can you think of anything to fix/improve this?
Anthony Calfo
New member
Dag,
alas, I do not see any clear rememdy here. It is a minor design flaw. Your sump is so very well built (thick acrylic!), but overcomplicated with partitions/baffles that really are not needed here and not easily skirted/removed for the benefit of the skimmer.
The only easy/practical solution I can see if for you to make a small vessel (plastic tub/bucket, aquarium) slightly bigger than the footprint of the skimmer and with an adjustable overflow that can handle some or (hopefully) all of the raw overflow water. This vessel with the skimmer is to be placed inline between the display above and the sump below. It could be as simple as mounting to the wall above the sump... or even next to it and slightly above. After the skimmer processes this concentrated water, it can overflow then into your unchanged sump design.
Ultimately, if this is not convenient or possible, no worries. The improved skimmate production will not make or break the system. You can compensate and finesse the deficiency with extra water changes, smaller and more frequent exchanges of chemical media (weekly instead of monthly)... and mindful stocking densities and feeding.
with kind regards,
Anthony
alas, I do not see any clear rememdy here. It is a minor design flaw. Your sump is so very well built (thick acrylic!), but overcomplicated with partitions/baffles that really are not needed here and not easily skirted/removed for the benefit of the skimmer.
The only easy/practical solution I can see if for you to make a small vessel (plastic tub/bucket, aquarium) slightly bigger than the footprint of the skimmer and with an adjustable overflow that can handle some or (hopefully) all of the raw overflow water. This vessel with the skimmer is to be placed inline between the display above and the sump below. It could be as simple as mounting to the wall above the sump... or even next to it and slightly above. After the skimmer processes this concentrated water, it can overflow then into your unchanged sump design.
Ultimately, if this is not convenient or possible, no worries. The improved skimmate production will not make or break the system. You can compensate and finesse the deficiency with extra water changes, smaller and more frequent exchanges of chemical media (weekly instead of monthly)... and mindful stocking densities and feeding.
with kind regards,
Anthony
Dag
Premium Member
Thanks.
One of my problems might have been caused by placing a bag of charcoal in between the baffles on the left row (in between the flow from the overflow pipe and the two bulkheads that feed the skimmer). I removed that and will put it on the right row (after the water leaves the skimmer).
How about the following for a solution: simply move the overflow pipe forward so that it discharges right behind where the two 1" bulkheads are. In effect, I would be eliminating the baffles (not sure if that helps).
I'm don't, however, understand the problem is, so it's hard for me to ponder the solution. I know you're busy and the problem isn't major, so I won't be insulted if you feel my questions below unduly belabor the point.
Is this cured by having the overflow dump right next to the pump inlets? What's called an "extended path"? Anything more than a few inches? How could the proteins be "diluted" along my left chambers, since there is no other water to "dilute" it? Even if they "stratify" aren't they going to be pulled through the two 1" bulkheads to the pumps?
One of my problems might have been caused by placing a bag of charcoal in between the baffles on the left row (in between the flow from the overflow pipe and the two bulkheads that feed the skimmer). I removed that and will put it on the right row (after the water leaves the skimmer).
How about the following for a solution: simply move the overflow pipe forward so that it discharges right behind where the two 1" bulkheads are. In effect, I would be eliminating the baffles (not sure if that helps).
I'm don't, however, understand the problem is, so it's hard for me to ponder the solution. I know you're busy and the problem isn't major, so I won't be insulted if you feel my questions below unduly belabor the point.
Is this cured by having the overflow dump right next to the pump inlets? What's called an "extended path"? Anything more than a few inches? How could the proteins be "diluted" along my left chambers, since there is no other water to "dilute" it? Even if they "stratify" aren't they going to be pulled through the two 1" bulkheads to the pumps?
Anthony Calfo
New member
No worries Dag... its not a matter of belabouring the point. I do wish to help you here, but fear that we are limited by the text medium of correspondance for me to clearly explain the dynamic to you. Let me invite you to give me a call. PM me or send e-mail to anthony@readingtrees.com and we can work out a time to chat by phone. I'm travelling quite a bit this month (about 15 days in January) and leaving in just a few days for my first trip, so we may have to play a little phone tag 
Please don't think I'm avoiding you though, my friend. If only we could transport like on Star Trek... my Italian extraction would readily clarify this topic as I speak with my hands A complete audio-visual presentation. ha!
be chatting soon,
Anthony
Please don't think I'm avoiding you though, my friend. If only we could transport like on Star Trek... my Italian extraction would readily clarify this topic as I speak with my hands A complete audio-visual presentation. ha!be chatting soon,
Anthony
Anthony Calfo
New member
I recently had a very interesting conversation with the owner of a national sea salt brand and he was describing this very thing. Indeed, some salts (variably) can get contaminants as such from lots and batches of the base materials they use. Underscores the importance (for them) of buying premium grade reagents.
Before we jump to any conclusions, though, do test the sea salt with at least 2 other brands of test kit. Arguably, using hobby grade test kits is a joke. I do like a few brands (or rather some kits within a few better brands like Aquarium Systems... some Tetra ones too). But really, your multi-thousand dollar marine aquarium is well worth the investment of a $30 Lamotte or Hach kit over some $8-15 hobby kits. Bear in mind too that even the premium brand test kits mfgs have various grades of quality kits too. It really is a case of getting what you pay for. As they say, "Good things are seldom cheap, and cheap things are seldom good:
I'm not assuming you are using cheap hobby kits either, BTW. Just making a point for the benefit of other folks that read this post after its archived/for the future.
FWIW... the owner of that sea salt company did not succeed in converting me I stand by my long standing preference and experience, and the time-tested brands of Trop Marin and Instant Ocean.
kindly,
Anthony
Before we jump to any conclusions, though, do test the sea salt with at least 2 other brands of test kit. Arguably, using hobby grade test kits is a joke. I do like a few brands (or rather some kits within a few better brands like Aquarium Systems... some Tetra ones too). But really, your multi-thousand dollar marine aquarium is well worth the investment of a $30 Lamotte or Hach kit over some $8-15 hobby kits. Bear in mind too that even the premium brand test kits mfgs have various grades of quality kits too. It really is a case of getting what you pay for. As they say, "Good things are seldom cheap, and cheap things are seldom good:
I'm not assuming you are using cheap hobby kits either, BTW. Just making a point for the benefit of other folks that read this post after its archived/for the future.
FWIW... the owner of that sea salt company did not succeed in converting me
I stand by my long standing preference and experience, and the time-tested brands of Trop Marin and Instant Ocean. kindly,
Anthony
Anthony Calfo
New member
I honestly have mixed feelings about Salifert as I do most hobby test kits. Although I do highly admire their representation and participation in the hobby at conferences and on message boards like this one.
Regardless, it would be ill-advised to make a judgement off of any one test kit. Do see if any of your LFS shops will test your samples for comparison on their test kits. Could be interesting.
You really might also want to talk to some old time aquarists (not just the message board folks... but some old dogs in an aquarium society... the old "Forty Fathoms" brand days... yikes!) about CS parent and its history/reputation. Good for perspective with any products you are considering... a consensus.
Anthony
Regardless, it would be ill-advised to make a judgement off of any one test kit. Do see if any of your LFS shops will test your samples for comparison on their test kits. Could be interesting.
You really might also want to talk to some old time aquarists (not just the message board folks... but some old dogs in an aquarium society... the old "Forty Fathoms" brand days... yikes!) about CS parent and its history/reputation. Good for perspective with any products you are considering... a consensus.
Anthony
Dag
Premium Member
If I'm not mistaken, you would not use CS if they gave it to you for free. Unfortunately, I didn't know that opinion until after I started with it, and on the theory that if it's not broke, don't fix it, I continued using it. And there are people with successful tanks using CS.
Still, I'm not sure what another test kit would show. Something is obviously making the CS change water test positive for nitrites which neither my RO/DI or my friend's water triggers.
Still, I'm not sure what another test kit would show. Something is obviously making the CS change water test positive for nitrites which neither my RO/DI or my friend's water triggers.
Anthony Calfo
New member
[If I'm not mistaken, you would not use CS if they gave it to you for free. Unfortunately, I didn't know that opinion until after I started with it, and on the theory that if it's not broke, don't fix it]
Yes... correct on both counts. Agreed.
[I continued using it. And there are people with successful tanks using CS. ]
well... do keep in perspective what we are calling "success": the majority of aquarists in the hobby with less than 3 years experience and only home aquarium(s) as the basis for their claims... or the wholesalers and coral farmers using literally tens of thousands of gallons of seawater year after year. Hence the reason for my suggestion for you to find some old dogs to get get other voices of real experience from.
[Still, I'm not sure what another test kit would show. Something is obviously making the CS change water test positive for nitrites which neither my RO/DI or my friend's water triggers.]
its only positive by the results of an unqualified hobby test kit. I'm just suggesting you get perspective, if not verification that your test kit is even accurate at all.
A-
Yes... correct on both counts. Agreed.
[I continued using it. And there are people with successful tanks using CS. ]
well... do keep in perspective what we are calling "success": the majority of aquarists in the hobby with less than 3 years experience and only home aquarium(s) as the basis for their claims... or the wholesalers and coral farmers using literally tens of thousands of gallons of seawater year after year. Hence the reason for my suggestion for you to find some old dogs to get get other voices of real experience from.
[Still, I'm not sure what another test kit would show. Something is obviously making the CS change water test positive for nitrites which neither my RO/DI or my friend's water triggers.]
its only positive by the results of an unqualified hobby test kit. I'm just suggesting you get perspective, if not verification that your test kit is even accurate at all.
A-
Dag
Premium Member
Anthony, I think I want to change my salt. Would you discourage me from trying this new Oceanic salt? The initial reviews are very promising -- high calcium and magnesium. Apparently, Tropic Marin is low in magnesium. there's supposed to be another line from Tropic Marin -- "Pro Reef" which is higher in calcium and magnesium -- but it's not available in the US yet.
Anthony Calfo
New member
I personally favor time-tested products and have little regard for the accuracy, or validity even if true, of these various reports. The proof is in the pudding.
Same advice here: Tropic Marin or IO
Reading of fish over 30 years in this salt... seeing (personally) fishes over 20 years in this salt... and (personally) growing literally a couple tens of thousand coral frags over 10+ years including some of the rarest and most sensitive species in the trade is good enough for me. I have no desire to debate it or make a change of my own. FWIW
Anthony
Same advice here: Tropic Marin or IO
Reading of fish over 30 years in this salt... seeing (personally) fishes over 20 years in this salt... and (personally) growing literally a couple tens of thousand coral frags over 10+ years including some of the rarest and most sensitive species in the trade is good enough for me. I have no desire to debate it or make a change of my own. FWIW
Anthony
Dag
Premium Member
I expected that advice, and cannot deny it's the reasonable view. It brings to mind, the following observation, for which I think there is some truth:
"Reasonable people conform their demands to the limitations of the world as it exists.
Unreasonable people insist that the existing world change to meet their demands.
All progress depends on unreasonable people."
I suppose we'll never reach a consensus on a better salt, without some unreasonable people who are willing to try it!
"Reasonable people conform their demands to the limitations of the world as it exists.
Unreasonable people insist that the existing world change to meet their demands.
All progress depends on unreasonable people."
I suppose we'll never reach a consensus on a better salt, without some unreasonable people who are willing to try it!
Dag
Premium Member
It appears that the make up tank was contaminated with some kind of bacterial infection, causing the nitrites in the make up water. I disinfected and cleaned the make up tank and the new make up water tests 0 nitrites.
But my tank is still tesing at .1 nitrites! that's after a water change and more than a week after I stopped adding the contaminated make up water.
Any ideas what else I could check?
But my tank is still tesing at .1 nitrites! that's after a water change and more than a week after I stopped adding the contaminated make up water.
Any ideas what else I could check?
Anthony Calfo
New member
The "bacterial infection" causing nitrites seems implausible if even possible in a practical application. Do you mean nitrifying bacteria? Even if... it seems unlikely to be possible to the extent that they have nothing of substance to convert in new mixed seawater... and not enough colonizing surface area in the bucket to do any kind of conversions that amount to a click on a test kit.
Delve deeper, Dag. Theres a reason in here somewhere!
Anthony
Delve deeper, Dag. Theres a reason in here somewhere!
Anthony
Dag
Premium Member
Whatever the exlplanation, it's a fact. The new make up water tested for nitrites and after cleaning the tank it didn't. And that's using two different test kits. It's not the test kits.
I don't know where else to dig ...
Like many problems, this one has no obvious solution, it seems.
Do you think my chronic nitirite problem in my tank is something time might fix? I've been patiently waiting 3 months ...
I don't know where else to dig ...
Like many problems, this one has no obvious solution, it seems.
Do you think my chronic nitirite problem in my tank is something time might fix? I've been patiently waiting 3 months ...
