nutrients and SPS corals.

[KafudaFish]

sentence started with "to me", which prety much makes it my opinion

when amount of algae growth increases ... it is a sing of nutrients increase. talking specifically about algae grown on front glass .

88% on here agreed, that when algae on front glass increases, changes in SPS corals "looks" are observed. read the "manual" for carbon dosing


not sure why I repeated myself again but hope that helps. you can continue being critical of my writing or wording to get away from the main point though.

What is your rate of increase in glass algae and the change in sps coloration?

Is it possible that these changes are not the result of the algae rather you changing water quality parameters?

 

[Allmost]

Is it possible that these changes are not the result of the algae rather you changing water quality parameters?

yes algae grows more when water quality degrades.

so when algae grows more, we can say, water quality was degraded

 

[Allmost]

lol now this thread has turned into a new specie ID ... the glass algae ....

I refer to algae growing on the glass ... cause we look at our tanks through the glass so its the most obvious and observed .... check out Randy's experiments on diatom and everything else ... what is his measure ? the rate at which front glass turns green

 

[KafudaFish]

yes algae grows more when water quality degrades.

so when algae grows more, water quality was degraded

But what if your sps grew faster and had better color when the algae grew more? Would water quality have degraded then?

 

[ganjero]

lol now this thread has turned into a new specie ID ... the glass algae ....

lol, I just called it that and put it in quotations because you mentioned the algae growing on your glass, and that could be anything from diatoms (any type) to Derbesia.

 

[Allmost]

But what if your sps grew faster and had better color when the algae grew more? Would water quality have degraded then?

I am not claiming to know, nor am I making a conclusion that change in nutrients means better or worse colors on acro. point of this poll was 10 steps before that.

whether change in nutrients means change in SPS corals appearance ... good or bad, color or growth

 

[Acronic]

of course ... and those are not so easy to answer even controlled experiments would not be easy to perform.

this was just to clarify one simple point ...

I can get down with that

yes algae grows more when water quality degrades.

so when algae grows more, we can say, water quality was degraded

Depends on your point of view, if algae growth is better on the glass then wouldnt the algae growth in coral tissue be better as well?

I just see the spokes turning and I was sitting here with a stick, wich was pretty boring, so I decided to put the stick in the spokes :hammer:

 

[Fredfish]

yes algae grows more when water quality degrades.

so when algae grows more, we can say, water quality was degraded

Pick a reef anywhere in the world and put a cage over a small piece of it to keep the herbivores out and algae will grow.

Algae growth is a sign that there are enough nutrients for algae to grow. The reef hobby has imposed an artificial definition of water quality that, at least in Thale's tank does not seem to apply.

I personally believe the obsession with brightly coloured sticks has further warped the definition of water quality (and healthy coral).

 

[aqua80]

I replied yes to the poll.

But, the question was not if there was a direct corelation between nutrients we mesure in the water and corals appearance and growth. To that I would have answered no.

I think that it is far more complex than that, and that if you take ten tanks with the same level of phosphates and nitrates, you would get many, many different results and many different ways in husbandry/feedings between those tanks...

so just be careful with using my answer to make conclusions from it.
All that this poll says is that most people believe that SPS are affected by nutrients level in the water. But how, when and what those effects are and if those effects are always the same for a given level is something else ... and more complex

 

[aqua80]

Pick a reef anywhere in the world and put a cage over a small piece of it to keep the herbivores out and algae will grow.

Algae growth is a sign that there are enough nutrients for algae to grow.

Agreed, a reef that can't grow some form of algae is not healthy reef IMO...
Algae are more opportunistic, efficient, and grow faster than corals.
If they can't survive good luck with corals !

But there is a balance (different for each system) that has to be reached... and herbivores crew are needed in this balance I think...

 

[galleon]

This is disappointing. A subjective public poll based on pure, qualitative anecdotes? Didn't you claim earlier to be a scientist?

 

[Acronic]

A subjective public poll based on pure, qualitative anecdotes?

And porcupines. Geez show some respect for the porcupine :wavehand:

 

[sahin]

.

What is your take on Nitrates and Phosphates (which hobbyists test for) and the effect on SPS coral colour?

I ask you specifically, not because of any posts you've made on this thread, but because I have a feeling your professional work is somehow linked...and I know you know what you are talking about.

How would you ideally run an SPS tank as a hobbyists in terms of levels of PO4 and NO3 you will allow in your tank, and what would you feed the corals and fishes?

Thank you in advance.

 

[Allmost]

This is disappointing. A subjective public poll based on pure, qualitative anecdotes? Didn't you claim earlier to be a scientist?

do you advice us all to sit back and listen to you and thale instead ? you guys are the only scientists and only your conclusions are correct right ?
lol

 

[galleon]

What is your take on Nitrates and Phosphates (which hobbyists test for) and the effect on SPS coral colour?

I ask you specifically, not because of any posts you've made on this thread, but because I have a feeling your professional work is somehow linked...and I know you know what you are talking about.

How would you ideally run an SPS tank as a hobbyists in terms of levels of PO4 and NO3 you will allow in your tank, and what would you feed the corals and fishes?

Thank you in advance.

Hah!

I am a scientist who works on isotopes and coral biomineralization (Bear in mind, that's not all I work on, only a small part, I'm a paleoclimatologist. By formal education and training, I'm a chemical and biological oceanographer, as well as a climate scientist). In another life, I curated live corals for an aquarium/research institute, and maintained rescue/collection permits for stony corals in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary.

I have been growing stony corals for 15 years, and for the most part, Atlantic/Caribbean species where coloring is set by the natural history of the species or colony.

Atlantic or Pacific, my success was always with simplicity. Kalkwasser or two part, water changes, tons of light and water motion, and very heavy skimming. I took a long hiatus (7 years) for graduate school, and am just now getting back into it.

My philosophy growing corals and my opinions on it were and remain unscientific. I measured nitrate or phosphate on any system I ran in the past, caring about numbers only enough to make sure they weren't batcrap nuts, even when I had access to equipment and techniques better than hobbyist quality kits. I tended to make sure nitrates were below 15 ppm, phosphates below 0.05 ppm. I fed corals heavily, since I had access to a big stock of fresh foods: pureed mix of krill, cyclopeeze, squid mantle, shrimp, artemia nauplii, capelin and clam (IIRC). My situation made big water changes (25-50% total volume) every week viable and really easy.

This is just me personally, another anecdote. I have been guilty of chasing numbers recently, and realize it's kind of silly since I don't really believe in absolutes for captive-grown corals, except for keeping them growing.

I'm also (Deuteranopia) colorblind. So it highlights the subjective nature of claiming certain color characteristics of methods, numbers, foods, etc. Many hobbyists don't realize how far down the rabbit hole of subjective bias, qualitative observation, and anecdote discussing coral coloration really is. You are measuring coral coloration how? etc. Simple fundamentals of quantitation are completely ignored.

Coral coloration is art in more ways than the aesthetic.

I've also known Thales personally and followed his tank for most of those aforementioned 15 years.

 

[Allmost]

Pick a reef anywhere in the world and put a cage over a small piece of it to keep the herbivores out and algae will grow.

you are missing the point again

I said change in nutrients.

I DID NOT SAY NO NUTRIENTS.
I DID NOT SAY ALOT OF NUTRIENTS.

question was very very very simple .... does change in water quality in terms of N and P make corals look different

you make a good point, and I agree with it, but that is not what anyone said here ....

 

[Allmost]

I can get down with that



Depends on your point of view, if algae growth is better on the glass then wouldnt the algae growth in coral tissue be better as well?

I just see the spokes turning and I was sitting here with a stick, wich was pretty boring, so I decided to put the stick in the spokes :hammer:

again, not talking about better or worse.

just saying change in N and P = change in corals appearance.

simple no brainer question ...

if you think higher nutrients make corals look better, or worse, it does not matter to this poll. cause its asking about change in any direction, better or worse, growth or color.

 

[Allmost]

I measured nitrate or phosphate on any system I ran in the past, caring about numbers only enough to make sure they weren't batcrap nuts, even when I had access to equipment and techniques better than hobbyist quality kits. I tended to make sure nitrates were below 15 ppm, phosphates below 0.05 ppm. I fed corals heavily, since I had access to a big stock of fresh foods: pureed mix of krill, cyclopeeze, squid mantle, shrimp, artemia nauplii, capelin and clam (IIRC). My situation made big water changes (25-50% total volume) every week viable and really easy.

now do you think that corals growth, or coloration, would change, if your no3 went up to 100 PPM and po4 up to 1 PPM ?

or do you think that would not matter ?

if no, then why test at all or filter at all ?

if yes, then thats what this poll asked

 

[Thales]

do you advice us all to sit back and listen to you and thale instead ? you guys are the only scientists and only your conclusions are correct right ?
lol

My Dear and Fluffy Lord! The only actual advice I have been giving is think for yourself, and be a skeptic. I have gone far in offering no conclusions in the other thread. And scientist...you clearly don't know my background.

I really don't know why you are so antagonistic.

 

[Allmost]

ahh big words that ppl like me can not understand, will check that on E-dictionary

Eistein has a nice quote ... "if observations dont fit the theory, observations were wrong"

okay he may have not said it in those words lol cant remember the exact quote. but point is that even though you did not want to make any conclusion, what ppl that Email me and PM me take from your thread and quotes I posted here, is that when your N and p were low, your corals looked the same as when N and P were sky high ...

I am skeptical of that observation.

97/109 ppl that voted also I think are skeptical of that observation.