nutrients and SPS corals.

[Thales]

Sigh.

 

[sahin]

Galleon, thanks for your response. I completely take your point regarding quantitation of coral colour.

 

[brob22]

my sps always looked best wen i had alittle nitrate and hardly any phosphate

 

[GroktheCube]

I haven't been keeping SPS long enough to say with certainty, and I've given up on testing N and P with much regularity. Too many conflicting results from test kits and Hanna checkers.

The factors I've seen make the largest difference (to my eye) in coral appearance in my tank, in order of importance are:
1. More feeding of coral foods (OysterFeast, RotiFeast, Rod's Food, etc) vs less feeding of coral feeds
2. WCs (more WCs seem to result in faster growth and "better" color, even without substantial changes in measured NO3/PO4)
3. Flow
4. Lighting (More blue seems to give me "better" colors and growth, better "coverage", meaning less observable difference in brightness between bright areas and dim areas, seems to provide more even color)

TBH, I haven't seen tremendous difference in coral color or growth based on measured NO3/PO4 levels, but they've also always remained relatively low (no higher than 5/.5 ppm respectively). I have seen BIG differences in growth of most types of algae (but not cyano) at higher vs lower nutrient levels.

I'm also still very much a noobie with this. My tank has been running for just under a year, and while I feel like I've been fairly successful (I've managed to avoid killing any corals/anemones other than aiptasia, knock on wood) all things told, I still have a long ways to go.

I don't really feel comfortable drawing any firm conclusions. While it's a given that any animal that needs to take up nutrients from its environment will be affected by varying nutrient levels, I'm not sure how important NO3 and PO4 are specifically and in isolation. I still need more evidence and experience before I'm willing to put my foot down on that one.

 

[tmz]

While some are nobly trying to provide CPR to this thread to turn it into something useful by talking abut their perceptions in some depth, I think the flood of boring polemics, personal attack and semantics have already drowned it.

The poll is meaningless,a charade,imo. I suspect its primary purpose was to gather some semblance of authority to perch on and "win" something at the expense of another . I wont vote or participate beyond these comments and wont feel used later.
Carrying a battle for attention from another thread to this one with out of context quotes in the shadow of a meaningless poll, where the outcome was obvious in advance , is unfair ,and wastes everybody's time. Anybody who wants to know what was said in the quoted thread can just read it for themselves.
While that thread about Thale's tank has a few gems of information in it for a skillful picker ; imo, too much of its potential for healthy growth in terms of learning has been poisoned( maybe like a nucleating calcium carbonate crystal poisoned by PO4 or calcium deposits running amok in a corals skeletal matrix with an out of whack calcium transport system), by a similar flood of charade, personal attack, semantics and diatribe .Much of it has denegrated to a personal fight to be perceived as "right" or more knowing or more abused than the other. There are also some inferences to be drawn without a clear actual implication dangled around in that thread ; pick one or be less than absolutely precise with our language and you'll likely get whipsawed and burned as a strawman.

Too bad: the whole subject of inorganic phosphate an nitrate in coral health is still in need of lots more information and discussion without prostelitizing and/or marfinalizing each others views. This has become about wining or loosing andwho is more important or affable ;it should be about learning and developing new insights and prisims to look through.

Personal attack, he/said/ she said arguments ,polemics and semantics are really boring and distasteful to some folks.
I don't mind playing once in awhile but ask why should others have to waste their time indulging it?

 

[ormet]

I wish RC had a "like" button.

 

[Thales]

Tom, I was on the fence about responding to this thread at all. It seemed that it made sense to respond when it was said that I said something that I went out of my way not to say. Should I just ignore that kind of thing in the future?
Thanks for your advice.

 

[tmz]

I wouldn't ignore it personally. I think you know from some earlier interactions that I'll fight particularly where I perceive rightly or wrongly that issues of intellectual or personal integrity are concerned . I just don't let folks take free shots if I can hlep it. That may not be a strength though and may be selfish at times. My tongue does bleed often from biting it ,so I know I'm trying

 

[Allmost]

nice distraction from the main point of the thread there ....

I am not here to E-fight, not here to start E-war, nobody knows my real name except friends on here ... so not winning any E-awards neither ...

I am simply clarifying something that was misunderstood from the other thread. is asking for clarification too much ?

I do not understand ... you can be critical of my english or intelligence, and get to personally attack me, but when I ask for clarification on something you have typed Its start of a war ? sounds like some ppl think of themselves too highly ... sometimes ppl need to stop thinking they are the guru ... and open their mind and eyes ...

no further point to this thread. so will ask a mod to close it.

 

[Thales]

I am not sure why so much seems so personal to the OP and why there has been so much misunderstanding. I will leave it in the hands of the readers, and hope that my efforts at clarification and discussion stand on their own.

 

[acesq]

While some are nobly trying to provide CPR to this thread to turn it into something useful by talking abut their perceptions in some depth, I think the flood of boring polemics, personal attack and semantics have already drowned it.

The poll is meaningless,a charade,imo. I suspect its primary purpose was to gather some semblance of authority to perch on and "win" something at the expense of another . I wont vote or participate beyond these comments and wont feel used later.
Carrying a battle for attention from another thread to this one with out of context quotes in the shadow of a meaningless poll, where the outcome was obvious in advance , is unfair ,and wastes everybody's time. Anybody who wants to know what was said in the quoted thread can just read it for themselves.
While that thread about Thale's tank has a few gems of information in it for a skillful picker ; imo, too much of its potential for healthy growth in terms of learning has been poisoned( maybe like a nucleating calcium carbonate crystal poisoned by PO4 or calcium deposits running amok in a corals skeletal matrix with an out of whack calcium transport system), by a similar flood of charade, personal attack, semantics and diatribe .Much of it has denegrated to a personal fight to be perceived as "right" or more knowing or more abused than the other. There are also some inferences to be drawn without a clear actual implication dangled around in that thread ; pick one or be less than absolutely precise with our language and you'll likely get whipsawed and burned as a strawman.

Too bad: the whole subject of inorganic phosphate an nitrate in coral health is still in need of lots more information and discussion without prostelitizing and/or marfinalizing each others views. This has become about wining or loosing andwho is more important or affable ;it should be about learning and developing new insights and prisims to look through.

Personal attack, he/said/ she said arguments ,polemics and semantics are really boring and distasteful to some folks.
I don't mind playing once in awhile but ask why should others have to waste their time indulging it?

Well said. I was hoping this thread would would actually be an interesting discussion of "how, why, how much and under what conditions". Turn's out it was a personal vendetta. Boring....

 

[Allmost]

not directly, but in your thread you have stated in regards to your own specific tank the following.

"It wasn't any different when the po4 was lower. I got tired of spending time and money chasing the numbers and decided to let it go and see what happened. Not much."


which could give off that impression that yes you do think certain nutrients have little to "not much" effect on coral, Maybe you could tell us if you were specifically referring to your unique tank and setup or any and all aquariums in general?

Thales ...

this is the only mis understanding.... what I have quoted above. [page 1 so ...]

they say 1 call to politician, means 1000 votes. same here, just cause I am posting it doesnt mean I am the only one taking it that way .

many who have read your posts and thread, have made the wrong conclusion about some of your statements.

this thread was meant to clarify those.

in above statement, you meant not much effect in your particular system, and did NOT make a generalized rule. I think that is correct and wanted to calrify it for newer reefers ... so they do not stop caring for filtering their water ... and end up with Rocks full of po4 bonded to it that wont be able to be used anymore. [I can forward you amount of Emails and PMs I have got on this ... with newer reefers misunderstanding it]


maybe in YOUR system there is something limiting algae or zoox growth ? perhaps Iron or something is limiting, unlike my tank where N and P are limiting ? there could be millions of different cases. DO YOU CARE TO EXPLORE THEM instead of finding flaws in my grammer or spelling to distract from the main topic ?