Po4 Issues..
- Thread starter CoralNutter
- Start date
CoralNutter
New member
reefmutt
Active member
I'm with Sahin and the above..
last time I checked my n and p they were 40-50ppm N and .18 ppm P..
If I were you, having no algae issues, and n of practically 0, I would try to just bump N up to about 1-3ppm. no AF, no gfo.. see what happens to p and to sps growth. Imo, it is entirely possible that the lack of growth is due to the lack of nitrate.. AND the high P could possibly be from a lack of n as well..
About Phosphates
Just wanted to say first -- I actually have to dose phosphates, as I'm still stocking my tank and have quite a lot of SPS for a small tank to boot..
I dose 2.5ml of Seachem Phosphorus every 2-3 days. This raises my po4 to around .05, which most people would tell you is the "maximum", but others with clearly stunning tanks can typically have much higher numbers, or plain 'unknown' numbers.
Some of the most stunning tanks I've seen in person aren't even tested for po4/no3 anymore. A collector near me has absolutely no clue where he's at, but his colors are magnificent and his growth is spectacular.. I would advise against this -- These guys have like 15-20+ years experience and they would still benefit from knowing their numbers.
0) When things are out of whack I typically suggest a 100% water change, which may not be practical -- So substitute 4-5 25% water changes, one every 2-3 days. I call this basically a "Reset".
1) Test no3/po4 -- Write it down (Or log in Apex.. It's great for this)
2) Perform a 25% water change -- (Test the fresh Salt Water too, make sure there's no no3/po4)
3) Retest the tank -- You should see a decrease of around the % of water changed (25% less po4 with 25% Water Change). But make sure by running a quick test.
4) Do another 25% water change in a few days, continue until you've done a 100 - 125% WC.
5) You have basically now reset your tank.
Just wanted to say first -- I actually have to dose phosphates, as I'm still stocking my tank and have quite a lot of SPS for a small tank to boot..
I dose 2.5ml of Seachem Phosphorus every 2-3 days. This raises my po4 to around .05, which most people would tell you is the "maximum", but others with clearly stunning tanks can typically have much higher numbers, or plain 'unknown' numbers.
Some of the most stunning tanks I've seen in person aren't even tested for po4/no3 anymore. A collector near me has absolutely no clue where he's at, but his colors are magnificent and his growth is spectacular.. I would advise against this -- These guys have like 15-20+ years experience and they would still benefit from knowing their numbers.
____________________________________________________
My Advice
____________________________________________________
My Advice
____________________________________________________
0) When things are out of whack I typically suggest a 100% water change, which may not be practical -- So substitute 4-5 25% water changes, one every 2-3 days. I call this basically a "Reset".
1) Test no3/po4 -- Write it down (Or log in Apex.. It's great for this)
2) Perform a 25% water change -- (Test the fresh Salt Water too, make sure there's no no3/po4)
3) Retest the tank -- You should see a decrease of around the % of water changed (25% less po4 with 25% Water Change). But make sure by running a quick test.
4) Do another 25% water change in a few days, continue until you've done a 100 - 125% WC.
5) You have basically now reset your tank.
Alfrareef
New member
If it were mine, and with the info you given I would stop AF and seat back and enjoy the tank for a week after changing something.
Can you post some tank pics?
Not just good for pictures and camera advice :lol:
Something most people seem unaware of is that dosing no3 will LOWER your po4, and dosing po4 will LOWER your no3.. People get very concerned about nutrients, but really, they shouldn't be.
Reefmutt, if you don't know, you're often the example I cite when talking about higher no3 being beneficial for SPS.
CoralNutter
New member
I am at work and i took a few pics of some sps that had improved since the AF herr they are.. when i get home i will take a FTS and some photos of the damage....
Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk
P certainly matters on certain kinds of tanks. Check out the backlog of TOTMs and see what they levels are at. There are inverts than can be poisoned by high N and P levels - this is not really debatable.
If you want to run a mixed tank with some easier SPS like monti, birdsnest, poci and stylo and a few stags then it might not matter as much. If you want colonies (not just frags) of acropora, then I would keep it under 10 on a Hannah ULR checker - roughly .03.
Also keep in mind that most of the good tanks under some of the pay-to-play methods (zeo and the like) basically keep the nutrient level very near zero - so near zero that they have to keep the alk down to keep the coral from growing so fast that it outgrows the tissue (burnt tips).
Depending on where you want to go, this will matter... or not.
If you want to run a mixed tank with some easier SPS like monti, birdsnest, poci and stylo and a few stags then it might not matter as much. If you want colonies (not just frags) of acropora, then I would keep it under 10 on a Hannah ULR checker - roughly .03.
Also keep in mind that most of the good tanks under some of the pay-to-play methods (zeo and the like) basically keep the nutrient level very near zero - so near zero that they have to keep the alk down to keep the coral from growing so fast that it outgrows the tissue (burnt tips).
Depending on where you want to go, this will matter... or not.
CoralNutter
New member
Hi jda thanks for the reply. Yes i totally agree with you here and I was just thinking to something Mike Paletta was saying in one of his videos that nutrients may have something to do with relation to Alk. Higher alk higher nutrients, lower alk lower nutrients. I am currently running my alk 7.2 in line with the aquaforest guide and like you said they recommend near 0 as well. Also yes my tank is mostly acropora so that is the direction I am going
Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk
jda, I'm a very 'too the point' guy. I'm not trying to fight if it comes off that way, but I am debating most of what you say.
Agreed. It's also worth noting a lot of those old TOTM's aren't that special by today's standards thought (Color wise, at least).
Extremely false. look at o2manyfish (AKA, the guy who runs the systems at Unique Corals). Look at Reefmutt. Phosphate is not bad. Phosphate does *not* stunt growth above .05 as we've been told in the past.
This is some OLD SCHOOL thinking right here, which obviously works, but is very outdated and pretty much what I'd consider 'broscience'. Especially when you see long term zeovit users have trouble without dosing a metric ton of little blue bottles to replicate what no3/po4 do.
But most Zeovit tanks are pale in color, and often start out great but slowly decline. Very few of these ULNS systems are built to last, and you see people like schnitzel who run ULNS for a long time start dosing no3 only to see massive improvements in growth and color.
Again, what you're saying is old school broscience based on params at real reefs.. What nobody takes account of is that the reefs are vast, and they take in astounding numbers of nutrients (no3/po4). Nutrients get taken up the moment they're available in reefs, and nutrient testing tests the 'available' nutrients as in, the excess within the water column. That's why the numbers are so low on reefs, because each coral is sucking 'em down ASAP.
The only Zeovit tanks that really look good are either newer, or dosed with the 100 little bottles the company sells to replicate what having some no3/po4 does for the system.
Agreed. It's also worth noting a lot of those old TOTM's aren't that special by today's standards thought (Color wise, at least).
Extremely false. look at o2manyfish (AKA, the guy who runs the systems at Unique Corals). Look at Reefmutt. Phosphate is not bad. Phosphate does *not* stunt growth above .05 as we've been told in the past.
This is some OLD SCHOOL thinking right here, which obviously works, but is very outdated and pretty much what I'd consider 'broscience'. Especially when you see long term zeovit users have trouble without dosing a metric ton of little blue bottles to replicate what no3/po4 do.
But most Zeovit tanks are pale in color, and often start out great but slowly decline. Very few of these ULNS systems are built to last, and you see people like schnitzel who run ULNS for a long time start dosing no3 only to see massive improvements in growth and color.
Again, what you're saying is old school broscience based on params at real reefs.. What nobody takes account of is that the reefs are vast, and they take in astounding numbers of nutrients (no3/po4). Nutrients get taken up the moment they're available in reefs, and nutrient testing tests the 'available' nutrients as in, the excess within the water column. That's why the numbers are so low on reefs, because each coral is sucking 'em down ASAP.
The only Zeovit tanks that really look good are either newer, or dosed with the 100 little bottles the company sells to replicate what having some no3/po4 does for the system.
CoralNutter
New member
This is a great point about corals on the reef sucking up available nutrients as soon as they are available. That is also in line with alot of literature and documentaties ive seen about reefs. I also strongly believe that its hugely beneficial to keep nitrate in the water for corals and i plan to keep some available at all times in my tank. I don't think this is debatable anymore even dtum who is a previous totm winner has been raving about the color improvements in his sps since dosing potassium nitrate. The one thing I disagree with is that all zeo tanks are not up to par or they have a short lifespan. In Europe there is plenty of tanks that have run zeo for many years and dont dose extraordinary amounts of supps.
Sent from my SM-G935W8 using Tapatalk
BTW - I am not a zeo guy. I only know a few who are (locally) and their tanks are quite amazing. They are probably so good that they could do well with any method.
You all are betting on the exception more than the rule. You can find a tank or two to show almost that almost anything will work. I will go with the hundreds/thousands who keep the N and P both undetectable on Salifert. They know that that they have some N and P, but not too much of it.
If you dig into these higher nutrient tanks, you will see that some certain types of acros are missing.
What do you do? It is easy to read about what other people do without fully understanding the details, but what has your own actual experience been? Mine is what I outlined... undetectable on Salifer offers by-far the best results... this is less than 10 on a Hannah ULR and .5 or less nitrate. I would rather hear about your own experiences from your than those of o2many or reefmutt.
You might call it broscience, but I call it actual experience over 20 years and multiple tanks.
You all are betting on the exception more than the rule. You can find a tank or two to show almost that almost anything will work. I will go with the hundreds/thousands who keep the N and P both undetectable on Salifert. They know that that they have some N and P, but not too much of it.
If you dig into these higher nutrient tanks, you will see that some certain types of acros are missing.
What do you do? It is easy to read about what other people do without fully understanding the details, but what has your own actual experience been? Mine is what I outlined... undetectable on Salifer offers by-far the best results... this is less than 10 on a Hannah ULR and .5 or less nitrate. I would rather hear about your own experiences from your than those of o2many or reefmutt.
You might call it broscience, but I call it actual experience over 20 years and multiple tanks.
reefmutt
Active member
'Guess the phosphate level' is another interesting thread questioning the lns necessity mantra.. his tank is old, oozing with nutrients and amazingly healthy. It's right here on the sps page.
I'm not advocating nutrient levels as high as mine, I'm actually trying to bring them down. I'd rather be around 5-10 ppm n and .03-.06 ppm p instead of the 50 n and .17 p I am running now but boy o boy am I ever liking colours in my tank at the moment.
The levels scare me a bit but after reading Thales's thread mentioned above, I am not freaking out.
There is so much more at play than nutrient levels.. I think anybody's target should be somewhere in between the extremes and then aiming for a healthy bioload, rock solid parameters and a robust bacterial/ micro fauna ecosystem..
When the foundation of the reef is solid and healthy, the corals will adapt very well to different levels of nutrients. But no matter what, they need nutrition. Whether it's n and p in a high nutrient system or other organic inputs in an ulns..
I'm not advocating nutrient levels as high as mine, I'm actually trying to bring them down. I'd rather be around 5-10 ppm n and .03-.06 ppm p instead of the 50 n and .17 p I am running now but boy o boy am I ever liking colours in my tank at the moment.
The levels scare me a bit but after reading Thales's thread mentioned above, I am not freaking out.
There is so much more at play than nutrient levels.. I think anybody's target should be somewhere in between the extremes and then aiming for a healthy bioload, rock solid parameters and a robust bacterial/ micro fauna ecosystem..
When the foundation of the reef is solid and healthy, the corals will adapt very well to different levels of nutrients. But no matter what, they need nutrition. Whether it's n and p in a high nutrient system or other organic inputs in an ulns..
Thought I started with my experiences first, my mistake if I didnt! My tank looked best color wise with no3 & po4 at 25/.08
I was regularly dosing no3 and saw a great improvement in color and growth. Because my tank is extremely light on fish at the moment, I've gone back to dosing larger quantities to keep my corals going.
After being told how crazy dosing no3 is and how foolish it was, then seeing amazing results personally (and in the tanks of all those I've met in the hobby) I decided to try some po4. From a chemistry standpoint, dosing of po4 reduces no3, and dosing of no3 reduces po4 -- When i dose no3 I notice an increase in algae growth on glass. When I dose po4 I notice a decrease in algae on the glass.
Both affect the growth and color of corals in different ways -- As i said before, dosing one nutrient causes the other to diminish.. So as my no3 fell to 1 and po4 rose to .05 I saw more growth overall, and *certain* corals colored up more than others. I want to note explicitly that *nothing* became worse coloration wise.. Some just liked it a lot while others had no real improvement.
Specifically while dosing po4, I've noticed all corals with green have improved overall color-wise. I have a blue and green table that everyone thinks is a pink floyd. Dosing po4 kept the green crisp, but brought out that baby blue coloration that wasn't very strong while just running ULNS or no3 dosing. Additionally, dosing of po4 has had a strong effect on the polyp color of ALL my sps.
I think that's *exactly* the wrong mindset to have. The world has changed a lot in 20 years. I have seen more people with "experience" make silly comments, and tout their failures than most newer reefers who use all experience to reach a consensus of their own.
But most importantly what I was *trying* and failing to convey, is that there are no rules in this hobby. I spent my first year with SPS in a biocube testing everything people told me I couldn't do.
- Oh you're gonna lose a lot of SPS, I know because I did, you can't blah blah -- Wrong.
- You need a mature tank, i've kept for 10 years and you're gonna kill blah blah -- Wrong.
- SPS don't like nutrients -- Wrong.
- SPS don't like po4 -- Wrong.
- po4 stunts growth -- Wrong.
- SPS won't truly color under LED -- Wrong.
I ran my tank as an experiment to sift out the bullshit. What I found is almost everything anyone has said about anything reef related *was* bullshit.
Every single method, idea, plan, experience is valuable. It can, and will, all work. You just have to know the proper reaction for your actions.
If you are at 1 N and .05 P, that it virtually what I posted where I like to be. Both of these would test "clear" on Salifert and are a good place to be, IMO.
If you are a biocube or 45G guy, there are some experiences that you might not have that I can share. ...as you get colonies (like football sized or bigger), they start to act differently with higher levels of PO4. The are both less hardy and less resistant to parameter flux. They can also start to die from the base up with higher levels of PO4. Colonies are different animals than frags or mini-colonies (baseball size). I found that you had to be more perfect. I have never been able to keep N up much, but I have never wanted to, so I cannot really say what happens there except that zoas start to die around 75 or 100 when I tried to keep them in my FOWLR.
Again, I am looking for results over years and years and the vast majority of tanks that are worth betting on are near-NSW parameters. I don't think that you would be able to do much for years and years at 25 N and .08 P, but I also have no doubt that it was fine for a while.
If you are a biocube or 45G guy, there are some experiences that you might not have that I can share. ...as you get colonies (like football sized or bigger), they start to act differently with higher levels of PO4. The are both less hardy and less resistant to parameter flux. They can also start to die from the base up with higher levels of PO4. Colonies are different animals than frags or mini-colonies (baseball size). I found that you had to be more perfect. I have never been able to keep N up much, but I have never wanted to, so I cannot really say what happens there except that zoas start to die around 75 or 100 when I tried to keep them in my FOWLR.
Again, I am looking for results over years and years and the vast majority of tanks that are worth betting on are near-NSW parameters. I don't think that you would be able to do much for years and years at 25 N and .08 P, but I also have no doubt that it was fine for a while.
Woah... Did you literally miss every single word I said? You wanted experience, when this tank was new my experience with no3/po4 was at those levels. That was where my system was when it looked poor -- Once I started dosing no3/po4, it improved, dramatically. First hand no BS experience, which you asked for, then for some reason completely ignored...
That's because ULNS *was* the only system there was for years and years.. Ditching the ULNS system is *new*, people literally haven't even been exposed to higher nutrient SPS systems for years and years, because high nutrient SPS didn't exist until fairly recently -- That's what I'm talking about with 20 years experience being a bad thing. You've single handed refused to open your mind to other possibilities, have 20 years experience doing it 'the other way', and ended up falling back on assumptions and speculation tethered towards other people... You just did exactly every single thing you complained about and considered worthless information...
I have given you an extremely detailed first hand experience and all you did was basically say "yeah, but no". I am thoroughly disappointed that once given what you asked for (first hand experience) you retorted by not showing a single shred of first hand experience yourself. Rather what you *think* and what others *think*, based on what reefing was like in the roaring 80's.
If you can't even hold yourself to the same standards you're trying to hold me to.. Why are you speaking out about anecdotal stuff you have no experience with? When did you run a high nutrient SPS system to prove it was bad? Did you do that before we knew flatworms existed?
I don't care about what happened in the 1980's bro -- Show me your first hand experience proving high nutrient systems are bad, then prove it was the nutrients and not another unknown factor (like the flatworms that didn't exist until 10 years ago).
My bad if I misread your post. I thought that "looked best at 25 N and .08P" meant in the past and the .05 P and 1 N was where you settled in the current.
I would love to know what happened in the 80s too, but I was in elementary school for the later parts of it and have no memory of the first part. Who ever said anything about the 80s? ...and what do flatworms have to do with any of this?
Everything that I posted was from my own experiences.
Don't fool yourself. Most tanks are high nutrient tanks and probably always have been... just most don't intend them to be. There are plenty of these to study. How is this different because you intended to do this? Most of them fail in the long run and people leave the hobby after battling algae and dying coral after a while when everything looked good for a year or two. This is going to be hard to hear or comprehend, but I will still likely be growing colonies after you have changed systems and methodologies a few more times or quit altogether. This is not the first time that somebody has come up with a new way to do it - it will not likely amount to much like all of the other methods. There are posts just like yours over the years about miracle mud being the secret sauce bringing all these missing nutrients, about how bare bottom will get out 100% of the organics by keeping them suspended indefinitely to get skimmed out, no water changes are the only way to keep a long term tank, continuous water changes are the only way to keep a tank... I could go on and on.
These corals did not choose to thrive in low-nutrient natural environments on accident. There are plenty of places in the world where they could go that are high nutrient... plenty. If you can do it better than nature for a while, then cool... but people need to understand that this is betting on the exception.
I am not going to argue with you anymore - I think that we can both agree that this is going nowhere so post whatever you will as a reply and I will leave it alone. I have no doubt that you are seeing some current success, but keep in mind that there is no chance that this is a new idea and people even a year or two ago were just too stupid to figure it out or chemistry did not exist to folks that had no GFO, Lanthanium, AlOxide and had high nutrient tanks all the time when only water changes and fuges existed. Don't discount how hard it was to NOT have a high nutrient tank.. and yet none of these folks are on here bragging about how great it was.
I would love to know what happened in the 80s too, but I was in elementary school for the later parts of it and have no memory of the first part. Who ever said anything about the 80s? ...and what do flatworms have to do with any of this?
Everything that I posted was from my own experiences.
Don't fool yourself. Most tanks are high nutrient tanks and probably always have been... just most don't intend them to be. There are plenty of these to study. How is this different because you intended to do this? Most of them fail in the long run and people leave the hobby after battling algae and dying coral after a while when everything looked good for a year or two. This is going to be hard to hear or comprehend, but I will still likely be growing colonies after you have changed systems and methodologies a few more times or quit altogether. This is not the first time that somebody has come up with a new way to do it - it will not likely amount to much like all of the other methods. There are posts just like yours over the years about miracle mud being the secret sauce bringing all these missing nutrients, about how bare bottom will get out 100% of the organics by keeping them suspended indefinitely to get skimmed out, no water changes are the only way to keep a long term tank, continuous water changes are the only way to keep a tank... I could go on and on.
These corals did not choose to thrive in low-nutrient natural environments on accident. There are plenty of places in the world where they could go that are high nutrient... plenty. If you can do it better than nature for a while, then cool... but people need to understand that this is betting on the exception.
I am not going to argue with you anymore - I think that we can both agree that this is going nowhere so post whatever you will as a reply and I will leave it alone. I have no doubt that you are seeing some current success, but keep in mind that there is no chance that this is a new idea and people even a year or two ago were just too stupid to figure it out or chemistry did not exist to folks that had no GFO, Lanthanium, AlOxide and had high nutrient tanks all the time when only water changes and fuges existed. Don't discount how hard it was to NOT have a high nutrient tank.. and yet none of these folks are on here bragging about how great it was.
That's not how reefs work. Reefs are absurdly high nutrient environments, the testing methods test excess nutrients, there is no test for the amount of nutrients being taken in by corals. The shoreline is where the dirtiest waters are, the reef is *why* they are low nutrient. They're sucking up nutrient at break-neck speed.
Reef's, contrary to what you just said, typically start at the most nutrient rich water there is. Since that was far before we were ever born, we missed that.
You've also still failed to point out when YOU had a high nutrient tank that failed personally. Again, falling back to what you told me I couldn't use, other people.. Additionally, you've selectively ignored the various people who have had fairly long lasting high nutrient tanks.
You failed to have a valid argument other than "Because", based on hyperbole which you said was invalid when anybody except you use it. "Because". It's a shame you won't be responding again, you might accidentally learn a little bit about marine biology :lol:
_______________________
@ Coral: All I was trying to say is phosphates aren't bad. Plenty of people have great experience with high nutrients. It doesn't matter how you run your tank, it can be successful. LNS, ULNS, HNS, it can all work.
You ever wonder how Amino's get the reputation of working like magic for some people, while the next person has no results? ME corals openly talks about their product (ME Amino Polyp Extender) only being useful for LNS/ULNS, as it restores the missing no3 in the water column.
The only thing I wanted you to note is that phosphates do zero harm -- That's it. That's all I was trying to point out. You don't have to do *anything*. Just watch your tank evolve. See what happens.
Last edited:
