Something like Alk-burn but not alk burn?
- Thread starter Canarygirl
- Start date
snipersps
Active member
LOL, I'm pretty sure you did not mean to say that
hahahaha sorry :reading::reading:
SaraB
Coral Killer
That made me laugh! I bet you meant pennies in your sump :hmm4:
LifeAquatic
New member
I have a cool Alk and Calcium chart that I got from D and D Aquariums. It shows the correct ratio of alk to calcium. Maybe double check your parameters again for the correct balance. Although it looks like you are pretty close to the right balance. 7.5 kh and 400 cal. Im going to double check my chart tonight to see what the correct cal balance is for alk @ 7.5kh. I hope you figure it out! good luck = )
LifeAquatic
New member
The chart I have shows this to be to high of a calcium reading for 7kh. Calium and alk are out of balance. Alk should be closer to 8.6 with cal at 420. This might be part of your problem.
montrealreef
Member
You're right, sorry about that....I just meant to make a joke out of it, but now I realize that I was wrong to quote it..
montrealreef
Member
Thanks LifeAquatic,
The reason I am running alk lower is that every time I ask someone for advice with the burned tips they tell me my alk is too high and that I should be running it lower.
The reason I am running alk lower is that every time I ask someone for advice with the burned tips they tell me my alk is too high and that I should be running it lower.
montrealreef
Member
double post...sorry
Canarygirl
New member
Hi Ralph,
I didn't know that too-high of phosphate can cause the same symptoms! I've never heard that before, just the usual algae problems. I do have some algae but not too bad and the herbivores take care of it. For measuring I use a hanna meter and the last time I used it I got a reading of .09. Tested nitrate today and got 7 or 8.
I started using Zeovit again just recently; I'm ramping it up slowly so as to not stress the corals. I also have chaeto in a refugium on a reverse light cycle.
Another thing: I took the advice of another poster on this thread and cross-checked my Elos KH test kit with LaMotte. The Lamotte tests out at 9.2 dhk which is high enough to cause burned tips. (The Elos measures ~.5 dhk point lower.) Alk has crept up in the last 3 days to that 9.2 level, before that it had been hovering at 7.5 (Elos) which would be 8.0 on LaMotte.
I didn't know that too-high of phosphate can cause the same symptoms! I've never heard that before, just the usual algae problems. I do have some algae but not too bad and the herbivores take care of it. For measuring I use a hanna meter and the last time I used it I got a reading of .09. Tested nitrate today and got 7 or 8.
I started using Zeovit again just recently; I'm ramping it up slowly so as to not stress the corals. I also have chaeto in a refugium on a reverse light cycle.
Another thing: I took the advice of another poster on this thread and cross-checked my Elos KH test kit with LaMotte. The Lamotte tests out at 9.2 dhk which is high enough to cause burned tips. (The Elos measures ~.5 dhk point lower.) Alk has crept up in the last 3 days to that 9.2 level, before that it had been hovering at 7.5 (Elos) which would be 8.0 on LaMotte.
No, I'm sorry about how that came across, I wish I could go back and choose my wording better. That was not meant to critisize you in any way for quoting it, I give people credit for grasping two languages, God knows I have a hard enough time with one.
Ralph ATL
Formerly mysterybox
I would take a twofold approach, maybe lowering alk slowly but trying some gfo. At .09 +/- 4% or 1.0 (according to Hanna) could be the problem. U want phates at .03 or lower. Also, alk at 9 shouldn't cause tips to burn in a low nutrient system, IMHO, although I have no experience with zeo (I use vodka and vinegar). Alk is almost impossible to measure with 100% accuracy, even Elos, Salifet, Lamott having issues from test kit to test kit. Which one is correct? .5 won't really matter since their deviation is more than that!
ReefTECK
New member
It sounds to me like the water changes are certainly playing a role in maintaining something, either adding needed elements back to the mix or dilluting unwanted elements from the mix. Alleopathic interactions seem like a probable scenario in this case, I think for all of us it's time to get serious about destroying those little aptasia/mojano etc. !!! Hate those things! It's actually rather surprising that those things are still persistant under ULNC (or maybe you're still working on that ULNC) Certinaly I'm familiar about how those things seem to hold on even under the most inhopitable environments but still!
Could the algae effecting these tips be some type of dinoflagellate? (hope I spelled that right(better than misspelling pennies :O lol))
Could the algae effecting these tips be some type of dinoflagellate? (hope I spelled that right(better than misspelling pennies :O lol))
Canarygirl
New member
Reeftek, the corals that get the spiderwebby algae on them...it's not like it disappears in a cycle and reappears with the light. It will go away (when I pull it) for a few days to several days and then come back. I don't think it is dinos for that reason.
I think the alleopathy is playing a role for sure.
I think the alleopathy is playing a role for sure.
ReefTECK
New member
I know you mentioned your using carbon passively, I assume you just mean that you are not running flow directly through it, and you're not using an unactivated or phosphate/acid wash activated carbon. Are you using a reputable brand of carbon?
Also, I've heard a few people mention they are having problems with BRS carbon, I have no idea if it is related, but here's a link to a thread about it RHF is weighing in on the topic as well: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1802698&highlight=BRS+CARBON
and FWIW I think if you are not running carbon in a fluidized reactor it's probably best to use a grandulated carbon that has more diversity in binding sites/pores, and though it is indicated to be effective without any direct flow, I've alway preferred that it be placed in a reactor or sock. That should at least help with alleopathic interactions. Of course depending on the concentration of these alleged compounds, GAC could be exhausted rapidly.
I'm also curious if you have an ORP meter and what type of measurements you are getting with that parameter. We had an open top tank at the pet store I worked at, and when first set up it was a fantastic SPS tank. It went downhill within a year though. All parameters read well except when we ran ORP test finally, we realized it was essentially saturated with bacteria and the ORP was extremely low. We summed this up to essentially excessive amounts of pet dander and dust, despite our media and skimming was destroying the water quality.
Also, I've heard a few people mention they are having problems with BRS carbon, I have no idea if it is related, but here's a link to a thread about it RHF is weighing in on the topic as well: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1802698&highlight=BRS+CARBON
and FWIW I think if you are not running carbon in a fluidized reactor it's probably best to use a grandulated carbon that has more diversity in binding sites/pores, and though it is indicated to be effective without any direct flow, I've alway preferred that it be placed in a reactor or sock. That should at least help with alleopathic interactions. Of course depending on the concentration of these alleged compounds, GAC could be exhausted rapidly.
I'm also curious if you have an ORP meter and what type of measurements you are getting with that parameter. We had an open top tank at the pet store I worked at, and when first set up it was a fantastic SPS tank. It went downhill within a year though. All parameters read well except when we ran ORP test finally, we realized it was essentially saturated with bacteria and the ORP was extremely low. We summed this up to essentially excessive amounts of pet dander and dust, despite our media and skimming was destroying the water quality.
Canarygirl
New member
ReefTek,
At the moment I'm using this from the Filter Guys: Bulk CGAC Carbon, premium grade catalytic granular activated carbon (acid washed, ph buffered), but I have also recently used BRS carbon (standard bulk and before that, their Rox8).
I have it in a sock in my sump, just downstream from the input drains. Zeovit does not recommend using carbon in reactors while using their system as it is too aggressive for the zeo dynamics.
I'm not sure what you mean by using carbon with "more diversity in binding sites/pores..." do you mean high surface area (small grained)?
In September I experimented with an ORP reactor and when I first put the ORP probe in, it read 250 which I think is pretty standard for non-ozonated tanks (?). The reactor did not work out for me...I lost a lot of corals in short order after putting that in.
At the moment I'm using this from the Filter Guys: Bulk CGAC Carbon, premium grade catalytic granular activated carbon (acid washed, ph buffered), but I have also recently used BRS carbon (standard bulk and before that, their Rox8).
I have it in a sock in my sump, just downstream from the input drains. Zeovit does not recommend using carbon in reactors while using their system as it is too aggressive for the zeo dynamics.
I'm not sure what you mean by using carbon with "more diversity in binding sites/pores..." do you mean high surface area (small grained)?
In September I experimented with an ORP reactor and when I first put the ORP probe in, it read 250 which I think is pretty standard for non-ozonated tanks (?). The reactor did not work out for me...I lost a lot of corals in short order after putting that in.
montrealreef
Member
ReefTECK
New member
Are you sure about that? I'm not using Zeovit myself, but I have read through alot of the material, and comprised my own domestic zeo blend of additives (which is working out fantastically without the zeovit price tag)which includes carbon dosing with vodka.
I would think that especially if you are using any grain vodka for carbon supplement you would want to be using carbon to remove the impurities (the stuff that contributes to your hang over)
I don't have time right now to look for that zeo literature, but I really thought it included carbon. Zeostart after all IS a carbon source.
Well yes, large amount of surface area, but with pelletized GAC the binding sites (although cracks in the media are quite small) are uniform in their binding site. I don't know if it could happen that if you had a high concentration of one contaminate that quickly bound up the sites on a carbon because they were all say...15nm in size, and then essentially clogs the pores and prevents other contaminates from being absorbed.
This could all be speculative, but I thought perhaps GAC as opposed to pelletized AC would have a higher diversity in pore size, that would prevent this type of binding behavior. This would be a good one for Randy to weigh in on, or we could just go look through RKM for archived chemistry lessons.
Glad to hear your ORP seems to be in order. Although I always hate it when I have those eureka moments and then it's already been ruled out. It's so much easier when something is CLEARLY wrong.
I'll keep thinking about it.
cheers,
Andy
Santoki
Shimmer Addict
I want to add that I am experiencing what seems to be the same thing as the OP, but I am not using activated carbon, nor dosing a carbon source (vodka, zeo, etc).
Nutrients all on the low side. My alk has been high 12+ for a while now, which is why I originally thought that it was alk related. But it seems from OP's posts, that doesn't necessarily have to be the case since OP's alk is 9. Water changes for me also very temporarily seems to relieve the problem, prompting me to contemplate use of activated carbon in attempts to remove unknown irritant. But that theory seems a dead end as well, as the OP uses activated carbon.
Note: I am only seeing this on my Acropora Yongei (Green Slimer).
Canarygirl, is this isolated to specific species in your case?
-R
Nutrients all on the low side. My alk has been high 12+ for a while now, which is why I originally thought that it was alk related. But it seems from OP's posts, that doesn't necessarily have to be the case since OP's alk is 9. Water changes for me also very temporarily seems to relieve the problem, prompting me to contemplate use of activated carbon in attempts to remove unknown irritant. But that theory seems a dead end as well, as the OP uses activated carbon.
Note: I am only seeing this on my Acropora Yongei (Green Slimer).
Canarygirl, is this isolated to specific species in your case?
-R
