SPS Cancer??

[reefiness]

I have weird growth on 2 pieces of SPS I have, and I cant find any info as to what the issue is. The only thing i can think of is some sort of neoplasm in the skeleton of the coral. The corals are basically growing these small deformed lumps mainly at the tips which when the slightest amount of pressure is applied to them I can feel the skeleton under these lumps crumble until i assume it reaches the healthy tissue again. I tried circling some of the areas I'm referring to in these horrible quality photos. There are obviously more areas on the coral which are affected but i didn't circle because it was getting excessive and i think you can get the point.

These have been developing over the past several months and has been 100% limited to these 2 pieces.

Parameters: SG 1.026, temp 77.5-78.5, ph 8.0-8.3, NH3 0, NO2 0, NO3 0-5ppm, PO4 0.00-0.05, Alk 8-9, Ca 450-500, Mg 1400-1500.

I use IO RC as salt mix. Dose BRS 2 part + mag, and vodka. Also supplement acropower, vitamin C, iodine, and live bacteria, coral frenzy.

 

[BattleAthletics]

Its a tumaaahhh!!






Jk i got nothing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mr.Fishtank]

Don't use a carbon source with alk above 8. They are getting tip burn I think.

 

[reefiness]

Don't use a carbon source with alk above 8. They are getting tip burn I think.

its not just a tip burn, it seems skeletal. Granted ive never had tip burn to compare it to. I would expect it to be more of a global issue among more of the corals if it was an alk burn.

I've also been carbon dosing for about 1.5 years while maintaining these alk levels and i only noticed this more recently. And on another note, I am also tapering my tank off carbon dosing anyway as I set up a cheato reactor which is making a snack out of my nutrient load.

 

[reefiness]

Its a tumaaahhh!!






Jk i got nothing


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what im sayin. I got nothing either... it just looks like a tumah!

 

[nicken]

I have these problem too.
During then I realized that my calcium tester give the wrong result . My CA was insufficient at low 200+ , the rest are fine . Corals over grow with tissue but skeleton didn't manage to grow well. Resulted was lumpy flesh dangling .

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

 

[Piper27]

Maybe hyperplasia, which has happened to me when the big three are not balanced or are being dosed in unequal amounts.
Using a carbon source with low nutrients is fine if you feed enough, tip burn only happens when you have low nutrients and not a large amount of nutrients going into the tank as well.

 

[Piper27]

Hyperplasia has never happened to me while using mall or a calcium reactor. Only when dosing balanced solutions in unequal amounts of having one of the big three off. If you look up others threads on it some have thought other things were responsible I think but I can't remember. Most people I have talked to fixed it by fixing their dosing.

 

[Acronic]

Calcite growth form of the skeletal matrix. Get the big three balanced to revert to an aragonite polymorph skeletal structure

 

[Piper27]

Yea what he said

But I am not positive hyperplasia is the right term for this, I have seen people call odd growth hyper or neoplasia. Is there a different term for it acronic? Either way the solution is stated above. Let us know how things go, what are your big three at right now?

 

[reefiness]

my average parameters are listed at top. including alk, ca, and mg.

my actual readings on my last test which was a few days ago was actually a little off from my usual so i had adjusted my doser. But I was at Calcium (salifert) 430, Alk (Hanna) 9.0, Alk (Salifert) 8.6, Mag (Salifert) 1380.

 

[reefiness]

Calcite growth form of the skeletal matrix. Get the big three balanced to revert to an aragonite polymorph skeletal structure

IDK how much more balanced I can be according to http://web.archive.org/web/20021127040526/http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/nov2002/chem.htm

Using an alk of 8.8 which is the average between the 2 testers I use, and my last calcium reading of 430, I am right in that ideal red zone.

 

[Acronic]

I don't believe there is any term for this. My gut feeling is that this is a stress response where the coral quickly builds calcite to protect its more desireable aragonite skeleton. From what exactly I'm not sure. I know that magnesium and calcium play a large roll in its development. Apart from this, I am not much help.

 

[Piper27]

Does your big three swing between the two numbers you listed for each? How much solution are you dosing for each one daily?

 

[Piper27]

Acronic, thanks, calcium was always the one that caused it for me.

 

[reefiness]

Does your big three swing between the two numbers you listed for each? How much solution are you dosing for each one daily?

I try to test my water every weekend, but more recently it has come to about every 2 weeks, and there doesnt seem to be much bouncing around. Its just always a balance between trends and me adjusting the doser to make up for the differences.

I did have a little blip in my levels at the end of november when i changed the lens on the radion over my frag tank from the TIR to the wide angle lenses. I guess the overall par dropped a little so I noticed the elements jump after that which I assumed was from less rapid growth.

Currently im dosing 112 ml alk, 100ml of Ca, and 20ml of Mg per day spread over 4 doses 6 hours apart. Also the different elements at least 1 hour apart. I dont recall the exact timings of each off hand, if you want I can get the information for you. But for example, 28 ml of alk is dosed at 00:00, then 25ml of ca is dosed at 01:00, then 5 ml of Mg is dosed at 02:00, then 1 ml of vodka is dosed at 03:00. Then 28 ml of alk at 06:00, then 25 ml of Ca at 07:00.... etc etc etc.

To get back to the actual swings the last few readings were

Note: Alk (Hanna/Salifert), Ca (Salifert), Mg (Salifert)
12/25: Alk 9.4/8.9, Ca 475, Mg 1500
1/13: Alk 8.8/8.9, Ca 475, Mg 1440
1/29: Alk 8.4/8.3, Ca 470, Mg 1470. Alk dose increased from 108ml/day to 112 ml/day.
2/7: Alk 9.0/8.6, Ca 430, Mg 1380.

I didnt adjust the doser after the last test even though the Ca and Mg came down a bit because I like to get at least 2 trending results before I adjust to account for a possible error, or to take into account that I did a water change last weekend which also could explain some of the levels having changed.

 

[Gotzegot28]

Your nutrients are too low for your alk. Try feeding, raising NO3 or lowering alk

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[Piper27]

If brs is supposed to be dosed in equal proportions try doing so and lower the dose for both if one parameter starts to rise. When I had the issue it was only on a few pieces like you. It went away in a month or two when I corrected the problem. Your growths are not to bad so it may start to grow over quicker. I clipped any spots that were very bad looking but they were much worse than yours.

Gotzegot28 I don't think the OP is having trouble with pale coral and the images look like healthy pieces and not starved, nor do they have tip burn from high alk and uln. Or are you saying there is a link between the odd growth, alk and low nutrients?

 

[reefiness]

If brs is supposed to be dosed in equal proportions try doing so and lower the dose for both if one parameter starts to rise. When I had the issue it was only on a few pieces like you. It went away in a month or two when I corrected the problem. Your growths are not to bad so it may start to grow over quicker. I clipped any spots that were very bad looking but they were much worse than yours.

Gotzegot28 I don't think the OP is having trouble with pale coral and the images look like healthy pieces and not starved, nor do they have tip burn from high alk and uln. Or are you saying there is a link between the odd growth, alk and low nutrients?

I've never heard they needed to be dosed at the same levels. I've always heard to adjust based on your individual tanks usage. But I guess its worth a shot. Ill move them both to 104 ml/day and see what that does for me for now.

As for the NO3, I dont think theres an issue as was mentioned as from my understanding coloration is a key in determining a healthy nutrient load, and my coloration is awesome. Also if that were the case I would be seeing a more diffuse dulling of all color versus what i have which seems to be a skeletal issue.

 

[Piper27]

I am not saying they should, just wondering if they are equal two part additives like bionic or aquaforest comp123. I know it doesnt have the other elements in it but I would check to see if it is made to be dosed in equal parts. I hope you get it figured out, those tips bothered me everytime I looked in the tank.