Snowsrfr
New member
Mmmmm.........possible new gadget......:lolspin:
What do you dose?
- Thread starter Snowsrfr
- Start date
Mmmmm.........possible new gadget......:lolspin:
JRF
New member
Corals really need to be fed, and not fish poo, especially in a closed system. Here is a blurb from a scientific study about coral nutrition, and although this section deals with coral bleaching, it aludes to the "fish poo" myth in relation to coral recovery and mortality.
"I bet you are correct that nutrients will be more important than suspected so far in the bleaching/mortality/recovery story, but maybe not in the bleaching end as you first suggested. A search for an important role of nutrients might be more likely to bear fruit if it were aimed at the post-bleaching mortality and/or recovery processes and focused on the interactions among nutrient availability, bacterial activity on dying corals, hypoxia, algal recruitment and growth, the ability of damaged coral tissue to recover and new larvae to settle. Michael Risk and colleagues have made interesting discoveries about the synergistic effects of nutrients and sediment. ...
On the other hand, observations of bleaching events around the world suggest that the "fish poop theory" will not be supported the data. To confirm this, the results of Reef Check and other datasets such as the AIMS long-term monitoring program could be used to show that reefs with high populations of various guilds of reef fish were often more heavily bleached than reefs with lower populations -- as noted by Alina and others. Good examples for this lack of correlation maybe found by comparing well-managed, no-take MPAs such as reefs at Orpheus Island, Australia with fished reefs nearby which bleached equally or less badly in 1998."
Gregor Hodgson, PhD
Extracted from:
Nutrient Deficiency and Coral Bleaching
A Coral-List Server Discussion Thread
"I bet you are correct that nutrients will be more important than suspected so far in the bleaching/mortality/recovery story, but maybe not in the bleaching end as you first suggested. A search for an important role of nutrients might be more likely to bear fruit if it were aimed at the post-bleaching mortality and/or recovery processes and focused on the interactions among nutrient availability, bacterial activity on dying corals, hypoxia, algal recruitment and growth, the ability of damaged coral tissue to recover and new larvae to settle. Michael Risk and colleagues have made interesting discoveries about the synergistic effects of nutrients and sediment. ...
On the other hand, observations of bleaching events around the world suggest that the "fish poop theory" will not be supported the data. To confirm this, the results of Reef Check and other datasets such as the AIMS long-term monitoring program could be used to show that reefs with high populations of various guilds of reef fish were often more heavily bleached than reefs with lower populations -- as noted by Alina and others. Good examples for this lack of correlation maybe found by comparing well-managed, no-take MPAs such as reefs at Orpheus Island, Australia with fished reefs nearby which bleached equally or less badly in 1998."
Gregor Hodgson, PhD
Extracted from:
Nutrient Deficiency and Coral Bleaching
A Coral-List Server Discussion Thread
Similar threads
