The Reef Tank banner
41 - 60 of 250 Posts

· Aquatic Philosopher
Joined
·
15,750 Posts
You can't grow algae (enough of a biomass to use as a nutrient export system) in a low nutrient state nor claim that any system with a increasing algal biomass is a low nutrient state in stasis. Algae's increase in biomass is an ecological marker for eutrophication. It is like trying to grow Kentucky fescue in a desert... in order to export water. Either it is a desert, devoid of water or there is enough water to support the grass or there is grass, therefore water, therefore not a desert. This is the only logical outcome.

Any ecologist worth their salt can pick out bioindicators like algae... for example

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/swamp/docs/presentations/newtool_wqa_algae.pdf

(or if you need a basic refresher)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioindicator
The composition and total biomass of algal species in aquatic systems serves as an important metric for organic pollution and nutrient loading such as nitrogen and phosphorus.
The algae in you system proves there is an abundance of N and P for it to exist. You can not prove that the algae is keeping it at a low level because phosphate test kits are not sensitive enough to reach the point where P becomes limited and often has too much of a margin of error to be useful. In addition, the competely miss organic P so test kits miss a large amount of P, are not sensitive enough, and if there is a large enough amount of algal biomass, it will convert inorganic P into organic in a tight enough of a loop with bacteria that it will foul your test. When it comes to inaccurate test kits, using bio-indicators is an extremely precise testing method.
 

· Export with Care!
Joined
·
6,805 Posts
Your not at a eutrophic state. But algae's natural processes promote a increasing nutrient levels. Which your maintence and water changes ect are keeping it from progressing rapidly. Your not operating at low nutrients or ultra low (oliotrophic). Your tank is hovering probably mesotrophic or at the edge of low nutrients.

Corals can survive and some do really well at that range. Softies tend to love it. Even some Lps. Sps can tolerate it but prefer lower. Due to the growth rate being decent places you higher then you think. Low or ultra low algae does not gain biomass/growth. It instead starves and diminishes.

Algae can act as a pseudo buffer of sorts, but it's releasing nutrients when you start to go towards lower nutrients. But slows the climb to eutrophic. The tank problems arrise when the increase bioload out paces your maintence and rocks ect start loading phosphates. This happens easier with algae as bacteria are being fed fro more algae sources as opposed to removing bound phosphates. They go for the easier meal.

This is where you have to step back and look at what the algae is effecting. Algae's a source of direct and released organic material. This is prime food for bacteria and pods. So its in essence a buffet for organisms. So since their is a easy access buffet you have far less working on cleaving and removing bound phosphates from the rock/coral skeletons in the system. This imbalance causes a build up of bound phosphates which once they reach high enough levels algae and other nuisances can take root on "fertile" fields of sorts. They now have a sponge of phosphates in high concentration to move form just the ATS to the rock work as well. This is one way algae slowly creeps up the nutrient level in a system.

Now keep in mind more bacteria is not a good thing really. The more bacteria you have in a system processing waste means there is more nutrients trapped within all those life forms. So the basic Bioload of a system goes up greatly. While day to day operation this is never noticed, but suspended in the tank is a much larger stock pile of nutrients. While its static while populations remain stable, a disruption to the tank. Whether be it be dosing to much of something, or lights weakening or changing, even just a air borne house chemical killing off some, any one of the human errors our tanks experience. Well due to having this large stock pile of nutrients waiting for the first misstep you run higher risks with a crash of sorts. One big enough misstep and all the bacteria population has die off or starves from a extra good cleaning. Those dead bacteria are now releasing nutrients not containing them. So you get a rise in nutrients again. Algae and bacteria play a dance one fuels the other, this ends up stacking up nutrients and in essence is a army of nutrients waiting to be released.

In the end your tank sounds like your cleaning is good enough that you might be keeping things in check for now. The algae is working for you at times generally but also working against you at times feeding nutrients back. It is preventing you from really pushing the nutrient levels ultra low via maintenance, but it can slow a sudden increase. Granted with some risk of loading phosphates in the rock and causing a later issue. Rock loading is not a sure thing, as your cleaning routine can prevent it or slow it, or if its not enough it just buys you time. This is why the presence of algae growth is not a sign of a system reducing nutrients. Algae cannot reduce nutrients past a certain point, once it hits that point it works against you.

I have not problems with algae, beyond the idea of in a Reef Tank it allows you to lower the nutrient levels to low nutrients or Ultra low. Because at that point its actually fighting you and you are making the system lower with algae kicking and screaming the whole time until it dies.


My low nutrient tank, has very minimal water changes, and a pretty massive food importing daily. I run nothing but a skimmer as well. As the tank has matured I have starved out all the algae down to very little trace. I even watched some byropsis decay and die. (Some types of Byropsis have the lowest nutrient threshold before full decay of algae). I have run a screen ATS on this tank a little while back to see if I could even grow algae on the screen. I couldn't grow any more them film algae on it. Even still if you noticed I said its a "low" nutrient tank. I am nearing Oliotrophic but I still have a ways to go. Simply I have some purging of bound phosphates that once they have purged I should firmly be able to hit ultra low levels. My 150g has been a fun test bed for nutrient control, and I love to watch algae starve it makes me feel good knowing I am going in the right direction.

I'm sadistic with algae, I let my 30g go with not water changes for a month to allow the one bubble algae to grow some friends in the 30g. I then took the bubble algae and popped half of them in the 150g and placed the remaining ones into a crack with light to see if they would survive. Yes I am twisted to invite bubble algae to come play. But when it died and no new ones grew, it was a bio indicator that the tank was moving the right direction.
 

· Aquatic Philosopher
Joined
·
15,750 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #44 ·
One example that I've seen that show how an ATS improved a system:

- 4 year old neglected aquarium that was on an auto feeder, very few if any water changes
- Hanna phosphate reader indicated .6 PPM in po4.
- ATS installed
- ~3.5 months later, no water changes, no changes in feeding, .09 PPM in po4 on the same Hanna.

The only maintenance was refilling the auto feeder and harvesting the turf algae.
 

· Export with Care!
Joined
·
6,805 Posts
Something I found interesting, and something to ponder.

Nitrogen and Phosphate are the big factors in algae growth.
In the wild Nitrogen levels due to pollution and fertilizers are causing mass algae growth and nutrient issues in the ocean. This is causing the direct destruction of coral reefs throughout the world. Phosphates are not the main issue in the ocean.

So why aree phosphates not a big issue in the oceans?

Is Nitrogen or Phosphates the bigger issue in Reef Tanks? And why?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #46 ·
I've always had about 10-30ppm in nitrates according to Salifert in my SPS tank. Many people consider Salifert to be on the low side.

However, in my SPS tanks, I've had several SPS frags grow fully into mini colonies of vibrant health and hardiness while outcompeting and overrunning nearby tufts of turf algae.

The green smooth skin SPS you see in the front left was a half inch frag a couple months ago. Even with .08 to .1 Po4 and between 20-30ppm nitrates, it grew and grew and grew.

 

· Export with Care!
Joined
·
6,805 Posts
One example that I've seen that show how an ATS improved a system:

- 4 year old neglected aquarium that was on an auto feeder, very few if any water changes
- Hanna phosphate reader indicated .6 PPM in po4.
- ATS installed
- ~3.5 months later, no water changes, no changes in feeding, .09 PPM in po4 on the same Hanna.

The only maintenance was refilling the auto feeder and harvesting the turf algae.
Super loaded system, and algae seizing the cesspool levels. Plus more of the available nutrients are being converted back and forth between inorganic and organic. So you have a faster rate of conversion and more trapped within the bioload of the system. Now the increase in organic phosphates your test kit can't test for. So your only seeing part of the problem. Also as well the system is in flux trading nutrients and working back to a balance. That will likely tank many months depending on the size of the ATS, vs how badly the tank was loaded. So its to soon to tell.

I also assume that the tank is fish only or maybe some softies, as otherwise you would start seeing a decline odds are in many of the corals for numerous reasons.

We think a month is a long time, to a reef tank a month is a day. My new tank has been purging wastes for a year now :) Its not done purging even now. I can still see the bio indicators of continual reduction of nutrients. I figured it would take at least a year to get it in the realm of where I want it to be. It will be a bit longer.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #48 ·
With your example on bacteria, I'm not sure then if you're also implying carbon dosing with vinegar/vodka and biopellets is also a crash waiting to happen.

IIRC, AA did a study and found that skimmer is the only method that really affects bacteria populations in a tank and only to a certain floor. High powered UV didn't make a noticeable dent. In the same study, aquarium bacteria levels were actually quite low compared to a healthy reef.

Again, I'm not one of those people that advocate only doing one, I think it's healthier to do all of the above (skimming, ATS, wc, carbon dosing). I believe Floyd is also in the same line of thinking about this.
 

· Export with Care!
Joined
·
6,805 Posts
I've always had about 10-30ppm in nitrates according to Salifert in my SPS tank. Many people consider Salifert to be on the low side.

However, in my SPS tanks, I've had several SPS frags grow fully into mini colonies of vibrant health and hardiness while outcompeting and overrunning nearby tufts of turf algae.

The green smooth skin SPS you see in the front left was a half inch frag a couple months ago. Even with .08 to .1 Po4 and between 20-30ppm nitrates, it grew and grew and grew.

Looks nice, you keep up on water changes well. Clearly your detritus removal is kept up.

Keeping SPS with algae is not impossible. I think this is where people get caught up in the idea. That anything negative said about algae is surely wrong and usually seen as an attack.

The Problem lies in algae can exist in a system with corals growing fine, Algae can create a bad situation if your not keeping up with the detritus removal. The algae will not allow you to bottom out a nutrient level to the prime areas, simply due to its presence growing in a system.

Does that mean that algae is going to destroy your tank? Odds are usually not.

Does that mean that tank with the same water change routine would not look so well? It would look just fine.

Is my tank successful ONLY because the presence of a ATS? Nope.

As often have to say, I have no problem with an ATS, or algae. I only seek to help people understand algae is not working as many perceive and its often given 100x more credit then it should. The credit often in those cases should be given to other aspects of the tank, Usally the Owner with the siphon hose in his hand :)

So lets turn this around, without a ATS on my main tank, how do I keep it algae free?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #50 ·
Well the whole reason I've gone down this ATS route is to try to mitigate out some of the turf algae on the rocks.

I've had a bad breakout when I had to remove all my media, UV, and skimming for 7 days to administer Prazi Pro in the display tank. Nothing bad happened but I did have an algae break out. ATS are noted for removing display tank algae by outcompeting them. Hence why I went to explore that route. I may eventually just use API AlgaeFix in the system. I've read a lot of good things about it and it doesn't seem to cause problems unless the user is an idiot.

My method of deterius removal is pretty bad probably. I just use a turkey baster to blow the hell out of my rocks, let it get suspended and trapped in my filter sock then immediately swap that out.
 

· Aquatic Philosopher
Joined
·
15,750 Posts
Actually, carbon dosing could be a crash waiting to happen. Talk to folks who have "come off carbon" and ask for the result. ;) It is not perdy.

Gawd, you are not suggesting to carbon dose AND run algae... that is a serious recipe for disaster.

The benefit for a skimmer is that it actively removes organics and some bacterial population from the system completely... and does so on a continuous basis. It is the only item that can do that save a continuous WC device.

Look up the margin of error for the phosphate checker. Keep in mind, our goal is 0.009 or less... 0.1 is 10X more that was algae needs to be complete unlimited.
 

· Export with Care!
Joined
·
6,805 Posts
With your example on bacteria, I'm not sure then if you're also implying carbon dosing with vinegar/vodka and biopellets is also a crash waiting to happen.

IIRC, AA did a study and found that skimmer is the only method that really affects bacteria populations in a tank and only to a certain floor. High powered UV didn't make a noticeable dent. In the same study, aquarium bacteria levels were actually quite low compared to a healthy reef.

Again, I'm not one of those people that advocate only doing one, I think it's healthier to do all of the above (skimming, ATS, wc, carbon dosing). I believe Floyd is also in the same line of thinking about this.
Good catch, yes carbon dosing and algae's effect on bacteria populations are very close to one another in effects. The same issues carbon dosing can experience is very similar to what algae does, but with some different rules of sorts.

Also I have NEVER said its going to crash, again people assume its a 100% thing. Understanding algae and how it really works, as well as its impact on the rest of a systems functions is key. Going under the basic idea of its a exporting and lower nutrients beyond the mesotrophic range is the problem. While you might be fine and never have issues, the blind leap people advocate algae doing these things, is what causes so many new reefers ATS's added to systems then a year or two down the road the tank has issues or crashes. No one wants to look at the algae as a source for the crash because its 100% the greatest thing ever, how could it hurt my tank. Then wander off and blame something else.

That is the greatest crime, Understanding algae and the system, and understanding Detritus and its role. You are able to maintain a good system, and avoid a possible issue later. The key is understanding beyond the algae what needs to be done to keep it running right.

When you get down to the core of lower nutrients, algae can be seen as a road block on the road to ultra low nutrients. But it can still have a role if your looking for more of a swinging buffer.
 

· Export with Care!
Joined
·
6,805 Posts
I don't think anyone is arguing against a skimmer.
Good skimmers are hard to beat! Great additional tools one of the few we really have at a clean removal of some waste :dance:
 

· Export with Care!
Joined
·
6,805 Posts
Well the whole reason I've gone down this ATS route is to try to mitigate out some of the turf algae on the rocks.

I've had a bad breakout when I had to remove all my media, UV, and skimming for 7 days to administer Prazi Pro in the display tank. Nothing bad happened but I did have an algae break out. ATS are noted for removing display tank algae by outcompeting them. Hence why I went to explore that route. I may eventually just use API AlgaeFix in the system. I've read a lot of good things about it and it doesn't seem to cause problems unless the user is an idiot.

My method of deterius removal is pretty bad probably. I just use a turkey baster to blow the hell out of my rocks, let it get suspended and trapped in my filter sock then immediately swap that out.
Yeah the filter sock trick is good I do run one during cleaning, But your missing a lot of waste not making it to the sock, which down the road can really screw things up, even a ATS would lose growth space in time.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
101 Posts
Discussion Starter · #57 ·
While you might be fine and never have issues, the blind leap people advocate algae doing these things, is what causes so many new reefers ATS's added to systems then a year or two down the road the tank has issues or crashes. No one wants to look at the algae as a source for the crash because its 100% the greatest thing ever, how could it hurt my tank. Then wander off and blame something else.
I don't know, I don't think new reefers are going out in droves buying ATS, most have never even heard of it. Most newbies seem to go the bio pellet route and buying the biggest skimmer oversized for their system then poorly maintaing their tank because their new $500 skimmer should be enough! :funny:

At least that's what I see when perusing beginner or question forums.

Most likely, tank crashes are probably due to poor husbandry by people who are new like you said.
 

· Aquatic Philosopher
Joined
·
15,750 Posts
I would go ahead and step "out there" and say that the Adey "Smithsonian" ATS husbandry approach will crash a tank. I will not mince words there. I will go ahead and say that the NYSteelo method with a fuge and a DSB (without WCs) will crash a tank.

ATS work against the nutrient reduction concept that folks advocate for in dark corners (and in public places) of the hobby. Just like telling a kid that "doing drugs" in HS will prevent them from getting into a good college is not always true, but that behavior combined with other activities is a recipe for disaster. Sure, there are those who manage recreational actives better and do fine but is it helping the goal... not really.
 

· Aquatic Philosopher
Joined
·
15,750 Posts
I guess all those tanks of the month on every site using pellets and macro algae refugiums are also just waiting to crash?
Yes. Especially if they are relying on those two methods for their primary export. Running both just shows that the user has no real clue about either method.

There are dozens and dozens of TOTM that crash months or a few year later. TOTM to me is just those who spend more on crap than others in a lot of the cases. TOTM have nothing to do with husbandry and everything to do with presentation. I can make any tank look good or a photo-op but that does not mean that the system is sustainable.
 
41 - 60 of 250 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top