[cdemeritt]

Hello,
I have been trying to keep my calcium at 420-440ppm range, however it drops about 20 ppm a day. I only have softies, and about 20% coralline coverage of surface areas, and a dozen or so of small snails. Doesn't seem to me to be enough of a calcium useage to account for a 20ppm day drop. It seems to stop when I get to about the 300-340ppm mark, and stablize around there. Any thoughts? Is this normal? I'd expect this if I had a really high requirement,But I didn't think I had one that large.

Tank setup:

Total system gallons :75 All Bare Bottom tanks
PH :8.3
Dkh :8-9
Phosphates : undetectable
Nitrates : undetectable
Magnessium : ??? But should be fine

Weekly 10% waterchange
I suppliment 1 TBS of Epsom salts per 5g water during water change.
I first noticed this a while back, and at the time had been using Kalk for Calcium, Now using the 2 part system.

Chleto in one 'fuge.

Thanks,
Chris

 

[Spanky]

Chris, I just posted this for Koddie. It might help you too.

Originally Posted by Koddie Doo i have been adding purple up and test my calcium and it was 480, my question is can i OD my tank? what would happen? and is purple up like buffer where it only reaches a certian # then stops?

Koddie, I don't know what purple up is, but if it just adds Ca, here's the real poop.

High Ca levels are another hobby myth. Ca is not limiting to corals or any marine animals that use it.
Limiting means, it's not the factor that limits their ability to put down Ca skeletons.

Carbon = buffer = alk, is the limiting factor. And even that is not limiting unless it's way lower than what's recommended in the hobby. It is the buffer through. So high alk will 'buffer' your tank against pH swings.

Ca has not been shown to be limiting even at 50ppm.

Keeping high Ca levels will certainly cause you problems. Not just in the off chance that you crash you alk, but it will precipitate on your pumps, heaters, plumbing, UV if you are using one, etc etc.
__________________

 

[mdcorcoran]

Supplementing with Epsom salts? I haven't heard of that before, is it for the iodide?

 

[Kathi]

Supplementing with Epsom salts? I haven't heard of that before, is it for the iodide?

I haven't heard of it either.

 

[cdemeritt]

Epsom Salt: Magnesium Sulfate
MgSO4:7H2O

To help keep Magnesium levels up (some salt mixes are very low in Mg). It can affect Ca Levels. Caution: Too much of a good thing isn't always good. Using Epsom salt can increase your Sulfates if you use too much or don't do water changes. Most people don't need Mg Suppliments, and it is very important to test for them.

 

[cdemeritt]

Spanky,
I've re-read your message several times hoping that I mis-read it. I first want to say that I know you've been doing this for a long time now, and that you usually have good experiances to back up your statements, If what you said had come from most anyone else I'd have dismissed it without a second thought. maybe I simply mis-understood what you said and please correct me if I have.
I got from your post that you believe that we shouldn't worry about how much calcium we have in our tanks, and that even 50ppm would be ok.
I have to say this is very hard for me to accept, as in the 10 years I've been keeping saltwater tanks, there have been many fads that have come and gone, But the one constant has been that every Book, Artical, document, paper, advice from LFS, Expert, Coral rancher, and anyone I've ever talked to has said, until today, that calcium levels should be maintained between 350 to 450ppm. There has been so much talk and effort put into calcium generators, calcium levels, suppliments, etc. etc, are you really saying it is all a waste? with respect, it to me would be as if you had said that you don't really need salt to keep corals. or was this a comment based on my personnal bioload?

With that said, I still would like to hear about how much calcium other people go though in a day (approx.)

Thanks,
Chris

 

[crvz]

I dont think that he's saying its ok, I believe the point was that it is not LIMITING when as low as 50ppm. I interpret this to mean that, if other components are available, calcium as low as 50 ppm will still allow for the building of calcium carbonate skeletons. This bangs home the point that keeping calcium in the 400+ ppm range may not be as necessary as other folks have said, and that a calcium level of closer to 350 should be nothing to worry about.

Personally, I use IO salt, which will pull my calcium down over time because it has a lower calcium content (~300-350) than others. So if I do a number of large water changes over a period of a month (say 3 or 4 20% water changes), then my calcium content will start to trend towards 350 (even though I use both a calcium reactor and a kalkreactor), and I'll add some SeaChem powdered calcium to get it closer to 400. Unfortunately, because I use this equipment, I don't know what my exact "bioload" of calcium is. However, I may let it sit around 350ppm for a few months and see if anything is impacted.

 

[combiemaster]

hmm mine always reads at 490 calcium using salifert test its been about 2 weeks since i last checked ill check tomorrow and ill post my results

 

[Spanky]

Spanky,
I've re-read your message several times hoping that I mis-read it.
Thanks,
Chris

I think you read it right.

Chris, let me try to describe it for you, them I'm off to work.

Let's say that no one had ever kept a dog as a pet before.

Some person comes along and successfully kept a dog. In a 5 acre, natural enclosure, with plenty of vermin to forage on.
That person became a dog hero, to other people that wanted to keep a dog.
Dogs became more popular, and other people decided to capitalize on that first person's discoveries. Those other people stole/took that first person's idea/method and ran with it. They wrote books on dog keeping, went on lecture tours, and as dogs became more popular, they did to.
All the while basing their methods on that first person's method. A five acre enclosure with natural food - you can even add a stream to it and some wooded areas and some field. It's all warm and fuzzy, and dog hobbyists jumped on it. Why not, these people were experts.

Now we know that dogs are perfectly happy living in the living room, healthier eating processed foods, and drinking water out of the faucet. Because now we know that they get distemper, parasites, and that stream has e coli and leaches.

But the dog experts have based their entire reputation on their way, and while building that reputation they were clear to claim that no other way would work - only their way, or only some way that they authorized. And since they were not the ones to authorize keeping dogs in living rooms - it was doomed to failure.

The science said that dogs needed certain vitamins, minerals, etc. But they didn't bother to read the science when they stole that other person's method and were not trained to understand it if they did. And a whole industry was built around fence sellers, stream builders, vermin breeders, and a huge amount of over the counter treatments for the parasites and diseases that dogs caught. This industry was now also dependent on keeping dogs in a 5 acre enclosure, some wooded, some field, foraging on vermin, and having a stream. The industry was also now dependent on the dog experts and their ability to stay experts.

 

[Geoff]

does it matter if the dog drinks out of the toilet.

G~

 

[Spanky]

only if some expert recommends it, and some manufacturer makes a special toilet just for that.

 

[beach bum]

only if some expert recommends it, and some manufacturer makes a special toilet just for that.

ahhh... :ac11: just what i needed this morning. i have missed seeing your posts even more than i realized spanky.

 

[lduncan]

... of course the experts soon discovered that one legged border collies lacked the intelligence to live trouble free in a 5 acre, natural enclosure, with plenty of vermin to forage on. Their owners were reported to the Authorities and proclaimed too dumb to operate such enclosures.

 

[Spanky]

That's three legged border collie with advanced typing skills! LOL

and since the dog experts couldn't debunk the science, and wouldn't dare discuss it with the border collies in public for fear of looking like even bigger bozos. The border collies had to be shut up and the dog experts were left with only one choice.....

..launch a campaign to have the collies declared incompetent.

But it backfired on them, and they were banished to a land devoid of all dogs.

 

[marcuspajp]

This thread is the funniest thing i've read all year

I hav'nt measured my Ca yet, I got freaked out by all the stuff in the Salifert box..

 

[tdwyatt]

I think it reasonable to shoot for 350 to 400PPM calcium anfd 9 to 11 dKH alkalinity in closed systems with a large number of hermatypic organisms for systems usinug ASW only (no access to NSW). It has been my experience that levels below 350 PPM calcium tend to have slow growth and occasional specimen losses as they drop below 300 PPM calcium in particular in my experiences in closed systems...

...then again, that is just my experience. There may have been other causes, but they are coincidental with low calcium and alkalinity levels during a period of inaccurate instrumentation here. BTW, I do not recommend the continuous use of the calcium probe on the market due to loss of accuracy over a period of weeks to months (discovery when you are one of the first to use a prduct can BE DISASTEROUS)

Personally, when I read the comment about 50 ppm not being growth-limiting in Spank's post, I thought it was a typo...

heh, still laughing about the 3-legged border collie analogy...

 

[cdemeritt]

BLASPHEME! How dare you challange the GODS of Reefkeeping like that! Down with the Blasphemer!

Ok, Seriously, It is a Interesting thought to keep the calcium levels at much lower levels than the currently accepted levels of 350 to 450 ppm. It might just work. However I hope you don't hold it against me if I don't take your advice at the moment, and keep my Ca levels at around the 400ppm mark. My tank has never looked so good, The coralline is expanding at a good pace for the first time in the 6 years, etc. etc. Simple visual observation by my untrained eye shows my I've got a good healthy tank. Much better than before, maybe it is not because Ca is more availible, but maybe because to bring the Ca levels up to 400ppm, the overall water quality had to improve, However whatever the reason, I don't plan to make any changes. Besides I just bought a 50lb bag of Calcium Chloride flakes.
I will keep my eyes open, as you may yet be proven correct, as you have in the past, but for me, I'm not going to jump on this particular bandwagon just yet. I'm just surprised that if 50ppm really isn't limiting, why no one has caught on much sooner. It only took 2 years to debunk DSB's.

As far as collies, I find them too difficult to keep, I Stick with Labradors, Much more hardy in my smaller 1 acre unfenced yard. only a few squirrles to chase so I need to suppliment with steak. As far as toliet water, I really haven't had a problem so far. You really need to watch out for those nasty porcupines, worse than Aiptasia. I've been thinking about adding a rottie to my collection, any thoughts about proper conditions and compatiblity? LOL.

Chris

 

[Spanky]

:rotflmao:

It seems to stop when I get to about the 300-340ppm mark, and stablize around there.

Chris, I would shoot for 350 then. That should be easier to maintain, won't be so unstable, and you won't be chasing numbers so much all the time.

I would be willing to bet that since you are paying close attention to Ca right now, you are paying attention to keeping the tank cleaner and Alk.
Keeping up with Alk and keeping phosphates out are making the biggest difference in what you're seeing.

I would guess adding a Rottie would be ok, as long as you run carbon.