Flow as it pertains to NO3 and ALK
- Thread starter snowmansnow
- Start date
- Messages
- 639
- Reaction score
- 627
Hmm! Guess I need to finally use this flow meter.
I don't know if it means exactly that. It might with the coral they studied but my take is this.
Our led's, t5's & and haldides will never produce the power of the sun. Just as the depth of our tanks won't match the depth of the ocean. So we're talking par relative to depth, water clarity plays a huge roll too. Yes, in a lagoon coral can't grow up past a certian point of depth do to the increased light but what is the par at different levels deeper than the lagoon, where the water is generally clearer?
Interesting points to think about. It would be nice to see some testing done on some different coral species found at different depths.
Great points Adam. As a test, Im going to move my Alk level up slightly from 8.75 to 9.25 and see how my colonys respond. I run a calcium reactor and have really low pH levels so this will help with that as well. I already have really high flow throughout most of my tank so that part is covered.
Depending on your Cal level you might want to think about moving the alk up with Kalk. Two birds one stone...
- Messages
- 4,970
- Reaction score
- 382
agree our artificial light will never match the sun, but my point is that nature seems to be away away from uninhibited growth. What I'm saying is, if the guy in the study is correct, there is basically a timer built into the coral. Up to 9am (when photosynthesis is being done) the timer is on.. then it cuts way down until 5pm at which point the PAR levels are friendly to photosynthesis. Deeper down those levels stay much more in the zone of growth, therefore the corals grow more.
THEREFORE if we want max growth from corals through photosynthesis replicating the sun is the wrong approach. Instead we need to be finding those levels of PAR / ALK / Flow that most encourage photosynthesis and tune into that instead.
- Messages
- 4,970
- Reaction score
- 382
I do have "reefer" thoughts on this all too though. First, I think back to the incredible tanks I've seen that are absolutely blasted with very high PAR levels and retain a lower alk of 7-8. What about those instances? You don't have to look very far to find examples like that.
If I take the approach of defending the science / observations in the above article the only response I can come up with is: Even THOSE tanks weren't living up to potential. They grew like that with a stunted photosynthesis and could have been even more amazing had the levels been more in range of optimal growth.
If I chase the points of the article what does it mean for me as a reefer?
1) PAR levels raising no higher than 250, which to my reefer mind seems SUPER LOW
2) Consistant high VOLUME flow
3) An elevated ALK 11-12dkh
4) Elevated NO3 levels (again pulling from the other article I noted) because of the increased NO3 and lower PAR levels
If I take the approach of defending the science / observations in the above article the only response I can come up with is: Even THOSE tanks weren't living up to potential. They grew like that with a stunted photosynthesis and could have been even more amazing had the levels been more in range of optimal growth.
If I chase the points of the article what does it mean for me as a reefer?
1) PAR levels raising no higher than 250, which to my reefer mind seems SUPER LOW
2) Consistant high VOLUME flow
3) An elevated ALK 11-12dkh
4) Elevated NO3 levels (again pulling from the other article I noted) because of the increased NO3 and lower PAR levels
I don't know. If you follow the ph trends in your tank it does seem to peak later in the day but I believe that is from the cumulative effect of the days photosynthesis. Nature does have mechanisms to control growth and population... until non-native species are introduced. Which is what we're doing with our tanks. Even biotope systems are to cramped for space to be natural. If we were going to make things ideal for growth we'd only have 1 or 2 species of coral and a couple inhabitants from the surrounding region of those coral. Then setup the parameters around those corals. Look at cudzu or in our realm xenia. Both will overtake their environment because there's no mechanism to control them in their new environment.
I do agree replicating the sun is the wrong approach but we need more info on other species of coral to know if the 200 par number holds true for them as well. (We already know certain species and colored corals do better at higher par levels than 200.) Then we can apply the par, pur, flow and nutrient levels to match an averaged balance to encourage higher growth rates. Not MAX growth rates, unless you are in it for propagation. Then you'd be back to making the most favorable environment for a smaller number of species per individual tank or frag setup.
This is why I love this hobby. There's always something new to learn.
If I remember correctly someone referenced this article recently.
https://www.reef2reef.com/ams/tank-parameters-of-some-masters.263/">https://www.reef2reef.com/ams/tank-parameters-of-some-masters.263/</a>
Some of the tanks more closely fit the parameters of the Advanced Aquarist series. But they're also all over the board and successful at the same time.
https://www.reef2reef.com/ams/tank-parameters-of-some-masters.263/">https://www.reef2reef.com/ams/tank-parameters-of-some-masters.263/</a>
Some of the tanks more closely fit the parameters of the Advanced Aquarist series. But they're also all over the board and successful at the same time.
- Messages
- 4,970
- Reaction score
- 382
I know what you're saying about using other species, however the constant would be that the zooxanthellae is zooxanthellae is zooxanthellae, right? Now, I could be wrong on this but isn't there just one species of zooxanthellae? The reason I'm asking that is because it would dictate photosynthesis occurs the same with different species of corals too, as long as the algae is the same.
And I also agree that we are FAR from nature in our tanks. Chasing nature is a futile effort. Everything about our tanks is synthetic, unless you're one that uses NSW. I sometimes wonder if the corals we propagate would even survive in nature, or if they have adapted to the artificial environment.
And I also agree that we are FAR from nature in our tanks. Chasing nature is a futile effort. Everything about our tanks is synthetic, unless you're one that uses NSW. I sometimes wonder if the corals we propagate would even survive in nature, or if they have adapted to the artificial environment.
- Messages
- 4,970
- Reaction score
- 382
- Messages
- 4,970
- Reaction score
- 382
ok i resend the thought that all zoo algae is the same. i knew better than that...
and upon some VERY preliminary research the different kinds are called clades
I know what i"lkl be reading today.
This:
and upon some VERY preliminary research the different kinds are called clades
I know what i"lkl be reading today.This:
I don't know enough to say all zooxanthellae is the same. My 1st thought is no. All the different colors are designed to target different spectrums of light. There's also the huge expanse in regions of the ocean. To me that's like saying all cats are the same or all of us, humans, are the same. Genenicly, yes close, but not the same. I know zooxanthellae is a much simpler organism but because of that it's able to evolve and adapt much quicker too. Too much variation in nature.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G935A using Tapatalk
SnowManSnow;1114009 wrote: ok i resend the thought that all zoo algae is the same. i knew better than that...
and upon some VERY preliminary research the different kinds are called clades
This:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/1/aafeature1">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/1/aafeature1</a>[/QUOTE]
Bookmarked for future reading, TY ;)
SnowManSnow;1114009 wrote: ok i resend the thought that all zoo algae is the same. i knew better than that...
and upon some VERY preliminary research the different kinds are called clades
This:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/1/aafeature1">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/1/aafeature1</a>[/QUOTE]
Im getting a headache already. Even more to read. Lol
- Messages
- 4,970
- Reaction score
- 382
I'm in the middle of the article now, and it really is a great read IMO. heres a quote that sums up why, "For instance, some zooxanthellae clades are tolerant of high light intensity, while others have higher thermal tolerances, and this is where it begins to get interesting to hobbyists."
in other words out efforts to keep water (and thats what we really are.. keepers of water) in specific ranges of things like alk and PAR levels are should be dictated by the zoozanthelle that is hosted in the corals we are attempting to keep, otherwise the coral can't survive or at least can't thrive.
I havent had a chance to review it yet. But, on another note, Im curious about how tightly controlled temp (and what range) is an influence of the entire process. Higher or lower temps must have an effect on zooxanthellae growth.
