Phosphates and SPS - help from the mixed reef and SPS experts

[kirkwood]

I took my GFO offline in November. Since then, in my SPS I've observed less and in some cases no polyp extension, reduced coloration, and stunted growth. Everything I've read about high phosphates impact on SPS lead me to believe that it was the cause of my problem. I got a new Hannah low range phos checker today after reading very favorable reviews and thumbs up from some trusted ARCers. I tested at 0.06. My zoas, acans, favia, hammer, torch, chalice, and pectinia all look fluffy and happier than ever. Acros and especially millies not so much. BN, stylo, pocilli, digi, and monti all look great.

I put my GFO reactor back online tonight with 20 tablespoons of BRS GFO. At this point I'm wondering what PHOS level do you target for a mixed reef??? Ideally I guess its easier to keep one or the other, and I guess that is a decision I may have to make soon if I'm not happy with the reuslts.

 

[gregoryleonard]

keep n mind that a reading of 0.06 could mean an actual reading of around 0.1. how is your flow? in a mixed reef, if you have good flow for SPS, it may be too much for Z/Ps and LPS and if the Z/Ps and LPS are happy, then SPS is not. Also, PE can be the results of not enough light as well. there are many factors that can make SPS look unhappy/unhealthy. Make small/slow changes whatever you do. I had a similar problem when I had just LEDS on my DT, when I added T5 lighting and even moved a SPS colony to my downstairs Frag system (all systems are tied together so water parameters are the same) with T5s and LEDs I got better PE and colors within a few weeks after making those changes and making sure I had enough flow as well.

 

[ralph atl]

I always try to keep phates at 0.024 or below and trates at 0.5 or below.

If my sps get too "pale", I start feeding my LPS excessively, and feed my fish & corals nutramar-ova.

I might add a 3rd or 4th fish feeding, too. It's easier to add, then remove (after it builds up, anyway).

my egg always said 0, when my low range DD Merck & Elos kit stated 0.024

 

[kirkwood]

gregoryleonard;926891 wrote: keep n mind that a reading of 0.06 could mean an actual reading of around 0.1. how is your flow? in a mixed reef, if you have good flow for SPS, it may be too much for Z/Ps and LPS and if the Z/Ps and LPS are happy, then SPS is not. Also, PE can be the results of not enough light as well. there are many factors that can make SPS look unhappy/unhealthy. Make small/slow changes whatever you do. I had a similar problem when I had just LEDS on my DT, when I added T5 lighting and even moved a SPS colony to my downstairs Frag system (all systems are tied together so water parameters are the same) with T5s and LEDs I got better PE and colors within a few weeks after making those changes and making sure I had enough flow as well.

right, I know the egg has a +/-.04 range, so I have to think of the worst case scenario of 0.1. All the signs make sense to me. Browning, slowed or stopping of calcification. GFO has been offline since 11/12/13, and I had a baby early december so I missed a water change or 2.

I believe my flow should be sufficient. I have 4 Koralia's running a total of 5,000 gph, in addition to the flow created from my return pump which is another 700-1000gph. All of this in a 120.

I do run just LEDs. 2 MM boxes (no optics) and 1 eshine 60x3w with 90 degree optics. All are non dimmable. 6 weeks ago I modded all units to go full spectrum adding 420nm, 480nm, 660nm, and 2.5K.

Edit:

mysterybox;926917 wrote: I always try to keep phates at 0.024 or below and trates at 0.5 or below.

If my sps get too "pale", I start feeding my LPS excessively, and feed my fish & corals nutramar-ova.

I might add a 3rd or 4th fish feeding, too. It's easier to add, then remove (after it builds up, anyway).

my egg always said 0, when my low range DD Merck & Elos kit stated 0.024

seems like those that are successful with mixed reefs maintain low phosphates but have extremely powerful nutrient export systems so that they can feed heavily to maintain their LPS and softies. What do you say Ralph?

My GFO is back online as of last night. I will test phos again in a few days to see the impact of the GFO.

Ralph I know you change out your GFO every 2 weeks. What is your ratio of tank gallons to quantity of GFO that you use?

My other question is if I consider increasing the size of my refugium to grow more chaeto, how much chaeto do you need to grow to achieve the same phosphate export as say 1 cup of GFO?? any one know that ??

 

[mcphock]

Why not just try carbon dosing instead of expensive GFO?

 

[kirkwood]

McPhock;926958 wrote: Why not just try carbon dosing instead of expensive GFO?

never tried it, haven't researched it, don't know enough about it.

Got a link I can look it?

 

[mcphock]

Google, my man...

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/CDosingArt.htm">http://www.wetwebmedia.com/CDosingArt.htm</a>

[IMG]http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2008-08/nftt/">http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2008-08/nftt/</a>

ANCEDOTAL EXPERIENCE WARNING:

Carbon dosing has been a Godsend for me. I dose 4ml every day for my 120 tank and I usually have PO4 around .02 and similar NO3. Costs me about $3.50 every 3 months.

 

[snowmansnow]

McPhock;926958 wrote: Why not just try carbon dosing instead of expensive GFO?

Dosing a carbon source is a completely different animal if your purpose is to get rid of PO4. A carbon source is simply food for bacteria.
GFO is a media that locks in the PO4 to then be removed from your system. The GFO does add a slight carbon source to the system, but it isn't a viable carbon source.

If you start dosing carbon be careful and start slow or you'll feed both good and bad bacteria. (cyano and such).

 

[kirkwood]

McPhock;926960 wrote:
ANCEDOTAL EXPERIENCE WARNING:

Carbon dosing has been a Godsend for me. I dose 4ml every day for my 120 tank and I usually have PO4 around .02 and similar NO3. Costs me about $3.50 every 3 months.

did you hit any snags along the way?? I also have a 120g. What was your dosing regimen from when you first started to where you are now??

 

[mcphock]

Yes and no. You're correct in that carbon is a food source. That food gets subsequently consumed as part of a bacterial colony which is then skimmed by your skimmer. Either way, the PO4 is bound up... either as skimmate or a chemical bond. Both are exported by manual removal...cleaning the skimmer or removing the GFO.

ANCEDOTAL EVIDENCE WARNING:

I had no issues with cyano at all. In fact, it cleared up what little I originally had.

Edit: I did hit one snag, although I cannot definitely conclude it was due to vodka dosing. I had two prized scolys, and both seemed to decline after the addition of vodka. Other LPS I have, like a huge doughnut coral and Frogspawn were unaffected. (For what its worth, I gave the scolys away to another non-carbon dosing tank and they have not recovered. Perhaps they were afflicted with something else I could not identify, but I am hesitant to implicate the carbon dosing if they still have not recovered in a carbon dosing free tank.)

I dosed exactly according to the instructions in the link I sent you:
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2008-08/nftt/

My system water volume is 110G, so it was just a matter of a few simple calculations to follow along with the dosing regimen.

 

[snowmansnow]

McPhock;926968 wrote: Yes and no. You're correct in that carbon is a food source. That food gets subsequently consumed as part of a bacterial colony which is then skimmed by your skimmer. Either way, the PO4 is bound up... either as skimmate or a chemical bond. Both are exported by manual removal...cleaning the skimmer or removing the GFO.

ANCEDOTAL EVIDENCE WARNING:

I had no issues with cyano at all. In fact, it cleared up what little I originally had.

I'm always up to learn, so help me out...

when you dose carbon, whatever source it is.. its primary purpose is to be food for bacteria. Now, as you skim, you DO remove some of this bacteria, but the intent is for the bacteria to stay in your system (one of the issues of strong skimming while dosing carbon) so that the bacteria can consume the carbon source, multiply, and as a byproduct reduce nitrates in the system.
You also want do DOSE A PARTICULAR bacteria as you being carbon dosing so that the chosen bacteria starves out the unwanted bacteria in your system.

I suppose dosing carbon CAN reduce PO4, but I see it as more of a byproduct than a main course of action.

b

 

[mcphock]

SnowManSnow;926973 wrote: I'm always up to learn, so help me out...

when you dose carbon, whatever source it is.. its primary purpose is to be food for bacteria. Now, as you skim, you DO remove some of this bacteria, but the intent is for the bacteria to stay in your system (one of the issues of strong skimming while dosing carbon) so that the bacteria can consume the carbon source, multiply, and as a byproduct reduce nitrates in the system.
You also want do DOSE A PARTICULAR bacteria as you being carbon dosing so that the chosen bacteria starves out the unwanted bacteria in your system.

I suppose dosing carbon CAN reduce PO4, but I see it as more of a byproduct than a main course of action.

b

You got the general idea, which is the important part. The carbon you dose, in any form you dose it, is designed to spur a bacteria bloom. As part of the greatly accelerated growth of bacteria, it consumes carbon, oxygen, PO4 and NO3. Logically, the bloom cannot be supported once the carbon is depleted and thus the bacteria levels recede. The bacteria and its remnants are skimmed off (functioning as the removal of consumed/bound nutrients). This generates substantially more skimmate than normal, hence the need for vigorous skimming (waste removal, additional oxygenation) and regular skimmer maintenance (efficiency).

My own anecdotal experience says reports of 'bad bacteria' being fed are greatly exaggerated. I dosed no further products beyond vodka and had no issues or sides effects otherwise including cyanobacteria. Your mileage may vary.

 

[acroholic]

And to throw a little curve into this thread, here is a thread from RC that shows a beautiful, thriving SPS reef with a very high phosphate level.

 

[mcphock]

In agreeing with your point Dave, there seems to be a lust</em> for 0 NO3 and PO4. People seem to forget that all chemosynthetic life requires</em> soluable nitrate and phosphate for life and growth.

 

[enderg60]

Interesting info in here but I would say try GFO to see if your problem actually is PO4 before attempting carbon dosing.

Personally I have never tried carbon dosing, I just got a 5g bucket of GFO about 5 years ago and havent even used 1/3 of it yet so not much point.

Edit: BTW my system is 580g

 

[kirkwood]

this certainly has my attention.. The cost of running GFO vs carbon dosing is a no brainer.

Question - how do you dose vodka when you go out of town? even setting it up on a dosing pump would have me very worried that it could be overdosed.

 

[mcphock]

My wife does it. I purchased a BRS pump that I'll be implementing soon.

 

[ringo®]

Dosing pump or a buddy you trust.

 

[kirkwood]

Acroholic;927012 wrote: And to throw a little curve into this thread, here is a thread from RC that shows a beautiful, thriving SPS reef with a very high phosphate level.

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2366953">http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2366953</a>[/QUOTE]


as awesome as this is, it doesn't help... ha... so how is this tank thriving at 9.5?? have the corals "learned" to thrive in these conditions given that the system is 10 years old???

 

[acroholic]

Kirkwood;927067 wrote: as awesome as this is, it doesn't help... ha... so how is this tank thriving at 9.5?? have the corals "learned" to thrive in these conditions given that the system is 10 years old???

It is not meant to help, but to show that there are many different paths and husbandry methods to achieving a successful reef tank.:yes: