What's the obsession w raising nutrients?????

[grouper therapy]

QUOTE=MarquiseO;1057195]It's based on the removal of TOC (Total Organic Carbon). I will post the article later when I find it from where I read it. The overall of build of recent skimmers are built for efficiency. There is generally no need to oversize like the need was decades ago. Now, a skimmer rated for 50g can effectively skim a 50g tank instead of the need to buy a 150g rated skimmer even though most skimmers on the market are rated to 3x's.[/QUOTE]

I understand that it is what is claimed my question is the method to measure the TOC levels. The last study that I read only showed a max of 37% TOC removal . While that may be more efficient than in the past it hardly quantifies "over skimming". No?
This thread is around three years old. Has a an improved study been done?

 

[marquiseo]

grouper therapy;1057217 wrote: QUOTE=MarquiseO;1057195]It's based on the removal of TOC (Total Organic Carbon). I will post the article later when I find it from where I read it. The overall of build of recent skimmers are built for efficiency. There is generally no need to oversize like the need was decades ago. Now, a skimmer rated for 50g can effectively skim a 50g tank instead of the need to buy a 150g rated skimmer even though most skimmers on the market are rated to 3x's.

I understand that it is what is claimed my question is the method to measure the TOC levels. The last study that I read only showed a max of 37% TOC removal . While that may be more efficient than in the past it hardly quantifies "over skimming". No?
This thread is around three years old. Has a an improved study been done?

http://www.atlantareefclub.org/forums/showthread.php?t=75627&highlight=bovine">http://www.atlantareefclub.org/forums/showthread.php?t=75627&highlight=bovine</a>[/QUOTE]

I can't remember the specific formula. Once I come across the article again, I will post. I never said that skimming alone was the reason for low nutrients. I simply stated that it is part of the reason because the advancement/refinement in technology and techniques.

 

[grouper therapy]

MarquiseO;1057218 wrote: I understand that it is what is claimed my question is the method to measure the TOC levels. The last study that I read only showed a max of 37% TOC removal . While that may be more efficient than in the past it hardly quantifies "over skimming". No?
This thread is around three years old. Has a an improved study been done?

http://www.atlantareefclub.org/forums/showthread.php?t=75627&highlight=bovine">http://www.atlantareefclub.org/forums/showthread.php?t=75627&highlight=bovine</a>[/QUOTE]

I can't remember the specific formula. Once I come across the article again, I will post.[B] I never said that skimming alone was the reason for low nutrients.[/B] I simply stated that it is part of the reason because the advancement/refinement in technology and techniques.[/QUOTE]
Nor did I imply that you did.
<span style="color: Red">Skimmers, for example, have become more efficient and some cases too efficient</span>
This is the statement that I was seeking evidence to qualify.
I look forward to your link.

 

[grouper therapy]

I look forward to the link.

 

[davidinga]

How about people who run super low biolad tanks like this example:

300gal dt
100gal sump
So 400gal total volume.

A school of chromis (say 6 of them) are the only fish in an otherwise full out sps tank.

Runs -
gac, gfo, carbon dosing, skimmer, lr, fuge/ats, and does 25% weekly wc's.

Feeds every 2-3 days a small pinch of pellets/flakes.

Odds are this guy is gonna have pale sps in his uln setup....

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[snowmansnow]

DavidinGA;1057227 wrote: How about people who run super low biolad tanks like this example:

300gal dt
100gal sump
So 400gal total volume.

A school of chromis (say 6 of them) are the only fish in an otherwise full out sps tank.

Runs -
gac, gfo, carbon dosing, skimmer, lr, fuge/ats, and does 25% weekly wc's.

Feeds every 2-3 days a small pinch of pellets/flakes.

Odds are this guy is gonna have pale sps in his uln setup....

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

To steer back to the op road:
Sure, some will have legitimate ULNS systems, but must of us, and I'm willing to bet must people in the hobby, don't struggle with having water that is too clean. (That takes a fair amount of effort) The example you stated is NOT the typical reef tank

There is a big emphasis on No3 and po4 as of late.

I just find it interesting. Perhaps it's just the newest method to "sell".

It is possible that the issue may be the next hurdle to be cleared in the hobby with all this dialogue. Exciting.

I'm not sure it's new knowledge, or super efficient skimmers as much as it is just the next thing in line to obsess over.



So long, and thanks for all the fish.

 

[grouper therapy]

SnowManSnow;1057053 wrote: Am I crazy or am I seeing a LOT of posts on the boards about reefers attempting to RAISE their NO3 and PO4?

I've been around about a decade, and not too long ago such a post would have been scoffed....

I understand the pros and cons of running a ULNS, but it just looks like noobs (no offense) chasing some kind of magic number.

So what's going on here? Why is everyone's water all of a sudden too clean? Did water treatment plants just get a LOT BETTER or something?



So long, and thanks for all the fish.

My bad I thought we were on topic. Sorry.

 

[grouper therapy]

DavidinGA;1057227 wrote: How about people who run super low biolad tanks like this example:

300gal dt
100gal sump
So 400gal total volume.

A school of chromis (say 6 of them) are the only fish in an otherwise full out sps tank.

Runs -
gac, gfo, carbon dosing, skimmer, lr, fuge/ats, and does 25% weekly wc's.

Feeds every 2-3 days a small pinch of pellets/flakes.

Odds are this guy is gonna have pale sps in his uln setup....

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

You can't remove what was never there. Where were the " nutrients" coming from? Obviously not his bio load.
And if he is doing a 100 gallon a week water changes I doubt he is stripping all the elements out of the system.

 

[snowmansnow]

grouper therapy;1057232 wrote: My bad I thought we were on topic. Sorry.

nah... all good...
Just didn't want it to head out toward skimmer effectiveness and such... (which is actually PUMP effectiveness). I mean... a skimmer is just a tube with a collection cup... the PUMP makes the skimmer

I suppose it was on topic... these things tend to circle back around

B

 

[fishlips]

All this talk about NO3, &PO4, Made me break out my Red Sea test kit.Its a new kit.Here is my reading
No3-0:wow2: Checked with Another kit, reads the same.
Po4- 0.02
Cal-440
Kdh-7.8
Do i need to do anything about the no3.
I have 145 gal total vol.
Wa- every 2 to 3 weeks. 31gal change
Run GFO continues.
Carbon " "
Skimmer on the weak side- Octopus 150
Bio load- Heavy, 6" naso, 4" regal, 4" yellow, 3" crhomis, 2" file, 2" Sailfin blenny,Pair of OC clowns.
Change 4" filter sock out every two days.Its very dirty.
Any suggestions, Almost forgot, All SPS, mostly acros.

 

[grouper therapy]

Not a heavy bioload IMO. Why would you want to do anything about the No3? Does the tank look good?
I'm gonna guess here at a couple of things. Your sps are growing but are rather pale and you run LEDs.

 

[fishlips]

Thought some might think to many tangs,
As far as the looks of coral, They are ok, not the best looking acros, But they are improving.The acros thats been in there for 8 months are looking good, and even the new ones look good.There is room for improvment.Maybe with time.

 

[jvb89]

Pics?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[fishlips]

As soon as i learn how to take a good pic, I will post some pics.Its not easy with leds.But I will say this ,growth is amazing.

 

[jvb89]

Then your nutrients are probably doing just fine

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[fishlips]

Thanks, will just keep doing what I have doing.What about those who dose nitrates.

 

[jvb89]

They usually dose if they are having slow to no growth, poor coral colors and ULN's. Or they are trying to correct the proper ratio for Redfield algae control theory.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[fishlips]

grouper therapy;1057255 wrote: Not a heavy bioload IMO. Why would you want to do anything about the No3? Does the tank look good?
I'm gonna guess here at a couple of things. Your sps are growing but are rather pale and you run LEDs.

I need to finish reading post. Sorry didn't see the last sentence. Not pale,but one acro.Bonsai acro .

 

[russ-iv]

Jvb89;1057265 wrote: They usually dose if they are having slow to no growth, poor coral colors and ULN's. Or they are trying to correct the proper ratio for Redfield algae control theory.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

this.

tbh. with all the tools at our disposal it is easy to retain 0 no3 and 0 po4. the zoox thrive off them like any other algae/dino.

i have no skimmer and still dose 20ml of potassium nitrate daily. phosphate rarely gets to 0 and when it does it is bumped back to .02 ppm again.

now i think i remember when i first dosed and was laughed out of these very forums for doing so. i have plenty of befores and afters to show coral need it for coloration.

in regards to adam... he uses sodium nitrate over at battle corals, i use potassium nitrate. you can also use calcium nitrate. it isnt for everyone and i would advise against it unless you know what you are doing.

read up on redfield, symbiodinium and their clades, nitrate uptake with regards to flow, etc.

i did a writeup in another forum and they are doing well in their results.

...stating they all have leds doesnt mean anything. most people have leds now.

 

[grouper therapy]

Russ-IV;1057290 wrote: this.

tbh. with all the tools at our disposal it is easy to retain 0 no3 and 0 po4. the zoox thrive off them like any other algae/dino.

i have no skimmer and still dose 20ml of potassium nitrate daily. phosphate rarely gets to 0 and when it does it is bumped back to .02 ppm again.

now i think i remember when i first dosed and was laughed out of these very forums for doing so. i have plenty of befores and afters to show coral need it for coloration.

in regards to adam... he uses sodium nitrate over at battle corals, i use potassium nitrate. you can also use calcium nitrate. it isnt for everyone and i would advise against it unless you know what you are doing.

read up on redfield, symbiodinium and their clades, nitrate uptake with regards to flow, etc.

i did a writeup in another forum and they are doing well in their results.

...stating they all have leds doesnt mean anything. most people have leds now.

As I stated most not all . Most have pale sps as well. Oddly enough in years past most of the Sps tanks I seen with MH never had pale corals nor traceable No3. So yes it does mean something. It is very obvious to many that many NOT ALL led lit sps tanks tend to be on the pale side. I'm sure that will be changing .