Jump to content

Hair Algae, A Case Study.


Timfish

Recommended Posts

Nuisance algae in reef systems is pretty much a ubiquitous problem, and one that is a common source of frustration for reef aquarists.   It is also one I've learned to view the problem very differently than what is generally portrayed and it just takes a few rather basic steps, and patience. (This is longer than I planned so feel free to jump past the backgound info.)

 

Back in the late 90's I realized the general notion of nuisance algae being just a nutrient issue didn't fit what I was seeing in my maintenance business. In my systems there was not a correlation between PO4, Nitrate, and nuisance algae problems. A nice looking tank that did not have a problem would test "bad", have "unacceptable" levels of PO4 and/or Nitrate, while a tank with "good" numbers would have a serious nuisance algae issue. If there was a correlation between equipment and nuisance algae it was a positive one, more and fancier equipment didn't get rid of nuisance algae.  There was clearly something else going on and I'll get back to this in just a sec.

 

While I have tried various chemical fixes, the first, and very simple, technique I realized worked well and produced the most consistent results was just small weekly water changes, 5% - 10%. One aspect of these early fixes with water changes that I didn't really appreciate until years later (reading reef research was at the time for purely aesthetic reasons), I would siphon out nuisance algae when doing a water change. The top layer of sand would also be siphoned off if there was any "color",any single cell algae, rinsed quickly in tap water, then put back in the tank. This constant removal of algae, not aggressive but persistent, turns out to be very beneficial and very similar to the way the primary herbivores (Parrotfish in the Pacific and Urchins in the Caribean) on reefs control the algae. 

 

Fast forward a few years, a little bit more than a decade, and I started getting on the internet and checking out the forums. I didn’t look up every forum, but the ones I did pursue suggested nuisance algae was still treated as a nutrient issue. So maybe I was missing something? I started wondering what the scientists and the research being done say about reefs? This was a real eye opener. Here are just two of the observations I stumbled across:

 

"When I see the colors of some of these low nutrient tanks, I can't help but be reminded of bleached coral reefs. It should therefore not come as a surprise that feeding corals in such systems becomes a very important component in these systems. Though reefs are often categorized as nutrient "deserts", the influx of nutrients in the form of particulates and plankton is quite high when the total volume of water passing over a reef is taken into consideration.

 

Our crystal-clear aquaria do not come close to the nutrient loads that swirl around natural reefs. And so when we create low-nutrient water conditions, we still have to deal with the rest of a much more complex puzzle. Much like those who run their aquarium water temperature close to the thermal maximums of corals walk a narrow tight rope, I can't help but think that low-nutrient aquariums may be headed down a similar path." Charles Delbeck, Coral Nov/Dec 2010, pg 127.

 

"Imported nutrients are usually transported to reefs from rivers; but if there are no rivers, as with reefs remote from land masses, nutrients can only come from surface ocean circulation. Often this supply is poor, and thus the vast ocean expanses have been referred to as "nutrient deserts". The Indo-Pacific has many huge atolls in these supposed deserts which testify to the resilience of reefs, but the corals themselves may lack the lush appearance of those of more fertile waters. Many reefs have another major supply of inorganic nutrients as, under certain conditions, surface currents moving against a reef face may cause deep ocean water to be drawn to the surface. This "upwelled" water is often rich in phosphorus [2.0 mg/l] and other essential chemicals." J. E. N. Veron "Corals of Australia and the Indo-Pacific" pg 30 "

 

What was real gratifying was reading Forest Rohwer in ch 5 of his book "Coral Reefs in the Microbial Seas" discussed how it wasn't nutrients per se that causes algae problems on reefs but a shift in the equilibrium of a reef ecosystem that allows algae to take over.   This really resonated as I would see nutrients stay the same or increase as algae abated.   Chasing some of the references Forest Rohwer mentioned, there is a far more complicated picture involving microbes, herbivores, corals, algae and the various roles of Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC). I'm going a bit off topic, but there's a lot of stuff aquarists are doing that's either not relevant or is detrimental to the long term sustainability of reef systems.  I encourage every reef aquarist to read his book.

 

So, back to the problem at hand.

 

Patience. You're not getting rid of algae. You are changing the equilibrium of your reef ecosystem. It ain't going to happen overnight. Expect to see it get worse at times; two steps forward, one back. Changes in the types of algae is a good thing.

 

As far as using any of the various products out there touted for dealing with nuisance algae, I strongly, strongly discourage their use. First of all, they definitely are not at all needed to fix a problem. These products do not actually fix the underlying problem; there's still the issue of why the ecosystem's equilibrium is favoring nuisance algae.   Some of the products if overused have the potential to create superbugs which none of us want. Most importantly, corals have a holobiont, an assemblage of various microbes, viruses, cyanobacteria, fungi and archaia which is species specific and essential components of a coral's immune system and nutrient cycling.  Much of the holobiont is in the mucus coating of the coral (a portion is internal and a portion is also endolithic, in its skeleton). Anything dumped into a reef system that kills nuisance algae will be killing beneficial, and I'll argue essential, portions of a coral's holobiont.  And pointedly, one (if not more) of these products were used in the 2nd thread I've linked to below by a previous maintenance company with no effect.

 

Small water changes. These don't have to be weekly. I'm posting links to two threads I've done dealing with nuisance algae below and one had water changes every 3 or 4 weeks. 20% monthly would be a good target number but I've never seen any benefit to going more than 30%. When siphoning, remember, suction strength is determined by the weight of the water in the hose and the height of the surface of the aquarium water above the surface of the water in a bucket you're siphoning into. Use a 1/2" or 9/16" diameter hose; smaller diameter is way too slow and the amount of suction gives poor performance. Larger is hard to control, has a higher suction over a larger area making it harder not to hurt animals, and siphons off water way too fast requiring larger water changes to accomplish the same amount of work. Stainless steel straws can be helpful and they have the advantage of actually increasing the suction strength at the nozzle end of the straw but decreasing the area that's seeing the suction. Below is a video using stainless steel straws to remove palies safely and works well with some aspects of algae removal. At some point straws do slow things down and I rarely do more than a third of my target volume using them.

 

Usually, like I did in this thread and the 2nd thread I've linked too below, I will pull out rock and scrub off algae in aquarium water with a toothbrush or small scrub brush. But I have also dealt with nuisance algae leaving the aquascaping in place (see below). If there's anything valuable like cryptic sponges, corals or coraline algae, I'll put a rock back in the tank. Some stuff may not be worth the effort and I'll use dry rock or a quality, quarantine wild or maricultured live rock to replace it in the aquascaping. I have yet, in all the tanks I've fixed over the years, seen one where I need to pull everything out to fix a problem. There are also occasions where I might do select rocks a second or third time, but never to the extent of the initial scrubbing. Remember though we're trying to get the corals growing again so minimize the disruption as much as possible.

 

Here's my first example shifting the equilibrium of a system to favor corals:

This is a hair algae problem I've been working on since March of this year and documented it so people can see what happens using this simple proccess. It also shows that phosphates are not directly the cause of the algae. System is just a refugium, no skimmer. Nitrates stayed around 5 mg/l (API) and phosphates stayed around 3-4ish mg/l(API)(I don't advocate PO4 levels this high, my reccomendation is around .1 mg/l). Every 2 or 3 weeks a small scrub brush and toothbrush were used to scrup the algae off the rocks then a 20% water change was done siphoning out as much algae as possible. Usually when I deal with a problem like this I do this every week and do just a 10% water change and this process is much shorter. Pictures were taken immediately before scrubbing the rocks. As you can see for several cleanings there was no real noticable change between cleanings then there starts to be a big slowing down of the alae growth.

post-1247-0-02586100-1434327532_thumb.jp

post-1247-0-97330600-1434327791_thumb.jp

post-1247-0-65510100-1434327838_thumb.jp

post-1247-0-02733000-1434327860_thumb.jp

post-1247-0-33026100-1434327897_thumb.jp

 

Here's the link to my 2nd thread on changing the equilibrium of a system and a link to my video for using stainless steel straws:

 

http://www.austinreefclub.com/topic/39043-hair-algae-a-second-case-study/?tab=comments#comment-325744

http://www.austinreefclub.com/topic/40619-stainless-steel-straws-beta/?tab=comments#comment-340809

 

I also wanted to share this following experience I had with one of the systems I've maintained over the decades which I think demonstrates a reef system's ability to change it's equilibrium with just water changes. Last decade one of the house systems I had maintained for over a decade was left empty for over three years. During this period I still maintained the system on a weekly basis. On three separate occasions the system was crashed from either AC failures or circuit breakers being turned off. Because the house was empty the home owner chose not to put any effort into any remediation, just continue the basic maintenance. While a few fish and robust mushrooms survived each crash the only animals added were a few hardy species that were overflow from other systems. As expected because of the dieoff there was a bad nuisance algae outbreak each time. But in each of the three events, in a process that took roughly 6-8 months, the nuisance algae abated. And the only action taken was siphoning out the algae small weekly water changes. No scrubbing, no removing rocks, and each water change left algae in the system. For those wondering the filtration was a wet/dry and no skimmer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice! I may have to try this method in my tank. Do you have any urchins or clean up crew critters to help in te eradication?

Yes, about 8 urchins and standard clean up crew - some hermits, snails, conch, and various stars as well as 2 lettuce nudibranchs that eradicated a bryopsis patch and then were removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice documentation! It seems like there is a resurgence between the next-to-last, and last picture. Is it just me?

I thought I saw that too but the picture quality and size make it hard to tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, regular physical removal has been needed. We've been doing water changes every 2 weeks, on one series of pictures it went 3 weeks. There seems to be a "critical mass" that if you let it accumulate it really takes off again.

We've noticed that the growth seems to be in established areas when that happens, rather than new growth in new places. It's definitely on the decline, and my anemones and corals that were in decline are all recovering and growing again.

I think the primary cause was lack of tank maintenance (ie water changes) once my wife started grad school and I was travelling every weekend combined with introduction of some frags with hair algae. Until then I had a manageable patch of bryopsis. Additionally I had always had a significant number of micro-feathers throughout the tank, millions of them. I got a copper band butterfly that first ate my aiptasia, then blue clover, then turned to the micro feathers. He cleaned every last one out of the tank. At that point I think all the filter feeding and nutrient export they were doing ended, and all those nutrients got pumped into the hair algae.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you use for nutrient export Mike?

Right now, water changes and macros in the sump/refugium. No skimmer. I also run gfo and carbon. Tank is primarily softies and anemones, never had any luck with sps. That said, in the last month we've added several sticks and so far they are maintaining color and polyps (birds nest, tortusa, green monti)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice documentation! It seems like there is a resurgence between the next-to-last, and last picture. Is it just me?

Besides the increase between May 23rd and June 12th there's an increase between April 11th and May 2nd as well. My experience things are never linear very long if ever in reef systems. Getting rid of nuisance algae I just about always see things have little variation for a while and then very quickly show big changes. (Sorry about the quality of the pictures but my cell phone's been acting screwy. There are several pictures I can view but when I connect it with my PC to down load them the PC doesn't see them. The pictures should be a lot larger also.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice documentation! It seems like there is a resurgence between the next-to-last, and last picture. Is it just me?

Besides the increase between May 23rd and June 12th there's an increase between April 11th and May 2nd as well. My experience things are never linear very long if ever in reef systems. Getting rid of nuisance algae I just about always see things have little variation for a while and then very quickly show big changes. (Sorry about the quality of the pictures but my cell phone's been acting screwy. There are several pictures I can view but when I connect it with my PC to down load them the PC doesn't see them. The pictures should be a lot larger also.)

Just use the Tapatalk app Tim. You can upload directly from the app on your phone and the pics are in full resolution.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another very noticable change has been with some of the BTAs. Several including the Roses had browned out pretty bad before starting water changes. It took 2 1/2 months for the color to show any noticable improvment. Comments I've seen before discuss increases on zooxanthellae but if nitrate and phosphate levels were fairly consistant they shouldn't have changed very much. Melanin is part of the immune response for corals and their relatives and could be the explaination as a response to the increase DOC from the algae. Just need a simple cheap test for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can upload directly from the app on your phone and the pics are in full resolution.

That doesn't get it on my PC with all my other 300 gigabytes of photo's and videos. :-/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call the geek squad!

On a side note, God bless the geek squad. I'm so glad I don't have to go hunt down friends and acquaintances who are computer wizards to do my computer hardware and software works for me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Here's an update. Haven't done a water change in about 6 weeks. Nitrate is still around 5 ppm and P04 is 3-4 ppm. A birdsnest and A. tortusa that were doing well were killed when part of a Paly colony died. Here's a picture just before a water change yesterday.

post-1247-0-43043200-1443394318_thumb.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Here's an update. Last water change was the Sept. 27th after the last pictures were taken. Biggest change has been the disappearnce of the hair algae (Derbesia sp.) from the nooks and crannys in the rocks where the urchins can't get to it and it's hard to get with brushs. There is a rock with a fair amount of Briopsis but it is thinning out also. Added a blue acro, Sour Apple Birdsnest and Povona Cactus coral.post-1247-0-36704100-1446431542_thumb.jp

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks fantastic! I'm curious how you're getting ID on your hair algae? The more I've been involved with geomicrobiology, the more I've come to understand that eyeball morphology is really bad and that even microscopy runs about 30% accuracy unless it's something really unusual or diagnostic of some kind of environment. Whose up for some 16s RNA testing!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks fantastic! I'm curious how you're getting ID on your hair algae? The more I've been involved with geomicrobiology, the more I've come to understand that eyeball morphology is really bad and that even microscopy runs about 30% accuracy unless it's something really unusual or diagnostic of some kind of environment. Whose up for some 16s RNA testing!?

Thank you! It is amazing what water changes and a little bit of elbow grease will do. I for one would love to see 16s RNA testing readily available to all aquarists. Being able to test for benificial and detrimental shifts in the microbiology of our systems and animals would be a huge benefit. As far as what species you're right, the ol' eyeball and touch test leave much to be desired and the hair algaes could be from any of a bunch of genera; Enteromorpha, Boodlea, Cladophora and Hinksia being some of the possibilities I know of that will show up in aquaria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks fantastic! I'm curious how you're getting ID on your hair algae? The more I've been involved with geomicrobiology, the more I've come to understand that eyeball morphology is really bad and that even microscopy runs about 30% accuracy unless it's something really unusual or diagnostic of some kind of environment. Whose up for some 16s RNA testing!?

Thank you! It is amazing what water changes and a little bit of elbow grease will do. I for one would love to see 16s RNA testing readily available to all aquarists. Being able to test for benificial and detrimental shifts in the microbiology of our systems and animals would be a huge benefit. As far as what species you're right, the ol' eyeball and touch test leave much to be desired and the hair algaes could be from any of a bunch of genera; Enteromorpha, Boodlea, Cladophora and Hinksia being some of the possibilities I know of that will show up in aquaria.

I'll have to see what it goes for these days. About a decade ago it was 50 a pop. It has to be cheaper now though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks fantastic! I'm curious how you're getting ID on your hair algae? The more I've been involved with geomicrobiology, the more I've come to understand that eyeball morphology is really bad and that even microscopy runs about 30% accuracy unless it's something really unusual or diagnostic of some kind of environment. Whose up for some 16s RNA testing!?

Thank you! It is amazing what water changes and a little bit of elbow grease will do. I for one would love to see 16s RNA testing readily available to all aquarists. Being able to test for benificial and detrimental shifts in the microbiology of our systems and animals would be a huge benefit. As far as what species you're right, the ol' eyeball and touch test leave much to be desired and the hair algaes could be from any of a bunch of genera; Enteromorpha, Boodlea, Cladophora and Hinksia being some of the possibilities I know of that will show up in aquaria.

I'll have to see what it goes for these days. About a decade ago it was 50 a pop. It has to be cheaper now though.

The scientific industry never over charges for goods and services because they're in a very specific field that requires high levels of accuracy and quality control. Gotta be cheaper now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks fantastic! I'm curious how you're getting ID on your hair algae? The more I've been involved with geomicrobiology, the more I've come to understand that eyeball morphology is really bad and that even microscopy runs about 30% accuracy unless it's something really unusual or diagnostic of some kind of environment. Whose up for some 16s RNA testing!?

Yeah, I couldn't be happier with the results. I was ready to dismantle the tank when Tim talked me into letting him try to resolve the problem naturally. He's put a lot of time and effort into it proving the methodology. So far the "cure" has been incredibly simple.

  1. VERY regular water changes (25-30% every two weeks)
  2. Aggressive physical removal of algae during water changes.
  3. Introduction of numerous urchins (tuxedo, pincushion, pencil, long spine)
  4. Introduction of lettuce nudibranchs for the briopsis spot (removed when it thinned, may add one back now that it has recovered a bit)
  5. TIME - I can't emphasize this one enough. As everyone says, nothing good happens quickly in a reef tank. I am much happier than I would have been if we'd gutted the tank and started over.

Prior to this I had tried several commercial solutions, extremely high magnesium levels, etc. with no success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...