Jump to content

Higher phosphates = lower calcification rates


FarmerTy

Recommended Posts

I've always read it in studies but to see it firsthhand in the frag tank is truly telling.

My frag tank was consuming 2.5 dKh daily and I started to notice the uptake was less each day starting this past weekend up until today when there was no net uptake. I had turned off the doser entirely the past 24 hrs and the alk level is exactly the same 24 hrs later this morning.

So what happened? Why did my SPS stop taking up calcium and using alk? Why do I not see any growth? Phosphates went from 0 ppm last week to 0.09 ppm as of today. Why? Because my media reactor pump stopped working.

Sure, life needs phosphates. I understand that. How much? Very miniscule really. What are average levels in natural reefs, some a bit higher than average tank levels, some a bit lower. Is that relevant to me or my SPS tank or my SPS frag tank, no. Why? Because my corals aren't in the ocean and I base their ideal growth on parameters I control in my tank and not based on what they are found naturally in. If that was the case, I would be running a more yellow light as well.

What point am I trying to make? Let's not try to mimic ocean parameters exactly. We've got enough base information regarding growth in reef tanks that now the data is more applicable to their environment we keep them in. It's like me studying wild dogs to better understand how to keep my shih tzu happy. Ridiculous example I understand but hopefully the underlying message rings through.

Proof positive for me, keep your phosphates low if you want to keep your SPS growing at significant rates. I tell people who come by my house constantly, I bet you my acro colony will grow faster than your zoa colony. Why do I say that? Because I feel the average reefer has no idea about how fast SPS can really grow. On some of my stags, you could see daily growth. Like visually see it getting longer each day!

Keep that phosphate below 0.05 ppm folks if you're growing SPS. Trust me on that. Now don't confuse that with keep all nutrients low. I've found an ideal nitrate level to be 5-10 ppm, not the zero everyone was aiming for a few years back. This gives you great, rich colors in your acros and I also feel is a lot healthier for them. They aren't at the brink of starvation just to show you their best colors. SPS in ultra low nutrient systems are like the supermodels of the reefing world, starving themselves to look pretty. Give them a little food (nitrates) and they'll be much healthier and happier while still looking good.

Sorry for my SPS and phosphate level rant. [emoji50]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure presenting reasonable experience qualifies as a rant. :)

I was more basing it on the OP's reputation for copious rants over the years that this felt like it could qualify. [emoji12]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

True. I'm pretty sure your rants are the glue that holds ARC together.

I go for the sheer volume approach. Some may use just enough glue to hold things together, where they look best and perfect. My method is to dob massive amounts of glue all over it, a hot mess that holds just the same but not as graceful or pretty to look at.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I wish it were so simple!

I guess to start off with I'll quote Charles Delbeek “"Our crystal clear aquariums come nowhere 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 heading down a similar path." Coral Nov/Dec 2010 pg 127.

And I'd have to say I'm fairly happy with 6 months grwoth with 3-4 mg/l P04 and ~1 mg/l NH3

post-1247-0-57110000-1469587986_thumb.jp

And I got what I would consider decent growth with P04 around .3 - .4 mg/l here:

Much ado is made in reefer circles about corals growing in oligotrophic or nutrient poor waters. But what is overlooked is the waters are nutrient poor because of the corals. Looking and the diffusion of phosphates helps give a better picture. Over reef flats, where coral density is highest P04 is very very low, 2 or 3 or 4 ug/l (or parts per billion) but as you move out to the open ocean you get up to .5 mg/l in places and 2 mg/l at depths of 1000'. With ocean currents causing upwellings around islands and atolls it's quite possible reefs can see high levels of phosphorus and other essential chemicals and depending on how the currents shift it could be for an extended time. And one of the things I've stumbled on I find fascinating is the research looking at nutrient distress and how an imbalance of P04 and nitrogen can cause problems. Here's one that shows an internal phosphate level of .07 mg/l will cause corals to have serious problems:

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/Nutrient%20enrichment.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will agree that corals uptake a lot of phosphate and that's why the coral dense areas have lower concentrations detected in the ocean. Take that same concept in a limited glass box and do you really think that applies? The ocean can supply phosphate and the coral population can grow fast enough to deplete the area in its vicinity. Now with a reef tank, with the limited volume, and the ample supply of phosphate we add to our systems via feeding and other biological processes, do you think we have the same scenario?

Once growth cannot keep up, we have an excess of phosphate in our systems. Instead of uptaking and growing more coral mass, the increasing phosphate level starts to inhibit calcification. Then it starts to bind to your live rock as your phosphate level grows. Your corals start growing slower and then the phosphate level starts increasing even more because there is less coral uptake. Then more binds in your rocks and then corals start to die and release even more phosphate. Then you apply some form of phosphate control and you'll spend months removing whats in the water column but still have to keep it aggressive to start leaching it out of the rocks.

Jump on any of the larger forums and the stunning examples of SPS dominant tanks mostly have their phosphate levels below 0.06 ppm. The only example I can think of that doesn't is Richard Ross' tank but I chalk his up to acclimation over the years. His corals just slowly got acclimated to his higher levels as time went on. I still haven't ever seen a close up of his tank so I really can't even judge the quality of his growth or coloration.

If you know of any, put up examples of SPS dominant tanks that have phosphate levels above 0.1 ppm. I'd honestly like to see them out of curiosity.

Again, I think you're applying principles in nature to what's going on in our little reef tanks and just my personal opinion, but in this case, I don't think it applies directly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What point am I trying to make? Let's not try to mimic ocean parameters exactly. We've got enough base information regarding growth in reef tanks that now the data is more applicable to their environment we keep them in. It's like me studying wild dogs to better understand how to keep my shih tzu happy. Ridiculous example I understand but hopefully the underlying message rings

Jon-Stewart-Eating-Popcorn-320x320.gif

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I wish it were so simple!

I guess to start off with I'll quote Charles Delbeck “"Our crystal clear aquariums come nowhere 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 heading down a similar path." Coral Nov/Dec 2010 pg 127.

And I'd have to say I'm fairly happy with 6 months grwoth with 3-4 mg/l P04 and ~1 mg/l NH3

attachicon.gifBPD Acros 01-06 2016.jpg

And I got what I would consider decent growth with P04 around .3 - .4 mg/l here:

Much ado is made in reefer circles about corals growing in oligotrophic or nutrient poor waters. But what is overlooked is the waters are nutrient poor because of the corals. Looking and the diffusion of phosphates helps give a better picture. Over reef flats, where coral density is highest P04 is very very low, 2 or 3 or 4 ug/l (or parts per billion) but as you move out to the open ocean you get up to .5 mg/l in places and 2 mg/l at depths of 1000'. With ocean currents causing upwellings around islands and atolls it's quite possible reefs can see high levels of phosphorus and other essential chemicals and depending on how the currents shift it could be for an extended time. And one of the things I've stumbled on I find fascinating is the research looking at nutrient distress and how an imbalance of P04 and nitrogen can cause problems. Here's one that shows an internal phosphate level of .07 mg/l will cause corals to have serious problems:

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/Nutrient%20enrichment.pdf

Not to gang up on you here, but doesn't your statement about flat reef coral density support Ty's point? The coral we are growing do not grow in the open ocean. Species at the interface of open ocean and reef would tolerate high phosphates but it seems to reason that interior back-reef corals would prefer lower phosphate. Just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, great thread here Ty. All I have to say is phosphates and their impact and role they play in biology is immensely important and pretty complicated. I just think back to my micro and biochem days from college and I think to myself in this discussion "man I don't know a single thing about what goes on on a cellular level with coral, their microbes, and nutrient/minerals." I would bet the interactions of phosphates and other compounds on corals goes a lot deeper than "this concentration does better than this concentration in a tank." What I'm saying is what works in one tank may not work the same way in another tank due to a plethora of other conditions that we may not even be testing for.

Also, the corals we collect and put in our tanks all come from (relatively) different environments. One coral may have evolved on a reef crest where there was a great deal of water turn over and nutrient import/export, some corals evolved in a lagoon setting where there wasn't a lot of movement of minerals and nutrients, even corals from the same reef could be different if it's around an island and one coral was on a side of the island near a stream discharge from the island with minerals and organic matter and the other coral was from the opposite end where it was only getting whatever the currents drew in. We throw all these corals into a glass box with the same environmental conditions and assume they all prefer a single certain condition.

My rant is this: I don't know anything, I'm sure I sound smug, but I don't think most of us here fully understand the complexities of the biochemistry happening in our tanks. Phosphate levels that work for Timfish and his montiporas may not work for Ty and his forest of acroporas. Very different species with different preferences for conditions. I'm sure if we got a full laboratory analysis of our tank water and compared them we would realize there are a vast number of differences chemically between our tanks.

We can make generalizations about phosphate levels and Ty made a great observation that will probably hold true across many of our tanks. I feel like any observation we make should come with a statement of limitations stating "This observation was made under conditions that are different from your tank, of which you can probably not perfectly replicate in your tank. Please take them as an example of what has happened in this tank and may not be able to be replicated to the same degree with other species and in other conditions."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and beautiful tank. Way to make the rest of us feel inadequate.

Statement of limitations: the opinions of Gig 'em are solely his opinions and do not reflect those of most members of ARC. Most comments are purely ironic and sarcastic and should only be considered useless banter and crazy rants similar to that of an old man on a porch yelling at young whipper-snappers to get off his lawn."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, and beautiful tank. Way to make the rest of us feel inadequate.

Statement of limitations: the opinions of Gig 'em are solely his opinions and do not reflect that of most members of ARC. Most comments are purely ironic and sarcastic and should only be considered useless banter and crazy rants similar to that of an old man on a porch yelling at young whipper-snappers to get off his lawn."

Yeah, what he said. Your statement of limitations fits me perfectly these days. [emoji12]

All good points and good summary of the variations of environments we find these corals.

With the variations in mind, I've seen phosphate levels above 0.18 ppm kill acros in my tank, not all, but some start STN'ing the minute my tank hits 0.18 ppm of phosphate. I've not lost an acro to a phosphate level of 0.03 ppm directly so I find it better to err on the lower side than the higher.

Montis, birdsnests, stylos to me are a different animal entirely. A lot of them are a lot more forgiving of water conditions than my acros. I can't kill my sunset monti... No really... I've been trying to kill it off the rocks and I keep finding spots here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I wish it were so simple!

I guess to start off with I'll quote Charles Delbeck “"Our crystal clear aquariums come nowhere 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 heading down a similar path." Coral Nov/Dec 2010 pg 127.

And I'd have to say I'm fairly happy with 6 months grwoth with 3-4 mg/l P04 and ~1 mg/l NH3

attachicon.gifBPD Acros 01-06 2016.jpg

And I got what I would consider decent growth with P04 around .3 - .4 mg/l here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyM6Y39iQ8M

Much ado is made in reefer circles about corals growing in oligotrophic or nutrient poor waters. But what is overlooked is the waters are nutrient poor because of the corals. Looking and the diffusion of phosphates helps give a better picture. Over reef flats, where coral density is highest P04 is very very low, 2 or 3 or 4 ug/l (or parts per billion) but as you move out to the open ocean you get up to .5 mg/l in places and 2 mg/l at depths of 1000'. With ocean currents causing upwellings around islands and atolls it's quite possible reefs can see high levels of phosphorus and other essential chemicals and depending on how the currents shift it could be for an extended time. And one of the things I've stumbled on I find fascinating is the research looking at nutrient distress and how an imbalance of P04 and nitrogen can cause problems. Here's one that shows an internal phosphate level of .07 mg/l will cause corals to have serious problems:

http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/Nutrient%20enrichment.pdf

Not to gang up on you here, but doesn't your statement about flat reef coral density support Ty's point? The coral we are growing do not grow in the open ocean. Species at the interface of open ocean and reef would tolerate high phosphates but it seems to reason that interior back-reef corals would prefer lower phosphate. Just a thought.

I didn't even see that posssibility Victoly. After you pointing it out, it does make a lot of sense that the interior colonies would appreciate similar conditions in my reef tank with the lower nutrients while the fringe colonies would appreciate higher levels of nutrients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you're going to need to creatively place your corals and dose higher phosphate waters to species that need it. Better get on that technical bio research as well as how to dose higher phosphate water.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now you're going to need to creatively place your corals and dose higher phosphate waters to species that need it. Better get on that technical bio research as well as how to dose higher phosphate water.

Maybe you should change your thesis instead? [emoji23]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to gang up on you here, . . . Just a thought.

No worries! laugh.png Time, science and experience are all on my side. biggrin.png

The study I referenced to looked at how low phosphate can cause "nutrient distress" in aquarium corals making them much more susceptable to bleaching with temperature and light changes. Gotta go play in the water, more later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...