Jump to content
Timfish

ICP test results, 90 gallon Mixed Reef w/ Tapwater

Recommended Posts

Just wanted to show the ATI ICP test results for a mixed reef system maintained with tap water.  Often what I've seen when aquarists post problems blame is quickly attributed to water quality issues that aren't supported by the research I've read and experiences I've had over the last couple of decades.   The microbial processes are far more important than maintaining "ideal" water parameters.   While I do not recommend adding corals without acclimating them the majority of the stony corals in this tank were added from systems maintained in acro dominate or ULNS mixed reef systems with "ideal" water parameters without acclimating them.  Here's the link to my ATI Aquaristik page.  I've posted as current video as well as the test results for both the tap water and system.

(Video taken with a Pixel III with White Balance set to "Auto" and a orange filter to cut some of the blue light)

 

Tap water

ATI 90 PBD Tap 04-06-19.jpg

System

ATI 90 PBD .jpg

 

Analyse40879.pdf

Edited by Timfish
List camera type and settings, grammer
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a nice looking tank. However I do think that in the same vein that you're talking about the microbiome being the main driver (which i agree with) that the macrobiome certainly has a substantial impact on "success" (whatever that means to any given aquarist). I would broadly define it as a tank that has healthy, growing coral and lack of nuisance algae.

In the tank in the video, i see a ton of fast growing soft corals, including xenia and nepthea. I would make the assertion that the nutrients or more specifically npk (nitrogen:phosphorus:potassium) uptake in a mixed tank with softies is very different than a tank that is dominated by acropora/millepora/other reef building corals. To have a successful tank, like i defined above, the water for those kinds of tanks needs to be far lower in npk to maintain the necessary nutrients for skeleton building and not enough for an algal bloom. 

If the desirable biome isnt there, micro or macro, then algae will come to fill the void. There are no silver bullets in reef keeping, just twisting dials until you can find what works for the mix of creatures you want to keep. Just my two cents

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/22/2019 at 9:40 AM, victoly said:

This is a nice looking tank. However I do think that in the same vein that you're talking about the microbiome being the main driver (which i agree with) that the macrobiome certainly has a substantial impact on "success" (whatever that means to any given aquarist). I would broadly define it as a tank that has healthy, growing coral and lack of nuisance algae.

In the tank in the video, i see a ton of fast growing soft corals, including xenia and nepthea. I would make the assertion that the nutrients or more specifically npk (nitrogen:phosphorus:potassium) uptake in a mixed tank with softies is very different than a tank that is dominated by acropora/millepora/other reef building corals. To have a successful tank, like i defined above, the water for those kinds of tanks needs to be far lower in npk to maintain the necessary nutrients for skeleton building and not enough for an algal bloom. 

If the desirable biome isnt there, micro or macro, then algae will come to fill the void. There are no silver bullets in reef keeping, just twisting dials until you can find what works for the mix of creatures you want to keep. Just my two cents

Since corals and algae (and sponges) are influencing the types and species of microbes and there are feedback loops that promote an equilibrium supporting corals or algae I like thinking of it as the microbiome and the macrobiome are dynamicly linked.   For the record I see success as having kept an animal for at least it's average natural life expectancy, if not longer. 

There is no nepthea, the large octocoral in the middle is the very rare Sinularia foliata, which has a fairly heavy demand for calcium to make the spicules that are incorporated into the colony.  It is probably safe to say the soft corals have a lot more biomass than acroporids or Pocilloporids for a given colony size/diameter so in that respect I certainly would agree the demand for nitrogen:phosphorus:potassium is a lot higher than than if I just had a tank full of corals from the Acroporid and Pocilloporid families.   But from what I've read and my experiences in getting rid of nuisance algae from systems with "ideal" nutrient ratios it's not a matter of having "ideal" numbers for nitrogen:phosphorus:potassium but having healthy corals competing for nitrogen:phosphorus:potassium and promoting autotrophic microbial processes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...