A losing algae battle

[Garf]

Speaking of pictures - any recommendations of a phone camera filter to prevent the pictures being washed out? Amazon has a lot, but I'd trust word-of-mouth if folks have one they like.

I don't have need for them, sorry, I use white light.

 

[Bpp124987]

Can you post some photos of the tank now and of the rock while it was dry. Might be covered in old organics from the prior tank

 

[VintageReefer]

Speaking of pictures - any recommendations of a phone camera filter to prevent the pictures being washed out? Amazon has a lot, but I'd trust word-of-mouth if folks have one they like.

You see my pictures and how they come out. This is an iPhone with an lens filter

The corals look this way in person. The lens just helps the camera capture them accurately. Orange gets slightly brighter but I would say this is 95-100% accurate depending on the coral.

https://a.co/d/2xMPzU9

 

[Lavey29]

There is so much wrong with this comment. I don’t even know where to start.
I suggest you do some more research on what the red field ratio is, what it actually was originally applied too and the difference between N, P and No3, Po4.

Taken from an internet source. There are dozens upon dozens of sources via Google stating essentially the same but you are welcome to your opinion. I'll stick with more fact then fiction.

 

[Lavey29]

There is so much wrong with this comment. I don’t even know where to start.
I suggest you do some more research on what the red field ratio is, what it actually was originally applied too and the difference between N, P and No3, Po4.

And here is one from Reef Builders, (RIP) running 100 to 1 ratio nitrates to phosphate. So there are different methods of approach as each tank is unique and what works for one may not work for the other

Interestingly at MACNA last year I was discussing this with Claude Schumacher of Fauna Marin and he said on his coral farm and in his examination of the hundreds of thousands of ICP tests that Fauna Marin had run he also found this 100:1 ratio to produce the most colorful corals. Having this confirmation, I now run all of my tanks at this 100:1 ratio and regardless of the phosphate level the nitrate level is always boosted up so that it is 100 times that of the phosphate.

 

[Garf]

his examination of the hundreds of thousands of ICP tests that Fauna Marin had run he also found this 100:1 ratio to produce the most colorful corals

Do you have to send a tank photo in with the water sample?

 

[arcangelreef]

And here is one from Reef Builders, (RIP) running 100 to 1 ratio nitrates to phosphate. So there are different methods of approach as each tank is unique and what works for one may not work for the other

Interestingly at MACNA last year I was discussing this with Claude Schumacher of Fauna Marin and he said on his coral farm and in his examination of the hundreds of thousands of ICP tests that Fauna Marin had run he also found this 100:1 ratio to produce the most colorful corals. Having this confirmation, I now run all of my tanks at this 100:1 ratio and regardless of the phosphate level the nitrate level is always boosted up so that it is 100 times that of the phosphate.

That’s all well and good but has absolutely nothing to do with the red field ratio. And not what you just told the OP.

I do agree with you, and many others on the 100:1 NITRATE TO PHOSPHATE ratio. It is also how I try to run my tank.

But again this is not the red field ratio.

 

[Lavey29]

That’s all well and good but has absolutely nothing to do with the red field ratio. And not what you just told the OP.

I do agree with you, and many others on the 100:1 NITRATE TO PHOSPHATE ratio. It is also how I try to run my tank.

But again this is not the red field ratio.

True because you need to actually measure nitrogen and phosphorus numbers to actually look at redfield ratio right?

I think the OP should understand that with 0 nitrates it's difficult to bring down phosphate correct?

 

[arcangelreef]

Taken from an internet source. There are dozens upon dozens of sources via Google stating essentially the same but you are welcome to your opinion. I'll stick with more fact then fiction.

There are 0 credible sources saying “essentially the same” and it’s not my opinion either.
The red field ratio is a ratio of C:N : P found in ocean phytoplankton. Has absolutely nothing to do with nitrate or phosphate in your water column.

 

[arcangelreef]

True because you need to actually measure nitrogen and phosphorus numbers to actually look at redfield ratio right?

I think the OP should understand that with 0 nitrates it's difficult to bring down phosphate correct?

Having 0 nitrate doesn’t necessarily mean your tank is nitrogen limited. Nitrate is only 1 form of nitrogen.
But yes, you are not wrong that a nitrogen limited tank will have issues reducing phosphate in natural ways.

 

[Garf]

The rock was from a previous setup, so maybe it's leaching PO4

Maybe. It can desorb for a long time with any phosphate reduction method. GFO works without the organic need for nitrogen, as does Lanthanum and calcium carbonate. That said, your levels are not catastrophically high.

 

[Lavey29]

There are 0 credible sources saying “essentially the same” and it’s not my opinion either.
The red field ratio is a ratio of C:N : P found in ocean phytoplankton. Has absolutely nothing to do with nitrate or phosphate in your water column.

Do nitrates and phosphate make up a portion of overall nitrogen and phosphorous in a reef tank? Do they represent a component of measure when looking at the redfield ratio overall?

Redfield Ratio Revisited – What are we doing wrong?

Reefs.com Discussion - Paulo Mallard Scaldaferri, João Carlos Basso, Marcos Augusto Bizeto, Miguel Mies, Roberto Denadai, Junio Melo Introduction Possible applications of the Redfield ratio in the management of the marine aquarium have been discussed over the year. Many have considered that...

reefs.com

 

[VintageReefer]

What needs to be understood here is that everyone’s tank different and we have people both with low nitrates and high nitrates and they all have success. There’s so many variables at play

I posted my test data and pictures of my tank. I frequently test zero nitrates, but usually 1-2. I got lazy with my tracking app, and I got lazy with testing because my tank is thriving and every-time I test it’s basically the same thing. Very low phosphates and very low nitrates.

Let’s step back and actually try to help the OP with his issue.
1) you shoud rent a par meter. I don’t know if any led fixture that is supposed to be run at 100%. But I’m unfamiliar with yours so I could be wrong you need a lar meter to see what you are getting on your rocks and sand bed. You said this starts when you increased light from 50-100. How did everything look when the lights were at 50%? My leds are different, but I run them at 40-45%. I have two other smaller tanks and they are in the 50-60% range for blues and white are about 10%

2) yes you brought over established rock but some was old rock. New rock will go through phases while it builds up the surface layers of beneficial bacteria and coatings that make it “life rock”. Part of those phases is brown dusting, algae, etc
New dry rock could be leaching silicates or other substances

The rock that was transfered could have had some die off being put in a new system with new conditions. This could trigger a cycle

And finally, new water in a new tank will have zero phosphate. Your rock could have phosphates bound up in it. When you put that in pristine clean water, it needs to equalize and it will leach/detach into the water column. You change the water, rub gfo, whatever, shortly after you do that, the rock will leach more and it will go back to the number you were at. Eventually, with food husbandry and proper feeding; the rock will run out of bound up phosphates. As this happens the phosphates that leach out and become exposed to light will grow into hair algae. This process can take weeks or months to complete

 

[SheldonC]

What needs to be understood here is that everyone’s tank different and we have people both with low nitrates and high nitrates and they all have success. There’s so many variables at play

I posted my test data and pictures of my tank. I frequently test zero nitrates, but usually 1-2. I got lazy with my tracking app, and I got lazy with testing because my tank is thriving and every-time I test it’s basically the same thing. Very low phosphates and very low nitrates.

Let’s step back and actually try to help the OP with his issue.
1) you shoud rent a par meter. I don’t know if any led fixture that is supposed to be run at 100%. But I’m unfamiliar with yours so I could be wrong you need a lar meter to see what you are getting on your rocks and sand bed. You said this starts when you increased light from 50-100. How did everything look when the lights were at 50%? My leds are different, but I run them at 40-45%. I have two other smaller tanks and they are in the 50-60% range for blues and white are about 10%

2) yes you brought over established rock but some was old rock. New rock will go through phases while it builds up the surface layers of beneficial bacteria and coatings that make it “life rock”. Part of those phases is brown dusting, algae, etc
New dry rock could be leaching silicates or other substances

The rock that was transfered could have had some die off being put in a new system with new conditions. This could trigger a cycle

And finally, new water in a new tank will have zero phosphate. Your rock could have phosphates bound up in it. When you put that in pristine clean water, it needs to equalize and it will leach/detach into the water column. You change the water, rub gfo, whatever, shortly after you do that, the rock will leach more and it will go back to the number you were at. Eventually, with food husbandry and proper feeding; the rock will run out of bound up phosphates. As this happens the phosphates that leach out and become exposed to light will grow into hair algae. This process can take weeks or months to complete

The local reefing club is going to buy a par meter, so I plan to grab that asap. But for my lighting I'm using the Red Sea LED 90s using their arms, so they're fixed at a height of ~8.5" over the water. What I've done is use the video BRS did () to get an idea of what my par MIGHT be based on distance from the surface of the water. By no means is this perfect, I admit that, but I thought it was better than nothing.

The tank did look better with the lower light intensity, and as of yesterday I actually turned them down a fair amount (65% at most for blues/UV, 10% at most for whites) and I want to observe how things do.

I fully expected the tank to go through an ugly phase, as all my other tanks have done, but this one when from diatoms to hair algae. But it is also my first setup with "clean/new" everything. Previously I'd use mostly pieces of rock from an existing tank. All-in-all, I expect the tank to take time to get into a groove. Sure, maybe I'm rushing a bit, but I think it's all relative. Appreciate the feedback from both yourself, and the others!