Another Dyno Question Here........
- Thread starter Carz
- Start date
- Tagged users None
1guydude
Well-Known Member
I used flatworm exit. I think it was... ":/ i dosed heavy. Lost 1 fish. Scoped em out of the water coloum with a net into a 5g bucket of water or back and forth to the sink. Lol. I ended up with hazy water. Prob die off or bacterial bloom.
Miss that tank. It was a great size...but the flatworm exit. Turkey baster and net worked great. Wish i had wc water ready more and carbon for after the dose killing.
D
Miss that tank. It was a great size...but the flatworm exit. Turkey baster and net worked great. Wish i had wc water ready more and carbon for after the dose killing.
D
attiland
2500 Club Member
It is totally my fault it wasn’t clear I was referring to the competition, the ones preventing your DT being affected.
- Joined
- May 22, 2016
- Messages
- 6,970
- Reaction score
- 10,769
Good discussion with good advice here. my approach would be pretty much what ScottB laid out.
I love these "connected tanks /different pests" situations. They really challenge our ideas about what we think causes nuisance growth.
If you think about it, an algae scrubber is a demonstration - repeated 1000's of times across the hobby - that what's in the water is not the whole story. In an algae scrubber, we take the same water, provide fresh surface, strong light and flow and reliably grow nuisance algae (including dinos, scrubbers often have a brown slime dominant phase) totally out of proportion to the rest of the system. So much so, that the tiny patch of scrubber can change the bulk water chemistry of the whole system.
So @Carz connected frag tank is providing light, flow, and fresh attachable surfaces in a way that makes this space far more conducive to nuisance growth than the rest of the system.
At least that's my interpretation.
I love these "connected tanks /different pests" situations. They really challenge our ideas about what we think causes nuisance growth.
If you think about it, an algae scrubber is a demonstration - repeated 1000's of times across the hobby - that what's in the water is not the whole story. In an algae scrubber, we take the same water, provide fresh surface, strong light and flow and reliably grow nuisance algae (including dinos, scrubbers often have a brown slime dominant phase) totally out of proportion to the rest of the system. So much so, that the tiny patch of scrubber can change the bulk water chemistry of the whole system.
So @Carz connected frag tank is providing light, flow, and fresh attachable surfaces in a way that makes this space far more conducive to nuisance growth than the rest of the system.
At least that's my interpretation.
MnFish1
10K Club member
The thing is - we go into an LFS - and see these crystal clear frag tanks (and hopefully algae free other tanks as well) and think - oh - its just simple - IMHO - they are cleaned far more frequently than most people clean their tanks. But - to me - there shoudl be no difference between a 'frag tank' - with corals growing - and a display tank (i.e. both have the same 'open space (ie the glass/sides0, high light, etc. IMHO the key would be if you're going to add on another frag tank - just need to do more maintenance - and depending on your nutrients, have a larger algae scrubber etc etc - and what ever else you're doing to the main tank. Right?
attiland
2500 Club Member
Yet we see that the theory is failing. There is new real estate and the first one always in the queue is dinos. Well at least this is my take on the 600 pages of dino forums.
Just for grins, OP what species of dinos are you dealing with? Same type each occurance. Have you looked at samples from the "unaffected" display tank?
MnFish1
10K Club member
Sorry - I dont think the theory is falling. In a new tank - you have to wipe the glass just like you do with your main tank. There is no difference.
EDIT: What you're saying does not make sense (to me) - as long as you keep the areas 'clean' Dinos will not grow. If you're saying Dinos are growing on the 'coral' - then they would likely do the same in your display tank. There is no magic - unless the lighting is more or less intense in one tank or the other. Right - Can you suggest a reason 'why' - a glass from a new frag tank would be any different than the glass in your display tank
- Joined
- May 22, 2016
- Messages
- 6,970
- Reaction score
- 10,769
maybe not glass, but other materials yes. If you place new rough surface into a system you'll get growth on it that is different than the rest of the established system.
A couple of reasons:
If you place filter floss in your display where it flaps in the flow from a powerhead, You will get rapid accumulation of (especially) ostreopsis dinos over half of a daylight period if there are any in the system. This is relocation to a preferred area - not cell growth. New rock often shows the same effect (not as strong), but the filter media is easier to manipulate.
Hans Werner mentioned in another thread the idea of flow conditions and boundary layers. Rough surfaces in high flow have thinner boundary layers - they interact more directly with the bulk water, and nutrients in the water could more quickly support benthic growth on those surfaces. It is not just light that causes accelerated growth on an algae scrubber. Could the egg crate used in frag tanks serve similar role? Maybe. My guess is that frag tanks at the LFS have been there longer than when hobbyists set up frag tanks, and most of the hobbyist issues are that they are early in succession of benthic growth.
If I took a rock that'd been in my tank and sawed/filed off a stripe to make a patch of clean surface, I'm pretty sure it would get colonized by visible benthic growth faster than the rest of the rock. (but I state it as a thought experiment. I haven't done it.)
MnFish1
10K Club member
Yes - thanks I agree. my point was that this would happen - but in a new 'frag tank' - I do not see where (except the glass) there is that much 'new landscape' (IME Dinos grow on dead pieces of coral - not necessarily living parts - i.e a dead piece (where tissue has been lost) - is now new 'real estate'. I also do not believe that this transient population will cause any problem with the corals/frags.
PS - it does though - take away from the theory that its nutrient levels that are a big influence on Dino populations right? I mean if the nutrients are the same as in the main tank - and now there are Dinos in the frag tank - this suggests to me - that its the new 'open area' that is the major determinant. Which is likely why in the threads of Dinos here - you can read 5000 different theories as to what to do nutrient wise. PS - I had some Dinos once - when I had a coral die off (due to a power issue) - I added a bottle of the coralline algae supplement - and within a month the Dinos were gone - replaced by purple corralline. JME - as always an interesting discussion...
Agree the "new" unpopulated surfaces are better able to host dinos than old, competitor-populated surfaces. Competition is the key. But you can't populate surfaces without sufficient nutrients. My earlier encouragement to maintain (or even raise) nutrients is standard dino treatment protocol that promotes competitor population growth.
When the OP added the frag tank volume, he was diluting an already low nutrient system (.04 IIRC)
My take. First low nutrients are not the "cause" of dinos. Low nutrients create an environment which gives dinos a significant competitive advantage over more desirable occupants of the space.
If I add brand new dry rock to my years old established tank it will go through "the uglies" just like a new tank(maybe to a lesser or accelerated pace). Unoccupied space is not going to be inhabited at the same rate by all organisms in the tank. Some are faster/better than others. Eventually a balance will be reached that is more representative of the make up of the biodiversity of the tank.
You can clean the surface of your glass/power heads/frag rack, but dinos can repopulate them almost over night. AND, if it's a toxic strain of dinos like ostreopsis it could kill the coral frags easily. It doesn't have to grow on them to kill them.
If I add brand new dry rock to my years old established tank it will go through "the uglies" just like a new tank(maybe to a lesser or accelerated pace). Unoccupied space is not going to be inhabited at the same rate by all organisms in the tank. Some are faster/better than others. Eventually a balance will be reached that is more representative of the make up of the biodiversity of the tank.
You can clean the surface of your glass/power heads/frag rack, but dinos can repopulate them almost over night. AND, if it's a toxic strain of dinos like ostreopsis it could kill the coral frags easily. It doesn't have to grow on them to kill them.
MnFish1
10K Club member
I know thats the conventional wisdom. In my tank I have seen no relationship. At one point I had quite high nitrates - and phosphate (and about near the Redfield ratio). All I had was Dinos. No green algae. Its just my opinion - I am not sure its not some other factor. In other words - I can see the point that Dinos can grow better in low nutrients. I do not think necessarily that high nutgrientrs prevent
Agree again. I've seen a filthy FOWLR with prorocentrum before. Chemiclean was the catalyst, not a lack of nutrient.
Agree! While dinos are most commonly associated with low nutrients, they aren't caused per se by them. Really low nutrients just give them a competitive advantage. I'm sure there are lots of different things that contribute to getting them...that's only one.
One of the things I'm seeing is the recent movement towards dry rock aquascapes. It's so rewarding to be able to create those beautiful scapes with dry rock but that seems to be associated with dinos every bit as much as low nutrients.
