Confused - Burnt Acro Tips - SPS Help

[ocncheffy]

I do use GFO but 1/3-1/3 the recommended amount. I honestly have not changed it in a 1 1/2 to 2 months. I turned it off a couple nights ago to see what happens.

Believe me, I had thought this exact same thing as well. Even just a tiny amount caused issues for me... Also, be aware that it took about 2-3 weeks to see any improvement once GFO went offline. I still lost a few colonies with burnt tips too as they couldn't fully recover. Newer frags are doing very well though, and the existing colonies that pulled through.

I'd recommend you snip the algae covered tips which will encourage growth.

 

[jda]

I have no idea if it is the lights... just a guess.

I have used GFO with no issues... key is to take it slow. If yours was on the tank for 6-8 weeks, then it probably bound up all of the po4 that it was going to long ago.

 

[sanzz18]

It’s not your lights
Gfo caused this every time I used it regardless of what my po4 level was. Now you just have to be patient and let the coral heal

Only issue is I had high phosphate for awhile (0.6 was the top). I have a refugium, but it can only absorb so much nutrients in a section of my waterbed sump. Without a bunch of corals to uptake some of the nutrients, I don't know how to keep phosphate low without GFO.

Believe me, I had thought this exact same thing as well. Even just a tiny amount caused issues for me... Also, be aware that it took about 2-3 weeks to see any improvement once GFO went offline. I still lost a few colonies with burnt tips too as they couldn't fully recover. Newer frags are doing very well though, and the existing colonies that pulled through.

I'd recommend you snip the algae covered tips which will encourage growth.

If my phosphate starts to climb to high levels again like before, I would not know how to maintain it without GFO.

I have no idea if it is the lights... just a guess.

I have used GFO with no issues... key is to take it slow. If yours was on the tank for 6-8 weeks, then it probably bound up all of the po4 that it was going to long ago.

Do you think all the phosphate being bound up in the reactor would be a reason? If so how often should I replace it, I only ever replaced it when I see phosphate start climbing again.

 

[BirdFish5000]

I've never seen anyone who claims that GFO is the cause of the issue be able to actually prove it outside of "once I removed it, the problems went away".

What specifically about GFO supposedly causes these issues? I'm very, very interested as there are plenty of nice SPS tanks that do run it.

 

[jda]

GFO will bind po4 to "equilibrium" with the water. The more that the water has, the more it will bind - if the water level is low, it will bind more. Even small amounts can bind a lot of the po4 level in the water is high. What most do not understand is that the rock/sand also do the same thing and as the GFO binds waterborne po4, the rock and sand (aragonite) will release some. Since the GFO often binds faster than the rock can release, you can have a sharp downward spike and then a spike back up. These spikes are likely more the issue than using GFO.

The po4 that is bound in the GFO is not harmful, but it can unbind if you change water or otherwise lower your water level of po4 like with a fuge.

If used actively in a reactor, the GFO was likely maxed out in a day, or maybe less. If used passively, then who knows... it could get bound up quickly or if it had low flow then it could have been coated in organics before it had a chance to bind up. In any case, the GFO that was in your tank already likely did nothing - either good or bad.

Using GFO is fine. Understanding the relationship that phosphate has with not only the GFO but also the aragonite and how to avoid spikes is what is important.

To manage po4, you can use media like GFO, Lan Chloride or Al Oxide, use another skimmer, more fuge or algae scrubbers and even some GAC can work to absorb organics before they break down (it needs to be changed often for this to work). Water changes rarely do much unless you always kept up and do them regularly in tanks where po4 never built up - water changes for high po4 levels are just not effective.

 

[homer1475]

I use 3 tbps mixed in with my carbon in a reactor(80G tank). I can tell by my testing that it is spent in about 3 days. I use to keep my phosphates between 0.1 and 0.2.

Never had an issue with acros that I can 100% contribute to GFO usage.

I will edit if I may......

I did have issues when I first start using GFO, only because I never knew how fast it can pull down phosphates. The coinstant spiking of phosphates did cause me issues with acros. Once I learned how to properly use it, I have not had issues since that I can 100% contribute to GFO usage.

 

[Charlie’s Frags]

I use 3 tbps mixed in with my carbon in a reactor(80G tank). I can tell by my testing that it is spent in about 3 days. I use to keep my phosphates between 0.1 and 0.2.

Never had an issue with acros that I can 100% contribute to GFO usage.

I will edit if I may......

I did have issues when I first start using GFO, only because I never knew how fast it can pull down phosphates. The coinstant spiking of phosphates did cause me issues with acros. Once I learned how to properly use it, I have not had issues since that I can 100% contribute to GFO usage.

Wow!!!! A thumbs up from @jda.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before.

I acknowledge that there are successful acro keepers that use gfo. I also know first hand that there many “pros” here that are not fully transparent about how successful they really are. All I know is I had zero success using gfo. I would come home to new stress/death every other day it seemed. Not the case ever since I stopped using it.

Regardless of who is and who isn’t successful, my point is it’s not needed. Just like there are many hobbyist that use gfo successfully, there also many hobbyist that are successful with +1.0 ppm po4.

Besides all that…..it’s disgusting to work with. Lanthanum chloride is so much easier. I’ve used the tm elimiphos many times with zero issues. I just add it directly to the tank.

 

[homer1475]

Wow!!!! A thumbs up from @jda.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before.

I acknowledge that there are successful acro keepers that use gfo. I also know first hand that there many “pros” here that are not fully transparent about how successful they really are. All I know is I had zero success using gfo. I would come home to new stress/death every other day it seemed. Not the case ever since I stopped using it.

Regardless of who is and who isn’t successful, my point is it’s not needed. Just like there are many hobbyist that use gfo successfully, there also many hobbyist that are successful with +1.0 ppm po4.

Besides all that…..it’s disgusting to work with. Lanthanum chloride is so much easier. I’ve used the tm elimiphos many times with zero issues. I just add it directly to the tank.

You and I have gone round and round a few times about GFO. LOL

I respect your input, just as much as any other "pro" on these boards. I have used lanthanum in the past, I personally just find GFO easier for me, with no ill effects.

 

[sanzz18]

GFO will bind po4 to "equilibrium" with the water. The more that the water has, the more it will bind - if the water level is low, it will bind more. Even small amounts can bind a lot of the po4 level in the water is high. What most do not understand is that the rock/sand also do the same thing and as the GFO binds waterborne po4, the rock and sand (aragonite) will release some. Since the GFO often binds faster than the rock can release, you can have a sharp downward spike and then a spike back up. These spikes are likely more the issue than using GFO.

The po4 that is bound in the GFO is not harmful, but it can unbind if you change water or otherwise lower your water level of po4 like with a fuge.

If used actively in a reactor, the GFO was likely maxed out in a day, or maybe less. If used passively, then who knows... it could get bound up quickly or if it had low flow then it could have been coated in organics before it had a chance to bind up. In any case, the GFO that was in your tank already likely did nothing - either good or bad.

Using GFO is fine. Understanding the relationship that phosphate has with not only the GFO but also the aragonite and how to avoid spikes is what is important.

To manage po4, you can use media like GFO, Lan Chloride or Al Oxide, use another skimmer, more fuge or algae scrubbers and even some GAC can work to absorb organics before they break down (it needs to be changed often for this to work). Water changes rarely do much unless you always kept up and do them regularly in tanks where po4 never built up - water changes for high po4 levels are just not effective.

I use 3 tbps mixed in with my carbon in a reactor(80G tank). I can tell by my testing that it is spent in about 3 days. I use to keep my phosphates between 0.1 and 0.2.

Never had an issue with acros that I can 100% contribute to GFO usage.

I will edit if I may......

I did have issues when I first start using GFO, only because I never knew how fast it can pull down phosphates. The coinstant spiking of phosphates did cause me issues with acros. Once I learned how to properly use it, I have not had issues since that I can 100% contribute to GFO usage.

@jda @homer1475 Thanks for you explanations on GFO usage. My system is roughly 180g of water. How should I proceed/how much GFO, should I use if I continue to use it? Trying to keep my acro frags from dying is so discouraging in a tank that I thought was old enough, diverse enough, and one of which I thought I finally stabilized the parameters.

Wow!!!! A thumbs up from @jda.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen that before.

I acknowledge that there are successful acro keepers that use gfo. I also know first hand that there many “pros” here that are not fully transparent about how successful they really are. All I know is I had zero success using gfo. I would come home to new stress/death every other day it seemed. Not the case ever since I stopped using it.

Regardless of who is and who isn’t successful, my point is it’s not needed. Just like there are many hobbyist that use gfo successfully, there also many hobbyist that are successful with +1.0 ppm po4.

Besides all that…..it’s disgusting to work with. Lanthanum chloride is so much easier. I’ve used the tm elimiphos many times with zero issues. I just add it directly to the tank.

I appreciate your insight on GFO/lanthanum chloride. I have considered lanthanum chloride and it definitely is not out of the question for me.

 

[jda]

Are you sure that you need to lower po4? If so, I have lots of thoughts on this...

First, my main display has only a fuge and three protein skimmers and they keep my tank low like 1-3 ppb except for when I had to feed these savage anthias too much and levels went up a bit (now back down). This is naturally sustainable, but I have plenty of room for a larger bunch of chaeto and multiple skimmers.

I use a good amount of LC in live rock bins and on a FOWLR (mostly) that I have larger fish in that I keep as a backup system in case my older tank decides to spring a leak. LC is cheap and easy to dose. It works. There have been too many fish losses that are just out of nowhere for me to recommend that anybody just tank-dose it and not use filter socks anymore - seems like people can be fine for a long time and then one day they end up with a bucket full of dead fish for no reason. These are like smart and experienced hobbyists. Nobody knows why. It is probably fine to just add it to the tank, and I have done it, but I use socks now. It is too easy to use socks that I don't risk it anymore.

In my live rock bins with no livestock, I add huge amounts directly it works fast. The last batch of real live rock that I got from a tank teardown was over what my hannah could test (diluted the water and it was about 1.5 ppm) after soaking. I added just added a ton of LC and waited for the water to clear (skimmer and socks) and it was down to like .30 a week later. I would never do this in a tank... no way. You can really get it down fast at first, but the longer you go the longer it takes since you have to wait or the inside or the rock to release, which is slower.

I also have a 50g lowboy that I keep my Colorado Sunbursts and some other softies in. The po4 can get out of hand in this tank, so I use some GFO or LC (with socks). I also change a lot of water on this tank, but this is not effective a lowering po4 all that much.

If you use the GFO, just start with a small amount, run it in a reactor and change it often and test your water quite often early on with a good tool like a Hannah Ultra Low. What you are wanting is to see the water level lower a little bit in a steady fashion. Understanding what I said above about the aragonite unbinding, you do not want spikes downward and then back up. You do not want to start with like .55 (made up example), then a day later after running some GFO (or LaCl) be at .20 and then a day later after the aragonite unbinds be at .53. You want to just run a bit, where your drop is small like maybe to where you are within the error of the test, so like maybe from .55 to .54 to like .53 in my made up example. Basically match the GFO usage to the rock release. Amount is hard to say, but start with maybe 1/3 of a cup and test ever day - you will see how long it lasts and stuff. There is no harm in going slow and seeing what your testing says.

The same is true with LC. I would try and match the dose so that the downward and upward spikes do not happen. Start small, test and learn. You will see some posts about people who spike it. Ok. You will also see a lot who went too fast and had issues.

The reason that it can be so hare to judge from tank to tank is because nobody has the same surface area of aragonite. Tanks with more sand and more rock have more po4 bound. You can get guesses on how much either the GFO or the LC can remove from the water column, but that is only the start since the unbinding is just as important.

I won a large bucket of Al Oxide a while back and I have use it too. ...same thing about going slow, but you really have to rinse this stuff and not let it tumble or it can make aluminum levels rise in your tank. Mine did not rise, but many others have and Dr. RHF wrote a good article on this with lots of numbers. This would be my third choice and I have not finished the bucket all the way because of this.

Basically, if you chart this, you want it to look more like a downward line and not an EKG.

 

[jda]

...sorry for the book, but you might not need to do too much of this.

I want to be able to keep any acro and any time. I also like to keep a lot of cool inverts and microfauna that build into my plan to not only keep my nitrate and phosphate low, those same microfauna that are EVERYWHERE in my tanks also keep fish diseases at bay (not eradicated) by consuming anything that falls off of a fish as part of it's life cycle.

There are tanks like the old Ross tank that have some acropora and have very large po4 levels.

Not all of what I keep could survive or thrive in the Ross tank, but some can. He talks about this subset a bit, but it is a subset.

I think that the people who just want to be somewhere in the middle are incredibly self aware as long as they don't think that what everything will work at higher levels. It does not. They don't want to work as hard to control po4, or whatever, and are happy with the outcome. Perfect use of the hobby, right?

All of this long stuff is to say that you might be OK, but you might not... such is life, I guess?

 

[sanzz18]

Are you sure that you need to lower po4? If so, I have lots of thoughts on this...

First, my main display has only a fuge and three protein skimmers and they keep my tank low like 1-3 ppb except for when I had to feed these savage anthias too much and levels went up a bit (now back down). This is naturally sustainable, but I have plenty of room for a larger bunch of chaeto and multiple skimmers.

I use a good amount of LC in live rock bins and on a FOWLR (mostly) that I have larger fish in that I keep as a backup system in case my older tank decides to spring a leak. LC is cheap and easy to dose. It works. There have been too many fish losses that are just out of nowhere for me to recommend that anybody just tank-dose it and not use filter socks anymore - seems like people can be fine for a long time and then one day they end up with a bucket full of dead fish for no reason. These are like smart and experienced hobbyists. Nobody knows why. It is probably fine to just add it to the tank, and I have done it, but I use socks now. It is too easy to use socks that I don't risk it anymore.

In my live rock bins with no livestock, I add huge amounts directly it works fast. The last batch of real live rock that I got from a tank teardown was over what my hannah could test (diluted the water and it was about 1.5 ppm) after soaking. I added just added a ton of LC and waited for the water to clear (skimmer and socks) and it was down to like .30 a week later. I would never do this in a tank... no way. You can really get it down fast at first, but the longer you go the longer it takes since you have to wait or the inside or the rock to release, which is slower.

I also have a 50g lowboy that I keep my Colorado Sunbursts and some other softies in. The po4 can get out of hand in this tank, so I use some GFO or LC (with socks). I also change a lot of water on this tank, but this is not effective a lowering po4 all that much.

If you use the GFO, just start with a small amount, run it in a reactor and change it often and test your water quite often early on with a good tool like a Hannah Ultra Low. What you are wanting is to see the water level lower a little bit in a steady fashion. Understanding what I said above about the aragonite unbinding, you do not want spikes downward and then back up. You do not want to start with like .55 (made up example), then a day later after running some GFO (or LaCl) be at .20 and then a day later after the aragonite unbinds be at .53. You want to just run a bit, where your drop is small like maybe to where you are within the error of the test, so like maybe from .55 to .54 to like .53 in my made up example. Basically match the GFO usage to the rock release. Amount is hard to say, but start with maybe 1/3 of a cup and test ever day - you will see how long it lasts and stuff. There is no harm in going slow and seeing what your testing says.

The same is true with LC. I would try and match the dose so that the downward and upward spikes do not happen. Start small, test and learn. You will see some posts about people who spike it. Ok. You will also see a lot who went too fast and had issues.

The reason that it can be so hare to judge from tank to tank is because nobody has the same surface area of aragonite. Tanks with more sand and more rock have more po4 bound. You can get guesses on how much either the GFO or the LC can remove from the water column, but that is only the start since the unbinding is just as important.

I won a large bucket of Al Oxide a while back and I have use it too. ...same thing about going slow, but you really have to rinse this stuff and not let it tumble or it can make aluminum levels rise in your tank. Mine did not rise, but many others have and Dr. RHF wrote a good article on this with lots of numbers. This would be my third choice and I have not finished the bucket all the way because of this.

Basically, if you chart this, you want it to look more like a downward line and not an EKG.

...sorry for the book, but you might not need to do too much of this.

I want to be able to keep any acro and any time. I also like to keep a lot of cool inverts and microfauna that build into my plan to not only keep my nitrate and phosphate low, those same microfauna that are EVERYWHERE in my tanks also keep fish diseases at bay (not eradicated) by consuming anything that falls off of a fish as part of it's life cycle.

There are tanks like the old Ross tank that have some acropora and have very large po4 levels.

Not all of what I keep could survive or thrive in the Ross tank, but some can. He talks about this subset a bit, but it is a subset.

I think that the people who just want to be somewhere in the middle are incredibly self aware as long as they don't think that what everything will work at higher levels. It does not. They don't want to work as hard to control po4, or whatever, and are happy with the outcome. Perfect use of the hobby, right?

All of this long stuff is to say that you might be OK, but you might not... such is life, I guess?

So it isn't so much that I am trying to lower my phosphate because from what I read 0.13 is not all that serious, especially when nitrates are where mine are (17). It is just when I start seeing the level rise is when I just want to use a little GFO to maintain it. I have barely any corals to assist with nutrient uptake.

I am just trying to figure out why some of my frags are dying when I thought my tank was ready and stable. I mean it may not even be related to GFO.

I have, since the start of this post, dropped my ALK to 7.7-7.8, hoping that it will help heal or allow me to keep new frags coming in.

I just don't know how to pinpoint the problem.

 

[jda]

Are you a water changer? They can really be a nice reset if you cannot figure out an issue. My apologies if I asked this already.

 

[sanzz18]

Are you a water changer? They can really be a nice reset if you cannot figure out an issue. My apologies if I asked this already.

I did an abundance (probably 20-30) of large 45 gallons of waterchanges to get my nutrients in check the last 3-4 months. I also now have daily waterchanges setup with apex/DOS. No worries lol you haven’t asked yet.