"Coral whispering"...and grumbling....

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Know that "science" and its associated experiments are not infallible. They can easily be flawed or based on information that is itself incorrect. The outcome can also be misread depending on the views of the scientist. I'm not saying they don't find things out, but nobody's perfect and neither is this thing called science.
 
Last edited:
Love the adaptation of the search for extrasolar planets lingo...was not lost on me!

-Scott

Wondered if you'd catch that :)

On the topic of nitrate and phosphate, I've been unable to obtain a reading in my 12g from either (Salifert test kits) for over 2 years, even though I have two adult, messy Clownfish and I feed the LPS in the tank weekly. Being a living system, I know that these substances are available and that the water column concentrations are lower than what can be detected by the kits. While I am actually not after good growth, it still happens due largely to the fishes' waste products.

Here's where I'm going with this. We have systems where these nutrient substances are testing '0'...and the corals are thriving. We have other systems with somewhat elevated levels, and the corals are also thriving. This leads me to believe that the key is in understanding what is actually available and assimilated by the corals at any given point in time and how that might effect their vitality.

For example, if I feed my fish moderately 3x/day I am supplying bursts of nutrients every 3-4 hours, but I do not detect these bursts as elevated phosphate and nitrate due to rapid assimilation and regular removal of detritus.

However, in a tank with measurable phosphate and nitrate, these substances are available in higher concentrations on a continuous basis.

In the natural reef environment, both scenarios can occur. As just two examples:

1. A large school of Surgeonfish passing over a particular area in the reef can supply a large burst of nutrition via their feces.

2. A deep water upwelling event can supply relatively long term nutrient enrichment.

Looking at this question strictly from the coral's needs, this begs the question: "Is there any advantage to having nutrients supplied intermittently while maintaining nutrient deficient water or is it advantageous to have them constantly available in more concentrated amounts?" In some studies, elevated nutrient levels have resulted in faster coral growth. In others, the result has been increased disease and bleaching (but I don't know the levels of elevated nutrients that the corals were subjected to).

My take-away from all this is that corals can do well in the aquarium using different strategies and techniques as long as their energy needs are fulfilled.

Ralph.
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that nitrate and phosphate are only small parts of the composition of so-called available nutrients. Perhaps the hobby is overfocusing on them...I would venture to guess that while they may be a helpful guide for measuring how "dirty" your water is, they are not the whole story.
 
Wondered if you'd catch that :)

On the topic of nitrate and phosphate, I've been unable to obtain a reading in my 12g from either (Salifert test kits) for over 2 years, even though I have two adult, messy Clownfish and I feed the LPS in the tank weekly. Being a living system, I know that these substances are available and that the water column concentrations are lower than what can be detected by the kits. While I am actually not after good growth, it still happens due largely to the fishes' waste products.

Here's where I'm going with this. We have systems where these nutrient substances are testing '0'...and the corals are thriving. We have other systems with somewhat elevated levels, and the corals are also thriving. This leads me to believe that the key is in understanding what is actually available and assimilated by the corals at any given point in time and how that might effect their vitality.

For example, if I feed my fish moderately 3x/day I am supplying bursts of nutrients every 3-4 hours, but I do not detect these bursts as elevated phosphate and nitrate due to rapid assimilation and regular removal of detritus.

However, in a tank with measurable phosphate and nitrate, these substances are available in higher concentrations on a continuous basis.

In the natural reef environment, both scenarios can occur. As just two examples:

1. A large school of Surgeonfish passing over a particular area in the reef can supply a large burst of nutrition via their feces.

2. A deep water upwelling event can supply relatively long term nutrient enrichment.

Looking at this question strictly from the coral's needs, this begs the question: "Is there any advantage to having nutrients supplied intermittently while maintaining nutrient deficient water or is it advantageous to have them constantly available in more concentrated amounts?" In some studies, elevated nutrient levels have resulted in faster coral growth. In others, the result has been increased disease and bleaching (but I don't know the levels of elevated nutrients that the corals were subjected to).

My take-away from all this is that corals can do well in the aquarium using different strategies and techniques as long as their energy needs are fulfilled.

Ralph.

Excellent points, Ralph- with great real world examples!

-Scott
 
It seems to me that nitrate and phosphate are only small parts of the composition of so-called available nutrients. Perhaps the hobby is overfocusing on them...I would venture to guess that while they may be a helpful guide for measuring how "dirty" your water is, they are not the whole story.

Exactly..Just like ORP is more of a "yardstick" for getting an indication of overall water quality...It's NOT everything, IMO!

-Scott
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top