Curious here how a po4>no3 is a set in stone indication for cyano. I understand redfield and I understand how some say this ratio has no baring in a reef. But is there not more to a cause of any outbreak (GHA) as bad as Ricky has (which reading here seems more to be a dry rock die off cycling issue) cyano is a completely different component than simply a no3o4 scenario is it not? There has even been Adv aquarist Articles noted here about cyano and aiptaisia correlation. I just don't know if it is fair to concretely deduce that a po4:no3 is a contagion for cyano (or GHA). It's a bloom that has got to work its way through the system over time/over good water changes/flow/turnover/prudent feeding/proper livestock/striking nutrient import:export balance. Not a biologist not a chemist and not an expert just along for the ride and being mindful that drawing such conclusions from two hobbyist test kit numbers is not necessarily gospel. Keep posting. Thanks for the read. Greg
sure. overdose on carbon.
or find the countless carbon dosers that ran it for 6 months, hit rock bottom and then cyano outbreak. its a common issue plaguing forums.
tons of carbon po4>no3 almost 100% of the time. everything seems dandy til that nitrogen is gone.
ive been noticing the same with gha minus the carbon (speculation)
sometimes you will see both gha and cyano. i havent seen conclusive evidence why gha takes over when conditions are ripe for cyano except for the lack of carbon.
in almost every case ive observed and seen from my experience, bad things happen if po4 has the upper hand and no nitrogen. even if you are running gfo.
i am not saying this is how it is or to take my word as gospel. i am only sharing my experience/observations
hth
Last edited:
