Everything is peeling

[chimbo84]

I have a mixed 120gal tank that is an upgrade from a Fluval Evo. It has roughly 20lbs of two year old live rock with the remaining 70lbs being new. The tank was upgraded in March so the new rock is roughly seven months old at this point.

The tank has been struggling to say the least. GHA and cyano have taken quite a hold but the thing that is really bothering me is that I am losing a TON of coral to STN. All my SPS are peeling and nothing looks particularly happy except my soft corals. All the skeletons quickly get covered in cyano so I am not sure if the cyano is causing the tissue recession or if the Cyano is taking advantage of the bare skeletons.

My ICP test last month (below) indicated low iodine (16.22ug/l) and high aluminum (46.7ug/l) but I am not sure if these are potential culprits. At the time this test was submitted, I was running phosguard and have since removed it out of concern for leaching Aluminum. I have been running carbon and GFO, upped my daily water change volume, and am running 100W UV 24/7 but am continuing to see decline in my corals. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

My current parameters are as follows:
Salinity : 34.6ppt
Temp : 24hr range 77.6 - 78.8
pH : 8.3 (24hr range 8.24-8.31)
Alkalinity : 8.2dKH
NO3 : 3.2ppm
PO4 : 0.00ppm (normally around 0.04ppm; not sure why so low today)
Cu : 0.03ppm (not sure why I am seeing Copper but read the Hanna checker is not accurate at low concentration)

Here is my ICP test results from August. I just sent out another set of results today but I haven't changed anything significant except removing the Phosguard and slowly dropping my alk from the 9.~ range. My alk has been pretty stable in the 8.3-8.5 range for the last few weeks.

^ Corals that I have lost are quickly covered in thick Cyano.

^ These frags were totally healthy and growing in my frag tank. I moved them onto a rack in my display tank about two weeks ago and they have started to peel and are getting covered in brown algae. Zoas are totally fine.

^ This monti cap has peeled and not recovered. Polyps are bright red and extended but the skeleton is exposed and getting covered in algae.

 

[Rick's Reviews]

Have you tried the basic 'turkey blast off' any algae/ film, on corals, also when was your last water change ?

 

[Crustaceon]

My advice is to do less of everything. That's probably what's shocking your sps to death. I wouldn't do a single water change for the next few months. I wouldn't care if nitrates hit 20ppm and phosphate hit .10 ppm. Those numbers typically aren't going to do anything aside from maybe cause some nuisance algae to pop up on your pumps, which is easily addressed with an old tooth brush. Your corals, including sps would be fine. What they're not fine with is rapid water parameter shifts and low nutrients. 3.2ppm nitrates and .04ppm phosphates is razor's-edge (yes, phosphate included). The main factor here is consistency. The lower the nutrient levels, the harder it is to maintain that consistency. People do keep sps at these levels, but there's little margin for error and this is typically where people get into trouble whereas if they ran 5-10ppm nitrate and .06-.1ppm phosphates, they'd tend to have far less issues. There's a big difference between 5ppm nitrates vs. 2ppm nitrates than there is between 10ppm nitrates vs. 20 ppm nitrates. It's deceptively tricky to stay at 3ppm nitrates and under without bottoming out that parameter and causing problems that take weeks, if not months to resolve. People will probably fight me on this, but I've tried both methodologies and IME, running nutrients a little higher that most expect causes far less problems.

 

[chimbo84]

My advice is to do less of everything. That's probably what's shocking your sps to death. I wouldn't do a single water change for the next few months. I wouldn't care if nitrates hit 20ppm and phosphate hit .10 ppm. Those numbers typically aren't going to do anything aside from maybe cause some nuisance algae to pop up on your pumps, which is easily addressed with an old tooth brush. Your corals, including sps would be fine. What they're not fine with is rapid water parameter shifts and low nutrients. 3.2ppm nitrates and .04ppm phosphates is razor's-edge (yes, phosphate included). The main factor here is consistency. The lower the nutrient levels, the harder it is to maintain that consistency. People do keep sps at these levels, but there's little margin for error and this is typically where people get into trouble whereas if they ran 5-10ppm nitrate and .06-.1ppm phosphates, they'd tend to have far less issues. There's a big difference between 5ppm nitrates vs. 2ppm nitrates than there is between 10ppm nitrates vs. 20 ppm nitrates. It's deceptively tricky to stay at 3ppm nitrates and under without bottoming out that parameter and causing problems that take weeks, if not months to resolve. People will probably fight me on this, but I've tried both methodologies and IME, running nutrients a little higher that most expect causes far less problems.

That is definitely the direction I am heading and have taken the carbon/GFO offline. The water changes I will take offline but I am worried about a potential contaminant in my tank... are my ICP tests cause for concern? Is iodine, aluminum, of phosphorous an issue? These are all out of range.

 

[chimbo84]

Have you tried the basic 'turkey blast off' any algae/ film, on corals, also when was your last water change ?

I run daily automatic 6L water changes and I have tried blasting the coral off with a baster but it comes back within a day or so. The cyano is really drawn to the coral skeletons for some reason which prevents the coral from having any chance of recovering.

 

[chimbo84]

I was using a different salt in my old tank (Instant Ocean) and everything was happy then. When I moved to the new tank, I switch to Fritz RPM so decided to see if there was a possibility for that being the issue and found this: https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/fritz-salt-issues.645518

I find it really interesting that the issues described in this thread are very similar to what I have.

 

[Crustaceon]

That is definitely the direction I am heading and have taken the carbon/GFO offline. The water changes I will take offline but I am worried about a potential contaminant in my tank... are my ICP tests cause for concern? Is iodine, aluminum, of phosphorous an issue? These are all out of range.

I’ve read so many comments on ICP results with aluminum levels out of range, yet those tanks still had healthy coral. Same for phosphorus. As I understand it, iodine level will drop on their own through natural biological processes. Beyond the obvious potential phosguard leeching, what could be a major contributor to these elevated numbers is your salt mix. That’s another reason why I recommend to hold off on water changes and try to do as little as possible aside from cleaning rocks and pumps. I don’t see ICP as a “match these numbers and have success” type of thing. It’s more of an indicator of trends that can become issues later on or a confirmation that yes, your toddler did throw a penny into your sump.

 

[sculpin01]

I would switch salts. Phosphate of 0.14 is fine for a reef tank and your aluminum isn’t particularly high. Given that Fritz salt has a history of similar problems, it absolutely makes sense to change. Just because the Fritz ICP is in range for inorganic seawater compounds doesn’t mean there’s not an unknown organic contaminant of some sort. I’d probably mix up a very large batch of new salt (blue bucket?) and do a near total water change.

 

[Smite]

Personally I always have some aluminum on my ICP tests. As stated already aluminum pops up all the time in healthy tanks so I wouldn't stress on that number.

The bottomed out po4 has caused problems for me in the past. I've ran near undetectable po4 for a good period with success but I do feel like tissue is healthier in the .06+ range and the pieces are just hardier. Looking at your ICP test results, vary from what you are testing and that is concerning, specially with the mention of GFO and other phosphate removers. Your test shows .14, which to me is an okay level just a little high. But you are test 0-.04. If this was due to GFO and your readings are correct then you may have stripped your nutrients too quickly and are experiencing a reaction from that.

For doing daily water changes you have a few trace elements very low on your ICP. Strontium, Flouride and Iodine. That to me points to the possibility of your salt brand lacking those traces. Specially if your consumption rate wasn't very high in a new tank. Personally I would change salt brands if you really want to stick with daily water changes. Maybe something like Red Sea blue bucket - dehydrated sea water basically. Due to that I feel it's the "safest" salt to use right now with shortage issues popping up here and there.

That being said on a 120g tank I'd prefer to do corrections. More stable for me and easier when using a reliable method/ICP. At a bare minimum I'd be correcting Strontium and Iodine - Iodine in small amounts as a daily supplement.

 

[Spare time]

My advice is to do less of everything. That's probably what's shocking your sps to death. I wouldn't do a single water change for the next few months. I wouldn't care if nitrates hit 20ppm and phosphate hit .10 ppm. Those numbers typically aren't going to do anything aside from maybe cause some nuisance algae to pop up on your pumps, which is easily addressed with an old tooth brush. Your corals, including sps would be fine. What they're not fine with is rapid water parameter shifts and low nutrients. 3.2ppm nitrates and .04ppm phosphates is razor's-edge (yes, phosphate included). The main factor here is consistency. The lower the nutrient levels, the harder it is to maintain that consistency. People do keep sps at these levels, but there's little margin for error and this is typically where people get into trouble whereas if they ran 5-10ppm nitrate and .06-.1ppm phosphates, they'd tend to have far less issues. There's a big difference between 5ppm nitrates vs. 2ppm nitrates than there is between 10ppm nitrates vs. 20 ppm nitrates. It's deceptively tricky to stay at 3ppm nitrates and under without bottoming out that parameter and causing problems that take weeks, if not months to resolve. People will probably fight me on this, but I've tried both methodologies and IME, running nutrients a little higher that most expect causes far less problems.

I think there is a problem with saying running lower "nutrients" (I don't like to use that word) is less stable than running more. That makes no difference. How much the number varies is unrelated to where the number is at. a 1ppm swing is the same from 2-3ppm nitrate as it is from 15-16ppm nitrate. The difference between 5ppm and 2ppm nitrates is not really larger than 10ppm to 20ppm. As long as the corals have the minemum nitrogen input (from aminos, fish ammonia, nitrate, etc.), the number only able to cause more issues when elevated (albeit no one really knows what nitrate does below lethal levels in this hobby with the exception of issues when its elevated and phosphate and organic carbon are low). As long as you have some or have 0 but heavy feeding or amino dosing, the difference doesn't matter. I tend to recommend 5ppm nitrate if the tank isn't heavily fed nor getting aminos dosed because test kit error margins are important to consider (which might be why you see 2ppm as very different than 5ppm compared to 10v20 since 2ppm could be 0 depending on the error of the kit and user).

 

[Crustaceon]

I think there is a problem with saying running lower "nutrients" (I don't like to use that word) is less stable than running more. That makes no difference. How much the number varies is unrelated to where the number is at. a 1ppm swing is the same from 2-3ppm nitrate as it is from 15-16ppm nitrate. The difference between 5ppm and 2ppm nitrates is not really larger than 10ppm to 20ppm. As long as the corals have the minemum nitrogen input (from aminos, fish ammonia, nitrate, etc.), the number only able to cause more issues when elevated (albeit no one really knows what nitrate does below lethal levels in this hobby with the exception of issues when its elevated and phosphate and organic carbon are low). As long as you have some or have 0 but heavy feeding or amino dosing, the difference doesn't matter. I tend to recommend 5ppm nitrate if the tank isn't heavily fed nor getting aminos dosed because test kit error margins are important to consider (which might be why you see 2ppm as very different than 5ppm compared to 10v20 since 2ppm could be 0 depending on the error of the kit and user).

I get it, but there really is a big difference between 20ppm nitrates falling to 18ppm nitrates and 5ppm nitrates falling to zero for most reefers considering how they run their systems and their level of experience/willingness to feed/dose multiple times per day. This is who I refer to and not so much the zeovit crowd or others that can pull off ULNS and tend to have a lot more experience in that arena. I say 5-20ppm nitrates because it is a safe target that most people can easily achieve and I've seen from my own personal experience dinos pop up once levels dip down below 2ppm. I also figure most people are going to miss that downward trend from 5ppm to zero because they MIGHT test nitrates once every four-five days. I'd much rather see a tank that trends nitrates and phosphates up rather than down for that reason. As I mentioned, I've tried both methodologies and the main issue I had with ULNS was being too busy doing other stuff or simply forgetting to do specific daily tasks. It has it's rewards and I was able to make it work for some time, but you have to be on the ball with those tanks and it wasn't a good fit for my life. For me, an elevated nutrient system (around 10ppm nitrate and under .1ppm phosphate) ended up being the best fit. I'm not knocking one method or another because it really comes down to how a reefer wants to run their tank. From what I read, the OP tried the lower nutrient method and maybe it's not the best option for him. Maybe that's something to attempt later on, but for now, I'd recommend an easier option but less "optimized" option.

 

[Spare time]

I get it, but there really is a big difference between 20ppm nitrates falling to 18ppm nitrates and 5ppm nitrates falling to zero for most reefers considering how they run their systems and their level of experience/willingness to feed/dose multiple times per day. This is who I refer to and not so much the zeovit crowd or others that can pull off ULNS and tend to have a lot more experience in that arena. I say 5-20ppm nitrates because it is a safe target that most people can easily achieve and I've seen from my own personal experience dinos pop up once levels dip down below 2ppm. I also figure most people are going to miss that downward trend from 5ppm to zero because they MIGHT test nitrates once every four-five days. I'd much rather see a tank that trends nitrates and phosphates up rather than down for that reason. As I mentioned, I've tried both methodologies and the main issue I had with ULNS was being too busy doing other stuff or simply forgetting to do specific daily tasks. It has it's rewards and I was able to make it work for some time, but you have to be on the ball with those tanks and it wasn't a good fit for my life. For me, an elevated nutrient system (around 10ppm nitrate and under .1ppm phosphate) ended up being the best fit. I'm not knocking one method or another because it really comes down to how a reefer wants to run their tank. From what I read, the OP tried the lower nutrient method and maybe it's not the best option for him. Maybe that's something to attempt later on, but for now, I'd recommend an easier option but less "optimized" option.

Yeah I definitely agree there is a larger room for error with a nitrate at 10ppm or such

 

[chimbo84]

Personally I always have some aluminum on my ICP tests. As stated already aluminum pops up all the time in healthy tanks so I wouldn't stress on that number.

The bottomed out po4 has caused problems for me in the past. I've ran near undetectable po4 for a good period with success but I do feel like tissue is healthier in the .06+ range and the pieces are just hardier. Looking at your ICP test results, vary from what you are testing and that is concerning, specially with the mention of GFO and other phosphate removers. Your test shows .14, which to me is an okay level just a little high. But you are test 0-.04. If this was due to GFO and your readings are correct then you may have stripped your nutrients too quickly and are experiencing a reaction from that.

For doing daily water changes you have a few trace elements very low on your ICP. Strontium, Flouride and Iodine. That to me points to the possibility of your salt brand lacking those traces. Specially if your consumption rate wasn't very high in a new tank. Personally I would change salt brands if you really want to stick with daily water changes. Maybe something like Red Sea blue bucket - dehydrated sea water basically. Due to that I feel it's the "safest" salt to use right now with shortage issues popping up here and there.

That being said on a 120g tank I'd prefer to do corrections. More stable for me and easier when using a reliable method/ICP. At a bare minimum I'd be correcting Strontium and Iodine - Iodine in small amounts as a daily supplement.

Thank you for this very thorough response. I have a 200gal sack of blue bucket arriving tomorrow and will perform a full water change over the next few days. I can only mix up 30gal at a time and I don’t want to shock my tank so I think running my auto water change to swap out 20-30gal a day for the next few days will be a good way to go.
I’ll be sure to update with my findings after a couple weeks but I’m hoping this may also help with my GHA and cyan issue as well since I just can’t seem to get rid of them.

 

[sculpin01]

That sounds reasonable. I’m of the mindset that if everything is dying anyway, you have nothing to lose by replacing all of water anyway. Only caveat there is that you may need to replete nitrate and phosphate following your water change.

 

[Smite]

Pros and cons to that plan:

Auto Water Change
Pros
Gradual change over a few days, potentially less stressful for the coral
Easy peezy - not being sarcastic, lets face it life takes priority.
Cons
Not manually removing the mentioned algae issues
Not clearing detritus in rocks/sump
Easy to drop nutrients further if you don't* monitor and dose/feed very well to offset a nutrient drop

Manual Water Change
Pros
-Can mimic same outcome over a few days for a gradual change, but not as steadily
-While performing water changes for corrections also siphoning nuisance algae: cyano bacteria and GHA- 2 birds 1 stone type of deal. This also helps remove whatever they are growing off aka: as they grow they consume, you remove and it's out of the water column; detritus/potentially unwanted metals/excess nutrients
- Overall I feel it's easier to control; Test each batch made to match or move towards the parameters you want.
- You'll perform a water change, watch the tank for a response and continue, or stop due to negative reaction.
Yellow water test after draining clean water. How clear is it? That can tell you a lot about your water quality. White bucket preferred.
Cons
-Added effort
-Added time
Which are both real things to consider, honestly.

For me the manual removal of algae while siphoning out what's being removed gives you a huge head start on fixing the problem. They could be 100% related. You'll be removing not only algae but also what it's consumed/growing on. Knocking it back will help you to elevate nutrients without just feeding the problem at hand. You may find just feeding more fixes the situation without clumps of algae present.

I tried so many tactics when battling GHA (followed by dinos trying to choke it out), which happens to align when I was struggling with nutrient issues, and what ended up fixing the GHA was the effort of manually removing it a few times a week for about a month. That knocked the algae back and gave all my coral a foothold to compete against it. That in combo with a decent CUC.

That's my mindset or experience with a similar situation. Hopefully the water changes help regardless of how you go about it.

 

[chimbo84]

Pros and cons to that plan:

Auto Water Change
Pros
Gradual change over a few days, potentially less stressful for the coral
Easy peezy - not being sarcastic, lets face it life takes priority.
Cons
Not manually removing the mentioned algae issues
Not clearing detritus in rocks/sump
Easy to drop nutrients further if you don't* monitor and dose/feed very well to offset a nutrient drop

Manual Water Change
Pros
-Can mimic same outcome over a few days for a gradual change, but not as steadily
-While performing water changes for corrections also siphoning nuisance algae: cyano bacteria and GHA- 2 birds 1 stone type of deal. This also helps remove whatever they are growing off aka: as they grow they consume, you remove and it's out of the water column; detritus/potentially unwanted metals/excess nutrients
- Overall I feel it's easier to control; Test each batch made to match or move towards the parameters you want.
- You'll perform a water change, watch the tank for a response and continue, or stop due to negative reaction.
Yellow water test after draining clean water. How clear is it? That can tell you a lot about your water quality. White bucket preferred.
Cons
-Added effort
-Added time
Which are both real things to consider, honestly.

For me the manual removal of algae while siphoning out what's being removed gives you a huge head start on fixing the problem. They could be 100% related. You'll be removing not only algae but also what it's consumed/growing on. Knocking it back will help you to elevate nutrients without just feeding the problem at hand. You may find just feeding more fixes the situation without clumps of algae present.

I tried so many tactics when battling GHA (followed by dinos trying to choke it out), which happens to align when I was struggling with nutrient issues, and what ended up fixing the GHA was the effort of manually removing it a few times a week for about a month. That knocked the algae back and gave all my coral a foothold to compete against it. That in combo with a decent CUC.

That's my mindset or experience with a similar situation. Hopefully the water changes help regardless of how you go about it.

Honestly I really appreciate the time and effort that you and everyone has put into writing responses for this thread. This community is amazing

I absolutely get what you’re saying and will see what I can do to do one or two rounds of manual water change and give the rocks a good cleaning in the process.

 

[chimbo84]

I wanted to update this thread because after just a 30gal water change with the Red Sea Blue Bucket salt, I am already seeing a massive difference in my tank. The cyano has started to fade and clear and my hammer and montiporas are noticeably happier. Acans are fluffier and my torch is more extended than I have seen it in months. I definitely think there was a deficiency or contaminant in my tank that is being addressed with the new salt and large water change. I may have to reevaluate my water change routine and either increase the amount of daily water change (I had been doing 1gal a day) or go to a more typical water change interval (ex, 20% twice a month).

Still awaiting the results of my ICP test but I am not hopeful that will provide any more insight. I have had this issue for months and my last ICP test didn't indicate any apparent cause.