How are your rocks so clean?

[LordWithBee]

While you're doing a water change,
get a Turkey baster and blow on the rocks, and siphon it to the sock in your sump

 

[FLSharkvictim]

Quick shot of MY DISPLAY!

 

[mta_morrow]

Time, diversity, good husbandry, and lots of patience.

That phase is starting to crank up in my tank which I started in February.

It took 2 years in my prior tank for it to start settling down and look good.

It takes time.

And if you watch it along the way and do things methodically and for a real reason, it will turn out great.

Most importantly, as you get advice, get it from someone who can show you pics of their successes

 

[Thomthom329]

I'm by no means an expert reefer, and learning something new everyday, but IMHO it's all about nutrient balance (along with many of the suggestions previously noted but balanced nutrients is key). For example, I had a nasty cyano/dino bloom occur in my tank 2 weeks ago. It was on everything and I couldn't figure out why - nearly wiped out my pink birds nest. Turns out that my nutrient levels were too low with undetectable PO4 and NO3 readings. Since then I've increased feeding and cut off my skimmer for 14 hours/day to get my NO3 and PO4 numbers up Today, my PO4 is .03 and NO3 is 1ppm. Cyano is about 80% gone and getting better everyday. I'm trying to get NO3 up (while keeping PO4 at 0.03) to somewhere between 2-5ppm which should be a good balance for my tank. Too high/low nutrient levels = uglies. Balance is key.

 

[reeferfoxx]

The nutrient equation isnti a balance only an act. Algae of any form works as a corrector. You feed the corrector and it never goes away. Dino's more or less are an identifier to nutrient limitation. The micro organisms within the tank are regulators. This includes bacteria, pods, isopods, plankton, filter feeders, etc etc. Nutrient limitations limits microbial growth. Limit deficiencies and gain postitive diversity to out compete the uglies. Filamentous algae need help to be removed. Limiting their competitiveness limits microbial diversity. It takes time to find equalibrium but takes the headache out of creating a balance.

 

[bubbaque]

I agree with those that say leave it alone. My rocks are pretty clean and covered with corraline. I notice though that if I add a new piece of dry rock, the rock will grow algae and other nasties on it, while the other stay the same. After a few months it will look just like my other rocks.

 

[Brew12]

Oops. Well I did not do this. My foxface fixed it after two weeks though!

Looks like you decorated it for Halloween!

Snails, urchins, fish, and nutrient balance

Time, diversity, good husbandry, and lots of patience.

Couldn't agree more with these 2 posts. Remember, we are trying to keep things alive in our system and if you try to eradicate dino's, cyano, or algae you will also be harming fish and coral. To be a successful reef keeper you must be able to grow "stuff" in your tank.

When it comes to dino's and cyano nutrient balance is very important. I'll put the links up that I feel show why. The quick and dirty? In general terms, low nitrates favor cyanobacteria. Low phosphates favor dinoflagellates. This isn't true of all strains of both so their are exceptions, but it roughly holds true for the planktonic versions.
Eutrophication of lakes cannot be controlled by reducing nitrogen input: Results of a 37-year whole-ecosystem experiment | PNAS
Putting the N in dinoflagellates

So when we get and keep our nutrients balanced we will hopefully grow mostly beneficial planktonic algae instead of the bacteria. To deal with this we typically rely on two methods. First is trying to control where most of it grows. This can be a fuge, chaeto reactor, or algae turf scrubber.

Of course, we will all grow some stuff in our displays. Hopefully most of this is in the form of coral. One reason well established tanks tend to have fewer algae issues is that the corals themselves will out compete algae. For the rest or the algae/bacteria, we rely on our CuC's. The most important member of the CuC is you. When there is a "problematic" algae/bacteria manual removal is a good start. You are also the one in control of nutrient imports and exports. If you use filter socks, are you changing them regularly? Are you letting muck build up in low flow areas of your DT or sump? Are you following a proper lighting schedule? Are you testing for and maintaining nutrient balance? I've also found that, especially in new tanks, using a small pump to blast the rock clean works wonders. I used a cobalt MJ1200 to blast the crud out from deep in the rock pores.
As your tank ages, hopefully you will continue to add biodiversity. We can add urchins, snails, crabs and sea hares to help target algaes and bacteria. Don't underestimate the value of the smaller CuC members. Amphipods, copepods, and rotifers will all eat cyano, dino's and diatoms. Bristleworms and some other polychaetes are also very valuable members of the CuC. Encourage that other life to thrive and your algae problems will start going away.

 

[reeferfoxx]

Balance ;Yuck

 

[av8soulfly]

My long spine urchin has stripped all my rocks clean. Now it's working on the glass.

 

[Crabs McJones]

I take my pictures from very far away so you can't actually see how dirty my rocks are

 

[Brew12]

I take my pictures from very far away so you can't actually see how dirty my rocks are

There is some truth to this!

If you look closely, you can see some very small growth on the rock. My CuC tend to travel in groups and hadn't made it here in awhile.

This was an area just picked clean. No fuzz.

From further away, everything looks clean.

 

[reeferfoxx]

This recent article(2015), discusses nutrients, red field ratio, and regulators. It completely negates a lot of trending advice towards nutrient "balance" and explains a balance in organisms. It also discusses the theories introduced into the hobby and how they don't pertain to reef systems or reef aquaria. It's a great read and very enlightening.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2014GB005066

 

[Brew12]

This recent article(2015), discusses nutrients, red field ratio, and regulators. It completely negates a lot of trending advice towards nutrient "balance" and explains a balance in organisms. It also discusses the theories introduced into the hobby and how they don't pertain to reef systems or reef aquaria. It's a great read and very enlightening.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/2014GB005066

I'm thinking you didn't link the correct study. This study fully supports maintaining a balance to avoid limitation.

"4 Discussion
Our model of coupled N and P biogeochemical cycles in the ocean predicts that phytoplankton should perfectly regulate N and P concentrations in the upper layer because of its top‐down control on the upper, accessible nutrient pools. These results are in agreement with chemostat and resource‐ratios theories, which predict that organisms consume as much of the limiting resources as possible at equilibrium [e.g., Tilman, 1980; Smith and Waltman, 1995]; as a result, they are expected to absorb any variation in the supply of a limiting nutrient in the accessible pool. "

They do show that this does change for deeper water which they define as not having light penetration.

"By contrast, we showed that variations in P and N supplies to the surface ocean impact nutrient concentrations in the deep, inaccessible layer. This occurs because biotic recycling of organic matter plays the role of a nutrient supply to the deep ocean, with the added complexity that the intensity of these biotic inflows depends on the biomass and N: P ratio of phytoplankton in the upper layer."

 

[reeferfoxx]

I'm thinking you didn't link the correct study. This study fully supports maintaining a balance to avoid limitation.

"4 Discussion
Our model of coupled N and P biogeochemical cycles in the ocean predicts that phytoplankton should perfectly regulate N and P concentrations in the upper layer because of its top‐down control on the upper, accessible nutrient pools. These results are in agreement with chemostat and resource‐ratios theories, which predict that organisms consume as much of the limiting resources as possible at equilibrium [e.g., Tilman, 1980; Smith and Waltman, 1995]; as a result, they are expected to absorb any variation in the supply of a limiting nutrient in the accessible pool. "

They do show that this does change for deeper water which they define as not having light penetration.

"By contrast, we showed that variations in P and N supplies to the surface ocean impact nutrient concentrations in the deep, inaccessible layer. This occurs because biotic recycling of organic matter plays the role of a nutrient supply to the deep ocean, with the added complexity that the intensity of these biotic inflows depends on the biomass and N ratio of phytoplankton in the upper layer."

Actually I didn't. It's the regulation of plankton with N availability. It discusses N fixers and P fixers. In fact you quoted it here.

with the added complexity that the intensity of these biotic inflows depends on the biomass and N: P ratio of phytoplankton in the upper layer."

 

[Brew12]

Actually I didn't. It's the regulation of plankton with N availability. It discusses N fixers and P fixers. In fact you quoted it here.

Yes, but that only applied to no light conditions.

 

[reeferfoxx]

This study fully supports maintaining a balance to avoid limitation.

Basically, there is no such thing as a nutrient balance. It's all about the availability of nutrients. If you have high po4 and low no3, you might see an influx of pineapple sponges. Its the balance of organisms. The advice is nutrient availability not balancing.

 

[reeferfoxx]

Yes, but that only applied to no light conditions.

;Facepalm

Ok, so when they discuss the upper layer, that would be the shallow reef area of the ocean.

 

[Brew12]

Basically, there is no such thing as a nutrient balance.

Are you trying to say that maintaining a specific number as a balance cannot be done?

I would argue that as long as you have some of each, there is a balance. If there isn't a balance, there is a deficiency. We can help determine what grows by how that balance of nutrients is shifted.

 

[Brew12]

;Facepalm

Ok, so when they discuss the upper layer, that would be the shallow reef area of the ocean.

Correct, which would be much closer to what happens in our tanks. And they say with those conditions: "These results are in agreement with chemostat and resource‐ratios theories, which predict that organisms consume as much of the limiting resources as possible at equilibrium" which I feel is what you are arguing against.

 

[reeferfoxx]

Are you trying to say that maintaining a specific number as a balance cannot be done?

I would argue that as long as you have some of each, there is a balance. If there isn't a balance, there is a deficiency. We can help determine what grows by how that balance of nutrients is shifted.

You can most certainly target/chase numbers. Is it good advice? Not sure. I think not.