NITRATE REDUCTION: Top 3 ways to keep Nitrates down?

[Belgian Anthias]

When you speak of nitrogen availability as opposed to nitrate when discussing algae growth, what form of nitrogen are you speaking of?

I thought CO2 was present in seawater at equilibrium with atmospheric CO2 and not limited. Are you maybe speaking of organic carbon rather than CO2? I can't read the link, it only comes up in what I think is Dutch.

The Makazi Bahraini wiki is originally written in Dutch, references can be consulted and most references used in the articles are in English. Google translate may help you out if you want to know more.
The nitrogen source used is determent for the possible growth rate. Most organisms prefer ammonia-nitrogen and inhibit the use of nitrate-nitrogen if ammonia is sensed. A lot of photo-autotrophs are able to use both at the same time but will favor ammonia, then nitrite. The nitrate level does not influence growth rates, 1ppm or 5ppm, they will grow at about the same rate if using nitrate-nitrogen. but will grow as long as all essential building materials are available. Using nitrate-nitrogen as a nitrogen source reduces growth rates.
CO2 dissolved in seawater will become bicarbonate. Rubisco uses CO2. Corals need CO3 and calcium for calcification , the transcalcification process releases CO2. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:chemie:calcificatie Halimeda uses Photosynthesis-induced calcification, needing calcium and CO2. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:chemie:calcificatie#fotosynthese_geïnduceerde_calcificatie A lot of algae calcify, some need CO2 for both, calcification and photosynthesis. A lot of autotrophs are able to use carbonate as a carbon source but must transform it into CO2 internally.

 

[Luciferene]

Any pictures of your tank? It will be interesting since I have all nitrate controls and also some agae

Please excuse the mess haha, just recently did a frag and glue work. I do get film algae on the glass I scrape once in a while - Just meant I haven't had algae bloom problem, especially no issue on LR.

When this tank was FOWLR I didn't even have film algae though.

 

[chaoticreefer]

The Makazi Bahraini wiki is originally written in Dutch, references can be consulted and most references used in the articles are in English. Google translate may help you out if you want to know more.
The nitrogen source used is determent for the possible growth rate. Most organisms prefer ammonia-nitrogen and inhibit the use of nitrate-nitrogen if ammonia is sensed. A lot of photo-autotrophs are able to use both at the same time but will favor ammonia, then nitrite. The nitrate level does not influence growth rates, 1ppm or 5ppm, they will grow at about the same rate if using nitrate-nitrogen. but will grow as long as all essential building materials are available. Using nitrate-nitrogen as a nitrogen source reduces growth rates.
CO2 dissolved in seawater will become bicarbonate. Rubisco uses CO2. Corals need CO3 and calcium for calcification , the transcalcification process releases CO2. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:chemie:calcificatie Halimeda uses Photosynthesis-induced calcification, needing calcium and CO2. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:chemie:calcificatie#fotosynthese_geïnduceerde_calcificatie A lot of algae calcify, some need CO2 for both, calcification and photosynthesis. A lot of autotrophs are able to use carbonate as a carbon source but must transform it into CO2 internally.

That would explain why some systems with a lot of fish do great, being ammonium based nitrogen.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

That would explain why some systems with a lot of fish do great, being ammonium-based nitrogen.

What I have tried to show is, it is a fact in reef systems some algae grow better because of the local CO2 production due to the calcification by corals.
Remineralization produces a lot of CO2 as most organic carbon is transformed into CO2, closing the carbon cycle. Big fish produce a lot of CO2, needing a high gas exchange rate. Fish Only systems use bio-filters.

Fish release a lot of ammonia directly into the water column, as do most heterotrophic end-users.
Approximately 40–60% of the nitrogen intake from food is excreted within 24 h (Ip et al., 2004c; Lim et al., 2004b).
The total may become as high as 85%.
Remineralization and dissimilation ( respiration) of food has already taken place within the fish, producing ammonia, phosphate, CO2, and organic waste.
All for growth usable nitrogen is ammonia-based. Safely stored usable nitrate-nitrogen is the end product of the aerobic remineralization process if the carrying capacity is sufficient to support the bio-load, and is ammonia-based. Also, if nitrate-nitrogen is used as a nitrogen source by organisms for growth, +- 40% may end up as ammonium in the water column.
The nitrogen source used by the organism is determined for growth rates, not what is present in the water column as this is what is left over at the moment of measuring. ( as long there is enough)
Nitrifiers use ammonia very fast but are slow growers, most ammonia is not used for assimilation but respiration. To reduce the same amount of ammonium heterotrophs need+- 40x more essential building materials for producing protein. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:het_water:ammonium_reductie

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Liverock should be an option.

Probably a lot of reefers would have voted for " live rock'! Which of course does not mean it would make a big difference in managing the nitrogen content. A lot of reefers have voted for a skimmer thinking it makes a big difference, which it does, using a skimmer will prevent produced nitrate to be used up, which may be considered being good or bad. You will have to vote for OTHERS and maybe explain why live rock should be one of the 3 best ways for keeping nitrates down!?

 

[Belgian Anthias]

As having nitrate production may be considered a good thing, one must have a good reason to prevent nitrate production as much as possible using products stimulating heterotrophic growth, as nitrate-nitrogen considered not needed can easily be exported. In most cases, the cure will be a lot worse as the disease.

 

[ReefGeezer]

As having nitrate production may be considered a good thing, one must have a good reason to prevent nitrate production as much as possible...

I can't quite wrap my head around what you are actually saying in your posts. Are you saying that nitrate control in unnecessary because it is a nutrient source for organisms that use organic carbon for a food source? Is there no limit to the concentration of nitrate? Doesn't anaerobic oxidation of nitrate into nitrogen gas provide a good method of exporting nitrates to keep them in check? Isn't removing DOC that is not being used by Hetertrophs required to keep its levels from getting too high? Finally, I am really confused about the CO2 thing. Are you saying that algae is normally limited by available CO2 rather than nutrients that include nitrate?

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I can't quite wrap my head around what you are actually saying in your posts. Are you saying that nitrate control in unnecessary because it is a nutrient source for organisms that use organic carbon for a food source? Is there no limit to the concentration of nitrate? Doesn't anaerobic oxidation of nitrate into nitrogen gas provide a good method of exporting nitrates to keep them in check? Isn't removing DOC that is not being used by Hetertrophs required to keep its levels from getting too high? Finally, I am really confused about the CO2 thing. Are you saying that algae is normally limited by available CO2 rather than nutrients that include nitrate?

Did I say nitrogen control is not nessary? Or nitrate is a nutrient source for heterotrophs? I do not think so!
Nitrate is not your enemy. Nitrate is just a messenger saying something else is responsible for the increasing nitrate level. Battling nitrates does not solve the underlying problem, some methods used to battle nitrates will increase problems.

Do algae grow without CO2? Corals produce a lot of CO2 due to calcification. Why do algae grow easily in reef aquaria?

Algae and photo-autotrophs also prefer ammonium as a nitrogen source. Using nitrate-nitrogen they will leak >30% of it as ammonia. They will help each other, one limiting growth using nitrate-nitrogen and leak ammonia for stimulating the growth of others in the function of the microbial community.

TOC and DOC which can not be used by heterotrophs are detritus and there is no reason to remove detritus as it is inert in the present conditions. The intension of most reefers for removing TOC and DOC is preventing total remineralization and dissimilation, the production of phosphate and ammonia, but as most ammonia is leaked or released directly into the water this creates an imbalance between nitrogen availability and building materials needed to use it. So, nitrogen must be exported.
As removing live bio-load removes all essentials, the balance can not be restored by only harvesting cultivated bio-load.

Fast-growing heterotrophic bacteria use ammonia nitrogen, not nitrate nitrogen, using nitrate-nitrogen consumes a lot more energy resulting in low growth rates. Adding organic carbon does not remove nitrate, it prevents nitrification, it removes the autotrophic carrying capacity if overdosed.
To restore the balance the best way to do it is by closing the nitrogen cycle, favoring N2 export. For this, one should not prevent nitrate production by promoting fast heterotrophic growth, but managing the nitrate production as nitrate-nitrogen considered not needed is easily exported. So , yes, stimulating denitrification is the way to go. Denitrification takes place in all normal nitrifying biofilms, a normal aerobic nitrifying biofilter may export +- 16% of the nitrogen by denitrification without interfering. Adding sulfur to the filter bed increases the nitrogen export rate. it can be done using a simple biofilter, a refuge.
Anaerobic heterotrophic denitrification or anaerobic remineralization is always accompanied by DNRA by which part of the nitrate ( >16%) is transformed into ammonia and only works if enough bio-waste can be broken down. If nitrate is used up, sulfate is used as an oxygen source, producing HS and ammonia. For this reason, I prefer to stimulate autotrophic denitrification in a nitrifying biofilter.

Of course, there is a limit for nitrate. To become harmful a very high level is needed starting at -+ 250ppm, >100 ppm as a long-term threat. (Rijn et al., 2006). Santhosh and Singh (2007) described a favorable range from 0.1 mg / L to 4.0 mg / L. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:theorie:nitraatprobleem#het_nitraatniveau
There is a good reason for keeping the nitrate reserve low in reef aquaria, but this is not because nitrate is harmful to corals. It has been shown phosphorus starvation is the main cause of coral bleaching in periods of increased growth (high temp, high DOC), growth supported by the availability of nitrogen, and all other essential nutrients. That is why I try to prevent the phosphate reserve may become the limiting factor for growth, by keeping the nitrogen reserve low enough, less as 10x the phosphate level. It has also been shown insufficient phosphorus availability harms corals after a very short period, nitrogen shortage only harms corals after a much longer period.

Nitrogen control is essential in a reef aquarium, preventing nitrate formation removes the autotrophic carrying capacity.

Managing the nitrogen content is easy using a simple biofilter.

 

[ReefGeezer]

...Nitrate is not your enemy. Nitrate is just a messenger saying something else is responsible for the increasing nitrate level. Battling nitrates does not solve the underlying problem, some methods used to battle nitrates will increase problems....

...Nitrogen control is essential in a reef aquarium, preventing nitrate formation removes the autotrophic carrying capacity.

Managing the nitrogen content is easy using a simple biofilter.

Now I'm even more confused. So can you describe what you are referring to as a simple biofilter that prevents nitrate formation? Thanks.

 

[saltyhog]

I used to struggle to keep my nitrates up....led to a dino outbreak. Now mine runs around 25 with no discernible issues from it.

I do several of those routinely ....Skimming, water changes, chaeto in a refugium. I've also used vinegar (not with vodka) with great success but this method does have a few more problems associated with it.

My go to method recently has been biomedia. Specifically Brightwell X-PortNo3 blocks. They have worked very well for me.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Now I'm even more confused. So can you describe what you are referring to as a simple biofilter that prevents nitrate formation? Thanks.

Please read the articles in reference, they contain all info needed and a lot more.

A simple bio is a recipient, a refuge, containing a substrate for a growing biofilm, manageable by controlling the flow, used for decades in aquaria and aquaculture systems, standard equipment for HIHO closed systems and ZMAS [zero emission marine aquarium ( aquaculture) systems] Is used to support the bio-load by providing a manageable and very effective carrying capacity and nitrogen export. A normal nitrifying biofilm growing on shell grit exports +-16% of the nitrogen without interfering, the nitrification process will have no or very little influence on the system alkalinity. A nitrifying biofilm growing on a mix of shell grit and elemental sulfur may be responsible for removing >80% of total nitrogen entered, also with no or little influence on system alkalinity. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/do...es:het_bio-filter_dat_geen_nitraat_produceert

 

[ReefGeezer]

Please read the articles in reference, they contain all info needed and a lot more.

A simple bio is a recipient, a refuge, containing a substrate for a growing biofilm, manageable by controlling the flow, used for decades in aquaria and aquaculture systems, standard equipment for HIHO closed systems and ZMAS [zero emission marine aquarium ( aquaculture) systems] Is used to support the bio-load by providing a manageable and very effective carrying capacity and nitrogen export. A normal nitrifying biofilm growing on shell grit exports +-16% of the nitrogen without interfering, the nitrification process will have no or very little influence on the system alkalinity. A nitrifying biofilm growing on a mix of shell grit and elemental sulfur may be responsible for removing >80% of total nitrogen entered, also with no or little influence on system alkalinity. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/do...es:het_bio-filter_dat_geen_nitraat_produceert

Understanding this literature if difficult. Part might be translation, but my limited intelligence is probably the root cause to my problem. I really don't understand the implementation. Can you show me a picture or sketch?

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Understanding this literature if difficult. Part might be translation, but my limited intelligence is probably the root cause to my problem. I really don't understand the implementation. Can you show me a picture or sketch?

Search for biofilter or bioreactor, any model will do.(no trickle filters) An old Eheim or a big bio with compartments as we used in the seventies and eighties. Any recipient, a plastic bucket, will do to make a bio filter. For having full control one needs a reactor, a reactor is not more as the same recipient which can be closed with a lid. Filter socks containing filter substrate can be used in a refuge. One can make filter columns or BADES rolls, making it possible to export >80% of the total nitrogen . The only thing needed is a refuge, a recipient, by which flow management makes managing removal rates possible.

 

[ReefGeezer]

Search for biofilter or bioreactor, any model will do.(no trickle filters) An old Eheim or a big bio with compartments as we used in the seventies and eighties. Any recipient, a plastic bucket, will do to make a bio filter. For having full control one needs a reactor, a reactor is not more as the same recipient which can be closed with a lid. Filter socks containing filter substrate can be used in a refuge. One can make filter columns or BADES rolls, making it possible to export >80% of the total nitrogen . The only thing needed is a refuge, a recipient, by which flow management makes managing removal rates possible.

So... just something to hold substrate for bacteria to populate? Is that different from any other substrate in the DT, whether it be rock, glass, plastic surfaces? Is all the unintelligible jargon simply about an old school aerobic biofilter? Nothing new? Where does sulphur come into the picture?

 

[Belgian Anthias]

So... just something to hold substrate for bacteria to populate? Is that different from any other substrate in the DT, whether it be rock, glass, plastic surfaces? Is all the unintelligible jargon simply about an old school aerobic biofilter? Nothing new? Where does sulphur come into the picture?

As I always said, one just needs a simple biofilter, which is not on the list, and of which you obviously do not know much about., yet.
Old school is thinking a bio produces nitrate and nitrate is a bad thing that must be battled.
The substrate on which a nitrifying biofilm grows is determent for the microbial population and the end result, as is the flow rate, and makes a big difference for the stability in the system, nitrogen source, alkalinity, pH etc..
The unintelligible jargon is basic knowledge for managing a life support system. If one does not know how to manage a bio-filter in a way it does what you like it to do, how managing a life support system?
About the use of sulfur and BADES in aerobic nitrifying biofilters, and other applications, all info is available in the Makazi Baharini wiki. The wiki is originally written in Dutch , most references used can be consulted and are in English. If you do not master Dutch, Google translate may help you out.

 

[ReefGeezer]

As I always said, one just needs a simple biofilter, which is not on the list, and of which you obviously do not know much about., yet...

I thought you were speaking of a BADESS system when you were referencing a "simple biofilter". I think that was the source of my confusion. While I'm not a biologist and don't work in the aquaculture industry, I have a practical understanding of the nitrogen cycle. I registered, read, and now understand the theory of operation of the different BADESS systems and recognize the differences.

Top 3 for me are still: 1) Maintaining a "simple biofilter" (suitable porous substrate of any nature that can provide aerobic and anaerobic areas for bacteria to complete the nitrogen cycle); 2) Propagating organisms that use/bind nitrogen compounds; and 3) Limiting DOC to the point that allows 1 & 2 to be effective. In my fairly mature tank, that means rock, a bunch of rapidly growing corals, cryptic life, and etc., and a skimmer that runs as needed.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I thought you were speaking of a BADESS system when you were referencing a "simple biofilter". I think that was the source of my confusion. While I'm not a biologist and don't work in the aquaculture industry, I have a practical understanding of the nitrogen cycle. I registered, read, and now understand the theory of operation of the different BADESS systems and recognize the differences.

Top 3 for me are still: 1) Maintaining a "simple biofilter" (suitable porous substrate of any nature that can provide aerobic and anaerobic areas for bacteria to complete the nitrogen cycle); 2) Propagating organisms that use/bind nitrogen compounds; and 3) Limiting DOC to the point that allows 1 & 2 to be effective. In my fairly mature tank, that means rock, a bunch of rapidly growing corals, cryptic life, and etc., and a skimmer that runs as needed.

1) No need for so-called " porous" rock for denitrification and anaerobic remineralization. Denitrification based on porosity has a very low capacity due to the very low water exchange rate. In porous rock, most nitrogen is exported due to the results of sulfate reduction, produced HS may then be used for nitrate reduction. Sulfate reduction also produces ammonia, to be reused. A normal nitrifying biofilm growing on calcium carbonate substrate will export a lot more nitrogen compared to what happens inside a porous rock. In a simple biofilter, the suitable substrate can be provided, as much space needed can be made available and the water exchange rate can be managed as desired, no need for so-called "porous" rock. The substrate of a growing nitrifying biofilm will become porous as it is used (dissolved) by the biofilm.

2) Propagating heterotrophic organisms by dosing organic carbon compounds does remove very little nitrate-nitrogen, it prevents nitrate production by outcompeting autotrophs for ammonium, the nitrogen export rate can not be managed and depends on a third factor, a skimmer, which only removes max 35% of TOC. If not dosed correctly, adding organic carbon compounds (carbohydrates?) will remove the installed autotrophic carrying capacity as heterotrophic bacterial growth meanly uses ammonium-nitrogen. if overdosed, it has been shown a high C/N ratio has a huge effect on the coral holobiont and carbohydrates even may kill corals. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:het_water:filtratie:vodka. Once started dosing one has to continue dosing to maintain the total carrying capacity needed, based on an abnormal and unnatural C/N ratio. Building off doses should be done very slowly for maintaining enough total carrying capacity, as reinstalling autotrophic carrying capacity may take several weeks. Heterotrophic growth produces a lot of ammonia, CO2, and phosphate due to dissimilation (respiration), 40x more bio-load must be produced for reducing the same amount of ammonium compared to nitrification. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:het_water:ammonium_reductie

3) Limiting TOC and DOC (preventing complete remineralization) by using a skimmer or absorbers ( GAC, polymers) creates an unbalance, leaving inorganic nutrients behind, and making (2) very difficult due to the constant removal of part of the building materials needed for growth, also for the coral holobiont and its symbiodinium, and maybe is the main cause of an increasing nitrate and or phosphate level. The removal rate should be manageable.
A skimmer removes only +- 30% of total DOC, does this very selective but does this continuously. A skimmer may be considered a cause of increasing inorganic nutrient levels. ref: https://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=nl:makazi:het_water:filtratie:eiwitafschuimer

Increasing inorganic nutrient levels are an indicator and not a cause of known problems.
Better management of the nutrient cycles will provide better stability. Most problems occur by overdoing things and then try to solve a created inbalance by shooting at the messengers, which of course will not change a thing.
There is no need for battling nitrates in the first place, they are harmless, and will leave peacefully if the exit doors are open.
By using a simple refuge the user may build the exit doors as big as desired and open these doors as wide as needed. As the user will have full control over the entrance doors, the emergency exits must not be used just to prevent overcrowding.
Not only for mixed reef systems but also for LNS and VLNS a refuge with a function as bio-filter may be very useful to prevent the nitrate reserve may be responsible for the phosphate reserve to become the limiting factor for growth, the only reason I can think of for keeping the nitrate level very low.

My favorite nutrient managing tool is using a refuge for to cultivate algae, biofloc, phytho- and zooplankton, for harvesting or and as a food source. Nutrient levels can be managed by feeding for the target nutrient modified F2 medium.

 

[ReefGeezer]

1) No need for so-called " porous" rock for denitrification and anaerobic remineralization...

I hear ya. So how EXACTLY is your system implemented? Let's see yours, no theory, show us how. I'm not being flippant, I am truly interested. However, theory is cheap. Implementation is where they are tested.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

I hear ya. So how EXACTLY is your system implemented? Let's see yours, no theory, show us how. I'm not being flippant, I am truly interested. However, theory is cheap. Implementation is where they are tested.

I do not have A system as every system is different.

If the theory is cheap, the practice can not be any better.

All information provided is free from any commercial point of view and unaffected by commercial interests. To keep it that way, we leave it up to the user of the information to judge and apply it, whether or not using commercially available products. Practically it all comes down to the same thing, nature should not be reinvented, and everyone is free to use available information using available hardware. The better the theory followed and applied, the better the same hardware becomes. We collected all info we needed to manage closed life support systems and published most of this info in our wiki, Makazi Baharini.

 

[ReefGeezer]

I do not have A system as every system is different.

If the theory is cheap, the practice can not be any better.

All information provided is free from any commercial point of view and unaffected by commercial interests. To keep it that way, we leave it up to the user of the information to judge and apply it, whether or not using commercially available products. Practically it all comes down to the same thing, nature should not be reinvented, and everyone is free to use available information using available hardware. The better the theory followed and applied, the better the same hardware becomes. We collected all info we needed to manage closed life support systems and published most of this info in our wiki, Makazi Baharini.

OK... I guess. Thanks.