No Algae? How Is This Possible?

[curiouser]

sundog101 said:
"I would think though in a tank with such low nutrients algae would have a tough time growing."[/QUOTE]

Me too. I have trouble wrapping my mind around low nutrients impair algae growth vs nutrients are low because the algae are scarfing it down. Which is cause? Which is effect?
I remain puzzled.

 

[mcarroll]

I'd look through these if you can:

[PDF] wiley.com
Algal blooms on coral reefs: what are the causes?
T Hughes, AM Szmant, R Steneck… - Limnology and …, 1999 - Wiley Online Library
The recent paper by Lapointe (1997) on the causes of algal blooms on coral reefs was
presented as a test of the hypothesis that the reefs of Jamaica and southeast Florida had
exceeded a threshold level of eutrophication that resulted in blooms of benthic algae. We …
Cited by 253 Related articles All 5 versions

[PDF] researchgate.net
Competition between corals and algae on coral reefs: a review of evidence and mechanisms
L McCook, J Jompa, G Diaz-Pulido - Coral reefs, 2001 - Springer
Despite widespread acceptance that competition between scleractinian corals and benthic
algae is important to the structure of coral reef communities, there is little direct experimental
evidence that corals and algae do compete, and very little data on the processes and …
Cited by 773 Related articles All 16 versions

...and for a capper: Nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: Is it a major cause of coral reef decline?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

sundog101 said:
"I would think though in a tank with such low nutrients algae would have a tough time growing."

Me too. I have trouble wrapping my mind around low nutrients impair algae growth vs nutrients are low because the algae are scarfing it down. Which is cause? Which is effect?
I remain puzzled.

I’m not sure why it is puzzling. A lot of algae must take up a lot of N and P ( and other things). If there is enough algae relative to the source of nutrients, it will drive nutrients down to the point where it can barely get enough of something it needs, slowing growth.

 

[curiouser]

I’m not sure why it is puzzling. A lot of algae must take up a lot of N and P ( and other things). If there is enough algae relative to the source of nutrients, it will drive nutrients down to the point where it can barely get enough of something it needs, slowing growth.

Randy,
Thank you for your comment. I think you are saying there is a balance between N, P and other things input and removed by algae, skimmers, filters, WC, plants, and coral uptake. If input exceeds output eventually algae will flourish, diminish our perception of beauty in the tank and even kill some corals. And if output exceeds input eventually corals will be undernourished, bleach, starve.
If the appearance of the tank is pleasing, corals colorful and growing, enough algae so we clean the glass but tank algae is not expanding, and overall things stay that way for a long time then I think we have achieved good balance.
Am I barking up the wrong tree?
If we have achieved such a balance in our tanks then what is useful about measuring N and P levels in the water? Should we use these measurements to alter our tank care?
Thank you

 

[mcarroll]

If we have achieved such a balance in our tanks then what is useful about measuring N and P levels in the water?

Once the tank is balanced and growing, there should be a lot less need to intervene.

Testing in those cases is probably still educational.

But automatically translating the test results under those circumstances into some kind of change action would be assuming too much.

 

[Nano sapiens]

^^ Mcarroll is correct. IME, once a reef tank has reached a healthy mature condition, testing for NO3 and PO4 becomes more of a choice than a necessity. Besides the obvious corals and the like, observing all the incidental creatures for type and number in the tank (sponges, tunicates, worms, amphipods, alga, etc.) tells me a lot more about my management and the overall system's condition than any NO3 or PO4 test kit ever could.

Having said that, I have the LFS check these two parameters once a year right before I post my yearly update (someone invariably will ask for them)

Ralph.

 

[mta_morrow]

My tank always had some types of algae, and also cyano. I had a foxface that would eat most anything (except cyano), however, so only cyano remained in the display.

On a side note, if I may ask, what kind of a citizen is your foxface, and does it truly “graze”?

Thanks

Mike

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

On a side note, if I may ask, what kind of a citizen is your foxface, and does it truly “graze”?

Thanks

Mike

I no longer have it due to a vacation disaster, but it was great. It eliminated a huge caulerpa problem and I never saw it cause any issues. It also seemingly eliminated valonia (bubble algae) from the display tank.

It was a one spot foxface from Divers Den.

 

[mta_morrow]

I no longer have it due to a vacation disaster, but it was great. It eliminated a huge caulerpa problem and I never saw it cause any issues. It also seemingly eliminated valonia (bubble algae) from the display tank.

It was a one spot foxface from Divers Den.

Thank you.

I have had great success with fish from DD. And I am favoring the 1 spot as well as it is the smallest according to LA

 

[Scott Campbell]

Randy,
Thank you for your comment. I think you are saying there is a balance between N, P and other things input and removed by algae, skimmers, filters, WC, plants, and coral uptake. If input exceeds output eventually algae will flourish, diminish our perception of beauty in the tank and even kill some corals. And if output exceeds input eventually corals will be undernourished, bleach, starve.
If the appearance of the tank is pleasing, corals colorful and growing, enough algae so we clean the glass but tank algae is not expanding, and overall things stay that way for a long time then I think we have achieved good balance.
Am I barking up the wrong tree?
If we have achieved such a balance in our tanks then what is useful about measuring N and P levels in the water? Should we use these measurements to alter our tank care?
Thank you

My experience is that export must equal import. In that sense a tank has to be "balanced". Which isn't all that complicated or difficult conceptually. Such a balance can be manipulated fairly easily with the right set-up or protocol. Finding the right set-up or protocol, however, can be exceedingly difficult.

Back in the 1980's I spent years trying to get a turf scrubber to work for my tank. But what I found was that growing a ton of one type of algae just stripped my tank of the nutrients needed by that one type of algae. Lots of other algae continued to thrive in my tank. It didn't seem to accomplish what I wanted it to accomplish. So I switched gears completely and decided to grow as many different types of macroalgae as possible in the main tank. That worked slightly better at removing excess tank nutrients but harvesting macroalgae from a display tank is a pain in the butt and the whole process was very disruptive to my corals. So I added a side tank just for macroalgae growth. That worked better only in the sense that it was easier to harvest some of the macroalgae. The problem, I eventually realized, was that to export excess nutrients - I needed to grow a *lot* of macroalgae. Too much macroalgae. So I replaced my three triggerfish with assorted herbivores (rabbitfish, yellow tang, blenny, large urchin, snails, etc.) The herbivores obliterated all the algae in the main tank and also allowed me to reduce the amount of food I added to the tank each day. Because now the nutrients got re-cycled. Which lowered the amount of macroalgae that I needed to harvest - but it was still too much algae growth to handle in a side tank. And the herbivores did nothing for the detritus in the tank. So I started limited carbon dosing and ramping up my populations of pods, mysid shrimp and worms. Then I had to add a wrasse to keep the worms and pods in check. Finally (after many, many years) I got to a point where all the excess nutrients are either captured by the skimmer as bacteria or funneled into the side tank. From the side tank I can harvest macroalgae, worms, extra montipora, basically whatever happens to grow in excess. Emptying the skimmer and pulling extra biomass out of the side tank now matches export to import. Without me really worrying about anything. I honestly care very little about phosphate or nitrate levels these days because I know something will pull it out of the water for me.

Looping back to the original topic - algae will certainly grow in a display tank without herbivores. Adding herbivores to the main tank and / or powerful lighting to a side tank will shift algae growth to the side tank. But it doesn't change the fact that you still have to somehow export a significant amount of biomass if you are feeding your main tank sufficiently. Removing nutrients with water changes, filter socks and detritus siphoning before the nutrients can become biomass certainly and obviously works. I just never found that approach very interesting. I prefer to let organisms grow in response to excess nutrients and then harvest out the excess organisms. It seems more elegant to me. But it is a challenge to implement. And it locks you into certain fish - like a rabbitfish (which I don't think I could now ever be without). And it locks you into a side export tank. And possibly carbon dosing with a large skimmer. It's not a free ride. So I don't think the ""Master Tanks" are doing anything special. I think they have simply found a set-up or protocol that largely moves algae growth out of the display tank with export somehow matched to import.

 

[Nano sapiens]

My experience is that export must equal import. In that sense a tank has to be "balanced". Which isn't all that complicated or difficult conceptually. Such a balance can be manipulated fairly easily with the right set-up or protocol. Finding the right set-up or protocol, however, can be exceedingly difficult.

Removing nutrients with water changes, filter socks and detritus siphoning before the nutrients can become biomass certainly and obviously works. I just never found that approach very interesting. I prefer to let organisms grow in response to excess nutrients and then harvest out the excess organisms.

IME, the approach to the input/export balance equation has a lot to do with the type and size of the aquarium. A large reef aquarium with a good sized sump has a lot of space to employ multiple export methods, if desired, and ideally they'll work in concert to achieve the desired system balance. The effects of detritus accumulation are typically not outwardly noticeable in these large systems for many, many years (in some cases a decade or two) and occasional removal of obvious buildup in specific areas *may* be all that is required. At the other extreme, small nano and pico aquariums typically have a much larger biomass to water volume ratio and export method choices are drastically reduced due to lack of space. Consistent water changes and efficient detritus removal become the critical methods in maintaining long-term system health for such micro-reef aquaria. Medium sized aquariums, which have historically made up a good portion of the reef keeping hobby, can benefit from a combination of both bio-mass removal and detritus removal/water changes (albeit, with much less frequency than a nano/pico aquarium).

 

[Scott Campbell]

IME, the approach to the input/export balance equation has a lot to do with the type and size of the aquarium. A large reef aquarium with a good sized sump has a lot of space to employ multiple export methods, if desired, and ideally they'll work in concert to achieve the desired system balance. The effects of detritus accumulation are typically not outwardly noticeable in these large systems for many, many years (in some cases a decade or two) and occasional removal of obvious buildup in specific areas *may* be all that is required. At the other extreme, small nano and pico aquariums typically have a much larger biomass to water volume ratio and export method choices are drastically reduced due to lack of space. Consistent water changes and efficient detritus removal become the critical methods in maintaining long-term system health for such micro-reef aquaria. Medium sized aquariums, which have historically made up a good portion of the reef keeping hobby, can benefit from a combination of both bio-mass removal and detritus removal/water changes (albeit, with much less frequency than a nano/pico aquarium).

I think you are absolutely correct.

 

[Potatohead]

sundog101 said:
"I would think though in a tank with such low nutrients algae would have a tough time growing."

Me too. I have trouble wrapping my mind around low nutrients impair algae growth vs nutrients are low because the algae are scarfing it down. Which is cause? Which is effect?
I remain puzzled.[/QUOTE]

This is why I believe a tank with a high coral load will actually have a tougher time growing algae simply because you have corals consuming light/nutrients instead of algae doing it. I really think tanks with some algae problems would be well off increasing their coral load.

 

[Nano sapiens]

Me too. I have trouble wrapping my mind around low nutrients impair algae growth vs nutrients are low because the algae are scarfing it down. Which is cause? Which is effect?
I remain puzzled.

This is why I believe a tank with a high coral load will actually have a tougher time growing algae simply because you have corals consuming light/nutrients instead of algae doing it. I really think tanks with some algae problems would be well off increasing their coral load.

Yes, agreed. This is part of the reason why I include false corals such as mushrooms. If one were to completely flatten out the surface area of just one adult Ricordia or Rhodactis, the area for absorption would be close to the size of a standard letter page. Multiply that by a dozen or so, and the potential to absorb ammonia, nitrates, phosphates, iron, etc. is substantial and so, assuming that I don't overfeed, there's a lot less of these substances available in the water column for the algae to utilize.

Also, aquaria with a complete and healthy covering of coral also help exclude algae growth by physically taking up the available space as well as drastically reducing the amount of light falling on the lower areas of the live rock.

 

[cracker]

Good read Thanks for all the input. Now the way to reach balance is another story !

 

[Nano sapiens]

Good read Thanks for all the input. Now the way to reach balance is another story !

Can be a challenge, but this might help...

IME, balance can be found most easily if the system is simplified as much as possible while still providing the necessary components to keep the organisms healthy. For an example, having 3 or 4 export mechanisms might be 'sexy', but trying manage them all...not such a good idea for the starting reef keeper.

Being very consistent with number/size of fish/food inputs and the export mechanism(s) of choice will soon reveal if there is a system balance or not if the reef keeper studies the system closely. It does take some time/experience to determine when a system is properly balanced, but adding lots of different remedies and additives is one sure-fire way to to keep the system off balance. Same with constantly adding additional bioload (unavoidable in a new tank, of course, which is a part of the reason that new systems are less stable than mature ones), inconsistent amount and frequency of feedings and ditto for inconsistent cleanings. Corals are remarkably adaptable and tend to respond best if they have a good measure of consistency in everything from day-to-day once balance has been achieved.

Ralph.

 

[sundog101]

I’m not sure why it is puzzling

Not everyone has a phd! Just kidding haha!

 

[MnFish1]

Why no algae? Well that's a loaded question. Understand that these "Masters" have a tremendous amount of coral and fish in their systems and their systems are mature. With that said and in the simplest terms, these animals need to eat and their uptake of nutrients can and will out compete simple algaes.

That is not the whole story: consistent husbandry practices, water changes, water testing and adjusting/dosing, dosing of required elements and amino acids, proper flow, proper lighting, proper feeding of the system and proper amounts of food, kinds of food......... you get what I'm saying.

It's about husbandry practices and balance with water chemistry and nutrient input and out take. This isn't always easy to learn and can take sometime, or years for new reef keepers to nail down. There is no "Secret Sauce" you can add, because that "Secret Sauce" is you.

And if all of the available 'land area' is covered by coral - which shades - algae will also be out competed. Most of the tanks with algae problems have 'seem to' have high surface area to coral ratios. This occurs on a natural reef as well.