NO3 Vs Acropora

[Hans-Werner]

For color I’d say greens have become more vivid no doubt. Kinda hard to say it’s just iron alone though, because I’ve increased about 8 other traces each time I’ve increased the iron, but I believe the iron is causing a vivid green sheen that is just beautiful in the right light.

I agree, iron improves the greens and maybe other GFPs. However, if you always increase 8 other trace elements also, you may not see the effects you see when increasing iron alone and altering the ratio of trace elements in this way. I think the latter approach is very limited and shows that iron alone has more of a prooxidative effect in contrast to manganese which has more an antioxidative effect.

I suspect the biofilm collapsed and released build up nutrients into rock sand etc… so cyanobacteria had lot of opportunities to grow.

Yes, this would be my interpretation also.

 

[Reefahholic]

I agree, iron improves the greens and maybe other GFPs. However, if you always increase 8 other trace elements also, you may not see the effects you see when increasing iron alone and altering the ratio of trace elements in this way. I think the latter approach is very limited and shows that iron alone has more of a prooxidative effect in contrast to manganese which has more an antioxidative effect.


Yes, this would be my interpretation also.

I just had to increase iron again. I’ll take a pic of that same coral in 4-6 weeks and we’ll see if it gets better color.

 

[reefluvrr]

I think the latter approach is very limited and shows that iron alone has more of a prooxidative effect in contrast to manganese which has more an antioxidative effect.

Can you help further explain the benefit or negative of what prooxidative and antioxidative effect does for corals such as our acroporas?

 

[Hans-Werner]

Can you help further explain the benefit or negative of what prooxidative and antioxidative effect does for corals such as our acroporas?

Prooxidative means it increases the danger of burning and bleaching while antioxidative means it helps prevent the same. The prooxidative effect may act synergistic with the same effect of nitrate.

Depending from other nutrients also, I thought that the effects of iron alone to overall color of corals are not as good long-term.

 

[reefluvrr]

Prooxidative means it increases the danger of burning and bleaching while antioxidative means it helps prevent the same. The prooxidative effect may act synergistic with the same effect of nitrate.

You have mentioned in many other post that nitrate is bad and I agree, corals need Nitrogen.
However, I have seen comments on R2R about PO4 to3 ratio of 1:100 to have darker/better acropora colors?
Can you share what you think may be going on with this process?

Thank you Hans as always for bringing such wealth of knowledge and letting us ask questions about your knowledge base and products!

 

[jda]

Higher no3 does not likely have any effect on darker corals on it's own, but it is likely a sign that more nitrogen passed through the system. Those other sources of higher nitrogen could have produced more zoox in the corals making them appear more dark to our eyes. Some like this darker color and some do not. If you rise too much, the coral will not be able to protect the zoox from too much nitrogen anymore and it can start to expel zoox. Nitrogen is necessary for new tissue, can be used well in a slight surplus, can be a hinderance in too much of a surplus and then it will end in death of all organic tissue if it gets too high.

With corals, this all can happen from undetecteable to 5ppm for some that are very sensitive whereas some corals still go strong in the undetectable to 150ppm range, or more. What makes this even harder is that too few know if a growing coral can be growing faster (in the hinderance range, but still alive and barely growing).

The age-old example is ORA red planet. In higher no3 and po4 environments, it would get a deep, dark red color - excess zoox. In lower no3 and po4 environments, it would have white on the tips, grow faster and have white contrast in the middle of the branches and stuff. Some folks like one look, some like another and some like either of them.

Remember, though, that it was not likely the rise of no3 that did this. It was the availability of nitrogen in different forms that got more nitrogen to the coral and also made the nitrate on the backend rise.

 

[jda]

Light can play a factor with this, but in general, the more uniform darker photo likely has higher no3 in the not-harmful range. The lighter one has more calcification likely from lower no3 and po4 levels and also more contrast and white. Don't look at the difference in red color (redder one is oversaturated), look at the differences in contrast in the middle and at the tips and stuff. To each their own on which looks better.

The lighter colored one was stolen from Reef Bum. He lists his tanks as 2-5ppm of no3.

BTW - with Red Planet, low light usually means green in the corals, so I do not believe that the corals have too much different light... but who knows?

 

[jda]

In the end, put me down as one who believes that ratios do not matter at all. The sources of nitrogen that matter cannot be tested for. The same is true of phosphorous.

This would be like trying to look at the ratio of trash vs. recycling at a normal residence and trying to determine if they ate well, or not.

I might be in the few (or alone), but I wish that nobody ever mentioned redfield or any other ratio again. ...or if they did, included a few paragraphs of nuance.

 

[Miami Reef]

I might be in the few (or alone), but I wish that nobody ever mentioned redfield or any other ratio again. ...or if they did, included a few paragraphs of nuance.

I agree. The confirmation bias of some people with ratios is painful to read.

 

[Hans-Werner]

However, I have seen comments on R2R about PO4 to3 ratio of 1:100 to have darker/better acropora colors?
Can you share what you think may be going on with this process?

The effect of nitrate to increase zooxanthellae pigmentation and in this way darken colors is confirmed by scientific findings and it is said to be negative. I compare this effect with fixing a screw, after "fixed" comes "broken". This is the way science describes the effect of nitrate on corals. The darkening of zooxanthellae and corals increases the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and finally may lead to bleaching.

I do not only think that the high concentrations and ratios of nitrate have nothing to do with nitrate as a nutrient but rather with nitrate as an oxidant, but also that corals usually don't make much use of this nitrate at all. Corals may take up some nitrate as nutrient but at the same time they also make use of ammonia excreted by fish.

Sometimes burnings of the illuminated parts of corals are reported at low phosphate concentrations. The best description what is going in corals that comes to my mind is the following: While the water is low in the nutrients ammonia/ammonium and phosphate, corals still have nitrate available and assimilate nitrate. With the deficiency of ammonia and phosphate repair mechanisms normally repairing the damage caused by ROS are "out of order". Now the ROS produced by nitrate assimilation can do visible damage that causes this kind of burnings and tissue necrosis.

If nitrate would also be low and limiting something else would happen: The corals would get very light by the reduction of zooxanthellae pigments. This is the proper adaptation to low nutrient concentrations and can be reversed in just a few days by more feeding or dosing of a better nutrient mix than nitrate only. This lightening up of coral colors is adaptation and may be taken as a warning but it is not causing damage yet.

The availability of phosphate and ammonia to corals is more important with nitrate present than without nitrate. Limitation and lack of phosphate and ammonia may really do damage to corals, lack of nitrate usually not.

Looking at the colors of corals may give you additional valuable information, especially if you know the phosphate and nitrate concentrations.

 

[Reefahholic]

If you rise too much, the coral will not be able to protect the zoox from too much nitrogen anymore and it can start to expel zoox.

Nitrogen is necessary for new tissue, can be used well in a slight surplus, can be a hinderance in too much of a surplus and then it will end in death of all organic tissue if it gets too high.

What would you say is too much. What’s your limit?

The age-old example is ORA red planet. In higher no3 and po4 environments, it would get a deep, dark red color - excess zoox. In lower no3 and po4 environments, it would have white on the tips, grow faster and have white contrast in the middle of the branches and stuff.

I have a picture for you (ORA Red Planet) with data…values and (the ratio) I know you love. Pic’s are dated if you look closely:

The sources of nitrogen that matter cannot be tested for. The same is true of phosphorous.

I agree to a certain extent. Here’s why. Most would argue that simple Orthophosphate’s (Let’s say Sodium Phosphate Monobasic)
would not be the best source of phosphate to dose. The same is said about Sodium Nitrate. “It’s not the best nitrogen source” they claim. The problem is that there really aren’t very many alternatives.

People have speculated that urea is a good source of nitrogen, but almost nobody doses it. Not to mention, it’s much more dangerous to dose.

Andre’s Phosphorus -N is the best form of phosphorus/phosphate I’ve ever dosed to my reef without a doubt. The one disadvantage was that it was so rich it fed the darn Dino’s. I had to transition off. The Acro’s were sucking it down like cool-aid though, so I hated to stop it.

Here’s the thing that bugs me if these simple products like Sodium Phosphate and Sodium Nitrate do not matter. If they didn’t matter, why do they work?

You could literally setup a 100/G system with zero fish, and 20 Acro’s. Let the nutrient levels bottom out (if present) or intentionally deplete the nutrients with Lanthanum Chloride. When the corals start to STN from Zero Phosphate, the simple supplementation of Sodium Phosphate and Nitrate will save the majority of the corals if they’re not too far gone. So as simple as they may be, they work.

 

[Reefahholic]

do not only think that the high concentrations and ratios of nitrate have nothing to do with nitrate as a nutrient but rather with nitrate as an oxidant, but also that corals usually don't make much use of this nitrate at all.

That very well might be the case. Still haven’t figured that out yet. I just feel like my system does better at that 50-100:1 ratio. So if PO4 is 0.12 ppm, at a minimal I want 6 ppm of nitrate to keep the balance.

Sometimes burnings of the illuminated parts of corals are reported at low phosphate concentrations.

100% agree with that:

Noticed it started healing from simply dosing “simple” Orthophosphate! The form of phosphate that some would argue is worthless, and that the more important organic forms are really working and doing the miracles behind the scenes! If that were true, and simple inorganic Orthophosphate doesn’t work, then why did the coral heal and repair itself. Pictures don’t lie! You can literally see the color change as well.

Looking at the colors of corals may give you additional valuable information, especially if you know the phosphate and nitrate concentrations.

I agree…and the Metallic trace element values.

 

[Hans-Werner]

Noticed it started healing from simply dosing “simple” Orthophosphate! The form of phosphate that some would argue is worthless, and that the more important organic forms are really working and doing the miracles behind the scenes!

What corals are taking up is finally always orthophosphate. If orthophosphate is limiting, corals and many other organisms excrete alkaline phosphatase that cuts polyphosphates and organic phosphates into orthophosphate.

Polyphosphates and organic phosphates finally are orthophosphate "melted" together to form shorter or longer chains or phosphate esters.

 

[Reefahholic]

What corals are taking up is finally always orthophosphate. If orthophosphate is limiting, corals and many other organisms excrete alkaline phosphatase that cuts polyphosphates and organic phosphates into orthophosphate.

Polyphosphates and organic phosphates finally are orthophosphate "melted" together to form shorter or longer chains or phosphate esters.

What would you consider the best source of Phosphorus/Phosphate that we can dose to our reef tanks if the system was limited.

Is it possible for something like TSP to only increase the PO4 while P remains low?

I want to get the best form of P and N into the corals. Carbon dosing would be great if it didn’t mess with stability, pH, and increase nutrient management stress.

There’s got to be a easier way. Maybe heavy fish load is the way to go. I’ve already removed all my bio filtration, and I don’t like a lot of mechanical filtration because I feel it steals a potential food source.

 

[Pod_01]

What corals are taking up is finally always orthophosphate. If orthophosphate is limiting, corals and many other organisms excrete alkaline phosphatase that cuts polyphosphates and organic phosphates into orthophosphate.

Polyphosphates and organic phosphates finally are orthophosphate "melted" together to form shorter or longer chains or phosphate esters.

So the products you developed like PlusNP and the new PhosFeed (hopefully available soon where I live), what type of phosphate do they contain? All types or organic only, I recall that you did mention you do not prefer Orthophosphate because it binds to rock and fuel algae (but I might be mistaken, I need to start to take notes).
The description for both products is ambiguous and I suspect that is on purpose;
PlusNP

PhosFeed:

Also I recall that Lou mentioned that corals are not efficient at taking phosphate (I suspect orthophosphate) but require bacteria to help them out. But perhaps I am starting to mix up different interpretations/information.

I do like your approach/methods and they work for me as in corals improved substantially. So I am at the stage where I seem to know what to do (I can follow instructions), but now I like to know why I am doing it. The confusion seems to be that there are multiple explanations and some contradict each other.

 

[Hans-Werner]

Is it possible for something like TSP to only increase the PO4 while P remains low?

No, nearly all phosphorus in the the biosphere (and also geosphere) is phosphate or you can say phosphate-phosphorus.

There’s got to be a easier way. Maybe heavy fish load is the way to go. I’ve already removed all my bio filtration, and I don’t like a lot of mechanical filtration because I feel it steals a potential food source.

This is a wise decision, especially to avoid the mechanical filtration in my eyes. Since fish excrete mainly particulate phosphate in their feces, fleece filter may take out too much phosphate.

I prefer particulate phosphate. For me it works best and has the best effect on corals.

 

[Hans-Werner]

So the products you developed like PlusNP and the new PhosFeed (hopefully available soon where I live), what type of phosphate do they contain?

Plus-NP contains polyphosphates because they don't form insoluble compounds as fast and easily as orthophosphate.

The new products Phos-Start and Phos-Feed contain fine grain particulate phosphate. It is the kind of phosphate dosage I am most happy with.

 

[Reefahholic]

This is a wise decision, especially to avoid the mechanical filtration in my eyes. Since fish excrete mainly particulate phosphate in their feces, fleece filter may take out too much phosphate.

Agreed. I think it’s too much. I want the natural fish fertilizer to circulate through the system, because I know the Acro’s are filtering the water 24/7. Not to mention my skimmer doesn’t perform well or stay consistent when I’m running mechanical filtration. So I just use them as tools when I’m cleaning the tank. The Powerfilter is particularly useful when cleaning, and I’ll also put some sera floss in a 7” filter cup. Together they really help to trap all the detritus, but the next morning I remove them.

 

[jda]

I have never used any mechanical filtration, but I do skim heavy.

I am not sure what people think that 0.15 ppm of phosphate is giving that 0.05 is not.

I found out on accident that a few different kinds of metaphosphate take about 3 days in saltwater to fully break down into orthophosphate. There is no other data that I could find anywhere on anything about this. Assuming that other types are similar, there is a window where metaphosphate could be available to corals in a more suitable form - read a few papers that true coral uptake of meta/poly phosphate is preferred to ortho, but none of them ever said that ortho is not usable.

 

[Pod_01]

I am not sure what people think that 0.15 ppm of phosphate is giving that 0.05 is not.

I think you are correct.

But, from my experience the higher value 0.15 gives a margin. With dry rock I found that PO4 in my system would go from 0.05 to 0.01 routinely and after few casualties I knew what the issue was/is. On the other hand drop from 0.1 to 0.05 was not as detrimental. Granted that observation was made early in my reefing journey and I had few fish, used GFO had algae and in retrospect followed lot of bad advice.
Let’s rephrase that, advice that resulted in nice white corals, that grew beautiful GHA.