Randy's thoughts on trace elements

[Thales]

Yes, at the same concentrations and in the same water corals may be phosphate limited while algae may be nitrogen limited. It is due to different demand and different uptake systems.

How would a reef keeper use this idea to successfully reduce pest algae in a home mixed reef?

 

[Hans-Werner]

How would a reef keeper use this idea to successfully reduce pest algae in a home mixed reef?

I think not everyone will agree but my answer is quite simple: Don't let phosphate bottom out, I recommend ca. 0.1 ppm phosphate, and try to keep nitrogen compounds and nitrate as low as possible. ... and dose trace elements.

In my opinion in a reef tank with a few fish which are fed regularly corals will never have a problem with low available nitrogen. A good phosphate availability and trace elements dosage will help to keep available nitrogen compounds low and in this way limit green algal growth.

Corals will grow on the phosphate and trace elements and will outcomplete green algae at nitrogen.

 

[jda]

Where does one stop at recommending that trace elements be kept at seawater levels with only guess of their importance? There is gold and beryllium at .3 ug/L in the ocean. Why not recommend these be kept? Is this just dogma?

Gold has a small biological role being an anti-inflammitory and anti-bacterial, which is more of a role than the elements that some wish to keep.

Who is to say that dosing gold might not do the same thing as Cipro?

 

[Thales]

A good phosphate availability and trace elements dosage will help to keep available nitrogen compounds low and in this way limit green algal growth.

Corals will grow on the phosphate and trace elements and will outcomplete green algae at nitrogen.

I understand that this is the hypothesis (though I think that the levels needed to limit algal growth are lower than we need to keep coral happy), I am having problems finding examples of it actually working in practice. There are plenty of tanks that seem to fit the parameters you are talking about that have problem algae issues. If the idea is that following the suggestions is a way to influence an algae problem rather than eliminate it, how much influence in a percentage does the idea create?

 

[Lasse]

Corals will grow on the phosphate and trace elements and will outcomplete green algae at nitrogen

I´m not sure of this. from the fresh water world - its known that manny microalgae can´t convert NO3 into NH4/NH3 - instead they are very good in using very low amounts of NH4/NH3 even if the aquarium is full of plants. The freshwater people normally dose NO3 because it will favour the plants and disfavour micro algae. There is not any reason why it should differ among salt water microalgae. With rediscovering of the these that the coral animal farm their zooxanthellae as food and not only use theirs surplus carbohydrates - the importance of both nutrients and trace elements in the water column have come into the spotlight - IMO

I agree with @Thales on the significance of grazers in order to have a aquarium with low content of unwanted microalgae

Sincerely Lasse

 

[jda]

I ready nearly every article that smart people post and often follow the links and references in them to go even further. I have yet to see anything in any of them that suggests that you can limit any type of macro algae without harming corals* - they both can get nitrogen from nh[3,4] and prefer it and they both only need trace amounts of phosphorous which they can get from meta/poly/ortho and even organically bound sources. This goes for the zoox in corals as well as their tissue - most folks forget about coral tissue, but it is important too.

Is there any new evidence or science that shows otherwise?

*The only exception to this is limiting calcium to the macro that leaves calcareous deposits or skeletons, or limiting iron to those that need iron. In both of these cases, some corals are harmed as well.

 

[MnFish1]

Brilliant. Sell a product that you don't know what it does.

Scientist: I have a drug that cures disease X.

Marketer: Great!

Scientist: But I'm not sure what else it does.

Marketer: Why does that matter? Folks will buy it to get cured.

Scientists: What if the cure is worse than the disease?

Marketer: No worry. They won't know what did it. They'll probably blame it on BPA or nanoparticles or the GMO modified eggs they ate.

This is true - but also true of nearly every pharmaceutical that's out there. Of course there is scientific study before marketing. But it is extremely common to find untoward side effects that weren't found in clinical trials. My point is not to justify what is being said by Seachem, but to make the point that removal of copper can be an urgent or emergency situation - and in my experience is used very rarely except for removing copper after treatment.

 

[Richsoar]

Sure.

ICP is Inductively Coupled Plasma. It is a very sophisticated machine used by commercial send out services that will analyze a water sample for multiple ions such as manganese. Lots of threads on it.

Organic carbon dosing means adding an organic molecule to the water. Organisms including bacteria consume it and lower nutrients. There are commercial brands such as NOPOX, but also DIY using vodka or vinegar.

GFO is granular ferric oxide. A red/brown granular material that binds phosphate and silicate. (and also organics).

Thank you.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

This is true - but also true of nearly every pharmaceutical that's out there. Of course there is scientific study before marketing. But it is extremely common to find untoward side effects that weren't found in clinical trials. My point is not to justify what is being said by Seachem, but to make the point that removal of copper can be an urgent or emergency situation - and in my experience is used very rarely except for removing copper after treatment.

Nonsense. That is not even close to the same. Yes, when tested on millions of patients instead of thousands, one might find new adverse effects. In reefing, we are lucky if the number of tank tests is more than 1 (or zero).

FYI...
To be approved for sale, pharmaceuticals typically get tested in at least 2 phase 3 trials, and the results of those trials, no matter what they are, are put into the package insert that patients and prescribers can see, including all health effect and concerns:

Here's the package insert for one of my drugs:

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2014/022127s011lbl.pdf

It has lots of pertinent sections on warnings, drug interactions, side effects, who should take it and who should not, and what to watch out for.

For example:

The following adverse reactions have been identified during post-approval use of sevelamer hydrochloride, which has the same active moiety as sevelamer carbonate: pruritus, rash, abdominal pain, fecal impaction, and uncommon cases of ileus, intestinal obstruction, and intestinal perforation. Appropriate medical management should be given to patients who develop constipation or have worsening of existing constipation to avoid severe complications.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Thank you.

You're welcome That's what the chemistry forum is for. Not everyone knows or is interested in knowing chemistry.

 

[MnFish1]

Nonsense. That is not even close to the same. Yes, when tested on millions of patients instead of thousands, one might find new adverse effects. In reefing, we are lucky if the number of tank tests is more than 1 (or zero).

FYI...
To be approved for sale, pharmaceuticals typically get tested in at least 2 phase 3 trials, and the results of those trials, no matter what they are, are put into the package insert that patients and prescribers can see, including all health effect and concerns:

Here's the package insert for one of my drugs:

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2014/022127s011lbl.pdf

It has lots of pertinent sections on warnings, drug interactions, side effects, who should take it and who should not, and what to watch out for.

For example:

The following adverse reactions have been identified during post-approval use of sevelamer hydrochloride, which has the same active moiety as sevelamer carbonate: pruritus, rash, abdominal pain, fecal impaction, and uncommon cases of ileus, intestinal obstruction, and intestinal perforation. Appropriate medical management should be given to patients who develop constipation or have worsening of existing constipation to avoid severe complications.

Yeah - as we have discussed previously I am well acquainted with the drug approval process - including sevelamer. My only comment was that many many products are sold (including pharmaceuticals) what have effects that are not intended. Potentially just like cupramine. BUT - if y ou need a phosphate binder, you take it and hope you do not have issues that are undiscovered. I was saying this is analogous to the use of cupramine. Why were many Cox II inhibitors taken off the market - because the cardiac risk was not known. Why is ozempic now a huge weight loss drug - because the effects of GLP1 inhibitors were not fully known when it want the market for diabetes. Both are examples of 'companies not knowing what they were selling'. And many drugs are approved with far fewer than thousands of patients.

 

[Dorsetsteve]

I think not everyone will agree but my answer is quite simple: Don't let phosphate bottom out, I recommend ca. 0.1 ppm phosphate, and try to keep nitrogen compounds and nitrate as low as possible. ... and dose trace elements.

In my opinion in a reef tank with a few fish which are fed regularly corals will never have a problem with low available nitrogen. A good phosphate availability and trace elements dosage will help to keep available nitrogen compounds low and in this way limit green algal growth.

Corals will grow on the phosphate and trace elements and will outcomplete green algae at nitrogen.

I have to say I have tried this, when I using Bacto Balance and Elimi NP. I was supplementing Sodium Nitrate, after listening to Lou I dropped the Nitrate additive and the corals did not appear to appreciate this. Very similar levels to what you recommend. Within days of bringing nitrate back up to testable levels they visibly improved. I’m not saying that it doesn’t work and I appreciate my experience is anecdotal but I’m not alone in the observation.

 

[Hans-Werner]

from the fresh water world - its known that manny microalgae can´t convert NO3 into NH4/NH3 - instead they are very good in using very low amounts of NH4/NH3 even if the aquarium is full of plants. The freshwater people normally dose NO3 because it will favour the plants and disfavour micro algae. There is not any reason why it should differ among salt water microalgae.

Many freshwater plants indeed prefer nitrate, well, simply because they are plants with land-plant ancestors and not algae. This is known for example for Echinodorus but not for Cryptocoryne which seems to prefer ammonium.

Which green microalgae are know as nuisance algae in reef tanks? When we talk about nuisance microalgae we usually talk about dinoflagellates, diatoms and gold algae. Nuisance green algae are Bryopsis and green hair algae.

For the most problematic microalgae, toxic dinoflagellates, there is a lot of scientific evidence that phosphate limitation and nitrogen replete conditions are very problematic, article 1, article 2, article 3, article 4, article 5, article 6, article 7, article 8 on the first 3 pages of a search for scientific literature with [dinoflagellate +phosphate +toxicity].

 

[Hans-Werner]

I have to say I have tried this, when I using Bacto Balance and Elimi NP. I was supplementing Sodium Nitrate, after listening to Lou I dropped the Nitrate additive and the corals did not appear to appreciate this. Very similar levels to what you recommend. Within days of bringing nitrate back up to testable levels they visibly improved. I’m not saying that it doesn’t work and I appreciate my experience is anecdotal but I’m not alone in the observation.

This may be true but it most likely has nothing to do with nutrients. What nitrate concentrations are we talking about?

Nitrate is an oxidant that may prevent the dissolution of iron and manganese precipitated in the substrate (usually coral sand). The observation would suggest that one of both may have adverse effects in reef tanks, at least at elevated concentrations. In my experience iron is the suspect. Maybe it is not iron directly but an indirect, secondary effect, releasing something bound to the precipitated iron.

 

[Thales]

@Hans-Werner

You may have missed my questions here

Randy's thoughts on trace elements

Yes, at the same concentrations and in the same water corals may be phosphate limited while algae may be nitrogen limited. It is due to different demand and different uptake systems. How would a reef keeper use this idea to successfully reduce pest algae in a home mixed reef?

www.reef2reef.com

Thanks

 

[Lasse]

Nitrate is an oxidant that may prevent the dissolution of iron and manganese precipitated in the substrate (usually coral sand). The observation would suggest that one of both may have adverse effects in reef tanks, at least at elevated concentrations. In my experience iron is the suspect. Maybe it is not iron directly but an indirect, secondary effect, releasing something bound to the precipitated iron.

Now I do not understand. Do you mean that - if it is not NO3 in the water (the thing you prefer) some toxic substances can be released, If so - why do you recommend as low NO3 as possible? By the way - one of the first substance to be bond to iron is PO4.

For the most problematic microalgae, toxic dinoflagellates, there is a lot of scientific evidence that phosphate limitation and nitrogen replete conditions are very problematic, article 1, article 2, article 3, article 4, article 5, article 6, article 7, article 8 on the first 3 pages of a search for scientific literature with [dinoflagellate +phosphate +toxicity].

Some of these articles mention that these algaes prefer NH4/NH3 before NO3 and the effects is not linked to the whole molecule - only to the N

In order to use NO3 as N source it needs to be converted into NH4/NH3 either just on the outside or directly in the organism. This conversion demand energy and an enzyme (in many cases). Some microalgae do not have these enzymes or the transformation is slow and ineffective. According to phytoplankton - they may have it because NO3 is the dominant inorganic N species in open water (mostly - upwelling can change this - but normally - no NH4/NH3 in open water)

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Reefkeepers Archive]

Hey @Randy Holmes-Farley, question regarding trace elements. Was feeding the tank and a piece of the foil that's in the frozen food containers fell into the tank and Into the sump. I have no idea where it went. Would a small piece release any noticeable trace elements into a 120 gallon setup? Thanks!

 

[Hans-Werner]

Now I do not understand. Do you mean that - if it is not NO3 in the water (the thing you prefer) some toxic substances can be released, If so - why do you recommend as low NO3 as possible? By the way - one of the first substance to be bond to iron is PO4.

I don't understand what you don't understand. I myself do not care about nitrate or nitrogen compounds at all. I feed the fish, that's enough. I only care for phosphate.

Well, phosphate binds to iron, well. But I can measure phosphate with a test kit quite easily. If this would be the problem I think I would know. I have made been experimenting with phosphate dosing for many years.

Some of these articles mention that these algaes prefer NH4/NH3 before NO3 and the effects is not linked to the whole molecule - only to the N

Yes, the articles are mainly about N-limitation vs. P-limitation. You replied to this post:

I think not everyone will agree but my answer is quite simple: Don't let phosphate bottom out, I recommend ca. 0.1 ppm phosphate, and try to keep nitrogen compounds and nitrate as low as possible. ... and dose trace elements.

In my opinion in a reef tank with a few fish which are fed regularly corals will never have a problem with low available nitrogen. A good phosphate availability and trace elements dosage will help to keep available nitrogen compounds low and in this way limit green algal growth.

Corals will grow on the phosphate and trace elements and will outcomplete green algae at nitrogen.

What was your question, please?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Hey @Randy Holmes-Farley, question regarding trace elements. Was feeding the tank and a piece of the foil that's in the frozen food containers fell into the tank and Into the sump. I have no idea where it went. Would a small piece release any noticeable trace elements into a 120 gallon setup? Thanks!

I expect it is ok. It is likely aluminum that may slowly be released, but it takes a pretty substantial amount of aluminum to be toxic.

 

[Thales]

Corals will grow on the phosphate and trace elements and will outcomplete green algae at nitrogen.

Do you have a example of this actually happening - corals being fed and given trace elements while algae diminishes? What levels or N and P, what levels or what trace elements? No herbivores?
I understand that these kinds of statements make sense hypothetically, but have yet to see any examples of this kind of success in reef tanks.