Removed Skimmer - Coral Coloration Increased

Dana Riddle

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
3,162
Reaction score
7,614
Location
Dallas, Georgia
What state or country do you live in
Georgia
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The title pretty much says it all - I removed the skimmer a few weeks ago and coral coloration is better. I'll be in the lab tomorrow and will look at nutrient concentrations and other parameters.
 
The title pretty much says it all - I removed the skimmer a few weeks ago and coral coloration is better. I'll be in the lab tomorrow and will look at nutrient concentrations and other parameters.
I’m assuming by coloration you mean for sps/acros, right?

Low nutrients=pale
Higher nutrients=darker.
 
The most noticeable change is in a red Montipora with blue polyps (a Mystic Sunset), but there are others. Nutrients (N & P) have always been low. Will know more tomorrow.
I’m assuming by coloration you mean for sps/acros, right?

Low nutrients=pale
Higher nutrients=darker.
 
I'm wondering why a 120liter/30gal tank needs a skimmer.
I replaced the aquaone that came with the tank, with a Mantis 120. Both struggled to run consistently. I think I am at the limit of what I can put in my tank to increase bioload to get the skimmer operating better. my No3 is at 38ppm but trying to reduce. It's down 2ppm and up 1ppm.
I have just put in the Polyplabs Genesis bricks to hopefully get this sorted.
 
Very interesting! I'm wondering if others are experiencing the same thing. I'm guessing the skimmer was pulling too many nutrients out of the tank and not leaving enough for the corals?
 
Very interesting! I'm wondering if others are experiencing the same thing. I'm guessing the skimmer was pulling too many nutrients out of the tank and not leaving enough for the corals?
Any guess would be based on anecdotal 'evidence'. After years of investigating colorful coral proteins, I don't have any real cause-and-effect. In the words of coral color guru Charlie Mazel: "Nature loves to confound us!"
 
Wondering if extra bacteria is now in the water collumn and a useful food source for the corals
I read something recently suggesting that there is a beneficial increase in bacteria by removing the skimmer that benefits corals.
 
I think we have 2 things colliding with all coral color anecdotes. 1st we have something physiological (which we do not even fully understand all the time) that has to do with the balance of various parameters(which seems to be different for everyone) and then we have personal preference.

One reefer's "fuller color" is another reefer's "time for a water change". What I find appealing and "best color" can be completely opposite to the look another is after. So we can both experience the same change in parameters and say opposite things about how much better or worse our corals looked.
 
I think we have 2 things colliding with all coral color anecdotes. 1st we have something physiological (which we do not even fully understand all the time) that has to do with the balance of various parameters(which seems to be different for everyone) and then we have personal preference.

One reefer's "fuller color" is another reefer's "time for a water change". What I find appealing and "best color" can be completely opposite to the look another is after. So we can both experience the same change in parameters and say opposite things about how much better or worse our corals looked.

Not to mention how we all like different lighting on our tanks to enhance or otherwise corals.
I do like overly fake looking corals, well fake to me. While others go for maximum colour pop. Just my preference but it seems our lighting might be more of a factor in the look of our corals than anything we may or may not feed them one way or another.
 
Any guess would be based on anecdotal 'evidence'. After years of investigating colorful coral proteins, I don't have any real cause-and-effect. In the words of coral color guru Charlie Mazel: "Nature loves to confound us!"

I did some research a while back and found that the pigments that cause fluorescence essentially act like the pigment in our skin to protect the organism from excessive UV exposure. In theory, you should be able to give your corals a "tan" so to speak with UV. Would be worth experimenting with if not done already. I rescued a brown BTA with just a hint of green from a Petco and put in natural day light supplemented with Blue LED and within a month it was fully green.
 
Last edited:
Not to mention how we all like different lighting on our tanks to enhance or otherwise corals.
I do like overly fake looking corals, well fake to me. While others go for maximum colour pop. Just my preference but it seems our lighting might be more of a factor in the look of our corals than anything we may or may not feed them one way or another.

Corals fluoresce in response to anything in the actinic range. Basically blue or UV light. I have noticed that different wavelength of blue light do result in different colors. The pattern I have noticed is that longer wavelength blue brings out more orange coloration while shorter wavelength brings out more red and neon green. But this is a different subject all together from development of pigment.
 
I am running tanks and systems without skimmers for decades. At the moment we run 2 systems of two tanks each and two single tanks without skimmer and only one system with skimmer, a DIY floating skimmer from a modified old Tunze horizontal model which works great. This system always has the highest phosphate concentrations, sometimes almost twice as high as the next highest phosphate concentration in a system or tank.

Scientific findings of bubbling ocean water or saltwater say exopolymers/slime of algae (and in my opinion bacteria) adsorb to air bubbles and have C : N ratios of ca. the Redfield ratio. Nitrogen and organic carbon limitation of bacteria may be the cause of increased phosphate concentrations in our skimmed system.

By the way, proteins need nitrogen. ;) :)
 
Corals fluoresce in response to anything in the actinic range. Basically blue or UV light. I have noticed that different wavelength of blue light do result in different colors. The pattern I have noticed is that longer wavelength blue brings out more orange coloration while shorter wavelength brings out more red and neon green. But this is a different subject all together from development of pigment.
I think we have long established what lighting K and UV etc makes certain corals pop. My point is we all like different looks to our tanks, me less blue than many so what we feed won't make the biggest impact colour wise. However, if enhanced colouration via what we feed is a sign of health then am all for it.

20220119_172940.jpg
 
Im starting to get the impression that skimmers are only really necessary on FOWLR systems with high bio loads to supplement nutrient removal when your chaeto or algae scrubber cant keep up.
 
I am running tanks and systems without skimmers for decades. At the moment we run 2 systems of two tanks each and two single tanks without skimmer and only one system with skimmer, a DIY floating skimmer from a modified old Tunze horizontal model which works great. This system always has the highest phosphate concentrations, sometimes almost twice as high as the next highest phosphate concentration in a system or tank.

Scientific findings of bubbling ocean water or saltwater say exopolymers/slime of algae (and in my opinion bacteria) adsorb to air bubbles and have C : N ratios of ca. the Redfield ratio. Nitrogen and organic carbon limitation of bacteria may be the cause of increased phosphate concentrations in our skimmed system.

By the way, proteins need nitrogen. ;) :)

I dont have much experience with skimmers, but I have found that the easiest way to lower phosphate is to dose nitrate. This is because algae will absorb it at a fixed ratio, so if Nitrogen is the limiting reagent, no more phosphate can be absorbed.
 
I am running tanks and systems without skimmers for decades. At the moment we run 2 systems of two tanks each and two single tanks without skimmer and only one system with skimmer, a DIY floating skimmer from a modified old Tunze horizontal model which works great. This system always has the highest phosphate concentrations, sometimes almost twice as high as the next highest phosphate concentration in a system or tank.

Scientific findings of bubbling ocean water or saltwater say exopolymers/slime of algae (and in my opinion bacteria) adsorb to air bubbles and have C : N ratios of ca. the Redfield ratio. Nitrogen and organic carbon limitation of bacteria may be the cause of increased phosphate concentrations in our skimmed system.

By the way, proteins need nitrogen. ;) :)
I agree with you on the bacteria thing. I had a discussion a while back with someone about plastic bio balls possibly being the cause of increased nitrates in the absence of an ammonia source. I theorized that it could be aerobic nitrogen fixing bacteria, basically pulling it out of the atmosphere and forming nitrates in the system under the right conditions. But this would ultimately lower phosphates. Generally speaking, for bacteria to remove nitrogen from a system it would have to be an anaerobic/anoxic process where the oxygen starved bacteria absorbs nitrates, utilizes the oxygen and releases the nitrogen as inert gas bubbles. This is not likely to occur in a skimmer.
 
Last edited:
I have a 90 gal sps dominant, 60 gal softy, and 25 gal mixed nem... use unfiltered NSW for changes and no skimmers or filter socks. Caulerpa and Xenia in my 90 and 60 gal sumps which I harvest regularly. I have to dose nitrates as they bottom out. Phosphates around 0.08. Acros growing really well and getting good colour.

I prefer the minimalist route and trying to achieve an ecologically balanced system (as balanced as one can get in a closed system).

I'm interested to know what you think may be the cause of colour improvement.
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top