what phosphate level cause greening acros?

[eamike261]

Just inquiring people's opinions and experiences with "high" phosphates causing acros to turn green? I've read that high phosphates is one common cause (other causes being lower light and excess iron levels).

Some people say 0.05 is high and others say they have 0.2 yet still maintain good coloration. I'm sure other variables come into play like flow, alk, light intensity, etc. but that's why I'm asking for individual opinions/experiences with phosphates levels specifically. Thanks!

 

[Graffiti Spot]

The quick change in phosphate levels is what I have seen change the color of acropora to green, not really the level. If it naturally rises over many months to become high without swinging or jumping than the corals normally just become more rich colored, and don't change their color. Anything that stresses the corals can potentially change an acro to become more green.

 

[Stickboy15]

I have 0.08 and no green acros

 

[TX_Punisher]

.05-.08 here. Would not call that high.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

Most attribute greening to too much light , second to potassium.
I’ve never heard it attributed to phosphate.

 

[eamike261]

Most attribute greening to too much light , second to potassium.
I’ve never heard it attributed to phosphate.

Hm reallly? From browsing and searching old posts I felt like more people said their acros turned green from low light or high phosphates. And too much light would cause them to become pale.

I wonder if the green caused from too much light would be more of a “healing” phase after they get bleached by high lighting, as they regain color?

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

Hm reallly? From browsing and searching old posts I felt like more people said their acros turned green from low light or high phosphates. And too much light would cause them to become pale.

I wonder if the green caused from too much light would be more of a “healing” phase after they get bleached by high lighting, as they regain color?

There’s a recent thread from d Riddle I can’t find right now.
All bout greening.

 

[Graffiti Spot]

Hm reallly? From browsing and searching old posts I felt like more people said their acros turned green from low light or high phosphates. And too much light would cause them to become pale.

I wonder if the green caused from too much light would be more of a “healing” phase after they get bleached by high lighting, as they regain color?

Yea low light will give more green in corals and too much will lighten the coral or make it paler. I would certainly say the green after paling a coral too much is the coral healing.

Saltyfilmfolks, are you talking about the thread on red to green color change in acropora tenuis, specifically orange passion and walt disney? I haven't heard anyone say potassium turned any of their corals green, that thread was a little odd and how Dana started it was like asking a question.

 

[jda]

Corals will brown out with too many building blocks. Green is a stop on this train with brown being the end destination.

Most of the the time, colors will go monochrome first with any contrast disappearing, then green, then brown. This can happen at all different levels for different corals. Some of the already monochrome corals might not look any different for elevated levels whereas something very complex like a plana or deepwater might show some of this at very reasonable levels sometimes.

 

[Ashish Patel]

My Phosphates came out 2 days back at 137 on the hanna ULR - shocked but corals are not green or brown

 

[jda]

I would not consider .4 too high for most corals. For some of my Lorpies or Grannies, they would have lost the white color "middle" or "stems" about at .1 and would either shifted to the color of the tips, or a light green. At .4, some of my monochromes like OBT or Red Planet might really be deep and dark (great looking), but maybe not as bright.

 

[Ashish Patel]

I would not consider .4 too high for most corals. For some of my Lorpies or Grannies, they would have lost the white color "middle" or "stems" about at .1 and would either shifted to the color of the tips, or a light green. At .4, some of my monochromes like OBT or Red Planet might really be deep and dark (great looking), but maybe not as bright.

5 month back it ran closer to 0 so I've been recklessly overfeeding and underskimming. only downsize is have to clean the glass more and the vortech every month. In an established reef you can stretch phosphates much higher than a new reef. I think the optimal levels in my tank will be .1 - .2ppm. No more of this nonsense 0.03 many people speak of as the optimal phosphates, I consider this to be a major reason why new acro keepers fail...

 

[Ashish Patel]

As you mentioned the variable to factor color with high phosphates are Alk, photoperiod or light intensity, and higher flow.
I personally feel my color has improved with higher phosphates because of lower ALK 7.5 and increased LED intensity and flow.

 

[jda]

Who said anything about trying to have .03 phosphates on a new tank? With an established system that is very stable, I can assure you that you will get better color and growth with .03, or even down to .01. Is it necessary? ...of course not. The very important thing is to actually have a stable and mature tank first... The main issue with tanks under a few years old is that the keeper is often watching a different game than the rest of us are... tanks are not stable as soon as the nitrite is gone in the third or fourth week... nor are they stable at 8 months when the algae blooms are still coming... nor are they stable if intervening all the time with GFO or other chemicals.

 

[Ashish Patel]

Who said anything about trying to have .03 phosphates on a new tank? With an established system that is very stable, I can assure you that you will get better color and growth with .03, or even down to .01. Is it necessary? ...of course not. The very important thing is to actually have a stable and mature tank first... The main issue with tanks under a few years old is that the keeper is often watching a different game than the rest of us are... tanks are not stable as soon as the nitrite is gone in the third or fourth week... nor are they stable at 8 months when the algae blooms are still coming... nor are they stable if intervening all the time with GFO or other chemicals.

Not a new tank just in general 0.03 is said to be optimal - "if phosphates are too high SPS will brown or unwanted algaes will take over", things like this have let to this thread being created. Early on my phoshpates where generally around 0.05-0.08 but if I was not careful would go to 0. Now its the opposite they just keep going up and I have to wetskim and cutt back on the wasteful feeding.

 

[srad750c]

My PO4 runs .09 - .114 ppm, all my SPS are colored up pretty good. I also run my NO3 @ 1.0 ppm. This coral was brown when I got it. Back then PO4 was .010 ppm.

 

[markalot]

In my opinion ...

People need to throw out the .03 ideal phosphate number, it's killing Acros in newer tanks. If you know what you're doing and can really reproduce wild conditions then go for it, but be prepared to make sure there's some food in the water at all times or your acros will starve and die at low PO4 levels. In the wild an unimaginable amount of water and food passes by corals every minute. So called nutrients may measure very low but it's not the whole story. The most successful newer tanks that controlled PO4 also fed extremely heavily. Big imports, big exports, move food through the system and get it back out before it becomes a longer term issue.

As far as colors, my guess is some acros can tolerate higher po4 quite well, others require more natural conditions to color up. Some have even adapted, apparently, by substituting food needs with nutrients in the water column. It's a crapshoot, no two acros are alike. I have one brown acro whose natural color is white with blue or purple tips. In my tank it's brown brown, and a bit of green. Last time I tested PO4 it was too low for my liking, .04 IIRC. I stopped testing because I was killing my acros.

Here's my stubborn brown acro. See the green tips? The Lokani frag to the right of it is a gorgeous blue. This is just a small piece of the larger brown colony. It grows fast, really fast, but refuses to color up.

 

[srad750c]

My PO4 runs .09 - .114 ppm, all my SPS are colored up pretty good. I also run my NO3 @ 1.0 ppm. This coral was brown when I got it. Back then PO4 was .010 ppm

In my opinion ...

People need to throw out the .03 ideal phosphate number, it's killing Acros in newer tanks. If you know what you're doing and can really reproduce wild conditions then go for it, but be prepared to make sure there's some food in the water at all times or your acros will starve and die at low PO4 levels. In the wild an unimaginable amount of water and food passes by corals every minute. So called nutrients may measure very low but it's not the whole story. The most successful newer tanks that controlled PO4 also fed extremely heavily. Big imports, big exports, move food through the system and get it back out before it becomes a longer term issue.

As far as colors, my guess is some acros can tolerate higher po4 quite well, others require more natural conditions to color up. Some have even adapted, apparently, by substituting food needs with nutrients in the water column. It's a crapshoot, no two acros are alike. I have one brown acro whose natural color is white with blue or purple tips. In my tank it's brown brown, and a bit of green. Last time I tested PO4 it was too low for my liking, .04 IIRC. I stopped testing because I was killing my acros.

Here's my stubborn brown acro. See the green tips? The Lokani frag to the right of it is a gorgeous blue. This is just a small piece of the larger brown colony. It grows fast, really fast, but refuses to color up.

Use amino acids, when my PO4 was low in the beginning, I had to use them to keep my corals alive. Use a very small amount until you figure out what you need.

 

[jda]

Throughput is by-far more important than residual values on a test kit. This is the basis of Zeo and even mostly the basis of the Ocean. They are very high nitrogen and phosphorous systems, but also have very low number on test kits. However, this is hard to understand and to teach whereas numbers on a test kit are easy to understand. I will say that while my residual numbers are low, I do have a ton of throughput.

Coral cannot use building blocks (N and P) for energy. They need to either have zoox produce sugars (from light) or catch some organisms containing proteins or sugars. There is no evidence that corals can efficiently catch any of the "food" that people give them in captivity NOR any evidence that it has the right nutritional makeup to provide value. If you are really concerned about feeding your coral, then light is the best for-sure way. When we were in the coral sea, one of the scientists at the AQ place where we caught the dive boat said that the reefs where most coral are collected have nearly no nutritious plankton available and you have to go out farther from the reefs or into the lagoons where the clams, filter feeders and not too many acros live. I think that it is fair to assume that acros do not catch a lot of food, but they probably do some.

Buildings blocks are used to create new tissue, not for energy. Once you have enough and a slight over supply, then more does you no good... so .1 nitrogen is not much different than 5 if the .1 is in constant supply (it can be in mature tanks). Also keep in mind that corals and Tridacna can get a lot of nitrogen from ammonia.

 

[eamike261]

Throughput is by-far more important than residual values on a test kit. This is the basis of Zeo and even mostly the basis of the Ocean. They are very high nitrogen and phosphorous systems, but also have very low number on test kits. However, this is hard to understand and to teach whereas numbers on a test kit are easy to understand. I will say that while my residual numbers are low, I do have a ton of throughput.

Coral cannot use building blocks (N and P) for energy. They need to either have zoox produce sugars (from light) or catch some organisms containing proteins or sugars. There is no evidence that corals can efficiently catch any of the "food" that people give them in captivity NOR any evidence that it has the right nutritional makeup to provide value. If you are really concerned about feeding your coral, then light is the best for-sure way. When we were in the coral sea, one of the scientists at the AQ place where we caught the dive boat said that the reefs where most coral are collected have nearly no nutritious plankton available and you have to go out farther from the reefs or into the lagoons where the clams, filter feeders and not too many acros live. I think that it is fair to assume that acros do not catch a lot of food, but they probably do some.

Buildings blocks are used to create new tissue, not for energy. Once you have enough and a slight over supply, then more does you no good... so .1 nitrogen is not much different than 5 if the .1 is in constant supply (it can be in mature tanks). Also keep in mind that corals and Tridacna can get a lot of nitrogen from ammonia.

So that makes me wonder. If we assumed that corals can't efficiently catch the food we feed and convert it to energy, then zoox sugar production from light would be the only energy source for corals. Which means you would be right about the building blocks (Nitrates/Phosphates) not directly contributing to energy production. But you neglected to mention how the building blocks (Nitrates/Phosphates) contribute to zoox production. Can you comment on that? Hobbyists assume that some corals "brown" out in high nitrate tanks due to excesses of zoox (maybe that is wrong?), so that tells me there is a lot more zoox producing energy for the coral when light is supplied. That would imply that different levels of nitrogen do impact energy production (indirectly of course).