This makes sense. Perhaps I need to add a cryptic zone although an area I know little of but that's what google is for. Awesome reply.
Would you say that this cryptic sponge zone would negate the need for ozone to combat the unknown or run both? Still adding a Fuge but I can make room easily for a Fuge without lights, too.
I think the cryptic zones are a fun and interesting thing to employ, and my systems had them. I also dosed silicate which boosted their growth. But I caution against taking subseas's comment below too expansively for the reasons I outline below it:
"Scientific studies on the composition of waste/byproducts/exudates of photosynthetic corals are mostly lipids & proteins while the exudates of algae photosynthesis is mostly glucose. The “sponge loop” and in particular, cryptic sponges consume both coral & algae DOC at 5 fold more than granulated activated carbon resins 10 fold more efficiency than protein skimmers coupled with carbon dosing."
1. First, it isn't sensible to claim something (sponges) consumes 5 fold more DOC than something else (GAC or skimming) does without quantifying how much of each (sponges and GAC) was used. Obviously that ratio can be jiggered from a million fold more to a million fold less by adjusting the relative amounts of each.
2. If the actual comparator in the study was not amount consumed, but reduced to a lower concentration, then that limits the utility even more. If some random DOC is reduced from 100 to 1 ppb by GAC and 100 to 0.2 ppb by sponges, one might correctly claim the sponge was 5 times more efficient. But functionally, is that an important difference?
3. The types of DOC subsea quotes are readily metabolized and "wanted" by sponges and other organisms. But if you alternatively looked at toxins (natural from tank creatures or man made from foods and other additives) such as caulerpacin from caulerpa or organotin compounds from tubing, , would organisms that may not want to be exposed to these at all be just as effective or more so than GAC, which only cares about chemical functionality, as opposed to biological toxicity?
www.reef2reef.com
