Nitrates in an SPS Tank

[kimoyo]

I email the professor from that class about a nitrate model. Hopefully she will get back to me.

But Randy found something that could be useful, I also invited him to join the discussion if want.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6739459#post6739459 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Randy Holmes-Farley
This article may cover it (or not, I do not have it):

The symbiotic anthozoan: a physiological chimera between alga and animal. Furla, Paola; Allemand, Denis; Shick, J. Malcolm; Ferrier-Pages, Christine; Richier, Sophie; Plantivaux, Amandine; Merle, Pierre-Laurent; Tambutte, Sylvie. UMR 1112 INRA-UNSA, University of Nice-Sophia Antipolis, Nice, Fr. Integrative and Comparative Biology (2005), 45(4), 595-604. Publisher: Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology.
Abstract

A review. The symbiotic life style involves mutual ecol., physiol., structural, and mol. adaptations between the partners. In the symbiotic assocn. between anthozoans and photosynthetic dinoflagellates (Symbiodinium spp., also called zooxanthellae), the presence of the endosymbiont in the animal cells has constrained the host in several ways. It adopts behaviors that optimize photosynthesis of the zooxanthellae. The animal partner has had to evolve the ability to absorb and conc. dissolved inorg. carbon from seawater to supply the symbiont's photosynthesis. Exposing itself to sunlight to illuminate its symbionts sufficiently also subjects the host to damaging solar UV radiation. Protection against this is provided by biochem. sunscreens, including mycosporine-like amino acids, themselves produced by the symbiont and translocated to the host. Moreover, to protect itself against oxygen produced during algal photosynthesis, the cnidarian host has developed certain antioxidant defenses that are unique among animals. Finally, living in nutrient-poor waters, the animal partner has developed several mechanisms for nitrogen assimilation and conservation such as the ability to absorb inorg. nitrogen, highly unusual for a metazoan. These facts suggest a parallel evolution of symbiotic cnidarians and plants, in which the animal host has adopted characteristics usually assocd. with phototrophic organisms.

Can anyone get this article?

 

[Deanos]

Can anyone get this article?

Full Article

 

[ShaunW]

Here you go!

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4054/is_200509/ai_n15704518

 

[jackson6745]

Pierce .03 is not much of a phosphate reading for a tank with 40ppm nitrates. I know you run GFO which helps keep it down.

Paul did the higher nitrate tank you have seen have somewhat low phosphates and run GFO?

 

[kimoyo]

Full Article

How the heck do you do it? :lol:

 

[kimoyo]

Pierce .03 in not much of a phosphate reading for a tank with 40ppm nitrates. I know you run GFO which helps keep it down.

Paul did the higher nitrate tank you have seen have somewhat low phosphates and run GFO?

Hopefully Adrian can explain his methods or Jim can comment. But his frag tank is no where near how people say you have to keep sps. He doesn't even test for nitrates but he has a lot of algae growth all over the the tank and he feeds rotifers. He does do water changes though.

 

[kimoyo]

I think the sand bed was doing the things it needs to do in that tank.

I have been thinking about this for a bit. You guys know clams like to use ammonium over nitrates and they do well in some of our tanks. And I know everyone says a cycled tank should have zero ammonia (I could never get mine to zero on my seachem test kit) but corals need ammonia also. In a bb tank, the point is to get the organics out before they breakdown into ammonia. Maybe the sandbed keeps the ammonia at a certain level by either trapping the organics or some bacterial process that releases it. And maybe we are reintroducing that ammonia by feeding the fish in a bb tank. And I read somewhere that corals in the ocean with schools of fish around them do better than those without.

Remember there are different bacteria that breakdown organics into ammonia than those that continue the cycle into nitrite and nitrate.

(I still like BB tanks for algae control though :lol

 

[kimoyo]

Full Article

Unfortunatly, he doesn't explain it.

"As for phytoplankton, the uptake of nitrate should be via a carrier transport system located in the host tissue. Such system represents an additional adaptive trait, but it has not yet been investigated in corals."

But he does talk about Carbon uptake. I have to read it fully.

 

[prattreef]

Pretty much agree with the comments regarding Nitrate, but I feel the need to comment on the science/hobbyist polarization.

Most hobbyists do not appproach reefkeeping as a primarily scientific pursuit and to expect them to seek out and then understand the scientific literature is, I think quite unreasonable. The other fact is that very few qualified scientists find it worth their while professionally and personally to write for the hobbyist literature, ( it is a lot of work distilling scientific data and rewriting jargon for a lay audience) and those who do seem to be criticised endlessly for their efforts. That generally leaves hobbyists with two things at their disposal--- unqualified people trying their best to grapple with scientfic material/explanations/ experimentation (some of these folks are fantastic husbandry people by the way, the exact opposite is true for many scientists-- or other writers like myself who try to take a decidedly nonscientific approach and rely instead on the accumulated experience of the hobby.

It wasn't very long ago that trained scientists wouldn't give hobbyists the time of day and brushed off what they knew as "true" from practical experience. This situation has changed to a degree as the 2 communities began more productive dialogue with the advent of Aquarium Frontiers in the mid 1990's. This dialogue is on going, but more of you scientists out there need to publish material for hobbyists that is informative, ACCESSIBLE and of practical value. The opportunites exist--- you can even get paid. Until then, you can bristle all you like at what is written, but tell me what the alternative is?

Randy Donowitz (the other, nonscientist Randy)

 

[kimoyo]

Randy Donowitz (the other, nonscientist Randy)

Oh heck yeah, a member I can voice my problems to about AAOM, J/K. Cool to know your member. I would welcome you but since you've been a member longer than me you should probably welcome me :lol:.

 

[spykes]

man im missing out on such a great thread, i will start looking up some info too. great stuff paul, you have given me new theorys to this hobby itself.

 

[prattreef]

Welcome Paul Advanced Aquarist is always seeking (and quite unsuccessfully I might add) qualified scientists to write hobbyist appropriate literature for them. If you are interested, let me know, Terry is a good friend and would be quite open to your submissions.
Randy

 

[spykes]

I just posted this in another thread so I'll repost it here.



You sould see Adrian's (ricordiaking) frag tank :lol:.


I've been asking around to see if there are any models for nitrate uptake and if I find them I will post here. I included the accepted model for ammonium uptake by corals at the bottom of this post.

Pierces system has 40ppm nitrates but still has great color and growth in his display. But his frag tank, which he is using old bulbs in, has great growth but not color.

What people believe now is that the coral and zooxanthellae draw from the same pool for carbon. So that when the zoox increase in population they are then outcompeting the coral for C thus preventing the coral from performing calcification. But it has been shown that high levels of ammonium or alkalinity or CO2 can negate the effects of high nitrate on coral growth.

It has also been shown that chlorophyll pigments darken in low light levels (remember they are most effective at specific wavelengths).

Some corals have not been shown to expel zoox. Its assumed that the coral controls zoox growth by limiting transport of nutrients to zoox. But I haven't seen a model that explains what happens to this transport mechanism in high nitrate levels.

Here's what I think and it could be wrong. Peirce might have high levels of zoox in his corals. But something (high levels of ammonium, CO2, alkalinity, or combination) is still allowing him to get good growth. And his lights are providing good enough light (remember he runs a longer MH photoperiod) that his colors are still coming thru; evidenced by the fact that his corals brown in his frag tank.

BTW Rich, I know you told me when we were talking about your fishload coloring up your corals that you thought it was the amino acids from the fish poop. But that is a very small percentage of what the corals actually use. Most of there requirements are met thru ammonium assimilation (the model below) which leads to AA's but this might still fit in well with the large fish population thing.

Click to enlarge.

SPS has a layer of slime which corals uses to host bacteria, basically culturing their own food, the bacteria breaks down the fish defication, noticeably all our defication in a human has bacteria as well, because in our large intestine contains a large amount of cultured symbotic bactera. Fish poop as well has a large amount of bacteria, where it's a substrate to the ones the corals synthsis. What i think is the fish poop contains bilirubin and other groups of iron that feeds the zoox. This bacteria that hosts the fish defication is how considered what to be called "Mum", thus when you blow your rocks, or at a high curculation of water, the bacteria blows around along with unbroken down peptides and bilrubin, therefore corals feed off "Mum". In my own hobbist experience, i've blown off my rocks and the corals will get darker, as well as "seeing" feeder tenticles come out of my corals. they look like threads that float all around stinging and capturing free bacteria to feed off of. that's my theory on what rich does with fish poop.

 

[kimoyo]

Welcome Paul Advanced Aquarist is always seeking (and quite unsuccessfully I might add) qualified scientists to write hobbyist appropriate literature for them. If you are interested, let me know, Terry is a good friend and would be quite open to your submissions.
Randy

Thanks Randy but to be frank, there a lot more qualified, knowledgable and experience hobbyist on this website and RC than me. Some people that I've learned a lot of biology/chemistry from recently and aren't very well known are Solbby here and Inwall75 from RC. But there a tons of people with a lot of knowledge and practical experience who could write some good articles. Another hobbyist, MCsaxmaster on RC has also impressed me with the depth of his biological understanding.

 

[herman]

Im getting more out of this thread than I expected!!! Cool!

 

[herman]

SPS has a layer of slime which corals uses to host bacteria, basically culturing their own food, the bacteria breaks down the fish defication, noticeably all our defication in a human has bacteria as well, because in our large intestine contains a large amount of cultured symbotic bactera. Fish poop as well has a large amount of bacteria, where it's a substrate to the ones the corals synthsis. What i think is the fish poop contains bilirubin and other groups of iron that feeds the zoox. This bacteria that hosts the fish defication is how considered what to be called "Mum", thus when you blow your rocks, or at a high curculation of water, the bacteria blows around along with unbroken down peptides and bilrubin, therefore corals feed off "Mum". In my own hobbist experience, i've blown off my rocks and the corals will get darker, as well as "seeing" feeder tenticles come out of my corals. they look like threads that float all around stinging and capturing free bacteria to feed off of. that's my theory on what rich does with fish poop.

I noticed that myself in the past. Hence my question with the high fishload earlier on. hmmmm

 

[Aqua Pro Builder]

I like your approach

( it is a lot of work distilling scientific data and rewriting jargon for a lay audience) and those who do seem to be criticised endlessly for their efforts. ....

or other writers like myself who try to take a decidedly nonscientific approach and rely instead on the accumulated experience of the hobby.

Randy Donowitz (the other, nonscientist Randy)

As for hobby, the only time I ever tested my water was 2, 3 days ago and another time when I returned a dead fish to Petland-Oops they did the test, not me. I rely on my eyes and watch how the animals or plants react to my changes of the environment or food .... That's what I call hobby. If we use too much scienticifc instruments, tests, addictives and so forth, it becomes an academic course or research. Of course, we have to rely on some science things such as sudden outbreak of dieases or major melt down or something you loved a lot. Of course, overheating of your PC light needs science to fix it safely.

 

[Deanos]

As for hobby, the only time I ever tested my water was 2, 3 days ago and another time when I returned a dead fish to Petland-Oops they did the test, not me. I rely on my eyes and watch how the animals or plants react to my changes of the environment or food .... That's what I call hobby. If we use too much scienticifc instruments, tests, addictives and so forth, it becomes an academic course or research. Of course, we have to rely on some science things such as sudden outbreak of dieases or major melt down or something you loved a lot. Of course, overheating of your PC light needs science to fix it safely.

Wingo, I understand what you're trying to say, but I don't think it applies to SPS keepers. Every hobby has levels of "intensity". Right now, based on your comments, you seem to be on Level 1 :p As time and experience accrue, some people go up in level. SPS keepers, especially, successful ones, are several levels higher, hence their desire to understand their hobby at a scientific level.

 

[jackson6745]

I also take a practical approach to the hobby but I still try to read every scientific article said to be useful. Only problem is most readings are inconclusive.

What really confuses me is that different SPS color differently in low or high nutrient environments.
For example
A Humilis, samoensis, and gemmifera are corals that I've kept with best color under "high light" or more importantly in a nutrient starved tank. By nutrient starved I mean a tank with a low bio load and little feeding. From the pics I see on the internet, best colors of these corals are also kept in the same environment
On the other hand I had great success with Poccilipora and stylophora in my present tank where I have a load of fish and feed a lot. Same holds true to tanks that I have seen in person and on the internet. I was actually talking to Dave about this yesterday.

So to add to the confusion, categorizing all corals into SPS with the same characteristics will still leave you scratching your head at times. Different requirements for different species must be taken into account.

OK my head hurts....I miss keeping African cichlids

 

[cali_reef]

I miss keeping African cichlids

I am going to buy some discus soon :lol:.