- Status
SpecialK":18yzsoyg said:
The point is you're replenishing elements with water changes. ,, something the boy Bob isn't doing. I don't see anything terribly unusual about your tankl,,, I think lots of folk use tapwater and I certainly don't let the new saltwater aerate for hours/days.
Export of nutrients and replenishing lost elements through water changes is just plain old good reefeeping.
Juck":2xxkp933 said:
I have heard that argument in all aspects of aquarium keeping since the late 70's. Yet I have ran tanks with no water changes just replaceing evaporative water and they ran just fine for up to 6 continuous years. So something else must be going on.
Take any parameter in any tank. Calcium, magnesium, ammonia, nitrIte, nitrate, iodine, copper---- any parameter. And the the unproven assumption all of those are at the "ideal" value. Further assume that the parameter in question is not constant at the "ideal" value. But instead is increasing or decreasing rapidily enough to cause problems in a month.
Under those assumptions 10% weekly water changes will not prevent the buildup or decrease in that parameter. Only slow the increase or decrease so the effects are noted several months later instead of the next month.
When you change 10% of the water with the "ideal" water the resulting value of that parameter is 10% of the distance from the current tank value and the "ideal' value desired. So the deviation from "ideal' is slowed not prevented.
The only way of maintaining the "ideal" value is to change 100% of the water with "ideal" water. Which upsets the entire system causing massive problems.
So water changes of 10% only correct the trace elements 10% and only cause a 10% massive upset the the entire system.
The only way water changes could work long term is if the tank was already at the ideal value, in which case the water changes would be uncessary to start with.
But under the assumption that the trace elements are being added through food, tap water, substraits, or even dosing (kalk, reactors, additives) Then those are increasing. Further that under the assumptions that plant life consumes those things and in proportion to the concentration in the water, then those parameters are being maintained without the need for water changes.
In my curent tank I have found that calcium is maintained at 400ppm with no dosing and no water changes. But I did have to move the tankwater over oyster shells. And the fish corals and inverts are doing just fine especially since I added the in tank refugium and got nitrAtes down to 0.0.
So with or without water changes, what is absolutely necessary is the system itself to balance out. In my case I found calcium to be low. Instead of doing the ineffetive water changes, I added the oyster shells so the system was stable at 400ppm instead of 250-300. And as a result I now have a system that is not only maintaing calcium but nitrates and phosphates and whatever else know and unknown as well.
All by using the same water the flows to the ocean, and same plant life that filters the ocean and maintains the ocean.
Finally, mankind will never completely understand all the complexities of life on earth. If say 1 part per trillion of say kypronite was required to get sexual coral reporduction, current information simply would not reflect that. But man can reflect on the fact that rivers flow to the sea. The water is filtered by plant along the way and in the ocean.
Apologies Bob, but this shows an *incredible* misunderstanding of how the oceans work.
1)Plant life filtering water on the way to the ocean...these are freshwater plants which aren't in our saltwater tanks.
2)Rivers flow to the sea -- this is true. So do factory spillpipes....I fail to see what point you're trying to make. My tapwater is processed just like most of America. I don't thing there are many reefkeepers hauling buckets down to the banks of their river to fill em up.
3)Plant life filtration in the ocean is an incredibly small component. You haven't taken into account a myriad of other factors that regulate the ocean.
4)Your point on the 'kryptonite' is easily turned against your own argument. Water runoff is very typically polluted with many different things. It's a sad but true state of the world. Pull any water quality report and if they have bothered to test those things that *aren't* normally mandated, you'll be surprised at the amount of things in your tap water.
Will I use RO/DI 'stripped' water in *my* reef when I set it up? Heck yes!
If 1 PPT can cause a change in my corals, I want it to be *clean*
And there ain't no plant that's going to uptake the majority of the crud that gets leached into our rivers. Some stuff, yes. All of it...nope.
So I'll start with water I *know* is pure. Not hope, not think, not wish....KNOW. And as far as stripped minerals, etc. most of the good quality salt mixes *include* these!!!
Your constant disregard for these simple facts (not including the fact that your tapwater ain't what's in your rivers) just negates the legitimacy of any information that you post.[/b]
first of all here is the pics every one wants.
http://www.reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=57481
hclh2ofish.
I respectifully submit that it is you who do not understand the huge influence plant life has on our oceans.
but then my understanding is a lay man's understanding. All I have is discovery channel type information.
In one article about the depletion of the amazon rain forest, scientiest specualted that as much as 1/2 the world's carbon dioxide consumption is taken up by macor algaes in the ocean. something they had not considered.
When enviromental engineers want to test a peice of the ocean for polution they probably take water samples there. But what they really look at is plant life harvented. If that plant life has the polution that is a much more reliable indication of the conditions of the ocean.
the coral reef and areas surrounding the coral reefs are teaming with plant life.
And without that plant life there would be no fish or corals in the ocean.
Dilution would not work because there would be no clean water to dilute the dirty water too.
Anaerobic action can not filter out toxins nor consume ammonia, nitrates, phosphates, and carbon dioxide. As well as add oxygen.
Dried macro algaes are being used to remove and recover all types of toxic industrial wastes from water.
So before you dismiss the actions of plant life, perhaps you should take a good hard look at what is actually going on in your tank. And not be so dimissive of plant life
But then you echo numerous people on these message boards.
Also, in another thread I understand you had a cyano outbreak. I did also when nitrates went below 5 ppm of so. Others have reported a similiar experience. From what I understand the outbreak could be a good sign. Basically, nitrates are down, plant life slows down, as does phosphate consumtion by the plant life. And therefore conditions are ripe for a cyano bloom. In my case the bloom went away on about three weeks. As others reported also. So the cyano bloom could have meant nitrates were approaching 0.0 and as the bloom disappates, then phosphates are 0.
I hope you got it under control and harvesting the cyano is one way.
http://www.reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=57481
hclh2ofish.
I respectifully submit that it is you who do not understand the huge influence plant life has on our oceans.
but then my understanding is a lay man's understanding. All I have is discovery channel type information.
In one article about the depletion of the amazon rain forest, scientiest specualted that as much as 1/2 the world's carbon dioxide consumption is taken up by macor algaes in the ocean. something they had not considered.
When enviromental engineers want to test a peice of the ocean for polution they probably take water samples there. But what they really look at is plant life harvented. If that plant life has the polution that is a much more reliable indication of the conditions of the ocean.
the coral reef and areas surrounding the coral reefs are teaming with plant life.
And without that plant life there would be no fish or corals in the ocean.
Dilution would not work because there would be no clean water to dilute the dirty water too.
Anaerobic action can not filter out toxins nor consume ammonia, nitrates, phosphates, and carbon dioxide. As well as add oxygen.
Dried macro algaes are being used to remove and recover all types of toxic industrial wastes from water.
So before you dismiss the actions of plant life, perhaps you should take a good hard look at what is actually going on in your tank. And not be so dimissive of plant life
But then you echo numerous people on these message boards.
Also, in another thread I understand you had a cyano outbreak. I did also when nitrates went below 5 ppm of so. Others have reported a similiar experience. From what I understand the outbreak could be a good sign. Basically, nitrates are down, plant life slows down, as does phosphate consumtion by the plant life. And therefore conditions are ripe for a cyano bloom. In my case the bloom went away on about three weeks. As others reported also. So the cyano bloom could have meant nitrates were approaching 0.0 and as the bloom disappates, then phosphates are 0.
I hope you got it under control and harvesting the cyano is one way.
bob, i don't think anyone is specifically dismissive of photosynthesisizing (plant, symbiont, cyano, algae, etc.) as a filtration method.beaslbob":2j5lhjks said:
the issue people have is that your method (while valid for you) benefits from a good tapwater source. most people probably do not have good enough tapwater to just 'plug and reef'.
like i previously said, i agree algae scrubbing can be a very effective filtration method and i have personally used such setups for years. like you, i also did tapwater and filtered tapwater when i began. i didn't see significant progress until i changed to distilled. but just like i said above, this is just my experience and not applicable to everyone (like your experiences are yours).
because of distilled's cost i became (by economic default) a no/low waterchange reefer like you. so i'm not 'against' you on the no wc's either.
BUT, i have to agree with the other positions that your recommended methods aren't the easiest or soundest ways to recommend to a new reefer. it's a nice exercise for people that can see/understand the reactions of the livestock/system. but frankly, beginners will only note the skyrocketing nitrates and dying livestock, and it will obviously be much too late at that point.
:lol: Then let's agree to disagree and say we *both* have less than an expert understanding :lol:
I fail to see what point you're trying to make here....
Ummm...again...what's the point?
Nobody has ever disputed this, nor did I.
Again...I don't see what your point is Bob.
But the point I was trying to make to you is that there are *lots* of other things going on that do this as well. It's not 100% plants. Heck, the majority of the earths CO2 is trapped in limestone karsts (I belive they're called) around the world. Placed there through the millenia as the ocean has risen, fallen, etc.
Again...so what? I never denied the benefits of plant life!!
Bob, I didn't dismiss plant life...nor to the best of my knowledge has anyone else here. I have a good understanding on what's happening in my tank -- maybe not as much as some of those with years more experience, but definitely enough to be able to have a thriving tank w/lots of nifty critters, good coralline, and thriving mushrooms ( :lol: although it can be pretty hard for them *not* to thrive)
Yah..it's just too small a tank and I wanted to get it outta there ASAP. There is no feeding to the tank other than *very* small bit of squid once or twice a week, and 1 drop of Clam food ever 3-4 days. The only critters are 'pods, some hydroids, and upside down jellyfish (Cassiopei sp.)
The jellies feed via zooxanthallae, so tank has lotsa light and very low flow. Really bad combo w/regards to cyano.
I just want to try and make it clear to you -- nowhere in my last post was I trying to negate the influence of plant life in our tanks, or it's benefits.
What I was disputing were items that you keep bringing up that aren't correct - items you still haven't answered instead concentrating on one thing (plant life in oceans) and ignoring the rest.
I gotta leave for home right now so don't wanna retype everything.
Please see my previous post and please answer items 1, 2, and 4.
These will count as 90% of your grade. There are no retests. No looking at other peoples papers. You may use all reference materials necessary.
(That was said in jest, by the way...)
Aerobotic bacteria transfers ammonia to nirtite then finally to nitrate where anaerobotic bacteria turns the nitrate to nitogenous gas.
So bacteria completes the nirtogen cycle on its own.
Sponges, clams, mussels, ect also filter the reef zones and anytime you see the reef covered in algae it is b/c it is dieing. Once the polution increases in the water around the reef (just look at how much polution the mississippi puts in the ocean) the algae cover the available surface and prevent settlement of new coral larvea.
I know when I go diving I dont see reefs covered in algae, beside coraline! Sure I see patchs here and there but not enough that they are the main "filter" for the oceans nutrients, not even close. Theres lots more to the oceans ecosystem then the plant life.
beaslbob":2shhojqx said:
And they speak for themselves.
And your understanding is flawed, as is much of the info on discovery channel type shows.
There are algae in almost all the corals, but 'plants' I assume you mean, no. If you see 'plants' on or around a reef, the reef is in trouble. You may be thinking of lagoonal systems.
That is a shocking misunderstanding of how the oceans work.
Not filter, but convert.
And again, you choose to not actually address any points made on you statements and instead revert to arguing against generalizations that no one supports.
beaslbob":36zwuqof said:
Looks like you finally replaced the Clownfish and Anemone that died earlier this year. They look nice.
This will probably surprise you but most people like to grow out their corals and fish instead of just replacing them every 6 months. You have every right to do it your way though.
- Status
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
