A
Anonymous
Guest
how do corals react to Clycocarb or sugar in general.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I dont think sugar is in their natural diet, maybe they'll get a little hyper...lol, j/k, did you spill some in the tank by accidentor was the misses trying to do the old sugar in the gas tank thing?
------------------
My 180 Utopia: Updated 5/21/00
------------------
My 180 Utopia: Updated 5/21/00
A
Anonymous
Guest
i think sugar is made by xooanthelia to the coral for growth.
A
Anonymous
Guest
It will end up being food for bacteria and other microorganisms for the most part.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Wouldn't the sugar made by the xoozanthalle be glucose? I'm no biologist but thats what most organism's use for respiration. If you put something like glucose in the tank, like sculpin said, everything else will use it and it won't be something good that uses it: ie algae. Maybe we'll have to send for Dr. Ron on this one!
A
Anonymous
Guest
First we need to clarify what you mean by sugar. Table sugar (sucrose) is a disaccaride of glucose and fructose. I do believe that the zooxanthellae in coral produce glucose for the coral animal, but dumping glucose (or sucrose) into the water is not likely to directly benefit the coral; they may not be able to take it up from the water directly. Adding sugar to a reef tank usually generates a bacterial bloom, which in some ways may benefit some reef tank inhabitants, but I'd be careful about how you dose, and start small. FWIW, I accidentially dumped several tablespoons of table sugar into a 65 gallon reef system once (I was dipping my strawberries into it) and 24 hours later the water turned quite cloudy, but cleared after about a day or two. No harm done in my case.
------------------
- Greg Hiller
need frags in the Boston area? E-mail me
------------------
- Greg Hiller
need frags in the Boston area? E-mail me
A
Anonymous
Guest
Greg:
I'm surprised you didn't implicate me in trying this one <G>. I agree with your post.
A long time ago I dosed glucose (could have been sucrose) to my tank. If I recall correctly, one or more corals in the tank turned brown, but regained their original coloration within a couple of weeks.
There are a few possible benefits of such a dosing:
1. Bacteria consume it, and are themselves consumed by higher organisms, etc. etc., feeding many of the tank inhabitants.
2. Bacteria consume it, and use up other excessive nutrients to grow, therby reducing nitrate, phosphate, etc.
3. Higher animals absorb it directly from the water, and use it to grow.
Because of the coral color change, I didn't pursue additional doses. Maybe I can find notes about exactly how much I dosed and which corals changed color.
------------------
Randy Holmes-Farley
I'm surprised you didn't implicate me in trying this one <G>. I agree with your post.
A long time ago I dosed glucose (could have been sucrose) to my tank. If I recall correctly, one or more corals in the tank turned brown, but regained their original coloration within a couple of weeks.
There are a few possible benefits of such a dosing:
1. Bacteria consume it, and are themselves consumed by higher organisms, etc. etc., feeding many of the tank inhabitants.
2. Bacteria consume it, and use up other excessive nutrients to grow, therby reducing nitrate, phosphate, etc.
3. Higher animals absorb it directly from the water, and use it to grow.
Because of the coral color change, I didn't pursue additional doses. Maybe I can find notes about exactly how much I dosed and which corals changed color.
------------------
Randy Holmes-Farley
A
Anonymous
Guest
Ahah! I found an archived post from 1997 where I described what I did. My post was in response to someone else who apparently got a bacterial bloom on adding sugar.
I wrote then:
"About six months ago I tried adding sugar to my tank as a means of giving a
jolt to the bottom of the food chain, and increasing the food chain from there
on up (not to decrease nitrate). I disagree with others who have criticized
this as adding "junk" food to the tank, and feel it is a quite reasonable
approach if what one wants to do is increase bacteria in the tank. It must,
however, be done carefully.
I did not get a bloom like you did. I added one teaspoon to a 90 gallon reef
tank. I only got two minor changes: one type of tan zooanthid temporarily
turned a darker shade of brown, and several cladocora corals bleached. They
also returned to normal.
I have not repeated the test due to the bleaching that I observed, but I
wouldn't conclude that it failed in what I wanted to do (though I cannot prove
it succeeded, either <G> )
One WHOPPING difference between my tank and yours, however, is the UV. I
suspect that you got a bloom of bacteria and other suspended organisms, and
then killed them as they passed through your UV. All those dead bacteria
could have caused a large amount of biological material to be dumped into the
system. You may have simply cause a large nitrogen cycle to initiate.
Sorry about the losses."
------------------
Randy Holmes-Farley
I wrote then:
"About six months ago I tried adding sugar to my tank as a means of giving a
jolt to the bottom of the food chain, and increasing the food chain from there
on up (not to decrease nitrate). I disagree with others who have criticized
this as adding "junk" food to the tank, and feel it is a quite reasonable
approach if what one wants to do is increase bacteria in the tank. It must,
however, be done carefully.
I did not get a bloom like you did. I added one teaspoon to a 90 gallon reef
tank. I only got two minor changes: one type of tan zooanthid temporarily
turned a darker shade of brown, and several cladocora corals bleached. They
also returned to normal.
I have not repeated the test due to the bleaching that I observed, but I
wouldn't conclude that it failed in what I wanted to do (though I cannot prove
it succeeded, either <G> )
One WHOPPING difference between my tank and yours, however, is the UV. I
suspect that you got a bloom of bacteria and other suspended organisms, and
then killed them as they passed through your UV. All those dead bacteria
could have caused a large amount of biological material to be dumped into the
system. You may have simply cause a large nitrogen cycle to initiate.
Sorry about the losses."
------------------
Randy Holmes-Farley
A
Anonymous
Guest
i dont use A UV.i added powder glucose 2tsp a day twice. No problems that i noticed.
its just that i have the product and thought of using it.i read in an article of the sugar being used by corals........
its just that i have the product and thought of using it.i read in an article of the sugar being used by corals........
A
Anonymous
Guest
Sugar is used by corals. More correctly, sugars are used by most animals, but usually as the energy currency within the animal itself. I'm not aware that corals have a specific transporter protein for direct uptake of glucose from sea water. Instead they either derive their sugars from their algae symbionts or from ingested materials in their gut. Since sea water typically does not contain glucose, there would be no purpose in corals having a protein for direct uptake from sea water.
Humans absorb sugar because it is a natural part of our diets (although fad dieticians will attempt to convince you otherwise). We have specific transport proteins in our gut which bring sugars from the gut (which is essentially the outside world) into our circulatory systems where it becomes part of the energy currency off which we live.
Humans absorb sugar because it is a natural part of our diets (although fad dieticians will attempt to convince you otherwise). We have specific transport proteins in our gut which bring sugars from the gut (which is essentially the outside world) into our circulatory systems where it becomes part of the energy currency off which we live.
A
Anonymous
Guest
you are true.but if sugar is available in reefs woulnt they absorb it...faster process.
A
Anonymous
Guest
You can make it available to them but they likely won't have the physiology for direct absorption. On the other hand, some filter feeders (such as tunicates, clams, sponges) might be able to. That would be a question for the good Dr. Shimek, however.
A
Anonymous
Guest
"Hmm, I'm thirsty" ..... DBW reaches over to a bucket of water and sticks his hand in to have a drink ....
Seriously though, for the direct absorbtion of anything to occur then there has to be the mechanism in place for that to happen. If it isn't then you can do what you like, add what you like etc, but it just wont happen.
For such a mechanism to be present then it has to be used in some manner, otherwise it would not be there. How much sugar, or any associated sugar, would be present in any significant amounts in water being flushed over a natural reef for a coral to be bothered utilising such a mechanism? Bacteria are far more superior at using any such thing, so before something like a coral would have a chance to get any access to sugar it would have been consumed by bacteria.
You have to also consider, where would such a source of sugar come from naturally anyway?
As to adding it to a reef tank, it is unlikely to cause any problems. Bacteria will just have a feast on it, that is all. More bacteria equals more food for organisms that prey on bacteria. You can achieve exactly the same thing by simply feeding the system more, and you are providing a more natural food source anyway.
When I first saw this subject I thought it was the feed the sand bed sugar type of things that was around a couple of years ago. That is also bit of a waste of time, unless carbon is the limiting nutrient in sand beds which is not the case I believe.
------------------
reefs.org
OZ REEF Marine Park
Don't worry, you will know when I am speaking as a reefs.org representative rather than a fellow hobbyist
Seriously though, for the direct absorbtion of anything to occur then there has to be the mechanism in place for that to happen. If it isn't then you can do what you like, add what you like etc, but it just wont happen.
For such a mechanism to be present then it has to be used in some manner, otherwise it would not be there. How much sugar, or any associated sugar, would be present in any significant amounts in water being flushed over a natural reef for a coral to be bothered utilising such a mechanism? Bacteria are far more superior at using any such thing, so before something like a coral would have a chance to get any access to sugar it would have been consumed by bacteria.
You have to also consider, where would such a source of sugar come from naturally anyway?
As to adding it to a reef tank, it is unlikely to cause any problems. Bacteria will just have a feast on it, that is all. More bacteria equals more food for organisms that prey on bacteria. You can achieve exactly the same thing by simply feeding the system more, and you are providing a more natural food source anyway.
When I first saw this subject I thought it was the feed the sand bed sugar type of things that was around a couple of years ago. That is also bit of a waste of time, unless carbon is the limiting nutrient in sand beds which is not the case I believe.
------------------
reefs.org
OZ REEF Marine Park
Don't worry, you will know when I am speaking as a reefs.org representative rather than a fellow hobbyist
A
Anonymous
Guest
While I generally agree that many higher animals probably cannot absorb much sucrose or glucose from seawater, I would point out that the argument that there is little sugar there naturally so corals would not likely have an absorption mechanism may be flawed.
One can make the same argument for seawater bacteria, and yet they apparently do absorb sugars.
In people, there are about 400 known transporters. However, based on gene homologies, it is believed that there are upwards of 10,000 transporters in humans. If we only know of 4% of the transporters in people, it's unlikely we have any significant understanding of transporters in corals.
Additionally, many of these transporters are only significantly expressed when there is a reason to do so (e.g., a phosphate deficient cell may ramp up phosphate transporters). Thus, a coral may only display significant sugar transporters when exposed to sugar solutions for some period of time.
Finally, the fact that zooanthids in my tank darkened up in response to sugar suggests that they were somehow responding to the sugar, though it's possible that they were responding to bacterial levels.
------------------
Randy Holmes-Farley
One can make the same argument for seawater bacteria, and yet they apparently do absorb sugars.
In people, there are about 400 known transporters. However, based on gene homologies, it is believed that there are upwards of 10,000 transporters in humans. If we only know of 4% of the transporters in people, it's unlikely we have any significant understanding of transporters in corals.
Additionally, many of these transporters are only significantly expressed when there is a reason to do so (e.g., a phosphate deficient cell may ramp up phosphate transporters). Thus, a coral may only display significant sugar transporters when exposed to sugar solutions for some period of time.
Finally, the fact that zooanthids in my tank darkened up in response to sugar suggests that they were somehow responding to the sugar, though it's possible that they were responding to bacterial levels.
------------------
Randy Holmes-Farley
A
Anonymous
Guest
its never been proven yet ...
enjoy reefing,.
enjoy reefing,.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Randy,
Good points.
On your last one, could "test" that out by using another food source for the bacteria and see if get similar results. Something like feed tank as normal for some time, add a given amount of sugar for a couple of weeks, stop addition (maintaining normal feeding regime) for say a month to allow things to return to normal, then repeat with another food source for the bacteria above that of normal feeding. Would have to be similar amount of food of course.
What we need is some rich dude to pour some money into studying things in reef aquariums
I volunteer to be his guy that sets up the studies, and spends the money
------------------
reefs.org
OZ REEF Marine Park
Don't worry, you will know when I am speaking as a reefs.org representative rather than a fellow hobbyist
Good points.
On your last one, could "test" that out by using another food source for the bacteria and see if get similar results. Something like feed tank as normal for some time, add a given amount of sugar for a couple of weeks, stop addition (maintaining normal feeding regime) for say a month to allow things to return to normal, then repeat with another food source for the bacteria above that of normal feeding. Would have to be similar amount of food of course.
What we need is some rich dude to pour some money into studying things in reef aquariums
------------------
reefs.org
OZ REEF Marine Park
Don't worry, you will know when I am speaking as a reefs.org representative rather than a fellow hobbyist
A
Anonymous
Guest
Randy,
I can soak you in sugar water from now 'til the cows come home and your skin will not begin expressing a glucose transporter. My point is expression of genes is specialized to the tissue they are expressed in. I would expect corals to be arranged equivalently based on selection pressure if nothing else, and thus would express their transporters in their gut where they are more likely to come in contact with elevated levels of simple sugars.
On the other hand, I agree that it is possible for corals to have glucose transporters in their external tissues. My question is to what benefit would this be in their natural environments. Most non-utilized genes are selected out of the gene pool based on the low selection pressure to maintain them. Were seawater to contain 1% glucose I would think transporter expression on coral surfaces more likely.
As an aside, all of the users of the SeaChem reef calcium (calcium polygluconate) dose sugar into their tanks on a daily basis.
Mike
I can soak you in sugar water from now 'til the cows come home and your skin will not begin expressing a glucose transporter. My point is expression of genes is specialized to the tissue they are expressed in. I would expect corals to be arranged equivalently based on selection pressure if nothing else, and thus would express their transporters in their gut where they are more likely to come in contact with elevated levels of simple sugars.
On the other hand, I agree that it is possible for corals to have glucose transporters in their external tissues. My question is to what benefit would this be in their natural environments. Most non-utilized genes are selected out of the gene pool based on the low selection pressure to maintain them. Were seawater to contain 1% glucose I would think transporter expression on coral surfaces more likely.
As an aside, all of the users of the SeaChem reef calcium (calcium polygluconate) dose sugar into their tanks on a daily basis.
Mike
A
Anonymous
Guest
Sculpin:
Maybe the transporters are located on the inside of the coral, where the zoox are located and are pumping out organics for the coral. Diffusion of sugar into this region, just as other nutrients diffuse in, could then provide a source of sugar in the right place to be actively taken up.
IMO, one likely reason that my zooanthids browned up was that the zoox proliferated, using the abundance of available organics. I don't know whether this might help or hurt the coral that contains them.
------------------
Randy Holmes-Farley
Maybe the transporters are located on the inside of the coral, where the zoox are located and are pumping out organics for the coral. Diffusion of sugar into this region, just as other nutrients diffuse in, could then provide a source of sugar in the right place to be actively taken up.
IMO, one likely reason that my zooanthids browned up was that the zoox proliferated, using the abundance of available organics. I don't know whether this might help or hurt the coral that contains them.
------------------
Randy Holmes-Farley
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:
