When and why did dosing nitrates start?
- Thread starter 2Sunny
- Start date
- Tagged users None
flampton
Ecological Reefing
@Randy Holmes-Farley
Hi Randy, I apologize, I was a little defensive after the lol of my hypothesis. I just need to be bigger.
I would like to point out that I never advised against utilizing acetate at all. In fact I think it makes a great carbon source and would be excellent choice in a carbon cocktail.
I just propose that possible using more than one carbon source would probably be more beneficial for the ecology of the aquarium. If you just want N and P reduction and don't worry about the intricate stuff that happens on the reef, well I don't blame you. It is because it is extremely difficult to discern and educated guesses have to be made based on the available research. And unfortunately the available research leaves a lot to be desired.
Peace
Hi Randy, I apologize, I was a little defensive after the lol of my hypothesis. I just need to be bigger.
I would like to point out that I never advised against utilizing acetate at all. In fact I think it makes a great carbon source and would be excellent choice in a carbon cocktail.
I just propose that possible using more than one carbon source would probably be more beneficial for the ecology of the aquarium. If you just want N and P reduction and don't worry about the intricate stuff that happens on the reef, well I don't blame you. It is because it is extremely difficult to discern and educated guesses have to be made based on the available research. And unfortunately the available research leaves a lot to be desired.
Peace
Last edited:
flampton
Ecological Reefing
He very well knows I have a PhD
Last edited by a moderator:
A bare bottom in an reef aquarium is created for one reason - to be as clean as possible. It nearly always associated with a strong flow and the biofilm you will get is very thin and polished - the anaerobic parts is more or less nonexisting. Further on - I never have buy the theory of biofilms that do the nitrification/denitrification simultaneous of on obvius reason - the build up of nitrate in most aquariums. The nitrification layer in a normal biofilm (not one that is flushed the way I describe with the bare bottom) is very thin - the film get anaerobic rather quick and that anaerobic layer is thicker than the aerobic - it means can have a larger population of anaerobes and potential denitrifiers than the nitrification layer have nitrifiers. Still most of the produced nitrate in the upper aerobic layer just go up in the water. The reason for this is that there is not enough of DOC for the denitrification. Well - we dose vinegar or some other DOC - denitrifiers will get their electron donor - yes but now we will forget that in a biofilm exist other organisms too - many denitrifiers are facultative aerobic heterotrophs by themselves as an example - the DOC will be their tickets to flourish in aerobic environment and because of much faster growth (more than 25 - 50 time faster) than the nitrifiers - they will just kick out the nitrifiers - especially the second step. This is well known ecological process in active sludge treatments plants and many other waste water techniques. One thing is to show something in a petri dish (in a monoculture) - another thing is to see if it have any importance in real life.
Sincerely Lasse
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2018
- Messages
- 6,724
- Reaction score
- 7,199
I eventually answer your question at the bottom of this reply.
Here is the problem. We are trying to explain anecdotal data. We have many reports of “increasing the nitrate concentration by a few ppm eventually brings the cyanobacteria growth to an end”. The number of reports does not establish scientific fact no more than the number of sightings of space aliens prove space aliens have visited earth.
Aquaria are uncontrolled experiments. Changes to the system are never made one at a time. Even increasing the nitrate concentration is a jumble of mitigation steps. For example, I just read a post that suggested increasing the nitrate concentration by several ppm, and disturbing the mat as much as possible, and lowering the light level will eventually diminish the cyanobacteria mat. Would the cyanobacteria have eventually disappeared anyway or disappeared by just disturbing the mat or just lowering the light level? And if nitrate concentration is an effective control measure, why does the author of the post continue to deal with cyanobacteria growth?
We should also add bias to the list of difficulties about reports of success using nitrate elevation. How many attempted to rid cyanobacteria by raising nitrate but failed? How many attempts were made where nitrate was not raised and cyanobacteria went away? How many systems have the correct nitrate level but still grow cyanobacteria? How many times does cyanobacteria return after posts claiming that increasing the nitrate level worked?
Extraordinary claims need extraordinary amount of data. Yes, people have seen cyanobacteria mats. I have little doubt that they had subsequently raised the nitrate level in their system. I am also very happy that the cyanobacteria eventually stopped being a concern for them, though we have no idea how many were successful and how many had cyanobacteria reappear after claiming success. This just isn’t convincing data.
My answer to your question then: there is no cause and effect relationship between adding nitrate and diminishing cyanobacteria growth in an aquarium. There is no phenomenon to explain. As much as we want to believe in this idea, there is simply no hard facts to support it. I am, however, still very interested in demonstrating scientifically how to make cyanobacteria go away by adding a small amount of nitrate. The only bright idea I have is to set up many small identical aquaria and induce cyanobacteria in all of them, using 3-5 for controls and 3-5 for nitrate additions and see if the systems with nitrate additions lose their cyanobacteria. The likelihood of success with this approach is low. I need more ideas and I am open to suggestions.
Dan
flampton
Ecological Reefing
Thin and polished biofilm huh? How many people have trouble keeping coralline off of this supposed fast flowing surface. And do these aquarium have rock? Your argument is just because there isn't much noticeable nitrate reduction in the aquarium that there is no anaerobic spots? I mean I just linked to coral having anaerobes growing in their skeleton! If a biofilm is 1mm thick it is around 1000 or so cells thick, and with carbon in the water they are rapidly chewing through that O2. Facultative anaerobes are growing everywhere, even if you don't think they should be there they didn't get the memo.
And for everyone reading this thread. Science is contentious, however if you come at me with statements based on assumptions on how you think things work. DO NOT get mad when I tell you why they are implausible. This isn't the same as arguing from authority. You know why? Cause I want you all to leave this thread and actually look up all this stuff and get super excited about science.
And I really don't understand the how dare you challenge the king stuff in these last few messages. That is the complete opposite of what science and a good scientist should be doing
However if you think that reefing has already been perfected, well not sure why you're here either
flampton
Ecological Reefing
No I think my tone is really not coming across at all. I sincerely wish no ill will to anyone in this thread. Instead of explaining what everything meant I will leave it at this.
On these boards we want to help people as much as possible. I'm not arguing for me. I sincerely want you all to grow and think freely. My personal recommendations on how you will get your answer is to try your hardest to prove your hypothesis isn't correct. Dont go looking in the literature for things you want to confirm. You'll probably find them and stop searching.
Thank you for participating everyone! As this thread is no longer nitrates and dosing I'm out so see you in another thread
On these boards we want to help people as much as possible. I'm not arguing for me. I sincerely want you all to grow and think freely. My personal recommendations on how you will get your answer is to try your hardest to prove your hypothesis isn't correct. Dont go looking in the literature for things you want to confirm. You'll probably find them and stop searching.
Thank you for participating everyone! As this thread is no longer nitrates and dosing I'm out so see you in another thread
Would a Seneye be suitable for such monitoring?
I would like to leave this thread knowing what parameters I should be looking at in my tank and how to best maintain them.
flampton
Ecological Reefing
I'm not familiar with the range on the seneye, I'll have to look that up.
I understand you want to know which parameters and how to maintain. As this has been gone over in this thread you will have to pick who you trust most. Their suggestions on things are somewhere in here. Even then it truly needs to be based on what you ultimately want in your aquarium and the level of attention you want to give your tank, for years
U
User1
Guest
I can't speak how they intended to use it but it captures temperature, free ammonia, ph, water level, lux, kelvin, and par. How accurate any and all of those are I'm not sure nor do I recall it being on their web site. Apologies for not having specifics. I've heard that the Ammonia is good and/or great. I've also heard that it works great in QT or isolation tanks for new or sick fish. Again, all second hand so...well, you know.
Having said that I do own one and only replying to say that there are two reasons why I bought it and none of which are for the monitoring of temp, ammonia, or ph. I use it for the out of water alarm and the par meter. I already have a controller that has reach back capability but the seneye is another check in the overall system and if the device detects it is out of water I get an email. Combine that with the controller and I have a bit better understanding if I have a real issue or not (network related ping vs water in sump low).
The par, kelvin, and lux reading is a bonus. Not sure how accurate it is nor do I claim to say it is be all end all but if you look at it as a tool I think it is helpful. You can get some initial readings, help guide placement of lighting, and also measure par over time to see if there is wear and tear based on how hard you are driving them (power/intensity).
Not sure this helps other than a comment on two of the nice features and I do not recall the level of granularity (or whatever is the right word) regarding measurements.
As to the exact title of when, I noticed my colors fading in my tank and after tests decided to try dosing nitrate and sure enough, color returned. It was dramatic and the only change. I think that was in 2010 and a few others had done it too so it’s been at least 10 years but probably longer.
Brew12
Electrical Gru
I'm going to start by saying that I have found this to be an incredibly interesting and educational discussion. Well, that which hasn't gone over my head.
But I do have this question..... with the accuracy of hobby level test kits and the possible diversity of microbial biologics from system to system, do you feel the type of additive used actually matters? I think these conversations are incredibly informative and important to have.
For the average hobbyist, is this a discussion using a microscope when we view it as if looking through a piece of wavy antique glass? Would the average hobbyist notice a difference between dosing Nitrates or Ammonia? Or between Vinegar or Vodka?
ichthyoid
Active Member
In my case it was anaerobic denitrification using methanol. I ran a NatureReef denitrification filter on a 150 gal FOWLR system, years ago & quite sussefully. Arguably, the best water quality I have ever achieved. I still have that filter & original pumps in storage. The system had an aerobic trickle filter also. The pod population in the bioball section was simply staggering! Probably because I had large angels and fed copious amounts of foods, which would spill over from the overflow.
It was a slow system to start up, due to low metabolic rates of the bacteria. Once running, the system nitrate levels would dip so low, that we then began dosing strontium nitrate as a nitrogen supplement and to assist with phosphate precipitation. That also worked very well!
Below is a thread from RC which follows a number of reefers that ‘rediscovered’ this method. It’s quite a good read if interested, although lengthy.
DIY Natureef Style Denitrator Build and Data thread... [Archive] - Reef Central Online Community
[Archive] DIY Natureef Style Denitrator Build and Data thread... Florida Marine Aquarium Society (FMAS) - Miami/Ft. Lauderdale
www.reefcentral.com
Last edited:
flampton
Ecological Reefing
Just when I thought I was out, they keep pulling me back in!! Haha!
As what I'm trying to work out right now is the ecological details that makes a successful aquarium. Which has been done to death by exploring nutrients by hobby test. Obviously as you see that when some people run 0 nitrates they have no issues while others crash and burn. What's the plausible explanation? Clearly there is a large nitrogen flux in the successful aquarium and the failure is a starved aquarium.
Now you see the OPs aquarium, would you suggest he just follow the norms and dose nitrates or just keep his current style of reefing? Id tell him to keep it up and if he sees a problem arise and wants to limit phosphate input, then my suggestion is ammonia. Clearly you can see some people argue this position is wrong. And some dose both. If he doesn't have a problem with phosphate he can certainly feed more
as well.
So I definitely think these details are key. What's great in this hobby is sometimes you don't need to know and it just works out. However, I'm hoping to help those who can't figure out why their perfect numbers aren't so perfect.
So not to get too far off topic, but when I'm talking ecology over set numbers it is exploring different and alternative ways, such as this thread I just started on cyano mat formers
Cyano mat formers destruction the new way forward!
Hi all well you might have seen me in other threads arguing for understanding bacteria and better ecological ways forward. Well I'm here to introduce you to some new thoughts on cyano mat formers. I mean we all know it's an imbalance in the aquarium, usually cited as some nutrient issue...
www.reef2reef.com
ichthyoid
Active Member
I like you and I am following you, but I wished you hadn't said that because that makes me even angrier at what was said.
@flampton I appreciate you and the @Dan_P and @Lasse and @ichthyoid and @taricha for all of the amazing information. The debate was amazing and unlike the wet blanket, I actually read the thread so that I could understand the players and the debate. This thread and debate are the reason that I am on this forum and it makes up for the frustration I have with many other threads.
Good job guys keep up the good work and remember there are many many others watching this and learning from it, more than you can possibly imagine.
Reefing is one thing in this world that tests the mind in all corners of physical science. Not many do.
flampton
Ecological Reefing
@Brew12
Sorry didn't answer all your questions. Yes I do believe that the average hobbyist will get better results if the scheme they develop is compatible with their reef. So if someone grabs NoPox and just follows the directions, I think they're starting at a complete disadvantage than someone who understands what is actually happening ecologically in their tank.
Look for all the threads where someone has crashed nitrates and high phosphates or vice versa. If they went into this with some understanding they'd have never collapsed their ecosystem.
Sorry didn't answer all your questions. Yes I do believe that the average hobbyist will get better results if the scheme they develop is compatible with their reef. So if someone grabs NoPox and just follows the directions, I think they're starting at a complete disadvantage than someone who understands what is actually happening ecologically in their tank.
Look for all the threads where someone has crashed nitrates and high phosphates or vice versa. If they went into this with some understanding they'd have never collapsed their ecosystem.
U
User1
Guest
I'm sure many will disagree but this is the only correct answer. If it isn't broken there is no reason to fix it. A bit vague yes but still applicable. There is always room for improvement as we see with launching objects into low earth orbit. But even a simple change could mean disaster. Not sure I would do or recommend a change on a thriving tank. If anything it would warrant setting up a test system provided I had the consistency of replicating display success to new tank and then test there.
flampton
Ecological Reefing
Yes! unless something was a guaranteed win. And guaranteed wins are few and far between in reefing. The OP clearly knows what's working for him and he has a coral thumb. It is great that in a hobby with so much intricate and exquisite stuff happening that is not visible it's a wonder we have gotten this far...lol
Similar threads
