Carbon Limited VS Carbon Balanced - Ugly Stage

[sixty_reefer]

Thought, as I started a new build that I’d check if there is any difference in a tank that is organic carbon balanced vs a traditional organic carbon limited tank.

For this tank I’ve chosen the following nutrients.

C - ReefActif
N - Nitro +
P - Phos +

Additional nutrients

Salifer all in one (once it runs out will be swapping to AFR)
Liquid glass (silica) - expecting a really ugly tank in a few days

The system has been just over 30 days dark with just media in the back sump baffle, no mechanical filtration, just protein skimmer.
All 3 nutrients have been doses from the beginning of the cycle.

Light are currently at 100% 8h/day 20.000k

The rock has been added yesterday to the system, one seems fairly clean (large one) and the smaller one has a variety of algaes growing on it, including bubble algae and GHA.
It’s live ish rock, they were bought from a LFS that kept them in the invert display.

With this first thread I will be looking at observing if the balancing of a system with organic carbon from early stage has any overall impact in the ugliest stage of the system.
I’m expecting a extra ugly tank due to silica dosing.

Due to discussion on the thread I’ll keep editing the first post pic for comparison in the most affected rock (pic under white light)

Day zero

Day 3

​

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

What do you mean by balancing?

All reef tanks are carbon limited (or should be) with respect to bacterial growth. The ocean certainly is.

 

[Subsea]

Instead of thinking carbon balanced,
Oceaneering 101: Dynamic Equilibrium

 

[sixty_reefer]

What do you mean by balancing?

By adding organic carbon without affecting Nitrates or Phosphate.
To me balance translates to a steady residual No3 and Po4.
A little different from what most in the hobby use organic carbon.

All reef tanks are carbon limited (or should be) with respect to bacterial growth. The ocean certainly is.

I’m aware of it, but I like to experiment. I’m not expecting much from this thread but should be a learning process for me.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Instead of thinking carbon balanced,
Oceaneering 101: Dynamic Equilibrium

Yes, that another expensive word to describe it

 

[Subsea]

Yes, that another expensive word to describe it

Let’s get technical. When co2 enters the water and combines to make alkalinity; that is a carbon source.

How do you plan on measuring that?

 

[sixty_reefer]

Let’s get technical. When co2 enters the water and combines to make alkalinity; that is a carbon source.

How do you plan on measuring that?

Planing on keeping a stable PH and alkalinity. That should help keeping my inorganic carbon balanced.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Planing on keeping a stable PH and alkalinity. That should keep my inorganic carbon balanced.

You continue to rehash the same carbon "carbon balanced" and "carbon limited" and other "nutrient limited" ideas in thread after thread in evolving forms, but want to wholesale ignore the numerous variables that would need to be measured and controlled to make any reasonable assumption about what is occurring, let alone proving it.

pH and alkalinity are included in those complex interactions and can't be ignore or removed from the equation because you "keep inorganic carbon" balanced with stable pH and Alkalinity.

So again - dissolved organic carbon, various bacterial populations and microbe competition, etc. all come into play. A "new" tank is going to have all kinds of competition as various fauna gets a kick start and competes for resources. Some of it merely a temporary stepping stone for others.

 

[sixty_reefer]

You continue to rehash the same carbon "carbon balanced" and "carbon limited" and other "nutrient limited" ideas in thread after thread in evolving forms, but want to wholesale ignore the numerous variables that would need to be measured and controlled to make any reasonable assumption about what is occurring, let alone proving it.

pH and alkalinity are included in those complex interactions and can't be ignore or removed from the equation because you "keep inorganic carbon" balanced with stable pH and Alkalinity.

So again - dissolved organic carbon, various bacterial populations and microbe competition, etc. all come into play. A "new" tank is going to have all kinds of competition as various fauna gets a kick start and competes for resources. Some of it merely a temporary stepping stone for others.

we’re allowed to evolve.

 

[BeanAnimal]

we’re allowed to evolve.

Presenting the same basic refuted argument 6 ways from Sunday is not evolution, it is pointless repetition.

True evolution involves refining ideas based on actual evidence, as well as addressing the flaws others point out and not deflecting and sidestepping valid points and criticisms.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Presenting the same basic refuted argument 6 ways from Sunday is not evolution, it is pointless repetition.

True evolution involves refining ideas based on actual evidence, as well as addressing the flaws others point out and not deflecting and sidestepping valid points and criticisms.

Humm…. Im starting a new tank and would like to observe the effect in going through the ugly stage with organic carbon instead of being carbon limited.

Why do I need evidence? Witch flaws have been pointed out? What I’m I deflecting?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Humm…. Im starting a new tank and would like to observe the effect in going through the ugly stage with organic carbon instead of being carbon limited.

Why do I need evidence? Witch flaws have been pointed out? What I’m I deflecting?

Starting a new tank and observing it is certainly fine. Pretending that this is not a tie into the the 6-10 other posts related to your ideas on carbon and nutrient ratios and limitations is kind of silly. I pointed that out in my post already.

The "carbon balanced" and "carbon limited" wording is simply adding noise instead of clarity to what is a complex set of interactions. This was pointed out in my post.

The flaws in your assumptions about "balance" have been pointed out here and in many of the related threads.

Instead of addressing those points, your "evolution" comment was another deflection aimed at sidestepping the context of my post.

So let's stay on topic, shall we.


Planning on keeping a stable pH and alkalinity does not equate to keeping your inorganic carbon "balanced."

As has been pointed out here and elsewhere, inorganic carbon (among other things) involves much more than just stable pH and alkalinity. There is a complex web of interactions related to the microbial activity and nutrient cycling that can't be ignored or easily measured.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Starting a new tank and observing it is certainly fine. Pretending that this is not a tie into the the 6-10 other posts related to your ideas on carbon and nutrient ratios and limitations is kind of silly. I pointed that out in my post already.

Not pretending, this is definitely about what I’ve learned from the other experiments.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Not pretending, this is definitely about what I’ve learned from the other experiments.

That is another deflection and more sidestepping to avoid the actual topic and critical responses regarding "balance" and directly about pH and Alkalinity.

 

[sixty_reefer]

That is another deflection and more sidestepping to avoid the actual topic and critical responses regarding "balance" and directly about pH and Alkalinity.

I would prefer to see the first 3 months effects before discussing if that’s ok with you.
I don’t mind folks speculating on what could happen. Past that it’s no point to discuss it.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I would prefer to see the first 3 months effects before discussing if that’s ok with you.
I don’t mind folks speculating on what could happen. Past that it’s no point to discuss it.

The (our) discussion was not about your observations, it was about your understanding of "balance" and "limited" in context to the content of this thread and the other related threads.

 

[sixty_reefer]

The discussion was not about your observations, it was about your understanding of "balance" and "limited" in context to the content of this thread and the other related threads.

Ok, cool educate me.
Whats your definition of both words?

 

[twentyleagues]

Its kind of like watching the Matrix. You know the part where Mr. Anderson is dodging the gun shots from agent Smith? Yup just like that.

@sixty_reefer I think what @BeanAnimal is saying is we (most of us reefers) dont have the testing ability to see what you are describing as its not available to "us". What are you using to test this balance? Just keeping you alk and ph stable isnt a surefire test of carbon balance. We already know without a reasonable doubt that we are carbon limited or carbon dosing wouldnt work so well. How do you know or prove that balance has been achieved?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Ok, cool educate me.
Whats your definition of both words?

You are still deflecting. The actual definitions of "balance" and "limited" aren’t the issue here... it’s how you’re (repeatedly) misapplying them in your arguments.

In general - all of our tanks are "carbon limited", no matter how much carbon we add (obviously within reason).

Likewise - because we are "carbon limited" carbon will always be in "balance". Your wording implies that we can somehow measure this "balance" between carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in a meaningful way. The problem here (for the nth time) is that the dynamic relationship between these nutrients is extremely complex and does not follow a single ratio or steady state.

Your claims about "balance" and "limitation" are based on oversimplifications that don’t account for the complexities of these system. This is the recurring flaw that’s been pointed out repeatedly in your threads but repeatedly sidestepped or dismissed.

If you are genuinely looking to be educated, start listening to Randy's responses and start listening to those of other informed people. We can begin with the simple fact that stable pH and alkalinity alone don’t "balance" "inorganic carbon". These factors are part of a larger system (nth time) and their stability doesn’t automatically mean the "carbon" is in balance with other nutrients or microbial processes.

 

[sixty_reefer]

The way that @BeanAnimal and @twentyleagues are applying the word limited then everything is limited in a reef tank, the rock is limited, the water is limited, the glass is limited, the sand is limited. Is this any useful?

In the relationship between import of nutrients and export of nutrients, I don’t use the word “limited” unless this nutrient is not allowing the biological needs of a organism or several organisms.

“If I say that phosphate is limiting my denitrification” I mean that there isn’t enough phosphate in the water column for the denitrification to take place.

“If I say that phosphate is affecting my balance” this means that because denitrification can’t happen as result my nitrates will increase.