Could we utilise the Redfield ratio a little better in aquaria?

[BeanAnimal]

What on earth is it with you and bacon? Lol.

If you ask to are out of the club. No bacon for you.

 

[hart24601]

This bacon hookup is easily the most valuable part of the thread. Finally something useful!

 

[GARRIGA]

We don’t have to dose to have doc in the water column, there is several sources of DOC in our systems that contribute to more mature systems having a pro dominant heterotrophic biological filter.

Honestly, clueless to exactly what creates DOC to the extent we need to be concerned other than being told my approach to using OH would create DOC and this is detrimental to coral yet also told sponges can consume or remove it. Latter as far as need to know. Now learning about cryptic zones although photosynthetic sponges catching my attention. Might solve two issues in that I need to process waste and new found villain (DOC) as well as remove co2. Potentially, bye bye Fuge/ATS.

 

[GARRIGA]

Certainly without carbon limitations bacteria can consume ammonia, nitrite and nitrate, in aerobic conditions.

Have known about ammonium and nitrites since early 70s. Just learned today that includes nitrates. In aerobic conditions, that is. As if I wasn't confused already

 

[sixty_reefer]

I quit, this paper makes no sense in this context to me

Its pretty obvious really.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Thank you. I was going to say the same thing.

Not that wikipedia can't be wrong but it also says the same thing. Delbeek was just talking about this on the reefbum episode and even provided some background and math.

Wheel goes round and round Hope your day is well.

Redfield ratio - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He’s talking of the usual idea of using Redfield to set your nitrate and phosphate, what’s the advantage really for it in reef aquaria? It’s a nonsense there isn’t anything out there that supports the idea that we need to have residual nitrate in a ratio in relation to phosphate or that that will bring any benefit to reef aquaria.
What difference does it really makes as long as it’s not limited?
With limited being key.



This kind of discussion is really why it will never be applied correctly imo, folks really need to move from that idea it’s been debunked many times over.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Any context to bacteria in relation to Redfield is wrong. To me, Redfield indicates phytoplanktonic organisms extracting the maximum out of a nutrient poor medium. I delved into this Stoichiometry many years ago, gave up, far too complicated.

You inclined to say that the pelagic heterotrophic bacteria doesn’t have a nutrient assimilation ratio from their environment? Or that they won’t be limited by any of the tree nutrients?
That’s just not true

 

[Hats_]

So what is it that you want to know exactly, formulate it in a single sentence that can not be answered simply with yes or no. all this beating around the bush is giving me a headache

 

[sixty_reefer]

So what is it that you want to know exactly, formulate it in a single sentence that can not be answered simply with yes or no. all this beating around the bush is giving me a headache

applying Redfield nutrients limitations equations to identify C limitation in reef aquaria by using know pelagic heterotrophic bacterial assimilation ratios by interpreting the residual Nitrate and Phosphate availability in Reef aquaria.
With the purpose of balancing the export of pollutants Nitrates and phosphate's

 

[keithw283]

About the only part of the hobby that just about everybody seems to agree with is don’t chase numbers. There is zero need to focus on this.