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

[BeanAnimal]

constant spamming of some users, most likely sponsored by companies…
…disrupt any conversation that envolves the use of carbohydrates…
….Although it seems at the moment the issue are my banners.

People are responding to your posts, how is that spamming?

Movement to disrupt conversations about carbohydrates? Where did that come from and what does that have to do with this thread?

Who here is “sponsored”, let alone involved in a conspiracy to discredit “carbohydrates”? The Redfield bacon and cereal stuff was a joke….

The “issue” is not banners, it is that nobody can follow any of this. You change directions faster than cat chasing a laser pointer.

 

[BeanAnimal]

This train crashed burned down two adjoining towns and killed thousands of innocent reefers.

In a 16:1 reefer to town ratio.

 

[sixty_reefer]

I'm curious to see the results of the experiments. Evolution comes from trying something different then adaptation.

Thank you, that’s the way that has been for decades. I’m planning on developing my own carbohydrate, if the experiment works it can be easily replicable with a diy solution.

 

[Hats_]

That is the purpose of the constant spamming of some users, most likely sponsored by companies.
There has been a movement for some time to disrupt any conversation that envolves the use of carbohydrates in reef aquaria. Most likely due to this being the main ingredient in many shelf products designed for reef improvement.
I’ve mentioned several times that I can prove the concept.
Although it seems at the moment the issue are my banners.

Do you think i am sponsored by a company amd that i am against carbondosing? I wish i was sponsored lol, would take some of the financial load of of my hobby also i am not against carbondosing at all and i have no clue where you got that idea

 

[twentyleagues]

It's like cloak and dagger. I still have no idea what the actual idea/theory is here. I get the big picture but the how and why is missing. Carbon dosing helps control n and to some extent p keeping these in a "ratio" promotes.........does..... How do we know what is benefitting? and what does it mean for the big picture?

 

[Hats_]

It's like cloak and dagger. I still have no idea what the actual idea/theory is here. I get the big picture but the how and why is missing. Carbon dosing helps control n and to some extent p keeping these in a "ratio" promotes.........does..... How do we know what is benefitting? and what does it mean for the big picture?

Exactly this, and this is what OP can't/won't answer

 

[sixty_reefer]

It's like cloak and dagger. I still have no idea what the actual idea/theory is here. I get the big picture but the how and why is missing. Carbon dosing helps control n and to some extent p keeping these in a "ratio" promotes.........does..... How do we know what is benefitting? and what does it mean for the big picture?

The idea is that using dissolved organic carbon from carbohydrates (not acetic acid or ethanol as they are not carbohydrates) to promote the development of healthy populations of Protozoa (not heterotrophic bacteria as I had the end user wrong) in reef aquaria.
Protozoa usually prefers a source of carbohydrates, nitrates and phosphate to thrive in a reef aquarium they also are the main organism that competes directly with dinoflagellates and other nuisances for nutrients.
My argument is that in some systems carbohydrates, phosphate or nitrate can be a limiting factor for this organism to thrive (one of the nutrients that they require to thrive has bottomed out)
My argument here is that using Redfield nutrients limitation charts could help identify the nutrient that has bottomed out.
It’s easy to determine if Nitrate and Phosphate has bottomed out although is difficult to identify if dissolved organic carbon has bottomed out. My idea here is to use charts like the one below to identify a possible C limitation.

Chart by ATI

Protozoa will use nitrate and phosphate faster than heterotrophic denitrifying bacteria if a carbohydrate is present and it will use carbohydrates, nitrate and phosphate faster than dinoflagellates competing with many known nuisances as long as there is a carbohydrate available in the water column.
Protozoa is also particularly more affected if there is a phosphate limitation (bottomed out) that goes in line with dinoflagellates blooms in reef aquaria.

In a summary

 

[twentyleagues]

So what sources of carbs are you intending on? I thought both acetic acid/vinegar and ethanol/vodka were a good source of carbs. Is there a particular protozoan you are looking to cultivate? and how do you intend on ensuring they are present and its not heterotrophic bacteria or corals using the "nutrients"?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Protozoa being the first consumers if conditions are right and therefore targetable based on nutrient ratios (the right condition) doesn’t hold up in a practical reef tank or in theory. There are too many variables and other consumers in the system. It's a complex environment that isn’t simply driven by ratios, whether Redfield or any other.

Sure, Protozoa can be part of the system, but they can’t be managed directly, and trying to use the Redfield Ratio to control them makes no sense. The focus should just be on keeping nitrate and phosphate above zero, and carbon dosing helps manage excess nutrients when needed.

 

[Hats_]

Im starting to think his responses are being generated using some ai...

 

[sixty_reefer]

So what sources of carbs are you intending on? I thought both acetic acid/vinegar and ethanol/vodka were a good source of carbs. Is there a particular protozoan you are looking to cultivate? and how do you intend on ensuring they are present and its not heterotrophic bacteria or corals using the "nutrients"?

Ethanol and acetic acid will be used faster by heterotrophic denitrification as it’s not the primarily source of energy for Protozoa, they can use it just not as efficiently. (According with what I read).
I intend to do some trial with simple carbohydrates extracted from live phytoplankton. As this has been the main form of carbohydrate I’ve used in the past although I had to rely on bacteria to break them down to usable forms.
Not a particular Protozoa in mind in the past I’ve just made food available and seeded with live rock from established systems.

 

[MnFish1]

This thread represents a deep misunderstanding of the Redfield ratio. First we do not measure N and P in the aquarium second - Redfields papers suggest this is a false question/assumption. I'm not sure why it's still being argued/discussed - despite my respect for @sixty_reefer. Many people want a magic number - and perhaps there is one - but it's not the Redfield ratio. People that are believing therein - should read the original papers and research.

 

[sixty_reefer]

This thread represents a deep misunderstanding of the Redfield ratio. First we do not measure N and P in the aquarium second - Redfields papers suggest this is a false question/assumption. I'm not sure why it's still being argued/discussed - despite my respect for @sixty_reefer. Many people want a magic number - and perhaps there is one - but it's not the Redfield ratio. People that are believing therein - should read the original papers and research.

My intention on using Redfield is not in the same manner as many folks are considering.

The idea is that using dissolved organic carbon from carbohydrates (not acetic acid or ethanol as they are not carbohydrates) to promote the development of healthy populations of Protozoa (not heterotrophic bacteria as I had the end user wrong) in reef aquaria.
Protozoa usually prefers a source of carbohydrates, nitrates and phosphate to thrive in a reef aquarium they also are the main organism that competes directly with dinoflagellates and other nuisances for nutrients.
My argument is that in some systems carbohydrates, phosphate or nitrate can be a limiting factor for this organism to thrive (one of the nutrients that they require to thrive has bottomed out)
My argument here is that using Redfield nutrients limitation charts could help identify the nutrient that has bottomed out.
It’s easy to determine if Nitrate and Phosphate has bottomed out although is difficult to identify if dissolved organic carbon has bottomed out. My idea here is to use charts like the one below to identify a possible C limitation.

Chart by ATI

Protozoa will use nitrate and phosphate faster than heterotrophic denitrifying bacteria if a carbohydrate is present and it will use carbohydrates, nitrate and phosphate faster than dinoflagellates competing with many known nuisances as long as there is a carbohydrate available in the water column.
Protozoa is also particularly more affected if there is a phosphate limitation (bottomed out) that goes in line with dinoflagellates blooms in reef aquaria.

In a summary

Is not to set a value just a tool to determine a possible carbon limitation for a specific organism.

 

[twentyleagues]

Ethanol and acetic acid will be used faster by heterotrophic denitrification as it’s not the primarily source of energy for Protozoa, they can use it just not as efficiently. (According with what I read).
I intend to do some trial with simple carbohydrates extracted from live phytoplankton. As this has been the main form of carbohydrate I’ve used in the past although I had to rely on bacteria to break them down to usable forms.
Not a particular Protozoa in mind in the past I’ve just made food available and seeded with live rock from established systems.

So the heterotrophic bacteria on the live rock can not use the carbs from phyto? or the protozoa use it faster/more efficiently? does this end up with protozoa outcompeting the bacteria? How do we test this is truly happening?

 

[MnFish1]

My intention on using Redfield is not in the same manner as many folks are considering.



Is not to set a value just a tool to determine a possible carbon limitation for a specific organism.

OK - so my answer is 'no'. You cannot use the Redfield ratio in this manner - unless I'm totally misunderstanding your post - which of course is possible.

 

[sixty_reefer]

So the heterotrophic bacteria on the live rock can not use the carbs from phyto? or the protozoa use it faster/more efficiently? does this end up with protozoa outcompeting the bacteria? How do we test this is truly happening?

I don’t know the answer for that question, there is a possibility of it happening and Protozoa becoming the main organism controlling phosphate and nitrate availability.
Will it be detrimental? Possibly not, in the past I’ve added rocks covered in Cyanobacteria and seen them melting in front of my eyes in just days.

 

[sixty_reefer]

OK - so my answer is 'no'. You cannot use the Redfield ratio in this manner - unless I'm totally misunderstanding your post - which of course is possible.

Yes, you can’t use Redfield to set nitrate and phosphate. I’ve said that many times throughout the thread

Edit:
My intention is to only use it as a tool to determine possible organic carbon limitation in the form of a carbohydrate (bottoming out) as there isn’t any other tool for that interpretation available at hobby level

 

[twentyleagues]

I don’t know the answer for that question, there is a possibility of it happening and Protozoa becoming the main organism controlling phosphate and nitrate availability.
Will it be detrimental? Possibly not, in the past I’ve added rocks covered in Cyanobacteria and seen them melting in front of my eyes in just days.

Ok so once this is theoretically complete how would someone implement it? Is it even possible? and what effect will it have on the desirable organisms in our reef tanks?

 

[MnFish1]

Yes, you can’t use Redfield to set nitrate and phosphate. I’ve said that many times throughout the thread

Edit:
My intention is to only use it as a tool to determine possible c limitation (bottoming out) as there isn’t any other tool for that interpretation available at hobby level

Except - IMHO - you can't use it as a tool. That was the point. I know you want to use it - but it makes no sense scientifically.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Ok so once this is theoretically complete how would someone implement it? Is it even possible? and what effect will it have on the desirable organisms in our reef tanks?

Technically is not a theory. As I’ve done it many times now. The difference was that I would have to dose large quantities of live phytoplankton into the system to be able to get the carbohydrates available, I also needed to rely on bacteria to break those carbohydrates into forms that this organism could use it.
This time around I intend to extract those carbohydrates and only use them instead of using the live phytoplankton. If that makes sense.
The effects shouldn’t differ much from someone that doses live phytoplankton regularly. With the benefit that no pollutants are being added by parts of the phytoplankton that can’t be broken down by bacteria and the fertiliser used to grow the culture. Basically will be a 2.0 upgrade from my automated phytoplankton dosing unit.