Help between refugium or turf scrubber for my setup

[Garf]

I can tell you this. They work and phosphate isn’t the only thing at play here

As far as I remember, iron limited chlorosis affected scrubber growth far more severely than display algae. The proposed solution was to add iron to prevent limitations in the scrubber and, hence, elsewhere. Chlorosis was evidenced with yellow scrubber growth.

 

[mizimmer90]

As far as I remember, iron limited chlorosis affected scrubber growth far more severely than display algae. The proposed solution was to add iron to prevent limitations in the scrubber and, hence, elsewhere. Chlorosis was evidenced with yellow scrubber growth.

There's a difference between iron limited and iron depleted. If there were no iron available at all, all algae, corals, and fish would die.

Iron is constantly added with foods for fish. Various algae and microbes have ways to scavange and sequester iron during periods of low iron. Siderophores are excreted molecules that chelate iron, then get actively transported back into cells. Ferritin can then store the iron in vacuoles.

The difference is that if one region is absorbing iron faster than another, it will outcompete for the limited supply.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

For sure! I'm also skeptical that N or P are the limiting nutrients. A bit of conjecture, but my money is on iron! There have been a number of controlled iron enrichment experiments in oceans that lead to large algae blooms, suggesting most natural reefs are limited by iron. This doesn't necessarily have to translate to our home reefs but it feels intuitive.

As for corals, their growth may not be as hindered by iron (or maybe a different nutrient) as common algaes. This is a matter of necessary vs sufficient, i.e. it is necessary that both algae and coral need iron, but X amount of iron per day may be sufficient for corals and not algae. (My cracker example above was an attempt to illustrate that an organisms requirements for survival may be different haha).

Some more anecdote: I dose N and P in my tank to keep them elevated but don't often see excessive algae in my display. When I overfeed my tank with food, there will be a noticeable increase in algae for the next few days, despite N and P being reasonably stable from testing. I take this to be consistent that there is some other nutrient that is rate limiting and fueling the growth.

I'm tempted to want to look for ICP tests of people with scrubbers but these are just snapshots. It's possible that everyone has 0 iron (or other rate limiting nutrient) in their tank at time of testing, but that the transient spikes from feeding/dosing are sufficient for differential outcomes in people's tanks.

In this context, it would be interesting to see what folks using an ATS and simultaneously a method such as Moonshiners dosing by ICP measurement see with respect to algae, since that dosing method tries to ensure a target level of trace elements regardless of demand in the system.

 

[GARRIGA]

Know this much. Soon as I added ChaetoGro which contains iron my Pom Pom stabilized and started to grow along with GHA in my display. Combined with other measures did seem to contribute to eliminating my Dino although purely anecdotal.

Have known from FW plants that iron a vital element and even had a Seachem test for it. Seems there's plausible evidence to suggest that limiting iron in the display might reduce nuisance algae and perhaps dosing that directly into the Fuge or ATS might help keep that algae where preferred based on first path of contact. Food for thought.

Should be simple enough to run several months dosing into display then changed to where algae should stay and see if display clears while Fuge/ATS either remains status quo or improves.

 

[mizimmer90]

In this context, it would be interesting to see what folks using an ATS and simultaneously a method such as Moonshiners dosing by ICP measurement see with respect to algae, since that dosing method tries to ensure a target level of trace elements regardless of demand in the system.

Definitely! The only issue with that is an ICP test is only a snapshot in time. If nutrients are rapidly depleted, it might make the observation of these transient states difficult.

Do people doing moonshiners dosing see an appreciable level of iron in all tests? Or are they constantly increasing this to chase bottomed out values?

I wonder if another way to go about this would be to do an ICP test on algae itself to determine relative concentrations of various trace elements found in the scrubber vs display algae. Just spitballing an idea here, but if someone took an equal amount of algae from each spot, digested each one with acid, then sent off the sample for ICP, could we find hints that some trace element is found at higher concentrations in one than the other? That would suggest we're in a nutrient limited regime.

 

[Seansea]

. Do you feed nori or other algae based feeds? Thanks for replying.

Yes. Every day sometimes twice a day. As well as spiraling enriched brine. Always worried they are not getting enough algae. The orange shoulder and the tomini do scrape at rocks and back glass. The hippo never.

In this context, it would be interesting to see what folks using an ATS and simultaneously a method such as Moonshiners dosing by ICP measurement see with respect to algae, since that dosing method tries to ensure a target level of trace elements regardless of demand in the system.

I icp every 3 months. With a scrubber several elements will always be depleted. Iodine which will cause major zoa problems, heavy metals, manganese and magnesium. I use all for reef but its still not enough. I use isol mt in my ato as well as iron to replace the rapid depletion of this. If you don't the scrubber will strip all these to the detriment of your corals. I find it also rips nitrate down faster than phosphate but without the scrubber and the amount I feed with a heavy bioload I would be afraid of what my nitrates and phos would be.

 

[Garf]

Every day sometimes twice a day

Thanks, was trying to establish that your tank had a decent iron, molybdenum etc input. Seems you have more than one, lol.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I icp every 3 months. With a scrubber several elements will always be depleted. Iodine which will cause major zoa problems, heavy metals, manganese and magnesium. I use all for reef but its still not enough. I use isol mt in my ato as well as iron to replace the rapid depletion of this. If you don't the scrubber will strip all these to the detriment of your corals. I find it also rips nitrate down faster than phosphate but without the scrubber and the amount I feed with a heavy bioload I would be afraid of what my nitrates and phos would be.

Thanks. I do think manganese is another likely possibility.

 

[Brian916]

I am going to skip to controversy and opine on OPs question. I run bare bottom primarily for LPS and nems. Over the last 12 years, I started without any algae export. I then went to a chaeto fuge that I eventually accidentally killed with Vibrant when it first came out before we knew it was just a poison. I then switched to an IceCap ATS and ran that for several years. I took it down when I moved the tank, and I spent 1 year with no algae export. I am now switching back to growing Ogo in a 10x10" fuge.

ATS Pros - tunable, effective, easier to manage footprint

ATS Cons - less tolerant of neglect, worse slime and pest algae at startup, not nearly as good for pods and other biota, usually needs 2-3 outlets for feed pump and lights.

Macro fuge Pros - faster cleaner startup, better for pods and other biota, can be a 2nd home for your urchin or species that are not reef safe, and corals seem to like something about having macroalgae in the system

Macro fuge cons - prone to accumulate debris and pests like aptasia, can melt or crash if your nutrients fluctuate, spillover light is worse

FWIW, I am going back to a fuge with rubble (for now). Yes, it is a cleaning headache, but I want the pods, the macroalgae garden, and the intangible benefits to the corals.

 

[Peace River]

Having run a refugium, several brands of scrubbers (including Santa Monica and IceCap), and algae reactors, I would lean toward a refugium if you have room. Good luck with whatever you choose!

 

[UMALUM]

How many people here actually looked at his setup before running their suck? Both methods are very effective at lowering nutrients BUT the last thing I would presume OP wants is to be digging chaeto out of his return and display. It will absolutely find its way there sooner or later. I myself prefer to keep things contained.

 

[Garf]

How many people here actually looked at his setup before running their suck? Both methods are very effective at lowering nutrients BUT the last thing I would presume OP wants is to be digging chaeto out of his return and display. It will absolutely find its way there sooner or later. I myself prefer to keep things contained.

Despite @VintageReefer declaration that "neither" is not an option, I suggest "neither" is always an option.

 

[Brian916]

How many people here actually looked at his setup before running their suck? Both methods are very effective at lowering nutrients BUT the last thing I would presume OP wants is to be digging chaeto out of his return and display. It will absolutely find its way there sooner or later. I myself prefer to keep things contained.

Valid point. Chaeto isn't the only option and there are always baffles and containment strategies that can work well. This isn't much different from my setup and my Ogo is staying behind my baffles. Macroalgae can make for more complicated and irritating maintenance.

TBH, I am super jealous of OPs space and I would probably think about a remote fuge / pod farm in that open space on the right side.

 

[Garf]

Valid point. Chaeto isn't the only option and there are always baffles and containment strategies that can work well. This isn't much different from my setup and my Ogo is staying behind my baffles. Macroalgae can make for more complicated and irritating maintenance.

TBH, I am super jealous of OPs space and I would probably think about a remote fuge / pod farm in that open space on the right side.

Folk make this marine thing far more complicated than necessary. Decent light and flow, adding stuff that's consumed, waterchanges, done. Oh yeah and luck, skill, but mainly luck.

 

[Seansea]

Folk make this marine thing far more complicated than necessary. Decent light and flow, adding stuff that's consumed, waterchanges, done. Oh yeah and luck, skill, but mainly luck.

.I won't lie. Luck plays a major part. All.our glass boxes with reefs that belong in The ocean are ticking time bombs. But being as proactive as we can be can help and I feel an algae scrubber is the #1 thing.i would put on a tank for filtration. But so many things contribute.