The problem I see with Dinos is most everyone seems to think anything brown is Dinos without using a microscope to confirm they have Dinos.
I would agree, however imo it is more common for mats to be associated with Cyanobacteria. When I see “mats” on-line in problem algae post, I believe it is a combination of nuisance algae. Here is a picture from Sprung in his algae book of a “mat” of dinoflagellate.
I don’t believe we need insurance at all for anything, including dinos. “Insurance” is a term I borrowed from RHF that adequately describes what dosing no3 accomplishes in low nutrient situations. Some may believe no3 is a cure for something, I don’t.
That makes a lot of sense, however that is not how it works in ocean reef. Nitrates is nearly nonexistent in the oceans and even zooxanthella, a photosynthetic organisms, have adapted strategies to capture organic nitrogen.
I would agree, however imo it is more common for mats to be associated with Cyanobacteria. When I see “mats” on-line in problem algae post, I believe it is a combination of nuisance algae. Here is a picture from Sprung in his algae book of a “mat” of dinoflagellate.
Not exactly, my position is that we shouldn’t be afraid of “zero” no3 tested with hobby testing. With the understanding that nitrogen is available in multiple sources.
Yes! With fed fish nitrogen is abundant in nearly all closed systems.
That´s not much
This article deal with free-swimming zooxanthella which it clearly say - my bold. Its not about captured zooxanthella. Whole article is attached belowThat makes a lot of sense, however that is not how it works in ocean reef. Nitrates is nearly nonexistent in the oceans and even zooxanthella, a photosynthetic organisms, have adapted strategies to capture organic nitrogen.
Heterotrophic feeding as a newly identified survival strategy of the dinoflagellate Symbiodinium
Survival of free-living and symbiotic dinoflagellates ( Symbiodinium spp.) in coral reefs is critical to the maintenance of a healthy coral community. Most coral reefs exist in oligotrophic waters, and their survival strategy in suchwww.academia.edu
When I test with sensitive equipment, ICP and Hanna LR, I get readable levels. So I assume since I feed sparingly, have active filtration, and perform weekly wc that no3 is never a limited nutrient in closed systems. Storage of no3 seems like an amazing evolutionary function. What do you consider a reasonable “storage” level in a closed system? In the ocean it appears to be < 0.1ppm?
Imo it is more than adequate…here is a long term chart of no3 levels in my aquarium tested with Hanna LR. The trend is upward so this indicates overfeeding while coral and mangroves growth is substantial, imo my feeding is not “limiting”. Zero readings were before I had the Hanna LR and was using Salifert. My first reading with Hanna LR was 0.07 ppm in July 2025.
The article says: “acquired from the tissues of the coral Alveopora japonica”
I look at the article when you originally posted and thanks. However this gene iirc was exclusive to clams. Still very interesting.
Now you read the text as the devil read the bible. Yes they was acquired from a coral but they was free swimming when the test was done - not in the captured phase - zooxanthella = another word for captured symbiotic dinoflagellates. Think twice - how would a dinoflagellate eat if it is surrounded by its host tissue - through a straw? The coral larvae capture free living Symbiodinium spp from the open water - the investigation you refer to ask itself how these dinoflagellates survive during the free living stage and they show that they could survive on only prey if NO3 was depleted and their photosynthesis did not working. The article did not show that they was heterotrophic when captured.
I do not know but you must also have the mass transfer in mind. There is reports that both shows that NO3 is depleted over a reef and also some that have shown an increase when a water body pass through a reef. The problem can be that this 0.1 is the lowest level they can absorb because enrichment over this value has been shown to cause biological growth - the NO3 concentration has thus been growth-limiting. There is also another - for me - factor that I prefer NO3 concentrations around 2 - 3 mg/L. In a closed biological system - there is always a danger that to much H2S can be formed. It has been shown that NO3 concentrations above 2 in some way hinder these bacteria that have H2S as waste to grow.
Haha. Yes I would agree!
OK, but here is myview.I would agree, however imo it is more common for mats to be associated with Cyanobacteria. When I see “mats” on-line in problem algae post, I believe it is a combination of nuisance algae. Here is a picture from Sprung in his algae book of a “mat” of dinoflagellate.
It will not accumulate because of evaporation alone, unless your top off water includes some nitrates which is possible if not using Ro/di for example.
