Why your aquarium needs nitrates (no3)?

[Peer.Boerner]

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.

Thanks.

Thanks! I get it. Appreciate the insight.

 

[sixty_reefer]

It is also coral access to N insurance.

It seems to me the potential benefit of having a few ppm Nitrate outweighs any theoretical risk.

I agree but also “depends”.

If we’re talking specifically about dinoflagellate insurance, nitrate is only one type of insurance. It can also serve a different purpose in some aquariums by helping ensure corals don’t become nitrogen limited.

 

[Tripod1404]

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.

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 such

www.academia.edu

Most other nitrogen sources, including organic ones are also broken down, converted to nitrate and stored as nitrate.

Plus, as also Lasse mentioned, low level in the ocean is a product of many marine autotrophs ability to store massive quantities of nitrate. Some organisms given below are storing >10,000 PPM nitrate. So the low nitrate concetartion in the ocean is a product of high flux to cellular storage pools.

Frontiers | Nitrate Storage and Dissimilatory Nitrate Reduction by Eukaryotic Microbes

The microbial nitrogen cycle is one of the most complex and environmentally important element cycles on Earth and has long been thought to be mediated exclus...

www.frontiersin.org

 

[CHSUB]

Most other nitrogen sources, including organic ones are also broken down, converted to nitrate and stored as nitrate.

Plus, as also Lasse mentioned, low level in the ocean is a product of many marine autotrophs ability to store massive quantities of nitrate. Some organisms given below are storing >10,000 PPM nitrate. So the low nitrate concetartion in the ocean is a product of high flux to cellular storage pools.

Frontiers | Nitrate Storage and Dissimilatory Nitrate Reduction by Eukaryotic Microbes

The microbial nitrogen cycle is one of the most complex and environmentally important element cycles on Earth and has long been thought to be mediated exclus...

www.frontiersin.org

I read this article closely and admittedly had to look up a few terms. Then reread the abstract and got an understanding of its purpose. So I repost my original comment:
“Why your aquarium needs nitrates (no3)?
The answer is it doesn’t. Saltwater aquariums need salt at a specific measured level. The same thing can’t be said about nitrates, because the truth is no organism we keep have a use for nitrates”

From understand the article it directly supports my hypothesis…

Since eukaryotic microbes have been discovered to have the ability to store nitrates and use it for DRNA (the biological mechanism that converts nitrate (NO₃⁻) into ammonium (NH₄⁺), allowing nitrogen to remain in a usable form rather than being lost as gaseous nitrogen (N₂) through denitrification)

This further supports my original comment. With this quote from the article: “Dissimilatory nitrate reduction and nitrate storage in particular are physiological life traits that provide microbes with environmental flexibility (i.e., metabolic activity under both oxic and anoxic conditions) and resource independence (i.e., anaerobic metabolism without immediate nitrate supply), respectively. Such life traits are especially important in environments that are temporarily anoxic and/or nitrate-free and they may have developed as a “life strategy” in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes”

Ie: life traits..in environments…that are nitrate-free.

 

[Ernie Mccracken]

If we say that natural reefs have low nitrates and it's ok for our tanks to have relatively low levels of nitrates, what is the practical implication for Joe Reefkeeper?

1. Ammonia dosing?
2. Impact to nuisance algae?
3. What about the relationship to phosphate?

 

[Tripod1404]

I read this article closely and admittedly had to look up a few terms. Then reread the abstract and got an understanding of its purpose. So I repost my original comment:
“Why your aquarium needs nitrates (no3)?
The answer is it doesn’t. Saltwater aquariums need salt at a specific measured level. The same thing can’t be said about nitrates, because the truth is no organism we keep have a use for nitrates”

From understand the article it directly supports my hypothesis…

Since eukaryotic microbes have been discovered to have the ability to store nitrates and use it for DRNA (the biological mechanism that converts nitrate (NO₃⁻) into ammonium (NH₄⁺), allowing nitrogen to remain in a usable form rather than being lost as gaseous nitrogen (N₂) through denitrification)

This further supports my original comment. With this quote from the article: “Dissimilatory nitrate reduction and nitrate storage in particular are physiological life traits that provide microbes with environmental flexibility (i.e., metabolic activity under both oxic and anoxic conditions) and resource independence (i.e., anaerobic metabolism without immediate nitrate supply), respectively. Such life traits are especially important in environments that are temporarily anoxic and/or nitrate-free and they may have developed as a “life strategy” in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes”

Ie: life traits..in environments…that are nitrate-free.

I mean the conclusion of the article is somewhat the opposite of what you are suggesting. These organisms need nitrate, so much that they store it in case they encounter temporarily nitrate-free environments. If nitrate was not needed, there would have been no need to store it.

 

[Fishy888]

I’m a little late to the party here but I find the idea of Dino “mats” likely being from several different organisms intriguing. I had a crash recently caused by a bad heater thermostat.

The result was four dead fish, a dead anemone and a combination of dinos and cyano. They definitely formed mats together, but I assumed only where I saw red stringy mats mixed with the brown.

At some point I remember reading that dinoflagellates like to form chains, resulting in the dino strings we see. I always figured that the mats were what happened when enough strings came together, catching air bubbles and detritus etc. I’ve got to do a deep dive into this!

Once the crash happened, I got a couple of smaller heaters and cranked the temperature to 84 for 1 week. The dinos died back. Curiously the cyano also died back. I’ve since turned the temperature down to 82. The dinos haven’t come back, and I had a quarter sized patch of cyano come back, which I dealt with promptly. It hasn’t been back since.

I have a good bit of coralline on the back acrylic, and on the sides. There’s also a good bit on the rock too. It’s growing at a good rate. It’s one of many weapons I’ve used to beat the dinos back. Pods and phytoplankton help too.

One last thing. When the crash happened, NO3 was at 30 ppm and PO4 at 0.2. Dinos definitely can and do bloom in high or low nutrient conditions! As I understand it, Cyanobacteria can feed directly from uneaten food, waste, detritus etc. When the sludge goes away, the cyano tends to go with it. I wonder if maybe dinoflagellates can also do this?

 

[sixty_reefer]

I’m a little late to the party here but I find the idea of Dino “mats” likely being from several different organisms intriguing. I had a crash recently caused by a bad heater thermostat.

The result was four dead fish, a dead anemone and a combination of dinos and cyano. They definitely formed mats together, but I assumed only where I saw red stringy mats mixed with the brown.

At some point I remember reading that dinoflagellates like to form chains, resulting in the dino strings we see. I always figured that the mats were what happened when enough strings came together, catching air bubbles and detritus etc. I’ve got to do a deep dive into this!

Once the crash happened, I got a couple of smaller heaters and cranked the temperature to 84 for 1 week. The dinos died back. Curiously the cyano also died back. I’ve since turned the temperature down to 82. The dinos haven’t come back, and I had a quarter sized patch of cyano come back, which I dealt with promptly. It hasn’t been back since.

I have a good bit of coralline on the back acrylic, and on the sides. There’s also a good bit on the rock too. It’s growing at a good rate. It’s one of many weapons I’ve used to beat the dinos back. Pods and phytoplankton help too.

One last thing. When the crash happened, NO3 was at 30 ppm and PO4 at 0.2. Dinos definitely can and do bloom in high or low nutrient conditions! As I understand it, Cyanobacteria can feed directly from uneaten food, waste, detritus etc. When the sludge goes away, the cyano tends to go with it. I wonder if maybe dinoflagellates can also do this?

Wouldn't it be possible that what we're seeing is a shift from organisms relying primarily on inorganic nutrients in the water column to organisms exploiting organic nutrients concentrated within the mat itself?

In low inorganic nutrient situations, the mat seems to form directly over surfaces where detritus, dissolved organics and microbial activity are already concentrated, by creating a physical structure, the mat may establish its own microenvironment, allowing nutrients released from the sand bed, biofilms and trapped organic matter to be captured and recycled more efficiently than they would be in the surrounding water.

What's interesting is that a similar pattern seems to occur in high nutrient systems, the water column chemistry may be very different, yet the mats still often develop around areas where organic matter accumulates, that makes me wonder whether nitrate and phosphate are sometimes only part of the story.

If the organisms within the mat are responding primarily to the local conditions they create for themselves, then the chemistry inside the mat could be very different from the chemistry of the surrounding aquarium.

If that's true, can we really identify the cause of the bloom simply by measuring residual nitrate and phosphate in the water column or are we missing the nutrient dynamics occurring within the mat itself?

 

[CHSUB]

I mean the conclusion of the article is somewhat the opposite of what you are suggesting. These organisms need nitrate, so much that they store it in case they encounter temporarily nitrate-free environments. If nitrate was not needed, there would have been no need to store it.

No not at all. Resource storage is an evolutionary advantage that allows survival during scarcity. If resources were constantly available or “press” they would not need storage and the trait would disappear. The organisms that doesn’t possess this trait will die when the resources is unavailable. In the oceans “pulse” addition of nutrients from up-welling of nutrient rich water and fish waste provides resources in an otherwise resource-free environment.

“These organisms need nitrate”. They need nitrogen and store it as nitrate.


Here is an article to that affect:

Asymmetric physiological response of a reef-building coral to pulsed versus continuous addition of inorganic nutrients - PMC

Coral reefs, especially those located near-shore, are increasingly exposed to anthropogenic, eutrophic conditions that are often chronic. Yet, corals under unperturbed conditions may frequently receive natural and usually temporary nutrient ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Wouldn't it be possible that what we're seeing is a shift from organisms relying primarily on inorganic nutrients in the water column to organisms exploiting organic nutrients concentrated within the mat itself?

In low inorganic nutrient situations, the mat seems to form directly over surfaces where detritus, dissolved organics and microbial activity are already concentrated, by creating a physical structure, the mat may establish its own microenvironment, allowing nutrients released from the sand bed, biofilms and trapped organic matter to be captured and recycled more efficiently than they would be in the surrounding water.

What's interesting is that a similar pattern seems to occur in high nutrient systems, the water column chemistry may be very different, yet the mats still often develop around areas where organic matter accumulates, that makes me wonder whether nitrate and phosphate are sometimes only part of the story.

If the organisms within the mat are responding primarily to the local conditions they create for themselves, then the chemistry inside the mat could be very different from the chemistry of the surrounding aquarium.

If that's true, can we really identify the cause of the bloom simply by measuring residual nitrate and phosphate in the water column or are we missing the nutrient dynamics occurring within the mat itself?

Why would organics be concentrated in the mat if organisms in the mat are consuming them?

 

[sixty_reefer]

Why would organics be concentrated in the mat if organisms in the mat are consuming them?

I believe I may have unintentionally deviated the thread a little, sorry @CHSUB

I suspect the organics may be concentrated in the sand bed beneath the mat, the mat itself could be able to affect the nutrient exchange between the sand bed and the water column creating a local micro environment that in part could separates the sand from the water column. The air bubbles we often see trapped within the mat could be a clue that not much is escaping to the water column.

IMO, it may simply be an effective feeding strategy as inorganic nutrients in the water column become depleted or when excess organic matter becomes trapped within the sand bed.

 

[Tripod1404]

No not at all. Resource storage is an evolutionary advantage that allows survival during scarcity. If resources were constantly available or “press” they would not need storage and the trait would disappear. The organisms that doesn’t possess this trait will die when the resources is unavailable. In the oceans “pulse” addition of nutrients from up-welling of nutrient rich water and fish waste provides resources in an otherwise resource-free environment.

“These organisms need nitrate”. They need nitrogen and store it as nitrate.


Here is an article to that affect:

Asymmetric physiological response of a reef-building coral to pulsed versus continuous addition of inorganic nutrients - PMC

Coral reefs, especially those located near-shore, are increasingly exposed to anthropogenic, eutrophic conditions that are often chronic. Yet, corals under unperturbed conditions may frequently receive natural and usually temporary nutrient ...

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Yes, obviously nitrate is not essential if there is a constant input of nitrogen. But this is like saying “water is not essential as long as I am not thirsty”.

You won’t know if the organisms in a closed system have enough nitrogen storage unless you do metabolomics. So having detectable nitrate in water is insurance against cells running out of it.

 

[Dan_P]

Why would organics be concentrated in the mat if organisms in the mat are consuming them?

“Organics” is a term or concept that has captured the imagination of many aquarium sleuths and the topic seems to have had a rebirth lately. It is the boogeyman that causes many issues, but like many junk terms, is rarely defined and is never measured. It also fails the actionable criteria. In such a state of ignorance, there is nothing you can do about but generate misinformation about it. In this case, I am including unfounded conjectures about “organics” as misinformation.

 

[CHSUB]

Have at it….

I believe I may have unintentionally deviated the thread a little, sorry @CHSUB

 

[CHSUB]

So having detectable nitrate in water is insurance against cells running out of it

Not disagreeing…

 

[CHSUB]

Organics….is rarely defined and is never measured

Nope, I have 3 measurements included in my ICP that measure organics; but yes not to common: SAK254, NPOC, TNb.

 

[CHSUB]

If we say that natural reefs have low nitrates and it's ok for our tanks to have relatively low levels of nitrates, what is the practical implication for Joe Reefkeeper?

1. Ammonia dosing?
2. Impact to nuisance algae?
3. What about the relationship to phosphate?

The understanding that the vast majority of typical closed systems will never be nitrogen limited and don’t be fooled by the narrow view of hobby nitrate testing.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The understanding that the vast majority of typical closed systems will never be nitrogen limited and don’t be fooled by the narrow view of hobby nitrate testing.

How do you know that first part?

 

[Tripod1404]

The understanding that the vast majority of typical closed systems will never be nitrogen limited and don’t be fooled by the narrow view of hobby nitrate testing.

I think there is plenty of empirical data that suggests otherwise.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I believe I may have unintentionally deviated the thread a little, sorry @CHSUB

I suspect the organics may be concentrated in the sand bed beneath the mat, the mat itself could be able to affect the nutrient exchange between the sand bed and the water column creating a local micro environment that in part could separates the sand from the water column. The air bubbles we often see trapped within the mat could be a clue that not much is escaping to the water column.

IMO, it may simply be an effective feeding strategy as inorganic nutrients in the water column become depleted or when excess organic matter becomes trapped within the sand bed.

Folks have often implicated degradation of organics in sand as a source of nutrients for overlying mats of algae/cyano/dinos/etc. it may sometimes be the case, but in at least some cases (dinos or cyano in a new tank on the sand) it’s hard to pit the finger on accumulated organics.