2 issues- Algae and Dying torch

[reefwithareefer]

Algae

I am new to saltwater and wonder if it is common to have to clean your glass of algae everyday? If i leave it for 3 or 4 days it covers the glass pretty good. It is a reddish brown color and when it is cleaned off the glass, it comes of like dust.
My tank is washed in sunlight on all four sides. Not direct sunlight just washed over the tank from the windows. My halides are on from 10 am till 7 pm.

There is no algae growing anywhere else. just the glass

My calcium is at 420
Alk is 10
Mag is 1200
Almost zero ammonia and Phospates
Ph is 8.2

2nd issues is my green torch has been growing like crazy, it went from about 3 inches to about 7inches in 4 months and then is a span of about 4 days it is almost dead. Three of the 5 heads are dead.

Any ideas what may have caused this.

My tank is pretty consitent. The temp stays at 78, plus or minus 2
I use dosers for the cal, mag and alk. Nothing new was used in the tank.

I did notice that my cocoa featherduster retracted in about the same time and is now starting to come out. This was about the same time the torch seemed to quit dying too.

I had another SPS that died just before the torch started to go. That sps was introduced into my tank about a month ago, it was doing great, then about a week ago it died, then the torched started to die and the feather duster retracted. My hammer coral is doing fine, as are any softies and LPS

Any help is appreciated

[Aquattro]

New tanks can do the algae thing, not a real concern at this point.

A temp of 78 +/- 2 is a pretty big swing, not what I would call stable.

Almost 0 Ammonia is bad. It should be 0. Period. If it's not, you're tank isn't cycled yet or your test kit is off. This could cause coral loss if it's actually present. Check the test kit.

What are your water changes like? volume, frequency?

[kien]

Older tanks can have this particular algae issue too :redface:

For example, if I forget to close my blinds my tank gets a lot of direct and indirect light that really algaes up my glass fast! Algae LOVES that yellow (sun) light! It's a lot worse in the winter when the sun is really low as my front window is south facing. Closing my blinds helps a lot!

Also, 9 hours of halide time seems like a pretty long photo period to me! And also, what colour temperature are your halides? Do you have any supplemental lighting like t5s or LEDs?

[reefwithareefer]

Hi,
The temp swings are in a 12 hour period. It is 78 at 8 am and by 8 pm it is around 79.6 and then halides go off and temp drops to 78 by 8 am. From what I have read, this is what happens in the "wild"

As for ammonia, it is less than .15ppm and Randy Holmes literature says that is normal, as chemicals such as mag, calcium, sodium carbonates have trace elements as can the salt. I use Instant ocean.

My water changes are automated at 2 gallons per day. I have a 180g DT, 90g refugium and a 55g sump. Total water volume is approx 235 gals. There is approx 80lbs of live rock in the refugium and 200 in the DT

The tank is approx 8 months old, but the rock is around 4 years. I bought different tanks and made one big one


So the algae issue is probably normal then? It has gotten worse, now that winter is here.

I have 3 250w MH lights. The left one is 14k and goes on at 10, then 1/2 hr later the center one goes on, it is 20k and another 1/2hr later the right one goes on, it is 14k.
I have 4 96 power compacts (2-50/50 and 2 Actinics)that go on 1 hour before MHs and off 1 hr after the MH shut off. No moonlights as the actual moonlight washes the tank as well.

There is no algae growing on anything else, so I assumed that the lighting schedule was ok. Maybe I will lower it to 8 hrs a day.

Yes, some say 9 hrs seems like a lot, then i have read that some leave them on for much longer. Not sure what is right or wrong. Everything is growing like crazy. As were the LPS until one day they started acting weird. I can not think of any changes etc that i made , for this to happen. The fish are happy, eating well etc.

The lighting schedule, parameters, water changes, dosing schedule have been the same for about 6 months now.

I was thinking there may be some kind of bacterial disease?? Being as the LPS seem to be acting strange or dying.


Thanks for the input guys.

[kien]

From what you describe it sounds normal. 14 and 20K will promote less glass algae. I would be more concerned if you ray maybe a 10K bub. Those bulbs love to grow everything, but will shift down into the yellower spectrum (below 10K) as they age and pretty much can end up looking like our yellow sun.

At any rate, it sounds like your tank is basking in the winter light just like my tank LOL. If your tank is on the main floor and you have lots of windows, ya this is a challenge! But more or less normal (ish).

[Reef Pilot]

Not sure if you can ever totally eliminate algae and have enough light for SPS. It is certainly worse with higher phosphates. But even when my P04 is down to zero (Hanna checker), as it is now, algae will still hang onto wherever it can find some nutrients. Eg, where detritus can accumulate in rock crevices, on dead coral tissues (I had some RTN on some SPS this past summer), etc. The best solution for that is the toothbrush and turkey baster.

I understand that chemical solutions do work as well such peroxide, H2O2, but have stayed away from that. I have tangs, and figure a little algae is good for them to browse on. And the glass can be kept clean with a scraper once or twice a week.

[Masonjames]

If you are having to clean algae from the glass daily then you have far to many freely available nutrients in your water column. Algae that grows on the glass cannot access nutrients other then those available from the water column. Despite what your test kits say, you got way more available nutrients then I assume you want to have. Your exports are not nearly sufficant if you are having to clean the glass daily. No matter sun bathed or not.

I would evalute your system and your husbandry practices and determine where and why exports/system processing are insufficient. And I'm not implying imports and exports simply by feedings or water changes, but as the entire system as a whole. Bioload, calcium carbonate structures, equipment, your own habbits and practices. You got to much extra so you are going to have to determine how to reduce those extras and keep them reduced. Your husbandry practices being the first to explore.

[Masonjames]

Not sure if you can ever totally eliminate algae and have enough light for SPS. It is certainly worse with higher phosphates. But even when my P04 is down to zero (Hanna checker), as it is now, algae will still hang onto wherever it can find some nutrients. Eg, where detritus can accumulate in rock crevices, on dead coral tissues (I had some RTN on some SPS this past summer), etc. The best solution for that is the toothbrush and turkey baster.

I understand that chemical solutions do work as well such peroxide, H2O2, but have stayed away from that. I have tangs, and figure a little algae is good for them to browse on. And the glass can be kept clean with a scraper once or twice a week.


I disagree with sps lighting and algae. Yes algae will always be present within the system. There is no way to avoid that. But it can easily be controlled and maintained. Lower your nutrients and turn down your lights. An equal benifit.

If you have algae growing daily on your glass, algae growing on your calcium carbonate structures. (Sand, rock, coral) then you probably have more nutrients then you want. Especially if you are keeping sps. Given the fact you had algae growing on your calcium carbonate structure aka coral, I would assume your rock is full of bound nutrients and those are being wicked up into other available realestate. Your coral.

But that's would just be my observation from the limited info provided in the post. No harm intended. Just don't agree with the algae vrs sps strength lighting

[reefwithareefer]

First off, thanks for your responses.

I am not sure about my nutrients. I have no algae growing on anything but the glass. If I spray the rocks etc with a baster, very little, to nothing comes off the item

If I have not changed my husbandry methods and there is more algae now then in then summer, does that not imply that the sunlight does play a factor. It does seem to make sense.

I feed mysis, brine and copepods in the a.m. I have 12 fish, about 24" total for a 180 DT. The food is gone within 1 min. I have the apex feeder that dishes out about 20 pellets twice a day. once at 12 and again at 5. The pellets are gone within 30 seconds.

I either add phyto, fuel, coral frenzy, reefroids etc once a day and less than what is recommended.

I have a bubble king 180 skimmer that is never overworking in my limited experience.

I have all my equipment in the basement. The sump and refugium have zero amount of algae on the glass. The refugium runs halides and CF. Halides are on while they are of in the DT, as are the CFs

I set up a reverse algae scubber in the hopes of not using any carbon. I can not get algae to grow, no matter how many different setups I try. It barely even grows on the glass where the lights are against it. Whats does grow is the typical green slimy algae, not the reddish brown stuff that is like dust, that grows on my DT

Does this not say I have no nutrient issue?

Still at a loss as to why LPS have died and acted funny, while everything else is flourishing.

I love this hobby, but sometimes a simple reason/solution would be nice.

Once again, I do appreciate all the different opions. Thanks

[denny_C]

First off, thanks for your responses.

I am not sure about my nutrients. I have no algae growing on anything but the glass. I fi spray the rocks etc with a baster, very little, to nothing comes off off the item

If I have not change my husbandry methods and there is more algae now then i n then summer, does that not imply that the sunlight does play a factor. It does seem to make sense.

I feed mysis, brine and copepods in the am. I have 12 fish, about 24" total for 180 dt. The food is gone within 1 min. I have the apex feeder that dishes out about 20 pellets twice a day. once at 12 and again at 5. The pellets are gone within 30 seconds.

I either add phyto, fuel, coral frenzy, reefroids etc once a day and less than what is recommended.

I have a bubble king 180 skimmer that is never overworking in my limited expereince.

I have all my equipment in the basement. The sump and refugium have zero amount of algae on the glass.

I set up a reverse algae scubber in the hopes of removing the carbon. I can not get algae to grow, no matter how many different setups I try.

Does this not say I have no nutrient issue?

Still at a loss as to why LPS have died and acted funny, while everything else is flourishing.

I love this hobby, but sometimes a simple reason/solution would be nice


check for brown jelly :)

google it , this may be your issue;)

ps. it is good that your fish eat everything before it hits the ground however fish arnt the end of the process but a small tiny part;)

[reefwithareefer]

Thanks Denny, but it is definitely not Brown jelly.

Only on the glass and when I use the magnet scraper to clean glass it makes a "dust" cloud in the water. Then you look at the magnet cleaner velcro and it is a deep brown color with no real slimy/jelly feel to it. It feels like wet dust.

The torch has noting on it at all, just the clear, light brown slime left from the tentacles that have died and now bright white skeleton on 3 of the 5 heads.

Besides the bioload of the livestock and foods, how else can nutrients be introduced to the water column?

[denny_C]

Thanks Denny, but it is definitely not Brown jelly.

Only on the glass and when I use the magnet scraper to clean glass it makes a "dust" cloud in the water. Then you look at the magnet cleaner velcro and it is a deep brown color with no real slimy/jelly feel to it. It feels like wet dust.

The torch has noting on it at all, just the clear, light brown slime left from the tentacles that have died and now bright white skeleton on 3 of the 5 heads.

Besides the bioload of the livestock and foods, how else can nutrients be introduced to the water column?

my pleasure my friend although im gonna guess you didnt google brown jelly disease?


it has nothing to do with your algae, glass or even most of the system and how it operates.

brown jelly is a bacterial infection that will mat over lps and eventually it is fatal if not stopped and can even spread to other lps.

signs are white to brown film and rapid tissue loss.

it is contagious and it is also for the most part treatable but now always:)

[Reef Pilot]

Does seem kind of odd that all was going good and then suddenly everything dying. Was this after a water change? New salt? New carbon? There have instances where bad batches have poisoned the water.

No bugs or nudis?

A little algae on glass is normal, and needs to be cleaned often. Doesn't sound like you have a nutrient or husbandry problem.

I know there are other local reefers in Abby. Maybe get someone to come over and have a look, and might discover something.

[denny_C]

Besides the bioload of the livestock and foods, how else can nutrients be introduced to the water column?

nutrients can come from just about anything but mostly organics , so your salt has it, your water has it , the animals create it and so on....ther are many sources

one can have too much nutrients and still have no algae fwiw;)

[reefwithareefer]

I did google it. Read and looked at it. I do not see anything that would leave me to believe it was. I would never sluff off anyones offerings without researching.

I do not see any of the symptoms etc.

Not saying it is not, but I do not see anything to say it is.

I have been going thru my head, what I have been doing differently and the only two things come to mind of what I have done differntly. I have been mixing in some copepods, mysis, brine into a small bottle of phyto, and coral frenzy. I keep it in the fridge and use it to feed my two anenomes and sun coral. I only mix up enough for three days and then make a new batch. they anems and sun coral are fine

I just started my auto water change about 2 or three weeks ago. I fill up my 50 gal drum with rodi water, use Instant ocean salt. The drum has a heater in it as well as a maxijet to keep the water going. I let it sit for 48hrs and then let the apex control the pumps to pump water in and out . I change about 2 gals a day. the drum has a lid on it.

Mmm, crap... I wonder if it is my filter fabric i am using...I got a box full of of this stuff that I put in my sump to strain out the small stuff. I was using the stuff from wal mart but changed because a box was left at work. The fabric is used to filter out sediment. Crap maybe it has something in it...

No new type of salt, carbon etc. I use Randys 2 part with mag. I bought schlobster bulk stuff at J&L.


Maybe the wife is mad at me.....

[reefwithareefer]

Thanks RP, I do not know any reefers out here as I just started this hobby. Maybe I will call a few guys that do it for a living.

The only thing else I did was add a whack of zoas into the tank, They are growing like crazy...

Thanks again everyone.

The torch seems to have quit dying. One head is sort of coming back and the other seems to be healthy


Seahawks game is on , so going to take a break for a bit.

[Reef Pilot]

Are you changing water every day!!?? That would seem a little excessive. I do mine (20%) every 3 weeks or so.

Are you testing your salinity with a refractometer? You definitely don't want that to vary.

[denny_C]

The torch has noting on it at all, just the clear, light brown slime left from the tentacles that have died and now bright white skeleton on 3 of the 5 heads.



^^^^ this is the symptom:)

fwiw theres no way to diagnose this ( not on a hobby level anyways) as bacteria is almost impossible to id just by visuals alone;)

torches in particular are very prone to it , if your torch melted over night and ended up with a white film on it i would imagine its bacterial based ;)

the algae is a seperate issue:)

[reefwithareefer]

ReefPilot
Yes , everyday. I have 235 or so gals. I exchange roughly 2 gals a day. It is actully approx 1.75 gals. so in 21 day I exchange approx 37 gals. That is 16 percent in three weeks. How is that excessive?

I do changes everyday because i believe it keeps all my parameters more consistent. If i change out 37 gals in one shot, my parameters will change much more drastically and it makes it harder to know what amounts to dose etc.

Yes, I use a refractometer. In fact I have 2. I calibrate once a month. I am consitently at 1.025. I check the tanks and holding tank, as I have the apex/tunze doing the topping off of the evaporated saltwater every hour, 24 hrs a day. The water is all run thru the refugium, so it mixes well, then to the sump and back up to the display.



Denny

When I say "just the clear, light brown slime left" I mean that while it is dying, that is what you see. Once it was dead to the skeleton part there was nothing left, nor is/was there anything while dying. What I see is the tentacles dying off, they go kinda clear/brown as they dye and float away in tiny pieces. This occurred over a 3 to 4 day period.

Does that mean that I have Brown Jelly. I took it as the brown jelly was left clinging to the skeleton or was there before the lps died.. Sorry, I am a lil confused and trying to make sure I understand everything. When I look at the pics, it does not seem to look anything like it.

The other LPS just sucked himself into the skeleton and never came out again, or at least that is all i saw happening.

On a side note, I may be moving out to Calgary, so I will have to come look at your new digs. I saw the posts you put up. Looks pretty cool. Plus no point in bring my old tank with me, when I can get a new one..:)

Sorry, what is "fwiw"?


Yeah, go Hawks!!

[reefwithareefer]

Geesh, the more i post and describe my stuff, the more I see myself as obsessed with this hobby. I admitted to having 2 refractometers!!! Oh geesh, is this how it happens..Ugh...More therapy I suppose.. lol

[Masonjames]

First off, thanks for your responses.

I am not sure about my nutrients. I have no algae growing on anything but the glass. If I spray the rocks etc with a baster, very little, to nothing comes off the item

If I have not changed my husbandry methods and there is more algae now then in then summer, does that not imply that the sunlight does play a factor. It does seem to make sense.

I feed mysis, brine and copepods in the a.m. I have 12 fish, about 24" total for a 180 DT. The food is gone within 1 min. I have the apex feeder that dishes out about 20 pellets twice a day. once at 12 and again at 5. The pellets are gone within 30 seconds.

I either add phyto, fuel, coral frenzy, reefroids etc once a day and less than what is recommended.

I have a bubble king 180 skimmer that is never overworking in my limited experience.

I have all my equipment in the basement. The sump and refugium have zero amount of algae on the glass. The refugium runs halides and CF. Halides are on while they are of in the DT, as are the CFs

I set up a reverse algae scubber in the hopes of not using any carbon. I can not get algae to grow, no matter how many different setups I try. It barely even grows on the glass where the lights are against it. Whats does grow is the typical green slimy algae, not the reddish brown stuff that is like dust, that grows on my DT

Does this not say I have no nutrient issue?

Still at a loss as to why LPS have died and acted funny, while everything else is flourishing.

I love this hobby, but sometimes a simple reason/solution would be nice.

Once again, I do appreciate all the different opions. Thanks

Why not try and take those coral foods offline for awhile and see if that helps With the algae. Those foods are not necessary and I assure you, if your fish have fat bellys your shrimp your crabs your etc etc. are all getting fed, your corals are getting there share too.

The ats can be really tricky to get to take. Especially a reverse. I've ran an ats but for the opposite reasons I assume you are wanting to. But maybe i should ask why you are wanting to run one? Like any form of life, algae needs To feed. You need to create that envioroment where it can thrive. Do you really want to be promoting an environment where it can thrive? Or would you rather promote an environment where it's not so ideal for it? non the less there can be certain benefits from doing so (also negatives) if you choose but just keep in mind that they can be tricky to get going and maintain. So your attempts may or may not have been limited by available nutrients. The algae on the glass can find a meal so there is food to be had.

I understand you seem to be only limited to the algae on the glass. Which you very well may be, and being the tank is receiving more sunlight recently it could very well be the cause for an increase in growth. But as I said before, the only way the algae that is growing on your glass can get an availabe meal is through the water column. So your water has algae fertilizer floating around in it. Is this a nutrient problem? I don't know. Is the algae doing you a favor and consuming 100% of the extra nutrients that are availabe? or is there a percent of the extra not being consumed and is getting sinked someplace else? When you clean your glass of the algae is 100% of that algae and the nutrients they consumed being removed and filtered out?
The algae problem really could be a s simple as your just fertilizing the tank with too much of that fancy "food". Ditch all the extra for while and see if that helps. I'm only trying to stress that the nutrients are there. Work to fix it before those nutrients start to be stored elsewhere else.

I am on board with the gallon a day water change ; ) that be what I do! I don't have mine automated though. Takes about 20 seconds and I'm done. Made maintenance so much more simple for me.

The loss of the corals. Strange indeed. Contamination, disease, etc. all a possible cause.

[Reef Pilot]

ReefPilot
Yes , everyday. I have 235 or so gals. I exchange roughly 2 gals a day. It is actully approx 1.75 gals. so in 21 day I exchange approx 37 gals. That is 16 percent in three weeks. How is that excessive?

I do changes everyday because i believe it keeps all my parameters more consistent. If i change out 37 gals in one shot, my parameters will change much more drastically and it makes it harder to know what amounts to dose etc.

Yes, I use a refractometer. In fact I have 2. I calibrate once a month. I am consitently at 1.025. I check the tanks and holding tank, as I have the apex/tunze doing the topping off of the evaporated saltwater every hour, 24 hrs a day. The water is all run thru the refugium, so it mixes well, then to the sump and back up to the display.

Well, you get a much higher turnover of water and export of nutrients by changing 16% of water every 3 weeks, instead of that same amount doing 1.75 gallons every day. Plus creating a lot of work for yourself. Ideally, should change about 20% every 2 weeks.

[reefwars]

Well, you get a much higher turnover of water and export of nutrients by changing 16% of water every 3 weeks, instead of that same amount doing 1.75 gallons every day. Plus creating a lot of work for yourself. Ideally, should change about 20% every 2 weeks.


i dont understand or my math is wrong but ....... ....how does removing 16% every three weeks better than removing the same amount rationed daily?

[Reef Pilot]

i dont understand or my math is wrong but ....... ....how does removing 16% every three weeks better than removing the same amount rationed daily?
Because if you remove it every day, you are also removing that same proportion of what you just added yesterday, therefore diluting and reducing the amount of actual nutrient removal.

Think of it another way, and maybe might make more sense to you. If you exchange 10% of your water each day over 10 days, you will have changed 100% of your volume. But you still have some of your original water and nutrients present because of your daily mixing and dilution. However, if you change 100% of your water in 10 days, for sure you will have a complete exchange of nutrients and no old water.

I know this is an extreme example, but just using it to illustrate the point. It is actually math, and you can use any amount you want. Remember, that with each water change, you are also changing some of the water (and leaving that portion of nutrients present) that you exchanged the last time.

[Masonjames]

Well, you get a much higher turnover of water and export of nutrients by changing 16% of water every 3 weeks, instead of that same amount doing 1.75 gallons every day. Plus creating a lot of work for yourself. Ideally, should change about 20% every 2 weeks.

That's not actually entirely correct. In an emergency situation, yes a single large percentage water change will be far more effective then the same percentage being changed by smaller multiple changes. But when these two identical percentages are changed over a bi weekly, monthly, etc. period of time the difference of both removal and additions is very very small. A few percent, to points of a percent. So one could argue this is less effective, but the difference is literally so small that it's nearly irrelevant.

Switching to a dialy water change schedule has made my workload easier for me to maintain. Doing my daiky change takes 15-30 seconds and I am done. The same amount of time it takes me to peak into my sump room and make sure everything is running and working. I no longer need to heat the water, I can mix a month or two and store it, at anytime that is convenient for me, not a given day deligated by my water change schedule. Never mind reducing potential stressors on the system by doing larger percent water changes. To me this works best for my schedule. But I certianky wouldn't say its a fit fr everyone.

[Reef Pilot]

That's not actually entirely correct. In an emergency situation, yes a single large percentage water change will be far more effective then the same percentage being changed by smaller multiple changes. But when these two identical percentages are changed over a bi weekly, monthly, etc. period of time the difference of both removal and additions is very very small. A few percent, to points of a percent. So one could argue this is less effective, but the difference is literally so small that it's nearly irrelevant.

Well, actually, if you do daily changes vs 3 week changes using the same volume over that time, it does make a fairly big difference. If you are doing weekly vs 3 weekly, then not as much, of course.

Not sure why this is not obvious to everyone!?? I don't know how I can explain it better... I could use an apples and oranges in a barrel example, but hopefully that isn't necessary.

[reefwars]

Because if you remove it every day, you are also removing that same proportion of what you just added yesterday, therefore diluting and reducing the amount of actual nutrient removal.

Think of it another way, and maybe might make more sense to you. If you exchange 10% of your water each day over 10 days, you will have changed 100% of your volume. But you still have some of your original water and nutrients present because of your daily mixing and dilution. However, if you change 100% of your water in 10 days, for sure you will have a complete exchange of nutrients and no old water.

I know this is an extreme example, but just using it to illustrate the point. It is actually math, and you can use any amount you want. Remember, that with each water change, you are also changing some of the water (and leaving that portion of nutrients present) that you exchanged the last time.



well assuming were talking about nitrates?


"Size of Water Changes: A Nitrate Example
The cases examined above for nitrate with "once a month" batch water changes can also be examined using smaller, but more frequent, changes. Figure 6 shows results obtained by doing daily batch water changes that amount to a total of 7.5%, 15% and 30% changed each month (0.25%, 0.5% and 1% daily). This graph can be compared to Figure 1, and Figure 7 shows an overlay of Figures 1 and 6. It is clear from Figure 6 that daily water changes are essentially comparable to larger once a month water changes in their reduction of existing nitrate concentrations over a year, as long as the same total volume of water is changed. It turns out that continuous water changes are so close in efficiency to daily water changes that for the sort of data shown in Figures 6 and 7, the results of continuous changes are indistinguishable from those of daily changes (which is clear in Table 1 also, where continuous changes and daily changes (1 x 30) nearly match each other's efficiency)."


"conclusion:

Water changes of 15-30% per month (whether carried out once a month, daily or continuously) have been shown in the graphs above to be useful in moderating the drift of these different seawater components from starting levels. For most reef aquaria, I recommend such changes as good aquarium husbandry. In general, the more the better, if carried out appropriately, and if the new salt water is of appropriate quality."



http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-10/rhf/

i guess it comes down to is the 4% extra im removing with larger water changes outweigh the risks?



"There are many ways to perform water changes, and some of these are outlined below.

Large batch water changes: These changes are what most aquarists think of as water changes - remove some aquarium water and replace it with new water. Reef aquarists often talk of changing 10-30% per month this way. These changes can be completely manual, using buckets and siphons. They can also be partially or almost completely automated. Some systems allow aquarists to open and close appropriate valves (or turn on appropriate pumps), and pumps take care of the actual removal and addition of water.

In doing batch changes, aquarists should consider the changes in the water parameters that will result, and be sure they do not excessively stress organisms. Differences in salinity and temperature are most likely to be significant, and the larger the change, the more stressful it can become for the aquarium's inhabitants. If there is substantial ammonia in the new water, as there may be in artificial salt water or possibly in natural seawater that has been stored for a while, that can also be stressful. Obviously, any organisms that become exposed to the air can also be greatly stressed. Differences in other water parameters are less likely, in my opinion, to be particularly stressful during water changes, with the possible exception of certain trace elements which may be more toxic in raw artificial seawater when not bound to organics than after they have had a chance to become bound in the aquarium or in natural seawater. The normally encountered differences in calcium, magnesium, alkalinity, nitrate, phosphate, silica, pH, etc., are unlikely to unduly stress organisms during water changes up to 30-50% using natural seawater or aerated artificial seawater, in my opinion.

Small batch water changes: These changes are similar to the large changes above, but are much smaller and are done more frequently. Daily changes of 0.25% to 2%, for example, can be used. One could also do a series of consecutive small water changes on the same day. This method ensures that organisms near the top of the aquarium are not exposed to the air, and that water parameter shifts are less sudden. These types of changes can be done in a variety of ways, such as by removing water via a skimmer and replacing it once a day, or by simply taking out an amount (such as a half gallon) and replacing it once a day (automatically or manually). While lots of smaller changes (say, 30 changes of 1% each) are slightly less efficient than one larger one (30% in a single batch), the difference is small (30 changes of 1% each exactly matches one 26% batch water change), and consequently other factors of convenience or stress on organisms may be more important.

In doing batch water changes of 2% or less, aquarists need not particularly worry about the changes in the water parameters that will result, as long as the new water is of reasonable quality. For example, a 1% change with new water at 55°F from a basement reservoir will change the aquarium temperature only from 81°F to 80.74°F. Differences in salinity are also unlikely to be significant.

Continuous water changes: Continuous water changes, despite their name, are not necessarily performed every minute of every day. The distinguishing feature of these changes is that water is added at the same time that it is removed. The actual rate of addition can be high or low. Reef aquarists (myself included) most often perform these types of water changes with two matched pumps, one that removes the old water and one that adds the new water. Often these pumps are part of the same mechanism (such as two sets of tubing on a peristaltic pump or two heads on a diaphragm pump), but that is not a requirement. I use a dual head diaphragm pump capable of a maximum of 30 gallons per day for each head (a Reef Filler pump from Champion Lighting). In my setup, once I have a 44-gallon trash can full of new salt water, all I do to perform a 44 gallon or smaller water change is plug in the pump. The wastewater is sent down the drain. Sometimes I change 44 gallons in one shot, taking about a day and a half. Sometimes I pump for a few hours at a time, and then wait for a few days.

These changes are slightly less efficient than single batch water changes of the same total volume. A continuous water change of 30% exactly matches one batch 26% water change. As with very small batch water changes, these have the advantage of neither stressing the organisms (assuming the change is done reasonably slowly), nor altering the water level in the aquarium. The ease of doing such changes automatically also makes it far more likely that busy or lazy aquarists will actually do them."





if you take in account of all the things that can go wrong with larger water changes , smaller ones dont seem so bad for practically identical results;)

[reefwars]

But when these two identical percentages are changed over a bi weekly, monthly, etc. period of time the difference of both removal and additions is very very small. A few percent, to points of a percent. So one could argue this is less effective, but the difference is literally so small that it's nearly irrelevant.





exactly;)

[Reef Pilot]

exactly;)
Gawd,... I have better things to do,... but here goes one more time.

Start with a barrel of 100 apples. Change 10% volume (incl that percentage of oranges from the previous day) every day for 10 days with oranges. (Of course, after a day you will have to start slicing the oranges and apples a bit to get the right proportions:smile:...)

At the end of 10 days, in the barrel, you will still have 34.86784401 apples and only 65.132156 oranges. Oranges can represent new water, and apples the old water nutrients.

And if you change 100% of the apples with the oranges in one change, you would have all oranges and no apples.

And daily changes over a longer period of time, just makes it worse... Not sure how else to explain it. If this doesn't do it, I give up...

[Masonjames]

Gawd,... I have better things to do,... but here goes one more time.

Start with a barrel of 100 apples. Change 10% volume (incl that percentage of oranges from the previous day) every day for 10 days with oranges. (Of course, after a day you will have to start slicing the oranges and apples a bit to get the right proportions:smile:...)

At the end of 10 days, in the barrel, you will still have 34.86784401 apples and only 65.132156 oranges. Oranges can represent new water, and apples the old water nutrients.

And if you change 100% of the apples with the oranges in one change, you would have all oranges and no apples.



And daily changes over a longer period of time, just makes it worse... Not sure how else to explain it. If this doesn't do it, I give up...

.

Think of it another way, and maybe might make more sense to you. If you exchange 10% of your water each day over 10 days, you will have changed 100% of your volume. But you still have some of your original water and nutrients present because of your daily mixing and dilution. However, if you change 100% of your water in 10 days, for sure you will have a complete exchange of nutrients and no old water.

Those exact same principles of mixing and dilution apply to any percent changed so I don't understand the differnce your trying make. With your apple to oranges comparison, you are neglecting to apply the very principles you brought up originally. You are applying the rule that you are removing 100% of whatever percent of apple you are removing. But you've neglected to apply your mixing and dilution rule that once In the barrel, those apples and oranges must become so thoughly mixed they become for the most part unrecognizable from each other. Now pull out a handful and calculate from the slurry how many apples and how many oranges.
If you change x% volume biweekly with a single water change, you will have changed x% of your systems volume monthly. But you still have some of your original water and nutrients present because of mixing and dilution. If you change x% volume daily you will have change x% volume of your systems volume monthly. But you still have some of your original water and nutrients present because of mixing and dilution. Unless your doing a single 100% change, your still leaving behind old water and nutrients and removing a percentage of the previous change. I guess one could consider 2 week old water changed already spoiled removing the potential to remove a percent of brand spanking new water by changing daily. But those principles of mixing and dilution are actually what sorta makes the math work on a small scale change as the mixing and dilution happeneds over a much larger body.

[Reef Pilot]

Don't know what else to say.... Do the math for yourself and you will see. You can use any example or proportion you want. The point is the same. And that is that changing the same vol of water less frequently gives you a bigger bang for the buck with nutrient exchange.

I am not arguing that frequent water changes are bad. It's just that you need to do bigger volumes to make up the difference over time. In fact, if your tank has high nutrients, a big water change is not as good because of the possible rapid composition change of your parameters. But that is another issue... My point above is just about the math...

[reefwars]

RHF:

"Previous articles on water changes have "shown" that small water changes are not useful, and have sometimes left the impression that even many small water changes are not beneficial. It is also "common knowledge" among many reef aquarists that continuous water changes (where water is added and removed at the same time, usually by automatic pumping) is not very useful "because this removes some of the new water that was just added." As I'll show, these assumptions do not stand up to analysis for typical water change scenarios. Consequently, whether choosing to change a lot of water, or only a little, and whether it is done continually, daily, or only rarely, more water change options are available to aquarists than many realize. These increased options' availability may permit busy aquarists to spend time on other important activities, and less time on water changes, while still accomplishing the same goals."



haha well if all the same to you folks ill take my advice from scientists as i usually do as they have put the actual research into it and done the math using the variables and not ignoring them , especially the ones that have debunked many aquarium myths.....like apples and oranges;)

[Reef Pilot]

RHF:

"Previous articles on water changes have "shown" that small water changes are not useful, and have sometimes left the impression that even many small water changes are not beneficial. It is also "common knowledge" among many reef aquarists that continuous water changes (where water is added and removed at the same time, usually by automatic pumping) is not very useful "because this removes some of the new water that was just added." As I'll show, these assumptions do not stand up to analysis for typical water change scenarios. Consequently, whether choosing to change a lot of water, or only a little, and whether it is done continually, daily, or only rarely, more water change options are available to aquarists than many realize. These increased options' availability may permit busy aquarists to spend time on other important activities, and less time on water changes, while still accomplishing the same goals."



haha well if all the same to you folks ill take my advice from scientists as i usually do as they have put the actual research into it and done the math using the variables and not ignoring them , especially the ones that have debunked many aquarium myths.....like apples and oranges;)
Are you trying to rationalize your incorrect math?:razz:
Like I said before, I am not arguing the merits of frequent vs infrequent water changes (although I do question small daily changes). My point is about the math, which even RHF above acknowledges.
It's good to quote articles, but it is also important to understand what they are saying, too;).

[denny_C]

My point is about the math, which even RHF above acknowledges.

yes but the math is a very small difference when applied permanently , if you read the article you'll see in the graphs how small the differences actually were ....very small.......randy also clearly states that the amount is so small that its irrelevant while the risks are many and not so irrelevant ;)


not sure whats so hard to understand......seems the rest of the experienced reef world gets it so not sure what you question about smaller water changes lol

are you saying that small water changes arn't adequate enough of a practice?

why would you think a larger water change that not only removes but changes the system overall the more the larger it gets is any better than a small one?

[Reef Pilot]

yes but the math is a very small difference when applied permanently , if you read the article you'll see in the graphs how small the differences actually were ....very small.......randy also clearly states that the amount is so small that its irrelevant while the risks are many and not so irrelevant ;)


not sure whats so hard to understand......seems the rest of the experienced reef world gets it so not sure what you question about smaller water changes lol

are you saying that small water changes arn't adequate enough of a practice?

why would you think a larger water change that not only removes but changes the system overall the more the larger it gets is any better than a small one?
OK, to cut through the chase... Do you believe that changing 1.75 gal per day (ie 16% total vol over 3 weeks) on a 235 gal system is a good regime?? Yes, or no.

As I stated before, even 16% all at once every 3 weeks is not enough vol.

[Masonjames]

What Denny? You mean to tell me you have never done the research yourself? That's it, from now on I don't believe a thing you say... Ha ha ha ; )

I gotta agree with RHF ( and not Denny for his lack of research) as well. The only problem with the apple and oranges math, is that it is only considering the values your choosing to acknowledge while deliberately choosing to ignore others.

But tomatoes tomatos. Apples to oranges. As long as buddy is doing water changes then we all can be happy.

Sorry if we got a bit off topic op. Not much value in all that considering the context of your original post.

[denny_C]

OK, to cut through the chase... Do you believe that changing 1.75 gal per day (ie 16% total vol over 3 weeks) on a 235 gal system is a good regime?? Yes, or no.



i would shoot for 1-2% or around there per day , be it in large or small. its the large or small part i dont think matters if your looking at it from a removal of nutirents point of view ;)

[Reef Pilot]

i would shoot for 1-2% or around there per day , be it in large or small. its the large or small part i dont think matters if your looking at it from a removal of nutirents point of view ;)
Well, that's about double the quantity the OP is changing per day. So, I guess your answer is no, that is not a good water change regime that he is using... Wow, we agree...:mrgreen:

[denny_C]

Well, that's about double the quantity the OP is changing per day. So, I guess your answer is no, that is not a good water change regime that he is using... Wow, we agree...:mrgreen:

for sure , haha i think james said it best as long as hes DOING water changes thats the important part.

right now like you my water changes are in bulk cause the hobby over the years beat into my head that it has to be better , but now i look at it from a whats important point of view ...i dont suffer from excess nutrients, i dont use water changes to replenish calcium/alk or mg and i dont use water changes to syphon out ditrius i believe a system can be simple and automation is pretty practical alot of the numbers that weren't know years ago are better detailed today as actual data so i believe a more stable approach to things and assurances it works is easier than its ever been and overall its the health and impacts on the animals i keep i care most about :)

i will be looking in the future to doing smaller changes continuously vs weekly , right now the way im set up is more convenient to do bulk but that doesnt mean my system wouldnt do well with smaller one either.

[Reef Pilot]

for sure , haha i think james said it best as long as hes DOING water changes thats the important part.

Very graceful backpeddle...:wink: Have a great Black Friday. You want to keep Dave happy..., that's what really important,... haha.:mrgreen:

[reefwithareefer]

Poor torch has all but been ignored today..lol

OK. My 2 cents on water changes...Mmm, looking at how long this is, maybe I will say, "here is my 5 bucks worth!" :)

I did a lot of research on water changes. Randys info was the leading reason I chose to do daily water. Now bear in mind that even as a noob, I know there is very little that is an absolute in reefkeeping, as this thread has shown.
There is science beind everything, but that science is limited and leaves alot of question of why, what, how etc. I have a ton of respect for the guys that have been doing this for so long. How they managed to keep a stable tank without half the gizmos, juices, elixirs, etc, I do not know. They are literally pioneers, and that is cool to me.

Even though I may do daily water changes at 1.75 gals a day, it does not mean that it is an absolute. I may find I want to do water changes twice a week instead, maybe stick to daily and double the amount. Who knows.....
I am not going to determine that, my tank will. The inhabitants may say, "hey, knock it off buddy!" or "more changes". That to me is husbandry. It is also how looking after a reef is a lot easier that it was 5, 10 , 20 years ago. I watch and learn, If i do not know why or what, I go do research and if that does not work, I ask you guys and try to form an opinion of what is logical or illogical, right or wrong etc.


I do daily water changes because...............


1: Randy Holmes says it is alright and he seems to be a pretty smart guy.

2: I paid alot of money for my apex. I now have 20 outlets. For as much as I paid for it, I hate seeing them unused. Fill'em up is what I say. lol

3: The Apex makes my life easy. I have the ability to automate everything. thereby, letting me watch the tank more. Once you learn the methodology of the skimmer. chemicals, hoses, plumbing, glues, food. sumps, refugiums etc etc, what else is there , but to watch your tank and learn what makes them tick, so you take care of the living things you have paid to have snatched from the ocean, their home!

4: My best analogy is......Look at it as if you were to take a glass and fill it up with apple juice and grape juice, doing a 50/50 split, and then decide to add water to it because it tasted too strong.

Of course the glass is full, so you need to empty it. Let's say you have a choice to do it all at once or you can do it over a week.
To me, doing it over time, gives the ability to taste it(look at your tank) each day and see what is going on. It would not change the flavor drastically,
if changed day by day.

If you just take 25% out and dump 25% back in, you change the taste drastically, instantly; don't you?

Now I dose my tank etc etc to keep the parameters consistent (Hold the flavor more consistent.) I also believe that the tank grows microorganisms and stuff that I have no idea about, because I add stuff to it, plus I believe it occurs naturally as well. These things do not just all appear, they take time to grow, dose, add etc.

Now you take away 25 percent of the juice, and you take 25% of those good things; do you not?
As opposed to changeing out a smaller amount, because I believe that the orginisms, chemicals etc will restock to a consistent level easier and way quicker than trying to get back from a 25% change

I also believe this goes for my alk, calcium, mag. The new saltwater will replenish some of it, but I highly doubt it will replenish all of what was taken.
Does this not make more work for me, since I will have to figure out how much to add to get to the parameters to what they were originally, just so my dosing will hold them steady?

It seems to me that if I do daily changes, I hold everything more consistent. From what I have read, consistency is really important for a tanks inhabitants.

5: Because I like to think I can :)

6: Because I like to figure out how to do it and the challenges it posed to get the same amount out as in


I think my logic seems ok, maybe not..Time will tell.

[reefwithareefer]

Shoot...To who ever thought it was a good idea to stop feeding the mixture to the corals...I think you are right. It makes sense that it would be adding many nutrients. I was told that sun corals had to be feed once a day, so I figured it would not hurt to feed many things in one shot by making the elixir.
Thanks

[reefwithareefer]

and to those questioning my regime and how much I change..

You can read 100 threads of how much water should be changed and how often, but does it not just come down to each persons tank?

Does it not matter how much you feed or what type; does it not matter what type of salt and what salinity levels are kept? What about how many inhabitants and types? What about if you only keep LPs, or LPS and SPS etc?
Do you have a refugium? What about a skimmer or algae scrubber?
I could go on and on......

In my opinion, there are guidelines and that is all there is. The rest is up to the individual to determine is it not?

example of differences of opinion

http://www.thereeftank.com/forums/f97/how-much-water-do-you-change-per-week-133637.html

[reefwithareefer]

Mason James

Quote:

"The ats can be really tricky to get to take. Especially a reverse. I've ran an ats but for the opposite reasons I assume you are wanting to. But maybe i should ask why you are wanting to run one? Like any form of life, algae needs To feed. You need to create that envioroment where it can thrive. Do you really want to be promoting an environment where it can thrive? Or would you rather promote an environment where it's not so ideal for it? non the less there can be certain benefits from doing so (also negatives) if you choose but just keep in mind that they can be tricky to get going and maintain. So your attempts may or may not have been limited by available nutrients. The algae on the glass can find a meal so there is food to be had.

I understand you seem to be only limited to the algae on the glass. Which you very well may be, and being the tank is receiving more sunlight recently it could very well be the cause for an increase in growth. But as I said before, the only way the algae that is growing on your glass can get an availabe meal is through the water column. So your water has algae fertilizer floating around in it. Is this a nutrient problem? I don't know. Is the algae doing you a favor and consuming 100% of the extra nutrients that are availabe? or is there a percent of the extra not being consumed and is getting sinked someplace else? When you clean your glass of the algae is 100% of that algae and the nutrients they consumed being removed and filtered out?
The algae problem really could be a s simple as your just fertilizing the tank with too much of that fancy "food". Ditch all the extra for while and see if that helps. I'm only trying to stress that the nutrients are there. Work to fix it before those nutrients start to be stored elsewhere else."


The reasons I am wanting to experiment with an algae scrubber are.....

1: No more carbon. I think it is better not to run carbon and it costs money.

2: My understanding is that it takes nutients to grow algae. Does that not mean the the scubber will take nutrients out of the water?
Is it not better to have the algae grow on a piece of plastic, in my refugium, in the basement? There is little light down there so I do not see it spreading from the box it is in. The light to grow it has to be at a low kelvin and intense from what I have read. If that is true, I believe it cannot live to far from the actual scrubber.
Yes, there could be minute pieces that float out, but will it not die off and get skimmed if it does not have the required parameters?

I do wonder if it will propogate in the DT as it is a different type of algae that grows on the plastic as to the one that grows on my glass. Or, at least my research says that.

3: I think a scrubber is more natural filtration.

I agree that it may or may not be a nutrient issue, as to why I am having trouble getting it going. Something I will have to determine and fudge with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algae_scrubber

[reefwithareefer]

Sorry guys, last post....

Lol... I did more research and this is what it is, but my tank is 8 months old. That is not new is it? It would have cylced a long time ago would it not have? Especially since all my rock and sand were live when building...

http://www.reefcleaners.org/nuisance-algae-id-guide

Called Diatoms, first pic in article They describe it to a tee...but....

[newbie2]

I am by no means and expert but diatoms tend to come back if you have an influx of silicates, could there be silicates in/on the filter material you were talking about earlier?

[AquaAddict]

OK, here's my 2 cents worth:

To my way of thinking exchanging water every day means that a percentage of the new water put in yesterday ends up being removed the next day. I would think that to be wasteful.

AquaAddict

[reefwithareefer]

Newbie 2

I am wondering the same thing. I have always used a filter cloth, but changed over to a different one a month ago. I do not know for certain if it has silicates, oils etc in it. But out they come.


Aqua Addict

In theory I would agree, but the research that Randy Holmes and others have done, say that this in ot so, or it is so minor that not worth worrying about.
In reality, Reefing is wasteful. I use rodi water for changes and topoffs. I can not remember the ratio, but I think I "throw away" 3 gals of waste water for every rodi water I get to keep. Never mind using 2 gals of water a day.
Part of my reason to do daily changes, was to see if it will help reuce water changes or the amout used/wasted..Time will tell.

[Masonjames]

The reasons I am wanting to experiment with an algae scrubber are.....

1: No more carbon. I think it is better not to run carbon and it costs money.

2: My understanding is that it takes nutients to grow algae. Does that not mean the the scubber will take nutrients out of the water?
Is it not better to have the algae grow on a piece of plastic, in my refugium, in the basement? There is little light down there so I do not see it spreading from the box it is in. The light to grow it has to be at a low kelvin and intense from what I have read. If that is true, I believe it cannot live to far from the actual scrubber.
Yes, there could be minute pieces that float out, but will it not die off and get skimmed if it does not have the required parameters?

I do wonder if it will propogate in the DT as it is a different type of algae that grows on the plastic as to the one that grows on my glass. Or, at least my research says that.

3: I think a scrubber is more natural filtration.

I agree that it may or may not be a nutrient issue, as to why I am having trouble getting it going. Something I will have to determine and fudge with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algae_scrubber

Sure. Ats work, refugiums work, macros work. They have proven themselves time and time again to be an effective tool. So, I don't see why you would not be able to make one work yourself. These can be effective tools, and they ca have there benefits. But IMO it will simply come down to the environment you are trying to create and the critters you are trying to keep, wether a deliberate inclusion of algae into your sytem fits with that or not.
Before you try and understand ats, refugiums, macros etc. I woudl first try and broader your understanding of the nature of algae itself and the enviormnet it needs and promotes. I am sure you may learn a few things about it that may help you understand a bit better if deliberately including it your system fits the bill for you or not.
I have ran an ats. And it worked for the purposes I intended it to. But I used it slightly differnt then most i would imagine. I learned a few things out about what makes alage tick, and I took advantage of some of its other qualities and used it as a means to raise my systems trophic indices to that of eutrophic. I wanted to raise nutrient levels and keep them within the system. So an ats (algae) fit the bill for my needs.
You cannot have one without the other. Algae comes with the territory or it doesn't. Wether it's deliberate or not. If you wish to promote a higher nutrient system, which you may want to depending on what your trying to achieve with your system then algae can be a wonderful tool to use. If you wish to promote pod life and or all types of critters for certain fish/invert species etc, keeping higher nutriant demanding corals, etc. These are great reasons to include algae in some form to your system and it can be very beneficial to do so. But as algae will also seek to promote a thriving enviormnet for its own self preservation and success, you have to be careful to keep the scale in balance. If you can maintain a healty and thriving mesotrophic enviromnet, without pushing the scale to far into the eutrophic zones then you have found a good balance for your needs. And many appear to and/or are able to maintain this balance. Unfortunately many people inevitably end up in the eutrophic zones unintentionally. When you get to the higher scales in this zone you can start to boarder on the hypereutrophic zone which will more then likely result in a crash or a system **** down due to not being able to control alage. And it's surprizing common. And our friend algae is more then happy to help us along in this journey as its only seeking to promote itself by self promoting an envirmonet for itself. Simply put, if your going to have alage deliberately or not, you need to or will have had to create the enviromnet it needs, and your waters will need to be rich with nutrients.

If you want to maintain low nutrients in a true sense, algae doesn't fit. You can't have low nutrients and have algae. At least in nuisance form or as a deliberate tool. If you wish to maintain a oligotrophic system, that being one of truly low nutrients, you cannot have and will not have algae deliberately, or as a nusiance. It would not work. Opting to maintain a system which maintains this trophic level can have many benefits, but it also comes with its own potential downsides based again upon the environment you are trying to create. Many species of fish, inverts etc. Would not be possible in such a system as the system would not be able to meet the needs of these species. Some species of coral which require a greater level of nutriants also would not do well in this type of system.

In regards to your statement/question, "my understanding is that it takes nutrients to grow algae. Does that not mean the scrubber will take nutrients out of the water"
Yes, absolulty at the most basic level of algae being a tool for export. This works very well to a certain degree.
What I don't understand is the logic. However it is a very common point of view.
We don't want algae. So we feed alage with nutrients so that we can use it to remove nutrients. Why not not feed the algae and forget having to remove the food you fed it? I don't understand the point of giving algae the fuel it needs to thrive, just so we can use it as a form of nutrient export. Seems pretty roundabout to me for those wanting to keep an algae free enviromnet.

[Kellyscoral]

Hmmm - I may have had one too many tequila shots cause this is all clear as mud in my brain!!

[Masonjames]

Hmmm - I may have had one too many tequila shots cause this is all clear as mud in my brain!!

Lol. Is this lasts night tequila or this mornings were talking about? Jks.

What needs clarifying? My point is simply this. Decide on the type of critters you wish to keep. Determine the enviromnet where they come from. And build your system around there needs. Some tools (like algae) can aid in creating an enviroment better suited to there needs, and some tools (like algae) can give you a leg down in creating an enviroment better suited to there needs.

[reefwithareefer]

Alright.
So I took the opinion that I had too many nutrients in my tank and tried to figure out from where etc.
I decided my sandbed was probably the culprit. It varies from 1" to 3 inches.I took it all down to about 3/4" deep.

I also took out that sediment filter cloth.

I did a 20% water change after removing eveything.

There is hardly any algae/diatoms growing on the glass after three days.

Another funny thing has happened as well. The one LPS that has been closed for 3 weeks has all of a sudden popped open a lil. All three heads are open. I also have some kind of nuisance "polyp" I am not sure what it is called, but J&L was selling some and said it spreads quickly, needs nutrients and can be a nuisance if allowed to spread. All of it is shrinking and disappearing from my Zoa garden.

The torch is continuing to die. A few strands are left. :(

A fella came by and got my free sand and confirmed it was not brown jelly and could not see why it was dying. Then again, maybe the nutrients were an issue for it.

So thanks for all the input everyone. Much appreciated.

[reefwithareefer]

Not sure when I first posted this thread, but I figured that I would pass on what happened the other day while at J&L.
I never solved the issue of the reddish brown algae that coakes my glass within a few days, even after buying all sorts of "chemicals", doing water changes more often, cleaning rocks etc etc. The algae always persisted.
I use carbon and Rowa Phos etc and nothing changed. I used the recommended amounts etc.

So here is what experience taught me the other day. I go into J&L looking for some product that I forgot what its name was. Jeff was there and I tried explaining what I wanted, as I forgot the name. He said he never sold anything like that before. I said it was to remove phosphate, came in little white cubes etc etc. Conversation carried on until he remembered the product I was looking for and that it was for removing nitrates, not Phos.

I explained my issue of the algae on my glass and he said that Rowa phos is the product to use. I stated that I had been using it for a year but the amount of algae never changed. Jeff asked how much I was using and I told him that I followed the instructions and he said that I was way off for my 400 gal tank. I should be using 4 times the amount I had been...

$237.00 later, I found my self walking out of there with a bucket "O" Rowa...
Put a liter in my reactor and two days later I have almost zero algae build up on the glass.

So much for following the manufacturers instructions, is the lesson learned. It may not answer why my phosphate levels are so high, as my test kit says none are detected. All I know is that with a fews words from Jeff, I no longer have to scrub my glass every night.

Thanks Jeff