Feelers

Stoked to see the octopuses and cuttlefish feature, although they didnt do much colour changing. Good quality footage, I'm surprised, for the amount of footage shot of the tropical reefs its quite difficult to find stuff online. This video was an excelent showcase of what's out there.

If they are the same species just a different phenotype then they would be allowed in... I wonder how that works? The definition of a species is a complex issue, and typically things have been grouped together by the way they look, but the only reliable method is by genetic comparison. I doubt these underwent any genetic analysis and so I'd imagine that's why they are just called Rasbora! That's why the MAF system of going down to the species level instead of the genus one is totally, totally stupid. However it does mean that the system can be totally exploited. :lol:

Yeah I read the "main population thought to be found at 250ft" hmmm. $$$

I think he makes those photos worse with his photoshopping technique, that bottom one just looks silly. It isnt a question of using photoshop, he just does a poor job. I think he might just be changing the saturation on the whole image, which is why the blue background is so bright. I agree his aquascaping is pretty darn cool.

Haha there's an awesome class photo of mine from standard 1, and we could normally wear mufti but on the photo day it was compulsary uniform. So being the only one that forgot - I'm right in the middle of a sea of blue sporting a bright white Leonardo TMNJ shirt. :lol: I find it weird that things go suddenly off the rails and you havent really done anything very drastic to the tank. Are things looking better/stalled, or are they actually getting worse?

Im dissappointed Chimera! I was a huge teenage mutant ninja turtles fan! Their first movie "remains one of the highest grossing independent films of all time." Pretty cool for such a whacked out idea. I even own their Vinyl record haha. :lol:

The red/white stripes of the cleaners is genetically programmed into most fish as useful, I'd say they'd stand a much better chance of not being abducted by the clown.

I was under the impression that osmotic shock and temperature changes over a short period were really bad for crusteaceans in particular.

Well Layton I dont own a Salifert test kit, so at least the Endowment effect is not at play on me. As for anecdotal evidence... defined as I selected those two because they indicate that anecdotal evidence while not standing up to scientific standards, can none the less be useful sometimes. The picture that I get from people who use the salifert test is that it is consistant with their observations of the tank. Many who use the tests like the ULTRA skim tanks nearly always show up as undetectable, and do not show up as 0.05. If I were to put my life on the line for an accurate reading from a salifert test kit your damn sure I wouldn't put it on being more accurate than +- .05, but what if those kits are say within 0.01 accuracy 80% of the time? What I would be interested in is a fair test - say 100 tests at increasing phosphate levels ten at each 0.00 0.01 0.02 etc. I would be really interested in the results, but so far as I'm aware noone has tried this? I imagine that there would be outliers, but I'd also be interested to see if they could be removed using conventional stastical techniques. Anyone know if this has been done anywhere? It wouldnt be took expensive to carry out. At least Wasp has provided some evidence/"evidence", I might try to analyise his results!

Well what about all the points that I brought up? Why do incredibly low nutrient taks consistantly get nil phosphate readings? At the same time tanks that have higher levels consistantly get detectable levels. I'm well aware of the science involved, but I can still see from anecdotal stastical evidence that these tests seem to be a lot more on the money than plus or minus 0.05. If you keep tossing a coin and it comes up heads time after time, you have to check to see whether its statistically significant.

I agree with Wasp, anecdotal evidence suggests that those tests are more accurate than the ratings given by the manufacturer. This is based on what I've seen of other people experiences also, if you look at all the super skimmed tanks they have a phosphate of 0 on the test. Now you say flipping a coin but it if it keeps coming up heads enough the results are probably significant. What I would imagine is that for x amount of tests produced, say 10 in every hundred will be way outa whack. So the varience is wide which shifts the average accuracy disproportionately away from the median. If what your saying is the case Layton heaps of the ultra low nutrient tanks would be getting .3 or .4 ratings at least some of the time, and I have not seen much if any evidence of this. Sure it may occur, and what most people do is another test which goes back to the usual result.

Man that big tank is ridiculous! I can only imagine how much that guy earns.

Does anyone have any of this algae? I think it looks awesome!

Haha 80,000LPH, thats pretty damn psycho! Awesome.

I've read that UV actually increases the likelyhood of bacteria being skimmed. On the pond units - the distance between the bulb and the wall of the unit is important, while green algae is easy to kill with fast flow and a wide bulb to wall distance, salt tanks need a different system. In a salt tank you want to kill everything thats going past - so the distance between the bulb and the wall is short, ie the light has more intensity because it isnt dissapated through the water as far. Salt UV acts as a sterilizer, while pond UV kills algae and not much in the way of bacteria/cysts etc.

I thought cowries were coral destroyers?

I particularly enjoyed the "meat grinder" reference.

Haha no way I've been using the UK measurement of gallons when converting things, something new everyday.

That guys trails are hard to judge - going from MH to all T5's is a pretty major change IMO, added to the zeovit change he's talking about. I definately agree - the befores were much more appealing, although he seems to think things have improved, so maybe its the lighting etc.

I dont get why you dont just use it as a nutrient sink anyway? Even with mechanical filtration and small grain sand it will still fill up with nutrients. This system of RDSB is quite similar to a fluidized sand bed (in terms of nutrient buildup). Definately give it a go, I'm surprised so few people incorporate DSBs in this manner. If it were me I'd want the dirtiest sandbed around, you can always disconnect & throw it away, any gunk that it pics up has been missed by your skimmer, but can feed pods etc.

I think a DSB in the refugium sounds like what you are after. The effectivness of algae and mangroves has been measured, mangroves are pretty much useless and algae can only live in "dirty" tanks. If you can grow algae, you have too many nutrients, and obviously just removing the algae wont get you below this level. I'm not sure but I think some people here still use algae?

The return pump should not be how you set the water level in the overflow. It is a bad idea to restrict the pipe down into the sump, as a blockage could make your display overflow and your sump empty out. Normally you set the hight of the water with the height of the pipe in your overflow. Hanve a look here... http://www.dursostandpipes.com/ this is what I'd say the majority of reefers use. http://www.melevsreef.com/what_sump.html this is a good link, there is an article down the bottom "everything you wanted to know about sumps but were afraid to ask" or something which is very good.

For the rotary fanatic who has everything... http://www.trademe.co.nz/Home-living/Pe ... 586259.htm :lol:

Yep thats still the plan, man has it been a long time in the making! I have everything I need, I really want to see how my DIY rock went as well, only problem is I have to see if I remember where I put everything... I got an awesome deal on a chiller, so my setup should be pretty sweet given the cost. I think I'll have to sell everything up though as I'll probably move somewehere else next year, but I could still just set things up for the hell of it!

I just got my tank drilled and the overflow sorted, but I dunno what I'm gonna do next year so am unsure whether I want to set it up hmmm. My live rock has been sitting in the ocean since November last year haha!! So it should be pretty damn live.