Link to thread on TN & sudden nutrient drop ( or PH )

[wasp]

http://zeovit.com/forums/showthread.php ... #post51668

And no, my avatar is not photoshopped other than cropping, it is the real monti

[lduncan]

Someone should tell the reefs this info... if it were true, surely they would be long gone with tide changes and weather patterns etc.

The common theme is that you are ADDING a substance to the tank then you observe TN. Surely in the absence of any real data, it would be logical to suspect the substance you are adding as the cause?

People can also notice these effects well before any nutrient drops even occur. The theory just isn't consistent with other observations.

Layton

[wasp]

No you're confused.

Water around sps reefs is quite stable. That's why there is a sps reef there. Never saw an overdose of vodka into a wild reef.

The problem they are discussing is what can happen in a little glass box we call a reef tank. Very small environement, very vulnerable. We are talking about much bigger swings, much bigger, than what happens on a wild sps coral reef when the tide changes.

Catastrophically big changes. Big enough to cause TN.

[lduncan]

We are talking about much bigger swings, much bigger, than what happens on a wild sps coral reef when the tide changes.

Catastrophically big changes. Big enough to cause TN.

So what sort of changes (numbers) over what period of time are you calling "catastrophically big changes" ?

Layton

[cracker]

Wasp, Layton....stop bloody arguing!!

Wasp, dont change your avatar.......It makes you look like a legend, (Nice Monti!!!).

Hows the Fire fish?

:lol:

[cracker]

What is TN?

Or is it simply tissue necrosis?

[lduncan]

It's not arguing it's a discussion.

I don't buy the whole sudden drop in nutrients causes TN thing.

Too many observations which contradict it.

Layton

[wasp]

OK Cracker, you're right.

Sadly I'll have to let Layton continue with his tank "issues", when he learns more, he may be able to get a pic up.

[lduncan]

More personal jabs.

I was just asking questions. If you can't answer them fine, but does it always have to come back to false assumptions and personal attacks?

It's always interesting to here how my tank is doing from someone who is at the other end of the country. :roll:

Layton

[jetskisteve]

:roll: :roll:

[Brianemone]

the logic does go in laytons favor here, personally im considering using zeovit but i dont think that the TN would be cause by rapid improvements in water quality.

[lduncan]

but i dont think that the TN would be cause by rapid improvements in water quality.

Personally I think it is a convenient explanation to explain the occasional trouble people have with the system, without directly implicating the product itself. Same goes for some other commercial products as well.

They all have one thing in common, they are adding something to the tank. Surely the logical thing to expect is that it is actually the product causing the problem? Especially when there is no evidence that sudden drops in the nutrients they talk about cause similar problems under other circumstances.

Layton

[wasp]

the logic does go in laytons favor here, personally im considering using zeovit.

Sorry Brian if that’s what you think I would not recommend you go zeovit.

Craig was correct in that if I respond to Laytons arguments, it will never end, same as every other thread I ever started involving filtration or water quality.

So I’m just going to state that what typically happens in a tank, NOT IN A WILD REEF which is a whole different ball game.

The tank will typically be running at a much higher level of nutrients than a wild reef. Perhaps a Po4 value of 3.0, or similar. As a result, there will be brown sps, and perhaps algae. The sps are chocolate brown and have adapted to the high nutrient level over a long time, perhaps months or more.

So – The reefkeeper decides to do something about this and reduce phosphate. Typically using a phosphate resin, zeovit, or vodka. But he gets carried away and overdoes it, reducing Po4 in a very short time to levels below 0.003. Below levels that occur in NSW and are required by the sps to sustain life. The sps need Po4 for survival and there is now not enough to sustain them. On top of that they have been adapted over a period to much higher Po4 levels than occur in a wild reef.

The result is they lose tissue, and perhaps die. It has nothing to do with iron or whatever Laytons latest theory of the month is.

Now I know Layton will come back and argue about this, but I cannot be bothered. I’ve just posted this so those who wish can have the information.

[gregb]

I hope all your corals turn into Emues & kick your dunny door down.

[Brianemone]

wasp no need to argue or get upset, the whole idea of these threads and forums is to discuss things, just because someone says that they think something else is happening it doesnt constitue an argument.

things need to be turned back a few notches and just discuss the issues at hand.

as per your comment on the PO4 drop after long acclimatisation i can see the reasoning in it.

[wasp]

wasp no need to argue or get upset.

It's just the mindless repetition of over simplistic assumptions that get me when I've been hearing the same thing for years from a guy who can't even keep colourful & healthy sps.

Comparing our tank to a wild reef may be what people want to hear, but it is not the reality. We need to understand the chemistry of a tank.

When Layton can put up a pic of his healthy and colourful sps, I'll talk to him, but for now why should I or anyone take his advice?

Thanks for making this another great thread, I'm done with it.

[Pies]

I think its reasonable to expect to have problems (TN) when the environment changes. A sudden change (for better or for worse) can cause problems, be in PH, ALK, temprature, CA, MG, Nutrients (e.g. from large water changes), dosing etc.

One thing not discussed (by wasp or layton) is exposure time. I belive that in the wild, there are changes in nutrient levels and temprature as a common occurance (e.g. after a storm, change in season etc). But we know the corals (mostly) survive. However in the wild, things quickly return to the 'stable normal levels'. Nutrients peak then return to normal, probably within a few days. In our tanks, nutrients are altered, but remain in this state.

I believe this is where many problems occur and when a comparison to nature often doesn't fit well. e.g. water in a shallow area in low tide may reach 33degrees and corals survive, a few hours later the cooler water returns (high tide) problem sorted. In our tanks the temprature may rise to over 30 degrees but typically stays high, the same with other environment changes.

Just my thoughts.

Pie

[Brianemone]

good point.

alot like my flatworm kill off, the tank did get back to normal fairly quickly tanks to the water changes, and the acro's responded well.

what i want to know is how much of the zeo system is good husbandry (regular water changes, constant water parameters etc) and how much it the zeo system??

it will be a while untill i can attempt it as i have along way to go in perfecting my water param's and keeping it all stable

[lduncan]

So I’m just going to state that what typically happens in a tank, NOT IN A WILD REEF which is a whole different ball game.

The tank will typically be running at a much higher level of nutrients than a wild reef. Perhaps a Po4 value of 3.0, or similar. As a result, there will be brown sps, and perhaps algae. The sps are chocolate brown and have adapted to the high nutrient level over a long time, perhaps months or more.

So – The reefkeeper decides to do something about this and reduce phosphate. Typically using a phosphate resin, zeovit, or vodka. But he gets carried away and overdoes it, reducing Po4 in a very short time to levels below 0.003. Below levels that occur in NSW and are required by the sps to sustain life. The sps need Po4 for survival and there is now not enough to sustain them. On top of that they have been adapted over a period to much higher Po4 levels than occur in a wild reef.

You assume that 0.003 is actually a low level of phosphate. It isn't in terms of corals requirements. That's just orthophosphate you're measuring there. It's around when every other biological store is saturated with phosphate.

Coral need very little phosphate to survive. It's not orthophosphate that they need.

So your assumption that people should have detectable levels of phosphate in their tank is wrong. That means that their tank is saturated with phosphate.

What happens when people do water changes? Do a 20% water change and (assuming the new water has undetectable levels) you reduce nutrients by 20% over a period of a few minutes. Why doesn't that cause problems?

What do people recommend people with excessive nitrate problems do? Large water changes > 50%. Does that cause TN? How many people complain about TN after doing water changes?

What about when you get a new coral from the lfs. Their tanks could be running an order of magnitude higher nutrient levels. Do people have tn problems every time they put a new coral in their tank?

Sure changing SOME parameters quickly can cause problems. pH comes to mind. It controls many cellular processes, determines reaction equilibria etc. But reducing nitrates and phosphates suddenly does not cause the same effect.

What about coral researchers who report stop RTN in it's tracks simply by removing the coral from a high nutrient tank, into a low nutrient sea water flow through system?

Corals have stores of phosphate. You'd have to see them deplete first before you would see TN due to "low" nutrients. That could take weeks or days. The first challenge though would be to get nutrients that low in the first place, near impossible with the equipment used in our tanks.

Layton

[lduncan]

Tt's just the mindless repetition of over simplistic assumptions that get me when I've been hearing the same thing for years from a guy who can't even keep colourful & healthy sps.

More personal insults. And I'm the one who ruins threads? You can't even discuss something civilly.

When Layton can put up a pic of his healthy and colourful sps, I'll talk to him, but for now why should I or anyone take his advice?

How does a picture of my tank relate to whether sudden decreases in nutrients cause TN?

Layton

[wasp]

You assume that 0.003 is actually a low level of phosphate. It isn't in terms of corals requirements.

Layton

Completely wrong Layton. Below that level will not sustain sps. You are perhaps confused thinking I mean 0.03. But I don't, I mean what I say, which was below 0.003.

No doubt the rest of your post will be full of wrong info also but like I said i can't be bothered so beyond the first sentence which turned out to be rubbish, I'm not even reading it.

[suphew]

For the sake of the rest of use that dont have degree's in Marinebiology and biochemistry etc, could you guys just let us know what qualifications and lab experience you have to back the bold statements you are making so we have a better idea who to believe?

Obversely you can't both be right so if whichever one of you actually has the qualifications and has done the research to back up the claims that you're making as your own could just hold up your hand now then we would know that the other is just passing on dubious secondhand un-substantiated dribble, myth and folk law.

Of course I'm assuming that one of you is qualified????

[Brianemone]

nice call out suphew.

it does get hard wading through all the muck to find out the truth when ther is so much heresay etc.

[wasp]

I have no qualifications in marine biology or similar.

If people want to class what I say as muck that's fine on this site I get told I can't read, I have been called ignorant, I have been called stupid, etc. all by the same guy who has accused me of being abusive. I'm quite used to it by now.

However despite the fact that I am ignorant, stupid, and can't read, I am able to post pics of nice corals growing in my tank, such as the one in my avatar. ( Unphotoshopped other than cropping of course ) I have grown that one from a small frag over the period of 9 months or so. Naturally that would count for nothing and truely I have no further interest in continuing in this thread. I only came back last post to counter the false information given in Laytons previous post, somebody following it could end up losing corals.

But it's just yet another big undignified argument and this time I really am out of this thread, Layton can spout whatever he wants, and have an avatar of a coral from somebody elses tank, that's over to him.

I can see how people just cannot choose from the many differing opinions given in this hobby, all I can say is do lots of reading, and go with something that works for you.

[lduncan]

If people want to class what I say as muck that's fine on this site I get told I can't read, I have been called ignorant, I have been called stupid, etc. all by the same guy who has accused me of being abusive. I'm quite used to it by now.

No, I've said that sometimes you don't comprehend what you read, and some theories are stupid. I've never called you stupid at all.

You ASSUME I haven't posted pictures of my tank because it's in some sort of wasteland state, with brown dying acros. That's far from true. I have nothing to prove. My tank has no bearing on whether what I say is accurate or not... yet some people seem to think it does.

Ask photobarry (on RC) how they have stopped RTN in the past in their research facility? Then see If you agree with the thread posted.

Also wasp I wasn't confused, I saw the two zero's. That's still 3ppb, many reefs operate happily at 0.31ppb (10 times lower than that lower limit). This level is far from starving corals of phosphate.

Layton