Whats in the soup?

[Kalkbreath]

..The problem is that , its ingrained into the mentality of the hobby today................... that in order to succeed........."you must feed the corals" I also can say that I personally have never suggested one bottle of plankton type supplement.. But I dont run the store day to day.........The question is why do the majority of hobbyists drop out of the hobby .........and why do so many have hair algae problems as the reason?

 

[Anonymous]

The pendulum has also swung to the other side as well. A few years ago we were all about keeping our tanks as nutrient starved as possible, now we are all about feeding as much as possible (phyto, zoo, etc...) It's not surprising that many people don't understand the balance.

 

[mkirda]

The pendulum has also swung to the other side as well. A few years ago we were all about keeping our tanks as nutrient starved as possible, now we are all about feeding as much as possible (phyto, zoo, etc...) It's not surprising that many people don't understand the balance.

Rover,

This is due to the fact that even the folks who expouse the feeding more is better idea cannot agree on how much more.

My own take on things is pretty simple- You would need to monitor nitrate and orthophosphate levels with some pretty sophisticated kits, and map the data over time to see how much dosing affects these two end products, while combined with a more subjective observational approach: i.e. How does the tank *look*?

Time-based analysis would help, that is for sure, but this is quite the PITA, as you need to then quantify how much you are adding, how much the skimmate is pulling out, then how the nutrient levels change, combined with how other indicators (i.e. algae and/or coral growth).

I can't see too many people doing it. And even if they did, the results would only apply to their tank anyway... They sure couldn't be generalized.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[John_Brandt]

The pendulum has also swung to the other side as well. A few years ago we were all about keeping our tanks as nutrient starved as possible, now we are all about feeding as much as possible (phyto, zoo, etc...) It's not surprising that many people don't understand the balance.

Rover,

My own take on things is pretty simple- You would need to monitor nitrate and orthophosphate levels with some pretty sophisticated kits, and map the data over time to see how much dosing affects these two end products, while combined with a more subjective observational approach: i.e. How does the tank *look*?

What is a hobbyist supposed to think as the tank looks "better and better" each day, as the nitrate and phosphate continue ratcheting upwards, well beyond NSW levels?

 

[Anonymous]

The pendulum has also swung to the other side as well. A few years ago we were all about keeping our tanks as nutrient starved as possible, now we are all about feeding as much as possible (phyto, zoo, etc...) It's not surprising that many people don't understand the balance.

Rover,

My own take on things is pretty simple- You would need to monitor nitrate and orthophosphate levels with some pretty sophisticated kits, and map the data over time to see how much dosing affects these two end products, while combined with a more subjective observational approach: i.e. How does the tank *look*?

What is a hobbyist supposed to think as the tank looks "better and better" each day, as the nitrate and phosphate continue ratcheting upwards, well beyond NSW levels?

:?:

 

[mkirda]

What is a hobbyist supposed to think as the tank looks "better and better" each day, as the nitrate and phosphate continue ratcheting upwards, well beyond NSW levels?

John,

I haven't seen one that matches that description, John.

Do you have examples?

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[John_Brandt]

What is a hobbyist supposed to think as the tank looks "better and better" each day, as the nitrate and phosphate continue ratcheting upwards, well beyond NSW levels?

John,

I haven't seen one that matches that description, John.

Do you have examples?

Regards.
Mike Kirda

You have seen the examples, Mike. Virtually all closed-system aquariums are examples of this. There is no good correlation between nitrate and phosphate level and the 'health' of animals. Even aquariums with 'near zero' levels have nutrients that are orders of magnitude greater than natural seawater. From the moment they are collected and placed into closed containers, marine animals are exposed to extraordinary levels of nutrients.

I'm not saying that it isn't desirable to maintain low levels of these testable nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, etc.); I'm just saying that a hobbyist cannot practically watch their animals closely and assume that declining health is directly related to a rise in nutrients. Ironically, it could be related to a decrease in nutrients. But it's only ironic when using the incorrect correlate of nutrient level being directly related to health or 'appearance'.

 

[Anonymous]

i have never seen any tank look 'better and better', as nitrate and phosphate levels 'ratchet upwards'

i have seen them look worse and worse, though

 

[John_Brandt]

The thing that improves the health and appearance of animals - food, directly 'ratchets' the testable nutrient level of the water upwards.

 

[Kalkbreath]

I think what he is saying .....is that the first weeks of dosing ,the animals react favorable....{to the addition of new food}........but then the waste begins to build up and there is a point at which too much of a good thing is reached.....

 

[mkirda]

The thing that improves the health and appearance of animals - food, directly 'ratchets' the testable nutrient level of the water upwards.

John,

Can you tell me what was wrong with my assertion?

That if you are to feed your tank, that you feed it and monitor the levels of N and P and adjust the amounts you feed so that the levels of N and P do not rise over time?

Is there something you feel is inherently wrong with this? Heck, I feel it is pretty darn conservative myself.

Also, John, I have to admit that, for the life of me, I cannot come up with a single example of a tank that fits the situation that you describe. You say I've seen it, but I have no idea what tank it is. Can you enlighten me?

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[mkirda]

I think what he is saying .....is that the first weeks of dosing ,the animals react favorable....{to the addition of new food}........but then the waste begins to build up and there is a point at which too much of a good thing is reached.....

That is not how I understood it. I understood it to be that you continue to feed, the nutrient levels rise and rise and rise, but the tank continues to remain healthy.

I cannot say that I've ever seen a tank like that.
I cannot imagine that the tank wouldn't eventually crash.

Regards.
Mike Kirda

 

[JennM]

Anybody ever heard of water changes?

Nutrient levels won't "ratchet upwards" if the tank is properly maintained! Small frequent water changes and a sensible regimen... every tank is different, so what works for one may not work for another.

There is a lot of science in the hobby, but a great hobbyist also has good intuition, to go along with the common-sense and science.

Jenn