dosing vodka to bring down N and P [Archive] - Page 2

tmz

11/21/2008, 11:28 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13546881#post13546881 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by WaterKeeper
I still am lost to WHY it works. As I said, pages ago, alcohol is just a carbon source and there should be plenty of carbon sources in one's tank without the booze. As you know bacteria will increase with more food (carbon/ethanol) and presumably bind up orthophosphate and nitrate along with the carbon.

I think the phosphorous and nitorgenous waste are still in the aquarium in a different form as is more carbon than you started with and more bacteria. All of which can lead to an increase in potentialy harmful organics which may or may not be exported by the skimmer.

The additional bacteria feeding off the increased carbon source may be beneficial as food or have a probiotic as food competitors with pathenogenic bacteria. They may be benign with no real effect. They may actually be patenogenic or a combination of all three. So in my opinion while carbon dosing may have benefits it is not without significant risk.

Now if you drink it instead of dosing it all of you water parameters will look just fine as Randy pointed out to me in another thread.:p

Safedad

11/22/2008, 05:46 PM

I have increased .5ml a couple of times. I noted that one early post said you can increase by .25 every couple or three days. What should I look for as I increase to know that I am reaching a saturation point for the bacteria? It seems many cut back to half their dosage at some point. My nitrates are low, 0-2, but am still having hair algae and cyano growth. I am getting new coralline algae growth on the rocks and on the glass. My acan is starting to grow again and my corals look fine. I would like to step up the Vodka as fast as is productive, so would like to have a better feel for what I would see in my aquarium. I am finding that to be the best indicator of how things are doing.
Thanks,
Bob
P.S. 55 gal main with 55 gal sump (prob 70 gal H2O) Dosing BioDigest and Bioptim on alternate weeks, using 3ml vodka daily, have a small turf algae scrubber, some GFO and Carbon passively in the sump, and an ASM G-3 with mesh mod and recycle mods

NYreefKeeper

11/29/2008, 08:08 AM

ok so after months of reading through threads on vodka dosing i decided to jump in, ive been dosing for about 2 months now, started with .5 ml for first 4 days then went to .75 for next 3 days then too 1ml a day up to 3ml a day now and pretty much decided to stop here, not a biologist or anything of the sort { crash you car and i am a doctor in that field } been in the hobby for a little over 2 yr's now and have been keeping sps for about 1.5 { buddy forced a few pieces on me } i've seen people making this and that claims as to what it does to there tank, well when i did reg water changes and all my maintnance things did just as good as they are now, but now i only do wc every 2 weeks. my thought in why i have a little better pe and color is that now the water is much clearer which is allowing for better light penitration and allowing my skimmer to pull more waste out of the tank. i did the prodibio for 2 months and basically got the same visual results but at a much more cost effective route. like most of your average reefer's alot of the formula''s and reading's are above my knowledge, but being able to look at my tank and have a great idea if anything is wrong, i dont see the vodka or any other method as a cure all and make your tank totm from any of these, i do believe they have some benifit but so does doing regular water changes of a significant amount and taking care of tank and inhabitants needs

HighlandReefer

11/29/2008, 08:34 AM

I think if you do a search of the hobbyists who have made the Tank of the Month honor, you will find few that dose carbon sources. Most of the TOM hobbyists do not add anything more than the standard needed ingredients. Many hobbyists have the wrong impression as to what dosing a carbon source will accomplish. IMHO, the reason you dose a carbon source is if you can not lower your nitrate & phosphate levels down low enough to maintain sps corals or if you are having a problem with algae. As far as any additional benefits that are derived from dosing a carbon source, perhaps additional food for the bacteria located in the coral polyp slime surface may have a benefit. It has been established in some preliminary research, if you dose sugar and/or vodka at higher than the recommend levels, it will kill corals. If hobbyists would stop adding to many fish to their tanks, like I do, then they would not have to dose carbon sources. :D

Genetics

11/29/2008, 10:49 AM

Safedad, if you are seeing positive results then you may be at a good dose for vodka. It is difficult to gauge when nitrates read zero but if you have (20 proof) 3mL in 60gal net water then you may be at the end of dose increasing. I would stay there and see if positive effects keep coming.

NYreefkeeper, prodibio is similar in function and I hear many positive results from it or in combination with zeo products. I don't know the exact composition and in my mind, I will not add something to my tank I don't know what it is. My vodka at $12/1.5L and lasts about 6 months compared to prodibio of $18 for 3 months.

Highland, most TOTM have never run a carbon source. Carbon sources are to help people that struggle to get their parameters in order to help grow corals better. Most TOTM have beautiful, efficient setups that remove wastes and keep excess nutrients in check.

NYreefKeeper

11/29/2008, 05:23 PM

genetics where at in col are you ? i'm from the hilltop but living in ny now, truelly i feel i could go without the dosing myself, skimmer is more then enough for my tank as well as all my equiptment is, but since ive been doing it and i do have too many fish and havent had any bad effects other then my figi yellow leather almost died, { put it in my seahorse tank } all seems good, not going to raise my dose anymore

gindobuck

12/02/2008, 11:43 PM

hi i just finished reading the article on alcohol dosing. i have some questions.
what happens when i stop dosing alcohol all of a sudden?
does it harm zoanthids or palys or soft corals? it seems like its only for sps and lps
anyone dose vit c in their tank as well. im planning to dose vit c because i heard that it enhance color of all corals especially zoanthids and palys as well as make them bigger and grow faster.
what happens when dosing vodka 80 proof and vit c?

SunnyX

12/03/2008, 11:15 AM

Wow, I just read through this entire thread! My eyes, they burn, they burn!! :eek:

Really good info here. I started dosing vodka to combat some Dino's that sprung up. Hopefully this will help.

Adrianvh

12/03/2008, 03:07 PM

ginobuck you don't stop dosing. Read the instructions, you only ever reduce it to a maintenance dose.

Safedad

12/03/2008, 08:48 PM

Quick history: Prodibio started this summer and it knocked my NO3 right down. However, I got a serious outbreak of HA and Cyano. Am using GFO, algae turf scrubber, ASM G# skimmer (with mesh, recirc, and discharge gate valve mods) to knock it back. I did one treatment of slime control but I believe the Prodibio released a lot of PO4 from my rocks, sand bed, and DSB.

Zeozym arrived today. I added 1/4 tsp. Mixed with tank water, set for 1hr, added to tank. Skimmer off for two hours.
Mixed up next batch and will let sit overnight.
Hair algae looking very faded.
Vodka: 2ml am & pm - this reduced the NO3 down to 0 about two weeks ago. Still dosing to eliminate HA
Vit C: 2000mg am & pm because my original zoos not looking very well. Started 3 days ago and worked up to 4000mg in tablet form. Will get some powder
Cons for all this treatment today:
Trumpets and Kenya trees not responding well to Vit C right after dosing, original zoos just so, so
Pros:
Acan mouths open wider than ever before. No other special PE to note.

tmz

12/03/2008, 10:23 PM

Why would prodibio release PO4 from the rocks and sandbed?

gindobuck

12/03/2008, 11:16 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13870047#post13870047 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Safedad
Quick history: Prodibio started this summer and it knocked my NO3 right down. However, I got a serious outbreak of HA and Cyano. Am using GFO, algae turf scrubber, ASM G# skimmer (with mesh, recirc, and discharge gate valve mods) to knock it back. I did one treatment of slime control but I believe the Prodibio released a lot of PO4 from my rocks, sand bed, and DSB.

Zeozym arrived today. I added 1/4 tsp. Mixed with tank water, set for 1hr, added to tank. Skimmer off for two hours.
Mixed up next batch and will let sit overnight.
Hair algae looking very faded.
Vodka: 2ml am & pm - this reduced the NO3 down to 0 about two weeks ago. Still dosing to eliminate HA
Vit C: 2000mg am & pm because my original zoos not looking very well. Started 3 days ago and worked up to 4000mg in tablet form. Will get some powder
Cons for all this treatment today:
Trumpets and Kenya trees not responding well to Vit C right after dosing, original zoos just so, so
Pros:
Acan mouths open wider than ever before. No other special PE to note.

watch out for your ph because i heard the tablets can cause the ph to become acidic.

Genetics

12/04/2008, 12:25 AM

NYreefkeeper, I'm in the Grandview area currently. Its a nice place to live as a graduate student.

Ginobuck, maybe someone else will chime in on the Vitamin C dosing. The article, though written around sps, will work for a multitude of corals and invertebrates. I've noticed little change in my soft corals and zoos but I do not dose vodka to try to acheive an ULNS that some have done. My nitrates are undetectable and phosphates are ~0.02-0.04ppm and I have good growth with acans, zoos, clams, mushrooms, rics, candycanes, anemones, and leathers. As for stopping, cutting back slowly would be the ideal way to stop. If you are worried about missing just a day or two in the dosing regimen then I would advise to skip it and not worry about it.

Safedad, have you tried to pull out some HA to see if it grows back?

Safedad

12/04/2008, 06:34 AM

I pull some out each weekend. Regrowth is slow. Doesn't seem to be spreading at all. Some patches looked "whiteish" when I got home yesterday. I assume that means it has given up its chlorophyll and is just the structure left.

Safedad

12/04/2008, 05:47 PM

A few pictures from this morning with my 50/50 PC only on.
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn299/safedad/Prodibio%20progress/DSC00058.jpg
Notice the mushroom is curled up and the kenya tree is gray and pulled in. These zoos look nice and open.

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn299/safedad/Prodibio%20progress/DSC00060.jpg
These zoos can open a lot more

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn299/safedad/Prodibio%20progress/DSC00063.jpg
Sorry about the picture quality, but the HA is just holding the bubles from the cyano which is fading.

cybrsufr

12/05/2008, 12:35 AM

Well I have been lurking in this forum and a couple others on vodka dosing and took the plunge 8 days ago. I have been using ProdiBio Biodigest for over a year in my 90 Gallon and continued when I upgraded to a 180 in July. However I have not been able to get my NO3 below 15ppm. This may have been due to also running O3 since the setup and since I have a Lifereef VS3 72" skimmer I have concluded that I was probably just wasting my money on the ProdiBio since my skimmer can turn over the entire system in about 30 Minutes and with approx. 2 minute dwell time in the reaction chamber I have probably been just killing any bacteria I was adding. 8 days ago I removed all of my GFO,GAC, and shut off the O3. I then started the vodka (along with the ProdiBio) and the tank has not looked better. I started with 2ml for 3 days then raised it to 2.5ml for 3 days, and now at 3.5ml. I dose 1/2 in the am and 1/2 in the pm. I am raising it very slowly until the NO3 drops instead of doubling after day 3. It may take a little longer to reach the correct level but feel that I need to play it safe since I have a huge investment in Corals, especially LE Montis and LE Chalices. I am guessing that with 273G total water volume, that it will probably be around the 6-8ml range before I see the drop in NO3 and am able to cut back to the maintenance dosage but so far I am impressed with the results. My water is just as clear if not clearer that it was running the O3 and the couple patches of Cyano I had on the sandbed are starting to retreat as well as a couple small patches of Bryopsis I had (it is slowing stopping to expand and beginning to lighten up and fall apart. All corals look outstanding and have no burnt tips and anything at this point. When I started 8 days ago my NO3 was running around a solid 15-20ppm not it is barely 15ppm so it is getting there. Here are a couple pictures of the corals from today before the Halides came on and a full tank shot with the halides on.

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0027.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0035.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0038.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0041.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0044.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0046.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0051.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0062.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_4892-med.jpg

Safedad

12/05/2008, 06:14 AM

Great colors! Congrats

I have a fair amount of "white" streamers in the tank this morning. If I remember correctly, that is bacteria so it is time to back down on the Vodka?? If so, I am thinking that a drop of .5ml every couple of weeks (am at 4ml now) down to 2ml would ease it off, keep the HA faiding, and not be too drastic. What do you think?
Thanks

Genetics

12/05/2008, 09:00 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13878479#post13878479 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0027.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0035.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0038.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0041.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0044.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0046.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0051.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_0062.jpg
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/500/152688IMG_4892-med.jpg

Pictures look great! I'm worried about the drastic change in your setup recently and wonder if in a few weeks if that may have a negative impact on your system (unrelated to the vodka dosing).

Safedad, yes it looks like you are getting past a good dosing area. I would cut back to 3.5mL immediately and then further cut back overtime according to the schedule you've worked out.

fred fishstone

12/05/2008, 09:29 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13878961#post13878961 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Safedad
Great colors! Congrats

I have a fair amount of "white" streamers in the tank this morning. If I remember correctly, that is bacteria so it is time to back down on the Vodka?? If so, I am thinking that a drop of .5ml every couple of weeks (am at 4ml now) down to 2ml would ease it off, keep the HA faiding, and not be too drastic. What do you think?
Thanks

Where are the streamers originating? (I want to know what to look for!)

Safedad

12/05/2008, 10:19 AM

They are mostly coming off of the edges of corals. A few are coming off of hair algae clumps. They go/wave in the direction of the current and are several inches long but very thin. If you get them, they are easy to see. If I can get a decent picture tonight, I will post.

fred fishstone

12/05/2008, 10:29 AM

Cool...thanks.

cybrsufr

12/05/2008, 01:02 PM

Originally posted</a> by Genetics
Pictures look great! I'm worried about the drastic change in your setup recently and wonder if in a few weeks if that may have a negative impact on your system (unrelated to the vodka dosing).

I doubt that there will be any negative effects on the system at all. Only changes would be improvements in color and clarity due to the Vodka dosing. Removal of the GAC and GFO will be negligible as the PO4 will be handled through the Vodka Dosing and GAC is really only for water polishing. The O3 removal will only be beneficial, as it will now allow my bacterial population to increase which will facilitate better waste removal from the system. Either way I am well prepared for any situations as I always have 79 Gallons of SW mixed up at all times ready to combat any crisis's, as well as having GFO, GAC, and all supplements that might be needed in an emergency. These systems are not as fragile as some would like to think, as long as you provide great husbandry, maintain water parameters, provide more than adequate lighting, and use a little bit of common sense, you can have a thriving reef. My only minor issue I am having is in the way of slightly elevated nitrates which does affect the coloration of my SPS due to the zooxanthellae being able to grow a lot faster, which in turn caused the polyps to take on a browner appearance (all zooxanthellae are brown). Once I get the nitrates reduces back to zero, the polyps will become clear again which will allow the pigmentation in the coral skin to show through. I do appreciate the concern and will keep the thread updated on my progress as it goes forward.

Genetics

12/05/2008, 01:23 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13881241#post13881241 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
I doubt that there will be any negative effects on the system at all. Only changes would be improvements in color and clarity due to the Vodka dosing. Removal of the GAC and GFO will be negligible as the PO4 will be handled through the Vodka Dosing and GAC is really only for water polishing. The O3 removal will only be beneficial, as it will now allow my bacterial population to increase which will facilitate better waste removal from the system. Either way I am well prepared for any situations as I always have 79 Gallons of SW mixed up at all times ready to combat any crisis's, as well as having GFO, GAC, and all supplements that might be needed in an emergency. These systems are not as fragile as some would like to think, as long as you provide great husbandry, maintain water parameters, provide more than adequate lighting, and use a little bit of common sense, you can have a thriving reef. My only minor issue I am having is in the way of slightly elevated nitrates which does affect the coloration of my SPS due to the zooxanthellae being able to grow a lot faster, which in turn caused the polyps to take on a browner appearance (all zooxanthellae are brown). Once I get the nitrates reduces back to zero, the polyps will become clear again which will allow the pigmentation in the coral skin to show through. I do appreciate the concern and will keep the thread updated on my progress as it goes forward.

Sounds like you know what you are doing! I apologize, one of the difficulties on these types of forums are knowing where people stand in their understanding of biology. Looking forward to the updates. :)

cybrsufr

12/05/2008, 01:48 PM

No apology necessary, that is one of the reasons I finally jumped in here as I was seeing that only yourself and a couple others really knew what was going on and responding to the guys that only have 15-50 posts and starting this process. Yes I have a very solid grasp of Biology as I was a pre-med Major, but ended up hating and therefore bot completing Organic Chemistry. I have completed Gen Chem, P-Chem, Analytical Chem, and too many Biology courses to list. When the Organic fell through (due to a nasty prof, should of tried a second time) I decided to go the Computer Science route. Now 20 years later I was making a great living in this field until I was laid off last month due to the economy and my company downsizing. Oh well almost finished with my MBA and something will happen.

Now that I have gone completely off topic I will try to steer it back there.

These types of processes (Vodka, VSV, ProdiBio, Zeo, Ultra Lith, etc) are very experimental and are not for the person who just setup their systems. People should take the time to get the right equipment, cycle their systems naturally (IMO this is very important to save from issue further down the road) as quick cycling the system using things like ProdiBio, BioZyme, Stability, etc. Just do not provide enough of a natural bacterial filter to keep things in check, then when you start adding 20 fish and hundreds of corals, you start seeing spikes in parameters, whereas If you endure and have patience and wait the full 8-10 weeks to start up a tank, you will have much better results further down the road. My problem with mine was that I did not even think about the O3 not allowing the bacteria to colonize. I had a break out of Ich from a Powder Blue Tang I did not QT (I know shame on me) so I flipped on the ozone as a cure, (It does work as a cure in my system due to the size of my skimmer, the dwell time in the reactor chamber, and the O3 level inside the skimmer) Well long story short after 2-3 weeks I had eradicate the Ich but decided to leave the O3 on, not thinking that I had not fully established a bio filter in the system. That combined with the 80W of UV had limited the amount of Nitrate fixing bacteria I had. This meant I had no NH4, and NO2 as those were well in the system from the cycle, but after transferring 22 fish, and hundreds of corals from the old system, I needed to allow the system to create a large colonization of Nitrate fixing bacteria to build up and instead I was killing them all with the UV and O3. Now since shutting of the O3 and deciding to wait 60-90 days before turning it back on. I will allow a large enough bacterial filter to build up in the system. (oh yeah I forgot to mention that I started this system with with 150lbs of dry/dead, then cooked Puccani rock so there was no bio filter at all when setting up). I think in the next 60-90 days I will have the system back to where it should be and the colors and bio filter working efficiently.

NYreefKeeper

12/06/2008, 08:30 AM

cyb dont let amount of post lead you to the amount of understanding that a reefer has, or experiance, this is a new account for me as i am a avid member on several other sites. as stated before i am not any where near a biologist or understand all the number's, but i do understand what it takes to have a successful tank { 90% sps 10% lps mainly chalices } really the main reason i chose this route over the other's was cost, being they are all doing the same basic thing, i also have a nitrate reactor, not in use and could use it. but it's extra pumps and wires i dont need. { have a sulfur reactor and one that i feed with vodka. have used both with great results } i like fish and not that i feel my equiptment can't handle it, the dosing is a little back up to keep things from having to be done as often. plus no worries of fluiding of power utages thati would have to completely recycle one of the reactors if a problem occured

Safedad

12/06/2008, 09:42 AM

Vitamin C: I am stopping my dosing of Vit C tablets because soft corals haven't responded well. It also upsets the skimmer so that it is now way out of balance. I have ordered some powdered Vit C and will resume when it gets here next week.
Vodka:I have cut back on Vodka from 2ml 2X to 2ml am and 1.5ml pm. I got long white stringer/filaments Thursday when I checked the tank.
Prodibio: Dosed BioDigest yesterday with ZEOzym. I also dosed one vial of Reefbooster. I will move from monthly to biweekly as long as HA doesn't start growing. Eventually will go to weekly.
ZEOzym: Dosing has been 1/4 tsp, 1 tsp, 1/2 tsp, and 1/2 tsp. Last 3 doses I let sit in a container overnight. I stopped air to skimmer for an hour or two when I added it (golf tee works well).
Hair algae appears to be dead but the tank looks pretty rough. Cyano is all gone and crushed coral base looks pretty clean. One acro tenius frag appears to be bleaching out. My blue acro is getting more blue on its entire stalk. My birdsnest is turning pink from the center out. Notice how the stalks look browner at the ends.
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn299/safedad/Prodibio%20progress/PC060202.jpg

An opinion: I have been at this a few years now. Unfortunately some livestock have suffered while I learned. I have tried a variety of approaches and NO3 has always been my underlying reef problem. From a 29g to 55g to 90g (in a couple of weeks). From little skilter to G3 with mods, from flourescent to PC to MH. I tried the Right Now bacteria with its TBPC carbon. It worked but I didn't have a good way to clean the carbon. The Prodibio caused a severe outbreak of HA and cyano. It knocked down the NO3 and with the Vodka I have gotten both the NO3 and PO4 down. It seems you either need to enjoy DIY (have a small turf algae filter running in my sump), piddling with the process, trying new things, or spend a lot of $ to buy equipment that does iit well (dosers, chillers, CA reactors, bubblemasters, etc.) I am also a Biology major with a fair amount of Chemistry. I am curious about the science but have come to believe the appearance of the tank compared to recent actions (change in dosing, new lights, new livestock, etc.) is a good way to manage my tank. I think the Prodibio system is a fairly easy way to manage the water. Its dosing protocol keeps me checking on the tank without taking up a lot of time. I would recommend it to start up a new system. I don't test the water for as many things as I used to because they don't change. The problem will always be getting an understanding of having good water with living things trying to pollute it as well as the living things interacting with each other and their external environment (temp, carbon, skimmers, lighting, additives, etc.). It isn't simple and although frustrating, is an interesting journey.

cybrsufr

12/06/2008, 12:55 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13886051#post13886051 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by NYreefKeeper
cyb dont let amount of post lead you to the amount of understanding that a reefer has, or experiance, this is a new account for me as i am a avid member on several other sites. as stated before i am not any where near a biologist or understand all the number's, but i do understand what it takes to have a successful tank { 90% sps 10% lps mainly chalices } really the main reason i chose this route over the other's was cost, being they are all doing the same basic thing, i also have a nitrate reactor, not in use and could use it. but it's extra pumps and wires i dont need. { have a sulfur reactor and one that i feed with vodka. have used both with great results } i like fish and not that i feel my equiptment can't handle it, the dosing is a little back up to keep things from having to be done as often. plus no worries of fluiding of power utages thati would have to completely recycle one of the reactors if a problem occured

I agree 100% and should have clarified that better than post count. I really was just trying to make the statement that someone who just setup there system without any other experience should not be doing these type of systems unless they FULLY understand that they have the potential to LOSE everything in there system if they mess it up and are not 100% diligent in monitoring and maintenance of their system. I for one know this and realize that I could lose over $5000.00 in corals alone not even counting the fish. I also have used the Sulphur DeNitraters and have had great success with them, but like you, I don't want the extra equipment, electricity, and potential problems when having to reSeed them after they are offline for any period of time. This system is working well so far and I can see the potential benefits long term (more food for fish and corals without the nitrate surges).

NYreefKeeper

12/06/2008, 06:08 PM

one of my earlier post on here was really towards people who are new to the hobby and jumping into vodka dosing, just as in dosing anything you should be checking and monitoring things, i think alot of the failure people had with vodka dosing is not following instructions to the T. or that try to use this method to do the work for them or not understanding why their level are where they are for a reason, and not trying to fix the problem but cover it up or fix a problem without knowing why they have the problem. and that this is not something that really lets you do less maintanance to the tank or that you can just skip out n doing water changes. fortunate for me i found this site and another when i first started the hobby and was given info on how things really work and that buying the proper equiptment the first time saves alot of money and headaches down the road. one of the thing's i had not seen in this thread is how many people feed with frozen food and do not rinse the food, this can and will eventually cause problems, phosphates and so on. all my fish are syrenge feed so i dont have much waste food.

Safedad

12/06/2008, 10:37 PM

I echo the value of these forums! There isn't one way as there aren't any two tanks alike. Finding formulas, general guides, pitfals help all of us chose different combination of approaches. I like the Prodibio but needed the Vodka supplement to help clean up my "dirty" tank that prodibio demonstrated. I now need to back down and find maitenance levels.

danorth

12/15/2008, 02:34 PM

Anybody have high nitrates to start with? I mean well over 100? Did it work for you/them?

Haksar

12/23/2008, 12:22 PM

Phew,I have ben reading this topic for the last 4 days.A few q's.

1How is the effect on Alk and ph while dosing vodka.
2)If its two time dosing what time gap is the dosage per day.
3)Is a WC recommended every week or after 02 weeks.
4)Any effects on CUC.
5)Is it ok to use Aqua Medic or any Po4 remover during the dosing regime.

Thanks,
Haksar

cybrsufr

12/23/2008, 12:50 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14002317#post14002317 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Haksar
Phew,I have ben reading this topic for the last 4 days.A few q's.

1How is the effect on Alk and ph while dosing vodka.
2)If its two time dosing what time gap is the dosage per day.
3)Is a WC recommended every week or after 02 weeks.
4)Any effects on CUC.
5)Is it ok to use Aqua Medic or any Po4 remover during the dosing regime.

Thanks,
Haksar

1. I have seen no effect on the Alk, it does have a very minute effect on PH, but not enough to worry about, since we are talking in the range of .05 or less in my experience

2. I dose twice a day between 8-10 am and between 9-11pm

3. I do weekly 37G changes on my 180 with 273G Total water volume including sump and fuge

4. No effects at all on any of my inverts or CUC

5. I have removed all Phosphate removal medias from my system, I used to run ROWA Phos in a fluidized reactor, but remove when starting Vodka Dosing and have see absolutely no rise in PO4, I have seen a decrease though which is good.

Paul_PSU

12/23/2008, 01:10 PM

Safedad, could you pm me any info or links on the algae scrubber you have running. I have nothing in my sump but a skimmer ( no fuge or macro) I have a dsb in my display tank. I was very interested in setting one up.

cybrsufr- I took my GFO offline about 5 days ago. I ran it the entire time. My nitrates have been zero for some time. My phosphates read zero on the test kits but we know how that goes. I am still cleaning the green film off of my glass daily (although not as much). I am hoping that taking the GFO offline will get me to that next and final level for an algae free tank. My rocks are fine, just the green film on the glass. I am currently dosing biodigest and vodka(1.6ml/day) on my 100gallon total system volume. I am hoping that the GFO was the key to holding me back from that next level with vodka dosing.

Paul_PSU

12/23/2008, 01:14 PM

I have also noticed that when I bumped my dose up to 1.8ml I started to get the clear stringy algae. I cut back to 1.6 the next day and it was gone the next.

cybrsufr

12/23/2008, 01:29 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14002658#post14002658 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul_PSU
Safedad, could you pm me any info or links on the algae scrubber you have running. I have nothing in my sump but a skimmer ( no fuge or macro) I have a dsb in my display tank. I was very interested in setting one up.

cybrsufr- I took my GFO offline about 5 days ago. I ran it the entire time. My nitrates have been zero for some time. My phosphates read zero on the test kits but we know how that goes. I am still cleaning the green film off of my glass daily (although not as much). I am hoping that taking the GFO offline will get me to that next and final level for an algae free tank. My rocks are fine, just the green film on the glass. I am currently dosing biodigest and vodka(1.6ml/day) on my 100gallon total system volume. I am hoping that the GFO was the key to holding me back from that next level with vodka dosing.

I haven't seen any of the stringy stuff yet and I am up to 7ml split twice a day. Been dosing for a full month and just starting to see NO3 dropping very slowly. I am estimating that around 9-10ml I will hit the critical mass where NO3 drops to zero, then figure round 6ml as maintenance. That is on a 180G with 273g Total including Sump and Fuge

Paul_PSU

12/23/2008, 02:39 PM

I know one thing for sure is that I'm going to invest in a Hanna meter to get accurate readings for phosphates.

cybrsufr

12/23/2008, 09:40 PM

Just curious, does anyone know of a tank that has been dosing for over 2 years. Wondering about long term sustainability using Vodka.

Paul_PSU

12/23/2008, 09:55 PM

I know Genetics has been dosing for at least one year. I am not sure exactly if it is closer to one or closer to 2 years.

Genetics

12/23/2008, 11:37 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14006053#post14006053 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul_PSU
I know Genetics has been dosing for at least one year. I am not sure exactly if it is closer to one or closer to 2 years.

My current tank has been setup over a year. I started dosing when I set this tank up and noticed nitrate issues. This was before I started adding any great degree of corals to the tank. I've been very happy with dosing. I do get paleness when I've added too much vodka. I've found a very happy medium though and will continue to drip it through my kalk reactor. Here's a pic I was playing with earlier today.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h116/NAWalton00/Birdsnest12-20-08.jpg

Paul_PSU

12/24/2008, 01:08 AM

Your ears must have been burning.....:lol:

I think I found the right dose for my system. When I bumped it up .2ml to 1.8 I started to see the clear stringy stuff in my tank. I took it back down to 1.6 and it went away. How long before you had to stop cleaning your glass daily because of the green film? There is definitely less of it but I still have to clean it daily. My nitrates have been zero and stay there just dealing with the phosphates now.

Your OK, even for a Buckeye......:p

Safedad

12/24/2008, 06:18 AM

Paul:
Here is the algae scrubber: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=1424843&perpage=25&pagenumber=1
With my Vodka dosing I got the white filaments (just found them one morning when the lights came on) and cut my Vodka in half. I pulled my scrubber because I needed the light for another project. My hair algae came right back. So I went back to my full dose of V and started increasing again. I was up to 2.5ml am and 2.2ml pm. I stepped my dosage up .1ml daily in my 55 gal (80 gal net water with sump) tank.
I just finished moving to my new 90 (120 gal net) yesterday. I will have to find a new correct level.
My Prodibio bacteria system has kept the NO3 down since August. The Vodka finished off the PO3 and the HA was dying (dead is when I can't see it, not just transparent filaments). The Zeozym by Pohls got rid of the cyano.
Bob

Genetics

12/24/2008, 09:45 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14007190#post14007190 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul_PSU
Your ears must have been burning.....:lol:

I think I found the right dose for my system. When I bumped it up .2ml to 1.8 I started to see the clear stringy stuff in my tank. I took it back down to 1.6 and it went away. How long before you had to stop cleaning your glass daily because of the green film? There is definitely less of it but I still have to clean it daily. My nitrates have been zero and stay there just dealing with the phosphates now.

If you nitrates are gone but you're still fighting some phosphate levels, I would run a small amount of GFO to get that in order.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14007190#post14007190 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul_PSU
Your OK, even for a Buckeye......:p [/B]

So I've been told. :) It will be interesting if I end up transferring to Bulldog's territory next year.

ejreyes6

12/30/2008, 08:29 PM

Would it be possible to add vodka to my ato if i know my comsumption rate?

cybrsufr

12/30/2008, 10:12 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14006788#post14006788 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
I've found a very happy medium though and will continue to drip it through my kalk reactor. Here's a pic I was playing with earlier today.

Genetics, I am curious how you are dripping it through the kalkstirrer? How did you determine the dosage to put in the kalkstirrer compared to direct dosing through the sump? I am current 34 days into it and am up to 8ml a day split between AM and PM additions of 4ml each. If I could automate it through the Kalkstirrer, that would be much easier, and lees apt to miss a dose (which I haven't yet thank goodness)

Genetics

12/30/2008, 10:30 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14046859#post14046859 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
Genetics, I am curious how you are dripping it through the kalkstirrer? How did you determine the dosage to put in the kalkstirrer compared to direct dosing through the sump? I am current 34 days into it and am up to 8ml a day split between AM and PM additions of 4ml each. If I could automate it through the Kalkstirrer, that would be much easier, and lees apt to miss a dose (which I haven't yet thank goodness)

I do not have my kalk hooked up to an RO unit but to a container of water. I figured out how much water my tank goes through in a day and then add vodka in a corresponding amount to the water. HTH.

How is the dosing going?

fred fishstone

12/31/2008, 11:16 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14047002#post14047002 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
I do not have my kalk hooked up to an RO unit but to a container of water. I figured out how much water my tank goes through in a day and then add vodka in a corresponding amount to the water.

I wondered if that was an option. I pump my kalk from a Brute container in the basement -- about 1.25 gallons a day (this time of year.) So I should divide gallons of kalk in container by 1.25 and multiply that by the number of milliliters of vodka per day. Add that much vodka to the kalk. Is that how you do it? Any problems?

Genetics

12/31/2008, 11:21 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14049663#post14049663 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fred fishstone
I wondered if that was an option. I pump my kalk from a Brute container in the basement -- about 1.25 gallons a day (this time of year.) So I should divide gallons of kalk in container by 1.25 and multiply that by the number of milliliters of vodka per day. Add that much vodka to the kalk. Is that how you do it? Any problems?

There is always the worry that I may grow some sort of bacterial film in it at some point. I have yet to have that but I do give it a good scrub every few months which may help.

Yes. I dose 8mL/day and use 1.75gpd. So I add 4.6mL per gallon of water and then multiple that by how much water I make up.

fred fishstone

12/31/2008, 12:00 PM

That makes sense.

I've been dosing for two months now, and I'm up to 4.5 mL a day on my 50. Have yet to see any "bacterial blooms."

mhaith

12/31/2008, 03:43 PM

Hello, My name is Michael and I have been dosing Vodka for one year now.

A year ago I started with a ml or so and haphazardly built up to 7mml/day with AA. I backed when I noticed my corals lightening and have been steady at 3 ml or so for the last 10 months.

All was fine until I read the VSV article in Reefkeeping magazine, so I switched from pure vodka to VSV; and now, despite GFO, GAC, UV, 2 skimmers, LR, Chaeto, UV, Huge water movement, good lighting and semi monthly 30% WC, have a small but virulent outbreak of Cyano.

With the thought that the carbon was feeding the Cyanobacteria, I stopped vodka dosing all together for a month and switched to Brightwell's MB7 to no avail.

I am back to dosing pure vodka in addition to the MB7 in an attempt to outcompete the Cyano. If that doesn't work I will go lights out for 3 days or use Chemicals but that is not the subject of this thread.

The moral of the story is that everyone's tank is different. Vodka dosing works for me in moderation and does not have to be highly regulated (per the RK article). The only negative appears to be that some SPS are more susceptible to Alk shifts due to the creation of a ULNS or LNS and I rarely see that mentioned in Vodka threads.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll87/mhaith/1yrFTSrightangle.jpg

I hope these one-year anniversary observations help and if any one has some thoughts on carbon dosing and Cyano..............

Genetics

12/31/2008, 04:12 PM

Michael, first of all nice tank! :eek2: How long has it been setup?

I have just recently found cyano in my tank as well. A small patch in the back where I can only see from the top down. I ended up ridding it with a product from Ultralife, Slime Remover. Seems to have worked well though I only used half the recommended dose. Its been a week and a half and I haven't seen anything negative come from it. Though I'm not sure my fish liked it. I have noticed my ORP is 30 points lower since dosing the Ultralife and haven't figured out if it is coincidence or a direct result.

The moral of the story is that everyone's tank is different. Vodka dosing works for me in moderation and does not have to be highly regulated (per the RK article). The only negative appears to be that some SPS are more susceptible to Alk shifts due to the creation of a ULNS or LNS and I rarely see that mentioned in Vodka threads.

I agree with you. Vodka works very well in moderation and will disagree with you on the comment of regulation in the RK article ;). The reason would be that everyone's tank is different and also everyone's way of going about dosing. Once you get accustomed to dosing, I can see where you're coming from. You know the limits of your tank and what to look for. But from a starting standpoint structure is always the key.

mhaith

12/31/2008, 04:25 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14051629#post14051629 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
Michael, first of all nice tank! :eek2: How long has it been setup?

I have just recently found cyano in my tank as well. A small patch in the back where I can only see from the top down. I ended up ridding it with a product from Ultralife, Slime Remover. Seems to have worked well though I only used half the recommended dose. Its been a week and a half and I haven't seen anything negative come from it. Though I'm not sure my fish liked it. I have noticed my ORP is 30 points lower since dosing the Ultralife and haven't figured out if it is coincidence or a direct result.

The moral of the story is that everyone's tank is different. Vodka dosing works for me in moderation and does not have to be highly regulated (per the RK article). The only negative appears to be that some SPS are more susceptible to Alk shifts due to the creation of a ULNS or LNS and I rarely see that mentioned in Vodka threads.

I agree with you. Vodka works very well in moderation and will disagree with you on the comment of regulation in the RK article ;). The reason would be that everyone's tank is different and also everyone's way of going about dosing. Once you get accustomed to dosing, I can see where you're coming from. You know the limits of your tank and what to look for. But from a starting standpoint structure is always the key.

Actually you are right about the regulation comment and that is why I preceded it with "every tank is different". Although this tank is only a year old, I have enough experience to know why certain 'bellweather' corals look the way they look.

I too, used the UltraLife Slime Remover at 1/2 dose. It worked great for 3 weeks then Cyano came back. I was very concerned about fully knocking out the very bacteria populations I was propagating so well.

This time I'll try lights out for 3 days if I can keep my PH and Alk in line.

Safedad

01/01/2009, 12:20 AM

Michael,
I am using Prodibio BioDigest (bacteria), Bioptim (bacteria supplemental food), and Reefbooster. I started using the Vodka after a hair algae and cyano outbreak. It did in the HA but not the cyano. When I started using Pohl's Zeozym, it knocked out the cyano. I had tried the slime remover and it worked, but not for long.

I just moved from my 55 gal mixed reef tank to a 90 gallon settup. New tank, new dosing yet to be figured out. Somewhere in the move my alkalinity spiked to 16. It is coming down slowly through water changes and no ALK supplement of my bulk reef supply two part mix.
Bob

mhaith

01/01/2009, 09:58 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14054109#post14054109 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Safedad
Michael,
I am using Prodibio BioDigest (bacteria), Bioptim (bacteria supplemental food), and Reefbooster. I started using the Vodka after a hair algae and cyano outbreak. It did in the HA but not the cyano. When I started using Pohl's Zeozym, it knocked out the cyano. I had tried the slime remover and it worked, but not for long.

I am going to try the Probidio regimine. Do you also use the Zeozym on an on-going basis or did you use it specifically to get rid of the Cyano?

Safedad

01/01/2009, 02:30 PM

I got it to rid the tank of cyano and plan to use it as part of my regular dosing:
Prodibio (nitrate, phosphate control), Vodka (hair algae control), Vitamin C (zoa growth in low nutrient system), Zeozym ( cyano control), Bulk reef supply two part with Mg (Ca, Alk, Mg levels).
I will watch my topoff over the next month with my new tank. Hopefully I can add some of this through it. I am trying to automate as much as possible. However, I do want something that brings me to the tank daily to check, not just watch it from the sofa.

cybrsufr

01/01/2009, 03:05 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14055241#post14055241 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mhaith
I am going to try the Probidio regimine. Do you also use the Zeozym on an on-going basis or did you use it specifically to get rid of the Cyano?

I am also using a similar regimen for my system. I use ProdiBio BioDigest, Seachem Fuel (for bacteria food, Aminos, and trace, cheaper than the BioOptim), I get the Lipids from Zoe mixed with my fish food (I found the reefbooster to add too much and spurred HA growth), and Voodka Dosing. After reading this I think I am going to order the Pohls though as well as I have two patches of cyano that just don't want to go away. I siphon them out once a week but they still come back. That could also be from the fact that the side of the tank it is growing on gets filtered natural sunlight from the Living Room windows.

cybrsufr

01/01/2009, 03:14 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14047002#post14047002 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
I do not have my kalk hooked up to an RO unit but to a container of water. I figured out how much water my tank goes through in a day and then add vodka in a corresponding amount to the water. HTH.

How is the dosing going?

It is going very well. I am up to 8ml a day split between two 4ml doses AM and PM. My nitrates have fallen from approx 20ppm to under 10ppm, still waiting for zero though. Phosphates were holding steady and dropping a little , but have stopped declining at .096 according to the Deltec Phosphate test. Will have to keep an eye on them and add some RowaPhos if they start climbing anymore. Want to hold off until Nitrates get down to zero if possible as I believe they will fall rapidly at that poit as well.

ricwilli

01/03/2009, 11:33 PM

I have started dosing Vodka. Should I remove the carbon media or should I leave it? Would like to know if the carbon media will remove the vodka that I dose. I also do 20% water changes every two weeks. Should I stop the water changes? I have a total of 90 gallons of water and battling Red Algae.

cybrsufr

01/03/2009, 11:44 PM

I still run carbon and water changes as usual.

ricwilli

01/04/2009, 11:04 AM

Yes, but can it be done at the begining of the dosing phase? I'm affraid that I will be removing the vodka.

Kolognekoral

01/04/2009, 11:27 AM

There is no danger of removing the vodka with carbon. After all, it is actually filtered through carbon before bottling to purify it. I always use carbon, aprox 1 cup per 250 gals/1000l changed every 4 weeks. One may use up to twice this amount, but I find this good for my tank. It should be kneeded daily to prevent the build-up of a biofilm, which will reduce its effectiveness.

melev

01/12/2009, 07:08 PM

I decided after almost six months of dosing that I needed a simpler system to get the vodka into the tank. It isn't all that hard to do, but I really didn't like having to stand over the sump dripping it in for almost 2 minutes each day, and figured there had to be a better way. So I grabbed some acrylic...

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/voda_doser_bracket.jpg

And made a holder for my 'reservoir'. Here's the entire Vodka Dosing Drip System or VDDS for short.

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_doser.jpg

I found a larger syringe to be the reservoir, and it holds about 15 ml of solution to the top. I'm pretty much at capacity at the moment, since I dose 13 ml daily.

I took the plunger out, and cut off the top 3/4" section to keep a lid on the reservoir around the clock so it stays clean internally.

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_reservoir_cap.jpg

So this is how it works. First I get the vodka, a small dosing cup (to draw the vodka from) and a syringe.

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_cup.jpg

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_syringe.jpg

Then I squirt it into the VDDS.

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_filling_reservoir.jpg

Here it is, fully and ready to do its thing.

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_reservoir.jpg

I have a pinch valve on the thin tubing to regulate the drip rate.

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_pinchvalve.jpg

And while I don't need to see it drip in here, I can anyway (btw, it took 20 shots to finally get a drop in the picture):

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_drip_counter.jpg

And it drips into my sump via this tip

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_drip.jpg

The benefit for me is I fill it up and let it drip in at its own rate, which would be over the next 2 - 10 minutes. I didn't realize the viscosity of vodka was so different from water, but it is. You have to really crank down on the pinch valve or it rushes right out all at once.

To me, it seems like the vodka seems to work better when it is added gradually instead of more quickly, based on what I'm watching my skimmer do foam-wise. Time will tell if this makes any difference at all, but I figured I'd give it a try.

mhaith

01/12/2009, 07:46 PM

Marc, do you have any theories as to why a 2 minute slow drip of vodka in your tank is more effective than just squirting it in?

If this is true, then can you create a much longer super-slow drip?

melev

01/12/2009, 09:38 PM

Theory - yes. Facts - no. It is just something I observe with my skimmer's collection cup. And I could be way off, but this is what I've noticed:

When the vodka is dosed haphazardly and in a rush, the skimmate seems to be messy as it pours into the cup. However, on the days when I really take my time and add about a drop a second until all 13 ml have been added, the skimmate seems to froth out into the cup like a volcano (in shape only, not some type of geyser effect). This is just something that occurs a few hours after dosing, not as I do it.

I figured if this method works and the shape of that foam stays the same in the cup, it is working. :lol:

OR ...

I just had too much time to think about this and should have just never posted. :D

mhaith

01/12/2009, 11:28 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14142512#post14142512 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev

OR ...

I just had too much time to think about this and should have just never posted. :D

aaah, but this is the base of great discoveries no?

Perhaps your observations on the shape of your skimmate will result in a reefkeeping breakthrough! :thumbsup:

melev

01/13/2009, 12:19 AM

We'll see, right? :lol:

Kolognekoral

01/13/2009, 03:04 AM

Marc,

great little set-up! I may try this out with the Zeovit products to see if the same 'foaming' results. Although I work with vodka on some set-ups, I've not noticed a big difference in skimmate one way or the other, but I do dose small quantities over a 24hr period.

Mind you, was the moon full?.....:D

Paul_PSU

01/13/2009, 06:30 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14142512#post14142512 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
Theory - yes. Facts - no. It is just something I observe with my skimmer's collection cup. And I could be way off, but this is what I've noticed:

When the vodka is dosed haphazardly and in a rush, the skimmate seems to be messy as it pours into the cup. However, on the days when I really take my time and add about a drop a second until all 13 ml have been added, the skimmate seems to froth out into the cup like a volcano (in shape only, not some type of geyser effect). This is just something that occurs a few hours after dosing, not as I do it.

I figured if this method works and the shape of that foam stays the same in the cup, it is working. :lol:

OR ...

I just had too much time to think about this and should have just never posted. :D

I also dose vodka and never really paid attention to the difference in skimmate at the time of dosing. You got me thinking and I'll have to try to drip it for a few days and see what happens. I think that vodka dosing is new enough that who really knows how fast the vodka is used up or stays in the water column. If anything, this just may be a more efficient way to dose. We may find that doing it this way we need less vodka per dose.

My only suggestion; maybe you should change the name from VDDS to something else. Sounds like a new STD.......:lol: If someone overhears you saying "I haven't been monitoring my VDDS lately," I'm not sure how they would take it....:eek2:

Paul

danorth

01/13/2009, 12:35 PM

I'm up to 7 ml daily in my tank. Nitrates are still blood red. I am a FOWLR tank though....

Questions, does it matter if I dose 1/2 morning, 1/2 evening?

Do the lights have to be on to dose?

mat167

01/13/2009, 10:14 PM

Better to dose in small portions from what I've read.

On another note, I've stopped because I haven't seen any significant or worthwhile effect. NO3 has not dropped, coral colors look the same, no real extra polyp extension. I was up to 2mL/day in a 90gal with 27 gal sump/fuge.

melev

01/13/2009, 10:28 PM

This is what I mean by how the skimmate comes out with the more gradual dosing. For the past few days, it has been quite consistent, and happens within the hour.

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_skimmate.jpg

thi7b

01/13/2009, 10:47 PM

Are you guy getting green algae on the glass. I been dosing .5ml since last Wed. I have to clean the glass everyday. I check my nitrate last night it's zero. It was .5 before I start dosing vodka. My tank is a 185gal. Does anyone know what cause this.

melev

01/13/2009, 10:52 PM

I get various algaes on the glass, but green is rather rare in my tank. Usually it is brown. It could be because my nitrates are quite a bit higher than yours though.

Paul_PSU

01/13/2009, 11:10 PM

My nitrates are zero and have been for months. I still have to clean my glass daily although not as much. I get the green film algae on it. I am assuming it has to do with phosphates. I am dosing 2ml daily in my system and will see what happens as I raise it slowly to see if the algae on the glass goes away. I test my phosphates with a kit and get zero but I know that's not the case. I am going to have to bite the bullet and get a hanna meter.

thi7b

01/13/2009, 11:14 PM

Melev,
Have you notice any change good or bad that you can talling me. I do see alittle brown algae but mostly green on the glass. I can clean in the morning. But when night time come I see it growing back. Is there any fix for it.

melev

01/13/2009, 11:28 PM

Usually the algae on the glass is related to water quality, but there are times of the year when it gets a little ridiculous and almost unbearable. That tends to be seasonal, such as Spring-related.

Running fresh carbon in a Phosban reactor can help reduce it some, and cleaning the glass with a magnet often is really important so it can't take a firm hold. It may be annoying to have to use the cleaning magnet for 60 seconds or so, but if you don't do it, you'll spend a lot more time later trying to get it off.

thi7b

01/13/2009, 11:34 PM

Are you using any phosban reactor.

melev

01/13/2009, 11:41 PM

Only to run carbon. I've not run GFO in at least 8 months, if not longer.

Genetics

01/14/2009, 09:17 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14146186#post14146186 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by danorth
I'm up to 7 ml daily in my tank. Nitrates are still blood red. I am a FOWLR tank though....

Questions, does it matter if I dose 1/2 morning, 1/2 evening?

Do the lights have to be on to dose?

Lighting cycle should not matter. If you have the time you can break up the dose to make it more consistent in the water.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14150470#post14150470 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
This is what I mean by how the skimmate comes out with the more gradual dosing. For the past few days, it has been quite consistent, and happens within the hour.

http://melevsreef.com/pics/09/01/vodka_skimmate.jpg

Looking like it is starting to work for you Marc! Patience pays off in the long run right? ;) Is that skimmate now darker than what you were pulling off? What dose are you up to currently?

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14150626#post14150626 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by thi7b
Are you guy getting green algae on the glass. I been dosing .5ml since last Wed. I have to clean the glass everyday. I check my nitrate last night it's zero. It was .5 before I start dosing vodka. My tank is a 185gal. Does anyone know what cause this.

Once the vodka started giving results, my glass would get covered lightly in a brown algae. Before then my glass always had a green tint to it and needed to be cleaned more often than currently.

cybrsufr

01/14/2009, 10:25 AM

I have a couple of questions that I figure someone here may know the answers.

1. I have been Dosing Vodka since November 27th, 2008. I have slowly worked up to 9.5ml split between two 4.75ml additions one in AM and one PM. I have dropped my NO3 from 25ppm to 5ppm and PO4 from 1.02 to .01. What I am trying to figure out and I know all tanks are different, but how much could it take to get NO3 to zero? Is 9.5ml getting too high for a 273G total water volume system? Should I continue to increase weekly until zero is reached before backing off to a maintenance dose or is 5ppm going to be about the best I can get and should look at backing off now. I have had no stringy bacterial growth on rocks or glass so I assume I am just fine, but looking for some other opinions.

2. Second question is really odd and just curious as to why. I noticed last night that my ORP had jumped to 469. It has been running in the 350-380 range since stopping O3 when I started dosing in November. Could this be an indicator that I am reaching the right level of dosing or is it just a fluke. It is still above 430 this morning. I have not added any thing or changed anything at all so was just wondering if dosing can raise the Redox in the tank.

Thanks

Genetics

01/14/2009, 11:07 AM

cybrsufr,

Have your nitrates continued to decrease over time since starting to dose or has it been relatively recently that they dropped and now have plateaued? I add 8mL of 20% vodka daily to 200g. What proof are you using?

Have you cleaned your ORP meter recently? My ORP usually drops.

cybrsufr

01/14/2009, 11:23 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14153238#post14153238 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
cybrsufr,

Have your nitrates continued to decrease over time since starting to dose or has it been relatively recently that they dropped and now have plateaued? I add 8mL of 20% vodka daily to 200g. What proof are you using?

Have you cleaned your ORP meter recently? My ORP usually drops.

No they have decreased over time. Starting at 20-25ppm and slowly came down to where they are now at 5ppm over the last 45 days or so. So if 8ml is your maintenance dose how high did you get when starting out (about 14-16? before dropping back to maintenance). I am using 80 proof cheap old Aristocrat Vodka. Though about something better but then decided that I would drink the better stuff :D

Yes I had been noticing the ORP drop as well. Yes I just cleaned and recalibrated it about 3 weeks ago, but it had still been running around the 350-380 range until yesterday when it climbed up to 476 was the highest I saw. Just though it was odd since I had not added anything at all. Was thinking that I may be hitting the perfect point for dosing and therefore the redox was getting to be optimal as well. I would assume that once your bacterial colonization has reached an equilibrium the Redox should in theory rise as well since you would be maximizing the reduction and oxidation of waste in the system.

Genetics

01/14/2009, 01:12 PM

Yeah, I was up to 16mL at one point. 8mL works for me, but I could probably get a little better results moving up to around 12mL. As for the ORP, I've never had it go above 400. I will pay more attention to it. As redox is extremely complex, I don't have any concrete explanation why it might go higher. Maybe you reached a point where the organics in the water lessened do to bacterial stimulation from the vodka... Essentially, the bacteria started pulling up DOCs from the water which would potentially increase ORP?

SunnyWindyClown

01/14/2009, 01:18 PM

I have been dosing vodka for a while now and i am at zero phospahtes and zero nitrates but have lots of cyano. What can i do to get rid of this?

melev

01/14/2009, 01:31 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14152520#post14152520 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
Looking like it is starting to work for you Marc! Patience pays off in the long run right? ;) Is that skimmate now darker than what you were pulling off? What dose are you up to currently?

I'm dosing 13 ml per day currently, and the only way for me to know if the skimmate is darker is to pour it in a glass again and compare to an earlier picture.

I have a feeling that if I just spend $450 on new pumps for my skimmer (ugh!), this situation will have finally been resolved.

Jk5

01/14/2009, 01:58 PM

SunnyWindyClown

01/14/2009, 02:57 PM

I will try that and see what happens.

Safedad

01/14/2009, 03:20 PM

I added Zeozym to my dosing and it got rid of the cyano. The Vodka does a good job of keeping the hair algae at bay. The Zeovit.com site has several good threads on the Zeozym. Glassbox also has a couple of articles regarding their experience.

cybrsufr

01/14/2009, 04:58 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14154184#post14154184 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SunnyWindyClown
I have been dosing vodka for a while now and i am at zero phospahtes and zero nitrates but have lots of cyano. What can i do to get rid of this?

I definitely would not stop dosing for a week. If you stop dosing without gradually backing down to zero, just like ramping up in the beginning, you can cause a crash of the biological filter resulting in Algae and other issues. For Cyano, suck out as much as you can, try adding some Cerith Snails (they are the only snails I know of that will eat cyano), or try the Pohls ZeoZyme. I have a couple of small patches that I suck out once a week, but will be ordering the ZeoZyme as I hear it works very well.

NyReefNoob

01/14/2009, 05:10 PM

agreed, this isn't a method that you just start and stop, cyano could be several thing's, flow, how old are the bulbs ? ect a little more info would help, ive been doing this about 4 months now at 4ml a day on a total of 60g sps dominated tank. really havent noticed a difference in coral color or growth, but then again i do weekly wc of 10g run phos and carbon, will say this though, had taken my cal reactor off for a few weeks and noticed the diatom came back a little faster

mhaith

01/14/2009, 05:30 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14154541#post14154541 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Jk5

your cyano must be caused by no3 limitation.

So you are saying that Cyano is caused by no3 limitation? Do you have some backup sources on that one?

As far as stopping for a week, I have been dosing Vodka for about a year now and I have stopped and restarted a week later (a couple of vacations) without noticable effect, but I have never gotten up to the large doses you guys are using. 7ml was the max on a 210g.

I did have a small Cyano outbreak and could not figure out the Nitrate or Phos. sources despite very aggressive export. turns out my Dursos had caused the trapping of an enormous amount of detritus (and a very healthy neon goby) in the overflows over a 7 month period.

SunnyWindyClown

01/14/2009, 06:59 PM

fish only system I run copper so no to the sanils. All the lights are within 2 months old, lots of flow. it started when I started using Vodka and has never gone away. Where can I find zeo zyme?

Safedad

01/14/2009, 07:18 PM

Several stores carry it now. I got mine from Aquarium Specialty and I think it is still on sale. It is Zeozym. Do a google search to find a source close to you.

spazthecat

01/17/2009, 07:32 PM

I've flipped through the thread and I can't really find any information about dosing vodka or VSV if your NO3 and PO4 are already zero on a test kit. So, here's my situation.

I've been dealing with GHA and brown hair algae for a couple of months now. It all started when my skimmer pump died and it took me a week to get a replacement. I've done all the usual things like water changes, chaeto, GFO, etc... and I haven't made dent in it. My NO3 and PO4 are always zero with Salifert kits but I know this can't be correct because of the continued algae growth and my chaeto grows like a weed.

So, I thought I'd try VSV or just vodka but all of the dosing recommendations I've found deal with dosing until your nutrient levels decline and eventually hit zero.

Any suggestions are appreciated,

Thanks,

Andy

Safedad

01/18/2009, 08:26 AM

I suggest you decide on the right dosage of Vodka and start dosing. Regardless of the tests, there are nutrients the HA is getting to grow. Step your V doses up slowly and you will see the HA get faint in color. Be careful that you don't get too high a dosage and get a bloom (slime all over every surface). Then ease it back down as the HA recedes. It is a balancing act but really does work. Take some pictures so you can compare the difference. Some have talked about cutting the dose in half as a maintenance level. I would recommend stepping back down as opposed to cutting it in half. Easy, constatn increase, easy constant decrease

Genetics

01/18/2009, 08:55 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14182148#post14182148 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Safedad
I suggest you decide on the right dosage of Vodka and start dosing. Regardless of the tests, there are nutrients the HA is getting to grow. Step your V doses up slowly and you will see the HA get faint in color. Be careful that you don't get too high a dosage and get a bloom (slime all over every surface). Then ease it back down as the HA recedes. It is a balancing act but really does work. Take some pictures so you can compare the difference. Some have talked about cutting the dose in half as a maintenance level. I would recommend stepping back down as opposed to cutting it in half. Easy, constatn increase, easy constant decrease

It makes more sense to do it by this method as opposed to cutting it in half for a few reasons. Detectable N or P need higher than maintaining levels of vodka or vsv to remove the excess. If you are dealing with GHA, starting at the dose in the article for vodka and moving upward overtime until you find a level that is outcompeting the GHA for nutrients. The GHA will turn white or not be able to grow back when picked by hand. Then instead of cutting in half, you should back down slowly to a point where you don't grow GHA but your corals aren't fading from a lack of nutrients.

Aqua Keepers

01/18/2009, 08:55 AM

spazthecat,
You'll find that most test kits suck when it comes to PO4 including Salifert. It'll read 0PO4 if you use tap water.

jamesdawson

01/18/2009, 01:49 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14156204#post14156204 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mhaith
So you are saying that Cyano is caused by no3 limitation? Do you have some backup sources on that one?

Actually it has more to do with the ratio between Phosphate and Nitrate according to Claude Schumacher of FaunaMarin.

If your method reduces one more then the other then the ratio is out of balance and this allows Cyano to proliferate. This is a known issue with these bacterial methods like vodka, sugar, acetate dosing.

James

tmz

01/19/2009, 01:03 AM

I know there is a ratio(Redfield) which counted the biomass of certain organisms and found carbon. phosporous and nitrogen at certain proportionate levels. I never heard No3 limitation would increase cyanobacteria and don't see how it could nor have I seen any science on this.If there are references ,they would be helpful. I don't think it would in some way increase PO4 for lack of uptake by NO3 starved bacteria and consequently provide a source of phosphate for cyano
It is just as likely the extra carbon is providing food to cyanobacteria as it does to other bacteria. This could be so with any carbon source not just vsv, in my opinion.

tonyf

01/19/2009, 02:31 AM

@tmz & JamesDawson,

In the article "Microbial Balance in Natural Aquaria", Sea Scope Volume 23 Fall 2007, Bob Goemans wrote, "In fact, a question often asked of me is why are there increasing amounts of unwanted green algae in some reef aquaria where nitrates appear low? Answer: a possible ammonium source from a deep bed or from too much live rock, since it’s undetectable and quickly incorporated into the color green."

This might provide some insight to possible causes.

Tone ;)

mathias999us

01/19/2009, 06:57 AM

Too much live rock, hmmmm.

Genetics

01/19/2009, 08:01 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14184101#post14184101 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jamesdawson
Actually it has more to do with the ratio between Phosphate and Nitrate according to Claude Schumacher of FaunaMarin.

I would be rather skeptical of this idea.

HighlandReefer

01/19/2009, 08:08 AM

I would buy the possibility of phosphates being released by rock and sand beds, but ammonia?

melev

01/19/2009, 01:02 PM

Hey Genetics, when I tested my PO4 a few days ago, it was .03 :D

Nitrates seem to be dropping just under 20ppm at last. Or should I say for once. I'm dosing 14 ml per day now.

and is it wrong that I just want to pour the entire bottle in today to finally get rid of those....???

tmz

01/19/2009, 02:16 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14188835#post14188835 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tonyf
@tmz & JamesDawson,

In the article "Microbial Balance in Natural Aquaria", Sea Scope Volume 23 Fall 2007, Bob Goemans wrote, "In fact, a question often asked of me is why are there increasing amounts of unwanted green algae in some reef aquaria where nitrates appear low? Answer: a possible ammonium source from a deep bed or from too much live rock, since it’s undetectable and quickly incorporated into the color green."

This might provide some insight to possible causes.

Tone ;) :) Ammonium is NH4 which is detectable on most kits which measure total ammonia(ie NH3 and N4). Ammonia is more toxic than ammonium. NH3 and 4 change into one another as often as a billlion times per sec. The more H+(lower ph) in the water,the more NH4 relative to NH3 there is.

The Nh3 and 4 is the first product of bacterial action in disposing of nitrogen from decaying matter. It is then changed to NO 2(nitrite)
by bacteria living on or near the surface of the rock and then to NO3(nitrate) .

While not all ammonia/ammonium is converted and some organisms take it up directly,unless there is a breakdown in the nitrifying biofiltration or the rock has an unusual amount of new decay ,more cured and aged liverock would not contribute much if any ammonia/ammonium; it would reduce it.

Since cyanobacteria rely on sugar for nourishment ,I'll still bet on the extra carbon as the likely cause. Eventhough cyanobacteria can uniquely produce their own sugar since they can fix free nitrogen, it's easier for them to consume what is readliy available,in my opinion. .

Genetics

01/19/2009, 02:17 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14191265#post14191265 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev

and is it wrong that I just want to pour the entire bottle in today to finally get rid of those....???

I know that feeling! But I can assure you nothing will survive.

What is going on with your skimmer? It looks like it is pulling out the right type of gunk but it only seems to be working for a little bit and then stopping on you?

melev

01/19/2009, 02:42 PM

I think it is working the best it can until I can spend the money on new pumps. It's tired, basically.

Plus I clean it every couple of days, so you'll never see a picture of it full like others post, unless it happens to be overflowing for some unknown reason.

Genetics

01/19/2009, 02:54 PM

I hate spending money on new pumps. You'd think the old ones would just last forever, they cost enough already... On the brightside, your nitrates and phosphates are lower than anytime in the past year. :D

cybrsufr

01/19/2009, 04:16 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14191265#post14191265 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev

Nitrates seem to be dropping just under 20ppm at last. Or should I say for once. I'm dosing 14 ml per day now.

Mark, I have had the same problem and finally they have fallen from, 25ppm or so to between 5-10, holding steady there at the moment though and I am up to 10ml a day in a 180G with 273G total water volume.

and is it wrong that I just want to pour the entire bottle in today to finally get rid of those....???

Just drink the whole bottle and the NO3 won't bother you as much :D

OT: Tell Evan that we need faster turn around the the podcasts, 4 months is too long to be without them, and what happened to the intros, I guess he is slacking off huh????

melev

01/19/2009, 05:10 PM

Drinking solves everything it seems. :lol:

You know I can't reply to that other topic. Brat. You know how to contact us. ;)

winland

01/19/2009, 06:16 PM

I have been dosing vodka in a 24g nano for about 6 months now with good success.
I have also been dosing sugar in a 150g system with good success.
I would like to switch from the sugar to vodka in the 150g system.
Any recommendation on method to do this?

Thanks,
winland

mathias999us

01/19/2009, 07:31 PM

OK, so I'm using vinegar in my kalk. I'm starting to get the white stringy stuff everywhere. Will it go away eventually, or am I using too much? I haven't had the water turn white like others have described. I've been using the vinegar for close to 2 weeks now.

Thanks for any input.

Genetics

01/19/2009, 09:26 PM

winland, you could switch by weaning off sugar and starting slowly on vodka. But for an easy equivalent, there is none.

mathias999us, you should cut back on your vinegar. Find a level that doesn't cause the "stringy stuff" and you should be fine with that dose.

Phillybean

01/19/2009, 10:44 PM

Vodka/Sugar Question...

I had a massive Nitrate Spike and performed daily 20 gallon water changes for 10 days and brought them down to 15. During that time I was dosing Vodka.

Once at 15, I just dosed Vodka. I didn't see any results, so decided to try sugar + Vodka. I scaled back the Vodka to 2 ml and added 1/4 teaspoon of sugar. Four days later, I checked the Nitrates and Phosphates...both read 0 on my API test kits (tested each twice).

My question is, what should I keep dosing and how much? Should I cut both the Vodka and Sugar in half?

melev

01/19/2009, 10:50 PM

What were you dosing (in ml) prior to this new mixture?

Phillybean

01/20/2009, 12:20 AM

I was at 3.5ml of Vodka per day.

Genetics

01/20/2009, 07:23 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14195696#post14195696 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Phillybean
Vodka/Sugar Question...

I had a massive Nitrate Spike and performed daily 20 gallon water changes for 10 days and brought them down to 15. During that time I was dosing Vodka.

Once at 15, I just dosed Vodka. I didn't see any results, so decided to try sugar + Vodka. I scaled back the Vodka to 2 ml and added 1/4 teaspoon of sugar. Four days later, I checked the Nitrates and Phosphates...both read 0 on my API test kits (tested each twice).

My question is, what should I keep dosing and how much? Should I cut both the Vodka and Sugar in half?

For the sugar part, I would cut back by at least a half or more. The problem with sugar is people use way too much of it but it works great for awhile, very quickly depleting nitrates. For a tank your size, which is ~50 gallons of water??, I would use no more than 1/16tsp sugar and adjust the vodka based on your results from that.

Phillybean

01/20/2009, 08:12 AM

My total tank size is about 100 gallons. 75 in the display with 75lbs of rock and a 45 gallon sump with another 23 lbs of rock. I'll cut the sugar down to 1/8tsp and adjust Vodka.

Thanks for the reply.

mesocosm

01/20/2009, 10:40 AM

Greetings All !

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14188835#post14188835 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tonyf
... In the article "Microbial Balance in Natural Aquaria", Sea Scope Volume 23 Fall 2007, Bob Goemans wrote ... Dr. Bob Goemans, along with Sam Gamble, promotes the use of the fantastical device known as the Eco-Aqualizer. With due respect for Dr. Goemans' academic achievements & contributions to the marine ornamental industry, at some point you have to wonder if he has blown some critical analytical brain circuitry, or if he has merely sucucumbed to the pull of the marine hobbyist Abyss O' Ignorance marketplace bonanza. In any case ...

... Goemans is hardly a legitimate reference source. :lol: ;)

JMO
:thumbsup:

mesocosm

01/20/2009, 11:10 AM

Greetings All !

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14189383#post14189383 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
I would be rather skeptical of this idea. You may wish to revisit the issue of shifting & competing inorganic nutrient limitations, and take a look at this one ... Rivkin & Anderson (1997) Inorganic nutrient limitation of oceanic bacterioplankton. Limnol. Oceanogr., 42(4), 730-740.

From the article ...
Although several investigations in marine systems have shown that DOC additions can stimulate rates of bacterial production (e.g. uptake of radiolabeled thymidine or leucine) or growth (e.g. cell abundances) (Wheeler and Kirchman 1986; Kirchman 1990; Chin-Leo and Benner 1992; Heinanen and Kuparinen 1992; Kirchman et al. 1994; Shiah and Ducklow 1994a; Carlson and Ducklow 1996), recent studies suggest that, during some seasons, PO4, (and at times NH4,) rather than DOC limits bacterial activity (Chin-Leo and Benner 1992; Kuparinen and Heinanen 1993; Zweifel et al. 1993; Pomeroy et al. 1995; Thingstad and Rassoulzadegan 1995).

Also from the same article ...
The patterns of utilization of specific organic carbon and nitrogen compounds by bacterioplankton can vary spatially and temporally. ... under changing nutrient (or temperature) conditions, substrate uptake and cell growth may become uncoupled (Karl 1986; Ducklow et al. 1992).
You might also take a look at gqjeff's posts on this subject. He's not hallucinating ... :lol: ;)

Along similar lines, from my twisted little perspective, many folks are missing the nutrient linkage between water column chemistry and cyanobacterial growth ... bacterial activity.

Bacterial activity on DOM patches can also result in continuous local nutrient release that would enhance potential uptake by autotrophs in the vicinity.

Blackburn, Nicholas, Azam & Hagstrom (1997) Spatially explicit simulations of a microbial food web. Limnol. Oceanogr., 42(4), 613-622. Autotrophs like Cyanobacteria are NOT carbon limited, therefore the notion that supplying them with a carbon-source would enrich their growth dynamics is fundamentally flawed. However, Cyanobacteria living within close proximity to a bacterial cluster that is releasing additional N & P compounds due to enriched metabolic activity (resulting from carbon dosing) might very well demonstrate enhanced growth as a secondary effect.

;)

HTH
:thumbsup:

Boomer

01/20/2009, 02:32 PM

My old buddy strikes again :D

tonyf

01/20/2009, 03:28 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14198318#post14198318 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mesocosm
Greetings All !

Dr. Bob Goemans, along with Sam Gamble, promotes the use of the fantastical device known as the Eco-Aqualizer. With due respect for Dr. Goemans' academic achievements & contributions to the marine ornamental industry, at some point you have to wonder if he has blown some critical analytical brain circuitry, or if he has merely sucucumbed to the pull of the marine hobbyist Abyss O' Ignorance marketplace bonanza. In any case ...

... Goemans is hardly a legitimate reference source. :lol: ;)

JMO
:thumbsup:

:D just goes to show that one is never too old to learn new things ... I had one of those Garbage -Aqualizers back in the 'ole days'. If Dr B promotes those then you have a strong point. Thanks

Tone:eek:

Canarygirl

01/20/2009, 05:03 PM

Hi Gary ~ :)

I've been wanting to ask you this for some time now.

If I remember correctly, you and Eric are using zeovit Start2 in some tanks and you're also testing Brightwell Aquatics Biofuel/Bac in another tank (?). If so, can you share whether you can observe any differences in the effects on corals, colors, etc., between the two systems? And/or between those products and the use of vodka or a VSV mix?

mathias999us

01/20/2009, 06:56 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14195010#post14195010 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics

mathias999us, you should cut back on your vinegar. Find a level that doesn't cause the "stringy stuff" and you should be fine with that dose.

Hmmm, OK. But, if the bacteria consume ALL of the P and N from the water, how do they continue to grow and bloom after all of the P and N are gone or become the limiting nutrients? What happens to the carbon then?

tonyf

01/20/2009, 07:17 PM

Simply, the carbon is food for the bacteria ... the bacteria grows, it is eaten by other organisms, it dies, it is is skimmed out. :)

mesocosm

01/20/2009, 07:18 PM

Greetings All !

Hi Jan ! ... :rollface: :mixed:

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14201128#post14201128 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Canarygirl
... you and Eric are using zeovit Start2 in some tanks and you're also testing Brightwell Aquatics Biofuel/Bac in another tank (?). ... Indeed ... we've been in full hybridization experimentation mode using ZEOvit, Brightwell, and Elos products for over 6 months now (... and soon to include Reed Mariculture products as well). It's been an extraodrinary learning curve for me so far, if for no other reason than that Eric is one of those experienced-based master reefer geeks. I've been able to get Acropora species & their friends to grow and "be happy" for years ... but I've never been able to fully "tweak" their colors ... certainly nothing near the way that Eric is able to ... very annoying. He really has neither use for, nor trust in, the biochemistry side of things ... it's all about what his senses tell him. Translating what he talks about and does into science-speak has forced me to test and refine the majority of the premises and operating assumptions that I've been using for years ... it's an amazing ongoing conversation.

And I get paid to have it ... Life is good ... :D

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14201128#post14201128 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Canarygirl
... between the two systems? ... I'm no help here because we haven't applied the products in a way that would yield a meaningful & reliable comparison of systems. More than that, I've grown weary of presenting information regarding specific products (information that, IMO, consumers should demand from manufacturers before any purchase is possible) ... and now, no matter how careful I am, my objectivity is contaminated as a necessary consequence of my employment.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14201128#post14201128 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Canarygirl
... can you share whether you can observe any differences in the effects on corals, colors, etc., ... Only to the extent that I've noticed some profound colors shifts as a direct correlation to the dosing of both ZEOvit and non-ZEOvit products. For example, I've watched dull green and red Echniophyllia, Montipora, and Porites specimens shift to bright fluorescent green & red within a 24 hour period, sustained color shift throughout a multi-day dosing trial, and watched a return shift as soon as dosage stopped ... without any apparent health/vitality detriment. As someone who rejects entirely the notion that the dosing of elements directly stimulates chromoprotein formation, I must confess that I'm still pondering the causal pathways.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14201128#post14201128 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Canarygirl
... And/or between those products and the use of vodka or a VSV mix? ZeoStart2 remains my favorite mystery potion for stimulating nitrification & denitrification processes ... JMO. Your mileage will vary. :D

On another tangent, Jake Adams has shamed me into an intention to write something more detailed than mere opinion or "product experience" with regards to carbon dosing strategies, so I'm going to hold off until I get that done, except to say this ...

... despite some of the potential risks, carbon dosing represents the best pathway to get higher levels of performance out of Berlin-style configurations than anything else being currently discussed. The only way we're going to get at "less technology, more biology" is through the manipulation of the microorganism consortia that ultimately determines the carrying capacity of reef aquaria.

JMO ... apologies for the length ... let the beatings begin.
:thumbsup:

Genetics

01/20/2009, 07:24 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14198521#post14198521 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mesocosm

You may wish to revisit the issue of shifting & competing inorganic nutrient limitations, and take a look at this one ... Rivkin & Anderson (1997) Inorganic nutrient limitation of oceanic bacterioplankton. Limnol. Oceanogr., 42(4), 730-740.

Thanks for the article! It's rather well written and worth the read. From it some references that we all have been looking for.... or well at least I have to counter the argument of sole denitrification as a methodology for the bacteria:

"Although bacteria must assimilate organic carbon, they can use both inorganic and organic nitrogen and phosphorus and frequently account for a large fraction of PO, and NH4, uptake in both freshwater and marine habitats (Currie et al. 1986; Currie 1990; Kirchman 1994)."

And as for this non-paraphrased quote from above...

Although it is much more convenient to measure TdR {radiolabeled thymidine} or Leu uptake than bacterial abundances, under changing nutrient (or temperature) conditions, substrate uptake and cell growth may become uncoupled (Karl 1986; Ducklow et al. 1992). Thus, TdR or Leu may not always be a reliable proxy for cell growth and assuming that there is a constant proportionality between uptake and growth could lead to misinterpretations of nutrient enrichment experiments.

It makes sense to argue that increasing incorporated thymidine, which is used during DNA synthesis, correlates to bacterial growth. Uncoupling, as mentioned, of this relationship could potentially be due to the bacterial synthesis of its own thymidine for DNA incorporation or other cellular dynamics such as size. Leucine as a marker for growth has limitations also since it is incorporated into proteins. Changing environment and gene expression patterns of bacteria would cause a noted "uncoupling" effect. :D

Bacterial activity on DOM patches can also result in continuous local nutrient release that would enhance potential uptake by autotrophs in the vicinity.

Blackburn, Nicholas, Azam & Hagstrom (1997) Spatially explicit simulations of a microbial food web. Limnol. Oceanogr., 42(4), 613-622.

Very nice.

Again, I am unconvinced that N/P ratio is the reason for cyanobacterial growth. While potential growth factors for cyano are DOM, iron, zinc, nitrate, ammonia, phosphate as well as others. I cannot say or agree with the posit that N/P ratio causes specific bacterial growth.

Genetics

01/20/2009, 08:18 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14202053#post14202053 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mathias999us
Hmmm, OK. But, if the bacteria consume ALL of the P and N from the water, how do they continue to grow and bloom after all of the P and N are gone or become the limiting nutrients? What happens to the carbon then?

Interestingly, I do not have a great concrete answer for this. This can trickle back into the paper posted by Mesocosm. From it:

Although bacteria must assimilate organic carbon, they can use both inorganic and organic nitrogen and phosphorus and frequently account for a large fraction of PO4, and NH4, uptake in both freshwater and marine habitats (Currie et al. 1986; Currie 1990; Kirchman 1994).

Bacteria have the ability to not only utilize inorganic N and P but the potential to consume organic N/P. The organic N/P is not currently measurable with hobbyist test kits. Therefore, the potential exists that after depletion of inorganic N/P there is still food for the bacteria laying around and with the excess of organic carbon from addition allows them to still proliferate to potentially devastating proportions. Also, the overdose observed does not mean one has depleted inorganic N/P but more have stimulated vast numbers of bacteria that has become senescent at a point where N/P or organic C has become limiting.

... despite some of the potential risks, carbon dosing represents the best pathway to get higher levels of performance out of Berlin-style configurations than anything else being currently discussed. The only way we're going to get at "less technology, more biology" is through the manipulation of the microorganism consortia that ultimately determines the carrying capacity of reef aquaria.

If I may add; since the inception of reef keeping hobbyists, the every expanding knowledge and understanding of biological filtration has improved greatly our understanding of the husbandry requirements. At one point reef chemistry was largely mysterious, but the elucidation of seawater parameters led to the understanding and enhancement of coral growth and proliferation. It only makes sense that our growing understanding propels us to expand our parameters to not only include inorganic chemistry but organic chemistry which will be the next revolution in reef husbandry.

melev

01/20/2009, 10:20 PM

A few months ago, I was watching one of the nature shows (Planet Earth, or something similar) and it talked about how cyano bacteria was a normal part of the ocean's biological filter. I remember how it caught my attention, because they were discussing it on a cellular level, rather than the ugly red mats we so often discover covering the sand, rock, and/or even corals.

Since cyano is a normal component, the question is why does it bloom that way in our tanks? Does it take up something else from the system? Does it out compete a different bacteria? Is it breeding? We know it reacts to light, and that it weakens in darkness. Some medications eliminate the bloom, but it doesn't erradicate the entire strain since it #1) is part of the natural filtration in our oceans and thus our tanks, and #2) it reappears later without our adding new stuff to our tanks -- other than food and water.

Will vodka or other chemical additives fuel its growth, or retard it? That seems to vary from tank to tank. Since I'm a hobbyist and not a chemist, I look forward to what others discover, especially if it will help my hobby experience be more enjoyable and less stressful.

Mesocosm, what do you do for a living?

Canarygirl

01/20/2009, 10:33 PM

Mesocosm, what do you do for a living?

I don't remember the specifics about Gary's background but I can tell you that right now he is working with Eric Camaano of **********.com :)

toaster77

01/21/2009, 12:05 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203817#post14203817 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
A few months ago, I was watching one of the nature shows (Planet Earth, or something similar) and it talked about how cyano bacteria was a normal part of the ocean's biological filter. I remember how it caught my attention, because they were discussing it on a cellular level, rather than the ugly red mats we so often discover covering the sand, rock, and/or even corals.

Since cyano is a normal component, the question is why does it bloom that way in our tanks? Does it take up something else from the system? Does it out compete a different bacteria? Is it breeding? We know it reacts to light, and that it weakens in darkness. Some medications eliminate the bloom, but it doesn't erradicate the entire strain since it #1) is part of the natural filtration in our oceans and thus our tanks, and #2) it reappears later without our adding new stuff to our tanks -- other than food and water.

Will vodka or other chemical additives fuel its growth, or retard it? That seems to vary from tank to tank. Since I'm a hobbyist and not a chemist, I look forward to what others discover, especially if it will help my hobby experience be more enjoyable and less stressful.

Mesocosm, what do you do for a living?

good questions melev.

cyanobacteria are pretty unique amongst bacteria and microbes in that they are capable of performing both photosynthesis AND nitrogen fixation. that means they are pretty self-sufficient in producing carbon and nitrogen sources needed for growth. they can reduce CO2 via photosynthesis to produce glucose (carbon source) and reduce N2 to produce ammonia (nitrogen source). so agree with mesocosm that cyanobacteria should not be limited for carbon sources for growth. if i had to guess - higher phosphates, rather than nitrates or carbon sources, would help fuel cyano growth. i'll keep thinking about reasons why fellow reefers report cyano blooms upon dosing.

also remember, cyanobacteria are one of the most ancient species on this planet. they must have figured out various ways to grow well under a variety of conditions :)

mathias999us

01/21/2009, 08:14 AM

Genetics - wow, thanks for a great detailed response! That makes sense to me, with the understanding there's still a lot we don't know. But, it seems like this is a promising path forward to the "future of reef aquarium husbandry". I certainly look forward to the day when we look back on the 200X years, and laugh about how little we knew back then (and perhaps how modest the reef aquariums of that time were!)

mhaith

01/21/2009, 10:24 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14205770#post14205770 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mathias999us
Genetics - wow, thanks for a great detailed response! That makes sense to me, with the understanding there's still a lot we don't know. But, it seems like this is a promising path forward to the "future of reef aquarium husbandry". I certainly look forward to the day when we look back on the 200X years, and laugh about how little we knew back then (and perhaps how modest the reef aquariums of that time were!)

200X years? At the speed this hobby is evolving, my bet is 2 years....:) Great stuff you guys!

mesocosm

01/21/2009, 10:27 AM

Greetings All !

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203817#post14203817 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
... Mesocosm, what do you do for a living? What's up, Marc ? ... :D

As Jan pointed out, I'm working for **********.com ... and I'm loving it. :thumbsup:

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203931#post14203931 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Canarygirl
I don't remember the specifics about Gary's background ... My degree is in Biological Sciences, and I've held secondary teaching credentials in Chemistry, Phyisical Science, and Earth Science ... SW fish since 1976 ... Reefs since 1984 ...

... severe brain damage sometime in the mid-1990s. :lol: ;)

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14202236#post14202236 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mesocosm
... no matter how careful I am, my objectivity is contaminated as a necessary consequence of my employment. I'm often astounded (... but no longer surprised ...) at how oblivious most folks seem to be to the financial motivations of some of the folks that they're interacting with in reefkeeping discussion boards. The company I work for sells many of the products I'm asked about in these types of threads. The conflict of interest is inherent. I know many are not overly concerned by this type of thing ... fair enough ... but I am. What else can I say?

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203817#post14203817 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
... part of the natural filtration in our oceans and thus our tanks ... Cyanobacteria are ubiquitous (omnipresent) in both natural and captive marine systems. The primary vectors into captive systems are natural sediments, live rock, and corals.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203817#post14203817 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
... the question is why does it bloom that way in our tanks? ... Cyanobacteria demonstrate exponential growth (a "bloom") in both natural and captive systems in the presence of both photosynthetically appropriate light (which is why shortening the photoperiod is such an effective tool against Cyanobacteria colonies), an excess of N, P, and certain elements (most listed by Genetics earlier), and a persistent localized environment (a "microenvironment" ... BTW, disruption of this favorable microenvironment is why increased flow is such a useful tool for lessening the growth rate of Cyanobacteria colonies).

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203817#post14203817 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
... Does it take up something else from the system? ... Cyanobacteria are utilizing photosynthetically appropriate radiation, and whatever organic & inorganic nutrients that their physical structure and enzymes enable them to access.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203817#post14203817 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
... Does it out compete a different bacteria? ... Compared to some bacterial strains ... yes. Compared to other bacterial strains ... no. In certain microenvironments ... yes. In other microenvironments ... no. This is why flocculants, and flocculants colonized by bacteria can effectively disrupt Cyanobacteria colonies ... these products change the microenvironment without significantly impacting the chemistry of the water column. Some microenvironments are more resistant to change than others, which is why results from the application of these types of products vary so widely. BTW, this is also why products purported to contain enzymes have the potential to disrupt Cyanobacteria colonies, and why results from the application of such products vary so widely.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203817#post14203817 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
... Is it breeding? ... Sometimes ... yes. Sometimes ... no. If you dig into the articles that I cited earlier, you might be surprised at how large a percentage of any given Cyanobacterial, or bacerial, biofilm is dormant at any given time (... movement kinetics influencing predation rate).

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14203817#post14203817 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
... it reappears later without our adding new stuff to our tanks ... While mature captive reef ecosystems demonstrate increasingly stable water column chemistry, the surface microenvironments are continually dynamic. Little wonder that localized Cyanobacteria blooms seem to appear out of nowhere, without water column chemistry test results changing. My non-rigorous tracking of reports throughout reefkeeping cyberspace indicates that carbon dosing strategies applied to established systems demonstrate a higher number of Cyanobacterial "blooms" than do systems that are newly created. This shouldn't be surprising ... once "stabilized" microenvironments have been disrupted.

HTH ... your mileage will vary.
:thumbsup:

Boomer

01/21/2009, 11:20 AM

A short note. High pH, with very low CO2, is often an environment where Cyano fair much better than other algae. Since I'm in Texas and don't have it with me, there have been a number of studies done on the effects and growth rate of Cyano, at least in FW, as a function of N, P and CO2. What you see is rather surprising. There is review in.....

Freshwater Microbiology: Biodiversity and Dynamic Interactions of Microorganisms in the Aquatic Environment by David Sigee

Also from

The Biology of Cyanobacteria, they can convert, extracellualry, organic phosphate into PO4

Biology of Cyanobacteria (Botanical Monographs, V. 19) by N. G. Carr and Brian A. Whitton

cybrsufr

01/21/2009, 07:31 PM

I have a quick question because even after dosing for three months and reading all of the threads here on RC I still have not seen a definite answer to this.

Why is it recommended that we keep the DKh at 7-9 when dosing or as close to NSW as possible. I have never found any reason for this or any references that state that there could be or are detrimental effects to do something to the contrary.

I had been running mine at 8 DKh but was having major issue with keeping the PH above 7.7 - 7.8. I use a Deltec KM500 Kalkstirrer and a H&S 200 Ca Reactor. Recently I upped the Kalk levels to raise the PH but my Alk is now running right around 10.5 - 11. at this level my PH stays between 8.1 and 8.4. Corals look better, and overall tank parameters appear to be much more stable. Is there any concrete evidence that not keeping at 7-9 when dosing is detrimental to the system???

Reefflections

01/21/2009, 07:43 PM

This all sounds the same at my end also.One reason I found with my tank is the Cal reactor and the CO 2 drive the PH down.I did a little change on where the Eff,drip goes now.I got it running into my filter bags,coming fron the over flow.There is plenty of bubbles,flow in there blows these CO2 gases off.Before it's pump back to the main system now.And my PH never falls below 8.0.at any times of the day.These for these Alk really came from the Zeo folks.Back then they set the standards as for all your levels when running Zeo.What the reason is I really don't know.:rolleyes: Maybe it's more related to a low nutrient system.Where these levels are not needed,higher than 8.What I remember ALL their numbers were always target to NSW? Now matter what test you run. Just my 2 cents here.

Paul_PSU

01/21/2009, 08:59 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14210761#post14210761 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
I have a quick question because even after dosing for three months and reading all of the threads here on RC I still have not seen a definite answer to this.

Why is it recommended that we keep the DKh at 7-9 when dosing or as close to NSW as possible. I have never found any reason for this or any references that state that there could be or are detrimental effects to do something to the contrary.

I had been running mine at 8 DKh but was having major issue with keeping the PH above 7.7 - 7.8. I use a Deltec KM500 Kalkstirrer and a H&S 200 Ca Reactor. Recently I upped the Kalk levels to raise the PH but my Alk is now running right around 10.5 - 11. at this level my PH stays between 8.1 and 8.4. Corals look better, and overall tank parameters appear to be much more stable. Is there any concrete evidence that not keeping at 7-9 when dosing is detrimental to the system???

My alk is 12 and my ph is around 8.0. The vodka dosing works fine for me. I keep my mag around 1500 and my Ca around 480. Same here, I run a Ca reactor and kalk reactor.

Genetics

01/21/2009, 09:11 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14211539#post14211539 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Paul_PSU
My alk is 12 and my ph is around 8.0. The vodka dosing works fine for me. I keep my mag around 1500 and my Ca around 480. Same here, I run a Ca reactor and kalk reactor.

I'm glad to hear this! My mariculture corals don't like any dkH above 8 sadly, but maybe that is only in my tank.

cybrsufr

01/21/2009, 10:52 PM

I had always maintained my tank at 10-12DKh before starting dosing, but there were all the recommendations about keeping it as close to NSW as possible. I was having a nightmare trying to keep my PH up and my Ca reactor is only running at about a drop a second or a hair more, with a 6.55 PH in the reaction chamber so I am not dumping a lot of effluent to maintain an 8-9 DKh, but the tank PH was hovering between 7.7 and 7.9, while a lot of people are OK at those levels, I prefer to keep it between 8.1 - 8.4. So to counter the low PH I bump my Kalk back up to where it was before starting dosing and the DKh is back at 10.5 - 12 DKh and the PH is back at 8.1-8.2. Ca is holding steady at 410 and Mag is at 1500. It has only been 3 days but all corals look much better. More polyp extension, and just look happier. I guess there is no substantiated research on keeping it at NSW levels other than the Zeo and Ultralith info. I had ran ProdiBio BioDigest in my 90 at those levels and never had a problem, so I may just try it for a wfew weeks and see if I notice any detrimental effects, if I do then I will just cut back again and let it slowly decline back to the 8-9 DKh levels. If anyone has any info to show the reasons or effects of a higher DKh while dosing vodka, please post it.

Also is anyone in here adding Vitamin C along with vodka? I was thinking about trying it after reading the Zoa thread since I have a lot of Zoas as well but did not know what the cumulative effects could be.

mhaith

01/21/2009, 11:10 PM

I too have the same PH problem with it swinging between 7.6-8.0 but the corals don't seem to mind!? I've been keeping it around 8dkh, Calc 450 and Mag at 1500 and trying everything to increase the PH while keeping down the ALK.

I have been dosing vodka for over a year now and had some STN on my encrusting Montis when ALK topped 10dkh. When I asked on RC, I was told high ALK in ULNS frequently reports 'issues' by the ZEO folks..

tonyf

01/21/2009, 11:19 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14212431#post14212431 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
I had always maintained my tank at 10-12DKh before starting dosing, but there were all the recommendations about keeping it as close to NSW as possible. I was having a nightmare trying to keep my PH up and my Ca reactor is only running at about a drop a second or a hair more, with a 6.55 PH in the reaction chamber so I am not dumping a lot of effluent to maintain an 8-9 DKh, but the tank PH was hovering between 7.7 and 7.9, while a lot of people are OK at those levels, I prefer to keep it between 8.1 - 8.4. So to counter the low PH I bump my Kalk back up to where it was before starting dosing and the DKh is back at 10.5 - 12 DKh and the PH is back at 8.1-8.2. Ca is holding steady at 410 and Mag is at 1500. It has only been 3 days but all corals look much better. More polyp extension, and just look happier. I guess there is no substantiated research on keeping it at NSW levels other than the Zeo and Ultralith info. I had ran ProdiBio BioDigest in my 90 at those levels and never had a problem, so I may just try it for a wfew weeks and see if I notice any detrimental effects, if I do then I will just cut back again and let it slowly decline back to the 8-9 DKh levels. If anyone has any info to show the reasons or effects of a higher DKh while dosing vodka, please post it.

Cybrsufr, That is like reading the history of my system ... exactly. Although I'd like to, I've not added BioDigest as we can't get it in Australia due to some archaic interpretation of bio-protection.

Tone :)

Canarygirl

01/21/2009, 11:38 PM

Why is it recommended that we keep the DKh at 7-9 when dosing or as close to NSW as possible. I have never found any reason for this or any references that state that there could be or are detrimental effects to do something to the contrary.

This alk level question has been discussed a number of time on the Zeovit forum in the past 18 months. What I remember is that the mods provided observational info. but not the theory behind it. They don't really know why this happens, but on the zeovit system if alk goes above 8.5 there is a high likelihood of STN from the tips ("alk burn"). As for why, they don't know. It just happens. And with alk below 6.5, TN from the base. If this doesn't happen with vodka dosing then maybe the reason it occurs in Zeovit systems has to do with the reactor and media in combination with the carbon dosing. (Just guessing)

melev

01/22/2009, 12:06 AM

My alkalinity is my system is 8.0, calcium is 400, and it looks like the orange color of my API Nitrate kit is getting weaker. I'd like to say that it seems to be less than 20ppm, maybe 15ppm. Egads, could it be true? :eek2:

Kolognekoral

01/22/2009, 03:28 AM

As Canarygirl noted, the actual reason for this tip-burn is not known, but it does happen in the more refined methods of carbon dosing. Both the Zeovit and Ultralith methods use mixed carbon sources, which may be a starting point. Are there any V/S/V people who have noticed similar occurances? Gary, have you done any research on this phaenomenum?

My own theory is, and this is theory, that the higher Alk will tend to bind PO4 (or other wastes) into the water column and, if this is released via the bacteria in a bloom, then the short-term results cause burn. It happens overnight, sort of a threashold reaction. Not overly logical, as one would expect a continuous breakdown of wastes regardless of the Alk, but, the further we move away from NSW, the stranger the chemistry becomes.

If the pure vodka method doesn't cause this, then it may not be an issue. From my own experience, I have only noted it on Montipora digitata, which appears to be a 'signal' coral. I adjusted the Alk (slowed the CARx) and it went no further. We should consider that any quick shift in Alk is bad news, and it may be that ULNS corals are a bit more sensitive to these changes. Remember way back when, many new corals would just RTN overnight. Maybe this was Alk shock?

Paul_PSU

01/22/2009, 05:30 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14211643#post14211643 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
I'm glad to hear this! My mariculture corals don't like any dkH above 8 sadly, but maybe that is only in my tank.

I dose Biodgest in my system also (normal dosage of 1 amp/15days) so I am not sure if this would make a difference also. Besides my Ca reactor and kalk, vodka and biodigest are all I dose.

cybrsufr

01/22/2009, 07:36 AM

I have to agree that if you change the alk levels fast you are asking for a problem as out little critter are just like us and and a analogy, if the weather changes from 80 degrees to 30 degrees over night we generally can have issues with it, more people get sick, and so forth. But if thing change gradually then we can adjust to those changes. I believe the same is true in our tanks. Any quick changes can wreck havok in the system. I might have to agree with CanaryGirl as in the Zeo method that are using the Zeolite medium in the reactor. and generally Zeolites are a no no in SW. In FW they are used all the time to remove ammonia, but something in SW causes them to break down and release hings into the water column. Zeo's Zeolites are formulated differently according to their own non released composition which allows them to be used in their system, but could be that a higher or lower alk can cause this same breakdown of the media which in turn causes something to go awry with the system or it could be in one of the basic 4 additive in the zeo method that breaks down. I mean look at NH4 in SW. Above 7.8 NH4 is kept as ammonium which is easily broken down and not as toxic, but let the PH drop below 7.8 in SW and it turns into pure ammonia, which is very toxic. So it is likely that some chemical in the Zeo/Ultralith systems are very sensitive to this change in DKh. Vodka is Vodka at any PH or DKh, pure ethyl alcohol, so maybe that is why it appears so far to not have that same effect. I will carefully monitor my system and note any negative or positive changes and post them.

Kolognekoral

01/22/2009, 07:52 AM

cybr,

zeoliths are a group of minerals, some 40 found in nature, plus unlimited synthetic forms, which selectively adsorb compounds into their matrix. They are not all the same, just belong to the same family of minerals. (like apples and oranges are fruits, just not the same in a pie)

The zeolith first used for FW was preferential for ammonias in FW, but in SW, it is preferential for Ca+. Yes, a no-no for marine systems. The zeoliths used in the Zeovit mixture (or other marine zeoliths) are specifically chosen to remove ammonias from a marine environment.

Now, the idea that the zeoliths may be connected to the alk sensitvity is interesting, but I see no evidence one way or the other. A good place to research. You are quite correct noting the change in ions via pH. Plants use this to create certain colours. Changes in pH allow different sugar groups to be attached in specific bonds to anthocyanins creating colours ranging from yellow-red to violet-purple to blue. Mother natures chemistry is amazing.

As I mentioned, there are synthetic zeoliths designed to adsorb specific compounds. Maybe we need to develope a 'designer' zeolith for specific marine applications?

Genetics

01/22/2009, 08:05 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14213991#post14213991 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Kolognekoral

The zeolith first used for FW was preferential for ammonias in FW, but in SW, it is preferential for Ca+. Yes, a no-no for marine systems. The zeoliths used in the Zeovit mixture (or other marine zeoliths) are specifically chosen to remove ammonias from a marine environment.

As a quick note, ammonium ions have been shown to cause zooxanthellae density to increase. Without normal ammonium ion concentrations coral coloration may appear... pale.

Kolognekoral

01/22/2009, 08:14 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14214040#post14214040 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
As a quick note, ammonium ions have been shown to cause zooxanthellae density to increase. Without normal ammonium ion concentrations coral coloration may appear... pale.

Exactly! On a reef, corals must find ways of obtaining nutrients to feed their zooxanthellae, a process they use to control zooxanthellae densites within their tissues. While in the aquarium, the corals can no longer control the amount of food the zooxanthellae receive, which is why corals often turn brown in high nitrate environments. Zooxanthellae bloom.

The trick in the aquarium is to control the available nutrients in order to obtain the prefered densities.

HighlandReefer

01/22/2009, 08:44 AM

I am curious about the phenomenon called "tip-burn". Has anyone actually looked up close at these so called "tip-burns" to determine if the tips are white because of lost tissue or is the "tip-burn" actually calcium being deposited by the coral, do to the increased alk., faster than the coral can keep up, perhaps do to the ULN environment? :)

Randy Holmes-Farley

01/22/2009, 09:08 AM

My own theory is, and this is theory, that the higher Alk will tend to bind PO4 (or other wastes) into the water column and, if this is released via the bacteria in a bloom, then the short-term results cause burn.

How would alkalinity bind phosphate?

With all of the different forms of phosphate and bicarbonate/carbonate negatively charged, they would not directly interact in solution.

Kolognekoral

01/22/2009, 09:52 AM

Randy,

as I mentioned, PO4 (or other wastes). What is actually the culprit, I do not know. I do know that Ca+ will precipitate PO4 and an increased Alk brings more reactive ions. To think they will just hang-out waiting to be incorporated into a coral skeleton is missing the big picture. Salt water is a highly corrosive substance. What would stop unexpected reactions in a synthetic seawater with non-NSW make-up? As I see it, there must be a reason why seawater is what it is. Part of the evolution of marine environments.

Do you have an explantation for tip-burn?

Kolognekoral

01/22/2009, 09:55 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14214244#post14214244 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by HighlandReefer
I am curious about the phenomenon called "tip-burn". Has anyone actually looked up close at these so called "tip-burns" to determine if the tips are white because of lost tissue or is the "tip-burn" actually calcium being deposited by the coral, do to the increased alk., faster than the coral can keep up, perhaps do to the ULN environment? :)

Cliff,

the cases I've seen/experienced, where showing tissue loss, followed by very slow recovery of the axial. Often, the damaged area simply started branches and never regenerated the actual tips. It can be a very ugly happening.

Randy Holmes-Farley

01/22/2009, 11:55 AM

as I mentioned, PO4 (or other wastes). What is actually the culprit, I do not know. I do know that Ca+ will precipitate PO4 and an increased Alk brings more reactive ions. To think they will just hang-out waiting to be incorporated into a coral skeleton is missing the big picture. Salt water is a highly corrosive substance. What would stop unexpected reactions in a synthetic seawater with non-NSW make-up? As I see it, there must be a reason why seawater is what it is. Part of the evolution of marine environments.

I am very familiar with the interactions of dissolved ions in seawater. There are many such interactions, but none are between ions with a similar charge. It is not an unknown. It simply doesn't happen. :)

I discuss what phosphate binds to in seawater in this article:

Phosphate and the Reef Aquarium
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php

specifically here:

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#1

I discuss what bicarbonate and carbonate (alkalinity) bind to in this article:

What is seawater
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-11/rhf/index.php

specifically here:

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-11/rhf/index.php#14

Tip burn? No, I do not know what it is or when and why it happens to some folks and not others with seemingly similar conditions.

Kolognekoral

01/22/2009, 12:41 PM

Randy,

I follow you completely, but I think you miss my point. Alk is not just a measurement of the carbonate for marine aquariums. It is directly related to the release of Ca+, which means, the higher you push the alk, in order to increase the Ca+, you are increasing the reactive ion content in both species, + and -. The carbonate may well be built into the coral skeleton, but, if the Ca+ is already precipitated with PO4, then the corals will build their skeltons with strontium, in example. As strontium is actually built into corals at what appears to be a higher rate in aquariums, than in nature, we have something different happening, but why. The supposed 1:1 with calcium and carbonate is not happening.

Also, what other reactions are taking up carbonate? Once the CaCO3 is ionized, it can go in many directions. This is where I believe we are missing part of the processes possible in non-NSW mixes (and natural, for that matter). As I see it, it is more of a case of which reaction will take place a what speed, which will thus regulate the use of the CaCO3.

On the other hand, maybe tip-burn is caused by too much free carbonate, which then impeedes part of the corals growth process? Of course I'm grasping at straws, there is nothing else to go for except considering the possibilities.

Boomer

01/22/2009, 12:56 PM

The zeolith first used for FW was preferential for ammonias in FW, but in SW, it is preferential for Ca+. Yes, a no-no for marine systems. The zeoliths used in the Zeovit mixture (or other marine zeoliths) are specifically chosen to remove ammonias from a marine environment.

Somebody has got you believing a bunch of hype and nonsense. I have explained this in great detail here on Zeovit threads and Mesocosm, Randy and Habib have also discussed it.

Zeolites are just a surface they prefer to grow on. It is even more nonsense that they can fit into the Zeolite pores. It is like trying to stick a watermelon up your butt. There can be a limited population in the void fraction (large channels and passage) of the Zeolite. Ask yourself the question "why would bacteria expend all that energy, to process a Zeolite, that may have a trace of ammonia in it, when it can pull it out of the passing water/column. Since Zeolites become a facualtive anaerobic environment, in the inner void fraction spaces, thus filling up all those ammonia exchange sites and they do not use ammonia, how would the nitrifying bacteria, which grow and coat the outer layer of the Zeolite, covering the FAB (Faculative Anaerobic Bacteria), get the ammonia out ?" You could take any non-zeolite media that has a preferred surface and so the same thing. The issue is that the surface area of zeolites is known to be preferred and we have not really tested anything else to see what other media could be used, so most just stick with Zeolites. This process or claim by them is not new to this hobby and has been around for like 20 years. Look up the trade names X-Nitrate or Nitrate Sponge. Some reefers do not even use ZeoVit Zeolites and get the same effect. 99% of those are all part of the Heulandite series of Zeolites and 75 % of them are Clinoptilolite. All of which are Tectosilicate minerals. Old fashion Kitty litter and floor dry are the same thing.

Kolognekoral

01/22/2009, 01:11 PM

Boomer,

that doesn't even deserve a reply. Leave your head in the sand.

Genetics

01/22/2009, 01:33 PM

Not to sound naive but wouldn't the zeolites function to absorb ammonium ions? Their accidental affinity for positive potassium ions is the reason why potassium deficiency occurs. This is my non-scientific understanding of zeoliths. Also, the bacterial growth that occurs coats the rock, with the potential to hinder absorption. The bacteria aren't the key, its the ammonium removal by zeolites.

Canarygirl

01/22/2009, 01:44 PM

Some reefers do not even use ZeoVit Zeolites and get the same effect. 99% of those are all part of the Heulandite series of Zeolites and 75 % of them are Clinoptilolite. All of which are Tectosilicate minerals. Old fashion Kitty litter and floor dry are the same thing.

Zeovit media is nothing like this. Other types of zeolith may be, but not Zeovit.

Not to sound naive but wouldn't the zeolites function to absorb ammonium ions? Their accidental affinity for positive potassium ions is the reason why potassium deficiency occurs. This is my non-scientific understanding of zeoliths. Also, the bacterial growth that occurs coats the rock, with the potential to hinder absorption. The bacteria aren't the key, its the ammonium removal by zeolites.

This coating of the surface of the zeovit media is the reason that users "shake" the stones once or twice a day. It gets the "mulm" off the stones, and the mulm has a happy side effect of being food for corals. :) Sorry if I'm explaining something you already know. But I'm not sure I agree with your summary that the bacteria aren't the key. It may very well be the key or at least an important part of the equation.

Randy Holmes-Farley

01/22/2009, 02:22 PM

It is directly related to the release of Ca+, which means, the higher you push the alk, in order to increase the Ca+, you are increasing the reactive ion content in both species,

It is only related to calcium ion concentration if you add it that way. There are many ways to add and maintain alkalinity, and many will have no impact on the calcium concentration. They certainly do not have to move in tandem.

The supposed 1:1 with calcium and carbonate is not happening.

True, and we don't expect it to. Magnesium and to a lesser extent strontium get into the calcium carbonate structure in place of calcium. That happens in abiotic precipitation, in coral calcification, in the ocean, and in reef tanks. I'm not seeing how that impacts phosphate, however.

I do agree that solid calcium carbonate surfaces do bind phosphate. :)

Also, what other reactions are taking up carbonate? Once the CaCO3 is ionized, it can go in many directions.

Not sure what you mean here. There are not many sinks for carbonate and bicarbonate in reef tanks, and none that I know of involve combination with phosphate, except for formation of calcium carbonate which can incorporate phosphate.

mesocosm

01/22/2009, 02:56 PM

Greetings All !

What's up, Jamie? I always reading your posts immensely ... :thumbsup:

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14213517#post14213517 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Kolognekoral
... tip-burn ... Gary, have you done any research on this phenomenum? I've been vexed by the whole alkalinity threshold thing regarding ZEOvit for quite some time, and have been data mining it for over fours years. I have not found a useful vein to dig ... I have no answer. However, one of the anecdotal information sets that I've been waiting a few years for has finally begun to emerge: the behavior of non-ZEOvit carbon dosing strategies at various alkalinity levels.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14213517#post14213517 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Kolognekoral
... Are there any V/S/V people who have noticed similar occurances? At this point it's become pretty clear to me (subject to revision by the appearance of more & better data) that ethanol (vodka) & VSV dosing, and the Prodibio, Polp-Labs, and Brightwell Aquatics methods, do NOT exhibit the type of alkalinity threshold issue(s) that the ZEOvit and UltraLith systems do.

I have suspected for a long time that what folks were reporting was largely going to boil down to something having to do with bacterial respiration (enriched by carbon dosing) within a coral's holobiont and the effect of such respiration on carbonate equilibria. The carbonate equilibrium relationship that I'm referring to is this:

CO2 + H2O <---> H2CO3 <---> H + HCO3 <---> 2H + CO3

It always seemed plausible to me that a rapid rise in localized CO2 concentration (resulting from bacterial respiration) might be able to distort the above equilibrium to a degree that zooxanthellae expulsion and/or cellular metabolic pathway disruption (... a catastrophic pH gradient shift, for example ...) could occur. In other words, the same type of destructive, rapid shift in water column alkalinity (that is so well documented in Berlin-style systems) might actually be happening in ZEOsystems ... but on a localized, micro-environment scale.

The absence of corresponding alkalinity threshold issues with other carbon dosing methods argues against such a notion.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14213517#post14213517 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Kolognekoral
... any quick shift in Alk is bad news ... Indeed.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14213517#post14213517 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Kolognekoral
... ULNS corals are a bit more sensitive to these changes. ... We need to be careful here, my friend ... ;)

I doubt very much that carbon-dosing strategies are capable of shifting water column nutrient levels from the aquarium ppm (parts per million) range downward to natural seawater's (NSW) hundredths of micromoles range. The whole "UNLS" label may be nothing more than a convenient shorthand that allows product enthusiasts to share their ignorance of NSW chemistry & geomicrobial processes more quickly and effectively. Also, isn't pushing corals towards a place of greater sensitivity to water column chemistry an argument against using carbon-dosing strategies?

Hehe ... I'm a ZeoHeretic ... remember? :lol:

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14213926#post14213926 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
... could be that a higher or lower alk can cause this same breakdown of the media which in turn causes something to go awry with the system ... Apologies if this comes across as either argumentative or rude, but ... no ... it couldn't. Many of us have been posting well documented, reserach literature based commentary on what zeolithic media is, and is not, capable of doing in a marine aquarium ... for years. Chemical breakdown toxicity resulting from prolonge (4 - 8 weeks) exposure to an alkalinity range between 6 dKH to 12 dKH is simply not on the list of possibilities.

Boomer's commentary on this stuff is far more definitive than anything I've posted ... :D

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14213926#post14213926 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
... and release things into the water column. ... Ahhh ... now here's something that's entirely possible. Indeed, Fauna Marin comes up right to the edge of asserting this in their UltraLith System manual (... something which Korallen Zucht has denied for years). My favorite candidates are ferric oxide, and aluminum oxide ...

... but this tangent is a different thread. ;)

Circling back, like a drunken vulture, to the alkalinity vs. tip-burn issue ... one of the other things that became apparent, as I sifted through my notes of what people were reporting, is that a significant number of the reports were later resolved as having nothing to do with alkalinity. Excessive light, skewed salinity, bad test readings, physical handling damage, allelopathic interaction, rogue fish picking at corals, parasitic infestation ... these were the ultimate "answers" to questions that were initially posed within an alkalinity context. Might we be talking about something that, while clearly correlated to an alkalinity threshold, isn't actually caused by an alkalinity threshold?

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14213926#post14213926 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
... some chemical in the Zeo/Ultralith systems are very sensitive to this change in dKH. ... Once I abandoned bacterial respiration as my favorite plausibility, I started to look at how various metal ions (that I've long suspected as meaningful components of some KZ formulae) might be complexing ... but with regards to ozonation, and UV sterilization, in ZEOsystems.

Dr. Holmes-Farley ... is it likely that alkalinity is playing a role in the formation of organic-metal complexes (... complexes that might explain some of the negative events that folks are reporting? ... TIA).

JMO ... use at your own risk.
:thumbsup:

jamesdawson

01/22/2009, 02:57 PM

I do agree that solid calcium carbonate surfaces do bind phosphate. :)

. [/B][/QUOTE]

Randy,

Is this why dripping limewater helps with PO4?

Everyone else,

Isn't dripping kalk not recommended with zeolith systems?

James

Randy Holmes-Farley

01/22/2009, 03:03 PM

It isn't recommended by some, but I don't buy the reasoning. From a previous post of mine:

The explanation I've been told is that the phosphate that precipitates in the tank causes problems for a low phosphate system like zeovit.

If I accept that phosphate is precipitated as calcium phosphate (not convinced it happens, but it may) and that the calcium phosphate settles out somewhere, how is that a problem? Yes, theoretically it might redissolve somehow if the pH gets very low, like in a sand bed. So what? How is that different than the initial phosphate coming in with food? Overall, the net available phosphate to the bulk water column system would have to be the same or lower when using limewater. So I fail to see the issue.

Randy Holmes-Farley

01/22/2009, 03:05 PM

This is my thought on limewater and phosphate:

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#10

Phosphate Reduction via Calcium Phosphate Precipitation

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One mechanism for phosphate reduction in reef aquaria may simply be the precipitation of calcium phosphate, Ca3(PO4)2. The water in many reef aquaria is supersaturated with respect to this material, as its equilibrium saturation concentration in normal seawater is only 0.002 ppm phosphate. As with CaCO3, the precipitation of Ca3(PO4)2 in seawater may be limited more by kinetic factors than by equilibrium factors, so it is impossible to say how much will precipitate under reef aquarium conditions (without, of course, somehow determining it experimentally). This precipitation may be especially likely where calcium and high pH additives (such as limewater) enter the aquarium water. The locally high pH converts much of the HPO4-- to PO4---. Combined with the locally high calcium level (also from the limewater), the locally high PO4--- level may push the supersaturation of Ca3(PO4)2 to unstable levels, causing precipitation. If these calcium phosphate crystals are formed in the water column (e.g., if they form at the local area where limewater hits the aquarium water), then they may become coated with organics and be skimmed out of the aquarium.

Many reefkeepers accept the concept that adding limewater reduces phosphate levels. This may be true, but the mechanism remains to be demonstrated. Craig Bingman has done a variety of experiments related to this hypothesis, and has published them in the old Aquarium Frontiers magazine. While many aquarists may not care what the mechanism is, knowing how it occurs will help us understand the limits of this method, and how to best employ it.

One possible mechanism could be through calcium phosphate precipitation, as outlined above. A second mechanism for potential phosphate reduction when using high pH additives is the binding of phosphate to calcium carbonate surfaces. The absorption of phosphate from seawater onto aragonite is pH dependent, with the binding maximized at around pH 8.4 and with less binding occurring at lower and higher pH values. Habib Sekha (owner of Salifert) has pointed out that limewater additions may lead to substantial precipitation of calcium carbonate in reef aquaria. This idea makes perfect sense. After all, it is certainly not the case that large numbers of reef aquaria exactly balance calcification needs by replacing all evaporated water with saturated limewater. And yet, many aquarists find that calcium and alkalinity levels are stable over long time periods with just that scenario. One way this can be true is if the excess calcium and alkalinity, which such additions typically add to the aquarium, are subsequently removed by precipitation of calcium carbonate (such as on heaters, pumps, sand, live rock, etc.). It is this ongoing precipitation of calcium carbonate, then, that may reduce the phosphate levels; phosphate binds to these growing surfaces and becomes part of the solid precipitate.

If the calcium carbonate crystal is static (not growing), then this process is reversible, and the aragonite can act as a reservoir for phosphate. This reservoir can inhibit the complete removal of excess phosphate from a reef aquarium that has experienced very high phosphate levels, and may permit algae to continue to thrive despite all external phosphate sources having been cut off. In such extreme cases, removal of the substrate may even be required.

If the calcium carbonate deposits are growing, then phosphate may become buried in the growing crystal, which can act as a sink for phosphate, at least until that CaCO3 is somehow dissolved. Additionally, if these crystals are in the water column (e.g., if they form at the local area where limewater hits the aquarium water), then they may become coated with organics and be skimmed out of the aquarium.

If phosphate binds to calcium carbonate surfaces to a significant extent in reef aquaria, then this mechanism may be attained with other high pH additive systems (such as some of the two-part additives, including Recipe #1 of my DIY system). However, this potential precipitation of phosphate on growing calcium carbonate surfaces will not be as readily attained with low pH systems, such as those using calcium carbonate/carbon dioxide reactors or those where the pH is low due to excessive atmospheric carbon dioxide, because the low pH inhibits the precipitation of excess calcium and alkalinity as calcium carbonate, as well as inhibiting the binding of phosphate to calcium carbonate.

jamesdawson

01/22/2009, 03:30 PM

Thanks Randy!

James

Canarygirl

01/22/2009, 03:47 PM

The issue about dripping Kalk in Zeovit systems has been explained to me in relation to macroalgae growth on live rock. People go on zeovit for a while, then some (like me) feel like they have new algae growth on their LR. Often the question will be asked, "Do you drip kalk, or has your LR come from a tank that used to drip kalk?" The feeling being that PO4 has deposited into the LR from use of kalk, then will gradually be released by that rock when nutrient levels decline. Encouring growth of algae. That's the only problem I know if in relation to use of Kalk in zeovit systems. After a while, the algae growth will slow down and stop but it can take weeks or even months, as in my case.

Gary, what does it suggest to you (and your theories about ions) that sometimes when zeovit users experience coral TN, they are asked about the rate of water flow through their zeovit media, and frequently they are counseled to slow down that flow? Why do you think that higher water flow rates through the media is stressful to corals? Does it relate to the ion exchange within the media, do you think?

Randy Holmes-Farley

01/22/2009, 04:17 PM

HighlandReefer

01/22/2009, 04:23 PM

Canarygirl

01/22/2009, 04:26 PM

Perhaps. But elevated phosphate, whether limewater or not, puts phosphate on the rock. Maybe the question should be "have you had elevated phosphate in the past?".

Likewise, many of us have dosed limewater for many years and do not have algae on the rock? Given the above hypothesis, why do we not?

And likewise, I didn't have algae on the rocks until I started using zeovit. The advice was to "stay the course" until the PO4 in the rockwork burned itself out...which it eventually did but it took several months. The inference I made was that if the chemistry in the water column changes to where it has a lower level of PO4 than what's sequestered in the rock, that's when the LR's PO4 will leach out and become algae fuel. The explanation made sense to me. But maybe there's some other reason peculiar to zeovit that this happens.

Canarygirl

01/22/2009, 04:29 PM

If you are not suppose to use kalk with ZEOsystems, then I would assume you would not be allowed to use a calcium reactor also. One might argue that the reactor could add more phosphates than kalk.

No, every zeo user I know has either a Ca Rx or uses 2-part. But many of us have a small chamber with PO4 absorber in it, and we drip the Ca Rx effluent into that. :)

HighlandReefer

01/22/2009, 05:17 PM

Are there any guidelines that have been established regarding feeding habits when using the ZEOsystems. Personally, I do not want to harm my fish by cutting back too much, but at the same time, I feel that I can get buy with feeding maybe three or four times a week. I have noted many hobbyists feeding twice per day.

Canarygirl

01/22/2009, 05:28 PM

Oh my, I can't imagine feeding my fish only a few times a week! They'd be starving (literally). Promoting aggression and stress and that increases likelihood for disease.

I feed twice daily. I don't believe there are any fish-feeding guidelines for zeovit users but I don't know any who restrict feeding that way...a large part of the reason to do carbon dosing etc. is so that you can feed your fish freely without as much worry about adding too much nutrient to the tank.

cybrsufr

01/22/2009, 05:59 PM

I agree with CanaryGirl again. I feed 2-3 times a day. Certain fish such as my Anthias would go on a starvation strike and die if they were not fed at least 2 times a day. There are other species that will do that as well. Generally feed 2-3 times a day though for good healthy fish. Also all tangs should have a regular supply of Nori or Algae sheets attached to a clip as we cannot provide enough algae in our closed systems for them. On the reef they spend every waking moment eating algae off the rocks and will not stay healthy without it IMHO.

HighlandReefer

01/22/2009, 06:00 PM

I completely agree with your concern for the health of the fish. I have given some thought to this issue and some thoughts come to mind:

1) You do not want to have left over food after feeding your fish. This is the easiest to determine an appropriate amount to feed.

2) You want to add an appropriate amount so that all the fish get enough food.

3) The more your fish eat, the more waste products they produce causing further pollution to the tank system.

4) At some point your fish are consuming to much food for proper health and the extra food eaten is causing unnecessary pollution to the system. I have not seen any data which tries to determine this level.

5) Small doses daily or semi-daily can be hard to administer in tank systems with lots of fish where it can be time consuming to spot feed individual fish.

6) Heavier feeding of fish every other day or so could make it easier to make sure that all fish get enough food and not over pollute the system. What are the real consequences of this method as far a fish health. I have not seen any data discussing this option.

IMHO, if you feed twice per day without worries of polluting the system, then why would one be so concerned about the phosphates tied up in kalk. It would seem to me that the amount of phosphates released would be trivial compared to amount introduced by feeding your fish. :)

mesocosm

01/22/2009, 06:41 PM

Greetings All !

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14217157#post14217157 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Canarygirl
... what does it suggest to you (and your theories about ions) that sometimes when zeovit users experience coral TN, they are asked about the rate of water flow through their zeovit media, and frequently they are counseled to slow down that flow? That something is being released from the media into the water column. I take notice of user reports that excessive flow rates through reactors that happen midway through the media replacement timeline do not generally produce TN events. I'm unconvinced that too rapid nutrient reduction is the fundamental issue. The literature about bioreactors documents that biological nutrient reduction decreases with excessive flow rates (... the shear force of excessive flow disrupts the metabolic functioning of the biofilm).

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14217157#post14217157 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Canarygirl
... Does it relate to the ion exchange within the media? Boomer was the first to post definitive literature on this in RC ... years ago. The assertion that meaningful ionic exchange is going on with zeolithic media after the media has been exposed to a saltwater solution for much longer than 96 hours is ... hmmm ... indefensible. While different zeolites will indeed present different N adsorption degradation curves (and different NH3/NH4 adsorption curves as well), the endpoints and timeframes are relatively the same. The notion that zeolithic media is removing NH3/NH4 at a rate high enough to impact water chemistry throughout a 6-8 week exchange cycle is simply inaccurate. The combination of the ZEOvit media, ZeoBak, and ZeoStart2 within a reactor vessel presents the opportunity to do powerful, effective & "controllable" nutrient reduction ... but not because of the ionic-exchange capacity of the ZEOvit media.

Regarding too rapid flow through the reactor stimulating a negative response from corals ... there's no need to speculate about organic-metal complex formation(s). All you need to do is ask yourself what might be released into the water column when an aluminosilicate (laced with iron) material is strongly agitated for many hours in NSW. Then ask yourself what happens to the release rate if the material is agitated less strongly.

JMO ... HTH
:thumbsup:

HighlandReefer

01/22/2009, 06:54 PM

"All you need to do is ask yourself what might be released into the water column when an aluminosilicate (laced with iron) material is strongly agitated for many hours in NSW. Then ask yourself what happens to the release rate if the material is agitated less strongly."

I asked myself, but myself can only speculate. :D

Genetics

01/22/2009, 07:12 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14218420#post14218420 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mesocosm
Greetings All !
Boomer was the first to post definitive literature on this in RC ... years ago. The assertion that meaningful ionic exchange is going on with zeolithic media after the media has been exposed to a saltwater solution for much longer than 96 hours is ... hmmm ... indefensible. While different zeolites will indeed present different N adsorption degradation curves (and different NH3/NH4 adsorption curves as well), the endpoints and timeframes are relatively the same. The notion that zeolithic media is removing NH3/NH4 at a rate high enough to impact water chemistry throughout a 6-8 week exchange cycle is simply inaccurate. The combination of the ZEOvit media, ZeoBak, and ZeoStart2 within a reactor vessel presents the opportunity to do powerful, effective & "controllable" nutrient reduction ... but not because of the ionic-exchange capacity of the ZEOvit media.

Interesting. Any explanation why potassium becomes a limiting factor in zeo?

Boomer

01/22/2009, 07:14 PM

Jamie

Well, if my head is in the sand we know where yours is ;) Fell free to do some research on the subject and we will have a debate.

Candy

Zeovit media is nothing like this. Other types of zeolith may be, but not Zeovit.

It most certainly is. It is not magic rock. Please inform me what kind of Zeolite it is and I want the mineral name :) Just because it L@@KS different or is in bigger chunks does not mean it is not the same. Take a ZeoVit Zeolite to a major University Geology Department and have them run an XRD on it and see what you find. That is the #1 method for studying the composition and crystal structure/chemisty of Zeolites. 90% if it will be Clinoptilolite the most common and mined Zeolite.

This coating of the surface of the zeovit media is the reason that users "shake" the stones once or twice a day. It gets the "mulm" off the stones, and the mulm has a happy side effect of being food for corals

100 % correct :D and which has nothing to do with ion exchange chemistry or ammonia. It what is pulled from the water column by the bacteria.

Genetics

Not to sound naive but wouldn't the zeolites function to absorb ammonium ions?

It will adsorb very little ammonia seawater. GAC will remove actually just as much or more. Ammonia adsorption is seawater by ion exchangers, like zeolites is old news.

Their accidental affinity for positive potassium ions is the reason why potassium deficiency occurs.

Based on what tests that show how much X zeolite removes Y K+ in seawater. Ask yourself the question how and with what are exchangers like Zeolites recharged with ? Have you ever looked at Zeolite ion affinity data sheet. And YES K + is up there. I have posted a few as has Habib. Zeolites are water softeners and in seawater are useless when dealing with the composition of seawater.

This is my non-scientific understanding of zeoliths. Also, the bacterial growth that occurs coats the rock, with the potential to hinder absorption.

Yes to hinder ion exchange, thus ionic exchange is usless.

The bacteria aren't the key, its the ammonium removal by zeolites.

The bacteria are the key. It has nothing to do with ammonia. I'll say it again :) Why would a bacteria pull or try to pull ammonia bound to a rock when it is right there in the water column for the taking. When the rock is coated with bacteria how is the ammonia going to get into the rock/zeolite. What, the ammonia is going to go through the nitrifying bacteria and the the FAB and into the rock and then by my magic the nitrifying bacteria pull it off the rock and through the FAB to get it ???

As Candy has stated and have many other ZeoVit users

This coating of the surface of the zeovit media is the reason that users "shake" the stones once or twice a day. It gets the "mulm" off the stones, and the mulm has a happy side effect of being food for corals

The coating of mulm is removed and the Zeolite surface is still pretty much coated with bacteria. How is that ammonia going to get in ?

All of this has been discussed here a number of times.

Here is just one of the many threads with a very long and somewhat technically review from 2002

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133912&perpage=25&highlight=affinity&pagenumber=1

OK I'll be quite now :)

tonyf

01/22/2009, 08:11 PM

Boomer wrote: "OK I'll be quite now"

That'll be "quiet now", Sir ... LOL :)

Genetics

01/22/2009, 09:22 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14218683#post14218683 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Boomer

Genetics

It will adsorb very little ammonia seawater. GAC will remove actually just as much or more. Ammonia adsorption is seawater by ion exchangers, like zeolites is old news.

Based on what tests that show how much X zeolite removes Y K+ in seawater. Ask yourself the question how and with what are exchangers like Zeolites recharged with ? Have you ever looked at Zeolite ion affinity data sheet. And YES K + is up there. I have posted a few as has Habib. Zeolites are water softeners and in seawater are useless when dealing with the composition of seawater.

Yes to hinder ion exchange, thus ionic exchange is usless.

The bacteria are the key. It has nothing to do with ammonia. I'll say it again :) Why would a bacteria pull or try to pull ammonia bound to a rock when it is right there in the water column for the taking. When the rock is coated with bacteria how is the ammonia going to get into the rock/zeolite. What, the ammonia is going to go through the nitrifying bacteria and the the FAB and into the rock and then by my magic the nitrifying bacteria pull it off the rock and through the FAB to get it ???

All of this has been discussed here a number of times.

Here is just one of the many threads with a very long and somewhat technically review from 2002

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=133912&perpage=25&highlight=affinity&pagenumber=1

OK I'll be quite now :)

Thanks for answering some of those questions! In the thread Habib mentioned that he noted a significant decrease in ammonia when it was exposed to zeolith in saltwater. Which again whether it does it effectively or not is up for debate. But I do hear zeo users constantly complaining of K deficiency which is above ammonium ion affinity.

It was also proposed that the material could pull and release ammonia. However, it quickly gets covered with bacterial films as was pointed out. These films are slightly greater in their ability to reduce ammonia in comparison to carbon granules suggesting a potentially better substrate for their growth. Interestingly my phosban reactor with carbon granules seems to build up a bacterial film/mulm...

After reading the thread, it really seems as if zeoliths were taken and applied rather hastily to the hobby without any science directly supporting it. I really don't see this being the key to zeovit systems. The real setup comes from applying a few key organic chemicals to rid detectable N/P and then use of a combinatorial approach to reduce this further, while promoting coloration and growth.

Canarygirl

01/22/2009, 09:49 PM

are we having fun now, or what? :lol:

All you need to do is ask yourself what might be released into the water column when an aluminosilicate (laced with iron) material is strongly agitated for many hours in NSW.

Ummm.....aluminum?

IMHO, if you feed twice per day without worries of polluting the system, then why would one be so concerned about the phosphates tied up in kalk. It would seem to me that the amount of phosphates released would be trivial compared to amount introduced by feeding your fish

Cliff, I don't consider that feeding generously, twice a day, is excessive for the amount and type of fish I have. I feed generously but I don't overfeed and I avoid the higher phosphate foods like flake and pellets. But like I said earlier, my wanting to keep my fish happy is a big part of the reason I do carbon dosing (and have a bubble king skimmer, and a large water volume....)

HighlandReefer

01/22/2009, 09:59 PM

Thanks for bearing with me. :)

I always try to have fun at what ever I do. If you are not having fun, then you just need to look at the situation from a different perspective. :D

The reason I ask, is that I have started to feed every other day. So far I have not seen any negative results in my fish and the amount of phosphate build-up seems to be decreasing by the amount of microalgae growing.

cybrsufr

01/22/2009, 11:08 PM

I agree with you Cliff. I know a lot of people that only feed 3-4 times a week and they also only use pellets and flakes. I have a large Bio Load myself with 3 large tangs, Pair of XL Banggai Cardinals, Pair of Black Occelaris, Fuzzy Dwarf Lion Fish, Trio of Chromis, Pair of Lyretal Anthias, Black Cap Basslet, Diamond Goby, Lemon Damsel, Firefish, Yellow Coris Wrasse, African Pygmy Angel, and I know I am forgetting at least 3 or 4 others in my 180G. I feed a teaspoon of my mix which is comprised of (hakari mega marine,mega marine algae, mega marine angel, Mysis, Spiralina Brine, clams, squid, blood worms, cyclopeze, and nutromar ova, this is all mixed with Zoecon and Garlic) twice a day every day, then 3 times a week at night I feed Oyster Feast for my corals. I am maintaining a .01 PO4 level and down to a 5-7ppm NO3 level since starting Vodka dosing 60 days ago. While I rarely feed flake or pellet may be part of the reason my PO4 is not through the roof as you stated. I also only use Hikari which is no gel binders and low in PO4 to begin with. But when I feed this food within 5-10 minutes it is completely gone from the view and whatever is left is being devoured by my crabs, shrimp, and the 150 nassarius and 30 cerith snails. They pop out of the sand at feedings like jack-in-the-boxes. I also have two 12" Banded Serpent starts that help clean up and left overs. IMO flake and pellets cause a lot of the PO4 build up in some people tanks if that is all they feed.

mesocosm

01/24/2009, 12:13 PM

Greetings All !

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14216248#post14216248 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
... The bacteria aren't the key, its the ammonium removal by zeolites. Not to beat a long dead seahorse ... nor to instigate another flash of the classic cyber-savagery associated with this particular topic ... but the science is the science, and its butchery ought not pass by without comment.

JMO ... :D

I stumbling across a thread in another forum this morning, and posted the following reply ...

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

Wow ... this is a little disturbing. As someone who began posting & linking the Wikipedia 'zeolite' page beginning back in 2004, I was more than a little surprised at how the information in the 'Aquarium Keeping' section has been changed. Folks may want to take notice that the Wikipedia 'zeolite' entry was last modified on 12 January 2009, at 14:06 . More specifically, these statements are entirely new:

statement #1
Zeolite filtration is used in some marine aquaria to keep nutrient concentrations low for the benefit of corals adapted to nutrient-depleted waters.
statement #2
Zeolite is an effective ammonia filter, but must be used with some care, especially with delicate tropical corals that are sensitive to water chemistry and temperature.

While statement #1 might be excused as being merely incomplete (in that it is the biogeochemical processes of bacteria living on, and in, the zeolithic material that are impacting nutrient concentrations in the water column) ... statement #2 is demonstrably inaccurate. By 'demonstrably inaccurate' I mean that there exists replicable, independent documentation describing how clinoptilolites rapidly loose their capacity to ion exchange with nitrogen compounds in saline solution(s). For example ...

In vitro Comparison of Zeolite (Clinoptilolite) and Activated Carbon as Ammonia Absorbants in Fish Culture
H. Emadi, J.E. Nezhad and H. Pourbagher
The ICLARM Quarterly (Vol. 24, Nos. 1 & 2) January-June 2001
http://www.worldfishcenter.org/naga/Naga24-1&2/pdf/aquabyte%204.pdf

Also ...

Chiayvareesajja and Boyd (1993) indicated that brackish water drastically decreased the effectiveness of zeolite for ammonia removal, as compared to freshwater.

Comparison of the Zeolite Sodium Chabazite and Activated Charcoal for Ammonia Control in Sealed Containers
Z. ZHANG and P. PERSCHBACHER
Aquaculture/Fisheries Center

Also ...

Clinoptilotile absorbs ammonium ion selectively in freshwater even in the presence of competing ions such as Mg, Ca, and Na (mercer and Ames 1978). Johnson and Sieburth (1974) found that the presence of salinity of 5 percent of artificial water (ASW) reduced the ammonia removal efficiency of clinoptilotile tenfold. Salinities of 10, 15, and 25 percent ASW reduced efficiency even more but not as drastically as the initial ecrease which occurred at 5 percent. It was ineffective in sea water.

Evaluation of an Experimental Recycled-Water System for Brackish Water Aquaculture
Terry King
Technical Completion Report
Project No. 1423622
May 1986

Full Article
http://wrri.nmsu.edu/publish/techrpt/tr164/tr164.pdf

There are several more, but I grow weary of repeatedly posting them. You can easily find them yourselves if you're willing to invest a little time to do so. While zeolithic media can indeed demonstrate short duration, efficient uptake of TAN (total available nitrogen) ... which is why folks who ship either freshwater or saltwater fishes have been so interested in zeolithic media as a tool to reduce mortality ... the assertion that zeolithic media demonstrate sustained, long duration TAN removal in saline solution(s) is unequivocally wrong. You don't need to believe me. You can figure it out all by yourself. All you need to be able to do is ...

... read. :lol:

Long have I commented that there are some powerful, clever minds behind the marketing strategies associated with some of the proprietary carbon-dosing product lines. This is the kind of subtle impact that I've been talking about. While I doubt that the manufacturers themselves were personally involved in making the changes in the Wikipedia entry, it is an impressive testament to the raw power of sustained repetition of anecdotal "information", and a blithe disinterest in scientific data.

:bounce1: :bounce2: :bounce3:

BTW, from my twisted little perspective, at least one of the modifications to the entry is a significant improvement ...

... As of January 2008, 175 unique zeolite frameworks have been identified, and over 40 naturally occurring zeolite frameworks are known.[1][2] Zeolites have a porous structure that can accommodate a wide variety of cations, such as Na+, K+, Ca2+, Mg2+ and others. These positive ions are rather loosely held and can readily be exchanged for others in a contact solution. Some of the more common mineral zeolites are analcime, chabazite, heulandite, natrolite, phillipsite, and stilbite. ...

Those interested in DIY zeolithic media mixtures might want to take a look at the NH3 uptake profiles of phillipsite and heulandite. A quick review of 'aluminosilicates' and 'clay minerals' may also prove helpful.

:D

FWIW ... no need to respond ... FYI. :thumbsup:

I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread, already in progress ...

:D

Genetics

01/24/2009, 01:29 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14216248#post14216248 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Genetics
Not to sound naive but ... The bacteria aren't the key, its the ammonium removal by zeolites.

I retract my statement or naivety. It really does amaze me how many threads and manufacturers state what I had above. The comment by Habib in the RC thread now make sense btw with that paper.

Beating a dead seahorse sounds like it could be a problem... I know beating a dead seadragon would be cause for alarm. :lol:

melev

01/25/2009, 04:20 PM

Sometimes, it seems very hard to know whom to believe, but I do tend to lean in mesocosm's direction after that above post. It sounds reasonable to me, which is how I come to most of my own conclusions. If it doesn't make sense to me, I tend to hold off on any final decision-making.

Thanks.

Boomer

01/25/2009, 07:12 PM

I have been stating what Meso as said for like 10 yeas here, to include some of the links he gave. I also have the 4 leading textbooks on Zeolites which are kind hard to argue with :) Dont' take me wrong but I think I have said it before, " a good set of refs pretty much shuts one up" It seem that every couple of years we have to repeat it all, just like repeating Salinity SG and Density relationships.

Meso, nice review. You missed the one by Bower's though :)

Genetics

01/25/2009, 08:32 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14239210#post14239210 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
Sometimes, it seems very hard to know whom to believe, but I do tend to lean in mesocosm's direction after that above post. It sounds reasonable to me, which is how I come to most of my own conclusions. If it doesn't make sense to me, I tend to hold off on any final decision-making.

Thanks.

Mesocosm is no doubt correct on this topic. After reading the links it seems to be rather well-known, albeit obscure to me. From reading other papers on zeolites, not based on SW conditions as well as a lot of threads online, the ammonia absorption seemed valid. Live and learn.

If we were right all the time, what would be the point of having a conversation?

melev

01/25/2009, 09:32 PM

I usually don't like it when I have to read up on material that refers to tests done in freshwater. Results are already varied in the saltwater field, so I tend to ignore freshwater results since they simply can't be compared.

danorth

01/26/2009, 10:49 AM

Has this been answered yet.....how much nitrate can one expect to be reduced in a week? I am curious if I will ever get a drop since I have so many large fish. If they produce 20ppm a week, and vodka can only reduce 10ppm a week, I will never win. I am up to 10ml a day and don't see a drop. 300 gallon total.

cybrsufr

01/26/2009, 11:43 AM

I am up to 11ml a day and currently maintaining a 5-7ppm nitrate and .01 PO4 with several large fish. Will go up to 12ml next saturday. It has been 2 months since starting and was at 25-30ppm NO3 and .15ppm PO4 before starting the vodka. I expect to hit 14-16ml before bottoming out and cutting back to a maintenance dosage.

GreshamH

01/26/2009, 12:28 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14220679#post14220679 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
twice a day every day, then 3 times a week at night I feed Oyster Feast for my corals.

Slightly on topic but the media Oyster-Feast is in is a carbon source :)

melev

01/26/2009, 01:04 PM

LOL! So I could drink that instead of Crown Royal? http://www.melevsreef.com/g/drinking_shots.gif

GreshamH

01/26/2009, 01:05 PM

Um ewww and no :)

5 shots in a row would do that to me as well Marc :P

melev

01/26/2009, 01:19 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14244871#post14244871 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by danorth
Has this been answered yet.....how much nitrate can one expect to be reduced in a week? I am curious if I will ever get a drop since I have so many large fish. If they produce 20ppm a week, and vodka can only reduce 10ppm a week, I will never win. I am up to 10ml a day and don't see a drop. 300 gallon total.

If we knew that, this thread would be way shorter. :D I've been dosing for over 6 months, and am currently at 13.5 ml per day. My tank is a 280g. NO3 is creeping below 20ppm, PO4 is .03 at my last testing.

I have two large fish (tangs) and a bunch of small ones.

melev

01/26/2009, 01:19 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14245968#post14245968 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by GreshamH
Um ewww and no :)

5 shots in a row would do that to me as well Marc :P

How come you didn't come out to dinner with us on Saturday night? We had a great time!

cybrsufr

01/26/2009, 02:07 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14245698#post14245698 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by GreshamH
Slightly on topic but the media Oyster-Feast is in is a carbon source :)

Actually wouldn't any type of food be a carbon source? Whatever micro nutrients that are left after feeding would be consumed by the bacteria in the tank as well correct?

tmz

01/26/2009, 02:17 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14246053#post14246053 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by melev
If we knew that, this thread would be way shorter. :D I've been dosing for over 6 months, and am currently at 13.5 ml per day. My tank is a 280g. NO3 is creeping below 20ppm, PO4 is .03 at my last testing.

I have two large fish (tangs) and a bunch of small ones.

:) Good information. Are you using any other N an P reduction methods other than live rock and vodka dosing? GFO, lathanum chloride ,etc?

tmz

01/26/2009, 02:19 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14246427#post14246427 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
Actually wouldn't any type of food be a carbon source? Whatever micro nutrients that are left after feeding would be consumed by the bacteria in the tank as well correct? :) But obviously the food waste includes nitrogen and phosphorous.

melev

01/26/2009, 02:38 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14246496#post14246496 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tmz
:) Good information. Are you using any other N an P reduction methods other than live rock and vodka dosing? GFO, lathanum chloride ,etc?

I've not used GFO in probably a year.

I do run carbon (2 to 3 cups) in a Phosban Reactor that is changed out every two weeks.

I have a skimmer, a refugium, and a DSB. LR in the reef.

During the past 6 months, I dosed Phosphate Control once a month to kick PO4 from what it was back to zero, overnight. When PO4 was .1, .25 or .5, I dosed to remove it from the system. I felt the vodka would take care of it, once I found the right dosage. The last time I dosed Phosphate Control was Dec 14, and on Jan 14 when I tested PO4, it measured .03ppm. Of course, who knows what happened in the past 10 days, right? I'd have to test again to see where things are.

Be that as it may, my main goal with vodka dosing was to drop NO3, which has been happening painfully slowly for my system. It was 35ppm when I started last July, and seems to be getting below 20ppm finally.

tonyf

01/26/2009, 03:37 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14240539#post14240539 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Boomer
I have been stating what Meso as said for like 10 yeas here, to include some of the links he gave. I also have the 4 leading textbooks on Zeolites which are kind hard to argue with :) Dont' take me wrong but I think I have said it before, " a good set of refs pretty much shuts one up" It seem that every couple of years we have to repeat it all, just like repeating Salinity SG and Density relationships.

Quite right Boomer ... it's the Robinson Crusoe Syndrome :lol: And it happens through all levels of the hobby.

Tone :)

tonyf

01/26/2009, 03:38 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14240539#post14240539 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Boomer ... It seem that every couple of years we have to repeat it all, just like repeating Salinity SG and Density relationships.

Quite right Boomer ... it's the Robinson Crusoe Syndrome :lol: And it happens through all levels of the hobby.

When I was a 'smart' youngster, my father told me to get out there and do everything before I became as stupid as he was ... he was right and I'm now as stupid as he was.

Tone :)

tmz

01/26/2009, 03:49 PM

Marc, Thankyou for your reply.

I am having a similar problem with nitrate . I use a remote dsb, two macroalgae refugia, 2 large skimmers, and carbon. Phosphate is ok with GFO and an occasional knockdown with Brightwell Phosphate E. May consider a change over to all lanthanum chloride for PO4 removal down the road since it is less costly.

For now, nitrate remains a problem at 40ppm with no clear answer yet.

Before doing carbon dosing again, I'm trying a sulfur denitrator from the diy thread . It does put out zero NO3 water after a week pf cycling. The only question is wether it can process enough to keep up with the biolaod.Lots of corals and about 40fish in the 575 g system.

BTW I noted in one of your posts a mention of Seriatorpora showing effects of high NO3. Could you elaborate on that a bit? I am having difficulty with Seriatopora and Stylopora but acros are fine as are lps, anemones and leathers. Don't know if it's high NO3 or some species specific parasitic or bacterial predation .

melev

01/26/2009, 11:49 PM

Tom, did you remove anything that contributes to making nitrate, such as sponges, socks, filter floss, etc?

AZNO3 will drop them down as well, as I use that to bring mine from 65 to 2ppm in 60 days. It took 5 bottles of the stuff, but I was dosing very slowly rather than following the recipe on the bottle because I didn't want to harm my livestock.

I ran out of the product, and decided not to continue because it really made cyano bacteria bloom all over the place and I was sick of it. NO3 rose back up to 35ppm, but since it was 50% less than what I had at first, I put that one in the 'win' column.

I tried a DIY denitrifier system that did nothing for two months, and I also tried lots of Algone pillows floating in the sump, changed like clockwork. The vodka dosing started in July when the article was submitted to the magazine, and I do believe it is going to work as promised. It just takes time, especially when you approach it gradually as was recommended and avoid the common pitfalls of rushing things. If your denitrifier's effluent is 0 ppm of NO3, it should be able to gradually drop the tank's NO3.

When NO3 dropped in my reef, Birdsnest coral grew nice sharp tips. As NO3 rose again, the tips dulled over. By looking at that coral in my tank, I can tell how nitrates are doing. When looking at other people's tanks, I can tell how good their water is at a glance. It's a trade secret, so don't tell anyone. Mum's the word. :D

GreshamH

01/27/2009, 12:05 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14246427#post14246427 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by cybrsufr
Actually wouldn't any type of food be a carbon source? Whatever micro nutrients that are left after feeding would be consumed by the bacteria in the tank as well correct?

Guess so... but the media itself is a carbon source in this case.

tonyf

01/27/2009, 12:26 AM

Tom, have you considered a couple of large clams to reduce nitrate?

tmz

01/27/2009, 02:15 AM

Yes but from what I have read it would take dozens to have a mesureable impact.

tmz

01/27/2009, 02:38 AM

Thanks again Marc.

The system has no mechanical filtration except for a sock on the drain which is cleaned every three days.

There is very little detritus since I have very aggressive flow and I blow it off the rock regularly and siphon a good bit.

The denitrator is putting out zero nitrate water but not enough of it yet. It's only been up for 10 days. Somewhere around 7 gallons per day. I need 5 to 10 times that to impact my large system. I do add to the flow rate after a day at zero. I look at that like an extra water change at least in terms of nitrate export. I also do 6 gallon changes per day plus larger changes from time to time.

AZ NO3 is pricey for the amount I would need.Don't think I want to put up with the cyano either.

I tried vodka dosing about 2 years ago. 4ml on the then 400 g system with no discernible ill effect over 4 months. Unfortunately I was not measuring N an P . I stopped because I became concerned about TOC buildup and the potential for boosting some harmful as well as beneficial bacteria. I will probably try it again if the sulfur doesn't get me where I want to be.

I don't have much of a clean up crew . A few trochus, cerith , nausaurius and three or four turbos spread out in the system and yet there is almost no nuisancxe algae and only an occasional small short lived patch of cyano. Some turf algae in one tank.Just want to get those nitrates down so corals can do better.

What is an algone pillow. Did it work?

tonyf

01/27/2009, 05:03 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14252071#post14252071 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tmz
Yes but from what I have read it would take dozens to have a mesureable impact.

I kept 5 clams in my 500 display ... 9" to 18" in size. Never had a problem with nitrate until I let 'them go' as part of an aquascape rethink. Not that nitrate is much of a problem now but it never used to register in testing, now it gets up to 4 or 5ppm which I think is kind of just right for the coloured sticks.

I dose 2ml/day vodka as part of a sps feeding regime along with the natural impact of the fish feces ... I've got BIG fish.

Tone :)

Paul_PSU

01/27/2009, 06:30 AM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14252104#post14252104 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tmz
Thanks again Marc.

The system has no mechanical filtration except for a sock on the drain which is cleaned every three days.

There is very little detritus since I have very aggressive flow and I blow it off the rock regularly and siphon a good bit.

The denitrator is putting out zero nitrate water but not enough of it yet. It's only been up for 10 days. Somewhere around 7 gallons per day. I need 5 to 10 times that to impact my large system. I do add to the flow rate after a day at zero. I look at that like an extra water change at least in terms of nitrate export. I also do 6 gallon changes per day plus larger changes from time to time.

AZ NO3 is pricey for the amount I would need.Don't think I want to put up with the cyano either.

I tried vodka dosing about 2 years ago. 4ml on the then 400 g system with no discernible ill effect over 4 months. Unfortunately I was not measuring N an P . I stopped because I became concerned about TOC buildup and the potential for boosting some harmful as well as beneficial bacteria. I will probably try it again if the sulfur doesn't get me where I want to be.

I don't have much of a clean up crew . A few trochus, cerith , nausaurius and three or four turbos spread out in the system and yet there is almost no nuisancxe algae and only an occasional small short lived patch of cyano. Some turf algae in one tank.Just want to get those nitrates down so corals can do better.

What is an algone pillow. Did it work?

Hang in there on the denitrator. I built one when I switched from FOWLR to reef. I was using tap water with the FOWLR ( I know...IDIOT) and when I switched over I did a 100% water change but kept the sand and rock(bigger IDIOT). I used RO/DI water going forward but everything was bound up in the sand and rock my Nitrates were 180. It took me about 4 months but I got it down to 20 with the denitrator.

tmz

01/27/2009, 12:22 PM

Thanks Paul good to know.

austin93

01/27/2009, 12:52 PM

I have undetectable N and P but am interested in vodka dosing. I have a 75 sps dominant w/ 6x t5 and a basment sump w/ oct nw200 skimmer. I want clearer water than I have now so I think maybe the vodka method would be helpful. I tried it before, but saw negative results probably due to an undersized skimmer (remora). Any input would be appreciated.

Randy Holmes-Farley

01/27/2009, 12:59 PM

If you want clear water, using ozone is likely to be more effective than anything else you might use. Vodka dosing will not likely reduce yellowness of the water, and may contribute to it.

austin93

01/27/2009, 01:13 PM

Thanks for the quick response. I was under the impression that the vodka would improve the efficiency of my skimmer, thus creating crystal clear water. I know what you are talking about, the gebstalv (sp) effect that needs to be removed with carbon or ozone.

Canarygirl

01/27/2009, 01:17 PM

the gebstalv (sp) effect

What is this?

What I hear from people who try vodka dosing is that their water gets very clear afterwards (even to the point where corals can get light shock).

Randy Holmes-Farley

01/27/2009, 01:29 PM

Well, it is certainly easy enough to try, I just personally would look to other methods for water clarity improvements. :)

Thanks for the quick response. I was under the impression that the vodka would improve the efficiency of my skimmer, thus creating crystal clear water.

I do not think there is any improvement in efficiency. The bacterial bodies and their breakdown products can be partly skimmed out, but that doesn't change the skimmability of organic compounds already in the water.

What I hear from people who try vodka dosing is that their water gets very clear afterwards (even to the point where corals can get light shock).

If you have phytoplankton in the water that gets starved for nutrients that could happen and reduce greenness, but it is not likely to help removal of the existing organics. That's the term austin is using to apply to the array of organics which can remain behind after skimming etc, yellowing the water.

FWIW, light shock can also come from nitrate reduction, since nitrate can absorb UV, and suddenly dropping it may let more UV hit the corals.

Finally, if the zoox are declining due to reduce nutrients, corals and other organisms might be light shocked as the reduced amount of zoox gets more exposer.

Genetics

01/27/2009, 01:29 PM

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14254997#post14254997 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Canarygirl
What is this?

What I hear from people who try vodka dosing is that their water gets very clear afterwards (even to the point where corals can get light shock).

Gelbstoff, German for yellow matter, is reported to buildup in aquariums over time. Additions of vodka or other carbon sources have the potential to accelerate the yellowish water buildup from organics. To solve this problem, people have utilized ozonators to breakdown of the organic molecules responsible for resulting in yellowish water.

It is system dependent. Now most tanks are reporting clearer water compared to the original assessment that it was doing the exact opposite. It might be dose dependent or a exporting issue that accounts for the differences. I know a few years ago, skimmers were undersized or not used which may explain the varying results.

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h116/NAWalton00/TankShotBeforeOzone.jpg

http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h116/NAWalton00/OzoneTreated.jpg

This is what ozone treating did for my tank a few years back. I had the same results with vodka.

austin93

01/27/2009, 01:35 PM

How much time was there between the 2 pix? That is a major improvement. Do you have to dose ozone w/ a controller, or can you just use one w/o a controller? If you had the same results w/o ozone but by using vodka, why did you get the ozone? This was quite a post filled with questions, so I thought maybe I should just put a question mark at the end of this just for effect?

Genetics

01/27/2009, 02:05 PM

It was less than a week between pictures, maybe 3 days. At the time I was just becoming familiar with the technical aspects of the hobby and had bought a pool ozonizer off ebay. I used a controller for ORP because of how much ozone can be produced from these guys. I still have the ozonizer attached to my skimmer but it rarely kicks on until recently with vitamin c dosing.

Vodka interest started about 6 months after getting the ozonizer as I was looking for ways to control nitrate. The skimmer I had, which was undersized, did not like vodka. The lid would come off from the junk being pulled out and the bubble film was very thick. The dosage hadn't been worked out and tested with many people talking about entire system crashes. Turned out too many people were adding way too much! Seeing it had potential, I spent some time around the internet looking at dosages and methods.

Off topic, if you look closely at the pictures you will see my corals are actually pale in color. Never figured it out until a few months ago (this is 3+ yrs). Had stray voltage running through my tank. A few months ago, I was planning on selling the pump I used back then to someone locally. Wanted to test it and so threw it in a tub full of water on a bathroom circuit. Blew the circuit. Turns out that it had enough stray current to blow a breaker... My sps started falling apart when I bought this pump back then and never made the connection. I blamed this and that and the cloudiness of my water... Sad and funny how you can go years without figuring out what is causing issues but without it I never would've found ozone or vodka for that matter.

melev

01/27/2009, 02:13 PM

The denitrator is putting out zero nitrate water but not enough of it yet. It's only been up for 10 days. Somewhere around 7 gallons per day. I need 5 to 10 times that to impact my large system. I do add to the flow rate after a day at zero. I look at that like an extra water change at least in terms of nitrate export. I also do 6 gallon changes per day plus larger changes from time to time. 

It probably will take months to accomplish your goal. I tend to think that if it is putting out 0, it will eventually resolve the problem. How long did it take to get your NO3 to its current levels? You might contact djfrankie to see what he thinks about your particular case. His article is in this month's Reefkeeping Magazine, with a link to his thread.

AZ NO3 is pricey for the amount I would need.Don't think I want to put up with the cyano either.

I know, right? I've read some guesses from others that it might be sugar water, which is what VSV contains. The cyano matting drove me nuts, and I siphoned out huge patches just so I could stand to look at my tank. NO3 plummeted, but that side effect was really problematic for me.

I tried vodka dosing about 2 years ago. 4ml on the then 400 g system with no discernible ill effect over 4 months. Unfortunately I was not measuring N an P . I stopped because I became concerned about TOC buildup and the potential for boosting some harmful as well as beneficial bacteria. I will probably try it again if the sulfur doesn't get me where I want to be.

You'll need to use quite a bit more. As I said, I'm dosing 13.5 ml per day on my system that is half the size of yours (estimated). Genetics is following this thread and may chime in as well, or point you to the article in Reefkeeping. ;)

I don't have much of a clean up crew . A few trochus, cerith , nassarius and three or four turbos spread out in the system and yet there is almost no nuisance algae and only an occasional small short lived patch of cyano. Some turf algae in one tank.Just want to get those nitrates down so corals can do better.

That sounds good to me.

What is an algone pillow. Did it work?

meh. It works, but not so well in my tank. It is a small pillow of some type of straw/hay mixture that is used to improve clarity in ponds. www.algone.com I've used it over the years, and the pillow inflated, and smelled horrible. Which means it was working. I just don't know why it didn't work as expected. I thought about dropping 10 of them in my sump once or twice. :lol:

Using a sharpie, I'd write the date on them before tossing them in so I knew when it was time to swap them out. The large version of the pillows should each treat 200g, so three in my sump really should have done well. I don't know why it didn't work. A friend of mine had a tank servicing company, and he puts them in all his clients tanks. That way those customers can dump in too much flake food (as they often do), but the numbers stayed in check. He too couldn't understand why it didn't work for me. Oh well.

At least there's vodka, right? http://www.melevsreef.com/g/drinking_shots.gif