Let's Talk About ~Algae Control~

[reedman]

Would doing a 10% water change a week as well as suck out the detritus from the rocks be more beneficial then adding stronger lighting and more flow.

Pondguy,

First I'd say "YES" doing water changes while removing detritus will be more beneficial than stronger lighting. If you have an algae issue now, adding more lighting will just fuel the fire. Read on though before you jump on that statement.

Bottom line is there are excess nutrients in the water that the algae is having a feast on. We just need to determine where they are getting in and limit them.

Top choices are:
1) Top off water quality
2) food
3) salt mix
4) additives

Let me ask the silly question. Are you using RO/DI water? If you are great. If not, stop everything and go buy one (unless your tap water is much better than most of us). Also, just because the P or NO3 test kit registers low doesn't mean you don't have these elements in the system. Your algae could be taking it up as fast as it is going into the system producing a false low reading. Take a water sample from near a rock with algae on it and test that water. How are the P & NO3 readings there? You may have rocks that need to shed a lot of detritus (you can look into "cooking" the rock if this is the case). If you are getting detritus in the tank on a regular basis it is probably the rocks shedding it. Also using a powerhead to blow off the rocks just before a water change can help remove the detritus.

What are you feeding? Flake, frozen, homemade? Are you rinsing and straining?

Have you tested your top off water for P and NO3? What about a fresh batch of salt water for a water change? Maybe you are putting nutrients right back into the system.

Keep us posted....we'll figure it out.

 

[Krish]

algae could be taking it up as fast as it is going into the system producing a false low reading

Reedman I never knew that...That's quite interesting. Is it at the same rate as when the problem first arises in a new aquarium or does algae have to kinda develop first before it can use up nutrients at that speed?

 

[wave98]

Hey NaH20
Thanks for writting back, it seems like everyone is fighting over crabs, snails and urchins oh my, but my main concern was why my fish were dying. I have since performed another water change and algae harvest so to speak with possitive results. No fish deaths, thats good. I just tested my parameters before the water change and were as follows. Phos- 0.00, Nitrate- 0.01, Nitrite- 0.01, Calcium 380, pH- 8.2, alk- 11, I have 4-96w Pc 2-96w actinic and 2-65w actinic on the tank. I believe my water flow is low, but it seems that the algae grows even where the flow is the highest in the tank. So, I know that a balanced tank is a clean tank and that is what I am trying to accomplish, but in doing so I am loosing fish, and some very nice fish at that. Does anyone have any ideas, (a lot of you seem to have all the answers) as to why doing a water change or physical removal of algae would kill my fish. I was thinking of up grading to 3-400w MH lights and keep a couple of the actinic that I have as well as add a couple of closed loops for more flow. But from what I am reading, this might not have any effect on the algae problem that I have. Would doing a 10% water change a week as well as suck out the detritus from the rocks be more beneficial then adding stronger lighting and more flow. Help!!

Pondguy, when you first posted with this problem, you were harvesting algae through a tube, which should be just fine, but you were also running this water through a "sock" in order to save the water. Back then, you had some fish dying, right after each "harvest".

Depending on what kind of rock you have, how it was cured, and how thick the algae is on the rocks, some interesting ( and even nasty ) micro-environments could have set-up between the algae, and down into the rock.

When you were first harvesting, and returning the water to the sump, you could have been getting into these little micro-environments, and opening them up with the harvesting, and then returning the nasties within, back to your tank water, via the sump. It would probably be much better to waste this water from "harvesting, and call it a water change.

There's some salt cost here, but it's probably much cheaper and less painful than losing your fish. It sounds like, from your last post, that you have already changed your "harvesting" method, I can't quite tell. Is something different with your latest "harvest and water change"?

Best of luck with this, I know it's difficult to see fish die. > barryhc

 

[reedman]

Is it at the same rate as when the problem first arises in a new aquarium or does algae have to kinda develop first before it can use up nutrients at that speed?

Krish, From what I have seen it is usually the case the new aquariums fall into a catagory of their own. You cycle, you get algae, and if you have good husbandry the algae subsides. In established aquariums you can get to an equalibrium point where the algae grows to a level where it is taking up nutrients at the same rate they are being introduced into the aquarium. This is why a lot of people post that they have zero P and zero NO3 but still have algae. If you truely had zero P and NO3 then you would not have any algae (no food...no algae). Hope that makes sense.

 

[wave98]

Well, two posts popped up while I was typing. :lol:

Pondguy,
Let me ask the silly question. Are you using RO/DI water? If you are great. If not, stop everything and go buy one (unless your tap water is much better than most of us). Also, just because the P or NO3 test kit registers low doesn't mean you don't have these elements in the system. Your algae could be taking it up as fast as it is going into the system producing a false low reading. Take a water sample from near a rock with algae on it and test that water. How are the P & NO3 readings there? You may have rocks that need to shed a lot of detritus (you can look into "cooking" the rock if this is the case). If you are getting detritus in the tank on a regular basis it is probably the rocks shedding it. Also using a powerhead to blow off the rocks just before a water change can help remove the detritus.

All good information from reedman, but I was thinking especially about the rock, during that last post. It seems that pondguys parameters are good "before" the water change, so probably not food inputs ( as far as the fish dying ), but how about after the water change. Taking readings near the rock is a good thought as well. ( could be food inputs that are keeping the algae "fueled" )

In other words, the rock may not be "cured" thoroughly, and further curing, or rock cooking may be the answer, such as reedman stated.

> barryhc

 

[Krish]

Thanks Reed...Makes sense. So in actuality it doesn't really make sense to test for nitrates once algae is present in the tank (because you know nitrates must be present if algae is present or high levels of phosphates). If they are using it up as fast as it is being produced then all you would be really reading is the rate at which algae is using up nitrates not really how much nitrates are actually in there (if that makes any sense or am I just confusing myself and everyone else)

 

[wrightme43]

Heck Dan that makes sense too. I can only go on my experince. I have never had a sandbed work like I wanted it too, except the one I shiphoned out a part of it at a time and cleaned with a quick filter. It worked like a champ and I had pods galore. I notice that as a sand bed is in the tank long term it seems to get nastier and nastier. In my mind the thing that is pushing the stuff into it is gravity, the sand in water is more like quicksand than a firm substrate and the little pieces of dirt and junk just seem to work thier way to the bottom. Thats just my experince and if you come up with a way to make them work long term, I am all for it. I would love to have my pisol shrimp and gobie combo back in my tanks. I think the reason BB is so neat is that all the junk that used to go into my sand bed (could be my problem with poor design like you are planning to deal with) is now sitting where I can siphon it out with a water change.
Steve

 

[mojoreef]

You are wrong on your perception that snails and such critters do not impact a nutrient export.

Danny Danny Danny.. I never said they have no impact just very little (based on thier size)

First of all while it is in the gut of said crab, snail, cuke, etc., etc. the nutrients are NOT available to the algae.

LOL oh your to smart my friend!! Now how long of a digestive process does a snail, crab and/or simular have?? Well snails poop as they eat, so is thier something to measure their?? maybe soemthing to do with the space time continium??

You downplay the importance of this collective export as you well should but in fact it is an export and the more animals you have the more nutrients that remain bound up in digestive tracts

Man you are on a role!! Ok so we have 50 snails in a tank eating algae, over a perior of time if you added up all the food they eat, digested, and burned off as energy you would come up with a measurable form of export. So now one falls upside down and cant get up?? how many months of cumulative collection just went out the window?? Would all that work out to equal a teaspoon of detirus from a turkey baster??

The fact that the uh, poop comes out mostly insoluble is another situation you ignore. The fact that it comes out a turd means that your awsome $100000000 skimmer has a chance to remove it once again before it dissolves.

Danny your not reading I did address various forms of poop. Insoluable, soluable or particulate will be attacked by bacteria, which in turn will create a biofilm around it, which in turn will attract further insoluable, which will create more biofilm and more bacteria which in turn will become particulate?? kinda like happens in your sand right?

I have come to the conclusion that the substrate should absolutely not take on any importance to the aspect of nutrient control.

Well some folks just take a little lonnger to figure things out then others, lol. Is that a left kind of thing??? :idea:

Hope you liked my rant I will prove you wrong with empirical evidence of my own! That is not a threat, I have a job now and intend to carry out my accusations and borrow your digital camera to prove you wrong.

Always fun to listen to Mr Dean...oh I mean Danny


MIke

 

[mojoreef]

Pondguy a couple of questions.

How old are the fish (in the tank)?
How old is the system?
What kind of socks were you using?
Were the deaths associated with the harvest of algae and use of sock filtration?


Mike

 

[Scooterman]

What kind of socks were you using?

When just kicking about the house I wear those short tennis socks, sometimes I go as far as stockless

 

[Krish]

When just kicking about the house I wear those short tennis socks, sometimes I go as far as stockless

LOL...I'm with you Scooter! Socks are meant for feet not tanks (LOL). You think if you wore your socks all day and sweat in them and put it on your intake coming from your tank, will it kill algae? (LOL) Just a though...Never saw algae in a sewer before!

 

[wave98]

I see we're getting back to that good conversation now.

This is much better. :lol:

> Wave98

 

[chris&barb]

I see we're getting back to that good conversation now.

This is much better. :lol:

> Wave98

it was a joke. lightin up

 

[wave98]

it was a joke. lightin up

Aah, What?

 

[mntl]

Srry to interrupt, I am usually more of a spectator and less of a poster but I want to throw some ideas out to hopefully be picked apart. I have run nano’s for a few years specifically BB/high flow/mass skimming/cooked lr etc. The only difference is I do not have fish/shrimp, just sps/usually 3-4 snails (anymore and they starve) and a couple blue-legs/scarlets for movement.
I do not/have not had visible algea beyond coraline and when I do happen to get frags that are on rocks that have algea I just place it in the tank and it is gone within a few days. I have recently (within the last 4 months) been making my plugs and rocks that I use for frags, out of a bio-safe/uv resistant 2 stage epoxy and cleaned/dried aragonite (I mix these into a rock/plastic concrete and let dry). They are basically rocks that look like clumps of sand that can be made to whatever shape/size, they are essentially plastic so the thought (hope ) is they will only have their outer surface to house algea/bacteria and not have any potential of internal die-off/nutrient/phos release. I then “cook” these rocks with actual live-rock to hopefully get some form of bacteria growing on them so they house some form of biological filtration.

—So far nothing has grown on them (besides the sps frags I have glued to them ) and all the levels in my tank are staying 0 (trates/phos/etc). I have just ordered a new starfire 20"L/20"W/12"T nano that should be here within the month and I will be using 100% of this cured/fake rock in the tank, I currently have about 45lbs of it curing in the dark with some lr. My inhabitants will be all acros/montis a few snails and a few small crabs. My feeding regime will be the same (I wont feed anything) and water changes will be my usual 10% weekly.

----What I have found with this so far is the following:
-It takes about 1 week to have a visible (if viewed from the side) light film on the glass, after 2-3 weeks this light green haze can be seen from the front, I then use my mag-float and scrape it off, the back wall of the tank has not been cleane for 3 months and there is only a little bit of visible coraline, nothing else.
-when I place (sps) frags in the tank from other systems the rocks they are on tend to shed a lot which sometime can cause slow necrosis on the base of the frag. the skeleton will look green at the base, I assume (I could be way off here )it is wicking up whatever is leaching from the rock it is on. If I immediately chissel the frag off and glue it to a fake-rock plug before letting it sit in the tank, I do not have this issue, and before I did this by switching the frag, it would stop the stn/rtn.
-Ricordia slowly shrivels and die. I have only tried yumas, floridas might be different?
-Cheato does not grow so I took it out of my sump.
-gsp doesn't grow, they don’t die but they don’t grow either?
-zoo’s grow but only on the bottom and they tend to grow down/away from the light.
-Anymore than 4 snails and one will die soon after addition, I am assuming it is starvation because ammonia/trites/trates/phos still remain 0 after addition. When I am 100% fake rock I will probably take it down to 1-2 snails or let them starve to equilibrium.
-I have had to reduce my photo period to 9hrs (from 12) and my light is now about 16" from the water (was 6) since removing most of my lr and replacing with fake, I was getting bleaching and slowed growth.
-The feather worms on my remaining live-rock are growing and multiplying?
-my pods are growing and multiplying?.
-I have tried pink pom-pom zenia, it is growing but very slowly, it looks plump not shriveled(my sps outgrow it).
-coraline growth is very minimal, the coraline I get is very light colored-I only do water changes, no dosing of anything so my cal is probably not extremely high. I use tropic marine pro.
-skimmate has greatly decreased, adding a single piece of additional lr/frags (even only a couple of inches) causes the skimmer to go crazy for a day or two, but trites/trates/phos remain 0.

This is kind of an extreme approach and I am not advocating it do too not having enough experience with it myself, my bio-diversity is whatever I add, and I only add corals so my rocks are probably boring to a lot of people (I prefer to look at the corals ). I have yet to introduce an algea that has lived (I had a rock with a small patch of a thick red spikey weed that didnt go away, it did not grow but it did not shrivel and die either, my blue-legs eventually got it. I do not believe that the 20 or so gallons of water is realistic for a fish, especially if my focus is sps, so I do not add any. I had a yellow tailed damsel that I kept for a year but got rid of because I did not like that I was adding waist (food), it did not however have any visual side effects on the tank?

What does anyone see as potential problems with this system in the future, what would you change? My basic thought is, if it has potential to die/polute and it is not a coral or something i look at, it is removed(I am soooo srry for the length of this post ).

-Mntl

 

[Krish]

WOW MNTL!!! You said you were a spectator more than a poster, but I think you just made up for all of the time you could have posted since you joined in February(LOL) The problem with the post was, by the time I finished reading through it, I forgot what I read in the beginning!(LOL) Just Kidding...I think it was quite interesting and something that I'm sure will have much debate on. Me, I'm not much of a debator, just wanted to say welcome to RF and I'm glad you finally posted! I'll be looking forward to the replies to your post.

 

[pondguy]

Here are some answers to your questions! Some of the LR is more than 9 years old, it has been transfered from tank to tank as I keep upgrading. So it is safe to say that this is cured. The sock that I am talking about is not a sock off my foot, but one of those nylon filter socks like a 500 micron that filters out sediment in water. I would never use an ordinary sock for such things. The fish that I had were young, any where from 6 months to a year. i have not changed my ways of algea export but thinking that maybe more frequent water changes would be the better way to go. I have an Ro unit, but no DI, could this be the culpret. I have been using Kent marine salt for the water changes. Did I forget any questions?

 

[swissgaurd]

this one confuses me
ive had tons of algae problems in the past installed a calcium reactor and algae problems gone.

ive heard of people adding reactors and algae problems arousing

vic

 

[MarineTeng]

i thought i'd post my algae experience since i have so much algae, i started with a lot of sargassum, so much that i pulled it almost all out, and then some hair algae which was cured kinda when cyano came in and ate it all. During this time i also had something that has now completely dissappeared for no apparent reason, some thought it might have been a gorgonian, but i was harvesting this stuff like a 2 pitchers a week then it just stopped, then what as left of the hair algae was eaten by my tang and cyano was cleaned out with chemi clean. I used to have piscina but that fell victim to the cyano too, a shame that stuff was cool looking, now the sargassum is back though it looks nice with my lack of corals and money to fix that problem. I've got a unidentified algae just has been maintained by my tang, and cheato now in my sump along with a few types of caulerpa (razor, feather and grape) and halmedia. my halmedia seems to max out and get white once it reaches a certain height, i've also got decent amounts of coraline, though mine isn't purple like most, it's more white on the glass but the stuff on some rocks is purple, anyone know why? i've also got bunches of bubble algae valonia, bigger round ones and long lighter colored ones, and umm another kinda that has a bunch of dark green small bubbles form a single bigger bubble. i've also got the weird stalks that are mostly white with green tips, but one that is green on the underside and red on top, i'll try to get a picture since i've never seen one like this. i've also got a calcium skeleton green algae that grows in a bushy fashion that i don't know what it's called, for algae control 10 hermits and a yellow tang and chemi clean was used once and now sits by my tank

 

[MarineTeng]

o i forgot to mention i have nitrates of 0 for well almost the entirity of my tank just over a year and for a span i did like 2 water changes in 4-5 months, probably not good but i'm amending those habits.