Question about coraline alge
- Thread starter zulreef
- Start date
Help Support Reef Aquarium & Tank Building Forum:
yhellomhan
Member
is it true that you can brush like rock with existing coraline alge to release spores? And cause the coraline alge to bloom?
Hiya Yhellomhan
Yes scraping it off the glass or attacking it will cause it to spore, that is pretty much the rule fro most algaes. I am not sure if brushing it will be concidered and atack on it, mabe f you did a bit of scraping or got an urchin to eat it.
Mike
Yes scraping it off the glass or attacking it will cause it to spore, that is pretty much the rule fro most algaes. I am not sure if brushing it will be concidered and atack on it, mabe f you did a bit of scraping or got an urchin to eat it.
Mike
zulreef
Well-known member
Well, My test today shows calcium at 420pp and 1.023. I am also scraping the back of my tank. Thanks for the help from everyone.Thanks,
Zul
I'm not sure, lol. 440 is 440 I agree Collin but thier are other elements that play a role. If his salinity is 1.023 and the other elements are level for that salinity then the calcium is way to high. Alk is but one player in the calcification process.
Mike
mojoreef said:
As you have elegantly pointed out, calcification by corals is a complicated but poorly understood process. I am certain that there is an optimum balance of all the important elements a coral needs to exhibit optimum health.
Corals though, like any sort of animal, can adapt and also thrive in fairly significant ranges of these elements or other conditions. Ranges quoted for NSW are averages taken from oceans and regions all over the world. Each of the elements making up the NSW will have individual variances around their means depending upon where the samples are taken from.
At some point, in my opinion, trying to achieve the perfect balance becomes an excersize in splitting hairs. This is especially true when considering the fundmental error margin of the tests involved with measuring these values in the aquarium. 400 or 440 for Ca are likely the same value from a statistical perspective using a Salifert test kit. Using a swing arm hydrometer 1.023 and 1.025 may be barely different if many measurements were done and averaged and it was a good hydrometer with no bubbles on the arm. Using a refractometer, these values are clearly distiguishable with a single measurement.
When we start a series of experiments in my labs, the first thing we do is an excersize called a "Gage R&R". This stands for "Repeatability and Reproducibility" of the "Gage" we are using to measure a specific parameter.
In this case, it would be the test kit. To do this one takes at least 3 people and has them repeat an identical measurement at least 3 times. For instance, we could get three people to make Instant Ocean to 1.023 salinity from the same bag and then have each of them measure the Calcium concentration on 3 individual days. To get really technical, we could have this matrix of experiments done 3 times with 3 different test kits in a "blind" and "random" fashion (the user would not know which sample or which test kit he was using/measuring). This would yield 27 total measurements of Ca. From this data set we could understand several important variances. Namely, variances between 1) Workers, 2) test kits and 3) measurements. Also second order effects between permutions of all three sources of variance. Although I have never done this with Ca test kits and IO salt, I am quite sure that the results would be un-surprising. The variance of Ca measurements would be very significant, on the order of at least 10-15% relative for the overall variance.
Only by understanding the precision and accuracy of your measurement system can valid conclusions be drawn from a set of experiments.
The moral of this is when we suggest for a hobbyist to make changes to his tank for small differences in measured parameters, we are mostly dealing with a clear case of statistical uncertainty.
I think the important question here is at what point does the benefit of the proposed changes become negligable with respect to the time, effort and risk involved?
If we are suggesting changes of parameters that are within their variances of uncertainty, then the expected benefit will also be statistically un-measureable by definition.
This is a technical way of saying that at some point we begin to split hairs with parameters.
My suggestion for a best practice regarding aquarium parameters would be for each hobbyist to keep a log of values and watch them over time. If values are within their generally established safe ranges, but a trend is noticed over several weeks, then I would suggest a corrective action to be worthwhile. If on the other hand, parmaters are found to be outside their ranges or deviating from their normal values by large swings, then also I would suggest a corrective action.
For tanks that are healthy and growing with no real problems other than fine adjustment of parmeters, immediate action is not warranted in my opinion. Making changes to tanks carry a small but certain risk. Changes such as this can be carried out slowly over time if desired. However, it is extremely likely that no noticable or measurable benefit will be realized due to the reasons I elaborated on above.
Does this make sense?
Sincerely...Collin
wrightme43
Well-known member
Yes it makes sense to me. One day at 70 degrees does not make it spring, 2 weeks at 70 degrees and its spring time. mmmmmm spring. LOL Steve
mojoreef said:
I think you are misunderstanding me Mike. I am not suggesting people not try to optimize their parameters. I think this is important and your point is well taken.
My point is that one should watch things for a while and then decide to change.
A simple test you can do to validate my point. Take 3 small samples of your water at one time. Then on three consecutive days, measure the Ca and Alk. When you do it, place a piece of tape over your syringe so that you can't see the graduations and bias yourself in any way. Don't count drops or anything. Ideally you would squirt approximately 1/2 to 3/4 your needed titrant into the vial before starting to go drop-by-drop. Then look at your readings. I would bet that you get a 20-40 ppm range in your results. Now If you send me some of your water and I do the same with my kit in which the titrant solution (EDTA) comes from a different batch, I'll bet the range goes even higher because my perception of the endpoint will differ from yours. (do I stop at the first hint of purple, wait until clear blue etc etc) This would be assuming we live at the same altitude and keep our houses the same temperature. If not, the results could spread even more.
The point is that if somebody says their calcium is 440 and that is based on a single measurement, there is a very large chance that the REAL value could be as low as 400 or as high as 480 give or take some. Now if they measure it 5 times and average these values the confidence of the reported value goes up greatly. Assuming they are recognizing the colorimetric endpoint correctly. This is why I suggest people to watch their values. If they trend consistently low or high, then a change is waranted. The problem is magnified though because we are shooting at a moving target, calcium and alk change over time.
I'm just preaching conservatism. Measure 3 times and cut once sort of mentality. I think people can run into more problems by over managing thier tank than undermanaging it sometimes. Adding too many additives to fast, or adjusting too frequently (depending upon how things are done) can lead to other sorts of problems.
I do agree with you though fundamentally. Try to get your tank where it needs to be. Just don't jump to a hasty conclusion before the pattern becomes clear is all.
Sincerely...Collin
Collin that came out not the way it was intended. I understand what you are saying and to a point I agree that folks shoulnt be to anal with their testing and make adjustments at the drop of a hat. Having said that to many reefers run thier parameters far to high in regards to calcium and alkalinity (now mag with this oceanic salt). They see faster growth and equate that to great health and happy corals. What they dont know is that their corals are working alot harder then they were intended to and end up with a low energy reserve to take care of critical process (small thigs that go wrong) the next post is usually "I dont know what happened I had a small 2 to 4 degree temp swing and my coral cooked". Then that is followed by it must be the salt or the additive and so on. For me I try to get folks to keep the parameters with in the corals easy zone and not tap into the budget to much, it makes for a healthier coral and a coral that can handle events alot better.
take care
Mike
take care
Mike
mojoreef said:
I think that is sound advice. Keeping parameters where they should be is the name of the game.
How precise do you believe your Ca and Alk measurements to be? What sort of spread do you see in your measurements? I see about a spread of 30 ppm in mine for Ca and about 0.3-0.4 meq's for Alk.
Mine tend to flux about the same Collin. The high side of my calcium is 420 and alk is around 3.5 . The alk in my tank tends to flux more then the calcium, I would imagine this has to do with the larger fish, when they go..they tend to go pretty large, lol
Mike
Mike
yhellomhan
Member
How Long Does It Take For Coraline Alge To Grow?
yhellomhan
Member
coraline alge
I'm talking about with some growing already. I bought some live rock which had some deep purple coraline alge already on it, which now seems to be being re-covered with a grey-bluish alge and I'm just wondering if this is how coraline alge starts or is some kind of stage which it undergoes during its growth process? someone please help me to better understand what this is I see?
I'm talking about with some growing already. I bought some live rock which had some deep purple coraline alge already on it, which now seems to be being re-covered with a grey-bluish alge and I'm just wondering if this is how coraline alge starts or is some kind of stage which it undergoes during its growth process? someone please help me to better understand what this is I see?
Corraline algae is a spreader, usually it spreads in circle shapes. If attacked (ex: scraped or eaten) it will spore and start new colonies through out the tank. It will come in a variety of colors and shapes (check our coral id gallery for types). The colors are dictated by light, darker light tends to produce a dark purple color, the higher the light the lighter the corraline, eventually turning green at high light.
If other algaes grow over it it usually still survives, so dont worry to much. it like higher alkalinity levels. If you want it to spread more scrape it and it will spore or get a urchin that eats it, that is the fastest way to get it t spread as long as the chemistry is good.
MIke
If other algaes grow over it it usually still survives, so dont worry to much. it like higher alkalinity levels. If you want it to spread more scrape it and it will spore or get a urchin that eats it, that is the fastest way to get it t spread as long as the chemistry is good.
MIke
Boomer
Well-known member
They see faster growth and equate that to great health and happy corals. What they dont know is that their corals are working alot harder then they were intended to and end up with a low energy reserve to take care of critical process (small thigs that go wrong) the next post is usually "I dont know what happened I had a small 2 to 4 degree temp swing and my coral cooked".
Mike I have preached that for years and people think I'm nuts. Ok, we are nuts. They seem to think backyards. Think of it more like overweight people eating to much and getting bigger, since when is that a good thing
Mike I have preached that for years and people think I'm nuts. Ok, we are nuts. They seem to think backyards. Think of it more like overweight people eating to much and getting bigger, since when is that a good thing
yhellomhan
Member
what is yellow alge?
