+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 21

Thread: Eliminating, destroying, getting rid of Hair Algae in Display Tank - with Scrubber Help

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    940
    Yup, you got it right Floyd. Under high pH, phosphates in the water will form precipitates. When you dose Kalk or the 1st part of 2 part, Alk, it creates a very high pH zone in the area it was dosed and forms the white cloud you see, which are precipitates, and are not really useful in the tank. At that point the phosphates are bound up inorganics in particulate form, meaning they can't be used to feed algae (or corals). In order for it to become useful for algae the pH would have to drop to around 7 or lower to break the ionic bonds and release the phosphates back into the water. In regards to rocks, instead of precipitates being an issue, it is more the calcifying organisms that went into creating the rock. The corals, coralline algae, etc. They used phosphates to create those structures, so in order for the phosphates to be released from them the pH would have to drop below 7 before phosphates could start to 'leach' from the rock and feed algae. Most rock we use would 'leach' to the point of turning to mush/wet cement over a fairly short time if rocks were leaching phosphates into the water. You could speed up this process by placing live rock in a strong acid bath and seeing how many days it takes to dissolve. The lower the pH the quicker it will dissolve, but under normal tank conditions where pH is normally in the 7.8-8.2 range it isn't possible for phosphates to leach out because that is the sweet spot where inorganic particulates and rock are stable.

    It is always better to slowly add kalk/alk from something like a dripper/dosing pump instead of dumping in xx ml from a cup a day in order to avoid to much precipitation because you just end up using more elements in the water and have to dose more of other things like calcium and magnesium to make up for it. On one hand heavy dosing seems nice in that it binds phosphates and removes them from the water, it comes at a cost of more dosing of other elements back into the water and having to remove those particulates before they reach the display along with worrying about not spiking the pH in the display. It is safer and creates a much more stable system by slowly dosing over the course of a day vs once a day, and dosing so the effluent goes into a 1 micron filter sock will remove almost all of the precipitates that may form, which is how it is done when people dose Lanthanun to bind phosphates and remove then from the water. In the case of Lanthanum though the crystal structures that form when it binds can be damaging to fish gills so you always want to remove the particulates by dosing into a 1 micron sock.

  2. #12
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    10,576
    Well I don't agree. In a constant pH system, if it was high-P before and is now low-P, the P will come out and form algae on the rock.

    Even in constant pH.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,710
    Yeah but the point is, how low does the pH need to get before it starts dissolving? I believe the answer is low enough that the tank would not be very reef friendly anymore. But I am open to correction.

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by SantaMonica View Post
    Well I don't agree. In a constant pH system, if it was high-P before and is now low-P, the P will come out and form algae on the rock.

    Even in constant pH.
    All I ask and have ever asked from you is 'to prove it'. Show us some scientific paper, some personal experiment you video, anything to back up what you are saying. I have shown from a link that what you are saying isn't possible according to science. I have done my own experiments over the years and know the results I have seen (although I admit since I didn't video/record it in any way it is just hearsay, but anyone can do the same test and post their results to confirm or negate my findings). It is your job to now show what is wrong with that link/science since you are the only one believing it is possible for rocks to leach phosphates under normal pH conditions.

    Also, if you believe it is possible to leach phosphates under normal pH conditions, that also means it would have to leach calcium and magnesium to name a couple other things since those are bound to the phosphates. If the phosphates leach, so would the other elements. If this were to happen (which I do not believe is possible) it would be easy to confirm the rocks are leaching because not only would you have a phosphate reading 'before and after', you would also have a calcium reading 'before and after' to prove those phosphates came from the rock, and the calcium having risen along with the phosphates.

    The only 'constant pH' scenario where rocks are able to leach anything from them is at a pH of 7.2 or lower, far below acceptable. If a reef tank were to have a pH anywhere near 7.2 for an extended period of time, even 7.4 which is higher than the point of phosphates coming from rocks, corals won't be alive for long. At a pH of 7.4 'constant' all the dying corals would be my first suspect on where a rise of phosphates are coming from, not the rock.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    160
    My guess is the phosphate comes from organic matter that is in the live rock that dies off over time. Normal "curing" of live rock basically kills off the organics or stabilizes them with a certain water flow. When the rock is placed in a tank it takes time for the rock to actually "cure" in the tank and to the tank conditions.

    Eventually all this stabilizes as the amount of stuff in the rock, the amount fed to the tank, and the size of a scrubber and/or skimmer used for filtration evens out. Sponges and other life in the rock stop dying as well. At this point a scrubber that grows algae at a rate that uses P and N higher than produced by the combination of the stuff in the tank will cause a reduction in DT algae.

    At least in theory. I suspect that for a large GHA outbreak or an outbreak of bubble algae more steps may need to be done other than increasing the size, hours and flow in a scrubber.

    I also wonder if a waterfall scrubber may be more effective at "cleaning up" algae than a UAS.

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    940
    That is a different type of phosphate though. Organic phosphates are not the same as inorganic. Organic phosphates are something most people never test for and I don't consider organic phosphate as part of the 'leaching from live rock' discussion because it isn't actually coming off of the live rock itself (as in calcium phosphate dissolving from the rock). Organic phosphate buildup is caused by 'the person in the mirror', meaning it is caused by the person that maintains the tank by either not setting the tank up correctly (dead zones in flow due to incorrect flow, incorrect rock placement/amount, or insufficient filtration) or overfeeding (where the vast majority of organic phosphates come from).

    Everyone has a different definition of 'cooking' rock. To me, normal cooking of live rock is not intended to 'kill off ALL organic life' on the rock. Some peoples definition of 'cooking' rock includes giving it an acid bath, which in that case, it does kill off organic life. When I 'cook' rock I just scrub the rock clean of algae and loose organics, then place in a clean container/tank with no light, powerhead, heater set on 76, add some bacteria (like Dr. Tim's) to increase bacteria levels so they can eat up any detritus on the rock, but still keep larger organisms like sponges alive. My goal when I 'cook' rock is to just clean out any built up organics and algae that may be growing on it while still keeping the rock 'live' as much as possible. Not saying my definition is more or less correct than someone elses, it is just one of those terms where everyone seems to have a slightly different idea on what it entails, and none of them are wrong since there is no set definition.

    I just got done redoing my 75G with 'cooked' live rock. After many years of trying to get my ATS to reduce algae outbreaks in my 75G to no avail (it has only gotten worse over the years). Here are a before and after video. Now I am 'cooking' all the rock I took out, but this time I will be giving the rock an acid bath first in order to kill off aiptasia as my last attempt didn't seem to do the trick (leaving rock outside on patio for 30 days + soaking in RO/DI for a week, some aiptasia still survived!).




  7. #17

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    160
    What kind of phosphate are we actually measuring when we use a hanna checker or a phosphate test?

    I got the impression that organic phosphates - coming into the system through food - are supposedly used up by algae scrubber and other algae - and that if they get to a higher than wanted amount this causes problems with corals etc.

    Originally I started a algae scrubber for Nitrate reduction, and have achieved success with that.

    Now I am fighting GHA and looking for ways to get rid of it - the algae scrubber is supposed to help here.

    My question is: What do I do? Up the hours, raise the pH slowly, get more turbo snails, or what?

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    940
    99% of the liquid tests as well has the Hanna Phosphate meters ONLY test for inorganic phosphates. You can test your water and have it say 0.03 phosphates while at the same moment you are dumping in 10 cubes of food. It is much harder and more expensive to test for organic phosphates (Hach sells a $150 test kit that will test for organic phosphates).

    The algae scrubbers biggest benefit is like you state, it does reduce/eliminate nitrates extremely well, too well in most cases as it causes an imbalance of zero nitrates and rising phosphates. As for what to do about an algae problem. My #1 answer is to feed less. #2 answer is to get creatures that will eat it. Lettuce nudibranchs and turbo snails are by far the 2 best methods I have found for smaller tanks but snails seem to become 'lazy' after just a couple months, meaning it is best to replace them every couple months. For larger tanks, Tangs are one of the best methods but you need several of them, which means you would need a fairly large tank to support them (200G+ IMO as a Tang police member, lol).

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,710
    Phosphate test kits read inorganic phosphate, algae uptakes. Organic phosphate is food, which is processed by organisms into inorganic phosphate. read this http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php well worth the time

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Merritt Island, FL, USA
    Posts
    37
    I cannot reference any science links or studies, but I remember reading someplace that the idea was that there was a localized pH drop at the rock surface caused by bacteria.

    So bacteria coat the phosphate bound live rock surface, slime it over and isolate it's chemistry, lower the pH to release the phosphate, then cackle evilly as they release it through their slime layer to destroy the system (or maybe just eat it). Also, they could be in league with the hair algae roots, and are both working together...

    It does make more sense to me that they are working like bio-balls, just accumulating detritus over time, and releasing organic phosphorus.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts