3 Tanks corals growth experiment

[Anemlover]

I came up with idea to make an experiment to check the corals growth. The experiment would lask for a year.

3 tanks (the same lights, 25 gallons each and Kh, Mg, Ca would be at the same level in every tank).

First tank - no skimmer, only balling. (NO3, PO4 would be at level ~0)
Second tank - skimmer, only balling. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0)
Third tank - skimmer, balling and phytoplankton dosing. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0)


Facts:
In each tank would be located 3 LPS, 3 SPS, 3 soft corals (every coral would be the same size and type)
Every two weeks every coral would be weighted and measured.

 

[MnFish1]

This experiment - (thanks for offering to do it) - seems to ask multiple questions with 3 tanks - if you're going to do it - I might try to narrow down a specific question:

1. Does phytoplankton help with Coral xxxx
2. Does nitrate of 0 or 10 or whatever influence coral growth
3. Define your definition of the Balling method, lighting, corals, etc - so people can try to fine-tune whatever you're trying to do.
4. There are multiple other issues - replication, etc - and my guess is that this would be an extremely costly issue - unless you narrow down your topic(s)

Best Wishes

 

[Tired]

Disturbing a coral every 2 weeks to take it out of the tank and weigh it is not conducive to growth.

And yes, you need to figure out what you're trying to experiment with. Pick exactly one thing, and test that.

 

[MnFish1]

Disturbing a coral every 2 weeks to take it out of the tank and weigh it is not conducive to growth.

And yes, you need to figure out what you're trying to experiment with. Pick exactly one thing, and test that.

Well - it kind of depends. Many corals survive just fine - for example during a water change - having no water on them for a while. Agree though - quickly taking a coral out of water - is not a great idea. If I were going to do an experiment like this - I would do it with pictures - and a ruler somehow in the frame.

 

[Anemlover]

This experiment - (thanks for offering to do it) - seems to ask multiple questions with 3 tanks - if you're going to do it - I might try to narrow down a specific question:

1. Does phytoplankton help with Coral xxxx
2. Does nitrate of 0 or 10 or whatever influence coral growth
3. Define your definition of the Balling method, lighting, corals, etc - so people can try to fine-tune whatever you're trying to do.
4. There are multiple other issues - replication, etc - and my guess is that this would be an extremely costly issue - unless you narrow down your topic(s)

Best Wishes

Thanks for joining the discussion. Of course, the collection would take place in some kind of gofund me service.

I am sure that many variants of coral growth can be carried out, but at the beginning I limited myself to the first three basic ones.

For several weeks now, I have been browsing opinions and articles on coral growth and answering your questions:
1. It should help with the growth of everyone, giving phytoplankton raises a few questions - what matters is the time of day in which we give it and in what phase the coral is.
2. The level of nutrients up to 10 is taken as a safe limit, also in order to have a broad picture of the impact of this on growth, experiments should be carried out at different levels, e.g. 0, 5, 10, 15, 20.
3. Each tank would be the same - light height and type, tank capacity, skimmer. The choice of equipment and balling method is still to be determined. I wanted to know if there are people interested in something like this.
4. When it comes to the growth ratio, many different things can be taken into account - fungi colony-to-unit growth, SPS and LPS weight and length.

Disturbing a coral every 2 weeks to take it out of the tank and weigh it is not conducive to growth.

And yes, you need to figure out what you're trying to experiment with. Pick exactly one thing, and test that.

Thanks for joining the discussion.

Weighting each frag would take 1-2 minutes so I am sure this won't be a problem for them. Growth = increase weight of the frag also it can be measures how much did it growth.

Picking one thing is not what I am looking for. A lot of people are asking what are the best parameters to keep in the tank. 1# option is safe one. Nothing bad should happen there, second one and 3rd could allow people to grow their frags in safe and fast way. Of course everything should be checked so in my opinion 3 tanks are the minimum to state and draw conclusions

 

[Anemlover]

Well - it kind of depends. Many corals survive just fine - for example during a water change - having no water on them for a while. Agree though - quickly taking a coral out of water - is not a great idea. If I were going to do an experiment like this - I would do it with pictures - and a ruler somehow in the frame.

Of course pictures would be taked with notes - that I was thinking about . There are a lot of factors that can be checked in a safe way to not damage the corals.

 

[Tired]

The thing is, if you're changing phyto levels and also nutrients, that's two variables. You can't do two experiments at a time. If you have high nutrients and more phyto in one tank, and see more growth, you won't know if the growth is due to the nutrients, the phyto, or both.

This could be an interesting experiment, if done properly. Doing it properly would mean testing ONE variable at a time. Once you have information from testing each thing separately, THEN you get to the stage of combining them to see what happens. To do otherwise is poor science.

To remove one variable, I'd suggest buying mini colonies of each coral you want, and cutting them into 3 frags. That way you'll have corals from the exact same colony in each tank, which should help remove the possibility that one is simply from a more vigorous colony.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

How would you control nutrients at 0?

 

[MnFish1]

There are 3 tanks, 3+ variables and no controls.

 

[Anemlover]

The thing is, if you're changing phyto levels and also nutrients, that's two variables. You can't do two experiments at a time. If you have high nutrients and more phyto in one tank, and see more growth, you won't know if the growth is due to the nutrients, the phyto, or both.

This could be an interesting experiment, if done properly. Doing it properly would mean testing ONE variable at a time. Once you have information from testing each thing separately, THEN you get to the stage of combining them to see what happens. To do otherwise is poor science.

To remove one variable, I'd suggest buying mini colonies of each coral you want, and cutting them into 3 frags. That way you'll have corals from the exact same colony in each tank, which should help remove the possibility that one is simply from a more vigorous colony.

There are 3 tanks, 3+ variables and no controls.

As I stated in first post.
First tank - no skimmer, only balling. (NO3, PO4 would be at level ~0) - comparing 1st and 2nd tank - 1 variable nutrients.
Second tank - skimmer, only balling. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0). comparing 2nd and 3rd tank only variable would be phyto feeding. Nutrients all the time would stay ~10.
Third tank - skimmer, balling and phytoplankton dosing. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0)

so after the experiment we could make statements about:
1. How nutrients impact on coral growth (compare 1st and 2nd tank).
2. How phyto feeding impacts on coral growth (compare 2nd and 3rd tank).
3. Comparing 1st and second experiment we could state that the nutrients increased growth of the frags but adding phyto increased it x more times.

How would you control nutrients at 0?

First tank - no feeding = nutrients 0.
Second tank - no feeding = nutrients 0 so I would need to use buffer. Maybe the skimmer wouldn't be necessary. If raises to much I would use purrigen.
Third tank - Skimmer and if phyto would rise the nutrients to much I would use purigen.

Kh, Mg, Ca levels would be also measured and they would be all the time at the same level.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

As I stated in first post.
First tank - no skimmer, only balling. (NO3, PO4 would be at level ~0) - comparing 1st and 2nd tank - 1 variable nutrients.
Second tank - skimmer, only balling. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0). comparing 2nd and 3rd tank only variable would be phyto feeding. Nutrients all the time would stay ~10.
Third tank - skimmer, balling and phytoplankton dosing. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0)

so after the experiment we could make statements about:
1. How nutrients impact on coral growth (compare 1st and 2nd tank).
2. How phyto feeding impacts on coral growth (compare 2nd and 3rd tank).
3. Comparing 1st and second experiment we could state that the nutrients increased growth of the frags but adding phyto increased it x more times.


First tank - no feeding = nutrients 0.
Second tank - no feeding = nutrients 0 so I would need to use buffer. Maybe the skimmer wouldn't be necessary. If raises to much I would use purrigen.
Third tank - Skimmer and if phyto would rise the nutrients to much I would use purigen.

Kh, Mg, Ca levels would be also measured and they would be all the time at the same level.

You said second tank has 10 ppm nitrate. How do you control that?

0 ppm is not a good number. You need to specify what it means to you and your testing. If a kit can detect 0.01 ppm, then 0.005 and 0.00000000001 will both read as 0, but there may be a big difference to a coral.

 

[Anemlover]

You said second tank has 10 ppm nitrate. How do you control that?

0 ppm is not a good number. You need to specify what it means to you and your testing. If a kit can detect 0.01 ppm, then 0.005 and 0.00000000001 will both read as 0, but there may be a big difference to a coral.

In case the level goes above 10 I will use the absorber, if it goes below 10 (which can only happen on the 2nd and 3rd I will use the buffer to raise the level) after the first few weeks and not increasing the amount of frags I could set the automatic dosing so it wouldn't drop under 10. For now, the topic is at the level of discussions and ideas, so a lot of things can still change.

You are right that I couldn't measure levels below 0.01 but to simplify I could keep 0 value for that and use absorbers to keep it at as low as possible. The difference in growth between 0.01 and 10 would be visible. Coral growth in the case of very low nutrient levels will only be due to light.

The tanks are really small so keeping the parameters on exact levels will be really hard but I think its worth to try.

 

[MnFish1]

IMHO - you have many more than 1 experiment going on here:

1. The affect of Phytoplankton addition to a tank.
2. The affect of Nitrate on a tank
3. The affect of phosphate on a tank

Then you have the fact that you can multiply that by 3 since you are looking at 3 different corals (and - its much more difficult to raise soft corals, LPS and SPS in the same tank as compared to raising each individual type in separate tanks.

Then there is no replication - you you would need to do that to verify any findings at the end of the year (or during the year).

My comments were not meant to criticize the idea per se - but you're trying to measure IMHO - way too many things at the same time.

 

[Tired]

First tank - no skimmer, only balling. (NO3, PO4 would be at level ~0) - two variables here compared to the other tanks: no skimmer and no nutrients. BTW, can tell you the results: bad. Corals need nutrients.
Second tank - skimmer, only balling. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0). Two variables compared to the first (nutrients and skimmer), one compared to the third (no phytoplankton).
Third tank - skimmer, balling and phytoplankton dosing. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0) Three variables compared to the first (nutrients, skimmer, and phyto), one compared to the third (no phytoplankton).

Sounds like you're trying to do three experiments. Presence of skimmer, presence of nutrients, and presence of phyto. Pick one thing. It'll be a mess otherwise. For example, if the third tank has better growth than the first tank, you won't know if it's the presence of a skimmer, the presence of nutrients, or the phytoplankton causing that.

Don't bother testing whether not feeding a tank and having 0 nutrients is good for corals. That'll just kill them. Photosynthetic organisms need phosphate to function as living organisms, otherwise they die. If we're testing what kind of food makes fish grow fastest, we don't test what happens if we give them 0 food. We know what'll happen.

Corals CANNOT grow only on light. They use the light as energy to perform basic functions, like cellular respiration. To actually make more cells and grow, they need food to turn into those new cells. Light provides energy, not matter.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I came up with idea to make an experiment to check the corals growth. The experiment would lask for a year.

3 tanks (the same lights, 25 gallons each and Kh, Mg, Ca would be at the same level in every tank).

First tank - no skimmer, only balling. (NO3, PO4 would be at level ~0)
Second tank - skimmer, only balling. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0)
Third tank - skimmer, balling and phytoplankton dosing. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0)


Facts:
In each tank would be located 3 LPS, 3 SPS, 3 soft corals (every coral would be the same size and type)
Every two weeks every coral would be weighted and measured.

The way you have it outlined, this might be an interesting exercise, but as others have said, you won't be able to draw any useful conclusions because it is not set up as a scientific experiment.
A properly designed experiment controls for all possible variables but one. Only if the same results are obtained when same experiment is conducted again (and again, and again...) can you say with any confidence that your results are valid.

 

[Anemlover]

IMHO - you have many more than 1 experiment going on here:

1. The affect of Phytoplankton addition to a tank.
2. The affect of Nitrate on a tank
3. The affect of phosphate on a tank

Then you have the fact that you can multiply that by 3 since you are looking at 3 different corals (and - its much more difficult to raise soft corals, LPS and SPS in the same tank as compared to raising each individual type in separate tanks.

Then there is no replication - you you would need to do that to verify any findings at the end of the year (or during the year).

My comments were not meant to criticize the idea per se - but you're trying to measure IMHO - way too many things at the same time.

I have been dealing with marine aquariums for over 10 years and this hobby has taught me that there will always be someone who thinks otherwise. This is nothing bad because everyone has the right to their opinion, but the results would be unambiguous.

What do you mean by replication?

It can statistically be random and with LPS corals the number of new coral heads would not be a determinant. It is better to consider the increase in mass when comparing the gains.

Phosphate would be 0 in every tank.

First tank - no skimmer, only balling. (NO3, PO4 would be at level ~0) - two variables here compared to the other tanks: no skimmer and no nutrients. BTW, can tell you the results: bad. Corals need nutrients.
Second tank - skimmer, only balling. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0). Two variables compared to the first (nutrients and skimmer), one compared to the third (no phytoplankton).
Third tank - skimmer, balling and phytoplankton dosing. (NO3 would be at level ~10, PO4 close to 0) Three variables compared to the first (nutrients, skimmer, and phyto), one compared to the third (no phytoplankton).

Sounds like you're trying to do three experiments. Presence of skimmer, presence of nutrients, and presence of phyto. Pick one thing. It'll be a mess otherwise. For example, if the third tank has better growth than the first tank, you won't know if it's the presence of a skimmer, the presence of nutrients, or the phytoplankton causing that.

Don't bother testing whether not feeding a tank and having 0 nutrients is good for corals. That'll just kill them. Photosynthetic organisms need phosphate to function as living organisms, otherwise they die. If we're testing what kind of food makes fish grow fastest, we don't test what happens if we give them 0 food. We know what'll happen.

Corals CANNOT grow only on light. They use the light as energy to perform basic functions, like cellular respiration. To actually make more cells and grow, they need food to turn into those new cells. Light provides energy, not matter.

As I stated before, 2nd tank don't need the skimmer as there will be no feeding. A lot of people strive to have zero levels of NO3 and PO4. I underestand thats not good idea and they need nutrients to grow thats why they are at 0 level at 1st and higher in 2nd tank. They probably wound't die but the growth in 1st tank wouldn't be really high.

The way you have it outlined, this might be an interesting exercise, but as others have said, you won't be able to draw any useful conclusions because it is not set up as a scientific experiment.
A properly designed experiment controls for all possible variables but one. Only if the same results are obtained when same experiment is conducted again (and again, and again...) can you say with any confidence that your results are valid.

I realize this is very general, but it would allow me to outline the direction in which to go in the development of a given type of coral.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I have been dealing with marine aquariums for over 10 years and this hobby has taught me that there will always be someone who thinks otherwise. This is nothing bad because everyone has the right to their opinion, but the results would be unambiguous.

What do you mean by replication?

It can statistically be random and with LPS corals the number of new coral heads would not be a determinant. It is better to consider the increase in mass when comparing the gains.

Phosphate would be 0 in every tank.

As I stated before, 2nd tank don't need the skimmer as there will be no feeding. A lot of people strive to have zero levels of NO3 and PO4. I underestand thats not good idea and they need nutrients to grow thats why they are at 0 level at 1st and higher in 2nd tank. They probably wound't die but the growth in 1st tank wouldn't be really high.

I realize this is very general, but it would allow me to outline the direction in which to go in the development of a given type of coral.

Despite your 10 years of experience and your belief that the scientific method is an "opinion", what you are proposing is not a well designed experiment. If you are simply interested in how these three systems will work for you personally, that's fine, and there's nothing wrong with that.
But understand that your results won't be helpful to others, as there are too many uncontrolled variables involved.

Cheers

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

What do you mean by replication?

The ability to replicate your results is at the heart of scientific experimentation. If you can't run the same experiment and get the same results, then the original results just aren't statistically reliable.

 

[Anemlover]

You said second tank has 10 ppm nitrate. How do you control that?

0 ppm is not a good number. You need to specify what it means to you and your testing. If a kit can detect 0.01 ppm, then 0.005 and 0.00000000001 will both read as 0, but there may be a big difference to a coral.

Am I allowed to post crowdfunding link here?

The ability to replicate your results is at the heart of scientific experimentation. If you can't run the same experiment and get the same results, then the original results just aren't statistically reliable.

You are right. I am going today for a holiday. I will consider all the comments and make a final statements in 2-3 weeks.

 

[Tired]

If you have literally 0 phosphate in one tank, your corals will die. Period. Almost as inevitably as they would without oxygen. You can't use that as a control, for the same reason that we don't test not feeding fish at all in an experiment to see what fish food is the best. If you really want to test nutrient differences, try testing very low nutrients, not 0 nutrients.

The skimmer is a variable. You need to either have a skimmer on every tank, or have a skimmer on no tanks. Skimmers don't just remove nutrients, they remove particles from the water and oxygenate it. You need to have the skimmer be consistent for the same reason that you can't have 2 of the tanks with a powerhead apiece and the third with an airstone. It makes a difference.

A result that's gotten from a poorly designed experiment is not unambiguous. It's borderline anecdotal. The scientific method works the way it does for a reason.

I don't see why you couldn't post a crowdfunding link, but I think you're going to have a hard time funding an experiment that isn't going to give any conclusive results. Aside from probably "0 nutrients is bad for corals".