Many people of all ability levels appear to struggle at one time or another with Acropora issues. It seems like poor color, poor growth, bleaching, browning, burnt tips, and even STN / RTN events are quite common not only with newbie, but also with the “pros”.
When the basics of Acro care (lighting, flow, alkalinity, Ca, Mg, pests, coral nutrition, etc.) are properly addressed and there’s a problem, it seems like many of these problems can be traced to issues with nitrate and phosphate nutrient levels, and more importantly nutrient level stability. While Acropora can adapt to a wide variety of nutrient levels, they tend to be very intolerant to rapidly changing nutrient levels. It’s been my experience that good color requires rock steady nutrient levels, and the absolute values within reason are far less important.
The interesting thing with a bacteria driven method like ZeoVit is the levels of measurable nitrate and phosphate become essentially irrelevant as they measure around 0,0 with common test kits.
When algae (ATS, Chaeto, etc) is used for export, N and P levels must be actively managed to maintain coral and Chaeto health, and prolonged measured levels of P=0 or N=0 (or even abrupt changes) can result in coral and Chaeto problems or even death. I have found that achieving stability with the algae method can be completely natural for some tanks, and very difficult and frustrating for other tanks.
Question – Is there an inherent overall advantage (Acropora health, stability, ease of use, etc.) using a carbon / bacteria method? Is it reasonable or advantageous to use a less aggressive carbon / bacteria method such that N and P levels are measurably higher than 0,0.
When the basics of Acro care (lighting, flow, alkalinity, Ca, Mg, pests, coral nutrition, etc.) are properly addressed and there’s a problem, it seems like many of these problems can be traced to issues with nitrate and phosphate nutrient levels, and more importantly nutrient level stability. While Acropora can adapt to a wide variety of nutrient levels, they tend to be very intolerant to rapidly changing nutrient levels. It’s been my experience that good color requires rock steady nutrient levels, and the absolute values within reason are far less important.
The interesting thing with a bacteria driven method like ZeoVit is the levels of measurable nitrate and phosphate become essentially irrelevant as they measure around 0,0 with common test kits.
When algae (ATS, Chaeto, etc) is used for export, N and P levels must be actively managed to maintain coral and Chaeto health, and prolonged measured levels of P=0 or N=0 (or even abrupt changes) can result in coral and Chaeto problems or even death. I have found that achieving stability with the algae method can be completely natural for some tanks, and very difficult and frustrating for other tanks.
Question – Is there an inherent overall advantage (Acropora health, stability, ease of use, etc.) using a carbon / bacteria method? Is it reasonable or advantageous to use a less aggressive carbon / bacteria method such that N and P levels are measurably higher than 0,0.