If You Had To Choose Only One: Perfect Water Parameters or a Visually Healthy Tank? What’s More Important (To You)?

[Reefer Matt]

Of course we want both, and I know this seems like a contradiction, but I’ll elaborate. If you had to choose, what is more important? Having every water parameter (including trace elements) within range regardless of the apparent health of the tank? Or having a seemingly healthy tank with no issues, yet there are deviations in parameters from suggested values?

Of course in a perfect world we get both, and would vote for that, but is it really necessary to strive for perfection? Or should we leave well enough alone if things are looking good regardless?

 

[PJs_Bucket_List_Reef_75]

As a clueless newbie, I would have to go with the visually healthy tank. You're right that in a perfect world we'd have both, but the way I'm thinking, even the ocean doesn't maintain "perfect" parameters. And yet the reef life still thrives. It's adjusted to the less than perfect conditions, the ebb and flow, ups and downs. Life is resilient. Kinda a "circle of life" mentality. But what do I know? Not much, at this point

 

[Luigi Reefs]

Our corals and fish are much more capable of letting us know if our parameters are wrong than a test kit.

 

[GARRIGA]

Delicate life likely doesn't flourish under poor conditions. Best then just leave it alone vs possibly getting a bad test result prompting immediate action that unbeknownst to one wasn't needed. For example, alkalinity reads 20 but water crystal clear. Which do you trust

 

[Miami Reef]

I prefer a healthy tank. I will do what it takes to have a happy aquarium. “Perfect parameters” is subjective.

What does “visually” healthy mean? Does that imply the tank is internally unhealthy?

 

[lil sumpin]

What is visually healthy? I constantly get film algae on the glass but the coral are all healthy. Perfect parameters are kind of a pipe dream, I just aim to keep things as consistent as possible

 

[Reefer Matt]

I prefer a healthy tank. I will do what it takes to have a happy aquarium. “Perfect parameters” is subjective.

What does “visually” healthy mean? Does that imply the tank is internally unhealthy?

What is visually healthy? I constantly get film algae on the glass but the coral are all healthy. Perfect parameters are kind of a pipe dream, I just aim to keep things as consistent as possible

Visually. As in you look at your tank and don’t notice anything wrong with the livestock. This question is for those familiar with their tanks.

 

[KrisReef]

How can I enjoy my visually healthy tank when I know that the NO3 is dangerously low and the salinity is a tad high?

Nothing is ever perfect

 

[Troylee]

These are nothing but numbers or a basic guide at best… as you can see I don’t pay much attention to any of them besides my ph lol… if those were correct my tank would be dead and it’s far from it! I don’t trust trident as it creeps all over the place and I’m thinking my calcium is crazy high but it’s not I’m low on reagent and when I change it everything shifts.. the salt conductivity jumps from 30 to 56 all the time also haha! It’s all about visuals and that comes with experience and time.

 

[Reefer Matt]

These are nothing but numbers or a basic guide at best… as you can see I don’t pay much attention to any of them besides my ph lol… if those were correct my tank would be dead and it’s far from it! I don’t trust trident as it creeps all over the place and I’m thinking my calcium is crazy high but it’s not I’m low on reagent and when I change it everything shifts.. the salt conductivity jumps from 30 to 56 all the time also haha! It’s all about visuals and that comes with experience and time.

What if an icp test said you have issues, but the tank looks good? Do you chase those parameters or shrug it off?

 

[Miami Reef]

if those were correct my tank would be dead and it’s far from it!

That’s the point. If the value was true, then things might not be well. That’s why the real value IS important.

 

[Miami Reef]

Visually. As in you look at your tank and don’t notice anything wrong with the livestock. This question is for those familiar with their tanks.

Visually looking good does not always imply healthy.

For example:

Growth rates and weight gain highest at 0.50 mg phosphate/L, but skeletal density lowest there. ►Phosphate increases growth but lowers density; coral growth is a poor reef health indicator.

Effects of phosphate on growth and skeletal density in the scleractinian coral Acropora muricata: A controlled experimental approach

Phosphate contamination can negatively affect corals, modifying growth rates, skeletal density, reproduction, mortality, and zooxanthellae. We determi…

www.sciencedirect.com

Sometimes what we perceive as visually good does not always mean that’s what’s best for the animal.


I personally think ultra-low-nutrient pastel corals are visually appealing. Is that what’s best for the coral? No.

Having a parameter guideline is important. Visual guides are not always accurate. We need both.

 

[Reefer Matt]

Visually looking good does not always imply healthy.

For example:

Effects of phosphate on growth and skeletal density in the scleractinian coral Acropora muricata: A controlled experimental approach

Phosphate contamination can negatively affect corals, modifying growth rates, skeletal density, reproduction, mortality, and zooxanthellae. We determi…

www.sciencedirect.com

Sometimes what we perceive as visually good does not always mean that’s what’s best for the animal.


I personally think ultra-low-nutrient pastel corals are visually appealing. Is that what’s best for the coral? No.

Having a parameter guideline is important. Visual guides are not always accurate. We need both.

So which carries more weight with you? Parameters, or the visual perception of the tank?

 

[AlyciaMarie]

My goal is to have a thriving and happy tank, and my parameter adjustment efforts are in pursuit of that goal. If my parameters are off, but everything is happy, I won't risk irritating my reef to achieve perfect parameters. But the word perfect is a stretch because everyone and their mama have different opinions on what "perfect parameters" are. The reality is that we have a small piece of a vast ecosystem in our home, and the odds are that nothing will ever be perfect—just my opinion.

I'll also add that sometimes something can look "happy" right before it decides to rest in peace upside-down-face, so going off just your eye can backfire at times. But in general, I don't think I'll jump to trying to adjust parameters if something has no visual evidence of distress. Those types of knee-jerk reactions have gotten me in trouble in my recent reefing history.

 

[Reefer Matt]

But the word perfect is a stretch because everyone and their mama have different opinions on what "perfect parameters" are.

“Perfect” in this case means that they are all where you want them to be.

 

[AlyciaMarie]

“Perfect” in this case means that they are all where you want them to be.

In that case, my perfect parameters will be "Whatever will make my whole tank happy and not just my fish, anemone, and softies." I wonder what the numerical translation of that would be... LOL

 

[Miami Reef]

So which carries more weight with you? Parameters, or the visual perception of the tank?

Both are important. Look toward evidence that supports success with set of parameters, and also look into the corals to see if you can detect if something amiss. Just because a coral is struggling doesn’t always imply something is wrong with your parameters: parasites or predators is often a likely culprit.

 

[Reefer Matt]

Both are important. Look toward evidence that supports success with set of parameters, and also look into the corals to see if you can detect if something amiss. Just because a coral is struggling doesn’t always imply something is wrong with your parameters: parasites or predators is often a likely culprit.

So your answer to this question is “other” then?

 

[Miami Reef]

So your answer to this question is “other” then?

My answer is both are important.

 

[Formulator]

Both are important. Look toward evidence that supports success with set of parameters, and also look into the corals to see if you can detect if something amiss. Just because a coral is struggling doesn’t always imply something is wrong with your parameters: parasites or predators is often a likely culprit.

I would also say the reverse applies. People gawk and gasp at a number like 1.0 ppm phosphate, yet in some tanks corals thrive at this level. It is important to consider the appearance of corals before chasing a number, when that chase could result in casualties due to the instability.