Redfield Ratio Revisited – What are we doing wrong?

Reef and Dive

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
5,190
Location
Brazil
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Paulo Mallard Scaldaferri, João Carlos Basso, Marcos Augusto Bizeto, Miguel Mies, Roberto Denadai, Junio Melo

Introduction

Possible applications of the Redfield ratio in the management of the marine aquarium have been discussed over the year. Many have considered that knowledge very helpful while others consider it completely dismissible and useless to the reef keeping hobby. Our objective with this systematic literature review was to obtain the best information that could help clear this concept in terms of aquarium reef keeping.

It has been stated in the past that the well-known 106: 16: 1 carbon : nitrogen : phosphorus ratio should be aimed in order to keep a healthy aquarium. It has been suggested that it would prevent nuisance algae and cyanobacteria by many respected authors like Julian Sprung (1) and João Carlos Basso (2) among others (3). However, many hobbyists have questioned the actual usefulness of these predictions and possible corrections.

(edited jan-2023)

After much help and important information provided on this topic by Mr @Lasse and Mr @sixty_reefer, it is necessary to make a simple conversion to compare our commonly measured Nitrate and Phosphate in ppm to Nitrogen versus Phosphorus in moles, what is actually discussed in scientific articles. That conversion is actually pretty simple:

N/P Redfield = 1.53*NO3/PO4

(end of edit)

Origins

In 1934 Alfred Redfield published a widely known study (4) comparing the rates of oceanic organic compounds collected on the path of the “Dana” ship, between 1928 and 1929. Samples were obtained on the surface, and at depths of 700 and 1500 meters. The original publication identified the stoichiometric N : P ratio of 20:1, offering a light on a possible balance between these components in the ocean. In 1958, the same author (5) based on new published data recognized that a new C: N: P ratio of 106:16:1 was obtained and these are the numbers often referenced in our hobby.

A more recent and larger study (6) was made with extensive data collection (5336 distinct oceanic points). It showed a significant variation in ratios among different sites and revealed a more accurate global average for this relationship: 163:22:1. There was found a significant variation of rations between different sites.

The marine aquarium community has been using information from the original study to keep a healthier environment within the tanks. However, applicability of the original study values is very questionable since it was carried out in ocean waters.

The new interpretations of the N : P ratio

Every day more and more nitrogen-fixing organisms are studied and different N : P gradients have been identified in the nature and tested in laboratory (7). Different species benefit differently from various N : P ratios. Mathematical models have been developed to predict the prevalence of microorganisms where limiting factors are nitrogen, phosphorus or both (8).

A large number of studies include analysis of the carbon component of this equation. In order to simplify our focus, I will report more frequently the data specifically on the N : P ratio. These are the most available and practical parameters to the marine hobbyist (we usually use nitrates and phosphate tests, which are quite representative of the N: P ratio in the water column).

Could a ratio of nutrients really promote or limit the prevalence of different microorganisms in marine aquariums? Apparently yes, but it is not as simple as we previously thought.

Let’s look at the biochemical basis for the different demand and composition of N : P (8). The largest pool of N is present in proteins and nucleic acids. It is also present in chlorophylls a, b, c and amino acids, and appears in diatoms chitin. In contrast, nucleic acids and phospholipids are the largest pool of P and it is less present in proteins. The main macromolecule that makes up for the cellular content in phosphate is the RNA.

But it is even a little more complex than that. Cyanobacteria have a high N: P cell ratio comparing to most other eukaryotic microorganisms due to their significantly bulky light uptake apparatus (9). In contrast, other genera of eukaryotic phytoplankton such as green algae, diatoms and dinoflagellates have a higher content of phosphate. Evaluating just the cellular content of cyanobacteria, a high demand for nitrogen would be expected, but studies have shown exactly the opposite. Through repeated observation, it was hypothesized that cyanobacteria could supplement N deficiency with diazotrophic N2 fixation capacity (10). This N2 fixation capability also offers a better explanation for the competitive advantage of cyanobacteria over other microorganisms in nitrogen-deprived environments.

Relationships between N: P ratios and cyanobacteria

The unbalanced proliferation of cyanobacteria in estuarine and marine waters have been related to environments rich in nutrients, but lacking the N fraction of this equation. Smith has already verified in his studies that the N : P ratio below 29 favored the proliferation of cyanobacteria, which were more efficient in fixing N (11, 12).

Cyanobacteria are ubiquitous in marine aquariums, but their excessive proliferation is considered very problematic. Usually, some species are more prevalent in aquariums such as Oscillatoria , Lyngbya and Phormidium (3, 13, 14). Like other marine planktonic microorganisms, after an accelerated growth, cyanobacteria also develop a competitive advantage through secretion of allelopathic substances. These substances can inhibit the growth of other algae and cyanobacteria (15), even evidencing antimicrobial properties. This observation may partially explain the success of cyano treatment with macrolides, such as azithromycin or erythromycin. Other drugs from this group (macrolides) have already been isolated from different cyanobacteria (16). Could their mechanism of action have any similarity to allelopathy? Although it is interesting, we have not identified specific studies to verify the veracity of this hypothesis.

The initial imbalance that leads to accelerated cyano growth seems to be influenced by the N: P ratio. Ahlgren tested this hypothesis in closed environments, which we could call small aquariums (0.5L glass tubes). The researcher evaluated the proliferation of Oscillatoria agardhii in environments with limited nitrogen or phosphorus (17). He observed that in the studied species phosphorus depletion was a greater growth limit factor than nitrogen, evidencing a competitive advantage in nitrogen deprived environments. Levich (18) also studied the proliferation of cyanobacteria in detriment of other microorganisms with various N : P ratios and found very interesting balances: above 20 : 1 green algae was favored; on the other hand, cyano grew more rapidly in ratios below 5 : 1.

Implications of N : P ratios in carbon dosing

Carbon dosing is a widely used technique by marine aquarists for nutrient export and nitrate and phosphate reduction. Several carbon sources have already been tested such as sugar, vodka and vinegar. Principles of carbon dosing also seem to be explained with C : N : P ratio knowledge. Addition of carbon provides the limiting growth factor for the aquarium’s bacterial population. Through this incorporation, bacteria also consume nitrate (in greater proportion) and phosphate, being later exported by the skimmer.

We also identified some studies (19) that investigated the C : N : P in these bacteria and found a ratio of 50 : 10 : 1. Exponential growth of marine bacteria in vitro was achieved when the ratio reached 32 : 6.4 : 1 in nitrogen rich and 45 : 7.4 : 1 in nitrogen poor environments.

In other words, we could expect in aquariums that the maximum export efficiency would theoretically occur in a ratio of 7 : 1 (N : P) and the expected theoretical result of consumption would occur in a ratio of 10 : 1 (N : P). This proportion was not the same in every single study, but it is closer to reality than the original Redfield (20).

Once nitrogen or phosphorus is eliminated, normally the increase in carbon supply will not remove the other residual element. Sometimes, over-dosing may stimulate the development of cyanobacteria, which can be well understood by the mechanism already mentioned: after removing the nitrogen source, cyanobacteria and others capable of fixing gaseous nitrogen (N2) could be stimulated.

Final considerations

We know that marine aquariums are closed environments with very diverse micro and macro fauna, and interpretation of this closed environment through studies carried out in nature is extremely complex. Alfred Redfield’s initial studies were conducted in open waters, far away from coral reefs, so we discourage that the original Redfield ratio be taken as a rule for marine hobbysts. However, we identified the importance of his initial studies of C: N: P relationships, which were followed by the identification of new ratios in different environments.

However, many studies have demonstrated that different species usually preponderate under specific conditions. So we can check that the predominance of certain species with accelerated growth in marine aquariums seems to be influenced by the C : N : P ratio.

Higher N: P ratios (above 20 : 1) seem to favor green algae but also dinoflagellates, while lower values (below 5 : 1) favor the growth of cyanobacteria. In situations where there is a critical limit in nutrients supply (a large reduction of both N and P), this interpretation seems to have less predictive value.

We must emphasize the limitations of these information and implications. The well-known imprecision of the tests that we usually use in the hobby demands that critical judgment should be used above all. Redfield did not predict with his studies events that occur in aquariums, neither it was his intention, but other studies already published seem to increasingly offer data that can help us manage marine aquariums. We believe that dissemination of this data may provide new horizons on nitrogen, phosphorus and carbon dynamics in aquariums.

Bibliography

1. Dellbeek JC, Sprung J. The Reef Aquarium: A Comprehensive Guide to the Identification and Care of Tropical Marine Invertebrates. 3: Two Little Fishies, Inc.; 1994. p. 274-5.

2. Basso JC. In: Aquaribasso, editor. O Aquário de Recife de Corais. 2017. p. 45.

3. Knop D. Algues en aquarium. Les guides Zebras. 2010:59-63.

4. Redfield AC. On the proportions of organic derivatives in sea water and their relation to the composition of plankton. James Johnstone Memorial. 1934;176:176-92.

5. Redfield AC. The Biological Control of Chemical Factors in the Environment. American Scientist. 1958;46(3):230A-21.

6. Martiny AC, Vrugt JA, Lomas MW. Concentrations and ratios of particulate organic carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus in the global ocean. Scientific Data. 2014;1(1):140048.

7. Gruber N, Deutsch CA. Redfield's evolving legacy. Nature Geoscience. 2014;7(12):853-5.

8. Geider R, La Roche J. Redfield revisited: variability of C : N : P in marine microalgae and its biochemical basis. European Journal of Phycology. 2002;37(1):1-17.

9. M B, M S. Factors affecting the growth of cyanobacteria with special emphasis on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta.: Southern California Coastal Water Research Project; 2015.

10. Parrish J. The Role of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in the Growth, Toxicity, and Distribution of the Toxic Cyanobacteria, Microcystis aeruginosa. Master’s Projects and Capstones: University of San Francisco; 2014.

11. Smith VH. Low Nitrogen to Phosphorus Ratios Favor Dominance by Blue-Green Algae in Lake Phytoplankton. Science. 1983;221(4611):669-71.

12. Smith VH. Nitrogen, phosphorus, and nitrogen fixation in lacustrine and estuarine ecosystems. Limnology and Oceanography. 1990;35(8):1852-9.

13. Sprung J. Algae: A Problem Solver Guide: Two Little Fishies; 2001.

14. Nienaber MA, Steinitz-Kannan M. A guide to cyanobacteria: identification and impact: Univeristy Press of Kentucky; 2018.

15. Chauhan VS, Marwah JB, Bagchi SN. Effect of an antibiotic from Oscillatoria sp. on phytoplankters, higher plants and mice. New Phytologist. 1992;120(2):251-7.

16. Wang M, Zhang J, He S, Yan X. A Review Study on Macrolides Isolated from Cyanobacteria. Mar Drugs. 2017;15(5):126.

17. Ahlgren G. Growth of Oscillatoria agardhii in Chemostat Culture: 1. Nitrogen and Phosphorus Requirements. Oikos. 1977;29:209.

18. Levich AP. The role of nitrogen-phosphorus ratio in selecting for dominance of phytoplankton by cyanobacteria or green algae and its application to reservoir management. Journal of Aquatic Ecosystem Health. 1996;5(1):55-61.

19. Vrede K, Heldal M, Norland S, Bratbak G. Elemental Composition (C, N, P) and Cell Volume of Exponentially Growing and Nutrient-Limited Bacterioplankton. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 2002;68(6):2965-71.

20. Chrzanowski TH, Kyle M. Ratios of carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus in Pseudomonas fluorescens as a model for bacterial element ratios and nutrient regeneration. Aquatic Microbial Ecology - AQUAT MICROB ECOL. 1996;10:115-22.
 
Last edited:

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
11,262
Reaction score
30,666
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Thank´s a lot for this review.

One question - in your sources - did they analyse if it was NH3/NH4 - N or NO3-N. In the experiments I have done and the first thing I do in a Cyano outbreak is to dose NO3. It looks like that the whole NO3 (not only the N part) have a critical roll in defeating mat building cyanobacteria.

Sincerely Lasse
 
OP
OP
Reef and Dive

Reef and Dive

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
5,190
Location
Brazil
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Thank´s a lot for this review.

One question - in your sources - did they analyse if it was NH3/NH4 - N or NO3-N. In the experiments I have done and the first thing I do in a Cyano outbreak is to dose NO3. It looks like that the whole NO3 (not only the N part) have a critical roll in defeating mat building cyanobacteria.

Sincerely Lasse

Sure I also believe NO3 plays a major role.

Measuring was just about the technique used, older studies measured NO3 the same way we do. Most recent ones measured N only because of the better technique used...
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
72,100
Reaction score
69,741
Location
Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Many have considered that knowledge very helpful while others consider it completely dismissible and useless to the reef keeping hobby.

I think there is a critical middle ground between those which says understanding what the redfield ratio is (and is not) can be useful, but IMO, it is not very useful at all when setting target levels for reef tanks.

On the face of it, a ratio as a target is just ridiculous.

If nitrate is 0.00000000000000000000001 ppm, does that mean the optimal phosphate level is 0.000000000000000000001 ppm?

If nitrate is 1000 ppm, does that mean the optimal phosphate level is 16 ppm?

It makes far more sense to target N and P independently to desirable levels.

Sure, one might use the sorts of experiments indicated by the first post to help set those desirable levels, but then come out with a far simpler set of target levels, such as optimal nitrate is 2-10 ppm and phosphate is 0.02-0.1 ppm, or some such thing.

Forget the whole ratio idea. IMO, it is just a misleading complication.
 
OP
OP
Reef and Dive

Reef and Dive

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
5,190
Location
Brazil
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think there is a critical middle ground between those which says understanding what the redfield ratio is (and is not) can be useful, but IMO, it is not very useful at all when setting target levels for reef tanks.

On the face of it, a ratio as a target is just ridiculous.

If nitrate is 0.00000000000000000000001 ppm, does that mean the optimal phosphate level is 0.000000000000000000001 ppm?

If nitrate is 1000 ppm, does that mean the optimal phosphate level is 16 ppm?

It makes far more sense to target N and P independently to desirable levels.

Sure, one might use the sorts of experiments indicated by the first post to help set those desirable levels, but then come out with a far simpler set of target levels, such as optimal nitrate is 2-10 ppm and phosphate is 0.02-0.1 ppm, or some such thing.

Forget the whole ratio idea. IMO, it is just a misleading complication.

Yeah Mr Randy. Thank you a lot for your feedback it means a lot for us.

Our group’s research was to get be best uptodate science research on that subject. Not really to prove any particular opinion (since most of us thought the Redfield’s Ratio does not help at all).

For sure what we found out was quite far from the original ratio, wich does not make any more sense. But there are some ratios that seem to just favor some groups of microscopic beings. Since that occurs in vitro and in nature, possibly that information could help us.

It seems there is some evidence that could help us interpreting things.

For extremely low numbers we could understand cyano growth just by their ability to fix gaseous nitrogen and bound phosphate on rocks (this could explain cyano that sometimes apear on “zero nutrient” tanks).

It also helps understanding cyano that gets better sometimes just by dosing nitrates.
 

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
11,262
Reaction score
30,666
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
For extremely low numbers we could understand cyano growth just by their ability to fix gaseous nitrogen and bound phosphate on rocks (this could explain cyano that sometimes apear on “zero nutrient” tanks).
According to one of the most common cyanobacteria in aquarium - the species from the genus Oscillatoria is known to not have the nitrogen fixation cells - heterocytes. - there are more genus like lyngbya that not have these special cells too. Therefore - it must be other processes that manage the N-fixation. In the case of Oscillatoria - I´ll think that the forming of the mats is the major clue in order to understand these processes. Below the mats - it is easy to form an anoxic microenvironment that allowing oxygen free nitrogen fixation by other bacteria and also a NO3 free zoon that´s allowing the forming of hydrogen sulphide that break the bounds of different metal-phosphorous compounds. You get a self playing piano with help of the mats. When the mats is formed - I do not think the ratio of N/P has any importance but your findings can give a clue to what environment is giving the trigger why some common cyanobacteria like the oscillatoria genus suddenly abandoning their individual life and forms colonies with help of mats containing a lot of carbohydrate-rich substances that´s probably is a way to external store carbon fixated by photosynthesis.

It makes far more sense to target N and P independently to desirable levels.

Yes I think that a target level of at least PO4-P is important of other reasons (calcification as an example) but that a ratio can be useful in order to know what´s happen if the other major nutrients are at certain levels. According to photosynthetic animals - the amount of C in saltwater is more than enough - therefore the only ration that can be important is N/P. For no photosynthetic organisms (like many heterotrophic bacteria) there can be a lack of organic carbon (there is some no photosynthetic bacteria like the autotrophic nitrification bacteria that need inorganic carbon). In these bacteria strains - there could be of interest to look at C/N/P ratio IMO. My standpoint for many, many years - long before vodka methods and other DOC (Dissolved Organic Carbon) methods - have been that organic carbon is the limited growth factor for heterotrophic bacteria in a recirculated system like an aquarium. some have say - there is enough but bound in organic matter and debris. That´s true - but the most important for fast growth is the DOC concentration IMO. The bound organic C will be converted into DOC sooner or later (mostly very later) of mostly anaerobic fermentation and hydrolyzation.

There have also been shown that a N/P ratio can be very interesting when talking about bleaching of stony corals. This is of certain interest if the PO4 concentration is below 0.03. These two articles are of interest in this issue


Sincerely Lasse
 
Last edited:

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,875
Reaction score
8,015
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yeah Mr Randy. Thank you a lot for your feedback it means a lot for us.

Our group’s research was to get be best uptodate science research on that subject. Not really to prove any particular opinion (since most of us thought the Redfield’s Ratio does not help at all).

For sure what we found out was quite far from the original ratio, wich does not make any more sense. But there are some ratios that seem to just favor some groups of microscopic beings. Since that occurs in vitro and in nature, possibly that information could help us.

It seems there is some evidence that could help us interpreting things.

For extremely low numbers we could understand cyano growth just by their ability to fix gaseous nitrogen and bound phosphate on rocks (this could explain cyano that sometimes apear on “zero nutrient” tanks).

It also helps understanding cyano that gets better sometimes just by dosing nitrates.

Are you confusing Cyanobacteria with dinoflagellates? As dinoflagellates is the species tha thrive under low nutrients and it’s normally under control by increasing no3 and po4
 

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,875
Reaction score
8,015
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think there is a critical middle ground between those which says understanding what the redfield ratio is (and is not) can be useful, but IMO, it is not very useful at all when setting target levels for reef tanks.

On the face of it, a ratio as a target is just ridiculous.

If nitrate is 0.00000000000000000000001 ppm, does that mean the optimal phosphate level is 0.000000000000000000001 ppm?

If nitrate is 1000 ppm, does that mean the optimal phosphate level is 16 ppm?

It makes far more sense to target N and P independently to desirable levels.

Sure, one might use the sorts of experiments indicated by the first post to help set those desirable levels, but then come out with a far simpler set of target levels, such as optimal nitrate is 2-10 ppm and phosphate is 0.02-0.1 ppm, or some such thing.

Forget the whole ratio idea. IMO, it is just a misleading complication.

Have you read the triton reefkeeping ratios on the subject? Even though it’s not perfect it makes sense for aquaria, I don’t believe anyone can translate a nitrogen and phosphorus directly in to No3 and po4 isn’t that a common mistake wend discussing red field?


@Reef_and_Dive good write up but the above makes more sense to the hobby IMO
 
Last edited:

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
72,100
Reaction score
69,741
Location
Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Have you read the triton reefkeeping ratios on the subject? Even though it’s not perfect it makes sense for aquaria


@Reef_and_Dive good write up but the above makes more sense to the hobby IMO

While their approach is much better than simply thinking the Redfield ratio is a target ratio, it still fails (IMO) to be better than simply targeting a range of desirable levels for whatever you are measuring.

i see no reason to think ratios are a better approach than desirable ranges, and certainly there are reasons to think it is not (such as the hyperbolic examples I gave above).
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
72,100
Reaction score
69,741
Location
Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yeah Mr Randy. Thank you a lot for your feedback it means a lot for us.

Our group’s research was to get be best uptodate science research on that subject. Not really to prove any particular opinion (since most of us thought the Redfield’s Ratio does not help at all).

For sure what we found out was quite far from the original ratio, wich does not make any more sense. But there are some ratios that seem to just favor some groups of microscopic beings. Since that occurs in vitro and in nature, possibly that information could help us.

It seems there is some evidence that could help us interpreting things.

For extremely low numbers we could understand cyano growth just by their ability to fix gaseous nitrogen and bound phosphate on rocks (this could explain cyano that sometimes apear on “zero nutrient” tanks).

It also helps understanding cyano that gets better sometimes just by dosing nitrates.

I certainly agree that knowing what happens at different levels and ratios of nutrients is useful to help decide what our target levels should be. :)
 

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,875
Reaction score
8,015
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
While their approach is much better than simply thinking the Redfield ratio is a target ratio, it still fails (IMO) to be better than simply targeting a range of desirable levels for whatever you are measuring.

i see no reason to think ratios are a better approach than desirable ranges, and certainly there are reasons to think it is not (such as the hyperbolic examples I gave above).

I agree it’s not perfect as mentioned above, it’s missing the microbe information as they the ones that dictate the ratios in the ocean and in home aquaria, that’s why I was excited with @Eli_mayers @AquaBiomics work as this could be really beneficial to understand the hobby better.
 

Crashnt24

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 20, 2019
Messages
582
Reaction score
714
Location
Denver, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think there is a critical middle ground between those which says understanding what the redfield ratio is (and is not) can be useful, but IMO, it is not very useful at all when setting target levels for reef tanks.

On the face of it, a ratio as a target is just ridiculous.

If nitrate is 0.00000000000000000000001 ppm, does that mean the optimal phosphate level is 0.000000000000000000001 ppm?

If nitrate is 1000 ppm, does that mean the optimal phosphate level is 16 ppm?

It makes far more sense to target N and P independently to desirable levels.

Sure, one might use the sorts of experiments indicated by the first post to help set those desirable levels, but then come out with a far simpler set of target levels, such as optimal nitrate is 2-10 ppm and phosphate is 0.02-0.1 ppm, or some such thing.

Forget the whole ratio idea. IMO, it is just a misleading complication.

I think people over complicate the ratio. Shoot for a target nitrogen and try to maintain a phosphate that is close to that ratio.

If you didn't give the idea of the ratio, people give even worse advice IMO. I have seen posts where someone says they have 2ppm NO3 and 0.2 PO4, and people giving advice say there is nothing wrong with that because they have read about successful tanks running high nutrients... they are only looking at one measurement at a time and not considering everything together.

I think the general idea of a healthy ratio is something everyone should know going forward in this hobby.
 

sixty_reefer

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Nov 8, 2018
Messages
5,875
Reaction score
8,015
Location
The Reef
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think people over complicate the ratio. Shoot for a target nitrogen and try to maintain a phosphate that is close to that ratio.

If you didn't give the idea of the ratio, people give even worse advice IMO. I have seen posts where someone says they have 2ppm NO3 and 0.2 PO4, and people giving advice say there is nothing wrong with that because they have read about successful tanks running high nutrients... they are only looking at one measurement at a time and not considering everything together.

I think the general idea of a healthy ratio is something everyone should know going forward in this hobby.

Do you understand the ratio? Most hobbiest would see a problem with the advice described above including myself. As long as it’s stable and it’s not causing any issues to the system.
 

Crashnt24

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 20, 2019
Messages
582
Reaction score
714
Location
Denver, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Have
Do you understand the ratio? Most hobbiest would see a problem with the advice described above including myself. As long as it’s stable and it’s not causing any issues to the system.

Have you seen a system that doesn't have an issue(nuisance algae, cyano, coral coloration,
coral growth, ect) with a big imbalance of N and P? I haven't. So yes I understand the ratio and what it meant for my tank. I have experienced first hand what a bad ratio does to a reef tank. Sure you can say "just shoot for ___ NO3 and ___ PO4", but those numbers usually fall within the recommended ratio numbers anyway. So it's essentially teaching someone to not learn for themselves and just remember a hard number. Which causes number chasing and headaches.

For example, if you experience a NO3 spike of 3ppm you can measure PO4 and see if it's acceptable in the ratio. Then you can take a breath, and not start doing some drastic changes to drop your NO3 because it's suddenly out of that hard number that was given to him by a member on these forums.

I personally just think it's a better approach to maintaining nutrient levels for a healthy tank versus chasing numbers for that hard number.
 

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
11,262
Reaction score
30,666
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Are you confusing Cyanobacteria with dinoflagellates? As dinoflagellates is the species tha thrive under low nutrients and it’s normally under control by increasing no3 and po4
Its the same for some cyanobacteria as it is for some dinoflagellates. IMO - many times this two are misidentified for each other.

Sincerely Lasse
 
OP
OP
Reef and Dive

Reef and Dive

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
5,190
Location
Brazil
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
According to one of the most common cyanobacteria in aquarium - the species from the genus Oscillatoria is known to not have the nitrogen fixation cells - heterocytes. - there are more genus like lyngbya that not have these special cells too. Therefore - it must be other processes that manage the N-fixation. In the case of Oscillatoria - I´ll think that the forming of the mats is the major clue in order to understand these processes. Below the mats - it is easy to form an anoxic microenvironment that allowing oxygen free nitrogen fixation by other bacteria and also a NO3 free zoon that´s allowing the forming of hydrogen sulphide that break the bounds of different metal-phosphorous compounds. You get a self playing piano with help of the mats. When the mats is formed - I do not think the ratio of N/P has any importance but your findings can give a clue to what environment is giving the trigger why some common cyanobacteria like the oscillatoria genus suddenly abandoning their individual life and forms colonies with help of mats containing a lot of carbohydrate-rich substances that´s probably is a way to external store carbon fixated by photosynthesis.



Yes I think that a target level of at least PO4-P is important of other reasons (calcification as an example) but that a ratio can be useful in order to know what´s happen if the other major nutrients are at certain levels. According to photosynthetic animals - the amount of C in saltwater is more than enough - therefore the only ration that can be important is N:p. For no photosynthetic organisms (like many heterotrophic bacteria) there can be a lack of organic carbon (there is some no photosynthetic bacteria like the autotrophic nitrification bacteria that need inorganic carbon). In these bacteria strains - there could be of interest to look at C:N:p ratio IMO. My standpoint for many, many years - long before vodka methods and other DOC (Dissolved Organic Carbon) methods - have been that organic carbon is the limited growth factor for heterotrophic bacteria in a recirculated system like an aquarium. some have say - there is enough but bound in organic matter and debris. That´s true - but the most important for fast growth is the DOC concentration IMO. The bound organic C will be converted into DOC sooner or later (mostly very later) of mostly anaerobic fermentation and hydrolyzation.

There have also been shown that a N:p ratio can be very interesting when talking about bleaching of stony corals. This is of certain interest if the PO4 concentration is below 0.03. These two articles are of interest in this issue


Sincerely Lasse

Yeah that article was also found by out group, very interesting one, totaly worth to read.

For Oscillatoria, even with its particularities it seems to like the higher phos/lower nit ratios as well. One of the cited studies researched that genus specifically (17) and the possible reaction to different N : P ratios. Nitrogen became a limiting factor at the 7:1 ratio on that study (higher than other cyanobacteria).
 
OP
OP
Reef and Dive

Reef and Dive

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
5,190
Location
Brazil
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Its the same for some cyanobacteria as it is for some dinoflagellates. IMO - many times this two are misidentified for each other.

Sincerely Lasse

Dinos were usually on the opposite group of growth, usually together with green algae.

Not reported in this study, but it also seems they are favored by extremelly low nutrients in general.
 
OP
OP
Reef and Dive

Reef and Dive

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
5,190
Location
Brazil
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Have you read the triton reefkeeping ratios on the subject? Even though it’s not perfect it makes sense for aquaria, I don’t believe anyone can translate a nitrogen and phosphorus directly in to No3 and po4 isn’t that a common mistake wend discussing red field?


@Reef_and_Dive good write up but the above makes more sense to the hobby IMO

Yes we have, but we tried to keep track of scientific studies published on indexed science papers.

In comparison to the data we found Triton suggested ratios appear to be too high (in terms of nitrogen), so we found no scientific data supporting those numbers...
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
72,100
Reaction score
69,741
Location
Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Have

Have you seen a system that doesn't have an issue(nuisance algae, cyano, coral coloration,
coral growth, ect) with a big imbalance of N and P? I haven't. So yes I understand the ratio and what it meant for my tank. I have experienced first hand what a bad ratio does to a reef tank. Sure you can say "just shoot for ___ NO3 and ___ PO4", but those numbers usually fall within the recommended ratio numbers anyway. So it's essentially teaching someone to not learn for themselves and just remember a hard number. Which causes number chasing and headaches.

For example, if you experience a NO3 spike of 3ppm you can measure PO4 and see if it's acceptable in the ratio. Then you can take a breath, and not start doing some drastic changes to drop your NO3 because it's suddenly out of that hard number that was given to him by a member on these forums.

I personally just think it's a better approach to maintaining nutrient levels for a healthy tank versus chasing numbers for that hard number.

To each his own, but this makes no sense to me.

You believe that it is hard to understand guidance like targets of

0.02-0.05 ppm phosphate
2-10 ppm nitrate,

but it is easy to understand how to apply a ratio?

I guess you just think differently than I do, and perhaps give a lot more credit to how reefers will use ratios.

if you do not put bounds on how to interpret the ratios, it is obviously flawed for the reason I showed above, and if you put bounds on it (only applies from this absolute value to this absolute value, etc.), it becomes far more complicated than simple target levels.

Chasing the ratio seems just as likely as chasing the target values.
 

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
11,262
Reaction score
30,666
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Chasing the ratio seems just as likely as chasing the target values.

Yes it could but if we learn to connect our measurement to what we see in our aquarium and that we succeed to to hammer in the line - High values, okay - but how does your aquarium look? We maybe can succeed to connect the measurements with facts like this below. If I have a problem with Oscillatoria - maybe not going above the ratio of 7 : 1 according to N : P. But I agree - there is a lot of questions not solved. Does it matter which form the N is in. Can Oscillatoria utilize NO3-N or does it not have the enzymes needed. Most the N in the ratio be as NH3/NH4-N or as amino acids - N in order to be taken up by the cyanobacteria cell? Amino acids pass through single cells and protozoa cell walls as good as NH3/NH4

For Oscillatoria, even with its particularities it seems to like the higher phos/lower nit ratios as well. One of the cited studies researched that genus specifically (17) and the possible reaction to different N : P ratios. Nitrogen became a limiting factor at the 7:1 ratio on that study (higher than other cyanobacteria).

Sincerely Lasse
 
Back
Top