SPS Healthy & Colorful but Not Growing, Zoas Partially Closed - Ca, Mg, Alk Barely Decline. Why?

[Arylus]

I know nearly nothing about sps but I just wanted to say that *this* is how you ask for help.

 

[HuduVudu]

You are attempting to redefine alkalinity as something it is not. This leads to an enormous amount of confusion.

The problem here is that you have decided that you want to use a chemistry definition of alkalinity and then conflate that with what corals are using for skeletal growth. They are not the same. The only reason we bother with measuring alkalinity is because we believe that some or all of the components are associated with skeletal coral growth. If we are actually interested in what constitutes skeletal growth then all of a sudden alkalinity becomes more than it's actual definition ... the ability of a substance to hold the PH of an aqueous solution with the addition of an acid.

Alkalinity is buffering capacity, nothing more, nothing less. You could produce two different solutions with completely different bicarbonate or carbonate concentrations, but with equal alkalinity.

And by this measure I could use completely different buffers to buffer against acid holding the PH where I want it, but those buffers are not used in the skeletal growth of coral so why bother to measure for them. We measure carbonate hardness (not the same as alkalinity) because we are interested in the carbonate. That these items are a buffer is beside the point. We don't care that calcium is a mineral, and we don't measure all of the minerals of the water and declare X ppm of minerals in the water, because truly we don't care about the other minerals as they are not used in skeletal coral growth. That the tests are imprinted with alkalinity and measure as such does not mean that alkalinity is what we are interested in.

If your arguments are about bicarbonate or carbonate concentrations you'd be able to make those points more clearly by using the established terms.

Established terms? Perhaps you didn't read my post to Randy. If not everyone understands the actual difference between the terms then of what use is it to use those terms. Clearly even you are confused by the term alkalinity but you continue to use it imprecisely conveying incorrect meaning with it. I highly suspect the you don't have a clear understanding of the terms carbonate and bicarbonate as well.

I am not sure why you are arguing these points. You haven't read the thread and you haven't seen the things that I said. I am not interested in engaging with people who's entire modus operandi is to make other people look small. You have yet to clarify anything that you said and have backed into arguing definition.

 

[HuduVudu]

Really? You believe they take up carbonate? What is your evidence?

My experience and my aquarium. In other words as stated previously ... empirical.

It is certainly not because it is the exact thing corals “care” about. Total alkalinity is the sum of a bunch of different things in the water, some of which are counted once (bicarbonate, silicate, hydrogen phosphate, borate, magnesium monohydroxide, hydroxide), some twice (phosphate and carbonate) and one (hydrogen ion) is subtracted back out to get the final answer.

I find it sad that you must re-iterate this and that you must talk down to me as if I don't know what I am talking about. Generally speaking arguments from authority are poor at best and escalatory at worst. You know nothing about me ... how could you, but maybe just maybe I do indeed know something about you, at least in so far as your body of work. I respect your understanding of chemistry but I find that like many highly theoretical people you have lost touch with the reality of the reason for all of the chemistry and theory. That is to solve problems.

So if we care about bicarbonate and cannot readily measure it, total alkalinity is a fall back measurement that may have value.

Absolutely, and if through a different lens we care only about carbonate and not bicarbonate then once again our only real option for testing is alkalinity.

Electrophysiological evidence for light-activated cation transport in calcifying corals
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rspb.2018.2444

I am going to post this before I read this link, but rest assured I read the links provided.

You have stated yourself that the science complicated. I get this. That is why I switched away from trying to plow forward with impractical theoretical approaches. The number of factors at play creates too many possibilities to properly winnow down for actual experimentation, and in the end the only real measure is the long term growth of corals in our aquariums. I am also of the thinking that necessity is the mother of invention. Becoming untethered from the necessity brings knowledge beholden to itself.

I am going to assume unless you otherwise state that the debate we are having is over bicarbonate vs. carbonate. If you agree with this and want to continue to debate then we should move to a different thread so as not to hijack this one. Let me know if this appropriate and I will create the thread.

My name is Shane. Hi, Randy it's nice to meet you. Now you know a little bit about me.

 

[Cory]

I agree alkalinity as a whole isn't that important to a coral, but bicarbonate or carbonate is. I dont know if corals care about borate, hydroxide or the others. Well phosphate they do, isnt that interesting that phosphate is both part of alkalinity and part of their nutrients to grow. Hmm

 

[stephj03]

Honestly man, I hate to say this but I would almost just scrap this thread and go to the SPS forum and simply post your progress pics of the frags you have and ask if that amount of growth looks within normal range.

This one has gone off on to tangents about the definitipn of alk and high C02.

This has led to recommendations to buy more gear before even verifying whether or not your pH probe is calibrated and reliably reporting....

I guess it depends on what you want the hobby to center around, but it seems from your initial post that you would like for it to center around SPS growth.

No offense to those that contributed here but the SPS forum might be more fruitful in that aspect now that you've ruled out major chemistry red flags here.

 

[stephj03]

FWIW, it seems like there are a lot of these threads floating around right now and it's kinda hard to watch.

There's a modern mythology about reefs and somehow SPS tanks specifically that they are only suppose to take a few months to build and that 1" frags should all fire off and double in size vertically within the first 6mo.

To be clear:

Anyone starting with dry rock should know it could take 1-2yrs to be ready for 1" Acros to then spend another yr to double in vertical size after encrusting a base

And

Anyone starting with live rock should know it could still take 6-9 mo to be ready for 1" Acros to spend another yr doubling in size vertically.

 

[stephj03]

Again I don't at all want to discourage you, but I do think it hurts a lot of hobbyists to buy into these myths.

IMO your tank is on point. The switch to live rock is working and you're sticks are encrusting with good color. That's actually a multi-month phase, not a trigger for explosive growth.

Find a way to take credit for that and feel good about it. It's an awesome accomplishment.

And equally please don't buy into any solution you hear from me or anyone else if your hope is that deploying that solution will suddenly make SPS grow faster than they actually do.

Instead take that money, look up the sale thread by Therman, pic 2-3 acros you can easily afford and PM him requesting a price for the biggest frags he has available.

This is the only thing I have ever seen actually work, is to take a tank like yours that is mostly on point, and put 2003 sized frags in it. Growth will still not be explosive, but it will be noticeable to the eye and your test kits.

Think about it. You have 20 booger sized frags in a 165g tank. How much Alk do you really think they can suck up from that much water each Dy?????

 

[HuduVudu]

@stephj03 I don't think that you are helping here. I am not saying that to insult but you haven't read the entire thread. There are actual problems here and if you look at the frag pics that have been provided you will see that the corals are not encrusting, and IMO they look frail. This is the second thread that the OP has posted with this problem. The first thread was in Jan. Many people have jumped into this thread and it has quickly gotten out of control. I think that the OP just wants help on aquarium and after no one was at all interested in his problem now everyone seems to have an answer. I am honestly about to bag this mess because why continue to deal with everyone that is quick to judge but never do the important work of reading through the entire thread to see what is being said. I am lucky because I posted early so I have been following along, but many of the people that have come lately don't want to see the history. :mad:

 

[stephj03]

Note to self:. The below frags are not encrusted, look frail and show no signs of growth in a month....

Coral Picture Example of coral that is growing the fastest out of them all:

Taken June 16, 2020:

Taken July 16, 2020:

Snow Cap Monti taken May 15, 2020:

Snow Cap taken July 16, 2020:

Example of no growth:

PC Rainbow taken June 16, 2020 vs July 16 2020:

[/QUOTE]

 

[stephj03]

Secondary note to self:

Always reccomend a C02 scrubber on any tank that shows an apex Ph curve floating between 7.9-8.3

And make sure not to suggest checking the calibration on the probe before buying another $100 of gear.

And think there are issues if growth hasn't exploded within a mo of when a PC Rainbow was added.

BC that's more helpful than being realistic about how fast SPS actually grow.

@OP, think about the above. And please post a few growth refference pics in the SPS forum and simply ask if that looks like decent growth.

 

[stephj03]

Hint:. You're likely to hear that your purple tip acro is actually plugging along quite nicely.

And: PH around 8 is perfectly suitable for happy, growing acros

And:. Stable alk even due to modest consumption is a good thing.

And:. Alk swings from C02 scrubbers aren't always a good thing.

And:. SPS are still going to take several mo to shoot off in your rebooted system.

And:. This is not because your Acros are not happy, it's bc thats how long it takes

And:. Based on you water chemistry, the growth you are about to see in the second half of the yr is going to be due much more to the foundation you've laid this yr than it will be to further tuning with supplements and C02 scrubbers.

Just have to wait for it. But it's coming C02 scrubber or not.

 

[stephj03]

And @OP FWIW I did actually read the whole thread. And most of your dry rock thread. I just came to different conclusions.

 

[sgrosenb]

Hi all - I appreciate all the insights. It is with all this healthy debate and group knowledge that reefers like myself are able to search for answers and try different strategies in the hopes of having a successful tank. @stephj03 I appreciate the kind words and encouragement that I have succeeded in at least keeping my frags alive; to me, that feels like a win in and of itself. @HuduVudu I appreciate the outside-the-box thinking of things that could be beneficial to my tank.

I'm not a chemist, and nor do I aspire to be one. I do, however, appreciate and admire those that are. I wish that I had that knowledge base. I think a healthy discussion on the basics as to why someone is recommending an approach for a tank is appropriate, which I think has been the case in this thread. So for that, I say thank you.

@stephj03 in terms of growth - note that I have posted pictures of my only two frags of ~20 that have had growth. I have another 18 that have truly shown no sign of growth in the past few months. The encrusting that you see is 100% from the frag owner that I purchased the frag from; this is not encrusting that has occurred in my tank. One exception to that is my snow cap monti - that one has actually covered the plug nicely and it is the one thing that makes me the happiest when I look into the tank each day.

If the answer is truly that it just takes time, I am all for that and am willing (and happy!) to wait. However I feel like I am tainted by stories of many tanks on reef2reef that have SPS growing in 6 months with a brand new tank; it is difficult as a reefer to not feel as though I am doing something wrong. My tank is going on 20 months, which - live rock or dead rock - seems to be a reasonable amount of time for growth to occur.

I am not looking for a silver bullet, and nor do I think one exists when it comes to reefing. But I have been living with an odd phenomenon that no one to date has been able to explain, and that is the increase of alkalinity on it's own with no dosing (or more recently, small increases in alkalinity or just steady flat alkalinity with no dosing). In my other forum posts that I linked, you'll see that my alkalinity actually increased for over a year in my tank. It was confirmed with a KH Director, Hanna tester, LaMotte tester and Red Sea tester. It just strikes me as being something that should be addressed and is not commonplace in reefing, let alone in a successful SPS tank.

I am not smart enough to know whether the drop in alk due to opening my windows and adding a CO2 scrubber is good, bad, or indifferent to my system. But I can tell you that it is the only thing, aside from an acid buffer, that has resulted in a decline in alkalinity. And in my head (and I could be wrong) a decrease in alkalinity is good. If people are collectively telling me that a small rise in alkalinity, or even steady and non-declining alkalinity, are a good place to be at, I will gladly stay here. To date, it doesn't seem like that has yielded positive results; but to the contrary, my corals aren't dying either - so maybe that is a good positive for now.

As always, I appreciate and welcome all suggestions and insight. Thank you all for the support.

 

[stephj03]

I would strongly recommend reposting this in the SPS sub from a different angle.

Post your tank size/gear rundown and chemistry rundown with the age starting at tuebdybofnthe reboot and ask the stick head experts over there what would be a reasonable timeline for growth.

I think you'll be surprised. Many of them would just barely be adding frags now even if started with live rock. And they wouldn't be expecting much growth for the first few mo.

Overwhelmingly the tanks you see that have immediate progress with acro growth are upgrades where the rock/sand/fish (and in many cases corals as well) have been transferred from a system that was thriving to a new tank where they settle in quick and catch their stride.JMO

 

[stephj03]

Maybe even run it as a poll....

Seriously though, you're on track IMO, it really is this painful to watch SPS grow.

 

[stephj03]

Your stags and montis have started growing first and that's normal. And your other Acros will follow suit so long as you keep them happy enough to remain well colored and not receding.

It would be a shame IMO for you to end up giving credit for this eventual result to minor tuning tools vs the hard work you've now out into a strong foundation for the tank to do well upon.

 

[sgrosenb]

Thanks @stephj03 that's good to hear. At this juncture, here are the takeaways that I've gotten from this thread:

1. Growing SPS successfully is hard
2. My tank may benefit from lower CO2. I am opening my windows and periodically using a CO2 scrubber for potential benefit.
3. Kalkwasser is a good way to dose alk/cal. I've read that it can also potentially help keep phosphate in check, which I would welcome given that my PO4 sometimes creeps up. I am going to set up a kalk reactor and use that as a main means of replenishing alk/cal as needed. Maybe I will add a calcium reactor further down the road once my system demands it.
4. Time is one of the most valuable items of all, and I need to give my system more time. It is tough sometimes, being as eager and excited as I am, to wait - but I do believe that things will only get better as we go.

Thanks again for everyone's input. I'll be checking back in in a week or two, or as I see any notable changes worth mentioned. Cheers!

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

My experience and my aquarium. In other words as stated previously ... empirical.

It is extraordinarily difficult to distinguish between bicarbonate and carbonate uptake by corals, and I do not believe typical hobbyists have the biochemical tools to do so, no matter how long one observes a reef tank or under what conditions.

Based on your answer, I do not believe that you accomplished that task, and I do not want to move this to a different thread because it will leave folks here thinking you might be correct and that other advice you are providing that flows from it is good to follow.

If you do also want to debate in a different thread, the one I linked would be perfect, and is already participated in by folks with a keen interest in these sorts of details and how that might impact husbandry techniques.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

1. My tank may benefit from lower CO2. I am opening my windows and periodically using a CO2 scrubber for potential benefit.
2. Kalkwasser is a good way to dose alk/cal. I've read that it can also potentially help keep phosphate in check, which I would welcome given that my PO4 sometimes creeps up. I am going to set up a kalk reactor and use that as a main means of replenishing alk/cal as needed. Maybe I will add a calcium reactor further down the road once my system demands it.

I have to apologize for what has happened here (this being my forum on chemistry), but I think you have been misled by the discussion of "false alkalinity". I should have commented and diverted the discussion immediately on seeing it.

While I am a proponent of maintaining normal to high pH, I think it is unlikely that a tank that has pH equal to or above 7.8 will change dramatically on raising pH.

In your case, you say:

" pH ranges from 8.0-8.3 like clockwork throughout the day "

IMO, there is zero chance you are going to fix some large perceived problem by raising the pH.

I have been dealing with reef chemistry questions and experiences online for 30 years, pH is a very common one. I have likely dealt with more than a thousand different cases of pH "issues". That knowledge coupled with being a chemist informs me on how to comment on such a question, and to suggest that your issue is not enough carbonate truly misses the mark (IMO).

 

[HuduVudu]

I do not want to move this to a different thread because it will leave folks here thinking you might be correct and that other advice you are providing that flows from it is good to follow.

Heaven forbid that I might be correct.

Based on your answer, I do not believe that you accomplished that task

Wow! Without even allowing me to present my arguments you have formed your conclusion. How very scientific of you. You are what I have come to believe you are.

Also you might want to note that I accurately predicted and then solved the OP's problem.

It is extraordinarily difficult to distinguish between bicarbonate and carbonate uptake by corals, and I do not believe typical hobbyists have the biochemical tools to do so, no matter how long one observes a reef tank or under what conditions.

So your eyes and brain are useless tools, got it. I have only one point to make to you. If bicarbonate is so good for hard coral growth then why bother with higher PH why not just flood the tank with bicarbonate. Also why are the environmentalists screaming about ocean acidfication that seems counter-intuitive.

Unfortunately I can't ignore you, but rest assured I won't be responding to anything that you say. It seems that you are more interested in how smart you appear to other people than actual investigation and discovery (the root of the scientific process). Good luck with your aquarium.