the 1700g stingray reef

[Travis]

Energy, the tanks is looking great. Really like that efflo!

Carman, thanks for the update and pics!

[Energy]

I've been running a reverse flow recirculating rowaphos reactor that spazz built for me. Since I've consistantly had coral burn every time new media was added I have begun to run the effluent from the reactor through the wetneck of "Big Ugly". I've noticed that even after weeks of the reactor running I still pull red skimmate. The entire collection cup and neck are bright red. This happens even after the rowaphos reactor has had weeks to settle in. This is telling me that the rowaphos is constantly leaching fine red particulate matter into the aquarium. Since running it through the wet neck which is now my "red neck" skimmer cup the corals haven't showed any signs of burning.

[jnarowe]

I was just discussing this issue with another local reefer and I am planning on running all effluent through a sock. I have had trouble with some LPS and I believe it may be associated with the Rowa/carbon fines getting into my system. Thanks so much for posting about this issue as I may have never figured it out on my own!

[sherm71tank]

That was one hell of (dude there was mud flying everywhere!)a burn out!!!! Anyhow, I will keep an eye on my sock for abnormal color. As usual I leave your pad more educated than when I went.

[jnarowe]

my wife is the one with the "pads" dude...but thanks for the great burn out...I am sure my neighbors loved it. Good thing they are all afraid of me!

[sherm71tank]

I'm sure it was much more fun for me!!!!!

[Lunchbucket]

Energy - great updates man. you have a beautiful tomini tang in there!!

also where did you get the 2 snowflake clowns (i think that is what htey call them)?? the amazingly unique. they are the background pic on my computer. i like the little solid orange male? the best.

hope Travis and i can make a trip up and see the tank again soon!
Lunchbucket

[melev]

I run a RowaPHOS material in a Phosban Reactor. My system is only 330g of water, and I'm using about 2" of media. The first 5g goes into a bucket, just like a mini water change. I'm not experiencing bad effects with my corals right after making the change. If anything, they seem to be perking up lately.

I can't believe your cup is turning red in the skimmate. Do you have a lot of flow going through the media? Mine barely wiggles at the very surface.

[drummereef]

Unreal. Those pics are outstanding - thanks!

[Jeffie]

I would think that the particles that you are getting back in your skimmer may be from too much flow thru the reactor also.. When I re-fill my phosban reactor with ROWA- I do the same as Melev and let the first few gallons dump into a container that I discard and after that there are not particles that leach out back into the aquarium. The flow thru the reactor is very slow though. You can just see a slight tumbling at the surface of the media..

[KEEPERZ]

energy-just changed out my rowaphos last
night for my 700g, stuck the reactor in a 50g
rubbermaid garbage can with some salt water,
let it run for a couple hours so the media could
settle out.Once it does,I set it back into the sump
and run the effluent into a 100 micron filter sock for
safe keeping. Been doing this the same way in my
stocked 450 for a couple years with no problems to
the acros,barely let the top of the media shimmer
and soon all po4 is ghost-using the merk/deltec test
kit.

[Energy]

My reactor runs very slowly plus I let 100 gallons run through it prior to putting it into my system. The reactor spazz built is adjustable so I can control the flow. The top of my media barely wiggles as well. My point is even though it appears that no media fines are being released, my skimmer cup says otherwise. I can see the media and it does not appear that any contaminated (media clouded) water is recirculating into the system. My other skimmer which does not have the effluent running into the wetneck does not pick anything up. The media that is released is so super fine (not even visible) that it probably settles out prior to getting picked up by our skimmers under normal circumstances. Only by running 100% of the effluent directly into the wetneck of the skimmer am I able to get the red skimmate. I doubt if a 100 micron sock would pick it up- but it's better than directly releasing it into the water without straining. I will be trying the new Warner Marine phos r product. It is supposed to have large particules and be able to get the phospahte level near zero. According to their advertising it can be used without a reactor as well. I have heard great reviews on the product and already placed an order.

[Energy]

LUNCH - you and the T-Man should come over soon. Catch ya later.

[melev]

It seems to me that if you run 100g of water through the media, you'll lose a lot of its potential to absorb PO4.

[jnarowe]

Please update us on the new media. So what is the working theory behind Rowa et. al. harming corals? Is it that the fines are clogging the epidural pores and choking off the coral's ability to respirate?

About the red carpet...one of our LFS just got in a blue one that was at least 18" across and it was sweet. I have never seen a red one...are there any in captivity that you know of?

[onehundred20]

seen a few red ones around, barely see them for sale though...i noticed some byropsis near some acros(i think thats how its spelled) any plan of attack for that?

[Energy]

Jnarowe- These are just my theories, but I have a few. First the Rowa clarifies the water to the extent that coral burning occurs. Also the rowa can strip the phosphates out of the water very fast. This rapid reduction in phosphates can be harmful to the zooxanthaele (sp?) in the corals which partially utilize them as a nutrient source. Third the continual release of unseen particules that could be landing on the corals would probably cause a chemical burn to occur.

Jnarowe- Red Carpets are rare and not very hardy. Caquarium usually has a few a year which are always sold out. There are also orange carpets but I've only seen one picture and never any for sale.

One hundred 20- Thats' what the rowaphos is for. I'm takeing away the nutrient feeding the hair algae. The algae's there because I quit running Rowa due to coral burn. Now by running it through the wetneck I've seen very small problems with new batches of Rowa.

Melev- Yes I lose some potential to absorb the PO4 but I also reduce the potential to lose corals at the start up of a new batch. I might be a little over paranoid but until I get it down just right that's the way I'll proceed.

[jnarowe]

I am surprised you have an algal problem with all the algae eating animals you have in that system. I popped a sea hare into mine and it ate every last nub of grape caulerpa in the tank. Maybe you should try that too? I know they can be a problem if they die, but I had one die and just grabbed it out of the tank. It did not affect my system at all and you have even more water volume than I. It is a real work horse and ineteresting to watch as well. (OK...so it's ugly as sin but I like it! )

I have been running Rowa (and clones) since day one and have had a few corals die. My biggest problem has been with LPS for some reason. Since you have been discussing this, I started keeping a log of when I change the media to see if there is a correlation.

If I run across a red carpet I will let you know.

[maxxII]

Originally posted by melev
It seems to me that if you run 100g of water through the media, you'll lose a lot of its potential to absorb PO4.

Marc,
how so? If Energy has a 1700 gallon system, what difference is 100 gallons through the media prior going to make? I realize if he's not using enough media for his system, but if he's got the right amount in his reactor, 100 gallons shouldnt make a difference. Might be a waste of water, but thats a different matter and subjective I would think....

Just curious,

Nick

[dgasmd]

Originally posted by Energy
Jnarowe- These are just my theories, but I have a few. First the Rowa clarifies the water to the extent that coral burning occurs. Also the rowa can strip the phosphates out of the water very fast. This rapid reduction in phosphates can be harmful to the zooxanthaele (sp?) in the corals which partially utilize them as a nutrient source. Third the continual release of unseen particules that could be landing on the corals would probably cause a chemical burn to occur.

1. A few misconceptions to clarify here if I may. Rowa or any other PO4 removing compound DOES NOT clarify water at all. They do remove PO4, silicates, arsenic, and a few other things, but binding tanins and other things that may make your water yellow or less clear is not one of them.

2. The removing the PO4 too quickly theory is nothing more than an RC thing. Think about it. Water in the ocean where corals come from, even in lagunal environments, has a 100 fold lower PO4 content than most tanks with very low PO4. If anything, corals would tend to perish when exposed to high PO4 enviroments like our tanks, so bringing them closer to cleaner water devoid of PO4 will do no harm, bleach, or burn corals. Does this happen in your tank when you do a large water change with newly mixed water that obviously has a very much lower level of PO4 than your tank water? Of course not.

3. I do agree with you on the particle theory. The fine continued release of these particles do land on the corals and their mucous covering. That in itself can have a huge impact as a chemica burn on the coral.

Originally posted by Energy
One hundred 20- Thats' what the rowaphos is for. I'm takeing away the nutrient feeding the hair algae. The algae's there because I quit running Rowa due to coral burn. Now by running it through the wetneck I've seen very small problems with new batches of Rowa.

Macroalgae, which is pretty much anything we see in our tanks short of cyano, is not dependant or limited by PO4 for growth. They are limited by nitrates though. As a matter of fact, macroalges are extremely poor at binding PO4. They do need it, like anything alive, but our tanks even at 0 readings of PO4 have more than plenty for algae, corals, fish, and anything else growing there. If you want to grow macro to compete witht he macro in the tank or deplete nitrates, a refugium is a much better solution for this. One other thing to keep in mind is that rowa and allt he Fe based PO4 removers also dissolve a good amount of Fe in the water, which in itself fuels macroalgae growth.

I am only pointing these out because I see this being written all the time here and it just continues to get propagated without real scientific basis. Keeping an aquarium doing well is a combination of things at least in my mind: luck, art, dedication, paying attention to details, knowledge, money, etc........

One things you may try is adding strontium weekly. It tends to fuel and speed up the growth of coraline algae, which in itself competes with nuisance algae for room. No scientific basis for this though, but it is something I see in my tank over and over.

[jnarowe]

I just spent several hours getting rid of coraline algae!

dgasmd: I agree that really the only negative impact from Fe media would be the fines irritating the corals themselves, if in fact that does happen. I suppose that iron in solution well above natural SW levels may have an impact on corals though.

Too often we relate tank problems to some thing that is easy to "see". And using Fe media to control HA is probably not the best approach since iron does fuel plant growth.

I just read within the last 2 days a post where someone wrote that large tanks don't need as much water changes and I just about fell off my chair! That person clearly doesn't understand the dynamics of water changes nor the trouble we can get into with large tanks should we do less water changes. Once something gets out-of-control (visible), it is very tough to get the tank parameters back in line with a large water volume.

The other thing about Energy's tank is the incredible variety of animals and corals present and while it is a huge system, there must be some fairly significant chemical warfare going on as well as an occassional death that releases toxins into the system. The subject of skimming comes up a lot and I have seen a few posts about "overskimming" and stripping the nutrients from the water. Maybe this was the case with Energy's tank? I find that hard to believe, again because of all the bio mass in the system. We may never know what caused his recent problems, but I did notice some kind of a "domino" affect with the HA, the snail die-off etc. Snails are fairly hardy and I still wonder what happened to them. They usually just die of "old age". I think whatever killed the snails may ultimately be the culprit.

[melev]

Originally posted by maxxII
Marc,
how so? If Energy has a 1700 gallon system, what difference is 100 gallons through the media prior going to make? I realize if he's not using enough media for his system, but if he's got the right amount in his reactor, 100 gallons shouldnt make a difference. Might be a waste of water, but thats a different matter and subjective I would think....

Just curious,

Nick

It is purely my own personal theory. I hate wasting anything, and on some level I worry that if I rinse something such as RowaPHOS, I'm getting less bang for my buck. Rather than use tap water to rinse it which does contain PO4, I used to use RO/DI water to get the fines out but not decrease its PO4-removal abilities.

However, I ran into the problem of switching it from the rinse system to reinstalling it in the sump. At that point, a big volume of air would be pumped into th reactor, which would create a mini atomic puff of media in the reactor and send more fines into suspension and out into the sump. So now I just hook it up in sump, and run a longer piece of tubing from the reactor to a nearby bucket, and turn on the pump. It takes about 20 minutes or so to push out about 3 to 4 gallons of red effluent. Once I can see through the reactor and it is clear above the media to the top, I disconnect the longer tubing and put the effluent into the sump.

My reactor is in the skimmer section, but the pump is in the prop section (or return section). The effluent returns in the skimmer section before the bubble trap. If any fines are making it through that into the prop section, my corals seem completely unaffected in that zone. And then that water travels back up to the reef, and those seem to be fine as well.

[onehundred20]

i was also told to slowly add the rowa in as lower the po4(same for nitrates) quickly would shock the corals, but isnt that like saying having "filling the garage with carbon monoxide, and someone telling you not to open the garage door; that the rapid reduction in carbon monoxide levels would in some way be more harmful to you"

[dgasmd]

Originally posted by onehundred20
i was also told to slowly add the rowa in as lower the po4(same for nitrates) quickly would shock the corals, but isnt that like saying having "filling the garage with carbon monoxide, and someone telling you not to open the garage door; that the rapid reduction in carbon monoxide levels would in some way be more harmful to you"

One of the best analogies to this subject I've heard in a long time. Same goes for the salts in the market. Don't mix salts or your tank will crash! As if all the points from the collection to the holding facility, to the shipper/exporter, to the importer, re-bagger or wholesaler, store, and finally you all use exactly the same salt!!

Anyway, my apologies to Energy if we have derailed the thread enough, but I thought the clarifications about the rowa and PO4 absorbers was important and legitimate as it pertained to the subject.

[KEEPERZ]

If these "fines" from the media are harming corals, wouldn't we see bad reactions from our clams also?