No Lights for 3 Days Every Couple of Months Works Wonders!

[RichConley]

Nothing has been glossed over? You left Mr. Kelly off that list of results.

[Aquabucket]

I would hardly call that glossing over things just an honest mistake on my part. When compiling the last list I hit the submit button instead of the preview button after copying and pasting the previous list. Due to editing time constraints I had to add the new data in a hurry. I assure you his info will be added to the next update.

On a side note I have several alveopora frags in my tank and they also take a few days to expand fully afterwards.

[HowardW]

Aquabucket,

How about a few caveats to the premise of the original idea, tell me what you think?

1) Tanks with primarily acros or other high PAR requiring specimens may want to only try this for 2 days at first and see how it goes.

2) Some species of Xenia typically don't like to go more than a day without any light (in my experiences).

3) People with tanks in a room that get no direct or indirect sun or other sources of ambient light may also want to start with a 2 day trial period and see how it goes.

4) Increasing the surface water agitation before beginning may be a good idea to increase oxygen exchange.

5) Careful examination of more sensitive corals with a flashlight every 24 hrs. and stopping the experiment if any show severe signs of stress.


I apologize in advance if any or all of these ideas have already been posted.....it's a long thread :-)

[drummereef]

Originally posted by RichConley
...I'm looking for more people who aren't starting out with horrible cyano.

My tank has no trace of cyano at all, nor does it have a hair algae or diatom problem. I have the usual buildup on the glass that I scrape off every couple days. But for the most part my tank is without issue. I'm now 25.5 hours into the treatment. My tank has been set up for over 10 years and all my corals are healthy. I'm not doing this to cure an issue, just to see what the results can be for my tank.

[Abynum1]

Rich, Mr Kelly is on a list, it's the same one you're on...
"People who post here for no reason other than to troll for an argument."
Really,from your 1st post on,what have you contributed?
Nothing! You were searching for an argument from the start.
Same as mr kelly did.
Go back and reread his 1st post where he referred to us as newbies and unread.
Yea he was "tactful"...that was a tactful way of calling us stupid.
Then you come in with guns blazing,yet accuse us of mistreating people?
At least mr kelly did have a point even if he did run it in the ground and had no idea how to speak to people.
You on the other hand say you read the entire thread but instead of posting an opinion,experience, or something, you instead choose to start attacking people.
Wow, did you not get enough arguing over in the lfs vs online thread?

[Abynum1]

Drummerreef, 10 years?
I'd like to get some some of your sand...
It will be interesting to see if you have any noticeable results after the 3 days.

[Aquabucket]

Originally posted by HowardW
Aquabucket,

How about a few caveats to the premise of the original idea, tell me what you think?

1) Tanks with primarily acros or other high PAR requiring specimens may want to only try this for 2 days at first and see how it goes.

2) Some species of Xenia typically don't like to go more than a day without any light (in my experiences).

3) People with tanks in a room that get no direct or indirect sun or other sources of ambient light may also want to start with a 2 day trial period and see how it goes.

4) Increasing the surface water agitation before beginning may be a good idea to increase oxygen exchange.

5) Careful examination of more sensitive corals with a flashlight every 24 hrs. and stopping the experiment if any show severe signs of stress.


I apologize in advance if any or all of these ideas have already been posted.....it's a long thread :-)

No need to apologize! And your observations have merit.

Your advice for acros was something I emphasized early on. Until we can get a better understanding of what causes RTN events these black-out may always pose a risk to certain colonies. A lack of light is most likely not a factor to cause RTN but other resulting issues may arise such as local PH swings, etc...

As for the xenia troubles encountered with Icefire's tank if you saw the condition of his tank beforehand its no wonder his Xenia was having troubles. In fact he just posted recently of more melting events and other serious tank issues. To be quite frank his tank is a mess and has been for some time. The other xenia problem encountered by vol_reefer occurred to a very small portion of his total population. The RTN event he had was limited to a very small unestablished frag.

On another note I have no control over how other people are going to respond to others like a few did with MR. Kelly. Quite frankly I look forward to his responses even though we have different opinions on some things. I really respect his work and dedication to gonipora and feel he is great asset to this site. He also brought up vary valid points that needed to be addressed. He did chime in off the bat in a bit of a condescending manner.

The only thing I have little tolerance for is when one's views are presented in a condescending manner and I hope these types of attitudes could be put aside and allow us to simply observe our results and state those observations. I have repeated this notion several times in this thread.

Doing black-outs are nothing new and that's been acknowledged several times.

Running a thread like this for me has been no easy task. I never claimed to have all the answers. I never stated you all have to try this. In my first post I simply asked if any-one else was doing them on a regular basis like I have. I merely posted here to share my own personal experience and findings.

[RichConley]

Originally posted by Abynum1
Rich, Mr Kelly is on a list, it's the same one you're on...
"People who post here for no reason other than to troll for an argument."
Really,from your 1st post on,what have you contributed?
Nothing! You were searching for an argument from the start.
Same as mr kelly did.
Go back and reread his 1st post where he referred to us as newbies and unread.
Yea he was "tactful"...that was a tactful way of calling us stupid.
Then you come in with guns blazing,yet accuse us of mistreating people?
At least mr kelly did have a point even if he did run it in the ground and had no idea how to speak to people.
You on the other hand say you read the entire thread but instead of posting an opinion,experience, or something, you instead choose to start attacking people.
Wow, did you not get enough arguing over in the lfs vs online thread?

Who did I attack? Please quote where I was attacking someone.


You're the one making attacks. If you can't handle having a level conversation on an online forum, maybe you should put the keyboard away.

[Aquabucket]

Please guys lets stop all the ballyhoo and get back on topic.

[Abynum1]

"Its horrifying. I've never seen people seeking understanding so ruthlessly driven away. You guys are worse than the zeovit people."

"Its like the inquisition in here."

Those are truely the makings of a "level conversation."
Thanks, that helped out a lot. Afew more posts like that and we should really make progress.

[RichConley]

Originally posted by Abynum1
"Its horrifying. I've never seen people seeking understanding so ruthlessly driven away. You guys are worse than the zeovit people."

"Its like the inquisition in here."

Thanks, that helped out a lot. Afew more posts like that and we should really make progress.

Everything I said was true. You drove Mr. Kelly out of this thread because he didnt agree with you. Now you're attacking me because you dont agree with me.


Again, part of discussion is that it has to go both ways. It can't go both ways when you insult everyone on their first post that doesnt agree with yours.

You're just making my point here. I came in, made a comment you didnt agree with, and you started with personal insults. Thats not productive.

[Aquabucket]

And yes Rich whether you want to admit it or not some of your posts have a tough and often over dramatic edge to them. Posts like that a sure way to ruffle some feathers.

[Abynum1]

I don't agree with you???
Agree with what???
Did you post anything related to the topic and I somehow missed it?
Go both ways??
You don't have a way! You just started arguing!!
So no I guess I don't agree.
Can we stop this "level conversation" and get back to the topic now?

[RichConley]

Originally posted by Aquabucket
And yes Rich whether you want to admit it or not some of your posts have a tough and often over dramatic edge to them. Posts like that a sure way to ruffle some feathers.

That was exactly what I intended with my first post. You guys drove off atleast two posters (Mr. Kelly, and michaeltwana) who had very valid questions and points.

Did we just have a mod posed question about this the other day? About how someone makes a point in a thread, and then everyone hops on the bandwagon and beats the hell out of anyone who disagrees? Thats whats happening here.

We need to get back to discussing this, instead of flaming everyone who it doesnt work out well for.

(Ab, I've had very little problem with your posts...its some others)

[Aquabucket]

Originally posted by RichConley
Everything I said was true. You drove Mr. Kelly out of this thread because he didnt agree with you. Now you're attacking me because you dont agree with me.

Again, part of discussion is that it has to go both ways. It can't go both ways when you insult everyone on their first post that doesnt agree with yours.

You're just making my point here. I came in, made a comment you didnt agree with, and you started with personal insults. Thats not productive.

But Rich your first comments had little to do with the subject at hand and more to do with other posters. Some of the adjectives you used were poorly chosen IMO. Mr. Kelly's first post could have been viewed as condescending to many who have participated in this thread.

Lets all sit back and realize we all have a passion for this hobby and remember that this is something that should keep us corresponding on a more respectful level.

[Abynum1]

For the record rich, I was rooting for you on the lfs vs online thread,

[RichConley]

Originally posted by Abynum1
For the record rich, I was rooting for you on the lfs vs online thread, lol

LFS owners drive me nuts. Watching (some of) them is like watching Al Davis try to run the Raiders.



Honestly, I think you guys may be onto something here, but I really just dont like the tone this thread has had. I'll go back and look at Mr. Kelly's posts again, but I didnt see anything condescending about them. Yeah, he got a little testy, but only after being belittled a whole bunch.

Sorry, its not just this thread. I've just noticed a LOT of this on RC lately, and it bugs me. People are too quick to squash anyone who disagrees with them.

[kslick]

I don't think we are quick to squash someone, but when a thread is about a certain topic like modding nano streams or like this one, certain people come on here to start a debate, instead keeping it light hearted and staying with the conversation at hand. The whole debating thing gets really old, unless the thread reads "lets debate protein skimmers or whatever".

[Aquabucket]

Originally posted by RichConley
Honestly, I think you guys may be onto something here, but I really just dont like the tone this thread has had. I'll go back and look at Mr. Kelly's posts again, but I didnt see anything condescending about them. Yeah, he got a little testy, but only after being belittled a whole bunch.

Whether intended or not some of his quotes could be interpreted as condescending to a few experienced reefers who have participated in this thread.

Originally posted by John Kelly
Doing a black-out for two or three days has been a regularly recommended and used method for getting rid of problem cyanobacteria (slime algae) and dinoflagellates for YEARS. It is important to point out that this is nothing new. Anyone who is surprised by the results of this technique must be fairly new to reefkeeping, or unread.

Even though this notion was posted earlier in the thread.
as an experienced reefer I was surprised by the results.

Originally posted by John Kelly
Keeping an optimum environment for fish and corals will consistently give optimal results in their health and growth, and I think that any experienced reef keeper would look at this black-out method just the same as they already have for years ........as a quick fix technique to temporarily cover for poor tank conditions.

The use of the phrase "any experienced reefkeepers" could be interpreted as being condescending. A large number of participants here are not suffering from poor tank conditions.

Originally posted by John Kelly
I think most corals would be quite "happy" to get their light back.
Oh wait......they really do look happy afterwards don't they...

Holy Cow!! What a GREAT IDEA I have !!! Let's starve the corals of light for a few days so that they look happy for a few days afterward!! Anyone want to research this with me?

More condescending remarks IMO.

Also using terms like "hopping the bandwagon" does little to acknowledge those who made informed decisions with regard to the subject.

So lets try to continue this thread with more respect for each other and their opinions and not belittle those who think differently.

[pledosophy]

Originally posted by Abynum1
pledosophy,do you do a water change afterwards? If so,how much?
Also, what type of corals do you keep?
Thanks for the input, it's nice to hear from someone that has been doing this for years, very reassuring.

For me it all started innocently enough. I had an eclipse light burn out, took me a few days to get funds for a new ballast. Noticed after the three days that the cyano was gone and algae was greatly reduced. That was on my 18g which held 3 seahorses, 2 damsels, a manderin, a clown a few crabs including a horseshoe, and a few soft corals. I was a newb and an idiot, had been in the hobby for a couple months, still believed the LFS.

SInce then my care levels and stocking density's are much much better, but the no light thing still works for me. I have been doing it around once a month since April or May of 01.

In the last six years I have kept many many corals. Mostly all softies until 2005. Including several species of zoo's and mushrooms, several species of leathers, a colt, kenya tree, xenia, a few different gorgs, some clove polyps, etc. In 2005 I moved and setup a prop tank growing out mostly mushrooms and LPS (frog spawns, hammers, torch corals, bubble corals, lobophylia's, cynaria's, etc, etc.) Since around August of 2006 I have moved into SPS and Clams. I keep mostly acro frags and have a monti cap.

All of these corals and the clam show no ill effect from the dark period.

I did have some problems with green grape caulphera in my display tank, but that was the only problem I have seen.

I do a waterchange around once a wek or so but no, I do not intentioanlly plan to do one after the dark period, but it usually happens within a day or two.

On new tanks if I get the cyano as part of the cycle I have always found that three days with no light will kill the cyano, and always do a waterchange after that.

I hope that helps, it's just my observation of what has happenend in my systems.

[pledosophy]

Originally posted by RichConley

Sorry, its not just this thread. I've just noticed a LOT of this on RC lately, and it bugs me. People are too quick to squash anyone who disagrees with them.

Been reading your own posts again Rich?

[melev]

Rich, I see it as well. And that is why I've been involved in this thread since the get-go, trying to keep it peaceful. My impressions were that people were going out of their way to shut down any interest in this thread, and that bothers me.

And regarding the other thread, that was started by a TeamRC member, not a Moderator.

[TriniStylez]

Wow...Hadn't read this thread in a while! Its getting pretty intense. I have to agree that people who disagree with new experiments (if Im allowed to call this that...) do get "jumped" on pretty quickly sometimes BUT often times they themselves are "jumping" all over a new idea and shooting it down. Personally, I can't understand the need for the scientific data and controlled experiments, if it works, it works! Melev was right when he said that most of us are just trying to have fun and enjoy the hobby, don't need to know why it works, just that it does (something along those lines). I really couldn't imagine going through life only doing things because they had been proven and the results were clear...boring. I love this "new" idea and REALLY love the results so far.

Speaking of results, I guess its been about a week and...

No algae or Cyano has come back, Keep going to use my magnet to clean the glass to find, well, not much of anything...Sand has never been so white and clean! I love it!!!

[snadaud]

DISCLAIMER : THIS IS PURE SPECULATION DON"T LOOK FOR ANY HARD FACTS HERE !
I have no recorded data or any measurement of any kind to back up this speculation, it is purely for the pleasure of speculating.

...Also I may have misunderstood the meaning of the articles I linked...

It seems that too high levels of oxygens are detrimental to corals and that it is a problem for bleached corals :
"In more detail, the quantity and quality of photosynthetic products is a major factor. In particular, the production of oxygen by zooxanthellae can be especially problematic. Excess oxygen, especially in forms where singlet oxygen radicals are produced, or when coupled with water to form hydrogen peroxide, can be damaging to coral tissue."
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/2/coral

http://www.springerlink.com/content/n114121643pw5055/
Is it conceivable that some tanks are "over"lighted, at least in relation to certain corals which might need lower light levels and that some corals do accumulate higher than normal oxygen levels within their tissues over time (like we do when doing many dives on a few consecutive days for nitrogen) ? Is it further possible that seemingly healthy corals may in fact be dealing with these elevated levels and be partly inhibited because they have excess oxygen levels in their tissues ?


In this case, could the brief period of darkness actually help the zooxanthellae use up this excess oxygen stored and thus "detoxify" the tissue ? Could that be an alternate explanation to some of the seemingly healthier looking corals when the light is back on ?

Conversely most acros which would probably not suffer from over-exposure would not be so happy for being "cured" of a problem they don't have.

I do not currently have problems with algae at the moment and did not ever try the 3 days dark out. However I occasionnaly switch of my MH off for 1 day with just the actinics on and my mushroom open much larger than usual for a few days afterwards.

Could another alternate reason for larger than usual polyp extension (other than being starved and hungry) be that as some of the nuisance algae dies, whatever is not pulled off by the skimmer becomes prey for the corals ?

Once again this is pure speculation on my part, please do not take any of this for fact or for an easy reason to flame me

[Aquabucket]

snadaud ~ Thanks for sharing your findings! Any info that can help provide some answers in which extended dark periods can play a role in the overall health of our corals and livestock is appreciated!