
|
|
FAQs on Marine Water Supplements, Science
Related Articles: Marine System Additives,
Marine Maintenance, Understanding
Calcium & Alkalinity,
Related FAQs: Marine Supplements 1,
Marine Supplements 2, Marine
Supplements 3, Marine Supplements 4,
& FAQs on Marine Supplement: Rationale/Use,
Measuring, Using,
Troubleshooting/Fixing... Products/DIY &
Brands, & Biominerals,
Iodine, Calcium and Alkalinity, |
|
Trace
Element Questions Dear Bob, I have an 810 gallon tank with
variety of soft and hard corals, but not as many as I would like. I also
have cleaner shrimp, filter feeders and two rock urchins plus plenty of
algae. I presently feed the corals trace elements which the pet store
recommended. I feed 140ml of Tech M, 140ml of Tech I, 70ml of strontium
and molybdenum, 80ml of coral-Vite, MicroVert, and calcium. All these
are Kent Marine products, since that is only available to me. Could you
tell me if these are enough? Could you also tell me why these elements
are important for the corals or where to find out this info ? I would
desperately like to know about these so called "trace elements" and any
other recommendations you may have. Thank you very much for your
assistance. >> Thank you for writing. This is quite some tank...
and yes to the various chemical additives you are placing... if two
conditions exist: You are boosting your photosynthetic animals growth
with intense light as well, and you have a desire to do so. It's
important to be clear here, so allow me to state the above in a
different way. In such a large system, you may well be
under-illuminating the corals... less than they can take up the
supplements you're adding (here's where the real value of test kits come
in)... And/or alternatively, you may have little interest in boosting
their metabolism/growth. If indeed you do have a LOT of lighting (as
measured by a PAR meter, or a lumen meter at the animals placement, or
by bioassay... the animals' growth)... then the cost of supplementing,
versus supplying "enough" minerals, alkalinity, trace elements,
vitamins... exogenously (via supplementation) might well be "worth it".
On the other hand, if by the measures listed, and your desire
(maintenance, slow growth versus something more robust)... the light
issue and supplementing question are irrelevant... You don't "need" much
of either. Now, on the issue of "where to find the info." on coral
husbandry, scientific topics of nutrition/growth... in the hobby
literature, start with Fossa (Sven) and Nilsen (Alf), Modern Coral Reef
Aquarium series... two volumes in English currently (more in other
languages if you can read them). For science... start with "subscribing"
to the Coral List Servs... and following their threads, information
sources listed there: coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov (type in the
word subscribe in the text area and send)... And, we'll be chatting.
Bob Fenner Trace Element Toxicity/ Safe Additives Hello
there, I am writing with some concern. Please feel free to direct me
to the appropriate link regarding this question so that I may read for
myself...I could not find it on my own, searching your site with key
words "additive toxicity; supplement toxicity." I just read (or did my
best to read and comprehend) an article in the most recent issue of an
online reef keeping magazine. The topic was in regards to Trace Element
Toxicity (?). This gentleman (a PhD) warns that the trace elements that
reef keepers add (I assume in forms of commercial additives) to their
tanks create a ticking time bomb. <thank you for your discretion
about the author, etc... rest assured that I do know exactly who you are
talking about. Many industry professionals have an interesting
perspective on this chap's views. My opinion is that much (even most!)
of what he has to say in general is very important and useful for the
hobby. However, enough of it is so ridiculous and far-fetched as to be
patently inaccurate if not harmful to aquarists that do not have enough
experience or knowledge yet to make an informed decision. My criticism
of his more controversial opinions (additive toxicity, high aquarium
temperatures, telling new aquarists to feed shovels full of food to
their tanks before they even know how to work a skimmer, etc) is based
on one crucial argument: he hasn't lived the practical and commercial
side of the industry to fairly make such statements. He hasn't been a
wholesaler, retailer or merchant in charge of tens of thousands of
gallons of livestock systems. Hasn't been a fish farmer, or a coral
farmer... hasn't spent years collecting fishes and navigating them
through import... any of the previous would impart considerable
experience and wisdoms on the practical aspects of aquarium husbandry
and water quality dynamics by virtue of the volume of water and animals
held (and done so with great care for how much $ is involved!). Are any
or all of the previous necessary to speak on the topic: absolutely not.
But by the same token... tossing around a PhD earned on the field study
of temperate species decades ago has little to do with tropical
aquariums today.> He states that in NSW, the trace elements are
significantly lower than what would be found in hobbyists' reef tanks.
This addition/abundance of unnecessary trace elements in aquaria in time
will ultimately kill everything. <20 years of reefkeeping stands in
stark contrast to this theory> Am I making sense...I am not even sure
how to phrase my question. <you are understood clearly> My
understanding is that excess elements can be absorbed by the algae,
coral, and inverts to a point, but when they die, they release the trace
elements back into the system, causing a spike in the amount of elements
to the system...a dangerous thing. <are you planning on massive die
offs?> This is why it would be advisable to siphon out detritus and
non-coralline micro-algae, besides for aesthetics. The writer contends
that anything above the amounts/levels found in NSW is responsible for
premature death to the inhabitants. <heehee... he also suggests
keeping reef aquariums at 86F because that's what the water was like in
Fiji the when he dived there (he also uses skewed NOAH data)... of
course, the following year Fiji experienced the worst bleaching event in
history for those high temps as filmed and documented by Dr Bruce
Carlson who has more dive time logged in one year than the PhD author,
you and me combined will in a lifetime> According to the writer, the
corals we purchase are either pollution tolerant or have mutated into a
species that can sustain the excess trace elements <that's funny...
so they have mutated on an evolutionary scale of 10 -20 years but 2000
years of domestication with the cat and we still can't get the little
bastards to some when called. His theory is too convenient> (I was
also reading a debate he was having with chemists in an online
forum...ReefCentral I believe... this previous statement was not in the
article). Anyway, I am considering stopping the intentional introduction
of trace elements into my tank. <whoa! partner...lets reconsider
this if you actually want your corals to grow> The writer also stated
(I think in his forum debate) that all commercial salts include trace
elements and that these are much higher concentrations than found in
NSW. <that is true by necessity because if they were AT NSW then
every tank would need daily 100% water changes to stay at NSW levels. By
mixing high... we start at little above NSW and end a little below NSW
and that serves the greater good for most aquarists that don't want to
be a slave to water changes. For what its worth... if I was going to
stop supplements... I would simply do large weekly water changes for
supplementation. A fine idea IMO... just laborious and not for the same
reasons that the Dr professes> My only additive is called Oceans
Blend, which contains 70 elements (on the label)...it's a two-part
additive with the trace elements added to the Ca part, Alk part is just
Alk/Ph mixture. Maybe I'm sounding like I don't understand what's going
on, but I am concerned about the life in my tank. <a knee-jerk
reaction caused by an author that knows how to keep himself employed
with controversy perhaps :p> Am I doing more harm than good? The
writer stated that corals and other life can be sustained in such
polluted environment (i.e., our tanks) for about 5 years at best before
succumbing to "old tank syndrome," when the system/life ceases to
function at all.
<hahahahahhahha......Hehehehehe......hahahahahhahha. Ahhh... maybe we
should buy him a ticket to Germany to see Stuber, Olsen, Knop, etc tanks
with 10, 15 and 20 year old "poisoned" corals. > Should I add just
plain calcium and ph/alk buffer??? <indeed the foundation. Iodine
has a stable life of about mere hours in SW... I would add a small
amount of iodine too> If I'm getting trace elements in the salt mix
and food, <but not in the ratio that they are consumed in the
tank...> plus from the LR and other unknown sources, then why should
I add additives? <good heavens... can you test for all trace
elements and know what those sources are actually contributing if any at
all? Better yet... can you test for your own dietary trace element and
vitamin input OR does your body take in more than it needs and safely
excretes the rest... understand my friend? Anything to excess can be
toxic but nothing has suggested that aquarists are adding too many trace
elements or iodine, strontium, etc. The suggestion is causing
unnecessary fear!> Can you suggest some products that are just plain
calcium with no trace elements? <why is it that excess or
supplemented calcium is not a poison but trace elements are? Dubious
logic IMO> How will this affect the balance of elements; that is,
aren't some elements toxic or useless without others? Can calcium be
used alone or does it have to react with magnesium or that other long
word that I can't spell (begins with an "S"; strontium or something like
that)? <strontium OR calcium combine with carbonates to make
aragonite> This was just one study he initiated, and it is my opinion
that its conclusions may not justifiably be generalizeable... <I'm
not sure that they are fair if they are even sane...heehee> I
question his methodology (didn't see a lot of info) and would have liked
to of read more about his controls for confounding variables,
reliability measurements, etc. <yep... I'd like to see a year of his
hard science against twenty years of anecdotal evidence from aquarists.
And by the way... aquarists have spent millions of dollars on the
private keeping and study of such organisms in the process and it hasn't
been in vain. We have a lot of corals in captivity that are well over 10
years old. Some much older!> Several of his points were countered by
"chemists" in the debate in the forum...but I don't know if these people
work for additive companies. <I assure you that they have no more
ulterior motives than he does> He does state that aggressive protein
skimming and water changes reduces the amount of trace elements, but is,
as I understand, not enough. He goes so far as to advise the use of NSW
in tanks, for those who can get it...unwise IMO, <WOW...staggeringly
dangerous advice for most new aquarists. He can take credit for killing
a lot of animals with that advice> as I agree with this sites
concerns for the intro of parasites/pests and man made pollutants.
<big time> My apologies if this has been addressed in a previous FAQ.
<nope...thank you!> Thanks a bunch, Randy M. Yniguez, MA <---who
wishes he had paid more attention to his Research Methods instructor in
grad school! <no worries. Even after the above dialogue I will tell
you that I do not use trace elements myself. I simply don't agree that
supplements are toxic the way that most people dose. My preference is
indeed for aggressive protein skimming and frequent water changes
(weekly or more). With kind regards> Re: Trace Element
Toxicity/ Safe Additives Hello there, <cheers, my friend>
Thank you for your comments. <my pleasure> My skepticism and
reassurance from your response will prevent me from doing potential harm
to my tank inhabitants. <good healthy skepticism, indeed.> I will
continue to treat my tank as I have been doing so far with weekly water
changes and careful husbandry/maintenance, as I have so far found
nothing but success <exactly my friend! We don't need to be chemists
to enjoy the hobby... instead we can follow simple established recipes
for success or just look at our animals and tank health to know that
what we are doing is good> (i.e., everything is still
alive/happy/healthy looking; LR has cycled as expected; and water test
parameters indicate a safe environment for my livestock) . In the
future, I will consider just switching to a Ca reactor, <indeed your
best long term solution when used correctly... a little Kalk
supplementation too wouldn't hurt> or supplement with Ca Chloride and
Ph/Alk supplements only, <there are documented problems with Ca
Chloride regular and extended use (skewing ALK dynamic and precipitating
ALK). Simply using Calcium hydroxide and buffer will be fine (mostly
Kalkwasser alone in truth)> without the additional trace elements
mixed into the two-part additives; perhaps additional Iodine as you
suggest. The doctor's article did strike me as peculiar in light of the
testimonials of "successful" reefers on various websites/chats/forums,
many of whom state keeping corals/fish/inverts for many years under
regular/frequent addition of trace elements. <indeed it is the crux
of criticism of our colleague who hasn't lived the industry and
application of the aquarium hobby to the extent that many other
successful folks have. His points may be valid... but theirs are equally
strong or greater IMO. Aquarium science on paper and tested through
clinical trials with sea urchins and their eggs, for example, doesn't
always translate accurately to the real hobby. Heehee... scientists!>
Thank you for your time and insight. Your site's info/input is crucial
for making informed decisions. Thanx a bunch, -RY <---with more
questions/comments to come, in the near future I'm sure <looking
forward to it. Do continue to keep an open mind. With kind regards,
Anthony>
|
|