|
|
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, |
|
Copper and aquatic life
5/26/2010
Hi Bob, There are so many hobbyists are so misinformed about the present
of copper in fish food that I thought the link below “might” clarify the
misconception. Even among the advanced reef keepers still warn fellow
reef keepers the danger of copper in fish food! I thought you might be
interested in this info. As well. Little learning is indeed a dangerous
thing.
<Heeeee! Indeed>
http://www.copper.org/publications/newsletters/innovations/1998/12/water_health.html
Oceans, tidal pools, lakes, rivers, and ponds --all bodies of water that
sustain life-- have copper present as a vital, naturally occurring
element. Its presence as a basic component of the process that spawns
the abundant species that swim, scurry, wiggle and wallow in the waters
of the world has been established by Nature and confirmed by scientists.
It is, simply stated, indispensable because it is necessary for normal
growth in living beings.
"The role of copper in small quantities is essential to marine life,"
says Dr. Karl D. Shearer, Research Fisheries Biologist with the National
Marine Fisheries Service, at the Northwest Fisheries Science Center in
Seattle, Washington.
"It is a key component of enzymes, compounds that act as catalysts in
the metabolism of organisms," says Dr. A. G. Lewis, an oceanographer and
Professor in the Department of Oceanography and Zoology at The
University of British Columbia in Vancouver, B. C., Canada. "Because it
is an essential metal, an adequate supply is necessary for normal
metabolism," he explains
"Copper's main role in the body is through metalloenzymes and enzymes
catalyze many different chemical reactions," says Dr. Kathryn Michel,
Assistant Professor of Nutrition at the University of Pennsylvania
School of Veterinary Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Dr. Michel adds that "the body is full of enzymes and any chemical
reaction in the body has possibly enzymes associated with it. Copper is
a very important component and absolutely essential to the performance
of the enzymes"
She explains that "enzymes are critical to the development of bone
tissue and the production of red blood cells. A copper deficiency would
contribute to anemia."
Put simply, "enzymes won't function without trace minerals such as
copper, which means there's no metabolism," says Dr. Shearer, the
National Marine Fisheries Services biologist, who has worked extensively
in the analysis and development of food for fish. With no metabolism
there would be no energy to fuel the vital processes that sustain life
in creatures.
Aquatic plants, which play an important role in marine life, are no less
reliant on copper. It plays an important role in photosynthesis and
respiration. Like marine animal life, plants get copper from copper that
is dissolved in the water, copper that is present in other particles or
sediment found in the water and copper in their food.
Levels of copper in fresh water and salt water have been found to be
generally low. In the United States studies of raw, untreated surface
water have shown copper content ranging from 0.001 milligrams per liter
to 0.28 milligrams per liter. The mean was 0.015 milligrams per liter.
In open oceans, copper levels ranged from 0.1 milligrams per liter to
0.39 milligrams per liter, with an average of 0.8 milligrams per liter.
These figures show how copper is effective in small quantities. Dr.
Shearer says that "the normal level of copper in whole fish tissue is
one to two parts per million." To measure such tiny amounts requires a
spectro photometer, an instrument that gauges matter by zeroing in all
the way down to atoms in molecules. Scientists heat animal tissue to
extremely high temperatures until atoms begin to emit light. Different
atoms produce light at different wavelengths. So "we measure (light)
wavelength to get to know what elements are present in the tissue of the
fish and we measure the intensity of the light, which tells us the
amount present," says Dr. Shearer.
The amount of copper and other trace minerals in the growth and
development of fish, crustaceans (shellfish) and mollusks such as
oysters and clams may be minute in quantity but enormous in economic
terms. Many of these species are part of the renewable foundation of
fishing, a vast worldwide activity that helps meet a growing demand for
protein.
Commercial and recreational fishing is practiced just about every where
in the world, including such land-locked countries as Bolivia, in South
America, and Azerbaijan, in Asia. Bolivians have been fishing the waters
of Lake Titicaca for centuries, and the valuable caviar industry of the
world is centered in Azerbaijan, on the Caspian Sea. The Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations estimated that in
1997 the world's food fish production reached 90 million tons, an almost
threefold increase since 1960. Almost a third of that catch was raised
on fish farms in a fast-growing commercial process known as aquaculture.
Fish grow under controlled conditions within enclosures and are fed a
carefully balanced diet that invariably includes copper.
At Bio-Oregon, in Warrenton, Oregon, a producer of formulated food for
fish farms, Dr. Dennis Roley, says that "copper has always been a
supplemental trace element." Because copper can be virtually recycled
from healthy animal tissue, fish food industries find copper in organic
forms such as copper sulfate in the offal of edible fish such as salmon
that has already been processed.
By including copper in fish food, fish farmers are replicating what
nature does so well in the wild: providing an environment that nurtures
life and growth. In this respect marine life is similar to other
species.
"The requirements for trace minerals such as copper are pretty steady
among vertebrate animals," says Dr. Shearer. Interestingly, he adds,
crustaceans, such as shrimp, lobster and crab, are in particularly need
of copper because its serves as an oxygen carrier in their blood.
Dr. Lewis, the University of British Columbia oceanographer, notes that
"copper concentrations in crustaceans may be elevated compared with
other groups since many crustaceans use copper in a blood pigment"
That is why, if you look closely, blood on an uncooked shrimp looks
bluish, a typical color of certain forms of oxidized copper. Copper in
marine invertebrates plays the role that among humans is performed by
iron, which is present in blood as hemoglobin.
It doesn't take much copper to perform its critical role in marine
species. Data supplied by Dr. Shearer shows that Atlantic salmon and
Channel catfish require 3 milligrams of copper per kilogram of feed.
Rainbow trout and carp make do on 3 milligrams per kilogram of feed.
Although requirements have not been determined for every marine species,
scientists do know that copper deficiencies in certain species can
result in reduced growth and cataracts, among other symptoms.
Conversely, scientists have observed that overly high presence of copper
in natural waters, due to pollutants or produced experimentally, may
badly damage gills, adversely affect the liver and kidneys of fish or
cause some neurological damage."
Scientists are frequently frustrated in their efforts to study more
closely the effects of too little or too much copper on aquatic species
in the wild because it is unusual to find whole fish that have died
slowly as a result of malnutrition. "In the wild animals with
deficiencies get quickly eaten or decompose," says Dr. Shearer.
Dr. Lewis, who every year prepares a review of copper in the environment
for the International Copper Association, says that copper plays an
important role in other aquatic environments, too. It is a key component
of marine plant life. It is commonly used to purify and distribute
drinking water. It combats the growth of unwanted organisms that foul
water intake lines, aquaculture facilities and the hulls of vessels.
In another link:
http://www.copperinfo.com/health/aquatic.html
The requirements for copper is fairly steady among vertebrate animals.
Crustaceans, such as shrimp, lobster and crab, are in particular need of
copper because its serves as an oxygen carrier in their blood.
Some scientists believe that copper concentrations in crustaceans may be
elevated compared with other groups since many crustaceans use copper in
their blood pigment. That is why, if you look closely, an uncooked
shrimp looks bluish, a typical color of certain forms of oxidized
copper.
Pablo
<Thank you for sending this along Pablo. As we discussed at last week's
Interzoo, some Copper is indeed a good thing... An essential
micro-nutrient, and useful as a preservative at times. Not harmful. I
will gladly post this about on WWM for others edification. Be seeing
you, BobF>
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>
|
|
