Our mission

Phosphates Low but Chaeto is dying

J

Jonathan Chia

Guest
BARcard
I run a Paxbellum Arid N18 algae reactor for nutrient control.

Prior to the water change, my phos levels have been at about 0.06, so I had assumed that my chaeto was growing and keeping it in check. When I did my water change today, I was cleaning out the reactor and noticed that my chaeto hasn't grown much and its actually starting to fall apart.

There's other types of stuff growing in the reactor, but doesn't seem like it'd be enough algae to keep my nutrients in check

Any idea what could be going on? I'm tempted to just switch to a GFO reactor and dose NoPox instead
 
Macroalgae depends on iron. You can dose with iron supplements and see if that helps. Chaeto us much better at nitrate export than phosphate. What are your nitrates at?

Personally, I have a heavily stocked tank and I use gfo in a reactor with chaeto and my phosphates are between 0.05 to 0.1. No issues here so I wouldn't stress about 0.06.
 
I dose with nitrates and the iron supplement thats supplied by Pax Bellum..Maybe I should upping the dosage amounts.

I'm not concerned about the .06, moreso wondering what could be bringing down the phosphates and if it will start to rise now that the chateo is dying off

Will need to test my nitrates, but they have typically been between 5-10
 
So I retested today and my nitrates are at about 25 and phos at .14...I dose iron every day so it shouldn’t be an iron problem...

Should I just switch to nopox and gfo for nutrient management since the algae reactor has become unreliable?
 
Man am worried you are doing too many things.
If you dosing iron daily I highly recommend you do icp. Make sure you do not have iron over dose.
When you switch to nopox make sure you read the manual do not just follow someone who advised u to switch to nopox. When you start nopox, just like any other carbon dosing, you are recommended not to use GFO btw. That is because, carbon dosing and the gfo will work very quick to strip the eater from nutrients too quickly.
My advice for you is to read research manual about nopox and algae management.
 
Last edited:
Jonathan Chia said:
Thanks for the advice. I think I’ll just take the algae reactor offline and start it slow with nopox.

Maybe add in gfo down the line if phos isn’t under control
Click to expand...
Nopox and all other carbon dosing are not compatible with micro algae, so commit to a method and move slowly with it.
I personally like carbon dosing (ironically did not like nopox) but with carbon dosing you really really need to test and dose based on knowing your parameters. Blind carbon dosing can get you in a slew range of troubles.
 
NOPOX use definitely is compatible with macroalgae, both scientifically and in practice. You just need to watch your PO4 and NO3 levels, which you already need to be doing if you are concerned with them and working to optimize them. I use both at the same time- I have cheato running in a refugium all the time and use NOPOX (and NO3 when too low) dosing as needed to keep phosphate under control.
 
Nopox(carbon dosing) is a way to export nutrients.

Chaetos and fugs are also a way to export nutrients.

Its like saying, using alot of GFO is compatible with dosing po4.. yeh, It can be done, but why?
to do so, you will need more testing and more fine tuning than the system was originally designed for.

www.redseafish.com

FAQ - Red Sea

Frequesntly Asked Questions - A massive reservoir of useful information for Red Sea products.
www.redseafish.com www.redseafish.com


​
Will NO3PO4-X affect my refugium?

​

We recommend maintaining minimum levels of 0.25ppm Nitrate and 0.02ppm of Phosphate. These levels are good for the Zooxanthellae and other micro-fauna however they will not support the macro algae in a refugium. The purpose of NO3PO4-X is to manage nitrate and phosphate levels without other reactors or chemical media and gives absolute control to ensure the ideal conditions for the corals.​
​
 
Last edited:
It’s not at all like saying that, what you are saying doesn’t make any sense. I’m not suggesting anyone should dose something they are already working to reduce. It’s more like saying exactly what I said. If you must have a reefing analogy it’s more like I generally use the Triton system to keep parameters in line without water changes, but sometimes I also need to do a water change (which is part of the Triton system).

I use a refugium with cheato to keep my nutrients (PO4, NO3, and carbon) mostly in line, and when it isn’t enough I replace what is needed. Usually in my system and I think many systems, PO4 is what creeps up. If PO4 and NO3 are unbalanced with too-high PO4 and too-low NO3, I dose NO3. If organic carbon is low as evidenced by elevated PO4 and NO3 levels, I dose carbon in the form of NOPOX.

The link from Red Sea is trying to say that if you are using NOPOX as your primary method and it is working well to keep your nutrients very low and balanced, then you should not also have a refugium, which is true. Likewise, if a refugium is your main method and is keeping your nutrients very low and balanced, then you should not use carbon dosing. BUT in the real world for many people the primary method isn’t quite enough, and nutrients lowly creep up or slowly become unbalanced. So having something else in your toolkit to address specific issues is useful.
 
JVU said:
It’s not at all like saying that, what you are saying doesn’t make any sense. I’m not suggesting anyone should dose something they are already working to reduce. It’s more like saying exactly what I said. If you must have a reefing analogy it’s more like I generally use the Triton system to keep parameters in line without water changes, but sometimes I also need to do a water change (which is part of the Triton system).

I use a refugium with cheato to keep my nutrients (PO4, NO3, and carbon) mostly in line, and when it isn’t enough I replace what is needed. Usually in my system and I think many systems, PO4 is what creeps up. If PO4 and NO3 are unbalanced with too-high PO4 and too-low NO3, I dose NO3. If organic carbon is low as evidenced by elevated PO4 and NO3 levels, I dose carbon in the form of NOPOX.

The link from Red Sea is trying to say that if you are using NOPOX as your primary method and it is working well to keep your nutrients very low and balanced, then you should not also have a refugium, which is true. Likewise, if a refugium is your main method and is keeping your nutrients very low and balanced, then you should not use carbon dosing. BUT in the real world for many people the primary method isn’t quite enough, and nutrients lowly creep up or slowly become unbalanced. So having something else in your toolkit to address specific issues is useful.
Click to expand...
To me saying use fug and carbon dosing means you are not doing either well enough. Because there is absolutely no reason to divert from the carbon dosing which give you the right nutrients export just to keep fug. Zero value of keeping fug if you are doing carbon dosing right...that is what red sea in the link is saying..

And if you want to reference real wold let's do this, show me your tank and I will show mine.
I use zero fug since I started carbon dosing. You use carbon dosing and fug. Let's compare real world results..

I personally am not aware of any successful reefer who use nopox or carbon dosing method as nutrient export consistently (not just as bandaid which is horrible) and run refugium. Clearly this opinion is as anecdotal as mix and match opinions!

I agree, nothing impossible you can mix and match whatever u want. But in my opinion, these mix and match approaches are anecdotal. While the method manual and standards are the intended use..

I try to give lowest risk advice that have resources behind it if the user is new to carbon dosing. Thats all.
 
Last edited:
You can have a beautiful reef tank that puts others to shame if you put enough money and time into it, which you certainly do. And clearly you are very passionate and knowledgeable. That doesn’t mean you know everything about the science and that your advice is unquestionable (none of us are in that category).

Just like how a model can be beautiful and thin without understanding the science of human biology and metabolism. When they give advice on what supplements to use and a science jargon explanation it is still worth being skeptical. Having her show amazing pictures of herself in a bikini doesn’t prove that her favorite supplement is the best.

If you don’t agree with my approach in my tank that’s fine, and quite frankly not unexpected. But to me the science and logic are more important/interesting than the actual tank, so when I see something written on our forum that I think doesn’t do the science justice I sometimes try to contribute what I think. It’s not personal, and I’m fine with being wrong if I am. That’s how I learn.
 
ofzakaria said:
And if you want to reference real wold let's do this, show me your tank and I will show mine.
Click to expand...
Wow, a bit defensive I see. I would think it has been proven that there are many ways to succeed in this hobby, or are you saying that if everyone isn't doing exactly what you say, they are doing it wrong?
 
Oakland Evan said:
Wow, a bit defensive I see. I would think it has been proven that there are many ways to succeed in this hobby, or are you saying that if everyone isn't doing exactly what you say, they are doing it wrong?
Click to expand...
Not at all, any argument is best backed by data. And i agree with John, real world data some times is best judge.
I did not say may way is the only way. I actually said there is many ways to reef. How is this saying only my way? Also what is my way? What i am describing is manual and the method instructions. Mix and match is "someones way" I do not have a way. I follow a method and thats it.


Hope that clears it..
 
P.S. I run a very large refugium and DOSE nitrates. I have zero'd out my system a few times and by dosing a very small amount of nitrates throughout the day I make sure my system never hits zero.
 
Getting back to the original problem of this thread. Is this new Chaeto or have you been successfully keeping Chaeto in this reactor? My first guess as to why your Chaeto is dying would be too little light or light not on long enough.
 
Oakland Evan said:
Getting back to the original problem of this thread. Is this new Chaeto or have you been successfully keeping Chaeto in this reactor? My first guess as to why your Chaeto is dying would be too little light or light not on long enough.
Click to expand...
I believe the OP run Paxbellum, can you control light intensity with Paxbellum?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top