This thread is talking about my new tank specifically, but also in general that most people find success after 12-18 months into a tank, myself included with my old system. I tend to agree with Derek, that I have somewhat more knowledge and skills than your average reefer (maybe not average bar member though, we are special) with 8+ years of experience in reefing and constant listening to podcasts on the subject.
I think your average reefer isn't listening to 3-5 podcast episodes on reefs every day the way I do, because they have jobs and a life outside of reefing. Both of which I am lucky to be without.
Me! Maybe not always, but I miss my tank when I leave the house to go grocery shopping. Vacations are worse.
@Kensington Reefer Yeah, not looking good for Madeleine going to day care this year.
So what killed my monti's and birdsnest? There are a couple monti's that are dong well, but the 3 birdsnest frags dies in 3 weeks, and a few monti's didn't fare that well either. I test for all the basics and nothing is out of whack. Plus the 330 gallons of water offers some good stability.
What I'd be really interested to see is if someone just does a partial swap of certain things, how often does it lead to failure.
For instance, I tore down my peninsula because we got our floors redone. I setup a rubbermaid tub (thanks
@Srt4eric) with my corals, live rock, fish, all the water from my original tank (though later I added more), my same skimmer, a good chunk of the chaeto, same lights, and same powerheads. The one thing I didn't move over was my sand. I ended up tossing effectively all of it due to complexities and timing of the teardown.
I have had almost zero coral loss, and some things actually colored up even better than it was. So that'd imply the sand wasn't a sole contributing factor to that tank being stable.
If I did a 100% water change, with water that was salinity, temp, pH, alk, Ca, Mg, N, P matched, would it plausibly have had zero issue?
If I cycled a bunch of rock, had put that in the tank with fresh saltwater, and then moved only the coral & fish over, would it have been stable?
...
In the end that's the same concept as "what in an existing tank makes things grow", but a reductive approach vs an additive one. I would've thought it was sand played a big part, but given how big of temp/ph/nutrient swings I've seen my healthy frag tank go through with no effects I'd think it must be the rock.
However as a counter to that, my frag tank has a bare bottom and basically no rock, outside of a handful of pounds in the sump and in the display. That thing is incredibly resilient. So it can't be the rock?
I really wish I knew. Feels like it might be one of those situations where there's no individual reason, but the full reason is the aggregate of all those little differences. If you have a stable tank, it has a big bact pop which can feed SPS, and a bunch of fish producing ammonia at consistent (and controlled by bac) levels that the SPS can also consume without being overwhelmed. It also probably has stable lighting and pH and other params if only b/c you're no longer playing with it anymore.
And also it might be something really basic, like a long stable tank that has had SPS growing means you have nothing janky that will kill SPS. Eg proven no chloramine in your water or ...