Your comments as to what's below and/or new comments and questions can be forwarded to my e-mail address - saltcorner@cs.com. Take into consideration that I'm a 'Senior Citizen' and growing a little slower every day. Your e-mail may be one of twenty or more received daily, and between travel, both pleasure and business, answering may take a week or more.
Dear Bob,
I just finished reading your book "Live Sand Secrets" revised 2nd Edition. I'm really excited about trying a plenum system on a 24-gallon nano cube tank. Dimensions roughly are 20" x 20" x 18"high. I've tried to follow your articles over the years and recently read where you recommended to someone else who had a 12-gallon tank to just use 1" of live sand on bottom of the tank. I don't know if anyone else has tried this with a 24-gallon tank before. My humble thoughts on this are, wouldn't it give you much better stability on a smaller tank regarding fluctuations of pH, calcium levels, etc., especially when implemented with the aragonite sand? It might solve some of the problems associated with nano reef setups. The only problem I could see is the height of the plenum, egg crate and sand, which would equal about six inches. Or do you think I'm wasting my time on a tank this small? I hope not.
Also, I can't seem to find Live Aragonite Sand in your recommended size of 2 - 4mm. I went to the CaribSea website and they recommend their special grade reef sand (list of products) size 1 - 2mm for plenum systems. Wouldn't this size be too small or am I just reading it wrong? You also mentioned a company that makes ready to use plenum grids. Do they have a website I could go to out of curiosity? I've also been emailing the manufactures of the Wave2K wavemaker about making a custom wavemaker for my aquarium that would fit on the back wall between the overflow skimmer and the return. (Another great product in my way of thinking) Do you think this would be too much turbulence for the aragonite sand? Possibly moving it around, etc. What would you recommend as a cleanup crew for this size of aquarium without disturbing the sand too much? I keep reading about quantities of hermit crabs, snails, etc that seem a little too much in excess. Not to mention the extra bioload added to the system. Lastly I've tried looking through some of your past articles and was wondering (Couldn't find), on whether you preferred metal halide or compact fluorescent lighting over your systems and if you felt that it made a difference or not with regard to the plenum.
I guess reading your book just opened up more questions for me. I've had reef tanks before but never had the chance to try this before now. I've always thought that you were on the right path and that there had to be a better way to manage a reef tank. I know these are a lot of questions and that you are a busy person, but any help would be greatly appreciated.
A fan from the beginning,
Steve LeRoy
El Cerrito, CA
Hi Steve,
Good letter, and the reason I recommended a shallow bed in that 12-gallon nano tank was simply that a bed of about five inches would distract from its appearance. Usually, the goal with nano tanks is to display a small environment with appropriate sized creatures. And a 5-inch deep sandbed in such a small tank would have shifted attention to the bed, instead of its creatures. Nevertheless, if that's your goal, i.e., to focus on the value of the bed processes, then go for it. In fact, it would be a good learning tool, and know of one plenum system that is now about 12 years old and still doing wonderful with never a sign of any unwanted algae.
As for a plenum system maintaining alkalinity/calcium levels, that all depends upon the system's bioload. If the draw is more than what dissolution of calcareous materials can provide, then I recommend the use of any of the fine two-part liquid calcium/buffer additives on the market for these small systems. In fact, would go that road from day one using the recommendations on their labels to be sure the important pH, alkalinity, and calcium parameters stay within the proper ranges, as nano tank water quality is more difficult to maintain because of their small water quantity.
As for your tank, quarter-inch supports and quarter-inch egg crate would suffice, with a 3 - 4 inch bed on top of the grid. One inch less of sand, as with a 3 inch bed, would equate to a loss of about 30% of its anoxic area, but still provide enough efficiency if the tank is properly maintained. And as for the proper size sand grains, I've been using/recommending that crushed coral be used, as that generally falls into the 2 - 5mm range sized particles. And CaribSea provides a 'live' product that I've used in many past systems. As for aragonite not being available in this grain size, that's true, or at least I don't know where it may be available. However, years of personal research has shown that beds consisting of particles larger than what was originally used in testing plenums, i.e., 1 to 2mm, provided improved porewater sites and diffusion, which in turn improved bed longevity/processes, especially so in beds that were somewhat mismanaged. And as for the solubility difference between crushed coral and that of aragonite particles, the difference can be easily be made up with the use of the two-part solutions. And note, the company that made custom-made plenum grids has gone out of business due to the poor health of the owner.
As for the Wave2K wavemaker, the test unit sent me and set up at a local shop on a 125 gallon system proved so successful, the owner took it home on put it on his 600 gallon aquarium! As for its lower wave action cycle, I would suggest the unit set on a couple pieces of rock so as to elevate it a little distance from the bed, or the unit built with a deflector that causes the outward bottom flow cycle to be slightly deflected upwards. And keep in mind, if they do build a unit for your system, do not place high reaching obstacles, such as high piles of rock or corals that would block the wave action across the aquarium, as you're defeating part of the cycling process. Carefully plan your environment so as not to cancel out the back and forth wave motions.
I agree that the use of clean-up crews is often overdone! In a fairly new set-up your size would recommend about six Astraea snails, a few hermits (blue and/or red legs) and one small brittle star. If your bioload greatly increases, then add some more snails and hermits.
When it comes to lighting, my choice of metal halide or fluorescent fixtures depend on what animals are in the system. But where you're concern, you'll have a very shallow environment, and fluorescents should be able to fulfill your needs, and besides, run a lot cooler than MH's. And furthermore, the intensity of the lighting will not affect the microbial processes in the bed. But, would suggest blocking light penetration into the lower 'plenum' area from around the outer sides of the aquarium, as it may initiate some algae growth because of the nutrients cycling in this area. Wooden furring strips, or black electric tape will do the trick.
For a lot more information, visit my website at saltcorner.com.
Bob
Hi there Bob,
I like your website because it give me a good idea about the hobby and many of its animals - thank you. I don't now how to start, but I have two tanks, one of them a hospital tank and the other a reef. I have started this reef tank (about 150 gallons) with some live rock and some cleaner shrimp and what I think is a Dusky Wrasse. I want some corals, but my tank is not ready yet. I have seen about 20 baby cleaner shrimp and I try to get them fast and put them in my small tank, but I have no idea about what they eat and what they need to grow up with good health. Please, can you give me some info to let the babies grow and live and how can I know if they need the mother? And how can I know if other mothers have eggs? Have included some photos, however, they are quite poor in quality. I need help about this as soon as you can.
Yours,
Abdullah
Kuwait
Dear Abdullah,
Thanks for your email, photos, and questions. And even though the photos were quite blurry, I think you're right about the fish being a Dusky Wrasse (Halichoeres marginatus).
As for the baby cleaner shrimp (Lysmata amboinensis), they are hermaphroditic spawners (possess both male and female sex organs), therefore all adult members of the group produce eggs and are fertilized by another member of the group. Therefore, any two of these shrimp is sufficient to propagate the species. And it is not uncommon for them to breed in captivity, and I've had several happenings in my tanks. And have had them spawn in small nano tanks where there were no predators, and was still unable to raise them to adulthood even though the tank was fed with the newest and best phytoplankton and zooplankton products. Even the important water quality requirements for molting shrimp, i.e., calcium, alkalinity and magnesium), were always correct. They seemed to simply vanish after becoming about a centimeter in length. In fact, I do not know of anyone who has successfully raised them. But this doesn't mean you can't try, and a quarantine/hospital tank filled with live rock and fed with phytoplankton and zooplankton products and where calcium, alkalinity and magnesium (especially magnesium, because if its not correct, they won't complete the molting process, which they do almost monthly) would be worth at least a try.
Good health and happiness to you and family,
Bob
Note to the Readers: Since this reader's letters and my responses were quite long and involved, it's necessary to divide some of it into three parts. The first will contain the reader's first letter and some of my comments relating to his problems. Part II will have a portion of his first letter for continuity and further areas discussed. Part III will contain my recommendations, follow-through and results. Bob
Hi Bob,
Bruce at ROWAphos told me to email you regarding my DSB. I'm having some serious problems with phosphate and hole in the head. My aquarium is 380 gallons along with 200 gallons in the sump. The tank is made of acrylic in a normal rectangle shape. It has a DSB that is on average 6" deep. It's a SeaFloor special grade sand by CaribSea. It has been set up for 4 years. It's a fish only live rock system. The fish population consists of:
The tank is fed by a Eheim Feeder using New Life Spectrum pellet food supplemented by various dried algae and frozen cube foods. This population has been maintained steady for the four years. The fish have grown very well, but over this past year the tangs have all developed hole in the head disease. Due to this happening I've implemented:
This problem, even with the above changes, has continued on and become even worse.
Current tests indicate the water quality as follows:
The filtering is done by the live rock and the sand bed along with an AquaMedic 5000 7' double needlewheel skimmer, and a UV sterilizer. The flow thru the system is done by a 1/3HP Dolphin pump flowing directly back to the aquarium at ground level. The tank has 6 overhead water pumps each pumping 750GPH aimed down towards the sand bed.
My problem is that for the first 3 years I never had an algae problem and my tangs appeared very healthy. During the past year the tangs rapidly developed the hole in the head problem but continue to grow but the algae fight is horrible. I can clean the tanks glass on Monday and by Wednesday all over is caked up green/brown algae. I can see the algae build up over night but within two or three days it's horrible. I've consulted with several people who feel that my sand bed is the source of my problem and that I should completely eliminate it. I was told to perform a test with a gravel washer. I sucked the sand up in one corner only to find very terrible nasty dark dirty water. I know as a diver that when I stir the sand bed up it is also dirty so I figure this must be somewhat normal. Some individuals have told me I should have more sand stirrers however they always get eaten. I've been considering purchasing some type of fluidized filter to run a large volume of ROWAphos hoping to rid the system of the PO4. During different discussions about using the ROWAphos I've been advised to eliminate the sand bed by several different people. My problem is that this is a very large job with about 500lbs of sand that I purchased because of its good filtering ability. Please provide me with your thoughts on how to remedy my problems. This is very frustrating. Also, what methods are available for using the ROWAphos in large quantities?
Thank you,
Jim Reid
Melbourne Beach, Florida
Hi Jim,
Thanks for an excellent email, and I see several areas where improvements could be made in your system. And I should note, that after 60 years in the hobby, I've seen much of what you describe numerous times. But unfortunately, I don't have any 'magic' cures that will do it overnight, as my recommendations will take much effort on your part. But if the system is worth saving/improving, then these suggestions/comments will provide a path that will lead in that direction. And since I've never been an aquarium product company employee, or have been paid by any of these companies to use my name or say nice things about them, you and everybody else can count on the sincerity of my answers.
Before I begin my recommendations, your bioload, fish wise, is quite reasonable for your size aquarium. In fact, it's probably the reason why your system has been so successful for a long period of time. But a combination of things is now catching up with you!
As for these recommendations, I first need to describe why a very DSB, such as yours, is largely a mistake when compared to a shallow bed of about two inches. - Those that create deep sandbeds are of the opinion they can keep the nitrate level in the bulk water low and that different microcrustaceans and worms will also help keep the bed healthy. That's mostly a misconception and in my well-experienced past, and after spending 12 years researching sandbeds in the wild and in closed systems (AKA aquariums), have found them to many times turn into what could be called a septic tank, where nutrients check in, and either don't ever check out or become something worse. That's because those who establish such deep beds do not understand the microbial processes occurring in that bed, and/or do not perform adequate bed maintenance. They are of the opinion that the nitrate formed in the upper portion of the bed will be reduced/oxidized to nitrogen gas in the lower bed, therefore ridding the system of that alga nutrient. And the deeper the bed, the more nitrate will be eliminated. That's only 'half' the story! What really happens, is that nitrate is formed in approximately the upper half inch of the bed (that is if the sand grain size is about 2 - 5 mm; if smaller, far less depth area, with mud like particles probably having a depth of a millimeter where ammonia is changed to nitrate), and is attracted deeper where it comes across 'two' different 'classes' of bacterium, not one that lives solely in the so-called anaerobic area. What really happens, is that in the upper portion of this 'so-called anaerobic area,' where there still remains some oxygen, (past tests indicate this to be .5 to 2.0 ppm (B. Goemans & S. Gamble, 2001), an area that should properly be called the 'anoxic' area/zone, a form of denitrification called "Dissimilatory Denitrification" occurs. And the class of bacteria performing this process is facultative anaerobic heterotrophs, with the result being that the nitrate is reduced to nitrogen gas. But these bacteria only exist in this zone where this level of oxygen exists! Below this zone, and no doubt the greater percentage of bed depth, a zone exists where there is less oxygen or none at all, and this zone/area is the true anaerobic area. And in this area, only obligate anaerobic heterotrophs performing the "Assimilatory Denitrification" process is where nitrate is only reduced to that of ammonium, and no further! And of course, ammonium is the primary alga nutrient. Now this is not to say all this ammonium leaches up through the sandbed and into the bulk water, however, in this type deep bed, that ammonium is in a state of constant flux where some of it changes back to nitrate, and or in some instances, some does leach upward through the bed, with some of it entering the bulk water (both nitrate and ammonium). Unfortunately, where ammonium is concerned, we can't test for it. Therefore, this very real possibility should be considered when there are increased unwanted algae growths in the aquarium that contains a DSB. There's also another situation with DSB directly on the aquarium bottom, as nutrients are positive charged (That's why protein skimmers work, as the positive charged nutrients are attracted the negative charged air bubbles!). And the deeper you go in the bed, the more negative its sandbed charge becomes! The more depth in closed system beds, the more opportunities for system balance to become affected.
And furthermore, when the sandbed surface is covered by an overabundance of rock, two more poor situations arise. The first is that under the rock directly in contact with the sand, there are no aerobic autotrophs living in the upper sand breaking down the inorganic ammonia since there is no oxygen present in that level of sand. Therefore, the only bacteria present in the sand below the rock are the obligate anaerobic heterotrophs producing ammonium! And I could also go into the sulfur cycle, where dangerous hydrogen sulfide is produced in areas such as this, but if not disturbed, should pose no immediate problems. Yet, the possibility for this compound existing is enhanced in these areas and should be at least thought of when attempting to vacuum the sandbed.
And that brings me to the second drawback with too much rock, and that is it becomes impossible to vacuum the bed in those areas, which just adds to the accumulating detritus. (Vacuuming should be done monthly in my opinion.) And that takes me to your statement of how dirty the sand was when you attempted to vacuum it, and that it compared to the sand found in the wild. Keep in mind there's a major difference between closed systems and the wild when it comes to the exchange of recycled/quality water crossing a section of sand in the wild, and that in your aquarium. Closed systems are just that; a very confined space depending upon a microbial balanced environment and that of a bioload that won't exceed it. And that does not often happen in aquaria! In the wild, billons of gallons flow over that dirty sand section, carrying 'away' any pollutants coming from it.
Part IIHi Bob,
Bruce at ROWAphos told me to email you regarding my DSB. I'm having some serious problems with phosphate and hole in the head. My aquarium is 380 gallons along with 200 gallons in the sump. The tank is made of acrylic in a normal rectangle shape. It has a DSB that is on average 6" deep. It's a SeaFloor special grade sand by CaribSea. It has been set up for 4 years. It is a fish only live rock system.
(For specifics on his bioload and equipment, see last months FAMA)
My problem is that for the first 3 years I never had an algae problem and my tangs appeared very healthy. During the past year the tangs rapidly developed the hole in the head problem but continue to grow but the algae fight is horrible. I can clean the tanks glass on Monday and by Wednesday all over is caked up green/brown algae. I can see the algae build up over night but within two or three days it is horrible. I've consulted with several people who feel that my sand bed is the source of my problem and that I should completely eliminate it. I was told to perform a test with a gravel washer. I sucked the sand up in one corner only to find very terrible nasty dark dirty water. I know as a diver that when I stir the sand bed up it is also dirty so I figure this must be somewhat normal. Some individuals have told me that I should have more sand stirrers however they always get eaten. I've been considering purchasing some type of fluidized filter to run a large volume of ROWAphos hoping to rid the system of the PO4. During different discussions about using the ROWAphos I've been advised to eliminate the sand bed by several different people. My problem is that this is a very large job with about 500lbs of sand that I purchased because of its good filtering ability. Please provide me with your thoughts on how to remedy my problems. This is very frustrating. Also, what methods are available for using the ROWAphos in large quantities?
Thank you,
Jim Reid
Melbourne Beach, Florida
Continued from Part I:
That's why so many other types of equipment and additives are required in closed systems, and why the 'one more pretty fish' routine gets so many hobbyists in trouble! There's just so much water in the closed system, and one needs to recognize that its important to stay within what should be well-established and commonsense goals. And before I leave this 'too much' live rock discussion, consider the rock no different than a very deep sandbed, as the majority of its microbial processes don't differ! (Ever wonder why algae, micro or macro seem to grow so well on the surface of the rock? - Gee, could it be a source of some ammonium from its 'truly anaerobic process within!)
And the gap between nighttime pH and mid lighting timeframe is an indicator that system alkalinity/magnesium level is probably out of balance. Without sufficient buffers in the system to dampen the swing caused by increases (dirty sandbed!) or decreases to carbon dioxide levels between day and night, pH can experience a wide daily range. First check your magnesium level (I use the Salifert test kit for this parameter) and then relate that to your Specific Gravity (SG). If your SG is 1.022, your magnesium level should be approximately 1100 ppm. If your SG is 1.026, your magnesium should be about 1280 ppm. You can go on-line for charts that note the correct levels as they relate to each other. You might even want to consider a quality calcium reactor (would help correct the dropping calcium and general alkalinity situation, and augment the magnesium situation, yet would still need to be monitored and corrected from time to time), or using one of the better two-part liquid calcium/buffers to better control this disparity, however first bring it under control (I use either ESV or Warner Marine magnesium additives to keep my systems in balance). Then there are major water changes that would also help bring the balance of elements and compounds in the bulk water more into balance.
And before I make a recommendation on your bed, let me address the thoughts on infauna maintaining the bed. I've always been fascinated with this subject, as I kept seeing comments that these little creatures will maintain the sand in a healthy condition. However, I've never seen just how many of what type creatures would do that! In all fairness, the right combination of microbial and infauna processes in a closed system where its bioload would not overwhelm said processes, would work splendidly. But in 'aquarium land' I wouldn't expect that to happen too often! Therefore, knowing that infauna need oxygen to live, they aren't going to inhabit true anaerobic areas, nor do I find it possible to direct each and every crustacean or worm to take certain paths so as to evenly ply the bed. Therefore, I need to look to things I can control, and infauna is not one of them. So in this aspect, let nature take its course, and if some infauna additions are possible, try them, but don't count on them to do wonders! And keep in mind that sand sifting sea stars are worthless in my opinion, as I've tried them and they simply consumed all my sandbed infauna that was of value!
Lets now address the phosphate level in your aquarium, which is far too high. And which gives the algae the 'energy' it needs to get/keep it growing (ammonium/nitrate provides its food source). Actually, most phosphate in our aquariums is due to the food fed and the quality of tap water used for evaporation makeup or water changes. And this is where we need to go, but want to mention the following, as it's been said anaerobic areas, where obligate anaerobic heterotrophs reside, accumulate phosphate. That sounds ominous, but the anaerobic area with its lower pH and redox is an efficient user of the oxygen electrons tied to the phosphorous element; therefore phosphate is quickly reduced to other phosphorus molecules and ions. That's a plus for the DSB as the majority of its substrate is usually in an anaerobic state.
It could then be said phosphate accumulates anywhere where it's not attacked for its oxygen suggesting that in more aerobic and anoxic bed areas there would be greater accumulation since oxygen is readily available. However, that's also not accurate! In those areas it's mostly bound to calcium and manganese where it's quite stable because it is very easy to maintain its 'charge' balance. Therefore phosphate is usually not available for uptake in substrates unless associated with reducing conditions.
On the other hand, where there is infauna (your orange worms are probably bristle worms - Eurythoe complanata, which if small, are not a threat), they depend on getting oxygen to live and have to link with the substrate surface, whereas microbes do not. The tunneling processes (irrigation) by infauna can bring phosphate to the bed surface. Yet, even though feasible it would depend upon the size and type of infauna, e.g., large worms. Nevertheless, when it does occur it's in the form of orthophosphate, something not registered on aquarium phosphate test kits and could help cause phytoplankton and algae blooms. Keep in mind infauna also ingest sources of phosphate and produce phosphate-laden wastes, however, they should be considered more movers of the compound than users.
So that brings me back to "most phosphate in our aquariums is due to the food fed and the quality of tap water used for evaporation makeup or water changes." Need I say more? Probably so, therefore lets begin with what you're feeding - and pellets of any kind would not be on my list, as they are too difficult to be sure they are 'all' consumed, and not finding their way to the sandbed surface and becoming a major source of nutrients in your bulk water. I look at pellets as an easy and fast way to feed certain animals, however, not always the best way to handle the situation. I prefer to feed often, and only small amounts that are eaten within a few minutes. But I'm retired, and can take the time to enjoy seeing my fish eagerly take the food numerous times a day. But for those not able to do that, there are various nori strips that can be used in so called lettuce clips that work quite good throughout the day. And there are many different frozen foods available that can be fed frequently during the evening hours when the aquarist arrives home from work. And as for frozen food cubes, they should first be removed from their little containers, then allowed to soften in the air, not in a dish of water, then be broken up and distributed through the aquariums water so the fish eat almost all of its contents. That way, its vitamins and minerals enter the fish, not the surrounding water. If you're placing the cubes in a dish of water to first soften them up, that's an incorrect way to handle them. You're then wasting a good portion of its vitamins and minerals in that water. And if dumping the entire contents of that dish in the aquarium, it only increases the nutrients in the bulk water. And do not use Iceberg Lettuce, as that has no redeeming qualities. Better control over the feeding processes will help reduce the phosphate level. And since you have begun using an excellent RO/DI to control any phosphate/nitrate in your tap water, we won't go there, as that's the right direction there.
Then, the next thing to discuss is the use of the ROWAphos product, or any of the new ferric hydroxide materials (iron-based products) designed for very efficient phosphate removal correctly. And one way to do that is in fluidized filters or similar devices. And since I've used this product I chose to use a Fluval canister filter, which has three internal baskets. I first filled the lower basket with activated carbon (I use either ESV or Boyd Chemi-Pure) in a sack of course, and I also cut up a Poly-Filter into small pieces (More areas of absorption that way). That fills the first basket. In the middle basket I place a layer of filter fluff and spread five tablespoons of ROWAphos over the filter fluff. Then cover the media with another shallow layer of filter fluff. I do the same in the top basket and change the media when there is the first sign of any phosphate reading on my test kit. Suggest you get the largest size Fluval, and use twice the amount of ROWAphos as mentioned. And either use the Salifert phosphate test kit, or try and get the Merck Phosphate test kit from those who sell the ROWAphos product, as it's 'extremely' accurate, but a little more pricy.
Problem areas:
Major phosphate and unwanted algae problems in a 380-gallon fish-only aquarium with a six-inch deep bed.
Jim Reid
Melbourne Beach, Florida
Continued from Part II:
To sum up the water quality/phosphate/algae situations, I recommend 'carefully' reducing the level of sand in the aquarium to about two inches. If this means removing some of the rock, so be it. I realize it's easier said than done, but in the long run, it will be worth it. I would recommend doing one third of the aquarium one month, then the next third the following month, and a month later the remaining. And while doing each third, be on the lookout for dark areas in the sand, as they may contain hydrogen sulfide, and if found, be sure to siphon out the entire dark area and not allow any of its water to reenter the aquarium. Bring each third down to the sand level suggested, and reinstall some of the rock, first cleaned of an unwanted alga, so it allows for as much sandbed surface exposure as possible so you can perform useful monthly vacuums thereafter. And at the same time better control what is fed, and continue to monitor the phosphate level. Also consider getting ozone equipment, including a controller and shoot for about 350 - 400 ORP. Once the entire aquarium is cleaned, add 50 - 100 Astraea snails, as they are far better than the turbo species. Then stay after unwanted algae growths by siphoning out new growths. Over time, the system will greatly improve and you and you pets will again be happy campers!
Lets now address the Hole in the head situation. Head & Lateral Line Erosion (HLLE) often appears as a pitted area on the face and/or along the lateral line of the fish, the cause of which has generated much conjecture in the aquarium world. That of dietary or vitamin deficiencies, stray electrical current or free electromagnetic fields, exposure to heavy metals, protozoan organisms, poor water quality, stress, the use of activated carbon, certain medications, and even various viral and bacterial infections has been put forth as possible causes.
It would seem reasonable to assume that any of these conditions could (possibly in conjunction with others) provide the emphasis necessary to get this malady going. Until more evidence is presented, I'm of the mindset that a poor or inadequate diet combined with stress and poor water quality (in that order) remains as one of the leading causes. Furthermore, I'm of the opinion that HLLE could be considered comparable to rickets or beriberi in humans, and that poor water quality and stress no doubt irritates a vitamin/mineral deficiency and the deteriorated areas on the fish body then become a haven for bacteria and viral infections.
I base a portion of my position on an incident that occurred over twenty years ago when the president of a local aquarium society was given a Purple Tang that had come into a local aquarium shop riddled from head to tail, or what was left of the tail, with HLLE. The fish was placed in a 100-gallon aquarium that contained some lionfish and lots of good hiding places. The water quality was excellent and the tang was fed flake food soaked in an all-natural multi-vitamin solution and was also given the excess macroalgae from another aquarium. The flake was fed as often as possible in the beginning, sometimes as many as ten to fifteen times a day. Only a small pinch of treated flake was dropped in the aquarium, never any more than the fish would eat in a minute or two. Within a few months the fish was almost fully recovered and was beginning to look like it just came from the ocean! About a year later the above remedy was suggested to a fellow hobbyist in England, who was having a severe HLLE problem with one of his Angelfish. After trying the recommendation for a few months, he wrote back saying the fish was returning to normal.
Keep in mind that most often, Tangs and Angelfish are among the most affected, as most are herbivores where their diet consists mainly of algae. And, since micro and macroalgae contain a wide variety of trace elements and vitamins, the lack of a proper supply of these elements and vitamins may just be part of this problem. Therefore I'm of the opinion that diet may be among the leading causes. Also, keep in mind that broccoli, which contains Vitamin A, C, E, and some iodine, may be something to occasionally feed fresh or blanched to those fish requiring vegetable matter in their diet. Additionally, I should also include here that fish exposed to natural sunlight don't seem to be affected by this malady, possibly due to the fact that Vitamin D synthesis requires exposure to sunlight. It could be there's a connection there also, although this is only anecdotal at this time, based on personal observations. Ultimately, however, further research on this condition is required, as there are still many unanswered questions as to the true cause(s) of HLLE. Nevertheless, I believe you have instituted a series of corrections that should help, however, I also 'highly recommend' feeding fresh macroalgae, preferably either or both Caulerpa mexicana and C. prolifera, as these two macro's seem to be the most tasty! And I would try to keep a supply of these in the aquarium so your fish can graze upon them throughout the day. And this should remove the need for an autofeeder, which, will do away with uneaten food products that eventually can lead to diminished water quality.
Furthermore, if HLLE has got to the point where secondary infections may exist, there's a Chinese tea extract that is found in a product called MelaFix, which would be helpful. I've used it to heal secondary bacteria infections on some fish, even in reef aquariums.
I realize a lot has been said here, but have gone this road with many others in the hobby, and most have come back saying it was worth the effort, and they appreciated the time taken to take them through a situation that could have put an end to their hobby. So the road is clear, at least in my opinion. Truly hope this helps.
Bob
Dear Bob,
Thank you so much for your reply. I intend to put your concepts to work immediately. I'm going to be starting over in the next few days. My methods will be as follows:
I would like to take the time to thank you so much for taking your time to help me out with my problem. Not many people in this day and age do that.
Thank you so much,
Jim
Hi Jim,
You're welcome, and as for you're questions, if the recommended quantity for ROWAphos is that great, then I would consider using one of their fluidized bed devices, as I'm not sure if the largest Fluval can handle that much media.
As for the ozone question, keep in mind it needs to be dispensed through a protein skimmer, (and its effluent needs to pass over a carbon bed before returning to the aquarium) and suggest not using your main skimmer to do this, as it will far reduce its foaming effectiveness. Simply purchase a cheap unit that will still move a lot of water through it, and apply ozone to it. That way, you won't be concerned about its lack of foaming ability once the ozone is applied to it! And if possible, place this second skimmer somewhere in the flow of things after the first skimmer. Simply more efficient that way. And as for a controller, I've in the past used the Red Sea ozonizer and controller and found it to work extremely good.
As for the snails, try some, and if they continue to be eaten, try a Lawnmower Benny.
And keep me posted, as your success is as important to me, as it is to you.
Bob
Hi Bob,
Again, thank you for your interest in my personal success. I find it hard to believe in this day and age that some people still try to help others. I actually started to remove a small portion of my sand bed but my hose continues to clog up. I'm going to the Depot later and I will purchase a 1" hose or possibly larger to suck the sand out.
Again, thank you for your help.
Jim
Hi Bob,
I wanted to let you know that I started on my journey today. I removed just over 1/3 of my sand bed today. I relocated the rocks in this area. This sand bed area was 'horribly dirty.' I tried to only suck the sand up but a lot of this dirt drifted into the water. It was very bad. My skimmer just immediately began pumping out horrible black guck. Seems the fish faired the storm so far. This evening it is still stirred up but they seem o.k.
Thank you,
Jim Reid
Hi Jim,
Yes, this is a messy procedure, but in the long run, it's worth it. Hang in there, and siphon out any visible accumulations of detritus that become accessible in these early stages. Isn't it amazing how filthy deep beds can get!
Bob
Hi again,
I wanted to keep you up to date. I've done as you said so far as I've removed the other 2/3's of my un-needed 'plugged up' sand bed. (Had to do 2/3's as it was loaded with hydrogen sulfide in many areas) I've done about 5-55 gallon water changes in the process of removing this sand. I've implemented ROWAphos, which has been running for 2 full weeks. I'm using it in two of the Little Fishies reactors. I immediately stopped the pellet fish food and have been giving the tangs and Majestic Angel live Red Gracillara algae that I'm collecting. They seem to enjoy this alga.
Jim
Note:
There were more letters, but to shorten a long story, I finally phoned Jim, as he gave me his phone number in an earlier email to get the latest results. He said that after cleaning the remaining sand and lowering it to 2 inches, the phosphate level dropped considerably as did algae growth. Further use of ROWAphos has brought phosphate and unwanted algae growth to nill!. His fish still have some HLLE, but it has also shown signs of improving. He again expressed his thanks for my help. (We aquarists are all brothers and sisters in my opinion!)
Hi Bob,
Have e-mailed you several times prior to this problem with my 110 gallon reef tank. As you may remember, the aquarium is set up using a 1" plenum with a 4" sandbed using 2 - 4mm CaribSea Aragalive. My setup and maintenance is performed closely to your books. Up until a hurricane last year my tank was doing unbelievably well and beyond all expectations and thanks mostly to you. My Acropora and other corals were growing out of control and I was always cutting off pieces to give away to my friends. The water was crystal clear and I had virtually no algae.
During a previous hurricane, I was without power for 3 days. I ran the aquarium on a small generator during the day with only the actinic lights on. At nighttime I turned off the generator and had a baitwell pump connected to a car battery providing water movement to the aquarium at night for about 8 hours. This worked OK for those few days.
However, during the last hurricane I was without power for 2 weeks and I 'tried' using the same method, however, not successfully. Since then all of my hard corals have died off except for one piece of brain coral and now have a major hair algae problem. I have tried removing the algae by hand and siphoning it out only to see it come back thick again in two weeks. I have never had an aquarium look worse. I removed all the dead coral thinking that it may have been fueling the algae growth. The hair algae are now growing on the live rock, back glass and even covering the substrate. I have tried using Emerald crabs, Astraea and Turbo snails to clean it up, but they seem to die after eating it for a few days. I also added a Lawnmower blenny but it doesn't seem to eat it. I have tried using sea urchins but they seem to clean around it. Since starting the aquarium my nitrate and phosphate levels have always been around 0.1 and 0.015 respectively or lower.
They are still good: pH 8.15, Ammonia 0, Nitrite 0, Nitrate 0.1, Phosphate 0.015, Ca 445, Mg 1350, Sr 13, Kh 9.8, Iodide .03, Iodate .01, Water temp 80 Deg., Salinity 1.025.
My equipment is as follows: One 250 watt 10K MH light on 11:00 am to 4:00 p.m.; two 75 watt URI Super Actinic 24", on 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; two 75 watt URI Aquasun 24", on 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; two 75 watt URI Actinic White 24", on 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; 1 watt moonshine bulb. AquaC EV250 Protein Skimmer with Iwaki MD30RT, Main pump Iwaki 30RXT, X150 Eco-Aqualizer, Kent Maxima RO/DI water filter for make up and top off water, Lifereef LCR1 CO2 reactor. I also have 4 Rio 800 power heads alternating every fifteen minutes for additional current. I also keep about 2 cups of E.S.V. carbon and one Poly-Filter in the sump 24/7 and replace them about every two months. I originally used Reef Crystals salt and have tried Tropic Marin Pro Reef salt.
My general maintenance at this point is cleaning the sump foam filter and protein skimmer once weekly and I stir the top 1/2" of gravel twice a month.
My feeding schedule is feeding the fish once or twice a day, adding 1/2 doses of Marc Weiss Coral Vital, LSB and Reef Vital DNA once per week. I also add 1/2 doses of Marc Weiss Black Power, Spectra Vital and Cyclop-eeze 1 to 2 times per week.
My latest try was adding a 1" Black angel, 1" Rock Beauty angel and a 3/4" Flame angel to eat the algae. Again they will not even touch it. However, they are getting along with each other and with my remaining soft corals and gorgonians surprisingly well.
Is it possible that the algae are toxic and therefore killing the snails that eat it? Will I have to remove all my live rock and bleach it and start all over?
Thanks for the help,
Bob Schichtel
Delray Beach, Florida
Hi Bob,
I see two problems that have led to the present poor conditions. The first and probably foremost was the coral die-off. Insufficient lighting and water movement for two weeks caused major water chemistry and probably unsuitable temperatures, besides major detrimental zooxanthellae changes in the corals! Add to this that you have never vacuumed the bed (that I know of), only stirred the surface sand, there's the possibility of clumped sand areas in the lower bed far reducing its effectiveness, and/or overwhelming amounts of detritus in the bed doing the same. Then add to this a far reduced dissolved oxygen content in the aquarium due to poor conditions during the outage, and the result is a glorious condition for unwanted algae to take over.
And we are not talking about an 'real' algae that tastes good, as its probably a form of cyanobacteria (Hair algae), such as Derbesia or Bryopsis, or both! And once these forms began, it's an almost never-ending situation, no matter how hard you try, as they can make their own nutrients under their base areas. Therefore, good water quality readings mean little thereafter. They also spread their spores everywhere and need little or no encouragement to begin new growth. And since the live rock is coated with nutrients from the die-off, they are a fertile area for new growth.
In all honestly, if its as bad as your say, you can go two different roads - spend some money and a lot of time trying to beat the problem, or simply start over. My recommendation would to be to start over. But the choice is yours, and if you want to stay with it, let me know and we'll form an action plan and go from there. Its beatable, but not without a lot of work!
You may want to visit my website and go to the Algae page in the Guess Articles section and look at its 160 different forms of algae and its list of consuming animals. Just keep in mind, if these animals eat different forms of 'algae,' their waste products contain nutrients, so if you don't vacuum often, those nutrients go back into solution! And if they don't eat it, it's a form that either doesn't taste good (cyanobacteria), or they have something better to eat.
Sad, …I hate to see problems like this!
Bob
Hi Bob,
I am new to the saltwater hobby and just got an aquarium. Have just finished my cycling and put 2 small angelfish and a Long Nose Hawkfish into the aquarium. I also have a Xenia, small clam and a few Zoa's or Zoo's. As for the cleanup crew, I have about 100 different snails and 6 crabs. Again I am only into this all for 3 weeks. According to your book "Marine Algae Control Secrets" and going on line it looks most like Microalgae is my problem, but do not have any stony corals. I do have 130 lbs. of live rock.
The algae sticks to everything and when I use the magnet clean it looks like a green power that is on the glass. I know this is hard to understand what I am explaining but any help would be great. I put in Algone some one said would be good as well as a Polly filter in the sump. Also put in the sump a ChemiPure filter. I do have a protein skimmer, wave master, RO water, calcium reactor, and just hooked up a Red Sea Aquazone 200. I am just trying to give you all information so I can cure this green problem.
Any help you have would be great.
Thanks
David Hammett
Nashville, TN
Hi David,
Thanks for your email and there's much to talk about!
First, you do not mention the size of the aquarium or type of sandbed, nor the size and type of lighting equipment or brand names of the other equipment, or if the live rock was cured before you put it into the tank, or what is being fed and how often. Nor do you mention water test results. A lot of info is missing!
I'm going to presume, therefore, several things to move on. I assume you have begun this aquarium on the thought that the live rock would provide the necessary nitrification processes to keep your fish/coral healthy. That may be true with 130 pounds of rock if it were in good shape and somewhat cured. But if uncured and loaded with material that will die-off and add to the organic load in the aquarium, your fish may become stressed from resulting ammonia and become wide open to a disease. Hopefully it doesn't go this way. If you do not have test kits, suggest getting ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, pH, alkalinity, phosphate, and calcium test kits, and a Specific Gravity hydrometer.
As for the green microalgae on the side panels and maybe also the sandbed surface, it's a sign that 'ammonium' is present in the water. And this is probably due to the system still being in a 'cycling' status or excess food now going into the aquarium. Once the nitrification cycle is fully established, this form of alga usually only occurs when the system is overfed. So control in a sensible way what is being fed. And to add any type of anti-alga chemicals at this point to rid this form of alga is not something I would recommend. However, there is a product called Fritzyme #9 in the 'concentrated' form that I would recommend using as stated on their label. It would quickly help establish the nitrifying cycle and that may just quickly bring this situation to an end! For now, simply wipe the side panels clean during this timeframe and prevent it from forming any thick mats on the bottom sand by siphoning it out with a small ID hose.
And since I do not sell products, I would never recommend anyone put that number of snails and crabs into a 'new' tank, where they will simply starve to death and add to the nutrients in the system, degrading the quality of the water! However, do recommend about two Astraea type snails per gallon, and 'no' crabs!
As for the Poly-Filter, which is an excellent product, continue to use as directed. The same is true of Chemi-Pure (which I used). The Red Sea Aquazone is also a very good piece of equipment, and hope you understand how to use it. Why use a calcium reactor if you don't have any stony corals?
Recommend visiting my website and taking in some of the vast amount of information that is presented. In fact, I have a section devoted to algae that has 160 photos of it along with what animals consume it. Check it out.
And try to find some time to read up on the hobby, and if you have further questions, don't hesitate to contact me. There are no dumb questions!
Hope this helps,
Bob
Dear Bob,
I would like to know if you ever heard of a problem to a septic tank or leaching field from wastewater from marine aquarium water changes? I'm concerned about the salt crystallizing and the other chemicals that would be present. I would also like to know about removing unwanted polyps, mushrooms and such from live rock. Should I re-cure it by putting it in a dark tank with powerheads and skimmer until they die off? I have some pieces that are really overgrown and they don't pull off very easily. I'm going to be moving soon and I want to make some changes to less free spreading specimens so I want to keep them out of the new tank.
In closing, I have had good luck with my plenum system that is under my main tank, but my new setup will be in the main tank. I know to keep the rock loose and have good water flow and phosphate removers in from the start. Any other tips would be helpful as well.
Thanks once again [this must be the sixth letter to you] for all your help. You have helped keep this an enjoyable hobby. Two plus years and algae free.
Steven O'Loughlin
Hi Steve,
Only six letters! A hobbyist in Cape Town South Africa and I have exceeded 135 letters over the past two years!
As for your questions, we live in the mountains and also utilize a septic system. I would never dump my old tank water into that system nor do we allow our clothes washer water to enter that system, as it is loaded with phosphate that would coat the walls of the leaching field piping and clog its ability to dispense the water into the adjacent soil. The same is somewhat true for the salt/minerals in seawater.
As for the polyp coated rocks, why not sell them to a local store before moving. If not a good idea, then simply drop them into a vat containing 'only' club soda and leave them there for a few days. Then remove, scrub clean, and place the rock in a dark vat of seawater until needed, which will help re-colonize their bacteria. The club soda bath will rid the rock of any unwanted worms, polyps, etc.
Hope this helps.
Bob
Hi Mr. Goemans,
I'm a saltwater fish enthusiast, and have an idea that may work to reduce nitrates. It first involves building a chamber, which would be nothing more than a four foot section of 3" pvc that is filled with 2 -4 mm aragonite substrate and uses a 3" adapter on one end and on the other end, a 1 1/2" adapter. Then pump water into it through the 3" adapter and let it more slowly flow out the 1 ½" adapter, which would establish the presence of anaerobic bacteria, which in turn would reduce the nitrates! Is this something people are already doing or, would it really work? But to me, it sounds good in theory. What do you think?
Nick
Myrtle Beach, SC
Hi Nick,
This reduced flow through an enclosed chamber filled with some sort of substrate for bacterium adhesion is a form of denitrification, which has been used in one form or another for decades, both with and without certain additives to enhance its microbial colonies. In fact, the gravel is not needed if you simply run the water with the dissolved nitrate through a 'very' long piece of airline tubing, as its oxygen/nitrate content will be used up by the time it exits the other end. In fact, such a device was widely sold in the trade many years ago, however, has fallen out of favor with aquarists as it was usually quite unreliable.
The problem with all these type ideas/equipment has been correctly controlling the water flow through its internal areas. Too fast a flow does nothing; too slow a flow results in hydrogen sulfide and/or nitrite. And keep in mind there are two classes of anaerobic bacteria, therefore the oxygen content of the water flowing through the device is critical as to what results it will render. To better understand these processes, visit my website and open the Guest Articles page and read the 'Sandbeds Part I & II' articles.
In closing, its not impossible to come away with some good results with a somewhat similar device (different dimensions), however, the time needed to precisely control the flow through it and the water testing associated with it, could easily become an enormous time consumer. And of course, it would be risky to allow the effluent from the device to reenter the aquarium until its safe. Furthermore, once up and running correctly doesn't mean it will continue that way, and frequent effluent testing is a must, and by frequent I mean every couple of days as the processes can swing from adequate to dangerous very quickly!.
Hope this helps,
Bob
Greetings Bob,
First of all, thank you for your articles in FAMA. I have learned a lot from your suggestions to fellow hobbyists. Also, I found it interesting that you are from Queens, NY. I grew up in Astoria, moved to Ditmars when I got married and now we are living on Long Island.
I have three questions about a set up I'm planning on doing. First of all, I want to set up a reef tank with some easy corals such as Xenia, various mushrooms and Zoanthus. I also want some snails, blue hermits, peppermint shrimp, and easy to keep fish such as a Yellow Tang, damsels, and maybe a Dottyback of some kind. I am going to be using live sand from CaribSea, i.e., special grade reef. For live rock I will be using Rock from Tampa Bay Salt Water. Also, I'll install a refugium of about 20 gallons with different kinds of macroalgae.
First question is about the glass aquarium from ALL GLASS Aquarium with mega flow, do you know if this is a good product for a reef tank? Second question is a plenum in the main tank a good idea? And the third question is about the refugium, which is sold by the local shop where I'm buying the fish tank. Its an ECO SYSTEM refugium, the size is 30L x 12W x 16H. Is this a product you know of or can recommend or suggest something different? The tank with stand and this refugium will cost approximately $1,000. I would not like to go over this amount. In the future I would like to purchase a protein skimmer to put in the sump. Any suggestions you have will be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time.
Sergio Aguilar
Long Island, NY
Dear Sergio,
Thanks for the nice words about my FAMA writings.
As for the All Glass tank, from what I know of the model, it should be adequate for your purpose. But before going further, the only Dottyback I would recommend would be the P. fridmani (Orchid Dottyback) as others can be quite feisty, possibly causing much stress to its tankmates. And as for damsels, would prefer you go with Green Chromis, at least three, as they are peaceful and like to school, and make for much better tankmates than other type damselfish.
As for the main tank, would prefer the plenum not be used in this tank. Even though its filtration efficiency cannot be matched by any other methods, it's more difficult to maintain when in a tank 'with' live rock and animals. It's much better in an interconnected tank that is not used for anything else except its filtration benefits, except possibly holding a skimmer and return pump. This is how it's basically used in Jaubert public aquariums. Anyway, the choice is yours, but would seriously consider a 'very' shallow bed of sand (crushed coral - one inch) in the main tank.
As for ECO System refugium, I had an opportunity many years ago to visit Leng Sy's first shop in Irvine California. His mud system refugia teamed with life, and in fact, were the best I've ever seen! His main systems were also fairly impressive, yet were bare-bottom tanks without skimmers, as he did not recommended their use (skimmers & sand) at that time. However, much time has passed since those days and skimmers and sand are commonly seen in tanks that now have mud refugia, and appear to be quite successful. Nevertheless, you're asking for my opinion, and if I had the choice between a plenum or mud system interconnected tank, I would select the plenum method. - Why? - One must keep in mind that a sandbeds 'destructive' denitrification process (where nitrate is reduced to nitrogen gas), occurs in the bed's anoxic zone (0.5 - 2.0 ppm oxygen), which is supplied nitrate from the above mineralization and nitrifying bacteria in the oxic zone (usually about the first half inch in depth of 2 - 5 mm grain size particles) of the bed. However, mud systems have practically no oxic and anoxic zones because its particle size is so tiny there's practically no oxygen penetration! Therefore 'mud' harbors the 'ammonification' form of denitrification throughout the greater majority of its depth rendering ammonium as its final product. Therefore I would rather have the plenum method, which reduces nitrate to a harmless gas and rids the system of it, than a mud system that generates the primary algae nutrient 'ammonium!' In fact, in a properly run plenum refugia it's almost impossible to get algae to grow. But that's not the case in mud refugia, where it does quite well!
I'm of the opinion that I would rather have a very nutrient poor system, the plenum method, attached to my hopefully nutrient poor/algae free main system than attaching a very nutrient rich system, the mud method. Nevertheless, with this said, and the fact there appear to be many successful mud systems, as there are plenum systems, there will be varying views and opinions on both methods. But you asked for my 'opinion.'
Hope this helps,
Bob