What is the right Calcium Level?

[Pat24601]

This question started in Wrangys tank thread, but it didn't seem like I should clutter up his tank thread with it, so I thought I'd ask here.

I've been going by Red Sea's recommendations as noted in their Reef Care Program. (Link at end of this post). They seem to recommend quite high numbers...particularly for SPS growth. I've been following that and maybe I shouldnt be? Goodness knows I'd trust you folks more than their reccomendation that I dont even understand in full.

They actually reccomend both different salinities and calcium depending on type of corals, which I don't understand either. But, maybe that's part of the answer...

Red Sea Reccomendation:



http://5w56d28u4co20frgwagf5y18.wpe...E_.FR_.SE_.NL_.SP_.IT_.PT_.JP_.CH_.HB_14A.pdf

 

[DaveK]

In a way I don't like seeing lists like that. I think it encourages people to chase numbers rather than worrying about their water quality. If you notice, all of the recommendations for corals are fairly close upping them a bit if you want fast growth.

I really feel that if you acclimate the coral correctly, it will do good in a tank at any of those readings. Consider these numbers to be a range. If your close and the livestock is doing well, leave things alone. You'll do more harm than good messing the system.

 

[Travis]

Very true Dave. Been there, done that.

 

[PSU4ME]

Consistency is the most important thing. Also, averages are great.

So whats the average water for corals? SEAWATER!

I've always found that corals color better at the NSW range and grow faster at the Red Sea range. 95% of the time my water has been under 8 alk and under 400ca........its seemed to work thus far

 

[Frankie]

Disagree with most of you on this part. According to Randy and a few others on the topic, Anything above 420ppm and there is a significant slow down in uptake of ca++.
I am at a disadvantage here, my pc is being worked on so most of my data is at a hault.
I will see if I can get Mike or boomer to check out this thread. They don't need to go over there logs. They know this stuff like riding a bicycle.

 

[Frankie]

Ok, just got off the phone with mojo, he will input here later to correct me. Thanks mike for taking your time out again for me!
Apparently 450ppm is ok as long as the alkalinity is of equal relationship between the two.
So, here is a coral trying to uptake ca++ and grow. If out of balance with the alkalinity, it still shows growth, but the transfer is stunted. So now you have a coral with good skeleton growth but thin tissue stretched over it.
I will stop and wait for Mike's input.

 

[mojoreef]

So the concept is that corals grow via cellular Division. Cellular division is actually stopped because of calcium in the cell, but the coral has a calcium pump that pushes the calcium ion to its outer wall, from this point the alk in the water that flows between the tissue and the skeleton, Pairs with the calcium ion and then looks for a clean seed surface (ie: skeleton) and the process is done.

So you can run your calcium anywhere from 400 to 460 IMHO as long as the alkalinity is equally balanced and able to preform the above operation. Keep in mind that the above process takes an amount of the corals tiny energy budget, so the higher your run things the more the coral has to donate to the process and not other things.

IMO the alk in the Red sea chart levels for lps and Sps are way to high, no real reason to go above 10.

Mojo

 

[Pat24601]

All, this thread is immensely helpful to me! Not only in understanding what numbers I should or shouldn't be shooting for, but why. Thanks!

Frankie, special thanks for your input and making me aware I should question this.

 

[Frankie]

Glad that helps Pat. You got me to call Mike! He has been my top influence patiently drilling my head and it's been to long since I have been to class...Thanks

 

[nanoreefing4fun]

Cheers Mike (mojo) - always great to see you on RS !

I always LOVE your post, ever since I read this GREAT READ !
how lighting effects corals

 

[sirrealism]

Ok good info but I may as well ask if the red sea chart is off "Which I believe it is also" and it is suggested that if your going to run your cal higher then run your alk higher also but what would those numbers be for alk? Example I run my cal at 420 what should my alk be? if I run it at 460 what should my alk? To be honest I dont fallow this thought but I can see others doing it. I personally run my cal between 400-450 and my alk 7-9 but lots of people like to have a number to strive for. The chart up top shows a very large swing from 430 cal and 8.2 going to 465 cal and 12.6 alk!!! Thats a huge difference in alk compared to cal.