Help (nitrate Levels)

[JennM]

Sounds like some here are trying to turn you Fish-Only (FO) tank, to a Reef Tank, or at least a Fish-Only with Live Rock (FOWLR).

Nitrate of 5 tells me that there is biological activity going on - don't sweat it. If it climbs higher than 10, examine your husbandry practices. Rule of thumb for a FO is nitrate below 50. Rule of thumb for a reef is nitrate under 20. You're just fine as it is, IMO.

Do slow down with livestock additions, I think. In my experience, tanks without live rock take longer to mature and don't handle speed very well.

Cut back your feedings to once a day, or every other day. As mentioned, they won't starve Less food equals less waste, and less bio load for your filter to handle.

IMO a skimmer would be a wise investment.

And don't ditch your artificial decorations or plants, UNLESS you are converting to FOWLR or REEF - and even at that, you can use those until you replace them with the real thing...

Some reefkeepers think there is only one way to do things... I've seen some AWESOME FO tanks -- I've set up and maintained some too. They are a different entity than reefs or FOWLR and need different considerations.

Jenn

 

[ReefLady]

Rule of thumb for a FO is nitrate below 50. Rule of thumb for a reef is nitrate under 20.

I've never read this, or heard it suggested anywhere. There are several marine fish that are extremely sensitive to nitrate levels. And as far as a reef goes, the only "rule of thumb" that I am aware of for nitrate levels is 0.00.
Yes, LPS & softy tanks can be done (and done well) with nitrate levels that aren't zero. However, why raise the bar so high? You're only risking the long-term health of your inhabitants, and it is not difficult to maintain nitrate levels at or around 0.00.

And don't ditch your artificial decorations or plants, UNLESS you are converting to FOWLR or REEF - and even at that, you can use those until you replace them with the real thing...

I see no reason to keep the artificial decorations and plants, but I guess it is a matter of personal preference. IMO, it just looks very *fake*.

Sounds like some here are trying to turn you Fish-Only (FO) tank, to a Reef Tank, or at least a Fish-Only with Live Rock (FOWLR).

I think what everyone here has tried to do is steer her toward the most successful way to maintain her tank. As far as a FOWLR is concerned, not only is LR far more attractive and natural looking than are artifical decorations, but it also provides biological filtration, and biodiversity. Why not advocate LR? It is a filter, a decoration, and a natural environment all in one, and will also maintain far lower nitrate levels than will most mechanical filtration.

 

[wooddood]

thank you teri.took the words right out of my mouth.

 

[JennM]

Whoa folks wait a minute.... Let's discern "opinions" from "facts"...

It's all very well and good that in your OPINION, the artificial decorations etc. look fake. I share that opinion... however not everybody wants a FOWLR or a reef, and I've seen some AWESOME FO tanks that are truly FO - no inverts, no live rock. This is what the person has - if this is what they want, why are you trying to force them to change this?

It is a FACT that live rock is a more natural means of filtration. It is OPINION that it looks better than coral replicas.

Why don't you stop trying to force your OPINIONS on the individual, and try to help them within the system that they have? Letting them know that live rock is a healthful option is one thing, but telling them to get rid of this or that is rather arrogant.

From Martin Moe's "Marine Aquarium Reference". I have the 1989 printing. On page 177 it says, "A tank devoted to invertebrates should be maintained at low, less than 10 to 15 ppm , levels of nitrate for best results" Note that it does not say ZERO... and I'd argue that very few tanks actually have zero nitrate - just that most hobby grade test kits don't register tiny amounts of nitrate -so that "zero" reading isn't a true zero... but I digress.

I've seen reefs and FO run at nitrates well over 100 ppm. I wouldn't recommend it for a second, but I've seen it happen. YES you ultimately want nitrates as low as possible in any system but IMO hitting the panic button over 5 ppm is really unnecessary. Sure, make sure the maintenance regime is a good one, tweak the filtration/skimmer to make sure it's at peak performance, but 5 ppm nitrate is highly unlikely to harm anything. Again from Martin Moe's "Marine Aquarium Reference", 1989, page 176:
"Nitrate is not subject to further bacterial oxidation and tends to accumulate in marine aquarium systems. It is perhaps 1000 times less toxic to fish than nitrite and can be allowed to accumulate to some extent in marine systems, especially systems devoted to fish keeping."

Edit: On page 128 of same book, there is a chart called, "Table 5: Water Quality Trends and Values" and it lists all the various parameters. For Nitrate, the trend is to increase, optimum value is 0-5 ppm but acceptable value or range is 5-50 ppm.

That's where I pulled my numbers from... and that's what I've subscribed to as a hobbyist and in the industry.

So if you don't believe me, that's fine. I'll defer to Dr. Moe.



Jenn

 

[ReefLady]

JennM,

I'm not sure what has prompted you to be so angry/defensive re: the advice that has been offered here -- however, I know that everyone here has only been trying to help a1emma, and share the knowledge/experience that they have. Everyone here knows that there is no "one" way to do things, but there are, however, certain methods and products that have been proven to be more beneficial than others.

It's all very well and good that in your OPINION, the artificial decorations etc. look fake. I share that opinion... however not everybody wants a FOWLR or a reef, and I've seen some AWESOME FO tanks that are truly FO - no inverts, no live rock. This is what the person has - if this is what they want, why are you trying to force them to change this?

Well, if you read my last post, you'll see that I clearly stated that it was a matter of personal preference. The original poster never stated that she was absolutely certain that she did not want LR. Again, we were pointing out the benefits and advantages of LR, we were not trying to *force* anyone to do anything.

It is a FACT that live rock is a more natural means of filtration. It is OPINION that it looks better than coral replicas.

Why don't you stop trying to force your OPINIONS on the individual, and try to help them within the system that they have? Letting them know that live rock is a healthful option is one thing, but telling them to get rid of this or that is rather arrogant.

Again, I'm not really clear on what has prompted the antagonistic tone of your post(s), but okay, let's talk fact. Fact - the original poster never stated that she was dead set against LR. Fact - nobody is trying to force any opinions on anything, people are trying to *help*, and suggest methods that might work better for her. Again,

not only is LR far more attractive and natural looking than are artifical decorations, but it also provides biological filtration, and biodiversity. Why not advocate LR? It is a filter, a decoration, and a natural environment all in one, and will also maintain far lower nitrate levels than will most mechanical filtration.

That is what was stated, and that is a fact.

From Martin Moe's "Marine Aquarium Reference". I have the 1989 printing. On page 177 it says, "A tank devoted to invertebrates should be maintained at low, less than 10 to 15 ppm , levels of nitrate for best results" Note that it does not say ZERO...

I guess I really don't want to argue quotes of material dated 25 years ago. I think most everyone would agree that many things have changed in the hobby since 1989.

and I'd argue that very few tanks actually have zero nitrate - just that most hobby grade test kits don't register tiny amounts of nitrate -so that "zero" reading isn't a true zero... but I digress.

Well then, going by your own example, if zero is not zero, than what is the 5 - or 20 - or 50 that you are saying is okay?

but IMO hitting the panic button over 5 ppm is really unnecessary

Agreed. I never argued that point -- I agree with Jupiter's post 100%.

I'm not going to turn this thread into an argument. The original post was from an obvious newcomer to the hobby.

People replied to the post offering a lot of good advice and suggestions. Stocking less quickly, feeding less often, not using fish to cycle, using RO/DI, raising salinity, and yes, one suggestion offered was the use of live rock. IMO, this is a very good suggestion, and an option that the original poster may not have been aware of.

As the keepers of SW fish and invertebrates, we are completely responsible for their health and well being. Since available products and methods of keeping aquaria have changed greatly over the last couple decades, it has become far easier - and attainable - to allow our tanks to have a more "natural" environment, and for our water parameters to be closer to that of NSW.
To have both the means and ability to do so available to us, and to not make the attempt, is irresponsible. We should be striving to give our fish and invertebrates the absolute best care possible. If we are able to do so, and neglect to try, then we should not be keeping SW creatures in captivity.

 

[ReefLady]

I don't want to turn this into an argument either, but I have to take issue with using 1989 water-quality standards in 2003.

How many creatures can we now keep, grow and propagate that we couldn't back then? How many fishes are now being successfully bred in our tanks, such as clownfish and banggai cardinals?

Fact of the matter is, great strides have been made in the last several years that allow us to keep our critters in a healthier, happier environment. Along the way, our standards have been raised.

I agree that nitrate of 5ppm is nothing to panic about, however, it could be a sign of a flaw in the system that could cause trouble down the road. And aiming for zero nitrates is certainly a worthwhile goal I will recommend to any hobbyist.

 

[a1emma]

thankyou all so much for your help,this is my first tank!and every bit of advice is valued! i have artificial plants ect because i was told that live rock is also impossible to keep. i think my tank looks quite nice but like you say it does look quite unreal....... if my ph level drops what is the best way to increase this.........

 

[Pro_builder]

When you change some thing, change it slowly and log everything that you do to your tank. This way you can go back later and look at the change and what effect it has made on your tank.
This will also help in the long run, in case you run into the same problem later on, you can look back on your reference journal and see what you did last time. Wheather it worked or not....
Trying to get to 0 Nitrate is definately a good *goal*, therefore *try to get it there* but don't kill yourself over it. The lower the reading the better.
JMHO

 

[JennM]

I'm not defensive, nor am I trying to be argumentative and I'm sorry if you saw it that way, I am simply trying to disseminate misinformation, and demonstrate that there is a difference between opinion and fact. If the person WANTS to get live rock they can, but not opting for live rock doesn't doom them to an unstable system. I was simply trying to point out that there are different methods of achieving a healthy sytem, and there's nothing wrong with artificial decorations.

Now that I'm at work, I checked the current version of Moe's Marine Aquarium Reference, Fifth Printing. I pulled it off the shelf, and the same passage is in there... so the information is still current, and still valid, at least as far as Martin Moe is concerned.

Tullock's Natural Reef Aquariums, copyright, 2001 states on page 70, "Check the nitrate level each week and start doing partial water changes if it rises above 20 ppm. This may be more or less often than every month depending on the indvidual circumstances of your tank"

Again, not trying to be a smartypants, but since my information was challenged, I just thought I'd back it up.

Jenn

 

[BoomerD]

Since we're gonna quote from authors on the nitrate ssue, Here's whgat Bob Fenner says onthe subject in CMA:
pg.81
"Nitrate ions (NO3) There is no clear dividing line over which nitrate is absolutely harmful; conditioned fishes and invertabrates have been cultured in water of several hundred-even thousand-ppm. All that can be said without frar of contradiction is that lower numbers are better."
pg 130
"Nitrate Accumulation
By itself, this is not a concern for most livestock and systems. What a measure of nitrate can and should do is serve as a guide to the total water-quality picture. There are many othe chemical and physical changes that occur in a small captive system that arecharacteristic of overcrowding in an artificial environment. A high nitrate reading almost assurely means a build-up of other dissolved organic wastes and degraded water quality. Be aware of and resist those changesby having amole filtration and circulation capacity, by removing and diluting convertedwastes via regular water changes, and by using live rock and calcareous substrates."

While I'm sure no one is disagreeing with the good Dr. Moe, we all seem to agree that lower levels of nitrates are something to strive for. It's just better for the health of all the creatures, fish, invertabrates, and along with lower levels of phosphates, will help to reduce nuisance algaes.
As has been posted here several times, there is no ONE only way to do this, but there are ways that are better for the health of the inhabitants of the tank.

 

[JennM]

Thanks - all the information quoted seems to be in agreement.

Of course lower nitrate is the objective - hence my assertion that 5 ppm was nothing to be worried about.



Jenn

 

[johnlewis]

To answer your question on how to bring up your PH there are going to several ways. Water changes will help, but so will you aggregate, and additions PH booster, or a Kalkawaser. I think the best solution for your Fish Only Tank FOT the PH booster with some make up water is the simplest.

How much does your PH drop and over what time period ? Measure it at the same time each day. Your PH will be lowest just before lights on, and at it's peak just before lights off.

 

[wooddood]

great info all and much appreciated jennm you sound to be very knowledgeble in reefkeeping and appreciate that,im also sure you know alot more then me.the fact is the way you respond to post that put people on the edge of their seats.i think your knowledge of this hobby is greatly appreciated here.but you come off as a i know more then you additude.personally i read all your replies justb to see what your going to say next. this the freindliest forum on the net in my opinion.ask teri herself and i have been been in disagreement before ask anyone who has been here from beginning of this forum.we are here to help people out with problems that happen in this hobby.i for one am glad you are here with the expertise you undoughtably have.the bottom line is lets work together to help out fellow reefers and not argue about who is wrong or who is right.everyone has his or her methods of maintaining a reef tank,f/o fowlr.what works for one may not work for the other.just my 2 cents.

 

[jks1]

Thanks Wooddood- well put

 

[JennM]

Hmmm perhaps you've "heard" me in a tone that wasn't intended. I did challenge the information given, so perhaps that put some on the defensive, and added a tone to the reader that wasn't intended by me, the writer.

I've been on forums such as this one for several years, and have never been accused of being inflammatory when trying to help hobbyists. I do however, tend to jump on information that is, IMO misinterpreted or incorrect.

Check my posts on TheReefTank.com, reefs.org, you'll perhaps see things a bit differently?

I'm no expert by anybody's stretch of the imagination - I learn every day. However I've spent 17 years in the hobby and 3 in the industry. I've seen lots of "mythology" and lots of "technology" come and go, but the basics are still tried and true and always come back around. My intention here or on any fishkeeping forum is to share what I have learned and what I have DONE. Nothing more, nothing less.

Jenn

 

[NaH2O]

Originally posted by JennM
Hmmm perhaps you've "heard" me in a tone that wasn't intended. I did challenge the information given, so perhaps that put some on the defensive, and added a tone to the reader that wasn't intended by me, the writer.
Jenn

Thank you for clearing up that the perceived interpretation was not intended

 

[mojoreef]

You Big bully Jenn , After reading this thread I think the question was just being read differently. In a FO tank 5 PPM of Nitrate is pretty much a win by most peoples standards. Introducing LR changes the equestion on the whole tank and leads one into a completely different set up.

Good info all the way around.

Mike

 

[Curtswearing]

There are a lot of great authors with a lot of great arguments..

I was greatly impressed with Curt Swearingen's latest book titled, "I don't know for sure----you don't know for sure---Reefing should be fun."

While I don't have a clue who this Curt guy is and I've never seen any scientific studies from him, I have to agree with the last line of his latest book----Reefing SHOULD be fun.

 

[fidojoe]

Curt we need to teach you how to use the smileys
:bigblue:
I almost thought you were being serious about the book.

I do agree reefing should be fun.

 

[Curtswearing]