The return of dinoflagellates! :(

[tibbsy07]

Assuming the UV light isn't orders of magnitude undersized, wouldn't a "smaller" light still get it done because of the tank turnover? Area under the curve kind of thing?

I meant smaller as in less intense, but yeah, you bring up a good point. Theoretically, yes, but you want the most potent amount of UV as quickly as possible. DNA damage can be repaired, and giving the cells a chance to repair and keep going will just prolong your problem. That's why I said lots of water flow and high UV intensity. The most water flowing through as possible to give the highest turnover through the UV unit as possible, with a massive punch of UV to allow for maximum effectiveness of the light.

[evanski]

Decontamination strength is usually calculated in terms of dose x time.

 

Time is simply dwell time in the U V sterilizer, so flow is NOT your friend here, nor is a linear flow. The longer the flow path the longer the dwell time for any given flow rate...not to mention that a longer path will also increase resistance and reduce flow rate.

 

Dose is a function of UV strength and a function or mean distance from the source...so thick flow paths are bad as well.

 

Idea situation: bright UV, thin flow path very close to source, slow flow, long flow path.

[tibbsy07]

Decontamination strength is usually calculated in terms of dose x time.

 

Time is simply dwell time in the U V sterilizer, so flow is NOT your friend here, nor is a linear flow. The longer the flow path the longer the dwell time for any given flow rate...not to mention that a longer path will also increase resistance and reduce flow rate.

 

Dose is a function of UV strength and a function or mean distance from the source...so thick flow paths are bad as well.

 

Idea situation: bright UV, thin flow path very close to source, slow flow, long flow path.

Hmm, I understand that. I guess I was thinking more about speed rather than anything. Good points - clearly I hadn't thought much about this

 

Edit: But to that end, how effective would this whole thing be on a big tank then? If you only have a small thin stream of water flowing through a UV unit slowly, the dinos in the tank have time to replicate. High flow would allow for overall more water turnover and more overall exposure, right? Sort of like rapid fast attacks over and over rather than one slow long heavy attack.

[evanski]

Good points - clearly I hadn't thought much about this

I used to kill spores for a living...lol.

 

Edit: But to that end, how effective would this whole thing be on a big tank then? If you only have a small thin stream of water flowing through a UV unit slowly, the dinos in the tank have time to replicate. High flow would allow for overall more water turnover and more overall exposure, right? Sort of like rapid fast attacks over and over rather than one slow long heavy attack.

Yes, at some point there has to be a minimal turnover calculated per tank, which would be the final parameter to consider when constructing the optimal UV sterilizer.

[tibbsy07]

I used to kill spores for a living...lol.

 

Yes, at some point there has to be a minimal turnover calculated per tank, which would be the final parameter to consider when constructing the optimal UV sterilizer.

lol I make spores for a living then eventually autoclave them.

 

Maybe the best option would be to have multiple UV set ups? 3 or 4? Each with long exposure, slow flow, good intensity UV with the flow close to the source?

[Steve973]

I started using Fauna Marin Dino X (It used to be called Ultra Algea X and that is how they spelled "algae") and the results are good. The product advertisements make you think that it will eliminate the plague algae instantaneously, but that is not my experience. The removal is slow and steady, and you may have to dose more aggressively than they recommend. For example, the directions indicate that my tank would require 3ml at the end of the daily photoperiod. I have seen better results bumping that up to 4ml and the end of the photoperiod and sometimes again when I wake up and before the lights come on. This is working FAR better than peroxide for me, or any other method that I have tried. Although with the increased dosage, it's probably best to maintain frequent and possibly large-volume water changes, since we don't know exactly what is in this stuff.

 

P.S. I am going to post this as its own topic because people will probably want this info, and they might not find it tucked away on page 3 of an old thread!

[brandon429]

Team Id like to get some feedback about po4 role in consistent dino invasions, did anyone already have wonderful po4 tank levels before importing these rascals? The reason I ask is you would be amazed at the amount of solid backed science claims that simply reducing po4 w zap all the dino strains out there. I dont see that in these types of threads where we did everything but battery acid and they are still invaded...and I recall several threads where the keeper had perfect po4 levels from day 1, via gfo, and still got wiped out.

 

 

Do we agree that simply reducing po4 to unnatural levels w beat dinos? if so, why all the delay in fixing tanks? Why is Ben perpetually cynical of all treatments if mere po4 attack was all we needed (it is healthy to approach all dino claims after getting a heinous dino invasion w skepticism, creates a high bar for acceptance I agree)

 

i also agree dino invasions depending on strain aren't responding to anything, much less some extra po4 work.

[brandon429]

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-11/rhf/index.php

 

 

this link says pH is powerful

 

Did you try pH work Steve

[Steve973]

Team Id like to get some feedback about po4 role in consistent dino invasions, did anyone already have wonderful po4 tank levels before importing these rascals? The reason I ask is you would be amazed at the amount of solid backed science claims that simply reducing po4 w zap all the dino strains out there. I dont see that in these types of threads where we did everything but battery acid and they are still invaded...and I recall several threads where the keeper had perfect po4 levels from day 1, via gfo, and still got wiped out.

 

 

Do we agree that simply reducing po4 to unnatural levels w beat dinos? if so, why all the delay in fixing tanks? Why is Ben perpetually cynical of all treatments if mere po4 attack was all we needed (it is healthy to approach all dino claims after getting a heinous dino invasion w skepticism, creates a high bar for acceptance I agree)

 

i also agree dino invasions depending on strain aren't responding to anything, much less some extra po4 work.

Based on a hanna checker, my p04 was undetectable. It's not the ultra-low level checker, but if it's undetectable on mine, my levels were very low. And, still, dinos proliferated and hardly responded to any treatment.

 

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-11/rhf/index.php

 

 

this link says pH is powerful

 

Did you try pH work Steve

I used a seachem product to increase my pH back before I tore my tank down and rebuilt it. I didn't have success with that method, but I wasn't sure exactly what level I needed, for how long, etc.

 

The only success I have had with any degree of permanent success was through the use of Dino X.

[CJJon]

Hmm, undetectable levels of p04 does not mean that they are not there. Your GFO soaks up p04, right? So do dinos. Just because you have some media in there soaking up the p04 does not mean that it does so exclusively. The GFO will compete with the dinos, but they will both be able to uptake any available p04.

 

Just like ammonia. I can't detect it by testing, but I sure know that my fish are producing it and the nitrifying bacteria are thriving off of it.

[jedimasterben]

As I have continually said, toxic dinoflagellates do their best in ULNS tanks where phosphate is nearly undetectable even before the bloom, and this is across many reefers noticing the same thing, so it's safe to lean towards dinos not being at all phosphate limited. They explode when carbon dosing, though, so they seem to be carbon limited.

 

 

That being said, dinoflagellates are living organisms and living organisms need phosphorus to continue doing so, but it's not in any amount that would make an impact.