Caesar777 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I think it's stress; 50% is just too much at once. Also not necessary; how about just dosing alk buffer and other stuff? Calcium is surely not necessary when you're doing weekly water-changes, and trace elements, too, are replenished by the salt mix. And no, ime 3.5meq : 350 calcium. Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 it's math: http://jdieck1.home.comcast.net/chemcalc.html and the relevant formulas are here: http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-04/...ature/index.php and the polyps closed up before the coral ever saw a water change - it's only been in the tank 6 days. can't be that. Link to comment
Caesar777 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I erased my reply, lol; I suck at math. Any temp swings? Not only from the sun but from the lights being on, etc.? Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 no, temp's been pretty solid, stays within one degree even with lights on, 79.0-80.0. yesterday a few polyps came out partially, here and there. oh, another reason i thought it was the sunlight was that when i first found the coral looking not-so-good, but before it totally shut down, the polyps that were closed were on the side of the coral that got the direct sunlight... Link to comment
spanko Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Sounds like some light acclimation going on. Like changes we see when we bring home something that has been under different lighting than ours. If you choose to keep sunlight may just be needs time to acclimate. Does this coral receive that type of direct sunlight in the wild or is it more of a deeper water type? Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 this, i do not know. i hope it's just acclimation and that the coral recovers - no other husbandry loss (like freshwater fish or terrestrial plants) makes me feel as bad as losing a coral. Link to comment
Hinecken Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Maybe I missed it in the previous pages, but if you are using sunlight, is it part of your normal photoperiod or is it in addition to it? What I mean is that if you want the tank lit say 10 hours a day, is 2 from sunlight and 8 from your tank lights? I had customers in the past that would give their tank 2-3hours of sunlight then have their lights on for a full photoperiod afterwards, that could severly stress your corals as well. Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 Maybe I missed it in the previous pages, but if you are using sunlight, is it part of your normal photoperiod or is it in addition to it? What I mean is that if you want the tank lit say 10 hours a day, is 2 from sunlight and 8 from your tank lights? I had customers in the past that would give their tank 2-3hours of sunlight then have their lights on for a full photoperiod afterwards, that could severly stress your corals as well. it was supplemental during the day. right now my lights go on at noon, off a 9PM, and the sunlight comes through around 2-4PM, lights on the whole time. when i look at how bright the sunlight is compared to tank lighting, my guess is that this coral probably hasn't seen the intensity of light that it gets from the sun for a very long time (it was maricultured), if ever. it would probably make sense that giving it such intensity would stress it... DUUUHH in hindsight, but i was thinking that since it was for a short period of time each day it wouldn't be so traumatic... argh. Link to comment
Weetabix7 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 I would have agreed with you on the sunlight issue, that having it for such a short period would not cause stress. I have lived in S. Florida and can understand where Hinecken would be coming from in saying that sunlight there would cause a problem. In Florida, it probably would. But I really think there is a big difference in the quality of sunlight you get in FL and what you get in NYC. And you were doing it for such a short period too. You had the shades pulled yesterday, right? Did it help? I am in TN which puts me kinda halfway between NYC and FL in terms of intensity of sunlight in relation to distance from the equator. My tank is getting MUCH more sunlight than yours since it is directly in front of an east-facing window. In my case, the jury's still out on the effects, but I don't THINK it's causing problems. My tank has mostly zoas, a few LPS, 2 different monti caps, a hydnophora, a pavona, and an acro. I am also curious where you're coming from on the 50% water change thing. It was my understanding that you wanted to keep your tank conditions as close to "natural" as possible, but it seems like doing water changes of that magnitude would go in the other direction, making the water more artificial. Can you explain your thinking on that? Still really enjoying following along on the "experiment". Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 If i could have a setup like what coral biologists use - constantly flowing "fresh" seawater, in one end, out the other, 100% "new" constantly, i would. This is as close as I'm willing to go without doing 100% daily. I'm using what is considered reagent-grade salt mix, Tropic Marin Pro. Based on mass spectometry it's the closest thing to natural sea water that I could find for sale. I'm taking into account that nitrogenous compounds aren't the only form of metabolic wastes or chemical input into the water. Corals are known to secrete compounds that have biological activity into their environment. So although my nitrogenous wastes are zero, there are other things added to the water column over time in a concentrated form considering the small volume I have. My aim is to keep the water as close to the baseline of natural water as possible without it being overly expensive in terms of money and time. Link to comment
RayWhisperer Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 very interesting!!! IN YOUR OPINION, or have you heard, if it might kill off a coral in a small volume like mine? or does it just make it "unhappy"? but nothing really changed after the water change i did my weekly 50%. same before as after. :\ The only time I've experienced die off was when a leather "sloughed" it's outer skin. Being too lazy at the time to peel any excess skin off anything, hoping the current would do it fo me. As far as hearing stories of leathers killing things completely, it's only from the "chemical warfare" type scenerio. Having never experienced this first hand, I can't say I've ever seen concrete proof of it. Honestly though, I don't think skimming and carbon pull the chemicals released by leathers very effectively. Even changing carbon every other week, the polyp extension was tremendous after removing the leather. I'm kindof in agreement with Weetabix here. It's not like your recieving 2 hours of direct tropical sunlight. NYC it pretty darn far north latitude, from the equator. For every degree Lat you go from the equator, that's approximately 69 miles. By this time of year, I'd guess the sun is only a few degrees north of the equator. Also, take into account smog and other pollutants further diminishing the quality of the sunlight. Link to comment
spanko Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 so is 50% at once too much? would 25% on Monday and Thursday say, be any better as far as shock to the system? Oh and of course would you be willing to take the time to do it twice per week instead of once? Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 i'm not saying the sunlight is too strong, only that this specimen isn't used to it yet. i haven't seen any shock from the water changes, when i do them things seem to perk up, actually. maybe that damn leather IS the culprit! that would be consistent with the polyps closed before the water changed... hmmm... Link to comment
spanko Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Yeah, maybe the chemical warfare Fenner always talks about. But I am still going with the light acclimation from the sunlight. With 50% water changes chemical warfare should be a null issue. Link to comment
Caesar777 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 "Maricultured" generally describes corals farmed overseas, so it was probably right around the equator, grown under sunlight in a sectioned-off area of the beach. Aquacultured is when it's in a hobbyist's tank... Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 yeah, i know. i was thinking that as he situation stands right now, the sunlight is equivalent to open air, no water between coral and sun, and even maricultured would be dimmer than that. but i could be wrong if the culture conditions were in very shallow water under equatorial sun... Link to comment
Caesar777 Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Welp.... Here. http://www.pacificaquafarms.com/farming.htm It's Walt Smith's company, btw. Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 THAT'S WHAT I WAS PICTURING - MY DIRECT SUNLIGHT IS A LOT STRONGER THAN THAT. Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 NO PROB, MUCH LOVE Link to comment
RayWhisperer Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 Not that this may hold much bearing on your light situation... However, I have an NC 12 that I modded with a 150 HQI into the canopy. That leaves the bulb about a grand total of an inch above the water line. I have had NO coral EVER stay closed for more than a day. I've stopped all my acclimation for light since finding this out. Basically, it came about by my lazyness, once again. After getting some corals from a shop tour, then attending a party in conjunction with said tour. Basically, the corals were bagged till about 1 or 2 am. I didn't temp acclimate or anything. I was so tired, I just dropped them into the tank and left them where they landed. Nothing, even zoa's that came from under a dual 96 watt VHO system, closed under the intensity of the halide for more than the first day. Link to comment
MrAnderson Posted October 19, 2007 Author Share Posted October 19, 2007 lights been on for a couple of hours, and some polyps have come out. not many, and not fully, but more than yesterday. time will tell.... Link to comment
RayWhisperer Posted October 19, 2007 Share Posted October 19, 2007 The more I think about it, the more light makes sense. If the spumosa is the one receiving the light and the only one who's polyps are affected,(or would that be effected? Damn, my grasp of the English language is slipping!) then it would stand to reason it's the sunlight. However, if the peltiformis is also showing diminished polyp extension, I'd start to think about removing that leather. Link to comment
Greenstar Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Being a couple inches from a 150W mh is not equal to the sun. At one of the LFS they use 400watt mhs about six inches over the water, frags are placed a few inches below that. The light coming indirectly through the side of the tank is still brighter than the 400s, considerably brighter. Don't underestimate the power of the sun. Danny Link to comment
Caesar777 Posted October 20, 2007 Share Posted October 20, 2007 Yeah, the sun is pretty badass. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.