I Damaged my Favia While Cleaning the Glass!!

[MotherofAnimals]

Hello everyone.
 

I was cleaning my aquarium glass this morning with a magnetic glass cleaner and accidentally ran it into my favia coral. It was damaged badly, and while I’m sad, I’m also unsure what to do next. Do I try and take it out? I used epoxy to attach it to the rock. Any advice would be so appreciated. 

[seabass]

3 minutes ago, MotherofAnimals said:

It was damaged badly

It looks like it was pretty healthy.  I think it'll be alright.

 

4 minutes ago, MotherofAnimals said:

Do I try and take it out? I used epoxy to attach it to the rock.

If it's still attached to the rock, I'd just let it be.  I would guess that less you fuss with it, the better off it'll be.

 

But I wouldn't be surprised if either:

1. The polyp heals into two polyps, or
2. The tissue recedes from the damage polyp (but the undamaged polyps are unaffected)

[Tired]

LPS corals are pretty hardy about damage. It might do something a bit wonky, as mentioned above, but it should recover fine. I've had a favites coral regrow from nothing but scraps of flesh inside a skeleton, so all that flesh means your coral is fine, provided conditions are reasonable. 

[MotherofAnimals]

Thank you @seabass and @Tired, I feel less anxious about it now. I can just be sad about not paying attention and hurting one of my babies . Kicking myself in the butt big time.

[mcarroll]

If the polyp pulls through in any fashion there will be some heavy duty healing involved....that implies a good source of water flow as well as available nutrients.  
 

Now would be a good time to check the tank's basic nutrient indicators (nitrates and phosphates) and get a review of your tank's flow.  (A full tank shot, including lights and flow sources.). If all this are in good shape, and fairly stable, then you have the best possible prognosis for things.  👍

 

On the other hand, if you find any nutrient level near-zero, then you should do what you can to fix it.  

 

Minimum levels IMO would be ≥0.05 ppm PO4 (more is better) and ≥5.0 ppm NO3.  

 

Reducing water changes, eliminating extra filter stages (including all mechanical filtration), dosing nutrients are some of the things you can do to tip the balance in favor of your healing corals.

 

Tell us more about your setup and post that photo I suggested if you think any of this might apply.  🙂 

[Tired]

Oh, do you feed the coral? If not, start feeding it. If so, continue to feed it, though only the healthy polyp until other mouths form. Pellets or frozen foods are good, or a thick slurry of Reef Roids. 

[MotherofAnimals]

1 hour ago, mcarroll said:

If the polyp pulls through in any fashion there will be some heavy duty healing involved....that implies a good source of water flow as well as available nutrients.  
 

Now would be a good time to check the tank's basic nutrient indicators (nitrates and phosphates) and get a review of your tank's flow.  (A full tank shot, including lights and flow sources.). If all this are in good shape, and fairly stable, then you have the best possible prognosis for things.  👍

 

On the other hand, if you find any nutrient level near-zero, then you should do what you can to fix it.  

 

Minimum levels IMO would be ≥0.05 ppm PO4 (more is better) and ≥5.0 ppm NO3.  

 

Reducing water changes, eliminating extra filter stages (including all mechanical filtration), dosing nutrients are some of the things you can do to tip the balance in favor of your healing corals.

 

Tell us more about your setup and post that photo I suggested if you think any of this might apply.  🙂 

I just ran the full battery of tests on my tank and found that my levels aren't ideal at the moment, but nothing irreparable. I'm about a week overdue for a water change because I'm currently in a coding bootcamp so I haven't had a lot of time to spare for the needed water change. That would explain why some of my levels are a little off. I broadcast feed my tank 1.5mL of a combination of MANY frozen foods (chopped mussel, chopped prawn, spirulina soaked brine shrimp, krill, oyster, etc.), amino acids, and Selcon. 

 

For equipment I have

two Vortech MP10s running in anti-sync mode. I'm not sure what percentage they're running at because my equipment never connects to Mobius reliably anymore, 

Radion g5 and a Micmol light to fill in some of the shadow. The average par in my tank is about 153. The very top is 177, the middle is about 150-170, and the bottom is about 135-150,

Vectra S2 return pump calibrated to run at 40% at max speed. 

 

I change out my filter sock every 3-4 days and

I have a protein skimmer running a CO2 Scrubber.

 

Video of tank

 

Parameters:

salinity: 1.026

pH: 8.24

Ammonia: 0

Nitrite: 0

Nitrate: 10

dKh: 8

Phosphate:0

Calcium: 420

 

[Tired]

Don't do a water change- you need to get phosphate up. Your nitrates are fine, and the low phosphate is a big concern. Water changes are to remove excess nutrients, replace the minerals needed for skeleton growth, or remove contaminants, and if none of those things needs to be done, you shouldn't do a water change.

 

That's a cool little tank, although I can sure see how algae cleaning might be a problem. What model is it? 

[MotherofAnimals]

22 minutes ago, Tired said:

Quote

Don't do a water change- you need to get phosphate up. Your nitrates are fine, and the low phosphate is a big concern. Water changes are to remove excess nutrients, replace the minerals needed for skeleton growth, or remove contaminants, and if none of those things needs to be done, you shouldn't do a water change.

Thank you for reiterating this. I wasn't going to do a water change this time around. It's strange because I usually do weekly water changes to keep my levels where I want, but the tank seems to be using up the nutrients faster now. So I'll feed a little bit more and not change my filter sock as often and see if that gets it up.

Quote

That's a cool little tank, although I can sure see how algae cleaning might be a problem. What model is it? 

Thank you!!! It's gone through several iterations, with this being the semi-final version. When I made the rock scape, I created a template of my tank with tape, but I probably should have added like 2" border inside the template to ensure the rock wouldn't be near the glass. Where my favia sits is the only place that's difficult to access because the rock is so close to the glass. I knew exactly where to cut the rock to make the proper space, but I wanted to ensure the inhabitants were safe. After today, I will pull the rock out for a few minutes and trim the rock.

 

It's a Fluval Edge 12-gallon with the top off. I cracked the top about two years ago, but I'm so glad it happened because it makes a better tank without it. 

 

[mcarroll]

52 minutes ago, MotherofAnimals said:

The average par in my tank is about 153. The very top is 177, the middle is about 150-170, and the bottom is about 135-150,

This is quite high.  I'd consider dropping that by ~50% across the board.

 

Consider these:

• https://www.tidalgardens.com/stock-pyromaniac-favia.html (check their lighting recommendation for comparison)
• https://reefs.com/magazine/how-much-light-analyses-of-selected-shallow-water-invertebrates-light-requirements/ (skip to conclusion then back-read the parts that are interesting)

 

2 hours ago, MotherofAnimals said:

two Vortech MP10s running in anti-sync mode.

This should be an awful lot of flow for a tank this size.  But you know what they say about making assumptions.  

 

Ultimately you need to judge if the flow in the tank is too strong or too weak.

 

Do you ever see food or poop fall to the substrate or into the rocks?  If so, flow could be at least a little stronger....or maybe a lot stronger.  (A coral can be placed where you see those things drop too, it'll be a natural feeding zone.)

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

I change out my filter sock every 3-4 days and

I have a protein skimmer running a CO2 Scrubber.

This seems quite aggressive.  

 

Just a skimmer should be more than adequate.  Try taking the other parts offline for the time being.

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

pH: 8.24

This is quite high.  There's no need for pH to be kept artificially high like this.  In fact it can cause problems.

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

Nitrate: 10

Phosphate:0

This is kind of a two-for-one problem.

 

Problem #1:   For corals, a lack of dissolved phosphate like this can be really problematic.  They need it for everything any animal needs it for PLUS they need it for photosynthesis....AND they do not have access to the variety of sources for phosphate that algae do.

 

Problem #2:  If there is simultaneously a high level of nitrate, then (for a veriety of reasons) internal demand for phosphates actually increases, making .  It can be overwhelming for the coral to the point of bleaching – and mortality – if it goes to the extreme.

 

This is a bad balance for corals AND for the tank....especially for a relatively new tank.

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

Good stuff there!  But I would stop adding these nutrients now.  

 

Aminos are like a combination Nirogen+Carbon dose.  Not what your tank needs.  (The opposite, if anything.)

 

The rest are fairly extra as well.  Use them VERY sparingly on foods that need it, such as pelleted food.  

 

Live/frozen shouldn't really need it in most cases.

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

I like the variety – a lot.  

 

But I worry a little about the small number of animals you're feeding.  

 

I think you're going to necessarily have to overfeed the tank if you're going to get through all of that food while it's still fresh.  Overfeeding is not really good for anyone.  So...

 

If you can share these foods with friends, I would do so.   Keep one (two at most) and go through it.  Rotate to something different when you run out.  

 

In general, and especially for a smaller tank like this, something like that Marine Quintet could be all you'd need. 👍  If it is what I think it is, it rotates the variety for you every cube.  👍

 

It would be nice if you could feed about half of one of those cubes per day....but cutting a cube in half is a pain...a whole cube per day should be okay.  I wouldn't do more than that (for now), and I wouldn't use any additives with it.

 

I hope this helps....fire back with questions!  🙂 

[MotherofAnimals]

3 hours ago, mcarroll said:

This is quite high.  There's no need for pH to be kept artificially high like this.  In fact it can cause problems.

 

Hmm, interesting. This is the pH of my salt mix. I don't add anything extra to my tank to achieve this pH. I have the CO2 scrubber on the skimmer because we're a small family with two fur babies in an 1100 sqft home. The Co2 climbs fast, and the pH gets pretty low without it. 

 

But also, what is your take on Randy Holmes Farley's opinion on pH in home aquaria? I've watched a few videos on ocean acidification and its effect on corals. Higher is better as it relates to coral growth and the strength of the coral's skeleton.

 

For others interested in the ocean acidification video.

3 hours ago, mcarroll said:

This is quite high.  I'd consider dropping that by ~50% across the board.

 

Consider these:

• https://www.tidalgardens.com/stock-pyromaniac-favia.html (check their lighting recommendation for comparison)
• https://reefs.com/magazine/how-much-light-analyses-of-selected-shallow-water-invertebrates-light-requirements/ (skip to conclusion then back-read the parts that are interesting)

According to the article you suggested, the average PAR in my tank is under the point of photo saturation and well under the threshold of photoinhibition (in most cases). The article states, "Certainly, 200-300 µmol photons·m²·second (~10,000 – 15,000 lux) is enough light to saturate photosynthesis in many cases." 

 

The average PAR in my tank is 153 µmol photons·m²·second, with the highest point kissing 177 µmol photons·m²·second using the Apogee meter, which, the article mentioned, wasn't the best tool for the job due to under reporting. Are you saying that I should lower the lighting to facilitate the healing of my favia?

3 hours ago, mcarroll said:

This should be an awful lot of flow for a tank this size.  But you know what they say about making assumptions.  

 

Ultimately you need to judge if the flow in the tank is too strong or too weak.

 

Do you ever see food or poop fall to the substrate or into the rocks?  If so, flow could be at least a little stronger....or maybe a lot stronger.  (A coral can be placed where you see those things drop too, it'll be a natural feeding zone.)

The two MP10 powerheads run at 45% on the lagoon setting. So food stays suspended in the water column and exits quickly too. It doesn't seem like too much flow since none of the other corals seem to react to it negatively. The pumps ramp up to 75% for 5 minutes twice daily to get anything that may have landed on the sand.
 

 

3 hours ago, mcarroll said:

This seems quite aggressive.  

 

Just a skimmer should be more than adequate.  Try taking the other parts offline for the time being.

Agreed. 

3 hours ago, mcarroll said:

This is kind of a two-for-one problem.

 

Problem #1:   For corals, a lack of dissolved phosphate like this can be really problematic.  They need it for everything any animal needs it for PLUS they need it for photosynthesis....AND they do not have access to the variety of sources for phosphate that algae do.

 

Problem #2:  If there is simultaneously a high level of nitrate, then (for a veriety of reasons) internal demand for phosphates actually increases, making .  It can be overwhelming for the coral to the point of bleaching – and mortality – if it goes to the extreme.

 

This is a bad balance for corals AND for the tank....especially for a relatively new tank.

 

Interestingly enough, my tank has never had zero phosphates since it's been running. It was so strange that I ran the test two more times using the Hanna ULR test. Is there something wrong with my tester? I'm still determining. But, either way, this bit of information is fascinating!

 

So how do I fix this? Do I feed the tank or use an additive? 
 

 

3 hours ago, mcarroll said:

Good stuff there!  But I would stop adding these nutrients now.  

 

Aminos are like a combination Nirogen+Carbon dose.  Not what your tank needs.  (The opposite, if anything.)

 

The rest are fairly extra as well.  Use them VERY sparingly on foods that need it, such as pelleted food.  

 

Live/frozen shouldn't really need it in most cases.

Done. Thank you!

 

3 hours ago, mcarroll said:

I like the variety – a lot.  

 

But I worry a little about the small number of animals you're feeding.  

 

I think you're going to necessarily have to overfeed the tank if you're going to get through all of that food while it's still fresh.  Overfeeding is not really good for anyone.  So...

 

If you can share these foods with friends, I would do so.   Keep one (two at most) and go through it.  Rotate to something different when you run out.  

 

In general, and especially for a smaller tank like this, something like that Marine Quintet could be all you'd need. 👍  If it is what I think it is, it rotates the variety for you every cube.  👍

 

It would be nice if you could feed about half of one of those cubes per day....but cutting a cube in half is a pain...a whole cube per day should be okay.  I wouldn't do more than that (for now), and I wouldn't use any additives with it.

 

I hope this helps....fire back with questions!  🙂 

I go through this quickly because I mix an entire row from each pack. First, I try to keep the nutrients in the food by defrosting the food in the refrigerator. Once the food is all mostly defrosted, I stir the supplements into the meat slurry while it sits in a bath of ice water. Then I freeze the mix in these cute little 1.5mL molds. 

[MotherofAnimals]

Just now, MotherofAnimals said:

3 hours ago, mcarroll said:

I hope this helps....fire back with questions!  🙂 

 

It does and did! Thank you for taking the time to write it all out and explain everything!

[seabass]

I'm impressed.  Sounds like you are doing most everything right.  And I like how willing you are to objectively look at suggestions.  I'll admit that I'd have a hard time finding a lot of fault in what you're doing.

 

For raising phosphate, I'd only suggest feeding more if you believe that you are under feeding.  Over feeding to raise phosphate can introduce excess organics, which can be problematic.

 

So, in many cases, dosing nutrients (phosphate in this case) might be warranted.  I recommend dosing up to 0.03ppm (with the goal to keep phosphate between 0.03 and 0.10ppm).  If you're tank has difficulty maintaining 0.03ppm, you might wish to dose up to 0.05ppm to try to avoid phosphate bottoming out.

[mcarroll]

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

Hmm, interesting. This is the pH of my salt mix. I don't add anything extra to my tank to achieve this pH. I have the CO2 scrubber on the skimmer because we're a small family with two fur babies in an 1100 sqft home. The Co2 climbs fast, and the pH gets pretty low without it. 

🤔That's confusing – IMO don't look at it that way (and put away the scrubber at least for now).  

 

The pH of any salt mix is "naturally" pM 8.1 or whatever.  But that's not all that relevant to your tank.

 

In practical reality, pH of seawater is an equation that includes, among other things, the alkalinity of the water and atmospheric CO2 levels.  

 

You're (needlessly, perhaps causing an issue) fighting against this with the CO2 scrubber.

 

Most tanks run at around pH 7.6-7.8 or so.  NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.  

 

In fact, CO2 is a fertilizer for corals....it fuels photosynthesis and is often in short supply to them SO DON'T WORRY ABOUT YOUR CORALS.  🙂   Worry about YOU.

 

Having said that, if you have actually monitored CO2 levels and found them in the 1000-2000ppm range, then you need a whole-house solution as those levels AREN'T HEALTY FOR PEOPLE – call your HVAC person.  Your corals will be happy and smiling with high CO2 while you get drugged every night by the air in your house!  Funny/Not-funny!! 🥴

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

But also, what is your take on Randy Holmes Farley's opinion on pH in home aquaria? I've watched a few videos on ocean acidification and its effect on corals. Higher is better as it relates to coral growth and the strength of the coral's skeleton.

 

For others interested in the ocean acidification video.

While it is one of our goals to emulate the ocean and its effects as closely as we can, it is important to recognize the ways in which the ocean is not like our tanks and ways in which our tanks are different.   The differences are crucial.

 

One of those ways our tanks are different is the colossal amounts of food/nutrients being adding on a daily basis, exactly corresponding to whatever bio-load we place in the tank.

 

Reefs in the wild, on the other hand, have only a finite amount of food and nutrients available.   Those are all in extremely high demand as a reef is a very efficient nutrient recycling system of inter-competing organisms, including corals.  When one of the factors in that balancing act of organisms gets out of control, say due to overfishing or due to pollution, then usually one of the organisms "blooms" out of control....often it's algae.  Corals always suffer when these imbalances happen, but some more than others....all depending on local conditions.  Recall that flow is what carries nutrients to corals....so an interruption of flow (or inadequate flow) to a coral can have similar effects.

 

As a result of this difference and others, the effects of temperature, CO2 levels and other factors are not the same in our tanks as they are in the ocean.

 

Phosphate limitation is the root cause of coral issues that relate to nutrient imbalances on wild reefs.  

 

And microbialization (from pollution/dissolved organic carbons) is the cause of most coral disease on reefs.

 

I like Randy's articles a lot – I think I read them all more than once before I set up my first tank.  👍

 

Consider this article (same author) instead/as well:  Chemistry And The Aquarium: The Relationship Between Alkalinity And pH

 

It's worth pointing out that he doesn't recommend any particular pH, but that it's important to understand what drives pH up and down.  

 

High pH isn't "good" or "better" and low pH isn't "bad" or "worse"....unless you figure out that it means (eg) that your alkalinity is low!  🙂 

 

Some things...

 

Water pH does not control coral skeleton strength.  (Evidence points to PO4 having a role, however....)

 

Coral skeleton strength does not imply more coral health.  

 

Faster growth does not imply more coral health.

 

In general, worrying about pH causes more problems than it ever fixes.

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

According to the article you suggested, the average PAR in my tank is under the point of photo saturation and well under the threshold of photoinhibition (in most cases). The article states, "Certainly, 200-300 µmol photons·m²·second (~10,000 – 15,000 lux) is enough light to saturate photosynthesis in many cases." 

 

The average PAR in my tank is 153 µmol photons·m²·second, with the highest point kissing 177 µmol photons·m²·second using the Apogee meter, which, the article mentioned, wasn't the best tool for the job due to under reporting. Are you saying that I should lower the lighting to facilitate the healing of my favia?

The first article suggests specific PAR levels.  (50-100 PAR)   It also suggests that a coral like your Favia (if not in fact the same coral) did not seem to do well under higher light.

 

The second article debunks the need for "high light" levels at all....unless you're growing corals not commonly in the hobby, or clams.  You basically can't over-light a clam. But it's VERY easy to over-light most corals.  (Most of our corals are from deep water, BTW.) 😉 

 

I think lowering your light levels would be a good move.

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

The two MP10 powerheads run at 45% on the lagoon setting. So food stays suspended in the water column and exits quickly too. It doesn't seem like too much flow since none of the other corals seem to react to it negatively. The pumps ramp up to 75% for 5 minutes twice daily to get anything that may have landed on the sand.

So how necessary is the "75% twice a day"?  

 

If you see lots of crap getting swirled up when those hit, then the main flow settings are inadequate.

 

On the other hand, if it doesn't seem to make a difference/no crap ever gets swirled up, then main flow settings are great.  (And you probably don't need the 75% mode at all.)

 

👍

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

Interestingly enough, my tank has never had zero phosphates since it's been running. It was so strange that I ran the test two more times using the Hanna ULR test. Is there something wrong with my tester? I'm still determining. But, either, this bit of information is fascinating! So how do I fix this? Do I feed the tank or use an additive? 

Taking those filter bits mentioned offline and eliminating the additives may be all it takes.  Since this is only a recent occurrence, things may swing back the other way (PO4-positive) in short order.

 

Reducing lighting (as suggested) will also reduce demand immediately.  👍

 

Worst case scenario if PO4 doesn't recover on its own you can dose phosphates (eg Seachem Flourish Phosphates) for a while starting any time....but that need seems like an outside possibility from what you're saying.  (No big deal if you want to/have to tho.  It's safe and easy.)

 

1 hour ago, MotherofAnimals said:

I go through this quickly because I mix an entire row from each pack.

First, I love the amount of effort you're willing to put in toward your tank.

 

Second, I admit the molds are totally cute.

 

Third, however (sorry), I've tried to read up on this a few times and thawing/refreezing is apparently not good at all on the more delicate nutrients.  

 

In whole food organism (gut intact) it can also cause unsavory microbes to grow.  (Even how you're doing it.)

 

In addition, the mixing action itself also stirs in a lot of air/oxygen with the food causing oxidation of important nutrients (eg fats).

 

MUCH better for all concerned to use the foods straight from the foil-bubble.

 

If you can start with fresh/live ingredients we can have a difference conversation tho.  It sounds like you would be a capable Rod's/LRS competitor!! 👍

 

 

 

[mcarroll]

2 hours ago, MotherofAnimals said:

Randy Holmes Farley's opinion

One more round of comments on this article in particular...with a reminder that I really like Randy's articles and I read all of them when I was starting my first reef....they were still new articles at the time. 😉 

 

This article looks at a lot of things from a laboratory point of view....which at the time was amazing and is still today VERY useful.   (Read anything you can find by Craig Bingman too.....I actually had read all of Craig's articles before I'd heard of Randy.....Craig's stuff is a bit harder to find since the main website he was on went kaput, but the articles are still out there in various places for the most part.....Randy has even sumarized Craig's URL's a few time I think.  Gold-level reading material.  Add Dana Riddle to that list of authors that you should "read everything" by and you'd be well prepared with online info. 😉 👌 

 

Getting to the caveat though...  

 

Some things on a reef aren't what they seem in a lab.  Phospahtes and coral skeletons are two things that fit this description.  And the article (by modern standards) is off the mark on these subjects.  Incomplete more than incorrect though.  We just know more about how things work now compared to 2004...a lot from practical experience.  Fewer things are theoretical now.  Article is true, but there's more to the story....making some parts of the article slightly less relevant.

 

For a couple of examples...

 

It's true in a lab that if you're trying to make aragonite and "poison" the crystal with phosphate, that "problems" will happen.  It's also true that in a lab pH has an effect like he describes as well.

 

However in a coral, skeleton (aragonite) generation is biogenically controlled – formed by the coral, independent from the chemistry of the surrounding seawater.  

 

The pH story – as you might guess – was more complicated as well.  I'll be willing to bet that slow growth actually related to a lack of carbonates, lack of CO2 or lack of Phosphates, or some/all of the above....and low pH was coincidental.  Back then they didn't look at those parameters as all being interrelated (and some under control of the biology) like we do now.

 

Here's the best takeaway on pH from the article you linked:

Quote

 

pH

Aquarists spend a considerable amount of time and effort worrying about, and attempting to solve, apparent problems with the pH of their aquaria. Some of this effort is certainly justified, as true pH problems can lead to poor animal health. In many cases, however, the only problem is with the pH measurement or its interpretation.

 

 

Basically, pH can't tell you anything by itself....so it can actually be misleading to even pay attention to it.  We're better off measuring and paying attention to....ca, alk, mg, no3, po4, salinity, temp.  Especially alk, which is what actually roots your pH level to the correct range.

[MotherofAnimals]

Update on my little Favia

 

Favianna Rodriguez is healing up great. She did what everyone predicted and created a new polyp from the damaged tissue and it even started a new polyp on the other side. Thank you everyone for your suggestions, and all the help and concern for my little tank. 

 

[mcarroll]

Looks great!!

[Tired]

Tada! The magic of being an animal without any blood to worry about spilling; you can regrow from anything that doesn't kill you.

[MotherofAnimals]

30 minutes ago, Tired said:

Tada! The magic of being an animal without any blood to worry about spilling; you can regrow from anything that doesn't kill you.

It's amazing! I wish I was bloodless!!🤭

[MotherofAnimals]

2 hours ago, mcarroll said:

Looks great!!

Thank you. You were such a big help.