Anyone can tell me if having caleurpa in the sump or possibly in the tank will actually help keep nitrates and phosphates down? Seems to me that it wouldn't work that sufficient but what do I know. Thanks.
-
Folks, if you've recently upgraded or renewed your annual club membership but it's still not active, please reach out to the BOD or a moderator. The PayPal system has a slight bug which it doesn't allow it to activate the account on it's own.
Caleurpa Does it help or not
- Thread starter RonnieB1089
- Start date
I put some cheato and cap in my fuge a couple weeks ago and it absolutly helped get my phophates down. I'm not sure it does anything for nitrates though. I have a DSB in my fuge for that reason, along with my skimmer.
RonnieB1089 said:
Look at it this way: It definitively absorbs them from the water. If you "harvest" it out of the tank you have removed from the tank that amount that was absorbed. That can't hurt
Is it as efficient as some other method, that is open for discussion and depends on your setup. There are plenty of other advantages of having macroalgae like that in fuge:- It removes part of CO2 and thus contributes to maintaining healthier water (richer in O2) and keeps pH higher.
- If you have herbivore fish in your tank, you can feed them with healthier food (green veggies) rateher the dried food. This will at the same time reduce your need for feeding and reduce the main source of your phosphates and nitrates (assuming you use RO water) which is the food that you are onstantly ading to your tanks.
- It provides a good environment for your microfauna in th fuge - plenty of hiding and hunting places.
I wouldn't recommend using caleurpa at all because if it goes sexual it will cause you all kinds of grief. He's a small article that goes into detail about it. http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-05/nftt/index.php.
If you do in fact choose to use caleaupa then try and get Caulerpa Raecmosa since it's a fast grower. The faster it grows the more nitrates and phosphates it will pull out of the water. In any event you do not ever want to get/put caulerpa in your main tank and you want to do everything you can to make sure it does not leave your refugium.
Cheato is a much safer macro algae to use all around.
As far as feeding your fish macro algae, DON'T DO THIS. Many macros are slightly toxic to the fish when eaten. Also worth thinking about: You grow macro algaes to take phosphates and nitrates out of the water. We buy foods low in nitrates and phosphates. Why would you then want to feed your fish this macro algae that is HIGH in these elements? All you would be doing is exporting these to turn around and reintroduce them to the tank again. You would be better off not growing the algae in the first place.
Carlo
If you do in fact choose to use caleaupa then try and get Caulerpa Raecmosa since it's a fast grower. The faster it grows the more nitrates and phosphates it will pull out of the water. In any event you do not ever want to get/put caulerpa in your main tank and you want to do everything you can to make sure it does not leave your refugium.
Cheato is a much safer macro algae to use all around.
As far as feeding your fish macro algae, DON'T DO THIS. Many macros are slightly toxic to the fish when eaten. Also worth thinking about: You grow macro algaes to take phosphates and nitrates out of the water. We buy foods low in nitrates and phosphates. Why would you then want to feed your fish this macro algae that is HIGH in these elements? All you would be doing is exporting these to turn around and reintroduce them to the tank again. You would be better off not growing the algae in the first place.
Carlo
Carlo said:
Sorry Carl, but I have to disagree with a couple of points you made:
First of all, toxicity of macroalgae is very species oriented. While Caulerpa taxifolia is very toxic, other species are not. Some species of caulerpa are even used in human consumption (I hear). Also, I am a bit surprised that you have used broad caution about feeding macroalgae to the fish, since most of the commercially available herbivore food is based on some type of macrolagae (the most popular nori for example and kelp that could be found in formula 2). Not to mention that herbivore fish do eat macroalgae in the wild. Mine had no problem eating them. Of course, each individual species (if not even each specimen) will have their own preferences of what they would eat - either taste wise or digestion wise, and
Second, you said that feeding the fish these macroalgae will not help the reduction of nitrates and phosphates. Even if you add foods that are low in them, you are still adding them to the tank, period. I am not advocating adding the fresh macroalgae from outside of your tank system. What I meant is, that by replacing the part of your feeding with the food that is already grown in your system (mind you I am not using the term tank), you are reducing that input. Granted, you are not exporting those nutrients out of the system, but at same time you are not adding any new either, so you have a zero sum gain. Of course, you won't completely replace all of the food with in-grown macroalgae, just supplement the part of it, since no single source of food has the complete set of necessary nutrients for healthy fish.
Now a couple of things I do agree with you
Caulerpa shouldn't be introduced in the tank, but kept safely in the sump/refugium. It will easily outcompete corals for light and some species have toxins that impede coral growth.
Preferably use Caulerpa racemosa, and definitively stay away of Caulerpa taxifolia. There are some species that resemble Caulerpa taxifolia but are not that toxic, but stay away from anything feathery, just in case.
I might have been a bit to literal, but RonnieB1089 has asked if caulerpa is usefull for nutrient export. It is, though it might not be the best choice of macrolage for it. From my personal experience, Caulerpa racemosa, grows 10 times faster then chaeto. That doesn't necessarily mean that it is 10 times better scrubber of phosphates and nitrates, specially since those bubbles are simply full of plain water, but I like to think that it is a bit more efficient and I keep harvesting it. Of course, maybe my light spectrum or water chemistry favors caulerpa instead of chaeto, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone else would have more growth with chaeto.
I had a huge algae problem in the past, have been using caleurpa for nine months, has not gone sexual and my phosphates are about .05 on the meter.
In addition to heavy skimming, I feel that it has truely made a difference in my tank.
In addition to heavy skimming, I feel that it has truely made a difference in my tank.
mladencovic, I pretty much agree with what you said. I was pretty brief for a change but I'll clarify my previous post somewhat.
Toxicity of macro algae is dependant on species and why I said "many" and not "all". If you know what you are growing and plan on recycling then it might be fine to feed it to your fish. I would never feed any type of Calerpa to fish however (just me as I don't want it in my system period). Many tangs also don't like Cheato (very popular) so most of the time feeding cheato to the tank doesn't work to well but could be worth a try.
Almost all algae to some extent is toxic because it's one of the few ways they have to protect themselves from herbivores. Brown algaes tend to be the most toxic, followed by red algaes, and then green. Caulerpa is an exception to the rule though since it's one of the most toxic of algaes. It has a pretty nasty antiherbivory toxin (among many) called caulerpenyne that is released any time it is broken. It can affect coral growth if you prune the Caulerpa often. To get around that the best thing to do is to try to remove whole "runners" of the stuff without breaking them. Typically "broken off algaes" release more toxins while those "pulled" do not. Some types of macro algaes we feed our fish are safe when purchased/processed but could be slightly toxic if we do the work of harvesting as it might not be done correctly (toxin wise). We typically don't process the algaes either or do anything else to make it safer for consumption as the "canning houses" do.
Fish are affected by the toxin too (besides your corals), so while feeding them some Caulerpa shouldn't cause a problem, feeding them large amounts or making it a staple in their diet isn't a great idea. Of course there is also the toxicity associated with it going sexual which is probably the main reason not to have it in the system.
While the invasiveness isn't such a problem when you keep it in a sump or refugium, sometimes even a small bit of Caulerpa or other macro that makes it through the pump or is added into the main tank as food can become established and cause problems.
I myself will only use two types of macro algae in a tank. Chaetomorpha and Gracileria are the only two varieties of macro algae that don't usually crash and/or seed that I'm aware of that grow fast enough to work well in a refugium. This pretty much makes the refugium very safe to the rest of the system.
Gracilaria is an excellent fish food as well. Gracilaria is the weedy red algae that grows on rocks. It has different characteristics than green algae, and has a high adsorption rate of phosphates. Much of the phosphates get processed out in prepared fish foods.
Just for the record, I have no issues with feeding the fish certain types of macro-algae fresh from the refugium. I don't see any problem with "recycling nutrients" after you have "exported" enough to bring your nitrate and especially phosphates down. If you have ZERO phosphates on test results and no sign of hair algae or cyano then go for it. Until the tank is testing zero on nitrates and phosphates I myself would concentrate on "exporting" the nutrients via the refugium and using purchased/processed algaes that are low in phosphates to get the system as low on phosphates as possible. Once you get to zero then by all means play with feeding it to the fishes and stop if the phosphate rates start to showup on test results or by bacteria like cyano growing.
To address the second point (sort of covered it above too). True if you add processed foods low in phosphates you are still adding them. Hopefully the refugium is absorbing them at a faster rate then you add them so the tank as a whole is getting lower and lower on phosphates as time goes by. (feed low, grow fast).
Hope this makes better sense and clarifies the brief post earlier.
Carlo
Toxicity of macro algae is dependant on species and why I said "many" and not "all". If you know what you are growing and plan on recycling then it might be fine to feed it to your fish. I would never feed any type of Calerpa to fish however (just me as I don't want it in my system period). Many tangs also don't like Cheato (very popular) so most of the time feeding cheato to the tank doesn't work to well but could be worth a try.
Almost all algae to some extent is toxic because it's one of the few ways they have to protect themselves from herbivores. Brown algaes tend to be the most toxic, followed by red algaes, and then green. Caulerpa is an exception to the rule though since it's one of the most toxic of algaes. It has a pretty nasty antiherbivory toxin (among many) called caulerpenyne that is released any time it is broken. It can affect coral growth if you prune the Caulerpa often. To get around that the best thing to do is to try to remove whole "runners" of the stuff without breaking them. Typically "broken off algaes" release more toxins while those "pulled" do not. Some types of macro algaes we feed our fish are safe when purchased/processed but could be slightly toxic if we do the work of harvesting as it might not be done correctly (toxin wise). We typically don't process the algaes either or do anything else to make it safer for consumption as the "canning houses" do.
Fish are affected by the toxin too (besides your corals), so while feeding them some Caulerpa shouldn't cause a problem, feeding them large amounts or making it a staple in their diet isn't a great idea. Of course there is also the toxicity associated with it going sexual which is probably the main reason not to have it in the system.
While the invasiveness isn't such a problem when you keep it in a sump or refugium, sometimes even a small bit of Caulerpa or other macro that makes it through the pump or is added into the main tank as food can become established and cause problems.
I myself will only use two types of macro algae in a tank. Chaetomorpha and Gracileria are the only two varieties of macro algae that don't usually crash and/or seed that I'm aware of that grow fast enough to work well in a refugium. This pretty much makes the refugium very safe to the rest of the system.
Gracilaria is an excellent fish food as well. Gracilaria is the weedy red algae that grows on rocks. It has different characteristics than green algae, and has a high adsorption rate of phosphates. Much of the phosphates get processed out in prepared fish foods.
Just for the record, I have no issues with feeding the fish certain types of macro-algae fresh from the refugium. I don't see any problem with "recycling nutrients" after you have "exported" enough to bring your nitrate and especially phosphates down. If you have ZERO phosphates on test results and no sign of hair algae or cyano then go for it. Until the tank is testing zero on nitrates and phosphates I myself would concentrate on "exporting" the nutrients via the refugium and using purchased/processed algaes that are low in phosphates to get the system as low on phosphates as possible. Once you get to zero then by all means play with feeding it to the fishes and stop if the phosphate rates start to showup on test results or by bacteria like cyano growing.
To address the second point (sort of covered it above too). True if you add processed foods low in phosphates you are still adding them. Hopefully the refugium is absorbing them at a faster rate then you add them so the tank as a whole is getting lower and lower on phosphates as time goes by. (feed low, grow fast).
Hope this makes better sense and clarifies the brief post earlier.
Carlo
Directly to the point:
RonnieB1089 yes caleurpa can reduce phosphates and nitrates pretty quickly in a refugium. Don't put it directly in a sump (compartment with return pump) or directly in the display however. If you use it keep lights on that area 24/7 so it has a much lower chance of going sexual on you (releases spores that travel all over the system). With that said IMHO there are better choices of macro algae like Cheato to use instead.
JRod, which meter do you have?
Carlo
RonnieB1089 yes caleurpa can reduce phosphates and nitrates pretty quickly in a refugium. Don't put it directly in a sump (compartment with return pump) or directly in the display however. If you use it keep lights on that area 24/7 so it has a much lower chance of going sexual on you (releases spores that travel all over the system). With that said IMHO there are better choices of macro algae like Cheato to use instead.
JRod, which meter do you have?
Carlo