<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/">




    



<channel rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/sort/algae/RSS">
  <title>Algae</title>
  <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com</link>

  <description>
    
      Below is a listing of all of our articles about algae (both macro and micro) sorted by date with the newest at the top of the list.
    
  </description>

  

  
            <syn:updatePeriod>daily</syn:updatePeriod>
            <syn:updateFrequency>1</syn:updateFrequency>
            <syn:updateBase>2009-05-02T07:30:56Z</syn:updateBase>
        

  <image rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/logo.png"/>

  <items>
    <rdf:Seq>
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2012/4/inverts"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/10/aafeature"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/9/beginner"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/2/aafeature3"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/9/diy"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/6/aafeature1"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/10/aquarium"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/4/lines"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/9/review"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/6/lines"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/5/tips"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/3/lines"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/1/aafeature1"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/10/chemistry"/>
      
      
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/2/media"/>
      
    </rdf:Seq>
  </items>

</channel>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2012/4/inverts">
    <title>Aquarium Invertebrates: Aiptasia, dinoflagellate algae and cyanobacteria - a three-way symbiosis?</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2012/4/inverts</link>
    <description>Aiptasia are tropical sea anemones which are commonly found in marine aquaria. Usually introduced as hitchhikers on live rock, they rapidly colonize the aquarium due to their prolific growth. Although Aiptasia may settle on any available substrate, chemical signals may attract them to specific microhabitats. In this article I report on the settlement preference of Aiptasia for cyanobacterial mats, a finding which suggests a three-way symbiosis between sea anemones, dinoflagellate algae and bacteria.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br /><div id="body">
<p><img src="inverts_album/aip2.jpg" alt="aip2.jpg" class="image-inline" /></p>
<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>he genus <i>Aiptasia</i> contains several species of tropical anemones, which are found throughout the world. These anemones, similar to many other cnidarians such as reef-building corals, have formed a mutualistic symbiosis with dinoflagellate algae known as zooxanthellae (Venn et al. 2008), which translocate photoautotrophically produced organic compounds to their host. Next to making use of light, <i>Aiptasia</i> feed on a wide range of particulate organic matter, ranging from copepods and <i>Artemia</i> nauplii to dried fish feed.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="inverts_album/image001.jpg" rel="gallery" title="Aiptasia, armed with powerful nematocytes, are the Nemesis of many aquarists."><img src="inverts_album/image001.jpg/image_full" alt="image001.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><i>Aiptasia</i>, armed with powerful nematocytes, are the Nemesis of many aquarists.</p>
</div>
<p>As <i>Aiptasia</i> have both autotrophic and heterotrophic feeding modes, these coelenterates thrive in well- and poorly-lit habitats as well as under complete darkness, provided that sufficient food particles are available. For example, completely bleached anemones have been reported growing in PVC pipes, solely relying on heterotrophy. Moreover, <i>Aiptasia</i> can tolerate large swings in temperature, pH and salinity, and survive in live rock exposed to air for some time.</p>
<div>
<p><iframe frameborder="0" height="381" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jkCTZPMUhe4" width="690"></iframe></p>
<p class="caption">Based on their diet, <i>Aiptasia</i> are true generalists. Here, a specimen is feeding on commercial fish feed.</p>
</div>
<p>In addition to their resilient nature, <i>Aiptasia</i> can reproduce very effectively in aquaria.<i>Aiptasia</i> spp. mainly reproduce asexually through a process called pedal laceration (Hunter 1984), during which parts of the pedal or basal disc break off which subsequently regenerate into new, smaller anemones. These new clones increase in size until they are perfect copies of their parent anemone. Their sexual reproduction entails the release of gametes (ova and sperm), after which fertilized ova develop externally into planula larvae (Chen 2008). These planula or propagules may settle on any substrate. Growth of <i>Aiptasia</i> usually is prolific, and they may outcompete other invertebrates if their populations are not controlled. Their potent nematocytes often damage and kill neighboring invertebrates, including corals, in a quest for space. These abilities make <i>Aiptasia</i> the Nemesis of many aquarists, which is why both chemical and biological methods are used to eliminate them.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="inverts_album/image003.jpg" rel="gallery" title="Aiptasia quickly reproduce asexually in aquaria, by means of pedal laceration."><img src="inverts_album/image003.jpg/image_full" alt="image003.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><i>Aiptasia</i> quickly reproduce asexually in aquaria, by means of pedal laceration.</p>
</div>
<h2><b>A three-way symbiosis?</b></h2>
<p>Recently, I observed the settlement behavior of an <i>Aiptasia</i> sp. (possibly Indo-Pacific <i>A. pulchella</i>) in the laboratory, where this species grows in oligotrophic coral aquaculture systems. Individuals settled on cyanobacterial mats, which in turn grew on the aquarium glass, PVC, pumps, corals and gastropod shells. With two exceptions, no <i>Aiptasia</i> settlement was observed on surfaces without cyanobacteria. This preferential settlement of an <i>Aiptasia</i> sp. on cyanobacterial mats suggests a symbiotic relationship between the anemone and bacteria. This symbiosis may be based on translocation of nitrogen, in the form of ammonia or ammonium, from cyanobacteria to <i>Aiptasia</i>. To further clarify this, I will briefly address the symbiosis between different types of cells found in cyanobacterial mats, also called a bacterial consortium.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="inverts_album/image005.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="inverts_album/image005.jpg/image_full" alt="image005.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a></div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="inverts_album/image007.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="inverts_album/image007.jpg/image_full" alt="image007.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a></div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="inverts_album/image009.jpg" rel="gallery" title="Aiptasia sp. settled on cyanobacterial mats, which in turn grew on PVC plates, the coral Seriatopora hystrix and the gastropod Astraea sp. Scale bars: 10 mm."><img src="inverts_album/image009.jpg/image_full" alt="image009.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><i>Aiptasia</i> sp. settled on cyanobacterial mats, which in turn grew on PVC plates, the coral Seriatopora hystrix and the gastropod <i>Astraea</i> sp. Scale bars: 10 mm.</p>
</div>
<p>Cyanobacteria are capable of diazotrophic growth, which means they are able to convert or fix dinitrogen gas (N<sub>2</sub>) into ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>) using the enzyme nitrogenase (Postgate 1998). Ammonia, in turn, is further assimilated as the amino acid glutamate (glutamic acid), an example of biosynthesis. Glutamate can be converted to other amino acids and proteins, a so-called metabolic pathway which is important for organismal growth. Nitrogen fixation is hampered, however, by the presence of oxygen. Cyanobacteria have solved this problem by making use of heterocysts, specialized bacterial cells that are protected from the photosynthetic oxygen produced by the bulk of the cyanobacteria in the mat by multiple cell walls (Fay 1992). Heterocysts fix and translocate nitrogen as ammonia to the photosynthesizing cells of the mat, whereas these latter cells provide the heterocysts with organic carbon. In this way, the consortium of cyanobacterial cells is able to convert carbon dioxide (CO<sub>2</sub>) and dinitrogen gas (N<sub>2</sub>) into organic compounds for growth. This strategy allows cyanobacteria to overcome nitrogen-limitation, enabling them to grow in an oligotrophic environment with low levels of nitrogen. Examples are <i>Anabaena sphaerica</i> and <i>Nostoc punctiforme</i>.</p>
<p>In a very similar way, <i>Aiptasia</i> may also become nitrogen-limited. These anemones have overcome carbon limitation by forming a mutualistic symbiosis with dinoflagellate algae, which supply them with organic compounds (or photosynthates) such as glycerol produced from photosynthesis. These photosynthates may, however, be deficient in nitrogen, requiring supplementary nutrient uptake for growth (Houlbrèque and Ferrier-Pagès 2009). Corals have gone a step further by associating with cyanobacteria, in this context referred to as zoocyanellae, next to zooxanthellae. Intracellular nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria provide scleractinian corals with significant amounts of nitrogen (Lesser et al. 2004), from which the zooxanthellae directly benefit. The same strategy, the formation of a three-way symbiosis between an animal, dinoflagellate algae and bacteria, may have been adopted by anemones from the genus <i>Aiptasia</i>. Instead of, or next to harboring intracellular zoocyanellae, <i>Aiptasia</i> spp. may use free-living cyanobacteria as symbionts. More specifically, the ectoderm (or skin) of the anemones may physically interact with heterocysts living in cyanobacterial mats. The ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>) produced by heterocysts may be absorbed through the ectoderm of the animal. It is known that <i>Aiptasia</i> take up ammonia from the external environment, after which it is assimilated into glutamate by the anemone's cells and its symbiotic zooxanthellae (Stambler 2011 and references therein), in the same way as in cyanobacteria. Although glutamate can be converted to proteins for growth, the anemones require ammonia as a precursor, which is usually present in low concentrations only. In this perspective, settling on cyanobacterial mats may be beneficial to <i>Aiptasia</i>: ammonia produced by cyanobacteria may be taken up by the anemone through the aboral ectoderm of the basal disc or column. This would provide these anemones and their symbiotic zooxanthellae access to both autotrophically fixed carbon and nitrogen, allowing <i>Aiptasia</i> spp. to grow rapidly in a nitrogen-limited environment, just like their symbiotic cyanobacteria. The hypothesized model below provides an overview of this symbiosis:</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="inverts_album/image011.jpg" rel="gallery" title="Hypothesized model of the symbiosis between cyanobacteria and Aiptasia spp. Heterocysts in cyanobacterial mats take up dissolved dinitrogen gas (N2) from seawater, and convert it to ammonia (NH3) with the enzyme nitrogenase (NG). Ammonia is subsequently taken up by the aboral ectoderm and gastroderm of Aiptasia, and its symbiotic zooxanthellae (depicted here as a brown sphere). Finally, ammonia is assimilated into the amino acid glutamate (GA) by the enzyme glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH) and used for growth of the anemone and its symbiotic algae. Model based on Stambler (2011) and references therein. "><img src="inverts_album/image011.jpg/image_full" alt="image011.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Hypothesized model of the symbiosis between cyanobacteria and <i>Aiptasia</i> spp. Heterocysts in cyanobacterial mats take up dissolved dinitrogen gas (N<sub>2</sub>) from seawater, and convert it to ammonia (NH<sub>3</sub>) with the enzyme nitrogenase (NG). Ammonia is subsequently taken up by the aboral ectoderm and gastroderm of <i>Aiptasia</i>, and its symbiotic zooxanthellae (depicted here as a brown sphere). Finally, ammonia is assimilated into the amino acid glutamate (GA) by the enzyme glutamate dehydrogenase (GLDH) and used for growth of the anemone and its symbiotic algae. Model based on Stambler (2011) and references therein.</p>
</div>
<p>This possible symbiosis between <i>Aiptasia</i>, zooxanthellae and cyanobacteria may explain the abundance of these anemones in oligotrophic environments, including heavily skimmed aquaria, and their preference for cyanobacterial mats as a settlement substrate. The discovery of potential symbiotic bacteria in the ectoderm of <i>Aiptasia pallida</i> (McKinstry et al. 1989, Palincsar et al. 1989) lends credence to the hypothesized model above, which encompasses an intimate link between heterocystic cyanobacteria and the aboral ectoderm of <i>Aiptasia</i>. More research will be required to confirm whether translocation of ammonia from heterocysts to <i>Aiptasia</i> occurs, for example by using isotope-labeled ammonia. In addition, it would be interesting to determine at what ammonia concentration this settlement behavior no longer occurs, and whether feeding (nitrogen-rich) zooplankton influences settlement choices of offspring.</p>
<p>If <i>Aiptasia</i> can benefit from the nitrogenous secretion of heterocystic cyanobacteria, the anemones will have to locate them. <i>Aiptasia</i> may be drawn towards cyanobacterial mats by chemotaxis, i.e. chemicals released by the bacteria, including ammonia, may attract the anemones. For example, when fragments of the pedal disc released by a parent anemone encounter a cyanobacterial mat, high local ammonia levels may trigger a settlement response. Subsequently, the fragment regenerates after which it may benefit from excreted ammonia by heterocysts. Whether the cyanobacteria also benefit (mutualism) or even suffer (parasitism) from this symbiosis remains to be determined. This symbiosis may be an example of commensalism, where the <i>Aiptasia</i> benefit whilst having a neutral effect on the bacteria.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="inverts_album/image013.jpg" rel="gallery" title="When cyanobacteria are available, and ammonia concentrations are low, Aiptasia seem to have a strong preference for settling on cyanobacterial mats. "><img src="inverts_album/image013.jpg/image_full" alt="image013.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">When cyanobacteria are available, and ammonia concentrations are low, <i>Aiptasia</i> seem to have a strong preference for settling on cyanobacterial mats.</p>
</div>
<h2><b>In the home aquarium</b></h2>
<p>Even though <i>Aiptasia</i> will settle on substrates without cyanobacterial cover, it may be helpful to minimize the growth of cyanobacteria in the aquarium, as this may promote settlement and thus survival of <i>Aiptasia</i> propagules. This may be especially true when ammonia, and possibly nitrate concentrations in the aquarium are low, i.e. nitrogen-limiting to <i>Aiptasia</i> growth. It is not yet clear at what ammonia concentration the uptake of this nutrient is no longer limiting the anemones in their growth, however this is likely to lie above average ammonia concentrations of marine aquaria. Using GFO to maintain a low phosphate concentration of the aquarium water may aid in the prevention of cyanobacterial mats, and in turn, may somewhat retard asexual reproduction of <i>Aiptasia</i>.</p>
<p>Either way, <i>Aiptasia</i> will probably always be considered an aquarium pest. In my opinion, these creatures are fascinating, having formed an intricate relationship with dinoflagellate algae, and possibly cyanobacteria, allowing them to make use of the sun's energy and dissolved nitrogen gas next to plankton. When predators such as certain Butterflyfishes (<i>Chelmon rostratus</i>) or Peppermint shrimp (<i>Lysmata wurdemanni</i>) are introduced in the aquarium, <i>Aiptasia</i> populations may be kept under control. In such cases, these anemones can be an interesting addition to the aquarium rather than a nuisance.</p>
<h2><b>References</b></h2>
<ol>
<li>Chen C, Soong K, Chen CA (2008) The smallest oocytes among broadcast-spawning actiniarians and a unique lunar reproductive cycle in a unisexual population of the sea anemone, <i>Aiptasia pulchella</i> (Anthozoa: Actinaria). Zool Stud 47:37-45</li>
<li>Fay P (1992) Oxygen relations of nitrogen fixation in cyanobacteria. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 56:340-373</li>
<li>Houlbrèque F, Ferrier-Pagès C (2009) Heterotrophy in tropical scleractinian corals. Biol Rev Camb Philos 84:1-17</li>
<li>Hunter T (1984) The energetics of asexual reproduction: Pedal laceration in the symbiotic sea anemone <i>Aiptasia pulchella</i> (Carlgren, 1943). J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 83:127-147</li>
<li>Lesser MP, Mazel CH, Gorbunov MY, Falkowski PG (2004) Discovery of symbiotic nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria in corals. Science 305:997-1000</li>
<li>McKinstry MJ, Chapman GB, Spoon DM, Peters EC (1989) The occurrence of bacterial colonies in the epidermis of the tentacles of the sea anemone <i>Aiptasia pallida</i> (Anthozoa: Actinaria). Trans Am Micr Soc 108:239-244</li>
<li>Palincsar EE, Jones WR, Palincsar JS, Glogowski MA, Mastro JL (1989) Bacterial aggregates within the epidermis of the sea anemone <i>Aiptasia pallida</i>. Biol Bull 177:130-140</li>
<li>Postgate J (1998) Nitrogen Fixation, 3rd Edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK</li>
<li>Stambler N (2011) Marine microalgae/cyanobacteria-invertebrate symbiosis: Trading energy for strategic material. 385-414. In: Seckbach J, Dubinsky Z (Eds.) All flesh is grass - Plant-animal interrelationships, Springer, Dordrecht, 531 p</li>
<li>Venn AA, Loram JE, Douglas AE (2008) Photosynthetic symbioses in animals. J Exp Bot 59:1069-1080</li>
</ol></div> <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Tim Wijgerde, M.Sc.</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Cyanobacteria</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Aiptasia</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Aquarium Invertebrates</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Tim Wijgerde</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2012-04-11T14:30:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/10/aafeature">
    <title>Feature Article: Algae: Sometimes Both Beautiful and Useful, Part 2</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/10/aafeature</link>
    <description>Although a tank with temperate marine macro algae as the primary focus may be unheard of in the aquarium hobby, all of the equipment required is readily available, and as you may have noticed, many of the techniques involved are strikingly similar to common reef-keeping techniques already being employed.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>n my <a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/2/aafeature3">last article</a> I discussed identification and taxonomy of some temperate macro algae. If your interest has been piqued and you're starting to think about setting up a tank to showcase some of these marine plants, this article may help serve as a guide. In this installment I will discuss the construction, set-up, and maintenance of a 2,000-gallon macro algae exhibit at Atlantis Marine World in Riverhead NY. Although a tank of this scale might not be feasible for most, equipment and techniques described here can be scaled down accordingly to accommodate your space and budget.</p>
<p>Building a strong usable base structure is essential to the success of a macro algae exhibit. This structure should be designed in such a way that allows for a lot of water flow throughout the tank. You will also need to keep in mind how algae will be placed throughout the tank. When suitable algae specimens are collected, they will be attached to rocks. This will require many flat areas to support the collected rocks. The theme of the Atlantis tank is the rock wall of an ocean inlet jetty. To create our jetty, we decided to build an insert out of fiberglass. In this particular set-up, fiberglass had many advantages over real rock. Locally, jetties are made up of large granite rocks. Unlike reef live rock, these rocks are solid, displacing a large volume of water and will carry a limited biological load. These granite rocks also far outweigh reef live rock of similar size. This increased weight of the rocks would create a safety concern. The size of the tank requires me to enter it
for maintenance. Large granite rocks could become very troublesome if they were to tumble when I am in the tank.</p>
<p>The first step in creating our artificial jetty was to build a three-sided mockup of the tank using plywood. This mock tank was then filled with large blocks of styrofoam. Carving the Styrofoam with a hot wire, the rough shape of a rocky wall was formed. The rough cut Styrofoam was covered with a layer of plastic. This plastic layer protected the Styrofoam when fiberglass and resin was applied (resin would dissolve the Styrofoam upon contact with it). Once covered in plastic, four layers of fiberglass were applied. Four layers of fiberglass ensured that the insert would be able to support a large amount of weight. After giving the fiberglass time to cure, the insert was removed from the plywood tank, and all the Styrofoam and plastic was removed.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="large blocks of Styrofoam before carving with hot wire." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/foam.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/foam.jpg/image_preview" alt="foam.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">large blocks of Styrofoam before carving with hot wire.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="The Styrofoam after being cut with hot wire." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/cut_foam.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/cut_foam.jpg/image_preview" alt="cut_foam.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">The Styrofoam after being cut with hot wire.</p>
</div>
<p>Although most of the fiberglass would, eventually, be covered with algae, we still wanted to start with something looking as real as possible. To create a more natural look, a thickened resin, with color pigments, was added to the exhibit side of the insert. The thickened resin was then sculpted, like clay, to look like the rocks of a jetty. Upon completion of this step, the insert was moved to the display tank.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="Styrofoam has been covered with plastic and 4 layers of fiberglass and thickened resin is being added to make it look more realistic." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/fiberglass.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/fiberglass.jpg/image_preview" alt="fiberglass.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Styrofoam has been covered with plastic and 4 layers of fiberglass and thickened resin is being added to make it look more realistic.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="All fiberglass work is completed, and insert is ready to be moved to the exhibit." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/finished_jetty.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/finished_jetty.jpg/image_preview" alt="finished_jetty.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">All fiberglass work is completed, and insert is ready to be moved to the exhibit.</p>
</div>
<p>Initial filtration consisted of two high rate sand filters, each powered by a 2.0 HP Hayward Super II™ pump. One sand filter pulls water from behind the insert. To allow water to flow from the display side, many small holes had to be drilled in the insert. This suction line is important to ensure that there will be no stagnant water behind the insert. Upon leaving the sand filter, the return water goes to a 5 HP Aqua Logic™ chiller before returning to the tank on the display side of the insert. The second sand filter pulls from a 200-gallon sump, and the return is split into two lines. One line returns to the tank via three one-inch Sea Swirls™ and the second feeds several holding tanks (consisting of approximately 1000 gallons) that are connected to the system. Initially the use of a protein skimmer was discussed, but we decided against installing one. We thought the use of a skimmer would remove important nutrients that might be utilized by the algae.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="5 HP Aqua Logic Chiller, one of the high rate sand filters, and holding tanks." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/chiller.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/chiller.jpg/image_preview" alt="chiller.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">5 HP Aqua Logic Chiller, one of the high rate sand filters, and holding tanks.</p>
</div>
<p>As with all plants, lighting is extremely important. Without adequate lighting, the algae would not be able to carry out photosynthesis. Originally, a single 1000W daylight metal halide (Venture Cool Deluxe by Sunmaster™) was placed directly over the center of the exhibit. This is the same bulb that is used on our living reef exhibit (<a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/2/aquarium/">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/2/aquarium/</a>). Using only one halide, centered on the tank, we hoped to keep the greatest concentration of algae growing in the center of the tank, and not on the tank walls.</p>
<p>At this point we had a tank with a strong base, filtration, and lighting, but no algae. To get the exhibit started, a collecting trip to Montauk, NY, was organized in March. The water temperature this time of year is in the low 40's and the air temperature is not much higher than that. Unfortunately, we had no other choice as to when to go collecting for this tank. The "star" of the exhibit is to be <em>Laminaria</em> (kelp) and here on Long Island, NY, we are at its southern range and it can only be found locally during the winter months.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="Tank after being stocked with freshly collected algae." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/jetty_first_planting.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/jetty_first_planting.jpg/image_preview" alt="jetty_first_planting.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Tank after being stocked with freshly collected algae.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="Tank after being set up for a couple months." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/couple_months_old.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/couple_months_old.jpg/image_preview" alt="couple_months_old.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Tank after being set up for a couple months.</p>
</div>
<p>While collecting, rocks that were small, flat and contained a high density of algae were sought after. Large rocks are not only difficult to transport, they are more difficult to place into the exhibit. As we collected rocks, their locations in the water column were noted. Knowing where the rocks were collected will ensure that they will be properly placed in the exhibit. Rocks that are collected in the shallows will require more light, and therefore should be placed towards the top of the exhibit. While rocks collected deeper, should be placed towards the bottom of the exhibit. Once back at the aquarium, the algae-covered rocks were placed in the tank.</p>
<p>Finally, the tank was looking like a section of a current-swept jetty. Large blades of <em>Laminaria</em> (Kelp), bright green leaves of <em>Ulva</em> (Sea Lettuce), and the purple shimmering of <em>Chondru</em>s (Irish Moss) swaying in the current were very relaxing to watch. Sadly, this "relaxing" exhibit quickly became a thorn in my side. Within a couple of weeks, the blades of kelp started to get an odd growth form. Instead of nice flowing blades, the blades started to grow in a twisted manner. The once lush <em>Ulva</em> and <em>Chondrus</em> broke loose from their bases and ceased growing.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="The current lighting set up." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/lighting.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/lighting.jpg/image_preview" alt="lighting.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">The current lighting set up.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="Overall look of the tank as it appears today." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/jetty.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/jetty.jpg/image_preview" alt="jetty.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Overall look of the tank as it appears today.</p>
</div>
<p>So what could be keeping the algae from thriving in this tank? Temperature was right were it needed to be. Water quality was exactly the same as the water where the algae were collected. Current seemed adequate, as all the blades were moving back and forth. The only parameter that I was unsure of was lighting. Is one 1000W metal halide sufficient? I quickly added two more 1000W metal halides. Shortly after the addition of the new lighting I started to see new recruitment of <em>Ulva</em> and <em>Chondrus</em>. Even the <em>Laminaria</em> started to show signs of new growth.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="Kelp that has recruited on one of the returns to the tank." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/kelp_on_return.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/kelp_on_return.jpg/image_preview" alt="kelp_on_return.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Kelp that has recruited on one of the returns to the tank.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="A newly recruited kelp blade." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/kelp_recruitment.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/kelp_recruitment.jpg/image_preview" alt="kelp_recruitment.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">A newly recruited kelp blade.</p>
</div>
<p>Shortly after the addition of the two new fixtures, I decided to try out some different bulbs to see if growth could be improved. I replaced the bulbs in the two new fixtures with 1000W horticultural bulbs by Solar Max™. After doing so, I noticed an increase of algae growth under those two fixtures. This increased growth rate prompted me to change out the third fixture with a Solar Max™ bulb as well. The Sun Master™ bulbs have worked very well in the reef exhibit, but the spectrum of the Solar Max™ bulbs seem better suited for the large macro algae of this tank.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="Laminaria and Ulva." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/misc_shot.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/misc_shot.jpg/image_preview" alt="misc_shot.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><em>Laminaria</em> and <em>Ulva</em>.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="Dark band on kelp blade is reproductive sorus tissue." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/sorus_tissue.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/sorus_tissue.jpg/image_preview" alt="sorus_tissue.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Dark band on kelp blade is reproductive sorus tissue.</p>
</div>
<p>Now, with the added light, I started getting unwanted algae growth on the bare wall of the tank. Removing this algae and keeping the wall clear was no easy task. The holdfasts of these algae could not be just wiped off with the use of a cloth, they needed to be scraped off with a blade. This scraping eventually led to scratches in the tank wall, which made it even more difficult to keep clear. Instead of trying to keep the wall algae free, I decided make it part of the exhibit. An artificial dock, constructed out of Trex™, was attached to the side of the tank. Trex™ is plastic lumber that is commonly used for decks. Unlike wood, it is negatively buoyant and will not deteriorate over time.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="December 2008." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/wall_december.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/wall_december.jpg/image_preview" alt="wall_december.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">December 2008.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="January 2009." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/wall_january.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/wall_january.jpg/image_preview" alt="wall_january.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">January 2009.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="February 2009." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/wall_feb.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/wall_feb.jpg/image_preview" alt="wall_feb.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">February 2009.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="March 2009." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/wall_march.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/wall_march.jpg/image_preview" alt="wall_march.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">March 2009.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="April 2009." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/wall_april.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/wall_april.jpg/image_preview" alt="wall_april.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">April 2009.</p>
</div>
<p>Now that I had sufficient light I could sit back once again and enjoy watching the tank. No sooner did I get comfortable than hair algae began its attack on the tank. To my surprise, the phosphate levels were much higher than I expected them to be. I was getting levels &gt;.5mg/l. How could this be? This exhibit is similar to a refugium on a reef tank. An aquarist adds a refugium to their reef tank to remove phosphates from the water that are produced by their fish and corals. So where are the phosphates coming from? There are very few fish in the exhibit so that could not be the answer. After a closer examination of the tank, I noticed several pockets of algae that had broken off and settled in crevices of the insert. These pockets were surely adding to the nutrient load as they broke down.</p>
<p>Removing these pockets of algae did help some, but the hair algae seemed like it was not going to leave without a fight. So I needed to bring in the heavy artillery: our local sea urchin, <em>Arbacia punctulata</em>. Approximately 30 urchins were unleashed on the hair algae and they plowed through it with ease. Once they knocked back the hair algae, I reduced the number of urchins in the tank to about six so they did not clear the tank of all algae.</p>
<p>Once the hair alga was under control, I needed to address the problem of why it appeared in the first place: the high phosphates. I had started removing broken-off pieces of algae on a regular basis, but the phosphates still remained high. Originally it was thought that the macro algae would use the phosphates, keeping them low or possibly so low that a source of phosphate (fertilizer) would have to be added, but this was not the case. It looked like it was time to install a protein skimmer. A skimmer was constructed out of 3 standard polyethylene containers. The contact chamber is two feet wide by four feet high. With the collection cup, the skimmer is almost six feet tall. The skimmer is fed by a 1.0 HP Hayward Super II™ pump through a down draft venturi. The addition of the skimmer seemed to do the trick. Phosphates started to reach a respectable level after the skimmer was placed online.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a title="A custom made protein skimmer." class="popup" href="aafeature_album/ff.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature_album/ff.jpg/image_preview" alt="ff.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">A custom made protein skimmer.</p>
</div>
<p>At this point, many of the major problems have been solved, and now some lesser, more welcome problems have arisen. As I mentioned earlier, flow is extremely important. As the algae would grow (some <em>Laminaria</em> blades were now over 4 feet) it would take more flow to get the blades moving in the water column. To increase flow, two 55gallon surge devices, constructed of 55-gallon barrels, were added to the tank. Each barrel fills in approximately two minutes and completely returns to the tank in 15 seconds through a two-inch pipe. This surge, in combination with the Sea Swirls™, keeps the entire tank in motion. The increase of flow also had a positive effect on recruitment of new algae. New algae started to appear in areas that had been devoid of algae since the tank first started.</p>
<p>After reading a previous Advance Aquarist article (<a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/aug2002/chem.htm">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/aug2002/chem.htm</a>) about iron additions to a reef tank and the benefits to macro algae, I decided to see how iron additions would affect algae growth in my tank.</p>
<p>I started by using the dose stated in the article; 0.1 to 0.3 mL of a solution containing 5 g of iron for a 250gallon tank, dosed 2-3 times a week. For a 3000gallon system I dosed 3ml, 2-3 times a week. At first I did not see any affect, so I started to increase the dosage. With every increase, I noticed significant changes. Recruitment of all algae species was occurring at a faster rate. The most notable effect was the increased growth rate of the <em>Laminaria</em>. I started seeing growth rates close to 2cm/day. Currently I am dosing 300ml/week.</p>
<p>Basic maintenance of the tank consists of a 50% water change every 3-4 weeks. During water changes I take advantage of the low water level to enter the exhibit to remove any algae that has broken loose and settled in crevices. Pruning of the algae is also done at this time. With growth rates of 2cm/day, pruning is a necessity. If left un-pruned, I would constantly need to increase water flow to keep up with the growth.</p>
<p>Water parameters are as follows:</p>
<ul>
<li>Temperature: 50-52F</li>
<li>Salinity: 32 ppt</li>
<li>pH: 8.0</li>
<li>Alkalinity: 2.6-3.0 meq/l</li>
<li>Nitrates: 0 mg/l</li>
<li>Phosphates: 0.2 mg/l</li>
<li>Photo Period: center light, 11 hours / Outer lights, 8 hours</li>
</ul>
<p>As with any living system, this tank has evolved continually in response to problems that have arisen, as well as new information and technology that has become available to me. Although a tank with temperate marine macro algae as the primary focus may be unheard of in the aquarium hobby, all of the equipment required is readily available, and as you may have noticed, many of the techniques involved are strikingly similar to common reef-keeping techniques already being employed.</p>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Christopher Paparo</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Algae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Christopher Paparo</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Feature Article</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Quality</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2009-10-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/9/beginner">
    <title>Beginner's Column: Filtration</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/9/beginner</link>
    <description>Terry discusses common types of filtration found in reef tanks.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>here are essentially three types of filtration that the marine aquarist need be concerned with: particle, chemical, and biological. For the marine fish only or the reef tank, biological filtration is essential. Without the establishment of nitrifying bacteria toxic metabolites will reach deadly levels quickly in a marine fish or reef tank. Waste products from the fish's respiration, excrement, etc., will rapidly convert to toxic ammonia. The same process occurs in freshwater aquariums, but in marine aquariums which have a much higher pH - at least 10 times higher - a given amount of ammonia is at least 10 times more toxic. Keep in mind that the higher the pH the more available unionized ammonia, which is the toxic form of ammonia. Therefore, it is essential that the marine aquarist establish a sufficient colony of nitrifying bacteria to convert ammonia to nitrites and finally to nitrates. Nitrates are relatively nontoxic. This must be done before
introducing fish into a newly setup marine aquarium. There are any number of ways to accomplish this. One way is to take filter material from an established marine aquarium and place it in the filter system of the new aquarium. Once there are nitrifying bacteria present increasing their number to handle the arrival of fish can easily be done by injecting ammonia into the tank. Even human urine will do nicely. It is then necessary for the aquarist to measure the change from ammonia to nitrites and then to nitrates, a process that usually takes several weeks. Keep in mind that these bacteria are aerobic and should be placed in filter material that is exposed to good water circulation. This is important for fish only marine aquariums. With a new reef tank the presence of conditioned live rock will have already acquired nitrifying bacteria. If the rock is dead and sterile then it will have to be made biologically alive using the same methods as described for new fish only aquariums.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="beginner_album/image003.png" title="The pH scale is logarithmic: Going from a pH of 7 (neutral) to a pH of 8 represents an increase of 10 times the number of hydrogen ions. Put another way, anything above 7 represents a concentration of H+ ions. The higher the pH number the greater the concentration of H+ ions. "><img src="beginner_album/image003.png/image_preview" alt="image003.png" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">The pH scale is logarithmic: Going from a pH of 7 (neutral) to a pH of 8 represents an increase of 10 times the number of hydrogen ions. Put another way, anything above 7 represents a concentration of H+ ions. The higher the pH number the greater the concentration of H+ ions.</p>
</div>
<h2>Producers and Consumers of Waste</h2>
<p>In successful reef tanks the production of waste, mostly by fish metabolism and uneaten food, is in balance with the capacity of the consumers. The filter feeders and the photosynthetic, symbiotic dinoflagelates (ZOOXANTHELLAE) that live in the hermatypic (reef building corals) corals will consume some waste, but unless there are very few fish in a large thriving reef tank waste will build up. It is therefore necessary for the reef keeper to use water changes, mechanical, and chemical means to maintain this vital balance. The buildup of waste, usually measured by aquarists as nitrates and organic phosphates, if allowed to concentrate will interfere with the ability of many invertebrates to survive, let alone grow. Phosphate (PO<sub>4</sub>) at concentrations greater than 0.1 PPM will interfere with coral growth.</p>
<h2>Water Changes</h2>
<p>One way to dilute unwanted waste in the form called total organic carbon or TOC is through water changes. Many successful reef keepers change 25% of the water monthly. However, for this to be effective the new water must be pure, free of phosphates and other waste products. The new saltwater should be made up from water that has been treated by reverse osmosis and deionization. Otherwise, whatever impurities exist in one's tap water will concentrate with the addition of water to replace seawater from evaporation and during water changes. Note, when making a significant water change it is important to make sure that the new water is at the same salinity, temperature, and pH as the reef tank's water.</p>
<h2>Protein Skimming</h2>
<p>For a long time marine aquarists believed that protein skimmers (also called foam fractionators) were the be all and end all of waste removal. Furthermore, that they were so efficient that they could remove too much, and thereby starve certain corals. They are effective at removing phytoplankton. However, resent studies by Professor Feldman has shown, regardless of the type of skimmer used, skimmers will only remove about 20% of the unwanted TOC. I strongly suggest that you read Feldman's study published here.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2/view?searchterm=feldman">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2/view?searchterm=feldman</a></p>
<p>I certainly do not want to give the impression that skimming is useless, only that it is but one of the useful devices available to the aquarist to maintain a balance between the producers and consumers of waste. Also, it greatly helps with gas exchange, especially at night when the production of oxygen stops with the end of photosynthesis after the lights are turned off.</p>
<h2>Chemical Filtration</h2>
<p>There are two forms of chemical filtration commonly used by marine aquarists, activated carbon and chemical phosphate absorbers. Activated carbon is very useful due to its ability to absorb TOC; however, it requires frequent changing - weekly --as it becomes saturated easily. There are a number of PO<sub>4</sub> absorbers on the market - Phosban and ROWAphos, are the two most popular - which are very effective at removing PO<sub>4</sub> to almost immeasurable levels. To know when to change the PO<sub>4</sub> media requires a PO<sub>4</sub> test kit that will measure to very low levels. Salifert, Hack, and ROWA Phosphate Test Kit, make kits that I know will indicate low enough to be useful; whereas, most other hobby kits are not. There very well maybe others, but these I have used successfully.</p>
<p>I strongly suggest that readers also read Professor Feldman's two articles on TOC published here also.</p>
<ol>
<li><a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/8/aafeature3">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/8/aafeature3</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/9/aafeature2">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/9/aafeature2</a></li>
</ol>
<p>If there is a heavy bioload (fish) it is difficult to keep the nitrate level below 10-PPM. Still, many of the more delicate invertebrates do better in water that has not accumulated a concentration of nitrate. One way to keep nitrates low is to do regular water changes; how much and how often will depend on the bioload of fish, and how often and how much they are fed. The way to monitor this is with a nitrate test kit. The aquarist should recognize that there is a difference in what some nitrate test kits indicate - nitrate- nitrogen or nitrate (NO<sub>3</sub>). If your kit measures nitrate-nitrogen to convert this to the Nitrate ion multiply your reading by 4.4. Some advanced aquarists have experimented with what is called the vodka method to reduce the nitrate and phosphate levels in their aquaria. Vodka is a carbon source, and can stimulate the growth of bacteria that will use nitrates and phosphates as food. To try this method it is vital to have a well functioning skimmer, as
the bacteria can reduced the oxygen levels too much. For more information about this method check chapter 6 in <span class="c2">The Reef Aquarium: Science, Art, and Technology</span> vol.3 by Delbeek and Sprung. ISBN 1-883693-14-4 In my opinion, if there's one book that the beginning reef keeper should regard as the essential source it is this book.</p>
<h2>Algal Turf Scrubbers (ATS)</h2>
<p>It is also possible to keep the TOC levels acceptably low by a method known as Algal Turf Scrubbers (ATS). In this method sufficient alga is grown and harvested. The alga uses nitrates and phosphates as food, which is then removed from the aquarium with the harvesting of the algae. It is of course necessary to grow a lot of alga, and to also be concerned with what trace elements are removed from the system with the harvested algae. Another concern with this method is that it yellows the water; however, this can be overcome with the regular use of activated carbon. This method was initially promulgated by Walter Adey.</p>
<p>Check out the following link for more discussion on this and other methods for reducing TOC in reef tanks:</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/9/diy">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/9/diy</a></li>
</ul>
<h2>Success</h2>
<p>A successful reef tank is a thing of beauty and well worth the effort. A picture of my reef tank</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="beginner_album/image005.jpg" title=""><img src="beginner_album/image005.jpg/image_preview" alt="image005.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a></div>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Terry Siegel</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Algae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Beginner's Column</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Equipment</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Skimmers</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Terry Siegel</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Quality</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Testing</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>ATS</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Algal Turf Scrubbers</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2009-09-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/2/aafeature3">
    <title>Feature Article: Algae: Sometimes Both Beautiful and Useful</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/2/aafeature3</link>
    <description>Too often marine macro algae are only considered to be part of an aquarium's filtration system.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">J</span>ust the mere mention of the word algae in a room of aquarists will send them running for their scrub pads. Algae are the nemesis of most aquarists, from pesky diatom algae covering our décor in a brown film, to the nearly impossible to eradicate hair algae. Not all algae should be despised however; many types are extremely useful and some can be quite beautiful.</p>
<p>Most of us are familiar with the ornamental species common to the trade, such as <em>Caulerpa</em> and <em>Chaetomorpha</em>. Occasionally species of <em>Codium, Halimeda, Acetabularia,</em> and some miscellaneous red species will show up at your local fish shop attached to a piece of base rock. But how many of us have wandered the local shoreline in search of algae for our aquariums?</p>
<p>Living on Long Island, I am fortunate to be minutes away from the bay or ocean. A short walk along the shoreline at low tide will expose you to a wide variety of algae. Many of the species, being temperate in range, will tolerate a wide range of temperatures, including those of a reef environment. Knowing what to look for will enable you to collect algae for your home aquarium.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/orient_pt.jpg" title="Rocky intertidal zone at Orient Point, NY"><img src="aafeature3_album/orient_pt.jpg/image_preview" alt="orient_pt.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Rocky intertidal zone at Orient Point, NY</p>
</div>
<p>There are three phyla of algae; Chlorophyta (green), Chrysophyta (brown) and Rhodophyta (red). Each of these phyla has unique characteristics causing them to be found at different depths of the water column.</p>
<p>Chlorophyta, the green algae, need more light than the other phyla and will be found higher in the water column. Of the greens, <em>Ulva lactuca</em>, or better known as sea lettuce, is probably the most abundant and widely known. Growing in large, thin sheets, it is unmistakable. Ranging from subarctic to tropical environments world wide, it can be found growing among the rocks of an inlet, to the calm waters of the back bay. It is frequently found thriving in areas of high nutrients.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/ulva.jpg" title="None"><img src="aafeature3_album/ulva.jpg/image_preview" alt="ulva.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><em>Ulva lactuca</em></p>
</div>
<p>A species similar to <em>Ulva lactuca</em> is <em>Ulva intestinalis</em> (formerly, <em>Enteromorpha intestinalis</em>). This green alga shares the same environment as <em>Ulva lactuca</em> but grows in long narrow tubes. This growth form allows it to survive in areas that might be too turbulent for the delicate sheets of <em>U. lactuca</em> to grow. As with many plants and even some animals (i.e., corals), morphology will vary with environmental conditions. In areas of high current or wave action, it tends to grow in very narrow tubes, almost as if it was hair algae, while growing in wider tubes in calm conditions. Large blades growing in such a turbulent area would only be broken off before the alga gets a chance to grow. Like <em>U. lactuca</em>, <em>U. intestinalis</em> has a worldwide range.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/entramorpha.jpg" title="None"><img src="aafeature3_album/entramorpha.jpg/image_preview" alt="entramorpha.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><em>Ulva intestinalis</em></p>
</div>
<p>Arriving to the east coast of America from the Pacific in 1957, <em>Codium fragile</em> is an invasive green alga that is quite abundant. Commonly called Dead Man's Fingers or Green Fleece, <em>C.fragile</em> grows in ropelike spongy branches, and when exposed at low tide, it looks like fingers. <em>C.fragile</em> is unique as it is a long single cell that is made up of many nuclei but no cell wall dividing them. Being able to reproduce by fragmentation has allowed it to spread easily through out the east coast of North America. This invasive species has been very destructive to shellfish beds, especially oysters. Upon attaching to a shellfish, wave action causes the shellfish to be "uprooted" and the currents wash it ashore. This species is commonly found in calm, protected waters. Locally, I tend to find it attached to some of our more common epibenthic mollusks such as Cockles and Slipper Shells.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/codium.jpg" title="None"><img src="aafeature3_album/codium.jpg/image_preview" alt="codium.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><em>Codium fragile</em> with a red algae growing as an epiphyte.</p>
</div>
<p>Chrysophyta, the brown algae, tend to grow much larger than the greens. Some of The most common brown algae of the intertidal zone belong to the genus, <em>Fucus</em>. Fucus can tolerate exposure to a wide range of environmental conditions. Being exposed at low tide, it is subject to freezing in winter months, and to extreme heat and dehydration in the summer. To adapt to these harsh conditions, <em>Fucus</em> has thick rubbery blades allowing the algae to retain moisture while it is exposed. The blades of <em>Fucus</em> have many air bladders that provide buoyancy for the blades. This buoyancy allows the blades to sway in the currents removing any detritus that has settled during the low tide. Algae growing in high surge areas will have fewer bladders as the current will keep the blades moving. Growing mostly in cooler waters, it has a worldwide distribution.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/fucus.jpg" title="None"><img src="aafeature3_album/fucus.jpg/image_preview" alt="fucus.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><em>Fucus sp.</em></p>
</div>
<p>Another type of brown algae found on our shorelines is kelp. When talking about kelp, we think of the giant kelp forests of cold-temperate waters such as the California coast, New England, and western South America. Some species, such as <em>Macrocystis pyrifera</em>, can grow at a rate of 30 cm a day and can reach a length of 60 meters. Like <em>Fucus</em>, giant kelp has air bladders that keep it suspended in the water column. On the east coast of North America, our species of kelp, <em>Laminaria agardhii,</em> is much different than <em>M.pyrifera.</em> Under ideal conditions, it can grow 2 cm a day, growing to 3 meters in length. Looking like a large lasagna noodle, it has one large blade, a stipe (similar to a stem), and a large holdfast. Similar in appearance to roots of vascular plants, the holdfast's sole purpose is for attachment, there is no nutrient uptake. Growing in areas of strong surges, the holdfast is important to keeping the alga from washing away. Unlike
    <em>M.pyrifera,</em> <em>L.agardhii</em> has no air bladders. It depends on strong currents to keep it suspended in the water column. Long Island is the southern most part of <em>Laminaria's</em> range, and can only be found in the winter months.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/kelp.jpg" title="None"><img src="aafeature3_album/kelp.jpg/image_preview" alt="kelp.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><em>Laminaria agardhii</em></p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/kelp_holdfast.jpg" title="None"><img src="aafeature3_album/kelp_holdfast.jpg/image_preview" alt="kelp_holdfast.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">The holdfast of <em>Laminaria.</em></p>
</div>
<p>The last group of algae you will find while walking the beach are the Rhodophyta or red algae. Red algae contain a pigment called phycoerythrin. This pigment absorbs blue light and reflects red light, giving the algae its red color. Being that blue light penetrates deeper in the water column, red algae tend to be found growing at greater depths. This can make it a little more difficult to collect as you might need to get your feet wet to find a suitable specimen. An abundant and well-known red seaweed in our local waters is <em>Chondrus chrispus</em>, better know as Irish Moss. <em>C.chrispus</em> is commercially harvested for use in the food industry. Carrageen is an extract of <em>Chondrus</em> that is used as a thickener in soups and dairy products.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/chondrus.jpg" title="None"><img src="aafeature3_album/chondrus.jpg/image_preview" alt="chondrus.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><em>Chondrus chrispus</em></p>
</div>
<p>One red algae, although not a macro algae, is encrusting coralline algae. Common to the tropics, encrusting coralline algae is absent from Long Island waters. As you move north away from Long Island, encrusting coralline algae becomes common once again<em>.</em> Even though encrusting red corallines are absent, we do have a macro coralline alga, <em>Corallina officinalis</em>, better know as coral weed. Unlike the encrusting species, it grows as fan-like tuffs reaching only a couple inches in length. When found washed up on the beach, it is white in color and will crumble in you hand when you pick it up.</p>
<p>Two other species of red algae commonly found around Long Island and ranging to the tropics are, <em>Agardhiella tenera</em> and <em>Gracilaria foliifera.</em> Both species are delicately branched and their color can vary from a bright red to almost brown. They can be found attached to rocks or shells, but are more commonly found free floating. They seem to prefer calm waters where they are less likely to be washed ashore.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/agardhiella.jpg" title="None"><img src="aafeature3_album/agardhiella.jpg/image_preview" alt="agardhiella.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption"><em>Agardhiella tenera</em></p>
</div>
<p>Too often marine macro algae are only considered to be part of an aquarium's filtration system. They are tucked deeply away in a refugium under ones aquarium, never to be shown as proudly as the main tank. Many of these algae are extremely beautiful, and deserve their own display. Although they do pose some challenges in keeping them, it can be done and I will share with you how to keep them in a future article.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature3_album/macro_algae_tank.jpg" title="This is the macro algae tank I care for at Atlantis Marine World and will go into more detail on the care of such a tank in a future article."><img src="aafeature3_album/macro_algae_tank.jpg/image_preview" alt="macro_algae_tank.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">This is the macro algae tank I care for at Atlantis Marine World and will go into more detail on the care of such a tank in a future article.</p>
</div>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Christopher Paparo</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Algae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Christopher Paparo</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Feature Article</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2008-02-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/9/diy">
    <title>Do It Yourself: What's in YOUR Sump?</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/9/diy</link>
    <description>Suzy reviews the common and not-so-common sump.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>s a sump just a place to hide equipment? A sump adds volume to your tank, but who is to say that wonderful aquatic acreage must just remain dormant? Adding fish would add bioload to the main display, but there are many other uses for this otherwise under utilized space. A dedicated hobbyist can design and build a custom sump to fit any need. Here is a starting place to begin considering what features you can add to your reservoir, depending on your needs and space:</p>
<p><strong>Hiding Equipment</strong>: The original concept of sumpage, hiding equipment removes it from the main display. This allows the art of the tank to catch the viewer's eye, without man made objects distracting attention away. Skimmers, heaters, return pumps all work well in the sump. One important concept to consider: Return pumps add heat to a closed environment. If in your situation this is detrimental, you may consider having a small return pump, and increasing circulation in the display with a closed loop system, utilizing an external pump.</p>
<p><strong>Algae Turf Scrubber:</strong> The ATS concept has been around for a while. It is a screen, situated so that the return from the overflow drains over it. It needs to be lit with an inexpensive lighting system. An ATS will remove large amounts of organic compounds, with large amounts of nutrient uptake. The drawback is the algae can yellow the water. Systems that run ATS will need activated carbon to keep the water crystal clear. One of the major benefits of an ATS is the amount of zooplankton that will proliferate in the turf algae, whose larvae make great zooplankton for coral food.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="diy_album/image001.jpg" title=""><img src="diy_album/image001.jpg/image_preview" alt="image001.jpg" class="image-inline" v:shapes="_x0000_i1025" /></a>
</div>
<p><strong>Reverse Daylight Refugium:</strong> The concept of a refugium is a place where zooplankton (amphipods, copepods, mysis shrimp, miscellaneous worms, ect) can be cultured naturally, with no added input from the hobbyist. If we have an area free of predators and encourage the right conditions, zooplankton will thrive, and their larva will travel to the display to feed our coral. A substrate with differing grain sizes and rubble can be a haven for tiny creatures. If we add plant life (macro algae and/or vascular plants), we can also manipulate the lighting to assist with stabilizing the pH. Lighting the refugium opposite of the display uses the properties of photosynthesis to control pH by allowing part of the entire system to be releasing (or absorbing) the acid CO2. The macro algae will consume nitrate and phosphate, along with other elements.</p>
<p><strong>Mangrove Forest:</strong> The ability of mangroves to remove nutrients could be minimal compared to macro algae, but a group of actively growing mangroves can be rather striking. If your situation allows your sump to have attention from your desired audience, you might consider investing in an area (and a few years time) where these can thrive.</p>
<p><strong>A Deep Sand Bed</strong>: Adding a few inches of sand to an area in your sump can assist a system with a nitrate issue, allowing the beneficial anaerobic bacteria to convert the nitrate to free nitrogen gas. Adding the DSB to the sump could allow the main display to have less substrate, which can be more aesthetically pleasing.</p>
<p><strong>Filter Socks</strong> : A must for most systems, filter bags for activated carbon or phosphate absorber are placed in the return from the overflow. If you place a line of acrylic tubing from the overflow, an AC or PA reactor can be built out of large diameter acrylic tubing.</p>
<h2>A few less conventional ideas</h2>
<p>Most people have heard of the conventional uses for a sump, but with some ingenuity, a few DIY skills and possibly some micron mesh, many unconventional needs can be addressed under the tank. Many different ideas can utilize the same space.</p>
<p><strong>A Frag Tank</strong>: An open area to grow out frags of coral can really work well. The H2O in a sump is usually well oxygenated and if you have a large return pump, the water flow can be directed through a smaller area to increase its strength. Easy access is a must for this operation. Use PVC and egg crate to build shelves on top of another compartment or dedicate a spot only for frags.</p>
<p><strong>A habitat for unruly or incompatible fish</strong>. Using your refugium temporarily for a fish that needs to be re-homed, or a new fish that needs to build its strength before being placed in the main display. A wounded fish could be placed there to heal while it awaits it's new home (no medication of course). If you have enough room, you can dedicate an area for a specimen you wish to keep there permanently. This option must be weighed against the fact that some specimens will eat the beneficial fauna, thus negating the effect of refuge. This area of our sump is a dedicated touch tank for inspiring young aquarists.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="diy_album/image003.jpg" title=""><img src="diy_album/image003.jpg/image_preview" alt="image003.jpg" class="image-inline" v:shapes="_x0000_i1026" /></a>
</div>
<p>Using mesh from the fabric store, you can easily make smaller areas for differing uses. This plastic fish bowl has a large area for water to flow out but traps fish fry, mysis shrimp and copepods as they travel out of the display. You could use this same concept using smaller mesh sizes for an area to grow out brine shrimp or copepods to use to feed a finicky eater or fry.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="diy_album/image005.jpg" title=""><img src="diy_album/image005.jpg/image_preview" alt="image005.jpg" class="image-inline" v:shapes="_x0000_i1027" /></a>
</div>
<p><strong>A Nursery Tank</strong>: A sump can house a nursery of sorts easily with a bit of imagination. Remembering that it should be easily accessible, using the water volume of the entire system can really help with water quality issues that affect most marine fry greatly. There is thought that parasites and disease from the display will affect the fry.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="diy_album/image007.jpg" title=""><img src="diy_album/image007.jpg/image_preview" alt="image007.jpg" class="image-inline" v:shapes="_x0000_i1028" /></a>
</div>
<p><strong>A Sponge Filter:</strong> A cryptic area can be added to a sump to increase sponge growth. I have used plastic needlepoint mesh to separate a small area in the sump, where the water flows through but it is very dim. Sponge grows wonderfully there and filters the water that flows through it.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="diy_album/image009.jpg" title=""><img src="diy_album/image009.jpg/image_preview" alt="image009.jpg" class="image-inline" v:shapes="_x0000_i1029" /></a>
</div>
<p><strong>An Additive Compartment</strong>: A mason jar can be placed in the sump for a spot to slowly add chemicals. Stability in an aquarium is very beneficial, and sudden changes can be detrimental. By placing additives in an area where they can be dispersed slowly, a small tube coming from the overflow can be adjusted to release the products slowly. Some chemicals cannot be added together so your situation may require 2 for maximum benefit. This same concept could be used to add filter food, to keep it available longer to the tank.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="diy_album/image011.jpg" title=""><img src="diy_album/image011.jpg/image_preview" alt="image011.jpg" class="image-inline" v:shapes="_x0000_i1030" /></a>
</div>
<h2>Things to consider when designing your sump</h2>
<p>Baffles: Walls to slow flow through a sump, or redirect flow may be needed to allow the tiny bubbles that will be generated from the splashing of the overflow to dissipate. If the overflow is on the opposite side of the return pump, this may not be necessary. Temporary baffles can be added and removed as needed.</p>
<p>It is imperative to never place tubes to the sump directly inside the main display tank. Any drainage from the tank must come from a secured overflow area, to avoid draining the tank in a pump malfunction situation.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="diy_album/image013.jpg" title=""><img src="diy_album/image013.jpg/image_preview" alt="image013.jpg" class="image-inline" v:shapes="_x0000_i1031" /></a>
</div>
<p>If you desire, leave an area for an auto top off under your cabinet. Easily installed to a sump, an auto top off can be a very helpful addition.</p>
<p>Some people add valves for water changes to their sump design, but I find it much quicker to drain water from the upper main display. The higher water level makes it drain much faster. But, if your sump is near a drain, having a valve could save you some trips with a water bucket.</p>
<p>A simple sponge filter can be kept in your sump to add beneficial bacteria to a makeshift hospital or quarantine tank. Keep the filter in the sump, ready if the need arises.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="diy_album/image015.jpg" title=""><img src="diy_album/image015.jpg/image_preview" alt="image015.jpg" class="image-inline" v:shapes="_x0000_i1032" /></a>
</div>
<p>With a little thought, a sump can be much more than just a place to hide a heater. Design your sump to utilize your available space to it's ultimate potential.</p>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Suzy Applegarth</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Algae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Do It Yourself</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Frag</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Mangroves</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Sandbed</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Sump</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Suzy Applegarth</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Refugium</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2007-09-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/6/aafeature1">
    <title>Evaluation of live food versus artificial food on the growth of juvenile Pocillopora damicornis cultured from planulae</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2007/6/aafeature1</link>
    <description>The following is a report on the first experiment where Lee examined the effects of different foods on the growth of juvenile corals.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">L</span>ast year, I wrote a two-part essay for this
    magazine (and spoke at several conferences) introducing the idea of growing
    corals from larvae. At the conclusion of my discussions I identified
    several experiments that needed to be performed in order to increase the
    success of culturing corals using this technique. During this past year, I
    stepped down from my soap box and retreated into my lab in an effort to put
    my words into action. After many unshaven,
    pretzels-for-lunch-and-dinner-days, I successfully completed two important
    experiments; one that will improve the techniques for growing corals from
    larvae, the other, a technique for increasing the growth rates of two
    different species cultured together in the same tank. The following is a
    report on the first experiment where I examined the effects of different
    foods on the growth of juvenile corals.</p>
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>Corals in the Order Scleractinia are popular marine ornamental
    invertebrates within the aquarium trade (Delbeek 2001). In 2006, the
    Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species (CITES) reported
    that over 1 million pieces of live coral were traded globally. Although
    there are over 100 commercial facilities worldwide that grow and sell coral
    fragments, 99% of the coral fragments introduced into the aquarium trade
    still originate directly from tropical reefs (Wabnitz et al. 2003).
    Currently, all of the corals offered within the aquarium trade originate
    directly from the harvest of coral fragments from parent colonies on the
    reef. These fragments are obtained by cutting pieces of coral away from the
    main colony and attaching them to substrate. This practice may ultimately
    affect the parent colony as the exposed skeleton may promote the settlement
    of algae capable of overgrowing and smothering the colony (Nugues and Bak
    2006). Further, the reduction in size could reduce the fecundity of the
    coral (Tanner 1997), and decrease its ability to contend in a highly
    competitive environment (Connolly and Muko 2003).</p>
<p>To reduce the number of corals harvested from reefs, I have developed
    techniques for growing corals from larvae. Other marine invertebrates whose
    populations have been threatened by the harvesting of wild stock, such as
    Giant clams (<em>Tridacna</em> sp.), have benefited substantially from the
    research and practice of culturing through sexual reproduction (Ellis
    2000). In addition to the potential profits associated with the culture of
    Tridanca clams, there has been an increase in wild populations that has
    resulted from the reduction in wild stock harvesting (Minogoa-Lucuanan and
    Gomez 2002).</p>
<p>One of the challenges involved with the culture of coral larvae into
    adult colonies is the high rates of mortality during the first month post
    metamorphosis (Gateno et al. 2000, Szmant &amp; Miller in press, L.
    Goldman, pers. obs.). Survivorship increases, however, as the age and size
    of the juvenile increases (Gateno et al. 2000, Raymundo &amp; Maypa 2004).
    Therefore, to ensure high rates of survival, growth during the first month
    must be maximized. The addition of food can make significant contributions
    to the growth of marine invertebrates including corals (Ellis 2000,
    Borneman 2001, Rhyne &amp; Lin 2004). Different food sources, however, can
    have varied performances and production costs which may affect colony
    growth and the overall financial investment. With the increase in demand
    for corals in the aquarium trade and the continual degradation of natural
    reefs around the world, new techniques in coral culture must be
    investigated.</p>
<h2>Methods</h2>
<p>Three treatments, live food (<em>Artemia franciscana</em>,
    GSL<sup>©</sup> Premium, 400μm), artificial food (Golden
    Pearls<sup>©</sup>, 400 μm), and no food (control) were replicated 3 times
    for each group of planulae donated from a single colony (Figure 1 and 2).
    The experiment was repeated 6 times using planulae donated from 6 different
    individual colonies. This experimental design is known as a ‘clonal
    design’. Using planulae in all of the treatments donated from a single
    colony gives me better control over any genetically-based variation that
    may exist between different genotypes. Ultimately, I can conclude with more
    accuracy that any differences in growth between colonies may be due to the
    different treatments (food types). Replication comes from the 6 times I
    repeat this experiment, using a different parent colony each time.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="None" class="popup" href="aafeature1_album/figure1.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature1_album/figure1.jpg/image_preview" alt="figure1.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 1: Three treatments, live food (<em>Artemia
      franciscana</em>, GSL© Premium, 400µm), artificial food (Golden Pearls©,
      400 µm), and no food (control) were replicated 3 times for each group of
      planulae donated from a single colony. The experiment was repeated 6
      times using planulae donated from 6 different individual colonies.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="None" class="popup" href="aafeature1_album/figure2.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature1_album/figure2.jpg/image_preview" alt="figure2.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 2: Left: Artificial food treatment, Golden
      Pearls© (400 µm); Right: Live food treatment, <em>Artemia
      franciscana</em>, GSL Premium (400 µm).</p>
</div>
<p>Each 500ml cup contained one juvenile <em>Pocillopora damicornis</em>
    colony and was supplied with aeration via an outdoor, 50W air pump.
    Temperature was maintained by placing the cups in a water bath (25º C) and
    a 70% shade cloth was used to minimize over exposure to direct sunlight.
    Nutritional values for <em>A. franciscana</em> and Golden
    pearls<sup>©</sup> were reported to be similar (Artemia Int’l 2007). I
    found that using 0.55 g of <em>GSL</em><sup>©</sup> <em>90% Premium
    hatch</em> (400 μm) and 0.50 g of 400 μm Golden Pearls<sup>©</sup> in one
    liter of water produced equal amounts of food. Each night, I used a 5 ml
    pipette to extract 3.5 ml of enriched seawater which was distributed into
    each treatment cup. Food remained in the cups overnight. The following
    morning 100% of the water was changed and no additional food was added.
    Data was analyzed using a two-factor ANOVA (factors: treatments and
    clones). Count data was square-root transformed prior to analysis.</p>
<h2>Results</h2>
<p>After one month, juvenile <em>P. damicornis</em> who were fed live food
    showed a significant increase in the number of polyps (Figure 3, ANOVA;
    <em>df</em> = 2, <em>F</em> = 67.83, <em>p</em> = 0.008, Tukey-Kramer test,
    <em>p</em> = 0.05) and colony size (Figure 4, ANOVA; <em>df</em> = 2,
    <em>F</em> = 145.34, <em>p</em> = 0.0002; Tukey-Kramer test, <em>p</em> =
    0.05) compared to juveniles who were fed artificial food or who did not
    receive either food item. Corals fed live food had an overall higher
    survival rate compared to corals fed artificial food and corals with no
    food (Figure 5). There was no significant difference among the responses
    between clones (ANOVA: number of polyps: <em>df</em> = 5, <em>F</em> =
    0.66, <em>p</em> = 0.6647; ANOVA: diameter; <em>df</em> = 5, <em>F</em> =
    0.55, <em>p</em> = 0.7236).</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="None" class="popup" href="aafeature1_album/figure3.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature1_album/figure3.jpg/image_preview" alt="figure3.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 3: Colonies fed live food (<em>Artemia
      franciscana</em>) showed a significantly higher number of polyps than
      either the colony fed the artificial food (Golden Pearls©) or fed a no
      food control. Treatments with an asterisk were significantly different.
      Values were untransformed for clarity.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="None" class="popup" href="aafeature1_album/figure4.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature1_album/figure4.jpg/image_preview" alt="figure4.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 4: Colonies fed live food (<em>Artemia
      franciscana</em>) showed a significant increase in colony diameter
      compared to colonies who were fed either the artificial food (Golden
      Pearls©) or fed a no food control. Treatments with and asterisk were
      significantly different.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="Figure 5: Although the differences were not significant, corals fed live food had a higher average survival rate compared to corals fed artificial food and corals that received no food." class="popup" href="aafeature1_album/figure5.jpg" rel="gallery">
<img src="aafeature1_album/figure5.jpg/image_preview" alt="figure5.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 5: Although the differences were not significant,
      corals fed live food had a higher average survival rate compared to
      corals fed artificial food and corals that received no food.</p>
</div>
<h2>Discussion</h2>
<p>Although <em>A. franciscana</em> and Golden Pearls<sup>©</sup> have
    similar nutritional values, colonies fed live food showed a significantly
    higher growth rate. Because corals are sessile, the exposure to food is
    dependant upon water flow (Sebens et al. 1998) or the locomotion of the
    prey, as in the case of <em>Artemia</em> spp. Corals consume a variety of
    reef organisms (Goreau et al. 1971) and will continue to consume prey as
    long as it is available, never becoming satiated (Ferrier-Pages et al.
    2004). Observations on the availability of each of the food item revealed
    that Golden Pearls<sup>©</sup> remained buoyant for only one hour after
    being distributed into the treatment cup compared to <em>A.
    franciscana</em> which remained continuously active in the water column.
    Therefore, because the artificial food did not circulate and sank to the
    bottom, it is probable that corals in the artificial food treatment were
    not exposed to as much of the Golden Pearls<sup>©</sup> as corals who were
    fed <em>A. franciscana.</em> This conclusion may seem fairly obvious and
    pretty straight forward. The manufacturers of Golden Pearls<sup>©</sup>
    promote their product as being ‘neutrally buoyant’; however, this was not
    the case (at least for an extended period of time). In their defense, they
    developed the food as a replacement for <em>Artemia</em> spp. used to feed
    young shrimp; highly mobile creatures that have no qualms about seeking out
    their food. Most corals do not have that ability and, thus, any type of
    food that cannot consistently remain in the water column may not be the
    best choice for corals. Although I believe this to be the major (and
    obvious) factor that produced these results, there may have been other
    factors at work here.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="None" class="popup" href="aafeature1_album/figure6.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature1_album/figure6.jpg/image_preview" alt="figure6.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 6: Coral colonies in each of the three
      treatments: a: Control; b: <em>Artemia franciscana</em>; c: Golden
      Pearls©. Note the substantial algal growth in artificial food treatment
      compared to either of the other two treatments.</p>
</div>
<p>An equally important observation was how water quality and the colonies
    were affected by the different food items. Most aquarists who care for a
    variety of corals understand that food additions can be a necessary evil.
    One the one hand, feeding corals promotes their health and growth; on the
    other, food contributes substantially to the quality of water in which the
    corals live. Nutrients associated with food are usually released into the
    water and may negatively affect water quality. Since many corals are
    vulnerable to even minor changes in water quality, the quality of food must
    be considered. In this experiment, I did not test water quality. The growth
    responses that I observed in each treatment and previous studies on the
    results of elevated nutrients on corals and seawater systems, however,
    permitted me to speculate on how the food item affected water quality.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="None" class="popup" href="aafeature1_album/photo1.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aafeature1_album/photo1.jpg/image_preview" alt="photo1.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Photo 1: Left: Colonies of <em>Pocillopora
      damicornis</em> at 2 weeks post metamorphosis (Diameter = 5 mm); Right:
      Colony at 8 months (Diameter = 35 mm)</p>
</div>
<p>In 1991, Stambler et al. performed a nutrient enrichment experiment on
    <em>Pocillopora damicornis</em>. Motivation for this experiment came from
    the need to understand what kind of effects elevated nutrients have on
    coral reefs. In the experiment, they examined two the effects of dissolved
    inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous on the growth of <em>P. damicornis</em>.
    They found that the addition of ammonium (nitrogen) did not lead to an
    increase in growth of the coral; rather, it led to an increase in algal
    growth. In this case, the algae were symbiotic zooxanthellae contained
    within the polyps of the coral. Phosphorous, in combination with nitrogen
    produced similar results, but phosphorous alone did not result in any
    changes to either the algae or coral. Stambler and his colleagues suggested
    that the lack of growth observed in the coral may be due to the higher
    energy demands from the increasing algal populations, thus no carbon was
    translocated to the coral from the algae. Their findings (and discussions)
    were consistent with previous work by Muscatine et al. (1989) who used
    <em>Stylophora pistillata</em> as their test subject.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="Photo 2: Colonies at 11 months. Most colonies have reached the minimum size for commercial distribution (Diameter = 50 mm)" class="popup" href="aafeature1_album/photo2.jpg" rel="gallery">
<img src="aafeature1_album/photo2.jpg/image_preview" alt="photo2.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Photo 2: Colonies at 11 months. Most colonies have
      reached the minimum size for commercial distribution (Diameter = 50
      mm)</p>
</div>
<p>In my experiment, I observed similar results. I did not count the number
    of zooxanthellae inhabiting each colony so I cannot say definitively
    whether one colony had more zooxanthellae than another, however,
    descriptively three things were apparent. First, colonies in the artificial
    food treatment did not grow significantly more than colonies that were not
    fed any food. Second, substrate tiles in the artificial food treatment had
    more algae growth than the other treatments. Dozens of studies have shown
    that the availability of nutrients affects the growth of algae (Larned
    1998; Schaffelke and Klumpp 1998). Third, colonies in the artificial food
    treatment were much darker than either of the colonies in the other
    treatments. Lisa Chou, a graduate student who studies zooxanthellae at the
    University of Guam Marine Lab, suggested, rather cautiously as any good
    scientist would, that the darkening of the zooxanthellae may be due to an
    increase in the density of zooxanthellae. These observations indicate that
    there may have been higher amounts of nutrients in the artificial food
    treatment. Analyzed as such, the picture may be more complete: since the
    artificial food remained un-consumed on the bottom of the cup, it decayed
    and released these nutrients into the water. Therefore, in conjunction with
    the lack of available food, there was an increase in nutrients both of
    which may have contributed to the lack of significant growth observed for
    colonies in the artificial food treatment. Colonies in the control were not
    fed, and showed similar a similar lack of significant growth response.
    However, their water quality was not affected by the presence of
    supplemented nutrients, and thus algal growth was limited. Complete as this
    picture now seems, it will take further experiments to confirm these
    discussion points.</p>
<h2>Conclusions</h2>
<p>Live food may incur higher production costs in the form of labor and
    equipment than artificial food; however, this study showed that the
    increase in colony growth and survival may be an acceptable trade-off.
    Although no conclusions can be made about the artificial food and its
    effects on coral health and water quality, it is apparent that artificial
    food did not promote coral growth, rather only algal growth. In my
    experience, substantial algal growth may be detrimental to the health and
    survival of juvenile corals. My observations are consistent with other
    studies on the growth and survivorship of juveniles on the reef (Sato 1984;
    Babcock and Mundy 1996).</p>
<p>This work, in combination with previous studies, has made substantial
    contributions to the refinement of this method and, although this
    experiment focused on coral recruits, the results can be applied to current
    techniques used for maintaining adult colonies as well. Future studies will
    investigate other live foods such as rotifers and algae and investigate
    other artificial foods and their effects on water quality. By growing
    corals from sexually produced larvae, farms can supply the aquarium trade
    demand as well as provide corals for conservation programs without having
    to harvest or sacrifice coral colonies from existing reefs.</p>
<p>Lee Goldman earned his Masters degree in Marine Biology at the
    University of Guam, where he also works as a research associate at the
    College of Natural and Applied Sciences, Guam Aquaculture and Development
    Training Facility.</p>
<h2>Literature Cited</h2>
<ol>
<li>Artemia international. 2007. <a href="http://www.artemia-international.com/default.asp?contentID=582#gp">http://www.artemia-international.com/default.asp?contentID=582#gp</a></li>
<li>Babcock, R and Mundy, C. 1996. Coral recruitment: Consequences of
      settlement choice for early growth and survivorship in two
      scleractinians. Jour. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 206, 179 – 201</li>
<li>Borneman, E. 2001. Aquarium corals: Selection, husbandry, and natural
      history. T.F.C. Publications. NJ, USA. 464 pp.</li>
<li>Connolly, S.R. and Muko, S., 2003. Space pre-emption, size-dependent
      competition, and the coexistence of clonal growth forms. Ecology 84, in
      press.</li>
<li>Delbeek, J.C., 2001. Coral farming: Past, present and future trends.
      Aquarium Sciences and Conservation 3, 171-181</li>
<li>Ellis, S. 2000. Nursery and grow-out techniques for Giant Clam
      (Bivalvia: Tridacnidae). Center for Tropical and Subtropical Aquaculture.
      Publ. 143. 103 pp</li>
<li>Ferrier-Pagès, C., Witting, J., Tambutté, E.,Sebens, K.P.2003. Effect
      of natural zooplankton feeding on the tissue and skeletal growth of the
      scleractinian coral <em>Stylophora pistillata.</em> Coral Reefs 22, 229 -
      240</li>
<li>Gateno, D., Barki, Y., Rinkevich, B. 2000. Aquarium maintenance of
      reef octocorals raised from field collected larvae. Aquarium Sciences and
      Conservation 2, 227-236</li>
<li>Goreau, T.F., Goreau, N.I., Yonge, C. M., 1971. Reef corals:
      Autotrophs or heterotrophs. Biol. Bull.141, 247-260</li>
<li>Larned, S.T. 1998. Nitrogen-versus phosphorous-limited growth and
      sources of nutrients for coral reef macroalgae. Marine Biology 132, 409 -
      421</li>
<li>Mingoa-Lucuanan, S.S. and E.D. Gomez. 2002. Giant clam conservation
      in Southeast Asia. Tropical Coasts. 24-31</li>
<li>Muscatine, L., Falkowski, P.G., Dubinsky, Z., Cook, P.A., McCloskey,
      L. 1989. The effect of external nutrient resources on the population
      dynamics of zooxanthellae in a reef coral. Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B.
      236, 311 - 324</li>
<li>Nugues, N.M. and R.P.M. Bak. 2006. Differential competitive abilities
      between Caribbean coral species and a brown alga: A year of experiments
      and a long-term perspective. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 315: 75-86</li>
<li>Raymundo, L.J., Maypa, A.P. 2004. Getting bigger faster: Mediation of
      size-specific mortality via fusion in juvenile coral transplants.
      Ecological Applications 14, 281-295</li>
<li>Rhyne, A.L. and Lin, J. 2004. Effects of different diets on larval
      development in a peppermint shrimp (<em>Lysmata</em> sp. (Risso)).
      Aquaculture Research 35, 1179—1185</li>
<li>Sato, M. 1985. Mortality and growth of juvenile coral <em>Pocillopora
      damicornis</em>. Coral Reefs 4, 27-33</li>
<li>Schaffelke, B. and Klumpp, D.W. 1998. Short-term nutrient pulses
      enhance growth and photosynthesis of the coral reef macroalgae Sargassum
      baccularia. Mar. Ecol. Progr. Ser. 170, 95 - 105.</li>
<li>Sebens, K.P, Grace, S.P., Helmuth, B., Maney Jr., E.J., Miles, J.S.
      1998. Water flow rates and prey capture by three scleractinian corals,
      <em>Madracis mirabilis</em>, <em>Montastrea cavernosa</em> and
      <em>Porites porites</em>, in a field enclosure. Mar. Bio. 131, 347 -
      360</li>
<li>Stambler, N., Popper, N., Dubinsky, Z., Stimosn, J. 1991. Effects of
      nutrient enrichment and water motion on the coral <em>Pocillopora
      damicornis</em>. Pacific Science 45, 299 - 307</li>
<li>Szmant, A.M. and Miller, M.W. Settlement preferences and
      post-settlement mortality of laboratory cultured and settled larvae of
      the Caribbean hermatypic corals <em>Montastrea faveolata</em> and
      <em>Acropora palmata</em> in the Florida Keys. In press</li>
<li>Tanner, J.E. 1997. Interspecific competition reduces fitness in
      scleractinian corals. J. Exp. Mar. Bio. Ecol. 214: 19-34</li>
<li>Wabnitz, C., Taylor, M., Green, E., Razak, T., 2003. From ocean to
      aquarium. The global trade in marine ornamental species. Bio series No
      17. UNEP – WCMC. Cambridge, UK.</li>
</ol>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Lee Goldman</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Coral</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Feature Article</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Feeding</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Lee Goldman</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Nutrient Uptake</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Plankton</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Planulae</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2007-06-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/10/aquarium">
    <title>Feature Aquarium: The Aquarium of 'Suzy'</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/10/aquarium</link>
    <description>This month we feature</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br /><div id="body">
<div class="aaolmMessage">Editor's Note: There are additional photos of this tank in the article's       <a href="aquarium_album">photo album</a>.</div>
<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>s a dedicated fish nerd for over 2 decades, I am so     thrilled to be able to show off one of my tanks on Reefs.org! I     have had many different specialty tanks in my lifetime, but     this one has been my favorite thus far. My last tank was a     large 180 gallon, with a large heavy canopy. I had it for years     while my innermost fish geek planned the next one in the back     of my mind. Being a 5 foot tall female, I found working in a     large tank cumbersome. It really was a drag if a bulb needed     changing, so I put it off. I keep thinking how nice it would be     to have room behind the tanks to tinker and fuss and test and     grow live food.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="aquarium_album/100_2337.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aquarium_album/100_2337.jpg/image_preview" alt="100_2337.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a></div>
<p>This is what I came up with: A wall of tanks all plumbed     together. I can have the aggressive fish, the docile fish, the     corals with their chemical warfare and pretty much anything. I     could also have a large sump to be able to house a large enough     skimmer for all....</p>
<p>I did not know then that the sump would end up being the     best part! I started collecting and experimenting with macro     algae. This was in the late 90's. I had always loved seahorses     but because of their endangered status, I did not feel buying     them was ethical. That changed in May 2005, when the cities     regulations made them difficult to import. I started a seahorse     tank then and I have been collecting macroalgae for aquascaping     their tank ever since.</p>
<p>At this time, this tank is dedicated to seahorses. It is lit     with 2 normal output bulbs that I got from a commercial     lighting store for under $10, housed in an old shop light     fixture. The water motion is provided by a drain from the upper     tank, that drains into an DIY spray bar. It has a few inches of     aragonite substrate. It shares 2 300 watt heaters with the rest     of the tanks. I have not used the skimmer for over a year. It     is a typical refugium, expect the fish do not let anything that     moves live for long...</p>
<p>Maintenance for this tank does involve a bit of trimming. I     like that part because I can make a major change in just a     moments time, where as in my reef tank, a change takes months.     SPS grow so slowly and die so quickly! I do have to add calcium     and bicarb, for the SPS and coraline algae. This tank consumes     a lot of Iron, so I do need to test and add FE+ occasionally     along with a rare dose of magnesium, I do not do typical water     changes. I add a lot of home grown phytoplankton so I need to     add fresh water frequently to keep the salinity at 35 ppm. I do     have 2 filter socks with AC at all times.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="aquarium_album/100_2320.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aquarium_album/100_2320.jpg/image_preview" alt="100_2320.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a></div>
<p>Parameters are incredibly stable in this system, I believe     because of the large amount of water,( ~ 250 gallons depending     on the level of the 50 gallon sump). I live in the mountains     and the tanks are open to a large room, so heat has never been     an issue, even with MH lighting on our reef. Temp is always     74`-76`. pH is monitored continuously and ranges 8.1.-8.2, if     it goes outside those ranges, I know I need to change the     battery and calibrate. I try to keep all electrolytes at     natural seawater levels.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="aquarium_album/100_2287.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="aquarium_album/100_2287.jpg/image_preview" alt="100_2287.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a></div>
<p>This tank processes a  lot of  nitrate and     phosphate. I have found that it allows me to feed my fish as     much as they need and still have low  nutrient levels.     But, because I try to keep the conditions ideal for algae, I     need a lot of janitors in my reef to keep the hair algae in     check.  But, finding fish that don’t eat desirable     algae has been a much bigger challenge!</p>
<p>It is a different type of tank, but for me, it is the best     of both worlds. The wonder of a planted tank, with focal points     that make a FW aquarist drool!</p>
</div> <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Suzy</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Coral</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Fish</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Featured Aquarium</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Macroalgae</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2006-10-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/4/lines">
    <title>Lateral Lines: Reef Aquarium Filtration Part III: Natural and Artificial</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2006/4/lines</link>
    <description>This article is a continuation describing some of the more philosophical filtration practices and concepts.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">T</span>his article is written in response to reader questions and
suggestions. Since the publication of Reef Aquarium Filtration I and II
(Blundell 2005a, Blundell 2005b) I have received feedback from numerous
readers. While most of the comments have been of appreciation, some
have addressed terminology and concepts that had not been covered. This
article is a continuation describing some of the more philosophical
filtration practices and concepts.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/AquariumSponge.JPG"><img src="lines_album/AquariumSponge.JPG/image_preview" alt="Aquarium Sponge" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<h2>Natural Filtration</h2>
<p>First off please understand that Natural Filtration in the
purest sense only takes place in the ocean. Even then, on a coral reef
it is not sure whether or not any filtration actually takes place. Some
would view corals, fish, plankton, and algae as organisms all
contributing to the filtration of the passing water. Others would view
these organisms as part of the life cycle, all taking in food and
excreting waste, never once filtering the water and potentially
polluting it.</p>
<p>For the sake of argument let's assume the coral reefs of the
world do have ongoing natural filtration. This filtration includes
substrate bacteria breaking down nitrogen compounds, corals eating
plankton, sponges trapping and consuming particles, and very, very
large amount of water moving through a reef system.</p>
<h2>Artificial Filtration</h2>
<p>In the same way that one may argue of natural filtration only
taking place in the ocean; one may defend the position that all
aquarium filtration is artificial. In a manner of speaking nothing
about a captive aquarium is natural. Bioballs, protein skimmers, ozone
units, and ultraviolet sterilizers are certainly not found on a
reef….. or are they?</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/ReefHairAlgae.JPG"><img src="lines_album/ReefHairAlgae.JPG/image_preview" alt="Reef Hair Algae" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/GiantLeather.JPG"><img src="lines_album/GiantLeather.JPG/image_preview" alt="Giant Leather" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<h2>The Sliding Scale</h2>
<p>It is important to notice that this article is not titled
"Natural vs. Artificial Filtration" nor is it titled "Natural or
Artificial Filtration" but instead uses the key word <i>and</i>.
This is not by chance but instead well thought out following the input
of fellow hobbyists. Because one could (and often do) argue that reef
aquariums do not use any natural filtration, or that they heavily use
natural filtration, we will use a sliding scale for the breakdown of
common filtration methods.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/Kelp.JPG"><img src="lines_album/Kelp.JPG/image_preview" alt="Kelp" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/Carbon.JPG"><img src="lines_album/Carbon.JPG/image_preview" alt="Carbon" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<h2>The Question</h2>
<p>My best efforts to understand filtration methods has left me
with one overriding question. This question is what I ask myself every
time I am presented with a filtration query. The question is "In what
ways is this natural, and in what ways is this artificial?" Now you
have the question, and I encourage you to ask yourself this question
when you look at your own aquarium filtration. Some examples are
explored below.</p>
<h2>Filtration Methods Explored</h2>
<h3>Protein Skimmers</h3>
<p>For years I considered these devices to be completely
artificial and the result of some amazing human ingenuity. It wasn't
until 1997 that I began to think otherwise. While speaking with a few
employees from a public aquarium in Portugal I began to see the natural
basis to protein skimmers. I asked a question to these employees as to
whether or not they used any mechanical/biological/natural filtration.
Their response was that the aquarium 'only used natural filtration such
as live rock, deep sand beds, and protein skimmers' (paraphrased).
Simply put, I was confused. I had not heard anyone previously classify
protein skimming (foam fractionation) as natural filtration. After some
follow up questions I soon understood their view. Quite near to the
aquarium these employees would walk along the Northern Atlantic
Shoreline of the Iberian Peninsula. There they could witness the
seafoam, or protein foam that was brought up on shore by the perpetual
waves. In this way, protein skimming is quite natural.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/BigSkimmer.JPG"><img src="lines_album/BigSkimmer.JPG/image_preview" alt="Big Skimmer" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<h3>Live Rock</h3>
<p>While the endless of benefits of bacteria colonized live rock
are not frequently debated what is of interest to many hobbyists are
the effects of everything else that can live on substrate. One example
of this is benefits of living sponges. One of my favorite items
available these days is the live rock produced and grown in the waters
off of the Atlantic coast of the United States. These live rock farms
in the waters around Florida produce eco-friendly rock full of life.</p>
<p>I absolutely love this rock. One of my favorite aquariums I've
owned was filled with this rock, and had a pair of Anemonefishes in it.
Indeed Anemonefishes are not found in the Atlantic waters, and
certainly are not found with the rock, sponges, gorgonian, and other
life that was abundant on my aquascaping. This combination was odd, and
certainly not natural in many ways. But then again sponges, gorgonian,
crabs, Anemonefishes, and algae can be found on reef systems all over
the world. Not only found together, but often relying upon each other
for survival.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/ReefSponge.jpg"><img src="lines_album/ReefSponge.jpg/image_preview" alt="Reef Sponge" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<h3>Water Changes</h3>
<p>How natural and artificial are water changes? Do the currents
simply bring in vast amounts of clean water and wash away the dirty
water from the reefs? Or is it the same recirculating water moving from
one reef area to the next?</p>
<h3>Macro Algae</h3>
<p>Unfortunately I can't make this item a two sided debate. Maybe
a reader can help me. So far, all my reading and personal observations
say that growing macroalgae as a way of taking nutrients out of the
water is natural filtration.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/MacroAlgae.JPG"><img src="lines_album/MacroAlgae.JPG/image_preview" alt="Macro Algae" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper"> <a class="popup" href="lines_album/SpongePatches.JPG"><img src="lines_album/SpongePatches.JPG/image_preview" alt="Sponge Patches" class="image-inline" /></a>
</div>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>To assess filtration methods for natural and artificial
concepts we need to be mindful of the overlapping terms. These two
items are not exclusive but rather very depending on the perception of
the viewer and method being employed. In order to form your own verdict
remember the key question postulated here "In what ways is this
natural, and in what ways is this artificial?".</p>
<h2>Author Information</h2>
<p>Adam Blundell M.S. works in Marine Ecology, and in Pathology
for the University of Utah. He is also Director of The Aquatic
&amp; Terrestrial Research Team, a group which utilizes research
projects to bring together hobbyists and scientists. His vision is to
see this type of collaboration lead to further advancements in aquarium
husbandry. While not in the lab he is the former president of one of
the Nation's largest hobbyist clubs, the Wasatch Marine Aquarium
Society (<a href="http://www.utahreefs.com/">www.utahreefs.com</a>).
Adam has earned a BS in Marine Biology and an MS in the Natural
Resource and Health fields. Adam can be found at <a href="mailto:adamblundell@hotmail.com">adamblundell@hotmail.com</a>.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ol>
<li>Blundell, A. (2005a) "Reef Aquarium Filtration Part I:
Mechanical and Biological Filtration", Advanced Aquarist Online
Magazine, <a href="../../2005/5/lines/">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/5/lines/</a>,
USA.</li>
<li>Blundell, A., (2005b) "Reef Aquarium Filtration Part II:
Recycling and Removing", Advanced Aquarist Online Magazine, <a href="../../2005/6/lines/">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/6/lines/</a>,
USA.</li>
</ol>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Adam Blundell, M.Sc.</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Adam Blundell</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Carbon</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Lateral Lines</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Live Rock</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Macroalgae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Skimmers</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Quality</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2006-04-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/9/review">
    <title>Product Review: An Early Warning Device for Coral Bleaching?: The Spectrum CM1000 Chlorophyll Meter</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/9/review</link>
    <description>Based on technology developed by NASA, Spectrum Technologies markets a 'chlorophyll meter' - the FieldScout CM1000. This instrument is a simple point-and-shoot device.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>magine an instrument that has
  the potential of instantly reporting your corals' well-being
  - specifically an estimate of zooxanthellae chlorophyll content.
  One could think of it as a 'coral bleaching early warning
  device.' This isn't science fiction, but it is a lot of
  science.</p>
<p>Based on technology developed by NASA, Spectrum Technologies
  markets a 'chlorophyll meter' - the FieldScout CM1000.
  This instrument is a simple point-and-shoot device (so simple a
  caveman can do it, as the TV commercial says). The CM1000
  immediately analyzes, averages and stores data for future
  reference.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="AAOMTitlePhoto.jpg" class="popup" href="review_album/AAOMTitlePhoto.jpg"><img src="review_album/AAOMTitlePhoto.jpg/image_preview" alt="AAOMTitlePhoto.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a></div>
<p>If this sounds too good to be true, perhaps it is as there are
  some downsides - price, and an inability to measure chlorophyll
  through more than an inch or two of water - but we'll examine
  these 'handicaps' later in this article.</p>
<p>I learned of the CM1000 when I happened across the Spectrum
  Technologies site while doing a web search on a peripheral
  subject. Intrigued, I called Spectrum and explained that I wanted
  to estimate chlorophyll content of zooxanthellae within corals.
  This question stumped the available technical staff. The
  CM1000's target markets are golf courses, commercial
  greenhouses, orchards, etc., so mine was probably the
  'oddball question of the day.' They were able to tell me
  that the instrument would not accurately measure chlorophyll
  content through a water column. However, if the corals were to be
  removed from the water, this instrument would likely measure
  zooxanthellae chlorophyll <em>a</em>. They would check with the
  inventor. Again, the same answer - theoretically yes, but not
  absolutely certain. Spectrum agreed to send a unit for testing
  with two conditions - I report the results, and, if satisfied
  that the unit would generate meaningful data, I would purchase
  it. If this device worked with corals, it could allow easily
  generated insights on long-term photoadaptation or
  photoacclimation processes and pigmentation shifts without
  destructive sampling.</p>
<h2>Theory of Operation</h2>
<p>The FieldScout CM1000 Chlorophyll Meter determines Relative
  Chlorophyll Content Index through measurement of two
  'light' wavelengths - 700 nm (red) and 840 nm
  (near-infrared). The device senses these wavelengths from the
  light source and those reflected from the targeted surface. Since
  chlorophyll absorbs red light (700nm) and reflects near-infrared
  (840nm), the instrument compares the results of these
  measurements and calculates an estimate of chlorophyll
  content.</p>
<p>This is made possible by internal workings including, among
  other things, beam-splitters, cutoff filters, two toggle-switch
  actuated diode lasers, a reflectance standard, a dark reference,
  a photodiode and a microprocessor tied into a liquid crystal
  display. Quite a lot packed into a small, battery-operated
  handheld unit.</p>
<p>The FieldScout takes one measurement of ambient and reflected
  light per second (without the optional GPS - one measurement is
  taken every 3-4 seconds with the GPS).</p>
<p>The microprocessor calculates a relative Chlorophyll Index and
  displays this number (0-999) in the LCD. An average is calculated
  among multiple readings. These, along with the number of
  measurements made, are displayed along with the instantaneous
  relative Chlorophyll Index (See Figure 1).</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="AAOMFigure1.jpg" class="popup" href="review_album/AAOMFigure1.jpg"><img src="review_album/AAOMFigure1.jpg/image_preview" alt="AAOMFigure1.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 1. The control panel of the
    FieldScout. The LCD indicates an instantaneous Chlorophyll
    Index of 264, with a running average of 242 among 19
    measurements. A built-in light meter indicates light intensity
    (Brightness, or BRT) of 1.</p>
</div>
<p>Testing procedures must be fairly standardized for consistent
  results. The Field Scout does not provide the lighting source for
  chlorophyll measurements so ambient lighting must be used. Light
  intensity should be intense, and illuminate both the
  instrument's light meter and the target. The CM1000 does,
  however, include two red lasers for sighting purposes. Spectrum
  recommends that the target object should be no closer to the
  sensor than 28.4 cm (11.2 inches); at this distance the field of
  view is 1.10cm in diameter (0.434 inches). There is also a
  recommended maximum distance of 183cm (72 inches - The field of
  view at this distance is 18.8cm, or 7.4&quot; in diameter).</p>
<h2>Product Evaluation</h2>
<p>This purchase would represent a substantial portion of my
  annual budget so I had to quickly but carefully determine if the
  FieldScout would be of value. Many questions had to be answered.
  The product was evaluated on several parameters, and my comments
  are as follows:</p>
<p>First, I had to make a determination of coral reflectance. To
  do so, I used an Ocean Optics USB2000 spectrometer with a fiber
  optic cable and reference standard (Spectrolon diffuse standard,
  &gt;99%). A dark reference was taken, followed by that of the
  Spectrolon standard, and finally the reflected light from a
  coral's surface. Reflectance is figured mathematically by the
  Ocean Optics software. The result suggested that the FieldScout
  would work with corals. See Figure 2.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="AAOMFigure2.JPG" class="popup" href="review_album/AAOMFigure2.JPG"><img src="review_album/AAOMFigure2.JPG/image_preview" alt="AAOMFigure2.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 2. The reflectance of a brown stony
    coral, <em>Pavona</em> species. This scan suggested the CM1000
    had a good chance of measuring chlorophyll content within
    zooxanthellae.</p>
</div>
<h2>Measurement Repeatability</h2>
<p>Spectrum advertises measurement repeatability is ±5%. I
  compared indices (of a green plant) taken over a range of light
  intensities. The individual data sets were indeed in good
  agreement. However, comparison of indices in all data sets
  revealed differences of up to 13%. I need to investigate this
  further, but it appears that lower light intensity causes
  slightly higher measurements and, conversely, high light
  intensity measurements are relatively lower (these measurements
  were made with natural sunlight throughout the day in clear, part
  cloudy and overcast conditions, with a range of 1 to 6 on the
  meter's 'Brightness' scale). Spectrum suggests that
  higher light intensity increases resolution and perhaps that is
  the explanation.</p>
<p>Since we're interested in trends, this is probably not
  that much of an issue. However, I will work to standardize
  conditions as much as possible when taking measurements (see my
  thoughts in 'Discussion' below). And, as a footnote:
  <em>Can Artificial Light Sources Be Used?</em> Spectrum
  Technologies recommends natural sunlight as the source. However,
  it is possible to use artificial light as the source if two
  conditions are met. First, the light must be intense (at least
  250 - 300 micromol·m²·sec, or about 15,000 lux. A built-in light
  meter estimates light intensity and reports it on a scale of 0-9
  on the LCD display. A brightness of '1' is the minimum
  amount of light required for proper measurements). Second, use
  either a lamp using direct current (DC) or alternating current
  (AC) at 60 hertz. Spectrum specifically recommends tungsten or
  halogen lamps (probably due to the amount of red and near-IR
  energy produced). I can't think of a reason why many (if not
  most) metal halide lamps could also be used. The meter must be
  modified for use with light sources operating at 50 hertz.</p>
<p>Incidentally, an error message of 'Excessive Light' is
  prompted when the sensors are saturated with light. Maximum
  sunlight has not generated this message, but it is a possibility
  under some of the higher wattage metal halide lamps.</p>
<h2>Laser Sighting</h2>
<p>The CM1000 includes two diode lasers for sighting. These are
  3mW maximum output in the red spectral range of 635-670nm. These
  'laser pointers' are quite bright and can be seen in even
  the most intense Hawaiian sunlight. Each of these lasers are
  slightly angled resulting in their beams intersecting about 30cm
  (12&quot;) from the instrument's lens - this is a very
  convenient tool for instant verification that the unit is the
  proper distance from the target as well as for sighting.</p>
<h2>Environmental Conditions</h2>
<p>The Chlorophyll Meter seems to be a rugged unit. Its housing
  (made of heavy plastic) is said to be dust-proof. Since I've
  managed to occasionally splash the meter with seawater, it seems
  to be splash-proof as well - but not water-resistant and
  certainly not water-proof). Spectrum recommends operating
  temperatures of between 0 and 40°C (32-104° F).</p>
<p>As with any electronic unit, this meter should be handled with
  care and environmental extremes avoided. Spectrum supplies a
  sturdy plastic carrying case with foam insert at no additional
  charge.</p>
<h2>Power Supply and Battery Life</h2>
<p>The CM-1000 requires two AAA alkaline batteries. Although
  other batteries can be used (such as NiCads), Spectrum recommends
  alkaline batteries in order for the battery charge indicator to
  work properly. Battery life is rated as 'good'. Without
  the optional GPS, Spectrum says 3,000 measurements are possible
  on one battery set. This seems a bit of an overestimation,
  however, I have had to replace batteries only once in 4 months of
  usage.</p>
<p>The CM-1000 automatically shutdowns after 20 minutes of
  inactivity in order to conserve batteries. The LCD will also
  display a 'Low Battery' warning when the batteries reach
  20% of full charge.</p>
<h2>Data Storage</h2>
<p>In its basic configuration (i.e., without optional data
  logging) the FieldScout can store up to 64 Chlorophyll Indices
  and these are available through the 'Recall Data'
  function. Oddly, the chlorophyll meter can count up to 250 data
  points in a data series.</p>
<p>Now that we understand the theory of operation and instrument
  function, we can get down to business and test the CM1000. The
  first test involved green algae and measured the instrument's
  ability to discriminate among small increments of 'known'
  chlorophyll concentrations. The second test involved corals over
  a timescale of months.</p>
<h2>Test One - Green Algae</h2>
<p>A simple test was devised to determine if the Chlorophyll
  Meter could recognize small differences in chlorophyll content of
  green algae.</p>
<h3>Procedure</h3>
<p>A 2-liter sample of 'greenwater' was analyzed for
  suspended solids. The sample was divided into aliquots of
  increasing volume. The procedure outlined in <em>Standard</em>
<em>Methods</em> was used, and equipment included an analytical
  balance (Sartorius), a drying oven at 103°C, and glass microfiber
  filters (Whatman, 934-AH, 47mm with pore size of 1.5 microns).
  This procedure allows determination of the weight of particulate
  matter suspended within the sample and when divided by area,
  arrives at weight per area (in this case, milligrams per square
  centimeter). It was assumed that the entire suspended solids'
  weight was due to chlorophyll <em>a</em> content (which, of
  course, it isn't. However this method errs on the side of
  caution, and we see that the meter can distinguish between very
  small incremental increases of chlorophyll content). Multiple
  readings (in sunlight) of each algae sample/filter were made and
  the average index was charted. See Figure 2.</p>
<h3>Results</h3>
<p>The results suggest that the instrument is capable of
  detecting small differences of chlorophyll, and that the trend
  appears to be linear at these concentrations. The final portion
  of this test was conducted outside in conditions of varying
  sunlight intensity, and persistent trade winds made holding the
  filters steady difficult. My curiosity was satisfied, and I did
  not wish to repeat the 4 hour test. See Figure 3.</p>
<p>Notice that the meter reports a Chlorophyll Index in the high
  60's for a clean, white glass microfibre filter. This is due
  to the reflective properties of the filter. See comments below
  about the reflective properties of a coral skeleton.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="AAOMFigure3.JPG" class="popup" href="review_album/AAOMFigure3.JPG"><img src="review_album/AAOMFigure3.JPG/image_preview" alt="AAOMFigure3.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 3. Relative Chlorophyll Indices
    ('Chl Index' on the Y-axis) and approximate chlorophyll
    content in milligrams per square centimeter.</p>
</div>
<h2>An Inadvertent Test - Corals</h2>
<p>Many questions had to be answered before I would be
  comfortable with results. The first question - How far could the
  two reference beams penetrate a water column? Since red
  wavelengths are quickly absorbed by water (and near-IR even more
  quickly), it was of little hope that 'in-aquaria'
  measurements could be made. Although the meter could detect
  chlorophyll content to a depth of about 10cm, the results were
  also low, and sometimes erratic. It appears that the corals have
  to be removed from the water in order to test their zooxanthellae
  chlorophyll content (but see remarks for a potential way of
  getting around this. See comments in 'Discussion').</p>
<p>The second problem is with the coral itself, more
  specifically, the reflective properties of the white coral
  skeleton beneath the thin layer of tissue. Spectrum warns that
  the reflectance of a light-colored or white surface may give a
  false reading. This seems to be true (as indicated by the results
  with the glass microfibre filter). It also seems true for coral
  skeletons, as the Chlorophyll Index of a reflectance standard
  made of a polished (and chemically bleached) <em>Porites</em>
  skeleton indicates a index of about 55 (mean of 25 readings made
  over a range of light intensities). In other words, the base
  index for a coral is ~55, and a measurement near this number
  would indicate total bleaching. For what it's worth, a
  measurement of 55 is about 5% of the meter's maximum
  measuring capability.</p>
<p>In any case, I began monitoring the chlorophyll index of
  captive corals in one of the Natural Energy Laboratory's
  (NELHA) outdoor tanks.</p>
<h3>Results of &quot;Test&quot; Two</h3>
<p>Figures 4 and 5 shows the <em>Porites evermanni</em> specimen
  before and after a bleaching episode. If the chlorophyll indices
  are any indication, the CM1000 noted a drop in zooxanthellae (or
  zooxanthellae chlorophyll <em>a</em>) well before any visual sign
  of bleaching was apparent.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="AAOMFigure4.jpg" class="popup" href="review_album/AAOMFigure4.jpg"><img src="review_album/AAOMFigure4.jpg/image_preview" alt="AAOMFigure4.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 4. A nicely colored 'Lobe'
    coral (<em>Porites evermanni</em>) and average relative
    Chlorophyll Indices (with dates and number of measurements).
    The coral is healthy and robust.</p>
</div>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="AAOMFigure5.jpg" class="popup" href="review_album/AAOMFigure5.jpg"><img src="review_album/AAOMFigure5.jpg/image_preview" alt="AAOMFigure5.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 5. June 28, 2005 - The same
    <em>Porites</em> colony shown in Figure 5 - it is obviously in
    distress. Chlorophyll indices as low 58 were noted. This
    suggests almost total bleaching has occurred, an observation
    verified by sight alone.</p>
</div>
<p>This colony is maintained with other propagated <em>Porites
  evermanni</em> in an 'open system' outdoor tank utilizing
  natural sunlight as the actinic source. All <em>P. evermanni</em>
  specimens suffered bleaching, while other <em>Porites</em>
  colonies (<em>P. lobata</em>), <em>Pocillopora meandrina</em> and
  <em>Pavona varians</em> did not. These colonies showed no drop in
  their Chlorophyll Indices.</p>
<p>It is not known why only the <em>Porites evermanni</em>
  colonies bleached. Was it over-illumination, resulting in chronic
  photoinhibition and ultimately death or expulsion of
  zooxanthellae? If so, what does this suggest about theories of
  colorful coral pigments and their suggested links to
  photoprotection? Could ultraviolet radiation have played a part?
  Why would the captive corals lose resistance to UV? Could it be
  due to diet, or possibly lack of nutrition (due to insufficient
  water motion resulting in poor particle delivery)? The parade of
  questions is almost endless. Most important, though, is the
  concept that bleaching (in some cases) could be
  <em>predicted</em> and preventive measures could be taken to
  limit the impact.</p>
<h2>Discussion</h2>
<p>The CM1000 is not inexpensive - it retails for about $2,200,
  plus shipping. Is it worth the price? That really depends upon
  your situation. Almost certainly, this instrument would not
  appeal to the average hobbyist. However, professional aquarists,
  coral farmers and researchers may find this instrument of use.
  The potential for predicting bleaching events would be of great
  value to those with large capital outlays invested in their
  livestock, brood stock and systems. Although still under
  investigation, this unit could also be of benefit to scientists
  wishing to monitor zooxanthellae content/health with a
  non-invasive means. Anyone who has ever extracted chlorophyll
  <em>a</em> with appropriate organic solvents and quantified
  chlorophyll content via spectrophotometric means (for instance,
  using the equations of Jeffrey and Humphrey, 1975) will really
  appreciate what this instrument has the potential to do.</p>
<p>It may come as a surprise that the purchase price really is a
  breakthrough - previous setups had costs exceeding $60,000. A PAM
  (pulse amplitude modulation) fluorometer senses chlorophyll
  through fluorescence, and these units start at about $5,000. Even
  with cost aside, a PAM meter requires careful setup, and
  evaluation of resulting data is time consuming.</p>
<p>Even more important than price, we potentially have a simple
  to use, point-and-shoot meter capable of examining zooxanthellae
  chlorophyll content of the <em>same</em> coral sample (no
  destructive sampling) over time and under differing environmental
  conditions. The experimental possibilities are almost unlimited.
  While a PAM meter tells us fluorescence and suggests relative
  chlorophyll content (less chlorophyll generally equals less
  min/max fluorescence) and is excellent for monitoring short-term
  and dynamic photosynthetic processes, it is not particularly good
  in allowing glimpses into long-term responses. The CM1000, on the
  other hand, seems to allow long-term monitoring of zooxanthellae
  -its ease of use and relatively large sampling area are genuine
  pluses.</p>
<p>At this point - based on very early observations - any falling
  Chlorophyll Index over the course of just a few days should
  encourage increased monitoring. Of course, this instrument will
  be of little use in predicting catastrophic bleaching events due
  to extremely high temperature (a 'stuck' heater), rapid
  and severe salinity modulations, etc. However, those 'long
  term' stressors resulting in bleaching (associated with high
  UV dosage, poor water motion potentially resulting in nutrient
  deficiencies, toxicity issues, etc.) might be corrected before
  serious bleaching and coral fatalities result. On the other hand,
  an increasing relative Chlorophyll Index could indicate a
  response to increasing nutrient (such as nitrogen) content in the
  water. It is an interesting thought that perhaps (and this is
  only a hypothesis) loss of coloration could be predicted with a
  rising chlorophyll index.</p>
<p>It is theoretically possible to estimate the accessory pigment
  content (peridinin, chlorophyll <em>c</em>) of zooxanthellae
  based on chlorophyll <em>a</em> content. There is a lot of work
  to do in this area, and I think I have enough years left to at
  least scratch the surface.</p>
<p>The scant evidence at present suggests that long-term
  bleaching events (as opposed to cataclysmic 'immediate'
  bleaching) of corals within aquaria may be predictable. Granted,
  the initial observation of reduced chlorophyll content could
  possibly be due to other factors - photoacclimation (Titlyanov et
  al., 1980), seasonal variance of zooxanthellae photopigments
  (Stimson, 1997), etc. I personally believe (just a hunch) the
  bleaching event was due to excessive ultraviolet radiation
  resulting in chronic photoinhibition.</p>
<p>I think it is possible to obtain underwater measurements if an
  underwater housing were to be used. It is possible that the
  instrument could be fitted with an air-filled tube and light
  sources to allow in-situ measurements within aquaria (See Figure
  6). The air-filled chamber will be about 12&quot; in length and
  will also act as a range guide in order to quickly and
  conveniently gage sensor-to-coral distance. This distance should
  provide relative Chlorophyll Indices of approximately 1cm². Light
  sources will probably be 12v halogen lamps (one in a waterproof
  housing). I expect some problems with laser reflection, and will
  have to perform some spectrometer work to standard lighting
  sources. At present, I don't see these obstacles as
  insurmountable. One has to wonder of the possibilities of a
  modified Field Scout in an underwater housing for measurements in
  situ.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a title="AAOMFigure6.jpg" class="popup" href="review_album/AAOMFigure6.jpg"><img src="review_album/AAOMFigure6.jpg/image_preview" alt="AAOMFigure6.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 6. My concept of modifications
    required in order to take chlorophyll measurements within an
    aquarium. An air-filled tube prevents major attenuation of red
    light and infrared energy generated by a submersed halogen
    lamp. Another battery-operated halogen lamp provides reference
    wavelengths to the CM1000's light meter. The vertical red
    line is the instrument's laser sight.</p>
</div>
<p>For more info, visit
  <a href="http://www.specmeters.com/">www.specmeters.com</a>. I
  will personally answer email directed either to the AAOM Forums,
  or
  <a href="mailto:RiddleLabs@aol.com">RiddleLabs@aol.com</a>.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ol>
<li>Jeffrey, S.W. and Humphrey, G. F. 1975. New
    spectrophotometric equations for determining chlorophylls
    <em>a</em>, <em>b</em>, <em>c¹</em> and <em>c²</em> in higher
    plants, algae, and natural phytoplankton. Biochem. Physiol.
    Pflanz. 167: 191-194.</li>
<li>Stimson, J., 1997. The annual cycle of density of
    zooxanthellae in the tissues of field and laboratory-held
    <em>Pocillopora</em> <em>damicornis</em> (Linnaeus). J. Exp.
    Mar. Biol. Ecol., 214(1-2): 35-48.</li>
<li>Titlyanov, E.A., M.G. Shaposhnikova and V.I. Zvalinskii,
    1980. Photosynthesis and adaptation of corals to irradiance. I.
    Contents and native state of photosynthetic pigments in
    symbiotic microalga. Photosynthetica 14(3): 413-421.</li>
</ol>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Dana Riddle</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Bleaching</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Coral</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Dana Riddle</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Light Meter</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Lighting</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Product Review</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Sunlight</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Underwater</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Underwater Light Field</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Zooxanthellae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>FieldScout CM1000</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Chlorophyll Meter</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2005-09-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/6/lines">
    <title>Lateral Lines: Reef Aquarium Filtration Part II: Recycling and Removing</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/6/lines</link>
    <description>In this month's column, Adam continues to discuss filtration and nutrient export.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">
<p><img src="lines_album/Monti.JPG/image_preview" alt="Monti.JPG" class="image-inline" /></p>
<p><span class="dropcap">I</span>n last months Advanced Aquarist
  <a title="Lateral Lines: Reef Aquarium Filtration Part I: Mechanical and Biological Filtration" href="../5/lines">article</a> I began a discussion on common
     filtration techniques. That article focused primarily on the
     gold standard of biological and mechanical methods. This
     article is an attempt to introduce new terminology and a new
     classification system for aquaria filtration.</p>
<p>The two new terms I am proposing here are Recycling and
  Removing filtration. The reason for these terms is because they
  describe a product more than they describe a process. This may be
  challenging to understand but hopefully this article will make
  filtration terms lucid to the reader.</p>
<p><img src="lines_album/Refugium.jpg/image_preview" alt="Refugium.jpg" class="image-inline" /></p>
<p class="centered">Combinations of Filtration Process and
  Products</p>
<table id="table1" class="listing nosort">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Process</th>
<th>Product</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Biological</td>
<td>Recycling</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Biological</td>
<td>Removing</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Mechanical</td>
<td>Recycling</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Mechanical</td>
<td>Removing</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="centered">Current Filtration Methods and Classification
  (from Blundell 2005)</p>
<table id="table2" class="listing nosort">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Mechanical Filtration</th>
<th>Biological Filtration</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Hang On Filters</td>
<td>Live Rock</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Protien Skimmers</td>
<td>Live Sand</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Water Changes</td>
<td>Macro Algae</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Canister Filters</td>
<td>Clean Up Crews</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Filter Socks</td>
<td>Micro Crustaceans</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p class="centered">Current Filtration Methods and Proposed
  Classification</p>
<table id="table3" class="listing nosort">
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Recycling Filtration</th>
<th>Removing Filtration</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Live Rock</td>
<td>Protein Skimmers</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Live Sand</td>
<td>Hang on filters (when cleaned)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Macro Algae (growing)</td>
<td>Macro Algae (harvested)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Live Stock</td>
<td>Water Changes</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<h2 class="Heading">Background</h2>
<p>The terms Recycling and Removing can be used on their own, or
  as a descriptive function of a filtration item. For example let
  me describe the usage of macro algae in the reef aquarium.
  Growing macro algae is one of the most common types of filtration
  in reef tanks. This is generally considered a biological
  filtration method. But how does it work? Macro algae obviously
  removes organics (nutrients) from the water and substrate as it
  grows; but it doesn't remove organics from the system. For
  this reason many hobbyists (including the author) preach the need
  to harvest and discard algae as it grows. This completes the
  filtration process before the algae "dissolves" or
  "goes sexual" and releases nutrients back into the
  system. Now let me also examine macro algae in another way.
  Hobbyists frequently remove algae from a refugium and throw it in
  their tank to feed hungry herbivores. In this case the algae work
  as a filter because it removes the need to add food to the tank.
  In other words by feeding your fish leftovers you don't need
  to make them dinner. That really is the concept of recycling
  filtration.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<img src="lines_album/Sump1.JPG/image_preview" alt="Sump1.JPG" class="image-inline" /><img src="lines_album/Sump2.JPG/image_preview" alt="Sump2.JPG" class="image-inline" />
<p class="caption">Whether a sump is a jumble of items or a
    pristine display the purpose of filtering the system is the
    same</p>
</div>
<h2 class="Heading">Recycling Filtration</h2>
<p>Recycling Filtration is the product of nearly all biological
  filters. In fact it is the basis for water quality. This product
  is accomplished in both very small and very large scale. Large
  items of food are added to an aquarium which in turn are consumed
  by fish, corals, anemones, shrimp, crabs, and much much more.
  Thank goodness for that because three teaspoons of flake food (if
  not consumed) contains enough organics to destroy a 90 gallon
  aquarium (Baensch 1994).</p>
<p>Live rock and live sand are the primary components of a reef
  aquarium. These items house an amazing amount of nitrifying and
  denitrifying bacteria. These bacteria are most likely the most
  important part of a reef aquarium. They serve the vital role as a
  biological process to breakdown and recycle nutrients into other
  (and usually less toxic) compounds.</p>
<p><img src="lines_album/Caulerpa.JPG/image_preview" alt="Caulerpa.JPG" class="image-inline" /><img src="lines_album/LiveRock.JPG/image_preview" alt="LiveRock.JPG" class="image-inline" /></p>
<h2 class="Heading">Removing Filtration</h2>
<p>Removing Filtration is the type of filtration that actually
  reduces the bioload (amount of nutrients and compounds) in the
  aquarium. Summed up it is the filtration that requires you to
  actually do something. Where as recycling filtration is a
  continual process, removing filtration is usually done in
  intervals. One example of this filtration method is a water
  change. That requires you to actually mix up new water and remove
  the current water. A water change is a sure fire way to remove
  nutrients, compounds, toxins; as well as a way to replenish ions
  and chemicals that may be depleted by growing animals. Many
  mechanical filters require a human work step to complete the
  Removing Filtration process. Examples include filter pads and
  protein skimmers. In order to actually remove the waste matter
  you must take out the filter pad or empty the skimmer cup. If you
  don't, you have trapped the compounds but really haven't
  removed them. I think everyone has seen the site of a filter pad
  from a hang on filter that is completely brown from all the
  detritus. Of course as you pull it out some of the detritus falls
  back in the tank and the water becomes cloudy. This is usually
  when I admit I should have washed out the filter a few weeks
  prior.</p>
<p><img src="lines_album/AlgaeHand.JPG/image_preview" alt="AlgaeHand.JPG" class="image-inline" /><img src="lines_album/SkimmerSetup.JPG/image_preview" alt="SkimmerSetup.JPG" class="image-inline" /></p>
<h2 class="Heading">Conclusion</h2>
<p>The main concept I want people to get from this is a better
  understanding of their own filtration (or lack there of). I hear
  hobbyists frequently questioning how others are able to feed
  their tanks so much food and never have excess nutrient problems.
  The answer is nearly always the increased Removal Filtration.
  Likewise I hear hobbyists question how some people maintain very
  high coral growth rates, in spite of very sparse feeding. Of
  course the answer tends to be a system for using the nutrients
  and not wasting them.</p>
<p>So before you change your feeding schedule on your system, be
  sure to analyze the process and products of your filtration.</p>
<p><img src="lines_album/Stars.JPG/image_preview" alt="Stars.JPG" class="image-inline" /></p>
<h2 class="Heading">Author Information</h2>
<p>Adam Blundell M.S. works in Marine Ecology, and in Pathology
  for the University of Utah. While not in the lab he is the
  president of one of the Nation's largest hobbyist clubs, the
  Wasatch Marine Aquarium Society
  (<a href="http://www.utahreefs.com">www.utahreefs.com</a>). He is
  also Director of The Aquatic &amp; Terrestrial Research Team, a
  group which utilizes research projects to bring together
  hobbyists and scientists. His vision is to see this type of
  collaboration lead to further advancements in aquarium husbandry.
  Adam has earned a BS in Marine Biology and an MS in the Natural
  Resource and Health fields. Adam can be found at
  <a href="mailto:adamblundell@hotmail.com">adamblundell@hotmail.com</a>.</p>
<h2 class="Heading">References and Suggested Readings</h2>
<ul>
<li>Baensch, H.A., (1994) "Marine Atlas", Tetra
    Press, Blacksburg Virginia, USA.</li>
<li>Blundell, A., (2005) "Reef Aquarium Filtration Part I:
    Mechanical and Biological Filtration",
    <a href="../../issues/may2005/lines.html">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/may2005/lines.html</a>,
    Advanced Aquarist Online Magazine, USA.</li>
<li>Blundell, A., Finch., J., (2005) "Oolitic Sand
    Analysis".
    <a href="../../issues/feb2005/short.html">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/feb2005/short.html</a>
    , Advanced Aquarist Online Magazine, USA.</li>
<li>Pro, S., (2004) "Protein Skimmer Impressions".
    <a href="http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/cav1i1/protein_skimmer_impressions.htm">
    http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/cav1i1/protein_skimmer_impressions.htm</a>
    , Conscientious Aquarist, USA.</li>
<li>Pro, S., (2004) "Power Filter Impressions".
    <a href="http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/cav1i2/Equipment/filters.htm">
    http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/cav1i2/Equipment/filters.htm</a>
    , Conscientious Aquarist, USA.
    </li></ul>
</div>
 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Adam Blundell, M.S.</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Microalgae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Mechanical Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Lateral Lines</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Nutrient Uptake</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Quality</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Macroalgae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Skimmers</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Biological Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Adam Blundell</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Algae</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2005-06-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/5/tips">
    <title>Hot Tips: Algae Control</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/5/tips</link>
    <description>In this month's column, our readers discuss how they control algae in their systems.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">A</span> selection of useful tidbits of
  information and tricks for the marine aquarist submitted by
  Advanced Aquarist&#39;s readership. Readers are encouraged to
  post them to our Hot Tips sticky in the Reefs.org
  <a href="http://reefs.org/phpBB2/viewforum.php?f=1">General
  Reefkeeping Discussion</a> forum or send their tips to
  <a href="mailto:terry@advancedaquarist.com?subject=Hot%20Tips%20Submission">
  terry@advancedaquarist.com</a> for possible publication. Next
  month&#39;s Hot Tip theme will be
  &quot;<a href="http://reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=768689#768689">
  Water Purification Tips</a>&quot;.</p>
<h2 class="Heading">Algae Control Tips:
  <br /></h2>
<p>Here&#39;s an strange sounding tip for reducing the time you
  spend cleaning algae from the glass: dose sodium silicate to
  promote a controlled population of diatoms. Diatoms! I know...
  bear with me.
  <br />
<br />
  Most aquarist&#39;s introduction to diatoms is as an unsightly
  reddish-brown coating of their sand and rocks in the first few
  weeks of a new aquarium. At that point, most decide that diatoms
  are a &quot;Bad Thing (tm)&quot; and are forevermore willing to
  do anything at all to avoid diatoms or even the possibility of
  diatoms. When diatoms are out of balance (like that bloom in a
  new aquarium), they don&#39;t do anyone much good. But when
  diatom populations are in a stable balance with other processes
  in your tank, they are very good for the whole system.
  <br />
<br />
  Good things for aquarists might include:
  <br /></p>
<ul>
<li>Diatoms compete with blue-green algae for resources (#1
    reason to mention this here).</li>
<li>Diatoms are much easier to remove from glass and acrylic
    and less unsightly than blue-green algae (light gold tint
    compared to algae&#39;s green blotches).</li>
<li>Diatoms are part of &quot;plankton&quot; and just like
    plankton products that you can buy, they provide a healthy
    natural food for filter feeders.</li>
<li>Diatoms consume nitrates and phosphates from the water
    column and fix them into their tissue where it can be filtered
    out of your system via your protein skimmer (don&#39;t worry,
    your skimmer won&#39;t get all of them).</li>
<li>Diatoms on your sand are some of the best possible food for
    your cleanup crew and are likely to contribute to their
    longevity and increased health/diversity.</li>
</ul>
<p><br />
  Now, how to get them to grow in balance in your aquarium. Diatom
  populations in home aquariums are largely limited by available
  silica. In order to get more diatoms without getting too many
  diatoms, you need to maintain a low but stable level of soluble
  silica in your tank water (I seem to get effective results from
  1ppm, though I personally haven&#39;t tried concentrations higher
  than 1.5ppm).
  <br />
<br />
  Before you dose something, you should know your tank needs an
  external supply, and you should be able to measure the level to
  know where you stand. Hatch makes a good kit for measuring
  soluble silica (detection level is .05ppm). To buy soluble
  silica, you want to buy the smallest amount of &quot;water
  glass&quot; you can buy from your local crafts store. &quot;Water
  glass&quot; is sodium silicate and it is used to preserve eggs
  (presumably artsy eggs, but I didn&#39;t ask). The smallest I
  could buy from the local Michael&#39;s was 1 quart, which is
  enough to keep an entire club&#39;s tanks dosed for several
  years.
  <br />
<br />
  The stuff I bought was 41 baume, which is 29% silica by weight. I
  dilute this stuff into a quart of working solution so that each
  teaspoon of working solution will dose 10 gallons to a level of
  1ppm. It takes 3 3/4 teaspoons of 41 baume solution to make a
  quart of working solution, which will treat almost 2000 gallons
  to 1ppm. (If you&#39;ve got a tank under 55gal, this is probably
  too concentrated to be convenient, so you should probably add 1
  1/4 tsp to make a 3x dilute solution and use three times as much
  when dosing). This stuff is very alkaline (even more so than
  sodium hydroxide -- kalkwasser), so use gloves and clean up well.
  <br />
<br />
  Once you have your dosing solution mixed up, estimate your total
  water volume, which is probably somewhere between 66-80% of the
  tank&#39;s total volume, depending on the density of your
  rockwork and the depth of your sand. Perhaps a first dose to
  0.25ppm, so if your first silica test shows undetectable silica,
  divide your volume of water by 40 to determine the number of
  teaspoons to add (divide by 13.333 if you made the &quot;small
  tank&quot; solution). Always dose into a high-flow area (remember
  the alkalinity). I suspect that anything up to 1ppm will be fully
  consumed within a week and you&#39;ll probably be at the
  detection limit of the hatch kit (0.05ppm) within five days. I
  started out testing every other day and found that I have to dose
  about 0.33ppm soluble silica each day to maintain a tested level
  of 1ppm. Now I only test for silica every month or so along with
  my other water quality tests.
  <br />
<br />
  If you don&#39;t use RO/DI filtered water, it&#39;s possible that
  your water already contains silica (among other things). You need
  to take this silica into account when figuring out your dosing
  regimen, so having and using a test kit is doubly important for
  this case. Many people who find that they have trouble with
  diatom blooms are likely to find that their water has very high
  silica levels: 18ppm or higher. I recommend removing this from
  your water with an effective filter (RO/DI) to prevent blooms and
  then adding a precise (and small) amount of silica back to your
  tank to encourage balance.
  <br />
<br />
  As I said earlier, I maintain 1ppm in my main tank, and that
  seems to be the lowest amount that makes the glass scrapings much
  easier and the color of the dirty glass more pleasant (I&#39;m
  lazy and refuse to scrape more often than weekly). I&#39;ve heard
  of people having no blooms with levels up to 3ppm, but I do see a
  dusting of diatoms on my sand every few months (not a bloom and
  gone within 24 hours, the tiger tail especially loves diatoms)
  and am unwilling to raise the silica further without a clear
  reason to do so.
  <br /></p>
<blockquote>
<p>Ross (aka rabagley)
    <br /></p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p><br />
  In any closed environment with animal life and light you are
  going to get plant life. Our tanks are no exception. So the only
  choice is whether you get the plant life you like like corraline
  algae, macro algae, sea grasses, mangroves, or corals. Or you get
  the plant life you don&#39;t like such as hair algae and
  cyano.</p>
<p>Every bit of ammonia, nitrate, phosphate, toxin, heavy metal,
  and carbon dioxide consumed or bioaccumulated by plant life you
  like is one less bit to feed the plant life you don&#39;t want or
  to adversly affect other life you like.</p>
<p>Sure use snails to consume the stuff you don&#39;t, but real
  solution is to get plant life you like established and in control
  right from that start. That way you will have a tank with the
  plant life you desire.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Bob (aka beaslbob)</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p>As long as the speed of phosphate removal is greater than the
  speed of production, all nuisance algae will eventually have to
  die off, as the phosphates are removed from the sytem.</p>
<p>The two main things that seem to confuse aquarists, are
  that:</p>
<ol>
<li>The resulting die-off of algae takes time</li>
<li>Zero test levels from the water column is not the same as
    zero production, or uptake, of PO4</li>
</ol>
<p>The aquarist needs to enable the system to dump phosphates
  BEFORE they can get used by algae; if 5ppm of PO4 is produced,
  and 5ppm uptaken by algae, one will still test a level of zero,
  as this only measures &#39;excess&#39; that builds up in the
  water column.</p>
<p>The first, easiest way, to eliminate one major source, is via
  an RODI unit for water processing.</p>
<p>The second, is to use a phosphate sponge, like phosguard, or
  rowaphos.</p>
<p>It usually takes a combination of both, to achieve a
  &#39;quicker&#39; result, though water changes,good skimming,
  etc., can achieve the same end,over a longer period of time.</p>
<p>The hobbyists also needs to understand that in addition to the
  daily production of PO4 by the life in the system, the phosphates
  introduced either via the source water, or livestock
  &#39;surges&#39; (like when placing an amount of live rock , and
  it&#39;s subsequent &#39;die-off&#39; occurs in a system) need to
  also be removed.</p>
<p>Since algae require phosphates to grow and thrive, PO4 removal
  is not only the true root &#39;cure&#39;, it&#39;s also the least
  complicated &#39;treatment&#39; around, for dealing with nuisance
  algae.</p>
<p>Algicides just recycle the PO4 back into the system, to feed
  more algae.</p>
<p>&#39;Clean up crews&#39; (especially snails) merely recycle
  the algae, releasing the PO4 in their poop, to begin the process
  anew.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>vitz
    <br /></p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p>I have a little bit of everything:</p>
<ul>
<li>I grow macro algae and harvest them.</li>
<li>I have some snails, hermit crabs, urchins, shrimp,
    stars...</li>
<li>I feed my tanks a little bit several time daily - they like
    food.</li>
<li>I keep my nitrogen sources as close to zero as
    possilbe.</li>
</ul>
<blockquote>
<p>radar!</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p>I like the combination high in tank circulation and a good
  skimmer. The numbers dont mean all that much, but when you can
  see detritus, and snail droppings floating around the tank,
  instead of to the bottom, you are getting close. In addition a
  good cleanup crew will break larger particles of waste down,
  making it easier for them to be swept into the water column, and
  be removed by the skimmer.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>ZooKeeper</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p>Ask yourself how old your light bulbs are, and replace if
  needed.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Lawdawg</p>
</blockquote>
<hr />
<p>Check your source water! You could be living downstream from a
  phosphorous mine and have no clue. Ask your local water district
  for the results of their most recent batch of water quality tests
  in your area before using tap water in an enclosed system.
  <br /></p>
<blockquote>
    Jolieve

  </blockquote>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Advanced Aquarist's Readers</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Biological Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Bulbs</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Hot Tips</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Mechanical Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Phosphate</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Skimmers</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Quality</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Testing</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Algae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Microalgae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Macroalgae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Diatoms</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Cyanobacteria</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2005-05-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/3/lines">
    <title>Lateral Lines: Macroalgae vs. Mangrove Growth and Nutrient Uptake</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/3/lines</link>
    <description>The author's viewpoint following this study is that mangrove plants may be useful to aquariums but in terms of nutrient uptake they are far inferior to macroalgae growth.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">
<p><ins>H</ins>ypothesis: Given the fibrous texture, large root system, and solid
structural plant tissues of mangrove plants; they should contain and
remove more nutrients than macroalgae species in the home aquarium.</p>
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>Currently reverse daylight photosynthesis and refugia are quite
poplar. It is common practice to install and utilize the nutrient
uptake properties of macroalgae in these setups. More recently a push
towards the addition of mangroves has come to fruition. Mangroves are
considered to be excellent for nutrient uptake. In addition they have
other beneficial aspects of macroalgae including: stability (do not
dissolve during reproduction), lack of toxic chemicals, require less
space to grow, provide physical structure for other organisms, and
remove rather than recycle nutrients. Macroalgae also have a list of
benefits over mangroves including: provide a matrix for micro
crustaceans, recycle nutrients, aesthetic appeal, ease of harvesting,
and quick growth rates.</p>
<h2>Purpose</h2>
<p>The purpose of this study was two fold. First the investigators
wanted to compare the dry weight (representing Nitrogen and Phosphorus
uptake) of mangroves and macroalgae. Second, the project was designed
to make in-exact measurements of nutrients, with an emphasis on useful
comparisons and terminology for home hobbyists.</p>
<h2>Background</h2>
<p>Several studies have focused on the limits of algal growth in reef
systems based upon Nitrogen and Phosphorus uptake (Rosenberg and Ramus
1981, Rosenberg and Ramus 1982, Lapointe et al. 1987, Littler et al.
1991, Lapointe et al. 1992, Smith &amp; Buddemeier 1992, Fong et al.
1994,). A very noteworthy and important study in this field analyzed
the ratio of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in algal tissue (Larned 1998).
These studies are the basis for several projects which followed, and
were conducted by this project's author (Blundell 2003). Previous
studies in the captive systems and on reef systems have been difficult
to follow or of little use to home aquarists. On main reason for this
is that studies often use measurements of grams/day or grams/linear
inch or dry weight/square meter which are too difficult to apply to
home aquariums. This project was the author's attempt to fix this
conundrum.</p>
<h2>Procedure</h2>
<p>The investigators asked for algal donations and mangrove donations
from a local hobbyists club. Donors were then instructed to provide
exactly one handful of algae. While this may sound scientifically poor,
it appears to be a very universal term. Therefore actual data figures
are estimates, but generalizations can certainly be made.</p>
<p>Algae samples (one handful) and mangrove plants were received. All
samples were simply blotted dry and then weighted. This measurement is
a control step, and is not used in the final analysis. Then all samples
were placed in pre-weighed aluminum foil pouches. Note- mangrove
samples were first cut into parts dividing them as stems, roots, and
leaves. The aluminum foil pouches were then cooked at 350 F for six
hours.</p>
<p>After this time the pouches were allowed to cool and were then
weighed again. This allowed for a calculated measurement of dry mass.
The contents of each pouch were then removed and weighed separate from
the foil pounces (which were also weighted again as controls). The
calculated weights were compared with actual weights of samples, and
were identical within 1 grain.</p>
<h2 class="Heading">Table and Figures</h2>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<table id="table1" class="listing nosort">
<thead>
<tr>
<th><strong>Specimen</strong></th>
<th><strong>Size</strong></th>
<th><strong>Dry weight in grams</strong></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Chaetomorpha sp.</td>
<td>One Handful</td>
<td>5.70</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Caulerpa serrulata</td>
<td>One Handful</td>
<td>2.59</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Mangrove Leaf</td>
<td>One Large Leaf</td>
<td>0.19</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Mangrove</td>
<td>Stem (43cm/17in)</td>
<td>8.75</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><br /></td>
<td>Roots</td>
<td>0.97</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><br /></td>
<td>Leaves</td>
<td>0.58</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><br /></td>
<td>Total Plant</td>
<td>10.30</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="centered"><img src="lines_album/Algae1.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae1.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae5sump.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae5sump.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae6stems.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae6stems.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae7leaves.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae7leaves.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae8scale.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae8scale.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae9dryitems.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae9dryitems.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae10handful.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae10handful.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae11weight.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae11weight.JPG" class="image-left" /><br /><br /></p>
<p class="centered">
<img src="lines_album/Algae2.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae2.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae3leaves.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae3leaves.JPG" class="image-left" />
<img src="lines_album/Algae4roots.JPG/image_mini" alt="Algae4roots.JPG" class="image-left" /></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>In this study we have found that one handful of Chaetomorpha sp. and
Caulerpa serrulata contain 5.7 grams and 2.59 grams of dry weight mass
respectively. On mangrove plant (of a length of 43cm/17in with six
leaves) weighed 10.3 grams of dry weight. If a home aquarist were able
to grow one handful of macroalgae in their sump each month, this would
equal 34.2 grams (for Chaetomorpha sp.) and 15.54 grams (Caulerpa
serrulata). This would correlate to growing 3 entire mangrove plants
and 1.5 mangrove plants during that time in that aquarium!!! That kind
of algal growth is common, but that kind of mangrove growth is
unprecedented. Therefore our hypothesis was wrong and disproved in this
study. The author's viewpoint following this study is that mangrove
plants may be useful to aquariums but in terms of nutrient uptake they
are far inferior to macroalgae growth.</p>
<h2>Acknowledgments</h2>
<p>The author would like to thank Adam Haycock, Aime Hancey, and Jake
Pehrson for donating the mangroves and algae for this project.
Appreciation is also owed to Gail Blundell for donating the measurement
equipment. A special word of gratitude is also owed to the author's
wife who tolerated the "wonderful smell" generated from cooking algae
in a kitchen oven.</p>
<h2>Authors Information</h2>
<p>Adam Blundell M.S. works in Marine Ecology, and in Pathology for the
University of Utah. While not in the lab he is the president of one of
the Nation's largest hobbyist clubs, the Wasatch Marine Aquarium
Society (<a href="http://www.utahreefs.com/">www.utahreefs.com</a>). He
is also Director of The Aquatic &amp; Terrestrial Research Team, a
group which utilizes research projects to bring together hobbyists and
scientists. His vision is to see this type of collaboration lead to
further advancements in aquarium husbandry. Adam has earned a BS in
Marine Biology and an MS in the Natural Resource and Health fields.
Adam can be found at <a href="mailto:adamblundell@hotmail.com">adamblundell@hotmail.com</a>.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ol>
<li>Blundell, A. (2003) Measurement of macroalgae dry weights. Reef Ramblings 2003: 1-3.</li>
<li>Fong, P., Donohoe, R.M., Zedler, J.B. (1994) Nutrient
concentrations in tissue of the macroalga Enteromorpha sp. as an
indicator of nutrient history: an experimental evaluation using field
microcosms. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 106: 273-282.</li>
<li>Lapointe, B.E., Littler, M.M., Littler, D.S. (1987) A comparison of
nutrient-limited productivity in macroalgae from a Caribbean barrier
reef and from a mangrove ecosystem. Aquat Bot 28: 243-255.</li>
<li>Lapointe, B.E., Littler, M.M., Littler, D.S. (1992) Nutrient
availability to marine macroalgae in siliciclastic versus
carbonate-rich coastal waters. Estuaries 15: 75-82.</li>
<li>Larned, S.T. (1998) Nitrogen- versus phosphorus-limited growth and
sources of nutrients for coral reef macroalgae. Marine Biology 132:
409-421.</li>
<li>Littler, M.M., Littler, D.S., Titlyanov, E.A. (1991) Comparisons of
N- and P-limited productivity between high granitic islands versus low
carbonate atolls in the Seychelles Archipelago: a test of the
relative-dominance paradigm. Coral Reefs 10: 199-209.</li>
<li>Rosenberg, G., Ramus, J. (1981) Ecological growth strategies in the
seaweeds, Gracilaria folifera (Rhodophyceae) and Ulva sp.
(Chlorophyceae): the rate and timing of growth. Botanica mar 24:
583-589.</li>
<li>Rosenberg, G., Ramus, J. (1982) Ecological growth strategies in the
seaweeds, Gracilaria folifera (Rhodophyceae) and Ulva sp.
(Chlorophyceae): soluble nitrogen and reserve carbohydrates. Mar Biol
66: 251-259.</li>
<li>Smith, S.V., Buddemeier, R.W. (1992) Global change and coral reef ecosystems. A Rev ecol Syst 23: 89-118.</li></ol>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
</div>
 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Adam Blundell, M.S.</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Mangroves</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Lateral Lines</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Nutrient Uptake</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Testing</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Macroalgae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Water Quality</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Adam Blundell</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2005-03-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/1/aafeature1">
    <title>Feature Article: Silica In Reef Aquariums</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/1/aafeature1</link>
    <description>Why would I recommend dosing silica? Largely because creatures in our tanks use it, the concentrations in our tanks (at least in mine) are below natural levels, and the sponges, mollusks, and diatoms may not be getting enough to thrive.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br /><div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">S</span>ilica is a chemical that is feared by many reef keepers. Visions of a reef tank covered with diatoms so thick that you can’t see through the glass come to mind. More recently, others have suggested that soluble silica does not, in fact, increase diatom growth in reef tanks. Much of the debate swirls around whether silica sand is a good choice for the substrate in a reef tank. According to different individuals, it can easily release soluble silica, or it cannot possibly do so. In this case it appears that the truth is somewhere between these views.</p>
<p>In this article I will expand on a <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/2000/feb/features/1/default.asp">previous article</a> covering silica in reef tanks by Craig Bingman.1 I will describe the nature of silica in the oceans, and describe which organisms use silica, how they use it, and how much they need. I’ll discuss issues around measurement of soluble and insoluble silica, and also describe some of the sources of soluble silica in reef tanks, including a demonstration that release from “silica” sand can be substantial.</p>
<p>I’ll also show with dosing experiments that soluble silica is rapidly depleted from my reef tank (about 50% per day). When adequate silicate is added to my reef tank, diatom growth appears to increase. Contrary to popular notions, however, the increased diatom growth actually makes my glass easier to see through than the green algae that it replaced.</p>
<p>Finally, and I think most importantly, I’ll recommend that people consider dosing soluble silica to their tanks to support the variety of organisms that potentially use it, from sponges to limpets.</p>
<h2>Silica in the Ocean</h2>
<p>Dissolved silica in the ocean largely takes the form of silicic acid, Si(OH)<sub>4</sub>. Since it is acidic and has a pKa somewhat above normal seawater pH values (pKa ~ 9.5 in freshwater; possibly it is a bit lower in seawater), about 5% of it will be present as silicate, Si(OH)<sub>3</sub>O<sup>-</sup>. Apparently, many diatoms take up the Si(OH)<sub>4</sub> form directly, although there is some evidence that certain organisms take up Si(OH)<sub>3</sub>O<sup>-</sup>. In this article, I will not generally refer to silicic acid or silicate unless I am specifying one or the other. Typically I will refer to the sum of them as “soluble silica” or just silica, if the context is clear.</p>
<p>The concentration of soluble silica in the ocean is highly variable. In near surface waters, diatoms are very efficient at sucking it out of solution to make their SiO<sub>2</sub> frustules. A diatom bloom in the ocean can drive the concentration of silica down from a value not atypical for the whole ocean, 45 mM (2.7 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>), to less than 1 mM (0.06 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>), at which point the diatoms can become silicon limited.2 Typical silica concentrations in the surface waters of the equatorial Pacific are a few mM.3</p>
<p>Rivers are the primary input of silica into the oceans (80% of the total input; underwater vents and deposition from the atmosphere are also significant contributors), and river water worldwide averages 150 mM (9 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>).4 Consequently, coastal areas near a river may have greater silica concentrations than open ocean areas. This input is approximately balanced by the deposition of silica on the ocean bottom. However, the total biogenic incorporation of silica into organisms is about 40 times as fast as river input, indicating that much of the silicon is deposited into skeletons and re- dissolved many times before it becomes “permanently” incorporated into sea floor sediments. The average residence time for a single silicon atom in the oceans is only about 400 years, before it gets deposited in some fashion.4</p>
<p>When diatoms and radiolarians die and sink, they slowly dissolve, and the silica concentration in deep water can be much higher than surface water for this reason. All ocean waters are undersaturated with respect to amorphous silica (allowing the silica structures in diatoms and radiolarians to dissolve), and most waters are undersaturated even with respect to quartz,5 although its dissolution is kinetically slow, allowing beaches to exist.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_1.jpg" title="Figure 1. A view through the front glass of my reef tank a few hours after scraping the glass."><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_1.jpg/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_1.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 1. A view through the front glass of my reef tank a few hours after scraping the glass.</p>
</div>
<h2>Marine Organisms that Use Silica: Diatoms</h2>
<p>There are a variety of marine organisms that use silica. In the oceans, the primary consumers are <a href="http://www.mbari.org/~conn/botany/diatoms/jennifer/introa.htm">diatoms</a>. They use silica to form frustules that provide them with a hard, silica-containing cell wall. These frustules form a dizzying array of beautiful patterns, and are well represented at the interface between science, art, and <a href="http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/news/2002/smallworld_e_02.htm">photography</a>.6</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_2.jpg" title="Figure 2. A view through the front glass of my reef tank 5 days after scraping the glass."><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_2.jpg/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_2.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 2. A view through the front glass of my reef tank 5 days after scraping the glass.</p>
</div>
<p>With one exception (discussed below) all diatoms require silica for growth, and low silica levels cause significant changes in the cell cycle.7 Silicon is a major limiting nutrient for diatom growth in certain parts of the oceans,8 although <a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/10/chemistry">iron</a>,9 nitrogen, and phosphorus can also be limiting. There have been many studies on the uptake of silica by diatoms. Most diatoms take up silica in the form of silicic acid, although one has been shown to take up the silicate form.10 If absorbing silica is a limiting factor, then it makes sense to transport silicic acid since it is present at much higher concentrations than is silicate, and hence is potentially easier to transport.</p>
<p>Different diatom species have different abilities to absorb silica from the water. That is, as the silica concentration drops, some diatoms can continue to pull silica from the water while others cannot. Most diatoms have half maximal rates of silica absorption of 0.7-10 mM (0.04 – 0.6 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>),2 but some are substantially higher, up to about 60 mM (2.6 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>).2 The in-situ average for biogenic silica uptake in the surface layer of the equatorial pacific showed half maximal uptake at a silica concentration of 1.6 mM at 3°S and 2.4 mm at the equator, which was close to the silica concentrations present.3</p>
<p>There apparently are genes for many different silica transporters in each of the diatom species that has been investigated.8 Diatoms also somehow maintain internal silicic acid concentrations at levels higher than its solubility, but the mechanism for accomplishing this is unclear. Nevertheless, it is obvious that this facilitates the deposition process, and inhibits dissolution of the existing frustule. Diatoms apparently use proteins to guide the deposition process, where soluble silica is converted into the intricate solid frustule, but exactly how this role is accomplished is not known.8</p>
<p>In a reef tank like mine with silica concentrations below 0.8 mM (0.05 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>, the practical limit of the Hach silica kit), some diatoms will have a hard time absorbing silica. Many reef tanks may, in fact, be selecting for diatoms that are able to get enough silica at the low concentrations typically available. Are diatoms silica-limited in reef tanks? That question is addressed experimentally below.</p>
<p>In the oceans, diatoms are silica limited in some natural settings (like the polar regions and the Sargasso Sea, where the ambient silica concentration is less than 1 mM (0.06 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>).11 There have also been many cases where eutrophication of natural waters has raised nitrogen and phosphorus levels to the point where silica has become limiting,12 even when it was not limiting in pristine waters. In reef tanks, where nitrogen and phosphorus are often not in short supply, it makes sense that silica could be limiting. In case you were thinking that silica limitation to diatom growth is necessarily a good thing, there are drawbacks. The limitation of silica, inhibiting the growth of diatoms that would otherwise take up the limiting nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus, has even been implicated in blooms of cyanobacteria.1</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_3.jpg" title="Figure 3. A view of the inside of the front glass of my reef tank 5 days after scraping the glass."><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_3.jpg/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_3.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 3. A view of the inside of the front glass of my reef tank 5 days after scraping the glass.</p>
</div>
<h2>Marine Organisms that Use Silica: Sponges</h2>
<p>Sponges are the second largest consumer of dissolved silica in the ocean, after diatoms.14 Many sponges use silica to form internal structures, called spicules, which help them retain their shape. In the case of the sponge <em>Tethya aurantia</em>, these spicules are needles of amorphous silica that comprise 75% of its dry weight. These spicules are 2 mm long and 30 mm wide.15</p>
<p>Most frequently, the spicules in sponges are hydrated amorphous silica, and also contain collagen, an organic material (although sometimes they are calcium carbonate). In order to direct the formation of these silica spicules, sponges produce enzymes that help control the silica deposition process. In the case of the sponges <em>Suberites domuncula</em> and <em>Tethya auranita</em>, an enzyme called silicatein is produced. When the silicate concentration is increased in the surrounding water from 1 mM (0.06 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>) to 60 mM (3.6 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>), the gene responsible for silicatein is strongly up- regulated, along with that for collagen.16 These experiments suggest that the sponge may be able to take advantage of silica concentrations as high as 60 mM, or alternatively, may be restricted in it’s growth, at levels below 60 mM.</p>
<p>It has been shown that in the sponge <em>Halichondria panicea</em> there is a correlation between the dissolved SiO<sub>2</sub> in the seawater, and SiO<sub>2</sub> content of the sponge.17 Moreover, it has been shown that silica uptake appears to require energy expenditure by the sponge, and that after conditions of starvation, uptake rates were greatly reduced. The ability of these sponges to remove SiO<sub>2</sub> from the water column is sufficient so that in the summer they may actually compete with diatoms for available silicate.</p>
<p>In this same sponge, the rate of silica uptake is a function of the dissolved silica concentration in the seawater, with higher silica concentrations resulting in higher rates of uptake. The concentration at which the sponges take up silica at half of their maximal rate is 46 mM (2.8 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>).14 Further, in certain waters it is believed that the growth of these sponges is limited by soluble silica, rather than by the availability of food. These sponges are capable of taking up 19 mmol/h per gram of tissue (maximally), so at 46 mM dissolved SiO<sub>2</sub>, they theoretically could take up 9.5 mmol/h per gram of tissue (though there is no evidence that the do take up silica that fast under normal growth conditions). A 50-gram sponge would then be able to take up 475 mmol/h, or 11.4 mmol (0.7 g) of silica in a day. A 100-gallon (378 L) aquarium with a high level of silica (30 mM or 1.9 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>) only contains that much to begin with. Consequently, the potential
silica depletion in reef tanks with actively growing sponges could be substantial. Of course, if your sponges are not growing rapidly, then they likely are not using much silica. Likewise, if there is not much silica, then they may not be able to grow rapidly, even if other conditions are good.</p>
<p>This reason is, in fact, why I initiated dosing of silica (0.33 mM/day or 0.02 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>/day) to my reef tank several years ago. I had a large sponge that I wanted to survive, and I had hoped that silica additions might alter the usual course of slow death for such sponges in most reef tanks. When I initiated that study, Julian Sprung told me that he had tried the same thing. In both of our cases the sponges eventually died, in my case lasting about 18 months. Perhaps we did not dose enough silica (0.33 mM/day is a small amount relative to the uptake numbers described above, and the concentration in the water column of my tank never rose above 0.8 mM (0.05 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>) where it could be detected with a Hach kit). Alternatively, perhaps the food sources were not right or something else was wrong.</p>
<h2>Marine Organisms that Use Silica: Mollusks</h2>
<p>It turns out that the teeth (called radula) of many mollusks contain substantial silicon. The teeth are used for scraping algae from rocks (or glass in reef tanks). Consequently, they rapidly wear down and are quickly replaced. These radula are quite chemically complex, containing lots of different ions. The exact chemical composition is dependent on the species and family. The radula of limpets, such as <em>Patella vulgata</em>, contain large amounts of Si (up to 35%) and Fe (up to 51%), and substantial amounts of Al, Ca, K, Mg, Na, and P. The radula of chitons seem to be more variable, with Zn in particular varying substantially between species.18-21</p>
<p>It seems likely that these and other mollusks get the silicon necessary to form their radula from diatoms that they consume, rather than from the water column. However, if reef tanks are kept artificially low in silica, and do not have much in the way of diatoms for the mollusks to consume, it is a possibility that these organisms may become deficient in silicon. It has been claimed by some hobbyists that many mollusks do not live as long in reef aquaria as they do in the wild, although I’ve not seen any definitive data in this respect. Many hypotheses have been proposed, and it stands to reason that a deficiency in silicon might be considered as one of the possibilities, if, in fact, mollusks die prematurely in reef tanks.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_4a.gif" title="Figure 4. The concentration of soluble silica as a function of time after dosing. Dosing was done at t=0. The concentration for t=0 (30 mM) is an estimate based on what was added and the estimated total system volume."><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_4a.gif/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_4a.gif" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 4. The concentration of soluble silica as a function of time after dosing. Dosing was done at t=0. The concentration for t=0 (30 mM) is an estimate based on what was added and the estimated total system volume.</p>
</div>
<h2>Marine Organisms that Use Silica: Algae, Radiolarians, and Silicoflagellates</h2>
<p>It has been reported that certain planktonic algae take up silica, but do not have an absolute growth requirement for it. One diatom specie, <em>Phaeodactylum tricornutum</em> (Bacillariophyceae) , and the prasinophyte <em>Platymonas</em> (a green flagellate), are two examples.22,23 These organisms have relatively inefficient silica uptake mechanisms, with half maximal uptake rates at 97 and 81 mM (5.9 ppm and 4.9 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>) respectively. These values are much higher than for diatoms that require silica, which are typically 1-6 mM (0.06 – 0.4 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>). Unlike most diatoms, <em>Phaeodactylum tricornutum</em> (Bacillariophyceae) seems to take up silica in the form of Si(OH)<sub>3</sub>O<sup>-</sup>, so it’s ability to take up silicate from a solution at fixed total silicic acid/silicate concentration is pH dependent. 24 What purpose the silica serves in these organisms isn’t known. Maybe it just makes the algae less palatable to herbivores.</p>
<p>Like diatoms, radiolarians are often beautiful organisms. They are protozoa that are nearly all planktonic. Most radiolarians have a siliceous skeleton, although some also contain strontium sulfate structures. 25 While radiolarians are a significant contributor to the silica cycle in the oceans, 26-28 I do not know how important they are in ordinary reef tanks. Other organisms also use silica, such as the silicoflagellates, but it is not evident to me whether they play any role in reef tanks either. <strong></strong>27</p>
<h2>Measuring Silica</h2>
<p>Before going on to discuss silica in reef tanks, a few comments on measurements of silica seem worthwhile. In the context of organisms that use silica, we are only interested in soluble forms of silica, typically silicic acid and silicate. Ignoring the fact that there can actually be other soluble forms in certain situations, like extended chains or rings, the most important distinction that reef keepers need to be aware of is between tests that analyze for silicon, regardless of form, and those that analyze for soluble silica.</p>
<p>Tests that analyze for silicon, such as ICP (inductively coupled plasma) can include silica particulates (e.g., fine sand) in the result. Even with filtration, fine particles can evade removal. Consequently, it is complicated to extrapolate from an ICP measurement to a soluble silicate concentration. In Ron Shimek’s tests of <a href="http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-02/rs/feature/index.htm">aquarium water</a>,29 for example, the technique chosen was ICP. Consequently, people should not interpret the values obtained, 1.8 to 104 mM (0.05 to 2.9 ppm Si = 0.11 to 6.2 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub> ) as necessarily indicating anything about the dissolved silica concentration present in the tanks studied (except that the dissolved silica cannot exceed those numbers).</p>
<p>Similarly, in studies of <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1999/mar/features/1/default.asp">salt mixes</a>,30 the different forms may be an issue as well. In that case, the authors attributed differences between ICP and wet chemistry methods to the nature of the silicon present.</p>
<p>Tests that analyze for soluble silica, such as any of the kits available to the hobby, will only detect soluble forms. I recommend the low range silica test from Hach, Model SI-7, catalog number 22550-00. While the values obtained with such kits may not be comparable to those obtained by other methods, they are suitable for understanding how much dissolved silica is present and available to organisms in tank water, and in other aqueous solutions, such as tap water.</p>
<h2>Sources of Soluble Silica in Reef Tanks</h2>
<p>What are the sources of soluble silica in reef tank? Certainly, tap water is a big one. It is added to many water supplies to raise the pH and reduce leaching of lead and copper into potable water from pipes.31 My tap water presently contains 17 mM (1.0 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>). When I started my first reef tank years ago, that fact, and the fear of diatoms, was what drove me to set up an RO/DI system. In fact, many makers of RO/DI systems seem very concerned by silica, and they pass that concern along to their customers (and vice versa). Silica may, in fact, be too high in some water supplies. As it turns out, however, I presently do not believe that this silica level is too high to add to my tank. Rather, I think it would be beneficial. It turns out that when I intentionally dosed this amount (equivalent to a 2% daily evaporation rate) for 2 years, I did not experience any problems. It also amounts to less silica than I recommend people dose to their tanks at the end of this article.
[Nevertheless, I still use the RO/DI system to protect me from all of the many other compounds that could be present in the water that I don’t want in my tank.]</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_5_.jpg" title="Figure 5. A view through the front glass of my reef tank 5 days after scraping the glass and adding the silica supplement"><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_5_.jpg/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_5_.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 5. A view through the front glass of my reef tank 5 days after scraping the glass and adding the silica supplement</p>
</div>
<p>Other sources of soluble silica are much harder to pin down. Many foods and additives contain silicon in some form. Tests that have typically been used on foods, like ICP, cannot distinguish dissolved silica from tiny particulates, as mentioned above. <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish/data/foods.asp">In some of these tests</a>, typical aquarium foods ranged from 20-540 ppm silicon. 32 A 5-gram spoonful of food that contained 540 ppm Si would actually only contain 2.7 mg of Si. If all of that were a soluble form, then putting it into a 100-gallon reef tank would raise the dissolved silica concentration by 0.25 mM (0.015 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>). That value is small, but not insignificant. Still, without knowing whether it is soluble silica or not, one cannot tell whether it is a usable form. In any case, it is less than I recommend for dosing (see below).</p>
<p>Another potential source of silica is the artificial salt mix used to prepare the tank water. Despite the marketing hype in which many mixes claim to have no silica, most do have some (a few mM), and these levels are not unlike natural <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1999/mar/features/1/default.asp">seawater</a>.30 Nevertheless, that silica likely depletes in a few days in a real reef tank (see below).</p>
<p>Other sources may include any of the various supplements added to reef tanks. While there are far too many additives to consider, some that could be significant sources would include those that are added in the largest amounts to reef tanks: calcium and alkalinity supplements. Analyses by <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1997/aug/bio/default.asp">Craig Bingman</a>33 and <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish/library/articleview2.asp?Section=Aquarium+Frontiers+--+Biochemistry+of+Aquaria&RecordNo=1571">Greg Hiller</a>34 of silica in calcium carbonate intended for CaCO<sub>3</sub>/CO<sub>2</sub> reactors would suggest that little soluble silica is delivered in this fashion.</p>
<p>Limewater may also be a significant, but likely small source of soluble silica. According to the Mississippi Lime Company, their <a href="http://www.mississippilime.com/products/product.asp?dept%5Fid=310&pf%5Fid=31004&tabsetting=2">food grade lime</a>35 contains 0.2% by weight silica, of which less than 0.1% is “crystalline silica”. If these values are accurate, and “non-crystalline silica” is actually a soluble form of some kind, then the addition of soluble silica to the tank can be calculated. A typical reef tank might add 1-2% of its volume in saturated limewater daily. Saturated limewater contains on the order of 1.5 g/L of Ca(OH)<sub>2</sub>, so it consequently contains about 3 mg/L of silica (assuming 0.2 wt percent SiO<sub>2</sub> in the lime). At the daily delivery rate of 1-2% of the tank volume, the silica addition to the tank could be on the order of 0.5- 1 mM/day (0.03-0.06 ppm/day SiO<sub>2</sub>). That delivery is not insignificant relative to the few mM that
may be present in normal ocean water. I dose limewater in my tank (using Mississippi Lime Company quicklime, CaO, not the grade described here), and do not detect any soluble silica in my tank. Consequently, in my tank, this mechanism may be useful for adding soluble silica, but is apparently still small relative to the silica demand (see below).</p>
<p>One additional comment on limewater. At high pH, glass will etch as silica is dissolved into solution. From the standpoint of the glass involved, this does not become significant until the pH is significantly higher than that of limewater. But from the standpoint of small amounts of silica getting into the limewater, and then potentially into the tank, leaching from glass in the situation where limewater is dosed from a glass vessel may be significant.</p>
<h2>The Dissolution of Quartz Sand</h2>
<p>One of the issues that has been floating around the reef keeping hobby for a long time is the issue of whether “silica” sand actually releases soluble silica or not. It is remarkable that so many people have strong opinions on this issue, and yet so few people have ever bothered to do the easy experiment of measuring it. Many even fall for the trap of concluding that since their glass aquarium is not dissolving, then silica sand must not be either. All of the arguments against soluble silica being released from “silica” sand can be easily refuted, and I have done so in the past, but that is not the point of this article. Still, some background is worthwhile before getting to experimental results.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_6.jpg" title="Figure 6. A view of the inside of the front glass of my reef tank 5 days after scraping the glass and adding the silica supplement."><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_6.jpg/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_6.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 6. A view of the inside of the front glass of my reef tank 5 days after scraping the glass and adding the silica supplement.</p>
</div>
<p>Silica sand is largely composed of quartz. Quartz has a maximum solubility in pure freshwater of about 180 uM (11 ppm as SiO<sub>2</sub>)36, and is somewhat higher in seawater.37 That value is substantially in excess of the dissolved silica concentrations in any normal part of the ocean (excluding plumes from vents from hot springs and such). So why doesn’t quartz beach sand dissolve? It does, but it does so very slowly. The rate of dissolution of quartz has been studied, and it is very slow. 38 It is the slow dissolution of quartz, not the solubility itself, which allows it to remain on many ocean beaches.</p>
<p>A final comment on quartz sand is that it is known that organic acids can increase the rate of dissolution of quartz by at least a factor of ten.39 This may be especially applicable in reef tanks, where organic materials may be in abundance, particularly when organisms are living directly on the sand, potentially releasing such acids directly onto the sand surface.</p>
<p>The problem with extrapolating from the known very slow rate of dissolution of quartz to “silica sand” is that it simply is not pure quartz. The dissolution of soluble silica from “quartz sand” (98.5% SiO<sub>2</sub>) has long been known to exceed the solubility of quartz itself.40 Take a close look at some commercial “silica” sand. It isn’t even close to being white, which an absolutely pure quartz sand will be. There are all sorts of different colored particulates in it (some are even magnetic and can be picked out with a magnet). Without going into detail on mineralogy, suffice to say that there are many minerals that readily dissolve to release silicate into the water. Such dissolution is why freshwater rivers contain so much silica (typically 150 mM (9 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>)).4 Your sand claims to be 98% quartz? What about that other 2%? Two percent of a 50-pound bag of sand is a pound of “other stuff”.</p>
<p>If you start with true beach sand, and don’t fracture it much, then it is very likely that you will detect little dissolution of silica from it in a few days (although I’ve not tried it), because most of the readily dissolved minerals would have disappeared long ago (or are trapped inside). But commercial play sands are not typically from beaches, and are not collected with any kind of gentleness. They are often mined from sand pits, crushed, screened, and generally treated rather roughly. This serves to break many of the grains, exposing new mineral inclusions that are then primed to dissolve. This source is, in my opinion, where most of the soluble silica comes from in “silica” sand.</p>
<p>So, on to some experiments. I bought some Quickcrete Play Sand from Home Depot and ran a number of tests on it. In all of the cases shown below the silica concentration was determined with a Hach low range silica kit after filtration through a 0.2 mm syringe filter. In cases where the concentration is above 1 ppm, the sample was diluted with RO/DI water prior to analysis. All experiments were carried out in the dark to reduce any effect due to diatom growth.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_7.jpg" title="Figure 7. An organism (at arrow point) isolated from the glass surface after silica addition, tentatively identified as the diatom _Cylindrotheca closterium (Nitzschia closterium). It is the second most abundant in the collected material."><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_7.jpg/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_7.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 7. An organism (at arrow point) isolated from the glass surface after silica addition, tentatively identified as the diatom _Cylindrotheca closterium (Nitzschia closterium). It is the second most abundant in the collected material.</p>
</div>
<p>In the first experiment I took 3 cups of sand, and suspended it in 3 gallons of freshly made Instant Ocean salt mix that initially contained less than 0.8 mM of silica (0.05 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>). After 48 hours of gentle stirring with a powerhead (the water was stirring, but not the sand), the silica concentration had risen to 17 mM (1.0 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>).</p>
<p>I then rinsed the same sand 5 times with 1 gallon RO/DI water (1 minute each time), discarded the contents, and then ran the same stirring experiment with 2 new gallons of Instant Ocean salt mix. In 48 hours the silica concentration had again risen, this time to 15 mM (0.92 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>). Then I let it sit unstirred for another 96 hours, and the concentration had risen more, to 23 mM (1.4 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>).</p>
<p>In a different experiment, I took about 45 pounds of sand, and added 2 gallons of Instant Ocean salt mix. I let this mixture sit for 7 days, with once a day mixing with my hands for about 30 seconds. At then end of this test, the concentration was 90 mM (5.4 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>).</p>
<p>It has been suggested that the amount of silica coming from calcerous sand might actually be as high or higher than that from silica sand. To test this hypothesis, I repeated the small-scale experiments above on a calcium carbonate sand from Home Depot (Southdown). In this case, there was some soluble silica released after the first 48 h, but only 1.6 mM (0.1 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>), or about a factor of 10 lower than the silica sand. In a long-term test, the concentration had only risen to 5 mM (0.3 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>) in 14 days with once a day stirring.</p>
<p>From these experiments, I conclude that:</p>
<ol>
<li>The “silica” play sand that I purchased from Home Depot can substantially raise the dissolved silica concentration in seawater.</li>
<li>The dissolvable portion of the silica sand cannot be completely removed by several rinses with either fresh or salt water, although it may be decreased somewhat by that process.</li>
<li>Southdown calcium carbonate sand (likely aragonite) can release soluble silica, but about ten fold less than the “silica” sand.</li>
</ol>
<p>Is it OK to use silica sand? Probably. Many people do so. I also believe that not all “silica “ sands will be the same for the reasons described above relating to processing of the sand and the nature of the mineral inclusions present. So the fact that many people successfully use some (or many) types of silica sand does not necessarily imply that all people can use any type of “silica” sand without a problem.</p>
<p>In subsequent sections of this article I describe dosing recommendations for adding soluble silica. Is silica sand a good way to go from that perspective? I cannot really answer that. It probably provides some silica to reef tanks, but the amount is completely out of the control of the aquarist. For that reason alone, I believe that it would be a poor choice as the sole source of soluble silica for a reef tank. In a tank without any silica dosing, silica sand may, in fact, be more beneficial to the overall tank, at least from a silica delivery standpoint, than calcium carbonate sand. There are, of course, many other differences that might be the deciding factor on sand choice (color, texture, dissolution, particle size distribution, nutrient and metal binding properties of sands, etc). Many of these factors are more aesthetic than technical, and the technical ones are beyond the scope of this article.</p>
<h2>The Effect of Added Soluble Silica on a Reef Tank</h2>
<p>As I mentioned above, I added small amounts of sodium silicate to my tank for 2 years in order to see what effect it would have on a sponge that I was trying to maintain. The dosing was not successful in maintaining the sponge, but other facts learned from that experiment are instructive. Most importantly, I never noticed anything that I would call “diatoms.” The aquarium glass always turned green after a while, not shades of golden brown that are typically (but not always) associated with diatoms. Additionally, there was never any build up of detectable silica using the Hach test kit (which could readily detect 0.8 – 1.7 mM (0.05- 0.1 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>).</p>
<p>When that bottle of sodium silicate solution ran out, I stopped dosing for a few months, with no obvious changes in the tank. Before going further, I should point out that my reef tank is fairly low in other nutrients. It has no nitrate detectable with LaMotte or Salifert kits, implying a concentration less than 8 mM (0.5 ppm). Inorganic phosphate detectable with the Hach kit was 0.3 mM (0.03 ppm). These figures are at the low end of values typically reported for reef tanks, but may be in excess of those present in surface <a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/9/chemistry">ocean water</a>.41 I also was routinely dosing Kent’s iron and manganese supplement during the entire course of the experiment, so iron limitation should not have been a factor.</p>
<p>Figure 1 shows the front glass of a portion of my 90-gallon aquarium a few hours after cleaning the glass with a razor blade. Figure 2 shows the same view 5 days after the cleaning. From this angle, the view is clearly somewhat obscured (I had actually taken photographs every day, but the 5 day point serves to show the differences after silicate was added). Figure 3 shows the inside of the glass, taken through the side of the tank. The growth is clearly green, and on again scraping the glass with a razor blade, the material that came off looked dark green</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_8.jpg" title="Figure 8. An organism (at arrow point) isolated from Tatu’s tank, tentatively identified as the diatom _Cylindrotheca closterium (Nitzschia closterium)."><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_8.jpg/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_8.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 8. An organism (at arrow point) isolated from Tatu’s tank, tentatively identified as the diatom _Cylindrotheca closterium (Nitzschia closterium).</p>
</div>
<p>Then I added a spike of sodium silicate to the water, estimated to be about 30 mM (1.8 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>; estimated because I knew the addition amount exactly, but not the actual water volume of my total system). Figure 4 shows the decline in the detectable silica concentration, again using the Hach kit, over the next 4 days. By day 4, the tank is back to where it started before the experiment, with none detectable (less than about 0.8 mM (0.05 ppm). Interestingly, the drop is quite rapid. The concentration drops by about half every day.</p>
<p>Figures 5 and 6 show the same views of the glass 5 days after dosing the silicate. In this case, the growth is clearly more yellow/brown that it was previously. However, the growth is no more obstructing of the view than when it was green algae that was growing. On scraping the glass with a razor blade, the growth appeared yellow brown as it came off.</p>
<p>I collected some of this material by filtration, and dried it on a filter paper (a process that severely damages the diatoms, but that was necessary to easily ship them overseas). I then sent them to Tatu Vaajalahti in Finland to take some photomicrographs and to see if they could be identified as diatoms. Identification of diatoms is a tricky business, especially for amateur diatom hunters like us. The range of possible structures in immense, and the ones that we found in greatest abundance did not obviously look like some of the pictures that we first located on line.</p>
<p>Figure 7 shows the second most abundant organism present. It bears a very close resemblance to the diatom _Cylindrotheca closterium (Nitzschia closterium).42 Tatu has found this in his tank water as well, and has taken better pictures of his own samples that have not been dried as mine were (Figure 8). In these photomicrographs, the color should be ignored as some of the samples were stained.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" rel="gallery" href="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_9.jpg" title="Figure 9. An assembly of organisms, possibly diatoms, isolated from the glass surface after silica addition. This organism is the most abundant in the collected material. "><img src="aafeature1_album/Silica_Figure_9.jpg/image_preview" alt="Silica_Figure_9.jpg" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">Figure 9. An assembly of organisms, possibly diatoms, isolated from the glass surface after silica addition. This organism is the most abundant in the collected material.</p>
</div>
<p>The most abundant organisms, shown in Figure 9, are also likely diatoms. They were identified by René van Wezel as being a small pennate diatom with platelike chloroplasts, possibly from genus <em>Gomphonema</em>. Together, these two organisms account for at least 80% of the total organisms, and large green algae ( &gt; 100 mm) were few.</p>
<p>From these experiments, I conclude that:</p>
<ol>
<li>Silica can be a limiting factor for diatom growth in some reef tanks</li>
<li>Adding soluble silica can increase diatom growth</li>
<li>The increased diatom growth was not apparently in addition to, but in place of, green algae growth</li>
<li>Added soluble silica is rapidly depleted from some reef tanks</li>
<li>Taken together, these facts suggest that silica supplementation may be desirable</li>
</ol>
<h2>Silica Dosing Recommendations</h2>
<p>Why would I recommend dosing silica? Largely because creatures in our tanks use it, the concentrations in our tanks (at least in mine) are below natural levels, and the sponges, mollusks, and diatoms may not be getting enough to thrive.</p>
<h2>How much and what to dose?</h2>
<p>I’d suggest dosing sodium silicate solution, as it is a readily soluble form of silica. It is very inexpensive. I initially used a high quality laboratory grade, but I’d expect the bulk grades sold to the world at large to be good enough (and I use it now). Remember, you aren’t dosing much, and the solutions available are very concentrated. You may find “water glass’ in certain stores because it is used by consumers for things like preserving eggs. Buying chemicals can be problematic for many people, however, and this <a href="http://chemistrystore.com/sodium_silicate.htm">hobby chemistry store</a> 43 sells to individuals. Ten dollars (+ shipping) gets you enough to last 150 years of dosing with a 100-gallon tank, so cost is not an issue. I just ordered some from them myself and it came broken open, unfortunately. Some of you may have gotten Christmas presents that had ¾ of a gallon of sodium silicate solution coating them as they passed my package in the mail. Nevertheless, I
still have enough for several years!).</p>
<p>Many “water glass” or sodium silicate solutions are sold with the concentration indicated by “° Baume”. Degrees Baume is a measure of the specific gravity, and values in the 40’s are <a href="http://www.pqcorp.com/productlines/SodiumSilicateSpecs.asp">typical of these concentrated solutions</a>.44 A concentration of 41° Baume equates to 29% SiO<sub>2</sub> by weight. Note that the density is high (1.38 g/mL for 41° Baume), so volume measurements should take this into account. Maybe eventually, some of the hobby supplement manufacturers will provide a supplement.</p>
<p><strong>Safety note:</strong> Sodium Silicate solution is very basic (high pH). In fact, the pH can be substantially higher than limewater, so it is very corrosive to tissue and to metal devices. Be careful to not spill it on yourself, wear some eye protection, and if you spill it on something metal, wash it. In all cases, extensive washing with water is recommended in case of spills or exposure.</p>
<p>Based on my dosing experience, aquarists are probably safe dosing the equivalent of 17 mM (1 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>) once every 1-2 weeks. That is based on the fact that my tank used that much in less than 4 days without having any sort of “bad” reaction. Of course, there’s nothing wrong with starting at a tenth of that and ramping up. And, of course, if you do get too much in the way of diatoms, just back off on the dosing. I presume that all that I added to my tank went into various organisms that us it (sponges, diatoms, etc), but perhaps I have more sponges than other aquarists, and diatoms consequently may be more of a concern in some tanks than in mine.</p>
<p>I’d also advise occasionally checking the soluble silica concentration in the water, in case the demand in your tank is substantially less than mine. If the concentration started to rise above 50 mM (3 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>), even in the absence of diatoms, I’d probably reduce the dose rate because that is close to the maximum concentration that surface seawater ever attains.</p>
<p>Here’s how to determine dosing amounts. I’ll assume that you want 17 mM (1 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>) dosing, and you can scale from there. If the concentration of the supplement is 29% silica by weight (41° Baume), then it is 290,000 ppm silica. To get to 1 ppm silica, you then need to dilute by 290,000 fold. If you add 1.3 grams of this supplement (0.96 mL) to a tank with 100 gallons (378,500 mL), then the final concentration will be about 17 mM (1 ppm SiO<sub>2</sub>). I’d disperse the concentrated silicate solution into some fresh water before adding it to the tank, and then add it to a high flow area. Because the pH is high, you likely will see some cloudiness that is mostly magnesium hydroxide. The magnesium hydroxide will dissolve without a problem, but to be safe, add the supplement in a high flow area.</p>
<p>Happy Reefing!</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ol>
<li>Silicon — Foe or Friend? By Craig Bingman <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/2000/feb/features/1/default.asp">http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/2000/feb/features/1/default.asp</a></li>
<li>A seasonal progression of Si limitation in the Pacific sector of the Southern Ocean. Nelson, David M.; Brzezinski, Mark A.; Sigmon, Daniel E.; Franck, Valerie M. College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA. Deep-Sea Research, Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography (2001), 48(19-20), 3973-3995.</li>
<li>Silicon limitation of biogenic silica production in the Equatorial Pacific. Leynaert, A.; Treguer, P.; Lancelot, Christiane; Rodier, Martine. Laboratoire "Flux de matiere et reponses du vivant", Institut Universitaire Europeen de la Mer, Technopole Brest-Iroise, Plouzane, Fr. Deep-Sea Research, Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers (2000), Volume Date 2001, 48(3), 639-660.</li>
<li>The silica balance in the world ocean: a reestimate. Treguer, Paul; Nelson, David M.; Van Bennekom, Aleido J.; DeMaster, David J.; Leynaert, Aude; Queguiner, Bernard. Unite Recherches Associee, Universite Bretagne Occidentale, Brest, Fr. Science (Washington, D. C.) (1995), 268(5209), 375-9.</li>
<li>The silica budget in the sedimentary cycle. Siever, Raymond. Harvard Univ., Am. Mineralogist (1957), 42 821-41.</li>
<li>Digital Eclipse Image Gallery: Diatom Frustules: <a href="http://www.microscopyu.com/galleries/dxm1200/diatomfrustulessmall.html">http://www.microscopyu.com/galleries/dxm1200/diatomfrustulessmall.html</a>, <a href="http://www.microscopyu.com/galleries/phasecontrast/surirellagemmasmall.html">http://www.microscopyu.com/galleries/phasecontrast/surirellagemmasmall.html</a>, <a href="http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/news/2002/smallworld_e_02.htm">http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/news/2002/smallworld_e_02.htm</a></li>
<li>Silicon availability and cell-cycle progression in marine diatoms. Brzezinski, Mark A.; Olson, Robert J.; Chisholm, Sallie W. Biol. Dep., Woods Hole Oceanogr. Inst., Woods Hole, MA, USA. Marine Ecology: Progress Series (1990), 67(1), 83-96.</li>
<li>Silicon metabolism in diatoms: Implications for growth. Martin- Jezequel, Veronique; Hildebrand, Mark; Brzezinski, Mark A. Universite de Bretagne Occidentale, UMR 6539, CNRS, Institut Universitaire Europeen de la Mer, Technopole Brest-Iroise, Plouzane, Fr. Journal of Phycology (2000), 36(5), 821-840.</li>
<li>Iron: A Look at Organisms Other than Macroalgae by Randy Holmes-Farley <a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/10/chemistry">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/10/chemistry</a></li>
<li>The chemical form of dissolved Si taken up by marine diatoms. Del Amo, Yolanda; Brzezinski, Mark A. Department of Ecology, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA, USA. Journal of Phycology (1999), 35(6), 1162-1170.</li>
<li>Modification of the biogeochemical cycle of silica with eutrophication. Conley, Daniel J.; Schelske, Claire L.; Stoermer, Eugene F. Cent. Environ. Estuarine Stud., Univ. Maryland Syst., Cambridge, MD, USA. Marine Ecology: Progress Series (1993), 101(1-2), 179-92.</li>
<li>Chronic substrate limitation of silicic acid uptake rates in the western Sargasso Sea. Brzezinski, Mark A.; Nelson, David M. Marine Science Institute, University California, Santa Barbara, CA, USA. Deep-Sea Research, Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography (1996), 43(2-3, Ocean Time-Series: Results from the Hawaii and Bermuda Research Programs), 437-453.</li>
<li>Role of transient silicon limitation in the development of cyanobacteria blooms in the Guadiana estuary, south-western Iberia. Rocha, C.; Galvao, H.; Barbosa, A. CIMA-Centre for Marine and Environmental Research, FCMA- Faculdade de Ciencias do Mar e do Ambiente, Universidade do Algarve, Faro, Port. Marine Ecology: Progress Series (2002), 228 35-45.</li>
<li>Silica uptake kinetics of Halichondria panicea in Kiel Bight. Reincke, T.; Barthel, D. Institut fur Meereskunde, Kiel, Germany. Marine Biology (Berlin) (1997), 129(4), 591-593.</li>
<li>Learning from biological systems: novel routes to biomimetic synthesis of ordered silica structures. Cha, Jennifer N.; Shimizu, Katsuhiko; Zhou, Yan; Christiansen, Sean C.; Chmelka, Bradley F.; Deming, Timothy J.; Stucky, Galen D.; Morse, Daniel E. Dept. of Chemistry, University of CA, Santa Barbara, CA, USA. Materials Research Society Symposium Proceedings (2000), 599(Mineralization in Natural and Synthetic Biomaterials), 239-248.</li>
<li>Expression of silicatein and collagen genes in the marine sponge Suberites domuncula is controlled by silicate and myotrophin. Krasko, Anatoli; Lorenz, Bernd; Batel, Renato; Schroder, Heinz C.; Muller, Isabel M.; Muller, Werner E. G. Institut fur Physiologische Chemie, Abteilung fur Angewandte Molekularbiologie, Universitat Mainz, Mainz, Germany. European Journal of Biochemistry (2000), 267(15), 4878-4887.</li>
<li>Silica uptake of the marine sponge Halichondria panicea in Kiel Bight. Frohlich, H.; Barthel, D. Inst. Meereskunde, Kiel, Germany. Marine Biology (Berlin) (1997), 128(1), 115-125.</li>
<li>Concentrations of elements in the radular teeth of limpets, chitons, and other marine mollusks. Okoshi, Kenji; Ishii, Toshiaki. Department of Biotechnology, Senshu University of Ishinomaki, Minamisakai, Japan. Journal of Marine Biotechnology (1996), 3(4), 252-7.</li>
<li>Structure, morphology, composition and organization of biogenic minerals in limpet teeth. Mann, S.; Perry, C. C.; Webb, J.; Luke, B.; Williams, R. J. P. Sch. Chem., Univ. Bath, Bath, UK. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences (1986), 227(1247), 179-90, 6 plates.</li>
<li>Mineralization and hardness of the radular teeth of the limpet Patella vulgata. Runham, N. W.; Thornton, Patrick R.; Shaw, David Anthony; Wayte, Richard C. Univ. Coll. North Wales, Bangor, Wales. Z. Zellforsch. Mikrosk. Anat. (1969), 99(4), 608-26.</li>
<li>Morphology and mineral content of radula of chiton. Liu, Chuanlin; Zhao, Jiangao; Cui, Longbo; Liu, Xingjie. Department of Biochemistry, Yantai University, Yantai, Peop. Rep. China. Dongwu Xuebao (2001), 47(5), 553-557.</li>
<li>Marine alga Platymonas species accumulates silicon without apparent requirement. Fuhrman, J. A.; Chisholm, S. W.; Guillard, R. R. L. Dep. Civ. Eng., Massachusetts Inst. Technol., Cambridge, Mass., USA. Nature (London) (1978), 272(5650), 244-6.</li>
<li>Silicon uptake by algae with no known silicon requirement. I. True cellular uptake and pH-induced precipitation by Phaeodactylum tricornutum (Bacillariophyceae) and Platymonas sp. (Prasinophyceae). Nelson, David M.; Reidel, Gerhardt F.; Millan-Nunez, Roberto; Lara-Lara, J. Ruben. Coll. Oceanogr., Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR, USA. Journal of Phycology (1984), 20(1), 141-7.</li>
<li>Silicon uptake by algae with no known silicon requirement. II. Strong pH dependence of uptake kinetic parameters in Phaeodactylum tricornutum (Bacillariophyceae). Riedel, Gerhardt F.; Nelson, David M. Coll. Oceanogr., Oregon State Univ., Corvallis, OR, USA. Journal of Phycology (1985), 21(1), 168-71.</li>
<li>Biological minerals formed from strontium and barium sulfates. III. The morphology and crystallography of strontium sulfate crystals from the colonial radiolarian, Sphaerozoum punctatum. Hughes, N. P.; Perry, C. C.; Anderson, O. R.; Williams, R. J. P. Inorg. Chem. Lab., Univ. Oxford, Oxford, UK. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences (1989), 238(1292), 223-33, 3 plates.</li>
<li>Vertical flux, ecology and dissolution of radiolaria in tropical oceans: implications for the silica cycle. Takahashi, Kozo. Woods Hole Oceanogr. Inst., Woods Hole, MA, USA. Avail. NTIS. Report (1981), (WHOI-81-103; Order No. PB82-199779), 465 pp. From: Gov. Rep. Announce. Index (U. S.) 1982, 82(17), 3410.</li>
<li>Biological buffering of oceanic silica. Harriss, Robert C. Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass., USA. Nature (London) (1966), 212(5059), 275-6.</li>
<li>Biosiliceous particle flux in the Southern Ocean. Abelmann, Andrea; Gersonde, Rainer. Alfred Wegener Inst. Pol. Mar. Res., Bremerhaven, Germany. Marine Chemistry (1991), 35(1-4), 503-36.</li>
<li>It’s in the Water by Ron Shimek: <a href="http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-02/rs/feature/index.htm">http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-02/rs/feature/index.htm</a></li>
<li>The Composition Of Several Synthetic Seawater Mixes by Marlin Atkinson and Craig Bingman: <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1999/mar/features/1/default.asp">http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1999/mar/features/1/default.asp</a></li>
<li>Lead in Drinking Water by EPA: <a href="http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw000/lead/passivation.htm">http://www.epa.gov/ogwdw000/lead/passivation.htm</a></li>
<li>Necessary Nutrition, Foods and Supplements, A Preliminary Investigation by Ron Shimek: <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish/data/foods.asp">http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish/data/foods.asp</a></li>
<li>Calcium Carbonate for CaCO<sub>3</sub>/CO<sub>2</sub> Reactors: More Than Meets the Eye by Craig Bingman: <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1997/aug/bio/default.asp">http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish2/aqfm/1997/aug/bio/default.asp</a></li>
<li>Alternative Calcium Reactor Substrates by Greg Hiller: <a href="http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish/library/articleview2.asp?Section=Aquarium+Frontiers+--+Biochemistry+of+Aquaria&RecordNo=1571">http://www.animalnetwork.com/fish/library/articleview2.asp?Section=Aquarium+Frontiers+--+Biochemistry+of+Aquaria&amp;RecordNo=1571</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.mississippilime.com/products/dept.asp?dept%5Fid=310">Vertical Calcium Hydroxide</a>: CODEX Hydrated Lime: <a href="http://www.mississippilime.com/products/product.asp?dept%5Fid=310&pf%5Fid=31004&tabsetting=2">http://www.mississippilime.com/products/product.asp?dept%5Fid=310&amp;pf%5Fid=31004&amp;tabsetting=2</a></li>
<li>Quartz solubility at low temperatures. Rimstidt, J. Donald. Dep. Geological Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Inst. and State Univ., Blacksburg, VA, USA. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta (1997), 61(13), 2553-2558</li>
<li>Quartz solubility in hydrothermal seawater: an experimental study and equation describing quartz solubility for up to 0.5 M NaCl solutions. Von Damm, K. L.; Bischoff, J. L.; Rosenbauer, R. J. Environ. Sci. Div., Oak Ridge Natl. Lab., Oak Ridge, TN, USA. American Journal of Science (1991), 291(10), 977-1007.</li>
<li>The solubility of quartz. Van Lier, J. A.; De Bruyn, P L.; Overbeek, J. Th. G. Massachusetts Inst. of Technol., Cambridge, J. Phys. Chem. (1960), 64 1675-82.</li>
<li>The dissolution of quartz in dilute aqueous solutions of organic acids at 25°C. Bennett, P. C.; Melcer, M. E.; Siegel, D. I.; Hassett, J. P. Dep. Geol., Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, NY, USA. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta (1988), 52(6), 1521-30.</li>
<li>The solubility of quartz and silicates. Lucas, C. C.; Dolan, M. E. Can. Med. Assoc. J. (1939), 40 126-34.</li>
<li>The solubility of quartz and silicates. Lucas, C. C.; Dolan, M. E. Can. Med. Assoc. J. (1939), 40 126-34.</li>
<li>Phosphorus: Algae’s Best Friend by Randy Holmes-Farley: <a href="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/9/chemistry">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/9/chemistry</a></li>
<li><a href="http://www.dnr.state.md.us/bay/cblife/algae/diatom/cylindrotheca_closterium.html">Cylindrotheca closterium (Nitzschia closterium)</a> (Ehrenberg, 1841), <a href="http://www.dnr.state.md.us/bay/cblife/algae/diatom/cylindrotheca_closterium.html">http://www.dnr.state.md.us/bay/cblife/algae/diatom/cylindrotheca_closterium.h tml</a></li>
<li><a href="http://chemistrystore.com/index.html">The</a> Chemistry Store.com: <a href="http://chemistrystore.com/sodium_silicate.htm">http://chemistrystore.com/sodium_silicate.htm</a></li>
<li>Sodium Silicate - Products and Specifications by PQ Corporation: <a href="http://www.pqcorp.com/productlines/SodiumSilicateSpecs.asp">http://www.pqcorp.com/productlines/SodiumSilicateSpecs.asp</a></li>
</ol>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Randy Holmes-farley, Ph.D.</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Feature Article</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Randy Holmes-farley</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Ph.D.</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Diatoms</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Photography</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Seawater</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2003-01-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/10/chemistry">
    <title>Chemistry And The Aquarium: Iron: A Look At Organisms Other Than Macroalgae</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/10/chemistry</link>
    <description>I do believe, however, that the benefits outweigh the risks when one is growing macroalgae. To date there have been no claims of a demonstrated problem in a reef tank from reasonable iron additions.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br /><p>In my article two months ago, I discussed <a href="../../issues/aug2002/chem.htm">iron in reef tanks</a>.  Much of that article was directed toward the effect that iron has on macroalgae, and in that article I concluded that it was generally positive.  Of course, macroalgae are not the only things in our tanks, and if iron is having an effect on other organisms, it is important to understand it.  Some hobbyists, for example, have suggested that iron may “supercharge” cyanobacteria, while others have suggested just the opposite.  It has also been suggested that iron supplements may actually be “toxic” to corals when dosed to a reef tank.   In looking at the literature, it would appear that diatoms and other microorganisms can also be impacted by iron additions.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, definitive research that can be extrapolated to aquaria is lacking.  Most studies of iron as it relates to growth and toxicity are directed toward organisms in natural settings like the ocean, and not reef tanks. Unfortunately for reefkeepers, the conditions in reef tanks may be sufficiently different than in the ocean as to make extrapolations of these studies to reef tanks ambiguous.   In a situation such as this, I think it best if hobbyists understand the scientific basis for these various concerns, and can then use the information to make up their own minds as to its importance.</p>
<p>In this article, I will review some of the pertinent scientific literature in this area, including one paper that has been suggested to show iron “toxicity” to a coral that many reefkeepers maintain.  Based on the papers described here, I’ll also suggest some things to look for if you are dosing iron and are worried about problems that it might cause.</p>
<h2 id="speciationofironinseawater">Speciation of Iron in Seawater</h2>
<p>Before proceeding to discuss the effect of iron on various marine organisms, there are some important issues that relate to the bioavailability of iron that should be understood.  Bioavailability is a concept that has applications that range from medicine to ecology.  In short, its premise is that not all of some particular agent is available to organisms.  For example, if a pharmaceutical that is intended to treat brain cancer is given orally and is not absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, it will not likely be effective. In this case, the drug would be described as having poor bioavailability. That is, it is not available where it is needed.</p>
<p>In discussing metals such as iron in seawater, bioavailability can be critically important.  Iron can take many forms in seawater, some of which are readily available to organisms and some of which are not.  For many organisms, iron that is complexed to certain organic ligands is not bioavailable.  In a sense, the organisms cannot use the iron, and are not impacted by it.  In other cases, the organic/iron complex can be absorbed and used, and in some of the most interesting cases, these ligands are specifically designed by organisms to “go out and collect iron”.   Consequently, it behooves us to understand as much as possible about the speciation of iron in seawater (and tank water) in order to understand the effects that it might be having on organisms.</p>
<p>While these general concepts apply to all metals in seawater, it has recently become clear that iron in particular is extensively bound to organic chelators.  For example, one research group recently claimed in the journal Nature that “Dissolved Fe(III) in the upper oceans occurs almost entirely in the form of complexes with strong org. ligands presumed to be of biol. origin.” 1</p>
<p>The chelators that bind iron in seawater (and by analogy, reef tank water) are many, and come from many sources that are present in our reef tanks.  <a href="http://www.bio21.bas.bg/ipp/bjpp/BJPP25_1-2_65-75.pdf">One researcher,</a> for example, details the concern: “The present report shows that both inorganic Fe(III) in the presence of oxygen, and humic Fe(III) which stimulates lipid peroxydation, trigger or stimulate the release of <strong>chelators from green algae, red algae, and cyanobacteria</strong>.” 2 Consequently, we should anticipate that we have such chelators in our tanks.</p>
<p>Moreover, <a href="http://www.copernicus.org/EGS/egsga/nice00/programme/abstracts/aac3596.pdf">some researchers</a> claim that the speciation of iron in seawater is more important than the total concentration.  That is, one cannot just determine to total iron concentration to know whether it is of adequate bioavailability for any given organism.  One must know what organic ligands are bound to it: “Recent observations showed that, more than its absolute quantities in surface waters, the biological availability of iron through chelation with complexing ligands could in fact limit the biomass growth. Thus, the study of organic speciation of iron in sea-water becomes a necessary step, if we aim to better understand the link between the climate forcing and iron dynamics in the oceans”. 3</p>
<p>Others researchers claim “Previous coastal marine studies concluded that total dissolved Fe may affect initiation of algal blooms, including brown tides of <em>Aureococcus anophagefferens</em>.  However, the existence of unavailable colloidal and organically-complexed Fe make the dissolved pool a poor indicator of what is bioavailable for phytoplankton assimilation.”4</p>
<p>Consequently, if one were assessing the status of a tank with respect to iron, one would have to understand the specific nature of the iron present.  In other words, one cannot use measurements of total iron, such as those provided by most test kits or by the analytical technique ICP, to know whether a given tank “needs” iron or not.  This unfortunate circumstance prohibits reefkeepers dosing iron from having the type of simple relationship between concentration and effect that is enjoyed by many other ions of interest, such as calcium. One might be able to use these techniques to follow bioavailability as a function of time in a single reef tank with increases or decreases in iron dosing since the level of available chelators may remain mostly unchanged (but I have not done this experiment).</p>
<h2 id="wholesystemstudiesintheocean">Whole System Studies in the Ocean</h2>
<p>The iron enrichment literature as a whole falls into 3 categories.  In the first, individual species are studied in isolation.  In the case of microorganisms, these studies would be the least relevant to aquaria where there is competition between many organisms for the same nutrients, space, etc, as well as predation.  The second category examines the effect of iron in the open ocean, but does not compare changes in growth of one organism to changes in growth of other organisms.  In the third category are those studies that have added iron to systems (such as the ocean) and looked at the absolute AND the relative populations of various organisms, including the effects of predation.</p>
<p>It is this last category of study that I will describe first, since it most accurately reflects what one might expect to happen when one adds iron to a whole ecosystem: a reef tank.  Unfortunately, there are no studies of this kind that describe the effects of iron on corals.  Consequently, the effects of iron on corals will have to be inferred from less grand studies.</p>
<p>In one <a href="http://aslo.org/lo/toc/vol_46/issue_6/1535.pdf">study</a>, the researchers added iron to a variety of ocean environments and tracked the population change in various organisms.5  What they found is very interesting.  The primary organisms that increased relative to the others were diatoms.  The also found that cyanobacteria and dinoflagellates declined, and bacteria remained largely unchanged.  They state “…at least eight diatom genera and an undetermined number of different autotrophic nanoplankton taxa were present in higher numbers in the Fe+ carboys, whereas cyanobacteria, one diatom group, and dinoflagellates were more numerous in the controls”.  Also, “In contrast [to studies adding things besides iron], the HNLC bacterial communities in our experiments showed only a small response, despite large Fe-induced changes in biological and biochemical parameters.”</p>
<p>Similar results were seen in the well-publicized <a href="http://www.cem.msu.edu/~cem181h/projects/96/iron/cem.html">IRONEX</a> experiments. These studies have shownthat when there is adequate nitrate and phosphate, iron may become the limiting factor for phytoplankton growth. 6-10    In IRONEX II, for example, diatoms accounted for 17% of the biomass growth prior to iron enrichment, and 79% after iron addition.11  In this test, in fact, diatoms experienced a 70x increase in population.12  It was also found in this study that cyanobacteria did not increase growth as much as diatoms.  One common cyanobacterium, Prochlorococcus, actually decreased.13  Heterotrophic (nonphotosynthetic) dinoflagellate and ciliate populations increased substantially (&gt;3x), presumably as they consumed the diatom bloom. 12 Heterotrophic bacteria experienced a smaller population increase (1.7 x).14</p>
<p>On the basis of these types of studies, the literature points to diatoms as one of the most likely things to become relatively enhanced by iron additions.</p>
<h2 id="cyanobacteriaandiron">Cyanobacteria and Iron</h2>
<p>It has been suggested by some hobbyists that iron additions to reef tanks may drive the growth of cyanobacteria, and that one should not dose it for that reason.  I’ve not seen that effect in my tank, nor have I heard it reported in others. It was also not reported to be significant in the open ocean studies described above.  Nevertheless, since cyanobacteria are a problem for many reefkeepers, this issue is an especially important one to address.</p>
<p>Fortunately, there is a great deal of literature on the relationship between iron and cyanobacteria.  Most of the literature indicates that cyanobacteria are especially well suited to low iron environments because they are able to release siderophores that bind to iron and give them a competitive advantage over other organisms.  This is, in fact, one of the reasons why they have been studied so extensively with respect to iron.  If they do generally have a competitive edge at low iron levels, then adding iron supplements and swamping out this competitive advantage may make strategic sense if reducing cyanobacteria is a goal.</p>
<p><a href="http://web.bio.utk.edu/wilhelm/sww_pap7.htm">In one paper</a>, for example, the researchers conclude “that cyanobacteria are efficiently adapted to grow in low-Fe environments (providing sufficient light for photosynthesis is available)…” 15  In a different paper, the researchers <a href="http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/ame/v09/n3/p295-303.html">state</a>: “This review focuses on how cyanobacteria respond to growth-limiting levels of available iron and on how siderophores potentially alter the biological availability of iron in the system thereby allowing the cyanobacteria to exist at low iron availabilities.” 16  In another <a href="http://web.bio.utk.edu/wilhelm/Wilhelm%20lab%20papers/Wilhelm%20et%20al%201996.pdf">paper</a> the researchers show that “The growth rates and intracellular and total cellular</p>
<p>iron levels for Synechococcus PCC 7002 demonstrate that iron availability does not directly dictate the maximum growth rate of these cyanobacteria…”17</p>
<p>Finally, <a href="http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/meps/v222/p63-72.html">in this paper</a>, it appears that the three species of cyanobacteria tested are not iron limited for growth in the ocean (2 are phosphate limited, the other may be phosphate limited) while one of the species of macroalgae may be iron limited (<em>Dictyota bartayresiana)</em>. 18</p>
<p>To be fair, some researchers do make seemingly contrary claims, though the fact that there are many species of cyanobacteria makes that result not overly surprising. One research group <a href="http://marine.rutgers.edu/ebme/html_docs/reprints/BermanFranketal_LO46-6_1249-1260.pdf">states</a> that “Our results suggest that in 75% of the global ocean, iron availability limits nitrogen fixation by this organism.”19  Previously, other researchers had shown that iron does indeed stimulate growth of this particular cyanobacterium.20</p>
<p>These results for cyanobacteria are essentially what one would expect for an organism that can grow well even in low iron conditions.  This fact does not demonstrate that the cyanobacteria won’t become iron limited under the higher phosphate and nitrate conditions present in a reef tank, but it also does not indicate that there is, at present, any cause for alarm about cyanobacteria and iron additions.</p>
<h2 id="effectsofirononthecoral_stylophorapistillata_">Effects of Iron on the coral <em>Stylophora pistillata</em></h2>
<p>Unlike the research areas described above, the work on corals has been very limited, with three papers meriting attention.  The first and most important of these papers, <strong>Response of a scleractinian coral, <em>Stylophora pistillata</em>, to iron and nitrate enrichment,</strong> was published in the Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology.21  The experiments in this paper essentially consisted of putting coral fragments (7 cm long) in a series of tanks.  The fragments were monitored for 4 weeks, the water was altered chemically, and the fragments were monitored for another 3 weeks.  This monitoring consisted of several measurements: coral growth rate, zooxanthellae density, photosynthesis rate, and chlorophyll content.</p>
<p>The starting water itself was pumped from the Mediterranean. It is low in nutrients, such as nitrate (&lt; 0.06 ppm; &lt; 1 mM); phosphate (&lt; 0.02 ppm&lt; 0.2 mM), and iron (&lt; 0.2 ppb; &lt; 4 nM). For test purposes, iron was raised to 0.3 ppb, and nitrate was raised to 0.15 ppm (yes, even the enriched nitrate level was far below that in most reef tanks).  The water volume of each tank was replaced continually so that a 100% change took place each hour.</p>
<p>Let’s begin, as they did, by discussing the zooxanthellae density.  This density is a measure of the number of zooxanthellae cells present.  It can be calculated as the number of zooxanthellae per animal cell, or by the total density of zooxanthellae.  By both of these measures, the zooxanthellae increased substantially in all of the test aquaria compared to the control. The largest increase in zooxanthellae was found in that with just iron additions.  Essentially the same results were found for the chlorophyll content.  On the face of it, these experiments suggest that the growth rate of the zooxanthellae is both iron and nitrate limited.</p>
<p>I’ll discuss later whether it is advantageous or not to boost zooxanthellae growth rates, but from this experiment is not clear is whether the iron and nitrate additions cause ongoing growth of the zooxanthellae, with excess zooxanthellae continually being expelled or otherwise lost, or whether the zooxanthellae have simply multiplied and reached a new plateau in density where they continue to grow at rates similar to before the iron and nitrate enrichment.  This issue is important because it bears on coral growth rates (below) and whether the changes seen in this 3 week test will continue for additional time periods.</p>
<p>The authors also measured various aspects of photosynthesis for all of these corals.  They found that photosynthesis was increased in all of the test tanks, with iron alone being the largest increase.  On a per zooxanthellae basis, however, the photosynthesis was unchanged.  This suggests that more zooxanthellae photosynthesize more as a whole (just as a large field of corn photosynthesizes more than a small field), but that the individual cells are photosynthesizing at about the same rate.  Apparently the added nutrients have increased the numbers of zooxanthellae, but did not otherwise impact photosynthetic activity.</p>
<p>Finally, the researchers measured coral growth by weight.  The growth rate was found to decrease substantially in each of the test tanks compared to control. That is, iron and nitrate, individually and in combination, had a big effect on coral growth rates, with all of them reducing growth by about 30%.  The authors state that “Iron seems, therefore, toxic to the coral host, even if it increases the total number of algae.”</p>
<p>The nature of this “toxicity”, however, may be somewhat less worrisome to reefkeepers than the word implies.  They authors propose a number of mechanisms for this effect, of which they seem to prefer the simple suggestion that if the zooxanthellae are growing more rapidly, they won’t be delivering as much in the way of useful photosynthetic byproducts to the host animal, decreasing its growth rate.  The do state that the relationship between calcification and iron additions remains unclear.</p>
<p>This explanation begs the question, suggested above, of whether this was a one time change caused by a one time increase in zooxanthellae, or whether there will be an ongoing lower level of delivery of photosynthetic byproducts.  Only longer-term experiments would easily answer this question.</p>
<p>I have no reason to doubt the possibility of reduced delivery of photosynthetic byproducts, and it makes perfect sense, but I’d like to propose another possible explanation that they did not address: phosphate limitation. For phytoplankton, phosphorus limitation in the ocean is usually secondary to nitrogen limitation.  That is, nitrogen is more limiting.  Still, according to Millero22:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“Above a phosphate concentration of 0.3 mM the rate of growth of many species of phytoplankton is independent of the concentration of P.  Below 0.3 mM cell division becomes inhibited and P-deficient cells are produced.  This probably does not occur in the oceans since NO3- is usually exhausted before PO4—- falls to this critical level”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The same is largely true of most macroalgae, with nitrate and phosphate being the limiting factors under different conditions and for different species.23-25  Of course, those studies relate to phytoplankton and macroalgae, and not a coral.  However, it is not an unreasonable hypothesis that corals may be similarly limited at the low levels of phosphate encountered in this test (&lt; 0.2 mM) when given extra nitrate.</p>
<p>Additionally, the <a href="http://www.cem.msu.edu/~cem181h/projects/96/iron/cem.html">IRONEX</a> studies have shown that when there is adequate nitrate and phosphate, iron may become the limiting factor for phytoplankton growth.6-10  In IRONEX I, for example, the phosphate level was1 mM and nitrate was 12 mM, both well above the values in this test, even after nitrate enrichment.  In that experiment, iron appeared to limit phytoplankton growth.</p>
<p>Putting these two ideas together, and retaining the caveat that these various studies involved phytoplankton and macroalgae, and not a coral, it is a reasonable possibility that the corals in this study with enriched iron and nitrate may be phosphate limited.  In such a scenario, the rapidly growth zooxanthellae may use up the absorbed phosphate, making the host unable to obtain enough phosphate, and thereby grow more slowly.</p>
<p>If phosphate limitation is a factor here, then it may not be so in reef tanks, where phosphate levels are typically far higher than in this test (and often equivalent to that in the IRONEX I study).  Additionally, since nitrate alone at 0.15 ppm had almost as big of an effect as nitrate plus iron, then perhaps all, or nearly all reef tanks (those with nitrate above 0.15 ppm) are already experiencing this reduced coral growth rate due to increased zooxanthellae growth, and the iron may not make the problem substantially worse.  Moreover, there may already be more than enough iron in reef tanks for this effect to have happened even in the absence of any iron supplements.</p>
<p>Whether one is concerned with coral growth rates, or even zooxanthellae density (which may impact the colors of corals), there is obviously substantial uncertainty here with any extrapolation of these results to real reef tanks.   Nevertheless, the experiment is interesting and helps us to understand issues involving iron in our reef tanks better.  In particular, it helps guide us in what types of problems to be on the lookout for.  These potential effects are detailed at the end of this article.</p>
<h2 id="effectsofirononothercorals">Effects of Iron on Other Corals</h2>
<p>A similar study of iron addition is described in a second paper titled <strong>Metal tolerance in the scleractinian coral <em>Porites lutea</em>.</strong>26**  **Surprisingly, it seems to suggest quite the opposite of the paper described above.  They claim “Exposure of the scleractinian coral P. lutea to elevated iron concns. leads to a loss of zooxanthellae (symbiotic algae) from the coral tissues”. They go on to state that corals seem to adjust to elevated iron levels, so that the effect on the zooxanthellae is reduced over time.  It is not clear whether the different conclusion obtained here compared to that in the <em>Stylophora pistillata</em> paper is due to differences between the species of coral tested, or some other aspect of the study methodology.</p>
<p>A third paper on corals is titled <strong>Indications from photosynthetic components that iron is a limiting nutrient in primary producers on coral reefs.</strong> 27  <em>* *</em>This paper discusses biochemical evidence of iron limitation in a variety of organisms on a coral reef, but does not actually test elevated iron levels to see if growth limitation is real.  In it, these authors suggest that zooxanthellae in <em>Sinularia sp.</em> may be iron deficient.  They conclude “The degree and extent of Fe-stress in primary producers on a coral reef thus may influence growth rates, biomass, and distribution of species”.</p>
<p>In addition to these papers on coral growth, there are many papers on the presence of iron in coral tissue28 and skeletons.29, 30  These papers frequently show that iron levels in corals are increased when the level of iron in the water is increased.  Whether that is generally “good or bad” is not typically addressed.</p>
<h2 id="thingstowatchforifdosingiron">Things to watch for if dosing iron</h2>
<p>The research described in this article has suggested a variety of things to watch for if dosing iron.  I’ve not noticed any of them in my tank, but I’m not sure that given my particular tank, I would have detected some of them anyway.  If anyone does initiate iron dosing in their tanks and notices one of these, I’d appreciate hearing of it.<em>* *</em></p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>If the increase in zooxanthellae described above happened in some of the brightly colored corals that we keep, it is possible that the color may be dimmed toward brown.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>If the decrease in zooxanthellae described above happened in some of the <em>Sinularia sp</em>. that we keep, it is possible that the color may be lightened or brightened.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>If the increase in zooxanthellae described above happened in an ongoing fashion, it is possible that aquarists may observe the expulsion of zooxanthellae more frequently.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>If the reduced coral growth rates described above translated to reef tanks, then it is possible that certain corals may grow substantially more slowly when dosing iron than when not.  Whether this is good or bad may depend on whether the aquarist likes to collect coral fragments from the tank or not.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>If, in fact, iron has any effect on cyanobacteria in a reef tank, then aquarists may experience decreased (or increased) levels of it.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Diatoms may begin to grow more rapidly if they are iron-limited in reef tanks.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Photosynthetic dinoflagellates may decline in population, presumably as other organisms better compete against them, though heterotrophic dinoflagellates may increase in response to food (diatom) availability.</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper"><a class="popup" href="chemistry_album/Figure.jpg" rel="gallery"><img src="chemistry_album/Figure.jpg/image_preview" alt="Photo" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">A <em>Stylophora pistillata</em> colony in the <a href="http://www.wymag.org.uk/tanks/simon.htm">aquarium of Simon Huntington</a>.</p>
</div>
<p>Given these various concerns, and the fact that we do not really know how these experiments translate to a reef tank, I would, at present, not recommend significant iron additions for reef tanks with no macroalgae.  I made this point in the previous article on the basis of driving microalgae growth when there is no macroalgae to take up the nutrients.  The topics discussed in this article serve to support the contention that there is little reason to add iron in the absence of macroalgae.</p>
<p>I do believe, however, that the benefits outweigh the risks when one is growing macroalgae.  To date there have been no claims of a demonstrated problem in a reef tank from reasonable iron additions.  Now that people have some clues as to what to look for, however, we may have such reports in the future.</p>
<h2 id="references">References</h2>
<ol>
<li>
<p>Response of a scleractinian coral, <em>Stylophora pistillata</em>, to iron and nitrate enrichment.     Ferrier-Pages, Christine; Schoelzke, Vanessa; Jaubert, Jean; Muscatine, Len; Hoegh-Guldberg, Ove.    Observatoire Oceanologique Europeen, Centre Scientifique de Monaco,  Monaco,  Monaco.    Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology  (2001),  259(2),  249-261. For those without a subscription or a handy library that has it, it is <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=GatewayURL&_origin=biology&_urlversion=4&_method=citationSearch&_version=1&_piikey=S0022098101002416&_volkey=00220981#259#249&_refkey=FerrierPages#2001#249#261&md5=c2352b1964e2b848916bd15a91321ba9">available online</a> for $30 for most individuals (some people seem to get a different message at that site and I don’t understand why; my two computers even get different messages; this may relate to whether the computer is “thought” by the web site to be part of an institution that does or does not already have a relationship with the publisher).</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Chemical Oceanography, Second Edition.     Millero, Frank J.; Editor. USA.    (1996),  496 pp.Publisher: (CRC,  Boca Raton, Fla.) .</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Effects of nitrate, phosphate and iron on the growth of macroalgae and benthic cyanobacteria from Cocos Lagoon, Guam.     Kuffner, Ilsa B.; Paul, Valerie J.    UOG Station,  University of Guam Marine Laboratory,  Guam,  USA. Marine Ecology: Progress Series  (2001),  222  63-72.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Nutrient-limited growth of the coral reef macroalga <em>Sargassum baccularia</em> and experimental growth enhancement by nutrient addition in continuous flow culture.     Schaffelke, Britta; Klumpp, David W.    PMB 3,  Australian Institute Marine Science,  Townsville,  Australia.    Marine Ecology: Progress Series  (1998),  164  199-211.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Nutrient limitation of the macroalga, <em>Penicillus capitatus</em>, associated with subtropical seagrass meadows in Bermuda.     McGlathery, Karen J.; Howarth, Robert W.; Marino, Roxanne.    Div. Biol. Sci.,  Cornell Univ., Ithaca,  NY,  USA.    Estuaries  (1992),  15(1),  18-25.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>IronEx-I, an in situ iron-enrichment experiment: experimental design, implementation and results.     Coale, Kenneth H.; Johnson, Kenneth S.; Fitzwater, Steve E.; Blain, Stephane P. G.; Stanton, Tim P.; Coley, Teresa L. Moss Landing Marine Laboratories,  Moss Landing,  CA,  USA.    Deep-Sea Research, Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography  (1998),  45(6),  919-945.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The behavior of iron and other trace elements during the IronEx-I and PlumEx experiments in the Equatorial Pacific.    Gordon, R. M.; Johnson, K. S.; Coale, K. H.  Deep-Sea Research, Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography (1998),  45(6),  995-1041.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Mesozooplankton grazing manipulations during in vitro iron enrichment studies in the NE subarctic Pacific.Boyd, P. W.; Goldblatt, R. H.; Harrison, P. J.  Deep-Sea Research, Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography  (1999), 46(11-12),  2645-2668.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Biological response to iron fertilization in the eastern equatorial Pacific (IronEx II). I. Microplankton community abundances and biomass.    Landry, M. R.; Ondrusek, M. E.; Tanner, S. J.; Brown, S. L.; Constantinou, J.; Bidigare, R. R.; Coale, K. H.; Fitzwater, S.  Marine Ecology: Progress Series  (2000), 201  27-42.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Confirmation of iron limitation of phytoplankton photosynthesis in the equatorial Pacific Ocean.    Behrenfeld, Michael J.; Bale, Anthony J.; Kolber, Zbigniew S.; Aiken, James; Falkowski, Paul G.  Nature (London)  (1996), 383(6600),  508-511.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Metal tolerance in the scleractinian coral <em>Porites lutea</em>.     Harland, A. D.; Brown, B. E.    Cent. Trop. Coastal Manage.,  Univ. Newcastle upon Tyne,  Newcastle upon Tyne,  UK.    Mar. Pollut. Bull.  (1989),  20(7), 353-7.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Indications from photosynthetic components that iron is a limiting nutrient in primary producers on coral reefs.     Entsch, B.; Sim, R. G.; Hatcher, B. G.    Aust. Inst. Mar. Sci.,  Townsville,  Australia.    Mar. Biol. (Berlin)  (1983),  73(1),  17-30.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Metal concentration in the tissue and skeleton of the coral <em>Montastrea annularis</em> at a Venezuelan reef.     Bastidas, C.; Garcia, E.    Departamento de Biologia de Organismos, Universidad Simon,  Caracas,  Venez.  Editor(s): Lessios, Harilaos A.; Macintyre, Ian G.    Proceedings of the International Coral Reef Symposium, 8th, Panama, June 24-29, 1996  (1997),  2  1847-1850.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Metal content on the reef coral Porites astreoides: an evaluation of river influence and 35 years of chronology.     Bastidas, C.; Garcia, E.    Depto. de Biologia de Organismos,  Universidad Simon Bolivar,  Caracas,  Venez. Marine Pollution Bulletin  (1999),  38(10),  899-907.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Trace elements found to be variable in two coral reef species, <em>Heliofungia actiniformis</em> and Galaxea fascicularis, collected from the Ryukyu Islands.     Yamada, Gen; Fujimori, Ken; Yamada, Masa-Oki; Minami, Takeshi; Tohno, Setsuko; Tohno, Yoshiyuki.    Department of Cellular and Developmental Biology, Research Center of Innovative Cancer Therapy,  Kurume University, Fukuoka,  Japan.    Biological Trace Element Research  (1998),  65(2), 167-180.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Physiological changes in the coastal marine cyanobacterium <em>Synechococcus sp.</em> PCC 7002 exposed to low ferric ion levels.     Trick, Charles G.; Wilhelm, Steven W..    Department of Plant Sciences, University of Western Ontario,  London,  ON,  Can.    Marine Chemistry  (1995),  50(1-4),  207-17.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Ecology of iron-limited cyanobacteria: a review of physiological responses and implications for aquatic systems Wilhelm SW, Aquatic Microbial Ecology (1995), 9:295-303.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Growth, iron requirements, and siderophore production in iron-limited <em>Synechococcus</em> PCC 7002.    Wilhelm, Steven W.; Maxwell, Denis P.; Trick, Charles G.  Limnology and Oceanography  (1996),  41(1),  89-97.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Effects of nitrate, phosphate and iron on the growth of macroalgae and benthic cyanobacteria from Cocos Lagoon, Guam.     Kuffner, Ilsa B.; Paul, Valerie J.    UOG Station,  University of Guam Marine Laboratory,  Guam,  USA. Marine Ecology: Progress Series  (2001),  222  63-72.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Iron availability, cellular iron quotas, and nitrogen fixation in <em>Trichodesmium</em>.     Berman-Frank, Ilana; Cullen, Jay T.; Shaked, Yeala; Sherrell, Robert M.; Falkowski, Paul G.    Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences,  Rutgers University,  New Brunswick,  NJ,  USA.    Limnology and Oceanography  (2001),  46(6),  1249-1260.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Iron-stimulated N2 fixation and growth in natural and cultured populations of the planktonic marine cyanobacteria <em>Trichodesmium spp</em>.     Paerl, Hans W.; Prufert-Bebout, Leslie E.; Guo, Chunzhi.    Inst. Mar. Sci.,  Univ. North Carolina,  Chapel Hill, Morehead City,  NC,  USA.    Appl. Environ. Microbiol. (1994),  60(3),  1044-7.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Response of marine bacterial community composition to iron additions in three iron-limited regimes.     Hutchins, David A.; Campbell, Barbara J.; Cottrell, Matthew T.; Takeda, Shigenobu.    College of Marine Studies, University of Delaware,  Lewes,  DE,  USA.    Limnology and Oceanography (2001),  46(6),  1535-1545.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Photochemical cycling of iron in the surface ocean mediated by microbial iron(III)-binding ligands.     Barbeau K; Rue E L; Bruland K W; Butler A    Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106, USA      NATURE  (2001 Sep 27), 413(6854),  409-13.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Algae and cyanobacteria release organic chelators in the presence of inorganic Fe(III) thus keeping iron dissolved.     Benderliev, Konstantin. Institute of Plant Physiology,  Acad. M. Popov,  Sofia,  Bulg.    Bulgarian Journal of Plant Physiology  (1999),  25(1-2),  65-75.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Study of the Organic Iron Complexation in Two Contrasted Environments: The Southern Ocean and the North-East Atlantic Ocean. Boye, M. vanden Berg, C. M. G.; Timmermans, K. R. Nolting, R. F.; de Jong, J. T. M.; de Baar, H. J. W.; University of Liverpool;  online abstracts of the European Geophysical Society: http://www.copernicus.org/EGS/egsga/nice00/programme/abstracts/aac3596.pdf</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Physicochemical speciation of iron during coastal algal blooms. Gobler, Christopher J.; Donat, John R.; Consolvo, John A.; Sanudo-Wilhelmy, Sergio A.    Marine Sciences Research Center,  State University of New York at Stony Brook,  Stony Brook,  NY,  USA.    Marine Chemistry  (2002),  77(1), 71-89.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Biological response to iron fertilization in the eastern equatorial Pacific (IronEx II). III. Dynamics of phytoplankton growth and microzooplankton grazing.     Landry, M. R.; Constantinou, J.; Latasa, M.; Brown, S. L.; Bidigare, R. R.; Ondrusek, M. E.    Department of Oceanography, University of Hawai’i at Manoa,  Honolulu,  HI,  USA.    Marine Ecology: Progress Series  (2000),  201  57-72.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Biological response to iron fertilization in the eastern equatorial Pacific (IronEx II). I. Microplankton community abundances and biomass. Landry, M. R.; Ondrusek, M. E.; Tanner, S. J.; Brown, S. L.; Constantinou, J.; Bidigare, R. R.; Coale, K. H.; Fitzwater, S.    Department of Oceanography, University of Hawai’i at Manoa,  Honolulu,  HI,  USA.    Marine Ecology: Progress Series  (2000),  201  27-42.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Differential response of equatorial Pacific phytoplankton to iron fertilization.     Cavender-Bares, Kent K.; Mann, Elizabeth L.; Chisholm, Sallie W.; Ondrusek, Michael E.; Bidigare, Robert R.    Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,  Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,  MA,  USA.    Limnology and Oceanography  (1999),  44(2),  237-246.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The heterotrophic bacterial response during a mesoscale iron enrichment experiment (IronEx II) in the eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean.     Cochlan, William P.    Romberg Tiburon Center for Environmental Studies,  San Francisco State University,  Tiburon,  CA,  USA.    Limnology and Oceanography  (2001), 46(2),  428-435.</p>
</li>
</ol> <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>Randy Holmes-Farley, Ph.D.</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Chemistry And The Aquarium</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Macroalgae</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Chemistry and the Aquarium</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Aquarium Chemistry</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Iron</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Chemistry</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Randy Holmes-Farley</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2002-10-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>


  <item rdf:about="http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/2/media">
    <title>Media Review: February 2002</title>
    <link>http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2002/2/media</link>
    <description>Charles reviews the media and highlights various sources.</description>
    <content:encoded xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Click through to see the images.</strong></em></p> <br />
<div id="body">

<p><span class="dropcap">A</span>s some of you may have noticed, Doug
  Robbins and I will be alternating scribing this column. My role
  will be to draw your attention to articles and other publications
  available in the scientific literature. Not everyone has the time
  to spend checking this literature on a daily basis so my goal is
  to alert you to items that may be of interest to marine
  aquarists. Not all of you have access to university libraries so
  the procurement of some of this material might be difficult, but
  many of you can get access if you register as a public lender at
  your local university of college. There is also a lot of
  scientific literature that can be accessed through the Internet,
  so whenever possible, I will include links that will allow you to
  obtain or perhaps even view the material mentioned. In some cases
  I will review the publication while in others I will provide only
  the citation so that you can find it on your own.</p>
<h2>Bulletin of Marine
  Science 50<sup>th</sup> Anniversary Issue</h2>
<p>National Coral Reef Institute: Proceedings of the
  International Conference on Scientific Aspects of Coral Reef
  Assessment, Monitoring and Restoration. <b>Bulletin of Marine
  Science 69(2):293-1060</b>.</p>
<p>In April of 1999, the National Coral Reef Institute held a
  three-day conference in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA involving
  scientists and resource managers from around the world to address
  the scientific aspects of coral reef assessment, monitoring and
  restoration. This special issue of the Bulletin of Marine Science
  published in September 2001 represents a collection of 49 papers
  from this conference covering assessment of coral reefs (health,
  coral coverage, etc.), biodiversity and community dynamics,
  impacts and stressors, monitoring of coral reefs, and restoration
  efforts and techniques. The papers all incorporate at least one
  or more of three themes: What do researchers/managers perceive to
  be important needs and trends in these areas? What are the
  emerging issues and priorities for coral reef research,
  conservation and management?</p>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" href="media_album/acervicornis.jpg">
<img src="media_album/acervicornis.jpg/image_preview" alt="A. cervicornis" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">A stunning photo prominently featuring <em>Acropora cervicornis</em>.</p>
</div>
<p>And what are the inadequacies in current programs/activities
  and action(s), modifications, or new approaches are needed to
  rectify these shortcomings?</p>
<p>Coral reefs are often termed the &quot;rainforests of the sea&quot;,
  where the fish and corals represent the birds and trees. However,
  rainforest ecologists have found that it is the less conspicuous
  organisms of the rainforest, the insects, which have proven the
  most informative about the intricate ecological workings of these
  habitats. As of this time coral reef ecologists have yet to
  identify the aquatic equivalent of &quot;insects&quot;. There is now a
  growing consensus amongst coral reef ecologists that an analogous
  group of organisms may need to be identified on coral reefs (be
  they sponges, algae, crustaceans or tunicates) before they can
  begin to better understand the intricacies of coral reef
  ecology.</p>
<p>Although all the sessions are of interest to anyone who loves
  coral reefs and is concerned about their survival, the last
  section on restoration holds the most practical information for
  aquarists. The following papers are, I believe, of particular
  interest:</p>
<ul>
<li>Becker, L.C. and E. Mueller. The culture, transplantation and
   storage of <i>Montastrea faveolata</i>, <i>Acropora
   cervicornis</i> and <i>Acropora palmata</i>: What we have learned
   so far.</li>
<li>Borneman, E. and J. Lowrie. Advances in captive husbandry and
    propagation: An easily utilized reef replenishment means from the
    private sector?</li>
<li>Bowden-Kirby, A. Low-tech coral reef restoration
     methods modeled after natural fragmentation processes.</li>
<li>Gleason,
      D.F., Brazeau, D.A. and D. Munfus. Methods to enhance sexual
      recruitment for restoration of damaged reefs.</li>
<li>Spieler, R.E.,
       Gilliam, D.S. and R.L. Sherman. Artificial substrate and coral
       reef restoration: What we need to know to know what we need.</li>
<li>Ortiz-Prosper, A.L., Bowden-Kirby, A., Ruiz, H., Tirado, O.,
    Caban, A., Sanchez, G. and J.C. Crespo. Planting small massive
    corals on small artificial concrete reefs or dead coral
    heads.</li>
</ul>
<div class="photo-wrapper">
<a class="popup" href="media_album/mfaveolata.jpg">
<img src="media_album/mfaveolata.jpg/image_preview" alt="M. faveolata" class="image-inline" /></a>
<p class="caption">A large colony of Montastrea faveolata photographed in the wild.</p>
</div>
<p>This special issue can be found in any university library that
  carries this journal, the call number is GC1.B8. You can also
  contact them via their website
  (<a href="http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/bms">http://</a><a href="http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/bms">
  www.rsmas.miami.edu/bms</a>) and obtain it as a back
  issue. Back issues are available for volumes 18 to present from
  the Bulletin of Marine Science, P.O. Box 971, Key Biscayne,
  Florida 33149-0971 USA. Most back issues are sold for $35.00 each
  and sent via surface mail. There is an additional charge for Air
  Mail depending on final destination. Prepayment in U.S. dollars
  is required. There are also table of contents available on their
  website for issues from November 1998 to March 2000.</p>
<h2>Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology</h2>
<p>Invers, O., Zimmerman, R.C., Alberte,
  R.S., Perez, M. and J. Romero. 2001. Inorganic carbon sources for
  seagrass photosynthesis: an experimental evaluation of
  bicarbonate use in species inhabiting temperate waters.
  <b>Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology
  265(2):203-217</b>.</p>
<p>This is a rather interesting paper
  that details experiments in growing temperate species of seagrass
  from the Mediterranean (<i>Posidonia oceanica</i> and
  <i>Cymodocea nodosa</i>) and from the Monterey region of
  California (<i>Zostera marina</i> and <i>Phyllospadix
  torreyi</i>) under different pH, carbon dioxide and bicarbonate
  levels. It was found that at lower pH's (5-6) the seagrass could
  photosynthesize at a greater rate due to larger amounts of
  CO<sub>2</sub> being present. An increase in pH (8.2-8.6) causes
  a decrease in photosynthesis due to less CO2 being present; at
  this point bicarbonate (HCO<sub>3<sup>-</sup></sub>) becomes the
  main source of inorganic carbon. As a result, a higher pH results
  in lower rates of photosynthesis, as bicarbonate becomes the
  limiting factor. Interestingly, it was found that at a similar pH
  the Mediterranean species were better able to use bicarbonate
  than the Monterey species, while the Monterey species were better
  at using carbon dioxide. The key point to take home here is the
  importance of maintaining bicarbonate alkalinity, especially if
  you are interested in keeping seagrass and macroalgae. Buffers
  that contain high levels of borate at the expense of bicarbonates
  and carbonates should be avoided for obvious reasons.</p>
<h2>Biological Bulletin</h2>
<p>Mizrahi, O.L., Chadwick-Furman, N.E. and Y. Achituv. 2001.
  Factors controlling the expansion behavior of <i>Favia favus</i>
  (Cnidaria: Scleractinia): Effects of light, flow and planktonic
  prey. <b>Biological Bulletin 200(April):118-126</b>.</p>
<p>It is a common belief that corals expand at night in order to
  feed on planktonic prey. However, what is forgotten is that water
  flow and light levels also play an important role. This paper
  describes a study conducted in the Red Sea on <i>Favia favus</i>,
  a massive coral who's polyps open soon after sunset and retract
  just after dawn. Their results indicate that three factors: flow
  rate (low= 5 cm/s, medium = 10 cm/s, high = 15 cm/s), light level
  (low = 40 umol/m/s<sup>2,</sup> medium = 80 umol/m/s<sup>2</sup>,
  high = 120 umol/m/s<sup>2</sup>) and prey presence
  (<i>Artemia</i> nauplii), determine the degree of polyp extension
  at night, but flow rate and light are the main triggers. Tentacle
  expansion was greatest when water flow was high, light levels
  were low and prey was present. When no prey was present extension
  was only 75%. In still water the corals would not extend their
  tentacles even if light levels and prey density were varied. When
  light levels are too high (above the light compensation point of
  107 +/-24 umol/m/s<sup>2</sup>) the coral would not expand no
  matter what the flow was or if prey was present. If no prey was
  present, and the flow was medium or high, and light was below the
  light compensation point, then the corals still expanded,
  indicating that the coral's response to the presence of prey was
  secondary to water flow and light level. The authors also
  concluded that since the zooxanthellae density in this species is
  low, extending the tentacles during the day was probably
  metabolically more expensive than keeping them closed. They felt
  that their results may not be applicable to corals with high
  densities of zooxanthellae and that these corals would be more
  likely to benefit from expanding during the daytime.</p>
<p>For the aquarist the lesson here is
  that flow rates need also be taken into consideration when it
  comes to determining feeding in corals at night. Too low a flow
  may result in some corals not expanding and hence, not being able
  to feed. This lack of polyp tentacle extension could be
  mistakenly interpreted as sign that the coral does not need to or
  want to feed.</p>
<h2>Interesting
  Citations from the Periodical Literature</h2>
<p>The following are citations for
  articles that might also be of interest to aquarists, which were
  published in the latter months of 2001.</p>
<h3>Corals</h3>
<ul>
<li>Duh, C.Y., Chen, K.J., ElGamal,
   A.A.H. and C.F. Dai. 2001. Sesquiterpenes from the formosan
   stolonifer <i>Tubipora musica</i>. <b>Journal of Natural Products
   64(4):1430-1433</b>.Fitt, W.K. and C.B. Cook. 2001. The effects
   of feeding or addition of dissolved inorganic nutrients in
   maintaining the symbiosis between dinoflagellates and a tropical
   marine cnidarian. <b>Marine Biology 139:507-517</b>.</li>
<li>Watanabe, M., Sekine, M., Takahashi,
    H and K. Iguchi. 2001. New halogenated marine prostanoids with
    cytotoxic activity from the Okinawan soft coral <i>Clavularia
    viridis</i>. <b>Journal of Natural Products
    64(4):1421-1425</b>.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Filtration</h3>
<ul>
<li>Amirsardari, Y., Yu, O. and P.
   Williams. 2001. Effect of ozone and UV irradiation with direct
   filtration on disinfection and disinfection by-product precursors
   in drinking water. <b>Environmental Technology
   22(9):1015-1024</b>.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Fish</h3>
<ul>
<li>Chan, T.C., Ormand, R.F.G. and Mok,
   H-K. 2001. Feeding and territorial behaviour in juveniles of
   three co-existing triggerfishes<b>. Journal of Fish Biology
   59(5):524-532</b>.Crossman, D.J., Choat, J.H., Clements, K.D.,
   Hardy, T. and J. McConochie. 2001. Detritus as food for grazing
   fishes on coral reefs. <b>Limnology and Oceanography
   46(7):1596-1605</b>.Randall, J.E. 2001. Four new cardinalfishs
   (Perciformes: Apogonidae) from the Marquesas Islands. <b>Pacific
   Science 55(1):47-64</b>.Randall, J.E. 2001. <i>Antennatus
   linearis</i>, a new Indo-Pacific species of frogfish
   (Lophiiformes: Antennariiidae). <b>Pacific Science
   55(2):137-144</b>.</li>
<li>Tanaka, Y., Hioki, S. and K. Suzuki.
    2001. Spawning behavior, eggs, and larvae of the butterflyfish, <i>Chaetodon modestus</i> in
    an aquarium. <b>Journal of the
    School of Marine Science and Technology Tokai University No.
    51:89-100</b>. (In Japanese with English abstract and figure
    captions).</li>
</ul>
<h2>Invertebrates</h2>
<p>And finally to compliment Doug
  Robbins' column last month here are a few citations for anyone
  interesting in the reproductive biology of <i>Lysmata</i> spp.
  shrimp:</p>
<ul>
<li>Bauer, R.T. 2000. Simultaneous
   hermaphroditism in caridean shrimps: a unique and puzzling sexual
   system in the decapoda. <b>Journal of Crustacean Biology
   20:116-128</b>.Bauer, R.T. and G.J. Holt. 1998. Simultaneous
   hermaphroditism in the marine shrimp <i>Lysmata wurdemanni</i>
   (Caridea: Hippolytidae): an undescribed sexual system in the
   decapod Crustacea. <b>Marine Biology 132:223-235</b>.Fielder,
   G.C. 1998. Functional, simultaneous hermaphroditism in
   female-phase <i>Lysmata amboinensis</i> (Decapoda: Caridea:
   Hippolytidae). <b>Pacific Science 52:161-169</b>.Lin, J. and D.
   Zhang. 2001. Reproduction in a simultaneous hermaphroditic shrimp
   <i>Lysmata wurdemanni</i>: any two will do? <b>Marine Biology
   139:919-922</b>.</li>
<li>Zhang, D., Lin, J. and R.L. Creswell.
   1998. Effects of food and temperature on survival and development
   in the peppermint shrimp <i>Lysmata wurdemanni</i>. <b>Journal of
   the World Aquacultural Society 29:471-476</b>.</li>
</ul>
<h2>On the Web</h2>
<p>A very interesting website is the
  Hawaii Sea Grant program. On this site you can find pages that
  allow you to search their list of publications (many of which are
  free)
  (<a href="http://imina.soest.hawaii.edu/SEAGRANT/publications.html">
  http://imina.soest.hawaii.edu/SEAGRANT/publications.html</a>)
  as well as a bibliographic listing of articles published in
  journals, conference/symposium proceedings, and other
  publications, as are titles of reports produced in cooperation
  with other organizations
  (<a href="http://imina.soest.hawaii.edu/SEAGRANT/bibliography.html">
  http://imina.soest.hawaii.edu/SEAGRANT/bibliography.html</a>).
  There is also an interesting list of articles, each of which you
  can read online, dealing with aquaculture of marine and
  freshwater fish including rearing certain fish and live feeds
  (<a href="http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/SEAGRANT/aquacultips.html">
  http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/SEAGRANT/aquacultips.html</a>).</p>

</div>

 <br /><br /> <script type="text/javascript"><!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-5170032844807535"; /* Square250x250 */ google_ad_slot = "6862474606"; google_ad_width = 250; google_ad_height = 250; //--></script><script type="text/javascript" src="http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js"></script>]]></content:encoded>
    <dc:publisher>No publisher</dc:publisher>
    
    <dc:creator>J. Charles Delbeek</dc:creator>
    <dc:rights>Pomacanthus Publications, Inc.</dc:rights>
    
      <dc:subject>Coral</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Filtration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Fish</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Invertebrates</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>J. Charles Delbeek</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Lighting</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Media Review</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Shrimp</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Coral Reef Assessment</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Coral Reef Monitoring</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Coral Reef Restoration</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Seagrass</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Flow</dc:subject>
    
    
      <dc:subject>Plankton</dc:subject>
    
    <dc:date>2002-02-15T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
    <dc:type>Page</dc:type>
  </item>





</rdf:RDF>
