Algae problem

[foxmulder]

Hello!

I have an algae problem in my 40g reef tank (a lot of green hairy algae growing on my live rock). I keep removing the algae by hand but it grows back imediately.
Also the glass gets completly green in max. 2-3 days after i clean it.

I have no slime algae (ciano or diatoms).

I have zero PO4 and NO3 in my tank so this cannot be the problem.

I bought an algae blenny (salarias), but it won't eat the already grown algae and recently it seems to like the food I'm giving to the other fish more than the algae... so this didn't solv my problem either.

Could the lighting be the problem? I have a 4*24 T5 HO fixture with one actinic and three 10k lights. I run them for 11 hours a day.

What else could I try to get rid of this problem.

Thanks!

 

[dannyb]

11 hours is a bit long, I only run my main lights (MH) for 7 hours. No algae at all, besides coralline algae. Is your tank near a window? Sunlight? What are your nitrate readings?

 

[bgeddes]

Same algae problem

Was going to post a similar question. 75G mature reef tank with new MH light with same problem. Also seeing suppression of coralline algae growth. A few years ago, when I was just using compact fluorescent I had no nitrate and no real green algae problem. Have not tested for Nitrates in years, so just ordered a test kit. I do have some natural sunlight and am running the lights about 10 hours.

I will cut the light time down to 7 hours and see if that helps.

Any reason why I would have nitrates now and did not have them a few years ago with all the live rock I have?

Thanks in advance for any ideas or thoughts!

 

[dannyb]

Maybe overfeeding them? It could be a number of things. Its hard to pinpoint what it is causing it.

 

[CaptainAhab]

Your nitrates are 0/low because the algae is consuming it and making it appear that somehow by magic you have no/low nitrates and algae. Your nitrates are not really 0

 

[foxmulder]

Your nitrates are 0/low because the algae is consuming it and making it appear that somehow by magic you have no/low nitrates and algae. Your nitrates are not really 0

I thought about that also. But what is the solution?
I have a good skimmer (designed for 100g), I have a "Nitratreductor" and a phosphate sponge. I am not feeding too much anyway.
The aquarium is not near a window or sunny place.

I could cut back on lighting hours, but wouldn't this affect my corals?

 

[CaptainAhab]

IMO: while lighting plays a factor more often than not it is feeding. Either how much or what kind. I had an algae outbreak not too long ago and the only thing different I was doing was I had switched salt brands (which doesn't really fit with the last sentence I just thought I'd throw that in as a hmmmmm moment). I switched back and it greatly reduced itself. Anecdotal, perhaps..

Feed less/better quality
macro in your sump
PWC more
buy critters/livestock that eat it
change your bulbs if they are old
reduce your lighting

That's my recommended order

 

[HollieDahhrlinn]

11 hours! try reducing it to about 6 for now and get a good scraper and then do regular changes, take out any decorations and scrub em'
Good Luck

 

[CaptainAhab]

My lights run for 10... 8hrs or 10k and ac, 1 hour on each end ac only. Have for years


O yea, hopefully your using RO/DI water.. If not that's probably a big contributor as well

 

[Hydrocephalus]

Hello!

I have an algae problem in my 40g reef tank (a lot of green hairy algae growing on my live rock). I keep removing the algae by hand but it grows back imediately.
Also the glass gets completly green in max. 2-3 days after i clean it.

I have no slime algae (ciano or diatoms).

I have zero PO4 and NO3 in my tank so this cannot be the problem.

I bought an algae blenny (salarias), but it won't eat the already grown algae and recently it seems to like the food I'm giving to the other fish more than the algae... so this didn't solv my problem either.

Could the lighting be the problem? I have a 4*24 T5 HO fixture with one actinic and three 10k lights. I run them for 11 hours a day.

What else could I try to get rid of this problem.

Thanks!

test kits are really only good when the tank is "perfect" P04 kits are probably the biggest waste of money in the hobby (unless its a le mott, hatch or electronic)
The relation of % of p04 and nitrates is pretty important, as phosphate is both organic and inorganic and only one can be tested for you should probably just assume elevated phosphate and start running a phosphate binder (start small and be patient) if you have the numbers for alc/calc/mag/ph there could be a clue there as well. RO/DI water, manual removal, check how old your bulbs are, blow off all the rocks with a turkey baster 2x a week and if possible get a filter sock on your return, if no sump a canister with filterfloss cleaned daily will assist in capturing detritus and loose algae

 

[foxmulder]

test kits are really only good when the tank is "perfect" P04 kits are probably the biggest waste of money in the hobby (unless its a le mott, hatch or electronic)
The relation of % of p04 and nitrates is pretty important, as phosphate is both organic and inorganic and only one can be tested for you should probably just assume elevated phosphate and start running a phosphate binder (start small and be patient) if you have the numbers for alc/calc/mag/ph there could be a clue there as well. RO/DI water, manual removal, check how old your bulbs are, blow off all the rocks with a turkey baster 2x a week and if possible get a filter sock on your return, if no sump a canister with filterfloss cleaned daily will assist in capturing detritus and loose algae

alcalinity: 7 d KH
calcium: 430 ppm
mag: 1200 ppm
ph: 8.2

 

[Hydrocephalus]

alc could go up a bit, T5's have one specific major downfall, heat, it will ruin them almost immediately, double check the fan(s) to ensure they are working and maybe get a thermometer inside the hood to check temp

 

[thincat]

HC, interesting. What is considered to high a temp for T-5's?

 

[CaptainAhab]

I'd raise the mag to the 1400 range. High mag has been shown to be a limiting nutrient for algae. Then back it down in the 1300-1350 range.

Not sure I understand the tie between phosphate and nitrate but I look forward to the links describing it.

 

[foxmulder]

I'm having trouble raising the mag. I don't know why...
I'm adding every other day but it will not increase the test result...
maybe my mg supplement is not good. I'll try another brand.

 

[melosu58]

FantasyReef Databases-Viewing item "10 Step Plan for Nuisance Algae Control"

Try some of the things on this check list.

 

[Hydrocephalus]

I'm having trouble raising the mag. I don't know why...
I'm adding every other day but it will not increase the test result...
maybe my mg supplement is not good. I'll try another brand.

I'd raise the mag to the 1400 range. High mag has been shown to be a limiting nutrient for algae. Then back it down in the 1300-1350 range.

Not sure I understand the tie between phosphate and nitrate but I look forward to the links describing it.

dirty tanks, clean tanks? some never see algae problems some suffer it continually, Redfield Ratio's are an interesting thought towards the balance between nitrates and phosphates, the carbon levels I believe is where the vodka/sugar stuff came from.
MARINE BIOGEOCHEMISTRY: ON REDFIELD RATIOS

The following points are made by P.G. Falkowski and C.S. Davis (Nature 2004 431:131):

1) An interesting empirical observation in biology is the relationship between the elemental composition of organisms and ecosystems. All organisms are composed primarily of a mixture of six major elements: hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and sulphur. But the proportion of these basic ingredients varies between organisms -- and such variations can lead to interesting properties within ecosystems.

2) For example, in the oceans most of the biomass comprises small drifting organisms (plankton) that are rich in nitrogen. These organisms are essentially functionally similar ensembles of metabolites, often encased in a shell formed from the most readily available ingredients. Much plankton is consumed by other plankton with similar chemical compositions. The result is that on average, the nitrogenhosphorus (N) ratios of plankton in the oceans are remarkably similar throughout the world, averaging approximately 16:1 by atoms. When these organisms or their body parts sink into the ocean interior, their energy-rich bodies are consumed by bacteria which, in aerobic conditions, oxidize the organic matter to form dissolved inorganic nutrients, especially CO2, NO3(-) and PO4(3-).

3) In 1934, Alfred Redfield (1890-1983) wrote a now classic paper in which he proposed that the N ratio of plankton (16:1) causes the ocean to have a remarkably similar ratio of dissolved NO3(-) and PO4(3-). This hypothesis suggested that, devoid of life, the chemical composition of the oceans would be markedly different. The concept of Redfield ratios has been fundamental to our understanding of the biogeochemistry of the oceans ever since.

4) The basic problem with Redfield ratios is that they are empirical. The ratios were originally derived from measurements of the elemental composition of plankton, and the NO3(-) and PO4(3-) content of seawater from a few stations in the Atlantic, but were subsequently supported by hundreds of independent measurements. Yet there is no known reason why the average N ratio of plankton should be 16:1. Why not 6:1? Or 60:1? If one looks at the elemental composition of individual species of phytoplankton grown under nitrogen or phosphorus limitation, the N ratio can vary from around 6:1 to 60:1. Redfield understood this problem, but did not try explain it, except to note that the N ratio of inorganic nutrients in the ocean interior was an average, and that small-scale variability around the mean was to be expected.

5) Despite many reports that the elemental composition of organisms in a region of the ocean does not conform to Redfield ratios, or that the elemental composition of marine phytoplankton grown in cultures is not 16:1, Redfield's fundamental concept remains valid. It cannot be rationalized by reductionist arguments, nor refuted by anecdotal observations. The fact that the NO(3-)O4(3-) ratio in the interior of all major ocean basins is remarkably similar to the N ratio of plankton is due to the residence times of these two elements in the ocean (roughly 10^(4) years), relative to the ocean's circulation time (roughly 10^(3) years). As the residence times exceed the mixing times by an order of magnitude, it should not be surprising that the NO(3-)O4(3-) ratios in the ocean interior are remarkably constant.

6) The specific elemental composition that is the Redfield ratio is truly an "emergent" property that reflects the interaction of multiple processes, including the acquisition of the elements by plankton, the formation of new biomass and the remineralization of the biomass by bacteria in the ocean interior, as well as losses of nutrients from the ocean because of burial in the sediments (for example, phosphorus in apatite), or outgassing to the atmosphere (for example, production and loss of N2, due to denitrification).(1-4)

 

[brandon429]

--

I did not know about t5 heat sensitivity nor those ratios. Reading that article was great interesting thread for sure
B

 

[CaptainAhab]

Google it for more info than what's posted. What's interesting is that for all you 0 nitrate/0 phosphate jockeys the formula says you should all be battling algae issues. While us 10-20ppm peeps should be clean as a whistle.

How's that hope and change working out for ya? Me, I just hit a diatom/hair algae bloom on a new tank. Merry Christmas to me. grrrrrrr

 

[Hydrocephalus]

Google it for more info than what's posted. What's interesting is that for all you 0 nitrate/0 phosphate jockeys the formula says you should all be battling algae issues. While us 10-20ppm peeps should be clean as a whistle.

How's that hope and change working out for ya? Me, I just hit a diatom/hair algae bloom on a new tank. Merry Christmas to me. grrrrrrr

0n/0p jockeys lol, I like that, uhh test kits for n and p are both questionable at best, anybody that truly has 0 p has a dead tank, life will not continue without phosphate and the dead give up their phosphate so the only answer is PHOSPHATE KITS LIE!
The ratio aspect is ( Ill be back with some better number explanation but I have to go dig it up, along with the T5 heat article)