Sugar In Your Gas Tank
- Thread starter Kman2010
- Start date
Turbosnail
Non-member
It's carbon dosing you can use vodka or vinegar too.
delta
Impatient Reefer
How old is the tank? You can have Cyano without being able to get test reading for excess nutrients, nutrients are being used up by the bacteria. Sugar Dosing increases the bacteria level in hopes a competing bacteria will out compete the Cyano. However that is not a long term solution.
Long term water change start 25-30% twice a week, then move to weekly. Makes sure to use 0TDS water to top off and do water changes.
If the tank is fairl new 8months or so it may just be a cycle stage but the water change advice stands regardless.
Long term water change start 25-30% twice a week, then move to weekly. Makes sure to use 0TDS water to top off and do water changes.
If the tank is fairl new 8months or so it may just be a cycle stage but the water change advice stands regardless.
inverted
Non-member
This is overly simplified, but cyano is a bacteria, carbon dosing drives bacteria and can drive cyano. Many people report increases, not decreases in cyano when carbon dosing. Also, that is a heck of a lot of sugar and corals seem to be sensitive to sugar. Myself and many others have found that using sugar as a carbon source can cause very negative reactions in corals, and at much smaller doses than what your talking about.
The best way to defeat cyano is to reduce phosphate via large amounts of GFO and then this will likely only stop it's growth, not kill what's there. So, you will likely have to siphon what is there, or turn of the lights for a few days to mop it up. Also, you will need to eliminate detritus build up, running GAC helps, water changes help. Making sure you bulbs are good can help, increasing flow can help etc.. Again though, carbon dosing may help or may make it worse.
If your going to start carbon dosing, this is a good reference. However, some of it is outdated and/or inaccurate, but it is a good start. I wouldn't recommend sugar though, vinegar seems to be the least likely to drive cyano, but that is anecdotal. If you do go with vinegar, just multiply the vodka recommendations by 8.
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2008-08/nftt/index.php
The best way to defeat cyano is to reduce phosphate via large amounts of GFO and then this will likely only stop it's growth, not kill what's there. So, you will likely have to siphon what is there, or turn of the lights for a few days to mop it up. Also, you will need to eliminate detritus build up, running GAC helps, water changes help. Making sure you bulbs are good can help, increasing flow can help etc.. Again though, carbon dosing may help or may make it worse.
If your going to start carbon dosing, this is a good reference. However, some of it is outdated and/or inaccurate, but it is a good start. I wouldn't recommend sugar though, vinegar seems to be the least likely to drive cyano, but that is anecdotal. If you do go with vinegar, just multiply the vodka recommendations by 8.
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2008-08/nftt/index.php
Last edited:
delta
Impatient Reefer
GFO has adverse affects on your corals this is why carbon dosing came back into play as the new magic bullets as GFO was causing issue for people.
Carbon dosing can also have adverse affects on the corals and you can create a mono culture of bacteria and that will make matters far worse.
There is no magic bullet to remove general maintenance. Get on the water changes and stick to them is only advice that has ever stood the test of time.
Water changes along with basic husbandry will solve the problem long term. IT may not work in a weeks time but in the real world of reef keeping where a tank is not mature until it is a 1.5-2yrs old a month or two is a drop in the bucket. You walked X into the woods, expect to walk X+ to get out.
IMHO/E carbon dosing should only be used to push the edge not solve problems due to neglect. It is a tool we have at our disposal but one that should be use carefully. And it is definitely not a long term algea/bacteria solution.
Want a quick fix for cyano it's chemiclean works like magic for a month or two. As long as you fix the problem in the mean time it is a good tool to get you back on track. But again short term fix.
Carbon dosing can also have adverse affects on the corals and you can create a mono culture of bacteria and that will make matters far worse.
There is no magic bullet to remove general maintenance. Get on the water changes and stick to them is only advice that has ever stood the test of time.
Water changes along with basic husbandry will solve the problem long term. IT may not work in a weeks time but in the real world of reef keeping where a tank is not mature until it is a 1.5-2yrs old a month or two is a drop in the bucket. You walked X into the woods, expect to walk X+ to get out.
IMHO/E carbon dosing should only be used to push the edge not solve problems due to neglect. It is a tool we have at our disposal but one that should be use carefully. And it is definitely not a long term algea/bacteria solution.
Want a quick fix for cyano it's chemiclean works like magic for a month or two. As long as you fix the problem in the mean time it is a good tool to get you back on track. But again short term fix.
Last edited:
inverted
Non-member
Hmm... interesting that isn't exactly how I remember it, but perhaps people had different reasons for using it. Back in the early 2000s, even I seem to remember the emphasis being more on N and driving heterotrophic denitrifying bacteria. Anyways though, certainly dropping nutrient levels too fast is often reported to have adverse effects on corals. GFO binds PO4 quickly, so, this definitely is a potential issue and it should be ramped up slowly.
IIRC, Randy discuses such issues here:
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-11/rhf/index.php
Agree, carbon dosing can also reduce nutrient levels too quickly. Also, if you do not remove excess carbon, the carbon itself can be detrimental to coral, by driving surface associated bacteria and disrupting symbiosis. I'm not sure of any evidence of the mono-culture hypothosis. Ken Feldmanet al. recently showed evidence that it may lead to a dominance of non-skimable bacteria in the system, but didn't study the actual bacteria.
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2011/3/aafeature
Also, though, Randy had some good points about the article, such as bacterial clumping and removal via other means, such as GAC:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1986614
I haven't seen any evidence of mono-cultures, but that is theorized by some.
Personally, I'm in agreement with Greg though. Slow and steady wins the race. Chemi-clean crashes biofilters occasionally, bacterial blooms can starve fish of oxygen, hydrogen peroxide can cause all sorts of issues. Realizing that patience seems to be a dead virtue though, GFO and lights out seems the lesser of the evils. However, I think with or without lights out, GFO is good to add to your routine though, if not using already. The ocean averages about .005ppm of PO4, well below any aquarium. As soon as we add food, we can potentially bump our systems up much higher than this, so, some mechanical removal is good. Certainly best in moderation though, and combined with a lot of good husbandry and patience.
Yeah I've never used sugar but heard it was not the best choice. I use just vodka now. Used to use vinegar too, but I prefer the more concentrated nature of the vodka. I've always wanted to try a little vitamin c, but never done it.
On the mono-culture front, I think that was just somebody's neato idea. I'm not aware of any evidence either way on that. Although using a mixed carbon source is one way to make yourself feel like you might possibly be addressing that issue that may or may not actually exist. Hehe. Lack of scientific process is great, isn't it?
Personally I do carbon dosing because I like the idea of having higher bacteria population densities. Of course I have no evidence that does squat for me, but bacterial density in the ocean is much higher than in our tanks, so having more bacteria makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. I also take steps to theoretically have increased bacterial diversity. For example, put some live Florida rubble rock in my sump, occasionally dose a starter culture from one of the commercial carbon dosing systems, etc. Does it do anything for me? No idea. But it sure is cool! Heh.
On the mono-culture front, I think that was just somebody's neato idea. I'm not aware of any evidence either way on that. Although using a mixed carbon source is one way to make yourself feel like you might possibly be addressing that issue that may or may not actually exist. Hehe. Lack of scientific process is great, isn't it?
Personally I do carbon dosing because I like the idea of having higher bacteria population densities. Of course I have no evidence that does squat for me, but bacterial density in the ocean is much higher than in our tanks, so having more bacteria makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. I also take steps to theoretically have increased bacterial diversity. For example, put some live Florida rubble rock in my sump, occasionally dose a starter culture from one of the commercial carbon dosing systems, etc. Does it do anything for me? No idea. But it sure is cool! Heh.
Aquaman_68
too many gadgets to fail
gfo is bad...takes out all the phosphates...corals can't live without any!!! they will start to stn from the bottom...
inverted
Non-member
Definitely, no phosphate would be bad. Really it's tough to get really low, even with all the filtration you can come up with.
For example, another good article on phosphate
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php
From it, reefs average around .005 ppm of phosphate.
Also:
"Flake fish food is typically about 1% phosphorus (3% phosphate equivalent) by weight (and many products have such phosphorus data on their labels). Consequently, if five grams of flake food is added to a 100-gallon aquarium, there is the potential for the inorganic orthophosphate level to be raised by 0.4 ppm in that SINGLE FEEDING! "
Granted, other foods are not necessarily as high in PO4, but only differ be relatively small amounts really, so, still will raise phosphate significantly. In the ocean, generally corals derive most of their nutrients from various food sources, which tend to be scarce in our systems. The .005ppm is not where they are getting the bulk of their PO4 from. If you feed, a reasonable amount, the risk of reducing phosphate to ocean levels isn't an issue though anyways. So, in our systems, it may very well be more likely that corals in a low nutrient system, still aren't getting enough phosphate, even though phosphate levels are higher than in the ocean.
I think that's why a lot of people will say that the point of extra filtration is to be able to feed more. You don't need/want to lower nutrients too much. However, really though, when filtration gets efficient enough, it becomes not just that you can feed more, but really that you need to feed more.
Personally, I've been using GFO for a long time, more than 7 years I'd say, and combined with various carbon dosing off and on for almost as long and have not had significant STN/RTN issues. Generally even SPS corals will get thicker, denser tissue after being in my system for a while, even though phosphorous averages around 1-3ppb (approx .003-.009ppm phosphate) on a Hanna ULR phosphorous checker. I feed a wide variety of food including cyclop eeze 5-7 times per day though. While PO4 is low, there is still a constant input and a number of potentially available food sources.
A lot of people who add carbon dosing and/or GFO and do not have significant nutrient inputs, certainly do report problems though.
For example, another good article on phosphate
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php
From it, reefs average around .005 ppm of phosphate.
Also:
"Flake fish food is typically about 1% phosphorus (3% phosphate equivalent) by weight (and many products have such phosphorus data on their labels). Consequently, if five grams of flake food is added to a 100-gallon aquarium, there is the potential for the inorganic orthophosphate level to be raised by 0.4 ppm in that SINGLE FEEDING! "
Granted, other foods are not necessarily as high in PO4, but only differ be relatively small amounts really, so, still will raise phosphate significantly. In the ocean, generally corals derive most of their nutrients from various food sources, which tend to be scarce in our systems. The .005ppm is not where they are getting the bulk of their PO4 from. If you feed, a reasonable amount, the risk of reducing phosphate to ocean levels isn't an issue though anyways. So, in our systems, it may very well be more likely that corals in a low nutrient system, still aren't getting enough phosphate, even though phosphate levels are higher than in the ocean.
I think that's why a lot of people will say that the point of extra filtration is to be able to feed more. You don't need/want to lower nutrients too much. However, really though, when filtration gets efficient enough, it becomes not just that you can feed more, but really that you need to feed more.
Personally, I've been using GFO for a long time, more than 7 years I'd say, and combined with various carbon dosing off and on for almost as long and have not had significant STN/RTN issues. Generally even SPS corals will get thicker, denser tissue after being in my system for a while, even though phosphorous averages around 1-3ppb (approx .003-.009ppm phosphate) on a Hanna ULR phosphorous checker. I feed a wide variety of food including cyclop eeze 5-7 times per day though. While PO4 is low, there is still a constant input and a number of potentially available food sources.
A lot of people who add carbon dosing and/or GFO and do not have significant nutrient inputs, certainly do report problems though.
Last edited:
jamesdong009
Anthony
In my experience, carbon dosing actaully starts a cyano bloom so adding sugar might not help in your case.
FWIW, I currently add VSV in my kalkwasser topoff but took some time to figure a good dosage.
FWIW, I currently add VSV in my kalkwasser topoff but took some time to figure a good dosage.
OP
OP
Kman2010
Senior Member
WOW!!! I just got back on to BRS, to see how this thread was doing. Great information from everybody, though some people debunk others.
Here is what I did and it seemed to slow the beast down tremendously.
1. Turned the MH's off for 3 Days (actinic only)
2. Added less than a tsp of sugar to my sump
3. did a ~30% water change, with another coming by the end of the week.
4. Got a Mag 9 and a new bulkhead. *in the progress of upgrading my circulation*
5. Fed once every 2 days a minimum but healthy amount, switching off Spectrum Pellet to Spirinula(spelling?) Brine
Results, my cyano has stopped spreading and is slowly breaking down. only in the most troublesome spots is there traceable cyano.
Thanks everybody!
Here is what I did and it seemed to slow the beast down tremendously.
1. Turned the MH's off for 3 Days (actinic only)
2. Added less than a tsp of sugar to my sump
3. did a ~30% water change, with another coming by the end of the week.
4. Got a Mag 9 and a new bulkhead. *in the progress of upgrading my circulation*
5. Fed once every 2 days a minimum but healthy amount, switching off Spectrum Pellet to Spirinula(spelling?) Brine
Results, my cyano has stopped spreading and is slowly breaking down. only in the most troublesome spots is there traceable cyano.
Thanks everybody!
Good you are making progress.
FWIW, adding sugar (or another carbon source) once or twice is not at all what is reccomended. If you are going to employ carbon dosing, the idea is to make a small daily addition continously to feed an ongoing bacterial population which will then suck up nitrate and phosphate (assuming the system was carbon limited in the first place).
FWIW, adding sugar (or another carbon source) once or twice is not at all what is reccomended. If you are going to employ carbon dosing, the idea is to make a small daily addition continously to feed an ongoing bacterial population which will then suck up nitrate and phosphate (assuming the system was carbon limited in the first place).
stingythingy45
Well-Known Member
Can't use Dominos sugar for this.
Carbon free...........
http://www.dominosugar.com/carbonfree/ourstory.html
Carbon free...........
http://www.dominosugar.com/carbonfree/ourstory.html
