4 gallon pico thread

[asylumdown]

Yah that open brain is wicked, I feel like I got away with theft though, it was ugly as sin when I bought it so I definitely did not pay the same kind of premium you often see them go for. I've never seen a brain with blue on it the way this one does.

And I definitely agree and a variety of methods working, what's important is the effect of what you are doing - how much light, water chemistry, flow, etc. how you achieve those things can be widely variable. I'm doing this to show with tests that doing a 100% water change, when done right, isn't dangerous to a system in terms of any of the metrics of "reef health" that we typically measure. I still see a lot of advice out there saying that it's dangerous to do it, but my hypothesis is that for the vast majority of animals out there, even a pretty significant sudden change in parameters like alk and calcium can be easily mitigated and adapted to by the organism. I'm not saying a change from dKH 6 to 12 is something you want to do often, but if you're using a good quality salt and keeping up with maintenance in general, you shouldn't ever get such a massive swing with a 100% change. It's my hypothesis that there's really only a few parameters that really, acutely matter from a biological functioning point of view - salinity being the most important, then probably pH and then after that temperature. Those are the ones that while a wide range of conditions are acceptable, marine organisms seem to need time to adjust to changes, and don't respond well to instantaneous shifts. All the rest of the major and trace ions only need to be held within a pretty wide range over long periods of time, but I don't think that sudden changes within that range (the key is the "within that range" part) once a week, or month, or year pose any threat to either the corals, motile animals, bacteria, or algae. I think to some people that sounds like a radical idea, but I'm going to try and show it using the tests available to us in the hobby as best I can.

[Myka]

Originally Posted by asylumdown

I'm doing this to show with tests that doing a 100% water change, when done right, isn't dangerous to a system in terms of any of the metrics of "reef health" that we typically measure. I still see a lot of advice out there saying that it's dangerous to do it, but my hypothesis is that for the vast majority of animals out there, even a pretty significant sudden change in parameters like alk and calcium can be easily mitigated and adapted to by the organism.

The trouble is simply that putting that information out there and a newbie reads it and starts doing 100% waterchanges "the wrong way" and now he crashed his tank. It's not that it can't be done, it's just that some care needs to be taken. Or even a tank that is used to 10% waterchanges for the last 5 years suddenly gets a 100% waterchange is not likely to go over unnoticed by the corals.

Also, it would be very difficult for you to be able to compare say 50% waterchanges which may show improved color, growth, etc. There is something to be said about disturbing corals and especially exposing them to air (no matter how brief). Generally, corals do prefer not to be disturbed or exposed to air. Another point is that I wouldn't be treating an SPS tank like this. LPS and softies are much more tolerant. Even small alkalinity spikes for SPS can cause severe damage. Some SPS are very sensitive, some are generally quite tough (like Montis for example).

It's working for you and your particular tank and corals though, so that's what matters.