rsarvis July 22, 2008 Share July 22, 2008 Sorry if this has already been posted, but I didn't see it in a quick search. Answer? Phosphorus. Seems like they could've just asked some of the experts on this forum!! http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonis...4e-34239419bf67 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MisterTang July 22, 2008 Share July 22, 2008 Perhaps they did test in the past, but had one of those defective Salifert kits :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve G July 22, 2008 Share July 22, 2008 Sorry if this has already been posted, but I didn't see it in a quick search. Answer? Phosphorus. Seems like they could've just asked some of the experts on this forum!! http://www.canada.com/victoriatimescolonis...4e-34239419bf67 I'm thinking a gigantic phosban reactor the size of Rhode Island would do the trick. Get Dandy on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctenophore July 24, 2008 Share July 24, 2008 Quite a waste of research dollars to take 37 years to figure out that phosphates grow algae. Or, that guy must be one good grant writer to keep getting funded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yauger July 28, 2008 Share July 28, 2008 dude what a huge waste of federal funding... all that research and no solution to the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tygger July 28, 2008 Share July 28, 2008 It took 37 years? At least is wasn't our federal gov. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogurnda July 28, 2008 Share July 28, 2008 If you look below the surface, so to speak, there is a lesson here for us. People endlessly blame nitrate for algae blooms and other evils in their tanks, yet the study showed that nitrate without phosphate didn't do much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yauger July 29, 2008 Share July 29, 2008 If you look below the surface, so to speak, there is a lesson here for us. People endlessly blame nitrate for algae blooms and other evils in their tanks, yet the study showed that nitrate without phosphate didn't do much. agreed, however nitrates alone in a reef environment can lead to coral death... so in a sense we have to be mind full to not pollute our systems by over feeding and maintaining proper water changes. right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mogurnda July 29, 2008 Share July 29, 2008 agreed, however nitrates alone in a reef environment can lead to coral death... so in a sense we have to be mind full to not pollute our systems by over feeding and maintaining proper water changes. right? And, in the same way, we should probably be mindful of runoff of both nitrogen- and phosophorous-based feritilizers in terms of the health of rivers and estuaries. But what the study showed was that phosorous was worse, and efforts should be probably be more focused on it. Anyway, I think sometimes people forget that there is a difference between "knowing" that X causes Y, and actually having evidence for it. Especially in field studies, it is often a very long, painful process to get real data bearing on a complex problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason the filter freak July 31, 2008 Share July 31, 2008 Isn't that whats in umm fertilizer or am I thinking of something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now