Attached is an article containing some research information that might change your idea of how stable your system has to be in regards Temp and salinity swings

.http://www.reefland.com/articles/rho/reef-stability-a-moving-target

I would like to get your take on it after reading the article.

After skimming it I would have to agree that the reef environment changes just like seasons change. But I don't think temperature/salinity change in one hour, or day in the wild as fast as it can in lets say in my 29 gal biocube.

After skimming it I would have to agree that the reef environment changes just like seasons change. But I don't think temperature/salinity change in one hour, or day in the wild as fast as it can in lets say in my 29 gal biocube.
If you read the entire article you will note a chart showing hourly changes in temperature on a reef in Indonesia.

Nice Dave, thanks for posting that.

It was an okay article. It would have been more telling if they had charted growth or decay rates of corals along with mapping environmental conditions, that would have been cool imo. Also, The greatest swing in temperatures in Fig two was 8 degrees F, that is about the maximum you want to let your temperature swing in a reef tank. Many tanks go through that kind of temperature fluctuation, especially in summer. But that swing of 17 degrees in the tide pool was crazy!! Obviously, expensive controllers and chillers are by and large unnecessary, advertising hype to the contrary. I totally disagree with this!!!! It kind of went against what the data showed. Sure you saw fluctuation but, the locations changed; such as the tide pool, lagoons, and deep water reefs. The environment changed and the corals within these different environments did as well. I think this article just proves that different animals are suited to different environments and conditions, and that sometimes as hobbyist we forget that. By forgetting I mean we put corals from this region and that region and we mix the fish from various places and we all expect them to react the same in the aquarium. That was my take away. Haha bring on the critics!

I will not critize but I will discuss your post:)

lon Also, The greatest swing in temperatures in Fig two was 8 degrees F, that is about the maximum you want to let your temperature swing in a reef tank. Why? But that swing of 17 degrees in the tide pool was crazy!! I totally disagree with this!!!! Why? It kind of went against what the data showed. How so? Sure you saw fluctuation but, the locations changed; such as the tide pool, lagoons, and deep water reefs. The environment changed and the corals within these different environments did as well. I'm pretty sure many of the same corals overlapped into multiple environments

I agree with the article... Good find... everyone is so into tweaking their tank.. just sit back and watch it for a while.. Quit fiddling around.. and just enjoy the dang thing.. temperature changes.... no harm...if they rise 20 degrees.. then worry

I agree with the article... Good find... everyone is so into tweaking their tank.. just sit back and watch it for a while.. Quit fiddling around.. and just enjoy the dang thing.. temperature changes.... no harm...if they rise 20 degrees.. then worry

Quote of the day.

I had more to add!

Edit:

I guess ARC admin is not going to add it back I'll retype later.

Attached is an article containing some research information that might change your idea of how stable your system has to be in regards Temp and salinity swings

I would like to get your take on it after reading the article.

While the article was interesting, I don’t find it compelling or even relevant. It was very broad in it's evaluation of environmental variables for a "reef". What constitutes a "reef" in this article? We have members here with GSP, leather coral, and mushrooms in their tank. Is it a reef? Yes. Does it have the same environmental requirements of an Acro or NPS tank? No way. All are reefs though. The author also quotes surface temps. Living many years in Hawaii and swimming for hours on end in reefs, I can tell you surface temp means NOTHING! The formations of volcanic shelves and structures would create strange flows that would leave your bottom half chilly and top half balmy.

Many of us try and keep a variety of corals from a wide diversity of origins in the same tank. (Guilty) THAT's why consistency is paramount for many of us to achieve success. The only way such a diversity of species with different needs can be successfully kept and propagated is through a lack of environmental variances.

This hobby is built entirely around monkey see monkey do. We have not come to this point in the hobby with the collective experience that wide variables and extremes are good for our tank. Would we not all agree that CONSISTENCY means more for a successful reef than hitting a target number here and there?

I think the author may have some good points valid to a real reef ecosystem. I think there is a huge lack of information or variables taken into consideration to apply to our captive reefs. I don’t have enough time or desire to poke all the holes he has left open.
I’m no expert by ANY stretch in this hobby but this article is anecdotal at best. Even to a laymen like me.

I will not critize but I will discuss your post:)

8 degrees is around the max we would like it to fluctuate based on experience and what the books tell us. I guess the article brings that into question, but not accurately imo, because the studies had different locations, depth, currents, and creatures. We set the limit temp swing at 8 to accomidate and limit the stress level on a variety of animals. But that depends on what species we are comparing and who is talking. :)

I disagreed with the statement that said we did not need heating and chilling technology, because it was just plain dumb. You cant say that cold-water species such as the Catalina goby or the blue spotted jawfish would do just as well with temp swings of 20 degrees. Also, i don't believe all species are able to cope with that kind of stress on a daily basis. Maybe this artilce would have been true if it presented a specific biotype and compared it to an aquarium biotype but it did not. It was incomplete science in my opinion.

you correct in assuming many species overlap however there are many endimic species in the ocean, ones that can handle and need extremes and others that do not. Species that live in tide pools will be different than those that live in deep water. Not to mention many species just live in certain parts of the world. (ex. the lion fish, until recently) perhaps the ones that are able to spread into other biotypes are hardier as well? I dont know enough to prove that, and the author didn't convince me of much.

I noticed a change every few min to an hour while snorkelling the reef in Culebra for Thanksgiving. Big temp swings and the reef was on its way on the up and up. Coral and their algaes may be adapting and those may be the guys reproducing the reef. Dunno really but myself and the locals were pretty darned stoked. And by darned I mean this is a family site

While the article was interesting, I don’t find it compelling or even relevant. It was very broad in it's evaluation of environmental variables for a "reef". What constitutes a "reef" in this article? We have members here with GSP, leather coral, and mushrooms in their tank. Is it a reef? Yes. Does it have the same environmental requirements of an Acro or NPS tank? No way. All are reefs though. The author also quotes surface temps. Living many years in Hawaii and swimming for hours on end in reefs, I can tell you surface temp means NOTHING! The formations of volcanic shelves and structures would create strange flows that would leave your bottom half chilly and top half balmy. Most of the surface temps that was measured is not the actual surface of the water it is a few feet below the surface.

Many of us try and keep a variety of corals from a wide diversity of origins in the same tank. (Guilty) THAT's why consistency is paramount for many of us to achieve success. The only way such a diversity of species with different needs can be successfully kept and propagated is through a lack of environmental variances. By your own admission corals come from different regions with different parameters yet they survive in a tank with set parameters that are different than what they originated from.

This hobby is built entirely around monkey see monkey do. We have not come to this point in the hobby with the collective experience that wide variables and extremes are good for our tank. That is what is in question here to me . What is the definition of wide and extreme.
Would we not all agree that CONSISTENCY means more for a successful reef than hitting a target number here and there? No,

I think the author may have some good points valid to a real reef ecosystem. I think there is a huge lack of information or variables taken into consideration to apply to our captive reefs. I don’t have enough time or desire to poke all the holes he has left open.
I’m no expert by ANY stretch in this hobby but this article is anecdotal at best. Even to a laymen like me. But yet we accept monkey see, monkey do? I think we could apply this at the hobbyist level as well.
One other thing I'm pretty sure he did not perform these studies. They data was obtained from researchers.

Edit: response 8 degrees is around the max we would like it to fluctuate based on experience and what the books tell us. Could you please reference that book I guess the article brings that into question, but not accurately imo, because the studies had different locations, depth, currents, and creatures. We set the limit temp swing at 8 to accomidate and limit the stress level on a variety of animals. But that depends on what species we are comparing and who is talking. :)

I disagreed with the statement that said we did not need heating and chilling technology, because it was just plain dumb. You cant say that cold-water species such as the Catalina goby or the blue spotted jawfish would do just as well with temp swings of 20 degrees. I think you read more into his statement than what I did . I think he was referencing the method of sale of this equipment by some stating a 2 degree temp swing is detrimental Also, i don't believe all species are able to cope with that kind of stress on a daily basis. Maybe this artilce would have been true if it presented a specific biotype and compared it to an aquarium biotype but it did not. It was incomplete science in my opinion. Much like our anecdotal evidence presented by most in the hobby.

you correct in assuming( not an assumption)many species overlap however there are many endimic species in the ocean, ones that can handle and need extremes and others that do not. Species that live in tide pools will be different than those that live in deep water. Not to mention many species just live in certain parts of the world. (ex. the lion fish, until recently) perhaps the ones that are able to spread into other biotypes are hardier as well? I dont know enough to prove that, and the author didn't convince me of much. I don't think that was his intent.

I think you guys actually reinforced what the data provided revealed . It did not say that corals from one region would survive in another region. It provided evidence that most corals from those different regions all under went much larger variances in temp and salinity than we have been told that they could survive in or out of our tanks.

It was an okay article. It would have been more telling if they had charted growth or decay rates of corals along with mapping environmental conditions, that would have been cool imo. Also, The greatest swing in temperatures in Fig two was 8 degrees F, that is about the maximum you want to let your temperature swing in a reef tank. Many tanks go through that kind of temperature fluctuation, especially in summer. But that swing of 17 degrees in the tide pool was crazy!! I totally disagree with this!!!! It kind of went against what the data showed. Sure you saw fluctuation but, the locations changed; such as the tide pool, lagoons, and deep water reefs. The environment changed and the corals within these different environments did as well. I think this article just proves that different animals are suited to different environments and conditions, and that sometimes as hobbyist we forget that. By forgetting I mean we put corals from this region and that region and we mix the fish from various places and we all expect them to react the same in the aquarium. That was my take away. Haha bring on the critics!


I also agree. Plus I think the problems we have are from:
1) Not giving the coral/fish enough time to adapt to the tank. In the wild we are talking years of growth, die off ...ect I see people change their display monthly by swaping from tank to tank.
also.. Some people change tank sizes and even equipment pretty quickly.

2) Making things too perfect. In the wild things are not perfect. Nature has a fix for just about everything. Our technology is making it to the point where the coral/fish live in a bubble. One 'natural' thing happens and it kills everything because they adapted to the perfect tank.

Many of us try and keep a variety of corals from a wide diversity of origins in the same tank. (Guilty) THAT's why consistency is paramount for many of us to achieve success. The only way such a diversity of species with different needs can be successfully kept and propagated is through a lack of environmental variances.
T

I find those contradict one another . Please explain.

Not picking on you Seth. ok I am :yes:While the article was interesting, I don’t find it compelling or even relevant. It was very broad in it's evaluation of environmental variables for a "reef". I thought it was exact . Temp and salinity was all he was discussingWhat constitutes a "reef" in this article? Some 1000 areas that were measured that had corals growing in saltwater. We have members here with GSP, leather coral, and mushrooms in their tank. Is it a reef? Yes. Does it have the same environmental requirements of an Acro or NPS tank? No way. All are reefs though. The author also quotes surface temps. Living many years in Hawaii and swimming for hours on end in reefs, I can tell you surface temp means NOTHING! The formations of volcanic shelves and structures would create strange flows that would leave your bottom half chilly and top half balmy. He actual mentions thermoclines and their effects on salinity

Many of us try and keep a variety of corals from a wide diversity of origins in the same tank. (Guilty) THAT's why consistency is paramount for many of us to achieve success. The only way such a diversity of species with different needs can be successfully kept and propagated is through a lack of environmental variances.

This hobby is built entirely around monkey see monkey do. We have not come to this point in the hobby with the collective experience that wide variables and extremes are good for our tank. Would we not all agree that CONSISTENCY means more for a successful reef than hitting a target number here and there?

I think the author may have some good points valid to a real reef ecosystem. I think there is a huge lack of information or variables taken into consideration to apply to our captive reefs. I don’t have enough time or desire to poke all the holes he has left open.
I’m no expert by ANY stretch in this hobby but this article is anecdotal at best. Even to a laymen like me.

[/COLOR]

I find those contradict one another . Please explain.

Actually, I would first like to hear your thoughts. Put the highlighter away and grab your pen!:cheers:

Actually, I would first like to hear your thoughts. Put the highlighter away and grab your pen!:cheers:
I will see you Tuesday and time permitting I would like to talk shop a little:up:

I will say Seth that I have had no major issues when my tank temp would swing 5-6 degrees in a 24 hour period . I did take measure to prevent it due to what the monkey was told but in retrospect I think it was unnecessary. I have had small salinity swings in my system as well without ill effects . I think we can take what we will from the article but the data he provided would appear to be from a respectable source and I find totally relevant to the care of our systems. Saying otherwise would be the same as saying that the data compiled about the content of natural seawater is irrelevant to our systems. Any info or data we can obtain from actual reefs would be beneficial to the advancement of the hobby.

I will give it one more go...lol

Let me just say this I'm not saying that the ocean is never changing... and I didnt say the facts were from a irreputable source. I'm also not saying this guy is wrong, he just did not conclusively prove it to me.

This is what the author said
Needless to say, the variability of lagoonal salinities is a major determining factor in the flora and fauna found in them. Those animals, algae, and plants that can’t tolerate the changes in the salinity will not be found in the lagoons. The flipside of this, though, for aquarists, means that any lagoonal animals in their tanks are likely to be quite tolerant of salinity variations. He didnt say all animals will be tolerant, in fact he said the opposite some specialized lagoon species will be tolerant. Since most aquarist do not have biotype tanks and many animals cannot handle the same extremes of others, that is why the "norms" in the hobby are stressed.

He also said this a lot but never gave proof. Scientists now know that not only do corals and coral reef organisms tolerate changing conditions, they may REQUIRE changing conditions for good health. I know this is true for many plants. I just cant think of any specific coral species

They would find there is no reason in the world to keep temperature and salinity in a reef tank stable. In nature, temperature fluctuations of several degrees (Celsius or Fahrenheit) on either side of the average reef temperature of 82º F are normal and of no consequence. They are of no consequence in aquaria as well. no proof presented, so we must just trust him? I have seen what happens when a chiller goes out in a big system, it happened at Star Aquatics and everything toasted... The corals “know” this; it is evolutionarily encoded in their genes. Hitherto, most reef aquarists have not been as knowledgeable. Obviously, expensive controllers and chillers are by and large unnecessary, advertising hype to the contrary. What else could that mean lol? Likewise, salinity can vary a bit. Keeping it in the range of 36 to 37 psu is prudent and minimizes the stress on the animals, but some slight variations outside this range are inconsequential.
Here he even reinforces the norms with slight variation

Personally ocean acidification is a highly interesting concept that I hope to work on personally.

That's all and I'm done. :)

I will give it one more go...lol

Let me just say this I'm not saying that the ocean is never changing... and I didnt say the facts were from a irreputable source. I'm also not saying this guy is wrong, he just did not conclusively prove it to me.

This is what the author said
He didnt say all animals will be tolerant, in fact he said the opposite some specialized lagoon species will be tolerant. Since most aquarist do not have biotype tanks and many animals cannot handle the same extremes of others, that is why the "norms" in the hobby are stressed.

He also said this a lot but never gave proof. I know this is true for many plants. I just cant think of any specific coral species



Personally ocean acidification is a highly interesting concept that I hope to work on personally.

That's all and I'm done. :)
OK I'm not sure what you answered but your done so it doesn't matter:D

I had the the opportunity to live in Australia for a year, two weeks (not long enough) of that year was spent in Cairns. We took a dive boat out on the great barrier reef, it was a five day trip. While on that trip there were times that I wish I did not have my wetsuit on and times I was glad I did. We also did several day trips while in Australia to different islands aroun Cairns, kind of strange to see live acros baking in the sun at low tide.

It relly was amazing the differences in the temperature at times. Currents, upwelling, and tides made the temperature change quit often.

Same goes for Fiji now that was SICK, no need for a wetsuit there.

I had the the opportunity to live in Australia for a year, two weeks (not long enough) of that year was spent in Cairns. We took a dive boat out on the great barrier reef, it was a five day trip. While on that trip there were times that I wish I did not have my wetsuit on and times I was glad I did. We also did several day trips while in Australia to different islands aroun Cairns, kind of strange to see live acros baking in the sun at low tide.

It relly was amazing the differences in the temperature at times. Currents, upwelling, and tides made the temperature change quit often.

Same goes for Fiji now that was SICK, no need for a wetsuit there.


Are you sure you were on a reef?:yes:

Reefer lol.

I read this article many years ago when I first got into reefing. As a result I have never been as concerned about temp and salinity swings as most people would be.

While it is true that these variables are just that, variable, I do feel that species will be better suited to certain conditions. They may adapt to differing temps and salinity but they certainly do thrive in certain environments compared to surviving in less than desirable environments.

I appreciate Dr. Shimek as he tends to challenge us to look at our reefs in a different and sometimes controversial manner. Challenging conventional wisdom based upon scientific evidence is a good thing in my mind.

I read this article many years ago when I first got into reefing. As a result I have never been as concerned about temp and salinity swings as most people would be.

While it is true that these variables are just that, variable, I do feel that species will be better suited to certain conditions. They may adapt to differing temps and salinity but they certainly do thrive in certain environments compared to surviving in less than desirable environments.

I appreciate Dr. Shimek as he tends to challenge us to look at our reefs in a different and sometimes controversial manner. Challenging conventional wisdom based upon scientific evidence is a good thing in my mind.
Well said

+1

I don't think that based on this article everyone should throw their heaters,chillers,and hydrometers /refracs out the door. I do believe that too much emphasis has been placed on the degree of stability (temp/salinity) needed in our systems. I think that developed over the course of time due to misdiagnoses of problems that some of us had and the limited data available to those we turned to for the diagnosis.. The variance in those parameters were easily detected and thereby were prematurely rendered the cause.

I don't have years and years of experience in reefing but I do have too many years of experience in life. One thing I have learned in life is that nothing is or will remain perfect. Yes, shooting for the best may prevent you from hitting the worst but momma nature understands that it is an imperfect world.

I do very little to my tank. So far I don't see a need to do much more than that. Reading hundreds of posts on this site and other sites, I have watched many reach for the chemicals when nothing is really wrong. I think most people cause the problems by over reacting to a precived problem when all that was really needed was a bit of time.

Yes, it is a gentle ballance but, if these creatures can't handle a little swing in our tanks, they would have died off years ago in nature.