Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Solve Riddle of Toxic Algae Blooms

An anonymous reader writes with an excerpt from the Victoria Times Colonist: "After a remarkable 37-year experiment, University of Alberta scientist David Schindler and his colleagues have finally nailed down the chemical triggers for a problem that plagues thousands of freshwater and coastal ecosystems around the world." Punchline: "Phosphorus."

65 of 237 comments (clear)

  1. Irony! by Redfeather · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This week's lesson: this discovery comes not long after phosphorus was eliminated from most household laundry detergents by federal law.

    According to a chemistry major I know, adding one gram or so of phosphorus can cause more devastating algae ownage than adding two or three kilograms of carbon.

    --
    Those things you're doing with that stuff you just bought? That's not what it's for! -
    1. Re:Irony! by 4D6963 · · Score: 4, Funny

      According to a chemistry major I know, adding one gram or so of phosphorus can cause more devastating algae ownage

      Algae ownage? I'd love to read that guy's thesis!

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    2. Re:Irony! by Remus+Shepherd · · Score: 4, Informative

      This week's lesson: this discovery comes not long after phosphorus was eliminated from most household laundry detergents by federal law.

      Federal law in America and in most of Europe, apparently. I wonder how much of the developing world still uses phosphorus-based detergents?

      --
      Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
    3. Re:Irony! by NeuroManson · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm guessing that's British for "Pwnage", correct?

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    4. Re:Irony! by QuantumRiff · · Score: 4, Informative

      Unfortunately, it is one of the major ingredients in fertilizer. In rural farming comunities, the problems with algea can get very severe from farmers over-fertilizing their fields. The algea bloom might be many, many miles down a river, from the combination of many different farms.

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    5. Re:Irony! by Atari400 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not irony, it's phosphorousy!

      --
      IBM doesn't play chess with the Universe.
    6. Re:Irony! by CheeseTroll · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, I believe the British spelling is 'aenage'.

      --
      A post a day keeps productivity at bay.
    7. Re:Irony! by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Funny

      This week's lesson: this discovery comes not long after phosphorus was eliminated from most household laundry detergents by federal law.

      FTFA, this discovery "comes not long after" experiments done in the 1960's and 1970's.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    8. Re:Irony! by ePhil_One · · Score: 4, Funny
      Its all part of the hip new lingo coming out of the "City of New Jersey"..

      One dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is about the size of the city of New Jersey and growing.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.
    9. Re:Irony! by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Does this mean I can still proceed with my "Lake Detergent Water Slide: Your kids have fun and get clean at the same time!" amusement park?

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    10. Re:Irony! by brentonboy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, it's not really ironic.
      The discovery that phosphorus caused the algae (in 1974)helped to get it removed from detergents.
      The punchline really should be: It's not nitrogen. (Still. Also; it's still phosphorus.)
      That is what was proved after 37 years. We've known it was phosphorus since 1974!

    11. Re:Irony! by AlvinTheNerd · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In a lot of fertilizers for gardern and lawn use it, but not farms. Farms are not allowed, at least in Iowa, to use industrial phosphorus. They use ammonia, manure, and limestone (antacid). There is no way farmers could get away will the amount or type of fertilizer that is allowed on lawns and gardens in suburbia. But its never suburbia's problem, they have too much voting power.

    12. Re:Irony! by D+Ninja · · Score: 2, Funny

      One dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is about the size of the city of New Jersey and growing.

      How many football fields worth of VW Bugs is that?

    13. Re:Irony! by Chyeld · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Also the true discovery, according to the article, is that nitrogen actually works against the process (in that controlling the amount of nitrogen that went into the lake actually caused more damage). This goes against the current trend of thinking that the two (phosphorus and nitrogen) were working in conjunction.

    14. Re:Irony! by HeroreV · · Score: 2, Funny

      In a lot of fertilizers for gardern and lawn use it

      This combination of words really makes my head freak out every time I try to read it.

    15. Re:Irony! by bagsc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think the developing world has other problems, like eating.

      --
      http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
    16. Re:Irony! by mrmeval · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://www.assabetriver.org/nutrient/DishwashingDetergentBillS.536.htm

      It hasn't all been banned though it should soon be. This looks like a state to state deal which can be a good thing since those companies have thousands of polytics to bribe rather than a handful.

      --
      I'd go on a Vegan diet but the delivery time from Vega is too long. --brownkitty
    17. Re:Irony! by aliquis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Something which is weird is that I know it was recently banned here in Sweden in laundrary detergents, but then I read a test of cleaning power in multiple ones and the store "Willys" own brand was supposed to be the best one, so I bought a box.

      The packaging says "new formula" and I noticed the ingredient list said "fosfor." I wonder if the ingredient list is wrong or if they actually made a kind of illegal detergent or whatever have happened. I did so back then aswell but I didn't knew how much of a deal it was so I haven't bothered to call them and ask yet. Will do.

      Box - http://img235.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p7236797ct6.jpg
      (Notice new formula and dosage in upper left corner.)

      Ingredients - http://img66.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p7236799tf8.jpg
      (15-30% Phosphates (5% Phosphorous))

    18. Re:Irony! by Aaron+B+Lingwood · · Score: 2, Informative
      Cow Dung contains a large amount of phosphorus in the form of Ca3(PO4)2 (which promote algae bloom) and nitrogen in the form of KNO3.

      I can't quite remember from school (16 yrs ago) what the negative impact of the nitrogen was but I think it was to do with oxygen and fish.

      Detergents were loved by my lawn. As a kid, I would pull out the slip 'n slide in summer. For some extra fun (read 'danger' for the current generation of children), I used copious amounts of dishwashing detergent for some extra slip and a lot more slide.

      The next day was always an interesting sight when the grass for a few inches longer.

      --
      If you believe everything you read, better not read.

      --
      [Rent This Space]
    19. Re:Irony! by Nasajin · · Score: 2, Funny

      In a lot of words and head combination for freak out it, every time but not you.

      Does that help at all? ;)

  2. City of... what? by RobertB-DC · · Score: 5, Funny

    From TFA:
    There are now 146 coastal regions in the world in which fish and bottom-feeding life forms have been entirely eliminated because of a lack of oxygen. One dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is about the size of the city of New Jersey and growing.

    I can understand dumbing-down the units of measure to Volkswagens or Libraries of Congress, but the last time I looked at Wikipedia, New Jersey was still the 3rd state admitted to the Union. I mean, come on... it's already the brunt of every New York comedian's jokes, and now you Brits are trying to demote it to a mere "city"?

    (Of course, I'm from Texas, where an "area the size of the STATE of New Jersey" would barely be counted as a moderate-sized ranch.)

    --
    Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
    1. Re:City of... what? by xpuppykickerx · · Score: 4, Informative

      New Jersey, Northumberland, New Brunswick, Canada This is an article from Canada after all.

    2. Re:City of... what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      From TFA:
      There are now 146 coastal regions in the world in which fish and bottom-feeding life forms have been entirely eliminated because of a lack of oxygen. One dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico is about the size of the city of New Jersey and growing.

      I can understand dumbing-down the units of measure to Volkswagens or Libraries of Congress, but the last time I looked at Wikipedia, New Jersey was still the 3rd state admitted to the Union. I mean, come on... it's already the brunt of every New York comedian's jokes, and now you Brits are trying to demote it to a mere "city"?

      (Of course, I'm from Texas, where an "area the size of the STATE of New Jersey" would barely be counted as a moderate-sized ranch.)

      In defense of New Jersey vs Texas, while you have the size advantage on us, we have waaaaaay more toxic Super-Fund sites here, thus ensuring our mutated progeny a leg-up (or tentacle/webbed appendage)on you soon-to-be extinct bipeds from the Lone Star State.

    3. Re:City of... what? by ak_hepcat · · Score: 5, Funny

      'Course, I'm from Alaska, where an area the size of Texas would be a moderate-sized park.

      Oh, SNAP!

      Although we like Canada over here next door. They're like the sassy ol' widow that bakes fresh pie and leaves it on the windowsill for us.

      --
      Support FSF: Stop thinking with your wallet, and think with your imagination. (cc/non-commercial)
    4. Re:City of... what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm from Alaska - If we made Alaska into two states, Texas would be the third largest state in the union.

    5. Re:City of... what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      which one would have people in it?

    6. Re:City of... what? by ratnerstar · · Score: 3, Funny

      Good morning Canada, how are you?
      Don't you know me, I'm your neighbor below
      I'm the state you called the city of New Jersey
      and I've got 500 miles of phosphorus glow

      --
      Just because you sold your soul to the devil that needn't make you a teetotaler. --The Devil and Daniel Webster
    7. Re:City of... what? by tzot · · Score: 5, Funny

      Both. Michael would stay in the bigger new state, and Billy would be in the other.

      --
      I speak England very best
    8. Re:City of... what? by philspear · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm from california. Where are Texas, Alaska, and Canada? Are they in the valley?

    9. Re:City of... what? by Belial6 · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm from California too, and I have to say that you've fallen for a prank. Those are made up places for TV shows. Texas was obviously made up for King of the Hill, and Canada was made up for South Park, but I'm not sure what Alaska was made up for... Was it Malcolm in the Middle, or maybe Babylon 5....

  3. Who knew by Narpak · · Score: 4, Funny

    Not only does the government have to pull out all stops to control phosphorous, he says, it needs to protect wetlands that remove these nutrients from runoff before they reach lakes and streams. It also needs to set up rules that create natural buffer zones that protect lakes and rivers from agricultural, municipal and cottage developments.

    Who knew that pumping phosphorous and toxic waste into the rivers and ocean would have negative consequences.

    1. Re:Who knew by snl2587 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What's interesting is that I was taught this over eight years ago, and I'm certain the information was available before that. The only thing new about this is the name on the research paper.

    2. Re:Who knew by maestro371 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not really a new name; the article indicates that this is a re-examination by the same folks who published the study in the 70s to combat the concept that nitrogen was a significant culprity. They wanted to re-emphasize that it's phosphorous that's the real issue and that nitrogen control usually just exacerbates the problem.

    3. Re:Who knew by mikael · · Score: 2, Informative

      Common sense would tell you that if a lake was pristine before someone started using fertilizers on farm fields, and that there were algae blooms after that time, that it was something to do with the fertilizers. Most articles in the past have talked about fertilizers and nitrates.

      What the scientist guy has done, is proved scientifically through trial and error, that it is the phosphorous alone, and not anything else that controls how large the algae blooms get. If other scientists can reproduce his experiment, he gets to publish the paper with his name on it.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  4. Common knowledge? by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Isn't the fact that phosphorus stimulates algae growth, which suffocates other lifeforms, common knowledge? I seem to recall being taught this in school...

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    1. Re:Common knowledge? by wiggles · · Score: 2, Informative

      Right -- Phosphate free soaps have been on the market for environmentally minded people for years: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/03/ask_treehugger_whats_the_dirt_on_phosphate-free_soaps.php

      The City of Chicago even banned (but can't enforce) phosphates in soap since the 70's: http://whoshomewithyourkids.blogspot.com/2007/07/dish-washing-detergents.html

    2. Re:Common knowledge? by notnAP · · Score: 4, Funny

      phosphorus leads to flora growth? They ought to look into using that stuff in fertilizers.

    3. Re:Common knowledge? by Chosen+Reject · · Score: 2, Informative
      Here are select quotes from the article:

      Schindler seemed to solve the problem ... in the 1960s and early 1970s.

      That might have been the end of the debate. But over the years, the idea that nitrogen removal is needed to control the chemical buildup that causes algae blooms ... has persisted.

      Schindler's latest series of long-term experiments shows that nitrogen removal completely fails to control blue-green algae blooms.

      Nitrogen control, he found, only encouraged algae blooms.

      So yes, it was already known that phosphorous causes the problems, and it was known well before you went to high school 8 years ago. In fact, it was known before you were born, and it was discovered by this very scientist. His latest studies are showing however that it is the phosphorous and phosphorous alone that causes it. Nitrogen doesn't cause it or even contribute to the problem like people previously thought. Quite the contrary, nitrogen control worsens the problem.

      --
      Stop Global Warming!
      Just say no to irreversible processes!
  5. Alternate punchline: nitrogen by OglinTatas · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was wondering what was so important about this study because the effects of phosphorous on aquatic life have been known for decades (hence the phosphate ban on detergents) but then I RTFA (which also mentioned the ban) and what the experiment really showed was that efforts to control nitrogen runoff are useless because it turns out nitrogen is not the problem (the implication being we are wasting money^Weffort controlling it).

    Bottom line: nitrogen is not the problem, phosphorous is _still_ the problem and needs more effective pollution control measures.

  6. Why is this a plague?? by iminplaya · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Harvest the stuff. Make fuel out of it. It's way better than using corn. You're throwing away free gas...ok diesel.

    --
    What?
    1. Re:Why is this a plague?? by thelexx · · Score: 4, Informative

      Words fail. From the Red Tide wiki page:

      "Marine and fresh waters teem with life, much of it microscopic, and most of it harmless; in fact, it is this microscopic life on which all aquatic life ultimately depends for food. While most of these species of phytoplankton and cyanobacteria are harmless, there are a few dozen that create potent toxins given the right conditions. Harmful algal blooms may cause harm through the production of toxins or by their accumulated biomass, which can affect co-occurring organisms and alter food-web dynamics. Impacts include human illness and mortality following consumption of or indirect exposure to HAB toxins, substantial economic losses to coastal communities and commercial fisheries, and HAB-associated fish, bird and mammal mortalities. To the human eye, blooms can appear greenish, brown, and even reddish- orange depending upon the algal species, the aquatic ecosystem, and the concentration of the organisms."

      --
      "Gold still represents the ultimate form of payment in the world." - Alan Greenspan, 1999
    2. Re:Why is this a plague?? by RingDev · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, but we can grow more efficient hydrocarbon eating algae in isolated raceway ponds in the desert where they will have no effect on other organisms. The type of algae being produced in these dead zones is no where near as efficient in the bio diesel production loop.

      In addition, using these highly specialized algae as an emissions filter for coal fed power plants can have a huge effect on existing power production emissions with out running the risks or costs associated with converting to a different source of centralized power.

      -Rick

      --
      "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    3. Re:Why is this a plague?? by bryce4president · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You seem to be missing the point that this type of algae's existence will harm the local ecosystem far more than it would benefit the world ecosystem if harvested. This algae shouldn't exist in the first place. Get rid of the phosphates and the algae disappears. Go build a man made lake in the desert as the parent suggests and you get algae plus clean local ecosystems.

      Try to take off your algae=fuel blinders for a second and see the situation for what it really is...

  7. Satire by BitterOldGUy · · Score: 5, Funny

    New Jersey, Northumberland, New Brunswick, Canada This is an article from Canada after all.

    I'm taking it as a very clever form of satire: confusing New Jersey as a state versus a city; confusing Canada with England.

    I mean, it's pretty obvious that it's a Canadian article because it's in English and Canada is the only state in the Union that speaks English.

    1. Re:Satire by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      That proves nothing! It could have been spoofed by those New Mexicans! They are always invading America. They are worse than the old Mexicans.

      --
      There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  8. Re:Huh? by faloi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is there something I'm missing here?

    A shot at enough money to fund an experiment for 37 years, apparently.

    --
    "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
  9. Re:Huh? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yea, jesus, that's a whole career with only one deliverable.

    --
    ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  10. "Life's Bottleneck" by Svartormr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...is an essay by Isaac Asimov, first published in the April 1959 edition of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction, then latter in his collections Fact and Fancy (1962) and Asimov on Chemistry (1974).

    In it the Gentle Doctor argued that phosphorous has the greatest relative concentration increase going from its abundance in the natural environment to that in life of all sorts. It thus was often the limit to growth of life as it was scavenged up and held in the biomass.

    It's always important to confirm by testing in specific cases, as with this one, as there are other limits, such as dissolved iron. I can't remember where, but I recently read that low blood iron may be a defensive mechanism to make it hard for bacteria to grow during some infections--and that treating the low iron may be the wrong treatment here.

  11. Worst part of algae blooms by syrinx · · Score: 2, Informative

    The worst part of the algae blooms are the damn mindworms.

    Also, I'm not sure what phosphorus has to do with it; I thought algae blooms were caused by drilling too many thermal boreholes.

    --
    Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
  12. Re:Huh? by FlyingOrca · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ahem. I happen to know Dave Schindler--he and my father were colleagues--and his contribution to our knowledge of aquatic ecosystems has been quite important. Among other seminal research out of ELA were definitive papers on phosphorus and nitrogen loading (per TFA) and a little thing called acid rain. Not long ago Schindler was given a $1M award for lifetime contributions to science, and I'm not aware of anyone who would say it wasn't richly deserved.

    --
    Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
  13. What?!? by PRMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It took 37 years to figure out that fertilizer helps plants grow?

    The plants, they won't grow...

    I'm no scientist...but have you tried, water?

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    1. Re:What?!? by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Funny

      What, like out of the toilet?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:What?!? by rivetgeek · · Score: 2, Funny

      Phosphorus: It's got want plants need.

    3. Re:What?!? by belthize · · Score: 3, Interesting

            That was my initial response but from the article it seems the real discovery wasn't phosphorous induces plant growth.

          The real discovery was that nitrogen removal methods in already damaged waters actually exacerbates the problem. Somewhat profound since it appears the common method to fight blooms is to try and reduce nitrogen.

      Belthize

  14. Re:well duh by camperdave · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...fish waist...

    Fish don't have waists. That's why they seldom wear pants.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  15. Re:So is there fertilizer without Phosphorus? by demachina · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Is/does fertilizer always contain phosphorus?"

    It does if you order it that way. The three numbers on fertilizer bags are:

      Nitrogen-Phosphorous-Potash(Potassium).

    If the middle number is zero it doesn't have any Phosphorous. You can get a number of trace elements like Sulfur, Calcium, Magenesium, Iron and other assorted trace elements.

    Properly educated farmers, gardner and landscapers certainly can reduce the problem by:

    A. Getting their soil tested before they apply fertilizer and apply only what is indicated by the test. Using a lab is best if you are fertilizer some acreage, or you can make an educated guess using a home test kit.

    B. Be careful when irrigating after applying fertilizer to avoid washing it off, sprinklers being much preferred over flood irrigation

    Another factor that is probably reducing the Phosphorous pollution problem is its so expensive lately, along with Nitrogen and Potash, that farmers either can't afford it or are very careful when they do splurge on it.

    --
    @de_machina
  16. She said, "Kiss me where it smells . . ." by PeeAitchPee · · Score: 2, Funny

    . . . so I took her to New Jersey. ;-)

  17. Interesting life cycle by PPH · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Algae growth can literally FILL a lake in just a few years, in fact this is part of the natural cycle for small lakes, which as they silt up and the water warms up, will fill first to algae beds, then to marsh, and finally to meadow; once started, the entire process can take as little as ten years

    Rich snots find pleasant lake and build waterfront mansions around it. Being rich, they insist upon maintaining a couple of acres of putting green quality lawn around them. [This I know, since I live on such a lake, but my 'yard' is basically wild. Whatever grows there unfertilized naturally. The rich snots hate me for not having a nice green lawn.] Eventually, their fertilizer will plug up the lake, turning it into a marsh. Their property values will plummet and they'll all move out.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  18. Re:We can't kill... by jd · · Score: 3, Funny

    Algae is not innocent. Did you know that most spam is generated by algae colonies hacking into open wireless routers? Or that algae monsters invaded Las Vegas and now own all of the casinos? That President Bush is, in fact, algae?

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  19. Re:So is there fertilizer without Phosphorus? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the type of algae involved with most toxic blooms in freshwater systems (and is the cause of many marine and estruary blooms as well) is mostly cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae, which is certainly not a plant.

    Phosphorous from fertilizer is the really big problem from farm run-off as a lot of the rest of the run-off elements/chemicals are naturally at higher concentrations in the water to begin than is the case with P. Normally there is almost no dissolved P left floating around free in an aquatic system. P is scavenged like crazy in aquatic systems is one of the main factors limiting overall biomass of the system.

    Really this article is a nice PR piece but we still don't know what causes harmless blooms to turn toxic. Harmless blooms aren't bad really, they just are inconvenient to us humans. They feed higher lifeforms and up the chain to the fish we eat (now overfish and we end up with food chain issues which cause blooms to stick around longer). The toxic blooms are the problem and we aren't really closer to finding what triggers their toxin production. We still just know what causes algal growth in the first place. Which we've had a firm grasp on for a long time now (thanks to this same research center)

  20. Re:Huh? by AK+Marc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is there something I'm missing here?

    Read your own link, then your post. You mention phosphorus and only phosphorus. Your link mentions phosphorus and nitrogen. That's what the issue is. The common thought was that it was all fertalizer (expecially phosphorus) that caused the blooms. He showed it was phosphorus and only phosphorus and that attempts to remove nitrogen as well only exacerbated the problem. It isn't anything "new" in that phosphorus causes blooms. It is "new" in that people thought other chemicals contributed as well, and they have been found to be inconsequential.

  21. Funny you should say that.... by Hillgiant · · Score: 2, Informative

    Harvesting is one of the principle limitations to the commercial adoption of algal biodiesel.

    --
    -
    1. Re:Funny you should say that.... by Hillgiant · · Score: 3, Interesting

      First you have to separate the bloom from the water, then you have to separate the algae from all the other gunk skimmed with it, then you have to separate the triglyceride bits from the non triglyceride bits. Then you hope that the oil fractions of the particular species are high enough to make it worth your while.

      All of these things can be done, but often they require more energy than is in the oil.

      --
      -
  22. Reef-aquariums - we've had proof in another form.. by mccabem · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Check out some of the results of a Google for "reef+phosphates" and see the problems even a tiny increase in the ppm of phophate can cause in a salt-water reef aquarium. Even just one additional ppm above "normal" can be pretty extreme.

    Multiply those effects by the size of our collective phosphate-largesse and the size of the oceans and I guess you get full-on dead zones instead of just a tank of nasty algae and bacteria.

    Hope this helps.

    -Matt

  23. Re:Reef-aquariums - we've had proof in another for by iivel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was thinking the exact same thing. As a saltwater reef aquarist I've been testing phosphates every few days for years to keep algae (esp. that annoying bubble algae) in check. I don't ever recall reading anything that considered nitrogen (other than nitrogenous waste ... which is another issue) to be part of the algeal bloom cycle. As mentioned earlier up in the thread, amateurs aquarists have a ton of products for phosphate removal/sequestering ... are these not practical on a large scale?