From: jamieo@gbrmpa.gov.au (Jamie Oliver)
Subject: Re: Dynamic Aquaria by W.H. Adey
Organization: Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 03:35:03 GMT

krogers@javelin.sim.es.com (K. Rogers) writes:

>tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse) writes:

>>>I seem to be under the impression that Mr. Adey was rapidly discounted by
>>>the industry in general and by people on the net. Am I right? If so, why?
>>
>>	I for one don't believe in algea scrubber.  As for why, some of us
>>get to see his algea scrubber in action (Museun of Natural History in
>>DC) and it's not a pretty sight.  If my tank look anything near as bad
>>as his, I would have quite the hobby long ago.  However, do keep in mind
>>that I don't think he is interest in a good looking tank, he's more
>>interested in a scientific research on ecosystem.

>Yeah, I've been perusing the his book as time's permitted and it's
>clear from the outset that he's interested in mimicing real ecosystems
>as closely as possible, not have a hodge-podge of inverts and fish
>from around the world which look pretty in the living room.

>He also has one major strike against his tanks in the Smithsonian: the
>cooling of the building is more or less defunct.  You could tell from
>his book (between the lines) he was really frustrated about it as his
>tanks were getting regularly stressed in a bad way.  No mention was
>made of using a seperate chilling unit.

>One other thing from his book is they (at least were) use 3700-4200K
>MH bulb @ 50-60% CRI.  This is not the best light to view things by...

>At any rate, Anthony, I'd like a (reasonably) detailed description of
>the Smithsonian tank some time.  What exactly bugged you about it so
>much?  I'll probably never get to the DC area so I'll not be able to
>see it myself.  In particular I'd be interested if the tank's in poor
>shape because of the algae scrubber and other basic ideas he has or if
>it's due to poor maintenance, the cooling problem, general lack of
>funds which plague such institutions, etc.  I guess I'd have to see
>several tanks set up along his lines for comparison to answer that
>question.

>If I won't get to DC I *really* won't get to Townsville to see the
>Great Barrier Reef Park's 700,000 gallon tank using many of his
>principles.  Nobody can complain about that tank as the corals spawn
>synchronously in it just like in the ocean on the other side of the
>wall.  Maybe Jamie could give us a short run down on that system some
>day (time and interest permitting.)
>-- 
>Keith Rogers
>krogers@javelin.sim.es.com

Let me say at the outset that I work for the Great Barrier Reef Authority
which runs the GBR Aquarium, but I am not in the Aquarium section, rather
I am in the Research & Monitoring Section. The view expressed here may
not necessarily be those of the staff of the Aquarium, and might
not even be 100% correct.......

The GBR aquarium was indeed built using the same principal as Adey's 
system. It basically a scaled up version.  

Fish do very well in the aquarium (I understand) but corals are
definately a problem.  Most corals eventually die, although this
takes 6-12 months.   Some corals (particularly fleshy massives) do 
pretty well and the Hydorzoan coral Millepora has been observed to 
grow quite rapidly and increase its area of coverage several fold before
eventually dying (probably due to temperature stress in the summer).
The problem with coral mortality is severe enough that the collection of
Acropora corals is now scaled down to a minimal level.

Corals have indeed spawned in the aquarium, but this is a bit misleading
since the corals which spawned were collected only a few months before.
To my knowledge there has not been any documented spawning of coral which 
have been in the aquarium for over 12 months.

The coral morality problem is severe enough that we are just about to
start some proper experiments to determine what it is that the corals
don't like (this is where I became invovled).

The Aquarium is short-staffed and there has been verly little documentation
of what actually happens to corals during their fatal visit to the the
aquarium, so the first step will be to quantitatively describe the appearance
and physiological responses of the corals once they are introuded into the 
aquarium.  The next satge will be to try various manipulations to improve
their health. As basic physical parameters such as salinity, temperature
and light are all maintained within known favouralbe limits, the basic
working hypothesis is that there is something screwy about the water
chemistry.  Its even possible that the algal scrubbers are introducing 
nasty chemical toxins due to the presence of a few undesirable algal species.

The manipulations planned are the type of things most aquarists consider
essential, but which aren't supposed to be requried with Adey's setup.

e.g  Activated carbon filtration
     Protein skimming
     UV treatment
     Addition of calcium
     Removal of algal scrubber system

As far as I am aware, Adey's system in the Smithsonian has the same
problem as us regarding coral mortality. You can find one or two that
survive but most (especially Acroporas) die eventually.

The impression I get is that no-one has been able to get a closed circuit
aquarium going that truly resemble a real reef in terms of coral health.
However I think that some very interesting and productive approaches have
been taken by amateur aquarists.  I'm open to any suggestions and/or 
comments.

Regards ....
                       Jamie Oliver

-- 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Jamie Oliver				Managing Australia's Great Barrier Reef
Newsgroups: rec.aquaria