Fred Dulley
Member
Hi gang at UKAPS.
Nothing to do with the aquaria and a little bit off-topic I know but I wanted to pick your brains with regards to this termonology.
I'm currently undertaking my 2nd year of Ocean Science at Plymouth Uni.
During our Chemical and Biological Oceanography lectures, the lecturer (who loves to work in mols per litre) insists on classing N+P+Si as micronutrients. I've always understood them to be macro nutrients (most certainly N+P). I've been reading a few sources online that say they are macro nutrients (corroborates with my opinion).
Surely even though it's seawater, N+P are still macro nutrients and not micro nutrients?
We've also come across Redfield Ratio...
Taken from one of Tom Barr's posts
From what I can see...it's OK if you're talking purely about number of atoms. But if you want to apply it via a concentration based on mass (ppm for example), then necessary calculations must be carried out. Is that right?
Is the Redfield Ratio right if you're talking about no. of atoms. Or is it completely wrong?
All your inputs are appreciated (especially Tom and Clive )
Nothing to do with the aquaria and a little bit off-topic I know but I wanted to pick your brains with regards to this termonology.
I'm currently undertaking my 2nd year of Ocean Science at Plymouth Uni.
During our Chemical and Biological Oceanography lectures, the lecturer (who loves to work in mols per litre) insists on classing N+P+Si as micronutrients. I've always understood them to be macro nutrients (most certainly N+P). I've been reading a few sources online that say they are macro nutrients (corroborates with my opinion).
Surely even though it's seawater, N+P are still macro nutrients and not micro nutrients?
We've also come across Redfield Ratio...
Taken from one of Tom Barr's posts
I've had a few discussion with folks, mostly in the UK over this one. I will not get into the issue with the difference between the mass ratio, which is what is used, versus what Redfield actually shown in his paper based on averages of marine phytoplankton, it was atomic ratios, atoms, not mass (eg ppm etc). So 106 carbon atoms to 16 nitrogen atoms to 1 P atoms and so forth. To convert to mass, you need to factor in molar weights, N/P will be 16N's* 14 g/mol/ 1P* 30.97 g/mol= 7.2 for a ratio for N;P for algae based on weight or about 10:1 for ratio for NO3/PO4.
From what I can see...it's OK if you're talking purely about number of atoms. But if you want to apply it via a concentration based on mass (ppm for example), then necessary calculations must be carried out. Is that right?
Is the Redfield Ratio right if you're talking about no. of atoms. Or is it completely wrong?
All your inputs are appreciated (especially Tom and Clive )