125G Tall FOwLR Stock List/Order

[Couevas]

Hi All,
I believe this may be my first post on RF. I have been lurking for a while, but mostly used to post on nano-reef (Quavecube/Quavecube2).

Brief history:

Previous Reefs: 90g reef, 24 nanocube reef, 70 bowfront/40g sump reef
Current Setup: 2 year old 20G Tall Reef - T5s, SPS & LPS, no fish anymore

I am through the cycle on my new SeaClear 125 Tall (80 lbs CC, 90ish pounds base rock, small seed rock from reef, 20L sump w/ homemade baffles and Reef Octopus 200nwb, 10 gal QT).
I moved a mated pair of tank-bred Ocellaris over along with a juvenile Snowflake Eel over from the 20 to the big tank. I am going to run the reef fishless from here out.

Question:
Below is my proposed stock list with order of introduction. I have read for weeks, but would like a little live human opinion as well...

1. Mated pair tank-bred Ocellaris clowns (~2 years old, already in 125)
2. Juvenile Snowflake Eel (already in 125)
3. Foxface Lo
4. Blue Tang (I know it gets a bit big for a 125, but there is a LOT of family pressure for this one)
5. Aussie Harlequin Tusk
6. Niger Trigger

I figure the bioload will be ok, and from what I have seen these specimens should get along ok. Thoughts? Should I change the introduction precedence?

Thanks,
C

 

[TJL]

I like it, looks to be a very cool mix of fish (color & shape). I'd put in a nice CUC assortment and then go small on the Harlequin Tusk and Niger Trigger, this way IME they tend to/might leave them alone to do thier thing.

Oh, welcome back.

Cheers, Todd

 

[Couevas]

Thanks Todd!

I too was thinking about a CUC here pretty soon knowing all too well that both the Eel and Trigger will eventually make short work of them. I figure the tank could use them and it will be valuable exercise/stimulation for the shellfish predators...

 

[leebca]

The 'tall' designed tanks, like the 'show' tanks, don't make for the best marine fish DTs. The foot print of the tank is what provides a good substrate surface area. Thus, it is more limiting as far as bioload goes.

You are right about the 'Blue Tang.' Not the best for it, but it is interesting to note that it would be okay, if the 125 was short and 6 feet long. As this fish grows, it will put stress on the biological filter and may push against the capacity. But it may not do well when bigger in that space.

Otherwise, the fish make up is good. For changing over to fish, you might want to read through the sticky here on starting up a FOWLR system, just so you can get some thoughts on the differences -- for instance, a FOWLR system is usually better off with about 2lbs of LR per gallon. Fish are heavy polluters in general, but two of your fishes -- the Tang and Trigger -- are big polluters.

Good luck! Post more about your progress in the General Forum so others can follow along.

 

[Couevas]

Lee,

Thank you for your response.
I agree with you on the Blue Tang in the 125T (60x18x24). I decided last night that I am just going to disappoint my 3.5 yr-old daughter and not get her the "Dori." She already has "Nemo and his Daddy," that should be enough, right? Ha Ha.

I am now leaning towards a Powder Brown/Blue or a Kole's. Would this change my introduction precedence?

1. Mated pair tank-bred Ocellaris clowns (~2 years old, already in 125)
2. Juvenile Snowflake Eel (already in 125)
3. Foxface Lo
4. Powder Brown/Blue or Kole's Tang
5. Aussie Harlequin Tusk
6. Niger Trigger

And yes, I have been reading through your stickies on FOwLR setups and noticed the recommended 2 lbs/gal LR suggestion. However, I am trying to maximize the open column swimming space in this tank (as most of my tankmates tend to spend a lot of time swimming in semi-open water along the edges of the reef). I was hoping that my decision to go with a deeper (~3") crushed coral substrate (very loose pack, a lot of surface area exposed to water movement) and later introduction of a 10 gallon-ish fuge with macro would make up for the lack of LR in the display (~50% of recommendation). I realize the CC substrate can be a nitrate-sink, but I think I can handle that with good maintenance and strong flow (i am running a Eheim 1262 return and two Koralia 750's in the display).

I plan on taking a close look at parameters once equilibrium is reached a few weeks after the last fish (trigger) is introduced and deciding then if additional cured LR is necessary, but do you think this could work? I will also have to pay attention as the fish grow and their subsequent bioloads increase...

 

[TJL]

Couevas, IMHO & IME would not go with 3" of corse crushed coral as substrate, Maybe 1-2" total with enough #0-1/Fine to fill in the gaps, this way there would be just enough for burrowing fish/inverts like Leopard Wrasses, sand-sifting stars & Nasarius snails etc.... Even this set-up is not the easiest to maintane as my curent reeftank would show you, I've been pretty much neglecting daily maintenance for past month (fishing season) and it shows. The amount of flow you have planned will also not be enough to keep everything suspended, my 75g has (2) Koralia 3's (850gph ea) a Koralia 1 and 950gph to DT from sump. My 125g in progress will have (4) Koralia Evo 1400's plus 110gph +- through sump. Hope this helps you out a bit but, if you would like to check out my system or other local reeftanks for ideas just shoot me a pm.

Cheers, Todd

 

[leebca]

I'm beginning to get a bigger picture now.

The order of addition is still good, IMO. Live rock does more than just give surface area for biological filtration. It's those other features/characteristics you want for the FOWLR. Have you read the sticky on What is Live Rock? Still, systems work fine without LR at all, provided then you have an ancillary biological filter (in addition to the substrate).

The substrate depth you propose is sort of a no-man's-land depth. Too deep for usual substrate and not deep enough for a DSB. It would unwise to choose the 3". Keep it to 1.5 to 2". Any deeper and you risk creating spots where hydrogen sulfide pockets could develop and possibly cause a wipe out. Not usual for new tanks, but if you plan to keep the tank for more than a few years, this becomes a real concern. Try not to mix substrate sizes. The more uniform the better (again for this same 'pocket' reasoning).

If you read through Goerman's pamphlet on substrates, there are studies which support the fact that after about 1.5 to 2. inches of the 'average sized' CC, there is not enough circulation into the substrate to perform as a biological filter (regardless of how much water is passing over or directed onto it).

The above is predicated upon an 'average' sized CC particle. If you think you have larger average particles (e.g., over 2.7mm) then the above recommendation/concern doesn't apply. But remember -- average.

[I suspected the Nemo theme].

 

[Couevas]

Todd/Lee,

Thanks again for the insight.
I have read the sticky on LR, but not Goermans pamphlet. I will and then take another look at the substrate. It is above 2.7mm on average, but I still may reduce it the depth. I have no intention of adding sand to it. That would defeat my intention of having a loosely packed substrate, and I am not hosting any burrowing critters/fish.

 

[TJL]

Hey, two more quick sugestions for you. #1 you can plumb in a couple Phosban 150 reactors, one for GAC and one for GFO. #2 for a Dori substitute there are few yellow-tailed damsels that could/would work with your list (big & tuff enough), and you can tell your daughter that its Dori's cousin/BFF or ???

Cheers, Todd

 

[Couevas]

I think I am going to build a grate in the baffle overflow of my sump to place media bags with GAC and GFO on. In theory, all water running through the sump will have to pass through the media on its way back to the tank. It should work well and cut down on ancillary equipment in the stand....

I think.

 

[TJL]

Well... what about Dori's BFF ???

 

[Couevas]

Haven't decided on that yet. Kinda hoping the other pretty fish will be enough. Plus, with two clowns already, I don't know if i want or could handle anymore damselfish. (those guys are mean, my female attacks with furosity)

 

[leebca]

Couevas,

(Assuming I understood your post correctly. . .) That form of mechanical filtration is very common and does work well. It's the 'sock' filter used in many of the larger home systems (and also in large public/private aquariums). You choose the sock with a specific pore size. Experiment with the 'tighest mesh' that will give you the flow, yet do the most filtration. Keep the sock clean.

 

[Couevas]

Lee,
I think I was unclear. I will be using a sock, but only on the drain tubing coming from the DT overflow drain bulkhead to the sump. I will use this to capture the majority of loose food and other detritus/particles prior to entering the skimmer in the first chamber of the sump.

I divided the sump into two chambers using an overflow baffle to keep bubbles out of the display. It is the typical sump baffle you see in which water spills over the first wall and under the second. My aim is to dual purpose this area as a bubble trap and a place for GAC/GFO media bags. I figured that all water running through the sump on its way to the return pump runs through this zone and would be forced to run through the media (potentially treating a larger percentage of overall system water than external canisters). Plus, by having a sock on the drain tube upon entry into the sump, I am keeping large particulates out of the media.

And yes, the socks will be swapped regularly....

 

[Red C Aquarium]

stop in Chris ,its been a long time.
good to see you have a new tank!!

Rob -Red C

 

[leebca]

Thaks. I think we're thinking the same -- those socks are built/offered with a variety of meshes for capturing different sized particles.

 

[Couevas]

Lee,
Gotcha.

Rob,
Will do.