Filer questions

[Clownguy]

Filter questions

I have been running a remote deep sand bed/refugium for years now in my sps system and I have noticed that no matter what I do my nitrates never drop below 20-40 ppm. I decided i was going to siphon the top layer of sand in the refugium and it was filthy. I am now thinking about removing all of the sand and just running with the live rock I have and maybe a little layer of sand and some macro in the sump instead of 6-8" of sand and was curious if this would still work and peoples experience removing the sand bed. Thanks in advance.

Chris

 

[clayswim]

It sounds like perhaps there's something else in your setup that bacteria are colonizing on. Either that or your bioload may be too high. How big is the tank and how many fish do you have in it? Under normal stocking conditions and given enough time a well maintained live rock and/or sand biological system should keep nitrates at or close to zero.

I'm a real skeptic as to how much macro algae actually helps reduce nitrates in most aquariums. Many people let it grow until it fills the refugium up, and then they leave it; thinking it will do its job just sitting there. This couldn't be further from the truth. Macro algae are like every other type of plant, it consumes large amounts of nutrients only as it grows. Maintaining itself takes very little. So the only real way to use algae as a nutrient export is to constantly trim it way back and let it grow back in again. Having said that I'm still skeptical that it will have a dramatic impact. To ensure low nitrates there's a few things you can do...

1. Keep as much live rock as possible. This is the best form of anaerobic filtration around.

2. Lots of circulation. This will not only increase the effectiveness of the live rock as a filter, but will also stir detritus up so that it can be picked up and removed by your skimmer.

3. Keep the tank clean. Make sure detritus doesn't build-up anywhere, and be sure to change any mechanical filters that may be acting as biological filters and trapping waste. This includes filter socks.

4. Make sure your skimmer is doing its job. A good skimmer will remove waste before it gets a chance to breakdown and get turned into nitrates.

5. Don't overload your tank with too many fish. The anaerobic bacteria responsible for denitrification work much slower than normal nitrifying bacteria, and they can be overwhelmed by too much bioload.

Clayton

 

[charlyclown]

I run a 100 G Ecosystem tank w/o a skimmer for about 6 months now. I have a skimmer and UV sterilizer rady, but I have 0 ammonia, nitrites and nitrates and no other problems. I have ~ 140 lbs or live rock, and use about 5 G biobals in the overflow and in my 45 G refuge. I found out that they work at least as good as live rock. I have quite a few of critters and I do feed them a lot. The sand you have in your main tank usually increases nitrates levels since it traps waste which cannot be removed easily.
I have about 1/4'' live sand in my main tank and ~3'' miracle mud in my refuge.
Cheato works great at removing nitrates, just like all plants do. That's what chaeto feeds on (also on ammonia, btw). Having SPS, you probably have already a high flow rate already. If you get Chaetomorpha, make sure you get a high flow rate in your refuge. Otherwise it won't help you much. Also, I trim my cheato every week or two weeks.

Karl

Karl

 

[Clownguy]

Thanks for the responses,
Clayton: I have only 6 small fish in a 150 gal, I have and ampmaster 3000 for a closed loop and an submersible pump the runs about 1450 gph as my main return. There is about 200 lbs of live rock. The only place there is any detritus is in the sump/refugium. I almost wonder if I need something to stir it up and clean it up too.

Karl: I have only minimal sand in the tank ab out 1" just in the fron three inches of the tank and When I vaccum it there is no dirt just dirt in the sump/refugium. I wonder if I need to reduce the amount of sand in my sump to three inches? If you have extra cheato I would love to trade you for some.

Chris

 

[clayswim]

Wet/dry filters decrease nitrates and live sand increases them? Now there's a switch. This could turn into a rather interesting thread. lol

In no way does a sand bed increase nitrates. There are a hundred good reasons not to use a DSB, but high nitrates is not one of them. It's equally absurd to suggest that wet/dry filters help at all with nitrate reduction.

Again, plants only decrease nitrates when they're actively growing; cheato included. A refugium full of cheato will remove very little nitrates unless you remove a good portion of the clump on a regular basis. Plant maintenance requires very little food.

Clayton

 

[charlyclown]

I think we are talking about different things here.
Generally, wet/dry filters decrease ammonia and build up nitrates, which, if you have a planted and maintained refuge, will be used by plants to grow. Hence, decreases nitrates and helps faster breakdown of ammonia which is most poisonous.

Sand: generally decreases nitrate, but only if well maintained (which is quite a bit of work in the long run). You have to make sure that detritus is removed one way or the other. Otherwise, it will increase nitrates in the long run. Bare bottom or 1/2'' live sand is virtually maintenance free provided that you have high flow in your tank. Also, I do have ~100 lbs of live sand in my refuge, which, due to the high density of undisturbed critters there, does not require any maintenance.
Plants: decrease nitrates. You need to have a large enough refuge to have a sufficient large "growing" plant population to remove all nitrates. Chaeto grows pretty dense and harvesting every two or three weeks is sufficient. In addition, plants can also directly use ammonia.
Chris: I have three other people who want some already and I unfortunately just harvested four days ago. If you are willing to wait, I'll have some again in a few weeks. You may also get some sooner if you ask on the discussion forum. How large is your refuge? For chaeto, you probably should have at least 40 G for chaeto to grow.

Karl

 

[clayswim]

Generally, wet/dry filters decrease ammonia and build up nitrates, which, if you have a planted and maintained refuge, will be used by plants to grow.

I think you're giving macro algae far too much credit. It does work to an extent, but not normally to a level that keeps up with a wet/dry.

Hence, decreases nitrates and helps faster breakdown of ammonia which is most poisonous.

Are you implying that other forms of biological filtration leave ammonia in the water?

Sand: generally decreases nitrate, but only if well maintained (which is quite a bit of work in the long run).

I'm not sure you grasp how a DSB works. By leaving it undisturbed you allow it to build an anaerobic zone, which will decrease nitrates far more efficiently than cheato will. I'm in no way a fan of the DSB, but it does do a good job at denitrifying.

In addition, plants can also directly use ammonia.

Ammonia isn't a problem in any common biological system. Live rock only, live rock with sand, even a sponge filter will completely remove ammonia and nitrites.

Here's a link to a thread on the subject of wet/dry filters worth reading...

http://www.reeffrontiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9481

Clayton

 

[charlyclown]

I think you're giving macro algae far too much credit. It does work to an extent, but not normally to a level that keeps up with a wet/dry.
Clayton

I do not really have a W/D. I have my overflow filled with bioballs and a T-pipe keeps half of the balls submerged under water. I installed it to quiet down the system (about 3 months ago), I had 0 nitrates before and I still do.

Are you implying that other forms of biological filtration leave ammonia in the water?
Clayton

I am not impying anything. I used to have DSB in my 55 gallon, and I did use a skimmer. However, I have reduced maintenance work now and the cost of operating a skimmer. (However, I do have a skimmer ready).

I'm not sure you grasp how a DSB works. By leaving it undisturbed you allow it to build an anaerobic zone, which will decrease nitrates far more efficiently than cheato will. I'm in no way a fan of the DSB, but it does do a good job at denitrifying. Clayton

Are you using a skimmer? I don't have any and my fish and corals do great and they all grow and have a better color than they had in my 55 G tank.

Ammonia isn't a problem in any common biological system. Live rock only, live rock with sand, even a sponge filter will completely remove ammonia and nitrites.

Partly true. If it's that easy, why have that much LR in a tank. Why not just have a sponge filter?

Even in medium sized tanks we have very complex bio systems. Simple 'discussion' of the matter will not prove anybody right. Emipircal data is crutial here. I have seen many people w/o a skimmer for several years now who all have beautiful tanks.

 

[clayswim]

However, I have reduced maintenance work now and the cost of operating a skimmer.

What cost? It's one of the cheapest filters out there to run. The only real expense is the initial cost of buying one.

Are you using a skimmer?

I've had dozens of tanks with and without skimmers, both successful. It's not that it's impossible to run a tank without a skimmer, there's just no good reason not to in my opinion. They're an extremely efficient and cost-effective way to remove organic waste from the aquarium. It's for that reason that I highly recommend their use. I'm not sure you'll find many experienced reef keepers that would disagree with that.

I don't have any and my fish and corals do great and they all grow and have a better color than they had in my 55 G tank.

And you can be absolutely sure that the skimmer is the reason for that?

Partly true. If it's that easy, why have that much LR in a tank. Why not just have a sponge filter?

No, it's completely true. Ammonia and nitrites are not difficult to get rid of. Provide ANY surface with oxygen and aerobic bacteria will grow on it. A sponge filter in your reef would do a fantastic job removing ammonia and nitrites, but it would do nothing to eliminate nitrates; and would of course require constant cleaning to get rid of collected waste. Any filter that provides enough surface area will act as a great nitrifying filter as far as NH3/4 and NO2 is concerned. I'm not sure what your fixation on ammonia is all about.

I have seen many people w/o a skimmer for several years now who all have beautiful tanks.

I'm sure you have; I've had some nice tanks myself without skimming. I'm still not sure why you're trashing skimmers. I gave some advice that running skimmers would help eliminate waste, which would in turn reduce the organic waste that is turned into nitrates. Somehow you saw fit to attack that advice?

Simple 'discussion' of the matter will not prove anybody right.

This is a forum for reef keeping, not a laboratory. Discussions happen here; if you're uncomfortable with that fact there's nothing I can do about it. The reason I sent you the link of "discussions" is because it gets a bit old explaining again and again the same information. A bit of time spent elsewhere reading discussions that have already taken place can be a great place to learn. If you want to get into the entire process of nitrification and denitrification we can do that as well; we'll just move this into the Advanced Section. That brings up something else that I wanted to mention... If you're running a small amount of bioballs in a heavily fed tank, and half of them are submerged and not providing much in the way of biological support; then how do you know it's not your live rock that's providing nitrification and denitrification?

Clayton

 

[NaH2O]

Ahh....I love good conversation.

The sand you have in your main tank usually increases nitrates levels since it traps waste which cannot be removed easily.

I suppose this depends on what grain size you are speaking of. Crushed coral, for instance, has a tendency to trap detritus, which would build up (if not siphoned out on a regular basis) to create nitrate issues. Oolitic sand combined with microfauna will allow for an anaerobic zone to build up and provide denitrification. Miracle Mud is of a finer grain size than oolitic, so you will see a higher amount of denitrification in comparison to oolitic.

Sand: generally decreases nitrate, but only if well maintained (which is quite a bit of work in the long run). You have to make sure that detritus is removed one way or the other. Otherwise, it will increase nitrates in the long run. Bare bottom or 1/2'' live sand is virtually maintenance free provided that you have high flow in your tank. Also, I do have ~100 lbs of live sand in my refuge, which, due to the high density of undisturbed critters there, does not require any maintenance.

You are correct by saying "generally" decreases nitrate.....there are factors that would change this, such as grain size, as mentioned above. Regardless of the system, maintenance is important. Removing detritus before it starts to rot in the tank is always a good idea. IMO, there is no such thing as a maintenance free system. I think the 1/2" of sand won't provide very much except some nitrification, and aesthetics. BB system, it is important to get removal of detritus and wastes. In any system, flow placement (not necessarily high flow) and keeping detritus in suspension will aid in this removal, via utilization by corals, mechanical or other biological filtration. Live rock can even cause problems when not maintained, so using turkey baster or a powerhead to blast the rock and free up detritus helps. Even miracle mud doesn't come without maintenance. You have to harvest the macro aglaes, and replace the mud ever 18 months or so depending on bioload.

 

[Krish]

My 5 cents on the whole subject is no 2 systems are a like. You may have the same equipment, setup and maintenence schedule as the other and one could have success and the other, a handful of problems. I guess you got to go by what works best in your system and not rely solely on what someone else has done. However, their are certain guidlines you should follow which would give you a higher success rate which has been tested time and time again and proven by the best in the field. Certain things for eg. is like bio-balls (or any other similar product like bio-bale) should not be used in conjunction with live rock for denitrification. Clay IMO, is right when he says the rock would and could never keep up with the bio-balls...Denitrification is to slow a process in comparison to the breakdown of ammonia and nitrites provided via bio-balls. I've learned this the hard way by my own personal experience and had to start completely over.

As for using coarser grade of substrate, I used crushed corals (aragalive) the first time around and it created the same atmosphere of high nitrates in comparison to the finer grade substrates like fiji pink which I changed to even if I siphoned it off weekly. I figured I'd have to do double the water change weekly (or siphoning the substrate), to keep up with removing wastes from the aragalive because ditritus in my tank (when using aragalive) made all the way through the substrate and to the bottom. However with the finer grade substrate, most of it would stay closer to the top making it easier to be siphoned off of lifted into the water column by powerheads and then removed by a skimmer of mechanical filtration. But like I said, no 2 systems are the same and maybe someone else may not have had the same experience...Just my 5 cents.

 

[charlyclown]

Clayton: To go w/o skimmer, that would be a topic in itself. I’ve been skimmerless for almost 7 months now and I still see no reason to turn on my skimmer. I’ve had no disease and had only minor algae outbreaks which occurred only when I introduced new livestock and lasted for 1 – 2 weeks until my chaeto/live rock/mud adjusted to the new load. I am not trashing skimmers, but if you can do without, why use them? You also don’t put 800 Watt halides to light up your living room just because you’ll get more light. You also may add harmful UV light and end up using a sun protecting lotion on your skin.



After all, we are talking here about very complex biological systems. There are very many variables that need to be considered and probably is a bit chaotic. I am not sure that simple principles can determine the outcome. It is likely that the skimmerless system shelters a higher variety of organisms in balance with each other and that opportunistic pathogens may have a harder time here.



"If you're running a small amount of bioballs in a heavily fed tank, and half of them are submerged and not providing much in the way of biological support; then how do you know it's not your live rock that's providing nitrification and denitrification?"



I don’t, because I did not do any controlled experiments in this matter. I just noticed that once I introduced them, my system adapted faster to introduced livestock. I will start controlled studies in a few months once I have all testing equipment ready.



NaH2O: I have N. snails which remove everything that drops on my ¼ - ½’’ crushed coral. In addition, I have shrimps&crabs who anxiously wait for stuff to drop down.
My system is essentially BB, I added sand for aesthetics and because I have so much of it from my 55 g which I am breaking down currently.

You are right. There is no maintenance free system just yet although that is and should be the ultimate goal. However, I significantly decreased my maintenance work. I have to skimmer to take care of, no siphoning of the sand, and due to high flow, at least half of my live rocks do not need attention/cleaning anymore. And harvesting macro algae, that takes 10 seconds, tear it and throw it away once in about two weeks. About the mud, the manufacturer recommends replacing half of it every two years.



Krish: You are right in that two systems are never alike. However, do not forget that I do not use a skimmer and I need my gunk to be removed from water. My (bio) balls seems to just aid doing just that. The lower half of the balls column are submerged in water which has not much flow (I have a 6’’ T – piece pipe). I drilled a few small holes in the pipe at the bottom, but I did that to prevent completely still water. I suppose these lower balls are in a rather anaerobic environment, thus aiding nitrate removal. I do monitor my nitrates twice a week, and I do 3% water changes every week. I had 5 ppm nitrates after I added the bioballs for 2 weeks, and then it went back to 0.

karl

 

[Krish]

I suppose these lower balls are in a rather anaerobic environment, thus aiding nitrate removal

This could be true, but from what I've read and learned about denitrification, I don't know how much you will get by doing this if any. The water is probably still really oxygenated down there and bio-balls are basically sealed plastic balls which aren't porus like LR. In LR, denitrification takes place within the rock and not on the surface. That is why bio-balls work so well in converting nitrites and ammonia, but not nitrates...All they are is an increased area for biological filtration to take place, but not denitrification. I don't know how many bio-balls you are using submerged and actually how much flow is getting through there so I can't say for sure and I could be wrong, but I doubt seriously it is as anaerobic as within LR or a DSB. I know with most denitrators, water flow is minimized in most cases to 1 gph or less if I remember correctly. So in actuality, at this region in your system (with the submerged bio-balls), you might not be benefiting any and denitrification might be taking place else where in your system... Just my thoughts.

 

[clayswim]

To go w/o skimmer, that would be a topic in itself.

Besides the fact that you're dismissing one of the most useful pieces of equipment available to reef keepers, and seem to be thrilled at the idea of not running one for an entire seven months; I'm not really sure what your argument is. If you're still arguing that running one isn't necessary then I'm afraid you're beating a dead horse; we've already covered that. Of course you can, but why not have one?

You also don’t put 800 Watt halides to light up your living room just because you’ll get more light.

Your analogy is off the mark. Not running a skimmer is like having no lights at all, and relying on flashlights to get around. Sure it works, but it's damn handy to have more.

You also may add harmful UV light and end up using a sun protecting lotion on your skin.

I'm not sure what that has to do with skimmers, but I seriously doubt they'll cause skin cancer.

I just noticed that once I introduced them, my system adapted faster to introduced livestock.

Again, it's very possible one had nothing to do with the other. It might be something as simple as your rock becoming fully cycled. Live rock can take many months to grow a decent population of anaerobic bacteria capable of eliminating nitrates.

I suppose these lower balls are in a rather anaerobic environment, thus aiding nitrate removal.

No, I'm afraid they do nothing for nitrate removal; since the area would still be loaded with dissolved oxygen. Besides, anything more than a very slow trickle or even drip in an anaerobic environment will produce nitrites as nitrates are broken down. Run a denitrator and you'll see how.

Clayton

 

[clayswim]

Krish, I think I agree with pretty much everything you said. Bioballs actually have very little surface area to grow bacteria, and none of it is outside the flow region. The reason it's able to work so well in a trickle filter is because the environment is loaded with oxygen; making a dense population possible. When submerged they serve almost no biological purpose since the area is much too small under normal dissolved oxygen levels. For them to grow anaerobic bacteria the environment must be completely free of oxygen, which normally happens when normal aerobic bacteria consume all of the available O2. When none is left the same bacteria begin breaking down nitrates to use their oxygen; leaving free nitrogen left to escape into the atmosphere. Creating this situation isn't as easy as it sounds. In a denitrator you have to run water through a very small coil of tubing for at least 50-75 feet, and only at a trickle. When you increase the flow; either by increasing the pressure or the tubing size you end up with an incomplete process which converts nitrates into nitrites. Karl won't have that problem, however, because his bioballs have more than enough oxygen to prevent an anaerobic space. When all you have in your tank is mostly submerged bioballs for biological filtration it's likely that the live rock is providing most of the nitrification and denitrification.

 

[Rhodophyta]

Chaeto

ClownGuy, PM an address and I will mail you a ball of Chaeto. Hermit crabs will gradually eat it if you have a large "cleaning crew". With just a few hermits, the Chaeto will grow faster than they can eat it.

 

[wave98]

I do monitor my nitrates twice a week, and I do 3% water changes every week. I had 5 ppm nitrates after I added the bioballs for 2 weeks, and then it went back to 0.
karl

It sounds like your addition of bio balls created a nitrate factory to the tune of 5ppm, and it took two weeks for your live rock's bacterial community to catch up.

By the way Karl, you would have a very good point about the snails and crabs, if you were using a skimmer to complete the job, or at least a mechanical filter that you cleaned every day or two( floss, pads or whatever ).

They do a remarkable job of keeping the bottom of your tank clean, and your live rock as well, so long as you have proper flow in the tank to move their by-products to whatever filtration you are using, and then export, export, export!

Wave98

 

[charlyclown]

I get the mechanical filtration via the bio balls in my overflow.

I don't know why you all dismiss the possibility of my chaeto absorbing a good portion of my nitrates. After all, it is growing constantly and I do trim it away. If I add more nutrients to the tank it also starts growing faster after a while. Plants also don't respond immediately to increased nutrients. It obviously does use nitrogen and phosphates one way or the other. Of course, the same is true for the mud and live rock. They have a lag time and require certain time to adjust to increased nutrients. Together they do the job. And I also do not see any of you presenting any empirical data concerning this matter. If any of you knows a source of scientifically done controlled studies on this matter, that would be great. I will start doing that once I set up a new 20 G tank. Too much of what I hear is just anecdotal evidence.
I plan on using a 20 G, trickle filter (or simlar) as nitrate factory, chaeto in tank for nitrate removal, constant T (place tank in styrofoam box), various lightings and pure ammonia as nitrogen sourse. I will measure nitrates, nitites and ammonia as a function of time, flow rates, lighting, T. As control, same setup w/o chaeto. Then repeat with cured live rock (after cycling of tank), then with live sand (after cycling the tank) and then combinations of cheato, live rock and live sand. I want to try also some other filters and possibly a self-made denitrifier. I won't use any live-stock, but may use fish flakes instead of ammonia just to verify the results. I'll keep you guys posted on what comes out. I would also want to find out how stable or unstable my system is, after all. I may try to monitor other parameters, but, as I said, i'm still in the process of aquiring all the testing equipment.

karl

It sounds like your addition of bio balls created a nitrate factory to the tune of 5ppm, and it took two weeks for your live rock's bacterial community to catch up.

By the way Karl, you would have a very good point about the snails and crabs, if you were using a skimmer to complete the job, or at least a mechanical filter that you cleaned every day or two( floss, pads or whatever ).

They do a remarkable job of keeping the bottom of your tank clean, and your live rock as well, so long as you have proper flow in the tank to move their by-products to whatever filtration you are using, and then export, export, export!

Wave98

 

[wave98]

I get the mechanical filtration via the bio balls in my overflow.
karl

This is the part that I really don't understand Karl. Mechanical filtration removes particulates( solids ), and I am at a loss as to how bio-balls remove particulate matter.

I do stand by my observation that you probably created a nitrate factory with the bio balls. You started this thread by stating that you were trying to reduce nitrate levels that you have in your tank at about 30 ppm.

I don't know why you all dismiss the possibility of my chaeto absorbing a good portion of my nitrates.
karl

I did not dismiss the Chaeto, and in fact I promote it in general.

I plan on using a 20 G, trickle filter (or simlar) as nitrate factory, chaeto in tank for nitrate removal
karl

You are very likely to find that the trickle filter outpaces your chaeto considerably, and you are going to keep this algae in the display tank?

What the heck is "constant T"?

Pure ammonia as a nitrogen source?

Look Karl, I am The most straight up and "nondebative" individual that you will find on this entire site, or anywhere else for that matter, so take a little more care when you quote me ( or anyone else ), if you want to get into some good discussion, and it it certianly seems like you do.

Respond to me directly, and I will help you as best I can with your endeavor.

Happy reef keeping! Wave98

 

[clayswim]

Look Karl, I am The most straight up and "nondebative" individual that you will find on this entire site

That's true, even I've never argued with you.

I get the mechanical filtration via the bio balls in my overflow.

That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. First of all, bioballs aren't mechanical filtration; and even if you did figure out how to make them trap debris they would require constant cleaning, as all mechanical filters do. Since you keep them in your overflow box I doubt that's the case.

I don't know why you all dismiss the possibility of my chaeto absorbing a good portion of my nitrates.

I don't know why you insist they are removing your nitrates. Chaeto is considered great for removal of phosphates, but only because almost nothing removes it; so every little bit helps. When it comes to nitrate removal they've just never shown to be all that effective. This I've learned from not only my own experience, but also the experience of others. I'm sorry if this information is "anecdotal evidence", but most people don't ask to prove the world is round. Plants in general don't work great for nutrient control. The only time I've ever seen examples of where plants can remove nitrates completely are heavily planted freshwater tanks. This is only true if there's strong lighting, good fertilization, and injected with CO2. These plants require almost daily pruning to keep up.

Plants also don't respond immediately to increased nutrients.

Depends on the plants, some respond immediately.

It obviously does use nitrogen and phosphates one way or the other. Of course, the same is true for the mud and live rock.

Actually mud and live rock do nothing for phosphates, except mud can hold them where they can't be easily removed.

constant T (place tank in styrofoam box)

I take it you're talking about temperature... Why a styrofoam box? Denitrification happens at different temps, no need to keep it exact.

It would be best not to switch things around with the same tank. For example... If you setup a tank and run it for three months, then switch and place live rock in it; you would see the tank experience changes over the next several weeks. This might not have anything to do with the rock, but rather the fact that the tank is still maturing. The only way to do a seriously controlled test is to conduct it using separate tanks for the different approaches. Use the same flow and same ammonia of course. Don't use flake food since you may give a different amount to one tank, throwing the test off completely.

Clayton