Macro Vs Bio Balls

[scubasteve]

I am open to different opinions but not when there is no proof or evidence behind such.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[scubasteve]

Cambridge is a little far but thanks Steve

just realised where you are lmao

 

[reeferkeeper420]

ya I also have had a lot of people of this site see my system up for 5 years and pristine not a drop of cyno. algae or any other crap.. reef hero is not open to ideas just condemning of decades proven practices how long have fuges been around.....and read what io pellets do.. they Feed bacteria... why would I feed bacteria when they are supposed to "feed" .. I feed my bacteria fish crap.. and you still have to skim heavy bio pellets history about 5 years vs refugiums decades .. hay hero go see Steve's system or come see mine proof is in the water... you reed articles awesome try Robert fenner (yes the king of marine aquariums and wet web media) and Anthony calfo"s book THE NATURAL MARINE AQUARIUM SERIES. both wrote hunderds of books and articles and dedicated to refugium aquaria... maybe your fug. didn't work because of a lack of maintenance and cuna's tank I see 2 fish and not to insult cuna's tank at all but with all due respect its not a reef tank its a frag tank and we all run frag tanks without much at all some even just hob aqua clears and no skimmers and they work...put 25 fish in there and feed 2 times a day and well see just how efficient that is for how long...please no offence to cuna at all nothing but respect here amazing looking corals there... hay mr fox just build yourself a balanced system do research and commit to what ever you go with is the bottom line

I dont think hes condemning anything or denying. Just simply stating and giving evidence that all you older reefers stuck in your old ways isnt neccessarily the right way or only way. I think its kinda backwards here, you guys are denying the possibility of running systems without liverock, amongst oher things( not gonna start listing crap). Theres no one way to run a reef, so how about we all stop trying to beat our ways of doing things into eachothers heads. Is it not possible to discuss this kinda stuff without getting all backed up into a corner with your claws out. And to say that cunas tank is simply a frag tank is a little ignorant..why cause he has no rock?? Sure in nature, theres lots of rocks, but is there anything natural about our tanks???i think not. You can run a reef anyway you please, just because you have rock doesnt mean everyone has to, all in personal preference.

 

[scubasteve]

Some evidence as requested.... god bless tft and the lovely members
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10934529.2013.762735?journalCode=lesa20

http://www.researchgate.net/publica...ULTURE_WATER_USING_MAIZE_COB_ACTIVATED_CARBON

http://www.algone.com/activated-carbon-and-chemical-aquarium-filtration

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19854640


http://www.freedrinkingwater.com/wa...8-08-nitrate-problems-with-gac-filtration.htm

And i also have a very very large pdf but need a new comp to send as phone wont handle the mb's of pdfs's from the university of guelph which is where most ministry officials are trained for water treatment, environments and ecosystems and animal biology of all kinds and are a world leader in findings in such fields so please browse the 1000's of pdf's regarding different water treatment processes on their website.

You obviously have no idea that activated carbon can have different properties depending how it was activated at what temp how long amount of present oxygen..... yes most aquaroa carbon is designed for large surface area to absorb organics over a longer time where as carbon treated to have a smaller pore size ( up to 12-15x smaller) create less surface area and smaller pores making less useful for organics but good for removing nitrates. only problem is lifespan is half of what the large pore size is and if carbon is left it will then start leaching back the nitrates.....this is when the de nitrification process has started and bacteria established which is a no no for water purification hence why the backwashing machines now rinse the carbon with sterile water to remove contaminants before de nitrifying starts thank you your welcome now go argue the facts with the pros

 

[Reef Hero]

My only beef here regarding nitrate control is the use of GAC as a sole reliable method to control nitrates. I have not witnessed any reefer successfully control their nitrates with only the use of GAC. Do you have any proof of a reef aquarium hobbyist being able to control their nitrates long term with the use of only GAC?
My other beef is being told it's not possible to control a coral reef tank long term without the use of rock, sand, or fish.... I was simply stating that it not actually required anymore..... I'm not stating that a refugium or carbon dosing are poor methods by any means here. In fact, I posted a link to a reef magazine recently released that covers all the various and latest proven methods used by reefers..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[scubasteve]

My only beef here regarding nitrate control is the use of GAC as a sole reliable method to control nitrates. I have not witnessed any reefer successfully control their nitrates with only the use of GAC. Do you have any proof of a reef aquarium hobbyist being able to control their nitrates long term with the use of only GAC?
My other beef is being told it's not possible to control a coral reef tank long term without the use of rock, sand, or fish.... I was simply stating that it not actually required anymore..... I'm not stating that a refugium or carbon dosing are poor methods by any means here. In fact, I posted a link to a reef magazine recently released that covers all the various and latest proven methods used by reefers..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Except i simply told a member something that would help in an emerg not a sole reliance to begin with..... nor did i say you have to have lr just stated it alot more difficult and expensive and as one of the links show a treatment facility in europe only uses that for nitrate controle so is possible just saying

 

[saltyair]

Except i simply told a member something that would help in an emerg not a sole reliance to begin with..... and as one of the links show a treatment facility in europe only uses that for nitrate controle so is possible just saying

Actually carbon alone can work as a no3 export - its been documented 100's of times. it works differently than carbon originally is used for. (toxins/tds)
What happens is bacteria start to grow on the porous carbon and feed off the tds and grow. Anyone who has carbon dosed has seen bacteria mats start to form in carbon reactors.

Steve is correct - and there are many tanks running this way. Also brings me back to the bio-pellets which does this more efficiently and can be shed for the skimmer to pull out.

 

[curiousphil]

Wow it looks like I missed a doozy of a thread!

The bottom line that Mr Fox needs to be aware of is, there are many ways to combat the buildup of nutrients and nitrates in our closed systems. Most of them have been discussed in this thread and they all work. However, they all have their drawbacks both in terms of cost to implement and the maintenance required to keep them running optimally.

Some people opt to implement more than one solution to make up for what another solution lacks. As has been mentioned, bio balls are very effective at processing ammonia into nitrites and nitrites into nitrates, but lacks the ability to facilitate the growth of denitrifying bacteria. This is where a fuge, deep sand bed, tons of live rock, zeo reactor, biopellet reactor, sulfur denitrator, and apparently even just GAC will come into play. (I'd never heard about the GAC method to be honest, and I've seen a whole lot of reef tanks.) Any of those methods will help to reduce the nitrates that are created by the bio balls. Macro algae will consume nitrate as it grows. GAC will absorb it into its pores as steve has shown, and the other methods will all facilitate the growth of denitrifying bacteria through various methods. DSBs will promote growth by providing lots of surface area and an anaerobic environment, biopellets by introducing a carbon source which allows another type of bacteria to grow which consumes nitrate in its growth - but must be skimmed out before it dies and releases the nitrates back into the water, and sulfur denitrators both create an anaerobic environment, and introduce sulfur in place of a carbon source which causes yet another type of bacteria to grow that fixes nitrates into oxygen as part of its metabolic process.

The Randy Farley-Holmes article that Reef Hero posted goes over all of these methods. They all work, just choose whichever one you identify with. If your goal is a fish only system, nitrates don't matter and any of the methods will be fine, even bio balls on their own. If you want stony corals, you will need to use something else with the balls. This last point has even been proven in this thread - barebottomcouple and scubasteve both use their bio balls with a fuge.

Myself I have always struggled with nitrates and still haven't found the perfect solution for my system. First I tried adding biopellets, then I tried adding more live rock, then I tried vinegar dosing. Eventually they came down but I unfortunately don't know which method was the one that worked. For my new system I will be trying a sulfur denitrator.

 

[theyangman]

I use unicorn turds to control nitrates, phosphates, amonia, and it helps with water clarity, while keeping my tank's alk, cal, and mg stable as well.

I get it from a special source, and I am not telling you guys where.

 

[EricTMah]

Hahaha.

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk 2

 

[onecansay]

Wow, back to the future. For nearly a year I have used chaeto, bio-pellet reactor and skimmer. Only when I notice a little glass accumulation do I clean skimmer and change floss. Once again what works for some may not work for others. I also only have 3X volume of system per hour running through my fuge.

 

[barebottomcouple]

I dont think hes condemning anything or denying. Just simply stating and giving evidence that all you older reefers stuck in your old ways isnt neccessarily the right way or only way. I think its kinda backwards here, you guys are denying the possibility of running systems without liverock, amongst oher things( not gonna start listing crap). Theres no one way to run a reef, so how about we all stop trying to beat our ways of doing things into eachothers heads. Is it not possible to discuss this kinda stuff without getting all backed up into a corner with your claws out. And to say that cunas tank is simply a frag tank is a little ignorant..why cause he has no rock?? Sure in nature, theres lots of rocks, but is there anything natural about our tanks???i think not. You can run a reef anyway you please, just because you have rock doesnt mean everyone has to, all in personal preference.

hay dude never said he was wrong or condemned what he was doing I gave him nothing but respect he has experience and it works for him if you read my posts just meant it was not a heavy FISH stocked reef... never ever did I condemn and never said my way was the only way just that it was the best way that worked for me. Mr. fox asked for opinions and experience and gave mine. if we 'fugers' have to respect other systems then HOW BOUT THE SAME BACK talk bout ignorant one sided. if I get called wrong then expect me to come back with defence.
subasteve makes some awesome points and again have to think research and weigh if that would work for ME AND MY SYSTEM or not
great reading Steve thanks

 

[reeferkeeper420]

Lol i never said you were condemning anything. But anyways this thread has gotten way out of hand and kinda off topic.

 

[Jewel]

I'd chuck the Bio balls for sure, Get some Red Mangroves

 

[Jewel]

Bio balls were often used for fresh water tanks, They do have a use for sure but I don't think they will benefit Salt, Sorta like a UV sterilizer has a use but not in salt, But it doesn't hurt to try anything.

 

[theyangman]

I've always wanted to try these things, but I've never been able to find a finite answer.

1. How much better if at all are they than chaeto? Chaeto grows a lot faster than mangroves but I can understand that it doesn't NECESSARILY mean they are better for nutrient export. (but it might!)

2. How MANY mangroves do you need say per gallon if you are using them as a form of nutrient export? Many people who have had success with them seem to have A LOT of them growing. 1 or 2 is pretty much decoration with little benefit.

3. This ties into number 1 and 2 I guess, but with the maintenance of having to clean the leaves daily (or a few times a week at the very least), overall can anyone really say that this a more effective way to control nutrients compared to running a simple fuge with macro algaes that requires almost 0 attention other than harvesting the algae and cutting it back from time to time? I get that if you have an open top tank that these can add a great visual effect and serve a purpose that way, but strictly speaking of those who run them hidden away in a sump, and have zero decorative value, is it worth your time to maintain these things?

I'm not bashing mangroves here, I just haven't had or found any real straight answers. So this goes out to all those who actually run these things as a real form of nutrient control.

 

[scubasteve]

I've always wanted to try these things, but I've never been able to find a finite answer.

1. How much better if at all are they than chaeto? Chaeto grows a lot faster than mangroves but I can understand that it doesn't NECESSARILY mean they are better for nutrient export. (but it might!)

2. How MANY mangroves do you need say per gallon if you are using them as a form of nutrient export? Many people who have had success with them seem to have A LOT of them growing. 1 or 2 is pretty much decoration with little benefit.

3. This ties into number 1 and 2 I guess, but with the maintenance of having to clean the leaves daily (or a few times a week at the very least), overall can anyone really say that this a more effective way to control nutrients compared to running a simple fuge with macro algaes that requires almost 0 attention other than harvesting the algae and cutting it back from time to time? I get that if you have an open top tank that these can add a great visual effect and serve a purpose that way, but strictly speaking of those who run them hidden away in a sump, and have zero decorative value, is it worth your time to maintain these things?

I have a couple in my fuge personally i dont rely on any one algae or plant as i figure a diversity is best i have both spaghetti and grape chaeto along with caulerpa and 2 mangroves in my sump the amount of nutrients they will export depends on flow and lighting mostly..... iam curiouse on how well just mangroves will do in great numbers but cant afford to try yet lol

 

[Jewel]

I don't think you have to harvest the leaves, not that I know anyway, What works anyway? I think they are a nice addition to a system and if you can get them to prosper then you can sell them. They'll definitely help your system

 

[Jewel]

A good guy to ask would be Benzzz, I know for a fact that he has sold them in the past. He'll know for sure.

 

[theyangman]

I don't think you have to harvest the leaves, not that I know anyway, What works anyway? I think they are a nice addition to a system and if you can get them to prosper then you can sell them. They'll definitely help your system

I never made any mention of harvesting the leaves.