Then and NOW
 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FDt8QTAp0Cs

Tank video was 4 years ago. I had moved a 16 year old tank from DeRidder, La to Austin, Tx. 9 years ago.

Two months ago, I turned out the lights on mud/macro refugium and seeded it for cryptic zone refugium. I have been slowly adding filter feeders to this tank.

Fts

So now that you have removed your macro algae what is you method of inorganic nutrient removal?

Where did you source your live rock, specifically with cryptic sponge(s) attached?

What filter feeders are you adding, to which zone, and where did you source these filter feeders?

Is that GSP on the back wall or algae??

gsp

Yes, I removed macro from refugium. However, there is abundant algae in display tank that is not visible to naked eye, including cynobacteria in coral biomass.

Which inorganics are you talking about. Nitrate as an inorganic nutrient is used by both macro and coral and bacteria. I say when macro is removed; bacteria and coral have more food.

Timfish brought me a seeded cryptic sponge rock. I could not begin to tell you the names of different sponges on it.

I contacted Cairns Marine to see if they could provide some cryptic live rock.
They asked me what I was talking about?

I'm talking NO3 PO4 ammonium. Do you have enough corals & invisible algae to take up the slack? Or don't you feed the tank much?

I have not followed Steve T use of zones except for refugium and even there I am flowing too fast. If it works, maybe I will write a book to describe my success.

Clams are a large consumer of inorganic nutrients and they require bright light.

I am also using Red Tree Sponges. It took them a month to adjust to bright light.

I made a shaded area for NPS arriving tomorrow from live-aquaria.com
http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/2...c=597+600+2980

I feed heavily with fresh bivalves every day. I have plenty of coral biomass in this tank. In fact, I planned on removing the large Green Sinularia to use it as a center piece in 120G new build.

Won't you be adding more food to the aquarium to feed the NSP.
Yes they filter feed, but they need to be fed the food to filter feed.

Bacteria are the most abundant biomass in our aquariums and they uptake inorganic nutrients.

I thought Steve’s seeded cryptic sponge rock was expensive. I know Steve differentiated cryptic sponges from the ones grown on the dark side of a rock wall. I could not tell you the difference. I believe, if you provide the right conditions, something good will grow on it. I am growing sponges, pods and worms in my refugium. Which sponges remove what? I don’t know and it would be difficult to know. Between the bacteria, the coral, the sponges and the algae there is a constate competition for nutrients.

Yes, I know that's the theory, but in reality live rock is a weak de-nitrifyer.

I couldn't control nutrients until I installed the algae scrubber. Best thing I ever did.

When I feed live oysters, coral polyps extend. Since the Coral is not feeding on clam flesh itself, what is the photosynthetic corals feeding on. The same thing that non photosynthetic corals feed on; organic & inorganic nutrients.

Bacteria, macro, corals and sponges all compete for nutrients.

With respect to bacteria, I am not sure what does the implication about live rock being a weak de-nitrifier mean. Bacteria are stacked up everywhere. It takes facultative bacteria in an oxygen reducing environment to complete de-nitrification. There are many many bacteria in oxidizing environments that consume inorganic nutrients,

Yes, I understand what coral feed on. My point is that at one time at least, people had difficulties keeping NPS corals because they needed regular feeding & polution was an issue. I'm just considering NPS utility as a filter feeder when extra food will have to be added to the aquarium?

"Live rock is a weak de-nitrifer" - Martin A. Moe, Jr The Marine Aquarium reference Systems and Invertebrates. His words, my experience. The correct bacteria has to have the correct environment to exist & perform de-nitrification.
Not too much oxygen (anoxic) not too little (anaerobic). Then it can only process so much. A couple of fish, plenty of water changes, ok. But if you have an aquarium stocked like many people do, the typical amount of live rock ain't gunna cut it.
Of course, if you only have a few fish, & plenty of photosynthesising corals, should be no problem.

Balancing Act
 

I really don’t think that much extra food from outside the tank is required. If you add beaucoup food, the competitors will fight for it and grow accordingly, until they outgrow the tank. At this point frag and sale becomes an option. However, if you choose to limit your food then some competitors would lose out and disappear.


The whole point to using natural filtration in our reef tank is multiple food webs to process nutrients and feed the tank live food. I believe that to my core and I have stepped out to excercise this core belief. My 25 year old Jaubert Plenum will feed NPS, sponges, clams, corals, macro and fish.

One other point about macro and herbivores. Consider reproducing Cerith snails. Even when algae is not visible, they are grazing and there population will match the food source. In the scenario where I turned out lights in refugium, the micro fauna and fana adjust populations to environmental changes. One likely scenario would be that extra inorganic nutrients from elimination of refugium light would be some visible algae growth with a corresponding increase in herbivores. Let the bugs do the work for you. They have been doing it since the geologic dawn of time. Because the dynamic equilibrium involved is not instantaneous in responding, some algae may be visible at times in tank. I have no problem with that and even consider it healthy in little to moderate amounts.

Good night Jaubert.

Martin wrote that book 50 years ago. In Sprung & Delbeek Volume 3, “denitrification and nitrification can happen in close proximity of each other. I agree about live rock being a poor de-nitrification method, but what does that have to do with this discussion.

Martin wrote that book 50 years ago <<<< 1st print 1989, that makes it 28 years ago.

In Sprung & Delbeek Volume 3, “denitrification and nitrification can happen in close proximity of each other <<<< yes, that is why live rock is practicle, because it has the ability to do all three, unlike bioballs, or Marine Pure for example.

I agree about live rock being a poor de-nitrification method <<<< noted

but what does that have to do with this discussion <<<< you have removed your most effective method of inorganic nutrient removal - macro algae fuge, as stated in your OP. I thought my queeries were relevant. Apologies if I have mis-interpreted what you wanted to discuss.

Moe's book is certainly still relevant, and to finish, I'll just quote from his book: - "Denitrification bacteria are also present in the deep crevices and pores of the rock, but assuming the tank contains a fair number of animals, the denitrification capacity of the bacteria in the rock will not take the place of active algae growth and a properly designed and functioning denitrification filter device."

I'll look forward to your updates on sponge & filter feeder progression & effectiveness.
Good luck.

Wow! Thats a wicked background! Very cool!

I want this discussion to go where the participants take it. I do not consider live rock a necessary component in the biological filtration of a reef tank. It gives the fish structure to hide and a surface for colonization of micro fauna and fana. I could not operate a reef tank without substrate.

Twin,
As I further think on your ATS, it dawns on me how much our methods are different. This is the Art that I spoke about in the title of Volume 3 from Sprung and Delbeeck. Your focus is nutrient export. My focus is nutrient recycling. Yes, I export some when I frag and remove coral.

The reason that I mentioned Sprung and Delbeek reference to nitrification & denitrification happening in close proximity of each other was because it negated the biological need for live rock. I would like to address Martin Moe’s statement about needing a “functioning denitrification device”. Why do I need to remove nitrate from the water as a free nitrogen gas. Why not feed my corals & bacteria with this nutrient source. Remember, nutrient recycling.

Bioballs and marine pure are very different media for one thing. Marine Pure IS capable of doing all three, much more efficiently then live rock. I'm confused why you say it can't when this type of sintered glass media was designed to do just that. Same with siporax.

Calling live rock a weak denitrifier im sure is relative. Can macro algae remove nitrate much faster? Yes, given good conditions and sufficient mass it probably will. But it takes light and a certain amount of care (pruning, flipping if its not properly spinning, etc.) to keep it growing. I can throw several liters of siporax or a few marine pure blocks in my sump and have a really effective de-nitrification process. Evidence of this is abound in the sps forums.

I am not operating an SPS tank. I do not consider de-nitrification relevant to my reefkeeping methods. It happens and that is fine, but I do not use it as a primary nutrient export method. I don’t encourage nitrogen gas export because I can not sell nitrogen gas, but I can sell corals and frags as a nutrient export method.