View Single Post
Unread 05/11/2010, 10:33 PM   #14
ChuckG
Registered Member
 
ChuckG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Batavia, Il
Posts: 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart60611 View Post
One thing that I found curious about the above snipet is the statement that the Warner Marine pellets can be used to replace GFO. In the NP Biopellets thread, it has been suggested repeatedly both by the manufacturer and users of the product that one often has to run the NP Biopellets with GFO suggesting that the NP Biopellets are best at breaking down nitrate and not as effective at breaking down phosphate. Here, it appears that perhaps the Warner Marine Pellets are better at breaking down phosphate. They are purportedly made from a different substance so perhaps that is the basis for the contention?
It is the bacteria that consume the PO4 while consuming the carbon source. Probably safe to assume it is the same bacteria the grow on the WM and BP products. They apparently consume carbon, nitrogen, and phosphate in a specific ratio. The BP manufacturers say that GFO may need to be used when more phosphates are dumped into the the tank than there is available nitrogen (nitrate) for the the bacteria to consume two along with carbon in the proper ratio.

I can't say for sure but following that logic and if it is correct then there may also be certain scenarios where GFO may need to be used with the WM product.

I also ran across this product the other day. Looks similar although no mention of phosphate reduction. That said they may not want to mention PO4 reduction for a product advertised for freshwater plants as I believe freshwater planted tanks sometime need phosphates dosed to keep things the plants growing optimally.

http://www.aquariumplants.com/Deniballs_p/am77006.htm


ChuckG is offline   Reply With Quote