Reef Central Online Community
Premium Aquatics

Go Back   Reef Central Online Community > General Interest Forums > Lighting, Filtration & Other Equipment
Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

User Tag List

Reply
Thread Tools
Unread 07/15/2008, 04:43 AM   #76
sjm817
On Yer left!
 
sjm817's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 18,777
Skimmer, algae, carbon will all pull out organics. Keeping the skimmer off will help kick start the algae growth.


__________________
- Scott
sjm817 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/15/2008, 09:05 AM   #77
paulsilver
Moved On
 
paulsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Portsmouth RI
Posts: 201
I personally have seen skimmers stop foaming for several days when new hardware is added... I agree that this is a generally temporary thing, and that the skimmer will begin again in a few days...


paulsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/15/2008, 09:58 AM   #78
FishNFun
Registered Member
 
FishNFun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally posted by paulsilver
I personally have seen skimmers stop foaming for several days when new hardware is added... I agree that this is a generally temporary thing, and that the skimmer will begin again in a few days...
I agree. I just added a couple TLF reactors and my skimmer stopped for a couple days. Back to normal now though.


FishNFun is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/15/2008, 10:11 AM   #79
herring_fish
Crazy Designer
 
herring_fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Winston-Salem NC, USA
Posts: 1,029
Spray Bars

Like I said, what you have is better than a spray bar but not everyone will be able to have the same sized or shaped envelope for their equipment to fit into. I am very happy with my dump bucket but it does have a weird shape.

My original thought was to have sprays bar that perhaps turned more slowly than what I have pictured. I have never used either of those products so I really don’t know anything about how well they operate. I only posted the pictures above to spark ideas.

I just thought that if you didn’t have access to a surge, then “Plan B” could be as follows: If something like one of those units were install on either side of the screen, oriented sideways, the water streams would not be going to the same spots and therefore it would be less likely to allow matting or deal spots.

Water could be directed at the screen and applied in a moving circular pattern to offer at least a little variation to the water flow. This variation would hopefully cause the strands of algae to be blown in one direction and then in another direction, separating them from one another as the stream moves along.

Of course there would be down sides to this idea including a requirement to clean the unit about once a month to keep it turning smoothly, knocking algae off of the screen if it were too strong and others problems but it might be better than nothing if you can’t have surge.


herring_fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/15/2008, 02:53 PM   #80
paulsilver
Moved On
 
paulsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Portsmouth RI
Posts: 201
Just be aware that many of those rotating spray bars will not work in anything but a perfect horizontal position... they stop turning. In fact I have not seen any that would work in a vertical position, as would be required to have them spray on the vertical screen...

The other item looks more like a fitting that goes on the outflow end of a powerhead, and if it does, then I have used them. They turn from the water pressure as it exists the pump... they do jam sometimes, especially if coated up in algae. But they work well, when they work...

Just wanted to point some of that out.


paulsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/15/2008, 11:58 PM   #81
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
sjm817: Well it's good then if turf pulls organics too; seems it pulls out everything that needs to come out, except large pieces of detritus. But any detritus in my tank goes through the powerheads, so maybe it's in a particulate form that's will disolve quick enough to be used by the turf before it get out of hand.

paulsilver, fishnfun: Yes that's apparently what happened. I test started the skimmer up again today and had foam, then shut it down again.

herring: I see what you meant now; the rotating idea is a way to "fluf up" the turf so it gets moved in different directions, thus allowing light to hit all sides of the turf strands. Well, now that I've had my hands on the turf, I'm not sure they would flex all that much. This turf that I got from IA really feel like artificial turf on a football field (although it may grow more). You may not see it in the video I posted, but when the water flows over it, it does not move at all. So, water flowing in the opposite direction probably would not move it that way as much easier.

Anyways, another day of turf-only filtering. P and N same today. Heavy plankton and phyto. I think my green bubble is growing for the first time (might just be me). The one clam continues to be unhappy.

I got another pump to replace the Rio... an Eheim 1260. Even though it was rated less than the Rio 2100, it was putting out much more flow at 4 feet. This time, there really was water splattering as it came out of the spraybar, and it sounded that way too, and it was splashing the side of the bucket (compared to the lesser flow which sounded like a small tabletop waterfall and did not spash at all and where the sides of the buck were totally dry). So I put the Rio back on and ordered the next size smaller Eheim. The short time the higher flow was going, it pushed some of the turf down the screen a bit, into small clumps. The water now has to travel over the clumps, but it still in no way leaves any dead spots. Another thing with the larger flow... it filled faster than it drained. So if the pump ever would stick on "fill", then it would overflow.

The tape is starting to leak a few drops; I put a bowl under to catch it for now, but this weekend I might look for more solid connectors. Green algae is just starting at bottom one inch of the bucket; this is the area always covered with water because the drain hole does not go all the way to the bottom. But, there is nothing growing on the sides, which is good since the white bucket reflects more of the light back to the turf.

Question: Is it possible that the turf is not really doing anything, and it's really the rocks that are doing the work?


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/16/2008, 06:38 AM   #82
sjm817
On Yer left!
 
sjm817's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 18,777
The Eheim 1260 is a much stronger pump in practice than other pumps with the same "rating". The 1250 has a lot less flow. I'm not sure you will be happy with it. I would put a valve on the output of the 1260 and dial it back to the flow level you need.


__________________
- Scott
sjm817 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/16/2008, 08:21 AM   #83
paulsilver
Moved On
 
paulsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Portsmouth RI
Posts: 201
I would say that the turf algae is definitely doing something, but that it is not instantaneous in result... it takes a bunch of algae to remove measurable amounts of phosphate and nitrate, so I doubt you would be able to tell much after just a week... let the algae grow, and harvest it, then grow again... in a month I think you would see measurable results in nutrient decline.

Of course, with the algae doing what it does, the rock will also do its job, and probably better. as with the sand bed.

But I really think that it would be nearly impossible to see results in a week. More like a month, in my own experience.


paulsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/17/2008, 08:57 PM   #84
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Another day another phosphate check... still zero. Paulsilver: I forgot to mention mine is BB (pic below), although I do have about 2 1/2 bags of sugar oolitic in the capped-off overflow (my version of an RDSB). Today I fed a full phyto pump, plus a cube of cyclops, a cube of daphnia, and a cube of sprirulina brine shrimp. No visible turf growth, other than some slight green algae in the few places where the turf slid due to the flow pressure. Also, I've added a fan on top the bucket to run 24/7 to provide more air contact.

So while I'm waiting a month (three more weeks) to get real results, I thought I'd add to the actual/possible advantages and disadvantages of a vertical two-sided turf filter for a reef tank (that I originally listed a few pages ago), compared to everything else including skimmers. And for simplicity let's just say this is for the bucket version (since most people can compare it to a DSB in a bucket). See if you agree with these, or would like to add some...

o Has highest nutrient uptake of any macro (because of high air and light levels).
o Very smallest size, for the amount of processing it does.
o High removal of N and P, low removal of foods (the opposite of a skimmer).
o Can entirely replace fuge, skimmer, DSB, carbon (?), phosban, polyfilters, etc.
o Harbours pods that can drain right down into display (if hung above display).
o Removes both N and P, unlike sand (only N), or phosban (only P).
o Extremely easy to build, similar to DSB in bucket.
o There are no moving parts at all.
o Provides cooling of water, especially with a fan.
o Does not form bacteria like vodka.
o Increases PH (unverified).
o Vertical turf algea screens can be lit from both sides, thus increasing processing.
o Removes DOC's (like carbon does) (unverified).
o Quick responding to high nutrients due to screen not reducing in size.
o Requires no skimming to work (like vodka does)
o Does not go sexual like caulerpa.
o Does not release strands into display like chaeto.
o Has strong light penetration into turf, since there is no standing water over it.
o Easy to clean; just lift the screen up out of bucket, and scrape or trim.
o No detritus trapping; most all waste flows right down the screen.
o No odor from the bucket (slight ocean smell when scraping).
o There is nothing to break or clog.
o Is very quiet when flowing, similar to a tabletop decorative waterfall.
o Introduces no microbubbles (that I've noticed).

Drawbacks:

o You must build it (none available to buy).
o Needs lights.
o Needs a pulsed flow (unknown if will work well without pulse).
o Cannot be used in same container as sump (although can be over sump).
o Does not provide a settling chamber for detritus (like sump does).
o Is still experimental (at least the bucket version)
o May tint the water a slight yellowish or greenish (carbon will fix this);
however I have not yet noticed any tinting yet.


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/17/2008, 11:43 PM   #85
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Pic before turf

Pic before turf:


Hi Res: http://radio-media.com/fish/TankNew.JPG


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/18/2008, 10:17 PM   #86
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Update at 1 week:

Turf is still the only filtration other than rock and sand. P still zero, N about 3 (steady). You can see P starting to come out of rocks because there are patches of brown algae forming on some rocks (those with P) and none on the rocks right next to them (those without P). Algae growth on glass is slow... three or four days between cleanings. No algae growth on back panel, and previous green patches are getting smaller. Feeding is enormous compared to what I used to feed. Below are the 1 week pics of the screen:

Seeded side at 1 week:

Hi-Res: www.radio-media.com/fish/SeededSideAt1week.jpg



Unseeded side at 1 week:

Hi-Res: www.radio-media.com/fish/UnseededSideAt1week.jpg


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/18/2008, 11:59 PM   #87
biomekanic
Registered Member
 
biomekanic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Gresham, OR
Posts: 542
Looks good.

Have you considered a small ozone unit instead of carbon? Or to supplement carbon?


__________________
O'Malley: They will all taste oblivion! Which tastes like Red Bull! Which is disgusting.
Red vs Blue

Current Tank Info: Planning stages on a Gulf/Carribean nano
biomekanic is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/19/2008, 12:28 AM   #88
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Have not studied ozone yet, so will not be pursuing that anytime soon. As for carbon, I've been using it on and off to combat various things (algae being one). For this turf test, of course, the carbon is removed, but if I start seeing any tinting of the water, that will be the time for the carbon.


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/19/2008, 09:17 AM   #89
syrinx
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: champaign
Posts: 3,160
My take on this (since you asked), is that its a good hobby project for a tinkerer. I think that the TS idea has valid points as has been proven by Adey and IA, but it is obvious that the system has fallen out of favor after never really becoming popular. I think the reason cheato has become the algae export standard, is the fact its easy to use and no work is involved. I guess the main thing I am saying is that there are far easier ways to have the same or better water quality than a TS, with far less work. There is no benifit to a TS over a refugium- esp once the surge aspect is removed.


__________________
My views are based on 49years as an aquarist, 25 years as a pro reef consultant, 10 years of owning a LFS, and the results of thousands of customers tanks. But I am always learning.
syrinx is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/19/2008, 10:54 AM   #90
paulsilver
Moved On
 
paulsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Portsmouth RI
Posts: 201
I think the TS has some advantages, like more comprehensive nutrient removal due to more intense lighting on the algae, which is in a thin layer... but the trade offs are obvious, a bit more scrubbing for a lot more work, in some cases, more investment.

But hey, for me this is a somewhat theoretical issue... I use a refugium, but I have used scrubbers before in the distant past...


paulsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/19/2008, 11:03 AM   #91
bergzy
Registered Member
 
bergzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: OC CA USA
Posts: 5,299
Quote:
Originally posted by syrinx
My take on this (since you asked), is that its a good hobby project for a tinkerer.
yes, a great thing about this hobby is the ability to tinker and have a lot of fun with diy.

i think it looks like a fun project with the scrubber that was made and looks to be functioning quite well. it is a great innovative leap to design and make such a compact scrubber when in the past, they have been more horizontal thus taking up real estate that is so vital to us reefers.

here is a link about turf scrubber long term use:
http://stason.org/TULARC/animals/aqu...bers-long.html

it is an really well written article that is both informative and easy to read.

it looked at a few public aquariums that utilized adey's turf scrubber concept. the reporter comments that:

"Many attempts by public aquaria at implementing reef tanks using
only algal scrubbing have been failures. In particular, it seems
difficult to find successful long term success with Scleractinia
(stony corals) in such tanks..."

thus, if you intend to use the scrubber. i would definitely recommend the continued use of a protein skimmer and carbon to remove the residual doc's that turf algae does not remove (it's explained in the article...i definitely recommend it).

as time goes by with increased understanding...there is a dance of the Oxygen produced and carbon dioxide removed via algaes and the oxygen consumed and carbon dioxide produced via bacteria.

i am not just talking about the denitrifying bacteria...i am emphasizing the oligotrophic bacterioplankton that has been brought to attention in the past couple of years.

since encouraging the proliferation of this bacteria population, water clarity has become more clear than i have ever had with ozone (yes, i have used it). couple this with strong skimming, macro nutrient export, small water changes, carbon use and carbon (limiting factor) supplementation (vodka & vinegar...please read A LOT if you want to use it)...noticeable increased coral growth and greatly improved coral coloration. sounds like a lot of work...but in reality, i cant recall having had such a hands off time with my reef.


__________________
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule it. H.L. Mencken


Ben.

Current Tank Info: 180g sps, 90g cube clam biotope.
bergzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/19/2008, 10:31 PM   #92
herring_fish
Crazy Designer
 
herring_fish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Winston-Salem NC, USA
Posts: 1,029
10 Years Without Hair Algae

I ran an algae scrubber by it’s self for 10 years before I Relocated. Once my algal turf scrubber got going, I never had any hair algae in my main tank. There just weren’t enough nutrients left in the water to let any hair algae, of any kind, grow anywhere in the show tank. As I said before, I grossly over fed my tank to grow filter feeders but never had an outbreak. All I had on the rock was the color purple, polyps and sponges. I actually added fish fertilizer to the tank on a regular bases. Any, way…. have a look at my tank.

http://asaherring.com/Reef/Spongearticle.pdf



Last edited by herring_fish; 07/19/2008 at 10:39 PM.
herring_fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/19/2008, 11:42 PM   #93
bergzy
Registered Member
 
bergzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: OC CA USA
Posts: 5,299
interesting article herring!

when was it written?

the pictures of the tank inhabitants look happy and healthy with that 'thriving' look that reefers love.

have you ever tried sps' with the scrubber? the article i linked states that stony corals did not survive long with ats based filtration. do you have have a pic of your old scrubber? one of the things that discouraged me from using a scrubber was the whole dump bucket mechanism.

i found an article about scrubbers in advanced aquarist:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issu.../editorial.htm



from a personal opinion, the display tank doesnt look too great...from an aesthetically pleasing reef appearance perspective. the only thing appearing to be doing ok is the big ol' mangrove. your tank appears to have thrived with the ats in growing softies and gorgonians.

i love your clam in the pic! gigas clams grow like a weed and are absolutely a thrill to have. i havent seen gigas clams on the market in a while. i am wanting to replace the one that my pygmy angel irritated to death.

on the topic of sponges. i have been getting an explosive growth of sponges with the installation of my 65g cryptic zone as closely replicated to tyree's description of it:
Tyree's Cryptic Zone


__________________
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule it. H.L. Mencken


Ben.

Current Tank Info: 180g sps, 90g cube clam biotope.
bergzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/20/2008, 12:39 AM   #94
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
syrinx: Good points. As far as turf never becoming popular, this must have had something to do with the fact that you can't buy a turf unit because the dumping-device is patented, and he decided to not manufacture units for sale (he went the industrial/enviromental route instead). So it appeared to everyone that a dumping design was a needed component (after all, that's what was patented), but nobody wanted to build their own because it's so complex. I however was not in the reef scene when the book and hoopla came out, so I did not know it could not be done another way. Chaeto: You could say it is no work, but that's assuming you already have a fuge/place for it, and that it will grow. I tried chaeto last year, and my work involved was: Had to find a place for it; had to get flow to it; had to add a light to it; had to figure out that it was trapping waste causing a nutrient spike that it was supposed to fix; had to clean out my sump and display and powerheads of the floating strands. Was not fun.

As for benefit of turf over a fuge, I think some of my bullet points above covered some, but basically: You wouldn't need a fuge at all, if you don't already have one; turf does not need to be cleaned of waste; turf exports much more N and P than chaeto per unit size; turf in a bucket can be hung over or drained down into the display (pods); turf cools; turf does not release strands; harvesting, however, appears to be about the same effort. As for the surge, I never wanted that anyway, and never considered it an advantage.

paulsiver: You certainly would know, since you've had both. I seem to recall yours was a dump design, which of course would be work and huge cost compared to my current bucket. As for size, my anectodal accounts that I've read about, and my current turf, allude to the possibility of a micro-sized turf filter that will easily handle lots of filtering. My current screen is only 12 X 12 inches (that's what would fit in a bucket), and only one side of it came seeded, and only about 3/4 of the seeded side actually had turf. So I started with about 100 square inches of turf. This corresponds to the fellow earlier who said he had even less than this for his 100 gal. Plus I'm feeding very heavy now, on purpose. Idea being, a small 6 X 6 inch screen (double sided) in a 2 gal pail might be all that's really needed for a 100 gal to remove all P, and most of N. I'm not sure how much fuge or chaeto space would be needed to remove all P, but I can imagine it would be more than 2 gal.

bergzy: Yes it is exciting that it could possibly be even smaller too. But a 5 gal bucket seemed a good start. And I just read that whole article. Fortunatly, very fortunately, I have no desire for stonies. I can see how (until proven wrong) that this information will deter stony people from trying turf. But I do think those public aquarium examples (from the 90's ?) were using turf exclusively; for a stony tank today, somebody would have to add turf to their other filters, and then slowly turn the other filters off while monitoring closely. Here are some other things I read in there:

"algae filters have been regarded in the past as too bulky and inefficient to be the sole filter for a aquarium." -- Yes, absolutely bulky; I'd probably never want to try a bulky dump or spinning wheel design, even if only a few hundred dollars. But I think the jury is still out on turf being "inefficient".

"The [recent] surge of interest in algal scrubbers seems to have been generated by Adey and Loveland's book Dynamic Aquaria (1991). They discuss both techniques which allow an algal scrubber to be compact and efficient and also a number of arguments as to why they are preferable to other filtration methods. They claim that perhaps 70-90% of the DIN in reef communities is consumed by algae, rather than by bacteria. The two methods produce rather different water chemistry; for example, algae are net producers of oxygen and remove carbon dioxide, while a bacterial filter consumes oxygen and produces carbon dioxide."

--I really like that last part, but then I also like not having to turn a skimmer off before I feed the corals.

"Adey and Loveland claim that their methods can bring levels of DIN down to a few hundredths of a ppm" -- This I have not seen; but then I'm not using halides as they recommended, and, mine is only a week in operation.

"Most or all reefs with algal scrubbers seem to have heavy algal growth in the tank as well" -- Here they are refering to the public aquariums in the 90's. Mine sure does not seem to be going this direction; there is no algae forming on the back panel, little algae forming on the glass, P is coming out of the rocks, old algae patches are getting smaller, coralline patches are getting bigger, all the while feeding at least 4X more than I was before. And of course P is testing zero (Salifert).

"Algaes seem to release much of the inorganic nitrogen which they take up, in the form of dissolved organic compounds (DON), which can also be later utilized by algaes. The very low levels of DIN measured in scrubbed tanks may mask the very high levels of DON which persist, providing nutrients for strong algal growth. This is borne out by many reports that the water in scrubbed tanks often has a pronounced yellow cast, characteristic of dissolved organic compounds. Since the water over natural reefs is very low in DON, high levels may be directly harmful to many corals, in addition to promoting uncontrolled algal growth."

--Something here does not make sense: "The very low levels of DIN measured in scrubbed tanks may mask the very high levels of DON which persist, providing nutrients for strong algal growth." --This seems to be saying that every algae EXCEPT turf uses organic N to grow, whereas turf RELEASES organic N as it grows. How can this be? Algae either uses or releases organic N as it grows. We know it uses inorganic N. So how can one type of algae "release" organic, while another type "uses" it, when they are both algae's?

My quick hypothesis: The yellowing stuff being released are not N related, but are chlorophyll related. Or, the DON are not being put there BY the turf, but instead are just not taken OUT by the turf, thereby making DOC look large in comparison to DIN. Anyways...

Oligotrophic bacterioplankton: Could you explain the connection of these to turf use?

herring: Nice pdf; never seen so many fan worms. I love filter feeders, and want to try them again now that they might hopefully have a real chance.

bergzy: I had already seen that AA article; was some of the info I used. And I had indeed already bought the Cryptic DVD from Tyree, but it would not play in my player. I nevertheless read about it. One of my future attempts will be sponges (again).

Lastly, I'm going to try scraping the screen for the first time soon (it actually has grown, now that I compare the new pics to the old); does anyone want the scrapings?


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/20/2008, 01:09 AM   #95
bergzy
Registered Member
 
bergzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: OC CA USA
Posts: 5,299
oligotrophic bacterioplankton is not turf related. it is a separate concept and execution that has been made popular with the zeovit method. i use macro growth (at night esp) to create O2 as the bacteria respire quite a bit.

bacterial strains are introduced intentionally via a purchased supplement...zeobac in zeovits case. zeobac got a bad rap in the very beginning when someone tested it and found no bacteria. this has stuck around with zeovit ever since despite retractions and discoveries of bacteria in its additives. for some reason, zeovit sparks the most heated arguments here on rc (right after skimmers)...that a lot of the threads have not only been locked but deleted.

the oligotrophic bacteria (in theory) consume the n and p that are in the water column (if i recall correctly as it has been some time since i cracked open the zeovit manual). there is also bacteria on the proprietary zeolites...but that is a different story.

thus, feeding the bacteria with zeofood encourages and exponentially grows the bacteria on the rocks. you 'shake' the rocks to dislodge the bacteria. they go into the water column to feed the corals etc and the remainder gets skimmed out. the bacteria in the water column create a very nutrient poor environment as well. this was noticed at about the third day of zeovit use. before zeo, i used a healthy dose of ozone to keep my water 'clear'...and it did keep it 'clear'. but with zeovit, my water became 'transparent'. it is soooo clear, it cant be described unless seen in real person. even my wife looking at the tank said 'ummm, the water is really clear. is that ok?' i didnt even know, i had to ask the zeo guys about that. they said 'welcome to the beauty of zeo!'

i have been using zeo for 2 1/4 years now with excellent results. i have pulled back on it though because it creates such a nutrient free environment that the tank is like on a knife edge. amazing colors, amazing growth BUT you really have to have incredible experience and skill at parameter adjustment if anything goes outside the zeovit specified parameters.

i stopped dosing zeofood and just use vodva and a little vinegar for carbon sources. these are very potent carbon sources that i dont recommend people to just dive into. i say i spent over a year to slowly create a nutrient poor environment to not shock the corals etc.

hth's a little in clarification of bacteria.


__________________
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule it. H.L. Mencken


Ben.

Current Tank Info: 180g sps, 90g cube clam biotope.
bergzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/20/2008, 11:41 AM   #96
bsagecko
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,752
i think that the turf scrubber make work but i would check out the book dyanimic aquarium it is a whole book based on turf scrubbers and refuges.................IMO you turf will help but i dont think it can replace a solid fuge and sump..................

i just dont think it is big enough....................IMO and in my experience with my friends the turf in order to be the only filteration needs to be very large............also watch out for the algae going in your tank...........

However i do agree that the turf algae scrubber if it is big enough is like 1000x better than macro algae at removing nutrients.......

i would turn off you PS unless you run an sps tank...................


__________________
There are three things that will never be believed- the true, the probable, the logical (Steinbeck)

Obey little, Resist much

Current Tank Info: 24g AIO
bsagecko is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/20/2008, 08:00 PM   #97
jglackin
Registered Member
 
jglackin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chicago South Loop
Posts: 2,379
Quote:
Originally posted by bergzy
interesting article herring!

when was it written?

the pictures of the tank inhabitants look happy and healthy with that 'thriving' look that reefers love.

have you ever tried sps' with the scrubber? the article i linked states that stony corals did not survive long with ats based filtration. do you have have a pic of your old scrubber? one of the things that discouraged me from using a scrubber was the whole dump bucket mechanism.

i found an article about scrubbers in advanced aquarist:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issu.../editorial.htm



from a personal opinion, the display tank doesnt look too great...from an aesthetically pleasing reef appearance perspective. the only thing appearing to be doing ok is the big ol' mangrove. your tank appears to have thrived with the ats in growing softies and gorgonians.

i love your clam in the pic! gigas clams grow like a weed and are absolutely a thrill to have. i havent seen gigas clams on the market in a while. i am wanting to replace the one that my pygmy angel irritated to death.

on the topic of sponges. i have been getting an explosive growth of sponges with the installation of my 65g cryptic zone as closely replicated to tyree's description of it:
Tyree's Cryptic Zone
I have seen this tank in person. I know Morgan. The tank pictured is really nothing more than a mangrove lagoon, not something that I would use as an example for a reef hobbyist. The truth is, they run the entire facility on turf scrubbers. All 35,000 gallons. They have some of the most amazing SPS colonies I have ever seen grown in an artificial reef. Some of them are larger than a trash can lid.


__________________
Best Regards,

Jim

170 gal curved glass
ATI 48" 8x54 Powermodule
AE400
ACIII Pro
Turf Scrubber
LiterMeterIII
4 Nanostream 6055s
Tunze Wavebox
Tunze 6201
Current Tank Stats: Click on my homepage

Current Tank Info: The one most valuable thing I have learned over the years is that the less I mess with my system, the better it does.
jglackin is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/21/2008, 12:39 AM   #98
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Sounds like oligotrophic bacterioplankton are the same thing that vodka develops. Vodka worked good for me in the past, but the red slime it also developed, as well as developing bacteria that bothered the fish, made me want something else. As for the whole Zeo thing, I have not studied it, and I don't yet have the desire to do so if there are other non-proprietary alternatives. I'm glad to see it working for you so well.

bsagecko: Thanks for your inputs. You may have missed a few pages ago, where indeed the book and some other items you mentioned were covered. But basically, the skimmer is indeed off, and there is no filtration of any kind (beside rock and sand) but the turf.

jglackin: That's good news that you've seen IA's sps abilities, using only turf. If Aday's claims are true that the N and P can be brought down so low, it would make sense that sps would thrive also. Which brings me to my topic for today...

In my last post I said my N was not coming down from the 3 or so it had been at for several week before the turf, and during the first week of having the turf. Well low and behold, my daily check today showed N to be zero (clear on the Salifert test). Could not believe it, especially since the last two days I've been really overfeeding the cyclopeez. You know those frozen pump bottles... when they run out you can add water and get them flowing again. Well it's not just a little bit that you get flowing again, it's about two week's worth (there is a lot of frozen stuff stuck in that bottle.) Forgetting that this is how it worked, I dumped the entire re-constituted bottle in the tank (along with some phyto, and daphnia). The swarm of little red dots was so thick you could not see some of the fish. Anyways, I was sure I'd screwed up my test by polluting the system, and that's why I was shocked today to see zero N (and zero P).


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/23/2008, 12:00 AM   #99
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Update for the last couple days... another N and P test to make my disbelief go away. Yep still zero. Got some new fish so was feeding even heavier. Also trying my first dendro, with no target feeding.

Well the turf has really started growing all of a sudden; seemed to coincide with N hitting zero. The seeded side is almost completely covered, and the non-seeded side is probably 50% now. Of course since I changed more than one thing at a time, I'm not sure what caused the growth increase, but what I did was reduce the pump timing down to 30 seconds (from 90), and I started dosing iron (Kent). Or maybe it's just my increased feeding. All I know is I put food in the tank, and it ends up as turf on the screen. If I were feeding this much with the previous setup of skimmer/carbon/gfo/sock/poly's, I'd have to clean the glass twice a day, and everything in the tank would be covered in green by now. Plus the corals would starve.

The turf has changed to a dark brown/green color from its original dull red color. What I notice is that parts of the screen that are bare first get a thin coating of green which fills in the holes, then the dark brown covers this and gets up to 1/4 inch thick. At this point it seems to stop growing. I'll have more pics this friday.


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 07/23/2008, 08:49 AM   #100
paulsilver
Moved On
 
paulsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Portsmouth RI
Posts: 201
sounds like it is kicking in...


paulsilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2022 Axivo Inc.
Use of this web site is subject to the terms and conditions described in the user agreement.
Reef CentralTM Reef Central, LLC. Copyright 1999-2022
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2022 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.