Berlin VS Smithsonian

[Bathrone]

Reading my way through "your first marine aquarium" I take note of a diagram showing the Berlin method with its protein skimmer, calcium reactor, strontium and iodine supplements etcetc.

Then I see the smithsonian. Much simpler, no skimmer, no kalkwater. Simply a algea turf scrubber.

Both have LR and a DSB.

Ive tried conducting searches and research elsewhere, but I dont see any clear defintion of the pro's and con's of each methodology. Some basic paramters might be:

1. Cost
2. Livestock capacity
3. Maitenance required
4. Stability and suitability to inverts, corals etcetc

What do people think?

[Rascal]

Do a search for Walter Adey...he was the brains behind the Smithsonian idea.

[wayne in norway]

Fossa and Nilsson Moder Coral Reef Aquarium, volume 1? Try to borrow a copy, it's a pricey book.

Then get the references for Adey, and Spotte.

[ReeferMac]

ATS (Algal Turf Scrubbers) are used all over the place. Most people that use them, feel that they are very effective. Morgan Lidster and InlandAquatics uses them, sells them, and can fill you in on quite a good deal of info about them.

- Mac

[wayne in norway]

The Smithsonian has the advantages of some simplicity. You are still going to need calcium addition for many orgs, plus you need to find a way to counteract organics yellowing the water, and to remove wastes not removed by organic biofiltration.

Both have pros and cons - many people use combo's of the two - skimmer + algal refugium. I can't imagine there are differnces in bioload for full implementation of either, but the actual species involved will be different.

The smithsonian is not nearly as simple in practice as your initial description describes

[Bomber]

Adey's tanks and systems at the Smith were a total failure for housing SPS and were shut down when we stopped letting them collect every month to replace the corals they were killing.

[Steven Pro]

But, there are other individuals who have been using ATS systems for years to maintain reef tanks including SPS corals. Most of the problematic ATS systems that I heard of were in public aquariums and other educational/scientific settings. In my opinion, that seemed to be the common thread among the failures. Not the actual methodology, but the type of people running them.

[photobarry]

We never asked what types of corals Bathrone intends to keep. Maybe we should start there.

[Bomber]

Originally posted by StevenPro
Not the actual methodology, but the type of people running them.

Steve, Adey was running the system himself. The self-proclaimed inventor and expert - the one that wrote all the books and promoted it, the main man - was running the system.

They were down here collecting as fast as they could to replace dead corals - until we pulled their permits.

[Steven Pro]

I believe you. The same can be said of the people at the Pittsburgh Zoo and soon afterward the Carnegie Science Center. Both had/have ATS systems and both can't replace the corals fast enough to keep up with the deaths. But, they don't tend to use the technolgy as an aquarist would, as part of a larger plan. They fixate on operating it as completely closed as possible. The only thing going out is the algae. They feed the tank/fish (the other net import being addition of new livestock), but don't supplement calcium or alkalinity relying instead on dissolution of aragonite sand for that. No water changes. No skimming. Some people did/do use activated carbon from time to time when the water looked too much like urine.

On the other hand, I have been the Inland Aquatics and seen Morgan's tanks. They look great! They are crystal clear and the fish and corals are healthy, old, and mature. There are also several locals who have used ATS systems dating back to when John Walsh/Walch was selling them. They are going on a decade old now and look great. Actually, Bob Nell runs several ATS tanks and they are some of the nicest tanks I have ever seen anywhere. But, Bob also has a skimmer on his ATS tanks, does water changes on a normal basis, calcium CO2 reactors, etc.

I see the difference in the mentality of the user. Hobbyists and commercial ventures not trying to prove that something can be done, but simply using the technology as part of a larger plan to simply keep the animals healthy. Adey was attempting to model an ecosystem by replicating the ocean on a small scale. Much like those Biosphere projects that, as I understand it, also were a complete failure.

[billsreef]

But, they don't tend to use the technolgy as an aquarist would, as part of a larger plan. They fixate on operating it as completely closed as possible. The only thing going out is the algae. They feed the tank/fish (the other net import being addition of new livestock), but don't supplement calcium or alkalinity relying instead on dissolution of aragonite sand for that. No water changes. No skimming.

You hit the nail on the head, Steven

Had a couple of friends in college that interned with Addey some years ago. They complained about Addey not being willing to use carbon. I also know from behind the scenes tours of the Smithosonian tank in my college days, that there was no other filtration or export other than the algae in evidence.

[Putawaywet]

I see the difference in the mentality of the user. Hobbyists and commercial ventures not trying to prove that something can be done, but simply using the technology as part of a larger plan to simply keep the animals healthy. Adey was attempting to model an ecosystem by replicating the ocean on a small scale. Much like those Biosphere projects that, as I understand it, also were a complete failure.

While I originally think his research showed merit, I truly feel he wound up shooting himself in the foot so to speak when things progressed to the point that it had become financially driven (as evidenced by his fondness for lawsuits on patent infringement.)That in itself lends suspect to the credability of any research.

However, with that said I'm am a rather big fan of ATS systems in general (as evidenced by my choice in current tank filtration) and the biodiversity and microfauna they have shown to foster But do I think that any one way is superior over the other? No, not particularly. This is just the path I chose to walk.

If I was giving advice to someone for their first tank I would have no hesitaiton recommending the Berlin method or an ATS based system.

I think you will find they both have their strengths and weaknesses and it boils down to which way you feel will work best for you. There are a lot of ways to get to where you want to go and it all depends on which road you choose to get there.

Brett

[Bathrone]

Thanks all

[Steven Pro]

Brett also brings up a good point. Just about any technology/methodology can succeed or fail. I have seen ATS systems that were stunning and others that were abysmal. The same can be said of DSB/NNR, Berlin, Ecosystem, etc. In the hands of a competent aquarist they can all work well. But, any system can be screwed up too.

[Bomber]

Originally posted by StevenPro
But, they don't tend to use the technolgy as an aquarist would, as part of a larger plan. They fixate on operating it as completely closed as possible. The only thing going out is the algae.

Towards the end, Addey was using huge skimmers and tons of carbon. He still couldn't pull it off.

Much like those Biosphere projects that, as I understand it, also were a complete failure.

Not much - all - Bio I and II were both failures also. For the exact same reasons. Algae leak.

The Great Barrier Reef Aquarium - which still to this day gets credit for breeding corals - was also a total failure. What they actually did was collect corals right before it was time for them to spawn naturally, put them in their systems which stressed them out so that they spawned sooner.

[Jeremy Blaze]

I have never personally ran an ATS tank. Altough, I have considered it many times, and still see it as an option. I have a few friends that have been succesful with it and have seen many nice tanks set up with it.

To anyone considereding an ATS system, plan a trip to Inland Aquatics, and talk to Morgan, very nice systems!

They have ste biggest healthyiest fish, coral, and tanks in general I have ever seen.

[CaptiveReef]

The Berlin method offers more biological filtration and the ability to keep a cleaner tank having the bare bottom and use of a protein skimmer. The only drawback with this method is having to deal with the production of Nitrate.
Having a bare bottom there is no way to provide an environment for the bacteria that consume Nitrate. The live rock does diffuse Nitrate deep inside, but at a slow rate. You end up with a tank that is saturated with Nitrate that is constantly diffusing. Having a Berlin setup with a DSB, you end up with low levels of Nitrate, and the sand bed is able to diffuse the Nitrate levels at a faster rate than the rock, so you are able to maintain low levels of Nitrate, and you can stock your tank with fish.
The Smithsonian is an ATS, that's it. It is effective at some nutrient
removal, but has to be trimmed to remove the nutrients. It does remove Nitrate, but that is really all it does. The Gelvin (yellowing)
production is rapid and you need to run protein skimming and carbon to remove this byproduct.
The side effects of this yellowing of the tank water is light penetration to the corals, which is greatly decreased and the SPS corals just breakdown if they are made to sit in these conditions.
Over the years I have experimented with all combinations of filtration practices, and have found out that it's the combination of all these methods that enable you to be successful in keeping a reef tank.
Relying on one filtration method requires alot of maintenance to
maintain a reef tank. Also calcium and trace elements are required on a weekly basis. Frequent small water changes will provide all the trace elements, and adding calcium, 2 part cal/buffers or Kalkwasser or calcium reactors will keep the tank supplied with calcium.



CaptiveReef

[ReefMon]

The old system that Addey ran in the MNH has be relocated to the Smithsonian Marine Station at Ft Pierce, FL.


Smithsonian Marine Ecosystems Exhibit

Any one have any info about if they are having any better success with it?

[Bomber]

Originally posted by CaptiveReef
The Berlin method offers more biological filtration and the ability to keep a cleaner tank having the bare bottom and use of a protein skimmer. The only drawback with this method is having to deal with the production of Nitrate.

CR, if you remove the waste that rots and produces nitrate, you don't have a nitrate problem.

[CaptiveReef]

Originally posted by Bomber
CR, if you remove the waste that rots and produces nitrate, you don't have a nitrate problem.

Hello Bomber,

Yes waste is broken down by the bacteria and will produce Nitrate the final byproduct of the Nitrogen cycle. I have setup Berlin systems that had the cleanest bottoms and still had high Nitrates, the fish load, even the live rock itself produces ammonia it's alive and has life on it. Fish breathing produces ammonia, the only Berlin systems that had a Nitrate level of 5-10ppm was a setup that had 1 small tang and a 6 line wrasse. The fish were hardly being fed, and the corals were fed very little. The tank was 125 gallons and water changes were 10 gallons a month.
By adding a DSB you can increase the fish load and not worry about high nitrate production, the Nitrate is diffused at a rapid rate and the Nitrogen is used by all photosynthetic creatures that have symbiotic algae in their tissue's. The nitrogen is used as a fertilizer by the algae.

CaptiveReef

[Bomber]

If these systems didn't take care of ammonia immediately none of us would have one.
They prefer ammonium.

Keeping nitrates low is easy. How do aquaculture facilities do it without using sand beds? They run much higher fish loads than that.

[wayne in norway]

The majority of aquaculture I'm familiar with uses colossal water changes.
Straight question - do protein skimmers remove dissolved ammonia/ammonium?

[CaptiveReef]

Originally posted by Bomber
If these systems didn't take care of ammonia immediately none of us would have one.
They prefer ammonium.

Keeping nitrates low is easy. How do aquaculture facilities do it without using sand beds? They run much higher fish loads than that.

Very large water changes, is the way they do it.

CaptiveReef

[Bomber]

No WE don't.

[newmoon]

CaptiveReef,
What Bomber is saying is that if you remove waste (by heavy skimming, siphoning) BEFORE it breaks down, then you will not have a nitrate problem. It works.
We can call it: Bare Bottom Fast Waste Removal system(BBFWR)