Call Me Crazy... : ) 110g L.R Aptaisia filter for 35g Frag Tank?

[BodiBuilt]

So I've been workin on setting up a frag growout system which began life as a 48"x24"x8" bottom drilled tank I scored used @ my LFS. He threw in a used sump for an extra $20 : )
After many hour's of pondering I designed and built a stand to support the frang tank in the middle, the sump on bottom, and a 40g refuge on top.
As I was building the stand I wondered if perhaps I could fit a 55g sump instead of the little one I got with the tank (already had a couple old 55's lingering). Then I started thinking I might have room to make the upstream refugium a 55g too instaed of 40g... (and yes, it all fit).
So now I have this new stand/frag tank/sump/refuge combo set up in what used to be the guest room (lol-thank's wife, love you) and it just happens to be sitting within inches of a 110g tank that has been running for over a year now as FOWLR to house a Harliquin Tusk. It already has @ least 150lbs LR and @ least 100 aptaisia thriving in it.
I also already have a CS90 overflow lying around so basically, all it would cost me is the effort to find the Harliquin a new home and a return pump to hook this baby to the sump...It would increase my total water capacity to near 200g (110g L.R/Aptaisia filter)

What do you think? Bad idea?... (all this madness for a 35g frag tank~lol)
Appreciate all imput

[twon8]

i think the aptaisia would find there way into the frag tank.

[xcreonx]

It might be a good idea to put a UV filter going back up into the frag tank to kill any free-floating aiptasias.

Anthony Calfo describes this exact thing in his coral prop book. it is certainly worth looking into.

If your fuge is inline with that UV, it might kill alot of good things, so that's something to think about as well. Maybe plumb it above like you mentioned.

[BodiBuilt]

I could UV all the water returning from the sump before entering the frag tank. The refugium is a seperatly plumbed system above the F.T. so that it can trickle down with all the good's not having to go through any pump to get there.
Here's a pic
http://reefcentral.com/gallery/data/...g_tank_033.jpg
You can see the front edge of the 110 to the right...

[Frick-n-Frags]

you are crazy. YW NP, glad to help out...

seriously, even though aiptasia seem to spread like wildfire, they are not rigorous enough growers to match bacterial and algae growth rates. Also, there is a risk, for sure with Xenia, of the whole colony crashing because some key nutrient runs out. And of course if one Xenia runs out, they all run out and they crash.

heh, I wonder if anyone has ever taken Aiptasias to the limit and had soo many that they crashed.

[hubris007]

You are crazy.

[LockeOak]

I have to agree that I don't really see the point in that although they grow fast they don't compare to macroalgae, plus you have all the problems of cross contamination and the fact that if you ever want to sell all of that rock you're going to have issues doing so.

[cabbage2003]

i have 55g aiptasia fuge on my system. 75g display. no aips have got back to the display that were not already there. seems to keep the water clean and 0 nitrates.

[HBtank]

^^ If you have them in your display, you have them in your display. They will reproduce to numbers that will allow regardless of the fuge, so any more or less really has nothing to do with the fuge. Stating "none have got back that were not already there" does not say anything, they are there, period.

Anyways, I have seen this discussed before, and UV was brought up as being a protection, but then other people have said that UV would hardly be able to zap the anenomes.

People have stated in general that large pods and amphipods have no problem getting through UV, so why couldn't an anenome? From what I have read, UV will do little more than give larger multicellular organisms a suntan.

[BodiBuilt]

Its not so much that I want an aptaisia filter...more so that I am interested in the much greater water volume and the capacity for L.R. Unfortunatly the 110 already has aptaisia, so to have the benifit from one... I must take both as a package deal (or neither)

[czerbe]

go with macro

[Growurown]

I like the idea, I think it is a wonderful use of a "pest" I personally think aiptasia gets a bad rap, just as bristleworms do. They both can be controlled in the display and are both useful to a certain degree

[SDguy]

I'll just say this.

I *hate* receiving frags with any pest. FW, RB, majano, aptasia, whatever. Good luck keeping them off your frags.

It's like buying a puppy mill dog.

[Zestay]

peppermint shrimp. for that size tank. id get 4 - 6 of them and let them run wild. mine took a few weeks before they ate a single aptasia. than the tank was cleaned out in a few days.

[HBtank]

Peppermint shrimp rule. I think using kalk on the big ones and letting the shrimp get the small ones and lefotvers would work.

Its nice looking at a spot where you knew a bunch of aips were and seeing them cleaned out in one night.

[Flint&Eric]

in addition to aptasia, i'd suggest xenia....

[BodiBuilt]

Should I attempt to irradicate the aptaisia first... (I will probably fail to get them all) and then add a natural predator such as peppermint shrimp? I really like the idea of having the added water volume (and L.R.)...

[jeweldamsel]

I like macro and xenia better.

[BodiBuilt]

This system will already have a 55 refuge for macro... I guess what I'm really asking is (your) opinion on weather on not (you) would take advantage of the addition of double the water capacity and 150 lbs of established L.R. in exchange for also adding aptaisia since this tank already is infested with them. Do the pro's outway the con's...? : )