|
|
|
|
#51
10/05/2007, 01:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 http://www.saltylivestock.com is my personal site. I haven't gotten around to uploading a lot of pictures yet but there are quite a few. Carlo |
|
#53
10/05/2007, 01:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Jonathan Bertoni |
|
#54
10/05/2007, 06:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#55
10/05/2007, 08:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
nitrification and denitrification can both be taken care of in a deep aragonite sand bed with good flow and without one ounce of live rock.dick perrin the owner of tropicorium in michigan uses carribsea aragonite sand and undergravel filters.(dont laugh)he was in the hobby before half of you were born.
|
|
#56
10/05/2007, 09:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yeah, those guys, while admittedly doing a few odd things that probably don't do a thing to help them, do know how to grow coral and sure are successful with a lot of corals. I've NEVER seen growth rates on Blastomussa merletti and Galaxea fascicularis anything like what those guys get, to cite a couple of examples.
cj
__________________
FSM ~ Touched by His noodly appendage ~ |
|
#57
10/06/2007, 05:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
At the same time the macros started dying off a few acros started to darken/brown out a bit which was a little puzzling since there wasn't too much N or P and everything else I could test for has been tested. So I pulled the macros and the colors are slowly coming back. It could be a pure coincidence. It could be the macros were using up the little bit of N & P in the water that the corals or some of it's food source wanted. It could be the macros were giving off a bit of toxins that bothered the corals, etc... Not exactly sure. Maybe had nothing to do with it. Once the colors come back I'll add some of the macros back again and see what happens. There isn't enough nutrients for them to really grow but they should "survive" at least. cutegecko3, yep can definitely get both nitrification and denitrification from a sand bed. Lots of different ways to do it. For the cost versus benefit a RDSB is probably one of the most effecient means to do them both. Carlo |
|
#58
10/06/2007, 08:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks Carlo----I would tend to side on the coincidence but maybe the toxins bothering the corals----I call these the silent killers--hard to get a handle on.
Personal experince--I lost a nice bubble coral beside a toad stool leather not knowing at the time that leathers introduced growth inhibiting hormones to the water column as a defense mechanism.
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#59
10/06/2007, 08:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
what is your suggestion on my system. The flow through the fug is really slow because I want it to produce more inverts. The sump is really too small to add a second refug to it---I was thinking of adding a second fug with mineral mud, mangos etc and letting that be a primary filtration.
Do you think a second fug like the first one but with initial entry from the tank would be a good idea. That way I could also add the live rock that is in my sump there where it would be more effective? Your suggestions would be appreciated and not taken as criticsm.    
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#60
10/06/2007, 08:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Carlo, can you or MCsaxMaster help this guy out--I directed him to this thread but he feels it is too technical
and I am just discovering different ratios of live rock need myself having always been under the 1lb per gal misconception also. Thanks Scott http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...readid=1221526
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#61
10/06/2007, 01:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't think there really is an actual magical number of lbs per gallon. Different types of rock are better then others at different things. Some rock is very dense and it takes more of this type of rock then something porous to do the same job from a denitrifying perspective. You can also get by without any rock and still achieve zero nitrates if you work the nitrates a different way (IE DSB, denitrator, carbon dosing, etc).
Having the rock is more natural however and does provide a biological home for bacteria and different types of fauna that all play a part in the grand scheme of trying to "reproduce nature" in our little tanks. Carlo |
|
#62
10/06/2007, 09:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
that's what I thought thanks
what's your suggestion on my idea of adding a second refugium?
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#63
10/07/2007, 01:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm not sure about that one.
What type of tank are you running? SPS, LPS? Are you thinking of doing it to remove nitrates and phosphates or just for additional diversity and experimentation? I personally am NOT a fan of mineral mud & mangos with sps. Because of that I'm probably biased so I'm not going to answer this one. Chris or anyone else with experience with this combo, what do you think? Carlo |
|
#64
10/07/2007, 02:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Generally speaking, I like refugiums on reef tanks and think that they can be a very good thing for their function on multiple levels.
I find the terms "sps" and "lps" to be the most utterly meaningless and least useful designations in reefkeeping, so I can't comment much here  Miracle mud whatnot works fine IME, but it is uber pricey. If it were $0.50 or $1 a pound I'd say use it. Last I knew it was something like $8 per pound, which is ridiculous and 'criminal' IMHO. I'd probably just use fine sand with little piles of rubble. I agree with Carlo: I would save mangos for eating and not put them in a reef tank  As for mangroves, I think they are very pretty plants and very interesting habitats to snorkel in in nature. They are fine to include for the "cool" effect, but are darn near useless in terms of sequestering nutrients for most tanks. They grow slowly, so they sequester nutrients slowly. You're much, much better off growing turf algae or macroalgae or even most corals if your goal is to sequester nutrients. cj
__________________
FSM ~ Touched by His noodly appendage ~ |
|
#65
10/07/2007, 02:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#66
10/07/2007, 02:49 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
But Billy, do you have any proof (as you say) that 1 to 1.5 lbs per gallon should be preferred for any reason other than that's what everybody tends to say?
__________________
FSM ~ Touched by His noodly appendage ~ |
|
#67
10/07/2007, 03:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
MC, there are a number of categories in our hobby that have actual scientific proof that one protocol is the best choice for all reef tanks.
Then there are a number of categories that scientific proof just doesn't apply to all reef tanks, or there just simply isn't enough research to prove one way or another. I believe this is one of those categories. And at that point, one can only go by what the majority of experienced reefers recommend. So, MC, since you asked........ Have you anything to offer, as proof, that 1 to 1 1/2 lbs of rock per gallon will or will not take care of the biological filtration in any tank ? 
|
|
#68
10/07/2007, 07:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Why would it make a difference if it was sps or lps? besides if I grew the mangos---I could have a Florida breakfast in the winter here --LOL 
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#69
10/07/2007, 07:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Peter started a misconception thread two months ago--nominated for thread of the month--I'll see if I can dig up the link for you. Take temp for eg majority of reefers --at least in my area --set the tank at 78 degress. When asked why--because it works. Yet real reef temperatures are more in the 80's Salinity--I was always told---.024 when nat. seawater is .026 Now it seems if this rock concept is coming under dispute more and more. Really that's the beauty of this site---it is becoming massive in scope, range and diversity of proactive reefers. So if we are trying to scientifcally quantify what we are anecdotally saying then the concepts of median and modes come into play more and more.
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#70
10/07/2007, 07:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 LOL--another misconception straightened out--thanks
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#71
10/07/2007, 08:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
capn_hylinur, I have no proof, no data to back it up, only a hunch and personal observation at this point but the Miracle mud products in systems with a large amount of acros doesn't work well IMHO for nutrient export. Here's my reasoning: I've tried a few different types of refugium designs. What I like best thus far is to keep the refugium bare bottom. You can siphon any detritus that collects there during water changes. Keep it higher flowing to prevent the refugium from becoming a nutrient sink and causing problems. Use Cheatomorpha macro algae for export, do not use Caulerpa as it has been shown in studies to release toxins that can affect some acropora. Previously I have tried the mud fuges, DSB and shallow sand beds. I had more problems nutrient wise overall then help from them. The detritus sinks to the bottom and the fuge can end up contributing to the problem of nutrients instead of helping with them. After removing all sands and muds and increasing the flow with only the use of cheato the fuge stays clean and the cheato does it's thing for N&P. Now keep in mind that's only from the standpoint of N&P export and tank/system maintenance go. There are other reasons to use/have a fuge besides N&P export. IE use of opposite light cycles for pH and O2 level control, place to put additional rock for bio-filtration, "refuge" for different pods and fauna to thrive without predators, etc... Does that make sense? Carlo |
|
#72
10/07/2007, 11:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Perfect sense Carlo----I see the light
 In my case then considering the sump as the main filtration depot for lack of another name and the refugium for invert production. Then I could really add more live rock to the sump to accomplish any extra filtration I need. That would allow me to clean it out well every time I do I water change. And having just increased the sand bed in the main tank except where live rock is ---so I would gestimate 2/3 of the floor space is now 3-4 inches.....160 lbs of live rock in the tank and 30 lbs in the sump----I really don't need to add anymore live rock to the sump.
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#73
10/07/2007, 11:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From my perspective i would think that the addtional surface area for the bacteria to be in contact with the water would be similiar to having more contact time with a larger filter, as opposed to having less contact time with a smaller filter. It just seems to make common sence. Another analogy would be a small a/c in a room as opposed to a larger one that was properly sized for the room. They may both get the job done but one may be much more effective and much more efficient.
__________________
That's what I think, and I think I'm right!!! :-p |
|
#74
10/07/2007, 02:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
good point--that is basically why I am questioning the effectiveness of putting more live rock in the sump----even though the live rock adds more surface area IMO--the flow rate through the sump negates it.---unless a series of baffles are added surrounding the live rock to slow down the flow across it
__________________
"evrr bean to sea Billy--evrr smelled a fish?" "Aye capn..experience is the best teacher" |
|
#75
10/07/2007, 05:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't necessarily believe that keeping a tank at NSW levels is the best thing for a closed system. One example is, Seawater is not always 1.0264 It varies around the world. Another example is, temperature is not always constant around the world. We get our fish and corals from different places around the globe. And they all have different needs. So you try and strike a happy medium to satisfy all of your inhabitants needs. I always say, if it looks good........... it is good.
|
|
|
Linear Mode
