20G of Chaetomorpha vs. Skimmer

[bristle]

So,

In my 75G I'm thinking of doing softies and LPS to begin with.

I have a 30G sump (36"x12"x17"). I would have the intake in a small sectioned off box and then the return in a baffled section as well (I don't need to make it too large because the flow will pretty low).

What about most of the sump with just chaetomorpha and a DSB instead of a skimmer? Anyone running fuges in a reef successfully without a skimmer?

[InLimbo87]

In a 30G sump you could easily do both... best of both worlds

[bristle]

Hi,

I know I could do both and would keep a section for a Tunze 9010 (tiny footprint) if I go into the realm of SPS, but for now I want to see if it is possible.

I've read that some softies enjoy a few nutrients and 'dirty' water that having no skimmer can produce. But will this non-skimmed water only filtered via plant uptake be sufficient to keep everything else happy (medium-low bio-load)?

I've read this from this website:
If one desires to have a display tank filtered by natural processes, it should be ideally (significantly) larger in scale than the display to be effective. Otherwise, any natural filtration is probably largely supplemental to what is already occurring in average reef aquaria, although I imagine with careful consideration it might become quite significant. The natural filtration of the display was already initially addressed with live rock and sand beds (Berlin, ATS, and Jaubert methods). Protein skimmers provide more than enough additional filtration in most other systems (Berlin method). A refugium design should incorporate food sources and habitats that are conducive to the growth and reproduction of organisms that would otherwise become food for the mouths present in a reef aquarium display. In all likelihood, these same elements will also provide additional benefits such as nutrient uptake and regeneration.

http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-12/eb/index.php

So unless I have a proportionally larger fuge, it won't be too effective? I just can't see it as needing 100G vs. 75G to be effective.

[kenargo]

I went the route you are thinking about over 9 months ago; converting a 130 G, Jabert plenum to a 180 w/45 g refugium, took off my down-draft skimmer and added mud and Chaeto and have never looked back. I admit I was quite worried in the beginning (to not skim was nothing I ever expected I would entertain) but I find the tank is doing better than before I skimmed (corals open larger and they appear more vibrant). At last test (tonight) No3 = 0, Po4 = 0, Calk = 400, etc (all where they should be and aome things (like P04 and No3) I had never been able to keep at 0 using the old method.

[bristle]

That's very encouraging news, especially since my fuge is proportional to yours. What quantity of water changes are you doing?

[Julio]

guys keep in mind that the chaeto will remove organics from the water, but not inorganic products, so you are better off using both.

[kysard1]

Originally posted by Julio
guys keep in mind that the chaeto will remove organics from the water, but not inorganic products, so you are better off using both.

The chaeto removes inorganics, the skimmer organics.

[Julio]

well either way, you still need a skimmer

[bristle]

What about larger water changes to remove the organics? I'm still a green reefer, but FW water changes can be quite large with excellent results to remove organics. September's TOTM removes 25% of water at each water change, but I don't know if that would be sufficient.

[Julio]

well even with large water changes you will have have nutrients accumulate causing your tank to crash in the long run.

[JCTewks]

Julio...don't be such a skeptic

There are tanks in Europe and asia that have been run this way for MANY years with none of the problems you'd expect. The "key" is matching your stocking to the size that your filtration can handle. Tanks set up with this "natural method" are obviously MUCH lighter stocked than most of us keep our tanks.

Bristle: I would seperate that into 2 fuges seperated by a dark partition that you could light seperately. In another thread, liveforphysics stated that cheato had an optimal lighting period of 6 hrs. He runs 2 fuges with each only being lit 6hrs at a time at seperate times. You might look into diversifying species of algea to see if better nutrient uptake can be had that way. You'll prob want to run carbon in that system, as large amounts of algea can can introduce LOTS of yellowing compounds into the water.

[bristle]

Interesting...I wasn't planning on very many fish, just a couple pest eaters as I'm planning on it being a prop tank. Fish are nice, but I don't want a ton of them. Coral is what attracted me to SW.

I have a 75 gallon oceanic E series with the stock stand. Anyone know if a 36"x12" sump can fit down there? I tried with a cutout, but the back is still too close to the wall and can't be moved due to water in the display. If not, I may have to go with two or more smaller sumps attached via bulkhead. What do you suggest? Seems like 2 sumps going at separate times would feed each other CO2 and not crash the pH at night if it were reverse scheduled.

I have a 72" 150G FW aquarium with 15 adult/semi-adult mbuna and I think it's just fine...some people would have 60+ fish in there.

[kysard1]

I did some calculations on what it would take to grow chaeto to export all your nutrient adds. For a 65 gallon tank I think it was something like a quarter pount a day of chaeto harvesting just to keep up. It takes a huge refugium to grow enough chaeto to take out what you put in.

[pjf]

Would yellowing compounds be produced by chaetomorpha that can only be removed by carbon filtration, ozone or water changes?

"Dissolved material in sea water that is resistant to bacterial attack. Its name comes from the yellow color it imparts to the water. Brown algae, the principal algae group growing in coastal waters of temperature and higher latitudes, excrete phenolic compounds. These polyphenols are converted into a brown polymer by secondary reactions with carbohydrates and proteins of algal origin. The properties of the resulting substance are identical with Gelbstoff. Its concentration in sea water is around 1 mg/l and it is removed mainly by precipitation since its phenolic nature renders it resistant to bacterial attack. This is also known as yellow substance or gilvin. See Riley and Chester (1971)." - http://oceanography.expert-answers.n...Gelbstoff.html

[JCTewks]

my guess would be yes...I'm not sure of the sepecifics with Cheatomorpha, but yellowing issues were one thhing hard fought by people running Algeal Turf Scrubbers. I've read reports of folks running ATS's and even with carbon and water changes couldn't get the yellow out of the water....ozone had to be used. I believe that the ozone breakks the compounds into a particle that can be skimmed out.

[pledosophy]

Originally posted by Julio
well either way, you still need a skimmer

well even with large water changes you will have have nutrients accumulate causing your tank to crash in the long run.

Shhhhhhhhhhhhh. Please don't tell my systems this. After running with no skimmer for 6 years they'll probably want two now.

IME a 20g with 20g sump works fine.

A 44g with 20g sump works fine

A 75g with 20g sump works fine

A 65g with 25g sump works fine.

I'm not really a huge chaeto fan myself prefering species of caulerpra like prolifera, taxifolia, and racemosa myself. I also incorporate the macro algaes into my displays as I find them aestetically pleasing.

I'm not the best at keeping up with water changes, use them more to replace trace elements such rather then for dillution.

I also only keep soft corals and LPS have not ventured into SPS much, but I do have better luck with many of the hard to keep corals then most keepers.

I have been around long enough to know that most of you aren't going to take my word on my setups but perhaps doing some research on Leng Sy and the Ecosystem company will help you gain some more legitiament knowledge.

I have tried using protein skimmers, mostly the less expensive varieties like the Remora Pro, but found they don't pull much of anything out. On my 20g with the 20g sump I was emptying my collection cup once a month, not cuz I had to, but just cuz I felt I should. After 6 months I just unplugged it so I could use the MJ1200 for something else.

Many of us take a more natural (not that skimming isn't natural given the ocean's behavior) and have found are tanks run just fine without all the high tech equipment.

I am currently running a 65g display with a 25g sump (my 20g broke during a move.) I'm only 6 months in to this setup since I moved from Souhern California to the Portland area, however so far this is tank has the best results and less amintence then any tank I have ever had. Corals are growing like mad. Fish are happy. I am still understocked bymost standards but do plan on adding 8 more fish to the 3 I currently have. Todays test put everything in my ideal range, except for Mg and Calcium which were a bit low.

Here is a pic for your viewing pleasure.



The plumbing was designed to push a 1000 gph from under the rock work to help to eliminate detritus build up.



Enough from me.

Here is the Ecosystem website

http://www.ecosystemaquarium.com/index.html

I had the great fortune of meeting Leng several times (he is partners with my old LFS owner in So Cal) and talking with him for a few hours several times. He is one of thee most knowledgable people I have ever met. The help he has given me is unmeasurable. I became friends with his partner who continued to guide and to whom I owe much gratitude for my succsess.

If that wasn't enough here are some quotes about the natural methods from some people you might have heard of

Micheal Paletta
"Over the years numerous individuals have come to be known for the development of various reef technologies. It may be time to add another name of an individual that has developed a breakthrough methodology: Leng Sy and the Ecosystem method."

Steve Tyree
"This filtration System has shattered a couple of myths. I feel confident in stating that the Ecosystem Filtration System can support a thriving Reef Building Stony Coral Aquarium."

There are many ways to run a succsessful tank. the longer you are in the hobby the more you will appreciate this. Try not to condem what you don't understand. Everyone here is out to give there inhabitants the best environment they can. Many of us just have different ideas.
JME

[BeanAnimal]

Try not to condem what you don't understand.

Why do you assume that we don't understand?

I'm not the best at keeping up with water changes, use them more to replace trace elements such rather then for dillution.

And you do not use a skimmer.

Please explain where the nutrients are exported.


You say the skimmer would not pull anything out. That is hard to swallow, where is "it" going? A box of already cured rock will produce skimmate. Even freshly mixed saltwater will produce skimmate. Of course a junk (or any) skimmer that is not properly set may produce very little.

You have quoted Mike P. but have you portrayed his comments in context to his thoughts on skimming?

Read here:
http://www.marinedepotlive.com/prote...paletta--.html

First sentance of article by Mike Paletta:

Considering all of the equipment that has come on the market over the past two decades, the only piece of equipment that remains indispensable is the foam fractionator or protein skimmer.

You mention some aquarium sizes and refuge sizes. Steve Tyree says The system also has a large refugia aquaria or filtration reservoir that is filled with Caulerpa macro algae.

Though the meaning of "large" is up for interpretation, a 20G sump on a 65G tank is certainly not "large". Consider that that 20G tank will have maybe 10G of useable space.. and the premise becomes almost laughable.

In other words, any of us with a 20G sump, a handfull of caulerpa and a few inches of mud don't need to skim? Hmmm...

I am not trying to start a fight, but your post had a somewhat condescending air to it and does not offer much in the way of fact. It reads more like an advertisement based on anecdote.

[BeanAnimal]

PJF

Steve touches on the yellowing here in his article about the ecosystem method.

http://www.ecosystemaquarium.com/html/tyree1.html

[pledosophy]

I'm sorry if your taking me wrong. Might be part of how I communicate electronically. I really did not intend to start a fight.

Originally posted by BeanAnimal
Try not to condem what you don't understand.

Why do you assume that we don't understand?

It is based on the comment that without a skimmer your tank will crash in the long run. Since several people have not used skimmers for years I would say this statement if false. Myth busted.

IME with not using skimmers I have had good succsess.

I'm not the best at keeping up with water changes, use them more to replace trace elements such rather then for dillution.

And you do not use a skimmer.

Please explain where the nutrients are exported.

The nutrients are exported through the use of macro alagaes mostly. Some of the nitrates are consumed by the bacteria in the rock (the rock was treated in a way to maximize this with a prolonged cooking period followed by being fed with pure ammonia and vodka to stimulate the anaerobic growth). Of course some amount is also absorbed by the corals and used for growth but if I understand correctly it is minimal.

You say the skimmer would not pull anything out. That is hard to swallow, where is "it" going? A box of already cured rock will produce skimmate. Even freshly mixed saltwater will produce skimmate. Of course a junk (or any) skimmer that is not properly set may produce very little.

Apparently with the amounts and types of algaes I am using in conjunction with the other natural elements in the tank, there is nothing for it to pull. It does pull some but not enough to have to empty the collection cup more then once a month, even then it is not full.

I stated the skimmer in my post that I was using (Remora Pro) so there would be no misconception. It's not like it's a Euroreef or anything. JME with that model on my system. The skimmer does work fine on my QT tanks, and did work well in the rock bin. I have tried different pumps, and the skimmer was cleaned with muerietic( sorry for spelling) acid prior to be installed on the system.

You have quoted Mike P. but have you portrayed his comments in context to his thoughts on skimming?

The quote was not in reference to his views on skimming but his view on the use of the natural method that was being used by one aquarists (Leng Sy) The preface to my quote from Paletta was

here are some quotes about the natural methods from some people you might have heard of

I am sorry if there was any confusion. The system Mike was commenting about does not use a protein skimmer.

You mention some aquarium sizes and refuge sizes. Steve Tyree says The system also has a large refugia aquaria or filtration reservoir that is filled with Caulerpa macro algae.

Though the meaning of "large" is up for interpretation, a 20G sump on a 65G tank is certainly not "large". Consider that that 20G tank will have maybe 10G of useable space.. and the premise becomes almost laughable.

I did not state I was using large refugiums. I listed the tank sizes and refugium sizes in an effort to be more clear and not to mislead. I don't really consider my refugiums large by any stretch.

In other words, any of us with a 20G sump, a handfull of caulerpa and a few inches of mud don't need to skim? Hmmm...

You said it not me. I wouldn't say handful of macro, my refugiums are prtty much a thick green forest. I also keep some macro in the tank which you can see in the pictures. It's in the tank cuz I think it is pretty to look at. I pruin the macro pretty regularly. Couple handfuls a week. It grows back without worry. It is why I prefer the faster growing species of macro like prolifera and taxifloria to the more commonly used chaetomorpha. JMO

I am not trying to start a fight, but your post had a somewhat condescending air to it

Do not mean to sound condescending in the slightest. Sorry it was read that way. I'm not really that type of a guy. Since electronic communications lacks tone of voice and facial expression it is sometimes misinterpreted. No ones fault, just the nature of it.

. . . and does not offer much in the way of fact. It reads more like an advertisement based on anecdote.

I'm not a scientist so I am unable to offer scientific research based on my experience. I lack the space and money to do trials through repition. I'm just a hobbyist sharing my experience on what has and is working for me. Forums like this are meant to push the hobby forward and to try new things. If no one ever tried anything new, how boring this would be. We'd still be removing all the rock and bleaching it every few months. What I am trying to bring to the table is that there are many succsessful ways in this hobby to build and maintain a succsessful tank and a great environment for it's inhabitants.

I'm not advertising anything but a method. I guess I did comment on a few species of macro algaes but mentioning a species is not an advertisement IMO. I didn't comment on Ecosystem's products at all or say they needed to be used(I think there are many ways to setup a good refugium without having to turn to a single source). Just linked a site to where a scientist is using a natural method and very succsessfully. I was attempting to give the readers with questions about this type of setup someplace they could turn to for more "scientific research" instead of just my opinion based on my experience. I did not expect you to just take my word, which is why I linked to the site.

I assure you most everything that I have referenced towards my system and my husbandry habits are purely ancedotal, as I am not in the business of marine biology research but they are my experiences.

Hope that clears things up a bit.

Good Luck.

[seastar12]

I think I would go with a skimmer, depending, of course what kind of skimmer it is.

[BeanAnimal]

It is based on the comment that without a skimmer your tank will crash in the long run. Since several people have not used skimmers for years I would say this statement if false. Myth busted.

IME with not using skimmers I have had good succsess.

Yes, but you need some type of export for the compounds that would otherwise be skimmed out. There are certainly other methods of export, but in general most require skimming. Most of the "experts" in the field are all on record as saying that skimming is the favored means of export.

The nutrients are exported through the use of macro alagaes mostly. Some of the nitrates are consumed by the bacteria in the rock (the rock was treated in a way to maximize this with a prolonged cooking period followed by being fed with pure ammonia and vodka to stimulate the anaerobic growth). Of course some amount is also absorbed by the corals and used for growth but if I understand correctly it is minimal.

The macro alone is not capable of exporting what a skimmer would export. Water changes will help, but dilution and removal are two different balls of wax. And many who subscibe to similar methods also subscribe to frequent "rock cooking". That is a means of export

Apparently with the amounts and types of algaes I am using in conjunction with the other natural elements in the tank, there is nothing for it to pull. It does pull some but not enough to have to empty the collection cup more then once a month, even then it is not full.

I would submit that the skimmer is not set up properly or capable of skimming the tougher (more soluble) compounds.

Refugium sizes...

That was my point. Steve Tyree appears to contend that much larger refugia are needed to accommodate the volume of export needed. It was in juxtaposition to your listed sizes. Just food for thought.

You said it not me. I wouldn't say handful of macro, my refugiums are prtty much a thick green forest. I also keep some macro in the tank which you can see in the pictures. It's in the tank cuz I think it is pretty to look at. I pruin the macro pretty regularly. Couple handfuls a week. It grows back without worry. It is why I prefer the faster growing species of macro like prolifera and taxifloria to the more commonly used chaetomorpha. JMO

And that was my point. Most of us have just that, a modest refugium with a mud or similar substrate and we MUST do water changes and skim to keep the water quality in check. I also prune my macro regularly and still must do water changes and skim heavily on a 75G display.

Thank you for your kind reply. Your opinions are surely valued. Some of us may see things very differently... but in the end (as you mention) we are all after the same thing. While I may not agree with the methodology, I do take you at your word that you maintain thriving systems.

Enjoy!

[wshive]

I think this is an issue of different philosophies. There's no question that a skimmer is probably the most effective single piece of filtration equipment you can use. Perhaps most important is its role as a FAIL SAFE. Should something large die while you're away, it's probably your best safeguard against a tank crash. (For the record, I am currently using one for this very reason.)

At the same time, skimmers use additional electricity, generate noise, and heat that, for many of us, require chillers to then take out. These inherent costs can take a toll, both intially and operationally. And there is something to be said about the natural, GREENER, approach, esp w/ global warming these days. Personally, I run a relatively low power setup of which I already cringe at the extra electricity I'm using (probably an average of 220w, 24/7).

From my own experience:

I have a 180 FOWLR w/ a 60g sump. Very light on the LR, about 100lbs. I just recently set up my skimmer, but for the six months before, I was going completely skimmerless. It was a completely natural set up, no bio balls, carbon, reactors, nothing, except for chaeto for nutrient export. My stocking list was/is:

6" Naso tang
6" Dog-faced puffer
5" Sohal tang
5" Blue-Throat trigger
4" Blue-Faced angel
4" Blue-spotted grouper
14" Snowflake eel

Somewhere in those six months, I had traded in a large niger trigger for the naso tang, but other than that, those were the fish I had. Every day, I fed four or five (yes, lots) tablespoons of a mixture of Formula 1, 2, and Spectrum pellets as well as a cube of Formual 1 or 2 every other day for the grouper (though he does eat pellets). I also offered a fair amount of nori every day for the tangs.

I tested every month or so and at no time did my tests read positive for ammonia, nitrites, or nitrates. I also had minimal cyano and hair algae growth. So with essentially 100lbs. of LR and chaeto as nutrient export, and that's it, I ran a pretty clean tank with 0's across the board for six months.

My point is that with testing, you can set up an effective low energy, non-equipment intensive, SKIMMERLESS tank. You obviously have to be aware that it is more susceptible to a crash, but in terms of daily filtration, a relatively little amount of LR with properly set up fuge for macro nutrient export is all that is needed to keep an appropriately stocked tank operating within normal parameters. I don't believe my tank set up in this way would have crashed in the long run if I were to maintain my stocking levels. (Obviously in my case some of the fish in my stocking list can get quite large but then I would consider my tank heavily stocked, thus inappropriate for this "greener" method.) Also, remember this... A well skimmed tank is removing organics before they have time to break down and cycle. It won't have anywhere near the population of bacteria a skimmerless tank will have, so in this sense, a skimmerless tank is far better at cycling through waste than the same tank running with a skimmer.

[BeanAnimal]

And there is something to be said about the natural, GREENER, approach, esp w/ global warming these days.

Umm the natural "greener" thing to do would be to shut down the whole system... Global Warming... bah! If it is the truth, then we all need to shut down our aquariums!

[kysard1]

Think about this:

You can run a tank for months, years even without a skimmer and not crash.

You can put a skimmer on that tank for a week, then dump the skimmate back into the tank and the tank will crash.

Why? Because a skimmer largely is removing/killing beneficial then it rots in the collection cup.

What does this experiment tell us ?

[BeanAnimal]

It tells us very little.

You can live for years at 480 pounds.
If I do liposuction and take all the fat out, leave it on the counter and let it rot, feeding it to you will kill you. What does this epxeriment tell us?