Your comments as to what's below and/or new comments and questions can be forwarded to my e-mail address - saltcorner@cs.com. Take into consideration that I'm a 'Senior Citizen' and growing a little slower every day. Your e-mail may be one of twenty or more received daily, and between travel, both pleasure and business, answering may take a week or more.
Hello Bob,
I've been reading your articles in MFM for years. I had a 75 gallon reef for 3 years, then went to a 120. The 75 was a Berlin and with the 120 I went to a Plenum. Both worked well. I relocated to Key Largo about 5 years ago and did not have a tank. I'm going to set up a 75 reef at long last and wanted to know what you think about a MUD filter. I will use a mud filter or a plenum and I wanted to know which you think would be better.
Thanks very much,
Mike Beni
Hi Mike,
Thanks for your email, and you may want to checkout my website at saltcorner.com for fair and well-balanced information on many different subjects.
As for your question, I think the answer centers on just what are your goals for the system. If your going to be running a system tuned to high quality water for the more reef crest type stony corals where little or no algae is present, then the plenum method is unbeatable, however, should be used in an interconnected sump-like tank. If your goal encompasses more bay-like corals where undesirable type algae is more commonplace, than the mud system may be the way to go.
Below is my comment sent to another reader; As for Leng Sy's device, I had an opportunity to visit his shop in Irvine and see it firsthand. There was no doubt his mud system refugia teamed with life. His main systems were fairly healthy, however in my opinion not as healthy as what the more microbial balanced plenum system can offer. Yet, success is in the eye of the beholder so to speak.
Bear in mind the all important destructive denitrification process in the anoxic zone is supplied nitrate from the above mineralization and nitrifying bacteria in the oxic zone of the bed. However, mud systems have practically no oxic and anoxic zone because the particle size of the mud is so tiny! Second, the diffusion gradient is also controlled by electrical charge and gravity, therefore it's not possible for a bed of any size particle directly on the aquarium bottom to function in any mode except that of a nutrient collection device because redox simply becomes more negative with depth. Not so in plenum systems. Third, the Caulerpa in his systems absorb some nitrate from the bulk water and slowly break it down to ammonium for growth. However, most of its nitrogen supply would come from the ammonification process in the bulk of his mud sandbed. That's because most of the mud particles are so tiny its pore water is almost nonexistent. Therefore it harbors the ammonification form of denitrification throughout most of its bed, liberating generous amounts of ammonium. So the Caulerpa would not be dependent upon getting nitrate and wasting its energy to break it down. It would simply be supplied a readily available amount of ammonium, what it really needs for growth, directly from the mud. Also, Leng's system uses a mud that is high in iron. Iron, in any type sandbed system whether a plenum or directly on the bottom, is instrumental in phosphate releases because of the processes associated with the sulfur/sulfate process.
If you have any further questions, please contact me.
Cheers
Bob
Hi Bob:
Haven't talked with you in a while, so I hope you're doing well. I'm hoping you can help me with a frustrating problem that I'm having with a 180 gallon marine aquarium that I set up during the first week of January. It is a fish only system, with approximately 183 pounds of live rock and a 4" sand substrate. I decided not to use a plenum on this system, though I presently have successful marine and reef tanks using both the plenum and deep sand bed methods. I've learned that both systems work just fine if they are properly set up and cared for. Beneath this tank is a 50 gallon sump that houses a protein skimmer, a pair of heaters, and a large return water pump.
The tank contents come from a 46 gallon bowfront aquarium that I subsequently sold to a co-worker. Fifty pounds of live rock, 25 gallons of saltwater, and the three resident fish from that tank were all moved to this new system when it was being set up. The additional live rock was purchased cured from local dealers and was of the highest quality. The remaining saltwater (about 120 gallons) was mixed fresh using Tropic Marin salt. The three fish were well established in their prior system, and include a pygmy angelfish (about 1-1/2"), a Scott's fairy wrasse (about 4"), and a purple tang (about 4").
Here's the problem. I realized that a diatom outbreak was going to occur, and it did show up roughly two weeks after the tank was up and running. However, it is showing no signs of letting up and the tank is now six weeks old. In fact, it is getting darker and taking a better hold on the sand substrate with each passing day. Experience tells me to "wait it out" and eventually it will regress. However, I would like to help the process along if at all possible. So far, these growths are well established on the sand bed -- especially in those areas of lesser water flow. Only minor traces are seen on the live rock and on the glass. Lighter areas are a golden brown color, and darker areas range from brown to dark brown.
To battle this problem, I have taken the following measures to this point:
1. Added a variety of snails including 100 nassarius snails to aerate the sand bed, 20 cerith snails, 15 astrea snails, and 5 large trochus snails to graze on the diatom growth -- and other potential growths when they appear;
2. Added two white sand-sifting starfish to further aerate the sand bed and turn over the surface;
3. Installed a AquaClear 500 Power Filter directly to the tank with both carbon and PhosBan running through it;
4. Added a third powerhead to the back wall of the tank (joining the two powerheads already in place, and bringing the flow from the powerheads up to 890 GPH). The power heads are placed in the upper third of the tank; if placed any lower they blow the sand bed into suspension;
5. Cut back on the 50/50 power compact lights (from 10 hours per day to 6). The standard fluorescent actinic blue lights still run for 12 hours each day;
6. Cranked-up the already efficient protein skimmer to produce a steady, stable foam.
Adding and installing these items gets expensive, and they've not yielded the results I have been hoping for. The nassarius snails burrow deep into the sand bed, and do not turn over the sand's upper layer to disrupt the diatom growth. The other snails stick to the rock or glass, and rarely move across the sand to feed. The white sand-sifting starfish pop-up every now and then, but not enough to stir the sand surface on a regular basis. The flow from the third powerhead is good, but in a tank this size you would need 10 powerheads to truly eliminate any stagnant areas. And, too many powerheads look bad and can get expensive. The lighting is a minor player, so the cut back from 10 to 6 hours produces little results.
Silicate does not appear to be the problem. The sand I used is sugar-sized and "silica free" according to the packaging. To verify this I tested the water with a Salifert Silica Test Kit, and all of the test results were zero. Other test parameters appear fine (8.2 pH, 9 dKH, etc.). The total flow in the tank is now somewhere around 2,100 to 2,200 GPH, so in my estimation the flow is more than adequate. All of the top-off water is from my SpectraPure RO/DI unit, and when checked this weekend with my TDS meter no detectable impurities register (only a zero '0' shows on the monitor).
I'm at a loss to explain why the diatoms continue despite all of these measures. Am I being too impatient, or should I step up the fight against them? Should I try to siphon the sand bed, though this means a large amount of sand will get siphoned out of the tank? I'm just about 'crittered-out,' but are there any other sand stirrers that might help here? Maybe something that stirs the sand's surface on a regular basis? Manually stirring the upper level of the sand bed makes it look good for a day or two, but the brown growth comes back without exception. Is there anything you can recommend? I'm open to any and all suggestions you might have!
As always, I appreciate your input and advice.
Sincerely,
Sam Mancini
Hi Sam,
Been a long time between letters, however, that must mean things have been going quite well. Your letter is well written and was able to eliminate all hobbyist caused diatom possibilities. As you know, silica/silicate is used in the structure of the diatom cell wall. Depending upon the amount of silicate in solution their growth can appear dot-like or mat-like. Since the problem area of growth is on the sandbed surface and not the aquarium side panels it points directly to the cause, which is the colonization of nitrifying bacteria in the upper reaches of your sandbed. In the course of their biological processes, small amounts of compounds containing silicates are produced. In areas such as the bulk water and sandbed interface, these compounds with the help of light form diatoms, especially during the initial enhanced bacteria colonization period. As for diatoms on a sand surface, if they form a mat, siphon out just the most upper-coated sand grains. Replace the water removed with freshly prepared seawater. Once the bed settles down, which may take a few months, the diatom problem will subside. Maybe not go away 100% depending upon many different environmental situations, but it should be far less than what it is during the initial colonization of the bed.
And keep in mind, the more the sand is disturbed, the more these bacteria have to reestablish themselves, causing an on-going diatom problem of one degree or another. Ever vacuum a sandbed and see diatoms forming on its surface a day or two later?
Hope this helps,
Bob
Dear Bob,
My company maintains a lot of large beautiful reef aquaria. We run all our tanks at between 70 and 80 degrees F, specific gravity 1.023, and pH 8.2. Our calcium levels are maintained at 400 - 450 ppm, and we use SpectraPure reverse osmosis and deionizing equipment to generate all of our water (Instant Ocean is our salt mix).
Sometime in the last few months we have had a couple of troubling changes occur. In one of our aquaria (a 300-gallon reef), we had a large population of the red planarians, and that has subsided a bit, but now many of our soft corals in the tank are not opening fully (although the clams are fine!). The first coral to suffer was the pulsing Xenia, which proceeded to shrink as well as cease to open. The lights on the tank are 250 watt metal halides, which are changed yearly. I also notice that since the planarians are still on the live rock (kind of carpeting it), I don't see a lot of coralline algae. The water flow is strong in this tank, powered by 2 pumps and circulated by 4 other pumps (I don't have their flow rates with me, but we aim for at least 10 x the volume of the tank per hour).
The other tank I am concerned about is a 75-gallon reef. This one is powered by a Rio 2500 pump, and has two 96 watt compact fluorescent bulbs (50/50) over it. This tank has a new kind of algae for us, which at first we thought might be dinoflagellates. It is reddish and smeary, but holds oxygen in little bubbles above it. It's not as brown as the dinoflagellates I have seen, though, and the "strings" holding the bubbles are not very long at all. Also, although it grows quickly, we aren't seeing the explosive growth I have seen in the past with dinoflagellates.
We are accustomed to "re-doing" of our tanks about once a year, meaning we rinse out the aragonite, plenum, scrape algae off the walls in the filter - basically an overall big cleaning to take care of pockets where the pumps don't circulate and manage nuisance algae (hair, slime) that tend to build up over time. Until recently, our strategies had worked pretty well, but I'm mystified by the recent events in these two tanks. Can you think of anything we're not doing that we should? And I would love your opinion on the new algae.
As always, thank you so much for your help.
Sincerely,
Karen Pianka
Hi Karen,
As for the first problem, it seems I've received at least four letters within the last month noting the same problem. Here's what each has been told:
Mushroom and leather corals seem to be a favorite gathering place. These flat worms are thought to be mostly harmless (Sprung, 2000), yet unsightly. When in great numbers they can block light from reaching photosynthetic animals. And some flat worms will consume both tissue and zooxanthellae and the corals may exhibit thin lines of dead tissue. I don't know if some corals are damaged to the point where they can't return to full health, however, most seem to slowly get better when the infestation is cleared up.
When there is an abundance of these flat worms, and if possible, remove the infected specimen and give it a five to ten second freshwater dip. Almost all the flatworms will drop off and any remaining can be gently brushed off. Of course not all corals can withstand a freshwater dip, but leather and mushrooms do handle it quite well.
Keep in mind these flat worms are photosynthetic and are attracted to light. Placing a lamp near the aquarium side panel at night will attract them in huge numbers making it easy to siphon out the majority very early in the morning. The reduced number my give other biological control methods a better chance at bringing their numbers under control.
As for a natural biological approach, the Palauan Banded Goby, Amblygobius phalaena, is said to eat the flatworm Convolutriloba retrogemma. Also, Wrasses, e.g., the Sixline Wrasse, Pseudocheilinus hexataenia, and Mandarin fish (Synchiropus splendidus) have cleared up the problem in some of my past reef systems. Also, the Sea Slug/Nudibranch 'Chelidonura varians,' (available at All Seas Fisheries in Miami/LA, and maybe Quality Marine and Sea Dwelling Creatures in LA) a black with two blue lines on the sides and two tail-like projections on the rear, is an efficient consumer of this pest. Also the scooter blenny, hawkfish and leopard wrasse (Macropharyngodon meleagris) may also consume them.
There is also some thought that the over use of iodine supplements, which flat worms concentrate in their internal fluids, may lend itself to their proliferation.
And caution, as there is some thought that killing them in large numbers with a chemical treatment of some kind could present a serious environmental hazard in the aquarium for all inhabitants. That's because their degradation could cause a large reduction of dissolved oxygen and/or since they are thought to harbor iodine in their tissues, the system may become overdosed.
Using the light/siphon out method has worked for the majority of aquarists having this problem. And having a few predators of these worms in the aquarium is a good back-up!
As for the brown algae problem, it would be wise to first see if its really caused by dinoflagellate. Use a small microscope, as that would help identify which form of brown algae is in the aquarium. If the alga cell has a flagellum, i.e., a tail (for propelling itself through water), it is a dinoflagellate. If so, it can be reduced/eliminated with the use of ozone or a UV sterilizer. Also, flowing all aquarium water through a sponge filter, which should be cleaned twice a week, is also helpful. Improving water quality is also helpful, if high in organic matter. If it's a diatom algae, then reducing silica is the way to go, and I would make sure the cartridges in your RO/DI equipment are still in good working condition.
If this doesn't help, there's an 'Algae page' on my website that contains photos of about 150 species of algae (good and bad) plus at least 60 known biological control species (fish and inverts) with the control species cross-referenced to the unwanted species of algae. Check it out.
And one last thing, hopefully you're not disturbing your plenum yearly, as that simply interrupts its efficiency. In fact, just heard from a person who has had his plenum system going for 12 years, and the whole system is still doing great.
Hope this helps,
Bob
Hi Bob,
I have e-mailed you a few times before about my 110 gallon reef tank (36" L x 30" H x 24" W). The aquarium is set up using a 1" plenum with a 4" sand bed using 2-4mm CaribSea Aragalive. My setup and maintenance is performed closely to your books. Up until hurricane Wilma in 2005 my tank was doing unbelievably well and beyond all expectations and thanks mostly to you. My acroporas and other corals were growing out of control and I was always cutting off pieces to give away to my friends. The water was crystal clear and I had virtually no aglae. During hurricane Frances in 2004 I was without power for 3 days. I ran the aquarium on a small generator during the day with only the actinic lights on. At night time I turned off the generator and had a baitwell pump connected to a car battery providing water movement to the aquarium at night for about 8 hours. This worked OK for only 3 days.
However, during hurricane Wilma in late 2005 I was without power for 2 weeks and I used the same method. Since then all of my hard corals have died off except for one piece of brain coral and now I have a major hair algae problem. I have tried removing it by hand and siphoning it out only to see it come back thick again in two weeks. I have never had an aquarium look worse. I removed all the dead coral thinking that it may have been fueling the algae growth. The hair algae in growing on the live rock, back glass and even covering the substrate. I have tried using Emerald crabs, Astraea and Turbo snails to clean it up, but they seem die after eating it for a few days. I also added a Lawnmower blenny but he doesn't seem to eat it. I have tried using sea urchins but they seem to clean around it. Since starting the aquarium my nitrate and phosphate levels have always been around 0.1 and 0.015 respectively or lower.
My test levels are as follows: pH 8.15, Ammonia 0, Nitrite 0, Nitrate 0.1, Phosphate 0.015, Ca 445, Mg 1350, Sr 13, Kh 9.8, Iodide .03, Iodate .01, Water temp 80 Deg., Salinity 1.025.
My equipment is as follows: One 250 watt 10K MH light on 11:00 am to 4:00 p.m.; two75 watt URI Super Actinic 24", on 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; two 75 watt URI Aquasun 24", on 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; two 75 watt URI Actinic White 24", on 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; 1 watt moonshine bulb. AquaC EV250 Protein Skimmer with Iwaki MD30RT, Main pump Iwaki 30RXT, X150 Eco-Aqualizer, Kent Maxima RO/DI water filter for make up and top off water, Lifereef LCR1 CO2 reactor. I also have 4 Rio 800 power heads alternating every fifteen minutes for additional current. I also keep about 2 cups of E.S.V. carbon and one Poly-Filter in the sump 24/7 and replace them about every two months. I originally used Reef Crystals salt and have tried Tropic Marin Pro Reef salt.
My general maintenance is cleaning the sump foam filter and protein skimmer once weekly and I stir the top 1/2" of gravel twice a month.
My feeding schedule is feeding the fish once or twice a day, adding 1/2 doses of Marc Weiss Coral Vital, LSB and Reef Vital DNA once per week. I also add 1/2 doses of Marc Weiss Black Power, Spectra Vital and Cyclop-eeze 1 to 2 times per week.
My latest try was adding a 1" Black angel, 1" Rock Beauty angle and a 3/4" Flame angle to eat the algae. Again they will not even touch it. However, that are getting along with each other and with my soft corals and gorgonians surprisingly well.
Is it possible that the algae is toxic and therefore killing the snalls that eat it? Will I have to remove all my live rock and bleach it and start all over?
Thanks for the help,
Bob Schichtel
Delray Beach, Florida
The coral die-off ready did it! And for them to all die, there must have been a major water chemistry/temperature/light intensity change! The die-off simply overwhelmed the biological capabilities of the system, which initiated the algae problem. And once begun, it's an almost never-ending situation, no matter how hard you try. I would think the bed is extremely dirty/filled with detritus, and 'if' its regular hair algae, it has spread its spores everywhere and needs little or no encouragement to begin new growth.
In all honestly, if its as bad as your say, you can go two different roads - spend a lot of money and time trying to beat the problem in the existing system, or simply start over. My recommendation would to be to start over. But the choice is yours, and if you want to stay with it, let me know and we'll form an action plan.
And just one thing else, cancel any iodine additions (and don't bother testing for it) and also any organic type additives at this point.
You may want to visit my website at saltcorner.com and go to the Algae page in the Guess Articles section and look at its 160 different forms of algae and its list of consuming animals. Just keep in mind, if they eat it, their waste products contain the nutrients, so if you don't vacuum often, they go back into solution! And if they don't eat it, it's a form that either does not taste good, or they have something better to eat.
Bob
Dear Bob
I would like to thank you personally for all the help and advice you have given me over the past few months. I have been a keen aquarist for the past few years now, but have just never had much "luck" in keeping marine specimens the way I have seen others keep them. I had always put this down to the fact that it was money that enabled these fellow aquarists to maintain and keep these beautiful reef tanks. You showed me that with low capital, basic equipment, a solid understanding in reef husbandry and PATIENCE, I could achieve what few ever get to do because they become frustrated and despondent and leave the hobby bitter because money could not achieve them the results they wanted.
My tank started with a simple email to you, asking if it was possible to fulfill three goals.
1) To keep and maintain a reef tank long term.
2) To do so without spending the family fortune.
3) To use basic equipment I had already in my garage from previous marine setups.
Your reply to me was very simple and did not make sense to me. You said that if I was prepared to listen, have patience in setting up the system and in maintaining it correctly, I could achieve what I wanted. What I could not understand was the lack of equipment you mentioned I would need. Apart from the tank, which is a 120 litre corner tank, I needed a small canister and a good lighting system. My Protein Skimmer that I used to setup with was in your own words a "dinosaur model"…which it was. A "Sander" air lift model, that together with a power head, and some tubing was converted to a "powered" model.
The tank was set up at the beginning of August 2004, using the directions you laid out for me in several e-mails. (Close to 125 now) Basically I used the design of a Plenum system, incorporated inside the main tank. I use NSW collected from our local Two Ocean's Aquarium in Cape Town where I live. Water was tested and found to be more than adequate for a Reef, so I could spare some expense there. I used crushed coral sand of around 2 to 5 mm grain size. Placed it directly on top of the Plenum that was constructed using Egg Crate (better known as Florescent Light diffuser panels in South Africa) and some shade cloth material to stop the sand from getting into the bottom space. I used the old airlift tubes I had to for the "stands" of the Plenum. One could also use them to perch live rock on, so that it is not in contact with the sand! Good use for air lift tubes! The sand bed was laid to a depth of 10 cm /4 inch. I used 10 kg of live rock to start the system, and here I made the first of a few mistakes.
What I was sold was NOT cured, and it kind of stank the house out for a few days until the bacteria levels got the Ammonia under control. It shows that ignorance can lead to bad mistakes early on, and that these can have serious repercussions at a later date. Anyway, with the Skimmer pulling 25 to 30 ml of gunk every day and all lighting suspended, the tank was matured over a 3 week period using the uncured live rock and a good bacteria start up supplied in a bottle.
Filtration consisted of a small Eheim canister packed with activated carbon and a phosphate sponge. The Plenum is now working fantastically and my Nitrate and Phosphate levels are close to zero. Stock currently is a school of Green Chromis, two Common Clowns and two African Clowns (Clarki). Many small polyps and Zooanthids have been added, fragging as I placed into the tank. Only other additions will be some small frags in the next few weeks. Now to sit back and let nature take it's course.
I will keep you updated as the tank progresses. Oh, supplements are:
1) Mark Weiss Combo Vital© added at the rate of 1 small pinch (or one sixteenth of a teaspoon every day. Other Mark Weiss products used at the same dose rate are Fish Vital© and "FORM©" The Fish are looking fantastic and colours are outstanding. They eat the Fish Vital© out of my fingers. (Have been using the product for close on two weeks now.)
2) Kent Marine A & B Calcium, at 5ml per day of each. Added directly to the main tank in front of the power head outlet.
3) Kent Marine Coral Accel. Used at 2,5 ml per day.
Testing carried out after any new additions to the tank. All Main parameters carried out at one monthly intervals. Basic checks made every day in evening together with RO/DI freshwater makeup. NSW used for water changes at rate of two litres per day. (60 litres per month.) Tank volume is currently only about 90 litres of water. Test Kits are all Fastest excepting for Phosphate and Magnesium that are Salifert kits.
Any Queries can be directed to me on leppanm@intekom.co.za
Mike Leppan
Cape Town
South Africa
Hi Mike,
Has it been that many emails? No wonder my wife is saying she barely recognizes me any more!
Its unfortunate uncured live rock was sold to you as cured live rock when we began this low-tech system. That threw us a curve ball and resulted in emails about smell and many on unsightly algae beginning to show up in the system. Then came the email noting how your local shops were suggesting various herbivores and additives, along with system equipment upgrades. And then there were the comments from local aquarists on the value of the plenum method. In fact, some never heard of the method.
Yet you showed much patience and listened to my thoughts on the value or lack of in many of the suggestions you received from other folks. And it has all paid off! Beating unwanted algae problems has always been a difficult task and some aquarists have left the hobby simply because they could not afford high tech equipment or win the battle against the green monster. You are to be commended for the patience you exhibited!
As for some of the additives on the market that are said to do away with unsightly algae or cyanobacteria growths, I have always hesitated to use anything in the aquarium unless I understood its ingredients and what impact it would have on system processes and aquarium inhabitants. I've researched many of these products and am currently involved in testing some new products. One is a 100% US Government certified organic product that is designed to prevent only the unwanted species from being able to uptake any nourishment, thereby causing them to slowly starve to death. The other is also an organic product and due to possible propriety reasons unable to say at this time as to exactly how it functions. However both have been tested in aquaria, including those in public aquariums with complex systems containing a variety of fish and corals. Results appear to be promising, with no harm to desired algae, fishes, microbial processes or invertebrates.
If other aquarists with algae problems would like to partake in these testing programs please contact me. And I should note I have no financial interest in these products, as I'm only one of many freely testing the products.
In closing, I feel gratified every time the result is as good as the one you're experiencing! This is what it's all about in my opinion, aquarium brothers helping other aquarium brothers.
Cheers,
Bob
Hello Bob,
About a year ago I sent you an e-mail regarding questions I had about a plenum versus a muddy bottom. In your response you convinced me that the plenum was the way to go. I am finally in a position to get the new tank going and I have read your various booklets numerous times to make sure I set the plenum up correctly and maintain it properly. In your books you mention that I should never have any deep burrowing animals. My question is would an anemone cause disruption of the anoxic zone.
Thanks again for taking time to help me.
Ruben
Hi Ruben,
Interesting question and of course depends on the type anemone. If it's a sand anemone, that is to say one that buries its foot area into substrate and retracts fully into the substrate when disturbed, that might cause a slight disruption in the anoxic zone. But probably not enough to cause enough disturbance to see a fluctuation in nutrient levels. In other words, the foot of the anemone would probably attach itself to the screen covering the plenum grid or the dividing screen if used. The anemone would then move slowly through the sandbed until it finds an area of its liking and probably remain there until something further disturbs it. This slow movement would not overly disturb the bed and if anything, its foot will only cover a small portion of the screen at any one time. Therefore I see no problem for the anemone or the biological efficiency associated with a plenum system. However, if something was added that would tunnel and have "open" tunnels that connect the bulk water area with the plenum grid area, then that would pose efficiency problems.
Hope this helps.
Bob
Hi Bob,
I have a difficult time raising my reef tank's pH level above 8.0. This is a 2-yr old system consisting of a 120 g reef, 40 g seahorse, and a 30 g sump interconnected. The skimmer was removed a year ago when it stopped producing, and I change some water every 4 to 6 months. Except for about 400 lb of rock, including in dark areas of sump and overflows, there is no other filtration, just heater, chiller, calcium reactor, and carbon. There is no detectable ammonia, nitrite, or nitrate. Calcium at 350-400 ppm, and alk at 12 dkh. The oxygen level is normal. The system is healthy with seahorses giving birth every 4 weeks, and all corals, including the acroporas and even gonioporas, growing at a substantial rate.
The ph level starts at 7.78 in am to 7.95 at night. I have never been able to raise this level above 8.0. I have tried Tech CB calcium additive, which has ph buffer, and it only makes a little rise. The calcium reactor's output ph is set at 6.8. When I increase the flow to raise the calcium above 400, the alk goes above 13. Standard ph buffer additive seems to do same. The calcium reactor's output dumps in the overflow's turbulence in the sump with lots of air bubbles. Do you know what I may be doing wrong? Also, with the calcium reactor, I have been adding the complete reef supplement. Should I only add iodine instead? .
Best regards,
MP
California
Hi MP,
Thanks for your email and see two things that should be considered. As for pH being low, I would think your dissolved oxygen level is probably low, which will in turn affect pH. No only is the skimmer a good way to remove nutrients before they have a chance to oxidize/breakdown into pollutants, it also help increase dissolved oxygen, helping to maintain a more acceptable pH level, which should be about 7.9 - 8.0 at night and 8.1 - 8.2 during the aquariums lighted timeframe. Therefore I highly recommend putting a very efficient skimmer into operation, even if it draws little waste gunk out of the system!
The second item is the type/brand of media in the calcium reactor. There are only two that I recommend, i.e., KORALlith media or CaribSea ARM. The reason for this is that other brands/type media have an imbalance between their carbonates and calcium content. In other words, once the majority of calcium dissolves, the majority of the remaining content is carbonates, which will, as they then dissolve, drive up your alkalinity. So, this 'other' media that was 'initially' delivering an ample amount of both calcium and carbonates, is now delivering 'some' calcium and a lot of carbonates as it ages in the reactor and/or as you increase the flow or CO2 bubble rate. In fact, any time this sort of thing happens, its time to change out the media, even if the reaction cylinder still looks quite full! The true initial value of the media has been exhausted, therefore its time to change it out. And believe me when I say I've gone through this sort of thing many times until I changed over to the brands mentioned!
Hope this helps,
Bob
Hi Bob,
First let me thank you for giving of your time to help aquarists. I look forward to every issue of FAMA and always look for your article first.
I have been in the hobby since 1997 and I do not understand two things; Buffers and Ozone. I have your plenum setup and a kalkreactor and my pH is not 8.4 and I wish to raise it so the kalkreactor can then maintain it. And the second item is Ozone, and wonder if it adds oxygen to the water? Or is it carbon dioxide? How do you tell if you need it? Please let me know if you need any more information.
Thank you.
Brian Buchanan
Alexandria, VA 22315
Hi Brian,
Thanks for the nice words and enjoy the hobby and speaking with fellow hobbyists. And in my retirement years wish to construct the best marine aquarist website possible, one with no product hype or sales pitches!
As for your questions, there's no good reason to maintain pH above that found in the wild, which is 8.0 - 8.2. And, when a calcium reactor is in use, a pH of 7.9 - 8.1 would adequately suffice, since the pH of the effluent from the reactor is generally quite low and somewhat affecting overall pH in the aquarium. Since you don't mention actual pH or the goal of the system, I'm hesitant to go further about this subject, but you might want to read my booklet on water quality where the subject is covered in detail.
As for ozone, a normal molecule of oxygen (O2) has two atoms, and ozone (O3) has one additional atom. The extra atom is highly unstable and is an intense oxidizing agent. The main reason for its use is to eliminate unwanted dissolved organic products by increasing the systems REDOX/ORP. Redox means "reduction/oxidation" and applies to a sequence of chemical events in which elements and compounds transfer and/or rearrange positive and negative electrons. Elements and compounds that want to gain an electron are called "reduction agents" and have a negative charge. Those that want to give up an electron are called "oxidizing agents" and have a positive charge. We measure the effectiveness of this process by the minute electrical charge it generates in millivolts (mV) with an Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP) meter.
Another way to look at it is that it's like resistance in electrical wiring. The more resistance the less electric current flow. The dirtier the water, the less ability/potential it has to conduct electricity. That is real basic, but I hope you get the point. High quality ocean water, e.g., around outer coral reefs, has an ORP of 350 to 400 mV. Most of the corals we keep in our aquariums come from lagoon areas where ORP is 200 to 300 mV. So a reading of 300 - 400 would be acceptable for most systems, however, other aspects would have to be considered. That would include the systems goals and an actual ORP reading.
The equipment needed consists of a device to generate the ozone (ozonizer), a gauge and probe to read aquarium's ORP, and a controller that can set the desired level by turning on/off the ozonizer. Bear in mind the effluent from an ozone contact chamber (preferably a protein skimmer) must be passed over a bed of activated carbon to remove residual ozone before it returns the aquarium. Even though residual ozone is fairly short lived, usually less than an hour, the residual can damage fish tissue and invertebrate.
And ozone does not add dissolved oxygen to the water, at least in any significant quantities that would benefit any of the aquariums' inhabitants. Nor does it have anything to do with carbon dioxide. Depending upon your goals and maintenance practices, it is very possible to get by without it. Before turning to its use, increase dissolved oxygen in the aquarium by increasing water circulation, reducing bio-load, trying a more efficient skimmer, removing any aquarium covers, and/or increasing the general level of maintenance. If you're already doing these things, then find out what the actual ORP reading is in your aquarium, then contact me and we will go from there.
Hope this helps,
Bob
Hi Bob
I've enclosed a picture of the red algae I discussed in my last letter. Its growing only on side panels but not on the rocks. It was actually my own undoing for I have allowed the red algae to grow on the panels thinking the fish would solve the problem for me. But over the months, it spread wider and farther. Do you think I should keep those side panels clean all the time? I was hoping to keep some algae for the Tangs and Angels. I now think it was a mistake.
There's also another alga, as there are two small patches of elongated brown jello-like tentacle-like (algae?) growing from damaged coral tips. Removal was easy but it kept growing back at the same area very quickly. I brought a book on Algae by Julian Sprung hoping to identify the culprits, but to no avail. None of the pictures in the book resembled the one I have in the tank. But according to the book, this algae may be the result of Nitrite(?). Could I have Nitrite problem? I do have a Nitrate reactor with ORP monitor.
I have also received the La Motte test kit this morning and have just tested it. It was a little confusing at first sliding the instrument up and down. But the end result is still the same - zero. I also tested Nitrate again and the reading remains at about 2.5ppm using Salifert kit. I have stopped adding any additives for months now, except for a half dose of Lugol's iodine occasionally. I also use Marc Weiss Reef Vital DNA every two days and feed the corals very day.
I have also changed the lighting recently hoping to stop the problem. The end areas of the tank are not very bright because the tank collars. I have now removed the 6500K lamps in favor of13K lamps along with the 20K Radium bulbs. I also disturb the water around the rocks during regular maintenance. There is usually some detritus built up on the surface of some rocks. My Tunze stream powerheads are powerful but they cannot keep the rocks clean at the far end of the tank. Does this mean that I do not have enough flow? My turnover within the tank is about 9 times using powerheads and 4 times through the sumps fed by four return pumps. As the tank is 4 feet wide, I can see dead spots in several areas either caused by position of corals or rockwork. The current created is no way near what is created by nature in the areas where I collect them.
And since FAMA printed some of my past letters, there has been a lot of interest in Marine fishkeeping in this country. And people I do not know from all over, even from places 100 km away came to ask about my tank. Since then, interest grew and soon the local fish shops were bringing in marine fishes and soft corals for sale even when they have no idea what they were doing. Many fishes and corals died because the dealers were inexperienced. And none of them showed any interest in the welfare of the creatures. They never stopped to ask why their goods were dying or even if the buyer had a marine tank at home. By all accounts, there aren't many aquariums in this area.
As instructed by local shops, buyers simply go to the sea and collect the water required for their tank and then add the fish. Some wealthier ones would buy salt instead. They would then adopt a wait and see situation before going out to buy more if the fish failed to survive the week. None of the fish shop owners have previous experience in marine. And none of them show any interest in wanting to learn. It was all about taking advantage of the situation. And even if they listen, they never do anything to improve the situation.
Luckily, the fish hobby in this country is only a fashion, and I hope the interest would fade away quickly. I would like to see the hobby grow in this country, but at present it is better to keep it away from most people here. But as of now, at least three neighbors were looking into marines.
To think, I was also the one who started placing plants in freshwater tanks before it became fashionable! Today nobody shows any interest in freshwater tanks.
Please advice
Herbert Hiew
Brunei Darussalam on the Island of Borneo
Hi Herbert,
Thanks for your photo and it must be wonderful to simply go out into local waters and collect all the species for your aquarium!
As for the red slime cyanobacteria, (probably Oscillatoria) it's a fairly common thing in some aquaria, so don't be overly concerned. It grows where the current is somewhat slow, and because of it, nutrients tend to hang in those areas. If you can reach it, siphon out most of it with small air tubing, then wipe the rest out with a cleaning pad. I recommend trying to increase the water flow in these areas, possibly with a small powerhead. That should end most of it, but some may come back and you'll need to occasionally clean the area as needed
And I have never found anything that really enjoyed eating it. But you may want to try the Blue Tuxedo Urchin if found in your area, or a small black spined urchin. Also, make sure your protein skimmer is properly working, as it's a good tool to keep nutrients from helping propagate this type of thing.
As for the brown jelly-like alga, which I could not see in your photo, that may be Phormidium corallyticum, a red slime species. Sometimes referred to as Black Band Disease, this cyanobacteria attacks damaged tissue areas. There's a couple of ways to go. Siphon out as much as possible, and if feasible remove the coral and wipe the area clean with freshwater and then dip the areas/tips in freshwater. This may eliminate the problem. Another approach is to siphon out as much as possible, then remove the specimen and bath the cleaned area in a Lugol's solution. If you can get the species out of the tank, dip it into a solution (one liter seawater + 20 drops of Lugol) for about one minute. If you can't get it out, siphon as much as possible, then using a turkey baster apply the solution to the cleaned area. Yet use something stronger, i.e., three drops in a teaspoon of seawater. Repeat in three days, and if needed three days later. This should help. Let me know how it goes. And if nitrite is zero, don't worry about it. And if nitrate is 2.5 ppm, there's no need to be concerned about that either.
As for water flow, what there is appears to be sufficient for your system. However, some areas in "everyone's" aquariums will have dead spots. And honestly, we are not going to fully replicate nature in closed systems. That's where you come in - simply use a turkey baster or small powerhead to wash clean those areas once every week.
I feel quite sad to see that posting your letters in FAMA has caused some degree of misuse of the creatures in your surrounding areas. I would think it should have provided a fertile situation for form an aquarium society where aquarists and those interested in knowing more could first gather the information they need to successfully begin and maintain a system similar to yours. In fact, I would think it a golden opportunity to further understand Mother Nature and the priceless gifts that she affords us aquarists.
As always, enjoy getting your email.
Cheers,
Bob
(Let add here, just incase you were wondering about his area because of that huge tidal wave disaster back in December of last year to some parts of the Indian Ocean. His area was spared because it was shielded by Sumatra and did not receive any damage.)
Dear Mr. Goemans,
Could you please help me with the problem that has plagued my tank (100 gal) since it was set up in July. I have this gelatin like substance that covers all the rock and the back glass. It has a light tan colour and in places it has air bubbles attached, which cause it to form vertical strands. I realize the tank is still breaking in but the live rock is from a tank that was about nine years old. I had this same problem in that tank so I figured that by cleaning the rock with a tooth brush and then putting it in a new tank which has new substrate on the bottom I could hopefully cure the problem. However after being set up for a few weeks the problem was back. The new substrate is aragonite gravel of the size recommended on your website for use in the jaubert method of filtration. It is about 1" deep in the tank. The 4" deep bed is located in a separate tank. There are no fish in the tank and just a few soft corals that were moved from the first tank. Therefore the bio load is quite low. The water quality is as follows:
nitrate 12ppm
calcium 400
I have been adding buffer for alkalinity but I seem to be having trouble getting it into the recommended level. It is sitting at about 2.4 meq/L. The lighting is provided by 4X4 VHO florescent tubes.
Many thanks
Robert Barlow
It sounds like a dinoflagellate type situation, not a diatom problem. It can result in large areas, including invertebrates coated in a brown slime-like gelatinous mess. This free-swimming algae, which came in on your rock, is difficult to cure. The reduction of the photoperiod, especially when using metal halide lighting is sometimes helpful, as is ceasing to add trace elements. The use of ozone and/or a UV sterilizer is also helpful. I have found that flowing all aquarium water through a sponge filter, which should be cleaned twice a week, is also helpful. Silicate is not a growth nutrient for this type algae as it is for diatoms. Unfortunately calcium carbonate is. Since we can not rid the aquarium of its calcium carbonate content, we need to concentrate on the above methods for ridding this pest. If you have a small microscope, you can tell which form of brown algae you have. If the algae cell has a small tail, it is the dinoflagellate type.
I recommend siphoning it out as often as necessary, adding an ozonizer to your set up and discharging the ozone into your skimmer. Red Sea makes a nice ozonizer unit. If you're not familiar with how this works, either read my booklet on Protein Skimming and Activated Carbon or contact me again and I'll explain it. However, have about 100 unanswered emails in front of me today!
And honestly, using separate buffers and/or calcium additives is really detrimental to maintaining good water quality. There's a complete rundown on how to maintain all water parameters in my Water Quality Guideline booklet. And I'm not trying to sell booklets, but have put most of the answers on how to resolve these problems in very inexpensive booklets with no advertising hype. Just plain English. Those booklets are mentioned on my website - www.saltcorner.com.
Cheers,
Bob
Dear Bob,
About 3 1/2 years ago I converted an old aquarium containing a limestone chip bed to one containing a sand bed. I was going to use the plenum as described in your booklets, however, decided to go with a deep bed instead after reading an article against that method. Everything went fine until I started using activated carbon. I had operated for 2 3/4 years without using any carbon. Several months after using the carbon I began to experience an increase in nitrates - from 0 to 10 ppm in 4 months. In the last 4 1/2 months it has climbed to 25 ppm. I do a 15 - 20% water change every three weeks. I don't know if the use of carbon had anything to do with this increase, or if the deep sand bed caused it.
The aquarium is a 150 gallon system, with a 30 gallon sump (no filter media), approximately 90 -100 pounds of live rock (reduced from about 300 lb.), 5 powerheads in tank recirculating 1500 GPH, VHO lighting, LPS and SPS corals, a few soft corals, 9 fish, and a heavy weight protein skimmer powered by a GEN X pump. I also recirculate the water from the sump with a GEN X pump.
The corals seem to tolerate the high nitrates, except I notice my pulsing Xenia is beginning to close up (and its not growing like it used to). My questions are:
1. I could tear down the tank, but it would be a monumental task, and I might lose some of my corals (I still have the plenum!). These denitrator systems, do they work? Are they worth the effort? Would a de-nitrate media work any better?
2. I replaced my recirculating pump just this last week. The one I had before (Little Giant 5-SD-MC) allowed about 20% of the water to bypass the protein skimmer. The one I now have allows 100% of the return water to go through the skimmer. Will this over skim my tank?
Any suggestions?
I want to take this opportunity to thank you for all the help you've been for aquarists like myself. I have all five of your booklets, and appreciate each one! I regularly read your Sand-Mail column in FAMA. Keep up the good work.
Thanks again!
Gordon Leathers
Hi Gordon
Thanks for your letter, and the addition of activated carbon itself has nothing to do with your nitrates increasing. However, keep in mind that its bed(s), that is to say its particles, will contain/colonize nitrifying bacteria with that resulting in some nitrate entering the system. Yet I doubt the existence of a bed of activated carbon would have the results mentioned in your letter. Just keep in mind to use small beds and rotate them as mentioned in my booklet. From what I can gather from your letter is that there's a possibility the increase may be from a previous inefficient protein skimming method (processing too small a quantity of aquarium water). Or possibly the use of too much live rock through much of the tank's existence and/or the deep bed is finally becoming saturated with nutrients. And it appears from your letter that filtration has solely depended upon the sandbed and the live rock, as you did not employ any other filtration devices or media, or even mention vacuuming the bed periodically.
Too much rock itself, and/or the covering of too much sandbed surface simply creates a lot of truly anaerobic areas where it majority of the less efficient microbes reduce nitrate only to ammonium. And if so, this ammonium in the sandbed can be recycled back to nitrate and diffuse upward in the sandbed, entering the bulk water.
And if the previous skimmer hookup was not adequately keeping pace with skimming the larger percentage of bulk water, it could have allowed too many nutrients to go unprocessed and result in some of the nitrate buildup.
Then there's the deep bed directly on the aquarium bottom. I don't want to get into the microbial processes occurring in a bed directly on the bottom of the aquarium as it is all explained in some of my booklets, especially the Natural Aquarium Booklet. Could well be the deep bed is finally becoming nutrient saturated, especially if its not adequately vacuumed periodically. And as explained above, nitrate may be leaching upwards. I would suggest better care of the bed be taken by vacuuming it once per month.
I'm going to assume when testing you know the difference between the nitrate molecule and nitrate nitrogen as you have read my booklets. And I have also personally seen Xenia become sensitive to higher nitrate levels. It appears to be a good indicator, such as in your tank that something has to be done to lower it.
As for reducing nitrate, I have tried a couple of different methods with very good success. About ten years ago I had a 75 gallon that contained a large lionfish, moray eel, and triggerfish. Its nitrate was always near 100 ppm, yet none of the fishes appeared interested in anything but three meals a day. Even though most fish are not overly bothered with high nitrate levels, you have some invertebrate that is no doubt being bothered by the growing nitrate level. In that old aquarium, I began using a plastic chip-like media called Nitrex, which is made by Aquarium Products. I placed half a box of it in another product of theirs called the 'Nitrex Box.' One box of media will handle a 60 gallon aquarium, where it oxidizes nitrate back to elemental nitrogen gas. In fact, within a few days you could see the nitrogen bubbles escaping the opening in the so-called Nitrex Box. I used three boxes as an experiment in my 75 and was able to reduce nitrate to about 40 ppm. One Nitrex Box was followed in thirty days by another Nitrex Box. Then thirty days later another Nitrex Box was placed in the aquarium. Thereafter each Box had its half box of media changed every thirty days. Its still sold and can be found in mail order catalogs. I would consider this a fairly cost effective way to reduce your nitrate level.
If you want to go high tech, suggest trying one of the newer sulfur denitrating systems. The process used in these reactors is not like those used in most other denitrifying devices. The majority of these other devices use 'anaerobic' heterotrophs, which must be fed a carbon source such as methanol or ethanol. Actually, Vodka has been one of my past preferred carbon food sources in a home built unit I made several years ago. Their feeding process needed to be carefully controlled to prevent hydrogen sulfide or nitrite being returned to the aquarium. Too much of the carbon source material resulted in hydrogen sulfide, too little resulted in nitrite and/or the nitrate simply returning to the aquarium. And the flow of the water stream through this and similar devices was also very critical, usually requiring constant tweaking to make sure the right amount of 'food' was being provided to the bacteria that colonized the substrate medium in the reaction chamber that the water flowed through. Really a constant pain in the you know where to control and quite dangerous if not correctly controlled.
Sulfur reactors are fairly new and use a process called 'autotrophic' bacteria sulfur denitrification. Small beads of sulfur are placed in a contact chamber and aquarium water flows slowly upward through the device. As the water rises in the contact chamber, bacteria on its sulfur substrate media begin to remove dissolved oxygen in the water, thereby making the area more anaerobic. When this occurs, the bacteria further up in the contact chamber go after the oxygen that is part of the nitrate compound. When the water exits the top of the device, nitrate is greatly reduced. How much reduced depends upon the level of the nitrate entering the device. The nitrogen gas resulting from this process exits from the device at its top area.
Keep in mind the reaction releases excessive hydrogen ions, which makes the exiting water very acidic. It is also believed that the process produces carbon dioxide, and all can easily lower the pH of the exiting fluid and also its calcium and/or alkalinity levels.
Another problem area with this process is the production of sulfate in the exiting water. It must be removed so as not to skew the ionic balance of the seawater in the aquarium. Therefore the effluent from the sulfur reactor should be flowed through a chamber filled with crushed coral, preferably one of the better grade calcium reactor media. This will help precipitate most of the sulfate, and since the water is acidic, release some of the calcium carbonates in the media thereby raising its pH. Much like a calcium reactor does, except without the use of a separate CO2 input. However, as I have not personally tried it, the media it passes through is said to fairly quickly turn to muck. Therefore it must be changed out as needed.
As with previous type denitrating devices, the speed of the water flow through the device is critical. Too high a flow results in nitrate being returned to the aquarium, too little flow results in hydrogen sulfide or nitrite being returned to the aquarium. Therefore its important to test the effluent every few days when first starting these type units until the right flow rate is found. Otherwise, after that, these unit require little attention except periodical effluent testing. And once the aquariums nitrate level is within the preferred level, a slightly faster water flow should be considered. However, that does depend on how much food is entering the aquarium. The instructions coming with the device should closely be followed.
And even though sulfur is one of the greater quantity elements in the bulk water, periodic water changes should be part of your standard maintenance chores. Also, since the effluent from these type reactors is very acidic, there needs to be additional attention to calcium and alkalinity levels and supplemented as needed. A calcium reactor would be an extremely good addition if a sulfur reactor were utilized.
Since I have not used this type equipment, and only know of one company offering it, suggest visiting d-daquariumsolutions.com and checking it out. I'm sure they could supply some additional information if interested.
As for over skimming, that is possible but probably rarely ever happens. If you see the skimmer taking out little waste when running full time, use it only from 6 PM to 8 AM. Of course a good trace element solution is another cure for that problem area, but don't over use as that can lead to unwanted algae.
Hope this helps and keep me posted.
Bob
Hi Bob
I wrote back in April and you gave me some great info. I am still in the process of setting up my 300gal reef. I will follow your advice and go for the AquaC (the 400 model) or perhaps the 1000model . What do you think? I've looked at the Cal-Pro by Marine technical Concepts and looks great however is there one that can use a more energy efficient pump but works as well. Bob I'll like to build a small shed on the side of the house to keep the KoldSteril water filter. I am planning on having a 55gal container to hold filter water to fill up a 30gal container that will be mixed with Kalkwasser to drip into my sump. However are there any concerns as far as having to worry about the water sitting in the 55 container for any period of time or do I need any supplements to add before mixing the kalkwasser.
The large unit will also serve in case of any emergencies so I can prepare 55 gal+30+30 for a water change. I plan on having another 30gal container so I can prepare 25gal for fresh saltwater changes every two weeks. Your input on this setup would be immensely appreciated. One of this days I would like to talk with you in person to continue with my plans on the tank.
Thanks again and hope that everything went well with your son in law.
Louis.
Hi Louis,
Thanks for the follow up and would probably go with the AquC 1000, as its always possible to reduce skimming by using it mainly at night, but not possible to increase if the unit is undersized.
As for the calcium reactor, the few pennies extra to operate its pump will more than pay for itself in the long-term when it comes to having the proper alkalinity and calcium levels! And I wouldn't recommend a substitute, as there are none in my opinion if you want the best.
As for the Kold unit, if your tap water is already excellent and has no phosphate or silica, then the unit is okay. However, if you read their literature it clearly says it will only take phosphate as low as 0.1 ppm. That's still far too high for reef aquariums. It also say's you have to buy an extra unit for their aluminum media to take out silica. That means the regular unit doesn't do that. Also, aluminum is not too good at taking out silica! Neither will it take out any colloidal silica. Your best bet is the SpectraPure unit.
You won't need Kalkwasser if you use the Cal-Pro! And the following is the way to handle the make-up water as it worked great for me and if you want more about water quality read my Water Quality Guidelines for Marine Aquariums booklet.
"When purified water is used for water changes or evaporation makeup it contains no calcium. And its pH, especially that of reverse osmoses and deionized water is usually quite low, e.g., 6. 5. Now take into consideration the aragonite particle enters a condition of equilibrium at a pH of 8.2. That is to say it begins the reversal of the very process that originally formed the particle and starts to dissolve. This can be quite beneficial, as the aragonite particle is about 97% calcium. Most of us have seen calcium reactors where carbon dioxide is used to lower pH to a point where the water becomes acidic enough to dissolve its calcareous gravel. But, what if you didn't need carbon dioxide to accomplish a "modest" dissolution process. Why not use RO or DI water to dissolve some aragonite gravel in a storage container. Water with such a low pH is an excellent solvent for almost any type calcareous gravel. Yet aragonite, because it is so pure, is a much better choice than crushed coral or oyster shell and contains much less phosphate.
I should note this method is not for maintaining the calcium level in a reef aquarium. It is simply a process by which the water used for evaporation make-up or water changes will be "enhanced" prior to use. I use about 50 pounds of aragonite in a strong plastic container that in turn holds about 35 gallons of RO and DI water. It is occasionally stirred to prevent any anaerobic areas from forming. When water is needed for my aquarium it is drawn from this container and what is remaining is topped-off with more purified water that is stored in other large containers. I have found enhanced water to contain somewhere between 50 to 100 ppm of calcium and have a pH of 8.4. I want to thank Leo Wojcik for this idea."
Hope this helps,
Bob
Dear Bob,
Having researched through various magazines the various methods of marine aquarium filtration now advocated, I would like to sound you out on a couple of thoughts to clarify further what I already understand. Given that none of the methods on their own seem to satisfy all the experts (what a surprise!), what would be the objection to combining the Berlin system with a DSB all in the same tank? I know that little or no substrate is recommended with the Berlin system because of the potential for a build-up of unwanted organics within it, but surely with sand sifters present in the bed this should not be a problem. You would then have the benefit of this greatly increased anoxic area to back-up the limited denitrification capability of the Berlin system.
Come to that would it not alternatively be possible to incorporate a plenum rather than a DSB provided there were no burrowing creatures present to cause a breach and the consequent release of nitrates into the main body of the aquarium?
In any of these methods, according to their supporters, dead areas should not occur provided the correct sand is used and a sensible, good old-fashioned maintenance regime is undertaken.
It is also a common factor of all of the above three filtration methods that they recommend use of gentle protein skimming, but what if this is done away with by the addition of an under-tank refugium, the philosophy of which precludes skimming. This will add even more benefits to the system, apart from avoiding any detrimental effects of the skimming, by virtue of its 24 hour lighting regime and its effects on pH, CO2 and oxygen levels.
What would you recommend as a flow rate between a refugium and its main aquarium, and also the overall flow rate within the main aquarium itself? I don't imagine these would necessarily be the same.
Finally, (sorry to keep on) is there a recommended ratio between the size of a Refugium and the aquarium it serves, for optimum results?
I very much look forward to receiving your comments, suggestions, and criticisms on the above so that I can decide how exactly to set up my own system.
Arthur Smith
Spain
Dear Arthur,
Thanks for your letter and you are so right about "satisfying some of the folks sometimes, but not all the folks all the time" when it comes to filtration methods. There has been, and still exist today various 'camps' that are set in concrete when it comes to their views. Unfortunately, they will not open their minds and at least admit there are other methods that have admirable attributes that if set up properly and correctly maintained, will provide excellent results. This kind of behavior certainly does not benefit the average aquarist, as "he said and/or they said" type of confusion tears down the fabric of our hobby. And there are some that publicly badmouth fellow aquarists because they have differing stances on various subjects. This 'closed mind' attitude simply causes further entrenchment in some individuals/groups, preventing accord of any kind on various subjects. And this type demeanor is not in the best interest of our hobby!
And even though I have promoted the plenum method since experimenting with it in early 1992, I have used other filtration methods over the last 50 years, such as the Berlin method, with and without deep beds and even bare-bottom tanks, along with various type refugia, and have done so very successfully. So the experience is there to draw upon, and where plenum systems are concerned, they are still sadly misunderstood or misquoted. However, they have been a great learning tool, as you will see with some of the information and facts noted below.
In my opinion, one of the biggest problems within these groups/camps is their terminology and the applied definition of certain words. As you mention in your letter, your thoughts lean towards a very deep bed because, as you say, there will be a greater 'anoxic' area. And sand sifters would greatly benefit that bed. However, that's not totally correct!
When speaking or writing about the terms anaerobic and anoxic, I have made it a point to exactly state what I'm referring to, i.e., anoxic is a zone containing .5 to 2.0 mg/l oxygen where its bacteria, facultative anaerobic heterotrophs, will reduce nitrate back to gaseous elemental forms (mostly nitrogen), which is technically called "dissimilatory denitrification." In the anaerobic area, an area/zone containing less oxygen than the anoxic area, obligate anaerobic heterotrophs produce the ammonification process, or what is technically called assimilatory denitrification. This results in a nitrogen product (ammonium) being returned to the surrounding area. So you see, there are two different zones, below approximately the first half-inch (1 cm) of substrate. Therefore, the majority of the bed in the DSB is truly anaerobic, as the oxic and anoxic zones basically take up the first inch of depth. Accordingly, in the DSB, most of its depth is truly anaerobic and a producer of ammonium, a primary algae nutrient! Great to reduce some of the systems nitrate compound, but worse when it comes to promoting algae because ammonium, another nitrogen compound, is 'the' primary algae nutrient! (Better than nitrate!) Of course, depth of the oxic zone (where nitrification takes place) and the anoxic zone (where reduction of nitrate to nitrogen gas exists) depends upon the sand grain size. However, the smaller its size, the less depth of the oxic and anoxic zones and the greater the anaerobic zone!
Now that we are clear on what and where certain forms of "filtration" occur and why, the next thing to examine is whether or not sand-shifting creatures are of value. The answer is generally yes, except for the larger sand-shifting organisms such as big worms, crustaceans, fish, and starfish that can feed upon the more valuable micro-size crustaceans that ply the substrate bringing nutrients to the various classes of existing bacteria. Unfortunately some of these larger sand-shifters not only diminish (eat) the valuable smaller microorganisms (including the good bacteria), they also can bring too much oxygen into the lower bed areas. And this creats more oxic areas leading to a potentially higher nitrate level in the aquarium, or possibly liberating some ammonium from lower levels.
And I should add all sandbeds eventually have tiny burrowing organisms that compliment the filtration capacities of the system. They usually arrive from live rock and/or coral additions, and find their way into the sandbed. And if we could control their size, activities, and what direction that would take, we would all have amazingly effective microbial colonies in our sandbeds resulting in "balanced" natural aquarium environment. Unfortunately, we aquarists don't have that power and must rely on the known facts of what various filtration methods provide, then match it/them to the goals of the system. And of course, limit the size and type of sand sifting individuals along with sensible maintenance, as you mention, if the sandbed is to remain in a microbially balanced, efficient state of health.
And I must add that Jaubert plenum sandbeds have their share of naturally occurring burrowing infauna/crustaceans. They, unless huge in size as noted above, do not liberate any of the temporary accumulating nutrients found in the plenum area (water space under the grid) from diffusing upwards in the sandbed. In fact, only a major intrusion into the bed all the way down to the grid could possible affect bulk water quality. Even then, I doubt it very much as I have yet to hear of such a happening after keeping plenum systems for 14 years and communicating with hundreds of plenum keepers, including Dr. Jaubert.
Further more, your thought that a Berlin system has limited denitrification and a DSB would help that situation is in error. In fact, is just the opposite of that, as most Berlin systems that I have seen have an over abundance of sand and live rock. And as mentioned above, if the sandbed is too deep, then there is more undesirable assimilatory denitrification occurring, and the same is true inside that of live rock. Probably even worse than that in a deep bed as there is far less penetration of oxygen into live rock! And even if 'nitrate' is a reduced aspect in these type systems, the very real possibility of excessive ammonium production and the inability to test for it along with it being a major algae nutrient, should raise a red flag. Could very well be aquarists with Berlin systems having alga problems have not fully understood the definitions of anoxic and anaerobic and what occurs where and why!
With that said, I think a DSB system is out of the question, and either a Berlin system with a bare bottom or very shallow bed, or an interconnected plenum system should be the possibilities.
As for a refugium, I think it's the area to add the plenum method or at least another shallow sandbed possibly with some macroalgae and at least lit opposite that of the main system. As for strictly a macro refugium (no plenum), they can be any size as there will be some overall system benefits in helping increase alkalinity, pH, and decreasing CO2 levels. Yet any thinking that such an interconnected macro refugium will eliminate the need for a protein skimmer, is not correct. That was an ill advised approach when Alga Turf scrubbers first came out, and after much discussion and further study, the majority of informed aquarists have realized that it is more beneficial to have a quality skimmer than not have one in almost all applications!
Furthermore, as for operating any aquarium or refugium without a skimmer, I find that thinking counter to maintaining an overall balanced microbial system. In fact, almost all aquariums should be equipped with "excellent" protein skimming. The reason for this is that its always possible to reduce skimming efficiency if you have an oversized unit, however not possible to increase its efficiency if undersized. And all systems have bumps in the road where increased skimmer efficiency may just be a lifesaver. And if fulltime skimming is not desirable, I recommend at least using a skimmer during the night when additional oxygen is needed in the aquarium. And if "detrimental effects" of skimming, as you call it, is thought to be the removal of trace elements, there's many excellent brand trace element solutions on the market and any one of them used sensibly would correct this minor problem area.
As for flow rates between refugium and main show tank, that depends upon the purpose of the refugium. If it's for holding a plenum system, anything between half the volume of the refugium and the full capacity of the refugium once per hour is sufficient. And its size, i.e., the size of the plenum tank, should be about half the size of the show tank. However, that really is dependable upon the bioload in the main system. If heavy, than half the size of the main tank is recommended. If bioload is moderate, than a smaller interconnected plenum system will suffice. As for a refugium solely for macroalgae, (no plenum) the flow should be swift enough to stir the macroalgae, yet not cause it to be uprooted so to speak and pushed around the tank or get sucked up into the return flow to the main system. Water motion in the main aquarium can always be enhanced as needed with wave making devices, and its level of flow would depend upon what species are being maintained.
Hope this helps,
Bob Goemans
Hi Bob,
I was referred to you by Tom Christou in NJ. He has all kinds of good words for you. I currently have a 90 gallon reef tank that is in a very bad condition due to hair/Botryocladia pseudodichotoma algae problems. I have read some of your Q/A section and per your suggestion, I am thinking of using ROWAphos to get rid of phosphates. However, I do not have a canister filter. I have a wetdry filter with bioballs(Amiracle). Where and how do I use ROWAphos with my current setup. Also, what do I need to do for the reduction of Nitrites in the tank?
I am also planning on setting up a Nano Reef(10-20 gal) at my work. I am planning to keep the following (leather coral, mushrooms, xenia, brain coral, Capnellia, star polyp etc). I am not too good at DIY stuff. Could you please recommend if the Nano Cube(12 gal) is a good one for the kind of nano I intend to create? If you think otherwise, could you also recommend/suggest any others?
Thank you,
Venu
Hi Venu,
Before I go into any details on your questions, I am currently involved in testing some new anti algae products. One is a 100% US Government certified organic product that is designed to prevent only the unwanted species from being able to uptake any nourishment, thereby causing them to slowly starve to death. The other is also an organic product and due to possible propriety reasons unable to say at this time as to exactly how it functions. However both have been tested in aquaria, including those in public aquariums with complex systems containing a variety of fish and corals. Results appear to be promising, with no harm to desired algae, fishes, microbial processes or invertebrates. Would you be interested in partaking. If so, they will send you what is needed for your size aquarium and you must tell them how you use it and the results. In other words, you correspond with them fully and keep them aware of what is occurring in your aquarium. If so, I will send them your email address.
Does your red algae look similar to the photo of this species on my website? (www.saltcorner.com) Go to the Guest Article section and open the Algae page. Can you send my a fairly good photo of it?
As for ROWAphos, which is an excellent product, you would probably be wasting your money if used where water simply tries to flow through a bag of it, such as if placed in your trickle filter. It would not only get into your aquarium because its an extremely fine material, it would also not be fully utilized since the majority of water would flow around the bag, not fully through it as what happens when used in a canister filter. So the choices are clear, at least in my opinion, use a canister filter or try one of these new anti-algae products.
Of course we can delve into the root cause and go from there. What are the levels of phosphate and nitrate in your aquarium and what brand test kits are you using? What kind of aquarium do you have, only fish and how many and type. What do you feed and how much. Please explain your system in much more detail as I need to know details to honestly help.
As for the Nano tank, it would be too small for any of the larger species corals such as leather corals, etc. Mushrooms, xenia, brain coral, and star polyp would work well. It's a nice idea for keeping small, fairly inexpensive reef environments. However, keep in mind the KISS thought, specially for these very small environments.
Let me know your thoughts.
Bob
Dear Bob,
I have been following you since your first article in Marine Fish Monthly. I have kept reef tanks since the trays were popular before DLS, protein skimmers, etc. I have gone through the progression of changes that took place in the hobby and lost count how many different wet/dry's, skimmers, and lighting changes I have undergone since 1986. I recently broke down a large SPS tank. I currently have a 10 and 20 gallon nano tanks with soft corals. Life is much more sane now not having to worry about calcium reactors, chillers (air-conditioning works just fine), and many different chemicals (as much anyway). Just do a 20% water change each week. I find myself enjoying things again. With the softies I just tell people "wavy is good!"
I want to set up a 40 gallon shallow tank. I do miss Montipora capricornis (my favorite coral of all time) along with zoos, Ricordia, Xenia, yumas, nepthea, african tree, green sea mat, crocea clams and perhaps some Blastomussa (undecided at this time). The tank is 36 inches long, 18 inches front to back and 18 inches high. No sump and all filtration will be HOT types.
Here is my set up plan and let me know what you think:
1) Live sand bed with no plenum - I would like to have a 1 - 2 inch layer of really fine sand. Since it is a shallow tank I didn't want a deep sand bed to dominate the space.
2) Filtration with refugium and Miracle Mud only. Similar to Ly Seng's commercial units. No skimmer. I figure it is easy to harvest Caulerpa and feed the tank. 24/7 lighting. If I have to use a skimmer (I'm really leaning against it) I was thinking about the new Coralife needle wheel Super Skimmer.
3) Lighting will be provided by six or eight 39 watt T5 bulbs. Many of my friends and stores have had a great deal of success with them. They run so much cooler than MH and appear brighter than VHO. This will allow me to just use my regular air-conditioning on hot summer days rather than adding a chiller. I figure this will allow me to keep a Montipora capricornis in the middle of my tank and still have it able to grow (along with the clams). I would use SeaChem products for top off with purified water. Still no need for a calcium reactor. If necessary I would use a two-part mixture. I've also wanted to try Ly Seng's method for quite some time. I never did it before since it worked against the plenum. Without a plenum, I thought it would be satisfactory. What is your opinion on this set up? What would you tweak, eliminate, add, etc.
Wilson Nacario
Hi Wilson,
Thanks for your letter and we go back a far way! My Salt Corner column in Marine Fish Monthly went 187 straight months without an interruption! Unfortunately the magazine shut down due to the Editor's poor health.
I can certainly understand your position where very large tanks are concerned. In fact, have a similar feeling about them as past health problems have caused me to steer clear of trying to maintain very large systems. Yet we both have a desire to keep our fingers wet so to speak, so we look towards smaller, simpler systems to keep our aquarium desires fulfilled. Whoever said you get better with age, really lied when they said that!
And we have both tried almost everything out there at this stage in life and from what you say in your letter, we both seem to have almost the same goals and think alike when it comes to aquarium products and various invertebrates. In fact, just put a Montipora capricornis in my aquarium last week!
As for the shallow sandbed in the main tank, one to two inches is what I would recommend for most aquariums, yet would recommend a course sand grain, i.e., about 5 mm. Very fine sand is either easily disturbed by animals or water currents, or does not provide the same useful microbial benefits as does the larger grained sand. Finer sand simply has a greater production of ammonium in its lower areas. I should also note that I've just seen a quite interesting set up that I think may have some very good long term benefits for some types of reef systems.
Try to picture this: In an empty tank, a wall of plastic material, such as what is used to edge lawns, is cemented to the bottom about four inches in from the surrounding panels. Its height could be whatever the hobbyist wants the look of the sandbed to be. In this case, the aquarium was a 150 gallon glass tank and the owner used this black grass edging material at a height of five inches (12.5 cm). He placed this plastic wall all around the inside bottom of the aquarium and bent the material so it conformed to the rectangular shape of the tank. He then marked the place where the material would rest on the bottom of the tank by using narrow masking tape and removed the plastic barrier. He then placed a bead of silicone along the bottom where the barrier would sit, and then placed the bottom edge of the barrier into that bead. A day later after it dried in place, he placed small, 4 inches high by about 6 inches long plastic triangular-shaped angles as supports every six inches along the inside of the barrier and siliconed those in place. He now had a sturdy wall that was filled with sand only on the front facing sides of the aquarium. Keep in mind this was an aquarium that would be seen from all four sides. A couple of days later he then placed all his live rock into the center bare bottom area and filled the tank. Why this way? Because he wanted long-term full control over accumulating detritus! In other words, did not want detritus accumulation in a sandbed where it was impossible to vacuum or reach, i.e., under a mountain of live rock. And, by directing jets of water into this empty bottom area, he would stir up any accumulating detritus in this area and allow some to flow to his mechanical filters, or be used as a foodstuff by his future corals. Where this goes in the future will be interesting to follow, but I think it has great value as a way to still see a sandbed of some depth, yet maintain a more healthy environment by reducing the accumulation of detritus in the long-term. Anyway, just thought you might be interested in this novel idea.
As for the HOT refugium filled with Ly Seng's Miracle Mud product, that's also a method that has gained some popularity over the past few years. Such an environment may even proved to be more interesting than the main show tank! In fact, I have seen Ly's original shop and his tanks along with some others that have utilized his mud method since that time and the various crustaceans, etc. living in them were quite interesting. And if the right forms of Caulerpa is used, e.g., C. prolifera and/or C. mexicana, which are the two best to feed herbivorous animals, then the benefits of such a tank increase, as not only are some of the bulk water's nutrients used up, the product produced is also useable. Yet, in my opinion water changes must continue as growths of Caulerpa can product toxins that may limit some coral growth. If only nutrient reduction is the goal with the refugium, then you might want to think about using the algae "Chaetomorpha," a fast grower, yet not suitable as a foodstuff. These algae can be seen by visiting my website.
And I would highly recommend using a skimmer, as it's really the most useful tool we aquarists have! Not only will it remove some nutrients before they become more problematic, it will also help oxygenate the bulk water, making for a healthier environment for "all" its inhabitants. And if you do, and use the new Coralife product, would like some feedback on it.
As for lighting, I keep seeing and hearing many great comments about the T-5's, especially from those in the U.K. And with about 6 watts per gallon you won't have any problems with your selection of stony corals or clams! As for your calcium and buffer parameters, don't delay the use of a two-part additive, as these additives are a simply way to control these important water parameters without the fuss and expense of a calcium reactor. Waiting until there is a deficiency would not be a good way to begin the system.
I hope this helps, and please keep me posted.
Bob
Hi Bob,
Thanks for your reply. I consider you one of the true hobbyists out there that lead by example, not for personal gain. You are a credit to this hobby and one of the earlier pioneers that has made a positive impact on reef keeping. It is good to have someone involved in reef-keeping as long as myself. It has been surrealistic in some ways watching the growth of this hobby over the years. I am amazed at the stages I have gone through (as you have undergone yourself) to keep up with the Joneses. I am taking your advice on my 40 and will go with a skimmer. I'm currently bidding on a Coralife Superskimmer on Ebay. We'll see how it goes.
What I find amazing is the rising price of coral. In 1986 it seemed all you could get was Ricordea and zooanthids. Now (depending on what part of the country you live in) they have surpassed the price of many SPS. The funny thing is I know a wholesaler and he insists the price of supposed "rare" color zoos are no more in price to purchase or ship than their less colored relatives. Ricordia cost more for one polyp than the multiple polyp heads I purchased back in the old days. I know moratoriums have been placed on various animals over time but I really feel people are getting gouged. I know one pet shop that had 3 blue zoos on a tiny rock and was asking $175 for it. It cost just as much as a purple rimmed efflorencens! This is another reason I have reverted back to "simple." My concern is beginning reefers will likely get driven out of the hobby and this will be a thing for only the rich and famous. Even at wholesale prices, I'm paying as much if not more than just 3 - 5 years ago. Oh well so much for the cost of progress. Keep up the good work and I'll keep you posted on my simple project!
Wilson Nacario
Hi Wilson,
Thanks for the follow up letter and kind remarks and you are so right about some of the costs associated with reef keeping. A few weeks ago visited a local store looking for a nice piece of Christmas Tree worm rock and the owner had a specimen of Ricordea florida with 8 healthy polyps. He wanted forty dollars "per polyp" for the specimen! Utterly ridiculous and said so! Yet in another local shop, purchased a small rock containing about 35 Zoanthus of which 12 were blue at a cost of 55 dollars. Even that was a little pricey in my opinion. I will however say the selection of animals is far better than a few years ago, yet so are the prices. But I'd rather spend some of my causal monies on this hobby and enjoy life, than not experience such a great hobby.
Enjoy, and keep me posted.
Cheers
Bob
Dear Bob,
I am a seventh grader and currently attending to the Manning Middle School. All seventh graders are required to participate in the Science Expo. For my project I am going to attempt to set up a 5 gallon hex aquarium capable of maintaining marine stock. I will also measure the chemical levels of the water during its cycling period producing data tables and charts for display. My father has discussed with me the Jaubert plenum method for setup but I am confused as to the appropriate height to construct the plenum structure. I also would like any information that you feel would be helpful in setting up this tank. The tank in question is an Eclipse Hex5 (i.e. sand depth and size, recommended changes to the existing tank, and problems that I may encounter with such a small sized tank.). My dad owns a 75 gal marine aquarium and I as well have a 15 gal freshwater aquarium in my room. Preceding my experiment, I also need to write a five paragraph essay about how I am to do my experiment and some information relating to projects similarly done in the past. Any help in any of these matters would be greatly appreciated. My father purchased your Live Sand Secrets book for me and I have read some of your articles in FAMA (My dad's Aquarium magazine). If you could please e-mail me back some information soon, that would be great! We have a limited time frame for completion with presentations scheduled for Feb. 3rd for completed projects. Sorry for such short notice, but that tends to be the norm with our school and our projects. Thanks and happy holidays.
Brandon Finamore
Hi Brandon
A very nice letter and happy holidays to you.
From what I gather your goal is to document the chemical parameters during the nitrification cycle in a marine aquarium as a science project for school. If that is correct, a plenum system in a five gallon tank would take up far too much space (about five inches in height) "and" any chemical parameters, such as ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate would be very miniscule and probably difficult or meaningless to record. I say that because when a plenum sand bed is established, usually with live sand and some live rock, very little or no ammonia or nitrite ever becomes visible. Generally, the rock and sand microbes provide enough biological processing to keep the water free of these constituents, even when a few fish are initially added.
I would consider going with a two inch bed of sand, about 2 - 5 mm in particle size, as proceeding either in two ways (organic or inorganic). In fact, I will attach an article I just sent to TFH that I think will help you in your goal. Please keep in mind you can not repeat or use it in public as the magazine has yet to print it. But portions of it should be helpful in writing you paper for school.
And suggest visiting my website at www.saltcorner.com as it has tons of interesting information and photos.
Say Hi to dad for me and let me know if you need anything further. Good luck with your project.
Bob Goemans
Bob:
I'm an aquarist with lots of questions. I'm setting up my first saltwater aquarium, I've had a freshwater planted tank for over a year with lots of success. I've read several books on the subject some of which were Natural Reef Aquariums, by John Tullock, The Reef Aquarium vol. I, by Charles Delbeek and Julian Sprung, Protein Skimming & Activated Carbon Secrets, Live Sand Secrets, and Water Quality guidelines for Marine Aquariums by you and recently The Captive Marine Aquarium by Wayne Shang that you recommended in FAMA. All of these are excellent books, so as you might guess I have a lot of knowledge, I just lack the experience in saltwater aquariums. I have a 46 gallon bow front tank with a 10 gallon sump in the cabinet both are open top. The sump houses a Pro Clear Aquatic Skimmer with a 200 gal/hr pump, Rio 1700 pump with 4ft of head, Ebo Jager Heater 200 watt, and 8 lbs of left over Tonga live rock. In the tank I have a plenum make with 50 lbs of Seaflor Special grade and 45 lbs of Seaflor Fiji Pink substrate, I then have 55 lbs of Tonga live rock. For water movement there are 2 Power Sweeps that moves 160 gal/hr and 1 Power Sweep that moves 270 gal/hr, all three are plugged into a natural wave maker. As of now there are two 36 inch 10,000K bulbs and one 36 inch Actinic 03 bulb, but I will build a custom hood that will be hung above the tank that will contain two 400 watt MH and four 36 inch 30 watt Actinic 03 bulbs and LED moon lights. The only additives I have added were Marc Weise Bacter Vital and Coral Vital LSB per directions on bottle and everything seems just fine. Before I bought the products I went to there web site and looked at there products and when I was done I was sold and now I wonder if these products are any good or did I waste my time and money. I'm vary excited about this tank and I want to set it up right and I can't afford to spend money on trail and error. By the way it took me about two months to get to the point I'm at, so as you can tell I'm not trying to rush this and get animals in there as soon as possible. I do have a list of fish and inverts I would like to house in this tank. I wanted to base the tank around a pair of clownfish and it's host, I really like the True Percula Clownfish but I'm having trouble getting information on the host anemones and there requirements. Other tank mates I would like to have are a Sailfin Blenny, Six Line Wrasse, 2-3 Neon Goby, Yellow Tang and several small crabs and snails. I wanted to have a few species of Acropora and or Montipora coral, several clams and maybe a soft coral or two. My million dollar question is beside the basic (ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, pH, alkalinity and calcium) what should I be testing for and if I need to make changes what additives do I use and what manufacture products do I buy. I read so many different options I'm not sure what I should be doing, some say calcium is the only thing to worry about others say to pay attention to strontium, iodine, and magnesium I now have Seachem basic and reef special test kits and if found that some the test are vary time consuming. I don't yet have a calcium test kit and would like to know of a good brad to buy and the best type and brand of calcium additive to use, I was thinking to a 2-part additive and maybe the aragonite solution you talked about. I would be vary grateful on any help and guidance you may be able to give me and if I'm doing any thing that is not good please let me know. Thank you very much for your time.
Thanks,
Bryan Chevrie
Hi Bryan,
Thanks for the letter, and it looks like you're doing very good at this point in time. Some of the info you're looking for, anemone for your clowns, can be found on my website (saltcorner.com). The water quality booklet will tell you what parameter levels you should seek, and as for the more important ones, nitrate (Fastest), calcium (Salifert), alkalinity (Fastest), and pH (Fastest), are the ones I recommend keeping a good handle on. Magnesium (Salifert), may be another if you decide to keep some Acropora corals. Iodine, forget about testing for it, as its not worth the time or money for the kits on the market. However, if you do keep some corals, one drop a day for your size system of any good additive will suffice. And I don't think strontium is of great importance if you keep the calcium and alkalinity levels in their recommended levels. I prefer the brand kits mentioned.
As for the two part calcium and buffer solutions, call Warner Marine and talk to Jon (805.584.5197). They have the best (also order their iodine)!
As for lighting, one 400W MH will be sufficient! That's eight watts per gallon and that will suffice for even stony corals. And two 36 inch 30 watt Actinic 03 bulbs for sun-rise and sun-set will also be sufficient in my opinion, as will two LED moon lights.
Read through my website and if you have any further questions, contact me. Otherwise, have a great holiday weekend.
Bob
Dear Bob,
In the August 2005 issue of FAMA, you respond to a reader that you are testing a couple of new products that claim to remove or prevent unwanted algae growth. Specifically, you describe an organic product designed to prevent nutrient uptake by unwanted algae, and other proprietary organic product. Would you mind sharing the names of these products with me, and any results you have obtained thus far?
Kind regards,
Rich Mendis
Hi Rich,
Thanks for your mail, and the product was Algae Magic the one and only 100% government certified organic product on the market, which has proved to be so successful that even large public aquariums are ordering it in the gallon size.
In fact, I even use it in my nano aquarium along with CaribSea liquid phosphate removing product, as it's the easiest way to go to control this aspect of reef keeping in small aquaria in my opinion.
Hope this helps, and enjoy the holiday weekend.
Bob
Bob,
In trying to keep up with going back to simplicity with my latest tank set up I need to ask your opinion. I told you about setting up a 40 gallon breeder tank as a reef. I am following your advice and will use 1 inch of coarse sand with no plenum. I didn't tell you that I will be using a lot of aragocrete rock (trying to do my part to save nature), I know you told me about the curing process and such but I can be patient since this is sort of a long term project. I am curing the rocks now in salt water after a 6 week curing in freshwater.
I got a great deal on one of those Coralife Super Skimmers. Only 36 bucks on Ebay! It's brand new and I'm looking forward to using it. I followed some threads on Reef Central and several hobbyists are using them and selling their Remora Pros. This sold me (I had a Remora and loved it) but according to what I've read these are just as efficient and more (especially at the price I paid!)
My question.......I want to use chemical filtration to further reduce phosphates and such. I am trying to decide between 2 approaches. Using an Aquaclear HOB filter with phosphate remover and carbon OR getting a HOB refugium to assist with extra filtration and some food production. I've heard mixed results on using a refugium for this purpose. I've also heard that using too much phosphate remover (in a phos reactor or HOB filter) can make some corals lose colors because they are not getting enough phosphate (again on reef central). I have seen a couple of pet shops that use a lot of phosphate remover in their display tanks and noticed many of their SPS have gone from vivid colors and reverting to brown. Of course it could be from other factors but when you do look at the equpment in their tanks it looks like a NASA space system. Oh going back to simple is nice!
I hope things are going well for you and I'll keep you updated on my latest going back to simple reef project.
Wilson Nacario
Hi Wilson,
Its extremely important that the pH of the water holding those man made rocks is normal, as they tend to raise pH dangerously high for a long time after they are made. So double check the water in the holding facility before using this type rock.
And give me some follow up on the skimmer, as I would like to read your comments on this unit.
When it comes to sps turning brown in the dealers tanks, that's almost always the lack of light intensity, not a phosphate problem.
And for your small tank, I would suggest using the CaribSea liquid product called Phos-Buster. It's so simple to use, and would be very cost effective since you don't need any other equipment to apply it. Simply add the recommended number of drops once per month, and/or as suggested on the label. I think it's a great product for small reef tanks.
Cheers
Bob
Hi Bob,
A reader (Illya Cheng) has recently contacted us regarding some Liquid Life BioPlankton he has purchased. I have read that this is a product you've got some experience of, hence the email via the experts service.
He is concerned that the product he has purchased is out of date (the bottle is stamped 05/10/04) and that it might not be safe to use in his reef tank. His dealer has told him, incorrectly I think, that US dates are the reverse of UK ones, so the product actually goes out of date on 4th Oct 2005, rather than 5th October 2004...
If you could give an expert opinion we'd be most grateful. ILLYA CHENG - cymricharry@yahoo.co.uk
Many thanks, Matt
Hi Matt,
Nice chatting with "Mr. Practical Fishkeeping" (in my opinion) as your articles are a vital part of that magazine!
As for the product, actually, we Americans place month, day, year or sometimes day, month, year in that order and you guys have it year, month, day, which is the Julian method, I believe. Anyway, the dealer is correct as Liquid Life 'does' use the Julian method to date their products. So the product is still good.
Further more, it would continue to be good after the expiration date for another six months, yet in that timeframe begin to lose its digestibility.
And note, sometime in the future this date 'problem' area is going to be corrected on their labels with specific info relating to reading the expiration date. When I'm not sure, but you can put the readers mind at ease as the product is still good.
Cheers
Bob
Hi Bob,
I found your web site 5 days ago and I can stop reading all the articles, it is such a great information resource. I am getting ready to put an order in for a custom made reef tank. I have bin planning for mounts thinking about what size and the best way to set it up. (planning around my 36" twin bulb hqi light that I just bought 3 months ago.) The tank dimensions are 36" x 24" x 22".
I going to get the over flow mounted on the back wall in the center of the tank. The over flow is rated at 1500 gph .
I'm going to use a 1100 gph pump with one squid for mec. filtering. The two returns from the squid will be g in each far back corner, then I would like to do a closed loop system. And that is when I m not shore what to ask for. Do I get 1 supply to the pump drilled in the back wall of the tank and were? And 2 or 3 return holes in the back wall of the tank? And were should the holes be located. I was planning to use a 1200 gph pump for this.
Also I have 75 lbs of live rock from my 46 gal tank that will be going in to this tank and hopefully 70 lbs more. my plan for my aquascape is to do an island or a trench, with no rock touching any glass, except the bottom. I have had many fresh water fully planted tanks over the years. I turned my 46 gal. in to a reef tank in Dec. this past year and I just can't stop looking at it, working on it and reading everything I can get my hands on, this is the greatest hobby I have ever had. hope you can help me .
Thanks
Joe Russell
Hi Joe,
If you like the website, please spread the word! I have my heart in it!
The central back area is the best place for the overflow, as that will allow surface water from all areas to exit your 80 gallon tank.
However, do not understand the following; "I'm going to use a 1100 gph pump with one squid for mec. filtering. The two returns from the squid will be g in each far back corner, then I would like to do a closed loop system. And that is when I m not shore what to ask for. Do I get 1 supply to the pump drilled in the back wall of the tank and were? And 2 or 3 return holes in the back wall of the tank? And were should the holes be located. I was planning to use a 1200 gph pump for this."
You'll need to explain that more.
And keep in mind, the less you drill holes in the tank, the better off you are in the long run.
Cheers,
Bob
Hi Bob,
I'm a recent fan of yours, it just so happened that every interesting book I picked up was written by you.. That could be because I have enough big books with pretty pictures, and needed some education materials. Anyways, I am in the market for a Calcium Reactor I only have one Green Birdsnest coral and the coco worm that even needs calcium.. The main reason I want one is to try to do away with the PH swings in the mornings it has been as low as 7.68 from a steady 8.3 during the day.. I just recently started taking note of this thinking that it was normal, and it may be, but from my understanding a Calc Reactor should remedy this.. I don't know what my ALK measurements are but they're probably bad.. I dose B-Ionic with a litermeter3, and haven't tested Calc or ALK in forever.. I just thought if PH is 8.3 it is good.. I had no Idea it was swinging so much.. So anyways, I saw your review of the Korallin and the Mini-Cal.. What do you think of the Knop S-IV? I have kinda narrowed it down to the Knop or the Korallin 1502. The knop is a couple hundred more I do subscribe to the thought that you get what you pay for so I am leaning towards the Knop.. Do you have any insight on this?
On another note, I had a very bad experience with an Aqua-Medic Denitrator I can't believe they sell that thing it was horrible I couldn't get the Drip Rate and the MV to cooperate at all, and then the bacteria colony would stop up the outlet tube, and it would go south from there.. It was horrible. I am really afraid that I won't be able to get the Bubble Counter and the drip rate to cooperate.. So what do you think?
Thanks,
Tommy
Hi Tommy,
Thanks for your letter. You don't say how big your aquarium is, but never the less, B-Ionic should maintain both pH and calcium unless… your magnesium level is incorrect. In fact, large swings in pH is a telltale sign of low magnesium levels! Before you go into the expense of a calcium reactor, get a Salifert Magnesium test kit and check its level. Keep in mind the magnesium level must be related to the aquariums specific gravity. If not sure what it should be, contact me with both results and we will take it from there.
And yes, have heard the same about the Aqua-Medic denitrator from others. But never have used the device or heard of quick fixes other than totally cleaning it out and starting over. But have heard good things about a similar sulfur reactor device made by Deltec. Unfortunately those types of equipment are still more experimental than common everyday equipment types.
Maybe we should discuss your nitrate levels (include stocking levels, feeding, and general maintenance in your response). There are other ways to resolve it.
Checkout my website at 'saltcorner.com'
Cheers
Bob