Mega Powerful Nitrate and Phosphate Remover - DIY!
- Thread starter SantaMonica
- Start date
0 Nitrates on the Salifert Test too. Awesome. I should still vacuum the sand bed once a month - to clean deteris right? Also, are these pods visible to the naked eye? I can't see them. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough.
We should start a new thread on this Ph bounce issue. I go from 7.9 (night) to 8.2 (end of day). Any thoughts?
OceanParks
We should start a new thread on this Ph bounce issue. I go from 7.9 (night) to 8.2 (end of day). Any thoughts?
OceanParks
Well, actually its the uptake of the CO2 that would help the pH. O2 and CO2 are not directly proportionate.
Sure you could try air stones in the sump at night but in the long run having the water surface agitated will be a better interface for gas exchange.
All things considered though, like I said, a pH swing is not uncommon. That's why when I do water tests I also log what time I did them. Personally I wouldn't worry about it if all other parameters are good. "Hands off" can be one of the best treatments for this hobby
.
Chris
Sure you could try air stones in the sump at night but in the long run having the water surface agitated will be a better interface for gas exchange.
All things considered though, like I said, a pH swing is not uncommon. That's why when I do water tests I also log what time I did them. Personally I wouldn't worry about it if all other parameters are good. "Hands off" can be one of the best treatments for this hobby
. Chris
One of the big benefits of a scrubber is that it keeps food in the water. Here is an update pertaining to this:
Part 1 of 7:
Taken from "Reef Food" by Eric Borneman:
Reef Food by Eric Borneman - Reefkeeping.com
"Detritus, marine snow, particulate organic material, and suspended particulate matter are all names for the bits of "dirt" [food] that flow around the reef; material that is composed of fecal material, borings, algae, plant material, mucus, associated bacteria, cyanobacteria and other particles. Decomposers (mainly bacteria and associated flora and fauna) break down waste material in the water, on the reef, and primarily, in the soft sediments. The result of their presence and action is not only a food source in and of itself, but provides raw material for channeling back into the food chain, largely through the benthic algae and phytoplankton.
"Phytoplankton [food] are small unicellular algae, or protists, that drift in the water column. They may be very abundant in and around coral reefs, and they are capable of absorbing large amounts of organic and inorganic nutrients. [...] Some of the reef animals can feed directly on phytoplankton; many soft corals, some sponges, almost all clams, feather-duster worms, and other filter feeders utilize phytoplankton directly as a food source. Small animals in the water column, termed zooplankton [food], also utilize phytoplankton as a food source. For the smaller zooplankton, phytoplankton and bacteria are the primary food source.
"Both of the [photos not shown] are from reefs on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. The left photo shows the clear "nutrient poor" (oligotrophic) waters of the outer reefs. The right photo is of an inshore "nutrient rich" lagoon reef off Townsville. Notice how coral coverage in both systems is high, and even though the green phytoplankton-filled lagoonal reef is nutrient rich, it supports a high density of Acropora.
"Coral reef food sources, then, are largely produced by the ocean. Bacteria, detritus, phytoplankton, zooplankton, small benthic fauna, mucus, and dissolved organic and inorganic material of various types and sizes are what comprise the majority of food on a coral reef.
"In aquaria, we are faced with several realities. Our phytoplankton and zooplankton populations are generally negligible to non-existent in comparison with coral reef communities. Those which do exist are either rapidly consumed without having a chance to reproduce, or they are rapidly removed or killed by pumps and filtering devices or suspension-feeders. Coral mucus, bacteria, detritus, larval benthos and other "psuedo-plankton" might be present in a reasonable amount if the water column were not stripped. On the other hand, dissolved organic and inorganic material [nitrate, phosphate] levels are frequently much higher than they are in the ocean. [...] Even very well maintained aquaria are generally found with much higher levels of nitrogen and phosphorous than wild communities. Even though many desirable organisms are able to utilize these nutrients, levels in most aquaria are very unnatural, and coral reefs under such conditions often wane or die - a process known as eutrophication.
"It is the lack of water column-based food that results in limited success with the maintenance of some desirable animals, such as crinoids, flame scallops, clams, certain corals, sponges, bryozoans, and many other invertebrates. Even the symbiotic (zooxanthellate) corals [like SPS] suffer, despite many obvious long-term successes with these animals.
"In terms of previously mentioned export mechanisms, it really does little good to be cultivating or adding more food material in the water column if it is all being rapidly removed by filtration devices. Live rock and sand provide abundant filtration, and some of the articles in past issues describing the set-up and use of unskimmed tanks are, in my experience, something that should be seriously considered. Algae Turf Scrubbers are also viable systems that provide low ambient water nutrient levels [of nitrate and phosphate] while maintaining higher amounts of food and particulate matter in the water. I also feel that if protein skimmers are used, they should probably be used in an intermittent fashion.
Part 1 of 7:
Taken from "Reef Food" by Eric Borneman:
Reef Food by Eric Borneman - Reefkeeping.com
"Detritus, marine snow, particulate organic material, and suspended particulate matter are all names for the bits of "dirt" [food] that flow around the reef; material that is composed of fecal material, borings, algae, plant material, mucus, associated bacteria, cyanobacteria and other particles. Decomposers (mainly bacteria and associated flora and fauna) break down waste material in the water, on the reef, and primarily, in the soft sediments. The result of their presence and action is not only a food source in and of itself, but provides raw material for channeling back into the food chain, largely through the benthic algae and phytoplankton.
"Phytoplankton [food] are small unicellular algae, or protists, that drift in the water column. They may be very abundant in and around coral reefs, and they are capable of absorbing large amounts of organic and inorganic nutrients. [...] Some of the reef animals can feed directly on phytoplankton; many soft corals, some sponges, almost all clams, feather-duster worms, and other filter feeders utilize phytoplankton directly as a food source. Small animals in the water column, termed zooplankton [food], also utilize phytoplankton as a food source. For the smaller zooplankton, phytoplankton and bacteria are the primary food source.
"Both of the [photos not shown] are from reefs on the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. The left photo shows the clear "nutrient poor" (oligotrophic) waters of the outer reefs. The right photo is of an inshore "nutrient rich" lagoon reef off Townsville. Notice how coral coverage in both systems is high, and even though the green phytoplankton-filled lagoonal reef is nutrient rich, it supports a high density of Acropora.
"Coral reef food sources, then, are largely produced by the ocean. Bacteria, detritus, phytoplankton, zooplankton, small benthic fauna, mucus, and dissolved organic and inorganic material of various types and sizes are what comprise the majority of food on a coral reef.
"In aquaria, we are faced with several realities. Our phytoplankton and zooplankton populations are generally negligible to non-existent in comparison with coral reef communities. Those which do exist are either rapidly consumed without having a chance to reproduce, or they are rapidly removed or killed by pumps and filtering devices or suspension-feeders. Coral mucus, bacteria, detritus, larval benthos and other "psuedo-plankton" might be present in a reasonable amount if the water column were not stripped. On the other hand, dissolved organic and inorganic material [nitrate, phosphate] levels are frequently much higher than they are in the ocean. [...] Even very well maintained aquaria are generally found with much higher levels of nitrogen and phosphorous than wild communities. Even though many desirable organisms are able to utilize these nutrients, levels in most aquaria are very unnatural, and coral reefs under such conditions often wane or die - a process known as eutrophication.
"It is the lack of water column-based food that results in limited success with the maintenance of some desirable animals, such as crinoids, flame scallops, clams, certain corals, sponges, bryozoans, and many other invertebrates. Even the symbiotic (zooxanthellate) corals [like SPS] suffer, despite many obvious long-term successes with these animals.
"In terms of previously mentioned export mechanisms, it really does little good to be cultivating or adding more food material in the water column if it is all being rapidly removed by filtration devices. Live rock and sand provide abundant filtration, and some of the articles in past issues describing the set-up and use of unskimmed tanks are, in my experience, something that should be seriously considered. Algae Turf Scrubbers are also viable systems that provide low ambient water nutrient levels [of nitrate and phosphate] while maintaining higher amounts of food and particulate matter in the water. I also feel that if protein skimmers are used, they should probably be used in an intermittent fashion.
Wow, what a thread. sure does spark some ideas.
I'm wondering if, in place of a screen, a sheet of plexiglass which has been beat with a meat tenderizer mallet might work. set it at a 45 degree angle or what ever works and run water over it of course keeping in mind the inch per gal and ghp rules.
now, if i read correctly, if you were to place a light under the plexiglass ( with the idea that the plexiglass worked ) the new growth would push the old growth off the plexiglass and, if this were the case then would the algae grow thick enough to slide off the plexiglass. if that were possible, then would it be possible to curve the bottom of the plexiglass so it overlaped a tray of some sort, like one of the new style rain gutters that won't allow the leaves and debries to fall in where the water goes.
Am i a little cracked or does this make any sense to anyone else. if so do you see where i'm going with this. possibly a easy algae removal where it builds up and under it's own weight slides off to a removel tray.
just a little of my crazy brain storming. what do you all think.
I'm wondering if, in place of a screen, a sheet of plexiglass which has been beat with a meat tenderizer mallet might work. set it at a 45 degree angle or what ever works and run water over it of course keeping in mind the inch per gal and ghp rules.
now, if i read correctly, if you were to place a light under the plexiglass ( with the idea that the plexiglass worked ) the new growth would push the old growth off the plexiglass and, if this were the case then would the algae grow thick enough to slide off the plexiglass. if that were possible, then would it be possible to curve the bottom of the plexiglass so it overlaped a tray of some sort, like one of the new style rain gutters that won't allow the leaves and debries to fall in where the water goes.
Am i a little cracked or does this make any sense to anyone else. if so do you see where i'm going with this. possibly a easy algae removal where it builds up and under it's own weight slides off to a removel tray.
just a little of my crazy brain storming. what do you all think.
Well I certainly like new ideas, but showing their bad side is not my favorite thing. However for the purpose of showing readers what scrubbers need to operate, let's look at yours
I recommend to not use plexi, unless you glue some plastic or rug canvas across it. Plexi is just too smooth. And a mallet won't help. Sandpaper/files, maybe.
You are referring to the "light screen" from a few pages ago, and yes it would work this way.
But this you definately don't want. That's why you using canvas/screen materials... to keep algae in place. If it were to slide off into a bin, then it would start dying from lack of light and flow.
So, just start with a standard and proven design, learn what makes it work best, and then tinker
I recommend to not use plexi, unless you glue some plastic or rug canvas across it. Plexi is just too smooth. And a mallet won't help. Sandpaper/files, maybe.
You are referring to the "light screen" from a few pages ago, and yes it would work this way.
But this you definately don't want. That's why you using canvas/screen materials... to keep algae in place. If it were to slide off into a bin, then it would start dying from lack of light and flow.
So, just start with a standard and proven design, learn what makes it work best, and then tinker
Thought Of The Day:
A few folks have seen (or thought that they had seen) their skimmers "working less" or "producing less" after their scrubber started working. While this may have happened for other reasons, there is really no direct reason that a scrubber should cause a skimmer to produce less. This is because a skimmer and a scrubber remove different things: Scrubbers remove Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate, which are invisible, and which are the things that your test kits test for. Skimmers remove food (Organics). So having a scrubber remove the Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate really shouldn't cause a skimmer to remove any less food (unless you are feeding less). What MIGHT be happening, is that less Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate in the water means there is less food for bacteria (bacteria eat Organics AND Inorganics), and if there is less bacteria, then there is less to skim out.
A few folks have seen (or thought that they had seen) their skimmers "working less" or "producing less" after their scrubber started working. While this may have happened for other reasons, there is really no direct reason that a scrubber should cause a skimmer to produce less. This is because a skimmer and a scrubber remove different things: Scrubbers remove Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate, which are invisible, and which are the things that your test kits test for. Skimmers remove food (Organics). So having a scrubber remove the Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate really shouldn't cause a skimmer to remove any less food (unless you are feeding less). What MIGHT be happening, is that less Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate in the water means there is less food for bacteria (bacteria eat Organics AND Inorganics), and if there is less bacteria, then there is less to skim out.
Update of the Day: New Research on Skimmers and Organics:
The whole point of scrubbers is that they remove Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate, which are the things your test kits measure, and which are also the things that cause nuisance algae to grow. The other good point about scrubbers is that they leave Organics (food) in the water for the corals and fish and bacteria to eat (the bacteria also then become coral food.) People who prefer skimmers, however, say that skimmers removes Organics (food) before they break down into Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate.
I say, why not just feed less, instead of feeding more and then removing it with a skimmer? Let's look at it from their viewpoint. Their viewpoint is "Feed more, and remove the excess Organics (food) with the skimmer." Well, the current January 2009 issue of Advanced Aquarist just published extensive research into how well different skimmers remove Organics. They refer to Organics as "TOC", which is the Total Organic Carbon; TOC is the the combination of Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC), and Particulate Organic Carbon (POC). Here is the article, and this is what it said:
Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine - Feature Article: The Development of a Method for the Quantitative Evaluation of Protein Skimmer Performance
"In addition to some dissolved organics, small particulates and microbes (bacterioplankton, phytoplankton) can be removed at the air/water interface of the [skimmer] bubble as well (Suzuki, 2008). The skimming process does not remove atoms/molecules that are strictly polar and readily dissolve in water, such as some organics, salts, inorganic phosphate, carbonate, etc.
"The skimmer pulls out all of the TOC that it is going to remove by the 50-minute mark. Beyond that time point, nothing much is happening, and the TOC level doesn't change much.
"Thus, all skimmers tested remove around 20 - 30% of the TOC in the aquarium water, and that's it; 70 - 80% of the measurable TOC is left behind unperturbed by the skimming process. It may be possible to develop a rationalization for this unexpected behavior by referring back to Fig. 1. Perhaps only 20 - 30% of the organic species in the aquarium water meet the hydrophobic requirements for bubble capture, whereas the remaining 70-80%, for whatever reason, don't."
So, the strength of skimmers (since they don't remove Inorganics) is supposed to be that they remove Organics before they break down. But this research shows (once again) that they don't even remove the Organics. Here is additional 2008 reasearch that shows the same:
Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine - Feature Article: Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and the Reef Aquarium: an Initial Survey, Part I
Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine - Feature Article: Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and the Reef Aquarium: an Initial Survey, Part II
The whole point of scrubbers is that they remove Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate, which are the things your test kits measure, and which are also the things that cause nuisance algae to grow. The other good point about scrubbers is that they leave Organics (food) in the water for the corals and fish and bacteria to eat (the bacteria also then become coral food.) People who prefer skimmers, however, say that skimmers removes Organics (food) before they break down into Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate.
I say, why not just feed less, instead of feeding more and then removing it with a skimmer? Let's look at it from their viewpoint. Their viewpoint is "Feed more, and remove the excess Organics (food) with the skimmer." Well, the current January 2009 issue of Advanced Aquarist just published extensive research into how well different skimmers remove Organics. They refer to Organics as "TOC", which is the Total Organic Carbon; TOC is the the combination of Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC), and Particulate Organic Carbon (POC). Here is the article, and this is what it said:
Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine - Feature Article: The Development of a Method for the Quantitative Evaluation of Protein Skimmer Performance
"In addition to some dissolved organics, small particulates and microbes (bacterioplankton, phytoplankton) can be removed at the air/water interface of the [skimmer] bubble as well (Suzuki, 2008). The skimming process does not remove atoms/molecules that are strictly polar and readily dissolve in water, such as some organics, salts, inorganic phosphate, carbonate, etc.
"The skimmer pulls out all of the TOC that it is going to remove by the 50-minute mark. Beyond that time point, nothing much is happening, and the TOC level doesn't change much.
"Thus, all skimmers tested remove around 20 - 30% of the TOC in the aquarium water, and that's it; 70 - 80% of the measurable TOC is left behind unperturbed by the skimming process. It may be possible to develop a rationalization for this unexpected behavior by referring back to Fig. 1. Perhaps only 20 - 30% of the organic species in the aquarium water meet the hydrophobic requirements for bubble capture, whereas the remaining 70-80%, for whatever reason, don't."
So, the strength of skimmers (since they don't remove Inorganics) is supposed to be that they remove Organics before they break down. But this research shows (once again) that they don't even remove the Organics. Here is additional 2008 reasearch that shows the same:
Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine - Feature Article: Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and the Reef Aquarium: an Initial Survey, Part I
Advanced Aquarist's Online Magazine - Feature Article: Total Organic Carbon (TOC) and the Reef Aquarium: an Initial Survey, Part II
Awsome
Awsome! thats all I can say. About a month ago I built a bucket style ATS, with a plastic sreen. And I did not have good results as far as algae growth on the screen goes. Did not test for N and P.
But four days ago I found a canvas rug screen from walmart(alot more than I need, like a couple meters squared). And did the ATS over again. Day 1 and 2 not much, but today after work I looked at it and wow it was full af algae. I can only imagine what its gonna look like tommorow. Its the only time I look forward to seeing algae.lol
Thanks very much SM for this reinvented idea, and this awsome thread. Keep it up guys.
Awsome! thats all I can say. About a month ago I built a bucket style ATS, with a plastic sreen. And I did not have good results as far as algae growth on the screen goes. Did not test for N and P.
But four days ago I found a canvas rug screen from walmart(alot more than I need, like a couple meters squared). And did the ATS over again. Day 1 and 2 not much, but today after work I looked at it and wow it was full af algae. I can only imagine what its gonna look like tommorow. Its the only time I look forward to seeing algae.lol
Thanks very much SM for this reinvented idea, and this awsome thread. Keep it up guys.
In my related research of reducing Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate, overfeeding was always an issue. Scrubbers help, by introducing live (instead of dead) copepods to the tank, but the rest of the feeding always causes excess food to get stuck in the rock and sand, and rot. The solution to this could be an Automatic Continuous Feeder. The writeup is here:
http://www.myfishtank.net/forum/sal...on/55696-automatic-continuous-feeder-diy.html
http://www.myfishtank.net/forum/sal...on/55696-automatic-continuous-feeder-diy.html