Bio Balls Or Refugiam

stuccodude

New member
I was looking at pictures of peoples set up and was wondering if i shound remove my bio balls and make it a refugium (hope i spelled that right) i appreciate the response, troy
 
if it is just fish only it doesn't really matter. if it is a reef tank then it is a good idea but make sure that you have enough live rock and that you remove them slowly.
 
for a tank your size, I would go with a fuge/sump combo. Buy a 55 used and glue in some partions and make your own.
 
I think that is an excelent idea.
Even if it is fish only the fish will benefit from the healthier environment as well as from the snackbar a refugium is.
 
Yep, bioballs tend to lead to excess nitrates. Fish can tolerate fairly high nitrate levels, but that doesn't mean that it's good for them. Many inverts are pretty sensitive to nitrates. I'd remove the bio balls a little at a time over several days (assuming that you have a good amount of live rock). The effect will be to switch the nitrogen processing from the balls to the rock slowly, giving the rock time to grow the needed bacteria.
HTH,
Mariner
 
This is a good question.
I thought that both bio balls and live rock both were homes for aerobic bacteria, and as such they would both produce nitrates from nitrite. If that is the case then what is the big deal, one way or the other. Other than the refugium being a good source of nutrient export, if it has a deep sand bed that is undisturbed it will have anaerobic bacteria to remove nitrate, and source of copepods. The refugium with live rock seems to be the method that most folks are using, however, I would like to know the science behind what I am doing and not just doing because everyone else is doing it that way.

PS: Not trying to hijack your tread, but I think this question will add to both your and my understanding of this choice for our reef tanks.
Thanks,
John
:)
 
Well, as I understand it (and my memory is a little fuzzy on the exact science) you are correct MosesBrown in that bioballs and LR produce nitrates from ammonia/nitrites. The difference seems to be that the balls produce nitrates very effeciently, but have no mechanism for processing nitrates. LR processes nitrogen more slowly, but it may also further process the nitrates themselves in some of the deeper anaerobic recesses of the rock AND LR can eventually process as much nitrogen as the bioballs. If you take out bioballs and add a refugium with macro (that you harvest as nutrient export), the net effect that most reefers experience is a vast improvement over bioballs/LR in general water quality and particularly nitrate levels.
FWIW,
Mariner
 
Thanks for this thread.
Why not both? I have bio-balls in one sump and a refugium next to that sump. Has anyone else found success with this?
 
I think that if you have both bio balls & LR the bio balls will actually do most of the nitrogen processing because they are somewhat more efficient at that. So, your LR is not doing much work; but, if you have a fuge with macro that can keep up with the bioballs, it might work ok. I just think the bioballs are an unnecesarry thing with good LR and a good fuge.
To paraphrase JFK, you look at bioballs and LR and say "Why not?" I look at bioballs and LR and ask, "Why?"
FWIW,
Mariner
 
thanks everyone, so im gonna pull the balls out over the next few weeks and replace with what appears to be algea(i,ll get the right stuff, i seen it at the LFS) i have about 130 pounds live rock in the display, i would run both troutdoc but i dont have the room, i may later when i put in a small opening in the wall to go into the garage and really get creative, thanks again everyone, i have been learning soo much by reading everyones comments, thanks, troy
 
Last edited:
Refugium instead of bio balls.

Yes a refugium needs lighting to grow the macro algea.

Macro algea helps export nutients i.e nitrate.
 
Back
Top