Biopellets - anyone running them?

[Jacob D]

If so, which brand are you running? How are you running them (reactor, sock, etc...)? And most importantly have you noticed a drop in PO4 or NO3 levels or other visual cues that indicate they're having a positive effect?


I just started running 1000ml of the Warner Marine "Ecobak" today. I've got them in a reactor. I started the flow very slowly they're not fluidizing at this point. I'm trying to play it safe be keeping the flow light, I don't want to end up with a crazy bacterial bloom that I have heard about.

I'm still running GFO for now but I'm hoping once the pellets start growing the bacteria population I can cut the GFO way down, or maybe eliminate it. I'd love to hear if anyone else here has experience with any of the brands. Either way I'll update here with my experience.

 

[RiOnRoxXx]

Johnny is the only one that I know of that runs them. After seeing his setup and took into consideration his advice, I may try this down the road. Staying tuned to see how it goes for you Jacob

 

[sfexplicit]

I've been on the pellets for about 6 months. Came off the Vodka and MB7 because I was tired of having to manually dose and I lost quite few zoas & palys. Running them in a reactor. I believe that the taller and skinner reactors tumble the pellets much better than a reactor with a wider diameter. I'm on my second reactor actually and it really helped. I'm using a Precision Marine reactor with a Maxijet 1200 that I got a deal on and it's about 4" in diameter I believe. I started slow and added enough pellets to reach recommended amount over a couple months time(overly cautious).
Be CAREFUL not giving enough flow through yours. From what I understand if it's stagnant inside the reactor with pellets it will produce a rotten egg smell. Some kind of sulfur that can crash your tank. If you're worried about starting too fast just take some out and add them slowly over a couple weeks time. From what I understand some people get a bacterial bloom because they started with higher NO3 & PO4. The pellets being a source of organic carbon feed the bacteria that breakdown nitrates and phosphates. I think that starting with a higher nutrient level gives the bacteria a lot to nitrates and phosphates to breakdown and with the pellets feeding the bacteria you will get this bacterial bloom. I started with low nutrients and I started slow and so did not have this bloom.
I took the sponges out of the reactor and am using some plastic needle point mesh to prevent the pellets from exiting the reactor. There are a couple of new pellet reactors on the market. The new Octopus one looks promising.
In my experience the pellets do help to keep nutrient levels low but not aggressively like other ULNS systems. I pulled the GFO after the first week and haven't used any since. Nuisance algaes have been slowly dying and I don't have to clean the glass as often. I've been able to feed the fish and corals a bit more with no ill effects. I also have had better growth and color on my sps. Once I hit a certain point it looked like my sps were starving a little and so I started feeding a little more which helped a lot.
I've read about a lot of people who have used the pellets and are dissappointed thinking it will work faster than it does. GL. Let us know how it turns out for you.

 

[sfexplicit]

Oh I forgot to answer your other question. I'm using the Vertex Pro Bio Pellets. I think after my supply runs out I may try the Ecobak. My N03 is consistently less than .2 per Salifert. I've never had a reading using phosphate test kits. But from what I understand hobby grade P04 test kits are crap. I've got a new ELOS nitrate test kit and a Hanna phosphate checker coming this week. I will see if it says different.

 

[fastrd400]

Check with pcfish, not sure what brand he is running, bit he swears by them and hid tank looks great.

 

[pcfish]

I use Warner Marine Bio Pellets

I use Warner Marine Bio Pellets

I am using Warner Marine bio pellets and had great results. I am using two Next MR1 reactors one for the bio pellets the other with Activated carbon. I have the reactors daisy chained bio pellets reactor goes directly into the reactor that has the activated carbon and then into my aquarium. Not sure if that makes a difference but if anything leaches out from the bio pellets the carbon takes it out.
I tested my NO3 with a red sea test kit and none were detected not sure how accurate reading is since my kit is pretty old same goes for my PO4 will go out and buy a couple of new test kits and post my results.
One thing is ever since I have started using the bio pellets have not had hair algae problems that was the reason that I started using them.

 

[Jacob D]

Thanks for the responses everyone.

I don't think there will be any stagnation in the reactor I do have a decent amount of flow coming out just not enough that the pellets are fluidizing. I'm going to crack the valve open a little every other day until they just start to tumble. I started off with about half of the recommended amount for my tank size. How long should I wait to add the rest? Another month?

I'm running them in a Deltec FR509 (I think) reactor. It's pretty large, I have two of them. I've been running carbon in one, and GFO in the other. I pulled the carbon out to start on the pellets. Once they've been in long enough to have kicked in I'm going to pull the GFO from the other reactor and replace it with carbon.

I've also had some issues with hair algae, really since my tank crash (lost a lot of fish, never recovered most of the bodies). I've been up on water changes and using 2 lbs of GFO every 4-6 weeks and the algae has been retreating but the cost of using that much GFO is a lot. I believe it can be recharged but I'm not sure the exact method, so for now I'm just holding onto the spent stuff.

 

[sfexplicit]

Yep. GFO is expensive. Thought I'd mention that it's recommended to keep alk around 8 dkh. I read that too high or too low can cause tips to burn on sps.

 

[sfexplicit]

Checked my PO4 with Hanna Checker last night. I got a zero reading. I'm going to test again next week.

 

[sfexplicit]

Quoted from another thread. Thought maybe it would help anybody wanting to understand the concept of carbon dosing and bacteria consuming NO3 & PO4.

This article gives you a brief history of the Redfield Ratio:

MARINE BIOGEOCHEMISTRY: ON REDFIELD RATIOS
http://scienceweek.com/2004/sa041119-5.htm

From it:

"ScienceWeek

MARINE BIOGEOCHEMISTRY: ON REDFIELD RATIOS

The following points are made by P.G. Falkowski and C.S. Davis (Nature 2004 431:131):

1) An interesting empirical observation in biology is the relationship between the elemental composition of organisms and ecosystems. All organisms are composed primarily of a mixture of six major elements: hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus and sulphur. But the proportion of these basic ingredients varies between organisms -- and such variations can lead to interesting properties within ecosystems.

2) For example, in the oceans most of the biomass comprises small drifting organisms (plankton) that are rich in nitrogen. These organisms are essentially functionally similar ensembles of metabolites, often encased in a shell formed from the most readily available ingredients. Much plankton is consumed by other plankton with similar chemical compositions. The result is that on average, the nitrogenhosphorus (N) ratios of plankton in the oceans are remarkably similar throughout the world, averaging approximately 16:1 by atoms. When these organisms or their body parts sink into the ocean interior, their energy-rich bodies are consumed by bacteria which, in aerobic conditions, oxidize the organic matter to form dissolved inorganic nutrients, especially CO2, NO3(-) and PO4(3-).

3) In 1934, Alfred Redfield (1890-1983) wrote a now classic paper in which he proposed that the N ratio of plankton (16:1) causes the ocean to have a remarkably similar ratio of dissolved NO3(-) and PO4(3-). This hypothesis suggested that, devoid of life, the chemical composition of the oceans would be markedly different. The concept of Redfield ratios has been fundamental to our understanding of the biogeochemistry of the oceans ever since."[/QUOTE]

 

[Jacob D]

Thanks for sharing that. It's very interesting the way life on Earth can impact the planet in positive and negative ways. I was watching a special not to long ago about the planet and they had some satellite photos which use special imaging to make pollutants in the water show more prominently... it was sad to see the big streams of pollutants running out from all of the large rivers and water ways of all the large countries into the oceans and spreading out like fingers for miles. Anyone who keeps an aquarium understands more than the rest of the population that there is only so much biological filtration an ecosystem can provide before it crashes.

...sorry for the doom and gloom... just made me think of that.


On a more positive note, that's excellent that the meter shows zero PO4. Those meters are said to be very accurate. I'd like to check mine to see where I'm at now for reference. I think BrianBigoats also has one of the meters, maybe I'll see if I can borrow it to do a comparison reading...

 

[RiOnRoxXx]

Johnny, since my tank is pretty small. Do you think a two little fishies 150 reactor would work for the biopellets? Also, many use carbon to remove impurities in the water column, does biopellets remove the "smell" and yellow tinge that carbon seems to do?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sfexplicit]

The tlf reactor would work fine. Solid carbon dosing is not like granulated activated carbon. It will make your skimmate really really stinky!!!

 

[Jacob D]

I think what Ryan was asking is if the biopellets eliminate the need to run carbon. From what I understand, they don't.

 

[hugo209]

have you though about dosing with vodka?

 

[RiOnRoxXx]

If I remember correctly, Johnny was dosing vodka before the switch.

 

[Jacob D]

Solid carbon source seems easier than dosing vodka to me, unless done by dosing pump, but even those can be fussy sometimes.

 

[sfexplicit]

Much easier than vodka dosing IMO. It does not replace carbon. I can only imagine how much more stinky it would be without it. Phew. My skimmmate has never smelled so bad.

 

[hugo209]

Ive been dosing mine for 10months now with no ill effects... I dont have any bad smell,I run GAC in my Tlf reactor to take care of that... IMO vodka dosing has really help my growth and color. I Feed my tank very heavy now since starting the regime with no spike in my nitrates....

 

[Jacob D]

It's not that there's ill effects to Vodka dosing, just that running pellets gives the same results without any dosing.

vodka = carbon source
pellets = carbon source

unless I'm missing something? I'm still new to the whole biopellet scene