Coral Tank from Canada (1350gal Display Tank)
- Thread starter nineball
- Start date
- Status
nineball
New member
Mitch, long time........I still have your T Shirt! I cleaned out my mail box with all your address info. PM me again and we will give it another try.
I have a High Def colour sony commercial security camera set up but the software choice has not been finalized. I will probably run some tests with Dave M, and then release it to the wild. The last run at it was not gratifying for me so I need to get my motivation restarted on this issue.
I have been playing eight ball in a league and with three losses to two wins, I need a lot of practice to bring my game back. The last night I played I was hammered by a woman who decided that running the table back to back twice in a row was a great way to crush her opponents ego. She was right and she would have passed the ladder test with flying colours to boot.
Peter
diving butcher
New member
incredibele tank
i love it
greetings from holland
i love it
greetings from holland
dave.m
Active member
Peter, if you haven't looked at it yet, this month's RC TOTM (Mike Cao) seems to have achieved the sort of feeding system you are looking for.
Dave.M
Dave.M
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
It's really great that so many people are following the build process, and it's especially nice to hear that we are reaching overseas and beyond. Thank you.
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
I took a quick look, and will study further when I get some time. It appears that his foods are smaller (Cyclopeze or smaller) so they work well with a doser and magnet stirrer.
My concerns with a dosing pump system are keeping the lines clean and avoiding clogging. Our latest thoughts are a device that drops food out of the bottom with no hoses to service. I can add a tee to the pump intake at the sump. Our manual testing has been good. The food is not pureed by the pump and the food is evenly distributed. It breaks the association of food and humans so the fish should act more "normal" instead of "begging". Some of the fish get so excited when you walk up to the tank they go into feeding frenzy mode and start biting corals. It's just like dogs that jump up when they see strangers, but behave under "normal" circumstances.
The other issue I have with a dosing pump is possible air introduction (cavitation) if & when the food container runs out. This doesn't exclude the idea of a dosing pump system, but I'm currently leaning toward a hopper/solenoid system.
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
Some of the equipment is a little exotic, but we don't gone overboard with hyped up "rare" corals or fish. None of the corals have been over $120 with most around the $50 mark. The fish have been in that same range as well. Reef tanks are greater than the sum of their constituent parts so the end result will really be something incredible... when we get there.
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
One mans refugium is another mans algae turf scrubber. Our mangrove planters on the walls surrounding the sump are raceways filled with sand and macroalgae, no different from what Dr. Walter Adey originally described. We are growing mangroves and Chaetomorpha (along with some incidental pink candy floss algae and valonia). Macro algae doesn't require trays to culture and harvest so we are mixing that one component.
The fastest, most efficient grower is caulerpa. We are growing it (C. racemosa & C. taxifollia) in the Mars invert system. The only problem is it can reproduce sexually and release a milky substance into the water column. From my experience, this doesn't happen if you have a steady 16-18hr photoperiod. Caulerpa reproduces with season changes so it is triggered by a change in photoperiod or temperature.
Adding trays and growing turf or hair algae would not increase nutrient uptake and it would release tannins into the water, thus yellowing it. I would also be concerned about introducing nuisance algae into the system for fear of it entering the display tank.
can you elaborate a little on this? are you saying that an ATS can introduce nuisance algae into a system?
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
The idea of using LEDs in the first place was something we did with great caution. I have been in the Marine hobby since 1979, with some experience in freshwater before that, so I have watched the evolution from 20w incandescent > fluorescent > mercury vapour > metal halide > compact fluorescent etc. The two new players have been plasma which we tried and passed on, and LED. We tried four different forms of LED and only one appealed to us.
We were not having any temperature problems, running consistently at 80˚F even in the middle of a heat wave. We do not use the chiller and plan on removing it some time soon. The electrical cost is always a factor, but in our case the quality of light for the corals and overall aesthetics was the main concern. The cost of lighting Peters tank with MHL was $6,000.00 and consumed 3200 watts, but we could have doubled up the fixtures if we had the room. The operating cost of lighting the tank with LED is half, but the capital cost is about $20,000.00. To compare apples to apples, that would be $12,000.00 capital cost for MHL vs. $20,000.00 for an $8,000.00 difference. The operating cost of MHL (if we doubled up) would be $280/mo. vs. $131/mo. for LED. If we were just relying on energy savings to pay for the fixtures, it would take 4.5 years, but we are also saving in bulb replacement. The annual cost of replacing all the bulbs would be $2,900.00 ($242/mo.). The pay off for just the bulb savings alone would take 2.75 years, so energy savings is not the main cost initiative for LED. If you combine the two ($391 savings per month), the LED upgrade is paid off in 20 months. You could also make an argument about the limited life span of MHL capacitors and lamp holders.
At no point in time was cost a major concern here. Peter is not foolish with his money, and there are a few tear stains on his check book to back that up
His concern is for the best possible reef display, even if that means tearing up what we have and starting from scratch. When I came on the scene, Peter had already purchased $14,000.00 worth of 150 watt HCI MHL fixtures. We weren't going to change anything just for the sake of doing it, so we tested them out before making any decisions. They did score high on the quantum meter but the beam was so focused it rendered them useless for our application. The light was also very white. I'm not a fan of eerie blue tanks, but this was really white and we were getting more hair algae as a result. If you look way back in the thread you will see some silly pictures of the many fixtures (8) that we tried over the tank (400w mogul, 250w HQI, 150w HCI, 290w plasma and several LEDs). We settled on a nice MHL unit from Aqua-Medic when we were not completely sold on LED. The wide nature of our reef formation led us to explore alternative ways of lighting the outer margins of the reef. At the time, Chingchai had just added some LED strips to punch up the colour so we decided to try some of the 120w LED fixtures we had in the Mars coral system. We flanked the 6' MHL fixtures on both sides (front & back) and we were very happy with the results immediately. The first thing we noticed was the fish colour was much more vibrant. The high CRI also gave the corals a more natural look and the blue moon light was absolutely stunning. The ATI actinic T5 we had been using was a joke in comparison. The 48 watts of blue LED completely eclipsed the 160 watts of T5 over the same 6' length. Peter fell in love with night viewing, and I'm not sure if Peter's wife Judy is happy with him staying up late with his new hobby
Within 2-3 weeks we started to see some colours in SPS that were lacking before. These were corals that had been
in the tank for a few months and I had thought that was their full potential. We put 16 fixtures up around the tank's outer margins and pointed them in a few degrees to side light fish and corals and minimize algae on the viewing panels. We were happy with the hybrid of MHL & LED but after a couple of months, we decided to experiment by taking out one 6' MHL fixture and see if colour would improve. It has been about a month and the pure LED section of the tank has the least amount of algae on the glass and the nicest coral pigmentation. The lack of nuisance algae, energy savings and cooler operating temperature means that we can extend the photoperiod by a few hours so corals can grow more and we can enjoy the tank more. The extra blue moonlights in the middle really make it worth the switch. We have started to buy more night glow corals for their fluorescence. Like anything in the reefing hobby, it has to be in balance; we have some corals like blue zoanthids that look great during the day, but become invisible at night, and conversely some yellow polyped acros that look dull during the day and explode at night.
We are planning on replacing the other two MHL fixtures soon. We are just waiting on some new dimmable drivers from the manufacturer. Unfortunately, the space above the tank is very limited so multichip pendent LEDs are not an option. I prefer the idea of a multichip and believe that is the direction the hobby is going in. They don't create weird blue & yellow shadows the way some LED fixtures do, the footprint is smaller for better viewing from above, and the shimmer is more realistic. A homogenous all-in-one chip is the way of the future and much more efficient than a mix and match of red, green, violet, blue and white chips scattered randomly over a pegboard.
Here is the criteria we looked at when evaluating LED lighting technology along with some general tips...
1) Make sure the light does not cast weird blue and yellow shadows under rocks and corals.
2) Look for a calming shimmer rather than the rapid flicker that is generated by some LEDs.
3) The light has to look natural, as if it was sunlight, not artificial, cold & clinical like some LEDs and T5.
4) Some emitters have a narrow spectrum and coral pigmentation is lacking in blue, purple and red, but green is vivid. Do a search and find other hobbyists who are using the light and see what their coral colour is like.
5) The CRI (colour rendering index) has to be high so fish and corals look natural and the sand is white, not blue.
6) Take a look at the spectrograph and see if it shows a lot of green & yellow light which is of little use to coral. This wavelength is put there so we recognize it as "bright" light for home and office applications. The green/yellow peak encourages nuisance algae and browns out corals with too much zooxanthellae. This peak lowers the PUR value.
7) The pegboard design creates hot spots and deficiencies with one green here and one red there (Lightbright) configurations. An all-in-one chip is homogenous and much more efficient.
8) Some manufacturers use tight 40˚ optics to fool quantum & LUX meters then use wider 70˚ optics on the outside to make it look like coverage is better (at the cost of intensity).
9) Some lights have a high percentage (often > 50/50) of blue LEDs which also give false high PAR readings.
10) Try to find a fixture that gives you the aesthetic you want for a reasonable price. Some feature heavy models are priced beyond reach and offer features that you may never utilize.
11) As with MHL, find a high kelvin white chip mixed with some blue and perhaps violet emitters for extra punch. A 7,000k LED is no better than using a 7,000k MHL bulb.
12) Pick a manufacturer who is developing new products and moving the technology forward, not just rebranding generic fixtures with standard industry components.
13) Take a look at who is using the product. Are they seasoned reefers with a lot at risk, or are they newbies who are trying products without doing thorough research and experimentation.
14) Review the pictures on the manufacturer's website. Often they are the owners tank and the coral colour is still weak.
15) Pick an adaptable technology where you can upgrade drivers and emitters, as the technology continues to grow, such as multichip LED.
We know MHL works, but LED can work better.
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
Peter has been compiling a greatest hits to summarize the thread, but I have been holding up the process by not answering a few loose end questions.
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
Right now we have no signs of hair algae or turf algae anywhere in the system. If we were to introduce it for the purpose of culture and harvest, we may find it migrating into the display. A post ATS UV or mechanical filter may stop it from spreading but I would hate to see an algae plague brought on by our own actions.
Algae is like a weed; instead of cracks in the sidewalk, it finds a niche on viewing panels and other areas void of life. You can train algae to grow on plastic trays where there is no competition and excess nutrients available, but it isn't as easy in a low nutrient SPS system.
I am pulling out a significant amount of Chaeto from the mangrove planters and the refugium itself. The dry weight of the harvest would rival that of any ATS system. We are doing the exact same process, just with a more stable species of algae.
When you harvest hair or turf algae, it can tear and "bleed" trapped nutrients into the water column. Chaetomorpha can be harvested without tearing or spreading algae spores. If I were to use an ATS system with hair or turf algae, I would have a convalescent tank for freshly cut algae to allow it to heal before introducing it back to the main system. This could alternatively be done with actuators or solenoids to take the ATS off line during harvest and recouperation.
One observation I have made is we get all kinds of undesirable algae (cyanobacteria, valonia, and pink candyfloss) growing in our mangrove system, but absolutely nowhere in the display. I'm not sure if that is due to the lack of predators or if it's the slower flow and yellower plasma lighting. We switched our refugium light from 290w plasma to 100w LED and the nuisance algae problem went away with no loss to Chaeto growth rates.
We have had a bryopsis and derbasia hair algae break out in the Mars invert system where nutrients are even lower (zero) than the display. The lower inorganic nutrient level (No3 & Po4) are due to the lack of powdered coral foods, and the hair algae break out is due to high lighting intensity with no photosynthetic competition in most of the holding tanks. There are six 12 gallon tanks and one 36 gallon tank. The big tank is full of caulerpa that I trim a few days a week with not a spot of nuisance algae anywhere. One of the 12 gallon tanks has a pair of sea horses and a leafy algae I haven't identified (looks like creeping version of sargassum) covering the substrate. Again, not a hint of nuisance algae in there either. The other 5 tanks on the other hand are loaded with hair and green slime algae on the glass. I don't even need to wipe the glass on the two tanks with macro algae. You would assume that the algae in the two tanks would cover the whole system. I have been doing Kent Tech M magnesium for the past few days and I did a big manual clean-up. The next step is to try adding caulerpa to each tank and seeing if the algae is mutually exclusive.
We had a red cyanobacteria break out in one Mars fish system and a small isolated break out in another Mars fish system. manual removal, large water change, and erythromycin dosing has seemed to kill it off. I also turned the lights off for 3 days.
canesfan44
New member
I learn something new everyday from this thread.
when one harvests turf algae from an ATS the screen is removed and the algae scraped off in the sink, if one then dipped in tank water in a bucket before re installing the screen, would that be sufficient to avoid "seeding" the DT?
also, if spores were released into the water of the DT wouldn't they then grow on the ATS anyway? I can understand a potential problem of running an ATS for a while, then discontinuing and allowing the turf to grow elsewhere, is that the scenario you had in mind?
Opcn
Member
It is at times like this that I remember what my microbial ecology professor would say often. It's called Bradford's law of tolerance and it goes like this: "Everything is everywhere, the environment selects".
If you've got the hair or turf algae on your ATS it got there because your system produced spores that landed and grew on the screen. If you've got spores that will grow on the screen then you already have spores that will grow in the rest of your tank, if the right conditions come to pass. Since those spores aren't growing in the rest of your tank it's safe to assume that the conditions aren't right, so you do not need to worry about seeding from the ATS.
I was not aware of significant portions of tannins being produced by hair and turf algaes of the sort seen on an ATS, mangroves have a bit of a reputation for water yellowing themselves as I understand it. Having read your excellent posts on cryptic zones and duplex sumps I find myself wondering if perhaps a cryptic zone filter could be used to pull those DOCs back out of the water column.
If you've got the hair or turf algae on your ATS it got there because your system produced spores that landed and grew on the screen. If you've got spores that will grow on the screen then you already have spores that will grow in the rest of your tank, if the right conditions come to pass. Since those spores aren't growing in the rest of your tank it's safe to assume that the conditions aren't right, so you do not need to worry about seeding from the ATS.
I was not aware of significant portions of tannins being produced by hair and turf algaes of the sort seen on an ATS, mangroves have a bit of a reputation for water yellowing themselves as I understand it. Having read your excellent posts on cryptic zones and duplex sumps I find myself wondering if perhaps a cryptic zone filter could be used to pull those DOCs back out of the water column.
nineball
New member
Hydroponic mangrove wall units with miracle mud.
Hydroponic mangrove wall units with miracle mud.
I'm not sure folks really appreciate the design elements of this Mangrove environment. The vast majority of Mangrove units found in this hobby are four or five foot boxes with water entrance and exit out of the same box as a slow one time feed. If the flow is strong enough the water travels over four or five feet at maximum width. If the mangroves are sitting in Miracle mud the value as I understand it is the water traveling over the mud as well as the questionable value of the mangrove trees processing the water.
Our objectives in putting up the Mangrove wall unit was first and foremost, one of aesthetics. We want our fish room to be alive and healthy in appearance with a wall of green to greet the visitor. Also we felt the Oxygen generated by the plant life to be an asset for the fish room as well.
If we could generate sufficient growth there would be a measure of nutrient export that the system would benefit from and with approximately 300 trees we believe this will eventually be substantial.
There has been a fair amount of dialogue about the value of miracle mud to our marine environments. We decided initially to use miracle mud as our 3 inch substrate for the mangroves to see if the benefit was appreciable to the overall ecosystem. The difference between this system and the majority of other domestic settings is that the water travels over 28 linear feet in a straight line. If there is any value in the 'time and distance' that the water travels over the mud then the raceway design must benefit water quality substantially more than a four foot box.
We have not followed through yet on our pledge to measure the water quality entering the system compared to the exit yet but we decided that this would only make sense after the system matured a bit first. Or at least that's what Mr. Wilson has been using as an excuse!!!
So we have two elements in tandem here.......the mangroves and their benefit and the miracle mud. Oh, and now the cheto as well. Lets not forget the other organisms that have now established some sort of life in the mangroves...
In my limited experience we have effectively developed a healthy refugium that hangs on the wall with more benefits than the standard floor standing tank. So at worst we have enlarged our refugium to be in proper balance with the needs of a 1300 gal display tank. At best we have added a few more natural elements to our water conditioning that extends our range of options to maintaining a healthy ecosystem in balance.
or not........
Peter
Hydroponic mangrove wall units with miracle mud.
I'm not sure folks really appreciate the design elements of this Mangrove environment. The vast majority of Mangrove units found in this hobby are four or five foot boxes with water entrance and exit out of the same box as a slow one time feed. If the flow is strong enough the water travels over four or five feet at maximum width. If the mangroves are sitting in Miracle mud the value as I understand it is the water traveling over the mud as well as the questionable value of the mangrove trees processing the water.
Our objectives in putting up the Mangrove wall unit was first and foremost, one of aesthetics. We want our fish room to be alive and healthy in appearance with a wall of green to greet the visitor. Also we felt the Oxygen generated by the plant life to be an asset for the fish room as well.
If we could generate sufficient growth there would be a measure of nutrient export that the system would benefit from and with approximately 300 trees we believe this will eventually be substantial.
There has been a fair amount of dialogue about the value of miracle mud to our marine environments. We decided initially to use miracle mud as our 3 inch substrate for the mangroves to see if the benefit was appreciable to the overall ecosystem. The difference between this system and the majority of other domestic settings is that the water travels over 28 linear feet in a straight line. If there is any value in the 'time and distance' that the water travels over the mud then the raceway design must benefit water quality substantially more than a four foot box.
We have not followed through yet on our pledge to measure the water quality entering the system compared to the exit yet but we decided that this would only make sense after the system matured a bit first. Or at least that's what Mr. Wilson has been using as an excuse!!!
So we have two elements in tandem here.......the mangroves and their benefit and the miracle mud. Oh, and now the cheto as well. Lets not forget the other organisms that have now established some sort of life in the mangroves...
In my limited experience we have effectively developed a healthy refugium that hangs on the wall with more benefits than the standard floor standing tank. So at worst we have enlarged our refugium to be in proper balance with the needs of a 1300 gal display tank. At best we have added a few more natural elements to our water conditioning that extends our range of options to maintaining a healthy ecosystem in balance.
or not........
Peter
tgunn
Active member
Peter,
One of the things that impresses me the most about your overall setup is your attention to details such as this. I really think you're onto something with creating such a vast refugium environment with the mangroves and miracle mud. The number of creatures that are going to be able to flourish in this zone can only serve to help your system in the long run.
In my previous 140g setup, I used a large sump with some live rock and cheato in it. Even this limited refugia benefited my system overall by providing a good supply of copepods, a snail breeding ground, etc. I think you're going to see even greater benefits from the biodiversity you're encouraging in this setup.
I tried "going barebottom" on my setup and keeping my sump and tank spotless and I found that the overall tank experience was far less enjoyable because it focused entirely on the macroscopic aspects; fish and corals. In fact I found my creatures did better with the increased biodiversity I had with the refuge and sand in the tank.
Keep up the great work; it's always a pleasure to see what your system it doing!
slapshot
Active member
I'm interested in the cryptic results. I unknowingly ended up with a cryptic filter when I discovered that one of my 55 gallon drums that I use as a sump for no other purpose but to add water volume to the system needed cleaning out. The water at the bottom had that ole sulfur smell. (the water entered at the top and exited the oposite top) I freaked out and drained the whole thing and then put in an air stone to circulate the water better. Since the addition of the airstone I have been fighting nitrates. I have it under control with pellets now but I am always thinking of pulling the airstone and letting it go back. I could keep my nitrates much lower when it was cryptic.
- Status
Similar threads
