Cryptic Zone Filtration
- Thread starter mr. bojangsjang
- Start date
BeanAnimal
Premium Member
I do not see why a dark overflow could not be used as the cryptic zone.
racrumrine
New member
For what it is worth, I have spent a a few minutes talking to Steve Tyree about his systems. He doesn't use skimmers and uses sponge tanks to filter everything.
He told me the sponge tanks are in rooms with some light. We were talking about them in a kitchen during the day with no lights on. He said the lighting where the sponge tanks are is about that intensity.
I have tanks with skimmers and tanks without. Based on my experience and tests, I have found that chaeto in the sump reduces nitrites to zero better than my skimmers do.
Given that Steve Tyree has many years of reefkeeping and is successful in growing Tyree Limited Editions, et al, I think that we shouldn't be so quick to discount his techniques or ideas.
Someday, I would like to set up a sponge tank filter to try it for myself.
Best of luck,
Roy
He told me the sponge tanks are in rooms with some light. We were talking about them in a kitchen during the day with no lights on. He said the lighting where the sponge tanks are is about that intensity.
I have tanks with skimmers and tanks without. Based on my experience and tests, I have found that chaeto in the sump reduces nitrites to zero better than my skimmers do.
Given that Steve Tyree has many years of reefkeeping and is successful in growing Tyree Limited Editions, et al, I think that we shouldn't be so quick to discount his techniques or ideas.
Someday, I would like to set up a sponge tank filter to try it for myself.
Best of luck,
Roy
Well this is true for any system, not just complex systems. For example a BB tank with no fuge is probably a very simple biological system compared to one run with refuges, turf scrubbers, and cyptic zones. Now, BB has far fewer methods of export-namely a skimmer and water changes. If one of those fails the system in theory would rapidly deteriorate, correct?
If you make it more complex by adding more biological means of export you in theory have alternate routes that can take up the slack if one part of the system fails (one species dies off). Of course there would be an effect but if the system is sufficiently complex there should be other species that will thrive in the absence of another species.
That being said, if the food chain is singularly linear you would have a recipe for potential disaster if a species in the middle dies, which I think is your point. If you have multiple branching paths it should be more ideal. Now, whether we can ever obtain the proper complexity is another matter.
Boy Im glad I stumbled across this thread, Ive had quite an interest in the subject for several years.
Just to kinda jump in I have to agree with racrumrine. The proof is in the pudding, as is always the case in this hobby, there are a million ways to setup a stable system, and whether you agree with him or not, Tyree has done so utilizing trizonal filtration. No one who has posted so far has even read his books, so to dismiss his claims as being ridiculous and unfounded is a bit of a leap since you dont actually know what his claims are. I dont see cryptic environments replacing todays filtration methods, but I do think when used in conjunction with other methods of filtration and nutrient export, it can be a great alternative means of filtration.
I have been tossing an idea of a project in my head for a few years, utilizing a cryptic refugium in a system where a skimmer would negatively affect the high levels of nutrients and pelagic foodstuffs in the water column.
Just to kinda jump in I have to agree with racrumrine. The proof is in the pudding, as is always the case in this hobby, there are a million ways to setup a stable system, and whether you agree with him or not, Tyree has done so utilizing trizonal filtration. No one who has posted so far has even read his books, so to dismiss his claims as being ridiculous and unfounded is a bit of a leap since you dont actually know what his claims are. I dont see cryptic environments replacing todays filtration methods, but I do think when used in conjunction with other methods of filtration and nutrient export, it can be a great alternative means of filtration.
I have been tossing an idea of a project in my head for a few years, utilizing a cryptic refugium in a system where a skimmer would negatively affect the high levels of nutrients and pelagic foodstuffs in the water column.
thriceanangel
New member
Hey Jamokie01, I got relatives in Canfield!
I am very interested in this. I was reading Bornemans thread on another forum about how he hardly ever does water changes no skimmer etc. Had the same tank for like 7 years, and I'd like to know more. What books are there on the subject?
I am very interested in this. I was reading Bornemans thread on another forum about how he hardly ever does water changes no skimmer etc. Had the same tank for like 7 years, and I'd like to know more. What books are there on the subject?
Well Tyree has published several books/cd roms with info on trizonal filtration. That being said, even I havent purchased any of them, too expensive. Hes turned this idea into a business, like an infomercial about making millions in realestate, and I cant really get behind that. My understanding is that he also needs to have an editor. Anyways I think his website is dynamicecomorphologhy.com if youd like to check it out.
GTR
Active member
Think low bioload, no fish so you never feed anything. That's an easy battle to win.
I keep a 25 gallon tub tied to my 300g system. Anytime I find a sponge or a squirt on a piece of LR it get's tossed into that tub. It's interesting for sure which is why I even bother but I don't think for a second that I could get SPS quality water with a cryptic zone to growout ration of any less than 80% cryptic to 20% growout.
SteveU
I keep a 25 gallon tub tied to my 300g system. Anytime I find a sponge or a squirt on a piece of LR it get's tossed into that tub. It's interesting for sure which is why I even bother but I don't think for a second that I could get SPS quality water with a cryptic zone to growout ration of any less than 80% cryptic to 20% growout.
SteveU
Well again you can only expect so much from it, obviously having its limitations, but I think finding a good way to maximize surface area for growth could lower that ratio a good deal. Getting the right amount of flow would also maximize the growth of more fragile filter feeders.
el aguila
Member
I have read Tyree's book on the Environmental Gradient, and found it very interesting. The only negative thing that I can say about the book is that it is bound very poorly for as much as it costs.
As pointed out earlier in this thread he only places a very few fish (herbivors) in his systems without feeding them (or very little). Which he is obviously more interested in corals and, this makes it difficult to compare his systems with the average reef tank.
While I am not a marine biologist nor do I have the experience in the hobby that many of you in this thread may have, I am experimenting with a 25 G cryptic fuge on a 55. If this shows favorable results, I am going to plumb a 100 gallon cryptic fuge into my 190 display.
Unlike Tyree on both tanks I am including a normal refugium with cheato for nutrient export and extra water volume. The way most of us stock our fish load to the limit, my personal opinion is that I would not try a cryptic fuge alone.
As pointed out earlier in this thread he only places a very few fish (herbivors) in his systems without feeding them (or very little). Which he is obviously more interested in corals and, this makes it difficult to compare his systems with the average reef tank.
While I am not a marine biologist nor do I have the experience in the hobby that many of you in this thread may have, I am experimenting with a 25 G cryptic fuge on a 55. If this shows favorable results, I am going to plumb a 100 gallon cryptic fuge into my 190 display.
Unlike Tyree on both tanks I am including a normal refugium with cheato for nutrient export and extra water volume. The way most of us stock our fish load to the limit, my personal opinion is that I would not try a cryptic fuge alone.
greenbean36191
Premium Member
I'll agree that he's had success with growing corals, but it doesn't logically follow that that makes his claims about sponge and tunicate biology any better. My grandma has a nice garden, but that doesn't make her much of an authority on soil ecology even if she did read some stuff about it. Also, his success with corals predates his use of the "cryptic zone" so it's hard to say it was a factor. Yes, he's doing something right but I certainly haven't seen anything convincing that the sponges have anything to do with it. They definitely aren't doing what he seems to think they are.
Like I said early, I have read his stuff and it wasn't impressive. A lot of it is unsupported or goes against accepted science. No I don't remember his specific claims, but then again I also read it like 3 or 4 years ago (whenever MACNA was in Boston). I can't even remember most of the claims made in the papers I had to read for the last project I worked on and it was my job to know what they said.
Well if the cryptic filtration definitly isnt doing what he thinks it is, how is it that he continues to setup skimmerless systems utilizing it for filtration. Reguardless of when he began using this method of filtration, hes still pumping out some top-notch corals. I just dont understand how you can say hes wrong when obviously this is working. I dont know enough about your credentials to discredit you, nor would that be my goal, but Im fairly certain hes done a good deal more research in this area than you have. Im not a member of the Steve Tyree fan club, but its like walking onto the golf course and telling Tiger Woods that even though hes consistently doing so well, his stance and swing are wrong. If you say this is all wrong, why? What makes it wrong? Why is it working for him and others that are using it?
mr.wilson
.Registered Member
I'm not about to try to diminish Steve Tyree's accomplishments, but it's possible that his system works for reasons other than his focus on sponges and ascidians. It's a hard point to prove, with so many variables.
It's possible that the sum of these benthic constituents (worms, zooplankton, barnacles, ascidians, sponges, bacteria etc.) are where the magic lies, with no single organism able to take the credit.
There have been a few similar "natural" systems over the years that have had a measure of success. Ly Sing's "Magic Mud" system and Jaulberts plenum systems have a similar design and share the same benthic invertebrates. Each system creator has there own perception of how it works, but it's possible that nature is able to support a reef better if we supply it with enough of the proper (pro-biotic) building blocks.
We still have a lot to learn about the interplay between reef creatures. Limiting yourself to the minute body of knowledge that science can currently offer is counter-productive.
It's possible that the sum of these benthic constituents (worms, zooplankton, barnacles, ascidians, sponges, bacteria etc.) are where the magic lies, with no single organism able to take the credit.
There have been a few similar "natural" systems over the years that have had a measure of success. Ly Sing's "Magic Mud" system and Jaulberts plenum systems have a similar design and share the same benthic invertebrates. Each system creator has there own perception of how it works, but it's possible that nature is able to support a reef better if we supply it with enough of the proper (pro-biotic) building blocks.
We still have a lot to learn about the interplay between reef creatures. Limiting yourself to the minute body of knowledge that science can currently offer is counter-productive.
thriceanangel
New member
The same thing could be said for those that use "non natural" methods. Zeovit, prodibio etc. all have produced stellar examples of flourishing reeftanks. Or how about the T5HO vs MH arguement. You can't really judge anything by the tank that is used as an example. Borneman is another example... He doesn't really do much to maintain his tanks- skimmerless, few water changes and been running for around 7 years I think. Or even the Deep Sand Bed argument. I mean Paul B has a beautiful tank that utilizes little more than an undergravel filter I believe. There are so many ways to be successful in this hobby, that there is no right way.
I don't fully understand this cryptic zone theory, but it seems to me that this is one successful way to keep a reef tank given certain parameters. The real question isn't whether or not it works, but which method works better?
It's a question that can only be measured through real scientific study. Not just a bunch of hobbiests- even hobbiests that have written books, who say "It works in my tank so its the best way" or "It works well for him, so THAT is the best way" or even "this more accurately reproduces whats in nature so that HAS to be the best way."
Admittedly it would take far more resources than I have. It would take exactly the same size tanks, with the exact same livestock, using the exact same water source, rock source, lights, etc. Eliminate as many variables that you can, and just change the variables that you are testing for. Then measure growth, color, chemistry, and other biological factors such as amount of zooxanthallae per x.
Then you'd have at least a beginning of a theory in figuring out the whats and whys of how you got the measurements that you did.
I don't fully understand this cryptic zone theory, but it seems to me that this is one successful way to keep a reef tank given certain parameters. The real question isn't whether or not it works, but which method works better?
It's a question that can only be measured through real scientific study. Not just a bunch of hobbiests- even hobbiests that have written books, who say "It works in my tank so its the best way" or "It works well for him, so THAT is the best way" or even "this more accurately reproduces whats in nature so that HAS to be the best way."
Admittedly it would take far more resources than I have. It would take exactly the same size tanks, with the exact same livestock, using the exact same water source, rock source, lights, etc. Eliminate as many variables that you can, and just change the variables that you are testing for. Then measure growth, color, chemistry, and other biological factors such as amount of zooxanthallae per x.
Then you'd have at least a beginning of a theory in figuring out the whats and whys of how you got the measurements that you did.
Driftwood
New member
Anyone have any more pictures or personal experiences to share?
My eggcrate structure has started to become populated with a medium sized red feather duster and a couple red tunicates. I've seen a few of the tunicates in the display before but am not sure where the red dusters came from.
The 'duplexium' I have been testing is working out much better then the pile of rubble I had in there before. The rubble used to collect a nasty looking gray dusting. I like the rubble raised up off the sandbed because it collects no junk at all. The snails and hermits can easily clean the sand around the eggcrate. My refuge looks much nicer now, the macro even grows better because it is forced to reside in the top few inches of water.
I also like the duplexium concept because you are not loosing anything over a standard refuge. You would probably already have live rock and macro growing in there, raising it up off the sandbed with eggcrate is beneficial to the filtering efficiency of the LR and at the same time provides a nice niche for some water polishers to live.
Dave
My eggcrate structure has started to become populated with a medium sized red feather duster and a couple red tunicates. I've seen a few of the tunicates in the display before but am not sure where the red dusters came from.
The 'duplexium' I have been testing is working out much better then the pile of rubble I had in there before. The rubble used to collect a nasty looking gray dusting. I like the rubble raised up off the sandbed because it collects no junk at all. The snails and hermits can easily clean the sand around the eggcrate. My refuge looks much nicer now, the macro even grows better because it is forced to reside in the top few inches of water.
I also like the duplexium concept because you are not loosing anything over a standard refuge. You would probably already have live rock and macro growing in there, raising it up off the sandbed with eggcrate is beneficial to the filtering efficiency of the LR and at the same time provides a nice niche for some water polishers to live.
Dave
greenbean36191
Premium Member
Lots of other people have had great success with skimmerless systems that didn't use sponges or tunicates as a form of filtration. The correlation hardly proves causation. Obviously something he's doing is working, but I'm fairly certain it would work (and it has) whether or not he was using the sponges. I can say he's wrong about how it's working because it goes against basic invert biology and common knowledge in reef ecology. Ask anyone with fairly basic training in reef ecology or invert zoology what they think of his claims and I doubt you'll find any that think they've got any merit.
One of the basic tenets of his system is that the sponges are removing something bad that would otherwise go unremoved. Turns out that "something" is mostly bacteria. Why that would be bad I'm not sure since it's one of the most imporant foods for corals. The something isn't bad and it is already being removed. So what exactly is the novel benefit of the system? Replace "sponge" with something like sun coral that fills roughly the same (but even broader) niche as a filter and you see how ridiculous it is to expect there to be a big impact.
I'm pretty sure he hasn't.
Driftwood
New member
Are you saying that the benthic critters are not beneficial? or at least no more beneficial then a coral? All these different critters eat the exact same thing as corals?
Based on your research do you think that this system actually steals food from corals that would otherwise consume this food source?
I am curious about something concerning sponges that maybe you have info on. I have noticed this in several different systems as the tank matures. Why do sponges explode in population during the algae cycle then slowly die off as the algae does? This is one of the reasons I thought that sponges consumed nasty stuff.
Dave
Based on your research do you think that this system actually steals food from corals that would otherwise consume this food source?
I am curious about something concerning sponges that maybe you have info on. I have noticed this in several different systems as the tank matures. Why do sponges explode in population during the algae cycle then slowly die off as the algae does? This is one of the reasons I thought that sponges consumed nasty stuff.
Dave
greenbean36191
Premium Member
I won't go so far as to say they aren't beneficial at all, but they aren't an integral missing link that Tyree has made them out to be. For the most part they are doing as much as a non-photosynthetic coral does to filter water. Compared to photosynthetic corals and anemones they aren't even doing as much. They aren't all eating the exact same things as corals since some of them do include things like small amounts of phytoplankton in their diets that corals don't, but then again how many reefers have phytoplankton wreaking havoc on their tanks?
There is no question about that. To what degree, I have no clue, but yes they are directly competing with one another.
Probably because the bacteria are blooming in response to the same nutrients that cause the algae. More sponge food means more sponges.
chris wright
In Memoriam
A very interesting thread.
Theirs obviously a lot of pros and cons for the idea, but i like the idea of the biodiversity that can be achieved. I dont believe that the original question can be answered, judging from the debate not be able to conclude a definite result.
What i mean by this is that although some aquarists are useing different methods successfully, not skimming, not doing water changes and so forth, it seams to me not enough people are using the cryptic system to accurately say that it does or does not work.
Driftwood, would you mind updating us on how your system is going. I am interested in the idea, and would like to know more from your own perspective, considering that you are using the system. I feel that you are more informed on how to set the sump up, flow etc and could possibly post some tips on what you would do differently if anything.
Theirs obviously a lot of pros and cons for the idea, but i like the idea of the biodiversity that can be achieved. I dont believe that the original question can be answered, judging from the debate not be able to conclude a definite result.
What i mean by this is that although some aquarists are useing different methods successfully, not skimming, not doing water changes and so forth, it seams to me not enough people are using the cryptic system to accurately say that it does or does not work.
Driftwood, would you mind updating us on how your system is going. I am interested in the idea, and would like to know more from your own perspective, considering that you are using the system. I feel that you are more informed on how to set the sump up, flow etc and could possibly post some tips on what you would do differently if anything.
Driftwood
New member
I like the duplex idea. Maybe more so because I love DIY projects and spending time on my system. It seemed to me that adding a 'zone' for critters that could improve water quality was a good idea. I never saw any proof that these critters improved water quality but they were all critters that lived in my system anyway.
My system isn't much like the original duplex idea. I have a full sump with refugium and baffles and DSB. The eggcrate is only 2-3 inches deep because I didn't have enough room with the DSB and I definately didn't want to remove it. I had a bunch of rubble in my crash/skimmer chamber and used that to cover the eggcrate. The rubble was beyond nasty from sitting in that first chamber for about two months. This is one improvement that the eggcrate structure made was to raise the rubble up and allow uneaten food and detritus to fall through where it could be eaten easily by the critters in the refuge.
I grow some different macros in the four inches that remain above the rubble. The macro seems to grow much faster in the shallow water.
For life in the refuge I have 8-10 medium red feather dusters, a couple red tunicates, and hundreds of mysid shrimp. I also have two big crowie snails and a bunch of baby Chinese hat snails that appeared from nowhere. I do not think that this is enough life to steal much away from my corals and I enjoy the display of dusters and mysids.
I definately cannot make any conclusion that this is beneficial to my system in any way. It works and I like it, that is really what matters the most. I really think my biggest exports right now are chaeto and coral growth.
Here is a picture of my refuge when it was first setup to give you an idea. I spread the rubble out to cover the entire top of the eggcrate and the chaeto was pulled apart to fit in the space above it.
Dave
My system isn't much like the original duplex idea. I have a full sump with refugium and baffles and DSB. The eggcrate is only 2-3 inches deep because I didn't have enough room with the DSB and I definately didn't want to remove it. I had a bunch of rubble in my crash/skimmer chamber and used that to cover the eggcrate. The rubble was beyond nasty from sitting in that first chamber for about two months. This is one improvement that the eggcrate structure made was to raise the rubble up and allow uneaten food and detritus to fall through where it could be eaten easily by the critters in the refuge.
I grow some different macros in the four inches that remain above the rubble. The macro seems to grow much faster in the shallow water.
For life in the refuge I have 8-10 medium red feather dusters, a couple red tunicates, and hundreds of mysid shrimp. I also have two big crowie snails and a bunch of baby Chinese hat snails that appeared from nowhere. I do not think that this is enough life to steal much away from my corals and I enjoy the display of dusters and mysids.
I definately cannot make any conclusion that this is beneficial to my system in any way. It works and I like it, that is really what matters the most. I really think my biggest exports right now are chaeto and coral growth.
Here is a picture of my refuge when it was first setup to give you an idea. I spread the rubble out to cover the entire top of the eggcrate and the chaeto was pulled apart to fit in the space above it.
Dave
Last edited:
Similar threads
