Duplex sump concept

I was going to use the aqualifter to pump water from the sump into the Aquafuge. My topoff is being handled by another system. I've already got a 12" Aquafuge, but a friend of mine has a 24" one that he said I could buy on the cheap. I figured bigger is always better!

I'm still in the planning stages anyway. I have to locate the tank I'm going to be using for the sump. I'm leaning towards another 40 breeder if I can find one for a good price. I designed the stand to be able to accomodate a 36" stand. Here's a little "blog" on my new system so far... (sometimes my host acts up and the link doesn't work) BLOG
 
That makes sense. I have a CPR Aquafuge sitting in my garage collecting dust. Maybe I'll incorporate it into something like that too.
 
Nice blog. Very interested to see how it turns out! I love the greenwater/pod system you have in the works.

It's neat to have your opinion here mr. wilson. I am interested in creating different zones that replicate what is found in nature. Your duplex idea is so simple and I have enjoyed adding the concept into a friends sump and my own. I am curious to see what develops!
 
Thanks, yes, that's working now. What sort of flow would you recommend through the fuge and cryptic zone, and do you think the accumulation of detritus in the bottom of this zone could eventually lead to issues? In other words, do you suggest cleaning this periodically?
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8622259#post8622259 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by AfAqua
Thanks, yes, that's working now. What sort of flow would you recommend through the fuge and cryptic zone, and do you think the accumulation of detritus in the bottom of this zone could eventually lead to issues? In other words, do you suggest cleaning this periodically?

I recommend three to five times the volume of the tank per hour flow-through rates with 75% passing through the upper macro algae refugium zone, and the remainder through the lower benthic zone.

This rate and ratio will assure detritus will not settle on the chaetomorpha and gracilaria, while providing slow semi-anoxic conditions for the sessile invertebrates in the benthic zone (just enough flow to deliver food).

The rock rubble and eggcrate will allow for detrital settling and possible build-up in the lower zone. A good colony of invertebrates has proven to keep detritus in check. The nice thing about a bare bottom benthic zone, is you can monitor how much detritus has collected. I have made the top eggcrate panel gravity fit, in the newer sumps. This allows access to siphon out excess detritus and seed with new critters.

I'm always on the look out for tunicates and sponge hitchhikers at the base of new coral arrivals. I'm still seeding benthic zones with new organisms as I find them. If you look at these tunicate sites http://www.edge-of-reef.com/tunicati/htmen/TUNtunicates.htm http://www.ascidians.com/, you will see that they can rival the most colourful SPS. If rarity (availability in the hobby) is an attraction, tunicates and sponges should top the list.

Eventually you will be able to ascertain which organisms are of most value due to survival of the fittest/fattest. If they out-compete with other invertebrates and prove to be stable (no crashes) they are the ones to focus on. On the other hand, biodiversity has proven to be beneficial in all closed ecosystems. Just because we don't understand their role in the hierarchy, doesn't mean that we should exclude them from it.

A small amount of detritus build-up doesn't concern me, as long as it is continually being reduced and removed. I wouldn't expect to see any different on a natural reef.

Take a look at this parallel thread if you haven't already. http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=976013
 
Hey, Mr. Wilson. Do you ever share your benthic critters with others? I just happen to live just down the road from you.

Fred
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8630764#post8630764 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Fredfish
Hey, Mr. Wilson. Do you ever share your benthic critters with others? I just happen to live just down the road from you.

Fred

I'm doing some work in Kitchener on thursday. PM me your phone number and I'll drop by. You can also catch me at WTR in Mississauga.
 
Ok, I think I'm getting ready to set up my sump in the next few weeks (fingers crossed) and I had a question...

In the sump, I was thinking about having the whole 2 layer thing and wanted to make sure i was doing it right. The higher layer would take up about 1/2 of the refuge and on top I was thinking about piling live rock rubble. The lower later would be pretty much entirely fine sand/gravel. Do I want a "dark" area that is shaded from the light? I've got some ceramic tile that I could put on the top shelf to block some light to the lower area. I'm also going to try to grow some chaeto in the refuge too, so I'm guessing that between the chaeto and the rubble it would just accidentally block light to the sandbed.

Thanks!
Eric
 
Yes. Chaeto blocks out light very well. Benthic invertebrates can tolerate some light, but they don't compete well against algae and other photosynthetic organisms. That's why they've carved out their niche at the bottom of the reef and in our sumps and dark corners.

Benthic invertebrates are irritated by strong flow, and some can simply blow away, but you don't need to go out of your way to block flow patterns. Some are motile (mobile/capable of locomotion) while others are sessile (stationary/capable of motion, but not locomotion). It's these sessile invertebrates that rely on some water movement for feeding purposes. Unlike corals, they don't require flow to slough off mucous or skin.

I assume that when you said "The lower later would be pretty much entirely fine sand/gravel", you were thinking of a DSB in place of the egg-crate (lattice) structure? I've been experimenting with using the lower regions of overflow boxes for a VDSB. This may be a better use of space. Regardless of how you set it up, benthic invertebrates will eventually populate your sump and overflow box.

I find that well established tanks (over two years old) have far better results supporting corals. I have no scientific proof, but benthic invertebrate colonies (both micro & macro) appear to be the significant factor differing old and new tanks. What is known, is that these organisms polish water and feed corals.

As I mentioned in a previous post, these critters are eating something in order to thrive on their own, and it's something we don't want in our tanks, as it isn't POC or photosynthetic activity. It's the same process we use with algal turf scrubbers, only with fauna rather than flora.
 
Here's what I'm thinking about doing with my sump. Good? Bad?

sump_plan2.jpg
 
If the finished product is anywhere near the quality of the drawing, your good.

I would add more eggcrate cross-members, spaced a couple inches apart for additional stability and surface area. You would be surprised how much usable real estate you gain with the 360 degree living quarters supplied by eggcrate panels.

The sand bed will operate more efficiently at a greater depth (6"). You could use a divider to keep it in check, but I would go with a low-tech rubbermaid container about 6" deep.

You could also place a larger sheet of eggcrate (horizontally) over your existing structure, that covers the sand bed as well. This cantilever design will double your chaeto refugium space, without compromising the sand bed. This top sheet of eggcrate could also be independent of the eggcrate structure (benthic zone). This would allow you more accessibility if you should decide to feed the sand bed a carbon source such as sulphur, or if you need to inoculate the benthic zone with new critters.

You can scrape some sponges and tunicates off of the undersides of corals to jump start your benthic zone.

If you can live with a bit of nuisance algae in the skimmer, you could use a larger light in the refugium and illuminate the skimmer zone. Xenia could be farmed for nutrient export and to help offset the cost of operating the tank.

Great drawing, and efficient use of space. As big as our display tanks look, you run out of space under the tank pretty quick.
 
Thanks MrW! I can put as much junk in the refuge as possible I suppose. I'm still going to hang the Aquafuge on the side. I picked up a timer that will allow me to turn on my Aqualifter pump from anywhere from a few seconds to a few minutes at pretty much any interval that I want. I was thinking that pumping the thing for about a minute once per hour for starters would be good. That should only displace about a cup of water per hour, if that. Trial and error I suppose. Do you think I should put the duplex sump through the whole refuge? How much room between the egg-crate and the sand? I'm figuring I'll have a 12" water depth through the entire fuge.

Thanks!
Eric
 
I would leave a space between the DSB "tray" and the benthic zone (egg-crate). This will allow for water flow, and room to exchange your sand as needed.

If you can fit the sand bed somewhere else in the system, like the unused space at the bottom of an overflow box, you could expand the benthic zone. You could even place the sand bed below the benthic zone if you can squeeze a 4" DSB, 4" benthic zone, and a 4" refugium into your 12". We'll just have to call it a triplex. If you go this route, I strongly recommend making each zone removable, for servicing. Not that you need to do much, but you don't want to paint yourself into a corner.

If you want to feed the sand bed a carbon source or sulphur, you could add a perforated PVC pipe as a "feeding tube". I was able to fit 15 gallons of sand in this overflow. The tank is 4' high, and the VDSB is 24" deep with a feeding tube that goes to the bottom.

110288600_DSB.jpg


At this point in time, I Don't know which is more efficient for filtration & feeding - sand beds, turf scrubbers, or benthic zones. Certainly they all have their merits as "green solutions" for waste reduction and removal. Nature requires all three methods, and it's still a delicate balance, so I don't expect to do any better.

If you think it through, you can find enough real estate for each, without compromising the other. I give them equal amounts of space for now. At some point in time, I'll start "unplugging" each zone, one at a time, to see which has the greatest impact. Then I can size them accordingly.

I use mangroves in my refugium, even though they've fallen out of fashion due to slow growth rates. They do still grow, and permanently remove organics in the process. Their root network grows quite large if they're planted in the egg-crate with "free" roots. Plants are limited to the size of their root mass, perhaps something missed by the hobby as we jammed them in small pots full of aragonite. Zooplankton lives within these "free-range" roots, and I'm sure there are other unknown benefits (phytochemicals) of having these semi-terrestrial contributors. It's all part of replicating a higher ecosystem in our closed systems.

I grow my mangrove pods in soil for six months to get a good head start. If you use dolomite in the soil, you can provide them with enough magnesium. They adapt to immersion quite well, as they've evolved to this process for millions of years. You might be able to plant a few mangroves in your Aquafuge and illuminate them with the display lighting. This may diffuse the light too much for the phytoplankton, apart from the obvious photo-period difference. Phytoplankton will grow better if illuminated from the side of the Aquafuge, as the top is quite narrow for a deep container; although, You may not have room for this option.
 
I Don't know which is more efficient for filtration & feeding - sand beds, turf scrubbers, or benthic zones

I think its a matter of what type of organics each is best at breaking down. Sand beds are very efficient at breaking down particulate organic matter. Sponges tend to foul if supplied water with larger particulates in it(at least according to Steve Tyree). They tend to feed on very fine particulates 1 micron and smaller (bacteria fall into this catefory).

From the research Adday did, nothing is more efficient than turf algae at removing disolved organics. A properly functioning scrubber can remove a lot of organics in a very short time. Dynamic Aquaria is a very worth while book to read.

I truely wonder how efficient or inefficient mangroves are. There is a lot of incorrect info out there on mangroves. Mangroves need a rich substrait to grow properly. I often wonder if they could be used as a compliment to sandbeds to help remove nutrients that may build up over time (though a properly functioning bed does not build up nutirents)

When I did some reasearch on mangroves, I fount that red mangroves actually exclude salt at the roots. That means all those folks that pulled leaves off their plants to 'help' export salt, were just limiting the growth of their mangroves. No wonder they are slow growers in aquariums.

As for growth rates, I do not know how they compare to turf algaes, but they are considered fast growers for tropical trees/shrubs, showing growth rates of ~ 1 meter per year.

They are also probably light limited in most peoples fuges. Consider how much light they get in their natural surroundings.

Fred
 
I hear you Fred. The Dynamic Aquarium is still a great reference book. It's a shame that hype and trends cause so many people to ignore good research, just because it isn't "new". Not much is truly new in this hobby. I have a marine magazine from 1967 that shows pictures of a remote refugium, and Frank De graafs' "Marine Aquarium Guide" from 1968 shows protein skimmers as commonplace in Germany and Holland. Most of the developments in breeding marine fish came from Martin Moe in the late 60's and until Dr, Ron Shimek, Dr. Stephen Spotte was the only aquarium author with a scientific approach. It's been 10 years since Dr. Pablo Escobal wrote "Aquatic System Engineering", and his formulas rarely appear on discussion forums. I still use Dr. Edward Kingsfords' "Treatment of Exotic Marine Fish Diseases" from 1975 as my Bible. The laws of nature don't change, but people certainly do.

Dr. Addey and Loveland, weren't able to build the ultimate system in the end, but that doesn't negate their contribution. They're research was solid and they were willing to take the risks involved in advancing the hobby and science. If there's one thing I've learned in this hobby, it's that no one person holds all of the answers. It takes a village to keep a reef aquarium.

You're right about the lack of lighting mangroves receive in sumps. A friend of mine has had the same mangrove trees in his system for 25 years. They grow in a shallow 48"x18"x8" tray-like aquarium in 5" of sand. His nitrates have always been 0, and he still swears by them.
 
Back
Top