How many of you are using a GFO PO4 remover in your Sps reef tanks

How many of you are using a GFO PO4 remover in your Sps reef tanks

  • Yes I use one and feel I have had good results, tell us how.

    Votes: 25 75.8%
  • No, I don't use one and don't think it is needed.

    Votes: 8 24.2%

  • Total voters
    33
  • Poll closed .

Znut Reefer

Premium Member
Trying to get an idea on how many of you are using a PO4 remover in your system. And if you feel it's needed or not needed. Please vote, and feel feel to reply your experience using one. Good or bad. Also, post on the thread if you use a Phos reactor, or just a bag in the sump.

Thanks!
 
I run mine in a phosban reactor. I run a slightly fuller container than some and that way I can also get a higher flow rate w/o getting too turbulent with no problems.
 
I just started using rowaphos in a phosban reactor. I like it so far. I think I have seen a reduction in hair alge and some better growth of corals. My hair algae is small so maybe I am just seeing things. So far I am happy. I feel it is needed. I tested my phosphate level with salifert kit and it read zero. Then I found out zero only means less than 0.03. So I am hoping this reduction will spur my growth as it has been pitiful. All other parameters are good. Time will tell.
 
I have no phosban reactor on my tank (180) and no hair algae to speak of, Seachem Reefsalt is the salt I use. Lights on for 10 hours a day. no refugium, running 1 cup carbon/ 100 gallon water.
I think algae can be linked to the color spectrum of lights you are using.. I have noticed over the past few months tanks with t5's, 20K- 12K dont have near the algae the tanks that run the more yellow spectrum.. I noticed this especially in my holding tanks (10K).. There is a thick layer of brown hair algae, but not in my main tank which is T5.
Even in the wild you dont see hair algae past a certain depth... maybe it prefers the more red/ yellow spectrum for photosynthesis???

But then you come full circle, what you put in your tank influences what you get out of your tank... are you dosing anything? what type of salt? what is the density of your tank? Lights?

for a 500 gallon tank I could see using a reactor beneficial ( all things staying the same).. if anything it would lengthen the time between water changes, I suppose. What do you guys think?
 
I'm not using a Phos reactor on my tank. I haven't seen the need to do so yet. I have no hair algae at present. But wanted to see how many are using a GFO remover for Phos removal. Just in case I do decide to use one in the future. Just to keep my levels low.
I have a BB system, was using a refuge with macro, but the macro is not growing much if at all now. My 550 has been up for almost 6 mos, recently upgraded from a 225.

I have also heard that using only 20K bulbs does prevent some algaes from growing. But have never used only 20K on my tank.
 
Right on, on the contrary I know a few people who have very successful SPS tanks and they swear by the Po4 reactor (they were DSB).

Interesting that you have a refugium.. how large? mangroves? DSB/BB? how long are your lights on? when I ran a refugium I had it installed after my Calcium reactor so all the dissolved Co2 was there for the macro to use, made a great effluent mixing chamber thingy too.. pruning, from what I can remember, seemed to help the stunted growth of macro.
 
I'm sure there are alot of people with successful SPS tanks. I consider myself one of them. But just not using the PO4 remover at this point.

When I had my sump built it was custom built to have a refuge in the middle so it's around 50-60 gals (just the refug) the total sump is 150 gals. It is a BB refug with just a small amount of macro algae that is slowly dying. And have several clusters of Xenia.It has tons of flow through the sump, and it is installed after the CO2. But the macro seems to be at a standstill for growth.
I have heard many BB tanks using a refuge with macro, the nutrients are not avail to substain the macro, and it slowly dies out. So that maybe the case. It is lit 12 hours a day.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8302692#post8302692 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by znut Reefer

I have heard many BB tanks using a refuge with macro, the nutrients are not avail to substain the macro, and it slowly dies out. So that maybe the case. It is lit 12 hours a day.

That, I think, is case and point as to whether or not BB's work! Also happens to be why I got rid of my refugium :rollface: I used to judge our nutrient levels by whether or not the xenia were reproducing/ growing..
 
I agree. I have noticed even the Xenia is not growing as fast either. So may have to shut down the refug and move the xenia to my 180. Guess thats a good sign.
 
Back
Top