Matrix (and siporax) questions, to keep from derailing Sahin's thread.....

[Johnyman]

Thats true, a lot of siporax certainly helps, then whats the advantage of using siporax instead of live rock?

Because siporax have a much better capacity to fix bacteria, don´t know exactly how much but 1 L of siporax could fix much more bacteria than 1Kg of LR.

Intersting experiment but I don't think Siproax sitting in stagnating tank water will yield any positive results.

Acording with SERA FAQS:
http://www.sera-usa.com/us/sera-service/sera-interactive/faq/details/article/nitratabbau-mit-sera-siporax-was-fuer-ein-filter-eignet-sich.html

"The main step is biological filtration with sera siporax, and in this case I recommend about 4 liters plus a relatively slow flow rate (200 - 400 liters per hour). After a few weeks (activation period) this will take nitrate values down considerably.

There is, however, another way: A separate slow flux filter in addition to the normal biofilter. This filter (a passive bypass system is OK) should then hold 2 liters sera siporax, with a water flow rate of only 1 - 2 liters (no typing error!) per hour. This setup will produce virtually nitrate-free water."

 

[Ontheway]

There is, however, another way: A separate slow flux filter in addition to the normal biofilter. This filter (a passive bypass system is OK) should then hold 2 liters sera siporax, with a water flow rate of only 1 - 2 liters (no typing error!) per hour. This setup will produce virtually nitrate-free water."

Are there any photos or more detailed description of this system? Is it oxygen limited? I formerly tried a similar setup with seachem s denitrate, it was set to 1-2 drop per second, effluent was nitrate and nitrite rich and this never changed for a long time, so in the end I stopped it..

 

[Johnyman]

Are there any photos or more detailed description of this system? Is it oxygen limited? I formerly tried a similar setup with seachem s denitrate, it was set to 1-2 drop per second, effluent was nitrate and nitrite rich and this never changed for a long time, so in the end I stopped it..

No, i did it simple and it works well too, i only have a basket with 3 liters of siporax suspended in the last chamber of the sump near the return pump. The only thing i do different is clean part of them with RO and bleach. What i´m going to this week is to slip the 3L of siporax into 3 individual baskets and each month i clean one of them, it will be more easy to control it.

 

[gregkn73]

Hi,

I have a 15g tank filled with 7" of aragonite, as rdsb, and I wonder if I replace the aragonite with siporax, will achieve the same or more denitrification by heterotrophic bacteria? Is there any research except anectodal evidence, that denitrification , do occur in siporax? How much siporax/Lt of tank and what flow through it, did you use to achieve denitrification? Thanks in advance for any kind of information.

 

[Ontheway]

Hi,

I have a 15g tank filled with 7" of aragonite, as rdsb, and I wonder if I replace the aragonite with siporax, will achieve the same or more denitrification by heterotrophic bacteria? Is there any research except anectodal evidence, that denitrification , do occur in siporax? How much siporax/Lt of tank and what flow through it, did you use to achieve denitrification? Thanks in advance for any kind of information.

Nitrate is decreased by bacteria, with two ways.
A) If dissolved oxygen and nitrate available in water, bacteria uses oxygen to respirate and nitrate to build more bacteria bodies (Aerobic conditions).

B)In lack of oxygen, bacteria starts to use nitrate (NO3) to get the oxygen in it, for respiration, and N2 comes out in gas form, in the end of reactions (aneorobic conditions).

Since siporax is a good bed for bacteria colonies, bacteria quickly fills its pores and establishes.

Then the problem starts. Bacteria needs food. And bacteria food is simply called carbon. There are (again) two ways to carbon-feed the hungy waiting bacteria around siporaxes:

1) You artificially introduce carbon source to siporax container (methanol works here, not sure about other carbon sources, they probably work), and pass aquarium water through siporax for bringing more nitrates to them, and during this circulation, you bring dissolved oxygen, also. In this method, relatively higher circulation is generally preferred. Plenty of oxygen, nitrate and carbon results with huge amount of bacteria production, which uses nitrate in water to build theirselves (see A above)

2) You let bacteria use the existing carbon (which will not be as high as above) within the water column, by passing the aquarium water through the siporax container. But in the second method, along with carbon and nitrates, you carry dissolved oxygen to siporax, too. In here, structure of siporax container, flow speed, oxygenation status of water reaching to siporaxes, amount of useful carbon in water column etc etc may alter the percent of the ways of nitrate processing (A or B), they probably occur together, with varying success.
As indicated by others, outer and inner parts/surfaces of both siporax mass and individual siporaxes may function differently to process nitrates.
Since siporax arrangement and water properties are different in every aquarium, success from siporax use will also vary. What I see from people's experiences is, passive (no external carbon) use of reasonable amount (like 10 liters or less) of siporax is successful if nitrate levels are already low, like around 5. To deal with high nitrates or heavy feeding habits, examples start from 50 liters of siporax and goes through 150 or more liters, requiring seperate (remote) containers.

 

[sahin]

My tank in its current incarnation (same equipment re-setup many times over the years) has the least amount of liverock. The Siporax keeps the Nitrates at 0.2ppm. I have no doubt that the Siporax works and I think it may work better than an equivalent amount of liverock.

 

[Ontheway]

Hello Sahin, is there any link to help me understand your setup, assuming you already posted some pics..

 

[gregkn73]

Nitrate is decreased by bacteria, with two ways.
A) If dissolved oxygen and nitrate available in water, bacteria uses oxygen to respirate and nitrate to build more bacteria bodies (Aerobic conditions).

B)In lack of oxygen, bacteria starts to use nitrate (NO3) to get the oxygen in it, for respiration, and N2 comes out in gas form, in the end of reactions (aneorobic conditions).

Since siporax is a good bed for bacteria colonies, bacteria quickly fills its pores and establishes.

Then the problem starts. Bacteria needs food. And bacteria food is simply called carbon. There are (again) two ways to carbon-feed the hungy waiting bacteria around siporaxes:

1) You artificially introduce carbon source to siporax container (methanol works here, not sure about other carbon sources, they probably work), and pass aquarium water through siporax for bringing more nitrates to them, and during this circulation, you bring dissolved oxygen, also. In this method, relatively higher circulation is generally preferred. Plenty of oxygen, nitrate and carbon results with huge amount of bacteria production, which uses nitrate in water to build theirselves (see A above)

2) You let bacteria use the existing carbon (which will not be as high as above) within the water column, by passing the aquarium water through the siporax container. But in the second method, along with carbon and nitrates, you carry dissolved oxygen to siporax, too. In here, structure of siporax container, flow speed, oxygenation status of water reaching to siporaxes, amount of useful carbon in water column etc etc may alter the percent of the ways of nitrate processing (A or B), they probably occur together, with varying success.
As indicated by others, outer and inner parts/surfaces of both siporax mass and individual siporaxes may function differently to process nitrates.
Since siporax arrangement and water properties are different in every aquarium, success from siporax use will also vary. What I see from people's experiences is, passive (no external carbon) use of reasonable amount (like 10 liters or less) of siporax is successful if nitrate levels are already low, like around 5. To deal with high nitrates or heavy feeding habits, examples start from 50 liters of siporax and goes through 150 or more liters, requiring seperate (remote) containers.

Thank you for your detail answer. Obviously I interested for the second way of denitrification, through anaerobic heterotrophic bacteria. If it is difficult and with big variation the denitrrification with siropax, do you thing that rdsb is a much better and safer method to go?

My tank in its current incarnation (same equipment re-setup many times over the years) has the least amount of liverock. The Siporax keeps the Nitrates at 0.2ppm. I have no doubt that the Siporax works and I think it may work better than an equivalent amount of liverock.

Sahin I will be very interested to explain your current set up , volume of siporax, placement, flow etc. You compare it with live rock, but I would like to replace with siporax my rdsb. Have you ever use rdsb to achieve denitrification?


The main reason I interested for siporax is this awesome tank http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1744289&highlight=siporax, where he had replaced the buckets of DSB with siporax. But today I red that in his newer tank http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2389675 , he returned to rdsb! So I am now even more confused......

 

[dadummy]

anyone try this? did a search for sintered glass, the same material siporax is made from

http://www.bio-motion.co.uk/

us distributer


https://greatwaveeng.com/shop/media/biohome-standard-media/

 

[illumnae]

Between pond matrix and matrix, which would be a better choice?

 

[Myka]

I haven't been following this thread too closely, but I notice that very few people are using Siporax in a reactor. I'm not sure I understand the point of using Siporax if it's not in a reactor where a controlled anaerobic zone can be created. Unless a person has a BB tank with a very small amount of live rock, there would be no need for aerobic bacteria. I thought the whole point was to create a large anaerobic zone for denitrification? If that's the case, then making these big boxes of dumped in Siporax won't do the trick, I don't think. If an anaerobic zone does form in these giant boxes of Siporax, when a person goes to clean all the detritus out that is certainly going to collect when dumped into a box in such a fashion, the anaerobic area will be destroyed, and there would be a potential to release noxious waste into the water column too. I could see a big box of those balls working better for this purpose than the tube-shaped Siporax.

So I guess my simplified question is, for those that are dumping a pile of Siporax into a box in the sump, what exactly is the proposed purpose?

 

[DiscusHeckel]

So I guess my simplified question is, for those that are dumping a pile of Siporax into a box in the sump, what exactly is the proposed purpose?

Nitrate control. Does it work? I think it does. How do I know? Before I had introduced my siporax box containing 7.5 litres of 15-mm siporax media, I had about ten fishes in a 250-litre net volume. My nitrate reading was ~ 2 ppm. I now have 16 fishes, including 8 anthias. I feed them up to four cubes frozen food a day. My latest nitrate reading is still 2.5 ppm (Salifert). This is despite reducing Tropic Marin NP Bacto balance dosage from 1.2 ml per day to 0.9 ml per day. FWIW, Tropic Marin NP bacto balance is a commercial product to control nitrates and phosphates.

 

[Myka]

Nitrate control. Does it work? I think it does. How do I know? Before I had introduced my siporax box containing 7.5 litres of 15-mm siporax media, I had about ten fishes in a 250-litre net volume. My nitrate reading was ~ 2 ppm. I now have 16 fishes, including 8 anthias. I feed them up to four cubes frozen food a day. My latest nitrate reading is still 2.5 ppm (Salifert). This is despite reducing Tropic Marin NP Bacto balance dosage from 1.2 ml per day to 0.9 ml per day. FWIW, Tropic Marin NP bacto balance is a commercial product to control nitrates and phosphates.

Yes, nitrate reduction/control. That is my understanding of the purpose as well, but in order to do so, you need to have a large anaerobic bacteria population. Although it may (or may not) be working for you now, I'm not sure that it will work in the long run when either the Siporax gets mucked up with detritus or you go to clean the Siporax and introduce oxygen to the anaerobic areas. How long have you had the Siporax in the system?

 

[nemodan]

Yes, nitrate reduction/control. That is my understanding of the purpose as well, but in order to do so, you need to have a large anaerobic bacteria population. Although it may (or may not) be working for you now, I'm not sure that it will work in the long run when either the Siporax gets mucked up with detritus or you go to clean the Siporax and introduce oxygen to the anaerobic areas. How long have you had the Siporax in the system?

MINDY, I have been using Matrix for almost a year soon. I just washed it 2 times during a water change with salt water. The washing was shaking the bags with Matrix in the water. Then back to their place in the fuge. I have not seen any change in my NO3 after the washing.

I believe for any of these compounds will be the same.

Cheers
Daniel

 

[DiscusHeckel]

Yes, nitrate reduction/control. That is my understanding of the purpose as well, but in order to do so, you need to have a large anaerobic bacteria population. Although it may (or may not) be working for you now, I'm not sure that it will work in the long run when either the Siporax gets mucked up with detritus or you go to clean the Siporax and introduce oxygen to the anaerobic areas. How long have you had the Siporax in the system?

Not long, for a few months. I am planning to rinse it in a separate container a couple of time a year using my tank water. I will post updates in this thread regularly.

 

[M007]

I haven't been following this thread too closely, but I notice that very few people are using Siporax in a reactor. I'm not sure I understand the point of using Siporax if it's not in a reactor where a controlled anaerobic zone can be created. Unless a person has a BB tank with a very small amount of live rock, there would be no need for aerobic bacteria. I thought the whole point was to create a large anaerobic zone for denitrification? If that's the case, then making these big boxes of dumped in Siporax won't do the trick, I don't think. If an anaerobic zone does form in these giant boxes of Siporax, when a person goes to clean all the detritus out that is certainly going to collect when dumped into a box in such a fashion, the anaerobic area will be destroyed, and there would be a potential to release noxious waste into the water column too. I could see a big box of those balls working better for this purpose than the tube-shaped Siporax.

So I guess my simplified question is, for those that are dumping a pile of Siporax into a box in the sump, what exactly is the proposed purpose?

Sorry I'm confused. How is Siporax in a reactor any different than in a box other than flow control?

 

[tomae]

just like feedback, I have used siporax for nearly three years, just shook twice today during water changes and my NO3 was never able to be measured by some home tests.

M007 think the difference between the two forms is the ability to form more easily cultures of anaerobic bacteria, however never tested this difference

 

[Myka]

Interesting anecdotal evidence guys, thanks. It doesn't make sense to me though. [emoji38] You guys are indirectly suggesting that your piles of Siporax are anaerobic and cleaning (aerating) them does not harm these bacteria. Hmm...maybe I'm over thinking it.

I'd be interested to hear what reefvet says on the subject since he's experimented with Siporax quite a but it seems.

Yes, using a reactor allows a person to reduce flow enough to achieve an anaerobic environment easily.

 

[watchguy123]

Why isn't anyone leaving their siporax in the mesh bags they come in. Am I missing something?

 

[DiscusHeckel]

Why isn't anyone leaving their siporax in the mesh bags they come in. Am I missing something?

In my opinion, there are two reasons:

1. when you pile siporax pieces up, they occupy a lot less space;
2. detritus will have less chance to settle on the media.