matrix/siporax vs carbon dosing for sps
- Thread starter tboneman
- Start date
Why not both? Carbon dosing just fuels bacterial colonization. With a good media to colonize (matrix / sip) carbon dosing would be even more effective.
Once I added a marine pure block I had to drop my vinegar dosing from 30ml to 5 just to keep my nitrates from staying completely bottomed out.
Once I added a marine pure block I had to drop my vinegar dosing from 30ml to 5 just to keep my nitrates from staying completely bottomed out.
nemodan
New member
Ok, I apologizing for being unclear with my question. Here goes again.
Does the bacteria that is colonizing the marine pure block matrix lower both phosphate AND nitrate much the same way as the bacteria does when using bio pellets? Or does the bacteria in the marine pure block matrix function more like live rock and stop short of processing phosphate but does indeed perform nitrate removal?
Thank you for your help
sahin
Ultimate Reefer
Firstly because it is easy and there arent really any negatives to matrix/siporax; the bacterial population is self regulating/determined by nutrient levels. Its a set in place and forget kind of thing.
Secondly, perhaps because more and more reefers are moving away from the "need to have very low PO4 and NO3" idea. I dont utilise PO4 remover in my tank; and the tank maintains PO4 around 0.03ppm
With other methods there is the need to keep within limits (ie Alk) or in the case of Zeovit, very strict limits over a range of parameters or else STN results.
So overall, its a relatively maintenance and problem free, set and forget method which works.
reefmutt
Active member
I have always been of the understanding that the porous medias like matrix provide the perfect environment for de nitrifying bacteria and therefor have a significant impact on nitrate.
I am not so sure what effect these medias- or the bacteria that colonize them- have on po4. Surely some reducing effect..
Granted, any system where food is being added is to a certain degree, 'Carbon dosing' the tank and will be feeding all the various forms of nutrient reducing bacteria..
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I think las is correct in his assumption.
tripdad
Frustrated Stick Gardener
I believe this to be the case as it is the same bacteria already living in your existing live rock and sandbed.
Great point made here.
reefmutt
Active member
You should check out the matrix/siporax thread. It has lots of good info..
It has been established that siporax is the best. It has the highest porosity and therefore can harbor the greatest amount of bacteria per weight..
Seachem Matrix comes a close second and for the money, may be more economical.
The marine pure is apparently a distant competitor to these first two..
It has been established that siporax is the best. It has the highest porosity and therefore can harbor the greatest amount of bacteria per weight..
Seachem Matrix comes a close second and for the money, may be more economical.
The marine pure is apparently a distant competitor to these first two..
organism
code monkey
Different materials, I prefer Siporax because it's made of glass as opposed to ceramic on the others. I used Marine Pure and got high aluminum levels so switched over to Siporax since it's non-reactive glass. Also it's more porous with smaller pores so denitrifying bacteria can colonize. The pore size on the smaller Marine Pure balls/blocks are too big for denitrifying bacteria since water passes too far through/into them, essentially making them nitrate factories which is something else I had issues with before switching to Siporax.
