Moratorium on "Nitrate Factories"

[TreyK]

SportoO.. fact is bioballs are outdated and there are better ways, easier ways of doing things now. If you like em, use em. I will stick with the latest technologies and reap the benefits. BTW do you have a picture of your tank? i would like to see it and see if it compares to the bacteria driven systems out there.

 

[sporto0]

well I guess I know nothing about reefkeeping & my tank is just an illusion & my corals are just a figment of my imagination & nitrate factories are the root of all evil. one last thought, do not overload your sytem, no matter how you choose to filter it & you won't have to work at a Nitrate Factory all your life, because you wont have a nitrate problem.

 

[thebanker]

Believe it or not, I refrain from cleaning my canister sometimes, and add amino acids so I can have nitrates in my water. I believe it helps me lower my phosphate by providing more organic nitrogen for bacteria...

But this is only applicable to those running a nitrogen-limited system. I'm not the only biopellet user with this issue.

 

[TreyK]

Taken From other threads are these posts by you SportoO;

hey fellow reefers, i need some input from you experienced experts in Hair Algae removal. i have a 55g reef with a 10-15 g refugium/wet dry filter, i have cheato in refug, it grows like crazy but so does that annoying HA & i have copious amounts that i have been battling for months with little success, i am currently using marine s.a.t. a biological type bacteria that is supposed to out battle the algae for the phospates & what not, well it helps making manual extraction of the hair easier but does not seem to actually kill or even reduce it. so i have decided to bring out the chemicals which i have tried to avoid like the plague, but i have read so many good posts about API's Marine Algae Fix that i am going to give it a shot. my concern is should i try & kill off the HA before i use my GFO reactor which i have not used yet? will the dead alage produce more phosphates & nutrients than the GFO can handle? wouldn't i just be wasting the GFO? please advise, I know someone has been down this road & has the answers. thanx in advance for your input.

ok experts, let's hear your opinions please, is this a form of bryopsis or green hair algae? thanx in advance.

Attached Thumbnails

Yup looks like your nitrates are under control to me..

 

[567234ta]

Um ok.

I will never use the term nitrate factory in a thread with you again.

I mean after this post of course.

Thank you for your time and good luck with your movement.

:lmao::fun4:

 

[Toddrtrex]

but you stopped doing water changes & regular up-keep for 3 months, that your nitrates would not raise, would not become an issue? I seriously doubt that & you can't convince me otherwise......... for shame sir, you insult my intelligence.

Talk about being close minded. And talk about insulting intelligence.

Not sure what your point it, because you have made up your mind, and refuse to listen.

However, last year (( actually 11 months today )) I had spinal fusion surgery, and guess what, I didn't do any water changes for 3-4 months. All that was done was top off, dosing and emptying of the skimmer cup. My nitrates were where they have also been, 0.

 

[TreyK]

I am really anxious to see what you have to say in your defense given the recent revelations in this thread...

 

[BrianOKC]

I am really anxious to see what you have to say in your defense given the recent revelations in this thread...

LoL........................................................... I know I'm interested in all his advice how he runs his tank now.

 

[barjam]

Nitrate problems (higher than normal levels) are caused by over stocking, over feeding & neglect, period, not the equiptment. you folks who run live rock, sump & skimmer only, tell me if you kept everything the same, normal feedings etc. but you stopped doing water changes & regular up-keep for 3 months, that your nitrates would not raise, would not become an issue? I seriously doubt that & you can't convince me otherwise. if you only have 2 small fish in a 55 or larger your never going to have a nitrate problem, so that does not apply here. a filter, no matter what style, does not on it's own, produce nitrates, it requires a load put on it, if that load is excessive, so too will be the nitrates. & the statement "unless i clean it every three days" is over the top & rediculous, not even you believe that, just another attempt to slay my credibility. for shame sir, you insult my intelligence.

I hate to admit it but I regularly go three months without a water change or other maintenance (other than refilling alk/topoff/calcium reservoirs, cleaning the skimmer cup or wiping the front glass). I don't feel that water changes are a good way to deal with nitrates in any tank over a nano.

 

[barjam]

For what it's worth it looks like Sporto0's problem was the crushed coral you see in that picture. Apparently moving to a new tank with sand cleared up the issue.

 

[TreyK]

For what it's worth it looks like Sporto0's problem was the crushed coral you see in that picture. Apparently moving to a new tank with sand cleared up the issue.

Cool lets see a picture of his new tank..

 

[barjam]

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2032946

About half way down the page he makes a post.

 

[TreyK]

Looks a hundred tmes better but I am still seeing Algea...

 

[barjam]

Looks a hundred tmes better but I am still seeing Algea...

Yea, no arguments there. I just noticed he had posted that and figured I would mention it.

 

[MedRed]

For what it's worth it looks like Sporto0's problem was the crushed coral you see in that picture. Apparently moving to a new tank with sand cleared up the issue.

so would you say his crushed coral became a... nitrate factory?

the culprit turned out to be my crushed coral substrate, when i finally broke the tank down to upgrade & use sand instead, there was so much gunk, detritus, mud, gross mixture of whatever stuck in and under the substrate, it literally stunk so bad, it had me gagging for a minute.

 

[TreyK]

LoL I would! Don't tell him that though

 

[TellyFish]

Does OP know he can solve his algae problem by removing all those nitrate factories? :fun4:

This thread has been a great fun and I appreciated the conversation. As it was mentioned, I agree that the words 'nitrate factory' are used as an easy way to explain a somewhat complicated problem. Also, "Nitrate Factory" pretty much just sounds badass when you say it.

I know when ever I walk-in to check out someone's setup and I am confronted with the dreaded 'ton-of-fish' tank with canister filters, a HOB skimmer + refuge, simulated 'oak' trim everywhere, and :eek2: wet/dry setup, the LAST thing I would expect is that this person has the experience or knowledge to properly clean and maintain that sort of setup in order to achieve low nitrates. I know some of us do, its just pretty rare in my experience. So I might question the setup if its a new tank or having an algae problem. Without diligent husbandry, this sort of tank will often have great success at keeping everything for years--including algae and detritus.

Dont want to :deadhorse: just my $.02

 

[disc1]

I have several nitrate factories in my 24 x 24 x 18 cube. :spin1:

Sorry, couldn't resist. :lol2:

 

[doctorgori]

I'm kinda new here, but this is becoming a ole fashioned cyberspace "pile on"....

I sort get what the OP is saying...he is arguing against the net effect of the purpose behind the term "nitrate factory" not a methodology per se

...athough I don't fully agree/side with the OP here, I get the jest of it...If I'm not mistaken you are basically saying if live rock makes nitrates and bio-balls makes nitrates, why put the blame on a singular component in the system (if the end result is going to be nitrates anyway)...

...to the OP....IMHO, I've found that anything that produces nitrates faster than a system (or hobbyist dilligence) can remove it tends to be bad, and creates a out of balance condition...

....I'm just thinking out loud here but if you made two identical tanks: both with live rock & skimmers but one tank has a additional path to convert nutrients in the form of a bio-ball wet dry

...and then you introduce organics at a equal rate into both...would not the one with the bio-balls produce an excess of nitrates while the other with just the LR & Skimmer produces less nitrates? (the anerobic qualities of LR not withstanding)

my thinking here is the skimmer in the simpler "2-component" tanks splits a larger percentge of the "load" (because it has more of an "opportunity" to skim out the organics 1st) and hence circumvents a larger percentage of the nitrogen cycle before it even produces nitrates...whereas the tank with the LR-Skimmer-bio-balls has at least one component that is converting the "load" into nitrates very fast; a product that a skimmer (or the Aquarist) can't easily or directly remove (more or less)....

.
...anyway, I'll listen to any flaws in my thinking ...pardon the intrusion

 

[barjam]

Your thinking sound. You are forgetting that liverock/sand also converts nitrates to nitrogen completing the nitrogen cycle. The theory is that the closer the nitrogen producers are to the nitrogen consumers the better.

Also liverock has a myriad of other creatures that can incorporate leftover food into biomass that bioballs would not have.