...?? May be too late at night for me but I don't follow DJ - were you alluding to my other post as to my questioning the actual functioning against timeline??
SJ
N/P reducing pellets (solid vodka dosing)
- Thread starter tntneon
- Start date
- Status
...?? May be too late at night for me but I don't follow DJ - were you alluding to my other post as to my questioning the actual functioning against timeline??
SJ
No, just agreeing. Bacterial incorporation of said elements is critical to exportation of these components, but do not underestimate the ability of a quality skimmer. There's a lot of very diverse crap in that sludge.
DJ
True enough... guess there is that [remote?] possibility that some miscellaneous trace ions can be bound up w/ various proteins being removed in addition to those we wish to be removed by bacteria...? might be getting a little off topic but that notion is reminiscent of the arguments raised re overskimming... don't recall the actual outcome, but I was left hesitant to believe that such a thing is possible - overskimming that is. Then again, this hobby is all about learning something new... 'hobbyist evolution' :fun5:
SJ
Aquarist007
New member
How long have you been running the pellets with your refugium?
Have you noticed any adverse affects on the chaeto or macroalgae in the refugium?
Here's an odd question. Is it bad to tilt your pellet reactor? When mine is tilted at a slight angle, the pellets fluidize on the upward facing side the most, and it will move the entire mass of pellets in a slow vertical gyre... Whereas if the reactor is level the pellets will clump and form channels under their own weight.
I think wording it this way makes more sense. The way I understood it, protein skimmers can take out proteins and some organic molecules but they can't take out NO3 and PO4 directly. What the skimmer removes could eventually break down into nitrogenous waste, phosphates, sulfides, etc.
If you can get good motion that eliminates the clumping effect - then I say go for it. tweak yours toward your best individual performance. SJ
SimonSKL
New member
Excellent idea! I am using an Eheim 1250 pump (317gph) that hardly moved my 600ml pellets in a NextReef MR1 reactor. By tilting the reactor a slight angle, most of my pellets are now moving with the pellets facing the upside the most. Thank you Banker!
tntneon
SPSahollic
+1 , like the biodiversion of a fuge , although i had to upgrade my fuge lighting since i've started the pellets.
Due to the lack of nutrients my Chaeto was getting lighter and more brittle , once i've swapped my 9w pl light to an 26 w aquatic nature spiral bulb , it is growing like crazy again .
greetingzz tntneon
Due to the lack of nutrients my Chaeto was getting lighter and more brittle , once i've swapped my 9w pl light to an 26 w aquatic nature spiral bulb , it is growing like crazy again .
greetingzz tntneon
tntneon
SPSahollic
I was answering to this post at previous page , i didn't knew there was still another page of unread information.... :lol:
greetingzz tntneon
I'm not so sure about that. I bet if you dug through the sludge in the bottom of my skimmer cups, I'm sure you'd find all kinds of PO4 and NO3, and the smell - well, that would be bacteria, and we already know what they're made of.
DJ
I was answering to this post at previous page , i didn't knew there was still another page of unread information.... :lol:
greetingzz tntneon
Yea, that happens to me too. I'll respond to a question or make a comment and log back in 2 hours later and 2 more pages have gone up.
DJ
Bcollins111900
New member
May be a stupid question but is anyone else running other medias while running bio-pellets? I will be running 2000ml of brightwell pellets in a GEO 420 Media Reactor on my new tank and want to run carbon or carbon & GFO in my other GEO 420 reactor. Will running GFO and carbon in the other reator effect the bio-pellets at all? The two reactors will not be linked together, both will have there own water inlet and discharge but both will drain back into my sump.
I guess it's been about 5 months now. The fuge was set up in March, and pellets were started sometime in June. I've had to harvest the macros 3 times in that period. The only downside to all of this is I grow a lot of cyano in their (better there than in the DT, though), and I'm certain the extended photo period has more to do with that than anything.
DJ
Last edited:
From what I've learned from this here site:fun4: that would be a yes sir to the carbon; and the gfo depends on your current balance... if you have an abundance of phosphate then you may benefit from the redundant phosphate solution, but if you have an extreme amount of nitrate then you may do well to leave the phosphate to the pellets.... it seems that there is a ratio of usage between the phosphate and the nitrate - much, much more nitrate to phosphate. Both must be present in this specific ratio for the system to work effectively. If one hit absolute zero before the other then the bacteria cease to function as desired. There was a post I think by tmz (don't quote me) a few pages back that explains the ratio...
SJ
Bcollins111900
New member
These reactors will be set up on my new tank but just wanted to make sure I was not cutting my own throat by running Pellets, Carbon and GFO and one canceling out the effectiveness of the other. More of less wanting to use all 3 as a preventitive measure.
Running gac is a very good idea,imo, as it will export organics which are typically higher when you are dosing organic carbon sources. GFO is a system by system call but will help keep PO4 low even when NO3 is very low and many continue it's use when carbon dosing .
Hey Bcollins - just to confirm [as I looked it up] I was referring to post No. 3066 on pg 123; and it was by tmz.
SJ
What I'm saying is that the skimmer takes out proteins and oily organic molecules that will degrade, via biological processes, to PO4, NO3, and other things while sitting in the skimmer cup. Of course you would find PO4 and NO3 in the skimmer sludge, but when the skimmer pulled them out of the water, they were part of something else.
I.e. what I'm saying is this, if you ran a skimmer on a bucket of water with a high concentration of PO4 and NO3, it wouldn't make a dent in either.
- Status
Similar threads
