You're probably going to have a tough time doing this with a two chamber, but if u do run them together then definitely GAC first. The slime from the pellets will goo all the carbon together and clog things up.
DJ
N/P reducing pellets (solid vodka dosing)
- Thread starter tntneon
- Start date
- Status
You're probably going to have a tough time doing this with a two chamber, but if u do run them together then definitely GAC first. The slime from the pellets will goo all the carbon together and clog things up.
DJ
tripnbili
New member
Do you think I'll have difficulty getting the pellets to tumble correctly?
Also, what should I do to the reactor to use the pellets? Remove the foam inserts??
tripnbili
New member
I have a mesh I used for a mod on a skimmer pump...it will probably work.
Am I basically using it to keep the pellets from leaving the reactor and getting stuck in the plumbing?
Yea. You'd need a pump big enough to potentially grind your carbon to dust. You may want to do a search and see if anyone has been successful with that type of setup.
DJ
No, it's a different type of mesh. Do a search for mesh discs for needle point. They sell them at Michael's, Hobby Lobby, and Walmart back in the fabrics section.
DJ
I agree with DJ on this, it will be very tough to get the pellets to tumble in a dual reactor setup, since the media in the second reactor will likely slow the flow to the point where the pellets are motionless. In a single TLF 150 reactor driven with a MJ1200, I have a tough time getting the pellets to move, and that pump drives the reactor to almost leaking with 295 GPH.
Aquarist007
New member
What the manufacturer didn’t tell you about using np pellets(polymers)
The theory behind the pellets is that they produce bacteria. The bacteria consume nitrates and phosphates and they themselves are consumed by corals.
Well fed corals colour up and thrive;the water becomes crystal clear.
This is where the theory stops short . Use of these pellets in six systems has caused a variety of problems leaving me with extra maintenance, unhappy and impatient customers, and a lot of explaining to do.
In Practicality
The pellets will reduce nitrates almost immediately and act like a floc pulling detritus out of the water and thus giving an almost instantaneous clarity. However the pellets fall short in how long it takes them to reduce phosphates.
Once the nitrates are reduced in your system algae that thrived very easily on them diminishes. This leaves the door open for other nuisance algae that was in competition before for nitrates and kept in check, yet has the capacity to flourish on phosphates. Namely bryopsis (hair algae) and cyano and other slime algae .
They have the capacity to pull phosphates from reef rock which over the years can form a hard paste with carbonates.
These algae are ugly, smell and can easily suffocate corals and drain the system of quality oxygen.
In four out of six tanks that I experimented with np pellets, this has been the case. It is a lot of work to take out reef rock and scrub it, similarly try to save corals that are covered in bryopsis.
Ever have to carefully clean off a sea fan or branch coral by hand that seem to be magnets for gathering bryopsis . I spent an hour on one just today.
If you add too much of the np pellets too fast then you can get a bacteria bloom. Left unchecked a bacteria bloom can seriously and quickly rob the system of vital oxygen and drive down the pH of the system.
Again I have had to deal with a bacteria bloom in a couple of the tanks---by setting up aeration, water changes, and in one case discontinuing the np pellets
What is evolving with experienced users of the pellets is that phosban should be run separately in conjunction with the first couple of months use of the pellets.
Running carbon and a protein skimmer is a must to handle the dead bacteria.
So now you have a reactor with carbon, a reactor with phosban and a reactor with the pellets---and a protein skimmer all hanging around on the outside of the tank. This is a very hard sell to my customers.
What the bacteria does do is form a mulm---a mixture ofdissolved np pellets and rapidly reproducing bacteria. One reefers suggested they call it bacteria snot—a good description in my opinion. This mulm can cause problems---it clogs the reactor and the filters in the reactor. It can coat corals that do not have the ability to produce their own mucous to ward off being coated by this mulm. They soon suffocate or can’t feed and die. This mulm can cause clumping in the reactor and the reactor has to be take down, the pellets rinsed an number of times till no more snot is realeased—another time consumer.
I have also heard from experts that the usefulness of this bacteria to corals is questionable. Although concrete research on bacteria produced from polymers is limited their experience questions it,
A better suggestion then the pellets-- reef keeping 101
Run carbon and phosban. If you don’t want reactors hanging about a simple Rena Canister filter with all other media taken out except a phosban pack and a carbon pack. This will do wonders for the clarity of your water and the control of nuisance algaes.
Maintain your live rock. Blast it once a week with a turkey baster. Get that detritus away from the rock and up into the water column where it can be filtered off. Move a couple of pieces of live rock around monthly
And guess who eats detritus—corals!
Maintain excellent circulation and flow. Creative placement of power heads can insure the water flow takes a circular flow from top to substrate, across the substrate and back up to the top of the reef. Flow should be a minimum of 20 times the volume of the display tank in gph.
10 per cent water changes performed weekly.
Set up and automatic feeder esp in the case of constant grazers such as tangs. The feeder can control the amount and time interval to feed the fish. This insures the feed is consumed at each feeding
Take care of your sand bed. Studies have shown that even a one inch sand bed is capable of reducing nitrates if the flora and fauna in the top level is constantly maintained. This means reducing the number of carnivores that ravage the sand bed----necessarius snails, sand sifting stars, hermit crabs.
Rinse all frozen food introduced to your tank---they contain phosphates in the juice—and nothing eats the juice in your tank.
The theory behind the pellets is that they produce bacteria. The bacteria consume nitrates and phosphates and they themselves are consumed by corals.
Well fed corals colour up and thrive;the water becomes crystal clear.
This is where the theory stops short . Use of these pellets in six systems has caused a variety of problems leaving me with extra maintenance, unhappy and impatient customers, and a lot of explaining to do.
In Practicality
The pellets will reduce nitrates almost immediately and act like a floc pulling detritus out of the water and thus giving an almost instantaneous clarity. However the pellets fall short in how long it takes them to reduce phosphates.
Once the nitrates are reduced in your system algae that thrived very easily on them diminishes. This leaves the door open for other nuisance algae that was in competition before for nitrates and kept in check, yet has the capacity to flourish on phosphates. Namely bryopsis (hair algae) and cyano and other slime algae .
They have the capacity to pull phosphates from reef rock which over the years can form a hard paste with carbonates.
These algae are ugly, smell and can easily suffocate corals and drain the system of quality oxygen.
In four out of six tanks that I experimented with np pellets, this has been the case. It is a lot of work to take out reef rock and scrub it, similarly try to save corals that are covered in bryopsis.
Ever have to carefully clean off a sea fan or branch coral by hand that seem to be magnets for gathering bryopsis . I spent an hour on one just today.
If you add too much of the np pellets too fast then you can get a bacteria bloom. Left unchecked a bacteria bloom can seriously and quickly rob the system of vital oxygen and drive down the pH of the system.
Again I have had to deal with a bacteria bloom in a couple of the tanks---by setting up aeration, water changes, and in one case discontinuing the np pellets
What is evolving with experienced users of the pellets is that phosban should be run separately in conjunction with the first couple of months use of the pellets.
Running carbon and a protein skimmer is a must to handle the dead bacteria.
So now you have a reactor with carbon, a reactor with phosban and a reactor with the pellets---and a protein skimmer all hanging around on the outside of the tank. This is a very hard sell to my customers.
What the bacteria does do is form a mulm---a mixture ofdissolved np pellets and rapidly reproducing bacteria. One reefers suggested they call it bacteria snot—a good description in my opinion. This mulm can cause problems---it clogs the reactor and the filters in the reactor. It can coat corals that do not have the ability to produce their own mucous to ward off being coated by this mulm. They soon suffocate or can’t feed and die. This mulm can cause clumping in the reactor and the reactor has to be take down, the pellets rinsed an number of times till no more snot is realeased—another time consumer.
I have also heard from experts that the usefulness of this bacteria to corals is questionable. Although concrete research on bacteria produced from polymers is limited their experience questions it,
A better suggestion then the pellets-- reef keeping 101
Run carbon and phosban. If you don’t want reactors hanging about a simple Rena Canister filter with all other media taken out except a phosban pack and a carbon pack. This will do wonders for the clarity of your water and the control of nuisance algaes.
Maintain your live rock. Blast it once a week with a turkey baster. Get that detritus away from the rock and up into the water column where it can be filtered off. Move a couple of pieces of live rock around monthly
And guess who eats detritus—corals!
Maintain excellent circulation and flow. Creative placement of power heads can insure the water flow takes a circular flow from top to substrate, across the substrate and back up to the top of the reef. Flow should be a minimum of 20 times the volume of the display tank in gph.
10 per cent water changes performed weekly.
Set up and automatic feeder esp in the case of constant grazers such as tangs. The feeder can control the amount and time interval to feed the fish. This insures the feed is consumed at each feeding
Take care of your sand bed. Studies have shown that even a one inch sand bed is capable of reducing nitrates if the flora and fauna in the top level is constantly maintained. This means reducing the number of carnivores that ravage the sand bed----necessarius snails, sand sifting stars, hermit crabs.
Rinse all frozen food introduced to your tank---they contain phosphates in the juice—and nothing eats the juice in your tank.
Cap'n,
I agree that GAC and GFO are good to use to reduce phosphates and improve water's optical clarity.
But I don't think it means that biopellets are bad. You said it yourself that they reduce nitrates effectively. Also I don't know about algae "draining the system of quality oxygen".
I agree that GAC and GFO are good to use to reduce phosphates and improve water's optical clarity.
But I don't think it means that biopellets are bad. You said it yourself that they reduce nitrates effectively. Also I don't know about algae "draining the system of quality oxygen".
jason2459
Well-known member
Hey Cap'n, sorry to hear you're having issues with biopellets on those systems. I've had some very interesting results the two times I've used them in that I've experienced pretty quick reduction in phosphates down from off the chart numbers to undetectable. First time I used them I had an OVERWHELMING amounts of cyano and phosphates were off the charts over 10. After the drop to undetectable I did have GHA pop up and slowly start to recede. I was using GFO before adding the pellets and changed it out every two weeks but I had so much PO4 that the GFO must have gotten saturated very quickly and the rocks I'm sure was just chock full of PO4. I did use GAC and a very powerful skimmer for my system as well. I ran the GFO, GAC, and Pellets in a canister filter. BTW, nitrates were never detectable at that time but I'm sure only because it was being consumed by the cyano and GHA.
Second time I used BPs I had a lot of GHA and some cyano. Nitrates were slightly detectable and PO4 was pretty high but not the off the charts it was before. This time I didn't use any GFO and I placed the pellets right in my substrate. PO4 and nitrates dropped to undetectable levels a lot quicker. Cyano has been gone and GHA is receding.
So far from both experiences though the PO4 reduction was very quick along with the cyano. But the GHA took longer to start reducing and go away. I'm still on my second trial and GHA is still there but not spreading and is going away slowly. I'm still running GAC and my overkill skimmer. Both of which I think are a great things to have when using BPs.
I'm sure I still have nitrates and some PO4 and is still being consumed by the remaining GHA and as the GHA goes away more bacteria is growing and out competing it. I still don't know why I've had such great experience with PO4 removale considering nitrates are supposed to be the main source for the bacteria and not the PO4.
Here's my thread on my experiencing using PCL type BPs.
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1830864
Second time I used BPs I had a lot of GHA and some cyano. Nitrates were slightly detectable and PO4 was pretty high but not the off the charts it was before. This time I didn't use any GFO and I placed the pellets right in my substrate. PO4 and nitrates dropped to undetectable levels a lot quicker. Cyano has been gone and GHA is receding.
So far from both experiences though the PO4 reduction was very quick along with the cyano. But the GHA took longer to start reducing and go away. I'm still on my second trial and GHA is still there but not spreading and is going away slowly. I'm still running GAC and my overkill skimmer. Both of which I think are a great things to have when using BPs.
I'm sure I still have nitrates and some PO4 and is still being consumed by the remaining GHA and as the GHA goes away more bacteria is growing and out competing it. I still don't know why I've had such great experience with PO4 removale considering nitrates are supposed to be the main source for the bacteria and not the PO4.
Here's my thread on my experiencing using PCL type BPs.
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1830864
jason2459
Well-known member
Got a few IMs about my last post and I'd like to clarify that I do believe I have Nitrates in my tank. I just don't truely know how much because I have GHA and now bacteria consuming it. I also believe I do have some PO4 in my tank even though it also comes up as undetectable.
I use API for nitrate so I do not get the most acurate or precise measurements under 5 but that's fine with me. I use the hanna ppm PO4 checker and it has a +/- 0.04 accruacy and again perfect for me. This is because I find that as long as my nitrates measure at 5 or under and my PO4 measures at 0.00 - 0.01 then I get no cyano and GHA has a hard time holding on.
Ever since I had a few things die on me and ended up stocking pretty heavy soon after along with feeding pretty heavily I've never gotten to those numbers. If you look at just the first page on that thread you'll see how horrendously bad the cyano got even after blowing it off up to twice daily and using a diatom filter here and there.
I have no idea why I had such a great reduction in PO4 so quickly, with-in a few weeks to undetectable, when the ratio that keeps being refered to has PO4 way down on the bottom.
I use API for nitrate so I do not get the most acurate or precise measurements under 5 but that's fine with me. I use the hanna ppm PO4 checker and it has a +/- 0.04 accruacy and again perfect for me. This is because I find that as long as my nitrates measure at 5 or under and my PO4 measures at 0.00 - 0.01 then I get no cyano and GHA has a hard time holding on.
Ever since I had a few things die on me and ended up stocking pretty heavy soon after along with feeding pretty heavily I've never gotten to those numbers. If you look at just the first page on that thread you'll see how horrendously bad the cyano got even after blowing it off up to twice daily and using a diatom filter here and there.
I have no idea why I had such a great reduction in PO4 so quickly, with-in a few weeks to undetectable, when the ratio that keeps being refered to has PO4 way down on the bottom.
Aquarist007
New member
Jason, when it is someone else's tank you are working on and bryopsis breaks out all over the place, it is not tolerated very well. Similarily if their favorite coral becomes covered with it week after week and you have to clean it off by hand it is time consuming.
More and more I read on this thread and others of bryopsis breaking out while using the pellets.
I know the reason or reasons but it still doesn't take away the fact that the breakouts of bryopsis is showing up as a real weakness or caution for using the pellets if you are in the maintenance business as I am.
Thank you for posting and I will have a look at your thread
More and more I read on this thread and others of bryopsis breaking out while using the pellets.
I know the reason or reasons but it still doesn't take away the fact that the breakouts of bryopsis is showing up as a real weakness or caution for using the pellets if you are in the maintenance business as I am.
Thank you for posting and I will have a look at your thread
Aquarist007
New member
Jason, when it is someone else's tank you are working on and bryopsis breaks out all over the place, it is not tolerated very well. Similarily if their favorite coral becomes covered with it week after week and you have to clean it off by hand it is time consuming.
More and more I read on this thread and others of bryopsis breaking out while using the pellets.
I know the reason or reasons but it still doesn't take away the fact that the breakouts of bryopsis is showing up as a real weakness or caution for using the pellets if you are in the maintenance business as I am.
Thank you for posting and I will have a look at your thread
More and more I read on this thread and others of bryopsis breaking out while using the pellets.
I know the reason or reasons but it still doesn't take away the fact that the breakouts of bryopsis is showing up as a real weakness or caution for using the pellets if you are in the maintenance business as I am.
Thank you for posting and I will have a look at your thread
jason2459
Well-known member
I have some type of green hair algae but don't think it's bryopsis as I have had that before but went away on it's own a while ago. I did have in my head but failed to type it out in my original post that I can see where you're coming from where you have clients that expect instant results but these pellets at least in my experience do not provide an instant removal of algae. They have provided my tank a very quick source for bacteria to feed on to start out competing algae and cyano but some manual removal has been the best way so far at reducing it quicker.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
jason2459
Well-known member
I also agree that pellets should not replace basic husbandry as you mentioned. But I do think they are a great way to help reduce both nitrates and phosphates. For me they removed the need for GFO entirely so far. For some though GFO will still be needed but shouldn't need near as much which would save some money.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
jason2459
Well-known member
I also find them really easy to use in the canister filter and even easier now that I put them right in my tank. I know another person has them in a reactor with substrate in it with some good results. I've been curious how well they would work in one of those tall fluidized substrate reactors mixed with pellets and some type of large grain sand.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
pecan2phat
Active member
Don't really understand the dynamics of these pellets. I had posted that I had started with 1100 ml of pellets back on 8/7/10 and went through the initial bacterial bloom. I slowly worked my way up to 2200 ml in two additional increments and only went through a shorter, less cloudy bacterial bloom and it took about 8 weeks for my No3 to start dropping from 100 ppm and to eventually 15 ppm by the 10th week. At this time I notice that about 500 ml of pellets had dissolved so on 11/13/10, I added another 550 ml after soaking in tank water for 30 hours. Thought everything was fine until 2 weeks later when I experienced a bacterial bloom worse then the initial bloom when I started the pellets. It got so cloudy and the skimmer was overflowing every 12 hours. The glass was coated and the fish look distressed that I had to add airstones into the sump. So now it's about the 4th day and the bloom is subsiding but the pellets in the reactor has seriously clumped up, what am I doing wrong, should I have not replenshed the target amount of 2200 ml of pellets in the reactor? NP-X brand recommends 550 ml per 75g and my system is about 300g hence the 2200 ml. TIA
I think the reactor needs to be completely redesigned for these things. The varying degrees of success I have read throughout these posts have given me an idea. Why not have a reactor that is nice and wide( about 6 inches) With a stirring device that goes all the way down. It can look a lot like some of the curvy blade systems I have seen in some Zeo reactors. The water flow could be set to a very slow churn to let the water really have a chance to contact the pellets, and then twice a day the spinner could churn up any sticky spots for about 30 seconds.
I think it would be curious to see if this would work.
I think it would be curious to see if this would work.
daveonbass
New member
any moveable plunger that could stir the pellets up would be advantagious IMHO. Every time I notice more crud in the tank and on the sand, I look and see that the skimmer it not making much nasty stuff, and then sure enough the pellets are all clumped up and not tumbleing. But as soon as I stir them up (not the easiest process) and they are good and moving again, I can finally notice more skimmate the next day and my tank looks "cleaner". So I agree that having a way to easily stir the pellets would be the best reactor for my set up.
- Status
Similar threads
