dainiusiva
New member
Reggie, nice write up. Good photos and also very informative.
N/P reducing pellets (solid vodka dosing)
- Thread starter tntneon
- Start date
- Status
kzooreefer
New member
I tested my pH both going into and coming out of the filter with NP pellets and its the same, 8.2 in 8.2 out. I used a pH probe that was just calibrated.
Cyano while using BP
Cyano while using BP
Ive been using the BP for about 6 months now and ive been getting this weird cyano problem in my tank. I used to have bryopsis but that went away after a while and was immediately replaced by massive amounts of cyano on my sand bed. Even when i was cycling my tank, i havent seen cyano this bad.
I have a 120g tank with 50g sump and i run about 550ml of the BP. I was thinking about maybe removing 100ml and seeing if that would help. What do you guys think?
Cyano while using BP
Ive been using the BP for about 6 months now and ive been getting this weird cyano problem in my tank. I used to have bryopsis but that went away after a while and was immediately replaced by massive amounts of cyano on my sand bed. Even when i was cycling my tank, i havent seen cyano this bad.
I have a 120g tank with 50g sump and i run about 550ml of the BP. I was thinking about maybe removing 100ml and seeing if that would help. What do you guys think?
I have almost the same set up, 120G w/50G breeder. I've been using NPX for about 4 months But never had any algae break out.
The pH/biopellets enigma...
The pH/biopellets enigma...
Thanks for the input kzoo. I think the factor of quantity might also play in to a significant extent. How many mL of pellets are you using. In my case the pH was high (which I believe was reflective of established high dKH). Before my one week vacation I was maintaining about 2.5-3 L of the pellets. My pH had worked it's way up to about 8.15 - 8.25 (the latter at end of the daily photo-period).
Since I ran out of time while servicing my reactor prior to leaving, I was only able to get about 1.5L into the system. I.e. my current reactor setup allows pellets to drop below a perforated pvc plate into a large (4" dp x 6" dia) slow/partial flow area of the reactor... On a regular basis I empty this bottom zone before it becomes completely anaerobic, every couple of weeks or so. It then takes me a couple of days to replace the entire volume of about 3.5L that the reactor can hold without excess pellets overflowing into my skimmer pumps (the pellets slowly trickle down below the pvc plate over that time). This is why I was only able to get approx. 1.5L into the reactor before I had to leave for vacation.
At that time (prior to my trip) I was using the calcium reactor to raise dKH to 11 - 12 which was necessary to maintain pH above 8.1. While away for a week; with the dKH still hovering around the 12 degree mark; and the reactor containing only about 1/2 of its regular volume, I returned to a pH of 8.41 the first night I checked - about 8 days since my last visit. Without thinking twice and just happy that the pH was now comforatbly above NSW, I continued to add the balance of the pellets which remained sitting aside circulating in a pail of aquarium water in order to maintain the bio-life and avoid them dying off to produce hydrogen sulfide - this became part of my regular routine after my first H2S experience encountered when pellets were left in a pail without a powerhead to move the water around and keep them well oxygenated.
Within a couple of days of my return, and now with about 90% of my running volume of pellets, I noticed the pH had dropped down to about 8.25 by the end of the daily photo-period. I found this a little odd and continued to add the balance (approx. 3.5L) of pellets. A few more days passed and my end of day pH read about 8.09. Just last night, now about 3-4 days of running my total volume of pellets, the end of day pH measured 7.93. I should mention that the night before yesterday, I upped the bubble count on my calcium reactor with the aim of raising the dKH even higher than 11, and at that time the pH was 8.01. Last night (at 7.93) I decided to resume my dosage of Kent Pro Buffer.
My theory so far is that unless the calcium reactor CO2 is making it into the system and causing the entire water column to become more acidic, I think the respiration of the bacteria within the pellet reactor is significantly increasing the CO2 post my calcium reactor. In order of functionality, I have the effluent from the calcium reactor run directly into the intake of the pellet reactor; the effluent from the pellet reactor runs directly into a protein skimmer via one of the two aspirating venturi pumps.
Based on above; and keeping in mind that this is a 500g system that now has enough bacteria (filtration within the pellet reactor) to have dropped the nitrates from above 200 ppm to 10 ppm as of last night (and anticipated to reach 0 ppm nitrate by the first week of February); I am almost unequivocally convinced that the respiratory activity of the large bacteria population managing my trates/phates is enough to add unpolished (sans calc media) CO2 to my water column.
At this point possible solutions include replacing my calc reactor with a kalk reactor to help control the pH; or adding a second aragonite (buffering) reactor/chamber to polish off CO2 leaving the pellet reactor, prior to entering the skimmer. The intent for running the calc reactor effluent through the pellet reactor and skimmer in the first place was to help to remove possible phosphates (by pellets) and degas much of the latent CO2 (by skimmer) that could be leaving the calc reactor.... I think the CO2 produced by the bacteria reactor could be overwhelming the capability of the skimmer to perform this function - unless I was using a disproportionately large skimmer...???
On the other hand - there is also a possibility that once my trates/phates hit zero, the reduced bacteria population required to maintain my system could be small enough to become benign within the CO2/pH dynamic in my aquarium.
The above is the best of my observation; interpretation; and guestimation abilities thus far... Hopefully it can be added to and/or clarified as more people compare and report on their own experiences with the pellets.
Regards,
Sheldon
The pH/biopellets enigma...
Thanks for the input kzoo. I think the factor of quantity might also play in to a significant extent. How many mL of pellets are you using. In my case the pH was high (which I believe was reflective of established high dKH). Before my one week vacation I was maintaining about 2.5-3 L of the pellets. My pH had worked it's way up to about 8.15 - 8.25 (the latter at end of the daily photo-period).
Since I ran out of time while servicing my reactor prior to leaving, I was only able to get about 1.5L into the system. I.e. my current reactor setup allows pellets to drop below a perforated pvc plate into a large (4" dp x 6" dia) slow/partial flow area of the reactor... On a regular basis I empty this bottom zone before it becomes completely anaerobic, every couple of weeks or so. It then takes me a couple of days to replace the entire volume of about 3.5L that the reactor can hold without excess pellets overflowing into my skimmer pumps (the pellets slowly trickle down below the pvc plate over that time). This is why I was only able to get approx. 1.5L into the reactor before I had to leave for vacation.
At that time (prior to my trip) I was using the calcium reactor to raise dKH to 11 - 12 which was necessary to maintain pH above 8.1. While away for a week; with the dKH still hovering around the 12 degree mark; and the reactor containing only about 1/2 of its regular volume, I returned to a pH of 8.41 the first night I checked - about 8 days since my last visit. Without thinking twice and just happy that the pH was now comforatbly above NSW, I continued to add the balance of the pellets which remained sitting aside circulating in a pail of aquarium water in order to maintain the bio-life and avoid them dying off to produce hydrogen sulfide - this became part of my regular routine after my first H2S experience encountered when pellets were left in a pail without a powerhead to move the water around and keep them well oxygenated.
Within a couple of days of my return, and now with about 90% of my running volume of pellets, I noticed the pH had dropped down to about 8.25 by the end of the daily photo-period. I found this a little odd and continued to add the balance (approx. 3.5L) of pellets. A few more days passed and my end of day pH read about 8.09. Just last night, now about 3-4 days of running my total volume of pellets, the end of day pH measured 7.93. I should mention that the night before yesterday, I upped the bubble count on my calcium reactor with the aim of raising the dKH even higher than 11, and at that time the pH was 8.01. Last night (at 7.93) I decided to resume my dosage of Kent Pro Buffer.
My theory so far is that unless the calcium reactor CO2 is making it into the system and causing the entire water column to become more acidic, I think the respiration of the bacteria within the pellet reactor is significantly increasing the CO2 post my calcium reactor. In order of functionality, I have the effluent from the calcium reactor run directly into the intake of the pellet reactor; the effluent from the pellet reactor runs directly into a protein skimmer via one of the two aspirating venturi pumps.
Based on above; and keeping in mind that this is a 500g system that now has enough bacteria (filtration within the pellet reactor) to have dropped the nitrates from above 200 ppm to 10 ppm as of last night (and anticipated to reach 0 ppm nitrate by the first week of February); I am almost unequivocally convinced that the respiratory activity of the large bacteria population managing my trates/phates is enough to add unpolished (sans calc media) CO2 to my water column.
At this point possible solutions include replacing my calc reactor with a kalk reactor to help control the pH; or adding a second aragonite (buffering) reactor/chamber to polish off CO2 leaving the pellet reactor, prior to entering the skimmer. The intent for running the calc reactor effluent through the pellet reactor and skimmer in the first place was to help to remove possible phosphates (by pellets) and degas much of the latent CO2 (by skimmer) that could be leaving the calc reactor.... I think the CO2 produced by the bacteria reactor could be overwhelming the capability of the skimmer to perform this function - unless I was using a disproportionately large skimmer...???
On the other hand - there is also a possibility that once my trates/phates hit zero, the reduced bacteria population required to maintain my system could be small enough to become benign within the CO2/pH dynamic in my aquarium.
The above is the best of my observation; interpretation; and guestimation abilities thus far... Hopefully it can be added to and/or clarified as more people compare and report on their own experiences with the pellets.
Regards,
Sheldon
I seem to have a one-track mind hears (kinda like a pitbull on a burglar), but would you mind stating your parameters... especially pH. Thanks. SJ
.... your params as well pls, just for the sake of camparison. Thanks. SJ
Great write-up. I think your first reported issue should be resolved if the pellets are pre-soaked. I think this is a common instruction from all of the distributors that I've seen, though I have never used the eco-bak.
Very informative writeup, and kool video. Thanks!
Sheldon
kzooreefer
New member
I use 250-ml of the pellets. Now I just cleaned the reactor out last weekend and added new pellets on top of the old and removed some of the bacteria colony so maybe that plays a role don't know. Its completely plausible that the bacteria produce CO2 as a by-product. When I cleaned it out it had a really bad sulfur smell to it now if it was putting H2S into the DT then it too might lower the pH. I'll have to redo the test once the reactor gets aged some.
rsuplido
Member
Thanks guys! Yes, after running the reactor for about 2 days now, there are no pellets floating anymore. The reactor is doing its thing -- no dead spots at all. I'll keep running it for a week on a test environment and see if I can spot any additional problems. I would like to see if the constant grinding will cause them to change in shape, etc.
DarkXerox
New member
Sheldon your pH shouldn't be that much if a problem at that level so long as it isn't dipping lower at night when the corals aren't photosynthesisizing. If you have a controller that can datalog you might be able to get a better idea, but it would be good if you keep an eye on it if you get up in the middle of the night. Also are you running a reverse photoperiod refugium? This can help with night pH.
I'm going to bet that once you have exhausted the nitrates in the tank as well as what seeps out from rocks etc. The bacterial population will decrease and reach a steady state assuming your food inputs don't change.
But my concern is your alk. Lower nutrient tanks with high kH can sometimes lead to coral tissue "burning". So keep an eye out for that once you're in the <2ppm nitrate range.
So keep recording data points and try to keep things stable.
I'm going to bet that once you have exhausted the nitrates in the tank as well as what seeps out from rocks etc. The bacterial population will decrease and reach a steady state assuming your food inputs don't change.
But my concern is your alk. Lower nutrient tanks with high kH can sometimes lead to coral tissue "burning". So keep an eye out for that once you're in the <2ppm nitrate range.
So keep recording data points and try to keep things stable.
gary faulkner
New member
Scej12
I'm interested in a large reactor myself. What reactor are you using?
TIA
I'm interested in a large reactor myself. What reactor are you using?
TIA
Thanks Xerox - The numbers I quoted are just when the lights shut off so it will in fact get lower throughout the night. I have not been there first thing in the morning yet to see exactly how low it gets (the tank is a client and not my own) but I'm sure it gets as low as 1 tenth further down from what I observed at lights-out.
I don't have a refugium on this system and if I do it will likely be just a critter refuge.
The more I think of my situation, the more I'm becoming convinced that the pellet reactor is producing CO2... if the bac population decreases once the trates and phates are 0, then I'm hoping that there will be less biomas which produces CO2 if that is what's in fact cause the pull toward the acidic levels of the pH scale.
With regard to the level, I just had a conversation with one of my respected colleagues regarding ideal and harmful pH levels. As it was concluded, once the pH gets below a certain point - probably 8.0 as far as I have discussed, the corals have real difficulty making use of available calcium and carbonate hardness. I would go so far as to say that I have loosely proved this as when my pH was low before, my calcium usage came to all but a halt.... stuck at 520 with the calcium reactor being shut off for at least two months. At that time I believe my pH was sitting around 7.85 or so. As soon as I was able to raise the pH up to 8.1 and above, the calcium began getting used - dropped from 520/540 down to 420ppm.
I'm aware of the risks related to high alkalinity when it comes to low nutrient systems. I'm caught in a little balancing act between pH and dKH. My priority has been to elevate the pH toward natural sea water, at the expense of having alk sitting too high. So far it looks as though some of my montipora capricornis are suffering a bit, which is why I'm also in search of an efficient way to fix the pH problem... might try a cylinder of aragonite first before getting into the kalkwasser change... will let you all know how it turns out. Thanks.
Sheldon
Hi Gary - unfortunately the reactor I'm using is not on the market as yet.... it's part of an adaptable filtration system that I'm in the process of prototyping at the moment. But for what it's worth, my reactors are 6" diameter by about 16" height for the reaction chamber - I can get about 3.5 L of pellets into them without having them escape out the top as I'm not currently using a mesh to prevent this from happening.
SJ
SaltyNovice
New member
OK, I want to give an update on my use of the Eco-Bak pellets by WM. This is the 8th week of running them. I've had only a few "œvisual" improvements up to now. Today my Nitrates tested out at 20 by API and 25 by Sailfert. The numbers where 80+ for API and 50 or so with the Salifert two weeks ago. So I'm definitely seeing some improvement. My Phosphates are still at 1.0 by Salifert - but I've been really feeding heavily to try to get the Phosphates up the last month or so because I felt like the Phosphates to low to allow any reduction in the Nitrates. At least that was my thoughts on the process.
One funny thing I have noticed the last 4 days. I've had a bad Diatom algae outbreak all over my sand for quite sometime. It would regress at night with lights out, but would come out everyday with the lights. The funny thing is that only half the tank has had the diatoms the last four days. The other half is fairly clear of the diatoms with or without the lights. I wonder if this is possibly due to the sand holding some phosphates and nitrates and it is leaching back out now that I'm starting to see some control of the nitrates ---- what do you guys think?
My alkalinity is still running high at 14.4 dKH by Salifert. I stopped dosing CA and MG to see if I can get it back down. It has dropped 1.0 the last two weeks. But that may be because of the skimmer really working hard and me just replacing with RO/DI. The SG was 1.023 the lowest it's ever been. Anyway just wanted to leave an update for those who are keeping up with some of our experiments?
All other Params:
PH 8.1
CA 470
MG 1170
One funny thing I have noticed the last 4 days. I've had a bad Diatom algae outbreak all over my sand for quite sometime. It would regress at night with lights out, but would come out everyday with the lights. The funny thing is that only half the tank has had the diatoms the last four days. The other half is fairly clear of the diatoms with or without the lights. I wonder if this is possibly due to the sand holding some phosphates and nitrates and it is leaching back out now that I'm starting to see some control of the nitrates ---- what do you guys think?
My alkalinity is still running high at 14.4 dKH by Salifert. I stopped dosing CA and MG to see if I can get it back down. It has dropped 1.0 the last two weeks. But that may be because of the skimmer really working hard and me just replacing with RO/DI. The SG was 1.023 the lowest it's ever been. Anyway just wanted to leave an update for those who are keeping up with some of our experiments?
All other Params:
PH 8.1
CA 470
MG 1170
DarkXerox
New member
I really think you should consider having some chaetomorphia on a reverse photoperiod though. Its a cheap addition and provides a habitat for copepods and arthropods. it doesn't hurt and you can check to see how it affects your pH. If it doesn't do anything, then just toss it.
Another thing you can try is running the skimmer inlet line outside to draw in air that has less CO2. Indoor CO2 levels can jump during the winter with closed windows, etc. Especially if you have a closed top on the tank.
These are all things that cost less than $20 and are worth a shot if you are concerned by the pH dips.
Thanks for the suggestions. I will try to rig up a refugium probably in the near future. I was at the tank this morning and the pH was at 8.00 when the lights came on. The dKH is still quite high and the nitrates are getting closer to 0.... should be another two weeks or so.
While I was there this morning I thought of a possible solution to construct a special exit tower from my pellet-skimmer chain which will accommodate aragonite media. It should serve the dual purpose of making use of the CO2 coming off of the pellets, and further reducing the bubbles comming off of my skimmer. It will also serve to better control the level within the skimmer so that it will be less affected by changes in feed-pump flow or level changes... the latter is just an issue when I service the tank as the sump has an level float valve.
Unfortunately there is no easy way to get fresh skimmer air from outside as the aquarium is located in the shared lobby of two condominium towers... although an exterior wall is not that far off, in this particular situation, the task will involve fishing through ceiling space and drilling through concrete....:sad2: But as mentioned earlier, at this point I think the solution is probably going to be found by polishing the CO2 coming off of the pellet system.... I'll let you all know how the fix turns out.
Thanks for offering ideas though.
Regards,
Sheldon
Yeah - that's been done, but I think my skimmer might be a tad undersized for my system and volume of pellets. As it sits now, 100% of the effluent from the pellet reactor goes directly into the skimmer via one of the aspirating pumps. The skimmer I'm using is a prototype: 6" dia. by about 16" reaction chamber - the total skimmer sits at about 24" in height. The aquarium this is running is 450 gallons, plus about 50 gallons between the two small sumps.
As mentioned earlier - the filtration system is a prototype that I'm developing... So I really want to see how well it performs. All of the filtration is being done in a 24"x16" sump with three reactors: 6" dia. calcium reactor - effluent into bio-pellet reactor; 6" dia. bio-pellet reactor - effluent into skimmer via one of two aspirating pumps; and finally the 6" dia. skimmer (with two ehiem 1103 venturi pumps) drains back into the sump.... I'm using a mag 3 to fluidize the pellet reactor (and eventually feeds the skimmer).
The other sump is bigger (about 36x18), but just houses a couple bags of carbon. Oh yeah, there is also a phosban reactor with gfo that I've just resumed as I've noticed the nitrates are coming down significantly but the phosphates seem to remain at 0.5ppm. I pulled the gfo off-line for a couple of months as I did not want the nitrate removal to be limited by a lack of phosphates.... but the phosphates have not budged through that entire time (0.5 then and now), although the nitrates have dropped down from about 80-100ppm to 10-15ppm currently (api).
Soooo even though the filtration system would, under normal circumstances, be grossly undersized for a 500g system; it appears to be doing the trick once I can get the pH issue under control. All in all Jonathan, I think you are exactly right - If I had a proper sized protein skimmer - one of a diameter that would normally be required to run a 500g system (say 10" - 12"), my problems with pH could very well be resolved with the current routing of bio-pellet reactor effluent...
I think the important revelation here is that (if all agree) we can probably conclude that the pellet system can be reasoned to have the following impact on the pH dynamic of a closed system:
- Bacteria are living breathing (respirating) animals;
- The pellets accommodate some mix of both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria;
- Like all [aerobic] respirating animals they breath in O2, and exhaust CO2;
- The pellets provide all of the carbon a given population of bacteria can use, therefore the limiting factors of the process (and therefore bacterial population) becomes the N & P available in our aquariums;
- In a situation where there is an abundance of N
:C, (such as in my situation of high nitrates/phosphates/ and 3.5L of pellets (carbon); we should expect quite a significant population of respirating (CO2 producing) bacteria to establish within our pellet reactors until such time as one of the limiting nutrients gets depleted to the point of decreasing the bacterial population.Therefore, it is my believe based on observations from tweaking my own rehabilitation experiment, as well as hearing some of the feedback presented by others here; that the impact on pH balance will depend on the volume of pellets used; the nutrient load present in the system; and the means employed to nullify CO2 produced by your working bacteria population.
Some pellet users never see a drop in pH. This could possibly be due to a relatively small volume of pellets used; a modest nutrient load in the system; or perhaps the use of an adequately large protein skimmer.
In my particular case, I don't have enough room in either of the sumps for a large skimmer, so I'm going to attempt a little trickery... convert my skimmer drain (the skimmer being second in series from the pellet reactor) into a calcareous media chamber. I'm going to construct a 3"x4" (by roughly 14"-16" high) tower which will be filled with Carib Sea ARM Coarse media. I roughly sketched out the contraption today, but it will be refined to readily replace my current skimmer drain setup. If this works as intended, I hope then I'll finally be able to put all of this pellet/pH speculation into the books of confirmation....:bounce3:
Thanks again,
Sheldon
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
