Nitrate control devices

[kenjung]

I am about to start a 400 gallon reef tank. Currently operating a 150 G SPS reef, I have a refugium and protein skimmer but I like to change it up a bit.

Refugium will stay small, I like to add de-nitrate control device filtration for additional layer of algae control.

I am planning to have high bio-loads, basically the 6 tangs are growing bigger and more fished to add.

Whats better for denitrifying in a high bioload SPS tank and is dependendable, less maintenance the better.

for this setup main filteration will be ATB 10.5 deluxe protein skimmer.

I probrably will start a build thread soon, after planning is ready to go.

Sulfer base reactor VS Bio-Pellets.

thanks for your input

 

[BeanAnimal]

I had a fairly high nitrate problem and my refugium did not help. I took the refugium offline and replaced it with a dum tray type ATS. Nitrates have been 0 ever since.

 

[ariel47]

What's a sum tray?

 

[ariel47]

Oops typo I mean dum trat

 

[ariel47]

Sorry iPad has a mind of it's own, dum tray

 

[BeanAnimal]

dump tray... it is an ATS with a tray that pivots back and forth, so that alternate ends fill and empty. It is the classic style of ATS.

 

[ReefPharmer]

maybe its a dumb question but whats an ATS? i googled and got some heavy machinery stuff

 

[Oildalemonkey]

maybe its a dumb question but whats an ATS? i googled and got some heavy machinery stuff

Here's where to start: http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1977420

 

[elegance coral]

ATS= algae turf scrubber.

It is a filtering technique that we used back in the 80's and 90's. Then most of us figured out there were better, more efficient ways of controlling excessive nutrients, so ATS's largely became a thing of the past. Then some guy came online with a plan to make money with ATS's. He joined every site of this kind, and started threads making ridiculous claims regarding the magical abilities of ATS's. Now a sector of the hobby has taken a step backwards and ATS's are once again popular. I'm sure in time, as more people run them, and for longer periods of time, the problems we had back in the day will become more and more common. Problems like poor polyp extension, slow growth, and brown corals. Eventually, ATS's will once again become a thing of the past.

There are several methods of controlling excessive nutrients that have stood the test of time. Simply keeping the system clean is a huge step in the right direction. Skimming, water changes, absorption media, and mechanical filtration (changed out regularly) are all methods that have proven their worth. Carbon dosing is a newer method, but so far, seems to be effective with few side effects, if done properly.

If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't employ any method that traps nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorous) within the system. I would use only enough live rock to support the biological load. Which typically isn't very much. Anything beyond that, and your just providing a place to trap more poo. I would use no DSB's (deep sand beds). They're just another place to collect poo. If I wanted sand in the display, I'd use a medium grain size to make it easy to vacuum the poo out when I did water changes. If you can do this, along with some of the proven techniques, you shouldn't have any problems with excessive nutrients.

All of the above is simply my opinion.
Peace
EC

 

[BeanAnimal]

Then some guy came online with a plan to make money with ATS's. He joined every site of this kind, and started threads making ridiculous claims regarding the magical abilities of ATS's.

Yes, that guy is 100% full of BS and makes things up has he goes and/or tends to explain/justify his opinions and observations with missaplied science and logic. He contradicts how own explanations, sometimes several times in a single thread.

BUT...don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just because one guy has convinced a large following that ATS are magic, does not mean they are BAD.

An ATS offers a viable method for nutrient export that can replace or compliment other methods. It is a filtration tool, not magic.

Now a sector of the hobby has taken a step backwards and ATS's are once again popular.

That may be your opinion, but I don't see any evidence for such a claim.

In fact, I know of at least (3) tanks (local club members) that utilize ATS systems (the dump tray type) and are easily tank of the month material. One of those systems was taken down when the owner decided to leave the hobby. The ATS is now on my system and is a vast improvement over my (now offline) refugium. I had a very high nitrate concentration (25-50) for over a year (very efficient skimmer, water changes, refugium) and crippling phosphates. Replacing the refugium with the ATS (everything else staying the same), nitrate is 0 a and has stayed there for 6 months and phosphates have dropped but still require other export means.

Note that taking the refugium offline for 2 months DID cause nitrates to slightly rise. Adding the ATS dropped then to 0. My coral looks better and my water parameters are more stable (PH) than I had with the refufium (also reverse photo period).

DSBs? I don't have an opinion but see merit to both sides of the debate and long term success on both sides.

 

[KCombs]

Yes, that guy is 100% full of BS and makes things up has he goes and/or tends to explain/justify his opinions and observations with missaplied science and logic. He contradicts how own explanations, sometimes several times in a single thread.

BUT...don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just because one guy has convinced a large following that ATS are magic, does not mean they are BAD.

An ATS offers a viable method for nutrient export that can replace or compliment other methods. It is a filtration tool, not magic.

That may be your opinion, but I don't see any evidence for such a claim.

In fact, I know of at least (3) tanks (local club members) that utilize ATS systems (the dump tray type) and are easily tank of the month material. One of those systems was taken down when the owner decided to leave the hobby. The ATS is now on my system and is a vast improvement over my (now offline) refugium. I had a very high nitrate concentration (25-50) for over a year (very efficient skimmer, water changes, refugium) and crippling phosphates. Replacing the refugium with the ATS (everything else staying the same), nitrate is 0 a and has stayed there for 6 months and phosphates have dropped but still require other export means.

Note that taking the refugium offline for 2 months DID cause nitrates to slightly rise. Adding the ATS dropped then to 0. My coral looks better and my water parameters are more stable (PH) than I had with the refufium (also reverse photo period).

DSBs? I don't have an opinion but see merit to both sides of the debate and long term success on both sides.

Yes, and Yes

but also EC is right from a historical perspective...
I remember in the 80's a article in FAMA I think on the Jaubert method and back then we all jumped on the ATS band wagob and all of us had GOBS of mexicanna crawling over everything; nitrates were near zero and life was good for our assorted Condys and half dead brain corals.... :hmm2:.

but yeah, many tanks I've seen grow a ball or so of cheato in the sump (one of mine has one) ...shoot it works..I dunno what actual problems that method supposedly causes tho :strange:

 

[BeanAnimal]

Yes, and Yes

but also EC is right from a historical perspective...

Never said his historical reference was not correct. I just disagree with his conclusion with regard to consequences of using an ATS and its effectiveness... even if said proponent hucks a steady stream of BS to his followers.

There is no doubt that an ATS or refugium can increase the yellowing organics in the water column... carbon has benefits if used in moderation, and removing those compounds is one of them

As for a place for "poo" to collect... I dont mind it collecting on my ATS screen and feeding the stuff I am exporting. An ATS is not an excuse to ignore system maintenance and cleaning. It is just a tool that can be used to help consume or store some of the stuff we are trying to get rid of.

 

[convict3]

My 2¢

Tank = 65 gal. 20gal sump octo extreme 160 skimmer with red dioblo needle wheel.

11days ago I took my refugium with a built in dsb (20 gallon long 7 inches of sand)off line and replaced it with a waterfall ats I build inside a 1 gallon brs calcium container. The reason I did this was because of a bad dino and cyno outbreaks thats lasted 4 months. My skimmer has only been pulling out green tea flavor for months.

Now all food and waste fall and stays in the bottom of my ats and I remove it every 7days. My skimmer is now pulling out blackish sludge.

Dinos and cyno are receading.

Over all I think a skimmer and ats is a good combo. I hope to be able to rum.my skimmer less some day.

 

[MIOR6485]

I have a 200 gal running for 7 years without teardown but I have had 2 crashes which were caused by nitrates above 180ppm and phosphate. My 2 cents is utilize a sulphur bead reactor. after being tired of water changes with no significant results, I brought my nitrates from 180ppm to 0ppm in 2 months. I followed the size and drip rate suggestions but found in the end that once the bacteria is populated, the drip rate is not important. Also with a low drip rate you run the risk of it getting clogged which results in a bad sulphur smell. For the last 4 years I have ran the reactor full open position feed from my return pump. My thinking is the bacteria will adjust to the aquarium condition in time. this has truly been a hands off miracle. I have not used bio-pellets but they claim it also reduces phosphates which sulphur beads alone will not reduce. Several years ago the bio-pellets were ridiculously expensive and they decomposed but now, there are multiple vendors and its cost may be cheaper than running GFO without the hassle of having to change GFO every month or so. Hope this helps

 

[G4546]

How I understand the ATS to work is that it uses the NO3 and PO4 in your system to grow algae onto something that will then be removed from the system, cleaned and put back to do it again. This sounds great. But, here is the issue (atleast how I understand it). You use an ATS to lower your excess nutrients, though the ATS is useless unless you have excess nutrients, otherwise the algae wouldn't be growing in the first place. If you're harvesting algae in crop form and think that you are removing 'excess' nutrients from your system, then when you 'clean' the ATS and put it back in it grows more... You're being counter productive. Again, algae needs nutrients to grow. No nutrients, no algae. No nutrients, healthy SPS. Which is what I would think you're going for considering you mentioned a heavy stocked SPS aquaria. Just how I understand ATS to work.

 

[BeanAnimal]

How I understand the ATS to work is that it uses the NO3 and PO4 in your system to grow algae onto something that will then be removed from the system, cleaned and put back to do it again.

In essence, yes.

This sounds great. But, here is the issue (atleast how I understand it). You use an ATS to lower your excess nutrients, though the ATS is useless unless you have excess nutrients, otherwise the algae wouldn't be growing in the first place.

1. I don't see how this is a problem. If your "filter" has no dirt to filter, it is not harming the system. It is simply waiting for dirt to filter.
2. Most (ALL?) systems have excess nutrients that need to be exported. The idea with the ATS is to give them a favorable place to be consumed instead of in the display.

If you're harvesting algae in crop form and think that you are removing 'excess' nutrients from your system, then when you 'clean' the ATS and put it back in it grows more... You're being counter productive.

Huh?

The algae consumes the nutrients from the water column (that would otherwise be consumed by algae in the tank). The algae is thrown away, taking the excess nutrients with it. The screen then grows more algae, taking away MORE nutrients from the system. If you are cleaning the screens and dumping the algae back into the tank, then of course it is counter productive.

 

[tomservo]

Most (ALL?) systems have excess nutrients that need to be exported. The idea with the ATS is to give them a favorable place to be consumed instead of in the display.

The way I see it, is if you don't feed then you could have a system with no nutrient export but then you'd have to add at least phosphorous for the corals, assuming they are growing and not just dead.

 

[BeanAnimal]

tom,

Coral and fish need food. Coral and fish produce waste.... feeding is not an option

 

[elegance coral]

Yes, that guy is 100% full of BS and makes things up has he goes and/or tends to explain/justify his opinions and observations with missaplied science and logic. He contradicts how own explanations, sometimes several times in a single thread.

BUT...don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Just because one guy has convinced a large following that ATS are magic, does not mean they are BAD.

I didn't say they were bad because one guy convinced a large following that ATS's are magic. They are once again popular because of what he did. It is the biology of the organisms that live on ATS's that make them "BAD".

An ATS offers a viable method for nutrient export that can replace or compliment other methods. It is a filtration tool, not magic.

What method can ATS's "replace"? That sounds like more of the magic, voodoo stuff Mr. S. Monica was talking about. Like when he said ATS's replace protein skimmers.

That may be your opinion, but I don't see any evidence for such a claim.

Read back through some of the older literature for the hobby. ATS's were quite popular back in the day. Myself and many others ran them. As hobbyists gained a better understanding of biology, chemistry, and made advancements in technology, most ATS's found their way to the garbage heap. Now they are once again popular. To me, that's a step backwards.

In fact, I know of at least (3) tanks (local club members) that utilize ATS systems (the dump tray type) and are easily tank of the month material.

No disrespect intended, but that shows us, or proves nothing. I call that rubber ducky science. If I float a rubber ducky in my tank, and the tank does well, should everyone run out and buy a rubber ducky because it worked so well in my system?????? That's ridiculous, right????? Well, it's no more ridiculous than saying a tank did well while running an ATS, so ATS's work well, and we should all run out and buy one. We should look to science to determine how something is going to effect our systems. Not someone else's system.


We can do all kinds of bad stuff to our systems and still make them "successful". I can buy liquid fertilizer, loaded with nitrogen and phosphorous, hook it up to a dosing pump, and dose it into my tank, and still maintain a beautiful and successful system. That doesn't mean dosing nitrogen and phosphorus to your tank is a good idea, or beneficial.

The fact that someone ran a successful system while running a ATS tells us nothing about how an ATS will effect a system. It is meaningless.

One of those systems was taken down when the owner decided to leave the hobby. The ATS is now on my system and is a vast improvement over my (now offline) refugium. I had a very high nitrate concentration (25-50) for over a year (very efficient skimmer, water changes, refugium) and crippling phosphates. Replacing the refugium with the ATS (everything else staying the same), nitrate is 0 a and has stayed there for 6 months and phosphates have dropped but still require other export means.

Note that taking the refugium offline for 2 months DID cause nitrates to slightly rise. Adding the ATS dropped then to 0. My coral looks better and my water parameters are more stable (PH) than I had with the refufium (also reverse photo period).

If I were to remove the typical fuge from an established system, I' wouldn't be surprised to see a temporary spike in nitrate. Most people design their fuge to house anaerobic areas. Once this anaerobic area is removed, it would take time for the microbial population in the anaerobic areas of the display to increase population and bring nitrates back down.

What you're describing above indicates that, in your system, the ATS may not be as bad as the fuge you were running. It does not show that the ATS is beneficial to your system. What would happen if you took the ATS off line, removed the vast majority of rotting organic matter (detritus) from the system, carried out routine maintenance, and simply kept the system clean? I'd be willing to bet that many of your headaches would go away. Like the phosphate problem in your 7 year old system.

DSBs? I don't have an opinion but see merit to both sides of the debate and long term success on both sides.

That is a totally different subject, but one I would never suggest to someone that wants a heavily stocked SPS tank.

Peace
EC:thumbsup:

 

[elegance coral]

There is no doubt that an ATS or refugium can increase the yellowing organics in the water column... carbon has benefits if used in moderation, and removing those compounds is one of them

How efficient can a filtering method be if we need to employ another filter to clean up the mess that it created? Wouldn't it be so much easier to simply not create the mess in the first place?