In my system, I'm completely flow through with no sponge blocks, socks or anything else in place that may trap particles other than the plants, animals, and rocks. I do this primarily because I don't want anything that clogs, requires cleaning and subsequently the associated removal of good ammonia and nitrite eating bacteria from the water column. However, I'm always confused when people say these things, such as sponge blocks, bioballs, and socks are "nitrate factories". Nitrates are only produced from nitrites which you don't want and nitrites are only produced from ammonia which you don't want. The only thing I can think is that these things are trapping and killing things that otherwise might live in the water column, killing them and then turning them into ammonia, nitrite, and then nitrates at higher rates than would otherwise be produced. I would think otherwise, that you would want to produce nitrates as fast as possible from the ammonia and nitrite that is present as it's the least harmful of the three. I realize of course that you want to remove the nitrate as well. Does anyway understand the science enough to explain why something like bioballs are really bad?
Nitrate Factories?
- Thread starter Pirate@40
- Start date
Chris2500DK
New member
The short version is that sponges/bioballs and the likes will trap detritus that could otherwise be removed by a skimmer. This detritus will break down but since sponges/bioballs, unlike live rock, doesn't provide the anaerobic environment needed for the bacteria that'll break down nitrate to nitrogen the nitrate will just be released back into the system.
Thanks for the reply. The skimmer part makes good sense to me as you'd be extracting stuff from the water column. You're obviously removing good stuff as well though. I actually don't run mine much anymore. I have a dark (cryptic if you like exotic names) refugium under my lighted one where I have sponges, bivalves, sea squirts etc. This is probably a nitrate factory as well, but it helps filter the water and I think it's a good thing to have for biodiversity. The lighted refugium has mangroves. When I do run my skimmer, I don't get a lot of skim mate as long as it's off cycle with any feedings.
For the nitrate removal within the anaerobic areas of rock and sand, are you suggesting that these need to be in close proximity to the ammonia and nitrite removing bacteria? I would think with the dilution rates most of us see with good water flow, where the anaerobic areas are in relation to the aerobic areas would be of minor consequence. Also a lot of people use remote DSB's, etc, so does it really matter if they're in close proximity?
For the nitrate removal within the anaerobic areas of rock and sand, are you suggesting that these need to be in close proximity to the ammonia and nitrite removing bacteria? I would think with the dilution rates most of us see with good water flow, where the anaerobic areas are in relation to the aerobic areas would be of minor consequence. Also a lot of people use remote DSB's, etc, so does it really matter if they're in close proximity?
I would think with the dilution rates most of us see with good water flow, where the anaerobic areas are in relation to the aerobic areas would be of minor consequence.
The concentration of nitrate getting into anaerobic areas is going to be directly related to the concentration near the surface of those areas, and if it produced there, the local concentration will be higher.
Remote sand beds do not necessarily only process nitrate. They process ammonia into nitrate in the near surface region, and whether they do or not isn't the point since adding enough denitrifying capacity can always win out, regardless of whether you have bioballs or not.
I discuss it here:
Nitrate in the Reef Aquarium
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/august2003/chem.htm
from it:
. Remove existing filters designed to facilitate the nitrogen cycle. Such filters do a fine job of processing ammonia to nitrite to nitrate, but do nothing with the nitrate. It is often non-intuitive to many aquarists, but removing such a filter altogether may actually help reduce nitrate. So slowly removing them and allowing more of the nitrogen processing to take place on and in the live rock and sand can be beneficial.
It is not that any less nitrate is produced when such a filter is removed, it is a question of what happens to the nitrate after it is produced.
When it is produced on the surface of media such as bioballs, it mixes into the entire water column, and then has to find its way, by diffusion, to the places where it may be reduced (inside of live rock and sand, for instance).
If it is produced on the surface of live rock or sand, then the local concentration of nitrate is higher there than in the first case above, and it is more likely to diffuse into the rock and sand to be reduced to N2.
The concentration of nitrate getting into anaerobic areas is going to be directly related to the concentration near the surface of those areas, and if it produced there, the local concentration will be higher.
Remote sand beds do not necessarily only process nitrate. They process ammonia into nitrate in the near surface region, and whether they do or not isn't the point since adding enough denitrifying capacity can always win out, regardless of whether you have bioballs or not.
I discuss it here:
Nitrate in the Reef Aquarium
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/august2003/chem.htm
from it:
. Remove existing filters designed to facilitate the nitrogen cycle. Such filters do a fine job of processing ammonia to nitrite to nitrate, but do nothing with the nitrate. It is often non-intuitive to many aquarists, but removing such a filter altogether may actually help reduce nitrate. So slowly removing them and allowing more of the nitrogen processing to take place on and in the live rock and sand can be beneficial.
It is not that any less nitrate is produced when such a filter is removed, it is a question of what happens to the nitrate after it is produced.
When it is produced on the surface of media such as bioballs, it mixes into the entire water column, and then has to find its way, by diffusion, to the places where it may be reduced (inside of live rock and sand, for instance).
If it is produced on the surface of live rock or sand, then the local concentration of nitrate is higher there than in the first case above, and it is more likely to diffuse into the rock and sand to be reduced to N2.
o.c.d.
New member
So if I was to remove my filter media (Eheim substrat pro) from my 7 year old canister filter should I leave it empty?Id remove it entirely but it feeds my gravity fed Fuge .I tried to convert to sump and it went horribly wrong, I learned not to buy used equipment from the whole ordeal and I've held off another conversion due to the significant waste of money on the first go round. Any suggestions?
Big E
Premium Member
If the output of the bio ball chamber was fed into a remote DSB wouldn't this work just as well or maybe better than just using live rock in the display or sump?
I have a vision of feeding the overflow directly into a skimmer, then to a bio ball chamber & finally through a remote DSB. Just brainstroming here.
I personally don't want rock in a sump as it seemsto proliferate filter feeders & I've had them grow to rampant & problematic propprtions in the display.
I don't want a lot of rock in the display so I'm looking for ways to house nitryfying bacteria. Looking to do this for mainly a fish only system so the bioload would be higher than a typical reef setup.
Wouldn't this high availability of nitrates on the rock also be availble to the macro & micro algae growing on this rocks surface?
I would think the algae is going to get it first before the denitryfiying bacteria inside the rock has a chance for it. Most of these algaes tend to be a nuicance.
If the output of the bio ball chamber was fed into a remote DSB wouldn't this work just as well or maybe better than just using live rock in the display or sump?
A RDSB can certainly be big enough and effective enough to work and drive nitrate low enough regardless of whether you produce more or less nitrate, but sending all of the nitrate into a RDSB is not the same as making the nitrate within the surface regions of that same substrate.
Wouldn't this high availability of nitrates on the rock also be availble to the macro & micro algae growing on this rocks surface?
I would think the algae is going to get it first before the denitryfiying bacteria inside the rock has a chance for it. Most of these algaes tend to be a nuicance.
You have a lot of rock and sand surface and near surface regions where there is no gale. Furthermore, algae may actually prefer to take up ammonia to nitrate, so they get their chare anyway. But remember that in a sand bed, the top part is aerobic. Maybe as much as an inch or more, so ammonia that enters and is converted into nitrate has a big head start to drift lower and be converted to N2 than does nitrate floating around in the main water column.
A RDSB can certainly be big enough and effective enough to work and drive nitrate low enough regardless of whether you produce more or less nitrate, but sending all of the nitrate into a RDSB is not the same as making the nitrate within the surface regions of that same substrate.
Wouldn't this high availability of nitrates on the rock also be availble to the macro & micro algae growing on this rocks surface?
I would think the algae is going to get it first before the denitryfiying bacteria inside the rock has a chance for it. Most of these algaes tend to be a nuicance.
You have a lot of rock and sand surface and near surface regions where there is no gale. Furthermore, algae may actually prefer to take up ammonia to nitrate, so they get their chare anyway. But remember that in a sand bed, the top part is aerobic. Maybe as much as an inch or more, so ammonia that enters and is converted into nitrate has a big head start to drift lower and be converted to N2 than does nitrate floating around in the main water column.
Randy, do you recommend removing sponge guards that are in the pumps? I clean the return pump sponge and the skimmer pump sponge often but they are really disgusting and the only reason I can see to leave them in is to protect the impeller - but is it worth it?
I do not have any mechanical protection in front of my Iwaki pumps, or anywhere else in my system. I have big opening plastic parts that keep fish and such out of my Tunze powerheads, but that's it.
Mechanical filters can do a fine job of removing particles, and if cleaned daily may be a good thing. If not cleaned they may be detrimental IF that detritus is otherwise removed somewhere else (like a skimmer). If that crud just settles out somewhere (as it probably does in my system), then I really don't see how it is a big minus since it is degrading in the tank anyway.
I do not have any mechanical protection in front of my Iwaki pumps, or anywhere else in my system. I have big opening plastic parts that keep fish and such out of my Tunze powerheads, but that's it.
Mechanical filters can do a fine job of removing particles, and if cleaned daily may be a good thing. If not cleaned they may be detrimental IF that detritus is otherwise removed somewhere else (like a skimmer). If that crud just settles out somewhere (as it probably does in my system), then I really don't see how it is a big minus since it is degrading in the tank anyway.
So if I was to remove my filter media (Eheim substrat pro) from my 7 year old canister filter should I leave it empty?Id remove it entirely but it feeds my gravity fed Fuge .I tried to convert to sump and it went horribly wrong, I learned not to buy used equipment from the whole ordeal and I've held off another conversion due to the significant waste of money on the first go round. Any suggestions?
i do not know how well that media supports denitrification, if at all. But it may be better than plastic bioballs if it does support anoxic regions down inside of it.
Still, it is probably unnecessary in a tank with a lot of live rock and/or sand, and you might be able to use the filter for GAC, GFO, or other media that you feel you want to use.
i do not know how well that media supports denitrification, if at all. But it may be better than plastic bioballs if it does support anoxic regions down inside of it.
Still, it is probably unnecessary in a tank with a lot of live rock and/or sand, and you might be able to use the filter for GAC, GFO, or other media that you feel you want to use.
Big E
Premium Member
Hi Randy,
So basically your'e saying the RDSB is serving both funtions & the bio balls are unnecssary? In this instance the tank is BB with very little rockwork.....not enough to function as the only filter.
If this is true then the only problem would be when/if the RDSB had to be replaced.
The only other concern would be whether it (RDSB) has enough capacity to handle the tanks bioload on it's own.
So basically your'e saying the RDSB is serving both funtions & the bio balls are unnecssary? In this instance the tank is BB with very little rockwork.....not enough to function as the only filter.
If this is true then the only problem would be when/if the RDSB had to be replaced.
The only other concern would be whether it (RDSB) has enough capacity to handle the tanks bioload on it's own.
So basically your'e saying the RDSB is serving both funtions & the bio balls are unnecssary?
Depends on the amounts of of fish and sand and rock, but yes, bioballs may be unnecessary.
Depends on the amounts of of fish and sand and rock, but yes, bioballs may be unnecessary.
Not that I know of, but I'd say that if the tank has a lot of live rock and sand, then they are unnecessary.
i have a question....i am thinking about removing my 3 inch stack of bio balls that have been in the tank since it's been up for almost 3 years or more....90 gallon reef with 135 give or take lbs of live rock...i have a 20 gallon fuge with your classic sump, not custom, which the fuge is gravity fed into the sump....but I am thinking that if I take the right hand side out where i have my filter media, activated carbon, phosguard at times, bio balls and others of the like then I will have just a house for my skimmer which I want badly. But then again I don't want to disrupt the entire enviroment. For those of you that know about the traditional acrylic sumps the area with the bio balls has a section in it where there is nothing underneath. In my sump there is about a .5 to 1 inch area of setiment that has accumulated through the years of which I have never touched....should I clear this whole area out or just leave it there with the bio balls.....or should I just rip the whole thing out and custom a whole new sump...which will be a major feet in itself....i am thinking about cutting the return Mag 7 off and just let the powerheads run for about 4 hours and see if the skimmer will take the setiment out......skimmer works great...berlin never had any issues with it....don't ask the modle number as to I have no earthly idea...
