bmullikin1
New member
how many of you use them and have you noticed a reduction in problems red slime etc. what type hang on or in sump. thanks
refugiums
- Thread starter bmullikin1
- Start date
rogergolf66
im an addict lol
yes I love mine. I have a 55 gallon tank I modded to a refugium.
Roger
Roger
gsellers1245
In Memoriam
i use a han on and a 40 gallon external source. I also have never seen red slime in my display in the full year its been setup.
SoundsFishy2me2
New member
refugiums
Absolutly. Simply adding additional water volume alone is helpful let alone the pods that grow in the macro algae and feed the tank and the reduction of nitrate plus reverse schedule lighting on the refugium helps keep PH up at night when it typically falls off the most. I made mine out of 40g long tanks & lowes cut glass with a place for filtersock(s). (see other posts regarding detailed DIY builds here from other Rc members for some great ideas.) --Darin
Absolutly. Simply adding additional water volume alone is helpful let alone the pods that grow in the macro algae and feed the tank and the reduction of nitrate plus reverse schedule lighting on the refugium helps keep PH up at night when it typically falls off the most. I made mine out of 40g long tanks & lowes cut glass with a place for filtersock(s). (see other posts regarding detailed DIY builds here from other Rc members for some great ideas.) --Darin
gsellers1245
In Memoriam
KINDA BRAVE ON THE WC'S HUH?
bmullikin1
New member
refugiums
thanks for all the feedback, have limited room under cabinet, thinking about using 5/10 tank built slightly above the one in the sump area, anyone have any pictures of something like that. thanks
thanks for all the feedback, have limited room under cabinet, thinking about using 5/10 tank built slightly above the one in the sump area, anyone have any pictures of something like that. thanks
triggerfish1976
New member
Interesting. What is your bioload?
gwaco
New member
so let me get this right ! you ask the algae to absorb nitrate and phosphate and then throw it right back in the tank for the tangs to eat it ! seems awfully counterproductive ! just because the algae absorbs these compounds , it does not make them disappear !<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11307607#post11307607 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mflamb
My refugium is 1/3 of a 125 gallon tank. This pic was taken when I first added all the algae. I harvest regularly and throw it in the tank for the Tangs.
i must be missing something
triggerfish1976
New member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11311144#post11311144 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by gwaco
so let me get this right ! you ask the algae to absorb nitrate and phosphate and then throw it right back in the tank for the tangs to eat it ! seems awfully counterproductive ! just because the algae absorbs these compounds , it does not make them disappear !
i must be missing something
I have to agree to some extent. It is similar to the theology of clean up crews. Snails eat phosphate laden algae but the snail doesn't just absorb it all so most of it goes right back into the aquarium.
I am also curious if everyone who has posted thus far has actually noticed a significant decline in their phosphates and nitrates since they started running a refugium and can actually trace it to the refugium as being the main source of nutrient removal.
I ask because I just don't see how they could make a huge difference in phosphate reduction, which I imagine is the main filtering goal since algae makes poor nitrate filters.
I have noticed that most people who run fuges normally setup either a separate tank or do a dual sump/refugium. The tank volume dedicated to the actual refugium is usually in the 10g-20g range or is typically no more than 10-20% of the total volume of the system. I have tried to find some literature on the PO4 absorption rates of macro algae but no luck yet. I can't imagine the percentage is very high if you have a decent bioload because there is only so much the algae can absorb before it becomes oversaturated.
IMOP in order to see significant phosphate reduction we would have to run a refugium close to if not equal in size to the main display. This would allow us to maintain enough algae (as long as it is pruned constantly and discarded) to use as a legitimate filter.
The theory of clean up crews is that they eat the trash and algae not removed by other means to make things look better. Their waste is much less since MOST of what they consume is used to maintain their life and to grow. The energy they use requires fuel which is provided by the waste. As for phosphates, it is already proven and accepted in biological science that phosphate is a building block of life. If the algae needs it to grow, it consumes it. If the fish need it to grow, their bodies consume it. Part of the fish waste is always going to contain phosphates, but MUCH less than went in their mouths originally. My refugium and my cleanup crew (over 500 snails) are not what I rely on for filtration. I have a very large dual beckett skimmer, lots of rock and sand, filter socks, phosphate reactor, etc. The refugium and cleanup crew are just small parts of the picture. Reverse lighting of the fuge provides proven pH stability, helps in gas exchange (CO2/O2), and provides some natural food for the Tangs. Just part of my system.
gwaco
New member
quote//.. I am also curious if everyone who has posted thus far has actually noticed a significant decline in their phosphates and nitrates since they started running a refugium and can actually trace it to the refugium as being the main source of nutrient removal
but you will see a reduction ! but it will be short term until the leaching starts ! plants and algae are constantly leaching phosphates - its just what they do ! there are no stop switches in bacteria and algae , they will continue to pull phosphates and leach phosphates , and release it all back into the system when they die .
but you will see a reduction ! but it will be short term until the leaching starts ! plants and algae are constantly leaching phosphates - its just what they do ! there are no stop switches in bacteria and algae , they will continue to pull phosphates and leach phosphates , and release it all back into the system when they die .
gwaco
New member
quote// IMOP in order to see significant phosphate reduction we would have to run a refugium close to if not equal in size to the main display. This would allow us to maintain enough algae (as long as it is pruned constantly and discarded) to use as a legitimate filter. >
this is not just your opinion ! its fact !
this is not just your opinion ! its fact !
gwaco
New member
sorry but your tank sounds like a time bomb , just ticking away ! the only thing you have listed here that 'will' remove the phosphates from your system is the skimmer , everything else is just moving it around .
and yes , things need phosphate to grow , but not at the rate to which we introduce it into our tanks .
again i have to repeat - their is no stop mechanism in algae or bacteria , they do not get full and stop processing , they just leach it back !
quote // -( The theory of clean up crews is that they eat the trash and algae not removed by other means to make things look better) . that is a very poor theory !
Last edited:
triggerfish1976
New member
I think we all can agree that in order to have an ideal reef tank we need to remove as much or more waste then we put in.
Like gwaco said, clean up crews and refugiums only move nutrients around but they still keep it in the tank.
If you don't believe this theory consider this:
A hobbyists with a 180g reef tank buys a 1" regal tang because they are led to believe that it will solve an algae problem that they have in their tank. The algae is growing like crazy because of an elevated phosphate problem. Over the course of a year the tang does a great job of keeping the algae visibily in check and the tang has grown to over 8" due to the amount of food that it has available at all times. The phosphates continue to be a problem because the tang is constantly pooping thus releasing phosphates back into the tank. The few soft corals that the hobbyist has are growing and look ok but the SPS are turning brown or have showed zero growth over the last few months.
One day the hobbyist comes home and finds the tang dead and starting to decay.
Considering that the fish is 8" and if this was your tank would you:
a. Remove it immediately and throw it away.
b. Take it out of the tank and put it in your sump to allow it to decay?
c. Leave it in the tank and allow your clean up crew to eat it?
Like gwaco said, clean up crews and refugiums only move nutrients around but they still keep it in the tank.
If you don't believe this theory consider this:
A hobbyists with a 180g reef tank buys a 1" regal tang because they are led to believe that it will solve an algae problem that they have in their tank. The algae is growing like crazy because of an elevated phosphate problem. Over the course of a year the tang does a great job of keeping the algae visibily in check and the tang has grown to over 8" due to the amount of food that it has available at all times. The phosphates continue to be a problem because the tang is constantly pooping thus releasing phosphates back into the tank. The few soft corals that the hobbyist has are growing and look ok but the SPS are turning brown or have showed zero growth over the last few months.
One day the hobbyist comes home and finds the tang dead and starting to decay.
Considering that the fish is 8" and if this was your tank would you:
a. Remove it immediately and throw it away.
b. Take it out of the tank and put it in your sump to allow it to decay?
c. Leave it in the tank and allow your clean up crew to eat it?
DaddyJax
New member
The thing about plants is that there is a conversion with consumption. Much like the plants that we need to produce O2 and remove CO2, the plants consume PO4 and use it for fuel and converts it. As far as the cleanup crews are concern my understanding is very similar in the since that the waste is much more broken down and easily consumed by bacteria in the rocks, macroalgae, phyto and zooplankton and removed by a skimmer. Since most of which the cleanup crews food consist of the afformentioned, it is a cycle of some sorts. The main thing to remember is that it is all converted into energy and used to build and that Phospates is the building block for all life. So as long as you have growth then you have Phosphates consumption. This is my understanding.
I have a Fuge for pod population because I believe that pods consume and use way more PO4 than the Macro itself and if you combine the two then you can do the math.
I have a Fuge for pod population because I believe that pods consume and use way more PO4 than the Macro itself and if you combine the two then you can do the math.
