refugiums

[ichthyman]

Ok Spanky Jr., I’ll play. Be nice.

Freshwater Microbiology: Biodiversity and Dynamic Interactions of ... By David C. Sigee

The referenced section of text, page 213 if the document fails to load correctly, is talking about freshwater phytoplankton but is still valid for this discussion. The mechanics involved are basically the same for marine micro and macro species. Carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and a host of other compounds do “leak” out of algae. Compared to mass the percentage of leakage in phytoplankton is small but it is my understanding that the proportion increases significantly with higher algae. Exudate is a better word than leak.

Stimulation of Bacterial DNA Synthesis by Algal Exudates in Attached Algal-Bacterial Consortia, this is an experiment that shows how certain bacteria living on the surface of algae can utilize the above mention exudates.

An example that everyone should here should be able to understand. It is the energy rich exudates that coral polyps utilize from Zooxanthellae.

Unless you’re paying for access to some serious marine science oriented sites this is about the best you can do. I did find a paper about phosphate leaching from saltwater marsh plants but I’m too tired for that much reading. Maybe more tomorrow.

 

[Kittikity]

I think both the refugium and without works.. No, I don't have any proof.. But all you have to do is look on these forums and you'll see lots of people running successful tanks with both methods.. There is no right and wrong way in this hobby, we all know that.. It's the same thing as the skimmer vs skimmerless discussions.. There are some worst ways of running a saltwater tank, yes.. But if your method keeps your corals and creatures healthy and happy, then let other people have their methods.. Just because it's different from your's doesn't mean it's wrong.. If I give advice (which I don't do much of yet since I'm still fairly new in this hobby) I try to point at that this is what works for me..

Yes, I have a refugium and currently no skimmer.. I currently have hair algae because I haven't been able to keep up with my water changes, I've probably fed too much lately, and I think it's still cycling.. But my corals are thriving and growing.. Since the refugium is the only thing I have (other than water changes) then I definitely think it is helping.. No, it's not the only thing I use since I usually have regular water changes.. But I do believe it helps..

Besides, we're all noobies when it comes to try and simulate mother nature..

 

[mflamb]

Kitty, you are correct. My point of the discussion is that, like anything correctly used, refugiums remove certain undesireable "stuff" from our aquariums. The net export of undesireable "stuff" makes a refugium a valuable part of my total system.

 

[triggerfish1976]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11333443#post11333443 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Kittikity
I think both the refugium and without works.. No, I don't have any proof.. But all you have to do is look on these forums and you'll see lots of people running successful tanks with both methods.. There is no right and wrong way in this hobby, we all know that.. It's the same thing as the skimmer vs skimmerless discussions.. There are some worst ways of running a saltwater tank, yes.. But if your method keeps your corals and creatures healthy and happy, then let other people have their methods.. Just because it's different from your's doesn't mean it's wrong.. If I give advice (which I don't do much of yet since I'm still fairly new in this hobby) I try to point at that this is what works for me..

Yes, I have a refugium and currently no skimmer.. I currently have hair algae because I haven't been able to keep up with my water changes, I've probably fed too much lately, and I think it's still cycling.. But my corals are thriving and growing.. Since the refugium is the only thing I have (other than water changes) then I definitely think it is helping.. No, it's not the only thing I use since I usually have regular water changes.. But I do believe it helps..

Besides, we're all noobies when it comes to try and simulate mother nature..

But that was not what the original poster asked. The thread was started to determine the viable effectiveness that refugiums have on reducing nuisance algae which means phosphate removal. Based on the information provided thus far and personal experience refugium setups as we see them on many RC tanks are not effectively removing phosphates because they are either not maintained properly or just not big enough. Combine that with the data that proves that sand (most refugiums have DSB's) that basically add to the phosphate problem and actually can create bigger problems with nuisance algae and general lack of coral health.
On the subject of soft corals tanks and filtration, many softies like leathers, mushrooms, etc. will "survive" in nutrient rich tanks so they are not a good gauge when trying to prove that a refugium on a skimmerless tank is providing sufficient filtration. Is it better than not having any filtration at all? Sure if the algae is being pruned on a regular basis but unless you are running a fuge the size of your main tank it is not filtering as efficiently as most other methods.
I would also recommend that everyone who uses RC as the be all end all of reef keeping be careful and not read to much into the "science" that gets thrown around by many so-called experts. Most of it changes on a day to day basis and is theoretical at best when it is applied to maintaining life in a small glass box. The most successful hobbyists seem to be the ones who are able keep their tanks stable, are consistant with their husbandry and have a decent understanding of the actual biological and chemical reaction that are happening in their tank regardless of what method they use.
Lastly, for the record, I have seen GWACO's SPS tank and I can vouch that he knows what he is doing.

 

[gwaco]

first , let me apoligize to any that found some of my earlier post offensive , we all have those days once in awhile .
QUOTE// (Ok Spanky Jr., I’ll play. Be nice.) < i assume this is a compliment ! l.o.l.
HI YA JOHN! i haven't heard from you in awhile ! thanks for joining in and providing some very good links , as you know when it comes time to find the hardcore scentific papers the door is usually closed until you make a payment , again thanks !
boy, its been awhile since i've been to the store , it may be time for a trip up there !
and let me just say this ! with your knowledge and integrity anyone who does not shop at your store has got to be off their rocker !
triggerfish , thanks for also joining in ! as someone that shares the same attributes as john you should be respected also ! we need to meet up for lunch one of these days so i can straighten you out on a few things though !

o.k. let me get back on track ! if you want to keep a refugium , by all means have at it ! i just feel its just something else that has the potental to go south very quickly . and if you hate doing good husbandry on your tank than why bother with a second tank you WILL have to maintain .
hopefully with what trigger , john and i have brought to the table ,someone like the original poster will do alittle more homework before making a decission on whether there is actual value in adding a fuge !

 

[gwaco]

here is a very good reference . forget the abstract and open up the pdf file .
www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi...1979.tb01659.x

 

[Kittikity]

Yes, I know what the original poster had asked and I gave account of my limited experience.. That's all I can do is state what has gone on with my tank.. I can not give my account of a tank without a refugium simply because I have not done that.. Or I would have given my 'opinion' on both methods.. I assumed that's why the original poster came here to ask opinions.. If he wants more then there are lots of sites with forums and more information on the internet to make your head spin.. Yes, you have to judge for yourself what you believe and what works for you.. But I was also saying that there is no one way to do this hobby.. I also never said gwaco didn't know what he was talking about.. I also referenced RC because we are all here for information and there are a lot of experienced people here to learn from.. Like gwaco.. I'm sure the original poster will find his advice and knowledge helpful too..

No, I doubt very greatly that it will make nuisance algae go away.. But I do believe it helps as part of a well maintained system..

 

[rogergolf66]

I personaly have a refugium and I will never go with out one again, but I will say I just went to a new friends house and saw his tank and wow what color and growth. Well my point is he dosn't have a refugium. That being said as I said above I will always have one.

Roger

 

[gwaco]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11344053#post11344053 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by rogergolf66
I personaly have a refugium and I will never go with out one again, but I will say I just went to a new friends house and saw his tank and wow what color and growth. Well my point is he dosn't have a refugium. That being said as I said above I will always have one.

Roger

roger , you say you will never go with out one , can you tell me what you find as the benifit of it and is it an in sump refuge or plumbed ? can you tell me how long your refuge has been in place , and whether it was in place from the start ?
also what type of setting is your tank set up to replicate ?

 

[gwaco]

quote from kittikity / But I do believe it helps as part of a well maintained system..

a well maintain system will not have an algae problem , hence no need for a fuge !

 

[mflamb]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11344600#post11344600 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by gwaco
quote from kittikity / But I do believe it helps as part of a well maintained system..

a well maintain system will not have an algae problem , hence no need for a fuge !

I don't believe that I know anyone who has a fuge for the purpose of solving an algae problem, but now I fully understand all of your previous posts.

 

[rogergolf66]

I had no refugium in my first two tanks and I had a nitrate and phosphates were hight on the test kits but I was running fish only and a softie reef tank.

Now with the new tank I have SPS dominated and yes I have had the refugium since day one. I don't know for sure if it is why I have 0 nitrats and .03 phosphates but I don't see a reason not to have one. In other words I don't see what it hurts.

as far as were it is I took a 55 gallon tank and made a sump out of it and 27 gallons is my refugium with 400gal per hour going through it.

It has been in place for 5 months.

Roger

 

[rogergolf66]

I agree I am not using it to stop algae. just remove nutiants

 

[gwaco]

deleted post

 

[rogergolf66]

link is dead. repost.

 

[triggerfish1976]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11344764#post11344764 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by rogergolf66
I agree I am not using it to stop algae. just remove nutiants

Both go hand in hand. Removing nutrients will in turn limit undesirable algae growth.

 

[flasher1]

Mangroves and other marine plants absorb and metabolize the nitrates and CO2 when exposed to light. At night though (or when your refugium lights turn off) it releases the CO2 back into the water. Photsynthesis uses the CO2 from the water, air, and the citric acid cycle to produce Oxygen.

The nitrates though, are absorbed and then released as nitrites. Therefor, anyone who has undergone the nitrogen cycle (hopefully everyone) has the required bacteria to handle this. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1092268

Refugiums (with mangroves in it) make protein skimmers obsolete over a period of time. http://saltaquarium.about.com/cs/nitratecontrol/a/aa051398.htm

Most LFS will not tell you this because that is a loss in sales for them. I have a protein skimmer myself, only because I do not have enough room in my current sump for a refugium. I hope this information helps with this thread.

Mike

btw for those of you checking credentials, I am a 3rd year biology student at UCF.

 

[flasher1]

Mangroves also remove phosphates as well. (Refer to the same link about mangroves above)

 

[triggerfish1976]

flasher1,

about.com articles are pretty much useless as far as accuracy goes. They generally are written by people who have either never had a SW tank or are newbies at best. Some of them are just down right comical on what they suggest including the one you referenced.

 

[flasher1]

trigger- so what are you disagreeing with? Mangroves dont absorb phophates and nitrates? Or that they will make skimmers obsolete over time?

As far as absorbing phosphates, phosphates are used in the production of ATP for use in photosynthesis. ATP (Adenosine Triphophate) is then reduced into ADP (Adenosine Diphosphate) in which a phosphate is added to make it ATP again.

So what are you debating as I am unsure. I am simply using it as a reference since there is no link to my biology book online that you are able to see.