Sumps are bad for reefkeeping

[BeanAnimal]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10328177#post10328177 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by kysard1
Baffles do nothing to stop bubbles in my experience.


Those with a sump and no filter socks: have you turned off all your lighting in the room and tank and shined a strong flashlight from the top of the tank down to inspect for micro-bubbles in your display. You may be surprised.

If you can run a sump without micro-buhbles or filter socks you are way ahead 90% of reef sump owners.

I agree that an overflow is essential but the better way to do things is with a behind the tank sump instead of below.

Zero Micro bubbles here... 2000GPH through sump.
No filter socks or other filtration media.

My sump is thriving habitat full of sponges, worms, tube worms, tunicates, snails, starfish, copepods, amphipods, mysis, etc.

Your statements are based on YOUR opinion.

Micro-bubbles (you mean mini-bubbles, as micro bubbles could not be seen ) are not a bad thing. You appear to be under the impression that they are harmfull. In YOUR case, if you must turn the light out to see them, then you can not see them during the photoperiod. What exactly is the issue?

Not everybody has the ROOM for a behind the tank sump.

I have a 75 gallon display with AT LEAST another 75 gallons on the sump and above tank refugium. How would you propose that I stuff another 75 gallon tank behind the display? Ohh you advocate a smaller sump? Lets say I can fit 15 gallons in a tall slender "sump" that is directly behind the display and the same height and width.

What do I gain? Slightly less cost to move the water? What else? Nothing!

What do I lose?

I lose 50 pounds of LR.
I lose a backflow area for all of my equipment.
I lose a large habitat for sponges, worms, fanworms, etc.
I lose 50% of my system volume and therefore a LARGE portion of my bio capability.
I lose added chemical the stability that comes from a larger water mass.
I lose the added temperature stability that comes form a larger water mass.
I lose the benefit of being able to do LARGE isolated water changes if need be.
I lose the benefit of having a LARGE evaporation resevoir in case of ATO failure.

Sorry man... your just way off base.

 

[BeanAnimal]

When I started out I siphoned that stuff out of the sump... I don't bother anymore.

 

[hobbzz]

^ I was kinda wondering if people that just left the stuff sit there had any problems with nitrates...I'm assuming you don't see any considering you don't siphon? I'd really love to be able to get rid of the socks. The one on the fuge is easy to change, but the one in the skimmer chamber is a p.i.t.a.

 

[dots]

Whatever little makes it to the sump bottom, I stir up every now and then for the skimmer to pick up. About every 3-4 months I pull the sump out and because my SSB is in a little prefilter box I fabbed up, it lifts out and I am able to clean the sump out, which has nothing of real concern in it to begin with.

The ultimate goal for me is to keep it suspended until it settles in the SSB or the skimmer picks it up.

 

[mhltcob]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10328177#post10328177 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by kysard1
Baffles do nothing to stop bubbles in my experience.


Those with a sump and no filter socks: have you turned off all your lighting in the room and tank and shined a strong flashlight from the top of the tank down to inspect for micro-bubbles in your display. You may be surprised.

Properly installed baffles will eliminate the vast majority of microbubble issues.

Why would I care about having microbubbles if I only saw them when i turned off all lights and used a strong flashlight to inspect for them?

 

[TomDe]

Guess I am with the 10% because I have a sump without a filter sock, and no bioballs. The sump is 1/2 fuge. Never had any bubbles in my display...

 

[Cody Ray]

A filter sock is not a nitrate factory. It is simply a way of catching detritus before ending up in your sump. When I ran a sump detritus would accumilate on the bottem. Once I installed a sock that ended. Clean the sock once a week. If the sock wasn't there than the detritus would simply build up somewhere else and decay anyway.

This whole "nitrate factory" thing is a joke. People are always looking for something to blame for what is most likely just poor husbandry. There is no reason to run bioballs or other biological filters if you are running liverock. It's just becomes excess.

 

[tperk9784]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10348562#post10348562 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by crrichey


This whole "nitrate factory" thing is a joke. People are always looking for something to blame for what is most likely just poor husbandry.

IMO It's poor husbandry and poor planning the setup.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10348562#post10348562 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by crrichey
A filter sock is not a nitrate factory. It is simply a way of catching detritus before ending up in your sump. When I ran a sump detritus would accumilate on the bottem. Once I installed a sock that ended. Clean the sock once a week. If the sock wasn't there than the detritus would simply build up somewhere else and decay anyway.

This whole "nitrate factory" thing is a joke. People are always looking for something to blame for what is most likely just poor husbandry. There is no reason to run bioballs or other biological filters if you are running liverock. It's just becomes excess.

If you're not cleaning your socks every day, the vast majority of the stuff theyre catching is being broken down before you swap the socks.


You not having nitrate problems doesnt mean the sock isnt a nitrate factory. Do you have a fuge?

 

[papagimp]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10350125#post10350125 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tperk9784
IMO It's poor husbandry and poor planning the setup.

100% correct. Bioballs and any other form of bio media, even live rock, add to the nitrate factor in the tank, the live rock will produce just as much as the bioballs do. After all, there kinda limited by the bioload in the tank correct? So poor maintance and husbandry will keep nitrates higher. Then you have the whole bioball nitrate factory thingy, it's not the bioballs people, it's the use of a redudant source of bacteria filtering in your tank vs location and amount of anerobic bacteria. YOu can get the whole "nitrate factory" from anything you allow to build up bacteria.

oh, and no microbubbles in my sump either, sure are an awful lot of us in that 10%.

 

[seattlerob]

Sorry, but I do not believe that is correct, that even live rock will become a nitrate factory.

In order to break down nitrate, you need the type of bacteria that grow in zero oxygen conditions (sorry, I forget the exact name). In a reef tank, that type of bacteria is most commonly found in either a deep sand bed (DSB) or inside large pieces of live rock. Both of those provide area that is oxygen depleted, thus allowing that type of bacteria to grow & break down the nitrates.

This is what bioballs, SSB, live rock rubble, etc lack.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10350260#post10350260 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by papagimp
100% correct. Bioballs and any other form of bio media, even live rock, add to the nitrate factor in the tank, the live rock will produce just as much as the bioballs do.

Live rock has anaerobic areas. Bioballs do not. Nitrate is processed in anaerobic zone. This is reef chemistry-101.

I suggest you read up on the nitrogen cycle before you post in the advanced forum again. This is simple basic knowledge.

 

[papagimp]

Your correct Seattlerob, I guess I should have worded that more carefully, anerobic bacteria does live deep within live rock and definatly reduced nitrates. I've been led to believe this is due to the location of one type of bacteria as compared to the other, when live rock aerobic bacteria releases nitrates, it's right there where the anerobic bacteria can get to it quickly, where utilizing bioballs mixes those nitrates into the water column before they can be removed and the anerobic bacteria just won't keep up. Same with the DSB effects.

 

[barbra]

I see why you think that filter socks are bad, but can you please detail why you think sumps are bad other than the virtually invisible bubbles? How do the bubbles make a sump a bad thing? Bubbles are fairly easy to overcome, but what negative happens if we don't?

It doesn't seem that your thread is related to it's title if I am reading correctly.

 

[papagimp]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10350427#post10350427 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
Live rock has anaerobic areas. Bioballs do not. Nitrate is processed in anaerobic zone. This is reef chemistry-101.

I suggest you read up on the nitrogen cycle before you post in the advanced forum again. This is simple basic knowledge.

I have read up on the nitrogen cycle, and that is why I stated, as you quoted me,

"100% correct. Bioballs and any other form of bio media, even live rock, add to the nitrate factor in the tank, the live rock will produce just as much as the bioballs do. "

Where is my information wrong here? Bioballs colonize with bacteria and that produces nitrates, same as live rock, and everyother bit of surface that will support bacteria. Live rock does add to the nitrate factor, I didn't say live rock was a "nitrate factory" I made one little slip that seattlerob corrected me on, other than that, the rest of my info was accurate.

 

[AZDesertRat]

BioBalls are not porous and do not have oxygen poor areas to support anaerobic or facultative bacterias like the interior of porous rock or deep sand beds do.

 

[HBtank]

What size of live rock is generally accepted to support anaerobic bacteria?

 

[seattlerob]

HBtank: I have heard at least the size of a softball. Take that with a grain of salt, as it's in no way a scientific measurement

hth,
rob

 

[wayne in norway]

Look at the nearby nitrate thread. There's a lot to look at there. Take the softball thing with a whole pot of salt.

 

[papagimp]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10352397#post10352397 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by HBtank
What size of live rock is generally accepted to support anaerobic bacteria?

IMO, size isn't going to matter nearly as much as porosity of the rock. Using a very dense base rock won't do much for anerobic bacteria since it's non-porous. But getting some nicer quality liverock will increase the likelyhood of having anerobic area's whithin the deep pores.