Use of Purigen to Replace Skimmer?

Kaiser Tang

Premium Member
I've heard that Purigen will remove the organic waste that a skimmer is supposed to remove. Does anybody use Purigen and not use a skimmer?
 
I did a Purigen experiment last month. Despite my hopes and enthusiasm for it, I had better results using Seachem Matrix Carbon.
 
I think running Purigen or carbon or both will compliment using a skimmer, but not replace it entirely.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12246218#post12246218 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by seapug
I did a Purigen experiment last month. Despite my hopes and enthusiasm for it, I had better results using Seachem Matrix Carbon.

I have been thinking about trying Purigen.

What where your results, that brought you to say Seachem Carbon was better?
 
I have a PhosBan reactor that I typically use for running Carbon. I had read all kinds of great things about Purigen so I thought I'd give it a try in the reactor. First, The particle size of Purigen is very small and light so it's even harder to keep in in a reactor setup than GFO, which is like sand. After about 3 weeks of running in reverse like I normally do with Carbon (water down through the media instead of upflow) the top 1/2" compacted into a brick like mass that started restricting flow. When I switched it to run upflow it worked better, but just didn't seem to be doing much. Once I started noticing the return of the green film on my glass and diatoms on the sand I decided to end the experiment and dump the Purigen. I went back to the Seachem Matrix Carbon and my water got nice and clear again and the films disappeared.

Just my experience.
 
I use Purigen in conjunction with carbon, a protein skimmer, and Polyfilter. Both the Purigen and Polyfilter turn brown so I know they're doing something the carbon and protein skimmer aren't. Likewise, the protein skimmer produces so I know it's doing something the others aren't. Whether they'd pick up the slack if I removed the protein skimmer, I highly doubt it.

So to answer your question, no, Purigen will not replace a protein skimmer. It will only complement it. I'd recommend it if you have the space and money, but if not, it's not the miracle the manufacturer claims it is.
 
I used to use Polfiler pads. Mine turned brown, but so does regular old filter floss. Not saying it did not work but. I need to see an independent study on it before I go back to it.

I just use rinsed once a week, changed once a month, Carbon now.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12247071#post12247071 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by seapug
I have a PhosBan reactor that I typically use for running Carbon. I had read all kinds of great things about Purigen so I thought I'd give it a try in the reactor. First, The particle size of Purigen is very small and light so it's even harder to keep in in a reactor setup than GFO, which is like sand. After about 3 weeks of running in reverse like I normally do with Carbon (water down through the media instead of upflow) the top 1/2" compacted into a brick like mass that started restricting flow. When I switched it to run upflow it worked better, but just didn't seem to be doing much. Once I started noticing the return of the green film on my glass and diatoms on the sand I decided to end the experiment and dump the Purigen. I went back to the Seachem Matrix Carbon and my water got nice and clear again and the films disappeared.

Just my experience.


Just a little help on the Phoban Reactor and Purigen. Use a Phosban reactor witrh my Purigen and Carbon as well. For the Purigen, I cut a couple of circle pads out of poly and put them on top of the Purigen, but below that top red strainer/divider in the reactor. The Purigen floats up and stacks up at the top, but doesn't go past the poly pads. I run the reactor the normal way. The Purign turns brown gradually throughout the whole reactor, so I know that water is making it's way through all parts of the media.
 
Back
Top