Waterfall Turf Algea Filter: CHEAP and EASY to build

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13339626#post13339626 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by InlandAqua
we propagate sps in the warehouse systems...they are all ATS systems.
the 125 tank that you see is mainly to show how little you have to do to a tank as far as dosing and water testing. We have not dosed any cal, mag, ...anything. We rely on the oolitic sandbed to dissolve and maintain the calcium level....it runs about 350.
We dose kalk in the warehouse systems...they are so big that is the only economical way to do it....35,000 gal.


No doubt, it's nice looking tank for the amount of effort involved. DSB version of a Monaco approach + ATS + carbon + skimming, that's it? Nothing more? Very neat. What levels of alk, magnesium, and strontium are maintained? I'm a lot more interested in aggressive-growth SPS tanks myself though. If you have any pics of anything like that, I would be interested in learning more.
 
actually this 125 has no skimmer....never ran carbon.
havent checked mag, alk, or strontium in 10years. basically we look at it each day and just do a visual evaluation....sure is nice not to worry about.

I"ll try to get some pics of some of the more sps populated tanks.
 
I guess this thread is a nightmare for those people who promote their business here on RC.
Imagine what would happen if ATS really work?
Zillions of useless skimmers and tons of salt that nobody buys anymore.
Disaster for the industry,
Shame on you Santa Monica (!!)
 
Last edited:
Ok, time to post in this thread again. I have avoided it like a plague, except for reading. Its to Santa, posted the thread heading such as it is and is so aggressive on many of the boards, otherwise it would have been some fine info.

Good to see Inland post here, finally. It would have been nice to see someone post on the many ATS threads we have had over the years.

I find it hard to understand that if they work so well, why many of us that have good ATS units, have them sitting in the closet while using other forms of filtration? I do pose that as a question though.

And if anyone bothered to read some of our threads, many of us are very experienced aquarists. My turf scrubber did work well. I never had any nitrates or phosphates, or any that I could measure. However I did still have some types of nuisance algae.

I ran carbon and a large beckett skimmer also, so one would think the tank would sure be nutrient deficient. I did experiment with running the turf scrubber alone but could not seem to handle the load alone.

Now that being said, I dont know why it would not work. If one had a set up with a tank behind the wall, as mine were then, its a good supplemental filter. Could not possibly use it in my current situation.

I would love to try it on a tank designed for corals that thrive on certain conditions. It would be interesting to run the tank solely on the turf scrubber and perhaps some carbon to remove any water discoloration. Running my current 90g sps tank alone on it would take some convincing though, thats for sure.

But who knows. I always thought I had real good turf algae growing but I allowed it to grow by itself with no seed from Inland. Perhaps something was missing. But then many of the others I communicated with seeded theirs.
 
Using an algae scrubber and using a protein skimmer are not mutually exclusive. For most hobbyists having both can be useful.

Santa Monica was not banned on for undermining the board's sponsors. As far as I can tell he was banned for soliciting a senior member to get members who did not agree with him banned. To have a board that is useful to everyone it's a necessity to cull members who lack restraint in what they say or are bad actors.
 
After using my ATS exclusively for 2+ years and now about 3/4 of a year with a skimmer attached, I think I've found a better balance with both forms of filtration. I have a few small acropora that are growing, but for the most part I haven't had much luck with SPS.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13349717#post13349717 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by yeniraki
I guess this thread is a nightmare for those people who promote their business here on RC.
Imagine what would happen if ATS really work?
Zillions of useless skimmers and tons of salt that nobody buys anymore.
Disaster for the industry,
Shame on you Santa Monica (!!)

well unfortunately he is now recommending dosing iodine to other users on other sites, why would you want to do that, without testing, and also dosing iodine is lethal if overdosed, and considering its only bearly 1% of the volume of the water just how do you know what quantity to dose, the scrubber method has merit but i just cant believe it is better than skimming, i am actually quite interested in SMs threads here and elsewhere but suggest not recommending iodine dosing without prior experience in doing so, based on this how do we know that all SM s comments are true, as mentioned before we do need to hear both sides of the diiscussion about this so we can make our own minds up:)
 
One persons opinion, I have never dosed iodine and have no problem growing turf. I once dosed iron thinking it would "fertilize" the turf, next thing I know I had hair algae all over my live rock.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13350394#post13350394 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Flatlander
Ok, time to post in this thread again. I have avoided it like a plague, except for reading. Its to Santa, posted the thread heading such as it is and is so aggressive on many of the boards, otherwise it would have been some fine info.

Good to see Inland post here, finally. It would have been nice to see someone post on the many ATS threads we have had over the years.

I find it hard to understand that if they work so well, why many of us that have good ATS units, have them sitting in the closet while using other forms of filtration? I do pose that as a question though.

And if anyone bothered to read some of our threads, many of us are very experienced aquarists. My turf scrubber did work well. I never had any nitrates or phosphates, or any that I could measure. However I did still have some types of nuisance algae.

I ran carbon and a large beckett skimmer also, so one would think the tank would sure be nutrient deficient. I did experiment with running the turf scrubber alone but could not seem to handle the load alone.

Now that being said, I dont know why it would not work. If one had a set up with a tank behind the wall, as mine were then, its a good supplemental filter. Could not possibly use it in my current situation.

I would love to try it on a tank designed for corals that thrive on certain conditions. It would be interesting to run the tank solely on the turf scrubber and perhaps some carbon to remove any water discoloration. Running my current 90g sps tank alone on it would take some convincing though, thats for sure.

But who knows. I always thought I had real good turf algae growing but I allowed it to grow by itself with no seed from Inland. Perhaps something was missing. But then many of the others I communicated with seeded theirs.

Hola Flatlander -

I've read your posts in many of the historic threads on the subject was wondering where you were in this discussion. I had expected you to come to the debate as a hard core supporter of turf scrubbing. What kind of a tank might you recommend an ATS for?

Michael -

That's good advice. If I can't reliably test for a certain component, I'm very hesitant to dose for it.
 
My 2 cents:

The issues with this thread, and other like it, had little to do with ATS, rather with SM's method being presented as a panacea. If you stay in the hobby long enough, you will see many things touted as the way to go and the way to save money and the way to replace other items. As it turns out, very few, if any of these claims pan out and can lead to dead animals and crashed tanks. People are especially wary of people with very little real hobby experience touting the theory de jour as gospel - SM had been running one of these things for a month, yet, well, you can see the first post in the thread.

Innovation is great. Re looking at past ideas is great. Some humility when reporting results of anything is not only great, but engenders discussion and thought rather than the artificially polarized back and forth SM's threads have generated on many forums.

I think all filtration methods have their place, and that we should strive to understand what makes them work on particular systems and not on others before anyone jumps on any bandwagon.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13350455#post13350455 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by piercho
Santa Monica was not banned on for undermining the board's sponsors. As far as I can tell he was banned for soliciting a senior member to get members who did not agree with him banned. To have a board that is useful to everyone it's a necessity to cull members who lack restraint in what they say or are bad actors.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner!

We could really care less if you support non-sponsor products. Heck, I think Oceanic BioCube's rock and some other tanks suck...oops...Oceanic isn't a sponsor. ;)

Now please....talk about the topic at hand...not folks that are not here any longer.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13351934#post13351934 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by miwoodar
Hola Flatlander -

I've read your posts in many of the historic threads on the subject was wondering where you were in this discussion. I had expected you to come to the debate as a hard core supporter of turf scrubbing. What kind of a tank might you recommend an ATS for?

Michael -

That's good advice. If I can't reliably test for a certain component, I'm very hesitant to dose for it.

Ack, I,m historic. :lol: I posted when he first pm,ed me but likely would have anyways, as I notice most ATS threads. :) As it went downhill, { I must say I agree with Thales last post somewhat}, I figured not much sense posting any info or ask questions.

I,m not as hard core as one would think. When I first became interested in them, I like some others, thought they would run as the sole filtration. I figured no need for a skimmer or perhaps even ro type water, as long as it was purified somewhat.

I did run it alone at times but always chickened out and put my skimmer back online. As mentioned I never measured any nitrates or phosphates, even with a bare bottom and no phosphate remover being used. Those tanks did have another problem though, that it took me ages to figure. It had to do with well water, my salt mix and alkalinity.

I would like to try again but not possible where I now live and my 90g,s room. Planning to set it up on a friends new 150g, {moving from his current 120G}. he has a mixed reef tank but will also be running a good skimmer.

I wont say it could not filter an sps tank by itself without trying again but I think one could filter a lps type tank, perhaps combined with soft corals. I would think fleshy lps, filter feeders and similar corals would thrive in it.

I thought perhaps my sps tank which is sumpless and runs a Tunze skimmer, could use the assist from a turf scrubber but hard to set it up in an office type room. :lol:

If you read many of my threads, I have asked to see sps tanks, run solely on a turf scrubber. Count how many posted a pic. :rolleyes: I had some links but they never amounted to much. Plus as I mentioned above, most of us that posted in those threads, own professional built turf scrubbers, {although mine is modified as it arrived smashed to bits}, {it was purchased 2nd. hand}. I dont believe any of us are running them at the current time. :confused:

I dont know why. Perhaps its simpler to run a good skimmer, unlike what some others have said. Plus some phosphate removed in my simple hang on filter takes care of that problem or running a clean bare bottom tank will also.

I dont follow the skimmerless argument. Most are run in a sump and remove a lot of detritus. The scrubber does not do that. As a matter of fact, mines designed to sit on an aquarium and run sumpless, so not sure where the detritus goes, except for the dsb using it??

It would be interesting to run my tank on it alone and see what happens, so I could post it in a thread. Mine is basically all sps type corals. Would they get a lot more food and better growth and perhaps colors?? Would the algae filtration "leak" and harm the sps corals?? I think I would run carbon, no matter what.

When I read the sps forum, I see lots of beautiful sps tanks and none of them are running scrubbers, so there skimmers and whatever must be working just fine. :)
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13315436#post13315436 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by vitz
unfortunately-your argument is NOT anything like the 'arguments' santa is using

and also unfortunately-the 'con' arguments and subsequents 'proofs' for each method are different as well

for you to say that simply because a skimmer has been argued against, and then proven to be a good thing, hence the same must be true for an algae scrubber is laughable, and makes me wonder just how qualified your knowledge base is to be a sw lfs 'manager'-you seem to not be able to adress the comparative merits of each's m.o., and use the type of discussions performed to evaluate the methods ?

so, according to YOU-just how does a turf/algae scrubber WORK, per your above sentence-do you also claim it replaces all filteration methods including water changes, and adds no wastes of its own to a closed system ?

please address the phosphate cycle, the carbon cycle, the nitrogen cycle, terpenes, phenols, voc/hvoc's etc etc in your reply

your thoughts on 'pods' and how they act as a sink, if at all, would be most welcome :)

btw-i'm still waiting to know what types of 'pods' y'all are reffering to, as well as which species of turf algae you seem to be recommending, as santa seems to have hardly any true turf algaes growing on his 'unit'

that was an uncalled for attack on the mans profession.

I have read a good deal of this thread and I can see where you have a right to feel anger. But that was directed at someone who was posting his personal experience and was not deserving of that amount of venom.

I hope you can see that attacking InlandAqua for posting something you did not agree with is no different then what SM was doing.


/On topic

there was/is a lot of good information here, I agree that removing nutrients before they become a problem is the best possible solution. But if it were that easy then we wouldn’t be having this discussion at all.

I think I may tinker with an ATS, I have an idea or two kicking around. but I have to agree with Flatlander, I don't think I would/could ever trust it as a sole filtration device.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13355734#post13355734 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by yeniraki
Michael,

well unfortunately he is now recommending dosing iodine to other users on other sites, why would you want to do that, without testing, and also dosing iodine is lethal if overdosed
...

That's a dangerous bit of advice on his part, dosing iodine is tricky for the experienced hobbyist, much less the newer people he is marketing to. Best case overdosing will cause huge algae issues, ATS notwithstanding. Worst case? ((shudder))
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13351582#post13351582 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Michael
well unfortunately he is now recommending dosing iodine to other users on other sites, why would you want to do that, without testing, and also dosing iodine is lethal if overdosed, and considering its only bearly 1% of the volume of the water just how do you know what quantity to dose, the scrubber method has merit but i just cant believe it is better than skimming, i am actually quite interested in SMs threads here and elsewhere but suggest not recommending iodine dosing without prior experience in doing so, based on this how do we know that all SM s comments are true, as mentioned before we do need to hear both sides of the diiscussion about this so we can make our own minds up:)

And your point is, you do not carry Iodine and Iodine tests??
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=13355750#post13355750 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by yeniraki
And your point is, you do not carry Iodine and Iodine tests??

:confused: what do you mean
 
The big three in reefing will always be, IMHO, calcium, alkalinity, and magnesium. If you're telling a newbie to buy additional test kits, please make sure that they already have these in their quiver.


With that said, iodine test kits ARE available. They just aren't very trustworthy or simple to use. Putting too much faith in the results and overdosing iodine can be disasterous.



-------RANDY HOLMES-FARLEY-------------
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/mar2003/chem.htm

Measurement of Iodine: Test Kits

There are many ways to measure iodine in seawater. Even confining the list to those that most aquarists are likely to encounter, there are still at least three fundamentally different ways, and those three all detect different subsets of the total iodine species in water. Unfortunately, those differences make comparisons of the different methods almost impossible, and also complicate the interpretation of the data from any single one of them. Of the commercially available kits, the Seachem and Salifert iodine kits are the most popular in the US. Unfortunately, the use and interpretation of these kits is tedious and complicated. I’d like to hold off on detailed comments about how well they work until I’ve had additional time to study them, but so far my experience has been rather less successful that with simpler kits (alkalinity, calcium, etc.).

The Seachem iodine kit detects only iodide (I-) and molecular iodine (I2). It is unlikely that there will be much I2 in an aquarium as it quickly breaks down into other products59 [to be described in a later article that will include a discussion on using products that contain I2, such as Lugols solution]. A potential drawback to this kit is that it doesn’t detect iodate. So if your tank water matches normal seawater in quantity and speciation of iodine, then it will look artificially low (say, about 0.01 or 0.02 ppm). I would also not advise using this kit if you are adding an iodine supplement that contains considerable amounts of iodate, molecular iodine (that may break down into products that include iodate and iodide)59, or organic iodine forms. There is also the concern that supplemental iodide, and those forms of iodine coming in with marine foods, may end up partially as iodate. Consequently, this kit may substantially underestimate the total amount of iodine present. I fell into that trap years ago in dosing iodate to my tank, and a significant concentration built up before I specifically tested for it.

The Salifert iodine test kit detects iodide, iodate, and molecular iodine. Salifert is about to come out with a new iodine kit (using a yellow color instead of a pink color). Assuming that it functions properly, it would be a good choice for anyone dosing iodide, iodate, or molecular iodine, though it is a long test involving quite a few steps. It will not detect many organic iodine forms, and people dosing such compounds should beware of overdosing.




-------RANDY HOLMES-FARLEY-------------
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-04/rhf/index.php#17

Supplementing Iodine:

Many aquarists dose iodine, and claim that certain organisms need it to thrive. Often mentioned are shrimp, Xenia species of soft corals, mushroom corals, and more. However, no evidence for an iodine requirement by these organisms appears anywhere in the scientific literature. They also thrive quite well in many coral reef aquaria where iodine is not dosed. Of Reef Central’s Tanks of the Month for the past couple of years, the majority do not supplement with any form of iodine (or at least do not mention doing so), although some certainly do dose it.

I do not presently dose iodine to my aquarium, and I do not recommend that others do so, either. Iodine dosing is much more complicated than dosing other ions due to its substantial number of different naturally existing forms, the number of different forms that aquarists actually dose, the fact that all of these forms can interconvert in reef aquaria, and the fact that the available test kits detect only a subset of the total forms present. This complexity, coupled with the fact that no commonly kept reef aquarium species are known to require significant iodine, suggests that dosing is unnecessary and problematic. On the other hand, it is nevertheless possible that some organisms that we keep do actually benefit from iodine, and that in some aquaria there is not enough in the foods that we add so that supplements may possibly be beneficial in those aquaria.

I dosed iodine for several years when I first set up my aquarium. I dosed substantial amounts of iodide to try to maintain 0.02 to 0.04 ppm of iodide (which is a natural level). Iodide is rapidly depleted as algae and perhaps other organisms take it up and convert it into organic forms. After a few years of dosing iodide, I became frustrated with the complexities of testing for it, so at that point I stopped dosing any supplemental iodine. That was about seven years ago. I detected no changes in any organisms, and never dosed any again. If you are dosing iodine now, I suggest stopping for a month or two, and seeing if you can objectively detect any difference in any organism.

For these reasons, I especially advise aquarists NOT to try to maintain a specific iodine concentration using supplementation and test kits. For those who do supplement iodine, I suggest iodide as a more suitable form than certain other additives, such as Lugol’s iodine, which is unnatural and potentially more toxic. Iodide is also more readily used than iodate by some organisms, and iodide is detected by both currently available iodine test kits (Seachem and Salifert).



-----------------------------------

Here's a 2008 thread in which bertoni and Billybeau1 both expressed clear support for Randy's position on the subject. These are three of the most prominent reef chemistry gurus on the net.

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1303831
 
Back
Top