You are wrong in your assumptions in one and two, and the ways #3 could occur are many. Bacteria are very good at getting from place to place where they shouldn't be able to survive.
Kevin
Why do bioballs get bashed? Scientifically...
- Thread starter SDatl404
- Start date
You are wrong in your assumptions in one and two, and the ways #3 could occur are many. Bacteria are very good at getting from place to place where they shouldn't be able to survive.
Kevin
disc1
-RT * ln(k)
I'm no longer a teacher because I am now chief scientist for a biotechnology company.
reefgeezer
Active member
I can't claim to understand the chemistry involved in the nitrogen cycle. I do understand the value of having a chemist with a ton of patience on the forum. Thanks David.
SDatl404
New member
Something also to think about. Let's say the chemist is correct, which he more then likely is, do these anaerobic "live rock" areas clog up over time and become useless or even worse start exporting more toxins into the water?
I can understand in a deep ocean that might not be the case, but in an aquarium 20+- inches deep with minimal organisms I can't see these anaerobic "live rock" areas being a noticeable benefit.
Also with just live rock in the main tank, bacteria gets disturbed by all the inhabitants in the tank and doesn't grow as well.
I am starting to think both bioballs and a replaceable porous media would be great if the anaerobic science is a benefit in an aquarium.
I can understand in a deep ocean that might not be the case, but in an aquarium 20+- inches deep with minimal organisms I can't see these anaerobic "live rock" areas being a noticeable benefit.
Also with just live rock in the main tank, bacteria gets disturbed by all the inhabitants in the tank and doesn't grow as well.
I am starting to think both bioballs and a replaceable porous media would be great if the anaerobic science is a benefit in an aquarium.
brandon429
Well-known member
Anemone, if I wasnt specific enough maybe this will be a better way of stating it...the benefits of denitrification from live rock has been invalidated by my tests. Its occurring on a scale that can't be measured, I'm open to experiments you can link.
If you have another link or set of tests I've missed, post up. If what you have to counter my test is science on paper, that's typically what drives the hobby until new knowledge makes changes.
Live rock does not help convert nitrate gas in any way we benefit and can measure in average reef tanks. Its overstated, the benefits can't be harnessed as well as they sound in theory. Remember the 1990s knowledge that said corals would never be able to cohabitate in small tanks due to allelopathy? On top of being wrong, it was an overstatement of natural phenomena.
That's what's happening right now.
If you have another link or set of tests I've missed, post up. If what you have to counter my test is science on paper, that's typically what drives the hobby until new knowledge makes changes.
Live rock does not help convert nitrate gas in any way we benefit and can measure in average reef tanks. Its overstated, the benefits can't be harnessed as well as they sound in theory. Remember the 1990s knowledge that said corals would never be able to cohabitate in small tanks due to allelopathy? On top of being wrong, it was an overstatement of natural phenomena.
That's what's happening right now.
I'm interested in exactly how you are measuring the denitrification from live rock. I have to question the methodology of your "tests."
Kevin
As long as we're making vague and unsubstantiated comments, I'll postulate that two "identical" reef tanks, one set up with bioballs only, and one set up with liverock, will result in the liverock tank having measurably less nitrate.
Not hardly. One has nothing to do with the other. In the 90s we hadn't found evidence of water on Mars, but that really has about as much to do with denitrifiction in a reef tank as alleopathy.
Kevin
SDatl404
New member
brandon429 I think you hit the nail on the head.
Matrix Media
The above link states that the live rock like media never needs to be replaced. So it's possible that the live rock could continue to reduce NO3, but how effectively is the question.
I am starting to think a combination of aerobic and anaerobic media might be the best filtration option.
So this is probably the way to go:
Polyfilter => wet/dry bioballs => submerged matrix like media => light carbon dosing => skimmer
Matrix Media
The above link states that the live rock like media never needs to be replaced. So it's possible that the live rock could continue to reduce NO3, but how effectively is the question.
I am starting to think a combination of aerobic and anaerobic media might be the best filtration option.
So this is probably the way to go:
Polyfilter => wet/dry bioballs => submerged matrix like media => light carbon dosing => skimmer
Quite possibly. Do a search on "cooking" live rock.
Why not? Surface area is an amazing thing, and porous live rock has an incredible amount of interior surface area.
Really? Do you have anything that supports "inhabitants" disturbing the growth of bacteria?
Kevin
Great, you just described live rock!
Or, you could have live rock!
Really, reefkeeping is as much "art" as science, and there are many ways to skin a cat (I think I just mixed my metaphors). What I mean is, Paul has been keeping plenums for 30+ years, I have a mix of crushed coral and oolitic sand (and took out my bioballs a dozen + years ago) and have no skimmer, and other folks have super skimmers and dose the latest and greatest in amino acids and chemical cocktails. All of these can work.
Kevin
SDatl404
New member
Great, you just described live rock!
:fish2: lol
The only issue I have with live rock is how realistically effective is it in reducing NO3. Is it enough to eliminate the need for de-nitrating. How does the lack of exposed surface area have on promoting nitrifying bacteria and reducing NH3/NH4 and NO2? Would it remove toxins faster to use media that promoted nitrifying bacteria and then carbon dose?
Bed time lol
Steve Wright2
New member
I have neither the qualifications or the experience of some of the other contributors to the thread
but I do "feel" that Bruno has made a good point and 1 that I feel may explain the success of some tanks run with Bio balls
I believe that the bio film that Bruno describes is a mixture of bacterial species some of which may well be actively involved in the denitrification process end stages
I also believe it is possible that some of that bacteria on the bio balls is acting in the same manner/ processing the nitrate in exactly the same manner as bacteria processes nitrate on surfaces like bio pellets
I may be wrong, and I have no scientific evidence to support it
but I think it may well go some way to describing why bio balls, run correctly do work for some reef aquarists
I also totally agree with Kevin, when he says that are many ways to achieve success
if there is 1 perfect way, I have unfortunately not found it yet
Steve
I think that would depend on the ratio of live rock to the biological load you put in the tank, if you had the ratio's right then I would say yes, however if you are like most of us that try to get as much into the tank as possible then I'd suspect you'd need some other pathway for NO3 reduction ranging from water changes to more advanced, depending on how out of "balance" you are with that live rock. I also don't think weight (pounds per gallon) is a great measure here because of the differences of porosity (is that a word) of the rock. I've used plenum under a deep sand bed for over a decade and I'm tinkering with bio-pellets as I plan my next upgrade.
Again the key is as others have said, to find the right balance for your situation, all this advice has to be taken in context of what you are trying to accomplish.
Interesting thought, if there was a carbon source in the water then the bio-balls could serve as home for the strain of bacteria that does this, but I don't think that would be maintained long term without the carbon source, and I don't know if you were to use vodka or vinegar if you need a substrate for that strain of bacteria or if its free floating. Bio-pellets on the other hand don't release the carbon source into the water column but the bacteria grows on them directly. The bacteria can then get released into the system which is why you want your output going right into a skimmer.
I know that you want the skimmer to be after the dosing (or bio-pellets) but why do bio-balls first, why create the nitrate in the first place, why not remove the organics first? Then you would need to dose less carbon.
Its sort of like if you break a glass, you pick up the big pieces and throw them out before you use the vacuum cleaner, then there is no need to have a vacuum cleaner that can handle big pieces of glass. Removing the organics rather than breaking them down means less further processing is required.
Steve Wright2
New member
Thank you Doug
I do understand what you are saying and would appreciate your input on other thoughts
there are still a number of reef keepers, some of them faces, within the hobby, who have not accepted that availability of free carbon is in fact the limiting factor governing the amount of bacteria that can exist within a given volume/ area
is it possible that free carbon is also a variable within the confines of an aquarium
and that people with more available free carbon ( for naturally occuring reasons rather than as a result of introducing) may have more success with bio balls than others have experienced?
I am just looking for the possible reasons why they are in fact successful on some set ups?
Steve
I do understand what you are saying and would appreciate your input on other thoughts
there are still a number of reef keepers, some of them faces, within the hobby, who have not accepted that availability of free carbon is in fact the limiting factor governing the amount of bacteria that can exist within a given volume/ area
is it possible that free carbon is also a variable within the confines of an aquarium
and that people with more available free carbon ( for naturally occuring reasons rather than as a result of introducing) may have more success with bio balls than others have experienced?
I am just looking for the possible reasons why they are in fact successful on some set ups?
Steve
Michigan Mike
Freedom costs a buckofive
I just would like to say my 29g tank has a shallow sand bed and lots of live rock. I have no sump, skimmer, refugium, only a Hob filter with no media and a canister filter with sponges and bio balls.I went 4 months before I cleaned it and it was so clean the sponges were white..
I have a couple fish and lots of corals including sps, my flow is mostly on the sps so i have lots of dead spots in the aquarium.
I have zero phosphates and zero nitrates. I'm willing to bet I can go without a water change for six months and will have zero nitrates still, maybe even longer.
I have a couple fish and lots of corals including sps, my flow is mostly on the sps so i have lots of dead spots in the aquarium.
I have zero phosphates and zero nitrates. I'm willing to bet I can go without a water change for six months and will have zero nitrates still, maybe even longer.
Last edited:
