Setup Recomendations

[KnH]

Setup Recommendations

 

I Went through and read a bunch of the Featured Nano Reef Aquariums

and there are quite few that do not use a protein skimmer, most run GAC, and do frequent water changes and dose different things.

 

Shooting for LPS, flower anemones and easier SPS, monties , birds nest ect.

 

Equipment wise I can have a sump any where between 10g & 55g. I have too many extra tanks needing a use.

 

The things that I have are.

Tank 15g will be drilled and internal overflow.

RO/DI

Reef Keeper Lite controller

T5 lighting

 

Things in need of or haven't decided on a path yet.

Sump, what size?

ATO = yes

Water changes , how much and how often?

Protein Skimmer?

Peristaltic Pumps if needed,

Siporax , marinepure, keep reading different things, haven't decided yet

Rock from BRS or Tampa Bay Live rock.

DIY reactor for GAC & GFO, from the BRS calculator 2 tbsp of both, I haven't seen a reactor for that small amounts.

2 propeller pumps for water movement.

 

Help me narrow things down a bit

In the past I have nickel and dimed things and in the end it cost me more than just getting what I needed from the start.

I am going to choose wisely this time.

Thanks

Ken

 

[Elizabeth94]

Water changes can be figured out later based on how your nutrient levels run/stocking/feeding. But it is normal to aim for atleast 10% a week.

 

There are nano gfo reactors made by Innovative Marine but it isnt necessary if you do water changes. However, they can make life easier and help with nutrients.

 

I can only recomend two skimmers that i have used.. My Tunze 9002 is okay, but mt AquaMaxx HOB-1 is absolutly amazing. It is rated for larger tanks but you wouldn believe the crap it pulls out of my ten gallon.

 

Oh, welcome to saltwater! A frustrating, but ever so rewarding hobby.

[SantaMonica]

I vote for an algae scrubber, and no water changes (to keep food particles in the water).

[KnH]

I vote for an algae scrubber, and no water changes (to keep food particles in the water).

The algae scrubber concept/scruber was getting started when I had my last reef tank setup at least 5 years ago, and I am registered on your forum so I do read up on things and receive email updates and changes to your ATS design.

 

The pluses and minuses are still argued back and forth. That said I don't know I can see it both ways.

But When I read up on tank spotlights/ tank of the month. I don't think I have run across one that runs a ATS as it primary filtration/nutrient export here or over at RC.

 

As far a pod production if I run one it will be in the sump, so all the pods would have to go through the return pump.

 

So with a nano setups, the margin of error can be very sharp.

 

I am setting up my sump now and it is going to be on a magnitude of two to three times the volume of the display tank for extra filtration and water stability, and I will have room for an ATS if I go in that direction.

Right now leaning towards # 1 Carbon and GFO reactor, + water changes then + or - a protein skimmer, + or - a ATS

 

 

So if there is a tank of the month that runs an ATS as the primary means of filtration / nutrient export please point me in that direction.

 

Thanks

[zsxking]

Use something like this for GFO/Carbon reactor if you want it small and cheap. Build a manifold from your return pump and use that to feed the reactor. Get a powerful enough return pump. There are budget option like jebao's.

 

To get a skimmer or not is really about how many fish you keep. Most of the tank that run without skimmer keep very few fish compare to the size of the tank. It's just a hundred bucks or two, and works for years. I really don't see a reason not to run one given you have sump area to put it. Honestly I would rate skimmer over GFO reactor. If you go without skimmer, why bother with GFO.

[ReefWeeds]

I vote for an algae scrubber, and no water changes (to keep food particles in the water).

 

I guess I don't understand how an algae scrubber would replace water changes. Water changes aren't a good means of nutrient export unless you're doing more than 50% WCs on a regular basis. However, they DO work to replace certain elements the reef will need. So, is the recommendation to run an algae scrubber and dose all the elements (not just calcium and alk) that would need replacing in the tank?

Use something like this for GFO/Carbon reactor if you want it small and cheap. Build a manifold from your return pump and use that to feed the reactor. Get a powerful enough return pump. There are budget option like jebao's.

 

To get a skimmer or not is really about how many fish you keep. Most of the tank that run without skimmer keep very few fish compare to the size of the tank. It's just a hundred bucks or two, and works for years. I really don't see a reason not to run one given you have sump area to put it. Honestly I would rate skimmer over GFO reactor. If you go without skimmer, why bother with GFO.

I agree with zsxking! I think if you're going to go big with your sump, a skimmer is the way to go. GFO can be touchy and cause more harm than good in some cases. Sk8nreefer's recent tank issues are at the top of my mind - I also stripped nutrients way too quickly running 1/4 of the recommended amount of GFO and it bothered a lot of my LPS. If phosphates are a concern later down the line, there are definitely other options that can help as well that wouldn't necessarily need a reactor.

[HarryPotter]

I vote for an algae scrubber, and no water changes (to keep food particles in the water).

 

"No water changes?" Thats one of the funniest things I've read here today. Funnier than periphyton.

 

Unless you want the OP to start dosing over a dozen trace elements I don't think you should recommend that

[KnH]

I tend to over analyze everything.

I have a 29, 30 and 55g to choose from for the sump, I went with the 55g because more water + more stability.

 

Thanks for the eBay find, the cheapest refillable cartridge I could find was $16, I looked at BRS at their 5" reactor compared to their 10". The 10" dual setup was cheaper than the small ones with the pump costs included

 

I ran the numbers comparing the cost of the Skimmer with the cost of Carbon and GFO for the break even point was over 5 years.

Then again like you guys suggested its only $130 for the skimmer, in the big picture the cost of the skimmer isn't that much.

Time to move on to the next item

 

Thanks

[SantaMonica]

I guess I don't understand how an algae scrubber would replace water changes. Water changes aren't a good means of nutrient export unless you're doing more than 50% WCs on a regular basis. However, they DO work to replace certain elements the reef will need. So, is the recommendation to run an algae scrubber and dose all the elements (not just calcium and alk) that would need replacing in the tank?

Scrubbers vs. Water Changes

 

If the purpose of the WC is to reduce Nitrate, Phosphate, or nuisance algae, then you will not need to do them anymore when using a scrubber properly. If the purpose of the WC is to do anything else (like remove medications, etc), then you will still need to do them. Taken from "It's In The Water", by Ron Shimek:

 

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-02/rs/feature/index.php

 

[Aquarists have] the feeling that organisms somehow "use up," "change," or "consume" many of these [trace] chemicals, and in doing so, forever remove the chemicals from the reef aquarium system. This assumption is not completely false, some chemicals are "used up" and removed from the system, but most are not. Organisms are dynamic entities, and while some chemicals are temporarily sequestered away, such chemicals generally remain available in the system due to metabolic turnover. The only real exceptions to this as far as organisms are concerned are those chemicals, such as calcium [and alk], which get incorporated into an insoluble matrix.

 

Several trace elements are found in elevated concentrations in aquarium water [Table 2; Figure 2]. Some of these metals have extremely high concentrations relative to NSW [natural salt water]; tin has already been mentioned as having concentrations over 200,000 times above normal, but Thallium, Titanium, Aluminum, Zinc, Cobalt, Antimony, and Copper all have concentrations of over 95 times normal.

 

Several of the trace metals [in aquariums] varied in concert, particularly Cobalt, Tin, Zinc, Titanium, Copper and Vanadium, and lower but still positive correlations with Nickel and Aluminum are found. All of these metals are found at concentrations far above those of natural sea water. Some of these concentrations are almost unbelievably high. Tin has an average concentration in our systems of over 200,000 times greater than in natural sea water.

 

Increases in many of these same metals are correlated with the age of the tank. One explanation for that pattern would be that they may build up with the passage of time.

 

The older tanks also have more ammonia, nitrate/nitrite, phosphorus, iodine and copper than younger tanks.

 

Many of the trace element concentrations are lower than they are in freshly made up artificial sea water. Whether this indicates organism use, or abiotic chemical reactions, is unclear. Even though these levels are lower than in "fresh" artificial sea water, they are still very much higher than in natural sea water, and may still indicate a cause for concern.

 

[scrubbers remove metals; skimmers do not]

 

 

- and -

 

Although almost no aquarist knows this, athough every marine biologist does: algae produces all the vitamins and amino acids in the ocean that corals need to grow. Yes these are the same vitamins and amino acids that reefers buy and dose to their tanks. How do you think the vitamins and amino acids got in the ocean in the first place? Algae also produces a carbon source to feed the nitrate-and-phosphate-reducing bacteria (in addition to the algae consuming nitrate and phosphate itself). Yes this is the same carbon that many aquarists buy and add to their tanks. In particular, algae produce:

 

Vitamins:

 

Vitamin A

Vitamin E

Vitamin B6

Beta Carotene

Riboflavin

Thiamine

Biotin

Ascorbate (breaks chloramines into chlorine+ammonia)

N5-Methyltetrahydrofolate

Other tetrahydrofolate polyglutamates

Oxidized folate monoglutamates

Nicotinate

Pantothenate

 

 

Amino Acids:

 

Alanine

Aspartic acid

Leucine

Valine

Tyrosine

Phenylalanine

Methionine

Aspartate

Glutamate

Serine

Proline

 

 

Carbohydrates (sugars):

 

Galactose

Glucose

Maltose

Xylose

 

 

Misc:

 

Glycolic Acid

Citric Acid (breaks chloramines into chlorine+ammonia)

Nucleic Acid derivatives

Polypeptides

Proteins

Enzymes

Lipids

 

 

Studies:

 

Production of Vitamin B-12, Thiamin, and Biotin by Phytoplankton. Journal of Phycology, Dec 1970:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1529-8817.1970.tb02406.x/abstract

 

Secretion Of Vitamins and Amino Acids Into The Environment By Ochromanas Danica. Journal of Phycology, Sept 1971 (Phycology is the study of algae):

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1529-8817.1971.tb01505.x/abstract

 

Qualitative Assay of Dissolved Amino Acids and Sugars Excreted by Chlamydomanas Reinhardtii (chlorophyceae) and Euglena Gracilis (Euglenophyceae), Jounrnal of Phycology, Dec 1978:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1529-8817.1978.tb02459.x/abstract

 

Many others studies are at:

http://Reefbase.org/resource_center/publication/main.aspx

 

Funnier than periphyton

Yep periphyton is your strongest natural filter, once it has filled in. And it keeps mandarins alive.

[zsxking]

Although almost no aquarist knows this, athough every marine biologist does: algae produces all the vitamins and amino acids in the ocean that corals need to grow. Yes these are the same vitamins and amino acids that reefers buy and dose to their tanks. How do you think the vitamins and amino acids got in the ocean in the first place? Algae also produces a carbon source to feed the nitrate-and-phosphate-reducing bacteria (in addition to the algae consuming nitrate and phosphate itself). Yes this is the same carbon that many aquarists buy and add to their tanks. In particular, algae produce:

 

I don't think this means the way you are trying to present. The algae grow in the scrubbers are removed by scrubbing. Whatever the algae created, including the stuff you said like amino acids and carbon, are inside the algae, and are removed from the tank, not added to the water (well if you add them back to the water, nitrate and phosphate will get back in as well). It's not the same thing as what aquarists dose at all. Also I don't believe the algae scrubbers trying to grow is the same type of algae and bacteria that grow in ocean water. Those are more like the green water types of algae instead of those grow on substrate. Also the production of them are pass down through food chain, from other micro organism to pods etc. Most part of that chain does not exist in a normal aquarium.

 

Grow algae on scrubbers are essentially the same as algae in refugium, it's just provide easier way to clean and faster grow rate. It's function as nutrition sponge to take nutrition out. It is impossible for those algae to supplement the nutrition need for corals.

[KnH]

Yes, all those study's do list the benefits of a specific algae in the ocean environment ,some of the ones you listed were diatoms, free swimming ..... Not what grows on algae scrubbers, most of are tanks are not a balanced system, over stocked with fish. That's why carbon dosing works, we add carbon and the organisms take up the carbon and multiply, are tanks are carbon limited.

 

To Link the benefit that you are claiming to your algae scrubber, you would have to be spacific to the particular algae you are growing.

Most of the studies you listed the algae were microscopic, and were more appropriate to be skimmed out of the system or used by the biomas in our tanks. Sence our tanks are carbon limited all plants are limited, this is recognized in the freshwater planted tanks and the fertz that they dose in a shotgun effect, adding everything to overcome what is missing to allow plant growth.

 

Yes. Growing algae may have a positive effect in our thanks, but all our tanks are different. Little petri dishes all skewed based on what each of us does differently.

[smeagol108]

All o have to say as I am no scientist but have been reefkeeping for 15 years is my current nano is the first I have tried a scrubber in, and I couldn't be happier with the results. I didn't start the tank with a scrubber and no skimmer either and had lots of issues with nuisance macroalgae and nutrient build up. There is now not a single speck of visual algae in the display and the nutrients remain in check. I do dose many supplements so I only do water changes when I feel like it. Sometimes every two weeks. Sometimes not for six weeks.

Although I think the Santa Monica scrubber is overpriced for what it is, I didn't have to build it myself and it does exactly what it is supposed to. Took two months to get established but now I have to clean it out every 5-7 days. If I ever get around to taking photos of my tank I am sure I could get tank of the month.

[holy carp]

yes, but is an ATS really better than a simple ball of chaeto in the sump with a light? Those are pretty forgiving and host loads of pods.

[smeagol108]

yes, but is an ATS really better than a simple ball of chaeto in the sump with a light? Those are pretty forgiving and host loads of pods.

When u don't have a sump it sure is. Also, my scrubber hosts loads of pods and I shake the algae off in the tank before every cleaning to release them to the tank. I also think my scrubber grows algae much faster than people's chaeto grows and dies off. At least what I have seen.

[zsxking]

Algae scrubber is good stuff. It's basically same as carbon dosing that grow bacteria. But algae can produce organics carbon via photosynthesis, thus not limited by it. One of its advantage over ball of charto is the algae grows out of water, thus they can use CO2 from air. So it grows a lot faster.

 

What I can't buy is the BS that scrubber can replace water change AND dosing supplement.

[SantaMonica]

Whatever the algae created, including the stuff you said like amino acids and carbon, are inside the algae, and are removed from the tank, not added to the water

No the amino are added directly to the water by the algae. That's why corals have learned to use amino's, because algae in the ocean put the aminos there. There is nothing else in the ocean that makes aminos.

 

Also I don't believe the algae scrubbers trying to grow is the same type of algae and bacteria that grow in ocean water.

Yes the same: Cladophora, Ulva fasciata, Ulva lactuca.

 

Also the production of them are pass down through food chain, from other micro organism to pods etc. Most part of that chain does not exist in a normal aquarium.

Yes the same chain exists; it is just invisible.

 

Grow algae on scrubbers are essentially the same as algae in refugium, it's just provide easier way to clean and faster grow rate. It's function as nutrition sponge to take nutrition out

Correct.

 

It is impossible for those algae to supplement the nutrition need for corals.

Not correct; when algae grows in your tank, it's chemical functions are the same as when it grows on reefs.

 

Yes, all those study's do list the benefits of a specific algae in the ocean environment ,some of the ones you listed were diatoms, free swimming ..... Not what grows on algae scrubbers

Correct, I need to put another list together for macroalgae, just have not had time. The chemistry is the same however, because photosynthesis is the same.

 

I think the Santa Monica scrubber is overpriced

It's the darn minumum wage in the U.S.

 

but is an ATS really better than a simple ball of chaeto in the sump with a light?

Scrubbers are more powerful for their size, yes. They will kill chaeto. This study shows why chaeto is limited:

http://algaescrubber.net/forums/showthread.php?2318-Production-within-dense-mats-of-the-filamentous-macroalga-Chaetomorpha

 

What I can't buy is the BS that scrubber can replace water change AND dosing supplement

Well, they do it all the time. WC removes a small amount of nutrients, that day only. And dosing is simply supplying what corals get from algae in the reefs. ReefBase has lots of studies about these things:

http://Reefbase.org/resource_center/publication/main.aspx

[KnH]

Santa Monica, I really want tp believe that your algae scrubber is what and everything you say it is. But you continue to miss-represent other people's experiments and studies for personal gain. I have wanted to purchases an algae scrubber and have been following the algae scrubber idea since Inland aquatics drum scrubber was forced off the market.

 

You continue go all used car salesmen claiming your Pinto is better than the flying DeLorean.

 

You claim that your scrubber is the be all, end all of reef aquaria, You claim more than the Zeolite people claim, at least they have excellent tanks to back up their claims.

 

So you have had years to perfect your product and your reef setup,

 

Let's see you tank and everything your scrubber can do!

[zsxking]

Yeah. I since yet to see a single proof of a long time (multi-years) successful tank with ATS and no water change nor dosing. ATS exists for loooong time already, there have been enough time to proof it out if it's really that good. But I dare he can show the proofs. Anyone can claim shit, but it's the study and evidence that counts. Don't link those vaguely related study on algae, show some peer reviewed study on your exact claim or example of successful tank with such.

 

ATS and carbon dosing achieve the exact same thing. But Santa Monica Filtration's ATS somehow managed to double the price of a biopellet reactor of similar capacity. I'm sorry, but your desperate BS in attempt to justify your overpriced product just make it sound worse. There was a brief moment I did consider your ATS a neat product especially for limited space application. But after all your BS claim, I completely wipe it off my wanted list.

[ajmckay]

The algae scrubber concept/scruber was getting started when I had my last reef tank setup at least 5 years ago, and I am registered on your forum so I do read up on things and receive email updates and changes to your ATS design.

 

The pluses and minuses are still argued back and forth. That said I don't know I can see it both ways.

But When I read up on tank spotlights/ tank of the month. I don't think I have run across one that runs a ATS as it primary filtration/nutrient export here or over at RC.

 

As far a pod production if I run one it will be in the sump, so all the pods would have to go through the return pump.

 

So with a nano setups, the margin of error can be very sharp.

 

I am setting up my sump now and it is going to be on a magnitude of two to three times the volume of the display tank for extra filtration and water stability, and I will have room for an ATS if I go in that direction.

Right now leaning towards # 1 Carbon and GFO reactor, + water changes then + or - a protein skimmer, + or - a ATS

 

 

So if there is a tank of the month that runs an ATS as the primary means of filtration / nutrient export please point me in that direction.

 

Thanks

Not sure this is a valid request... Oddly featuring a piece of equipment on a TOTM doesn't really mean it contributed anything to the tank's success nor does it mean it will turn your tank into a TOTM. The best measure of success we have is often the experiences of other hobbyists, but to narrow the pool to TOTM isn't an accurate representation of anything. I'm just saying that the experiences of anyone that runs an ATS (or other piece of equipment) should be considered in addition to any TOTM mentions which can have more to do with popularity and macro photography skills than "success" in reefing.

 

 

yes, but is an ATS really better than a simple ball of chaeto in the sump with a light? Those are pretty forgiving and host loads of pods.

 

Yes and no. In both cases there are successes and failures. Many people put a ball of chaeto in their refugium and then it dies. Likewise some people get an ATS and only grow slime. The way I look at it is if you want to be successful using algae for nutrient export you need to understand it's growing requirements and just like coral you need to provide the right environment for it to "thrive". Think of it as underwater gardening. Not everyone can successfully maintain a garden. Similarly not everyone can utilize algae in their tanks and get good results.

 

For my own experience I was dead set on getting an ATS (well, probably making one DIY), but then I stuck a clump of chaeto in and I had enough room that it really took off. So if it weren't for the fact that I am on a budget I would get an ATS because I like gadgets, But they're both capable of doing the same things if you plan it and manage things well.

[KnH]

There are many things that can make up a TOTM setup. When I see what other people have done, it inspires me to try to do as good as they have done. There are no hard rules that you have to follow, but if you look at all the different tanks that are TOTM or other great tanks there are common things that they all have in common.

 

There are patterns that develop of what works and the Santa Monica algae scrubber that eliminates water changes, and every other piece of equipment is not on that list.

 

It’s like when people used to say you could not grow corals with LEDs, people went out and proved them wrong. Santa Monica is making some pretty big claims, so let’s see the proof of those claims.

 

I have always liked the concept/ idea of using an algae scrubber because it makes sense to me. But if you are going to make the claims that Santa Monica makes you have better have you ducks in a row, he throngs out half-truths like they are carved in stone.

 

I believe the algae scrubber like any tool can be used to succeed and it all comes down to the time and effort you put into your tank.