What does "Nitrate Factory" mean

rkg · 01/07/2009, 02:19 PM

I see many references on these boards to certain types of filters (ie. canister filters) or devices that are to be avoided because they are "nitrate factories". I understand that generally what is meant by that is that the filter is efficient at breaking down ammonia and nitrate, but does nothing to eliminate the resulting nitrates.

What confuses me, though, is that no type of filter can increase the bioload - the bioloand comes from the food and organic matter we put in the tanks, right? If that is true, then any given system is only capable of producing a defined amount of nitrates based on the bioload. So, as long as there is sufficient live sand and live rock to process nitrates, what does it matter if there is a canister filter or somtheing else that is creating nitrates along with the sand and rock? wouldn't the same nitrates be created anyway by the live sand and rock, without the canister filter, and then further processed into nitrogen gas?

BradsOcean · 01/07/2009, 02:30 PM

its because detritus and other waste accumulate over time in it and therefore contribute to creating a nitrate problem.

rkg · 01/07/2009, 02:56 PM

where would that waste and detritus have gone if there was no canister filter? Wouldnt it have just been broken down in the sand bed and rock into nitrates anyway? How is the canister filter adding nitrates that would not have been there anyway?

As long as there is a functioning sand bed and rock, what does it matter whether the nitrates are created in a canister filter or somewhere else?

tmz · 01/07/2009, 02:59 PM

In addition to buildup of waste material,proximity of the nitrate production to the denitrifying bacteria is thought to be important,.If the nitrate is produced in places without nearby anoxic areas it,more of it will go into the watercolumn and may never get to the oygen poor areas in the rock or sand. If the same waste is processed on the rock or sand, the nitrate from it will be processed deeper in the sand or rock.

seapug · 01/07/2009, 03:08 PM

+1 ^^.

In the case of canister filters, there is also an "out of sight, out of mind" factor with them that often invites lazy husbandry. You often end up with sponges and filter pads that get so clogged with nutrient laden detritus they become organic waste teabags that have your entire volume of water forced through them hundreds of times/day.

Sugar Magnolia · 01/07/2009, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by seapug
+1 ^^.

In the case of canister filters, there is also an "out of sight, out of mind" factor with them that often invites lazy husbandry. You often end up with sponges and filter pads that get so clogged with nutrient laden detritus they become organic waste teabags that have your entire volume of water forced through them hundreds of times/day.

+1. As long as you a dilligent with periodic cleaning, a cansiter can be benificial for running media and adding a bit of water volume. It adds 2 eatra gallon to my 30g tank. I clean mine monthly, replacing the sponges and any media that needs to be replaced. It's amazing how much funky gunk gets trapped in it.

This is of course JMO and my experienmce running one on my tank for the last 5 years.

Paul B · 01/07/2009, 03:13 PM

rkg you are 100% correct.
The filter can only produce nitrate at the rate the animals are excreeting ammonia. Filters that are considered nitrate factories are actually very efficient filters like bioballs.
If you combine this type of filter with something that will remove that nitrate that is what you want.
If there are high readings of nitrate in your tank, it means your aerobic bacteria are doing their job. These filters are great in a fish only tank where there are a lot of wastes and nitrate is not as harmful to fish.
The problem is that it is easy to process the ammonia to nitrate but takes much longer to reduce the nitrate.
We usually use live rock to do both jobs, unfortunately, live rock is usually not abundant enough in a tank to reduce the nitrate as quickly as it is produced. Rock is not quite porous enough to harbor enough anerobic bacteria to use all the nitrate the surface of the rock is producing. Many people (not me) rely on deep sand beds to reduce nitrate but as you read these threads you will find that DSBs are not very good at it either.
A tank eventually should be self sufficient and should deal with all the ammonia and nitrate it produces without relying on changing the water. Water changes of course should be done but for other reasons.

xJake · 01/07/2009, 03:15 PM

The reason traditional 'bio-media' (sponges, bio-balls, cell-pore, etc.) are considered to be 'bad' and are constantly referred to as "nitrate factory" is that they are too efficient at converting nitrogenous waste into nitrate.

The method of husbandry that the majority of hobbyists use is known as "The Berlin Method" (or a modification of this method). This husbandry technique relies mostly only the use of foam fractionation (protein skimming) and live rock filtration (via water flow). The goal of this method is to remove as much decaying organic matter from the water column as possible before it has the chance to be broken down into NH3, NO2, and finally NO3 (including other waste products such as PO4). This method of waste extraction prevents a large portion of this potential nitrate from forming and subsequently creates an environment where any residual nitrate is at such a low level that it is simply used for normal metabolic processes within the tissues of desirable reef animals (photosynthesis, filter-feeding, de-nitrifying bacteria etc.). These animals completely consume the remaining nitrate and subsequently create a low-level nitrate environment that allows our fish and corals to thrive.

What happens with traditional bio-media is that they are so efficient at converting organic matter (food, waste, etc.) into nitrate (NO3) that they are able to do so before a protein skimmer can extract the dissolved wastes (and the organisms that use them) from the water column. This causes nitrate to build-up to levels that are deleterious or even poisonous to many desirable reef organisms. This build-up can subsequently kill, or at the very least overwhelm, these nitrogen using organisms. This would induce stress on your animals, eventually leading to death - without regular and large water changes (which can get very expensive).

Basically, the husbandry most hobbyists use relies on the inefficiency of live rock in processing nitrogenous waste (yet still having the ability to do so) and the efficiency of a protein skimmer to remove these wastes before having the chance to break down into nitrate.

xJake · 01/07/2009, 03:21 PM

double post

Chuck H. · 01/07/2009, 04:23 PM

I'll just throw an anecdotal observation on this subject out there:
I have a Tidepool II filter with an "industrial" bio-wheel (the ultimate nitrate factory in many discussions) on my 65 FOWLR Undulate Trigger species tank. I periodically check the parameters on this tank when I do my more frequent water checks on my Nanocube reef. I have yet to notice an appreciable level of nitrates (using both API and Salifert kits) on this tank. Now, my trigger is small, < 3", fed sparingly and I do have a small aquafuge with some Chaeto hanging off the back of it. I guess I have about 40-45 lbs. of LR in there. So, if the bio-wheel is producing excess nitrates, I guess between the 'fuge and anaerobic bacteria in the LR, it is being depleted before I can measure on a test kit. Just an observation. Here it is:

Chuck H. · 01/07/2009, 04:44 PM

I am running a Marineland model 100 skimmer. Been working great too!

Rainmann · 01/14/2009, 11:04 AM

My tank has been up and running for 8 years (with various canister filters). A few months ago I added an Aquafuge on the back with sand, LR, and Chaeto. I have been very nervous about removing the canister filter, even though I do a 5gal water change and a whole battery of tests every weekend - as well as clean the canister every other weekend. A few weeks ago I put the canister filter back together wrong and it was pumping NO water for 2 weeks. My water chemistry did not change. Then I realized it really wasnt needed anymore. Even a small refugium can do wonders.

Michael · 01/14/2009, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chuck H.
I am running a Marineland model 100 skimmer. Been working great too!

how many days crap is that in there chuck?

Chuck H. · 01/14/2009, 07:35 PM

That's about 4 days worth. Might not seem like much, I know some folks fill a cup in a day or two with their skimmers, but I only have 1 small fish in a 65, so, I'm happy with it.

tmz · 01/15/2009, 02:05 AM

I use a canister filter (fluval 304 on a 65 gallon soft coral tank. It does a fine job. I do not use ceramic media or bioballs in it. Just carbon and polypad. I clean it every 14 days. it would not be sufficient ,in my opinion, on the main system with sps and other stony corals though.

Michael · 01/15/2009, 02:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Chuck H.
That's about 4 days worth. Might not seem like much, I know some folks fill a cup in a day or two with their skimmers, but I only have 1 small fish in a 65, so, I'm happy with it.

thats a relief, i probably get the same amount as you, it looked a lot and i was wondering if it was from a week or so, thinking mine is a lot, but 4 days is about the same amount as me, i usually clean mine out every 3-4 days as well

mikersx02 · 01/15/2009, 06:23 AM

I have an eheim ecco canister on my 75- and I have never had any problem with nitrates. HOWEVER, this kind of answers my question as to why I dont get as much skimmate as everyone else.

So are more salt water hobbiest moving AWAY from canisters AND sumps? and just relying on the sand and rocks to filter it all?

My father has a 125 and he just got a canister filter rated for his tank and is having all sorts of issues with keeping the algae away and keeping tangs alive. Not sure what else could be causing those kind of issues.

loosecannon · 01/15/2009, 07:03 AM

It`s latin for wet- dry filter !

Michael · 01/15/2009, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mikersx02
I have an eheim ecco canister on my 75- and I have never had any problem with nitrates. HOWEVER, this kind of answers my question as to why I dont get as much skimmate as everyone else.

So are more salt water hobbiest moving AWAY from canisters AND sumps? and just relying on the sand and rocks to filter it all?

My father has a 125 and he just got a canister filter rated for his tank and is having all sorts of issues with keeping the algae away and keeping tangs alive. Not sure what else could be causing those kind of issues.

probably a few other issues causing the algae, why not start a new thread and add some details

01/07/2009, 02:19 PM	#1
rkg Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Rock Springs, WI Posts: 24	What does "Nitrate Factory" mean I see many references on these boards to certain types of filters (ie. canister filters) or devices that are to be avoided because they are "nitrate factories". I understand that generally what is meant by that is that the filter is efficient at breaking down ammonia and nitrate, but does nothing to eliminate the resulting nitrates. What confuses me, though, is that no type of filter can increase the bioload - the bioloand comes from the food and organic matter we put in the tanks, right? If that is true, then any given system is only capable of producing a defined amount of nitrates based on the bioload. So, as long as there is sufficient live sand and live rock to process nitrates, what does it matter if there is a canister filter or somtheing else that is creating nitrates along with the sand and rock? wouldn't the same nitrates be created anyway by the live sand and rock, without the canister filter, and then further processed into nitrogen gas?

01/07/2009, 02:30 PM	#2
BradsOcean Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: The Island Posts: 1,173	its because detritus and other waste accumulate over time in it and therefore contribute to creating a nitrate problem. __________________ the low cost of 3 Ramen meals a day is feeding my zoa addiction Current Tank Info: had a few small reefs in the past, researching for my future 125 :)

01/07/2009, 02:59 PM	#4
tmz ReefKeeping Mag staff Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: West Seneca NY Posts: 27,691	In addition to buildup of waste material,proximity of the nitrate production to the denitrifying bacteria is thought to be important,.If the nitrate is produced in places without nearby anoxic areas it,more of it will go into the watercolumn and may never get to the oygen poor areas in the rock or sand. If the same waste is processed on the rock or sand, the nitrate from it will be processed deeper in the sand or rock. __________________ Tom Current Tank Info: Tank of the Month , November 2011 : 600gal integrated system: 3 display tanks (120 g, 90g, 89g),several frag/grow out tanks, macroalgae refugia, cryptic zones. 40+ fish, seahorses, sps,lps,leathers, zoanthidae and non photosynthetic corals.

01/07/2009, 03:08 PM	#5
seapug Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: 4980 ft. Posts: 7,954 Blog Entries: 1	+1 ^^. In the case of canister filters, there is also an "out of sight, out of mind" factor with them that often invites lazy husbandry. You often end up with sponges and filter pads that get so clogged with nutrient laden detritus they become organic waste teabags that have your entire volume of water forced through them hundreds of times/day. __________________ insert clever saying here. Current Tank Info: 200 gallon custom Marineland DD peninsular tank. LPS dominated mixed reef. Previous 90 gallon mixed reef TOTM April 2009.

01/07/2009, 03:13 PM	#7
Paul B Premium Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Long Island NY Posts: 15,549	rkg you are 100% correct. The filter can only produce nitrate at the rate the animals are excreeting ammonia. Filters that are considered nitrate factories are actually very efficient filters like bioballs. If you combine this type of filter with something that will remove that nitrate that is what you want. If there are high readings of nitrate in your tank, it means your aerobic bacteria are doing their job. These filters are great in a fish only tank where there are a lot of wastes and nitrate is not as harmful to fish. The problem is that it is easy to process the ammonia to nitrate but takes much longer to reduce the nitrate. We usually use live rock to do both jobs, unfortunately, live rock is usually not abundant enough in a tank to reduce the nitrate as quickly as it is produced. Rock is not quite porous enough to harbor enough anerobic bacteria to use all the nitrate the surface of the rock is producing. Many people (not me) rely on deep sand beds to reduce nitrate but as you read these threads you will find that DSBs are not very good at it either. A tank eventually should be self sufficient and should deal with all the ammonia and nitrate it produces without relying on changing the water. Water changes of course should be done but for other reasons. __________________ I used to get shocked when I put my hand in my tank. Then the electric eel went dead. Current Tank Info: 100 gal reef set up in 1971

01/07/2009, 02:56 PM	#3
rkg Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Rock Springs, WI Posts: 24	where would that waste and detritus have gone if there was no canister filter? Wouldnt it have just been broken down in the sand bed and rock into nitrates anyway? How is the canister filter adding nitrates that would not have been there anyway? As long as there is a functioning sand bed and rock, what does it matter whether the nitrates are created in a canister filter or somewhere else?

01/07/2009, 03:15 PM	#8
xJake Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,385	The reason traditional 'bio-media' (sponges, bio-balls, cell-pore, etc.) are considered to be 'bad' and are constantly referred to as "nitrate factory" is that they are too efficient at converting nitrogenous waste into nitrate. The method of husbandry that the majority of hobbyists use is known as "The Berlin Method" (or a modification of this method). This husbandry technique relies mostly only the use of foam fractionation (protein skimming) and live rock filtration (via water flow). The goal of this method is to remove as much decaying organic matter from the water column as possible before it has the chance to be broken down into NH3, NO2, and finally NO3 (including other waste products such as PO4). This method of waste extraction prevents a large portion of this potential nitrate from forming and subsequently creates an environment where any residual nitrate is at such a low level that it is simply used for normal metabolic processes within the tissues of desirable reef animals (photosynthesis, filter-feeding, de-nitrifying bacteria etc.). These animals completely consume the remaining nitrate and subsequently create a low-level nitrate environment that allows our fish and corals to thrive. What happens with traditional bio-media is that they are so efficient at converting organic matter (food, waste, etc.) into nitrate (NO3) that they are able to do so before a protein skimmer can extract the dissolved wastes (and the organisms that use them) from the water column. This causes nitrate to build-up to levels that are deleterious or even poisonous to many desirable reef organisms. This build-up can subsequently kill, or at the very least overwhelm, these nitrogen using organisms. This would induce stress on your animals, eventually leading to death - without regular and large water changes (which can get very expensive). Basically, the husbandry most hobbyists use relies on the inefficiency of live rock in processing nitrogenous waste (yet still having the ability to do so) and the efficiency of a protein skimmer to remove these wastes before having the chance to break down into nitrate. Last edited by xJake; 01/07/2009 at 03:22 PM.

01/07/2009, 03:21 PM	#9
xJake Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,385	double post

01/07/2009, 04:23 PM	#10
Chuck H. Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: South East Virginia Posts: 560	An observation on my "nitrate factory" I'll just throw an anecdotal observation on this subject out there: I have a Tidepool II filter with an "industrial" bio-wheel (the ultimate nitrate factory in many discussions) on my 65 FOWLR Undulate Trigger species tank. I periodically check the parameters on this tank when I do my more frequent water checks on my Nanocube reef. I have yet to notice an appreciable level of nitrates (using both API and Salifert kits) on this tank. Now, my trigger is small, < 3", fed sparingly and I do have a small aquafuge with some Chaeto hanging off the back of it. I guess I have about 40-45 lbs. of LR in there. So, if the bio-wheel is producing excess nitrates, I guess between the 'fuge and anaerobic bacteria in the LR, it is being depleted before I can measure on a test kit. Just an observation. Here it is: __________________ Chuck H. Current Tank Info: Radion Powered Elos Midi mixed-reef in progress and 65 Undulate Trigger FOWLR species tank

01/07/2009, 04:44 PM	#11
Chuck H. Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: South East Virginia Posts: 560	One more thing... I am running a Marineland model 100 skimmer. Been working great too! __________________ Chuck H. Current Tank Info: Radion Powered Elos Midi mixed-reef in progress and 65 Undulate Trigger FOWLR species tank

01/14/2009, 11:04 AM	#12
Rainmann Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Frisco, TX Posts: 20	My tank has been up and running for 8 years (with various canister filters). A few months ago I added an Aquafuge on the back with sand, LR, and Chaeto. I have been very nervous about removing the canister filter, even though I do a 5gal water change and a whole battery of tests every weekend - as well as clean the canister every other weekend. A few weeks ago I put the canister filter back together wrong and it was pumping NO water for 2 weeks. My water chemistry did not change. Then I realized it really wasnt needed anymore. Even a small refugium can do wonders. __________________ 29 Tall, Aquafuge, Remora Skimmer sumpless 80 lbs Fiji rock and sand established 2001 Current Tank Info: 29 Tall

01/14/2009, 07:35 PM	#14
Chuck H. Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: South East Virginia Posts: 560	That's about 4 days worth. Might not seem like much, I know some folks fill a cup in a day or two with their skimmers, but I only have 1 small fish in a 65, so, I'm happy with it. __________________ Chuck H. Current Tank Info: Radion Powered Elos Midi mixed-reef in progress and 65 Undulate Trigger FOWLR species tank

01/15/2009, 02:05 AM	#15
tmz ReefKeeping Mag staff Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: West Seneca NY Posts: 27,691	I use a canister filter (fluval 304 on a 65 gallon soft coral tank. It does a fine job. I do not use ceramic media or bioballs in it. Just carbon and polypad. I clean it every 14 days. it would not be sufficient ,in my opinion, on the main system with sps and other stony corals though. __________________ Tom Current Tank Info: Tank of the Month , November 2011 : 600gal integrated system: 3 display tanks (120 g, 90g, 89g),several frag/grow out tanks, macroalgae refugia, cryptic zones. 40+ fish, seahorses, sps,lps,leathers, zoanthidae and non photosynthetic corals.

01/15/2009, 06:23 AM	#17
mikersx02 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Virginia Posts: 357	I have an eheim ecco canister on my 75- and I have never had any problem with nitrates. HOWEVER, this kind of answers my question as to why I dont get as much skimmate as everyone else. So are more salt water hobbiest moving AWAY from canisters AND sumps? and just relying on the sand and rocks to filter it all? My father has a 125 and he just got a canister filter rated for his tank and is having all sorts of issues with keeping the algae away and keeping tangs alive. Not sure what else could be causing those kind of issues.

01/15/2009, 07:03 AM	#18
loosecannon Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: port kent Posts: 1,292	It`s latin for wet- dry filter ! __________________ I like getting WET! Current Tank Info: 44gal. 40 gal. 75 gal. 30gal. and working on a 75gal. rigt