N/P reducing pellets (solid vodka dosing)

[rutz81]

Maybe I'm missing something, but, wouldn't an ATS or macroalgaes be used to lower nitrates? If the pellets are being run shouldn't they do the job of these?

[jlinzmaier]

Originally Posted by rutz81

Maybe I'm missing something, but, wouldn't an ATS or macroalgaes be used to lower nitrates? If the pellets are being run shouldn't they do the job of these?

The pellets will only do a part of what an ATS and chaeto growth can do. The chaeto and ATS profide spectacular areas of pod growth and reproduction. It's not all about nutrients.

Jeremy

[tntneon]

Originally Posted by jlinzmaier

The pellets will only do a part of what an ATS and chaeto growth can do. The chaeto and ATS profide spectacular areas of pod growth and reproduction. It's not all about nutrients.

Jeremy

+1 , I like the fact that there are so much pods they sometimes spawn and this is food for corals and fish w/o the rising of N or P .

greetingzz tntneon

[jlinzmaier]

For those of you using the biopellets, are you adhereing to the maintenance of alk levels near NSW params (7-8 dkh)??? I know that with normal carbon dosing (vodka, vinegar, sugar, etc...) the SPS corals will often get "burnt" tips and tissue recession when the alk is above 8dkh. Is anyone running a higher alk with the biopellets??

When using the biopellets, if corals can remain free of the burnt tips and usual tissue recession seen with higher alk levels, that could be a huge advantage over normal carbon dosing. Stony coral growth increases significantly as alk levels are increased and providing a low nutrient environment with high alk levels could yield spectacular growth results.

Jeremy

[tmz]

I like having a macro refugium for the pod habitat but even more so for the oxygen it adds on opposite photoperiod as swell as the PO4 and NO3 reduction even when carbon dosing.

[jlinzmaier]

Originally Posted by tmz

I like having a macro refugium for the pod habitat but even more so for the oxygen it adds on opposite photoperiod as swell as the PO4 and NO3 reduction even when carbon dosing.

Very good point!! I have a reeflo orca 250 for a skimmer and my pump went out on it a few weeks ago. I had enough algea growing on my ATS and chaeto growing in my sump that I didn't see any significant health decline in the fish or corals after not having my skimmer running for over a week. Granted I'm not carbon dosing right now, but I think the oxygen output that the algea provides is a great benefit in many respects.

Jeremy

[SECRETREEF]

I have one question that probably was answered elsewhere in the tread but I have not read it completely.

Some people have told me that protein skimmers don't skim the bacteria that grow with the pellets and that the bacteria just becomes food for the carals. For what I understood the mayority of the bacteria was suposed to be skimmed and that the ones that were not could end up being coral food.

In my opinion if the bacteria was only to become food for the corals the rest of the bacteria that didn't become food could die and the n : p would be released again in the aquarium.

Is the bacteria only used as food for corals and filterfeeders or is it supposed to be mostly removed by the skimmers? This has confused me a bit since what I had in mind of how this method worked has been said to not be correct.

[jlinzmaier]

Originally Posted by SECRETREEF

I have one question that probably was answered elsewhere in the tread but I have not read it completely.

Some people have told me that protein skimmers don't skim the bacteria that grow with the pellets and that the bacteria just becomes food for the carals. For what I understood the mayority of the bacteria was suposed to be skimmed and that the ones that were not could end up being coral food.

In my opinion if the bacteria was only to become food for the corals the rest of the bacteria that didn't become food could die and the n : p would be released again in the aquarium.

Is the bacteria only used as food for corals and filterfeeders or is it supposed to be mostly removed by the skimmers? This has confused me a bit since what I had in mind of how this method worked has been said to not be correct.

My understanding is that the BP reactor should be placed in front of the skimmer intake to try to export as much bacteria as possible. It's impossible that all bacertioplankton would be skimmed out so there is the significant added benefit that there will continually be a supply of bacterioplankton getting sent back to the DT to feed the animals that will prey on it.

Jeremy

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by SECRETREEF

I have one question that probably was answered elsewhere in the tread but I have not read it completely.

Some people have told me that protein skimmers don't skim the bacteria that grow with the pellets and that the bacteria just becomes food for the carals. For what I understood the mayority of the bacteria was suposed to be skimmed and that the ones that were not could end up being coral food.

In my opinion if the bacteria was only to become food for the corals the rest of the bacteria that didn't become food could die and the n : p would be released again in the aquarium.

Is the bacteria only used as food for corals and filterfeeders or is it supposed to be mostly removed by the skimmers? This has confused me a bit since what I had in mind of how this method worked has been said to not be correct.

Here ya go -

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/sh...postcount=1240

DJ

[SECRETREEF]

Thank you for the fast answer!

That is exactly what I had in mind, but after beeing told that the skimmer didn't skim bacteria I was confused. I do understand that some will be able to get by the skimmer and become food for some corals and filter feeders. My mayor consern was to know what would happen with the bacteria and the NO3 and PO4 they consumed if they were not to end up as food. If they die in the aqurium all that stuff they usedup to grow would be released again inside the aquarium. It is the same concept as if chaeto or other macroalgae died in the refugium, all the stuff they used to grow would be release back again in the water.

Thanks for answering my question!

[SECRETREEF]

Thanks DJ.

I gave them that same link and they still didn't belive that the bp worked that way. Their explanation was that the bacteria degraded the PO4 and NO3 into smaller traces that were easier for the skimmer to skim out. This made me think that the bacteria being larger than the PO4 and NO3 alone was the reason that the skimmer could skim them out and that the smaller the molecule or particle the harder it is to skim out.

Thanks again!

[FoothillCorals]

What is an ATS?
Thanks in advance

[PowermanKW]

Originally Posted by SECRETREEF

Thanks DJ.

I gave them that same link and they still didn't belive that the bp worked that way. Their explanation was that the bacteria degraded the PO4 and NO3 into smaller traces that were easier for the skimmer to skim out. This made me think that the bacteria being larger than the PO4 and NO3 alone was the reason that the skimmer could skim them out and that the smaller the molecule or particle the harder it is to skim out.

Thanks again!

OK, then your friends do not know what they are talking about. The thing that pellets have going for them is that there is a ton of info on carbon dosing and the bacteria that consume it. The bacteria have been studied for all kinds of reasons and their "consumption" of NO3 and PO4 for their biological processes are very well documented and even the uptake ratio of each is quite well known. So you just have to do some research and lots of reading, but plenty of info on the subject.

Pellets are just a solid source of that carbon instead of the liquid sources such as sugar, vinegar, and vodka that have been used. On paper pellets have several advantages over liquid and after this new fad runs it's course with all these new manufacturers coming to market will we be able to declare a winner.

Skimmers only skim out water phobic organic compounds. They will not skim water pholic dissolved organics. However, just the actions of the bubble chamber act as a mechanical filter and will filter out particulates from the water. They will skim out anything that gets caught up... phyto, food, detritus, eggs, and bacteria.

It is the export of these bacteria through a skimmer that provides the export of nutrients from the tank. Any bacteria that die in the tank, or is consumed as food is not a export of nutrients from the tank. The only proof you need that skimmers export this is that if they didn't.... carbon dosing would simply not work to reduce nutrients as it does. Might be great food for corals, but nutrients would RISE instead of the well documented way to produce ultra low nutrient systems being run today.

[PowermanKW]

Originally Posted by FoothillCorals

What is an ATS?
Thanks in advance

Algae turf scrubber. Macro algae grown on a screen with water running over it.

[SECRETREEF]

I have been using the biopellets for a little over a month now and I know that the skimmer is getting more skimate than it used too. Also my cyanobacteria problem dissapeared in less than two weeks without manually taking it out. I have read a bit before I got them for my tank but those resent opinions made me think abuot what I already knew. Thanks to everyone who have cleared this up for me.

Now I know I'm not crazy.

[powers2001]

tagging along

[jlinzmaier]

Can I ask again, to those of you whom are using the pellets, are you maintaining your alk levels between 7-8dkh to prevent burn tips and tissue loss like we must do with normal carbon dosing or are you able to use the pellets with higher alk levels. If your using the pellets and maintaining alk levels higher than 8dkh (without complications) please indicate how long you've been using the pellets.

Thanks.

Jeremy

[mnml]

i'm at 9dkh for about 3 weeks now with no showing of burnt tips.

[daveonbass]

well guys, I'm getting really dissillushioned with the pellets. It's been many weeks now and my nitrates will not go down. I've even moved four fish out. You've seen my videos of the tumbling of my pellets, and yet my skimmer is not producing as much waste. As much as I wish these would work for me, they are not. I have cut down on feeding as well to try and reduce the addion od new nitrates..and to no avail. My nitrates are still around 80+. The lowest they got after an almost 50% WC was about 40ppm. I'm ready to call my tank a failure. And it only cost me 150 bucks (sigh).

any new advice is welcome...

[bertoni]

Interesting. Are you running a GFO? I'd test the nitrate kit on some RO/DI water, too, although your kit sounds like it might be functioning reasonably.

[vegaskid11]

maybe try running a sulfur denitrator to get your nitrate to a more manageable level

[daveonbass]

have never run any GFO. I have tested the kit on both RODI and freshly made salt water. Both read 0ppm. I guess I'm gona have to run something else to get my nitrates down. But i ike the color and PE from using the NP pellets.

[bertoni]

Hmm, well, it's theoretically possible that the bacteria are phosphorus-limited for growth. I'm not sure how I'd proceed, though.

[daveonbass]

yeah...that's what I'm afraid of. But no one seems to have a safe/measurable way of adding some PO4.

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by daveonbass

yeah...that's what I'm afraid of. But no one seems to have a safe/measurable way of adding some PO4.

What kind of sand? and how deep? Give us some tank shots to work with.

DJ