Mega-Powerful Nitrate and Phosphate Remover Replaces Skimmer, Refugium, Everything

santamonica

santamonica

Member
That's exactly what this fellow did who came by my place friday... he has an 800g with .5 P and he brought some screen over to seed it from mine. Another fellow somewhere has a 1500 shark tank and was going to put a 1500 sq in screen in a 72g tank, but then decided to just build a vertical acrylic box that's very narrow and tall. These tank and acrylic designs (which were my first attempt, before the bucket) are even more efficient/powerful because you can put T5's or halides along the entire side wall, thus getting uniform light to all parts of the screen. Do post lots of pics.
 
ci11337

ci11337

Active Member
I've read alot about this kind of filter before but could never really find any modern info about it so i never pursued it. I really like the idea, and it all seems legit to me. (although i was very skeptical after reading your title
) My one question is that if the scrubber is your only filter, what happens to all the detritus? You would still need to do water changes or something to keep this from building up. IMO, the only thing it really replaces is using cheato, other macros, or GFO to remove N and P. But it certainly seems to be more efficient at doing so.(pending BangGuys results) If i was using one of these i would run a skimmer along with it to remove some organics before they decompose, and let the turf get anything that does. i would also still do water changes to replenish elements and remove detritus. I would also dose clac and alk as needed.
 
santamonica

santamonica

Member
Like you, many others heard about them but did not pursue, due to the same lack of info, so that's why I thought some info would help. If you do run a turf-only setup, detritus is simply processed by one organism to the next to the next until there is no more organics left, at which time it just becomes inorganic dust (most living tissue is water anyways.) So no, it does not "build up"; instead the tank reaches a balance point (compared to skimming) of higher organics and lower N and P. If the organics increase (feeding, dead fish, etc), the snails/crabs/ministars/bacteria increase consumption to offset this. This is why you don't need to skim the detritus out (let's call it fertlizer). The "fertilizer" feeds organisms in the tank (from corals on down) until it's broken down into N, P and inorganic dust. Turf, of course, has nothing to do with replenishing elements, or dosing alk and ca.
 
ci11337

ci11337

Active Member
I really don't think there is enough bacteria in a tank to process all the fish waste and organics down to P and N very quickly. Maybe it could do it well enough to keep the tank inhabitable, but i doubt you could grow acros corals in a well stocked well fed reef running turf only. And also, according to your post, there will be "inorganic dust" building up over time, thus i think waterchanges still necessary.
Still, it is a very good improvement on the current GFO+cheato system. And i think a system using a turf scrubber, skimmer, and a filter sock with carbon along with water changes and calc alk dosing would be quite clean and grow corals well. (not to mention it would be cheaper) If i every setup another tank, (or get an overflow and sump for my current one) i will do a turf scrubber instead of a fuge with cheato and GFO. Thanks for the info.
 
vayapues

vayapues

Member
I am in.
My design will be a remote 5 g bucket similar to yours, but I will be building the light directly in to the lid, and using a power head, very similar to a RDSB.
I will post pics when I build it, which will probably not be for a week or so.
 
santamonica

santamonica

Member
cil: The bacteria level varies according to load, just like when you add more fish load. Also the the pods and ministars and whatnot have a mini-explosion since there is no shortage of food for them. Then the filter feeders take off, but also the other corals now have endless food 24/7. And the inorganic dust that settles on your rock and bottom is probably far less than just what you could see; after all, how much metal, etc., is actually contained in food and waste. It's really all C, N and P.
vayapues: Sounds exciting. This will be a closed lid? Pics and stories, please.
 
subielover

subielover

Active Member
Very interesting read, I will stay tuned. Thanks for the very clear and concise instructions. It must have taken a lot of time to gather all of this information, so thank you
 
florida joe

florida joe

Well-Known Member
Ok my usual boring 4 cents
Dr. Walter Adey of the Smithsonian Institutes Natural History Museum in Washington D.C. begin his development of a coral reef aquarium in 1974. These systems were characterized by the use of a patented ALGE TURF SCRUBBER. They were shallow troughs with a plastic mesh screen illuminated by intense lighting. Water pumped to the troughs enters them by means of a dump bucket, generating surge that helps the algae exchange gases and take up metabolites. Various turf-forming algae are grown on these screens, and they remove ammonia, nitrate, phosphates and heavy metals from the water. Removing the screens and then scraping off the excess growth periodically (harvest the screens) exports them. The harvested algal mass is thus removed from the system. It can be returned to the aquarium as food when nutrient levels are very low.
What I understand is that, wave action is crucial because waves boost the efficiency of the photosynthetic mechanism and with out surge there is a radical drop in turf photosynthesis. Waves also facilitate the exchange of metabolites needed or excreted by algae
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/2725479
What I understand is that, wave action is crucial because waves boost the efficiency of the photosynthetic mechanism and with out surge there is a radical drop in turf photosynthesis. Waves also facilitate the exchange of metabolites needed or excreted by algae
Thanks! You just confimed my plan
 
bang guy

bang guy

Moderator
Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/2725511
Come on my good friend there are no secrets between us. WHATS YOUR PLAN

I'm thinking of setting up a 30 gallon surge device where the output flows over a series of slabs of shale and then trickles into the lagoon. I'm going to try to make it somewhat natural looking and yet set the shale up so that I can easily scrape algae off of the shale for nutrient export. I'm thinking about 6 feet long with a pair of 6' VHOs for lighting.
 
santamonica

santamonica

Member
subie: Glad you like the info. Did take a while, which is why it's lumped together in one post.
joe: Correct about Aday. There have been some advancements on the technique of harvesting in the last couple years, so as to eliminate any possible "yellowing" of the water. And surges/waves are indeed important; Aday said it doubles effectiveness. My design has no waves, but does try to simulate surges by pulsing the pump with a wave timer. Fortunately, even with this limitation, my bucket has gone beyond my hopes of effectiveness: Feeding as "much" as I want, and still have zero N and P.
 
santamonica

santamonica

Member
Daily: 2 pumps frozen plankton, 1 pump frozen phyto, two cubes mysis (unwashed), plus a silverside weekly for the eel. This is for a 90 gal.
 
florida joe

florida joe

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/2725572
I'm thinking of setting up a 30 gallon surge device where the output flows over a series of slabs of shale and then trickles into the lagoon. I'm going to try to make it somewhat natural looking and yet set the shale up so that I can easily scrape algae off of the shale for nutrient export. I'm thinking about 6 feet long with a pair of 6' VHOs for lighting.
Sounds interesting are you locked into using shale
 
florida joe

florida joe

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by SantaMonica
http:///forum/post/2726028
subie: Glad you like the info. Did take a while, which is why it's lumped together in one post.
joe: Correct about Aday. There have been some advancements on the technique of harvesting in the last couple years, so as to eliminate any possible "yellowing" of the water. And surges/waves are indeed important; Aday said it doubles effectiveness. My design has no waves, but does try to simulate surges by pulsing the pump with a wave timer. Fortunately, even with this limitation, my bucket has gone beyond my hopes of effectiveness: Feeding as "much" as I want, and still have zero N and P.
I think a problem early on was the result of people harvesting their turf algae as they would caulerpa (just grabbing a clump of it and pulling it out or cutting it), which resulted in rupturing of algal cell contents being reintroduced to the tank water. It was also believed that organic leachates from the turf algae itself was a cause of yellow water. A study by Zehr and Ward (2002). Have in fact shown that the major cause of yellowing is in fact bacteria and not algae. Although leachates from algae, invertebrates and fish can be an added factor.
An added benefit from the use of turf scrubbers is their ability to accumulate trace elements. It is believed that trace elements may accumulate to levels well above natural seawater values in a closed system. Harvesting the algae removes the excess elements.
 
florida joe

florida joe

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/2726534
Nope, still "pondering".
Bang you may want to look into limestone or believe it or not foam insulation. I am getting ready for a tropical storm party here in southwest Florida but I will give you some info on limestone and foam if you have not considerd those two tomorrow assuming I still have power
 
santamonica

santamonica

Member
Joe that's some good news to be added to the other good news on the yellowing front. I've been saying for a while now that yellowing has something to do with when and how the algae is scraped ("harvested"), and also what type of algae is growing. It's also something that folks years ago experienced, but most folks nowadays don't. I think it's the harvesting that is making the difference. It's pretty well known that if you just leave the algae to grow and grow, that you'll definitely get yellowing. After all, the yellowing is coming from the chlorophyll's which I believe are green-plant based. And if you don't harvest, the green algae will overtake the brown/red. But the actual turf we want is not green, it's brown/red, which would seem to impart less yellowing. So I believe this is why the current group of turf users get very high filtering (not needing any help), and no yellowing. I know I have zero yellowing in mine.
However your point of harvesting "in-tank" is a good one, because the old gigantic ATS's were so big I don't think many people removed the screen (could it be removed?) and took it to the sink, like you do with the turf bucket. So that would make sense that it would be a big factor in elimination of any (theoretical) yellowing, by just doing all harvesting in a sink with running tap water, which just so happened to be the way I describe to do it.
But if any yellowing ever did occur for whatever reason, a monthly dose of carbon (that you need anyway to remove allelopathics) will fix it up. About this Zehr study... do you have it?
 
florida joe

florida joe

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by SantaMonica
http:///forum/post/2726908
Joe that's some good news to be added to the other good news on the yellowing front. I've been saying for a while now that yellowing has something to do with when and how the algae is scraped ("harvested"), and also what type of algae is growing. It's also something that folks years ago experienced, but most folks nowadays don't. I think it's the harvesting that is making the difference. It's pretty well known that if you just leave the algae to grow and grow, that you'll definitely get yellowing. After all, the yellowing is coming from the chlorophyll's which I believe are green-plant based. And if you don't harvest, the green algae will overtake the brown/red. But the actual turf we want is not green, it's brown/red, which would seem to impart less yellowing. So I believe this is why the current group of turf users get very high filtering (not needing any help), and no yellowing. I know I have zero yellowing in mine.
However your point of harvesting "in-tank" is a good one, because the old gigantic ATS's were so big I don't think many people removed the screen (could it be removed?) and took it to the sink, like you do with the turf bucket. So that would make sense that it would be a big factor in elimination of any (theoretical) yellowing, by just doing all harvesting in a sink with running tap water, which just so happened to be the way I describe to do it.
But if any yellowing ever did occur for whatever reason, a monthly dose of carbon (that you need anyway to remove allelopathics) will fix it up. About this Zehr study... do you have it?
Actually I still don’t have the study on my PC but I am sure you can track it down. Jonathan P. Zehr
Professor of Ocean Sciences
Ocean Sciences Department
University of California
Santa Cruz, CA 95064
Office: Earth & Marine Sciences A-438
Tel: (831) 459-4009
Fax: (831) 459-4882
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top