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

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/2733115
My experience with Mangroves is that even using 2 dozen plants under MH doesn't export a lot of nutrients.
Comparison wise, in the exact same amount of space with the same lighting Xenia exported 500% more nutrients in the two tests I performed.
I have nothing yet to compare to the algae scrubber.
Xenia as a nutrients export?
 

reefkprz

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2733295
Xenia as a nutrients export?
yup, often used in SPS tanks instead of macros in the sump to prevent invasion of the DT. xenia isnt a bad exporter if you can grow it and harvest it regularly, google "Down the drain, nutrient removal in marine aquaria by shimek" to get some insight into the xenia export.
 

santamonica

Member
Here is the first screen builder ("varga" from another thread) to reach the cleaning stage:

Some comments from him along the way:
"Mine has very little growth on it, its been 4 days......more light?" (Which he then did)
"The light now is right on the screen, almost touching it"
"I'll have to reach in my tank to take out HA [for seeding] which is not easy! (Which he then did)
"We've now had a burst of growth in the last 24 hours; Here it is on day 6."
"We had another major burst of growth in the last 24 hours! its a redish/brownish stuff, Im guessing this is turf?" (No, it was brown diatoms)
"This thing is a great chiller!! forgot to turn the fan off last night, woke up to a 73 degree tank!"
 

santamonica

Member
In a classic case of "not doing research", some anti-turf folks on another site have ended up helping out the turf scene. They are constantly accusing pro-turf or pro-algae folks, and especially anti-skimmer folks, of not having research. So they post a research video from the College of Marine Science (U of S. FL, St. Petersburg) on that site, which is supposed to prove with research that algae, especially turf, kills corals. Yes. Then they
follow it up with "So I guess you didn't watch the video, right?"
Well. I took the time to watch it (one hour). But, I guess they did NOT. The video starts out appearing to make the point of "algae kills corals", and if you stopped watching after fifteen minutes, that's what you'd think. But the first part of that presentation is just a setup for the presenter's further explanations, and is not the point itself.
It's a similar situation to a presentation for beginners about how rock, sand, and the nitrogen cycle works: You would start by saying "If I have a fish in a bucket of water, and I pour in ammonia, the fish will die." This is true, but it's only used to set up later explanations of how rock and sand come into the picture to stop the death of the fish.
So it turns out that if you watch the whole research video, the presenter/researcher not only makes the point of pro-algae folks, and counters the point of the people who posted it (as their evidence), but it also counters the entire group of people who say no-skimmers and high-DOC's are bad. I've been saying that my focus never was skimmer or no-skimmer; instead my focus was reducing N and P cheaply, quickly, and with no risk. But since these people made this video/research available, I'll use it:
The presenter is trying to show how "algae that kills coral" would SEEM to occur, so later he can show you what they really found in their research. The crux of his presentation is basically: "We thought higher DOC's were the cause of coral death; We were wrong. Lower DOC's are" (these are my words).
23:30 "Bulk DOC does not correlate with coral decline; higher DOC areas have healthier corals; lower DOC areas have weaker corals. The opposite of what we predicted".
24:40 "The DOC to DIN ratio's are higher on healthy reefs, and lower on less-healthy reefs".
25:45 "Microbial numbers are elevated with a lower DOC to DIN ratio" (!) (even I got that one wrong).
34:00 "Christmas Island, with the really low DOC, has the highest pathogens, while Kingman Island, with the highest DOC, has the lowest pathogens."
37:00 "On Kingman Island you have high hard-coral coverage and the lowest disease [and highest DOC]. That's weird! What you SHOULD find is that as hard-coral coverage reduces, it should be harder for the pathogens to find hosts, so you should see a pathogen decrease. But we're not seeing that, which means there is SOMETHING ELSE going on."
49:20 "The DOC definitely always goes down, in the really bad coral areas".
52:39 "You can actually put the corals where the nutrients are really high, and the corals are not dying; in some cases they tend to grow better, which is also true in our [???].
So I submit to them, using their own evidence, that not using a skimmer, with the resultant increase in DOC's (and now apparent decrease in microbes), is not in-itself a coral killer. Something else is. And this explains why some people using algal-only filtration can grow great sps.
 

santamonica

Member
Wow. There's so much to post that I don't know which should be first. Today I'll cover max inputs that's I've been able to achieve.
I've been experimenting with how much I can feed my 90g, with only my 144 square inch turf screen doing the filtering. I'd add more food for a few days, then the Salifert N test would start showing a tiny bit of pink (about a .2 reading). Then I'd cut the food in half, until the reading went clear (zero N measured). Interestingly, P never increased. Ever. Only N. So after a few tries, here's the max I've been able feed the tank while just barely getting an N increase:
Max Feeding:
Liquid Life Marine Plankton with Cyclopeeze: 3 pumps a day
Liquid Life Bio Plankton (live phyto): 2 pumps a day
Frozone mysis: 2 cubes a day, unwashed, thawed in 4 oz tap water.
Silversides: 1 per week (for the eel)
Tank:
90 Display, BB
20 Sump
150 pounds LR
60 inches fish
40 corals, all softie and lps
6000 gph circulation
Carbon now used once a month for allelpathics
I'm now settling in on a lesser amount:
1 pump phyto
1-2 pumps plankton
2 cubes mysis, unwashed, thawed in 4 oz tap water.
Silversides: 1 per week (for the eel)
 

michael1972

Member
what is allelpathics?
i google it but didnt show any thing
"Your search - allelpathics - did not match any documents."
just getting info like a sponge and didnt know what you were using carbon for and looked it up.
 

sly

Active Member
It seems like you might be able to create a simple surge device by suspending a small container over the scrubber. Drill two holes in the bottom. One for the water to flow in and one for the return line. Then on the return line use some 90 degree PVC fittings so that you create an upside down J. Water will fill the container and then when the water level rises above the return line it will create a siphon which will flow into the scrubber until the water level falls back down below the opening in the return. Then the siphon will break and the water will stop flowing to the scrubber as the container fills back up... So it's kind of like a flushing toilet.
I might try to do something like this.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
This is the only thing that is bugging me, Keeping algae I don't want in my sump. I don't want that to seed the tank. Would running a micron filter bag with no flowby work to stop this?
 

sly

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2739460
This is the only thing that is bugging me, Keeping algae I don't want in my sump. I don't want that to seed the tank. Would running a micron filter bag with no flowby work to stop this?
The idea is that by creating an environment that intends to grow algae, it will be less likely to want to grow in your tank.
Algae will follow the path of least resistance. If you make it very easy for it to grow by creating an algae scrubber, then you in effect make it that much harder for it to grow in your tank. This is because the scrubber and the tank algae would be both competing for the same nutrients and the scrubber will end up winning that battle...
 

santamonica

Member
Sly that is a good idea; would eliminate the pump but still give you pulsed flow. A guy on one of my other threads is actually already trying it, but he has not posted pics yet. If someone ever built a commercial version, this would be the kind of thing to include.
stdreb27: Sly is correct. The algae that grows on the screen will not "spread" to the tank. You already have spores of algae in your tank right now as you read this, including green hair, green slime, and red/brown turf algae. But without enough light (and in the case of turf, flow and air), they will not grow. Algae grows first where it has the most light. You can test this right now by getting a strong light and aiming it at one corner of your tank, at the top where the waterline is. You will start developing green algae there in one day, but it won't cause "more" of the algae to spread to the rest of your tank.
That's the first part of how a screen works: It's just more light, out of the tank. The second part of a screen's operation is the turbulent flow across the screen; this brings many more nutrients in contact with the screen than just regular tank flow does. Lastly, if you are doing a vertical screen with a pump, and you put a wavemaker timer on the pump (on, off, on, off), then the "off" time will simulate the time between real waves in the ocean, which breaks up the "boundary layer" around the algae. This boundary layer slows down the passage of nutrients from the water to the algae. This last step (pulsing the water) is very important if you are going to want the true stiff red/brown turf algae, since real turf lives out-of-the-water (on rocks, pylons, etc).
 

vayapues

Member
Alright, here it is. Just built it today.
A picture says a thousand words. Let me know if you want any further info about any of the pics.









 

sly

Active Member
Originally Posted by vayapues
http:///forum/post/2739928
Alright, here it is. Just built it today.
Looks good... One thing you might want to consider is putting a hole on the top and one near the bottom above the water line. Then put a small fan on to draw fresh air through the unit.
 

santamonica

Member
Here is the screen from the person who bought pre-grown turf from Inland Aquatics, after growing on the tank for one week, and then after cleaning:
 

vayapues

Member
I had considered a fan, and probably will put one in. I am thinking I will take the fan out of an old computer I have, and use the same power supply that feeds the light.
My biggest concern was the heat from the lamp melting the plastic. I ran a test over a course of several hours, watching it very closely. At the end, I took the lid off, and felt the inside plastic. Absolutely cool. No heat. Thankfully.
I am running it on the pipe for my overflow. I had planned originally to use a pump, but I got lazy.
 

santamonica

Member
One thing about a fan: In my case it was only to help dry the screen for 30 seconds between "waves" when the wave timer went off; it was not to cool anything since the bucket is open anyways. Side benefits were water cooling and evaporation, which I wanted both. With an overflow feed, you won't get pulsed flow, so the only benefit in your situation would be water cooling, evap, and less heat buildup in the container. But you say it's running cool, so the fan probably is not needed.
 

santamonica

Member
One more thing, how far is the light from the screen? It will really make a difference if you can get it right up against the screen, almost touching it. A huge difference.
 
Top