nitrification- changing view point?

[JPR]

As an outsider looking in at the reef hobby, I have been fascinated to see how the hobby has evolved since the first MACNA meeting I attended in Toronto so many years ago.

Of particular interest is the evolution from UG filters to trickle tower/bioballs to live rock/ activated sand. This is interesting because biofilm does not operate as we once thought it did- circa 1990.

So here is my question- is today’s reef keeping philosophy one that says the nitrification cycle is best avoided by the use of protein skimming or is it still that ammonia/nitrite should be managed as an inevitable consequence of housing living creatures in a closed system? What I really am trying to get at in that second part is - are we trying to manage the nitrification cycle right down and through the denitrification cycle.

 

[Anonymous]

I personally view the nitrogen cycle as an inevitable consequence of housing living creatures in a close system. Therefore I embrace the cycle and use it to my advantage for a low cost low maintenance method of keeping all closed aquatic systems.

But there is an lot of aquarium keepers especially reef keepers that spend lotsa time, money, and effort to minimize the nitrogen cycle at all possible costs.

The second part, as far as I know I do not rely on anaerobic denitrification cycles. To me the nitrogen cycle is just part of the system. Add fish food -> fish wastes-> nitrogen cycle-> plant life-> fish food and repeat. with occasional harvesting of extra plant life which also exports toxins and heavy metals.

 

[JPR]

Thanks for helping me catch up and sort things out. I was recently in a high end type marine shop looking at a 135 gallon REEF set up and the owner suggested that the TT be left empty and only a Euro Reef FF be placed in the empty sump. I really got the feeling he was of that school of thought that says- keep the biomass tiny and head all ammonia off at the pass by using a protein skimmer.
I guess my last thought/question is, in your philosophy, we ultimately face either diluting nitrate or counting on plants to use it. I like the idea, but can we really strike a balance between fish output and macro algae uptake? Or are water changes still just as important as they were when I was heavily involved in marine systems fifteen years ago? James P

 

[Anonymous]

In my opinion having only a screwdriver in your toolbox is a mistake. There are many very good tools for maintaining high water quality. A combination of Skimmers, algae scrubbers, deep sand beds, phosphate filters, water changes, etc. should be tailored to your specific reef application.

For me, moderate skimming, deep sand bed, algae scrubbing, and water changes seem to be the best combination for the animals I keep.

My suggestion is to scout around on the board for pictures of a tank you would like to emulate and ask the owner for advice. Once you have your own results you'll be able to fine tune the system for your individual preferences.

For your second part, no. We are not trying to manage the nitrification cycle. We are trying to better understand it so we can use the knowledge to our advantage by working with the system.

 

[Anonymous]

I had to catch up also. Had been out of salt for many years.

But red flags kept going off. Live and learn.

Today there is talk of old tank syndrom with deap sea beds. Seems after a few years some just get filled up and the system can crash.

The marine shop advice about the trickle tower is the same as bio balls and canister filters being nitrate generators. And the skimmer being the means of avoiding the entire nitrogen cycle. I just use plant life like macros in a refugium to have 0-5ppm nitrates regardless of what else is going on in the system. So with the nitrate generator and without the skimmer all you get is stronger plant growth. Which also means more bioaccumlulation of toxins and heavy metals like copper.

Can you absolutely totally balance out fish and plant life. Probably not. Just sufficiently to where IME fw and fo system run for up to 6 years. My current 55g has had corals for only 1.5 years. But when nitrates finally went below 5 ppm even sps's took off. And my calcium is around 400ppm just by circulating 5x water through crushed oyster shells. the SPSs I have grow about 1/4" or so per week.

To me water changes were never important. Nothing in the tank can ever be maintained through water changes alone. Just the way the math works. I have heard of planted marine system that ran for over 6 years where they did do a 100% water change each year. I just don't do that. For instance, I am currently on my second bag of 50g salt mix in the two years I have been operating my 55g current system. (had a couple of accidents and started a 20 macro algae culture tank along the way.) The trace elements come from my tap water and the food I add and any are excesses are reduced by the bioaccumulation of the plant life. That bioaccumulation is linearly proportional to concentration.

Sure you have to provide lighting, current, food, and a good environment to the marine life. Balancing it out with thriving plant life is he single most important aspect of that. Just as it is in the ocean and the reefs.

 

[Anonymous]

Hey Beaslbob,

Do you have a current picture of your system? Maybe James would like to emulate yours!

 

[Anonymous]

sure.

bad dark pictures here:

http://www.reefs.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=57481

A thread from another board on using plants:

http://www.saltwaterfish.com/vb/showthr ... did=116386



Another thread with plants, tap water, no water changes:

http://www.saltwaterfish.com/vb/showthr ... adid=92124

better pics of my system when I first started the in tank refug.

http://www.saltwaterfish.com/vb/showthr ... did=101556

and guy's lagoon with plant life he uses to maintain his system.

http://www.saltwaterfish.com/vb/showthr ... ght=lagoon

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think all of those pictures are of your tank Beaslbob. It looks like only the first and fourth links are pictures of your tank.

 

[JPR]

wow! Thanks for some great ideas and inspiration! Maybe I can use this as a lagoon? James P

 

[Anonymous]

I think you are on the right track. Just use your immagination and see what you can come up with. My "gut feel" is that refugiums for plant life need to be at least ~30% of the display area. But anything is better than nothing.

I do hope you keep us posted if/when you set your system up. Always nice to see new systems and how the progress.

 

[JPR]

O man, I’m afraid some very serious obsessive compulsive behavior could be settling in after seeing these photos of your tank and the other lagoon!

Seriously, I have always favored the idea that a diversified bacteria culture and the correct algae species enhances the overall ‘toughness’ and resiliency of the closed system.

In a certain sense, the purchase of ‘ live sand’ is a marketing gimmick but in another sense it is a seeding of what will be a future ‘supporting cast.’
I guess what I mean is that any tank will naturally cycle given a little help without the need for an additive. And many heterotrophic species added via live sand, will simply die out or die back into the background. Still, the cartoon image of a biofilm being just two nitrifying species is not right either. Wild biofilms are dominated by one, two or three species but that biofilm is also home for many other species and genera. So maybe the seeding process is one that shows its true contribution over time? In effect, a biofilm molds itself to the nutrient source available within a given system. This will certainly include autotrophic nitrifying species and some level of denitrification within the film itself. In addition, heterotrophic species that can be switch hitters when it comes to organics and inorganics abound in and on the biofilm matrix.
The algaes simply find their own niche against the bacteria competition and horde those nutrients within their cells. Luxury nutrient, that algae can either wrestle away from the bacteria population or are handed off to by the bacteria population.

It’s all very interesting stuff and makes the idea of a supporting refug/lagoon very appealing.

Thanks again for stoking the flames! James P

 

[JPR]

I thought this might be of interest- an illustration of what biofilm can look like when current is present. ( Community structure and Co Operation in biofilms - International symposium microbiology 1995).The streamers are frequently released so that colonies or rafts can be sent down current to find new areas to colonize.
James P

http:// www.members.aol.com/thekoiguy/film.jpg

 

[Anonymous]

A good example of using a refugium and producing an excellent reef tank is on this thread:

http://www.saltwaterfish.com/vb/showthr ... tchen+nano

No skimmer used.

 

[ChrisRD]

Don't forget to mention all the water movement, weekly water changes, 24/7 carbon use and Ca supplementation w/B-Ionic + Kalk...

 

[JPR]

Very nice system indeed, beaslbob!

Chris, I should mention I am currently an outsider but not inexperienced in fish keeping. I maintained a 600, 400, 175 and two 90s for many years in the pioneer days. And I am old enough to have an autographed copy of Marine Aquarium keeping by Spotte. If you have that old classic, you will notice that the subtitle is - The Science and THE ART!”

And truly it would seem that the hobby in today’s marketing environment, has committed to one or the other! I have seen this syndrome in other parts of the fish hobby- pure science and technology vs. pure art and skill based on experience. Its an interesting line in the sand!

This aquarium, any aquarium, is first and foremost a closed system. Things are in a constant state of decline and exhaustion as some undesirable things are added and other desirable things are removed and used up.

I do like the idea of a diversified bio-system as a means to slow or reduce human intervention. Knowing that human intervention is ultimately inevitable.

Tiny water volume and huge biomass is a challenge no doubt. But the idea that technology will replace water changes or the nitrification cycle is naive as well.

All water parameters have a base line reading on a graph. Keeping those readings as close to the base line for as long as possible is the art.

James P

 

[Anonymous]

All water parameters have a base line reading on a graph. Keeping those readings as close to the base line for as long as possible is the art.

James P

Cool 8)

 

[Anonymous]

James:

Anyone who has an engineering degree like me certainly has to agree with the combination of science and art. Afterall the art of applying science to practical uses defines engineering.


I did find this link to a part of the dummies series on saltwater:


http://www.dummies.com/WileyCDA/Dummies ... -2065.html

It basically agrees with my ideas or I wouldn't have posted it :lol:

I agree the human intervention is necessary. And that my experience is simply the less I intervene the better system I have.

I have also seen numerous methods come and go over the years. Two years ago all you heard about was DSB's and skimmers. Before that plenums. 20 years ago various resins. Undergravel filters with the rage then reverse flow undergravel filters. 10 years ago macros in displays. Now never have macros in displays. but recently bare bottom, unskimmed systems with refugiums full of macros and other plant life.

Today sacarastically, And of course you can't possibily set up and maintain any reef system of acceptable size for under $2000. And you must constantly adjust all the filters and equipment to maintain that system. So much so that the system can not go for a week without human monitoring.

The truth is all those methods are more about the humans not the livestock being maintained. It just makes us humans feel we have done something with all that.

The truth is that anything can be kept with the old time proven methods you and I am talking about. A system can be setup to run indefinatly with the only human intervention being such things as simply maintaining the water level and feeding. But that doesn't satisfy our human needs to be doing something.

While many people will leave the hobby due to various reasons, I think the extreme expense and effort to maintain the currently in vogue methods should not the the reason. Meanwhile us older guys have different experiences. and I can leave my tanks alone for a week with not worry.

 

[JPR]

Yep, I think over a beer, you and I could agree on a lot of things regarding the past and future of the hobby. And I do think that the technology is part of the seduction for many entering the hobby. It is cool and can help 'forgive' a lot of beginner mistakes. But maybe mix and matching too many philosophies starts to cancel some of these benefits out?
In the end, stocking levels and natural microbial bed maturing ( but not 'over maturing' ) of a system are the keys to a trouble free long term, enjoyable hobby experience ? This can be hard since the first two years in the hobby tend to be about compusive buying.

JR

 

[Anonymous]

I agree mixing and matching can be dangerous.

For instance use of ro/di water can provide a sterile environment and not allow the plant life to get established.

But then the idea to get the plant life thriving then do the rest still applies. Just that you have more things to do get it thriving.

 

[Anonymous]

For instance use of ro/di water can provide a sterile environment and not allow the plant life to get established.

There are many area in the U.S. where not using RO water will not allow a hobbiest to get anything thriving though

If your goal is an algae tank then I agree, using RO/DI will inhibit algae growth.