Biopellet Reactor vs GFO or Both?

FireEMT

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Aug 8, 2015
Messages
213
Reaction score
49
Location
Grants Pass, OR
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I am in the process of purchasing all my equipment for my new and first tank. I plan to have a mixed reef and would like good coral growth (who wouldn't). My question is should I run a biopellet reactor or GFO, or should I run both. I've heard that biopellet reactors will take care of nitrates and phosphates and they will also supply good bacteria for the corals. I will be running a vertex skimmer that will be sized +1. Any advice would be appreciated. Tank size is around 150g total volume. Thanks
 
I currently run a BP reactor and have a refugium and a solid skimmer and a nitrate problem... haha phosphates are 0.16ppm, nitrates 16ppm. Apparently BP's and skimming is not a silver bullet. Then again, I don't think GFO would save the day here, it would just drag the phosphates down to zero and swing the alk. Ahh reefing, gotta love it!

I say give the BPs a try and test frequently, if you have phosphate issues, pop in some GFO.

Then again, never trust a person on this forum's advice until you have seen pics of their tank, and since I just told you that my nitrates are high, maybe take my advice with a grain of salt...
 
I would go with pellets but only if you give them a super good quality reactor. GFO is good in it's own right but for long term I'd go pellets.
 
I run both in my system, Nitrates are 0 but phosphates read 0 but probably not since I have strange algae growing >.>. Might not be a phosphate issue or it might be! Who knows. However when I started dosing Biopellets, i saw an increase in coral growth by double. Don't know why! But they took off lol. Very weird. Pellets are good but just make sure you don't dose any bacteria supplements with it. That's where I went wrong and started seeing a white film on my rocks after I stopped it went away.

Biopellets, seem like a more natural filter on paper which is also a plus.
 
I would go with pellets but only if you give them a super good quality reactor. GFO is good in it's own right but for long term I'd go pellets.
Two little fishies phosban 150? That be OK you think for BP? Thanks
 
Phosban reactors can be used for biopellets but u need to ditch the foam pads as they clauge with pellets and get some kind of screen to stop the pellets from just escaping. Also ull need a larger pump then if it was a phosban u want to keep all pellets moving doesn't have to be a hurricane just make sure they all move.
 
All my reactors would be plumbed off a manifold on my return side which will be powered by the new Ecotech M1. I guess my question is what luck do people have with biopellets vs GFO and are there more downsides to one over the other. What advantages do people see with the carbon dosing from biopellets in regards to coral growth? Thanks again for all the feedback.
 
I ran BP's for a number of years successfully, but you should use a decent reactor made for BP's for best results, and it needs to be set up and run properly. The use of GFO, may or may not be needed, depending on a nunber of factor's, so I wouldn't deploy one until you know that you need one. If your planning a manifold, I would design one with four ports, all with valves, so you can adjust the flow depending on the need of that reactor, or shut if off if its not in use. I ran GAC, GFO and BP reactor's in my system.
 
I ran BP's for a number of years successfully, but you should use a decent reactor made for BP's for best results, and it needs to be set up and run properly. The use of GFO, may or may not be needed, depending on a nunber of factor's, so I wouldn't deploy one until you know that you need one. If your planning a manifold, I would design one with four ports, all with valves, so you can adjust the flow depending on the need of that reactor, or shut if off if its not in use. I ran GAC, GFO and BP reactor's in my system.

Thanks for the info, I will definitely put ball valves on that manifold and will start off with just GFO or Biopellets.
 
There are many to chose from, but I used a Reef Octopus BR 110 on a 180 gal. system.
 
All my reactors would be plumbed off a manifold on my return side which will be powered by the new Ecotech M1. I guess my question is what luck do people have with biopellets vs GFO and are there more downsides to one over the other. What advantages do people see with the carbon dosing from biopellets in regards to coral growth? Thanks again for all the feedback.

Personally, I don't think comparing GFO to biopellets is especially useful since they do different things.

If you mostly want to reduce nitrate, the pellets can do that, but not as much effect on phospahte and you may need another method.

GFO only reduces phosphate and not nitrate, so you'll need a nitrate reducing method.

Many people, myself included, use both organic carbon dosing (I don't use pellets but rather vinegar) and GFO at the same time.
 
Personally, I don't think comparing GFO to biopellets is especially useful since they do different things.

If you mostly want to reduce nitrate, the pellets can do that, but not as much effect on phospahte and you may need another method.

GFO only reduces phosphate and not nitrate, so you'll need a nitrate reducing method.

Many people, myself included, use both organic carbon dosing (I don't use pellets but rather vinegar) and GFO at the same time.

Thanks Randy, I just read the other article that you posted to my GFO thread and it makes lots of sense. I think I'm going to try the media blocks and a good skimmer for my nitrates and GFO for the phosphates. My other question is do people run GFO 24/7, 365 or do they just run GFO when needed. I understand that the cost can be an issue but is it better to just maintain the levels by using a lower dose of GFO all the time or just pay attention to levels and turn the reactor on when needed. Thanks again for all the info.
 
Gfo was always too touchy imo, let alone the brown dust everywhere. Tried several brands of biopellets, but the breakdown of pha/sugars is a concern when the biological interaction to corals comes to surface.
Check out nopox, it's carbon dosing with some extra... I finally broke down and tried it after awhile, pretty shocked, wish I would have done it sooner.

The problem with most who carbon dose as well, is they don't recognize that the nitrate to phosphate reduction, will favor nitrates. The 16:1 redfield ratio is close, but that's not for bacterial biology. But most who carbon dose snuff out nitrates and are left with phosphates rising, which can be just as bad, and then you'll have cyano explode all over the tank because they can survive with almost no nitrates, but love phosphates.

This is where you're left with another part of the equation, how to deal with po4. Some use gfo, some use lanathum chloride..
The best option tho imo, is what Red Sea did, and that was to make a nitrate source. Check out Reef Energy, you're replacing gfo/LC, AND you're feeding corals at the same time..

To save on costs as well, I really just use a drop once a week, then 2 ml a week of RE in a 20g. Not at all the dose instructions, but I still see significant benefits in the ways of po4/no3 reduction and coral health from the food. And it operates better than plain vinegar and gfo. Here's the basis for it, I was skeptical, but I've seen it in my own tank and it's better than all the other options out there, and I've tried them all... lol, multiple times.
(I would link the site, but it's another forum, don't know if that's against the rules, so here ya go)
Nitrate and Phosphate Reduction via Carbon Dosing
By
Sharon Ram
Chief Scientist, Red Sea

Fighting nutrient build up in the aquarium is one of the major struggles the common hobbyist must face on a daily basis. Today, there are several methods to reduce nutrient levels; some by resins (ad/absorbers) and other chemical filtration components, but the latest trends include “pro-biotic” and/or the enhancement of biological nutrient reduction by bacteria.

Most hobbyists that favor biological filtration are well aware that the limiting factor in these processes is the absence of low molecular weight carbon compounds, which act as the energy source for the reduction processes. In order to boost the biological activity, many hobbyists started to dose the tank with any available carbon sources such as vodka, vinegar and sugars or various mixtures of all three. Common knowledge suggests that by providing enough organic carbon sources, together with the availability of the anoxic areas in the tank (live rocks and sediment) will be enough to encourage proper denitrification and phosphate reduction activities. Theoretically this is true, however it may also encourage other biological activities that may lead to disaster if they are not controlled or prevented from becoming established. It is important to be aware that the dissimilation processes in the marine environment involves very complicated ecological interactions between several groups of bacteria. These groups include 2 groups of dissimilatory nitrate reducers, another group of POA’s (phosphate accumulating bacteria or PHA bacteria) and the SRB’s (Sulfate reducing bacteria).

Between these 4 groups there are continuous competition and inhibition relationships that are regulated by the concentrations, availability and ratios of nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus and sulfur), the availabilities of enzymatic co-factors and other biotic and abiotic factors.
When we investigate the dissimilatory pathways in the aquarium, we found the two major bacterial groups, the first group is the DNRA bacteria that reduces nitrate to either nitrite or ammonia, and the other group of heterotrophic denitrifiers that reduces nitrate via nitrite to gaseous nitrogen. Elemental nitrogen is the end product of this process, but intermediate accumulation of nitrite, nitric oxide and nitrous oxide may take place under certain conditions, usually in the absence of enzymatic co-factors.

Environmental factors, in particular the availability and type of organic carbon compounds, the C/N ratio, the availability of specific co-factors and the oxidation/reduction state of the aquatic environment, dictate to a large extent the occurrence of each dissimilatory group and the primary reduction pathway.
For example; an unbalanced C/N ratio will prevent full denitrification and will increase DNRA activity which leads to the accumulation of ammonia and nitrite. After the initial maturation cycle most hobbyist do not test for NH4+ and NO2- and therefore while dosing carbon sources they may observe a reduction in NO3- but will not notice any accumulation of ammonia or nitrite. Even when the C/N ratio is optimal for denitrification there are other obligatory factors that regulate the full denitrification of nitrate to free nitrogen.
These factors include specific chemical elements that act as co-factors in each stage of the denitrification process. The absence or unbalanced levels of these elements may end the denitrification process in any of the early stages and will lead to the accumulation of toxic N2O and NO.
Therefore, one of the important aspects of biological nutrient reduction is to encourage specific dissimilatory pathway of heterotrophic bacteria and to ensure a complete process. This is what Red Sea’s NO3:PO4-X was developed for.

Red Sea’s NO3:PO4-X provides stoichiometricaly balanced levels of several carbon compounds, which we found encourage heterotrophic denitrifiers upon the DNRA bacteria and by that it prevents the accumulation of ammonia or nitrite. NO3:PO4-X also provides 7 enzymatic co-factors to insure complete denitrification to nitrogen gas and prevent the probability for N2O and NO formation.

Usually under denitrifying conditions with the availability of a sufficient carbon source, another 2 groups of nutrient reduction bacteria will start to thrive; the poly-phosphate accumulating bacteria and the sulfate reducing bacteria. These two groups have significant impact on the overall nutrient reduction processes in the aquarium.

The most common PAO’s or Poly-P bacteria are the PHA’s that accumulate phosphate in a two stage process of aerobic / anoxic and anaerobic conditions. These bacteria compete with the denitrifiers for the carbon source and in anaerobic conditions they may release PO4-3 back to the water. We have found that specific strains of heterotrophic denitrifiers are capable of accumulating phosphate and synthesize poly-P during the process of nitrate reduction with nitrate instead of oxygen serving as the terminal electron acceptor, so the double stage of aerobic/anoxic becomes irrelevant. When the bacterial population proliferates, bacterial flocks released to the water column are then taken out by the skimmer and therefore phosphates are stripped out of the system.

Red Sea’s NO3:PO4-X, encourages the proliferation of heterotrophic denitrifiers that have the biological capability to synthesize poly-p in anoxic conditions (that can be called PHB) upon other PHA bacteria by maintaining balanced reduction of both nitrate and phosphate. Rapid reduction of nitrate over phosphate will lead to a rapid proliferation of anaerobic PHA bacteria and cyano-bacteria outbreak that can assimilate atmospheric nitrogen to thrive.

The fourth group of bacteria is the SRB, these bacteria reduce sulfate to toxic sulfide in anaerobic conditions. Since sulfate is present in seawater at levels around 940 ppm, and carbon source and anaerobic conditions are also available, nothing can prevent sulfide production.
The proliferation of SRB’s will affect the other bacterial groups by competing for the carbon sources and by inhibiting their activities due to the toxic sulfide they release.
During our research we have found 3 elements that can inhibit the activity of SRB by competing with sulfate and breaking the intracellular respiratory complex thereby preventing the formation of hydrogen sulfide while still enhancing biological nutrient reduction in anoxic conditions.


Hope you enjoyed,
Aviad
 
I use a Skimz BR83 BP reactor and GFO. Add both in small quantity in the beginning and add as your test results dictate it. My No3 runs @ 5 and my Po4 runs @ .025. It took me around 3 months to find my sweet spot. JME
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top