cryptic zone

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul_N
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users None

Paul_N

MOD
View Badges
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
3,964
Reaction score
67
Location
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I am considering doing a cryptic zone in sump when I upgrade. Anyone know how efficient they are at nutrient reduction as opposed to macro algae? Is there a certain size they need to be? Just curious if anyone on here had any experience or knew anyone that used one.
 
there was a thread last week asking who all was using a cryptic zone...maybe try a search for that.
 
I searched and your thread came up and two other ones. One of them talked about Tyree using one on his system. There were no details though.
 
I doubt they're ever going to be as efficient as a simple box full of Chaetomorpha or other macro algae as far as exporting nutrients go. The whole concept seems more fad than anything and seems to pop up, gain a little steam, and then dye out again every few years (like so many other things in the hobby). Here's what I said about them on another site not long ago when someone asked if it's worth having a cryptic zone...

You're going to have cryptic zones in your tank whether you want to or not unless you go with some really radical type of aquascaping. Going out of your way to set up cryptic zones and relying on them as a means of filtration is a whole other story... At that point you're basically giving sponges and other filter feeders a larger area to grow and filter feed. How effective it is as a means of filtration is highly debatable. I wouldn't go out of your way to incorporate one into a system unless you're particularly fascinated by sponges and other filter feeders.
 
Last edited:
i run a cryptic fuge as part of my sump system, but can't comment scientifically on its effectiveness. my thought was to have an area without light to give sponges, bacteria, tunicates, protozoans, micro and macro crustaceans, worms, ect. a chance to thrive without algae competition. all organisms act in their own niche to both clean water and add biodiversity to the system. i believe that these organisms not only clean the water but more importantly add live food to the system


how large does it have to be - i don't know mine is a 90 gallon with about 50 lbs or so of rock that is covered with sponges and stuff

i have this posted in my thread but it is something like this:
step 1 water settles and is skimmed
40long.jpg


step 2 lite fuge with cheato
125fuge.jpg


step 3 cryptic zone live rock no lighting
90sump.jpg


step 4 water return to display
 
J&D, thanks for the pics. I would only be using 1/2 of a 85 gal sump. I was wondering like if it would be better to have the cryptic fuge right before the return like you do or to have it with overflow going right before it. Maybe do overflow,cryptic,skimmer,return.
 
i don't know how important the order really is, but my thinking was this;

skimmer should be first because the highest bioload is in the display and this water is highest in dissolved organics, therfore the skimmer will be most effective there. this region also has a settling area for dense particulates. i also dose my two part in this area because it has the best o2/co2 ratio because of the skimmer

cryptic zone last because if there is a live food benifit the chance of some of it reaching the display is enhanced. the water in this area has one last settling oportunity and microbubbles are completely eliminated. rock covered with drunken bacteria and a mesh bag full of carbon give the water a final polish before returning the water to the display

obviously though with one sump, you'll have to tweek the order to meet your needs, size of skimmer, baffles, and what ever else equipment you have in there
 
oh i should add in my last system/sump the cryptic zone was first
i never liked that set up because too much detritus settled in and on the rock and cleaning the sump was a pain
(notice in the new system i use elevated milk crates to create flow through, around and under the rock to prevent that prob)

here is a pic of my old sump when i first built it
the overflow enters at the far left and although not in this pic i eventially filled that entire chamber with live rock. the water then went over a baffel to the skimmer and the return at the right
i always felt this system was backward after i built it

newsump001.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks. You answered my question. I was wondering about putting it first if the detritus settled or if it was consumed in the cryptic fuge. I like the idea of keeping the rocks up off the bottom. I have enough room and an extra 29 gallon tall tank laying around so I may put that under the stand to use as the cryptic fuge. I will have a manifold off of the return so I can maybe have an output going into the the 29 cryptic fuge and then having the fuge empty back by the return.
 
I am the one whom originally started the cryptic fuge. Its not setup and running quite yet. My plan is to Tee off my drain line in two different places. One will feed my skimmer and the other will feed the conventional fuge with rubble and macro algae in it. I plan on feeding the Cryptic Fuge with a manifold off of my main pump. This way as John mentioned earlier there shouldn't be much Detrius in the cryptic fuge. I plan on painting the 3 sides of the cryptic fuge black. The front will have a fold down Flap if you will that will also blacken it out. This way I can raise it and look into it to make sure all is well. I have a fishroom in the basement therefore I have room to do all of this as well. All of the fuges will be draining into the return section of my sump therefore with the hope of feeding the tank any pods and etc that grow.

Eric
 

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%

New Posts

Back
Top