Detritus is it as bad as some make out?

[Nano sapiens]

It is a well known fact that denitrification can be incomplete - eg. stop at NO2 or NxO steps. This often happens if not enough of DOC is available. I doubt that a detritus rich environment will be responsible for this. On the contrary an anoxic environment with a lot of detritus will produce (by itself) DOC for the denitrification process.

This is where things get interesting for me. In a reef aquarium that is experiencing high NO3 (nitrate), one often finds that the owner has done little to no sand bed maintenance (vacuuming, stirring). Yet in such a detritus rich environment which contains lots of available DOC (dissolved organic carbon), not enough of the nitrification produced NO3 is being converted to N2 to keep the level low in the system. This suggests to me that the sand bed denitrification bacteria may not be functioning as efficiently as they could be due to the reduced advective flow into the substrate caused by the accumulation of detritus.

In Nano aquarium without any skimmers or aeration you will probably have more NH3/NH4 to nitrify - hence more will end up as NO3.

This makes sense. Less organics in the water column, less NH3/NH4/NO3

Obviously, by removing detritus you can reduce the amount of inorganic N that will be produced - but you can also do that by reducing your input - the amount of food.

Yes, true. And doing both would be better still if high NO3 is an issue. For many that like to have a high density of fish, having a large amount of coral cover (direct ammonia absorption) and a highly productive/effective substrate where nitrification/denitrification can proceed optimally would be of great importance.

To clean and clean every day - that´s one way - but not the only way to a healthy reef. Through planing and chose of animals you can reuse the nutrients in the detritus direct or through sub processes like growing algae that grazers will eat later on.

Or just clean the substrate on a regular basis if one isn't in a hurry. I don't grow algae (at least not on purpose) as I haven't found it necessary in any of my systems, but I understand why it's done. For me, the role of grazers in the display tank is largely an aesthetic one to keep unsightly algae in check. Consumers on their own (especially full sized adults) do little to reduce the overall nutrient load in a tank since most of what they consume is excreted as waste back into the system.

For me - the goal is to use the detritus as my store (and storage) of nutrients and as a guarantee that I not hit zero PO4 or NO3. For the moment - the only real nutrient export I have is Chaeto harvest and harvest of some corals. The rest of the nutrients (and other compounds) recirculate and accumulate in places there I want to have it.

Fair enough. I would say I'm fairly aggressive in removing detritus from my system and I make no effort to store it. Just goes to show that there are many ways to 'reef' and adjusting methods to one's particular system is the key. For my system, which has a good sized biomass in relation to the small water volume, I tend to err on the side of caution, perhaps.

Lasse, thanks for taking the time to post such informative information.

Ralph

 

[brandon429]

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/cyano-going-to-cause-me-to-shut-down-my-tank.343703/page-6


@Sallstrom
@Lasse
LANDSHARK
Make it look easy.


my expectations are that you three tag-team that tank into compliance. If you don't, I won't be let down as I already said the challenge threads are not for web sages and most authors, the theory threads and blogs are safer places to write.
Threads like Potatos are the most important threads on reefing we have, your time to shine. on post #190 now

We have lots of scientists posting here, critique providers, people absolutely sure of things. Love to see some work getting done there...passionate work where you guys keep his thread up until it's complete and fifty people are reading it like they read this one at any given time.

Everything written on this thread in support of detritus farming flounders if work doesn't get done in that thread, if the passion stays here in safety and his thread drops slowly due to convenient absence of the powerful aquarists and critics posting here

@Paul B
should he install RUGF to fix his eight month sustained invasion? Answer there, not here, and stay until his tank is fixed.
offer to mail him tidal flat animals at his shipping expense with the guarantee his balance will be restored.

Ralph I've always respected your writing style and works. that's one old nano, man.

 

[Redleg]

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/cyano-going-to-cause-me-to-shut-down-my-tank.343703/page-6


my expectations are that you three tag-team that tank into compliance. If you don't, I won't be let down as I already said the challenge threads are not for web sages and most authors, the theory threads and blogs are safer places to write.
Threads like Potatos are the most important threads on reefing we have, your time to shine. on post #190 now

We have lots of scientists posting here, critique providers, people absolutely sure of things. Love to see some work getting done there...passionate work where you guys keep his thread up until it's complete and fifty people are reading it like they read this one at any given time.

Everything written on this thread in support of detritus farming flounders if work doesn't get done in that thread, if the passion stays here in safety and his thread drops slowly due to convenient absence of the powerful aquarists and critics posting here

@Paul B
should he install RUGF to fix his eight month sustained invasion? Answer there, not here, and stay until his tank is fixed.
offer to mail him tidal flat animals at his shipping expense with the guarantee his balance will be restored.

Ralph I've always respected your writing style and works. that's one old nano, man.

I've been following this thread for awhile now and have read most of the ones you have supplied links for. In doing so I've noticed that you are very passionate in your belief that your methods are the only way to solve cyano/ algae problems. I don't disagree that people have had success tearing down and cleaning their systems of detritus, I find your insistence that other well known reefers accept your constant challenges to prove their methods better than your own disturbing.
The truth is that every reef tank is overstocked in comparison the an actual reef. Due to this overstocking detritus buildup can occur rather quickly in even the most experienced reefers tank unless the use or export of nutrients is planned from the start. Of the dozens of threads I've read in the last several months it has become rather clear to me that all the benefits of using dry/dead rock with it's lack of diversity is a larger problem than the hitchhikers that come on live rock. And that this lack of biodiversity is a major contributing factor in most of these tanks that you do "work" on.
I applaud your efforts in helping fellow reefers solve their problems, but also see that this seems to be a major ego trip for you. Especially this thread as the OP seems to have completely ignored your advice and now you are calling out specific people to publicly solve this tanks cyano issue. It seems that you are trying to publicly shame these men, in an effort to discredit their methods. I for one am done reading your one man quest to prove yours is the only way to reef.

 

[brandon429]

got notice of your quote before you are through crafting the reply, am expecting a zinger as I didn't write that lead in to unmotivate. Will check back

Remember my only goal is to aim the resolved at where results are needed most, my hat is tossed in the offer bucket too... I asked for the job after every one else gets a shot.

So far this thread is all compliant, no challenge large tanks that store detritus. We need examples of detritus tanks that are not compliant in order to get the big picture. We need those who own compliant large tanks with detritus to work on noncompliant tanks so we can see how they work with detritus and still restore balance.

 

[Lasse]

This makes sense. Less organics in the water column, less NH3/NH4/NO3

For the book - I do not believe that skimmers take away much of the organics (Particulate Organic Matter - POM) from the water column. My skimmer has a drain for skimmate - it is open and all skimmate will return to the DT through the return pump! However - I believe that skimmers - through aeration - takes away a lot of NH3/NH4 direct from the water column. That´s the reason why my Remote Deep Sand Bed with reversed flow is situated before my skimmer. If not produced NH3/NH4 (in the sand bed) takes up in the Chaeto forest over the sand bed (or if not are nitrified in the oxygen-rich environment of the huge area of Chaeto that´s work as biofilter with its own oxygen production) - the gas exchanging properties of the skimmer will fix the rest. To understand this you have to know about the nature of the NH3/NH4 complex, They always exist as a coupled pair but the percentage of each in this pair is predominantly determined by temperature and pH. However - If you live in Mexico City - you need to calculate with air pressure too . If you have a constant temperature in your aquaria - pH is the most important parameter. At 25 degree C and pH 7 - the NH3 percent is below 1, at pH 7.5 is 1.8 %, pH 8 is 5.4 %, pH 8.5 is 15 % and around pH 9.5 it is 50 %. This is valid for fresh water - nearly the same for saltwater. If one part of the pair is reduced or disappears - the percentage is restored momentarily. This means if you have 1 ppm NH3/NH4 in the water (25 degree C and p 8,5) - 0.15 ppm is in the form of NH3 and 85 % is in the form of NH4. If you - through gas exchange in the skimmer - take away this 0.15 ppm NH3 - there is still 0.85 ppm NH4 left and it will direct convert to the NH3/NH4 pair with the same percentage - in ppm it will be 0.13 ppm NH3 and 0.72 ppm NH4. and so on. This means that theoretically it is possible to remove all produced NH3 / NH4 by gas exchange. Normally this does not happens because the gas exchanger system (read skimmer) is to small and the natural nitrification system is much faster. This is the real pathway for the statement that biofilters is nitrate factories. All nitrification is a nitrate factory but a factory in your garage (read living rocks) will not produce as much as a high end factory (read biofilter) because the last is faster and not so much N disappear as NH3.

By the way - IMO - the best biofilter is a very fast flowing trickle filtration system with reversed airflow (@Jomama exclusive for you ) - it will both work as a effective gas exchanger and nitrification system! - but -contrary to what most people think - the flow across the filter should be very fast - it should not only drip - it should be fast in order to remove old lazy guys in the biofilm and leave the young hungry guys in there!

@brandon429 - this is the way I prefer to answer a question - not that you should do this (and only this is the way to salvation) - instead I want to give a controllable background that together with other things can be a help for peoples own decisions. It is their $ invest and animals - I can´t say do that or do that and not being responsible for what´s happen. But I can give them the background that give them a possibility to make their own decision. And if you promise to learn Swedish I will send you links to more than 20 years of answer questions and more than 10 000's attempt to explain the biological processes in an aquarium including advices like this - "if it was my aquaria - I would do this because of……".

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Paul B]

@Paul B
should he install RUGF to fix his eight month sustained invasion? Answer there, not here, and stay until his tank is fixed.
offer to mail him tidal flat animals at his shipping expense with the guarantee his balance will be restored.

Of course I feel all tanks should run a reverse undergravel filter but realize I am in the vast minority. I don't seem to have all these problems that many tanks have and I am not sure if it has anything to do with detritus, the UG filter or anything else. I can prove without a doubt that a massive amount of detritus, like a half inch thick under the gravel stored over 40 years will have no effect on the health of the tank and may be a benefit.
There are no tanks old enough with no detritus to compare it to so we will have to wait for such a tank to mature enough to see.

But at least we know that storing detritus may not be a bad thing and may be the key to a long lived, healthy system.
I recently took these pictures. This one was the Florida Keys. Nothing but detritus but it provides food for the reef fish that spawn here. There is much more life here than on the pristine reefs.



This is a remote Island off Hawaii. All detritus.



Before you say it, I know a reef tank is not like the ocean. But we are trying to emulate the ocean and detritus is a big part of it and not a detriment, it has been building up there for billions of years and it hasn't crashed yet.

I don't think detritus helps or hurts a tank, it's just there like Nancy Pelosi.

 

[Denniswbliss]

What a great topic for me because I'm running a nuvo 40 gal aio. And I get alot of detritus back in my sump area were it's super hard to clean out so it builds up fast. I was wondering if I put a maxie jet and stir it up at night will i be actually feeding my corals or will i be just stirring up bad gasses and harmful stuff????????

 

[Lasse]

I´ll think that it could be a good idea but I would first clean up a little of the detritus in order to not risk anything the first you use the method. After that I would try with that. let it run for a short time - maybe in som intervals just before and after the light going out. If you should do it every day or more seldom - you have to test - but it would a method that I by myself probably use in the same situation.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Cory]

If the Earth was a fish tank whos feeding it? Where does the food go?

Who feeds your tank? Whats an Ecosystem? Does your tank have one?

Whats the difference between your tank and Earth?

 

[DaveC]

For the book - I do not believe that skimmers take away much of the organics (Particulate Organic Matter - POM) from the water column. My skimmer has a drain for skimmate - it is open and all skimmate will return to the DT through the return pump! However - I believe that skimmers - through aeration - takes away a lot of NH3/NH4 direct from the water column.

very interesting ... doing an experiment to tonight ... I assume this allows you to collect the larger chunks in the neck or cup of the skimmer and release the smaller stuff back into the tank?

 

[Scrubber_steve]

I believe that skimmers - through aeration - takes away a lot of NH3/NH4 direct from the water column.

Hi Lasse; I posed the question once "Can a Skimmer Degass Ammonia from Aquarium Water?.
The response I got from a smarter person than me was "A skimmer probably won't outgas much ammonia at all, in my opinion. It's harder to remove than that."
&
"No, degassing isn't effective for marine tanks. First of all, a lot of the ammonia will be in the form of ammonium (the charged ion), and that won't outgas. I doubt you'd see much of the ammonia go, either, in a realistic setup".

Your thoughts?

cheers

 

[Reefin Dude]

If the Earth was a fish tank whos feeding it?

Plate Tectonics. i am assuming we are talking about N, C, and P imports and exports. the earth is not only water. the only logical answer to this question is terrestrial runoff.

Where does the food go?

eventually it gets locked up in terrestrial sources. starting by deposition into the deep oceans. Abyss.

Who feeds your tank?

i do. every day.

Whats an Ecosystem?

that warm and fuzzy word used by MARINE aquarist to try and explain away their detritus.

Does your tank have one?

not really. maybe up to the algae level, but beyond that, no, not really. if you add food to your tank at all, than there has to be that equal amount of N, C, and P leaving the system, or the system is becoming more eutrophic. by definition. if everything is broken down in our systems, than why is there detritus at all? if it all breaks down, it should all go away. there should not be any accumulation of detritus, or any organic material.

Whats the difference between your tank and Earth?

terrestrial locking of N, C, and P for the earth; and for the tank my grubby hands/skimmer pretending to be the abyss. removing as much N, C, and P as they can.

------------------------------------------

agree with Scrubber_steve. all of the reading and research i have done says ammonia can not be off gassed.

just looking at and smelling my skimmate is a pretty good indicator to me that it is removing organic material.

all of the research i have done sayst that the only way P can be exported from a system is through manual exportation. it can not be off-gassed.

G~

 

[Lasse]

My thoughts is the opposite - a good modern skimmer can degas rather much of NH3 - this is one of the reasons why persons with oversized skimmer says that biofilter is not good - it is nitrate fabrics. The nitrification occur even in an aquarium without a filter and with a system with low load normal living rocks works that out. Nitrate is the end product. In spite of that - a system running an oversized skimmer many times shows lower NO3 levels compared with one with one not so effective or a system without. Yes - the skimmer removes some N as proteins but protein residues normally is a lower part of the nitrogen load from fishes. The largest contributor of nitrogen from fish is NH3/NH4 from the gills. I always write NH3/NH4 because this pair is close to each other and the ratio between them is mainly depended of pH and temperature. NH3 is a gas and NH4 is a ion. NH3 can be aired out if there is a low concentration of NH3 in the air - NH4 not. But their relationship is momentant - if one of them change (i.e. in this case NH3 is aerated out) - the percentage ratio be recovered quickly. Let us say that we have 1 ppm NH3/NH4 in the water, pH = 8.5 and temperature 25 degree C. The ratio between NH3 and NH4 is in this case around 15 % NH3 and 85 % NH4 (0.15 ppm NH3 and 0.85 ppm NH4) . If we aerate out 15 % NH3 - we will have 0.85 ppm NH3/NH4 left in the water. It will fast change again to 15 % NH3 and 85 % NH4 - leaving the concentrations 0,1275 ppm NH3 and 0.7225 ppm NH4 = 0.85 ppm NH3/NH4. Next step -> 0.1275 ppm NH3 will be degassed and so on. You understand the mechanism but also that it is rather slow. As I said - it is also pH and temperature depended. At 25 degree C and pH 8 - the ratio is 5.4 % NH3 and 94.6 % NH4. But remark - because of that CO2 normally is degassed too - the pH in the skimmer will be higher than compared with the tank if the pH in the tank is below 8.15 (the equilibrium point for CO2 in water and air with 400 ppm CO2 in air)

Why can´t we smell this NH3 from the skimmer. During normal load in a home aquaria - the concentrations of free NH3/NH4 is normally below "smell concentrations" but I have several time smell NH3 from trickle filter in fish farms (fresh water) with high bio load and pH in the filter around 8. A friend of mine was farming Malawi chiclids (pH around 8). He had a large trickle filter with reversed air stream and feed a lot. Trickle filter is as good as Skimmers in degassing.

With a good biofilter IMO the NH3/NH4 conversion to NO3 is faster than the skimmers degassing system and therefore the process is referred to as a nitrate fabric

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Scrubber_steve]

My thoughts is the opposite - a good modern skimmer can degas rather much of NH3 - this is one of the reasons why persons with oversized skimmer says that filter is not good - it is nitrate fabrics. The nitrification occur even in an aquarium without a filter and with a system with low load normal living rocks works that out. Nitrate is the end product. In spite of that - a system running an oversized skimmer many times shows lower NO3 levels compared with one with one not so effective or a system without. Yes - the skimmer removes some N as proteins but protein residues normally is a lower part of the nitrogen load from fishes. The largest contributor of nitrogen from fish is NH3/NH4 from the gills. I always write NH3/NH4 because this pair is close to each other and the ratio between them is mainly depended of pH and temperature. NH3 is a gas and NH4 is a ion. NH3 can be aired out if there is a low concentration of NH3 in the air - NH4 not. But their relationship is momentant - if one of them change (i.e. in this case NH3 is aerated out) - the percentage ratio be recovered quickly. Let us say that we have 1 ppm NH3/NH4 in the water, pH = 8.5 and temperature 25 degree C. The ratio between NH3 and NH4 is in this case around 15 % NH3 and 85 % NH4 (0.15 ppm NH3 and 0.85 ppm NH4) . If we aerate out 15 % NH3 - we will have 0.85 ppm NH3/NH4 left in the water. It will fast change again to 15 % NH3 and 85 % NH4 - leaving the concentrations 0,1275 ppm NH3 and 0.7225 ppm NH4 = 0.85 ppm NH3/NH4. Next step -> 0.1275 ppm NH3 will be degassed and so on. You understand the mechanism but also that it is rather slow. As I said - it is also pH and temperature depended. At 25 degree C and pH 8 - the ratio is 5.4 % NH3 and 94.6 % NH4. But remark - because of that CO2 normally is degassed too - the pH in the skimmer will be higher than compared with the tank if the pH in the tank is below 8.15 (the equilibrium point for CO2 in water and air with 400 ppm CO2 in air)

Why can´t we smell this NH3 from the skimmer. During normal load in a home aquaria - the concentrations of free NH3/NH4 is normally below "smell concentrations" but I have several time smell NH3 from trickle filter in fish farms (fresh water) with high bio load and pH in the filter around 8. A friend of mine was farming Malawi chiclids (pH around 8). He had a large trickle filter with reversed air stream and feed a lot. Trickle filter is as good as Skimmers in degassing.

Sincerely Lasse

Lasse, you dose no3, why not get rid of the skimmer instead? If it does put a dent in the NH3?

 

[Lasse]

Yes - it is an option but the degassing of other gases and the oxygenation by the skimmer is important for me. I have a rather dense population of corals and other animals - the respiration from them during "non lighting time" is rather huge and I need the extra oxygen given from the skimmer. A trickle filter (or downstream skimmer) would be a better option (fast oxygenation, fast degassing and fast nitrification) but I have not place for this in my recent build. However - I have a small nitrification filter in the sump and the huge amount of Chaeto in my refugium serve as an excellent nitrification area too.


Sincerely Lasse

 

[Scrubber_steve]

Do you run the cheato on the opposite cycle to your display, & if so, doesn't that take care of the O2?

 

[Lasse]

Yes - I run reversed light cycles so maybe - but it is not as large as I want.

My refugium is placed direct after the DT. The reason for this is mostly a question of nitrogen. The DT produce NH3/NH4 - probably the best N source for chaeto and during light time for the chaeto it will pick up all NH3/NH4 and probably NO3 too. During not light time - the enormous surface of the chaeto serve as a good nitrification source and hence bound the nitrogen as NO3. During this time - it is production time in the DT an oxygen rich water will come into the refugium.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

As you can see - my whole system is build on nutrient recycling and to optimize these processes. The DSB with reversed flow has its importance too in order to give nutrient to the refugium. For the moment - the flow trough the DSB is on 7/24 but their is an idea to only run it during night time. Instead of throwing out resources - use them in order to build biomass

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Scrubber_steve]

As you can see - my whole system is build on nutrient recycling and to optimize these processes. The DSB with reversed flow has its importance too in order to give nutrient to the refugium. For the moment - the flow trough the DSB is on 7/24 but their is an idea to only run it during night time. Instead of throwing out resources - use them in order to build biomass

Sincerely Lasse

Sounds like its too effective. You have an equipment/method nutrient - oxygenation imbalance paradox

 

[Scrubber_steve]

Could a nutrient export system be described as ideal in the case where no3 stays just above zero at all times ( excess of what the system requires) without dosing ?