Marine Pure Bio Media Plates and Blocks

Reefahholic

Acropora Farmer
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
8,121
Reaction score
6,797
Location
Houston, TX
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Hey Randy!

Any new findings about the Marine Pure Blocks? I remember you were saying they tested a little high with some kind of metal. Can you Copy and paste any of that info here or update about the blocks?
 
I've not really heard anything more. I've not heard of anyone who clearly attributed actual problems to them. Some users do seem to get elevated aluminum, but then so do some reefers for no apparent reason.
 
What is the consequence of elevated aluminum in reef tanks? ...and what non-zero maximum level would be acceptable?
 
If soluble aluminum is released, and it hits 0.5 ppm, soft corals close up. I didn't see that happen at 10x lower (0.05 ppm or 50 ppb), but I do not know the long term consequences at lower levels, and there is some thought by some people that the aluminum released from similar materials (like alumina) is actually very fine alumina, not individual aluminum ions.

This has more on those tests and alumina solubility (but Marine Pure BLocks are a different aluminum structure):

Chemistry And The Aquarium: Aluminum In The Reef Aquarium ? Advanced Aquarist | Aquarist Magazine and Blog
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/7/chemistry

from it:

Biological Testing Of Aluminum Exposure
In order to more definitively show whether aluminum released by Phosguard might be the cause of reaction in corals, it seems prudent to test aluminum on corals. Toward this end, I set up a 30-gallon aquarium with several corals. These included a leather coral ( Sarcophyton sp.), green star polyps, and brown mushroom corals. In addition, the tank contained sand, live rock, and some macroalgae ( Chaetomorpha sp. and Caulerpa racemosa ).

Pictures were taken of the several corals, and then aluminum was added. Figure 3 shows the leather coral before any addition. The first aluminum addition boosted the aluminum concentration by 0.005 ppm by adding 0.15 mL of an aluminum chloride solution to the water. A pH electrode was in the water at the time and recorded no pH change (pH = 8.32). There was no apparent change in any corals in 2 hours.

The second aluminum addition boosted the aluminum concentration by 0.045 ppm by adding 1.35 mL of an aluminum chloride solution to the water (total additions = 0.05 ppm aluminum). A pH electrode was in the water at the time and recorded a pH drop of from 8.35 to 8.33-8.34 pH. There was no apparent change in any corals in 24 hours.

The third and last aluminum addition boosted the aluminum concentration by 0.45 ppm by adding 1.35 mL of an aluminum chloride solution to the water (total additions = 0.5 ppm aluminum). A pH electrode was in the water at the time and recorded a pH drop of from 8.35 to 8.25 pH. There was no apparent change in any corals in 1 hour. By the 5-hour mark, the leather coral had closed (pH = 8.30), and then it began cycling between open and closed every hour or two, continuing into the next day. Figure 4 shows the closed form.

Thirty six hours after the last aluminum addition, the leather was still cycling between open and closed. This behavior had not been exhibited by this coral prior to aluminum additions. While I cannot be certain it was a result of the treatment, it seems likely.

After 48 hours, the leather no longer opened at all. It then stayed closed for the next 3 days until the termination of the experiment. I’ve since moved it to my main tank in the hope that it will recover.

5 hours after the last aluminum addition, the mushroom corals appeared less expanded than before the aluminum additions, but not nearly as dramatically as the leather. They stayed that way until the termination of the experiment.

The green star polyps seemed unchanged for the first 48 hours. After that, they expanded significantly less than they had previously. The polyps were about half of the size that they were before dosing aluminum. They were still that way at the termination of the experiment.
 
What should the difference in performance and problematic issues be between a remote 6" deep sand bed and a remote tank with a bottom of Marine Pure Ceramic blocks. Assuming similar size tanks, and a yet to be determined depth of ceramic block.

I am trying to figure out whether they offer the same function or not and whether one should outperform the other.

I presume each has its own drawbacks but do not know what the drawbacks would be for the ceramic block version.

I would consider swapping out my RDSB if there is improvement to be had.
 
Potential advantages of the blocks are less collection of detritus and possible more surface area for this process in a smaller space.
That advantage can become a disadvantage since some folks get nitrate too low.
 
I have been running this media for 9 months or so. I did notice a drop in nitrates after the first 3 months. Not sure why it took 3 months, but levels that were previously running 15-25ppm were running 5-10ppm with no increase in water change, or dosing etc. I have run poly filters many times worrying about Aluminum levels that I read about. I see no red color on the pad which is indicates aluminum. I also have a tank full of SPS that are doing great with no issues. I no longer worry about Aluminum levels in the least bit :)
 

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