Marine Pure

[Huynhter_Soldier]

I'm the type of guy that like the look of minimal rock in my DT. As far as having more surface area for bacteria to grow on do people still use Marine Pure blocks or spheres in their sump anymore or is there a new technique that people are doing?

 

[mkereefer]

I'm the type of guy that like the look of minimal rock in my DT. As far as having more surface area for bacteria to grow on do people still use Marine Pure blocks or spheres in their sump anymore or is there a new technique that people are doing?

Ive seen people still use them and they work. Not the worse thing you could use.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I'm the type of guy that like the look of minimal rock in my DT. As far as having more surface area for bacteria to grow on do people still use Marine Pure blocks or spheres in their sump anymore or is there a new technique that people are doing?

What is it that you want it to accomplish?

 

[cpschult]

What is it that you want it to accomplish?

I'm the type of guy that like the look of minimal rock in my DT. As far as having more surface area for bacteria to grow on do people still use Marine Pure blocks or spheres in their sump anymore or is there a new technique that people are doing?

If you are looking at increasing bacterial growth surface area, marine pure will certainly do that, allowing for minimal rock in display.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I'm just not sure it is best all around to maximize bacterial surface area.

Corals will get more energy if they take up ammonia, for example, rather than getting the leftovers from a maximized bacterial conversion of ammonia to nitrate.

 

[Lavey29]

I'm just not sure it is best all around to maximize bacterial surface area.

Corals will get more energy if they take up ammonia, for example, rather than getting the leftovers from a maximized bacterial conversion of ammonia to nitrate.

So all the extra rock and marine pure stuff in sump is actually taking away beneficial stuff from the corals in the tank?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

So all the extra rock and marine pure stuff in sump is actually taking away beneficial stuff from the corals in the tank?

That is a reasonable hypothesis.

I just want folks to realize that driving ammonia lower and lower by providing more space for bacteria may be counter-productive since ammonia is typically recognized as the preferred inorganic nitrogen source for scleractinian corals.

 

[Huynhter_Soldier]

What is it that you want it to accomplish?

What I'm trying to do is to have less live rocks in the display but have a place for all the beneficial bacteria to grow in the sump. Since I'm planning on only putting around 60 lbs of dry live rock in my display for my aquascape. It's going to be in a Reefer 650

 

[Huynhter_Soldier]

If you are looking at increasing bacterial growth surface area, marine pure will certainly do that, allowing for minimal rock in display.

Thanks, I did this in my pervious builds and was just trying to confirm that that was the case. Plus it's been a min since my last build so i was seeing if other people were doing new techniques and such. Thanks

 

[vetteguy53081]

I'm the type of guy that like the look of minimal rock in my DT. As far as having more surface area for bacteria to grow on do people still use Marine Pure blocks or spheres in their sump anymore or is there a new technique that people are doing?

Have mine for 2 years and only rinsed once. I like it

 

[Sean Clark]

I have the large block and I like it. I used one that was from my older system to jump start my new system which worked really well. It is still in there just hanging out in the sump.

 

[X-37B]

70lbs of rock in my 120 with none in the sump. It worked real well for this mostly acro system and 15 fish. It was taken down after 33 months and replaced with an 80g lowboy 16" type system. Its easier for me at my age to service the 80g system as the stand is 36"

 

[Spare time]

Is there sand in the tank?

 

[cpschult]

I'm just not sure it is best all around to maximize bacterial surface area.

Corals will get more energy if they take up ammonia, for example, rather than getting the leftovers from a maximized bacterial conversion of ammonia to nitrate.

I had no idea! Always learn something new here. Thanks!!

 

[Huynhter_Soldier]

Is there sand in the tank?

Tank isn't setup yet but once it is I will use very minimal sand. Like maybe 40 lbs for a 5x2x2

 

[Spare time]

Tank isn't setup yet but once it is I will use very minimal sand. Like maybe 40 lbs for a 5x2x2

I don't think you would need the marine pure unless the tank is absolutely packed.

 

[Karen00]

I use the marine pure spheres in a baggie. I assume they're working but I guess I have no way of knowing that for sure unless I remove them and watch for an ammonia spike which I'm reluctant to do given I have fish. I added them because I don't have a lot of rock in my 5g pico but I might have enough rock and the spheres are just extra. I'm curious about Randy's take on corals and ammonia. Maybe I should let my corals do the processing.

 

[Sean Clark]

I use the marine pure spheres in a baggie. I assume they're working but I guess I have no way of knowing that for sure unless I remove them and watch for an ammonia spike which I'm reluctant to do given I have fish. I added them because I don't have a lot of rock in my 5g pico but I might have enough rock and the spheres are just extra. I'm curious about Randy's take on corals and ammonia. Maybe I should let my corals do the processing.

I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps we are coming at this from the wrong angle... Less may be more; provided you have the coral biomass to support it.

 

[Karen00]

I was thinking the same thing. Perhaps we are coming at this from the wrong angle... Less may be more; provided you have the coral biomass to support it.

Exactly! And maybe our corals will be the better for it.

 

[gbroadbridge]

That is a reasonable hypothesis.

I just want folks to realize that driving ammonia lower and lower by providing more space for bacteria may be counter-productive since ammonia is typically recognized as the preferred inorganic nitrogen source for scleractinian corals.

I don't believe it would make any difference.

Surely the bacteria will grow in number whilst ammonia is available, and then the population will stabilise.

I cant see how in any operating reef tank bacterial growth would be limited by surface area, even if it were limited to the surface area of the stony inhabitants themselves.