Pros and cons for a refugium.

[Gatorfan]

Should I put a refugium as part of my set up on my 100 gal? Please let me know your pros and cons.

 

[McMullen]

Cons? None I know of.

 

[Luke Schnabel]

if you have the space... its the best thing you can do for your tank

 

[AdamNC]

You'll regret not doing it unless you have an aio. 2 years later and I'm thinking about doing one for mine.

 

[PatW]

Here are the pros for a refugium.

1). It allows faster conversion of ammonia. This is the case whether the refugium has rock rubble for more bacteria surface area. If macro algae only, the algae will take up ammonia as well as nitrites and nitrates.

2). A refugium with macro algae can serve as a breeding area for copepods and ampipods which can serve as a constant source of food for your fish in the display tank. I would think this benefit is minor unless ou have a pretty large refugium compared to your display.

3). The major reason for a refugium is to have macro algae growing in it. The idea is that the macro algae will out compete the algae in your display tank for nitrates and phosphates. As the macro algae grow, you harvest part of them and discard them ( hopefully, you destroy them so they are not introduced into natural systems ). That way you export excess nutrients.

Cons

1). Adds volume to your system lessening the impact of water changes unless you increase those too.

2) You can end up exporting micro nutrients with your macro algae harvests. So you may need for a way to replenish them.

 

[cloak]

Being that you can achieve the same results without one, I've never found the need to incorporate a refugium on any of my tanks over the years. Simplicity seems to suit me best.
Live rock, an efficient skimmer and a little elbow grease seems to get the job done. Quite well actually.

 

[ReeferBen]

Theres many ways to remove nutrients and prevent nuisance algae from growing in the display.

IMO, a refugium is one of the easiest ways to prevent nuisance algae. It is cheap to set up, cheap to run, and effective. The fuge allows me to feed my fish heavily, and at the same time the display stays algae free. I can reduce the amount of water changes I do to once a month at 20%.

There is also some that have the opinion that this is just a band aid and that if the algae is growing rapidly in the fuge that the tank has nutrients in the water even if the display doesn't show the growth. They might prefer a ULNS approach that can be accomplished in a few different ways, but IME this has been expensive and in some cases time consuming.

Some people can get by with just water changes, carbon, and GFO. I haven't had to run them since adding the fuge. GFO is effective, but costly IMO.

No way is wrong or better, just kinda depends on what your aim is, and how much time and money you like spending on your system.

 

[pix4c]

The best thing about a refugium is I like to watch all the critters copepods ampipods starfish and you can stick a frag in there till it attaches

 

[revhtree Verified Admin]

Bump for more discussion!

 

[jamie callard Verified Sponsor]

I just started a fuge half the size of my display i hope it was worth it.

 

[d2mini]

My refugium that was nothing but a giant ball of rotating chaeto allowed me to not need GFO and nitrates were always less than 1 ppm.
Properly sized refugiums (at least 10% of the display volume) can replace other means of nutrient export, naturally.

 

[Wiz]

I ran without one for 6 years. Couldn't keep things in check without a bunch of media or chemicals. Nitrate being the main offender with phos coming in second.
My current is a 40b with a 20s. Ran great for the first while. But as my stock grew those same two crept up. Resulting in short term vodka dosing and then gfo dual reactor.
Installed a side by side 30l fuge. Within two months reactor was discontinued and all I run is a skimmer and a bag of carbon. My volume is in the area of 80g and my skimmer sca-301 is rated up to 65g. But all is undetectable and my incredibly overstocked display grows anything with no issues!

Also, no one mentioned the reverse lighting sched which will help stableize ph. And I add my calc and alk in the fuge just before the drain. So it drains to sump and mixes as well as possable before reaching the display. and trade value for excess algaes.
My fuge is full of life and the right macros make it almost as beautiful as the display! I love my fuge. No other way for me.

 

[Wiz]

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. Also no water changes in more than a year. I know it's not for everyone but works for me. I take water out of tank for raising brine therefore add 2 cups of Red Sea Pro salt to top off water every month But that is it as far as water changes.

 

[jamie callard Verified Sponsor]

@Wiz whats all in your fuge. I curently have dragon breath just wondering other good algee or safe inverts with a deep sand bed.

Dont want chato as not s fan of look for a dispaly system.

 

[Wiz]

I'm not thrilled with the chaeto look either. I was thinking about putting it flat against the sand bed and stretching it out to use it to hold other macros in place.
I have red titan, red fern, red grape tree (my fav), chaeto, grape and sawblade caulerpa, mermaisds fan, and a small amount of cotton candy. Trying to get dragons breath but guy forgot I guess. Lol
Maybe we could trade

 

[Gatorfan]

Here are the pros for a refugium.

1). It allows faster conversion of ammonia. This is the case whether the refugium has rock rubble for more bacteria surface area. If macro algae only, the algae will take up ammonia as well as nitrites and nitrates.

2). A refugium with macro algae can serve as a breeding area for copepods and ampipods which can serve as a constant source of food for your fish in the display tank. I would think this benefit is minor unless ou have a pretty large refugium compared to your display.

3). The major reason for a refugium is to have macro algae growing in it. The idea is that the macro algae will out compete the algae in your display tank for nitrates and phosphates. As the macro algae grow, you harvest part of them and discard them ( hopefully, you destroy them so they are not introduced into natural systems ). That way you export excess nutrients.

Cons

1). Adds volume to your system lessening the impact of water changes unless you increase those too.

2) You can end up exporting micro nutrients with your macro algae harvests. So you may need for a way to replenish them.

Good info...thanks

 

[Gatorfan]

The best thing about a refugium is I like to watch all the critters copepods ampipods starfish and you can stick a frag in there till it attaches

I do agree, it's like having two reef systems in one.

 

[Gatorfan]

I ran without one for 6 years. Couldn't keep things in check without a bunch of media or chemicals. Nitrate being the main offender with phos coming in second.
My current is a 40b with a 20s. Ran great for the first while. But as my stock grew those same two crept up. Resulting in short term vodka dosing and then gfo dual reactor.
Installed a side by side 30l fuge. Within two months reactor was discontinued and all I run is a skimmer and a bag of carbon. My volume is in the area of 80g and my skimmer sca-301 is rated up to 65g. But all is undetectable and my incredibly overstocked display grows anything with no issues!

Also, no one mentioned the reverse lighting sched which will help stableize ph. And I add my calc and alk in the fuge just before the drain. So it drains to sump and mixes as well as possable before reaching the display. and trade value for excess algaes.
My fuge is full of life and the right macros make it almost as beautiful as the display! I love my fuge. No other way for me.

Looks good, thanks for the info

 

[Gatorfan]

Thanks for all the info everybody. I added a fuge with miracle mud, live rock and grape caulerpa algae. Let's see how it goes