Reef filter roller or algae scrubber ?

[Crustaceon]

Removable growth chamber with dual bottom drains (primary and secondary/emergency)
Tuned siphon on primary so it runs dead silent (mine sits on top of my sumpless 120, the fans on my lights are louder)
Dimmable LEDs so you can adjust both intensity and duration to match your tank needs - IMO intensity adjustability is a magnitude of order more important that photoperiod

Many other differences, but these are really the main ones

I’ve always found intensity to be more important too in my own testing. I’ve ran different setups @ 12 hours and noticed substantially better growth at higher light intensity (lots of bulb swapping happened). The challenge for me was always maintaining the balance between harvesting enough to slow the nutrient reduction to the point where the tank could catch up and not removing so much algae that the ATS lost too much efficiency. Then there were the times where nutrients would tip a bit too low and some algae would die on the screen, which obviously didn’t help the situation. I could typically keep my tank between 2-5ppm nitrates but never more stable than that (I’d be happy sitting at 5). I’m sure being able to fine tune intensity would bridge that gap which is something I never had using home depot CFLs and basic light timers.

 

[Turbo's Aquatics Verified Sponsor]

I’ve always found intensity to be more important too in my own testing. I’ve ran different setups @ 12 hours and noticed substantially better growth at higher light intensity (lots of bulb swapping happened). The challenge for me was always maintaining the balance between harvesting enough to slow the nutrient reduction to the point where the tank could catch up and not removing so much algae that the ATS lost too much efficiency. Then there were the times where nutrients would tip a bit too low and some algae would die on the screen, which obviously didn’t help the situation. I could typically keep my tank between 2-5ppm nitrates but never more stable than that (I’d be happy sitting at 5). I’m sure being able to fine tune intensity would bridge that gap which is something I never had using home depot CFLs and basic light timers.

Intensity is more of an instantaneous measurement of how much photosynthetic production is going to occur. Think about photons hitting cells - the fewer photons, the slower the production.

Now consider nutrient uptake in relation to production. If you have constant intensity and can only turn it on or off, as your nutrients drop in concentration (flow rate remaining the same) they will get removed faster and faster - the runaway scenario. You can either back the light away physically, use a diffuser to scatter or shade the light, or you can dim it. Any of these will be effective in lowering production, but dimming is the most convenient IMO.

Slowing the production by dimming means you can choke back the runaway scenario. I have users start at 25% intensity to get algae growing, then slowly ramp up intensity and duration. Maxing out duration draws out production throughout the day, so that should happen first. Increasing intensity second. Intensity helps to allow longer harvest cycles, because the light can penetrate deeper into the algae mat - but at least for my scrubbers, 50% intensity (which is actually the 3/4 point on the dimmer knob) will work for the vast majority of tanks.

I usually tell people to start at 25% intensity (halfway on the dimmer) and 9-12 hours/day, then work up to 50% intensity and 18-22 hours/day over the course of several months, then hold there for at least 2 growth cycles to verify before bumping up any further.

The runaway scenario happens IMO because every tank has to find a new balance point when ramping up a scrubber, and it's very dynamic. So you can start to see slow changes in levels that seem to correlate with growth on the scrubber, but once the scrubber really gets growing well it's like having your foot on the gas and then coming to a steep downhill stretch of road.

 

[Crustaceon]

Intensity is more of an instantaneous measurement of how much photosynthetic production is going to occur. Think about photons hitting cells - the fewer photons, the slower the production.

Now consider nutrient uptake in relation to production. If you have constant intensity and can only turn it on or off, as your nutrients drop in concentration (flow rate remaining the same) they will get removed faster and faster - the runaway scenario. You can either back the light away physically, use a diffuser to scatter or shade the light, or you can dim it. Any of these will be effective in lowering production, but dimming is the most convenient IMO.

Slowing the production by dimming means you can choke back the runaway scenario. I have users start at 25% intensity to get algae growing, then slowly ramp up intensity and duration. Maxing out duration draws out production throughout the day, so that should happen first. Increasing intensity second. Intensity helps to allow longer harvest cycles, because the light can penetrate deeper into the algae mat - but at least for my scrubbers, 50% intensity (which is actually the 3/4 point on the dimmer knob) will work for the vast majority of tanks.

I usually tell people to start at 25% intensity (halfway on the dimmer) and 9-12 hours/day, then work up to 50% intensity and 18-22 hours/day over the course of several months, then hold there for at least 2 growth cycles to verify before bumping up any further.

The runaway scenario happens IMO because every tank has to find a new balance point when ramping up a scrubber, and it's very dynamic. So you can start to see slow changes in levels that seem to correlate with growth on the scrubber, but once the scrubber really gets growing well it's like having your foot on the gas and then coming to a steep downhill stretch of road.

Thank you so much for providing us with some great insight into how an algae turf scrubber. There's quite a bit a nuance here and it looks like you've really refined your ATS to make it easier on us on that front. I wonder if in the future we'll see some sort of automatic "anti-runaway" feature on an ATS that detects a trend in nitrates, adjusts intensity and at least alerts the reefer with a recommendation to harvest a certain amount of algae. Maybe it'll have an pair of optical sensors on either side of the screen?

 

[atoll]

From a Facebook member.

 

[Bruce Burnett]

You do realize vodka dosing only feeds bacteria, which then consumes nitrates and phosphates which is exactly what an ATS does, but much more efficient and just as “natural” right? Carbon dosing is biological nutrient reduction. Not chemical.

Since algae releases sugars it is also carbon dosing. An ats and a roller mat both have advantages and disadvantages. I went 5 years on my previous 300 gallon display no water changes, using calcium reactor and a large external ats. Fed tank pretty heavy with socks removed. Did one icp test was great so who knows. Down sized and just ordered ice cap in sump pro ats. Though of a roller mat but I hate the idea of having to keep rolls on hand plus removing all the food I add.

 

[Crustaceon]

Since algae releases sugars it is also carbon dosing. An ats and a roller mat both have advantages and disadvantages. I went 5 years on my previous 300 gallon display no water changes, using calcium reactor and a large external ats. Fed tank pretty heavy with socks removed. Did one icp test was great so who knows. Down sized and just ordered ice cap in sump pro ats. Though of a roller mat but I hate the idea of having to keep rolls on hand plus removing all the food I add.

I’ve also gone years straight without water changes using an ATS and later on carbon dosing. I’ve actually ran a tank long-term with only an ATS (no socks, skimmer, etc.) as another comment mentioned, so this isn’t a new thing to me. It’s not a debate of whether or not an ATS works. Nutrient reduction in this hobby isn’t hard. Most methods are actually too good if you allow them to work to their full potential, including an ATS. The hard part is balancing nutrient control and finding a way to make it plateau where you want it.

 

[Crustaceon]

Thing I already know: An ATS reduces nitrates and phosphates.

 

[bygster]

ATS is allowing the bad algae to grow where you want, not in a display. I have seen better nuisance algae prevention in display’s with ATS, Carbon dosing feeds everything in a tank maybe even some uglies. Never heard of or seen tank crashes with ATS ex. Cyano and Dino outbreaks. In addition carbon dosing can be difficult to use when starting a tank and leaves mulm “I think that’s the word” on everything especially a white filmy looking growth on glass, it does come off very easy and can dissipate on its own.

Now purely speculative but I think ATS does not help as much as carbon dosing in relation to coral coloration. I swear my greens and blues and purples look better with carbon dosing. So to round all this out occasional or minimally dosing carbon coupled with a fuge or ATS is my approach. Even my DIY ATS is a hybrid method since it is fully submerged in a refugium section of the sump with some tunze fuge lights.

 

[triggerfish36]

I will never run a reef tank with out a ats (.)

I will never run a reef tank with out a ats (.)

I completely agree. An ATS is superior filtration for any reef tank, at least in my experience.

 

[VintageReefer]

I use an ats. Couldn’t be simpler. It’s a enclosed floating unit, I threw it in the middle section of my sump. Haven’t done water change in 2 years and all corals thriving. Phosphates stable dollar .02 - .05, nitrates are always measuring low…around 1-2. Everything is doing no great with no work besides grabbing a handful of algae every 2-3 weeks and throwing it out