Thoughts on methods of eliminating water changes ?

[jason2459]

Lol...........you aren't getting the point. I'm referring you to the table I pointed out...............not the complete article.

Take note of the trace elements that algae consume in table 7 & all the info I posted is concerning algae uptake of trace elements. The total article isn't what I'm concerned with, it's to point out how much algae takes out of the water hence stealing it from the corals.

Look for data on macro algae uptake of trace metals and other elements.

The video is concerning algae and how it's detrimental to corals on the reef.

From the book, which I liked, the algae is an issue due to a reduced population of algae grazers due to over fishing.

And I do recommend the book. It was recommended to me by TimFish who doesn't believe in skimmers and heavily on water changes and has a beautiful long running tank about two decades old now I believe. The book is available on kindle.

He tried to use the book to convince me that skimmers are evil. I got something completely different out of it. lol

 

[jason2459]

I don't know what you are LOL about. I just pointed out what the article is about in completeness.

I use an algae scrubber, I believe the algae is microalgae. Your list showed that Gracilaria Parvispora dry weight analysis: Potassium @ 13.54%

I measure potassium & rarely have to dose it.

@Floyd R Turbo finds many need to dose K and Fe when harvesting a lot of algae. I haven't found a lack of K yet. But I did just upgrade to a much larger ATS from Turbo's Aquatics so will look to test for K a few times over the next 6 months to a year. Iron however seems pretty limited in my system and have started dosing small amounts of it again which I have done so in the past as well.

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/diy-the-diy-fe-ferrous-citrate-supplement.307168/


Otherwise it seems my water change schedule with a little added Mg to the new saltwater mix along with limewater dosing and feedings keep up with what my tank needs. Seems simple to me. Others may want to go a different route to dosing. To each their own and many ways to do this thing called reef keeping.

 

[jason2459]

Sorry, could you expand on that further, it's possible I missed it and if so inform me.

On the "bio" zone sump?

I personally do not like heavy mechanical filtration and the only kind I have is my skimmer. Skimmers are not that efficient compared to other filtration devices or methods like GAC, filter socks, diatom filters, etc which is perfect for me and more then enough. I look at it though much more so as an aeration device that I use to help increase my pH as I have low pH issues but that's another topic.

So, basically I let my sump build up in detritus and never touch it. I have designed my sump in 3 basic sections. Drains and a skimmer in one, a larger "bio" zone, and my return. I also designed the sump to have a high amount of water so I can stack up media in the bio zone. In that section I try to create an environment for basic forms of life to thrive. It's not lit other then some ambient light which is not much as it's in my basement.

Here's more on my design and setup of the sump
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/best-sump-features-to-date.274203/page-5#post-3500331

In what I call the bio zone as you can see above is an ATS above which is teaming with life and gets harvested every couple weeks.
Also, different forms of media like some Pukani rock, different media bricks and plates, and seachem matrix pond and regular covering the plate and a few large mesh bags filled with them as well.

And on the RUGF specifically It's basically all about life and keeping multiple ways of helping to create diversification. Under that plate is a much more cryptic zone.

I'll copy paste from another post I made a while back when I first got the my current RUGF going in my new sump before getting it covered in more pond matrix and adding some pukani rock.

copy/paste:
Bud is great and has put a lot of thought into his scrubbers.

I got the idea of the RUGF back in 2009 from PaulB when I was rebuilding my 55g after loosing everything my family owned due to a historic flood in 2008. Any Iowa folk on here know what I'm talking about.

The RUGF made the entire tank bottom a breeding ground for little critters like pods which helped maintain a very active breeding pair of mandarins.

I don't know what else it might do but that alone is enough for me. I had mine covered in dolomite before but this time around I'm going to try out some seachem matrix pond. Basically pumice stone. Very porous and some of it is still floating so I have it in a couple mesh bags until it all settles down. I have an Aquaclear 50 reversible pump which comes to around 100gph into the plate. Keeps it aerated and full of life down there.

Some more talking about it by PaulB
http://reef2reef.com/threads/how-to-make-a-tank-last-over-forty-years-with-few-problems.283516

a more recent video with the matrix on top and some rock in place. I'll keep adding to it.


I like detritus as it becomes food

and home for many organisms.

 

[Mark Gray]

On the "bio" zone sump?

I personally do not like heavy mechanical filtration and the only kind I have is my skimmer. Skimmers are not that efficient compared to other filtration devices or methods like GAC, filter socks, diatom filters, etc which is perfect for me and more then enough. I look at it though much more so as an aeration device that I use to help increase my pH as I have low pH issues but that's another topic.

So, basically I let my sump build up in detritus and never touch it. I have designed my sump in 3 basic sections. Drains and a skimmer in one, a larger "bio" zone, and my return. I also designed the sump to have a high amount of water so I can stack up media in the bio zone. In that section I try to create an environment for basic forms of life to thrive. It's not lit other then some ambient light which is not much as it's in my basement.

Here's more on my design and setup of the sump
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/best-sump-features-to-date.274203/page-5#post-3500331

In what I call the bio zone as you can see above is an ATS above which is teaming with life and gets harvested every couple weeks.
Also, different forms of media like some Pukani rock, different media bricks and plates, and seachem matrix pond and regular covering the plate and a few large mesh bags filled with them as well.

And on the RUGF specifically It's basically all about life and keeping multiple ways of helping to create diversification. Under that plate is a much more cryptic zone.

I'll copy paste from another post I made a while back when I first got the my current RUGF going in my new sump before getting it covered in more pond matrix and adding some pukani rock.

copy/paste:
Bud is great and has put a lot of thought into his scrubbers.

I got the idea of the RUGF back in 2009 from PaulB when I was rebuilding my 55g after loosing everything my family owned due to a historic flood in 2008. Any Iowa folk on here know what I'm talking about.

The RUGF made the entire tank bottom a breeding ground for little critters like pods which helped maintain a very active breeding pair of mandarins.

I don't know what else it might do but that alone is enough for me. I had mine covered in dolomite before but this time around I'm going to try out some seachem matrix pond. Basically pumice stone. Very porous and some of it is still floating so I have it in a couple mesh bags until it all settles down. I have an Aquaclear 50 reversible pump which comes to around 100gph into the plate. Keeps it aerated and full of life down there.

Some more talking about it by PaulB
http://reef2reef.com/threads/how-to-make-a-tank-last-over-forty-years-with-few-problems.283516

a more recent video with the matrix on top and some rock in place. I'll keep adding to it.


I like detritus as it becomes food

and home for many organisms.

Very nice post nice set up, i am an old cornhusker lol

 

[jason2459]

Very nice post nice set up, i am an old cornhusker lol

Ha, thanks.

I like biodiversity as I believe it helps keep my pests under control and tank healthy. I have many pests in my system like a few types of dinoflagellates that are very hardy and of course the common cyano and spirulina. I don't consider diatoms a pest.

As long as I don't do something stupid, which I've done in the past, or purposefully cause a bloom, which I still like to do from time to time, I never see any of them with the naked eye.

The other reason I love biodiversity is just for the fun of exploring it all.
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/our-tanks-biology-up-close.239838/page-34

 

[TbyZ]

On the "bio" zone sump?


I got the idea of the RUGF back in 2009 from PaulB

The RUGF made the entire tank bottom a breeding ground for little critters like pods which helped maintain a very active breeding pair of mandarins.

I don't know what else it might do but that alone is enough for me

I don't see a RUGF as being necessary to have plenty of pods. I just have a shallow cause coral sandbed & that does the job.

The RUGF, in my opinion, would just be a nitrate factory.

 

[jason2459]

I don't see a RUGF as being necessary to have plenty of pods. I just have a shallow cause coral sandbed & that does the job.

The RUGF, in my opinion, would just be a nitrate factory.

Oh, it's not necessary at all to have lots of pods. But it does help create an environment that they can thrive in as well. For me giving that kind of environment means other critters are thriving as well. So, I will always have one.

As for nitrates, I've never had an issue with them. Not even from the beginning of my system in 2009 with the RUGF spanning the entire bottom of my 55g. I've had lots of phosphate issues which since around 2011 has not been an issue at all. I don't believe in the nitrate factory thing. I have a UGF and I don't touch my detritus. Two big supposed no no's that lead to a nitrate factory...

Actually I lied. Around a year or so ago I had a nitrate and phosphate issue. During a time of heavy testing due to many other curiosities going I decided to try out switching from vinegar as a carbon source to a vinegar/vodka mix based on a ratio from TMZ, another member of a forum, with a ratio of about 690ml vinegar and 310ml vodka to 1000ml.

Up to that point my nitrates where always below 5mg/L. My phosphates had always tested in a range of about .02 to .09 ppm (can see that in all my comparison testing thread I linked to previously). After switching to the vinegar/vodka mix my Nitrates went completely undetectable by me and my phosphates was pushed and stayed under 0.02ppm. I personally did not like this and eventually switched back to just vinegar and my nitrates again stay around 2.5 to 5mg/L and phosphates around 0.02-0.09ppm.

 

[TbyZ]

Oh, it's not necessary at all to have lots of pods. But it does help create an environment that they can thrive in as well.

what environment does the RUGF create?

 

[jason2459]

what environment does the RUGF create?

Where some predators can not reach them. Where they can escape to. Breed. etc. Basically a refugium for them and other critters. There's low flow, but still some flow, and protection.

 

[TbyZ]

Where some predators can not reach them. Where they can escape to. Breed. etc. Basically a refugium for them and other critters. There's low flow and protection.

Yes I understand that. But I'm mean was does the reverse under gravel filter do specifically to enhance the environment for pods?

 

[jason2459]

Yes I understand that. But I'm mean was does the reverse under gravel filter do specifically to enhance the environment for pods?

Besides giving them an optimal safe place to live with fresh oxygenated water and food flowing through? I'm not sure.

@Paul B may have other opinions as well as he's had his in operation for over 4 decades now

 

[jason2459]

and BTW thanks to @Ryanbrs @Bulk Reef Supply for another fun thread!

Great discussions I think even if people do not agree its good.

 

[TbyZ]

Besides giving them an optimal safe place to live with fresh oxygenated water and food flowing through? I'm not sure.

I have that in my sump, but I don't have a RUGF.

@Paul B may have other opinions as well as he's had his in operation for over 4 decades now[/QUOTE]

Yeh, he has nitrates at 300ppm or something like that, that's probably why he can't pull a super model

 

[jason2459]

Yeh, he has nitrates at 300ppm or something like that, that's probably why he can't pull a super model

lol!

I don't think he really knows what his nitrates are as his kits are as crusty as his ....




But yeah, he's mentioned his nitrate levels here and there which I think were normally around the 60's? He would have to clarify that.

Which nitrates is another topic. Are high nitrates an issue? I personally don't believe nitrates are an issue unless they are. Basically high nitrate levels don't mean there's a problem. If a problem arises like hair algae then I would suggest that person get nutrients like nitrates under some control but never to 0. I'd target around 5-10 or under 20mg/L depending on how high the nitrates were and how the tank responds.

I've seen some amazing tanks with nitrates around 20 mg/L . They were not an issue at all.

 

[Lasse]

I do not understand the whole discussion. At one hand – we have a lot of brands selling hobby grade tests – often based on colour depend optical determination by a human eye. Many of these tests claim that they can detect very low levels of the actual compound. There is test kits that claim very low levels of phosphorus – no one is talking about acid cleaning of vials in these case. Many people try to tweak their aquariums with methods that claim they could show reliable values around 10 ppb of phosphorus. This with instruments with a price below $100. We have tests that we tweak our levels of calcium, magnesium and alkalinity with. Tests that can be inaccurate after certain time after opening – but we are relying on them.

On the other hand we have tests that are a lot safer (but with limits also) that can be used as check points. But even here is necessary to use our own ability of perception in order to judge if the value is a “**** happens” value or a real. With these methods, as with hobby tests grade kits, it’s important to use them as a trend indicator and not relay on individually figures.

But I think it’s important to use the same vendor, the same test kits and so one. Is impossible to compare values between different vendors or test kits – they have all their own limits.

On example – I have done 4 test with Triton during this last year. According to calcium levels – they have shown levels around 500 ppm. My hobby grade kit has shown values around 400 – 430. The corals look good and they grow. I have try to maintain that level (400 – 420) with help of my hobby grade kit. Two weeks ago – my hobby grade test was empty and I got a refill of the same brand. Now it show around 470 – 480 ppm – closer to Triton. The plan now is to let it go down to levels (with my hobby grade kit) around 440 and in a month or two – send a new triton test.

I use the Triton test in order to see if there is some long term changes in my water. I have discover three trends that is steady – the potassium level is slowly going down (I do not use zeovit but a fast growing chaeto refugium) Now it’s time to put in some potassium and I´m able to calculate a daily dose in order to maintain a rather steady level. I have notice a slow increase of sulphur and high levels of silicates. The silicates – I probably know the source off – but the sulphur source is still unknown. I suspect the forming of hydrogen sulphide in my DSB and the following oxidation of this compound.

I´m using tap water – therefore I want to have an eye on the cupper levels in my aquarium.

As food I´m only using frozen food – no pellets, granulates or flakes.

The Triton test is for me a tool – like other tools in the hobby – but a tool that I do not want to be rid of because it works like a lever in order to get a better understanding and knowledge of my aquarium. But without the head beyond the keyboard – the results say nothing regardless of method.

Forum like R2R also helps in order to evaluate the figures and methods because we are a mix of people with different knowledges in different fields

And for the moment – I test with a very low rate of WC – I will evaluate what happens if you try to run the system as closed as possible including a high biodiversity. But WC will be a tool – if I need it

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Sallstrom]

We have been sending water samples to ICP analysis since 2014, about 6-8 samples a year/tank(4-6 different tanks). First of all we want to know if there is any bad stuff in the water, such as Cu. We have had our own Hanna photospectrometer(?) to do test for Cu etc, but since the reagens was expensive and the procedure was time consuming(and we are not chemists), it's a lot easier and cheaper for us to send in water samples. I trust a ICP test more than a test I've done my self on a machine which I'm not trained for

/ David

 

[Ryanbrs Verified Sponsor]

Following up, here's how it can add elements:

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-10/rhf/index.php

Figure 16. An overlay of Figures 14 and 15 to allow comparison of the differences between magnesium depletion using daily and monthly water changes equivalent to 30% per month. In this example, magnesium is present at 1280 ppm at the start, and is depleted at a rate of 0.4 ppm per day when no water is changed.

While I still don't believe that minor and trace elements are "required" for a successful reef tank, exploring potential benefits is a fun and interesting extension of the hobby. If a reefer is looking to explore the presumed benefits associated with maintaining them I have always operated under the principle that, for the same reason that water changes are not an effective solution for calcium and alkalinity in a medium to high demand tank they won't be for minor and trace elements as well. This presumes the important elements are depleted in a somewhat similar ratio has calcium and alkalinity. I don't know the accuracy of that statement. Thoughts ?

 

[Big E]

That article points out that metals in the aquarium are a problem, & that macroalgae is an efficient way of removing them, along with toxic nutrients, so I can't relate that article to your original comment.

I'm not laughing at you............you are focusing on the article...............I linked the article and told you to scan down and read table 7. It is a reference you asked for concerning trace element uptake by algae............the data in the table is relevant to the discussion in this thread.

For anyone interested I'd make note of the Zn and Mn levels.

algae trace metal uptake table by Big E 52, on Flickr

Another reference again in relation to the threads discussion and focus--


Gracilaria Parvispora dry weight analysis:

Nitrogen @ 2.50%
Phosphorous @ 0.082%
Potassium @ 13.54%
Calcium @ 0.555%
Magnesium @ 1.163
Sulfur @ 4.82
Zinc @ 139ppm
Iron @ 107ppm
Manganese @ 20ppm
Copper @ 7.0 ppm

A lot of people use macro algae for algae filters/refugiums. Chaeto and Gracilaria are popular choices. There is a ton of info on the web on algae uptake of trace elements and metals. If people want more info do some google searches as I've mentioned.

If you want to know what's in your algae from your scrubber take it to a lab and get a dry weight analysis.

 

[jason2459]

@Lasse I don't disagree that the hobby kits we have don't have their own issues. Two of the biggest issues IMO is end user not doing something right or reagents degrading or bad from the start.

My point is everything we have available to us for a reasonable cost is all perfectly fine and good enough for our needs. With a few exceptions.

 

[Ryanbrs Verified Sponsor]

Folks thinking about water changes need also to know that anyone who uses sodium bicarbonate/carbonate and calcium chloride for calcium and alkalinity is effectively doing water changes (especially in terms of export). This includes Glennf as well as folks using two part systems.

For example, in a tank requiring 2.2 dKH of alkalinity per day and the proportional amount of calcium will increase in salinity by about 64% over the course of a year. Since obviously folks maintain salinity, some water is removed.

That salinity reduction is equivalent, at least in terms of export, to about 8% changed monthly. It would also be equivalent to 8% changed monthly in terms of element import if the method used includes appropriate levels of all elements (as claimed by ESV/B-ionic and Balling methods).

This is one of the first things I asked Trition USA when they told me the system was designed around a 2/4 part and limited to no maintenance water changes. Their answer was the system is designed to account for salinity and you can either skim wet to remove some salt water and combined with an ATO will appropriately dilute the tank over time. Alternatively, you can simply remove a small amount of water from time to time to supplement a dry skim. My follow up to that was "doesn't that process reduce all the other elements over time as well?" Thier response was that this is a well-understood process and the core 7 accounts for this effect. Hard to imagine that is done perfectly but it can certainly be significantly better than most. Like most of the claims manufacturers make, it is difficult to know how accurate they are in any other way than simply use the product and monitor the long term levels with the best of the available testing options we have.

Randy, do you have any thoughts on the possibility of such an approach and how close you could get? More or less an 8% monthly change through wet skimming combined with a 4 part designed to account for that dilution and keeps most of the elements in balance?