Mega-powerful Nitrate And Phosphate Remover Replaces Skimmer, Refugium

Excerpt from "Feeding The Reef Aquarium", by Ron Shimek
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-02/rs/feature/index.php

"It will become apparent that many of the problems we have with reef aquaria, such as excess nutrients, excessive growth of undesirable algae, and the inability to keep some animals alive and healthy is simply due to the feeding of inappropriate foods, compounded by feeding in the wrong manner.

"Bacteria, in fact, are an important food for most benthic or bottom-dwelling marine animals. This is because bacteria have higher nitrogen to carbon ratios in their cells than do either typical animals, plants or algae. As a consequence, many marine animals are specialized to eat bacteria, either directly out of the water column or indirectly as a frosting on sediment or detritus particles.

"One quite good study discussing zooplankton availability and concurrent feeding by planktivorous reef fishes has been published (Hamner, et al., 1988) [...] These researchers examined a reef [and found that] during a 12 hour period [in a section of reef only 3 feet wide, there were] 1,098,000 potential food items, about 70 percent of which are copepods and larvacean tunicates.

"A large amount of the zooplankton food that would have impinged upon the reef does make it to the reef, albeit modified into the form of fish feces. This [waste] is rapidly ingested by corals and other benthic animals.

"Also, what is apparent is that the fish eat ALL the plankton approaching the reef. NONE of it will reach the reef during the day when the fish are feeding.

"All of these fishes [listed in this article] eat large amounts of crustacean prey, particularly copepods.

"From this study, it is apparent that these fish are feeding continuously throughout the daylight hours. They are eating small items, but on the average they eat an item of food every three minutes, all day, during a twelve hour day. During that period they eat an average of two grams of food per day. [...] On the average, if you wish your fish to have the same mass of food that they are likely to eat in nature, presuming the data of Hamner et al., 1988, is applicable to other fishes, you should feed each fish in your aquarium that is the average size of a damsel fish, the equivalent of about 70% of a cube of this food per day. Large fishes would get proportionally more.

"During the day on a natural reef, it appears that virtually no moderately large zooplankter would reach the coral on the reef's face [because they are eaten by the fish]. Nonetheless, this area would be bathed in a diffuse rain of particulate organic material derived from fish feces [waste], dissolved material and microzooplankton.

"All aquarists may significantly control the amount of particulate food in their aquarium. This food will mimic either the zooplankton or the particulate organic material components of coral reef feeding dynamics. For the animals in a system to be healthy, those animals must be fed foods that more-or-less duplicate the qualities of their natural foods, and they must be fed in a more-or-less normal matter. Reef aquarium foods and feeding regimes tend to fail rather spectacularly on both accounts.

"The standard reef aquarium is probably fed once about once a day (Shimek, 2002), and the average daily feeding ration weighs 15.39 ± 15.90 grams, or roughly a half of an ounce, wet weight, of food. On a natural reef, this would be enough to provide roughly eight damsel fish with their normal daily allotment of food. Unfortunately, this amount of food all occurs effectively at once (or over a very short period) in an aquarium, whereas on a natural reef it would occur over a 12 hour period. Additionally, aquarium food is a relatively high-protein material. When most reef fish\es encounter planktonic patches of food, they eat voraciously, and material gets passed through their guts in a rapid manner resulting in incomplete digestion. This is precisely what happens to many fish in an aquarium when it is fed. If you watch some of your plankton feeding fishes, such as clown fish or damsels, you will see that shortly after the initiation of feeding they start defecating food at an increased rate. In effect, they are pumping food through their guts. The faster the passage of the food through the gut, the less the fish get from it. Perhaps in nature this doesn't matter, as the food is always coming at them. In the aquarium, this effect could be quite deleterious.

"In aquaria, fish that naturally feed consistently on small particulate material throughout the day are being forced to exist on bulk feedings once a day or with less frequency. Under such conditions, the animal is going through continuous cycles of near starvation followed by satiation followed by near starvation. This cyclic feeding simply must have a deleterious effect on the fish. Under such situations one could expect lower than normal growth rates, higher stress, increased susceptibility to disease and possibly problems with nitrogen metabolism.

"The amount of food impacting on the [natural] reef over the course of a day is substantial. Over a section of a natural reef about three feet on side, flows a continuous flood of water carrying with it about 2,000,000 food items with an aggregate weight of about two pounds in a 24 hour period. These tiny food items would be like a rain of diffuse nutrition on the reef and reef animals, particularly the fish.

"It is apparent that coral reef planktivorous fishes, and this is most of those kept in aquaria, would benefit from changes to the normal aquarium feeding regimen. They should be fed by some sort of continuous feeding apparatus. The food dispensed by such an apparatus should be particulate in nature, and very small. The largest sizes should probably be on the size of a brine shrimp or smaller. Such food need not be specifically formulated to be highly nutritious: Rather it should be of low to moderate nutritional value. If aquarium fish are able to eat more continuously and slowly, they will get much more nutrition out of each food item than they do now. Feeding a low quality food should result in significantly less nutrient accumulation than is now commonly seen in tanks.

"In effect, we need to turn our feeding regime on its head. Rather than feeding a small amount of highly nutritious food once a day, we should be feeding a large amount of low nutrient value food frequently. Such a feeding regime as this should reduce significantly the amount of pollution effects in reef aquaria. Additionally, there would not be a daily pulse of nutrients to temporarily overwhelm the biological filter. In turn, there would less potential growth of problem algae and the development of a more balanced and easily controlled assemblage of animals within the tank.

[Skimmers remove plankton, particulates, and copepods]

[Scrubbers add copepods, and don't remove plankton or particulates]
 
Update: Pancaked screens

Since nobody is currently manufacturing a proper screen for a scrubber, we have to make the best of the materials we can get. Whatever material you use, it has been found that stacking two screens together works better than one. This is when you "pancake" two sheet of screen material together; they can be glued, sewn, or clamped together. This gives the algae much more to grab onto.
 
Update: Empty Spots On Screen

Some people have small spots on the screen, about 1" (25mm) wide, that have no algae; these spots are scattered across the screen (not just near the bulb). These spots are where algae actually WAS growing, but the algae could not hold on, so it let go and went into the water. The reasons the algae could not hold on are:

1. The screen is too smooth (most common problem). No matter what material you use, you should use rough sandpaper to really mess up the surface. If the material is clear (like acrylic; not recommended), you should not be able to see through it at all. If the material is not clear, you should not be able to see a reflection, at all. If the material is a solid sheet, holes should be drilled every 1/4" (6mm)... instead of every inch like many people have tried. With solid sheets, instead of drilling holes, it's better to lay a layer of rug canvas, plasic canvas, shade cloth, or perforated drawer liner, across the surface. You would sand this also.

2. The screen is too thin. Screens should be about 1/4" (6mm) thick. This is thicker than most materials, so you should use two or three pancaked layers of material. This gives the "roots" of the algae more to grab onto.

3. The lights are not being turned off each night (18 hours ON, 6 hours OFF). So the algae grows, but then gets weak because it cannot rest. So it lets go.

4. The flow is too low (the opposite of what you would think). Higher flow delivers more nutrients to the algae (so it can grow strong), and also gives the algae more protection from the light (since the thickness of the water on the screen is more.)

5. The bulbs are actually TOO near, or TOO strong (this is very rare, however). It seems that bulbs that are 60 watt CFL (actual, not equivalent), AND which are 2 inches (5cm) from the screen or less, start to do this. If your flow is strong, then try decreasing the light by either (1) reducing the ON hours, (2) moving the light out to 4", or (3) getting smaller bulbs. But only try one technique at a time.
 
This is nothing new. Inland Aquatics created the algal turf scrubber decades ago. For a while they were all the rage. But even they never considered them a miracle cure for anything. They still run refugia. It will not eliminate all phosphates. Depending on the system, it may not obviate the need for a skimmer.

They can be beneficial. But not in a 5gal bucket form. Much more effective is long and shallow, the longer the better.
 
You are certainly entitled to an opinion, but you should be aware that IA did not invent scrubbers; IA still has scrubber-only tanks; scrubbers in fact do "eliminate" (i.e., remove) phosphates lower than any other biological method; 5-gal bucket versions are extremenly powerful, and cheap, and have been built and proven by hundreds of users to be the only filter needed on a 100g tank; long and shallow, or any other shape, is irrelevant... the important feature is high light-power, good flow, screen roughness, and weekly cleaning in FW in a sink. And as far as skimmers go:

Scrubbers do not replace skimmers, and skimmers do not replace scrubbers; they do totally different things. Scrubbers remove Inorganic Nitrate, Nitrite, Ammonia/Ammonium, Inorganic Phosphate, and Metals, because this is what algae eat to grow. And because algae consume CO2, and generate Oxygen, CO2 is removed from the water and Oxygen is added to the water at super-saturation levels (meaning, the water cannot hold any more.)

Skimmers do not remove inorganic nitrate, nitrite, ammonia/ammonium, inorganic phosphate or metals. Skimmers remove food. This includes Organic Nitrate and Organic Phosphate, which are the ingredients of the food you put in the tank (that's why they are Organic). Skimmers also remove fish waste, which is also Organic, and is the primary food for corals and some small fish; fish waste is also made up of Organic Nitrate and Organic Phosphate. Skimmers also do not remove CO2 biologicaly, or add Oxygen biologically; instead skimmers do it indirectly by using bubbles. Thus skimmers are not as effective at removing CO2 or adding Oxygen, and do not get the water to saturation levels of oxygen.
 
Contradiction there SM...........


From your first post
Mega-Powerful Nitrate and Phosphate Remover Replaces Skimmer, Refugium, and Everything Else


.....................................................It will replace (or keep you from needing) a skimmer, refugium, phosphate removers, nitrate removers, carbon, filtersocks, and possibly even waterchanges.

From your last post.......................................
Scrubbers do not replace skimmers, and skimmers do not replace scrubbers; they do totally different things. Scrubbers remove Inorganic Nitrate, Nitrite, Ammonia/Ammonium, Inorganic Phosphate, and Metals, because this is what algae eat to grow. And because algae consume CO2, and generate Oxygen, CO2 is removed from the water and Oxygen is added to the water at super-saturation levels (meaning, the water cannot hold any more.)


So which is it :blink: ??

Are you yourself still using a scrubber as the only form of filtration/nutrient export on your tank or have you started skimming again?


Johnny
 
It's a matter of clarification. Scrubbers do replace the end-result of removing nuisance algae (like people use skimmers for), but scrubbers do no remove the same thing as skimmers. Scrubbers remove Inorganic Nitrate and Inorganic Phosphate, which feed nuisance algae directly (which is why the algae grows on the scrubber), whereas skimmers remove food, which also reduces nuisance algae.
 
But what I wanted to know is........

Are you yourself still using a scrubber as the only form of filtration/nutrient export on your tank or have you started skimming again?


Johnny
 
Of course no skimming. Only the scrubber. Is about 9 months now, feeding heavy liquid food by continuous feeder, no water changes, good sps growth for the most part (in spite of 150w mh)
 
Of course no skimming. Only the scrubber. Is about 9 months now, feeding heavy liquid food by continuous feeder, no water changes, good sps growth for the most part (in spite of 150w mh)

Well done, 9 months is quite impressive SM :good:

How big is your screen? It looks bigger than 100 square inches in your video.
 
No, it's 100. The effective area is 5 X 20. I'm trying to find time to do a dual-screen version though.
 
Update: Screen Sequence

Here is the typical sequence of algae on a new screen: First is a light brown coating, like a slime. After a week of that, you clean it lightly, and the next week you get a darker brown. After you clean that, you'll either get very dark brown/black stuff which stays very hard and thin, or you'll start getting some green hair. If it's the dark stuff, clean it right way (don't wait a week). After a few cleanings of this dark stuff, it too will start turning green. After a month or two, most of the growth will be green hair. If you start getting purple cyano on the screen, it means your light is too weak or too far away. If you start getting a hard yellowish plastic-like coating that covers the algae, it means your flow is too low in that area. If you start getting bald spots near your bulb, it means you are leaving your bulb on 24 hours, when you should be turning it off 6 hours a day. If you start getting round holes in your algae, it means pods are eating through it, because you are not using freshwater in your 7-day cleanings.
 
Screen Recomendations

I've been doing research on the ultimate screen material. I want it to have all the best characteristics, so if you have some ideas as to what the material should do, or what it should have, let's hear it.
 
Taken from "It's In The Water", by Ron Shimek
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-02/rs/feature/index.php

[Aquarists have] the feeling that organisms somehow "use up," "change," or "consume" many of these [trace] chemicals, and in doing so, forever remove the chemicals from the reef aquarium system. This assumption is not completely false, some chemicals are "used up" and removed from the system, but most are not. Organisms are dynamic entities, and while some chemicals are temporarily sequestered away, such chemicals generally remain available in the system due to metabolic turnover. The only real exceptions to this as far as organisms are concerned are those chemicals, such as calcium, which get incorporated into an insoluble matrix.

Several trace elements are found in elevated concentrations in aquarium water [Table 2; Figure 2]. Some of these metals have extremely high concentrations relative to NSW; tin has already been mentioned as having concentrations over 200,000 times above normal, but Thallium, Titanium, Aluminum, Zinc, Cobalt, Antimony, and Copper all have concentrations of over 95 times normal.

Several of the trace metals varied in concert, particularly Cobalt, Tin, Zinc, Titanium, Copper and Vanadium, and lower but still positive correlations with Nickel and Aluminum are found. All of these metals are found at concentrations far above those of natural sea water. Some of these concentrations are almost unbelievably high. Tin has an average concentration in our systems of over 200,000 times greater than in natural sea water.

Increases in many of these same metals are correlated with the age of the tank. One explanation for that pattern would be that they may build up with the passage of time.

The older tanks also have more ammonia, nitrate/nitrite, phosphorus, iodine and copper than younger tanks.

Many of the trace element concentrations are lower than they are in freshly made up artificial sea water. Whether this indicates organism use, or abiotic chemical reactions, is unclear. Even though these levels are lower than in "fresh" artificial sea water, they are still very much higher than in natural sea water, and may still indicate a cause for concern.

[scrubbers remove metals; skimmers do not]
 
Update: Where to point bulb

Always try to point the bulb at the middle of the screen, not the top. You don't want too much algae growing at the top by the pipe, because it will grow into the slot and slow down the water. If you have no choice and you have to point the light at the slot, you can attach a thin plastic strip to the pipe, such that it blocks the light from hitting the slot.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top