Biopellets vs GFO
- Thread starter bpitts4
- Start date
Both are expensive. Biopellets will make a hole in any wallet. From what I understand, biopellets its is food source for bacteria, increasing the amount of this, so the bacteria will consume all detriment and won't let space to phosphate and nitrates to get in high levels.
In the other side phosphate removers bind and attach to phosphate thus removing it, once its exhausted has to be removed otherwise could start realising them back again to the water column. I could be wrong and I will let others to chime.
In the other side phosphate removers bind and attach to phosphate thus removing it, once its exhausted has to be removed otherwise could start realising them back again to the water column. I could be wrong and I will let others to chime.
I have run both at different times and found them to both be effective at keeping algae growth down. I grow chaeto in mu sump as well just in case though. The bio pellets to require less maintenance and monthly cost as GFO needs to be changed regularly.
I set-up a TLF reactor with GFO and later converted it to bio pellets. It's not a premium set-up but it's effective and goes for around $100 for the pump and reactor. IMOP with something as simple as a reactor you don't need to break the bank.
I set-up a TLF reactor with GFO and later converted it to bio pellets. It's not a premium set-up but it's effective and goes for around $100 for the pump and reactor. IMOP with something as simple as a reactor you don't need to break the bank.
Great. Thanks for the advice. I am going to order a reactor and slowly add biopellets to my system and see what the results are. I will skip the GFO for now and report back on the results. I have actually heard mixed results regarding bio pellets but I think it all depends on how fast you acclimate this new filter to your system. I plan on taking it slow and acclimating a little at a time. Thanks for all the feedback!
With biopellets you will want to start with smaller amounts and slowly build up and I would also test nitrates and phosphates at least weekly. It is also best if you have a recirculating reactor for these as then you can control the flow in and out separate from tumbling the pellets. Controlling the flow is so that once they start removing nitrates & phosphates you can control the flow through reactor.
I agree with the rest, both could shock any aquarium if not used properly and slowly added, overall with great benefits too.
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 0
why waste your time with biopellets when you can run Matrix Rock, which is much better at cultivating beneficial bacteria? GFO is a very effective way of removing Phosphates, but also extremely toxic to a reef tank if used in the wrong way. Phosguard is a much more safe way of removing phosphates, though it make take a tiny bit longer to start, which wont matter unless your phosphates are off the chart, and when it is exhausted it DOES NOT leach phosphates back into the tank. If i were you i would go with Seachem Matrix Rock and SeaChem Phosguard, both will do what you want, and both are a long term safe effective treatment that can be run non stop. Just my two cents.
IMHO Biopellets and GFO are the past.
IMHO Biopellets and GFO are the past.
Matrix has been around a lot longer than bio pellets. In my experience matrix and phosguard are both good products (as are most Seachem products), however matrix isn't going to have the same effect as a chemical binding agent (GFO or aluminum oxide like phosguard) or carbon dosing (biopellets, vodka dosing, ect). Matrix just gives bacteria a place to live, it doesn't feed it.
- Messages
- 6,671
- Reaction score
- 15
GFO and Carbon dosing are way more effective than Matrix and that Aluminum based Phosguard (every company used to make an Aluminum based "phosguard", but everyone pulled out and went to iron except Seachem) that has been known to cause issues with certain corals....GFO is so effective that it also can be detrimental to SPS by possibly stripping phosphates out of water too quick....
I have been carbon dosing, and using GFO, for years....I also use Seachem Matrix and Rox carbon, and along with large weekly water changes keeps my tank ULNS.
I did use bio-pellets at one time, but gave up after I found them not as effective and more work than dosing V-v.........
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
I disagree completely on several points. 1) define effective. I would argue that effectiveness is all rather equitable. Whereas speed (or efficiency) is different. 2) I can show you scientific research showing aluminum based adsorbers had NO negative effect on corals. That's an old wives tale. I have found the most effective (financially, long term, and stability wise).
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
Here's something that piques my curiosity re: bio pellets, carbon dosing, etc. The bacteria that's "grown" consumes nitrate/phosphate, yes? So, why are the carbon source and/or pellets needed? Why do you have to feed a bacteria that you want to eat something pre-existing in the water? Proponents of this, please explain to me. If like to know your thoughts.
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
We need to define "efficiency" to keep discussing it.
I'm no biochemist but from what I've read the bacteria in question consume phosphate, nitrate, and carbon. Since the goal is to minimize phosphate and nitrate in the system, adding carbon eliminates it as the limiting nutrient and the other two can be fully depleted. The bacteria can then be consumed by larger organisms or exported directly (skimmer).
- Messages
- 6,671
- Reaction score
- 15
here:
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#16">http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#16</a>
[IMG]http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/7/chemistry">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/7/chemistry</a>
[IMG]http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2004/6/review">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2004/6/review</a>
recent discussion with Randy Holmes-Farley contributing:
[IMG]http://web1.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2128912">http://web1.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2128912</a>
another one:
[IMG]http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2094236">http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2094236</a>
discussion and isotherm charts between DD Rowa & phosban, but I don't know of any between Aluminum (only one company still sells this stuff) & GFO.
anecdotally, on June 8, 2006 I started using Phosguard, my phates reduced but not low enough and on June 27 I switched to ROWA, and immediately my phates went "undetectable" with test kit that I was using at time (Salifert).
So, you may disagree, but I have years of experience with a product that works that is well supported by the "reef chemistry" and SPS community. I don't need any "proof" because I can look across the room and see it! Year after year......
Do either of you have "proof" other wise besides an incentive to sell stuff?
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#16">http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#16</a>
[IMG]http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/7/chemistry">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2003/7/chemistry</a>
[IMG]http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2004/6/review">http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2004/6/review</a>
recent discussion with Randy Holmes-Farley contributing:
[IMG]http://web1.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2128912">http://web1.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2128912</a>
another one:
[IMG]http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2094236">http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2094236</a>
discussion and isotherm charts between DD Rowa & phosban, but I don't know of any between Aluminum (only one company still sells this stuff) & GFO.
anecdotally, on June 8, 2006 I started using Phosguard, my phates reduced but not low enough and on June 27 I switched to ROWA, and immediately my phates went "undetectable" with test kit that I was using at time (Salifert).
So, you may disagree, but I have years of experience with a product that works that is well supported by the "reef chemistry" and SPS community. I don't need any "proof" because I can look across the room and see it! Year after year......
Do either of you have "proof" other wise besides an incentive to sell stuff?
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
If this were true, wouldn't organic carbon rich systems, such as those lacking carbon or protein skimming yield heavy loads of this desirable bacteria, and hence be nitrate/phosphate poor? And in reality, they are the opposite.
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
- Messages
- 3,379
- Reaction score
- 4
Also, FYI Ralph, I sell quite a bit of Rowaphos. So, get your info correct before making passive aggressive accusations.
