High Phosphate but Low Algae Possible?
- Thread starter lant
- Start date
Thanks, that's +2 for the Hanna checkers. I haven't used the Hanna checkers before, but really considering it now. Everytime someone posts them up in the drygoods section, it goes within minutes. Guess I'm gonna have to order online after all. How do you like the Alk and Calcium checkers?
Acro, I read several of your posts about BB, high flow and micron filters. I have BB, highflow, and I am also running 100 micron filters for the first time to emulate your success. I love the clarity, but the only problem I've found is that I have gone through several cycles of nutrient swings ever since I started using the socks. Mostly nitrates and now phosphates (but I am pretty sure it's from the dry rock). Maybe I didn't read your past posts thoroughly enough, but do you also run some sort of carbon source? How are you currently handling nitrates?
- Messages
- 1,126
- Reaction score
- 0
The best Hanna test is Alk. Super fast and easy, less than 60 seconds. I'd say their phosphate test is second best.
Ca is tough with many different brand tests as you have to do it just perfect and might never get the same reading twice. I really don't test it too much anymore ... I dose 2 part and keep an eye on the alk. If that's in check usually ca will be also.
The socks are just another form of mechanical filtration, catching stuff before it settles in the sump or stays in the water column. It would end up as nitrates either way if you never rinsed the socks, so I'd think the answer regarding nitrates is elsewhere.
I use a sulfur denitrator to get rid of excess nitrates in my 465, and I use GFO to get rid of phosphates.
Denitrator:
Dawg, you started out asking me why I think it's phosphates, and you also asked me to measure my other stats. I responded by saying that I think phosphates are the most difficult to test. I even responded with my latest aquarium measurements for the three stats you mentioned. I never said that other phosphate kits do not work, or wouldn't be able to detect my levels of phosphates. I simply said that I have not bought a phosphate test kit in a while, and that API was the only kit I had readily available. In fact, the whole reason I posted is because I did not trust the results of the API test kit. I even said, "By the time it shows up on the test kits, it means your phosphates are already too high" in reference to my API phosphate kit. Without a reliable kit readily available, I tried to figure out my phosphate levels by observation even if I did not have an algae problem.
Your response was some wiseguy comment designed to be confusing. You asked me for alk, cal and mg, yet did not use any of it in your answer. The only "answer" you gave was already given by someone else above, so you are absolutely right. I did not understand whatever knowledge you were trying to pass on to me.
Then you went on by saying that "staring" at my aquarium was some sort of hocus pocus. It's an aquarium, not a crystal ball dawg. Aquariums are designed to be observed, and you can learn things from observing it.
You insinuated that I was ungrateful for your help. Well gee gosh Dawg, I forgot to mention that your insights changed my lilfe. Also, did anyone ever tell you what big nice arms you have? C'mon man....
So there you go, my brief list of problems with your answers...
You think I am dead set I know it's a phosphate problem. I am so dead set, in fact, that I ordered a Hanna checker. Now, while I wait for the Hanna checker to come, maybe I can make a guess that phosphates are the problem and run phosguard. Or, I can do nothing for the next 5 days because I do not have the right kit to test my hunch.
Conversely, I was dead set that you were trying to be a wiseguy. I could be completely wrong. Most likely you're a really decent guy, and I'll come off as a complete a**. Whatever you end up thinking about me, at least you'll know that I don't have much patience for wisea**, condescending and confusing comments.
seth the wine guy
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 30
Before administering a "cure", ie Phosguard, I think you should verify with a good photometer what your PO4 is. You need to know where you've been to know where you're going. I can't personally speak to the Hanna checkers. I only have experience with their bench top models.
Easiest and cheapest way I've found to keep Nitrates down is Seachem Matrix. Some may complain about particles that get trapped in it but I don't care what it "appears" to have wrong with it if the water params are where they should be. I measure at absolute zero every time. (Using a fairly accurate tool.
Easiest and cheapest way I've found to keep Nitrates down is Seachem Matrix. Some may complain about particles that get trapped in it but I don't care what it "appears" to have wrong with it if the water params are where they should be. I measure at absolute zero every time. (Using a fairly accurate tool.
seth the wine guy
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 30
I have a compartment in my sump that was designed to hold a media like this. The entire water column has to flow through it. I'd estimate around 1300gph. I have a majority of pond matrix and the rest smaller matrix. You can easily use in a media canister but I'd recommend using a heavy duty built reactor like MRC makes. Ideally, you put a tremendous amount of flow through the matrix and that makes for a lot of had pressure. There are very few large reactors built to withstand that type of psi.
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Wiseguy huh? This so reminds me of 40 year old virgin when Kevin Hart overreacts in an argument with Romany Malco claiming Romany to be, “ throwing too many big words at him, because he doesn’t understand them he’ll take them as disrespect”. LOL </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">So to your first and ninth post and I’ll quote the specifics here. </span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Tell me how I was being a wiseguy by asking why you thought it was exclusively Po4? </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Since when is it out of line to ask for other parameters when trying to identify problems? </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Anyone? </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Anyone?</span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">…………….?</span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Quite honestly, most every forum out there ask as a way of politeness to the forum for asking your question; simple parameters, schedule and husbandry to be included before answers are given. But yeah I’m the jackass wiseguy!!!</span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Seriously?! You expect me to do the work for you?!! For starters how in the world do you expect me to give you answers post facto to the results that hinge on the problem?! How **** inconsiderate and selfish can you get? Or do you expect posters to go on a diatribe identifying the 400 problems you could have, of which 395 would become irrelevant the moment you clarify the simplest request of EVERY help thread!!! Again, ***! Get real! </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Furthermore, while you say you’ve responded with those figure (ALK, CAL and MAG) you’ve still yet to produce squat. Not only are you using and I quote from you, “not very reliable” and “I don't deny that they are unreliable” test kits you’ve still yet to post those results as you’ve said you have. For the record let me enlighten you here, “Good” is not a measurement in any sense of the word! </span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
<span style="font-family: Verdana">LMAO I like you reference to hocus pocus. Might be of more use to you in this hobby than your current methodology. For knowingly using and (argue it if you want) relying on admittedly faulty tests kits and backed by an ocular assessment of which apparently has the ability to replace test kits altogether… Hell hit the library, Hocus Pocus, witchcraft, sorcery and wicca may be all that’s left!<span style="color: black">
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Why would I insinuate you to be ungrateful?! You never let me help, you threw up a roadblock the minute I tried. Since then I coin you either ignorant or an ***, you pick.<span style="color: black">
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Well I’m glad for your last comment, I was beginning to get concerned. I tend to disagree slightly with your rendition here as well as your “patience”. </span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">But hey, we have two things in common I guess. We both think we don’t have time for wisea**, I’ll supplement my added irritation of idiots to go along with this…. </span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Good day to you,</span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Jesse</span></span>
</span></span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Wiseguy huh? This so reminds me of 40 year old virgin when Kevin Hart overreacts in an argument with Romany Malco claiming Romany to be, “ throwing too many big words at him, because he doesn’t understand them he’ll take them as disrespect”. LOL </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">So to your first and ninth post and I’ll quote the specifics here. </span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
</span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
</span></span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Tell me how I was being a wiseguy by asking why you thought it was exclusively Po4? </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Since when is it out of line to ask for other parameters when trying to identify problems? </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Anyone? </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Anyone?</span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">…………….?</span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Quite honestly, most every forum out there ask as a way of politeness to the forum for asking your question; simple parameters, schedule and husbandry to be included before answers are given. But yeah I’m the jackass wiseguy!!!</span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
</span></span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Seriously?! You expect me to do the work for you?!! For starters how in the world do you expect me to give you answers post facto to the results that hinge on the problem?! How **** inconsiderate and selfish can you get? Or do you expect posters to go on a diatribe identifying the 400 problems you could have, of which 395 would become irrelevant the moment you clarify the simplest request of EVERY help thread!!! Again, ***! Get real! </span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Furthermore, while you say you’ve responded with those figure (ALK, CAL and MAG) you’ve still yet to produce squat. Not only are you using and I quote from you, “not very reliable” and “I don't deny that they are unreliable” test kits you’ve still yet to post those results as you’ve said you have. For the record let me enlighten you here, “Good” is not a measurement in any sense of the word! </span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">
</span></span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">LMAO I like you reference to hocus pocus. Might be of more use to you in this hobby than your current methodology. For knowingly using and (argue it if you want) relying on admittedly faulty tests kits and backed by an ocular assessment of which apparently has the ability to replace test kits altogether… Hell hit the library, Hocus Pocus, witchcraft, sorcery and wicca may be all that’s left!<span style="color: black">
</span></span>
<span style="font-family: Verdana">Why would I insinuate you to be ungrateful?! You never let me help, you threw up a roadblock the minute I tried. Since then I coin you either ignorant or an ***, you pick.<span style="color: black">
</span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Well I’m glad for your last comment, I was beginning to get concerned. I tend to disagree slightly with your rendition here as well as your “patience”. </span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">But hey, we have two things in common I guess. We both think we don’t have time for wisea**, I’ll supplement my added irritation of idiots to go along with this…. </span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Good day to you,</span></span>
<span style="color: black"><span style="font-family: Verdana">Jesse</span></span>
Matrix or any other similar type porous media needs to be removed and rinsed regularly, which IME, eventually becomes coated with biofilm, greatly reducing its effectiveness for nitrate reduction. That is what I saw when I used it, before removing it from my sump completely. As I said, I think live rock has much more filtering capacity than we give it credit for.
I removed the Matrix from my 465 to see if I could without an impact on the biofilter of the tank, and it makes it easier for me to keep the sump clean. There was never a spike in ammonia or nitrite after I pulled the Matrix. I have fine biofiltration in the LR in the tank, roughly 250-275#, and I use the sulfur denitrator for the nitrates.
But if you decide to use it, Matrix is a fine product, just the caveat about cleaning it once in a while. The issue with it in my sump was that to get 100% flow through, I had to use about 11 gallons of it in my MRC 155 gallon sump, which made manual removal, cleaning, and replacement a real big PIA, vs the relative ease a denitrator can be serviced.
Probably not as big a deal on a smaller volume reef system, as you would not be using near the quantity of Matrix I had to use.
Either way will work for nitrate removal, and there are other methods as well besides Matrix or a sulfur denitrator. No one way is necessarily better than the other. Pretty much depends on what you personally find convenient to your reefing and maintenance style/regimen.
I removed the Matrix from my 465 to see if I could without an impact on the biofilter of the tank, and it makes it easier for me to keep the sump clean. There was never a spike in ammonia or nitrite after I pulled the Matrix. I have fine biofiltration in the LR in the tank, roughly 250-275#, and I use the sulfur denitrator for the nitrates.
But if you decide to use it, Matrix is a fine product, just the caveat about cleaning it once in a while. The issue with it in my sump was that to get 100% flow through, I had to use about 11 gallons of it in my MRC 155 gallon sump, which made manual removal, cleaning, and replacement a real big PIA, vs the relative ease a denitrator can be serviced.
Probably not as big a deal on a smaller volume reef system, as you would not be using near the quantity of Matrix I had to use.
Either way will work for nitrate removal, and there are other methods as well besides Matrix or a sulfur denitrator. No one way is necessarily better than the other. Pretty much depends on what you personally find convenient to your reefing and maintenance style/regimen.
seth the wine guy
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 30
I guess the sump design can greatly contribute to the difficulty and how debris collects. If I'm not mistaken, the MRC Matrix sump has a horizontal flow through media compartment. I bet a ton of stuff did collect with that design. I find a vertical flow through compartment much less troublesome than you describe. I use ~4 gallons of the media and have cleaned/rinsed it once in two years.
So, I think a large reactor application with high flow would be excellent for most reefers.
Yup, it has a horizontal flow, each side of the bio chamber has hundreds of small holes. Your experience may be totally different from mine. Maybe the detritus accumulation played a greater role in my sump than yours. A coating of mulm on Matrix would only worsen matters, outside of anything else that may grow on the surface of the Matrix. Strong vertical flow might lessen or eliminate that altogether.
I almost thought you didn't reply...but of course you did. I'll tell you what...seeing that you've really manage to work up a sweat, I'll apologize and concede that some or most of my comments were uncalled for.
That being said, as much of a prick as I am, I would never call someone an idiot because they disagree with me. I am new to ARC, but I've been reading threads for several months. Your name sure shows up a lot in threads belittling other people. Sure, some people deserve it, but taking turns calling someone an idiot isn't really the most "decent" thing to do. Your internet persona really comes off as someone quick to berate others.
From the beginning, I only had an issue with a single comment that you made. I am too much of an idiot to ever figure out the meaning of that one, so you are going to have to explain it to me. It's in your second post if you don't know what I am talking about. Explain to me how you were being helpful, and then tell me when I put up that roadblock.
As far as some of your other comments go, I don't really know where your trolling ends and begins. It's all entertaining non the less.
I bought a gallon of Matrix and 3 mesh bags. So my plan is to place these bags right where the water drains into my sump. I assume this is what you mean by vertical flow right? I am very excited to try this Matrix out actually. I previously assumed these worked only as well as rubble.
