Liverock rubble or Matrix

[acroholic]

My Cheato refugium is remote, and is set up like another tank in terms of water in/out.

I get a large part of the detritus in the two 7" 100 micron filter socks I use. Most of the rest settles in the skimmer section of the sump. And when I need to I just wet/dry vacuum it out. The return section of the sump is clean all the time.

I'd imagine any particulate detritus that makes it past the filter socks, skimmer section and Vertex 250 skimmer in the sump gets pumped back into the DT. But the water is clear, all parameters good, and the corals all have growth and PE. Actually, I have never seen my corals looking better.

So I guess what I am saying is that the way I do it is working for me, but my way is not necessarily the best or only way to do it.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Acroholic;541758 wrote: My Cheato refugium is remote, and is set up like another tank in terms of water in/out.

I get a large part of the detritus in the two 7" 100 micron filter socks I use. Most of the rest settles in the skimmer section of the sump. And when I need to I just wet/dry vacuum it out. The return section of the sump is clean all the time.

I'd imagine any particulate detritus that makes it past the filter socks, skimmer section and Vertex 250 skimmer in the sump gets pumped back into the DT. But the water is clear, all parameters good, and the corals all have growth and PE. Actually, I have never seen my corals looking better.

So I guess what I am saying is that the way I do it is working for me, but my way is not necessarily the best or only way to do it.

Again, just as deils advocate, if this rock was in a section past the socks and skimmer section, it wouldnt be a trap then, right? I guess Im just saying its not black and white.

 

[acroholic]

jmaneyapanda;541764 wrote: I guess Im just saying its not black and white.

I never said it was. I just said that is the method I prefer to use.

 

[jennm]

I've been away all day... Jeremy touched on several points concerning Matrix vs. BioBalls.

If I may expand on one point that I didn't see addressed (or forgive me if it was)... BioBalls are constructed to ONLY provide aerobic bacterial colonization and activity. BioBalls are not porous and 100% of their surface area is exposed to aerobic environments. All of the bacteria must stay on the outside surfaces. With Matrix, or rubble, the material is porous and dense, allowing penetration to anaerobic areas, which the BioBalls just don't have. They are hard plastic, nothing is meant to penetrate to the 'inside' of the plastic surfaces.

Yes, everything can be a "crap trap" (like that term!) if it isn't kept clean either with mechanical filtration or regular cleaning.

Jenn

 

[cr500_af]

This is a great thread at a great time for me... I'm laying out the new stuff, and fuge construction is one thing I'm not 100% sure about.
I will have two seperate 22.5g tanks (from Jenn's place once upon a time). My plan is one macro-only fuge, one full of sand, and all my rubble in the first chamber of the sump.

I'm wondering if I should do my fuge in a more conventional way (rubble and macro together), and try to maximize pod reproduction.

If I seperate them, I am wondering if they could do well with identical flow through the tanks, so that I can have one over the other and "daisy-chain" them... water from the sump into the upper (fuge), out the overflow into the lower (DSB), then out that overflow into the sump again.

 

[acroholic]

Assault;541762 wrote: but it's also your setup too Dave, you concentrate more on corals than fish, therefore need less swimming area in your DT, some on the other hand, have large fish that need more room, and prefer less rock in the DT.

My tanks have quite open aquascape. I am not using a large amount of live rock. I have a Naso, Kole, Sailfin, RS Purple, Gem Tang, melanarus wrasse, 4x flame wrasse, yellow coris, McKoskers, psychedelic wrasse, coral beauty, Male and Female Swallowtail Angels, and another wrasse that I can't remember the name of. And I have another 10 fish or so in my 150 gallon. I would not call that a light fish load.

 

[jmaneyapanda]

Acroholic;541768 wrote: I never said it was. I just said that is the method I prefer to use.

Thats it. We fight.


Just kidding. I didnt mean to imply you did. Its my overall concensus on this topic. What many people said.

 

[acroholic]

Here are my own feelings on the live rock amount needed in a tank, and of course I cannot back this up with any research other than my own experience.

Nitrifying bacteria, whether aerobic or anaerobic, will multiply to that population level equal the amount of food being produced. In a sulfur denitrator, they multiply to the amount of nitrate they consume. Lessen the nitrate and their population falls to match the amount of nitrate available. Increase it again and their population goes up again.

Same principle for aerobic/anaerobic nitrifying bacteria in live rock. If you rock is porous, an mine is, then you have a lot of space for nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria in that rock, regardless of the location (tank, sump, refugium, whatever). Is every available square foot of open space occupied by bacteria? I don't know, but I'd kind of doubt it. There is only the amount of aerobic or anaerobic bacteria in a tank's live rock that will equal the ammonia>nitrite>nitrate being produced. The nitrifying bacteria population level is dependent on the amount being produced, and will fluctuate relative to the amount of food available. More nitrogenous waste, higher bacteria population. Less nitrogenous, less bacteria population.

So do you NEED a tank full of live rock AND a sump full of live rock?

Who is to say that the excess porous space in the LR in your tank is not more than enough to deal with any fluctuations of nitrogenous waste from a fish death or overfeeding, for example, and that the bacteria will just multiply in the tank LR to meet the amount of nitrogenous waste generated? None of my reef setups use any type of LR in the sumps and it works just fine for me. I don't have an issue keeping fish or corals alive.

I don't think there is anything WRONG with having LR/rubble in your sump, but my experience tells me it may not be necessary.

 

[acroholic]

Assault;541795 wrote: how many lbs of rock in your system?

This is just a guesstimate, but I would say about 300-350 pounds between a 300 gallon tank/150 gallon tank/75gallon sump/15 gallon fuge and an total net volume of about
425-450 gallons of water.

My live rock is primarily Totoka and Figi.

 

[acroholic]

Assault;541826 wrote: I want about 800-1000 lbs of LR in my system, but don't wan't a detritus problem either.

I think any system will have detritus in it whether you have 100 or 1 million pounds of LR.

 

[acroholic]

Assault;541830 wrote: I plan on having detritus, just not a detritus problem

Oz has LR in his sump. I think he has the LR suspended above the bottom of the sump, on egg crate or PVC so any detritus that falls off can be washed out with a pump.