macro algae in fuge

[tgriffin]

I'm curious what others think about the true effectiveness of a refugium of reducing nitrates. I know everyone has an opinion so let's hear it. I just set up a fuge with grape calerpa and chaeto and no deep sand bed. I'm curious if this is going to be more of a benefit to me as a breeding grounds for pods or nitrate remover. I'm hoping for both


Thanks

 

[eagle9252]

i cant grow Chaeto as maybe due to flow in the bottom of the fuge. i can grow grape like crazy. i have a 100w 6500k cfl and a metal clip hanger . it comes on at 11:30pm and goes off at 9am. in my new sump i'm adding a spray bar to and some internal flow and see what happens.

 

[reeferman]

it traps a lot of crap if not properly maintained but will definitely boost the pod population.great for that if nothing else.

 

[realfish]

It works very well for me. I've run it in a few different setups and have never had nitrate issues. My current setup has only been up for 6 months, but my Nitrates on an ELOS test measure less than 1 ppm. I use chaeto in an independent refugium that is fed by my main pump and then drains back into my sump. I think the refugium has two 13 watt power compacts over it at 5100k. I do 10% water changes twice monthly.

 

[ralph atl]

reeferman;799517 wrote: it traps a lot of crap if not properly maintained but will definitely boost the pod population.great for that if nothing else.

that's about it....great for pods....eventually it will add more nutrients then take away.....

 

[rdnelson]

mysterybox;799521 wrote: that's about it....great for pods....eventually it will add more nutrients then take away.....

But if you are pruning it on a regular basis are you not removing those nutrients?

 

[k3nnyp]

rdnelson99;799525 wrote: But if you are pruning it on a regular basis are you not removing those nutrients?

Are the added nutrients from the macro algae or the additional pods it is harboring?

 

[ralph atl]

rdnelson99;799525 wrote: But if you are pruning it on a regular basis are you not removing those nutrients?

yes.....

but over time a lot of detritus is trapped also.....a lot.

 

[nassar0505]

Nutrient removal, Pods love it (free food) and if you grow the right stuff more free food for those tangs we all love....The Pros are huge compared to the Cons. Yes trimming and proper cleaning of a fuge is a must, but so is all maitiance with our reefs.

I feel like I cant over feed my tank, the more i feed the faster the macro grows and the faster I trim. I dont do water changes for nutrient removal, as much as i do them to replenish the goods for the reef.

 

[bruce 1]

nassar0505;799540 wrote: Nutrient removal, Pods love it (free food) and if you grow the right stuff more free food for those tangs we all love...f.

What kind do they eat?

 

[nassar0505]

I grow gracilaria and they love it and is more nutritious then any nori, but there are several.. Mine wont touch chaeto, though ive heard some say that there's do.

I think i say this every time this comes up, but i swear the health of my yellow tang is due to live macro.

Check ipsf.com good info on there site

 

[ichthyoid]

Gracillaria (both red and green) and Ulva (sea lettuce) are options that can be fed back to fish, and they will love it. Chaeto they won't (ime).

I found that if you feed the pods, by sprinkling a few flakes over the algae, they grow much faster and profusely.

Feed with the fuge light off, so the pods will come out. After ~20 minutes you can turn on the light and see them running all over the place.

You may find the amount of algae needed to reduce nitrate and phosphate significantly, will depend on the bioload (number/size of fish). A large and/or heavily stocked tank will need a lot of algae growth to keep up.

Using this approach in a SPS tank may not work well, due to the very low nutrient levels required.

 

[rdnelson]

Good info. Where might I find some of those types of macro

 

[ichthyoid]

Check LFS'S

PM sent

 

[jmaneyapanda]

IMO, the biomass of vegetation needed in order adequately remove a reasonable amount of nutrient would need to be massive in relative o the tank size. Enough to make most refugiums a nothing more than s refuge for micro life.

 

[ralph atl]

jmaneyapanda;799627 wrote: IMO, the biomass of vegetation needed in order adequately remove a reasonable amount of nutrient would need to be massive in relative o the tank size. Enough to make most refugiums a nothing more than s refuge for micro life.

exactly....