Can you have too much biomedia?

[Fugie]

Say you lived in an alternate universe where reefers had so much extra space in a sump... What would be the argument toward or against filling it to the brim with bio media as opposed to having just enough to serve your bio load? Can too much bimedia cause a problem or challenge? Is more better?

 

[shakacuz]

definitely a such thing as too much filtration. i would start slow and work your way up to a desired amount of bio media.

 

[Lavey29]

Bacteria is only go to develop to the available nutrients levels that support it. Having more available space for Bacteria doesn't mean levels will increase so in theory you can have to much bio media but doubt it hurts anything.

 

[srobertb]

I fail to see how too much is possible so long as they are not affecting water quality by leaching chemicals or affecting chemistry (by leaching chemicals).

It is my understanding that bacteria will grow and propagate based on the available food source (and recede or die back if that food source is limited). It’s self balancing.

I guess if you had “too much” bacteria they may break down organic compounds before they are skimmed? That sounds silly.

 

[brandon429]

all display reefs are using well past the degree of surface area they need for their fish loading + animals + feed and waste. so if you stack a sump full of extra pounds of matrix, in addition to the live rock already used beyond the need, nothing bad happens you just get more waste catching areas to clean.

and if you used no biomedia anywhere in the tank, and no sand, and half the live rock we all currently use in the display, that tank would carry the same degree of fish ammonia in balance on a seneye that the super stacked sump system would carry. It's hard to fathom that reef tanks don't ever run short on surface area when rocks are set in the display, but that's the case. you don't get 'better' ammonia control with more surface area balls or bricks than you do by using just the degree needed in the form of live/cured rock. the answer is, it's a waste of money to stack in extra media but it's also harmless.

sandbeds catch and store just as much waste as a sump full of unneeded bioballs and our systems deal with the sinking pretty well.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I question whether it is desirable to have ANY such media. I wouldn't.

One really does not need or even WANT to drive ammonia as low as possible, essentially taking food out of the mouths of corals.

It is also possible it may help drive nitrate too low.

 

[BZOFIQ]

Edit: I don't think it's harmful to have too much media. Beneficial bacteria levels will coincide with what population that system can support. I believe larger quantities of media will make the system more resilient providing additional surface area as needed.

 

[BZOFIQ]

I question whether it is desirable to have ANY such media. I wouldn't.

One really does not need or even WANT to drive ammonia as low as possible, essentially taking food out of the mouths of corals.

It is also possible it may help drive nitrate too low.

Randy,

In your opinion alone, what would you say is an ideal nitrate level in a softies dominant tank?

 

[threebuoys]

I question whether it is desirable to have ANY such media. I wouldn't.

One really does not need or even WANT to drive ammonia as low as possible, essentially taking food out of the mouths of corals.

It is also possible it may help drive nitrate too low.

I want to be sure I understand. Does this mean that filtration would be limited to filter socks (or equivalent) and skimmer and bacteria occurring naturally on the live rock, etc in the tank?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Randy,

In your opinion alone, what would you say is an ideal nitrate level in a softies dominant tank?

My recommendation is 2-10 ppm nitrate and 0.02 to 0.1 ppm phosphate for any reef tank, with levels above that range better than levels below it.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I want to be sure I understand. Does this mean that filtration would be limited to filter socks (or equivalent) and skimmer and bacteria occurring naturally on the live rock, etc in the tank?

Depends on what you mean by filtration, but the ammonia to nitrate conversion process by bacteria has plenty of surface area from rock and sand, and a great many tanks do not ever use such media. For 20 years I had no such media.

In a normal reef tank, I'm not sure that process is all that important anyway, since may organisms from algae to corals, will take up ammonia directly.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

IMO, anyone considering any amount of biomedia should ask themselves this question:

What problem exactly am I trying to solve?

If you cannot answer that, then it's time to rethink the plan.

Don't be fooled by sales advertising that imply it only does good stuff, since even the good stuff may be unnecessary and they ignore potential detriments.

 

[BZOFIQ]

My recommendation is 2-10 ppm nitrate and 0.02 to 0.1 ppm phosphate for any reef tank, with levels above that range better than levels below it.

Thank you, really wanted to know where you stand.

 

[brandon429]

wanted to add per Robert's mention above: bacteria do not die off in a reef tank/aquarium water system from starvation. if there is water in the tank, they're feeding, and growing/reproducing. our assembly process for reef tanks imports many different forms of trace feeding for water bacteria because it's nonsterile

if feed is ever added to a system, or a snail is there to make pellet waste / organic slicks developed during the cycle ramp up catch and hold new feed sources / those become permanent sources of bacterial feed for the water table in the system, bacteria don't starve in home setups. degree of surface area provided has a greater impact on their numbers over time (most reef tank waters are skimmed or changed or handled in ways that export suspended bacteria, we're rarely stagnant in reefing)

any new attachable substrate added will colonize with more bacteria without changing the feed levels in the system -this rule runs contrary to the training we all receive from peers online and especially from bottle bac sellers. bacteria are constantly dividing and feeding anyway even if we add no feed: homes contaminate. to starve waterborne bacteria you'd need a sealed off system, or a positive pressure microbiology lab with controlled environmental inputs/no home meets this condition.

bacteria in water get feed even if we don't provide it- that's the nature of contamination and cross contamination in aquatic systems. if hundreds of new filter spheres are added to a sump, in short order the bacterial loading the chemical/biological oxygen demand changes just the same because loads of new bacteria will form and sustain.

factors in the tank such as water shear and vital space competition on surfaces regulate colony numbers, nutrients have some control of course (bacteria blooms common in reefing-bacteria growth exceeds surface area space so they move to the water column) it's not that bacteria reach a certain population density based on # of fish then stop growing.

why does this matter:

because in a power outage, all those bioballs packed in aerobes become a massive liability, competing against fish for resources and easily starting a crash cascade if they're killed off by no flow or lack of o2

having tons of extra bacteria can be a direct liability during reef tank insult events.

 

[brandon429]

interesting side note:

Tuffloud1 made use of the hidden rule of surface area / no extra feed required here in this thread:

Connecting Established Reef To New Tank

EDIT: In conclusion, if using the method I did - connecting an established reef to a new system with dry rock (clean), I recommend the following: 1. Dose your new tank prior to connecting to your old tank with NO3 and PO4 enough to raise to your established tank levels. 2. Take your skimmer...

www.reef2reef.com

that thread accomplishes several beneficial things for aquarists.

1. shows how to chemically manage a new white rocks system and guide it through the uglies to produce an absolute top shelf reef tank anyone would desire. no rip cleaning needed, he finessed that final product completely and gives us the chemical measures for nitrate and phosphate to do so.
2. he shows that completely contrary to claims from bottle bac salesmen, reef tank water certainly has transmissible filter bacteria. bacteria aren't just on surfaces: they're on surfaces and in the water as well (high shear reef tank environs produce tiny rafts that emit from rocks and other surfaces in the tank and swirl around, riding on the rafts are bacteria that oxidize ammonia and quickly set up shop on any submerged surfaces)

there is a macna youtube talk specifically saying that reef tank water does not have cycling bacteria, it's linked for contrast in his thread

-the entire point of that thread was that he connected a completely dry sand, dry rock new tank to his running reef and got the new tank ready in just 20 days using only reef tank water and the current feed + fish + organic food store loading for the main tank. he upcycled a double set of sand and rocks changing no feed input, free, as if he'd paid for bottle bacteria, solely by exposing the new system to reef tank water-

3. he shows that a cycling chart's timeline is again pretty reliable.

 

[WhatCouldGoWrong71]

I question whether it is desirable to have ANY such media. I wouldn't.

One really does not need or even WANT to drive ammonia as low as possible, essentially taking food out of the mouths of corals.

It is also possible it may help drive nitrate too low.

@Randy Holmes-Farley I am sure you are correct. I added 10 pounds of ceramic bio to my sump (130G system) as I had a ton of open space and was thinking about seeding some for a new tank. I also added 2 pounds of Biohome to a 20G rear sump. Both tanks are struggling with nitrates. I am thinking of pulling it all out this weekend and watching to see what happens. I am doing what you wrote about regarding dosing ammonia. Actually, one tank is getting the ammonia solution (130) and one tank is getting nitrates (20G).