Chaeto Test Part III: We've proven it works, now time to up the game! | BRStv Investigates

randyBRS · Jul 21, 2017

Hey guys,

FINALLY! We've made it to the next update for the Chaetomorpha test! These results are pretty interesting and what we're going to do next is worth the wait!

Let us know your thoughts on the test and the future test plans!

-Find all of our reefing videos HERE!

esse · Jul 21, 2017

Yes!! I'm super into the BRSTv Investigates series
Seems like I need to set up a refugium

revhtree · Jul 21, 2017

This is a KILLER new addition to the series. I am seriously learning a ton.

XNavyDiver · Jul 21, 2017

I started my tank with a refuge and a Kessil H380 refuge light. I just measured NO3 for the first time last night since I started measuring my water parameters. I haven't experienced the higher Ph as in the video though.

revhtree · Jul 21, 2017

I started running a basketball sized amount of Chaeto in my refugium with a Kessil H380 about 3 weeks or so ago now. So far.....

AWESOME is the word!

I was battling an algae that I believe to have been dinoflagellates and after about a week and a half. GONE
I also was battling low PH issues where my PH wouldn't get over 7.7. I added a CO2 scrubber but it didn't make much of a dent but adding the chaeto has pushed it all the way up to 8.0. I added a fan on the sump because of heat rising and now I am pushing 8.1!

chipmunkofdoom2 · Jul 21, 2017

A few things I noticed. The test dedicates a lot of room for chaeto growth. Even though the chaeto chamber is not as tall as the "display" (the part with the rock and fish), it appears to have a similar, if not the same, footprint. To me this feels like an awful lot of space to dedicate to chaeto. I feel like most reefers don't have this kind of space for simply growing chaeto.

Second, the light that got the best results is very powerful and very expensive, currently $300. That's a lot to spend on a refugium light.

Please don't mistake this criticism as a lack of gratitude. I think you guys are performing a fantastic service to the hobby, and it's one of the reasons I feel great about shopping at BRS. It just seems like these results rely on having a large amount of space for chaeto and require a very powerful and very expensive light. That's not to say the results are invalid or incorrect... just that your results may vary unless you provide the exact conditions found in the test.

chipmunkofdoom2 · Jul 21, 2017

Double post

SciGuy2 · Jul 21, 2017

Thank you once again for all the hard work, BRS! There is one one more head-to-head I'd like to see: a watt to watt contest between the 90 watt Kessil H380 vs. 4 of the 23 watt CFLs. I suspect the Kessil would edge out the CFLs due to higher PAR/PUR, but I'd bet that the performance of the CFLs would be close at a significantly lower startup cost.

Greybeard · Jul 21, 2017

Excellent. Love the refugeum testing.

I'm in the process of building a 140g shallow, wide, peninsula, and have, from the start, planned on using the Triton method. Establising bio filter now, probably add some macro algae next week. Wish your next video had been out a few months ago

My ref is a little more than 1/2 of the 55g tank I've converted to a sump. Giving me about 25 gallons in the fuge, approx 18% of system volume. I'm using a 2 tube 24" T5 unit with daylight bulbs to light the fuge.. if that can't out compete the 8 bulb T5 over the display, I may add a 2nd 2x24w T5. Plenty of room

Triton style baffles in the sump, Vertex 180i skimmer... designed to run by Triton suggestion.

I noted in your video you had some 90 degree bulkhead fittings installed in Core7 bottle lids. Where can I find some of those? From my perspective, a bulkhead that goes from airline barb fitting to ridged air tube socket would seem ideal for use in this setup. I was just going to drill a hole in the tops and insert a bit of ridged air tube, but the bulkheads look great.

beaslbob · Jul 21, 2017

again I'm glad for this testing which confirms my feelings all these years.

I was hoping for some measurement of say copper to determine how the chaeto absorbs those things as well. But there seems to be no doubt the nitrates and phosphates are maintained at low levels with just the chaeto and that the chaeto is a great help at preventing display algae.

To me with a refugium it seems to also confirm that if you say cyano in the display, you can basically kill the display lights to get rid of the cyano.

great test and thanks for all the effort.

Ayzel1 · Jul 21, 2017

I do like how he can admit that certain practices are futile, and I am referring to water changes. The first sump that I got had no room for a refugium, so I got myself one that had that extra chamber, and bought some cheato from a fellow aquarist. One of my local LFS suggested that I can just use a 100watt LED bulb to grow the cheato. Everytime I do a water change I would remove a nice size chunk of cheato. It grows fast and as of recently gave some away to another fellow aquarist. Based on @randyBRS videos expensive lights do work. Based on my experience, 100w led bulbs work just as good, and the cheato is happy gobbleing up all the nutrients it wants. The lady that sold me the original ball of cheato suggested to buy this light, and it works just as good.
https://www.amazon.com/LVJING-Hangi...sr=8-2&keywords=20+watt+waterproof+grow+light

jwshiver · Jul 21, 2017

Little bummed your switching from Zeovit. As a Zeovit user I was hoping for some Zeo videos with your experience on the BRS160, maybe even a small video series on it. Love the videos. Keep them coming!

paulgla · Jul 21, 2017

I use a par 30 led with great results. Great chaeto growth.i could always double or multiply lights.

Cory · Jul 21, 2017

This was epic! Answered my question if my light was underpowered or not. Thanks brs!

Now i gotta buy a kessil h380 lol

dazedandconfuzed · Jul 21, 2017

revhtree said:
This is a KILLER new addition to the series. I am seriously learning a ton.

randyBRS said:
Hey guys,

FINALLY! We've made it to the next update for the Chaetomorpha test! These results are pretty interesting and what we're going to do next is worth the wait!

Let us know your thoughts on the test and the future test plans!

[/QUOTE

these programs are awesome!!! I have a crazy question for the pros out there. I currently have a 400 gallon tank with a 150 gallon refugium. I am running all kinds of stuff to make this tank the best I can but I can not get the nitrate and phosphate under control ?
maybe I am using too much?

Forsaken77 · Jul 21, 2017

Hopefully they will pit the Skimz Algae Reactor against the typical refugium setup to measure nutrient removal. The bigger Skimz, being roughly the same price as the H380 light, is good for up to a 220 gallon tank. On the YouTube comments Randy said they didn't have the reactor available when they started the test.

Like someone else said, the chaeto is in the same size tank as the rock and fish and is an enormous amount compared to what a regular setup is. So this proves, so far, that a fish tank with another equal size tank FULL of chaeto is capable of filtering the water with a $300+ light. Correct?

So if you have a 200 gallon tank, will you need at least 75 gallons, minimum, with 3-4 feet of chaeto to completely filter the water? I'm curious how it works on the BRS 160. Just wish they had results on the reactor as well. He also said they're getting more in stock because they're both sold out.

But if the Skimz is good up to 220 gallons, and the smaller one up to a bit over 100 gallons, it seems like a no brainer that using the reactor is more accommodating than having a mega-fuge that will serve the same purpose as far as nutrient export.

Great job on the series btw! No wonder my first saltwater tank did so well.... because I never changed the water

David Cher · Jul 21, 2017

what about using skimz alage reactor ?

thunderdood · Jul 21, 2017

chipmunkofdoom2 said:
A few things I noticed. The test dedicates a lot of room for chaeto growth. Even though the chaeto chamber is not as tall as the "display" (the part with the rock and fish), it appears to have a similar, if not the same, footprint. To me this feels like an awful lot of space to dedicate to chaeto. I feel like most reefers don't have this kind of space for simply growing chaeto.

Second, the light that got the best results is very powerful and very expensive, currently $300. That's a lot to spend on a refugium light.

Please don't mistake this criticism as a lack of gratitude. I think you guys are performing a fantastic service to the hobby, and it's one of the reasons I feel great about shopping at BRS. It just seems like these results rely on having a large amount of space for chaeto and require a very powerful and very expensive light. That's not to say the results are invalid or incorrect... just that your results may vary unless you provide the exact conditions found in the test.

My experience/opinion. I have a 10g sump with 3-4 gallons dedicated to Chaeto with the H380 running to support a 20g display. I used to clean the algae off the glass every week and depended on the CUC to eat the hair algae off the base of my Dendros. Since running a fuge for 3 months with the H380, I have no hair algae and virtually no algae growth on the glass in the DT. Since adding the light I've noticed very fast skin and skeleton growth on the Dendro heads.

Yes, a $300 light for a fuge/Chaeto does seem crazy but for me I think it's well worth it with the pros of noticeable coral growth, scraping very little algae off the glass once a month, and feeding more often with no excess nutrients like I used to have.