LR in SUmp = Nitrate Factory?

[Sm51498]

I think you pretty well have it. Basically, my thought is that so called nitrate factories aren't a problem. A nitrate factory is what we strive for. We want all ammonia and nitrite converted as swiftly as possible. As you say though, these areas to add extra surface area are often detritus traps. The problem isn't nitrate or the fast conversion of ammonia, nitrate is the symptom of too much detritus.

Even then, the extra nitrate isn't a problem if you make provisions for it's export. Skimmers, Algal turf scrubbers and algae refugiums when appropriately sized can deal with a lot of detritus.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

I think you pretty well have it. Basically, my thought is that so called nitrate factories aren't a problem. A nitrate factory is what we strive for. We want all ammonia and nitrite converted as swiftly as possible. As you say though, these areas to add extra surface area are often detritus traps. The problem isn't nitrate or the fast conversion of amonia, nitrate is the symptom of too much detritus.

Like the term Cycle, i think nitrate factory is a bit mis used or misunderstood. The was a good thread with the process recently. LR processing isnt the factory aspect. Its when it's actively produced.

Blast my memory. Id like the refresher.


@mcarroll You I believe, in a canister filter thread, had the actual science of the term Nitrate factory.

 

[drawman]

As others have said it's all about how you employ them and keep things clean. Accumulated detritus will not be your friend. Siporax, Seachem Matrix, or MarinePure media in the sump may prove to be easier to keep clean/maintain however.

 

[mcarroll]

I consider a nitrate factory a place where food accumulates and is broken down without being able to be eaten by one of the critters you set the tank up for. Those seem like pointless nitrates...may as well have dosed KNO3.

LR wasn't that powerful of a NNR system as was claimed in the 90s or carbon dosers/ats wouldn't be all the rage to clean up nitrate.

I agree overall with your post, but strongly disagree with this perspective.

First, how "powerful" was natural nitrate reduction ever claimed to be? By who?

Second, the carbon dosers have problems of their own. The tendency of hobbyists since before saltwater ever came around is to put too many animals into too small of a system. Carbon dosing is merely the latest in a long line of tricks employed in the ongoing effort to overstock. (Maybe worth noting this is a borrowed sewage treatment strategy, not a livestock husbandry strategy.) Overstocking is always a bad strategy IMO and carbon dosing is not without its side effects. There is no free lunch. ;)

Third, you've forgotten a whole class of problem tanks – those with excessive phosphates and no nitrates. Guess why that happens? :)

@mcarroll You I believe, in a canister filter thread, had the actual science of the term Nitrate factory.

Too many nutrient-related articles floating in my head...which one? (Sorry!)

Was it any of the links posted among the Nutrient Saturated Systems thread? (That was a good thread regardless.)

I think I've got them all listed in one place finally: nutrients

 

[brandon429]

To me, the fact that the Berlin method was the prevailing method for all the 90s and 2000s shows however that thinking was conveyed it was bought lock stock and barrel. Every article and book I cut teeth on made the NNR sound sure to work if the arrangements were made in-tank, I used them too and still do (modified, I clean) to this day

Agreed on po4, now we really like to export/clean/or bind it organically


-both- the sand and the rocks were simply stated to reduce nitrate with the implied benefit of natural degassing replacing pre breakdown export. The sandbeds were supposed to digest the whole waste and leak N2 into the atmosphere, but we had to take on bare bottom designs and new plant arrangements and carbon dosing to meet our export/bioload demands.

Agreed some have to dose nitrate in other arrangements, but the typical result of months of hands-off Berlin methodology was typically elevated nutrients especially if pockets of waste were to be disturbed during cleaning, moves etc

 

[locito277]

I actuallly place LR directly under my overflow where the water drops into my sump. Highly oxygenated and full of bubbles. Will this do any good or harm?

 

[brandon429]

If anything that movement prevents detritus settling, keeps channels open, and gives it the best chance of denitrification

 

[klp]

Like the term Cycle, i think nitrate factory is a bit mis used or misunderstood. The was a good thread with the process recently. LR processing isnt the factory aspect. Its when it's actively produced.

Blast my memory. Id like the refresher.

Maybe this thread?
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/do-deep-sand-beds-really-help-remove-nitrates.219206/?utm_source=newsletter_1&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=October_29_2015

 

[mcarroll]

Agreed some have to dose nitrate in other arrangements, but the typical result of months of hands-off Berlin methodology is algae issues and typically elevated nutrients

It would be interesting to know if there is a "typical" unbalanced aquarium...

It would also be interesting to know if overstocking is the "typical" part of the equation. My money is here....

Blame seems a funny card to play. If we buy a 100 gallon tank and stock it with an ideal 100 gallons of fish, but then we filter the tank with nothing but a whisper 10 filter, do we blame the whisper 10 for the ensuing issues?

If anyone bought into the "magic" of any filtration method, they might be very likely to have problems. You can exceed the capacity of and/or misuse any system. Especially if you thought it was like magic and didn't really understand it. ;) Like blaming "burnt tips" on the coral growing too fast rather than blaming the carbon dosing. (We know we're messing with the tank's carbon cycle, right? I mean that's the object. But we have generally neglected the fact that corals are utterly plugged into that cycle.)

It's worthwhile putting the Berlin Method in its context too....people were running "hi tech" reefs with bio-balls, denitrators, ozone, etc, etc, etc, with controllers for each component. There were some good ones, but it was a circus, sort of like today's tanks in several ways.

Then along comes this group of reefers that have tanks running this "berlin method" that are superior to any of the "hi tech" tanks, and without the accompanying circus of controllers, etc.

They weren't promoting algae farms. They were promoting functional, balanced tanks.

The point proven was that we don't need that stuff to have a reef. (We still don't.)

We choose that stuff because we often choose very firmly (if not conscientiously) to overstock our systems relative to the system's inherent capabilities. We rarely move slowly enough to even know our system's inherent capabilities.

The modern response to the berlin method is "so what, we like more fish". Plus GFO and carbon dosing and pellet reactors and turf scrubbers, etc, etc, etc, etc, are all really cool. It seems like most folks start off carbon dosing, with a pellet reactor and bacterial treatments, GFO running with activated carbon and Purigen support, along with filter socks and... None of it seems to rescue them from showing up in the "Help!" threads when they've predictably overstocked their tanks.

Berlin was not enough (even though it works), GFO and phosgard wasn't enough, and now carbon dosing is not enough for what seems like most folks.

When the typical goal shifts to achieving a balanced system – which there have been examples of all along the history of the hobby – rather than "how many can I fit, how quick?" I think we'll collectively turn the corner on most of the major issues that plague the hobby.

 

[john.m.cole3]

It would be interesting to know if there is a "typical" unbalanced aquarium...

It would also be interesting to know if overstocking is the "typical" part of the equation. My money is here....

Blame seems a funny card to play. If we buy a 100 gallon tank and stock it with an ideal 100 gallons of fish, but then we filter the tank with nothing but a whisper 10 filter, do we blame the whisper 10 for the ensuing issues?

If anyone bought into the "magic" of any filtration method, they might be very likely to have problems. You can exceed the capacity of and/or misuse any system. Especially if you thought it was like magic and didn't really understand it. ;) Like blaming "burnt tips" on the coral growing too fast rather than blaming the carbon dosing. (We know we're messing with the tank's carbon cycle, right? I mean that's the object. But we have generally neglected the fact that corals are utterly plugged into that cycle.)

It's worthwhile putting the Berlin Method in its context too....people were running "hi tech" reefs with bio-balls, denitrators, ozone, etc, etc, etc, with controllers for each component. There were some good ones, but it was a circus, sort of like today's tanks in several ways.

Then along comes this group of reefers that have tanks running this "berlin method" that are superior to any of the "hi tech" tanks, and without the accompanying circus of controllers, etc.

They weren't promoting algae farms. They were promoting functional, balanced tanks.

The point proven was that we don't need that stuff to have a reef. (We still don't.)

We choose that stuff because we often choose very firmly (if not conscientiously) to overstock our systems relative to the system's inherent capabilities. We rarely move slowly enough to even know our system's inherent capabilities.

The modern response to the berlin method is "so what, we like more fish". Plus GFO and carbon dosing and pellet reactors and turf scrubbers, etc, etc, etc, etc, are all really cool. It seems like most folks start off carbon dosing, with a pellet reactor and bacterial treatments, GFO running with activated carbon and Purigen support, along with filter socks and... None of it seems to rescue them from showing up in the "Help!" threads when they've predictably overstocked their tanks.

Berlin was not enough (even though it works), GFO and phosgard wasn't enough, and now carbon dosing is not enough for what seems like most folks.

When the typical goal shifts to achieving a balanced system – which there have been examples of all along the history of the hobby – rather than "how many can I fit, how quick?" I think we'll collectively turn the corner on most of the major issues that plague the hobby.

Bro, that statement is the light. Shifting our goals to finding a balanced system... I don't think that is the goal of a newer reefer. Not bc it isn't a good goal, but newer reefers get blind sided by all the gadgets out there with promises of providing balance. They don't have good guidance or the ability to decipher advertising vs. solid advice. I'm a newer reefer and also fell victim to implementing reactors and chem dosing to my system. All of that only masked the natural processes that were occurring in my tank. Sorry for sidetracking...

Back to the title of the thread... Live rock in the sump needs to be set up correctly for it to be effective in what you want it to accomplish. Providing quality, porous rock with adequate flow will aid in the denitrification process. Regular maintenance will enhance the effects. A poorly set up sump will end result in increased nutrients. A blanket statement of, "putting live rock in your sump will provide more surface are for bacteria to live on, therefore promoting a healthier tank", is not sufficient in providing good advice. Live rock in the sump can be useful if all else is considered in regards to stocking the tank. Again, I'm a learning new reefer, and these are my speculations.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

I actuallly place LR directly under my overflow where the water drops into my sump. Highly oxygenated and full of bubbles. Will this do any good or harm?

no harm at all.
Ive seen some folks who use piles of rubble under the overflow not completely submerged. Imo those would worry me.

 

[Rybren]

I tend to agree that overstocking is at the root of the issue. I believe that every aquarium, even if it only contains one fish, is overstocked when compared to the fish: water volume ratio in our oceans. The problem then becomes - how do we manage the waste and build up of nutrients?

Obviously, there are a myriad of ways that reefers use to attack the problem and some methods are more effective than others. Getting back to my original question, I believe that rock in the refugia is one prong in a multi-pronged attack to manage our system. I have a really hard time believing that this rock does not contribute to the denitrification process - which is what the folks that I quoted in my OP claimed. To wit - the rock produced nitrates and that's where its contribution ends. I call BS.

 

[Lionfish Lair]

which is what the folks that I quoted in my OP claimed. To wit - the rock produced nitrates and that's where its contribution ends. I call BS.

I don't agree with any of the comments you quoted.

 

[mcarroll]

I believe that every aquarium, even if it only contains one fish, is overstocked when compared to the fish

That belief is due to the lack of a good examples to the contrary to refer to. ;)

It's eminently possible – I do it* – but in a crowd of 1000 reefers, I think you might have only a handful or maybe even none attempting it.

We like more fish! :D

How long would it take you to find ten reefers that have tanks absolutely full of fish just like @Paul B's tank, but unlike Paul have from one to three years of experience keeping fish?

Of those ten, almost none will keep that tank full of fish alive for more than a few years.

I'm willing to blame lack of experience and overstocking for that, rather than the symptoms that routinely get scapegoated.

Why is a tank full of fish not frowned upon until you've at least learned to get one kind into breeding shape?

While we're totally off topic;), why are fish even on a beginner's list of things to try? Fish are way harder to keep than corals or most invertebrates, and corals can be reproduced ad nauseum, in captivity by cloning. Instead, almost 100% of newbie animals are wild caught fish. That's the opposite of what they should be looking at!

* Three barnacle blennies in a 50 gallon tank/100 gallon system sound overstocked? I like to think I still have room to expand!

 

[Brew12]

Providing quality, porous rock with adequate flow will aid in the denitrification process.

I thought denitrification required required low flow, low oxygen areas? Isn't that why a deep sand bed works? The nitrates can still make it into the deeper part of the bed but it is low flow, low oxygen? And while you need porous rock to allow the nitrates deep into the rock, it still must be low flow and low oxygen where the denitrification occurs, right? So in this case, wouldn't a porous rock perform denitrification better in low flow areas away from oxygen bubbles?

 

[Brew12]

Why is a tank full of fish not frowned upon until you've at least learned to get one kind into breeding shape?

I can offer some insight into this as a new reefer. If you research fish on the internet, almost every one will say that they are not compatible with others of the same species and should be kept singularly. Clowns may be the exceptions which is why I bet there are so many people with 2 clown fish and 1 of every other kind. :confused:
No online fish suppliers give you the option to order a male/female or bonded pair of anything other than clowns. Makes it hard to know if your fish are in breeding shape if they cannot breed. That is why I don't set it as a goal.

My snails on the other hand.. they lay eggs like crazy! Why don't my fish view it as caviar and clean it up for me???? :mad:

 

[john.m.cole3]

I thought denitrification required required low flow, low oxygen areas? Isn't that why a deep sand bed works? The nitrates can still make it into the deeper part of the bed but it is low flow, low oxygen? And while you need porous rock to allow the nitrates deep into the rock, it still must be low flow and low oxygen where the denitrification occurs, right? So in this case, wouldn't a porous rock perform denitrification better in low flow areas away from oxygen bubbles?

I think you're right. Adequate flow does not mean fast, but means enough flow. I have no idea how much enough is, but I think it is more than packing as much rock as you can in your sump allows.

 

[mcarroll]

I could be wrong, but I think he may have meant nitrification. Bio-balls worked well for a reason – plenty of O2!

 

[mcarroll]

No online fish suppliers give you the option to order a male/female or bonded pair of anything other than clowns.

I think ordering online is another thing newbies should never do. I guess that's even further off topic! Aah!

In the freshwater world, this is not a problem. You buy from three to seven babies. Then, usually through some machinations, you end up with a pair. Friends or the LFS end up with free fish.

With some fish you can just keep adding one more until you score a pair. There are even some that are probably a little dimorphic.

And why doesn't everyone start off with a male/female pair of clowns since they are at least somewhat available and almost always captive bred and raised?

Seems like the groundwork is in place....it's the ideas at the hobby level that are missing.

 

[Brew12]

I think you're right. Adequate flow does not mean fast, but means enough flow. I have no idea how much enough is, but I think it is more than packing as much rock as you can in your sump allows.

I could be wrong, but I think he may have meant nitrification. Bio-balls worked well for a reason – plenty of O2!

Yup, I got confused when the conversation jumped from nitrification (ammonia-nitrite-nitrate) to denitrification (nitrate-nitrogen gas).