No pox vs algae scrubber

[clk51212]

Up in the air as to which method of nutrient control I would like to use. System is a Red Sea reefer with a curve 7 skimmer. Going to be a mixed reef sps dominate. Have a clear water 50 algae scrubber now and running small Amount of gfo. Also have a dosing pump not in use for Nopox if I go that way. My thought was that I would have more control over levels using Nopox the algae scrubber and gfo.
Any thoughts would be great thanks

 

[120reefkeeper]

Might I suggest another option you might want to consider....

It works very very well! [emoji4]

https://aquaforest.eu/en/product/nitraphos-minus/

 

[Mal11224]

I think you have to figure out what kind of nutrient levels you want to maintain. You may not need NOPOX at all if you are using gfo and a scrubber. Sometimes, simple is better. I used to add NOPOX to my tank and stopped since I have a refugium and my water would be stripped of nutrients. Now I just let the chaeto work and my tank has been doing great. Sometimes we can do more than we need to in this hobby. Takes time to find that "sweet spot".

 

[OhDumb]

My decision would be on what is the less maintenance in the long run. Nopox is pretty easy if you have a doser and all you do is keep your skimmer maintained. Nopox is essentially just carbon dosing and regardless of what they say on the label I always run GFO with it as it couldn't keep up with phosphates. When I ran Nopox I was at near zero for nitrates. You'll want to end up dosing Aminos with it at some point.

If the algae scrubber or even a refugium is easier to maintain or a better routine for you then take that route.

 

[SPR1968]

I’ve used Nopox for over 2 years and I also use Rhowaphos GFO as well despite what it says on the label to keep phosphate in check.

It’s just very easy, you just add the Nopox with an auto doser and just adjust the dose as required. Once you get used to it it’s just simple. You need to have a good protein skimmer and skim ‘wet’ for best removal of nutrients with it. Like a weak tea colour skimmate.

I personally have looked at algae reactors over the last few months, but they need emptying and cleaning, whereas Nopox is just easy.

There are many ways in this hobby so use whichever method you prefer

 

[mcarroll]

Up in the air as to which method of nutrient control I would like to use. System is a Red Sea reefer with a curve 7 skimmer. Going to be a mixed reef sps dominate. Have a clear water 50 algae scrubber now and running small Amount of gfo. Also have a dosing pump not in use for Nopox if I go that way. My thought was that I would have more control over levels using Nopox the algae scrubber and gfo.
Any thoughts would be great thanks

Sounds like a pretty new tank, so these comments are made with that in mind....let me know if that's not corrrect. :)

And bear with me on these thoughts... :D

Real nutrient levels are dictated by the amount of food you put into the system.

The amount of food you put into the system is dictated by the type and quantity of livestock you keep in the tank.

Both of those ideas are easy to lose when designing "nutrient control".​

If you plan for it to be a coral dominated system, then that should mean that they get priority over noopox, algae scrubbers, fish load, gfo and everything else.

"Dominant"

This isn't merely a saying or catch-phrase...or at least it doesn't have to be.

You really do want corals to dominate - with a supporting bio-load of fish and other critters.

To "dominate" in this way means that the coral's carbon stream (mainly their mucus) needs to anchor as much of the food web in your reef as possible.

You can implement this deliberately.

But not by injecting carbon sources from human and algae-sources into the picture nor by using media/filtration to trick your test kits into saying "low nutrient" when nothing overall is really low nutrient.

Many folks short-circuit their goal of "coral dominant" in two ways:

The first is by crushing the tank with a huge bio-load of fish before anything...making it "fish dominant".

The second is by crushing it with a load of chemical media and non-coral carbon sources...making it "bacterially dominant". (Check out: Global microbialization of coral reefs)

Coral additions to a new tank, in contrast, are usually meek and mostly an after-thought as far as tank health, if they are even considered.

That approach "can work"....but it's obviously not the direct route. (Nor is it the easy route.)​

So if "coral dominant" is really a goal, those other carbon sources (human, algae, etc), if used at all, should come later after corals really have been allowed to become dominant in your reef.

It may be worth stating that fish are optional to a reef. They can help or hurt the ease of care and stability factors.

"More fish" too soon makes the tank more difficult to balance...fewer fish make it easier...especially at the beginning when there's such a narrow microbial base to make use of nutrients....mostly bacterial and algae.

This narrow microbial base combined with a large influx of fish nutrients leaves a lot of room for pests and instability. (Sound like any new tank stories you've read about?)

 

[mta_morrow]

Sounds like a pretty new tank, so these comments are made with that in mind....let me know if that's not corrrect. :)

And bear with me on these thoughts... :D

Real nutrient levels are dictated by the amount of food you put into the system.

The amount of food you put into the system is dictated by the type and quantity of livestock you keep in the tank.

Both of those ideas are easy to lose when designing "nutrient control".​

If you plan for it to be a coral dominated system, then that should mean that they get priority over noopox, algae scrubbers, fish load, gfo and everything else.

"Dominant"

This isn't merely a saying or catch-phrase...or at least it doesn't have to be.

You really do want corals to dominate - with a supporting bio-load of fish and other critters.

To "dominate" in this way means that the coral's carbon stream (mainly their mucus) needs to anchor as much of the food web in your reef as possible.

You can implement this deliberately.

But not by injecting carbon sources from human and algae-sources into the picture nor by using media/filtration to trick your test kits into saying "low nutrient" when nothing overall is really low nutrient.

Many folks short-circuit their goal of "coral dominant" in two ways:

The first is by crushing the tank with a huge bio-load of fish before anything...making it "fish dominant".

The second is by crushing it with a load of chemical media and non-coral carbon sources...making it "bacterially dominant". (Check out: Global microbialization of coral reefs)

Coral additions to a new tank, in contrast, are usually meek and mostly an after-thought as far as tank health, if they are even considered.

That approach "can work"....but it's obviously not the direct route. (Nor is it the easy route.)​

So if "coral dominant" is really a goal, those other carbon sources (human, algae, etc), if used at all, should come later after corals really have been allowed to become dominant in your reef.

It may be worth stating that fish are optional to a reef. They can help or hurt the ease of care and stability factors.

"More fish" too soon makes the tank more difficult to balance...fewer fish make it easier...especially at the beginning when there's such a narrow microbial base to make use of nutrients....mostly bacterial and algae.

This narrow microbial base combined with a large influx of fish nutrients leaves a lot of room for pests and instability. (Sound like any new tank stories you've read about?)

I run all of this through my head continuously it seems. You just did a great job of putting it all together the right way for me to “get it”!

Thanks!

Mike

 

[ZoWhat]

According to Randy Holmes Farley (R2R biologist) .....NoPox is basically: 80proof vodka + 3% vinegar ..... dosed in a 50/50 mixture ratio

1) NoPox 500mL - $17

2) 80proof vodka = $12 per 1/5th of a gallon (std 1/5th of vodka) plus 1gal jug of food grade 3% vinegar at $3

I've been dosing for 2mos now and the tank has responded positively 100 times more than my expectations.

 

[ReefWithCare]

An ATS is a sizable investment if you are going to buy a unit and a bit of a project if you DIY. I say dose and see how it goes.

 

[mcarroll]

I run all of this through my head continuously it seems. You just did a great job of putting it all together the right way for me to “get it”!

Thanks!

Mike

You're welcome! :)

 

[nhlives]

I use NOPOX for my 60 cube. For my system it’s pretty cost effective and easy with a doser. I’m coming up on two years of nothing but NOPOX. I stopped supplementing with GFO after 6 months. Couldn’t be happier.

Not enough space for cheato or I might be doing that. If I had 200 gallons I might be looking for cheaper alternatives.

 

[Style68]

Just renewing this old post. I originally started with NOPOX and it brought my nitrates and even phosphates to 0. The only negatives for me, and really it's an assumption, is that it may have caused red turf algae on my rocks. I switched to an algae reactor and it works great as well, but right now it doesn't remove the phosphates as well as the NOPOX did so I am using GFO as well. I am actually thinking of going back to using NOPOX because it's simple to use and maintain.