Refugiums: Are they worth the extra time, money & work?

[beaslbob]

curious why a dsb i thought they have been pretty much abandoned in the hobby

FWIW and IMHO I started posting in 2003 when dsb's were the in thing. Bout 2-3 years later there were reports of DDB tanks crashing. With all the usual rationalizations of keeping the sand with worms and stuff.

I speculate that a dsb uses anaerobic/ anoxic bacteria to reduce nitrates to nitrite and then nitrogen gas. And if not working correctly nitrite to ammonia. Personally I don't like a system the converts nitrates to ammonia. But that's just me. Not to mention possible sulphates and stuff.

So when working correctly at the surface of the sand you have low oxygen, nitrogen gas, and phosphates. Which are exactly what cyano bacteria need to use nitrogen gas for their nitrogen. So when working correctly your nitrates lower, things are going great then all the sudden here comes the cyano bloom. All over everything.

So what I noticed was that DSBs fell outta favor with more and more emphasis on macro algae in a refugium. After all, the macros consume ammonia (when available), nitrates, phosphates and carbon dioxide while returning oxygen and fish food.

Which is why this old planted tank guy prefers using macros or other algae to balance out and stabilize the system.

What being said that with skimmers, low bio loads, and even water changes it does seem possible the plant life action of the corals can have the same effect.


But that's just this old guy's .02

 

[Mkus]

In my 24 gal AIO I have one in the center chamber and it works great loaded with pods..
I think you need to make sure to have a prefilter before it to keep it free of detritus

 

[inletfish]

FWIW and IMHO I started posting in 2003 when dsb's were the in thing. Bout 2-3 years later there were reports of DDB tanks crashing. With all the usual rationalizations of keeping the sand with worms and stuff.

I speculate that a dsb uses anaerobic/ anoxic bacteria to reduce nitrates to nitrite and then nitrogen gas. And if not working correctly nitrite to ammonia. Personally I don't like a system the converts nitrates to ammonia. But that's just me. Not to mention possible sulphates and stuff.

So when working correctly at the surface of the sand you have low oxygen, nitrogen gas, and phosphates. Which are exactly what cyano bacteria need to use nitrogen gas for their nitrogen. So when working correctly your nitrates lower, things are going great then all the sudden here comes the cyano bloom. All over everything.

So what I noticed was that DSBs fell outta favor with more and more emphasis on macro algae in a refugium. After all, the macros consume ammonia (when available), nitrates, phosphates and carbon dioxide while returning oxygen and fish food.

Which is why this old planted tank guy prefers using macros or other algae to balance out and stabilize the system.

What being said that with skimmers, low bio loads, and even water changes it does seem possible the plant life action of the corals can have the same effect.


But that's just this old guy's .02

i completely agree with your assessment of the pros and cons of a dsb and the cons out weigh the pros.

was just curious why somebody would run one today. i had one in an old biocube. tank was absolutely phenomenal.... until it wasnt. im certain it was the dsb

 

[Magellan]

i completely agree with your assessment of the pros and cons of a dsb and the cons out weigh the pros.

was just curious why somebody would run one today. i had one in an old biocube. tank was absolutely phenomenal.... until it wasnt. im certain it was the dsb

Fwiw, I wouldn’t run a DSB in my dt. I too have about 1-1.5”

 

[living_tribunal]

Am I the only one that feels like they don’t require much time/investment at all?

They have too much utility that would be expensive/take up too much space to replicate with other equipment.

 

[inletfish]

Am I the only one that feels like they don’t require much time/investment at all?

They have too much utility that would be expensive/take up too much space to replicate with other equipment.

agree

 

[Shooter6]

I see post about hair algae growing in the refugeum. I dont understand why that is a problem? Its doing the same job as macro algae but is free. Hell it tends to work faster also.

 

[K7BMG]

Am I the only one that feels like they don’t require much time/investment at all?

They have too much utility that would be expensive/take up too much space to replicate with other equipment.

Nope your not the only one.
I don't understand this at all myself.

 

[mikee002]

I have to change mine up a bit.

All nutrients are 0. I’ve shortened the light cycle to 6 hours and trimmed back chaeto massively. My main purpose for the fuge is breeding ground for pods. With this in mind would a very small amount of chaeto be good with mostly all live rock filling the area (right now I have a pound of rubble).

 

[sp1187]

couldn't say. I went with an algae scrubber.

 

[Scorpius]

I found growing chaeto in a refugium, unless managed perfectly, would induce nutrient swings.

 

[DesertReefT4r]

How is having a fuge extra work? Pulling out a little macro algae once in a while is pretty fast and easy. I dont have a large separate fuge as its not needed to performmas an effect filter, just have a small section in the sump. Yes the light in the sump grows algae and gets the sump all nasty sometimes. Cleaning the sump is part of regular tank maintenance even if you dont have a lit fuge in it so not really making any more work there. Having a fuge ime makes less work for me. It reduces algae growth in the display so less cleaning the glass or unwated algae growth, helps reduce no3 and po4 reducing water changes both equal less work overall on the tank. I did not vote on this poll but yes I think you should have fuge if possible. While not needed to have a successful reef its highly benifical in many ways.

 

[Ndcrites]

I think a fuge is great. Been running it for about 3 years now. I used to use a jbj light but have moved to the Kessil H80 and wow what a difference spectrum plays in a fuge. I recommend having one and getting 5280 pods from algae barn. And don’t forget to feed with phytoplankton. It really does make a difference in population growth.

 

[Paulie069]

I see the point of a fuge, but I will never run one, my sump area is like a second display. I think the fuge will make it look dirty and unmaintained. now I know the benefits of the fuge, but I will just a scrubber instead and it will clean up the look of the sump area instead of having a nasty center section. I also have a fear of getting an aptasia outbreak because of it.

I’m really new and have been reading all the post in this thread to learn something new,, but I’m stuck on one thing /. What is Aiptasia any explanation will help and please keep it simple. Thank you

 

[WvAquatics]

I am also new starting a new aquarium and all this talking about a fuge makes me second guess having one. I have been dead set on one. I want to grow a couple macros and pods in there. But my display is only 40g. I am not sure of what fish I will have that can eat the macro. Hmm more research for me

 

[ESH]

Huge fan of refugiums and if properly planned make for a great addition to a system. It’s also a great way to increase your system volume - be it a small hang on the back type or something that fits the space of your sump. I’m always amazed when I see the thousands of pods crawl around in the glass.

 

[Paulie069]

I don’t use a refugium. My tank has been running for about 15 months. The only thing I run on my reef aquarium is a Fluval Fx6 canister filter, Mechanical, Biological, And chemical.I test 4 times a week and do a 5 gallon water change once a week.Ph 8.1 ammonia 0 nitrite 0 nitrate 10 calcium 430 alkalinity 9 magnesium 1375 salinity 1.025

Beautiful tank great job

 

[Oldsalt]

I modified the sump that came with my 1500 litre system. Reduced flow in the fuge chamber and added sand from the DT. Got cheato and a fuge light. No more algae up top, caught the crabs from the DT and put them in the fuge. Changed return pump to 10k/hr. That required another drain so I split it up for extra nutrient flow straight to the fuge section. That made an enormous difference in cheato and pod growth. Caulerpa brachypus started growing as well which I feed to my Naso and Foxface - they devour it (they hardly touched cheato - maybe it tastes bad?). Yes, it increased workload (detritus vacuuming) but reduced nitrates and phosphates to reasonable levels up top. So far so good.

 

[X-37B]

If you like a fuge system run it. I do not see a need for one but thats just me. Many awesome reefs are run with and without one.

 

[fl3xlinton]

I run my 40 gallon without a sump because it’s an aio but I think I could heavily benefit from a Fuge in the sump. I honestly think it was a lot of work to start up but now I only do a water change when I need to and my nitrates stay around 15-20 Main reason I say I would benefit from a Fuge is because I want copepods!!!! I’ve tried multiple times and ways to start up a pod population because I want some sort of dragonet. And they are the greatest cuc in the world! But no luck. Honestly I may be doing it wrong but In the sump you can dump em in and they live and thrive.