Rocks in sump. Can you have too much biofiltration?

[ScubaSkeets]

Hi folks!
I have a bunch of rock taken from a tank that i broke down several months ago. Its dry and just sitting on my garage floor. My other tank, up and running, has plenty of rock in the DT.
The whole pieces of the dry rock won't really fit in the sump, so I would like to break them up into smaller pieces and fill up the voids in the sump with as much as I can. Good idea or bad? Should I soak the rocks in bleach, rinse, and dry before putting them in?
Thanks!

 

[FUNGI]

IMO, no such thing as too much LR...., and yes, clean out before dumping then in.....

 

[Uncle99]

I think more surface area is a good thing provided your nutrients right now don’t run too too low.

I’d wash them, scrub them, rinse them in RODI and put in sump.

 

[mfinn]

If you have enough rock in your display tank you should be good.
If it were me I would not fill your sump with rock. Cuts down on water volume and makes good detritus traps.

 

[F4u-SuperCorsair]

I filled my sump with rock with no ill effect and my refugium also has a bunch of rock.

 

[ColdOceanReef]

Depends on how big is your tank. Keep in mind that the new dry rocks will go thru the same nitrogent cycle. So that depends on water volume of your display tank if it can handle the ammonia and nitrate spike from the new rocks. I would clean and cycle them in a separate bin, then introduce them to the DT.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

Keep in mind that the new dry rocks will go thru the same nitrogent cycle.

I'm not really sure what you mean by this (aside from the mis- spelling). A TANK has to cycle, not the rocks.

 

[jason2459]

Only way rock would increase ammonia is if it has dead organics on it. A muriatic acid bath would solve that.

 

[mfinn]

Only way rock would increase ammonia is if it has dead organics on it. A muriatic acid bath would solve that.

I agree with the dead organics on it, but IMO bleach would work better than an acid.

 

[mfinn]

I'm not really sure what you mean by this (aside from the mis- spelling). A TANK has to cycle, not the rocks.

THe rock in the tank is what goes through the nitrogen cycle. A glass or acrylic tank does not.

 

[WhatCouldGoWrong71]

But, to bring this back to the OP’s topic, well, sort of… So you really need rock in your sump? I have none. It’s a reefer 250, originally a 65G system, I added a 20L sump for increased volume and easy for a roller 500. I have about 60 pounds of gulf rock from KP in the display. The more volume of water I can get the better. It’s an All SPS tank, with 2 Varios S return pumps, 2 Nero 5 and 2 Reefwave 45s. So I think I have decent flow, probably not right, but I can smash the gas pedal when needed. With 60 pounds of rock in the display and lots of flow I would think I wouldn’t need any rock in my sump. I did have ceramic media in there but a precipitation event recoated the ceramic media and I just tossed it in my brute with other rock that is cooking. I like that I can quickly clean my sump, but it does feel a little sterile compared to my other tank.

So no big deal with no sump rocks?
If you are already fighting to raise nutrients, less surface area in the sump is best?
Is there a calculation to avoid rock/rubble in the sump? Meaning, what percent of display gallon to rock volume would negate needing sump rock?
However, I am going to try a cryptic zone on this tank. I spent way too many hours reading about it to not at least try it. I feel like if I don’t, I will have wasted several nights, lol.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

THe rock in the tank is what goes through the nitrogen. A glass or acrylic tank does not.

You're deliberately mis-interpreting my post. No, the actual glass does not; the entire system does though (and most of us use that term interchangeably with "tank"). My point being, of there is already a sufficient biofilter in place, adding more rock does not make a difference.

 

[jason2459]

I agree with the dead organics on it, but IMO bleach would work better than an acid.

Not nearly as fun.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

But, to bring this back to the OP’s topic, well, sort of… So you really need rock in your sump? I have none. It’s a reefer 250, originally a 65G system, I added a 20L sump for increased volume and easy for a roller 500. I have about 60 pounds of gulf rock from KP in the display. The more volume of water I can get the better. It’s an All SPS tank, with 2 Varios S return pumps, 2 Nero 5 and 2 Reefwave 45s. So I think I have decent flow, probably not right, but I can smash the gas pedal when needed. With 60 pounds of rock in the display and lots of flow I would think I wouldn’t need any rock in my sump. I did have ceramic media in there but a precipitation event recoated the ceramic media and I just tossed it in my brute with other rock that is cooking. I like that I can quickly clean my sump, but it does feel a little sterile compared to my other tank.

So no big deal with no sump rocks?
If you are already fighting to raise nutrients, less surface area in the sump is best?
Is there a calculation to avoid rock/rubble in the sump? Meaning, what percent of display gallon to rock volume would negate needing sump rock?
However, I am going to try a cryptic zone on this tank. I spent way too many hours reading about it to not at least try it. I feel like if I don’t, I will have wasted several nights, lol.

Generally speaking, it's not a problem to have "too much" rock in the tank/sump. Aside from your point of reducing total water volume, it's just a matter of preference. If you think you might need to quickly set up quarantine/hospital tanks, having extra media in the sump means you can use it to cycle the other tank.

Where the rock or other biomedia resides is also not important. The water flows through the entire system and it doesn't matter if nitrifying/denitrifying bacteria are in the sump or main tank.

 

[mfinn]

You're deliberately mis-interpreting my post. No, the actual glass does not; the entire system does though (and most of us use that term interchangeably with "tank"). My point being, of there is already a sufficient biofilter in place, adding more rock does not make a difference.

No I didn't deliberately mis-read your post. I simply pointed out it was the rock that is cycled.
No need to be so dramatic.

 

[Reefering1]

I personally prefer ample rock in the display. Piece of mind that knowing, if all else fails, the tank has the capacity of process ammonia on it's own with minimal circulation. Think extended or unprepared power failure

 

[Reefering1]

I personally prefer ample rock in the display. Piece of mind that knowing, if all else fails, the tank has the capacity of process ammonia on it's own with minimal circulation. Think extended or unprepared power failure

THe rock in the tank is what goes through the nitrogen cycle. A glass or acrylic tank does not.

To be clear, when I said "the tank", I wasn't specifying the actual glass box...

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

To be clear, when I said "the tank", I wasn't specifying the actual glass box...

Thank you!

 

[edd59]

you cant have too much rock, but your bio filter will only get as big as the nutrients your tank provides. there isnt a reserve, it grows and shrinks accordingly to the nutrient supply on all surfaces.