Why does everyone overdo the bio?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Jgray152;3548392; said:
Very Interesting. Thanks for posting. Opened my eyes a bit more and only makes me push harder for people to run stepped fine particle mechanical filtration

Do you actually know this or is this a copy and paste? lol Just playin.
Click to expand...

It's mine, for better or worse. I should note that it's all just inference from what I know about bacteria; I have not tested it. If anyone would like to test some of these things, here are some ideas.

Different combinations of flow, media, and maintenance should yield different results. In the following examples, mechanical and biological filtration are assumed to be in external filter.

High flow, little mechanical filtration--> extensive fouling of biomedia by solid waste and heterotrophic bacteria. Maintenance schedule will make little difference; frequent maintenance will remove the fouling but will disturb the nitrifying colonies.

High flow, much mechanical filtration--> fouling prevented; ammonification occurs in mechanical media. Maintenance of mechanical media primarily affects overall rate of ammonia production, as frequent maintenance removes solid waste prior to ammonification, thus reducing ammonia levels and subsequently denitrifying bacteria levels and amount of biomedia required.

Low flow, little mechanical filtration--> fouling less than in high flow tank; ammonification occurs primarily in tank. Flow is too weak to bring large solid waste particles into contact with flitration media, but small particles may still enter. Occasional cleaning of biomedia still required, leading to some disruption of denitrifier colonies.

Low flow, much mechanical filtration--> fouling prevented. Only fine media needed, as large particles remain in tank. Occasional cleaning of mechanical media needed. Frequent removal of solid waste from tank via siphoning will lower ammonia levels.
 
"That is impossible. No one here is trying to force anyone to down grade. Only letting others know that if you have "Extra" media, that does not mean you have ":Extra" BB and that all the media is being used.

In fact, if you think about it, canister filters, if the manufacture rating is true to any extent, The Fluval Fx5 is rated for a 400 gallon aquarium and it only has less than 6 liters of space available for bio filtration. Obviously this has been tested in their facility. Thinking this way, 6 liters for 400 gallon aquarium verses what many members use in wet/dry systems or any bio filtration system in much smaller tanks and they usually think they need to "upgrade". "

That is exactly my point.. It's impossible (I'de actually go with improbable, because it is doable, just would take years of study per bio-substrate to accomplish) I've gotten many filters over the years "rated" for so many gallons. and I have yet to come across one that will actually handle that size of a tank. Most people overstock = larger bio-load = larger filter = "over filter"

and It is not "mythical information" to tell a new aquarist to get a larger filter then they need. 9/10 people will overstock.. and if they do not.. ? .. they have abit of leeway in missing a WC or not catching that dead fish ect ect..

and yes some people are suggestiong not even needing a filter ect ect... can it be done? Sure. But the question is why does everyone overdo the bio... I gave my answer. It's practical. plain and simple. does it mean it's the "best way" maybe not. Huge advances in aquatic husbandy have been made in the last 20yrs I've had tanks. It's the old debat about UG filters.. to each his own. The question was asked. and I simply responded.

It works for me.. and countless other aquariests. Like I said it's interesting to see it debated by EXPERIENCED aquarists. But there are also alot of new hobbists that can and hopefully will read this thread.

My apologies for not being far more specific and less sarcastic ;) not everyone gets my humor.
 
oswego his post is from university so there probably is some science involved they just dont give it from what i could see
 
So nc_nutcase, from what your saying a simple powerhead in a very large system with heavy eating and waste producing predators could not experience heavy ammonia levels with just a powerhead flowing over the substrate?
 
I<3fish;3548777; said:
So nc_nutcase, from what your saying a simple powerhead in a very large system with heavy eating and waste producing predators could not experience heavy ammonia levels with just a powerhead flowing over the substrate?
Click to expand...
&#12288;
Thorough water movement is essential… as dead spots create problems…
&#12288;
But I strongly believe that a typical large tank, with typical substrate and typical décor, with typical stocking levels… with ample water movement via power heads and no other filters… will be able to process/oxidize the ammonia into nitrates that the fish produce…
&#12288;
Grossly overstocked tanks may be an exception… bare bottomed tanks may be an exception… tanks with poor water circulation will be an exception… tanks with no standard maintenance (typical water changes, vacuuming, etc) will be exceptions…
&#12288;
I am not suggesting that the use of power heads can replace any and all forms of maintenance… My single point is (I strongly believe) the typical aquarium is fully capable of hosting enough bacteria to support typical/common stocking levels without the assistance of bio media…
&#12288;
&#12288;
I am by no means suggesting that anyone filter their tank with powerheads only. Doing so will mandate a flawless commitment to thorough vacuuming and further tank cleaning every week without fail.
&#12288;
On the contrary I strongly support using ample mechanical filtration to prevent waste build up in the tank… as well as regular maintenance on those filters… as well as a regular water change schedule… As for “bio filtration”, I trust very strongly that a tank that is offered thorough mechanical filtration… will have it’s basic bio needs met without any specific bio media…
&#12288;
&#12288;
In many posts it has been misconstrued that I advocate “minimalist filtration”. This misinterpretation has been developed by reading my descriptions of “the bare minimum needed for bio needs to be met”... as “all the filtration you should use.”
&#12288;
&#12288;
My point has consistently been… if you ignore the concept of “bio filtration”… and design a tank with proper mechanical filtration, décor, etc… then cycle that tank… it’s basic bio filtration needs will be met…


The additional 'surface area' offered by bio media is not in any way needed, on typical aquariums...
 
i agree with nc under the conditions he describes that there is more than enough area for bb i used to use an under gravel filter in my tanks and it worked great i think without something like an undergravel though it is harder to get the circulation you need but there is plenty of area for bb
 
Noto;3547728; said:
Perhaps this should go in another thread, but several posts here have touched upon it, so I'll bring it up:

Where are the heterotrophic (ammonifying) bacteria?

As was mentioned earlier, heterotrophic bacteria are much less efficient than denitrifiers, which means that a given amount of waste will support a much larger population of them. Why is this important?

1. Bacteria form contiguous colonies (biofilms) along areas where the things they need (in this case, food and oxygenated water) are concentrated.

2. Biofilms take up space. A microporous ceramic bimedia element covered with a biofilm is effectively no longer microporous; the vast internal surface area is biologically unavailable and it has no more effective surface area than a similarly-sized piece of gravel.

3. Bacteria are not good neighbors. Many bacteria secrete allelotoxins to prevent colonization of their neighborhood by heterospecifics, such as, say, nitrifying bacteria.

So, any part of your biomedia that is interacting with solid waste- feces, uneaten food, plant debris, dead livestock, shed scales and exoskeletons, etc.- is primarily acting as a host for heterotrophic (ammonifying) bacteria and is not an effective home for autotrophic (denitrifying) bacteria.

This has two major consequences for aquarists:

1. Mechanical filtration has a massive impact on the effectiveness of biofiltration.

2. In the absence of effective mechanical filtration, a larger volume of low-surface-area media (e.g., gravel) is likely to be more effective than a small volume of high-surface-area media; even though the total surface area may be similar, less of the gravel's available surface area will be fouled by heterotrophic bacteria when a piece of solid waste comes into contact with it, because the surface area is more spread out.

This difference may have some consequences for TCarswell's barb experiment vs. NC_Nutcase's ammonia experiment, though I suspect the differences will be slight due to the spread-out nature of the biological surface area in this case.
Click to expand...
Good post. Im long away from adding the tiger barb I just found out where to get the ammonia :) However ill keep this in mind as mechanical filtration is necessary when keeping fish unless the environment is massive (lakes, ponds)
 
cvermeulen;3547943; said:
I don't know that we need a destination, there's been a lot of good information passed back and forth, and new information continues to arise, so we are all learning - which is sort of the point.

I think the info posted here is incredible. It kind of stink for people just getting into the thread to have to read through the whole thing to pick out 20 different points. For me it truely makes no difference.



I'm not sure I agree with you here. Do you have any evidence or theory to back this up? Unless the BB has to migrate a long way, like say from your filter to your gravel, in order to grow, why would it make any difference? As long as your capacity is not nearly maxed out already, why would the available room have any impact on growth rate?

I think it was proven in many tests that better 02 and flow in general is a better way for BB to grow. Hence bio-wheels, and/or the whole setup/design of a Bio-filter. I don't think BB if looked at through a microscope is building in mountains upon mountains of each other. I think it is a little more spread out. My point is with extra BM (example a WD set made for a 1000 gallon tank set up on a 400 gallon tank) in the same area the like a W/D the BB doesn't have to migrate to the other side of the tank. It can just spread like wildfire in current location hence speeding the process up.



So what are you saying? This sort of contradicts what you said before this, about having lots of BM allowing quick expansion of your BB colony.

Hmmm, maybe I need to reead what I posted. I don't see any contradiction. If you have added space or for simplicity lets say you have 1000 bio balls in your W/D... You only have enough load on the tank to say cover 500 bio balls in BB.... If the need for BB was there it would grow a lot quicker on the other Bioballs than it would across the tank on the wall where there is not the "perfect" environment. (hmmm will get some slams for that one lol)...... Possibly the contradiction that you may seem to have read is if you have a massive spike say over night from 2 fish dieing or little sister or cousin throws in the whole can of yummy flak food, I for one do not think the BB would be able to grow fast enough even with the "perfect" environment even with plenty of room in current location for expansion. DO I need to prove this??? I think it has kind of proven itself.



What is the distinction, and why? I mean, nobody is saying that overfiltration is harmful, just that it's wasteful.

DO I really have to explain how or why it is possible to overfilter a reef setup??? Give it 2 min of thought and I think you could figure it out. Keep in mind I am speaking of filtering in general, not just bio.

I am giving my opinion on over filtering tanks. As stated before imo most of the people whom over bio filter there tanks have nothing more than a form of mechanical form of filtering. There is nothing wrong with that at all. If anything as stock is slowly increased you always have room for expansion in your current setup.Besides that the topic was getting a little heated so I just had to jump in......what more can I say :)




Again... does it really matter? It's all interesting discussion.
Click to expand...


No it doesn't matter as stated before
 
As stated before imo most of the people whom over bio filter there tanks have nothing more than a form of mechanical form of filtering
Click to expand...

true.

one thing that I think is important is that people often distinguish between 'mechanical' and 'biologcal' filtration as if they are seperate.

they aren't.

lots of nitrifying bacteria will colonize the sponges of say, an Aquaclear filter that most think of as a purely mechanical filter.

that being said however, you can have 10 filters on a tank as compared to a tank with 8 filters (all things being the same) and both tanks will likely support the same amount of bacteria.

why?

because media space for colonization is not the limiting factor in bacterial growth.

people overdo the bio because they think they going to have more nitrifiers, when in fact, the additional media really becomes nothing more than additional mechanical filtration.

so you might have clearer water.

but not more bacteria, which of course exist all over the aquarium, with the most heavily concentrated populations being in the filter media and the substrate. both are rich in food (detritus) for the bacteria to consume. in addtion, the ammonia excreted from the fish's gills is another major source of food, but this food is in solution with the tank water.
 
I started to read the post again and I couldn't find what I was looking for....
Want to get something cleared up..or try to...
BB grows as quickly on glass as it would in a properly setup bio filter?? Such as a Wet/Dry??? I for one say no way.... WHy do we use flow to grow BB??? Powerheads work, but I think the W/D is a lot better.
All in all I agree with NC under controlled or the exact circumstance. Like I said before "a fish bowl".... wtf is more messy than a damn goldfish :) ??? Sorry gold fish lovers!!!!!! To me there is no difference with the same stock to volume from a 1 gallon fishbowl to a 1000 gallon tank. Hmmm, actually I take that back when I try to imagine a 1000lbs gold crammed in a monster tank. In theory it would work or should be the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom