A sump filtration rant up for debate.

[Miguel]

I believe in a mix of the two slutions.

Large sumps with biomedia, connected refugiums ( I have 2 ) and a wet/dry shower system taking water from the sump and dumping it in the sump.

Also working in the sump I have fluiidized sand bed filters.

And I do my WC's

 

[LD50]

Ammonia and trItes never budged and the tank is over stocked/ fed with 3 dozen and more large mature Haps and mbuna.

My nitrAtes are still a problem though and will rise to 30 or more if I do not perform water changes. Plants are good and all but WC's are still a mandatory.

Right on, your tank is prob doing most of the bio filtration, lots of BB lives on the substrate and decor. And I'm not saying plant/algae filtration gets rid of the need for WC's, I'm just saying it maintains better water quality in between them. Also a fuge in a 40g sump for a 200+g tank is a bit small to run it. I would put money on it that if you have a 75g sump with a a solid 5lbs of plants floating around in there you would see no NO3 build up.

You do understand that your plants in your sump are acting as a bio-media and absorption media as well. In a balanced aquarium, there is no need for all the added filtration that you find in most aquariums. Just regular WC's to replenish nutrients not found in the food you give to your fish and to decrease chemical compounds that some fish secrete. Algae/plant scrubbers work wonderfully to remove excess nutrients from the water but can't remove everything harmful hence the need for WC's.
Vegetative filtration is only really cost effective in a pond type setting if your going to have larger bio-loads.

yes I understand the nature of plant filtration, and its not anything like bacterial filtration. Plants uptake and use nitrogen compounds as well as a number of others in order to facilitate growth, they actually export these compounds. BB Simply metabolizes a highly toxic nitrogen compound into less toxic one.
I never claimed that plant filtration eliminates all harmful things in water nor did I claim that it eliminates the need for WC's because I still do regular WC's. But unlike a while back when I only used BB for filtration I dont have any NO3/PO4 build up nor do I have any algae growth in the tank. I see it like this, 30%+ WC's every week with a steady 20-30ppm NO3 and always scrapeing algae. OR a 20-30% WC every other week with zero NO3 and zero algae.

"Vegetative filtration is only really cost effective in a pond type setting if your going to have larger bio-loads." -

 

[RedDwarf]

"Vegetative filtration is only really cost effective in a pond type setting if your going to have larger bio-loads." -

I'll make this plain and simple. The surfaces in your tank grow BB, this includes gravel and decoration (which so happens to include your plants). You have bio-media in your tank, there is no way around it. Your choice of bio-media just happens to be plants.

And if you think my statement about vegetative filtration is so funny try adding a few more fish to your tank and after a couple of months get back to me. Your two fish in your 100 gallons of water doesn't constitute a large bio-load.

 

[CHOMPERS]

You do understand that your plants in your sump are acting as a bio-media and absorption media as well. In a balanced aquarium, there is no need for all the added filtration that you find in most aquariums. Just regular WC's to replenish nutrients not found in the food you give to your fish and to decrease chemical compounds that some fish secrete. Algae/plant scrubbers work wonderfully to remove excess nutrients from the water but can't remove everything harmful hence the need for WC's.
Vegetative filtration is only really cost effective in a pond type setting if your going to have larger bio-loads.

In addition to removing nutrients, plants also suck up trace minerals that are needed for the fish. In reef systems, these minerals are monitored and replaced on a continual basis (kalkwasser, Two Part, etc.). In FW systems, water changes are incredibly cheap; way cheaper than running the lights.

Furthermore, when an oversized sump is combined with an automatic water changer, the regular maintenance drops off dramatically.

 

[LD50]

I'll make this plain and simple. The surfaces in your tank grow BB, this includes gravel and decoration

lots of BB lives on the substrate and decor.

I'll make this plain and simple, I already established that.

And if you think my statement about vegetative filtration is so funny try adding a few more fish to your tank and after a couple of months get back to me. Your two fish in your 100 gallons of water doesn't constitute a large bio-load.

Just short of an adult snakehead I doubt much would survive in a 90 with a breeding pair of trimacs in the first place. I also don’t think a pair is a "heavy" load but it isn’t exactly light either, I think most would consider a trimac pair in a 90 a fair bio load and proper stock level. Further more I would never stock a tank to a point that I needed excessive "bio media" (rings, balls, scrubbies etc) just to keep the fish alive in the first place.

In addition to removing nutrients, plants also suck up trace minerals that are needed for the fish. In reef systems, these minerals are monitored and replaced on a continual basis (kalkwasser, Two Part, etc.). In FW systems, water changes are incredibly cheap; way cheaper than running the lights.

Furthermore, when an oversized sump is combined with an automatic water changer, the regular maintenance drops off dramatically.

I agree 100% that auto water changer>plants, no doubt and one day I hope to have one. I can also understand not wanting to pay for the lights esp in certian areas where they charge a grip for electricity. As for the trace ele and mineral content I suppose if you have mineraly diffecient source water this could be an issue but mineral replacement is kept in check by regular WC's anyway.I never said plants eliminate the need for WC's, just that they maintain better water quality in between them when compared to relying soley on the nitrogen cycle for filtration.

 

[Egon]

In FW systems, water changes are incredibly cheap; way cheaper than running the lights.

Furthermore, when an oversized sump is combined with an automatic water changer, the regular maintenance drops off dramatically.

X1

My drip system flows out to my yard. I just move the hose every few days to different locations to water different plants and trees. Basically I would of watered the plants anyway so I look at it as free water.

 

[fox3]

^^ We have better than 12" of this white stuff covering our hibernating lawn. That and the ground is frozen to over 8" down. Constant drip set up like that here would not work very well.

 

[Jc1119]

Because while most aquatic plants prefer NH3/NH4+, and therefore prevent even a build up of nitrates in the first place, there's always the risk of them not getting enough nutrients/lights/carbon, and dying. It's a lot easier for a plant to die than for your BB to die, so there's always an associated risk.

This is my situation exactly. I travel some 200-250 days a year, so my wife( non fish person) feeds and performs water changes while Im gone. Asking her to take care of live plants as well wouldnt be smart and or fair. For pom, I run multiple filters with tons of bio and understock my tanks. Probably costs a bit more in the long run, but the wife, my fish and I stay happy.

Using plants is a great way to help filter, just not practical for me.

 

[pengu13]

My tank i have a in tank sump on the one end so i can use the lights in my hood for the sump. i'm looking into getting water lettuce to float on the sump i want a floating plant but something a little larger so the pumps don't suck it up