Are canisters nitrate factories?

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
I think we can all agree that water quality is improved in general by maintaining our filters and performing water changes.

I think we can all agree that all fishkeeping is specific to our own particular scenarios - so no two tanks or two tank keepers are identical.

I think we can all agree that there is nothing really wrong with using canisters to filter our tanks.

I think we can all agree that sumps are the ideal, but not always a possible reality for everyone.

I think we can all agree (overall) that we could be doing more water changes and more filter maintenance then we generally do.

See we can all agree.
 
Redearsunfish said:
I think we can all agree that water quality is improved in general by maintaining our filters and performing water changes.

I think we can all agree that all fishkeeping is specific to our own particular scenarios - so no two tanks or two tank keepers are identical.

I think we can all agree that there is nothing really wrong with using canisters to filter our tanks.

I think we can all agree that sumps are the ideal, but not always a possible reality for everyone.

I think we can all agree (overall) that we could be doing more water changes and more filter maintenance then we generally do.

See we can all agree.
Click to expand...

I booked a flight for you to Ukraine then Syria. Good luck!


Sent from my iPhone using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
dogofwar said:
The characteristics that makes canister filters a less effective tool in managing nitrates - for me at least - are that they combine mechanical and biological (and chemical) filtration into a single (inaccessible) chamber and are a PITA to clean.

Other filtration approaches - air-driven boxes, powerhead quick filters, HOBs, pre-filters, filter socks before sumps or dumps, etc. - make removal of the uneaten food/protein/waste, etc. (the left of the process) that will become nitrate (to the right of the scale) that much quicker and easier....and likely more frequently done.

There's nothing magical going on in a canister filter (other than that you can't see it) that makes rotten food, etc. any less nasty than if it sat on the bottom of your tank and was permitted to be broken down by nitrifying bacteria and converted into nitrates.

Most freshwater fish are tough enough that it really doesn't matter, especially when folks are doing regular water changes and using plants to absorb nitrates.

Make no mistake, though, that canisters make it harder and not easier to maintain really low nitrates.

Matt
Click to expand...

Well said! A lot of people are passionate about canisters because they think canisters are sophisticated, and can run for months without maintenance. What they don't know is that they are just sweeping dirt underneath the rug, and waiting for disaster to happen. All mechanical filters need to be cleaned frequently to remove the solid wastes from the system as fast as they accumulate. It's a breeze to replace sock from a sump system or filter pads form HOBs, but a pain to clean a canister. Another vulnerability of canister is that if you clean it too often, sooner or later the O ring will fail or you make a assembly mistake, and flooding is waiting to happen.
 
I agree that boxes, HOBs etc have quicker access for service, but my eheims with the quick disconnect valves are SO easy to maintain that I'm not personally put off by doing it. without such convenient features I could easily see myself become lax, and nitrates climbing.
 
Lots of general statements here, but I beg to differentiate and speak up for customized fishkeeping :hitting:

Redearsunfish said:
I think we can all agree that sumps are the ideal, but not always a possible reality for everyone.
I think we can all agree (overall) that we could be doing more water changes and more filter maintenance then we generally
See we can all agree.
Click to expand...

Sorry, not on these two :grinno: but on everything else

viejafish said:
Well said! A lot of people are passionate about canisters because they think canisters are sophisticated, and can run for months without maintenance. What they don't know is that they are just sweeping dirt underneath the rug, and waiting for disaster to happen. All mechanical filters need to be cleaned frequently to remove the solid wastes from the system as fast as they accumulate.
Click to expand...

Let me add some oil to the fire - I am one of these "open-them-once-a-year" canisters-only guys :flamed:
Nature biodegrades bodily wastes completely - it dilutes by rain and recycles degradation products thru trophic levels. You know, cow manure being used as fertilizer.

Same thing happens in my tanks: Fish do poop. My canisters are large enough to biodegrade waste without clogging. What comes out are dissolved mineralized degradation products, mainly CO2 and NO3-, low-level phosphates and some trace minerals. My plants take up the nutrients. My drip system dilutes them and washes out surplus. I throw out plants (or sell them). I clean my canister to take out cellulose and lignin that have a long biodeg period, and to free creatures caught in my canister (crabs, shrimp, guppies, etc).

I don't want to open the can of sump vs canister, that has been debated since the dawn of time (search some threads in this forum dating back 7 or 8 years). All filters work, and we can happily coexist driving different cars, running different filters, and keeping different fish. You have to adjust your maintenance to your set-up and find the right equilibrium. I think my tanks show that I know what comes out of my canisters during the year, and I have no rug that I need to sweep that waste underneath. Nature takes its course.

Bottom line: Yes, nitrate factory. Just like with every other operational biofilter, be it sump or HOB or sponge filter.

Peace :cheers:
HarleyK
 
viejafish said:
There is a misunderstanding of what fish poop is made up of. Fish poop is not a huge source of nitrogen. Unlike birds and mammals, fish excrete nitrogeneous waste primarily through gill and secondarily through urination as ammonia. So even if you remove fish poop as fast as it is produced, the nitrate level will still go up. The only way to lower nitrate is WC and photosynthesis.
Click to expand...

I have looked for scientific studies with regard to your statement to no avail. Maybe you can provide the source of your information to us. (Not that you are wrong, just that I did not find any research on the ratios you are stating).

Thanks for all the replies
 
soul_assassin said:
I have looked for scientific studies with regard to your statement to no avail. Maybe you can provide the source of your information to us. (Not that you are wrong, just that I did not find any research on the ratios you are stating).

Thanks for all the replies
Click to expand...


"The gills are the primary site of ammonia excretion in fish (Wilkie, 1997, 2002; Weihrauch et al., 2009), because they have large surface area, perfusion by 100% of cardiac output, large ventilation rates, small diffusion distances, and contact with a voluminous mucosal medium (Evans et al., 2005)."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3059970/


I have found this in other sources as well, but it's fairly well established. This article covers far more than this one issue, but I believe it will answer your question as to validity.



"A byproduct of protein metabolism, ammonia is primarily excreted across the gill membranes, with only a small amount excreted in the urine."

http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/fa031




"We will consider the elimination of nitrogen first, a process technically known as excretion. Excretion is a necessary consequence of protein breakdown; when proteins are converted to carbohydrates to provide energy, the amino group is removed and must be dealt with. In the body, the amino group is quickly oxidized to form ammonia (or, at high body pH the ammonium ion). Ammonia is highly toxic and highly soluble in water. If the organism has a sufficient source of water, ammonia can simply excreted in the water. This is the course taken by many (if not most) aquatic organisms, particularly those in freshwater."

http://www.marietta.edu/~mcshaffd/aquatic/sextant/excrete.htm

Someone who has taken more biology than me (one course) can explain this, but it seems that using gils as the means of excreting ammonia is the best way for most freshwater organisms to handle it. Converting it to urea or uric acid is probably not the most efficient process for most FW animals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom