Best biological media

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
E.C. said:
They fall on the same category, biological filtration.
This is the part where the OP and I seems to connect,



The noise part is where I said I like k1, I just like it because it's self cleaning and because it's really noisy, well again IMO I don't mind it, and the establishment of the said self sufficient tank is here,



http://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/showthread.php?552388-(almost)-Self-sustaining-aquariums

The OP talked things about the thread, well it means he and I do understand where those previous comments came from.

If I ever offend you in some way, I say sorry, I prefer not to be a "dick".

And lastly all filtration has pros and cons, even plants, they may go haywire example duckweed, oh those dreaded duckweed.
well that's it.

Here's a pic to compensate the derailment of the thread.

View attachment 944020
Click to expand...

Thanks for getting back on track guys, getting tired of closed threads lol.


Sent from my iPad using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
I use Matrix in my canisters. It's cheap in bulk, packs well in canisters, and seems to work fine (I have 0 ammonia/nitrites, and that's all bio media is for)...

I use scrubbies in sumps because they're super cheap, stack in a sump well, and give you plenty of surface area.
 
"Best" in this case really depends upon your criteria, which is why I don't consider there to any absolutes and imo there is basically either personal preference or personal opinion. Best how? Cheapest, simplest, most efficient, longest lasting, easiest to clean and maintain, low or zero maintenance? If you want to talk about most efficient, quickest to recover from a power outage, quickest to respond to varying bio-load, and low maintenance, then fluidized bed filtration (which I have experience with) should be brought into the discussion.

If you start getting into the pore wars of comparing the claims of various ceramics or pumice products, etc., you need to consider that efficiency is affected by the fluid dynamics of your filter, how well your water is pre-filtered by earlier stages of filtration, and also consider that it's not as simple as the more or better bio-media you have, the larger your beneficial bacteria colony. Doesn't work that way. Your beneficial bacteria population will only grow to the size supported by the available nutrients or bio-load. Doesn't matter how many filters, how much media, which type or brand of media-- X number of fish, x amount of food, produces x amount of nutrients and will only support x bacteria colony, no more.

Therefore, the viable options to configure your system to handle your bio-load are many. I have or have had tanks running with fluidized bed sand filters, floss or pad only, combination of various mechanical, chemical, and 'bio-media', and a variety of filters. All were successful and all did the job for me. I like the efficiency of fluidized bed filters, but you need to add mechanical filtration, I love the quiet of a system running on Eheim canisters, I like the low tech, low cost, easy maintenance of some power filters, just replace the cartridges with poly, pad, and/or net bags of media, rinse it in tank water every so often and you've got cheap filtration. I don't like the noise of bio-wheels.

When it comes to de-nitration, you're in another ballpark and can think beyond media to the overall balance of your system and the extent to which substrate, filtration, algae, plants, etc. can all do some de-nitration. One of my tanks is a 135 gal running on two 2217 Eheims, no plants, Eco-Complete cichlid sand, reasonable but not unsightly amount of algae, moss, and other bio-film on rocks, driftwood, etc. and nitrates typically read @5 on that tank with typically 30-35% weekly water changes. Nothing special, just an overall well balanced tank.
 
neutrino said:
"Best" in this case really depends upon your criteria, which is why I don't consider there to any absolutes and imo there is basically either personal preference or personal opinion. Best how? Cheapest, simplest, most efficient, longest lasting, easiest to clean and maintain, low or zero maintenance? If you want to talk about most efficient, quickest to recover from a power outage, quickest to respond to varying bio-load, and low maintenance, then fluidized bed filtration (which I have experience with) should be brought into the discussion.

If you start getting into the pore wars of comparing the claims of various ceramics or pumice products, etc., you need to consider that efficiency is affected by the fluid dynamics of your filter, how well your water is pre-filtered by earlier stages of filtration, and also consider that it's not as simple as the more or better bio-media you have, the larger your beneficial bacteria colony. Doesn't work that way. Your beneficial bacteria population will only grow to the size supported by the available nutrients or bio-load. Doesn't matter how many filters, how much media, which type or brand of media-- X number of fish, x amount of food, produces x amount of nutrients and will only support x bacteria colony, no more.

Therefore, the viable options to configure your system to handle your bio-load are many. I have or have had tanks running with fluidized bed sand filters, floss or pad only, combination of various mechanical, chemical, and 'bio-media', and a variety of filters. All were successful and all did the job for me. I like the efficiency of fluidized bed filters, but you need to add mechanical filtration, I love the quiet of a system running on Eheim canisters, I like the low tech, low cost, easy maintenance of some power filters, just replace the cartridges with poly, pad, and/or net bags of media, rinse it in tank water every so often and you've got cheap filtration. I don't like the noise of bio-wheels.

When it comes to de-nitration, you're in another ballpark and can think beyond media to the overall balance of your system and the extent to which substrate, filtration, algae, plants, etc. can all do some de-nitration. One of my tanks is a 135 gal running on two 2217 Eheims, no plants, Eco-Complete cichlid sand, reasonable but not unsightly amount of algae, moss, and other bio-film on rocks, driftwood, etc. and nitrates typically read @5 on that tank with typically 30-35% weekly water changes. Nothing special, just an overall well balanced tank.
Click to expand...

Cool! Very good topics for more in depth conversations for sure bro! This thread is geared more to the basics as to share with newer hobbyist and more advanced to share their favorites as well as what's worked best for them. MBF's are def one of the best forms of bio! Another great topic would be how to gage how many liters of MBF media would be needed for any given system. Great share brother and thanks for posting!


Sent from my iPad using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
seedubs1 said:
I use Matrix in my canisters. It's cheap in bulk, packs well in canisters, and seems to work fine (I have 0 ammonia/nitrites, and that's all bio media is for)...

I use scrubbies in sumps because they're super cheap, stack in a sump well, and give you plenty of surface area.
Click to expand...

Matrix seems to be the popular kid on the block lol! I love scrubbies as well for the reasons mentioned! DIY is great!


Sent from my iPad using MonsterAquariaNetwork app
 
Ceramic is my choice. But Idk what is best
 
For ammonia and nitrites:
Sand
Ceramic noodles
Plants for nitrates. I try not to add any additional chemicals to my tank so I eliminate any chemical nitrate remover. established Plants > water changes because of $$$ lol. Not a fan of a DSB in a FW enviroment to establish anaerobic bacteria.
Just my opinion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom