Bio media efficiency - is it worth it?

[hardb0iled]

I was reading a thread on another forum where they were discussing the difference between generic porous ceramic noodles and brand name media like biohome or one of the other proprietry medias, basically asking if they do that much of a better job.

I started thinking(uh oh thats dangerous! ) for the exorbitant prices that are paid for these medias which supposedly have so much more surface area then the other and so and so on, is the extra surface area really required?

Here's my thinking, the BB(beneficial bacteria) population in a tank/filter system reflects the amount of waste there is for the bacteria to feed off. Once the bacteria population builds to a level where the available ammonia and nitrites are all being consumed - BB would cease to grow in population and in fact probably die off until the equilibrium has been reached again. So in actual fact you can have all the surface area in the world but if you arent producing the waste then its going to waste.

I can see benefits for the expensive media where you need to maximise the filtration in a small area - say if you have a canister filter that isnt coping with the bio load in your aquarium, it may be worth trying a better media in it. But I see aquarists on internet forums swearing by an expensive brand of media that costs them a fortune and am wondering if they are actually using all that surface area available or if they could just as easily have same the job done by a cheap media with less surface area.

So with this in mind, the only time I would see a brand name expensive media is required, is if the 'cheap ass' media your using is not coping and you have no more room to add more. So far it has never happened for me

 

[DeLgAdO]

its good to have excess amount of surface area in a bio filter, having an alot of extra surface area than is needed is called a"Starved biofilm" its the condition that occurs when "more than enough" surface area is available to host the biofiltering bacteria. This extra high ratio of available surface-area-to-nutrients results in a low maintenance, high efficiency biofiltration system.

its a very new concept to the home aquarium but its scientifically valid

 

[ogre929]

There's no real problem with having too much surface area, but if it's not used then why spring for the uber extra cash.

Can't say that I agree with the extra high to surface area to nutrient theory. Got a linky? I wanna read more so I know more, but seems to me that if you have a certain ammonia production level that constitutes in a specific number of bacteria to produce -NO2 and -NO3 and you end up with the same ammount of -NO3 in the end no matter how much surface area you have and have to do water changes at the same rate due to your unchanged bacteria quantity. Even if you have more surface area. What are the extra bacteria gonna feed on.

 

[Miles]

I would have to say it depends on the amount of waste put into the tank. I agree with the thought that unless you need to maximize the effeciency of your filtration (due to a high amount of bioload), then it might be worth it. I could also see it on a larger scale, aka MONSTER FISH, when a massive sump is worthy of that size and amount of surface area, which is needed to break down the waste of some big meals.

I think that if maintenance is done properly, and overfeeding dosn't occur, that common Bio-media is just as effecient as others.

This is my 120g wide, which houses my Fahaka and a couple buddies. His filtration unit is simple (due to no drilled overflows or holes in the tank.).. I change the water 3-4 times a week, and never overfeed. He gets small portions a couple times a day, and that is all. As you can see, my bio-media is a cheap oriental knockoff brand.

(and yes I know the biomedia is before the pre-filter, but the powerhead unit wouldn't hold the media properly in the upper chamber.)

 

[Gr8KarmaSF]

Wow, as always thanks for the bio lesson guys....