Pros:
1. UGF holds an immense amount of nitrifying bacteria.
2. Less Expensive to Purchase
3. Less Expensive to Maintain - no buying of filter media.
4. Oxygenates the water.
5. Easiest and most simple method of effecient filtration.
6. Less of a head-ache to get working properly. (ie: Canisters)
7. Less chance of spilling water on the floor during maintanence.
Cons:
1. UGF do not work properly if the gravel bed is too deep/thin.
2. Harder to maintain, with extra siphoning and a bi-yearly 'overhaul' cleaning.
3. Detritus can build up quite easily, especially with a high bio-load
4. Detritus releases excessive unwanted Nitates into the tank.
5. Detritus can lead to an outbreak of disease/infection.
6. Detritus will cause a build-up of organic wastes, causing pH to fall.
7. You can not use a Sand or fine Substrate.
8. Fish that dig will expose the UGF, causing it to run at 1/10th it's effeciency.
9. Small fish/creatures can find their way under the filter plate, and die/decay.
10. The uplift tubes are unsightly, often becoming 'algae' tubes. (Or more maint.)
11. No way of adding chemical filtration. (Tiny Carbon Cartridges do not count.)
12. Not as effecient with an airstone, but a powerhead is expensive and can cause unwanted currents.
13. Creates a 2-3" layer of gravel in your tank, which could be potential gallonage/swimming space for inhabitants.
14. Bottom Dwellers are sometimes bothered by it, depending on the flow. (Kuhli Loaches, Spiny eels, Small Corydoras)..
15. Sucks uneaten food into gravel bed, sometimes before the fish have a chance to eat it all. Makes Blackworms disappear real fast, destroying one of their 'features' as a prime food for smaller fish. (Ie: Not decaying within the tank, and being able to live in a gravel bed.)
Every filter was designed for a reason. None of them should be considered 'obsolete' as all of them get the job done. The important part is what the scenario is, and what type of fish you are keeping. I would have to agree that UGF are effecient for ALOT of types of tanks, but with some tanks/bio-loads, its just not a viable option.
I could go on and on about pros and cons between the different filtration methods, but I think TFH writes an article about this every few months.
I have to go ship fish,
Hasta luego
Miles
1. UGF holds an immense amount of nitrifying bacteria.
2. Less Expensive to Purchase
3. Less Expensive to Maintain - no buying of filter media.
4. Oxygenates the water.
5. Easiest and most simple method of effecient filtration.
6. Less of a head-ache to get working properly. (ie: Canisters)
7. Less chance of spilling water on the floor during maintanence.
Cons:
1. UGF do not work properly if the gravel bed is too deep/thin.
2. Harder to maintain, with extra siphoning and a bi-yearly 'overhaul' cleaning.
3. Detritus can build up quite easily, especially with a high bio-load
4. Detritus releases excessive unwanted Nitates into the tank.
5. Detritus can lead to an outbreak of disease/infection.
6. Detritus will cause a build-up of organic wastes, causing pH to fall.
7. You can not use a Sand or fine Substrate.
8. Fish that dig will expose the UGF, causing it to run at 1/10th it's effeciency.
9. Small fish/creatures can find their way under the filter plate, and die/decay.
10. The uplift tubes are unsightly, often becoming 'algae' tubes. (Or more maint.)
11. No way of adding chemical filtration. (Tiny Carbon Cartridges do not count.)
12. Not as effecient with an airstone, but a powerhead is expensive and can cause unwanted currents.
13. Creates a 2-3" layer of gravel in your tank, which could be potential gallonage/swimming space for inhabitants.
14. Bottom Dwellers are sometimes bothered by it, depending on the flow. (Kuhli Loaches, Spiny eels, Small Corydoras)..
15. Sucks uneaten food into gravel bed, sometimes before the fish have a chance to eat it all. Makes Blackworms disappear real fast, destroying one of their 'features' as a prime food for smaller fish. (Ie: Not decaying within the tank, and being able to live in a gravel bed.)
Every filter was designed for a reason. None of them should be considered 'obsolete' as all of them get the job done. The important part is what the scenario is, and what type of fish you are keeping. I would have to agree that UGF are effecient for ALOT of types of tanks, but with some tanks/bio-loads, its just not a viable option.
I could go on and on about pros and cons between the different filtration methods, but I think TFH writes an article about this every few months.
I have to go ship fish,
Hasta luego
Miles
