Take this with a grain of salt :
I dont think it would matter what media is used. Mayne more mech would allow for a longer "clean" period and who knows how ling it actually would take to gum up im just speculating and go off others experience.
Water Quality
- Thread starter jaws7777
- Start date
Take this with a grain of salt :
I dont think it would matter what media is used. Mayne more mech would allow for a longer "clean" period and who knows how ling it actually would take to gum up im just speculating and go off others experience.
Seachems reply to the lower gph (20ish range)
Thank you for your email. At a flow rate below 50 GPH, the difference in flow rates only really matter with regards to how it impacts the circulation of the tank and the delivery of nutrients to bacteria. At a certain point, the bacteria will start to be limited by how much nitrate they are receiving in new water. A lower flow rate does not mean that more bacteria will be growing. I'd suspect that 20 GPH would somewhat limit bacteria growth, but not to an extreme degree.
Thank you for your email. At a flow rate below 50 GPH, the difference in flow rates only really matter with regards to how it impacts the circulation of the tank and the delivery of nutrients to bacteria. At a certain point, the bacteria will start to be limited by how much nitrate they are receiving in new water. A lower flow rate does not mean that more bacteria will be growing. I'd suspect that 20 GPH would somewhat limit bacteria growth, but not to an extreme degree.
Well I know pumice-like media is preferred because it has deep pores that allow for anaerobic bacteria to thrive, but if the container the media is stored in is in itself completely devoid of oxygen couldn't you get by with something like a ceramic ring which may not clog quite as easily as the micro-fine pores of the pumice?
Im sure you could as long as the flow is low. Did read that the smaller sized pores help keep the bb in a low oxygen environment but could be just marketing
Last edited:
It's probably true, but given enough towers and enough media even if you had standard media in there it would deplete the oxygen during the normal aerobic parts of the nitrogen cycle and would leave quite a bit of anaerobic media to chow down on nitrates... but the deeper pores would definitely make it more efficient, though you probably wouldn't need that efficiency if you have enough towers filled with media. I'm definitely not an expert here, just some thoughts
It's probably true, but given enough towers and enough media even if you had standard media in there it would deplete the oxygen during the normal aerobic parts of the nitrogen cycle and would leave quite a bit of anaerobic media to chow down on nitrates... but the deeper pores would definitely make it more efficient, though you probably wouldn't need that efficiency if you have enough towers filled with media. I'm definitely not an expert here, just some thoughts
I hope a few more people start messing around with this someone is bound to strike gold lol
Seachems response to what the optimal gph would be.
I'd recommend to shoot for around 40 gallons per hour. The nitrate reduction starts once the anaerobic bacteria colonies have grown in, which is generally around week 3 or 4 after setting up the media reactor, although I have herd reports of nitrate reduction earlier.
Thank you,
Seachem Support
I'd recommend to shoot for around 40 gallons per hour. The nitrate reduction starts once the anaerobic bacteria colonies have grown in, which is generally around week 3 or 4 after setting up the media reactor, although I have herd reports of nitrate reduction earlier.
Thank you,
Seachem Support
Well atleast we know they werent b.s'ing me lol thanks for posting.
I adjusted the ball valve last night and got to 40 gph. Gonna test tonight to see if it holds true
