Why does everyone overdo the bio?

[sostoudt]

Let's put it this way. Let me make up two completely plausible, if imaginary tanks.

Both are 180gl 6x2x2 tanks, both house 3 20" silver aros, a 14" pleco, and some snails.

One tank has 3 FX5's with $100 worth of bio media. Total filtration investment: $1000. Total weekly filter cleaning time (based on cleaning one filter per week, rotating through them.) 20 mins per week.

Second tank as a pair of AC110's with the included biomax media. Total filter cost - $100. Total weekly filter cleaning time - 10 mins.

Both have zero ammonia, zero nitrite.

Who has the better setup?

?

is there any other media beside bio?
whats the flowrate on a fx5 and the two AC110's?

another thing you should consider is how efficient they both are at removing particulate matter from the water column.


edit: sorry if this has already been covered im kinda jumping into the middle

 

[iloveoscars702]

i dont even know how to respond to any of this. holy moly.

 

[Toby_H]

You've been screwing up my name on purpose for 2 or 3 pages just trying to be rude... don't give me a hard time because I doubled the r in yours... When I write your name (Bderick) my spell check automatically breaks it into B Derrick...

Comprehension is key... and when you misrepresent a situation to prevent people from understanding what you are really talking about... you stand in the way of anyone properly comprehending the situation...

Is the filtration I designed and built on my tanks really that far over your head that you can't see how it differes from what you suggest it is? You like to ignore the 700 gph pump... you like to ignore that the way they are set up the flow provided by that pump moves through each tank individually (as opposed to being split between the tanks)...


And just because you make some off the wall statement and claim that there is factual evidence to support somewhere out there... doesn't mean it's true...


If you doubt my claims of my fishroom you can visit the Charlotte Area Aquarists Society's site and ask around... I hosted a meeting for them in my fishroom summer of '08. Lots of people were there...

 

[Bderick67]

And your experience was? And the reason you concluded the bio media was insufficient was?

Previous tenants of the tank were 4 6" pacu, no ammonia, nitrite problems when tested. With the RBPs I would see ammonia and then nitrite spikes over the next day. Added a small 55g rated wet/dry sump...no more spikes.

Please don't deflect the topic. We're talking about bio filtration, not mechanical or chemical. Obviously there is all kinds of other media for other purposes, but for the purpose of keeping our water chemistry livable for our fish, Bio is the type of filtration we use. We can have another thread about the other two kinds if you want, as long as you don't call anyone names.

Considering that mechanical filtration has a bearing on biological filtration, why would you consider it

 

[Toby_H]

Previous tenants of the tank were 4 6" pacu, no ammonia, nitrite problems when tested. With the RBPs I would see ammonia and then nitrite spikes over the next day. Added a small 55g rated wet/dry sump...no more spikes.

You forgot to mention that your child was responsible for the feeding of this tank...

And we all know how unlikely it is for a young boy to overfeed his piranhas...

See what I mean about leaving out details to support his nonsense... lol

 

[sostoudt]

i believe nutcase has valid point, also based on my own expierences, that the surface area needed for ammonia and nitrite removal is far exaggerated by certain sources.

im still a unsure, if the area necessary for adequate nitrification is also adequate for ammonification.

 

[Lupin]

Last time, folks. Warnings will be issued for repetitive derailing.

 

[Bderick67]

You forgot to mention that your child was responsible for the feeding of this tank...

And we all know how unlikely it is for a young boy to overfeed his piranhas...

See what I mean about leaving out details to support his nonsense... lol

Yes my cichlid fed the pacu pellets did not feed the RBPs the frozen shrimp or smelt. Either way the biomedia could not keeep up yet added bio media resolved the issue.

Gotta stop assuming

 

[Burko]

"that the surface area needed for ammonia and nitrite removal is far exaggerated by certain sources."

How to measure surface area itself is a debatable thing.

The smaller the ruler the larger the area...

Add infiniteum.

 

[Jgray152]

This is not necessarily shown with just water parameters. With the media being "spread out" It is less likely that all the colony could be damaged or lost. This leads to having greater stability.

Damaged or lost? Please explain how the colony could be damaged or lost in a situation to which will possibly NOT take out the entire colony. Also explain how adding media will lessen the chance of the BB being damaged or lost?

Are you really that ignorant that you can't really get my name correct? But if ya want to butcher names so be it, BC Butface.

He spelled your name with an extra "r" and you get upset about it? Moving on.....

Yes my cichlid fed the pacu pellets did not feed the RBPs the frozen shrimp or smelt. Either way the biomedia could not keeep up yet added bio media resolved the issue.

It wasn't just "adding media". It seems you adding an entire different filtration unit to your tank which has more oxygen available to the BB. You didn't have the wet/dry before?

How to measure surface area itself is a debatable thing

I go by, if it looks like there is a lot of surface area, than there is. If it doesn't, it doesn't. IF I see there is 100,000 sq ft of surface area in one box of bio media, I lite the box on fire and hope the rest of the media burns with it.

im still a unsure, if the area necessary for adequate nitrification is also adequate for ammonification.

As I understand it, ammonification is the process of organic compounds breaking down into ammonia. Nitrification is the helpful process.