Why does everyone overdo the bio?

[iloveoscars702]

You really love talking down to people don't you ? I kept Tiger barbs in kindergarten

The experiment would be about bio filtration and not mechanical filtration which I feel is necessary to support fish but just running a simple cartridge that I rinsed in hot water would allow me to keep the available surface area to the tank walls, heater ,and parts of the filter. There would be absolutely no bio intended media or decor.
Its an experiment however so since it has not finished yet I personally cant guarantee what I feel is going to happen will happen. That is why its an experiment.

answering the original question. i overdo the whole bio filtration because my oscars. thats why i revert to once a week feedings with my fish.

 

[sostoudt]

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

yes for the health of the fish nitrification is the important one, but ammonification is a aesthetic one, basically the conversion of waste into ammonia. so waste or detritus accumulation or clouding in certain instances would be issues you have with inadequate ammonification.

 

[tcarswell]

　
You are misleading people when you argue against myself and others encouraging people to understand the truth… meaning what their literally need…
　
I have not once read or wrote that people should not use Bio Media… Only that they should know what is necessary, and make intelligent decisions from there. I’m not even arrogant enough to suggest what “intelligent decisions” they should make. I simply try to educate people on details and let them make their own decisions…
　
　

　
I agree… and I put the Bio Max in my AC filters… since it came with them it’s silly not to. But when the bag wears out/breaks down I usually throw out the Bio Max, as I understand it’s not a necessity…
　
　

　
As I have explained earlier in this thread… and as you have suggested you already know…
　
When you remove a portion of bacteria… it takes time (not media) for the remaining colony to expand to make up for the loss…
　
PS - No amount of additional media will remove the necessary time for this to happen… which is a misconception you previously promoted…
　
　

　
I do agree bacteria is likely to concentrate in the higher flow places… such as in the filter, as well as in the tank near the intake and return…
　
But also realize that lower concentrations of bacteria spread throughout the tank has it’s advantages. Just because you push 5 or 10 times your tanks volume through your filter(s) per hour, doesn’t mean that every drop of water goes through a filter 5 to 10 times per hour. Much of the water interacts with surfaces within the tank before it goes back into the filter (or else there wouldn't be bacteria in the tank )
　
I do not argue against large quantities of bacteria accumulating in the filter… I argue that bacteria can and will form in your system in the necessary quantities regardless. If you want to make special places for it to do so, you are welcome to… but it isn’t necessary…

I do not suggest it is a bad idea to use Bio Media... I only educate people that it is not necessary... and let them choose to or not to use it...
　
　

　
LOL… You’re a ton of fun Derrick… In one post you challenge me to keep a fish alive in a bare 10 gal now you are criticizing him for accepting your challenge…
　
Adding ammonia, as opposed to fish… is a much more controlled, therefore scientific, approach at proving the same thing… it’s also more “humane” since we are not forcing a living creature to be part of an experiment…
　
Go do some research and see how big a fish would have to be to produce 5 ppm of ammonia per day… My experiment has already proved what you want us to prove… you’ve just yet to accept it…
　
　

　
If this were true as simply as you present it… then you could take all of the fish and the filter(s) from a mature tank… and place it in/on a brand new tank… and you wouldn’t experience anything more than a very small mini cycle…
　
Which I have done personally and had just as much of a “mini cycle” as I would have expected to have if I replaced the old filters media with all new media…
　
　
While I agree/understand that a large portion of bacteria lives in the filter… it is not true to think that this is the only place it can/will/does live/thrive.

Well said

 

[iloveoscars702]

Well said

x2

 

[Bderick67]

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?

Very true, not just bio media, if I remember correctly the return pump was rated at 300gph and had about a 4 ft head. plus even the added 5 or so gallons of water would help dilute the pollute

Exactly. having more bio media to allow the bb colony to spread out will not help in this situation.
Localized colony in that specific filter that malfunctions, yes. Where would the healthy colony be?

(Just my opinion below)
I really don't like those penguin filters. I bet adding any other type of bio filtration with around 3-5 liters of media could have done the job just fine. A 55 gallon wet/dry on a 65 gallon tank is a little much personally. The water is VERY little contact time with those bio wheels. I do not believe in them at all. I think they are junk as you found out.

I believe there is a point that is excessive.
I believe you can have good bio filtration within the aquarium.
I believe more that its better to have external bio filtration without going over board.

The healthy bacteria would be in other filters.

The wet dry was RATED for a 55g tank it was not a 55g tank

Which makes even more sense... your son was putting food in the tank wanting to see the piranhas do what piranhas are supposed to do... but they didn't do anything... so the food just sat and rotted causing the ammonia spike you couldn't figure out...

By the time you added the Wet/Dry he gave up on the piranhas behaving the way he thought they were supposed to...



Cause most young boys want piranhas so they can feed them modestly once every 3 days... lol, and you say I'm making false assumptions... lol

So now you would be assuming that I could not see this uneaten food while testing the water parameters

Thanks bderick for finally posting some relevant experience, although I have to wonder why it took you so long to provide.

It was brought up before in a similar type thread, for some reason the OP did not want to discuss it and could only make a brash assumption which has been carried to this thread.

While there are some other explanations for what you were seeing, it does appear as though your biological filtration was having a hard time keeping up. However, you haven't really included any details on how the spikes were measured and how large they were.

It was 3 years ago at the time my son was 16. So remembering exact levels will not happen. The levels were more of the "concern" range and not that of the "911" variety Test were done with an API test kit and occasionally confirmed/checked with test strips

From what you said about the piranha's eating habits, it seems to me that such a stock, and their eating habits would result in quite large, periodic ammonia loads. Perhaps in this situation the biological demand is quite a bit higher than in some of the rest of our experiences, and a simple HOB was not enough.

This was my though, hence the adding of the w/d.

However if we back up to the beginning of this thread and talk about the point we started with, you still did not require a ridiculous amount of biofiltration. a small W/D (while larger than what we were just batting around) seems a reasonable amount of bio-filtration, and in this case perhaps it was what you needed. You still didn't need a big-ass bio tower and 10x filtration turnover though, even with large messy carnivores who only eat periodically.

As I originally stated this was a wet/dry RATED for a 55g tank and was not a ridiculous amount of bio filtration.

 

[cvermeulen]

As I originally stated this was a wet/dry RATED for a 55g tank and was not a ridiculous amount of bio filtration.

Maybe I wasn't particularly clear - my point was that the small W/D you described was a reasonable size, not a honking bio tower. So even with several large, messy carnivores in a relatively small tank, a modest w/d was more than enough to handle the periodic loading.

 

[Bderick67]

Maybe I wasn't particularly clear - my point was that the small W/D you described was a reasonable size, not a honking bio tower. So even with several large, messy carnivores in a relatively small tank, a modest w/d was more than enough to handle the periodic loading.

I see

Ya, I really didn't have the room for the horking bio tower thingy anyhow

 

[MonsterMinis]

Why do I overdo my Bio filtration?.. If I could get an exact amount of surface space to provide the most efficent amount of BB (aka how much is max use, compared to how much is just sitting there useless) I wouldn't have more room then I obviousely need. I don't think any aquarist reasonably would. So, with that being said. I'de rather have to much space for my BB colonies in my tanks then "not enough" filters are designed with this concept in mind to an extent. Yes BB will form smaller colonies in your tank. In my experience they are long to develop comparatively to most "bio-media", and easy to destroy. Others may have different experiences, but for me this is the facts of my fishkeeping.

So give me some scientific hard facts on how much surface space per media I need to support each given species in my tanks. And I will happly "down-grade" my bio-media if you will and pull my extra filters offa my tanks.

To advise people "less is more" particularly those who are new and lack the hands on experiance of dealing with fishtanks. Is sheer bad fishkeeping. and IMO the reason why this hobby hasn't grown more.

It's great to see avid experianced aquarists debat these things.

btw throwing a tiger barb ( or any singular small fish) into a 10 gallon, and seeing if it will survive on the BB alone. Is an interesting concept.. but if not done under scientific control in a lab.. really? The same concept would work by doseing w/ Ammonia or cycle, quick start, ect,ect...

 

[Jgray152]

The wet dry was RATED for a 55g tank it was not a 55g tank

Ah sorry, went back and re-read your post. Misread it.

So give me some scientific hard facts on how much surface space per media I need to support each given species in my tanks. And I will happly "down-grade" my bio-media if you will and pull my extra filters offa my tanks.

That is impossible. No one here is trying to force anyone to down grade. Only letting others know that if you have "Extra" media, that does not mean you have ":Extra" BB and that all the media is being used.

In fact, if you think about it, canister filters, if the manufacture rating is true to any extent, The Fluval Fx5 is rated for a 400 gallon aquarium and it only has less than 6 liters of space available for bio filtration. Obviously this has been tested in their facility. Thinking this way, 6 liters for 400 gallon aquarium verses what many members use in wet/dry systems or any bio filtration system in much smaller tanks and they usually think they need to "upgrade".

To advise people "less is more" particularly those who are new and lack the hands on experiance of dealing with fishtanks. Is sheer bad fishkeeping. and IMO the reason why this hobby hasn't grown more.

Have I missed the post that says less is more? People that lack the hand on experience might as well start by getting the GOOD information than the mythical information ( that being needing TONS of bio media)

 

[Jgray152]

yes for the health of the fish nitrification is the important one, but ammonification is a aesthetic one, basically the conversion of waste into ammonia. so waste or detritus accumulation or clouding in certain instances would be issues you have with inadequate ammonification.

since bacteria can convert waste or organic matter into ammonia, they don't need "media" do be able to do this. They break down the matter at its source. This really is not something to worry about. In fact, it would be great if ammonification did not occur and if the waste and organic matter just got filtered out by the filter and later cleaned out without breaking down.

The healthy bacteria would be in other filters.

What other filters? Your other filters? I have ONE filter. You are trying to say you will have a more stable tank all around but thats not true. In a situation like a malfunction or user error then you may have a slightly more stable tank but you will still have a mini cycle.

Its one thing to spread the media out through 2 or more filters. I have respect for that for providing a backup in case the inevitable happends.

Providing excessive media in one filter just because you think it will create a more stable environment is the wrong thinking.

I bet having an output shoot across the bottom gravel of the tank will be more than enough to keep a tank stable without external bio filtration.

I always clean my glass so I wouldn't rely on that area but case in point the glass could support enough BB for any sized tank.

Now for those that gravel vac their substrate and clean the glass, this would not work for them either.

Can I ask.....what is the direction this thread is taking now? I am a little lost when I try to keep up with the original topic and then realize I am down a different path...

Ncnut, I agree a tank can be stable with the BB that is allowed to be in the tank but do you also agree that for those who clean the tank and disturb a lot of the possible BB colonies that external filtration is good? Not saying you need to use specifically "bio media" because even gravel will do or a sponge.