to bio ball or not to bio ball. that is the question

[thefatman]

ok can someone help me understand something. i've read a lot about wet/dry filters. and it seems the one thing they all have in common regardless of shape size color or brand, is the bio balls. i guess that's what they are called. they are the little plastic spiked "golfball" things.

but i have seen alice, and others, mention that bio balls are bad...

keep in mind i'm coming from FW, and my current SW hasa standard fw hang on filter. the new tank i'm setting up will have sump/wet/dry/skimmer/ etc./. . and the one i've already ordered from my lfs, is an aqua clear model 75 wet dry package that comes with the overflow box as well as all the hoses etc.. and an aqua clear model 175 skimmer with pump.

so can someone tell me why i should or shouldn't put in bio balls.

i know that everyone has thier own ways of doing things. and 100 people are going to give 100 different answers. so i dont really want to try and start a debate here. i'm jsut trying to understand why some feel they are good and some feel they are bad.

(btw: all the lfs's in town that have sw, all use wet/dry with bio balls, on thier tanks in store and in home) which is why i went with the ac75, because that's what they recommened, and this was from a store whose opinion i trust, and they've offered a lot of help and advice to me, and i have yet to buy anything from them! so i dont think they are after a quick buck. but i was also adviced to get the same or equivilant filter from other lfs's in town as well.

[Heyoo]

Bio Balls are for biological filtration. If you have at least a pound of live rock per gallon of tank water, you should have sufficient bio-media without the use of bio balls. If your saltwater tank will consist of a few rocks, or decorative coral skeletons (or fake skeletons), you'll want to keep the balls for your biological filter.

I'm assuming you know all about cycling a tank... but...
Nitrifying bacteria that colonize the outer surfaces of rocks, substrate, and everything else in your tank convert wastes into Ammonia, then Nitrite, then Nitrate. Unless you're running a DSB, macroalgae refugium, or some other high-tech de-nitrifying device, nitrates will continue to build up in your tank. Water changes are a must to dillute the nitrate concentration. The more nitrifying bacteria you have, without a high population of de-nitrifying bacteria, the higher your nitrates. That's why people say remove the balls - and often refer to them as a "nitrate factory".

In summary: Lots of live rock, remove the balls. No rock or a few rocks, use the bioballs.

HTH
JJ

[thefatman]

ahhhhhh now i understand.....

actually i do know about the cycling process and the nitrifying bacteria ( i have 7 freshwater tanks) but i did NOT know about de-nitrifying bacteria!

i understood the concept of the balls building about nitrate overtime, and jsut assumed i would have to do regular water changes. which is nothing new to me. with 7 tanks and now 8 with the sw i set up lat month, and now 9 with this new tank, water changes are a FULL WEEKEND job!

when i first setup this tank, it will be just the tank and water, and sump etc.. no live rock. only because i'm shelling out 300 bucks for everything under the tank. but i will be adding live rock, probably 10 pounds a week, while the tank is cycling. i'm planning to cycle the tank for at least 6 weeks before adding any fish.. or unti lthe process is done.

so if i udnerstand correctly, then perhaps when i setup the tank this weekend, i SHOULD put in the bio balls, and remove a little each time i add in live rock, or maybe jsut remove them after the tank is cycled, or something along those lines.

i'm planning to have 50-60 pounds of live rock (my lfs sells fiji) the wet dry holds 3 gallons of water, then the skimmer, plus i'm thinking of dropping the wet/dry and skimmer into a 30 gallon tank as a sump. it'll have like 20 gallons of water in it. so i guess i would actually have like 75 gallons of water, so should i up my ante and put in 70 pounds of like rock?

once i reach a point that i'm removing the bio balls, do i still operate the wet dry as it normally was, just sans balls? or would i replace the balls with something else, like additional filter sponge material ? i hope i'm not goign to be pullign the entire wet dry out. i just paid 160 for it!

[snazlord]

if you use a DSB (or even a semi-deep sand bed) wouldn't there be enough bacterial colonization in the substrate to keep at least the ammonia and nitrite levels down? even if you didn't have a pound per gallon of live-rock? the live-rock would certainly help, but if you have enough water circulation and enough bacterial colonization in an appropriate substrate, wouldn't that be enough? (given water changes or an adquate refugium to lower nitrate)

[dark horge]

IIRC, and may someone correct any mistakes below...


Trickle (aka wet-dry or w/d) filters feature a highly oxygenated environment for nitrifying bacteria to do their thing. Bio-balls provide maximum surface area per volume for said bacteria to colonize, right?


In the presence of oxygen, Nitrospira-like bacteria take available ammonia and/or nitrite and process/re-process the filth until it is converted to nitrate, which can accumulate.

In the absence of oxygen, the same bacteria shift gears. Without any oxygen to work with, they rob an electron or two from available nitrate: this breaks the compound bond and results in nitrogen gas and oxygen (complete reduction of nitrate into its component elements).[/i]

It is always best to have proportional populations of said bacteria
living in both oxic and anoxic environments to avoid the stockpiling of nitrate. It's also best for those two populations to be immediately adjacent to one another, so that the nitrate produced by the oxygenated fellows gets handed immediately to their unoxygenated brothers and sisters, rather than drifting in the water, hoping for a chance encounter with the latter group.

Bio-balls are non-porous, hard-plastic affairs.
All bacteria grows on the oxygenated surfaces.
LR on the other hand, has oxygenated environments on its surface to offer, with adjacent anoxic environments within the rock, just a few millimeters deep sometimes.

Of course, the other major reductors of ammonia and nitrogenous waste are algae, and they do a far better job of it. But they can cash in on a nitrogenous bonanza TOO well, and become a nuisance. But that is another topic.


hth

[Heyoo]

Horge,

Everything you wrote seems similar to my readings. However, it was my understanding that anoxic means low oxygen, and anaerobic means no oxygen. I thought the denitrification took place in the completely anaerobic areas. ??? (I'm no authority on this by any means)

And yes - a DSB should have a large enough bacteria population to handle the biological filtration. No offense to anyone - but I figure that anyone considering a DSB would be beyond the bio-balls/no bio-balls question.


Snaz.... I'm certainly no expert on DSB's (Thus far I've done everything but a dsb), but I thought the big advantage of the deep sand bed was the nitrate reduction in the lower anoxic/anaerobic zones. Water changes would still be necessary to remove waste, toxins, etc, but not really for the benefit of nitrate reduction. If nitrate exists, the bed isn't deep enough!
But hey, you won't find my book at the local Barnes and Nobles. I'm no marine biologist. I do this just like everybody else... I ask a lot of questions, and try to remember a little of what I hear.

Good luck with the new tank!

[Silas]

Why not have both balls and DSB/LR in a setup? Would that give extra filtering?

s

[thefatman]

silas, you took the words right out of my mouth. i was wondering too if you can just have bio balls AND the LR.. based what DH said, i'm asuming then, that nitrates produced in the sump would be passed on and used up by the bacteria in the tank living amongst the sand and live rock.

also, what is considered a DSB, or rather how deep. i'm only interested in 2-3 inches of sand, plus i am incorporateing what i have done in my FW tanks, that i've read a few other places as well, regarding SW. and that is having a layer of eggcrate and screen beneath the sand giving roughly 1/2 - 3/4 of an inch of space/movement, below the bed, for even more bacteria to live.

if a DSB is considered to be those that are in the area of 5-6 inches, then i'm not interested. i know i've read alot about the debate between wet/dry vs dsb. it seems most folks are die hard one way or the other, and shun the other option. but IMO it would stand to reason that people are doing both, and both must be successfull, so why not incorporate both?

[jan]

Hi - i am new to salt water - about 5 weeks into it. I have a 60 gallon tank, with a wet/dry with bio-balls, about 40 lbs of live rock, a semi deep sand bed. i chose to use damsels to help the cycle the tank. All in all, everything seems good. Any sugestions... but can you say it in laymens words so i dont need a scientific dictionary

[Silas]

I currently have both in my tank. This is not by design but rather being lazy from removing old stuff out. The tank has the wet/dry filter hanging back there since 88 for a fish only tank. Recently my buddy moved to vegas and sold me lots of his stuff including LS and LR. So I removed my DR and replaced it with his stuff. Put his LS over my old sand and now I have about 5 to 6 inches of sand bed. Put his corals in and I think everything is doing OK (at least I hope). It has been like that for the past three months.

If running both is bad, I will remove it. I don't want to kill any of his stuff as he will throw me overboard on our next fishing trip.

s

[Heyoo]

Originally posted by thefatman
silas, you took the words right out of my mouth. i was wondering too if you can just have bio balls AND the LR.. based what DH said, i'm asuming then, that nitrates produced in the sump would be passed on and used up by the bacteria in the tank living amongst the sand and live rock.

I think its important to have balance. too much of the oxygen rich, nitrate producing bacteria is like having too much poop, and not enough flies.
Actually, the balls will trap detritus and other large masses of waste. If you don't mind rinsing the bioballs every 6 months to a year, that shouldn't be an issue. I'm not saying to sterilize them - just rinse off the waste.

also, what is considered a DSB, or rather how deep. i'm only interested in 2-3 inches of sand, plus i am incorporateing what i have done in my FW tanks, that i've read a few other places as well, regarding SW. and that is having a layer of eggcrate and screen beneath the sand giving roughly 1/2 - 3/4 of an inch of space/movement, below the bed, for even more bacteria to live.

I read Goeman's live sand secrets booklet (ok, so 30 pages doesn't make me an expert), but I got the impression that it will only work with 4+ inches of sand. Of course density, er shape and size of the grains is a factor. He said that many a failed sandbed was caused from people not following the rule #1... 4+ inches! Without sufficient depth, the bottom of the tank isn't starved for oxygen. Therefore, no denitrification.

The eggcrate gap you're talking about is likely the Jaubert Plenum method. I haven't heard much about that lately, but I did try it once. It did aid in lower nitrates, but when everything in the tank died, I ripped it out. Later I found out it was a mutilated cucumber in my canister filter, and not a breach of the anoxic zone that killed everything.

if a DSB is considered to be those that are in the area of 5-6 inches, then i'm not interested. i know i've read alot about the debate between wet/dry vs dsb. it seems most folks are die hard one way or the other, and shun the other option. but IMO it would stand to reason that people are doing both, and both must be successfull, so why not incorporate both?

I'm one of the few without an opinion. I firmly believe there is no right way to do anything in this hobby. I've done everything from undergravel filters, W/D, berlin, to an air stone for a filter. Many things will work - as long as you dedicate yourself regular maintainance. Don't fall for a sure-fire "no water changes necessary" gimmick. If you apply the same dillegence you have with the FW tanks, I'm sure you'll do fine.

[125G's]

Okay, now I'm going to get into trouble here but I've got to jump in on this. thefatman and silas--I'm with you on this. That may not count for much, but hey at least there's 3 of us

I've been around this hobby for quite a number of years, even owned an LFS for a number of years in the late '80's. I don't profess to be an expert, but my experience with various fish/reef keeping philosophies has driven me to the following conclusion: The best tank I've ever had (80g) was a combination of philosophies, W/D with LR and 3" sand bed. I experienced good coral growth and never lost a fish, save the 2 that jumped out and one a crab caught. Water parameters were always good, though I did have a slight nitrate reading, never more than 20, however. That's why I'm going to include a refugium on the next mixed philosophy tank I set up. (And yes, the plans are in the works as I type. Anyone know a good acrylic tank manufacturer? )

I'm now on my second DSB (with refugium) tank. Keeping fish alive in both of these tanks has been a difficult thing to do. I've been near the point of exiting the hobby over this problem. Corals on the other hand are doing very well. go figure that one???? I don't believe there's a problem with a DSB, but I do have the feeling there's something missing. JMO though.

thefatman: The most common minimum depth is 4" to be considered a DSB from the reading I've done.

Phil

[dark horge]

Four things:




1. Bob Goeman's does not know much of what he is talking about, if his verbal diarrhea on plenum-based systems are any indication. That he has no academic training in th field of biology nor indeed of any marine science, is NOT the issue.

The issue is that much of what he has published is patently wrong, on very basic levels. Plenum-based systems work, but apparently Mr. Goemans does not understand how nor why. I can link you to a thread elsewhere that dissects Mr. Goemans' various plenary pontifications, if you like.



2. Anoxic, hypoxic, oxic and hyperoxic describe environmental states, in terms of the availability of oxygen.

Anaerobic and aerobic are terms that apply to BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES. Thus, for example, an anaerobic process takes place in an anoxic environment. Bacteria are described as aerobes or anaerobes because they are largely perceived on the basis of what they do, and not as 'locations'.




3. DSB's are suited for potentially high food-import, low wave-energy systems, and do a remarkable job of handling dissolved and particulate nutrient. I happen to pursue high food-import as a personal philosophy. If your system philosophy involves moderate to light feeding, then there are simpler, better-controlled designs that likely will serve you far, far better.

Robust water movement in conjunction with LR, foam fractionation/skimming, a detritus-settling trap, and possibly UV would possibly be the best thing to recommend to the general, beginning reef hobbyist




4. If you have your aerobic and anaerobic bacteria apart, as would be the case of a W/D and LR setup, then you will always have nitrate in transit from the W/D to your LR. Your water will always have a level of nitrates in it which problem-algae can and will exploit.

This is why the immediate adjacency of nitrifying aerobes and denitrifying anaerobes is important: the nitrate gets handed to the anaerobes directly, and does not flood the system.




hth,
horge

[snazlord]

Originally posted by Heyoo

Snaz.... I'm certainly no expert on DSB's (Thus far I've done everything but a dsb), but I thought the big advantage of the deep sand bed was the nitrate reduction in the lower anoxic/anaerobic zones. Water changes would still be necessary to remove waste, toxins, etc, but not really for the benefit of nitrate reduction. If nitrate exists, the bed isn't deep enough!
But hey, you won't find my book at the local Barnes and Nobles. I'm no marine biologist. I do this just like everybody else... I ask a lot of questions, and try to remember a little of what I hear.

Good luck with the new tank!

thanks! yes, i know that the advantage of DSBs over "regular" SBs is that they allow for the anarobic metabolism of nitrate to nitrogen gas in the deeper, anoxic layers of the substrate. i actually wasn't even commenting on the nitrate aspect, but just on the nitrite and ammonia reducing aspect of a sandbed in general, no matter what it's depth is. my only point was that if you have the right substrate then you shouldn't need bioballs - all the bacteria you need would be right in the substrate (they will reduce the ammonia and nitrite, and may or may not further reduce the nitrate, depending on the depth and degree of anoxia in the deeper layers)

My other point (and question, actually) is as follows (ignoring, for the time being, the nitrate-reducing aspects of DSBs and focusing only on sand beds in general):

assumption #1: a sand substrate will reduce ammonia and nitrite

assumption #2: an UGF will do the same thing

assumption #3 (?): the UGF will be more efficient (again, not at reducing nitrate, just ammonia and nitrite) due the higher water, waste, and oxygen flow thru the substrate

question: given that a sand substrate is less efficient than an UGF, is it efficient enough to handle the wastes of a typical tank, by itself? Or do you absolutely need live rock or bioballs or whatever because the substrate by itself won't be able to do it.

Part of the reason i'm asking, is that as i transition my FO tank (with no live rock currently), rip out my UGF and install a DSB/refugium, will the DSB by itself be able to handle all the ammonia from my 6 inches of fish? (the DSB will be running in the sump while the UGF is still running in the main tank for a while, to give the DSB a chance to become colonized) I will be adding live rock, so eventually i'll have both a DSB and liverock just like everyone else - it's just that i probably won't add the liverock all at once. Rather i'll probably add it little by little, to give the tank a chance to "recycle" any die-off with each live rock addition.

[Beaches]

OK guys...I need some insight here as now I'm really worried I'm running a terribly wrong system!!

As most of you know from my previous postings (and some stupid beginner questions--which I can't tell you how much ya'll have helped me...) I have a 40g tank (up for about a year now--yeah), running a Prism Skimmer (for up to 100g), wet/dry (for up to 55g), 110w Compact Lights with 50/50 bulbs, and 2 power jets (one on each end), a 3" sandbed mixture of crushed coral/argonite and ls and also have around 40-50lbs of assorted lr.

My inhabitants are:
1 Tomato Clown (1 1/2")--First Occupant/Moved from 20g
1 Scooter Blenny (1")
1 Bi-color Blenny (1 1/2") (new purchase)
1 Yellow Tang (3")
3 Peppermint Shrimp
3 Red/Scarlet Crabs
1 Medium Brittle Star
1 Medium Arrow Crab
10 Astrea Snails
2 Large Turbo Snails
10 Nar...Snails

10 Red Mushrooms
6 Green Mushrooms (new purchase)
1 Medium Condy
1 Small Condy
1 Small Cauliflower Coral
1 Medium Leather Coral (new purchase)
1 Unidentified Hardish/Brown Coral (mounted on bottle--new purchase)
1 Red Lacy Twiggy Coral (can't remember name at the moment--looks sorta like a tree branch)

My water parameters are excellent...nothing out of the ordinary and everything is doing wonderful. But now I'm really worried...am I headed for a large "crash" because of the bio-balls? HELP!!

This little tank is not an inexpensive addiction...