Help! Can't get NitrAtes down....

FishForums.net Pet of the Month
🐶 POTM Poll is Open! 🦎 Click here to Vote! 🐰
WOW, you must feel pretty frustrated about all the dfferent types of opinons you're getting about taking caer of your tank eh? I feel for you man, if you lived near me I would be more than willing to help you out, but the forum will have to suffice. Through all of this frustration have you been testing your ammonia and nitrite levels? I would do this and see if those are at zero. IF so I would slowly remove your sponge filters one by one over the course of a couple of weeks, sponge filters are simply not needed in my opinon. Only if your tank water looks cloudy with organics or fine sand particles would I recommend putting a sponge filter in, and then when it clears up take the sponge filter back out. Sponge filters just can't be trusted in a tank long term in my experience. I would also recommend the refugium, someone previously stated that you need a "special substrate" in order to get growth of the macro algae in a refugium, this is not true. You can go with some aragonite sand at the bottom, some Chaeto, moderate flow , and lighitng that is on an opposite schedule from your tank. I would also agree with the previous posts about changing your substrate to aragonite, definitely a good move, this will help buffer your ph. I personally do 90% water changes on my 37 gallon reef tank. The only reason that I am able to do this is by having the new saltwater have the same temp, ph, salinity and oxygen levels (which are stabilized by letting newly mixed saltwater sit and circulate/aerate for 24 hours) as the water already in the tank. If all of these things are the same in your new make up water, then you can do whatever size water changes you would like (as long as your fish are still in water) If there is a major problem after a large water change, then either the salinity, temp, ph, or oxygen levels were way off in your new make up water. Let us know how things go.
 
you do not NEED a special substrate in a refugium, but it will give some benefits. (I wouldn't pay the ridiculous prices for miracle mud, but the similar mineral mud really doesn't cost that much and is worth it IMO).

as for 90% water changes, I really strongly disagree. Even if all the parameters are the same, the shock to the system of having that much water taken out and replaced is significant and unneccessary.
the only way I could see this not being as bad is if you are removing water at the same time as adding it, but this wouldn't result in a 90% water change as there would be a lot of mixing - and so would be a waste of time and money.
 
Sorry Fraservet, we'll probably have to agree to disagree. I don't know if you are a big fan of Anthony Calfo (one of the masterminds of our hobby, well published, and highly respected) but he is a stong advocate of 100% water changes (on tanks that this is feasable with size being the limiting factor) I only do 90% because I have fish in my tank so to take out all the water would be pretty dumb. Been doing 90% water changes for a while now, the huge shock you speak of is non exhistant, and as for unnecessary, the spike in growth of my corals, clarity of water, and general health of my system has vastly improved. And for the record I do take out 90% of the water, then add 90% new water afterwards. We all assume that our corals are so very fragile, they are far from it (unless unhealthy in the first place) As Anthony Calfo was so quick to point out, corals at low tide are subject to equatorial sun, vast changes in salinity (when it rains) and long exposure to air. So the 30 minutes that my corals were completely exposed is really nothing to my healthy corals.
I am unaware of this special substrate that you speak of for refugiums, as for miracle mud though, it is just live sand that has some critters in it, nothing more. Maybe we'll simply have to agree to disagree. No hard feelings on this end, we're all friends here.
 
Of course we all have different opinions, and there's nothing to say that several different methods wont all be as effective.

With regard to the 90% water change, I may have been unclear. I don't think there would necessarily be any "shock" due to the new water, providing the criteria we have mentioned are met. I was more concerned about the stress on the fish from having 90% of the water removed from the tank, and being forced into a much smaller area and more crowded. I think part of the difference of opinion is due to you considering a reef tank with corals and a relatively small fish population, while I automatically think of a fish only setup, with a larger number - and most likely larger size - of fish. I am not really knowledgeable on corals/reef tanks beyond the basice as I have less interest in that side of things - although I am soon to try a coral or two in my 10g frogfish tank.

As for miracle mud, it does have the benefit of being a very good particle size for all the little critters, and also contains a lot of trace elements etc. which are slowly released into the system, making the fish healthier and reducing the additional products you have to add to the tank.

As far as I'm concerned discussion can only be a good thing, and we can all learn from what other people do.
 
Hi Again!
I am still fighting the high NitrAtes in the tank but it has not seemed to affect the overall health of the 2 fish.
I do have good news though. I am purchasing a 180 gallon tank along with a professional set up from my lfs. I am looking forward to getting the different material at the bottom of the tank along with the stronger filter system for my puffer.
I do have a question: How does one do a water change in such a tall tank? I know I will be using a ladder - which is not an issue. But how do you get the new water into the tank? I presently use 5 gallon buckets which I hoist over my shoulder to pour down into the tank... I will not be able to do this in the future.
Again, many thanks for all of your info and support!
 
Use a pump/powerhead.

Alternatively, if you have a sump, add the water to it.
 
how much live rock, i mean real live rock have you got in the tank , not ocean rock that some dealer has `seeded` in his tanks
 
treeboa said:
how much live rock, i mean real live rock have you got in the tank , not ocean rock that some dealer has `seeded` in his tanks
[snapback]890224[/snapback]​

The difference being...? :dunno:
 
the diff, ok some dubious git puts a lump of ocean rock in a tank for a week or two, sells it as live rock at £13 a kilo, your telling me theres no difference?? if that the case i will start making mega bucks as i have about 50k of ocean rock thats just asking to be converted to quality fiji liverock, tell you what, i wont sell it to you for £13 a kilo, how does £10 sound, you pick it up, yeah i know your answer to that one :D , hence i asked the question about live rock in his tank, especially as the nitrates are going through the roof it seems
 
treeboa said:
the diff, ok some dubious git puts a lump of ocean rock in a tank for a week or two, sells it as live rock at £13 a kilo, your telling me theres no difference?? if that the case i will start making mega bucks as i have about 50k of ocean rock thats just asking to be converted to quality fiji liverock, tell you what, i wont sell it to you for £13 a kilo, how does £10 sound, you pick it up, yeah i know your answer to that one  :D  , hence i asked the question about live rock in his tank, especially as the nitrates are going through the roof it seems
[snapback]890476[/snapback]​

Rock that has been "seeded" would actually be preferable compared to rock direct from the ocean to most people with systems in the 90 gallon and up range. The reason for this being that there is a very good chance of getting some hitchhikers from the ocean that are not only detrimental to a tank's inhabitants, but are also extremely hard to catch and remove from a tank once the tank is set up. So to me, the only difference from seeded rock vs. dead rock that is seeded is that you have much less of a chance of getting the nasy hitchhikers. Of course this is assuming that the tank that the live rock is seeded in has compepods, amphipods, worms and the like and that the seeded rock is porous. Start making the big bucks treeboa, this is what many of the large "live rock" shippers actually do, since it is becoming much harder to get permission to take the live rock from the ocean.
 
Another question treeboa, what is it about the direct from ocean live rock that would reduce nitrates better than seeded live rock, I am confused.
 
ah right i think confusion has happened here, right the ocean rock i am talking about is not live, if it had anything on it then its many years dead, in the uk its considered to dense to be of any pracical use other than as a base medium for live rock, yet in the past and more recently i have seen it and tufa rock put into `live rock` tanks and then sold on as full blown live rock a couple of weeks later, ok so we have a very dense ocean rock, what the chances of it having life inside it which will be benificial to a tank, i was always told true live rock has bacteria inside which acts as the only filtration a tank needs other than a protien skimmer, though i know one old time keeper who 25 years down the line only uses live rock and water flow without a skimmer, and looking at his tank you would think he has it right
 
yes, proper live rock is much more porous than ocean rock or similar base rock, so it will always be better at biological filtration than these alternatives.
what the big companies do is get rock which has similar density to real live rock, and either put it into the sea to seed, or into big vats. This will effectively become live rock, and should perform just as well.
 
treeboa said:
ah right i think confusion has happened here, right the ocean rock i am talking about is not live, if it had anything on it then its many years dead, in the uk its considered to dense to be of any pracical use other than as a base medium for live rock, yet in the past and more recently i have seen it and tufa rock put into `live rock` tanks and then sold on as full blown live rock a couple of weeks later, ok so we have a very dense ocean rock, what the chances of it having life inside it which will be benificial to a tank, i was always told true live rock has bacteria inside which acts as the only filtration a tank needs other than a protien skimmer, though i know one old time keeper who 25 years down the line only uses live rock and water flow without a skimmer, and looking at his tank you would think he has it right
[snapback]891060[/snapback]​

You're right, I thought you were talking about porous rock (that used to be live). Dead porous rock can be made "live" quite easily though. Beneficial anaerobic denitrifying bacteria do quickly colonize inside the live rock, and the only other contributor to the "live" rock would be the little critters that would find a home in the rock very quickly.
 
so to get back to my origia
nal question, is it real live rock this guy has and if not is it that thats causing his problem, or another thing i was thinking about, could it be some copper causing the problem, new piece of rock thats had copper near it ??, allthough the fish would be ok the inverts would not and those dying off could cause a big nitrate spike

question superman, in your opinion , moved a fair bit of live rock the other day, 120 miles overnight, could not keep it wet but only damp, it got cold, not freezing but cold, put in large buckets as soon as home and brought temps up slowly so no cold warm shock to anything living, following day all moved into the tank i purchased at the same time, no ammonia or nitrite readings but nitrates at 40 ppm 4 days later , live rock wieghs in excess of 40k when would you estimate the nitrate spike to drop off, water flow around the tank is three seperate feeds at a total of 2000 lph, before you ask theres nothing else in the tank bar what was on the rocks, seen a couple of small snails and the sea squirts are starting to reinflate and be seen, odd fan worm as well, skimmers on full belt and pulling some gunk out the water, 96 ltrs of mature water used with 100 ltrs of fresh made up water, sg is 1.025 at 80c
 

Most reactions

trending

Staff online

Back
Top