I've found it does improve water clarity, shouldn't reverse-leach unless you have a ph issue, will host bb (could be an issue on replacement), no phosphate issue (touch wood) and can be expensive ongoing.
Filter Media
- Thread starter fijiwigi
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I've found it does improve water clarity, shouldn't reverse-leach unless you have a ph issue, will host bb (could be an issue on replacement), no phosphate issue (touch wood) and can be expensive ongoing.
Caliban07
Aquarium Advice Addict
That's great dela so you have found pros and cons? Do you continue to use it? Was it you I was having a discussion about this with a few week back?
Hi Caliban, it was I think as I've been using it for about 3 weeks now. I'm using it on a backup internal filter which is pretty much there to hide pipes, push water around and also mechanical filtration. I've found it has improved water clarity for sure but I still get a good filter intake flow rate. No issues with using it in a planted, community tank. No issues I know of with liquid ferts or liquid co2. I've yet to buy another container of it but can see myself doing so. I would be more hesitant if it was the main filter - would probably use more bio-media instead to play it safe.
I have yet to compare it to filter floss (found this compacted and reduced flow in another filter so thinking of trying a fine foam) and also purigen seems highly recommended. Also yet to check out cost of purigen.
I have yet to compare it to filter floss (found this compacted and reduced flow in another filter so thinking of trying a fine foam) and also purigen seems highly recommended. Also yet to check out cost of purigen.
Caliban07
Aquarium Advice Addict
That's good. Thanks for the feedback! I am going to find some space in my canister filter for it to see if the water goes clearer.
Keen to see how you go with it. At a guess I'm using 75g each time (actually I think I packed too much in last time but we roach bombed the house and I was worried the pesticide might get through the covering sheets). I have about half a 600g jar left so not looking too costly.
jlk
Aquarium Advice Addict
I am not saying there will be zero bacteria but it would be very minimal at best in a bare bottom tub with zero filtration that is cleaned religiously. Nitrifying bacteria do not colonize water but surfaces and this takes a great deal of time. Unlikely to occur even to a slight degree if you are changing all the water daily and wiping down the minimal surface area. Establishing a cycle is not the purpose of this practice.
That said, on my cycled heavy bioload tanks/tubs, I do change 75-100% two to three times a week and I have never had an issue. Not for most hobbyists.
Caliban07
Aquarium Advice Addict
Yes I know bacteria do not colonise water and it makes more sense now that you add wiping down surfaces. I was thinking of a gold fish pond that has a large bottom, ornaments and plants.
You can't really say zero filtration even if there are minimal amounts of bacteria. Technically you will still have a biological filter.
I would like to think that our bacteria friends are highly adaptable little fellas where survival is there sole purpose even in a body of water that had 100% water changed every day would still find a way to grow to colonise to a point where they could survive and hence you would always get a nitrogen cycle whether you wanted to or not.
If it was a bare bottom tub that was emptied and wiped down then yeh that would make it very difficult for them.
I'm just not sure why you would want to do this when nature has provided a perfectly adequate filter. It's not coincidence that the end product I the nitrogen cycle is the least harmful to our fish.
Anyway, I know you guys know all this. I'm just not sure changing 100% on the water is something I would encourage. I would hate to see the water bill!
and it makes more sense now that you add wiping down surfaces. I was thinking of a gold fish pond that has a large bottom, ornaments and plants. You can't really say zero filtration even if there are minimal amounts of bacteria. Technically you will still have a biological filter.
I would like to think that our bacteria friends are highly adaptable little fellas where survival is there sole purpose even in a body of water that had 100% water changed every day would still find a way to grow to colonise to a point where they could survive and hence you would always get a nitrogen cycle whether you wanted to or not.
If it was a bare bottom tub that was emptied and wiped down then yeh that would make it very difficult for them.
I'm just not sure why you would want to do this when nature has provided a perfectly adequate filter. It's not coincidence that the end product I the nitrogen cycle is the least harmful to our fish.
Anyway, I know you guys know all this. I'm just not sure changing 100% on the water is something I would encourage. I would hate to see the water bill!
Similar threads
