Comparing filtrating in tanks

[Nydiroth]

I've been battling algae of different forms in my 55gal Brackish puffer tank. It's (IMO) over filtered, but puffers aren't neat eaters. I have 2 puffers in there, both 3". I have a sponge prefiltered powerhead, AC300, and Fluval 204, banana plants, java moss, 10+ java ferns, and 3 anubia nanas. The tank is over 8months and no fish losses.
I've had to use Maracyn for the Cyanobacteria, I've increased the lighting to 2.3wpg for 10-12hrs/day for the diatom algae and now I'm dealing with hair algae.
The most frustrating thing is my son has a 5.5gal with a simple sponge filter in it, no light, with 3 Rasboras. My 55gal is in the basement and get's no outside light. His is in his west facing bedroom and the thing looks like it was just set up. Crystal clear, no algae.

Has anyone gone from superfiltration and decreased the filtration? Besides the type of lighting, filtration and salt for the BW tank is the only difference. The bioload seems to be equal but I could be wrong. Anyone offer any suggestions or experienced this?

 

[madasafish]

Welcome to the site!!

Well, your problem is that mechanical filtration does *not* get rid of nutrients in the water (biological filtration does). Regardless of how much you filter the tank (10 times, 20 times the capacity of the tank per hour), you may still have lots of algae. My 55 gtallon tank, for example, has 2 filters which filter at a rate of (total) 770 gallons per hour (>13X tank capacity) and I sometimes get algae problems!

If you're suffering from green water diatom algae, only diatom filters (and tough regimens of light reduction and nutrient starvation) will get rid of the cloudiness (trust me: I have a diatom filter and it's a lifesaver).

Plants do help, but you don't have exactly the best plants for nutrient uptake. Hygros, water sprites, duckweed are all excellent at absorbing minerals in the water, and consequently grow very fast. They can outcompete algae, but most plants cannot (e.g. banana plants, amazon swords, Anubias spp.). And, as all three of these can survive in 2.3 wpg tanks, I'd advise you to think about them for nutrient uptake.

I am no expert on plant reaction to salt in water, so I'm not sure how these would do in a brackish tank--I'd recommend you look this up on the net.

I use penguin and emperor filters--both biowheels, both highly effective biological filters. To an extent, a greater and greater surface area within the filter will allow bacteria to more effectively neutralize or convert nitrogenous compounds, but usually you simply have to vac the tank more often.

But, hey, as you've expressed, sometimes algae just doesn't respond to reason. The best thing I ever did for my low light rust-algae tank was buy Otos (Otocinclus vittatus or affinis), which are small sucker-mouth catfish. My big planted tank has a lot of hair algae, and I'm getting Amano shrimp to (hopefully) take care of that. Most ppl swear by them and true siamese algae eaters. I don't think that any of these fish/inverts are appropriate in a brackish tank, but you can check. Actually brackish tanks are the exceptions, and pains when it comes to algae regulation. Hobbyists know of precious few algae-eating species which really live, let alone, survive with a good amount of salt in their water.

Sorry I can't be of more help, but I hope this at least steers you in the right direction. Definitely look up brackish water plant species which denitrify water... They're usually referred to as "Nitrogen fixers."

 

[TN Tanks]

I know with my 150gal I had problems because it was under filtered. I added an additional 350 gph filter, and changed all of my media over. I also used phosphorus pads in the medium to eat up all of the food for growth. The result? Clean water in about an hour. ( It was SOLID green ) The new filter was a magnum, so I slipped in the polishing filter and now the water looks new. Good luck!