trickle filters and planted aquariums.. possible problem???

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.

greenmaji

Aquarium Advice Addict
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
6,015
Location
Central Kentucky
I was wondering.. I want to use trickle filtration with my tank and I was wondering if it would be a bad idea with a planted aquarium. Would I lose my CO2? they skim the surface of the water.. Im wondering if that is a bad thing as well, there is little agitation but from what I can see everyone is using canisters to avoid surface agitation altogether. I was wondering if a trickle filter is a bad idea because of the filter design, it works so well as a biological filter because it agitates the water over the media to introduse oxygen to the beneficial bacteria. this one has me confused... :roll:
 
you mean a wet/dry filter? if you can seal the top of it, that'll prevent CO2 from escaping, and you won't lose as much.

However, if this isn't a high light, CO2 injected tank, then it doesn't matter because you don't have extra CO2 to lose.

But by and large, canister filters are the king of planted tank filtration.
 
I have a wet/dry setup in a 29g sump under my 65g planted display tank w/ pressurized Co2. I have to maintain a high bubble count to keep my Co2 levels optimal but it's not a big deal since Co2 is cheap. :D
 
so you think the benifits of having wet/dry filter outweigh the loss in CO2? Can you calculate the difference between having a wet/dry and having a canister? or a rough estamate.. Ive never had a CO2 system so giving me a bubble count on your current setup wont help me much..lol.. :D
 
bubble counts don't mean a lot in terms of CO2 in the tank. Vinny's point is that with a wet/dry, you'll have to increase CO2 flow to get a better CO2 level in the tank.

Wet/dry's are a fine filter, but I've never seen a good article/debate/reason why they're any better than a canister filter...aside from noise maybe. From day 1 of my 75gallon tank, I've never been able to get a reading above 0.0ppm of ammonia, or nitrite. Canisters with bio-rings appear to be just as good as wet/dry's, with more veratility in filter media IMO.

Go with what you like, but be aware you'll use up to 10% more CO2 with a wet/dry.
 
you seem to have quite a few fish in your 75 malkore.. what would you say the stock level is in this thank.. fish wise? I have an old fluval 403 and a maginum 350 sitting around so a canister filter will be easier for me to just go ahead and go with; I just like the flexability of a sump.. I thought of possibly using the fuval with a sump but I thought that might be overkill..lol... sounds like I need move my post on over to the hardware desision area..lol I cant conroll the amout of flow with the old fluval though and I personaly have never used the magnum.. the guy I got it off of had noise issues with it, I dont think putting the thing in my bedroom would be a good idea. thanks for the input guys.
 
I have 8 lemon tetra, 2 paradise fish, 5 yo--yo loach, 2 clown loach (about 2.5"), 14 tiger barbs, 5 SAE's and 6 cory cats.
 
FWIW, I sealed the top of my wet/dry tower and still deal with some loss of CO2 from surface turbulation and area in the sump itself. As vinnymac said its certainly possible to have enough CO2 to reach target levels, especially with pressurized. I used DIY for both sump and CO2 in much lower volume because I'm stubborn like that, and enjoy DIY. I certainly think you should tackle the project if interested, if youre stubborn and dont mind the time messing with stuff.

Trickle filters can be noisy btw unless you get the spray bar real close to the media. You'll probably need to incorporate a durso standpipe on drain and damping on return pump to get as quiet as a good canister.
 
malkore.. how many in/gal is that.. it sounds like its close to the 1in/gal level, and you have never seen any ammonia or nitrite that sounds impressive. what are your nitrate levels before you do your pwc's? if you even test for that anymore. Im just wondering how the plants are affecting your nitrate. Im assuming there doing a pretty good job of lowering it.

czcz I am a avid DIYer.. I have a couple of concerns about a DIY CO2 system for this setup. First is the size of the tank.. its 75 gallons and second is the type of fish I want to keep in it, Mubas and Peacocks.. they cant take an accidental ph shock in the down direction. Im already going to have to acclimate them to the lower ph that hardy plants need. If the DIY CO2 system goes wonky and drops the PH further I would have dead fish on my hands. Im not sure if this is a valid concern but If you have ever watched home improvement you might have a clue what kind of DIYer I am, "More Power" is almost an understatement.. Its kinda more possible that it would happen to me first..LOL
 
Yeah, I probably should not have qualified post with mention of DIY CO2. You're planning pressurized with pH regulator?
 
Yes.. that why I wanted to go with a presurized CO2 system in the first place.. for the CO2 regulator. Of course if you know anyone that knows how to incorperated a CO2 regulator into there DIY CO2 system.. I think I thought of the possible ways but the price tag was around 120 dollors and by then I could spring the extra $40 + the price of the tank and I would have a presurized system. It would be complicated I am guessing.. :D
 
travis and malkore..
I was wondering if either of you guys still tested for nitrate levels in those heavily planted tanks of yours.. Im very curious about the anaerobic filtration properties of plants and what level of filtration they provide.
Thanks in Advance.
Bill :D
 
that previous question goes for anyone with a hevily planted tank...
sorry czcz... I wasnt thinking of your tank because of its size and "intresing setup" that I dont plan on trying to duplicate..LOL..Ie the day night photoperiod and such.... but if you answered I would be happy to hear about it!!
TIA.. :D
 
Heh, I forget about my tank when I think of Travis and malkore's too ;) I dose KNO3 two or three times a week (I add when test reads 5ppm NO3). Travis posted his fert schedule recently: http://www.aquariumadvice.com/viewtopic.php?p=411374&highlight=#411374 I know malkore doses KNO3 as well. This is typical in high light/CO2 system (nitrate is macro nutrient, and youll likely dose other macros too). Im pretty sure nitrate uptake in plants is part of the photosynthetic process btw, not an anaerobic process.
 
your right that plants are not a anaerobic process.. I just get my wires crossed sometimes because they have the same result in reducing the NO3.. In other words.. from what I was guessing they are more than sufficient at removing NO3.. they need it supplemented.. No trying to use anaerobic filtration in such a setup.. I had planned on that with a fish only setup by the way.. Thats why it's stuck in my head!!! sorry about that..lol.
The target level for NO3, for plants of course, is 5ppm correct... you are dosing at that level.. I am wondering why you wouldnt be dosing when it was under that level to try maintain it.. or does the NO3 drop so fast this is a moot point?
 
Target levels are tricky as there's smart people with different methods. I figure its best to use these numbers as starting points for experimentation, since every tank is different. Chuck Gadd recommends 5ppm NO3, but guys you mentioned advise 10:1 NO3 : PO4, and their success has me trying it.

[tangent] You may find my experience helpful or interesting: after adding sump NO3 stopped registering on my test (AP), and within a week there was an algae problem (as opposed to nuisance). One reason I added sump was to have larger volume/stability, so I happily started dosing KNO3. At this time I was also moving away from Excel to DIY CO2 (I mixed both while steadily increasing/measuring CO2 output). Algae was minimized quickly and my plants looked great. I kind of had a magic moment with my tank at this point, which is Feb update in my gallery/site. Then I decided I wanted all high light plants in main tank, and made things difficult :) So, now I've added much more efficent lighting and am experimenting with macro dosing with guidance from AA (I have new, hard to get rid of algae). High light/CO2/wet dry sump is really cool imo (example: vinnymac's system is sweet) and they make for interesting and efficent filters. Fun to build, too. Still, high light planted is the steepest learning curve I've experienced in aquaria.[/tangent]

Yes, nutrient uptake makes dosing for positive reading a PITA for me, as my system eats a little more than 3ppm of NO3 a day with constant photoperiod (I add ~24ppm NO3 from KNO3 a week, so this guesstimate does not take into account NO3 from animals). Dosing to 15ppm saves time and doesnt throw system out of whack, in addition to target ratio. If I understand linked post correctly, Travis has experienced up to 7.5ppm NO3 loss/day with regular photoperiod, and has measured enough to almost count on it... very impressive when you think about it.

HTH
 
Ok, it is all at the very least interesting and most likely be helpful in the long run to hear about other peoples experience. and that kind of consumption of NO3 is impressive. your setup is small, by comparison, so its consummation is also impressive in my opinion.
I checked out vinniemac's setup.. since you mentioned it.. and it is everything you said it was and more!...LOL
to bring it back to the subject at hand it looks like vinniemac's setup could be made a little more efficient for CO2 by sealing up that sump but he has a 10lb canister. Im assuming a 10lb canister is big for a 65gal pressurized set up.. I think travis has a 5lb canister on his 125gal setup...
 
acording to vinniemac's posts he said he had to fill his 10lb canister on average every 3.5 months..
travis..
Im I remembering right that you have a 5lb canister.. and how often do you need to refill it?
 
This dawned on me today: doesn't sealing my wet/dry chamber (to preserve CO2) mean I'm also severely limiting its oxygenation capability? If so. I'm comfortable just switching to submerged bio media and leaving all oxygenation duties to plants. Thanks.
 
Back
Top Bottom