Feelers

Does anyone have the link to bombers tank? I cant find it...

Thats the one.

Who's tank was it that was the super bare bottom tank? One of the famous BB guys? I forgot his name.

If it was after one day I'd want my money back - you'd have the consumer gaurentees act on your side - I dont think one day would be considered a "reasonable length of time" for a product to work. Especially with how much these things cost.

I still dont understand why some people on trademe sell their products from the first hand perspective of what their selling... Its just weird. :lol:

They are called aptasia, and they are bad. They will sting fish and corals I believe, and they are supposed to be annoying to eliminate. There are a lot of threads here about them - but the search function has been stuffed for a long time, so you probably wont be able to find them. Some of the people who've had them will be able to help though...

I'd think that nylon netting stuff you can sometimes find fruit in at the super market would be good?

Man that was cool! I thought that was an actual stingray haha!

Splendidus dont take anything personally - these guys do seem awefully cranky latey.

Just be aware of the process of making vodka, the very cheap stuff may have glycerine or sucrose added to make it "smoother". But thinking about it - when they make vodka they distill out the alcohol and leave it to soak in activated carbon, and I do remember people saying about how much phosphate is in alcohol carbon... something to think about?There are two normal types of distilling, Reflux is what I use - comes off at around 90% but you normally do a carbon soak to remove the smell/taste etc. With triple distilled - they are probably also using a reflux and run the product through twice again - each time less and less contaminates remain. At the end of three distillations they may not even use carbon, which might acocunt for crackers result.I cant really confirm or deny this theory, its kinda hard to find where they would write such info. I have never put my distillate through again, but it would probably be pretty damn pure after 3 cycles I'd imagine. Since they are a huge factory also, they could be using fractionation columns, and if they were triple distilling with those it would be overkill, but good marketing hype. I'd ask whether you can tell the difference between smirnoff and cheap vodka, if that's a BIG yes you can probably be sure there's a few lingering extras attacking your taste buds. As for what to use in your tank - I'd stick with crackers anecdotal evidence, one bottle's gonna last quite a long time, and with the amounts you guys spend its really not much. OR optimally; test it out, see if cheap stuff works as well as Smirnoff. 8)

I would say they could use extra carbon if it became available, perhaps they can pair the burning of carbohydrates with uptake of less available nutrients?? The cyanos have the ability to stay in a colony - a pretty intricate structure, maybe they are in the skimmer mix too, but they are primarily autotrophic, and I'd guess their generation time would probably be longer than the free floaters?

If you are adding Vodka you are adding a pretty much pure carbon food source, and skimming goes nuts as a result of the extra bacteria created it. All those bacteria also contain loads of phospherous and other things like nitrogen that get removed, so I dont see how you can say that this is not speeding up nutrient removal?? Thats the whole idea - supplying pure energy with no nutirents. Empty carbs.

I think I have a Via Aqua SK200, it used to be on briananemones coral tank, but he hasnt posted for a long while. He had SPS, so it must have been ok but be might have had another skimmer that I wasnt aware of...? Perhaps others can remember. I'd be fairly sure you shouldnt get the RQ TS2000, have you looked at the weirpro 2014? http://www.trademe.co.nz/Home-living/Pe ... 738306.htm I have both the sk200 and weipro 2014 but I havent set up my tank so I cant tell you which is better - for whats its worth I did try the weipro once, and it got gunk out straight away, although it was watery but still, it hadnt had anytime to "run in".

When you say that the lux measurement is the same as at the surface of the tropics - wouldnt that mean that things are likely very bright for the majority of corals which are typically found deeper than 70cms of water? For example what is the average depth of occurence of each particular species of Acro or Monti - sure some grow up to the surface but I'd guess that most corals are found below at least 1-2 meters to be totally happy, although I spose you cant really tell where they grow the fastest.

Still waiting for an answer Layton, What will happen to the nitrate levels/phospherous levels in your tank if you doubled the system volume? Would there be a measurable increase/change? I'm aware that there probably isnt enough info to work it out but I've never seen anyone mention an increase after addition of a sump etc.

Layton what would happen to your nitrate levels if you doubled your system volume? Do you think there would be a measurable change?

The guy I talked to in one of the marine shops over there said the western coast was the best (near Indonesia I guess) with the most colours. He siad the barrier reef wasnt as diversified as many think (but still awesome). If you goto tas, you can see giant cuttlefish - ,

If I'm your average reefer on here, and I have a 500L tank and add a refugium, the difference in buildup of waste is probably not even noticable. Just because the skimmer has a lower efficiency, it doesnt appear anecdotally to make any difference. There are far more factors involved that you cant easily work out. Is the relationship between skimming and concentration inversly proportional? I doubt the equation would be a simple one. The amounts of water a refugium adds are not enough to overwhelm the skimmers that people use. Take your tank for example - if you doubled the volume do you think your nitrates/phosphates would double? I dont think any difference would register. Its the size of the difference in nutrients within the system that people are worried about, not efficiencies. Even if your tank is less efficient (because of more water), I'm not convinced that you would register a difference. The nutrients produced by the refugium might be more easily skimmed than others, taking in crud missed by the skimmer and concentrating it in nice bacterial packages, who knows. The corals seem to like the pods etc.

Well, as it stands the oldest living thing on the planet - is a bacteria. And it's quite a long time. :lol: After existing as endospores for two hundred and fifty million years (1/4 of a Billion!) an unknown type of bacteria were fully revived in the lab. They were taken from dried up salt bed samples from under New Mexico. Pretty damn cool!

I'll try and work it out. I gotta do an assignment now but afterwards...

After you take into account power does the cost of t5 bulbs make them cheaper or more expensive than MH? For example would this guy's lighting cost more or less than yours chimera? I really like the idea of t5's.

Am am only just learning about these things - I think the take home message has been that there really arent too many rules, as the situation has so many vairables its almost impossible to grasp. But, I would imagine they all live together, and pass their waste to the next in line. The conditions within the biofilm can also vary greatly - you can get low oxygen levels just by hanging out in the middle, I think anoxic conditions are actually possible(not too sure on this point) but probably not in great enough levels for a tank, which is why you need the thick rock. Nitrate might even be passed on between non nitrating bacteria into the rock to get to where it's needed. The full reduction of Nitrate to Nitrogen is pretty complex, the reason this ability isnt spread between microbes is probably because there are many genes involved. Only way to see is the have a tank with no anoxic conditions and see what happens! :lol: Has this ever been tried?

They can rapidly exploit beneficial situations, so when you put in new rocks for them to colonise and nice warm water they will reproduce quickly -probably doubling every hour or so. The first bacteria (amonia feeders) will create a biofilm, and their waste (nitrite) will attract the nitrite feeding bacteria to join them etc. They rapidly get to the point of maxium saturation, and thats where things stay. After you tank is cycled the amounts of bacteria stay roughly the same, and they are back into the 7 hour reproduce/365 day resting stage.

Oh -another cool one; the average bacteria divides only once a year, they spend a total of 7 hours reproducing and the rest of the year sitting around doing nothing but maintence, (insert the life of a reef keeper joke). :lol: Biofilms (what we are looking at the moment) are incredibly complex - ie the slime on the inside of the tank wall. Complex 3-d structures in which the bacteria live together and share problems and DNA between completely different genuses. Apparently there's loads of DNA just sitting round everywhere, and microbes just pick them up and use them - human genes also. I love being able to watch them cruise by in the microscope, just puttering around crashing into everything, very surreal.

Are there any MH's on that tank??? Not that I can see - t5's all the way. Awesome!!!