lduncan

So what's the verdict on the OM? I'm thinking of using one or two on my tank when I find the time to plan the upgrade. Layton

Finally a more realistic approach. You could probably get by without a chiller running t5's, add a nitrite and ammonia test kit while starting. Can do without books internet can be a good resource if you're willing to spend the time searching. There may be other options than streams for smaller tanks. But of course no one I know that has ever purchased streams has regretted spending the money. But those are all things you should budget for. And finally someone who is factoring in the cost of live stock! What's the point in having the equipment and tank without anything in it? Petplanet, it disappoints me that that is the sort of advice you are giving to customers. Layton

I'll bite once. Where to start. Stop writing rubbish. We've been through this point before. What sort of credibility would I have if I advised someone they could setup a successful system for some of the price ranges you are claiming. Well that's the problem. Poor advice, and lack of information from the start. The price I have suggested is for a basic system. No calcium reactor no dosing pumps or extra equipment. Elaborate. I see you've covered the "setup for failure" topic quite well. Appropriate for a beginner to have the most chance of success. Which is invariable what people do. Sure they go buy a 3 foot tank, then they see the blue tang which they must have, even though the tank is too small, so they purchase it anyway it dies within a week. Then after numerous episodes like this they decide that they need a bigger tank. And that what they have just purchased, including livestock death is a total write off. I don't think much of you're advice. Total rubbish, prove it. No, amazingly irresponsible is advising someone to spend money on something you're claiming they know nothing about. That must be one impressive setup. :roll: What's your point? Again, success in keeping livestock alive and healthy, for as long as possible. Umm, livestock must be budgeted for. After all, it's the point of all the equipment. I thought the idea was to give a realistic approach to what a beginner should expect to spend on a system to be successful. I'll give up at this point. The rest is also crap, I'm sorry but is just plain misleading advice. Struggle to find any redeming comment in that lot. Layton

The only corals which do not adapt well for high flow are LPS, everything else you can go for broke, they will adapt soon enough, and love it. Layton

I think there are some advantages to starting with dead base rock. Layton

salt, plumbing, sump, pumps, substrate, livestock

Personally I think that is a terrible attitude. I started off with a 3 foot tank. And there is no way I would ever recommend it to ANYONE just starting out in the hobby. Nor would I recommend not using a skimmer. As for not much wasted, what about all the livestock which will be killed, because the tank was too small, had insufficient lighting, and no skimmer? $500, you really have to be joking, test kits alone may be a couple of hundred. Minimum realistic budget for a full reef would be about $5,000 For a fish only maybe $4,000 That is not starting big. 4 foot really is a minimum tank size for a beginner to have the highest chance of success. Layton

I think he builds homes for a living. I believe he has a friend who is a photographer by trade, that explains the great photos. In case some people don't know, he has his own website www.oregonreef.com describes his tank and has some great photo's

He has two in there.

He's added some new fish:

Sodium Hydroxide, it's the sure fire way to absolutely nuke them!

$500 - lucky to get an appropriate sized tank for that. $1000 - Maybe a skimmer and half a tank. You have to be realistic. Tell someone they can do a tank for $1000 and they'll be put off the hobby for life when they have poor results from it. I think this attitude is totally wrong. The best way to get people started is the way which will be most successful. Telling someone they can do a tank for $1000 is setting them up for disaster. $5000 would be my starting point for a 4 footer full reef, which should be the minimum size for someone starting out. Layton

Times have definitely changed. Layton

Yes they can do. Layton

The reason is not so much that they create nitrate efficiently, but more that they have no means to continue the processing to reduce nitrate to nitrogen gas. I'd say that a DSB would be more appropriate for that situation. But as for giving advice to someone starting out, I think it is appropriate to strongly advise against the above filters. Layton

Why not? I'd say almost all people here would agree with that. Sure you can use them, but will it be beneficial to you're tank... I don't think so. Despite the debates that go on here, most people agree on the fundamentals. Layton

I may consider using it if I had problems with phosphate, but I never have. Never been detectable in my tank. Trace elements are replaced through water changes. Different dissolved substances have different affinities to skimming, depending on their molecular structure, and polarity. Then whether the molecule is in the correct orientation to attach to the surface of a bubble and if it ever bumps into a water molecule is a statistical process. Don't know quantitatively what percentage of something a particular skimmer will remove in one pass, it's just too variable, to my knowledge no one has ever bothered experimenting with this. Additives - well kalk and that's about it. I will be adding amino acids once my tank is permanently set up, i think it causes water borne bacterial blooms which feed corals which may improve colouration and increase growth rates. Layton

No, iron oxide (virtually all phosphate removers) also bind things other than just phosphate, apparently including other trace elements. Then there are issues with corals acclimating to iron levels as well. Skimmers also remove other unwanted molecules other than just phosphate. Of course they also remove some things which may be beneficial. I would probably not consider running a tank skimmerless in the foreseeable future. Layton

The problem i have with skimmerless tanks is where is all the phosphorous going? Sure nitrates are fine, they are reduced and released as nitrogen gas which rises as bubbles escaping to the atmosphere. The problem with phosphorous is that it never gets reduced into some form which is self removing. It sits there being processed between many different forms. (And is why sand beds really are a phosphorus time bomb) I'm yet to be convinced that macro algae in realistic quantities has the ability to use phosphorous fast enough to stop this. Skimmers are a physical means of exporting phosphorous. Layton

what's different from freshwater? 1. Don't use canister filters for mechanical or biological filtration 2. Don't use wet/dry filters 3. Don't use undergravel filters all for the same reason really. They speed up the nitrification process, by providing aerobic surfaces for bacteria. This should be left to live rock, because, unlike these other methods, it also has the ability to reduce the nitrate back to nitrogen gas at deeper depths within pores where oxygen levels are lower and the environment is more suitable. The above methods can not do this. The general principle should be, get as much crap out as possible before it decays (skimmer). Then leave the rest to the live rock. Also just on cycling. You need to have some source of waste to kick the biological processes off. I would recommend feeding the tank even though there may be no fish, it will provide the food required by bacteria to build their populations. Layton

Well the tank size you have suggested is adequate for someone starting out. Not too small that water parameters change faster than you can keep up, not to big to be unwieldy, or too expensive. Marine tank filtration consists of two main components; 1. Skimmer. This uses small air bubbles to attract waste which are "skimmed" off as a foam. Deltec brand skimmers have a virtually flawless reputation. Once you get to the stage of choosing a skimmer brand, post here and people will give you their opinions on it's quality. 2. Live rock. This is the core of the biological filtration. Bacteria within the pores of the rock, provide an environment where nitrate is reduced. Lighting This depends on what you want to keep. Fish Only tank, fluro tubes will be fine. Reef tank, with corals etc will require metal halide. Metal halide lit tanks to me look cleaner and more natural, so i would be using metal halide lights on any type of marine tank. If you want to keep coral, then for a 4x2x2 i would say two 250Watt halides would be middle of the road. Sump I wouldn't consider building a tank without one. Too much large equipment takes up room and looks ugly in the tank. Cycling a tank is real, and unlike with freshwater, if you add too many fish too soon you are guaranteed deaths. Generally it takes at least 6 weeks for the initial cycle to die down to a point where it is safe to add fish, however a tank can take more than 6 months to stabilise and will go through different stages of algae and diatom growth, which will die away given time. Also, you probably should speed hours reading stuff on the internet. It will give you a better feel for what your in for, of course take everything you read with a grain of salt Layton

I'd love that fish. What sort of wrasse is it? I have problems with star polyps invading one acro, nothing kills them. Layton

Yeah. This is probably 50/50 for wild colonies in the past, most would brown out at least little in the first month. But the aquacultures that have come in recently hold colour perfectly, they maybe small, and relatively expensive compared to "wild" colonies, but the variety of species, and colours is very good, and I think worth the money. Layton

I have what I think is a formosa. Not the best colour at the moment, but looks to be a bit of purple coming through. I don't think the stag acros come in too often, maybe more will come through with the aquacultured stuff coming in more recently. There are plenty of really colourful acros around. Would be nice to see some nobilis or abrolhosensis I'm a fan of some of the "deep water" acro's like batunai, granulosa, suharsonoi, and jacquelineae at the moment.

Acropora pulchra or maybe prostrata Layton