lduncan

That's a lot of rock! How big's the tank?

Yip, just cause it's there mainly.

It's not a rare species in the wild, it's just uncommon in the trade. It's known for it's intense blue colour, and extremely slow growth. It's been aquacultured in the States by hobbyists, and 1" frags were selling for hundreds of USD, it is a bit more common now prices aren't quite as high (around $100 USD). Layton

It'll be gone before tomorrow morning.

Lucky we don't have ridiculously priced livestock like the States: http://www.reefermadness.us/RMD11180013.htm

These are sources of phosphate in a tank which is not being fed, especially when new. Plasitcisers are often phosphate based, and when added to the tank can be a significant source until the residue has been used. Your right that food is a major source of phosphate in tanks, one which is unavaoidable, so you need mechanisms in place to deal with leftovers and th eventual waste. Huh because it's a wierd question. What's unknown about the system? (Also, I'm not, and never have used it.) Vodka (an other small organic molecules like acetate) feeds bacteria, which are literally everywhere in the tank. They are the ones which are responsible for storing and releasing differing forms of phosphorous. Bacteria consume phosphourous in much larger quantities than they need to live and reproduce, so inducing a bloom will suck many different forms of phosphorous, not just the water soluble orthophosphate. This is where it differs from rowa and stuff like that. For oxide removers to work, they need water soluble forms of phosphate (mainly ortho, but also some organically bound stuff as well). These forms only exist when all other pools (including bacteria) are full. Vodka isn't any more "unkown" than rowa and other resins. Phosphate problems come from the simple fact that there is more phosphate going in, than is been taken out.

It will speed things up. But not absolutely necessary. Layton

I know Randy said it but he's not a biologist. ;-) Bomber is the one with a PhD in Marine Biology and Pathobiology, and Randy has degrees in Chemistry. Who would know more about bacteria's ability to fix nitrogen? I'd pick the Marine Biologist. I'm not saying it's a rule. I'm saying that it is far more likely that typical problems like algae and cyano (which incidentally can fix it's own nitrogen) are solvable by reducing phosphorous, rather than looking at nitrate. So nitrogen can be limiting to some "problem" causes, but not for others.

Exactly the same process. It will take few weeks for the bacteria to build up, then you should get a lot of crap shed from the rock. It may take anywhere from a few months to several months. This process should avoid all the signs of tank cycling people see when they setup a new tank (diatom and algae stages), you are letting bacteria do the job which algae just interferes with. Layton

It's not a never ending source. It takes a while to remove it. Huh? Because it's unnecessary. They also can have problems of their own. It doesn't fix the real problem. Layton

Live rock (or base rock) is often full of phosphate, pvc and plastics provide phosphate too. It can take months for it to reach low levels. All you need is phosphate. Nitrogen won't be limiting very often in tanks, because bacteria can fix it directly from the atmosphere. The only problem with bacterial blooms is often the oxygen levels take a dive. Which can obviously cause trouble for other inhabitants.

Awsome pics! I know where i'll be going on holiday next.

Also, whatever happened to RnB? Haven't seen him around here for ages.

:lol: Like I said could be other reasons. Coralline happily grows in low nutrients.

It's not really good or bad. It just happens to be a low nutrient type of algae which doesn't look like crap. It's there because it likes the same conditions as corals. Layton

Could be other reasons.

A few inconsistencies in there. Spattering of reality along with a good lot of pure crap. Is my assessment. Just watch your sources. Layton

Talk to reef, but around $1200 from memory. They have great upgradability potential, the kit comes with two streams 6100 and a controller with 4 channels (each channel can be connected to up to 4 streams). So those with large tanks can have 16 streams running of one controller.

There is another stream like pump coming from Icecap next year, the vortex (or something like that), bit lower profile in tank than the streams, similar price apparently. What size tank have you got? I'd go with the turbelle streams over the oldschool original turbelles. So maybe a couple of TS07 kits, or if you're game a TS24: http://www.tunze.com/149.html?&L=1&C=NZ ... zeprod_pi1[predid]=-infoxunter025 Layton

True, I think I do there. Must be the other way 400W cooling capcaity isn't much. Much more likely to be 1600 watts cooling capacity and 400 watts power consumption. I'm confused there too. None of the numbers are consistant, Don't know where they get that 1/3 HP rating from. More like 1 HP. Layton

They're polyp munchers, but some people do keep them in large tanks with acros which can sustain them. Acros recover quickly, unless the fish are partial to one in particular. :lol: Layton

That's 400 watts of cooling capacity, it's not using 400 watts of electrical energy. General efficiency of heat pumps (which is what a chiller is) is around 400%, so it's probably using around 100 watts of electrical power.

There have been a few questions like this in here, a search would find them easy enough. But I would recommend budgeting around $3500 to $5000 minimum for a 4 foot tank suitable for someone just wanting to get into the hobby. Layton