refugium good or bad?
Printed From: Utah Reefs
Category: Specialized Discussion
Forum Name: Equipment
Forum Description: This is the place to ask question about reef equipment.
URL: http://www.utahreefs.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=16892
Printed Date: December 09 2025 at 4:23pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: refugium good or bad?
Posted By: tamortman
Subject: refugium good or bad?
Date Posted: March 01 2007 at 2:49pm
| i was just in aquatica talking to the owner and said basically said that refugiums are more harmful then good in the long run. He said you just want a sump and that is all he has it on that huge display tank. Has anyone else heard this? i never have and i currently have a refugium sump and love it. what's the cons? |
Replies:
Posted By: Mike Savage
Date Posted: March 01 2007 at 3:01pm
|
I have had and will continue to have a refuge for growing pods and to harvest macro algae as well as a deep sand bed. Having a refugium works well for me and for countless others. Of course there are other methods that work well for others.
Mike -------------  |
Posted By: bbeck4x4
Date Posted: March 01 2007 at 5:21pm
|
I have been told that by Shawn also, then again he is the only person that I have met that has had that opinion, I say do what works for you. For me a refuge makes sense in the big picture, but I also run reverse photosynthesis on it to help with ph issues. Brian ------------- Family Portraits /Google trusted Photographer for Google Maps for Businesses |
Posted By: Corey Price
Date Posted: March 01 2007 at 6:43pm
| I've always thought that a refugium is a good idea. I have heard that SPS corals can possibly be negatively affected by the chemical warfare that certain macroalgaes produce, but don't know if it's true |
Posted By: Aquatic Evolution
Date Posted: March 01 2007 at 7:42pm
| DO A SEARCH ON CAULERPIN, OR CAULERPICIN AND READ AS MANY ARTICLES AS YOU CAN. ITS PRETTY BORING STUFF, BUT WELL WORTH READING. HOPEFULLY THIS WILL THROW SOMETHING INTO THE THINK TANK. |
Posted By: Mike Savage
Date Posted: March 01 2007 at 10:35pm
|
I'll check it out. Thanks. ------------- |
Posted By: tileman
Date Posted: March 01 2007 at 11:26pm
|
It's very hard to argue with success. Shawn has the most beautful display tank in the state. It also shows you that there are many different ways to run a successful reef. My 65g tank does not have a refugium, but my 225 does. ------------- 335G Reef TOTM. http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2015/2/aquarium ReefKeepers TOTM Feb. 2012 http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index....k-of-the-month & |
Posted By: bbeck4x4
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 12:12am
|
Shawn's tank is gorgeous, and there are many, many ways to run a reef tank successfully.
------------- Family Portraits /Google trusted Photographer for Google Maps for Businesses |
Posted By: Adam Blundell
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 9:02am
|
I think Dana convinced everyone last night that a refugium does way more good than any possible bad for a reef tank.
Then again I don't have one on my tank.
Adam
------------- Come to a meeting, they�re fun! |
Posted By: gateb
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 9:56am
|
Aquatica posted:
"DO A SEARCH ON CAULERPIN, OR CAULERPICIN AND READ AS MANY ARTICLES AS YOU CAN. ITS PRETTY BORING STUFF, BUT WELL WORTH READING. HOPEFULLY THIS WILL THROW SOMETHING INTO THE THINK TANK. "
I think most people use Chaetomorpha in their fuges these days. I searched for "Chaetomorpha caulerpin" in Google and found that Chaetomorpha does not contain caulerpin. So if you use Chetomorpha in your refugium this is not an issue.
Article:
Best Plants and Algae for Refugia - Part II "Vegetable Filters"
By: Anthony Calfo http://www.reefland.com/rho/0105/main2.php - http://www.reefland.com/rho/0105/main2.php ------------- 120 Gal RR 2 Pan World 100PX return pumps AquaC EV-180 w\Mag 9 40 + 13 Gal refugia 2 175w Iwasaki Aqua2 MH 4 48" URI Super Actinic VHO IceCap MH and VHO Ballasts Ogden, UT |
Posted By: Dion Richins
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 11:33am
 Good info Mr. Smith------------- http://www.customaquariumfurniture.com" rel="nofollow - Bad "censored" Cabinets Best quality in the valley! He is one sexy bald guy, even with out a finger!(MAC) |
Posted By: Aquatic Evolution
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 12:16pm
|
THIS ARTICLE IS SURELY ONE PEOPLE NEED TO READ. (AMONG OTHERS)
BUT I THINK IT WAS MISQUOTED. IT SAYS "It can be cut and pruned aggressively with little or no fear of toxins being released or having vegetative crashes." IT DOES NOT SAY THERE ARE NO TOXINS IN CHAETO. UNLESS I MISSED SOMETHING? I WILL READ IT AGAIN
|
Posted By: Aquatic Evolution
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 1:28pm
|
LIKE BRIAN WAS SAYING THERE ARE MANY, MANY WAYS OF KEEPING A SUCCESSFULL AQUARIUM. YOU CAN DEFINETLY HAVE A SUCCESSFULL AQUARIUM WITH A REFUGIUM. IVE DONE IT FOR MANY YEARS, BUT SUCCESS IS ALL REALATIVE. IS THE ABILITY TO KEEP CORAL ALIVE THE DETERMINING FACTOR. OR THE ABILITY TO MAINTAIN THEIR HEALTH, VIGOR AND COLORATION FOR MANY YEARS DICTATE THIS. I PREFER THE LATTER. KEEPING CORAL ALIVE IS EASY!
I SIMPLY THINK THAT ONE CAN ACCOMPLISH THIS MORE EFFECTIVELY, WITH LESS EFFORT, LESS OUT OF POCKET EXPENSE AND LESS RISK BY SIMPLY ELIMINATING- REFUGIUMS. THERE ARE SOO MANY OTHER REASONS AND PEOPLE LIKE ME AS TO WHY WE BELIEVE THIS TO BE TRUE. SO WE CAN CONTINUE THIS THREAD IF SOME OF YOU WOULD LIKE TO, AND I WILL SHARE SOME ADDTIONAL INFORMATION.
|
Posted By: gateb
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 1:33pm
|
Did a search for �Chaetomorpha Toxins� and didn�t find anything bad about Chaeto so far. Did find this paper that states that catches of moluscs and fish increased in areas where Chaeto presumably absorbed toxins in a polluted bay: http://www.ifremer.fr/docelec/doc/2005/publication-2131.pdf - http://www.ifremer.fr/docelec/doc/2005/publication-2131.pdf Consequences to the Ecosystem The effects of seaweed proliferation and accumulation on the biotope and the environment are both numerous and varied. First, the seaweed biomass plays an important role in purifying the medium by absorbing excess nutrients and by accumulating some toxins (BRAULT, 1983). A primary function of excessive macroalgal development appears, therefore, to be the abatement of pollution in coastal ecosystems. Taking into consideration the entire cycle of growth and decay of the seaweed, the Venice Lagoon, for example, acts as an important denitrifying reactor (SFRISO and MARCOMINI, 1994). Ulva concentrates several metals from water and is sometimes used to assess the level of this type of pollutants (MALEA and HARITONIDIS, 2000). Associations between macrophytes and marine animals are often considered to be positive. In some cases, seaweed proliferations provide a supplementary food source which can have a favourable effect on the development of herbivores. Another significant ecological role of excessive growths of algae is the provision of habitats and refuges against predators. For instance, LENANTON et al. (1985) noted that an increase in fish catches followed an increase in the biomass of Cladophora and Chaetomorpha, while VIRNSTEIN and CARBONARA (1985) reported high densities of small animals (peracarid crustaceans, gastropod molluscs, etc.) in Gracilaria drift beds. These proliferations do, however, pose significant fouling problems in aquacultural areas. Moreover, the seaweeds involved in the proliferations appear not to be very numerous in terms of species, but represent a stronger proportion of the algal community, with the growth being selective according to their degree of tolerance of pollution and to their affinity for the nutrients. The most sensitive species regress in quantity or disappear in favour of more tolerant species. ------------- 120 Gal RR 2 Pan World 100PX return pumps AquaC EV-180 w\Mag 9 40 + 13 Gal refugia 2 175w Iwasaki Aqua2 MH 4 48" URI Super Actinic VHO IceCap MH and VHO Ballasts Ogden, UT |
Posted By: Kevin
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 2:13pm
|
I want to join this discussion because I have a refugium and have been trying to decide for a while if it is really doing much good and if I should remove it.
First I would like to seperate the issues. I think we need to look at why the refugium is being installed. 1. A low flow area designed to allow macro algea to grow/flourish in order to export nutrients (seems to be the main argument above.) 2. A low flow area to put more DSB to allow for extra denitrification. 3. A place for amphipods/copepods to grow and flourish in order to help fish in main tank that require these foods to survive. 4?? is there more reasons? I doubt that anyone would consider #3 to be bad (assuming it works over a long period of time in this type of environment) So the argument so far seems to be for/against low flow areas seperated from the main tank for the sole purpose of nutrient export whether by macro algea, extra DSB, or both. Also I would like to point out that if your refugium/sump is anything like mine, then it is very neglected (apart from havesting macro algea) and therefore doesn't have the snails/crabs/biodiversity as the main tank has. I hope this seperation of points will contribute to this discussion instead of just being a pointless post 
|
Posted By: gateb
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 2:32pm
|
I had my refugium set up in my apartment when I moved my tank here from St. Louis, MO last May. I bought a house and moved my tank there last October and had large outbreaks of Dictyota and cyano after moving the tank twice (no suprise here). This was in spite of large water changes and running a skimmer, Polyfilter, Matrix Carbon and RowaPhos.
About a month ago I had enough of the crud growing in the tank and reluctantly set up my refugium again with a DSB and a small ball of Chaeto. The Dictyota and cyano are were pretty much gone in the first 2 weeks. So in this case the DSB and Chaeto accomplished what hundreds of dollars in chemical media and equipment couldn't do for me.
Oh I forgot to add that I plan on dumping a "Detritivore Kit" into my DSB/Refugium to grow some more pods, etc when I get my tax return $$. I have 200 lbs of Kaelini and Indonesian rock in the tank, but unfortunately it seems that most of those types of organisms didn't make it through the tank being moved twice. Then again my Mandarin and Scooter Dragonets are fat and happy, so maybe some did survive after all.
So points 1,2 and 3 are valid for what I am trying to accomplish. ------------- 120 Gal RR 2 Pan World 100PX return pumps AquaC EV-180 w\Mag 9 40 + 13 Gal refugia 2 175w Iwasaki Aqua2 MH 4 48" URI Super Actinic VHO IceCap MH and VHO Ballasts Ogden, UT |
Posted By: Mike Savage
Date Posted: March 02 2007 at 2:36pm
|
Mr. Calfo's article bookmarked above is and easy and informative read. Some of the points that caught my eye are:
"Chaetomorpha is multicellular and, as such, is inherently more stable. It can be cut and pruned aggressively with little or no fear of toxins being released or having vegetative crashes."
"illuminate most macroalgae in refugia with at least 1 watt of light per liter of water at depths less than 30 cm"
"moderate to strong water flow is necessary; keep a total water flow of at least 20X turnover of the volume of the culturing vessel."
"Aquarists with thick masses of Chaetomorpha in their refugiums get a bounty of zooplankton to feed their corals in their display, assuming the refugiums is kept without predators like fishes on the plankton."
Mike ------------- |
Posted By: Aquatic Evolution
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 10:49am
|
AS FOR "PODS"
LET ME SHARE WITH YOU A SHORT STORY. FOR YEARS I HAVE HAD A PROPOGATION SYSTEM SET UP IN MY BACK ROOM, AND HAVE GROWN OUT MANY HUNDREDS IF NOT IN THE THOUSANDS OF FRAGS. ABOUT 6 MONTHS AGO I HAD A FLAGELLATE BLOOM. HAD THEM BEFORE AND WILL AGAIN, HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO GET RID OF IT FAIRLY EASY. THIS TIME IT DIED OFF OVER NIGHT! TO MY DISMAY IT KILLED 200 GROWN OUT ACRO FRAGS. (ITS HIGHLY TOXIC) 2 MONTHS PASS BY, EVERYTHING TESTS PERFECT. SOO I MAKE SOME MORE FRAGS. THEY DO GREAT INITIALLY, BUT AFTER A WEEK OR SO THEY THEY BEGIN TO ERODE. (NOT RTN OR STN) LIKE SOMETHING WAS EATING THEM. BUT THERE WAS NOTHING IN THER TO DO THAT. COULD IT BE RESIDUAL TOXINS?
I TESTED EVERYTHING AGAIN, COULDNT FIND ANNYTHING WRONG. WHAT IS GOING ON? SYSTEM IS HEALTHY, EVERYTHING ELSE IS DOING WELL (PALYTHOA, ZOO'S). COPEPODS, AMPHIPODS AND MYSID SHRIMP EVERYWHERE! THE BOTTOM LOOKED LIKE IT WAS MOVING! I WONDERED IF POSSIBLY THAT THE PODS WERE EATING MY FRAGS? SO I PUT IN A MANDARIN GOBY... WEEKS HAVE GONE BY, POPULATIONS OF PODS ARE DOWN AND MY FRAGS ARE NO LONGER ERODING. SO THE QUESTION I HAVE FOR MYSELF IS- HOW SAFE ARE PODS? I NEVER THOUGHT IT COULD POSSIBLY BE PODS.
JUST SOMETHING ELSE TO THINK ABOUT!
|
Posted By: Adam Blundell
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 12:10pm
|
Shawn-
Very interesting info. I always considered pods to be completely reef safe. In fact I've never heard otherwise. Hmmm, I'm going to think more about pods today. Hearing your viewpoint on these issues is quite beneficial as it certainly provokes thought.
Thanks
Adam ------------- Come to a meeting, they�re fun! |
Posted By: Gahlenfr
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 2:08pm
| Take the Mandarin out now and see if your frags begin again to decline. If so I would attribute it to "something" the goby is eating. If not, I would say it was a coincidence. |
Posted By: sshm
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 2:11pm
Could it be that your system was very clean, i.e. totally nutrient poor? And the fish added some bioload, although the one mandarin must be a swimming poop machine to make a big difference like that. ------------- http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1157896 - Difficult and special care reef inhabitants |
Aquatica wrote:Posted By: Kevin
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 2:37pm
He could take out the manderin and see if makes a difference but -- If something aint broke don't fix it. 
|
Posted By: Aquatic Evolution
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 7:12pm
| I AGREE WITH KEVIN! IT WOULD BE RATHER REDUNDANT TO SACRIFICE MORE FRAGS. COINCIDENCE IS RARE IF NON-EXISTANT WITHIN THIS HOBBY. IF ANYONE WANTS TO CALL IT SO, GO AHEAD. BUT REMEMBER "CAUSE AND EFFECT" |
Posted By: bbeck4x4
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 8:06pm
hey, shawn, we can hear ya , do you really need to yell?JK. Brian ------------- Family Portraits /Google trusted Photographer for Google Maps for Businesses |
Posted By: Suzy
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 8:12pm
|
Hey, if anyone wants to rid their system of pods, at night you could put a piece of bridal view in, wrapped around a few flakes of food. Then in the morning, pull it out and put them in ziplock for my babies?
------------- http://www.suzysreef.com - SuzysReef.com http://z4.invisionfree.com/UtahBreeder/index.php?showtopic=11&st=0&#last - Using Macroalgae for Aquascaping |
Posted By: Aquatic Evolution
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 8:29pm
I USED TO HAVE LOTS OF THEM 
|
Posted By: Gahlenfr
Date Posted: March 05 2007 at 9:23pm
I am well aware of cause and effect but one experience does not fact make. You post here first stating the we should look at our refugiums as harbors for toxins and now our copepods and the like are bad. Have you personally experience this long term in your systems? I am not a scientist nor an expert or even a novice on toxins but I have experienced a greater thriving system with my refugium. I acknowledge that there are numerous ways to be successful and I by no means have been doing this for years like yourself. My point was if you want to know for sure if it was the m.goby then do an experiment and then form a conclusion based on more than a single experience. I am open to new ideas and if I am shown that what I am doing could be improved then by all means I will try it. 
|
Posted By: Aquatic Evolution
Date Posted: March 06 2007 at 3:38pm
|
IM ACTUALLY NOT TRYING TO MAKE A SCIENTIFIC STATEMENT IM JUST RELATING SOME VERY COMMON KNOWN FACTS AND EXPERIENCES OF MINE AND MANY OTHER HOBBIESTS AROUND THE COUNTRY. SOMETIMES ITS A GOOD THING FOR PEOPLE TO QUESTION THE NORM. ONE OF THE REASONS I ACTUALLY POSTED IS BECAUSE OF THE STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE STARTING THIS THREAD, THAT HE HAD "NEVER HEARD OF THIS BEFORE". IF YOU WOULD DO YOUR RESEARCH YOU WOULD REALIZE THAT WHAT I MENTIONED IS NOTHING NEW. AS FOR MY EXPERIENCE WITH REFUGIUMS- I REMOVED MINE AFTER ABOUT 6 YEARS, AND I MAINTAIN NUMEROUS ONES AROUND UTAH AND SLC VALLEYS. TYPICALLY IF THE OWNER ALLOWS, I WILL REMOVE THE REFUGIUM FIRST THING. THEY ARE EASIER TO MAINTAIN WITHOUT THEM.
MY QUESTION TO YOU IS HOW LONG AND WHAT TYPES OF SYSTEMS HAVE YOU HAD EXPERIENCE WITH DIRECTLY? AND HOW IS YOUR TANK THRIVING MORE NOW, THAN BEFORE?
AS FOR PODS AGAIN, YOU REALLY DONT THINK THAT ALL PODS ARE SAFE DO YOU? THERE ARE MANY PARISITIC AND CARNIVOUROUS SPECIES. THE REASON THAT I EVEN MENTIONED IT WAS THAT, WHEN YOU CREATE A REFUGE FOR PODS TO REPRODUCE, UNMOLESTED BY PREDATORS. LOGIC ONLY WOULD DICTATE THAT THEY WOULD END UP IN YOUR DISPLAY TANK. IT WOULD BE NAIVE TO THINK THAT THE ONLY ONES PRESENT ARE SAFE ONES. PREDATORS LIKE DRAGONETTES DONT ONLY EAT THE GOOD BUT ALSO THE BAD ONES. THE ONLY FACT IN MY EXPERIENCE IS THAT MY ACROS ARE NO LONGER DYING, AND THAT WORKS FOR ME.
|
Posted By: Shane H
Date Posted: March 06 2007 at 4:44pm
|
I have a small refugium and I have often wondered if the benefit is directly relative to the size. For instance, my display is a 120 gallon aquarium, and my refugium is possibly 15 gallons at most. Although I do regularly harvest chaeto, I'm not convinced there is any other significant benefit. Now, imagine a refugium that was 10x larger than the display, rather than 10x smaller (which is likely the case with most of us). Here, I begin to see some significant benefits.
With a very small % of the entire system dedicated to a refugium, I think there is a good arguement to be made that they are not worth the worry.
|
Posted By: Aquatic Evolution
Date Posted: March 06 2007 at 5:14pm
|
I AGREE SHANE, ITS SIMILAR TO THE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH MR. BORNEMAN WHEN YOU BROUGHT HIM DOWN TO MY STORE. I ASKED HIM WHAT HE THOUGHT ABOUT REFUGIUMS HE SAID" THEY DONT WORK UNLESS THEY ARE 100% THE SAME VOLUME AS THE DISPLAY TANK". ONE OF THE GUYS THAT WAS WITH YOU ASKED HIM IF HE HAD ONE ON HIS TANK HE SAID " YES, IT DOESNT WORK, ITS ONLY 40 GALLONS. THE ONLY REASON ITS STILL THERE IS IM TO BUSY TO REMOVE IT" |
Posted By: Gahlenfr
Date Posted: March 07 2007 at 12:47pm
|
Shawn, I appreciate your posts! You do bring some thought provoking ideas into the mix and we need more of that in our hobby. Keep it up! |
Posted By: Dutch
Date Posted: March 09 2007 at 1:39pm
|
I just read through all the posts and I think everyone has good points! I for one never even thought of "BAD" pods. I am glad I have my dragonet and six-line...I personally run a fuge...and I am pretty sure it serves no purpose in the large picture. I wish I could make it bigger one day...and thanks for stretching my mind and everyone elses. With out people thinking of new things and going "against the grain" I am sure we'd never progress! Dutch
|
Posted By: Mark Peterson
Date Posted: March 09 2007 at 7:20pm
Facinating comment. I went against the grain when I set up what was perhaps one of the first RDP Refugia in Utah, exactly 10 years ago. The story is here:
http://www.utahreefs.com/SeaStar/wmasSeaStar02Feb.pdf - http://www.utahreefs.com/SeaStar/wmasSeaStar02Feb.pdf
Interestingly, John Walch was sued for his article in FAMA, claiming his refugium idea copied them. Even then it wasn't really a new idea, refugia and algae scrubbers have been around forever.
I once came up with about 6 reasons for RDP Refugia, some of which were mentioned already, but I have seen too many good tanks done so many different ways to talk negatively about any of them. What really matters is how well the hobbyist makes use of whatever system they have. We used to hear that all coral could not do well together; that soft coral did not do well with hard...etc. etc. We now know that is myth.
Concerning the infusion of toxins from algae, activated carbon easily handles that, but then... I'm the guy who hasn't used a skimmer since 1997, yet grew and sold $1000's of all types of frags over the years.  But now that I don't have any tanks, you are probably better off not listening to me. ------------- Reefkeeping Tips, & quick, easy setup tricks: www.utahreefs.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9244 Pay it forward - become a paid WMAS member 
|
Posted By: pmpt
Date Posted: April 19 2007 at 2:25pm
 What!! Say it isn't so!!
I liked my refugium mainly to watch all the little "bugs" swimming around. Almost better than the main tank. But to how effective it was, I did notice a drop in algae growth in the main tank, but thats about it. |
Posted By: Ryan Thompson
Date Posted: April 19 2007 at 7:14pm
|
Well let me tell you my experience with refugiums. I started out without a refugium on my first tank. I let it cycle and the LFS said I was ready to go for fish and all that. So I started adding fish and corals. One day my tank decides to go crazy and crash. I lost almost everything I had. I got rid of my bio-wheel and skimmer. The skimmer was a HOB so it was not the most effective but it still did something. I got a HOB refugium. It was about 10% the size of my tank. I added LS and chaeto(from Mark) and within a week my tank did a 180. I then moved on to using RO water. That helped a TON! I credit my success with my tank to the refugium and advice from this site. I wouldn't even dream of setting up a tank without one. It has worked for me in the past. I also will go with a skimmer this time around. The ocean has a refugium and a skimmer(both are real big). If we are trying to replicate the ocean then why not have both? Just make sure you have a fish that eats pods. IMO you must have the complete eating cycle. If nothing is eating the pods then they will take over. This all just my opinion and my experience(very limited). |
Posted By: Haley'sfish
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 2:45pm
| Alright, so this was 3 years ago.... whats the opinion today? I am considering pulling out my macro from my sump and want to know what today's opinion of the refugium is. |
Posted By: tcfab
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 6:26pm
I will always use a refugium, they are beneficial to a tank. I am tempted to try the Warner Marine Ecobak pellets because I have some here at my house, but I am hearing very mixed results from them. My frag tank is 80% sps and I have been hearing people with sps dominated tanks running the pellets are having problems with keeping there sps happy with them. So i might just continue to use my in tank refugium on it my macro grows like crazy in there ------------- Need custom acrylic work? give me a call, www.Elite-Aquatics.net (801)645-6386 |
Posted By: Shade
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 6:53pm
Really? Do you have some links? I had not heard that yet. Would be curious to read about it! ------------- Sara Wootton 29 Gal Biocube (Wife of Jwoo) Here's proof that there are wives who support their husband's Reefing Addiction! |
Posted By: Connie
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 7:12pm
Wow this is an oldie moldy... I didn't even read the debate but rather looked at all that have given up on the hobby.....  ------------- I have flying monkeys and I'm not afraid to use them. 180 gallon money pit that I love..... |
Posted By: Haley'sfish
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 9:46pm
| Yeah its way old... tcfab, what do you say to those who claim that sps can be affected by toxins created by the macro algae? The reason I am wandering about all of this is that I recently had some SPS die off in my tank. I have no idea why, the parameters were all in a very good range as well as everything else. I was talking to Shawn and he told me about the refugium issues etc and it made me wonder. |
Posted By: tcfab
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 10:10pm
|
What type of macro are you using? Are you lighting your fuge 12 hours on and 12 hours off or 24/7? I have heard some types of algea can go sexual and create problems. Although I doubt your problems with sps were from macro. Did you inspect the coral to see if they were infected with aefw or red bugs? Did you dip the corals when you bought them? ------------- Need custom acrylic work? give me a call, www.Elite-Aquatics.net (801)645-6386 |
Posted By: Haley'sfish
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 10:51pm
| Mostly Chaeto, and like three leaves of caulerpa. The light is on 12 hrs at night. These corals have been doing good for about 2 months, and I did not see any red bugs. As for the aefw I don't know what that is. I will admit I am new to SPS but no one that I have talked to can see anything that could have caused this. That said, I do not blame the refugium at all. I just don't know. |
Posted By: Luckedout
Date Posted: February 27 2011 at 11:10pm
|
I wouldn't build a large tank without a refugium. A nano you could probably get away with it, but would still recommend it.
------------- -Ben 90g Mixed reef www.body-balancechiropractic.com |
Posted By: CapnMorgan
Date Posted: February 28 2011 at 7:35am
|
I totally agree. ------------- Steve http://utahreefs.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=40637&PID=356246" rel="nofollow - My Old 180G Mixed Reef Currently: 120G Wavefront Mixed 29G Seahorse & Softies Running ReefAngel Plus x2 435-8 |
Posted By: bfessler
Date Posted: February 28 2011 at 8:35am
|
I think those who have problems with a refugium don't take care of it properly. I've seen several that are so overrun it's hard to tell what is going on inside the refugium. You need to thin out the Macro from time to time and stir the sand bed as well. While a refugium doesn't require as much care as the display tank it does need a little regular maintenance. My refugium is only about 4 months old but I am trying to make it more of a display refugium with Macro, Softies, Live Rock and Rubble. I find myself looking at all the stuff growing down there nearly as much as the tanks it's connected to. ------------- Burt An equal opportunity reefer, I support all hobbyists and organizations involved in Marine Aquarium Keeping. [email protected] |
Posted By: Jeremyw
Date Posted: February 28 2011 at 9:38am
lol i disagree i wouldnt build one with a refugium! After talking with several vedors and speakers at the MWRF they all agree that for a fuge to work in a large tank that it needs to be just as big or bigger than the tank itself. So for my tank I would need to have another 210 gallon tank somewhere. And even then they said it would really effect the tank because the tank itself is so diverse. I was told that if I was worried about it through some cheato in there for a few weeks to help while you find out what the real problem is. Smaller tanks like a 45 gallon I personally fill a fuge is great and amazing! Im really curious about these pellets hurting your sps. I want to use them but am mainly keeping an sps tank. TCFAB do you have any articles that I can read about this! Once again thats my opinion.... and unfortunately i am beat up on by most on the board about not having a fuge but oh well i will cry! ------------- Next meeting: |
Posted By: Mark Peterson
Date Posted: February 28 2011 at 10:08am
|
We definitely need to recognize that there are many ways to run a good reef aquarium. We also need to ask more questions about the different methods. We need to also realize that after gathering all the information currently available, that there is a ton more we don't know. Every organism has it's toxins. We cannot avoid that, but we can remove some of those toxins to keep the aquarium water a little closer to what the ocean is like. The ocean is so large that these toxins are diluted and somehow decomposed in ways that our little systems cannot do. In my opinion, it's not wise to throw out one type of life unless we are willing to throw out all types of life that cause some problem. If we did that we would soon have nothing left. Let's use wisdom to deal with each aspect of the life we keep in our tanks. I also believe Haley'sfish would be better served by posting the problem in a new topic so we could work on finding the specific resolution. ------------- Reefkeeping Tips, & quick, easy setup tricks: www.utahreefs.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=9244 Pay it forward - become a paid WMAS member
|
Posted By: philhender
Date Posted: February 28 2011 at 10:36am
A 210g sump/fuge... I would love it... while the display tank is awesome to normal observer, I find myself strangely fascinated by the workings of the natural filter known as the refugium! ------------- I asked the Lord for the blessing of Patience... he gave me 6 kids! 125g Reef / 55g Sump-Fuge |
Posted By: tcfab
Date Posted: February 28 2011 at 10:43am
|
Disney, I would have to look for the thread I just read it the other day. If you search on Reef2Reef you will find lots of good reading on the pellets. ------------- Need custom acrylic work? give me a call, www.Elite-Aquatics.net (801)645-6386 |
Posted By: MadReefer
Date Posted: February 28 2011 at 1:45pm
I had a fuge with a water volume of about 12% of the size of the display volume on my 180. I wish I could have done 100% or more, but it just wasn't going to happen. It still accomplished great things: 0 phosphate and nitrates with the help of all the LS and LR in the display, a lot of pods, healthy corals and fish.
|