Phosphate and nitrate level reduction

[Raffael Hamzah]

sherman wher u find potassium nitrate??

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

[Mahesh]

Hi guys.. a lot of insight info here. I have 4ft tank with fish and liverocks only. My tank nitrate also high 40 to 60. But my phosphate is 0.03. How to reduce my nitrate? Thinking of using No3pox from Redsea. Anybody has experience with this?

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[Patrickmaniac]

Purigen can help

[alons]

5 hours ago, Mahesh said:

Hi guys.. a lot of insight info here. I have 4ft tank with fish and liverocks only. My tank nitrate also high 40 to 60. But my phosphate is 0.03. How to reduce my nitrate? Thinking of using No3pox from Redsea. Anybody has experience with this?

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app
 

40-60 ppm is not high.

You did not mention how old is your tank.

To mitigate, you can reduce feeding, and do 10-15% every 2-3 weeks to lower nitrate level.

Hold off on chemicals if you can, unless you have an algae problem, which I doubt.

This Nitrate level does not have any impact on fish.

Good luck.

[Mahesh]

40-60 ppm is not high.
You did not mention how old is your tank.
To mitigate, you can reduce feeding, and do 10-15% every 2-3 weeks to lower nitrate level.
Hold off on chemicals if you can, unless you have an algae problem, which I doubt.
This Nitrate level does not have any impact on fish.
Good luck.

Hi.. my tank is 10 months old. Its FOWLR tank with low light as algae bloom when medium or high light. Thinking to go for lps. Thats y wanna reduce nitrate. Fishes are healthy.

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[leong_rei]

Maybe your media not enff


Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[leong_rei]

Maybe your media too dirty try rising with salt water


Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[Belgian Anthias]

On 28-8-2017 at 11:52 AM, SubzeroLT said:

A suitably sized sulfur denitrator is very effective to reduce nitrates. The initial cycling process is troublesome unless you have an ORP meter. Generally, it tends to lower the tank pH a little because the effluent is pH about 7+

For phosphate removal, its very easily handled using rowaphos. Personally i prefer to use a reactor for it (eg. Two Little Fishies Phosban 150 reactor) so that the flow rate can be tuned up/down depending on the system phosphate levels. If done properly, the phosphate levels should reach the correct levels within a few days.

For refugium to work, you will probably need a fairly large refugium to grow cheato (eg. 50% of your sump volume). A nice example is the Triton display tank at Sims Avenue. 

ATS works but again, it needs to be suitably sized to maintain water quality. You probably need several large water changes to bring it down from 40ppm to let's say 5ppm

 

Why a sulphur denitrator is troublesome unless an ORP meter is used? ORP reading is very unreliable. Sulpur denitrators are used in marine aquaria for a few decades now. A  good BADES reactor is operated at a daily flow of +- the total volume of the system. So, why ORP?  http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=en:badess:start

[oMGreef60]

5 months reefing camp here


Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[Komerider]

Hi.. my tank is 10 months old. Its FOWLR tank with low light as algae bloom when medium or high light. Thinking to go for lps. Thats y wanna reduce nitrate. Fishes are healthy.

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

Can try bio reactors with biopellets
Dropped mine from 80 to nothing in 2 mths when I used them with reef octopus bio pellets.

What's ur bio load like ? Fish count and size of em.

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[sherman]

Potassium Nitrate can get at nursery 

[lis9090]

Hey guys.. thanks for the support for this topic started by a newbie like me. Jus an update.. I have reset my tank due to Ich few weeks back(unfortunately there's casualties due to Qt tank not cycled)..I have also added a denitrator(bio pellets) nitrates finally at undetectable level but phosphate still 0.25ppm. Will be getting or making an Ats soon:) would like to share a pic of my current tank.. adding GSP soon!!



Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[Belgian Anthias]

On 30-10-2017 at 12:12 PM, Komerider said:

 

Can try bio reactors with biopellets
Dropped mine from 80 to nothing in 2 mths when I used them with reef octopus bio pellets.

What's ur bio load like ? Fish count and size of em.

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app
 

These biopellets, I assume it are polymers, are they reducing nitrate or are they assimilate nitrate?

[Belgian Anthias]

On 4-11-2017 at 6:54 AM, lis9090 said:

Hey guys.. thanks for the support for this topic started by a newbie like me. Jus an update.. I have reset my tank due to Ich few weeks back(unfortunately there's casualties due to Qt tank not cycled)..I have also added a denitrator(bio pellets) nitrates finally at undetectable level but phosphate still 0.25ppm. Will be getting or making an Ats soon:) would like to share a pic of my current tank.. adding GSP soon!!



Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app
 

You have installed a denitrator with biopellets. are these biopellets for assimilating nitrate or for reducing nitrate? I assume it are polymers used as an organic carbon source for heterotrops. As you do not have any nitrate, what is the function for this denitrator?  A heterotropic denitrator must be kept anoxic and needs time to install an anoxic biofilm and needs nitrate to reduce to sustain this biofilm. I assume you do not have a denitrator but a heterotropic assimilator.

[lis9090]

You have installed a denitrator with biopellets. are these biopellets for assimilating nitrate or for reducing nitrate? I assume it are polymers used as an organic carbon source for heterotrops. As you do not have any nitrate, what is the function for this denitrator?  A heterotropic denitrator must be kept anoxic and needs time to install an anoxic biofilm and needs nitrate to reduce to sustain this biofilm. I assume you do not have a denitrator but a heterotropic assimilator.

Yup more of a assimilator. The pellets are carbon source

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[Belgian Anthias]

6 hours ago, lis9090 said:

Yup more of a assimilator. The pellets are carbon source

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app
 

As there is no or little nitrate to remove  I would remove the assimilator until there is enough nitrate present and even then it is only a matter of time for it to become a problem.

As the reactor has no or little nitrate to remove the C/N ratio in the reactor is very high which means that the heterotrops will start to use ammonia-nitrogen NH4-N for there metabolism. The moment ammonia is available the heterotrops will reduce it to form protein. No nitrate will be produced which is a good thing one should believe. Well, it isn't! First of all, nitrification will not take place and nitrifiers will not be installed in normal quantities.  Ammonia reduction produces 40x more biomass( protein) as would the nitrification process. A big problem on the long term. This will deplete the phosphate very fast.  As long as there is only one fish this will not be a problem but when the supply of ammonia increases this will clog filters and create bacterial slime all over the aquarium. As the process needs a lot of phosphate due to the intensive growth, what will happen when not enough phosphate is available  for ammonia reduction? Remember, there is no active nitrification biofilm installed!

Heterotropic nitrogen assimilation produces protein, +- 8 grams protein must be produced to assimilate one gram nitrogen. This is the equivalent of 20 grams food with 35% protein. As a skimmer removes max only +- 35% of TOC and is very selective in removing bacteria most of the produced protein must be consumed, what is not consumed must be recycled solving nothing. From what is consumed most is excreted as ammonia making the cycle round. As 1/3 of this produced protein, present in the water column ( most of it isn't), may be removed by a good skimmer some of it is effectively removed each cycle ( including all necessary basic elements) but the total bio-load of the system increases. The system becomes for 100% dependable of the functioning and supply of these biopellets as no nitrification capacity is available; This is an expensive never ending story.

In zero emission systems as there is the Belize system, where this method comes from, all the protein produced by the heterotropic ammonia reduction process is consumed by the growing scrimp, biomass which will be removed before growth stops ( +- 80kg to 125kg/m³)  http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=en:badess:theorie:ras

When there is enough nitrate available the C:N ratio decreases and the same cycle is created but in this case it is from NO3-N to NO3-N which includes the nitrification cycle which may effect alkalinity.

Heterotropic ammonia reduction does also consume some alkalinity but only half compared to nitrificication. The advantage of nitrification is that the nitrogen can effectively be removed from the system by denitrification and nitrification produces 40 times less biowaste .

Adding carbohydrates by it self removes nothing from the system ! it adds!

Personally I am not a fan of using biopellets  (carbohydrate polymers) or any other organic carbon based method in a reef aquarium for the reasons mentioned above. Others may think otherwise.

Edited November 7, 2017 by Belgian Anthias
adding link

[lis9090]

As there is no or little nitrate to remove  I would remove the assimilator until there is enough nitrate present and even then it is only a matter of time for it to become a problem.
As the reactor has no or little nitrate to remove the C/N ratio in the reactor is very high which means that the heterotrops will start to use ammonia-nitrogen NH4-N for there metabolism. The moment ammonia is available the heterotrops will reduce it to form protein. No nitrate will be produced which is a good thing one should believe. Well, it isn't! First of all, nitrification will not take place and nitrifiers will not be installed in normal quantities.  Ammonia reduction produces 40x more biomass( protein) as would the nitrification process. A big problem on the long term. This will deplete the phosphate very fast.  As long as there is only one fish this will not be a problem but when the supply of ammonia increases this will clog filters and create bacterial slime all over the aquarium. As the process needs a lot of phosphate due to the intensive growth, what will happen when not enough phosphate is available  for ammonia reduction? Remember, there is no active nitrification biofilm installed!
Heterotropic nitrogen assimilation produces protein, +- 8 grams protein must be produced to assimilate one gram nitrogen. This is the equivalent of 20 grams food with 35% protein. As a skimmer removes max only +- 35% of TOC and is very selective in removing bacteria most of the produced protein must be consumed, what is not consumed must be recycled solving nothing. From what is consumed most is excreted as ammonia making the cycle round. As 1/3 of this produced protein, present in the water column ( most of it isn't), may be removed by a good skimmer some of it is effectively removed each cycle ( including all necessary basic elements) but the total bio-load of the system increases. The system becomes for 100% dependable of the functioning and supply of these biopellets as no nitrification capacity is available; This is an expensive never ending story.
In zero emission systems as there is the Belize system, where this method comes from, all the protein produced by the heterotropic ammonia reduction process is consumed by the growing scrimp, biomass which will be removed before growth stops ( +- 80kg to 125kg/m³)  http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=en:badess:theorie:ras
When there is enough nitrate available the C:N ratio decreases and the same cycle is created but in this case it is from NO3-N to NO3-N which includes the nitrification cycle which may effect alkalinity.
Heterotropic ammonia reduction does also consume some alkalinity but only half compared to nitrificication. The advantage of nitrification is that the nitrogen can effectively be removed from the system by denitrification and nitrification produces 40 times less biowaste .
Adding carbohydrates by it self removes nothing from the system ! it adds!
Personally I am not a fan of using biopellets  (carbohydrate polymers) or any other organic carbon based method in a reef aquarium for the reasons mentioned above. Others may think otherwise.

True. Thanks bro.. I be removing the biopellet soon anyway. Will be adding an Ats instead

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[Komerider]

As there is no or little nitrate to remove  I would remove the assimilator until there is enough nitrate present and even then it is only a matter of time for it to become a problem.
As the reactor has no or little nitrate to remove the C/N ratio in the reactor is very high which means that the heterotrops will start to use ammonia-nitrogen NH4-N for there metabolism. The moment ammonia is available the heterotrops will reduce it to form protein. No nitrate will be produced which is a good thing one should believe. Well, it isn't! First of all, nitrification will not take place and nitrifiers will not be installed in normal quantities.  Ammonia reduction produces 40x more biomass( protein) as would the nitrification process. A big problem on the long term. This will deplete the phosphate very fast.  As long as there is only one fish this will not be a problem but when the supply of ammonia increases this will clog filters and create bacterial slime all over the aquarium. As the process needs a lot of phosphate due to the intensive growth, what will happen when not enough phosphate is available  for ammonia reduction? Remember, there is no active nitrification biofilm installed!
Heterotropic nitrogen assimilation produces protein, +- 8 grams protein must be produced to assimilate one gram nitrogen. This is the equivalent of 20 grams food with 35% protein. As a skimmer removes max only +- 35% of TOC and is very selective in removing bacteria most of the produced protein must be consumed, what is not consumed must be recycled solving nothing. From what is consumed most is excreted as ammonia making the cycle round. As 1/3 of this produced protein, present in the water column ( most of it isn't), may be removed by a good skimmer some of it is effectively removed each cycle ( including all necessary basic elements) but the total bio-load of the system increases. The system becomes for 100% dependable of the functioning and supply of these biopellets as no nitrification capacity is available; This is an expensive never ending story.
In zero emission systems as there is the Belize system, where this method comes from, all the protein produced by the heterotropic ammonia reduction process is consumed by the growing scrimp, biomass which will be removed before growth stops ( +- 80kg to 125kg/m³)  http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=en:badess:theorie:ras
When there is enough nitrate available the C:N ratio decreases and the same cycle is created but in this case it is from NO3-N to NO3-N which includes the nitrification cycle which may effect alkalinity.
Heterotropic ammonia reduction does also consume some alkalinity but only half compared to nitrificication. The advantage of nitrification is that the nitrogen can effectively be removed from the system by denitrification and nitrification produces 40 times less biowaste .
Adding carbohydrates by it self removes nothing from the system ! it adds!
Personally I am not a fan of using biopellets  (carbohydrate polymers) or any other organic carbon based method in a reef aquarium for the reasons mentioned above. Others may think otherwise.

I'm lost..
Summarize?

Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app

[Full Hedge]

What Belgian Anthias means is that once nitrates is removed the heterotrophic bacteria would switch from using nitrates as a source of nitrogen to ammonia.

Accordig to him. This leads to three problems

1: The chemoautotrophic bacteria( the nitrifying bacteria like nitrosomonas and nitrobacter that we are familiar with) will face competition and be unable to establish a ‘typical’ population that would exist without carbon dosing.

2: The heterotrophic bacteria assimilate ammonia but also require phosphate and once phosphate level is insufficient, the assimalation process would stop. But the nitrifying chemoautotrophic bacteria is unable to take over the role of oxidising ammonia to nitrite and nitrates. Hence the tank will suffer from an ammonia spike.

3: By removing nitrogenous products via assimilation rather than through the use of nitrifying autotrophs. There will be much more bacteria film that will clog pipes

 

 

Belgian Anthias, it seems plausible. Just to seek clarification.

Do you have a model, references or studies to show that the heterotrophic bacteria will outcompete the chemoautotrophs such that it leads to a DANGEROUSLY( Systematically risky) low population of chemoautotrophs such that a low level of phosphate may lead to an ammonia spike? Can you model or describe the mechanism/interactions behind the shifts in bacterial population?

Likewise can you show that in the above scenario there will be a bacterial bloom?

And can you identify the bacterial strain or genus responsible for the heterotrophic assimilation of nitrogenous compounds?

Different strains of bacteria do have different hydrophobic/hydrophillic/ hydrophobic and hydrophillic cell membranes, preferred habitats etc. All this factors will mean they have a different tendency to be skimmed out of the water. Some bacteria may be almost completely skimmed and some unaffacted by skimming. So just because a skimmer removes 35% of Total dissolved organic carbon does not mean it will even remove 1% of a certain bacterial population.

The following study  supports my point.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2011/3/aafeature

 

 

Are you implying that using carbon will necessarily lead to the aforementioned systematically risky state? And you are ignoring many other factors like fish and coral growth, population of bacteria predators, amount of food being fed when you make such blanket statements. An empirically verified model would be nice. Or to be honest even simple statistics would support you case alot.

 

Im not trying to attack your stance. I am being objective here. You should be providing ample references, models or even simple empirical data to support your claims. 

The reef tank is a complex system. Changing one variable by the same amount may lead to a million different outcomes in repeated experiments.

I Believe that in the end, the dominant bacterial strain(s) we grow is determined more by stochastic processes rather than the hobbyist will....

Ps i am unable to open the link. If his material is contained within the link please ignore my comments.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Full Hedge

[Belgian Anthias]

2 hours ago, Full Hedge said:

What Belgian Anthias means is that once nitrates is removed the heterotrophic bacteria would switch from using nitrates as a source of nitrogen to ammonia.

Accordig to him. This leads to three problems

1: The chemoautotrophic bacteria( the nitrifying bacteria like nitrosomonas and nitrobacter that we are familiar with) will face competition and be unable to establish a ‘typical’ population that would exist without carbon dosing.

2: The heterotrophic bacteria assimilate ammonia but also require phosphate and once phosphate level is insufficient, the assimalation process would stop. But the nitrifying chemoautotrophic bacteria is unable to take over the role of oxidising ammonia to nitrite and nitrates. Hence the tank will suffer from an ammonia spike.

3: By removing nitrogenous products via assimilation rather than through the use of nitrifying autotrophs. There will be much more bacteria film that will clog pipes

One can not compare assimilation with nitrification and denitrification. Assimilation of nitrogen removes nothing from the system. Nitrification makes it possible to  remove the nitrogen from the system by denitrification. As in a normal situation heterotropic assimilation of nitrogen takes place after nitrification this leads to a circle  each time including nitrification of ammonia. The question to ask is: must we recycle the nitrogen or is it better to remove it?

As  I want to be able to adjust the live support capacity of the system and increase it when needed we must be able to effectively remove the ammonia-nitrogen produced in a way we can control this removal and the removal rate. This only can be done by adding a bio-filter-or -reactor . An aquarium grows, animals grow and multiply. We want a filter system that is able to grow with the system. We use BADES. http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=en:badess:start

 

 

 

Belgian Anthias, it seems plausible. Just to seek clarification.

Do you have a model, references or studies to show that the heterotrophic bacteria will outcompete the chemoautotrophs such that it leads to a DANGEROUSLY( Systematically risky) low population of chemoautotrophs such that a low level of phosphate may lead to an ammonia spike? Can you model or describe the mechanism/interactions behind the shifts in bacterial population?

Likewise can you show that in the above scenario there will be a bacterial bloom?

When assimilation stops due to lack of available phosphate in a system where carbohydrates are dosed, these carbohydrates may accumulate as they are not consumed immediately. When suddenly phosphate comes available ( feeding) the explosive growth may have some undesired effects of which bacterial bloom my be the visible side effect. The following oxygen depletion and drastic disturbance of the balance of the existing nitrogen cycle to mention a few others.

And can you identify the bacterial strain or genus responsible for the heterotrophic assimilation of nitrogenous compounds?

I can not, but others have done this and published there findings. All info and references are available in the Makazi Baharini wiki. We made the choice to use BADES.  Most information was basically only for our personal use but we transformed it to readable text and published it. Information not available in the text will be available in the accessible references.

Different strains of bacteria do have different hydrophobic/hydrophillic/ hydrophobic and hydrophillic cell membranes, preferred habitats etc. All this factors will mean they have a different tendency to be skimmed out of the water. Some bacteria may be almost completely skimmed and some unaffacted by skimming. So just because a skimmer removes 35% of Total dissolved organic carbon does not mean it will even remove 1% of a certain bacterial population.

The following study  supports my point.

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2011/3/aafeature

We made a study  of the skimmer: http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=en:makazi:het_water:filtratie:eiwitafschuimer

Bacteria are not only skimmed attached to the air bulb, some will be  carried out on the foam without being  attached.

 

 

Are you implying that using carbon will necessarily lead to the aforementioned systematically risky state? And you are ignoring many other factors like fish and coral growth, population of bacteria predators, amount of food being fed when you make such blanket statements. An empirically verified model would be nice. Or to be honest even simple statistics would support you case alot.

When one starts to use bio-pellets or -balls for the purpose of assimilating nitrogen in a new  system. Yes!

When used to lower a high nitrate level. yes!

When used to assimilate a modest daily overproduction in an established aquarium, No, not directly

Of coarse we can not ignore what happens in a closed system,  but  the biological balance does not need this extra food. If the bacteria population as foodsource is a concern, the first thing I would remove is the skimmer.

 

Im not trying to attack your stance. I am being objective here. You should be providing ample references, models or even simple empirical data to support your claims. 

It is my opinion which I have build up by an in dept study of the different possibility’s to remove nitrogen . We have written down everything in the Makazi Baharini wiki. The wiki is in the Dutch language but we are occupied translating it to English. All accessible references are in the original language, most of them in English.  Our complete research database can be consulted in the wiki.

The reef tank is a complex system. Changing one variable by the same amount may lead to a million different outcomes in repeated experiments.

Adding carbohydrates is the same as adding protein by feeding. Nothing will be removed from the system this way. A part will be removed by a good skimmer. It does not add a thing to the live support capacity of the system. It increases the bioload but thus not change the maximum bio-load. Once  started dosing a cycle is created which must be sustained. To stop dosing this must be done very slowly as a lot of the  biomass sustained by these doses depend on it. Risky state?

I Believe that in the end, the dominant bacterial strain(s) we grow is determined more by stochastic processes rather than the hobbyist will....

 As a skimmer is very selective in removing bacteria, some strains are removed and others are not. This influences the evolution within a ZMAS.  Some straines have the possibility to adapt and change, others do not as they are removed, creating unwanted unbalances, deseases etc. The latter is part of discussions and research as it is considered as a real concern for the exploitation  of zero emission marine aquaculture systems (ZMAS).

Ps i am unable to open the link. If his material is contained within the link please ignore my comments.

If an access denied page is shown one has to register.  Does the link not show a page ?

 

[Belgian Anthias]

 The  heterotrops do not have to switch from nitrate to ammonia. Some may use ammonia, some nitrate, if available.   In a biopellet reactor the availability of an organic carbon source may be unlimited. It is not necessary all nitrate is removed. A high C:N ratio is enough to trigger some heterotrops to assimilate ammonia- nitrogen. As long nitrate is available both NH4-N and NO3-N will be assimilated. Normal carbon dosing does not create this situation if the doses are matched to the daily nitrate production. It is wrong to say that there is no competition between the two, hetertrops and autotrops but it is only a matter of C:N ratio. Heterotrops grow 4x faster  but at a normal C:N ratio the autotrops will reduce ammonia and the hetetrops will assimilate NO3-N until the organic carbon is used up. .  I suspect  in a bioball reactor there will be always a high C:N ratio as it is the aim to sustain a low nitrate level.

My opinion correct carbohydrate dosing will work fine as long the system may and can grow. By correct doses I mean daily doses which are matched to the daily nitrate production and not with the nitrate level as mostly advised, only a bit more when the level must be lowered. The doses may be included in the normal feeding rate. This way phosphate will not become the limiting factor!

Heterotropic ammonia reduction is a dream as it prevents nitrate production and depletion of alkalinity ( in some extend) but not for a reefaquarium because of the very high biomass production which must be consumed or removed in time. H.ammonia reduction is used with  success in  Belize aquaculture systems. http://www.baharini.eu/baharini/doku.php?id=en:badess:theorie:ras

 

[Harry H]

Sir there are endless solutions. Go to any fish shop and you see a myriad of bottles - nitrate, phosphate etc reduction. But the source is most important. Use RO/DI water. This will solve all your future problems and challenges. Then buy all the chemicals which you will be tempted to buy and experiment (and every reefer has his/her preference). And the other advice given by the 大哥 reefers is crucial. Water change. 20% -30% a week. Done.


Sent from Singapore Reef Club mobile app