Ceramic Rings and Biohome....truly necessary?

[zyblack]

Is having ceramic rings, biohome or any sort of media that promotes growth of nitrifying bacteria truly necessary in our filter? I have been wondering since nitrifying bacteria ain't really picky on where it will settle and spawn, won't we have enough surface area in our tank (driftwood, substrate, glass wall etc) for these useful bacteria to settle down and grow?

A four-feet tank should have enough surface area to grow enough nitrifying bacteria for say, 200 hundred neon tetras...no? I noticed most LFS run airpump driven sponge filters for their tanks where the stocking ratio is pretty high, almost like packing sardines into cans. The fish don't seem really perturbed in those conditions.

I have a setup which contains 100 litres of water which is roughly the size of a 3 feet tank and I have like 70 fish ranging from small tetras to guppies, mollies to 4 inch size cichlids. There is also a turtle in it as well which contribute enough waste to match 30 guppies (might be more). So the stocking ratio is roughly 1 inch fish per litre of water.

I used to run a filter system for this setup containing a mix of biohome and ceramic rings until one day I decided to take a risk and removed the ceramic rings and biohome altogether and stick to plain filter wool for mechanical filtration. I observed for signs of discomfort or mortality of fishes for weeks and found...none...In fact, I have managed to spawn fries in the tank.

I do keep plants in the tank though, including fast growers like duckweed and hygrophilla difformis so it would certainly play a part in maintaining the equilibrium. But then again there are those fish packed tanks of the LFS like C328...I wonder for planted tanks or even bare bottom tanks...is it truly necessary for nitrifying bacteria media to placed in out filtration system?

[Quixotic]

In a planted tank, the nitrifying process can be de-emphasised because the plants will do the job of removing ammonia.

A four-feet tank should have enough surface area to grow enough nitrifying bacteria for say, 200 hundred neon tetras...no? I noticed most LFS run airpump driven sponge filters for their tanks where the stocking ratio is pretty high, almost like packing sardines into cans. The fish don't seem really perturbed in those conditions.

Sorry, but I don't think that is true. There simply isn't enough bacteria to sustain that kind of bioload. Did you ever ask what is the death rate of these fishes? The reason why those that are alive, are still alive is probably because of frequent water changes and infrequent feeding.

And different fishes have different tolerant levels of ammonia. However, ammonia, in small amounts, are still lethal to any fish.

Edit: One other thing, free ammonia (NH3-N) and ionized-ammonia (NH4+-N) represent two forms of reduced inorganic nitrogen which exist in equilibrium depending upon the pH and temperature of the waters in which they are found. Of the two, the free ammonia form is considerably more toxic to organisms such as fish. In low pH environments, there are less free ammonia compared to a high pH environment. Do take some time to read, http://cobweb.ecn.purdue.edu/~piwc/w...monia/nh3.html

[zyblack]

Is the stocking ratio or biological waste output of my setup and livestock considered high or okay? My substrate is entirely coral sand and pH is averagely 8 to 8.5. In other words, with my high pH, my ammonia level should be high enough to be toxic? Or is that my plants are consuming the ammonia as soon as it is produced?

I do notice a trend with the LFS with putting ketapang leaves into the tanks so those should have acidic pH so less problems with ammonia.

I have a friend who rears guppies in a big ceramic vessel outside his house. I think the stocking ratio is roughly the same as mine or even more. No plants inside and zero water change for months but no mortality so far beyond the initial stage. There is also the case of this 1.5 feet cube tank I saw in a office housing 9 goldfish the size of my palm and a 6 inch pleco. Filtration is only mechanical via filter wool changed every week but feeding and waste output is pretty high. Still casualty rate is low except for the 1 goldfish death 2 months later due to lack of feeding during a period of absence in office.

I wonder how many planted tank hobbyists has these nitrifying media in their filters. Is it truly necessary with all those healthy plants?

[Quixotic]

Ever get a chance to read Diana Walstad's book? It is mentioned that aquatic plants prefer ammonium over nitrate. Here is some parts of it, http://www.aquabotanic.com/plants_an...filtration.htm

I should think your bioload is considered as moderate. You do perform water changes, don't you? In the end, the main thing is that your plants are actually doing a good job of removing ammonia from your tanks.

Bioload, the media surface, the size of the tanks, the routine maintenance, feeding, pH, temperature, presence of plants etc. are all factors in determining if there is any effect on your fauna due to toxic wastes.

Plants in particular remove ammonia fast, so the the nitrification process is de-emphasised. This is why in low-tech planted tank set ups proposed by Diana Walstad, there is no need for additional equipment and water change is discouraged, but low bioload would be necessary.

Therefore, in a well growing planted tank, it is not necessary for such media materials.

However, should there any major mishaps happening, these additional media materials may (or may not) serve to help buffer any misfortunes. There is no harm anyway. But the buffering part is just my opinion, others may just feel that healthy plants will be sufficient.

Edit: In any case, this was discussed before, http://www.aquaticquotient.com/forum...hlight=Biohome

[bossteck]

... I noticed most LFS run airpump driven sponge filters for their tanks where the stocking ratio is pretty high, almost like packing sardines into cans. The fish don't seem really perturbed in those conditions.

I too have something to add on this.
What you see at LFS is not the true picture.

Fishes in LFS, especially the more popular ones move fairly quickly, once they are sold, they are not the LFS problems already. Besides, what you're seeing are only the survivors. Most LFS would clear off the dead fishes in these over-packed tanks each day before they open up for business. There is also minimum feeding.

[zyblack]

Edit: In any case, this was discussed before, http://www.aquaticquotient.com/forum...hlight=Biohome

Oh this was discussed before! Ok I understand the arguments now and the point of the media serving as extra buffer is a pretty good reason to use them in the filter especially if you stock expensive fish.

Hmm...okay my curiosity is somewhat sated...

[Shadow]

Just want to add is algae love ammonia, I read this at Tomm Barr EI.

Thus with better filtration, it should help to reduce algae growth.

[valice]

And, nitrifying bacteria breaks down NH3 into NH4 and NO2 into NO3. In turn, you don't need to add so additional NO3 especially in a low-tech tank.

[bossteck]

If you want alternatives to ceramic rings and biohome, I read about someone having great success with plastic pot scrubbers in his filter.

[Quixotic]

Actually, a lot of things can be used, as long as it doesn't affect the pH and is porous.