Do you run a refugium?

Mr. Thingdoer said:
Cool.

I thought this was an interesting article, and going by past experiences, I think it sounds reasonable. The last paragraph really stuck with me, and I think I'd like to give it a try.

https://reefbuilders.com/2014/11/03/surface-area-live-rock-matter/
Click to expand...

I agree with it to an extent. I to have a large amount of pukani. It does collect a lot of detritus. What it doesn't mention is the simple workaround, a powerhead on a sitck. Weekly or every other week I use a powerhead on a stick to blow it out of all the rock. I place a filter sock on the drain and catch it all. The benefit of porus rock in the entire system without it becoing a nitrate factory in the long run.

I'm not discrediting ceramic media. Many people really love it. I just havn't seen the need to use it to date.
 
Article makes sense, but like Josh stated, detritus needs to be blown off rocks anyhow, regardless if porous or not. I would say that if you don't want to put rock in your refugium, then don't. Macro algea is more important IMO anyhow.
 
I'm doing everything I can to help move detritus straight to the skimmer. I would like my new system to be bare bottom, and to use minimal rock. My concern is obviously surface area for biofiltration. I think some ceramic media might be a good option for this system. I don't plan on having a huge bioload, and this is intended to be an SPS heavy mixed reef (coral garden style).

Evidently, the refugium as I knew it is outdated, so I need to figure out a creative, and effective way to export nutrients. It looks like the general consensus here is that a sump with a skimmer, high flow in the "refugium" area, and some macro algae will still work. I suspect that a bit of ceramic media could possibly be better than live rock for my purposes. I can play it by ear, and see if I need to add reactors of any type.
 
markitekt said:
Article makes sense, but like Josh stated, detritus needs to be blown off rocks anyhow, regardless if porous or not. I would say that if you don't want to put rock in your refugium, then don't. Macro algea is more important IMO anyhow.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping that with a Gyre 130 in a 57G rimless, minimal rock, and no sandbed, I'm able to move virtually all the detritus out of the tank in to the skimmer. I'm hoping to only need to vacuum small piles of detritus out of the corners of the tank during water changes. Does this sound realistic?
 
I hesitated to answer because it really comes down to the chosen definition for refugium.

Some folks would go so far as to say you don't have refugium unless you have an deep sand bed or mud bed for anaerobic bacteria to complete the nitrate cycle. They expect the detritus to collect, degrade and off gas nitrogen. http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2014/5/chemistry
Note: This essentially took the Jaubert's Method, aka 'Monaco System, from the display and put it in the sump.

Others consider any place in your system (sump chamber, hang-on box, etc) where zooplankton (amphipods, copepods, mysis shrimp, miscellaneous worms, ect) can be cultured free of predators.... a place that provides shelter

And then there are a bunch of in-between versions, ATS, mangrove, sponge, etc, but today it looks most common to have a sump chamber with some live rock rubble and grow macro algae....and lots of zooplankton :)

Mine only has live rock rubble...Seachem Matrix for denitrafication and a place for zooplankton to avoid predators. To address the detritus collection, I have the rubble/matrix in a mesh vegetable bag that lets me easily lift the rubble out of the way and siphon it out during water changes. For completeness, I do run a SantaMonica drop-in ATS is in the first sump chamber with the skimmer.
 
ultimatemj said:
I hesitated to answer because it really comes down to the chosen definition for refugium.

Some folks would go so far as to say you don't have refugium unless you have an deep sand bed or mud bed for anaerobic bacteria to complete the nitrate cycle. They expect the detritus to collect, degrade and off gas nitrogen. http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2014/5/chemistry
Note: This essentially took the Jaubert's Method, aka 'Monaco System, from the display and put it in the sump.

Others consider any place in your system (sump chamber, hang-on box, etc) where zooplankton (amphipods, copepods, mysis shrimp, miscellaneous worms, ect) can be cultured free of predators.... a place that provides shelter

And then there are a bunch of in-between versions, ATS, mangrove, sponge, etc, but today it looks most common to have a sump chamber with some live rock rubble and grow macro algae....and lots of zooplankton :)

Mine only has live rock rubble...Seachem Matrix for denitrafication and a place for zooplankton to avoid predators. To address the detritus collection, I have the rubble/matrix in a mesh vegetable bag that lets me easily lift the rubble out of the way and siphon it out during water changes. For completeness, I do run a SantaMonica drop-in ATS is in the first sump chamber with the skimmer.
Click to expand...

This is a lot like Julian Sprung described it. He even went as far as to say that your plumbing could be described as a refugium. He also mentioned that clams could be loosely considered to be a refugium.

I guess what I always considered a refugium is close to what is pictured above in my last post, although with a deeper sand bed.
That was pretty much standard in every reef tank in 2008-2010, and now I see that they seem to be a lot less popular. I guess I just wanted to find out if this was really true, why, and what are the best alternatives.

Here's a link to the refugium debate at MACNA.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h39VK-tNK30
 
Last edited:
I always tell everyone I just run a sump with a protein skimmer. After reading this I guess I should be saying I have a refugium. My sump is small but does accommodate one rack (made from egg crate) of Marine pure spheres.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The refugium master

Here's a Top view looking down into my custom refugium, it takes up most of the middle of my 40 gallon sump. You can always create your own refugium in a large enough sump. I believe they are a beneficial food source for all fish and corals to thrive with a more natural diet. Also the macro algae will benefit your water parameters in the long run. A sump in general will help any tank filter out any excess waste, mind as well add a refugium. It's like a sump upgrade if you can control the flow output from your tank. I alone know the secret of the sump. If you have questions post them.
 
Mr. Thingdoer said:
I also used to look for the most porous rock I could find. I would have again for my new build, but I started reading too many articles. At this point, I think I'm going with the least porous rock I can find, and that seems to be Tonga. My opinion may change depending on what else I learn before I go shopping for rock.

I'm new to this forum. What are the rules of posing articles from another site? I read an interesting article on the surface area of rock last night. I want to see what you guys think of it.
Click to expand...




Have you looked into the marine ceramic bio media? http://www.bulkreefsupply.com/marinepure-ceramic-biomedia-plate.html

I currently do not have a sump do to limited space but I do have this block in the back of my biocube. I think there is a good number of people that are using this ceramic media which is much more porous when compared to live rock. I think a refugium with these ceramic blocks and some cheato would be a perfect substitute for GFO .
 
djflashback83 said:
Here's a Top view looking down into my custom refugium, it takes up most of the middle of my 40 gallon sump. You can always create your own refugium in a large enough sump. I believe they are a beneficial food source for all fish and corals to thrive with a more natural diet. Also the macro algae will benefit your water parameters in the long run. A sump in general will help any tank filter out any excess waste, mind as well add a refugium. It's like a sump upgrade if you can control the flow output from your tank. I alone know the secret of the sump. If you have questions post them.
Click to expand...


I guess you really have to open your mind, and allow yourself to accept the fact that you might not be doing things the best way possible. I think the argument is that these modern refugiums don't function as well as we'd like to believe that they do, and especially if you use sand in them. Everybody agrees that a refugium is a safe place for micro, and macro fauna to breed, but aside from that they don't add other benefits to the system. There is a bunch of things crammed in to one space that have different specific requirements to function properly. For example, strong light is needed to allow macro algaes to grow, but strong light also prohibits denitrification in media, and promote things like Diatoms, Cyanobacteria, and other undesirables that are present in many refugiums. Those things also prohibit denitrification. Refugiums are also safe places to breed for beneficial critters, but are also a place to breed for a lot of things you don't want. Biofouling also occurs in refugiums. Evidently, Hair algae, bryopsis, and aiptasia that pops up out of nowhere, without warning, is coming from your refugium.

These aren't my opinions, just things that I've gathered from the anti-refugium argument of a respected scientist, and a community of people who feel the same way.
 
This is a pretty good debate. I have what I will call a separate macro display tank then. I do have a 1" layer of sand for the few types of Macro that need a sand base for the holdfast. I also have some rock in there because of the same reason, so macros need rock to root to. I have a separate part of my sump for Chaeto to grow. I use the Chaeto purely because it responds very quickly to nutrients and its incredibly simple to harvest. I do skim heavy with a very oversized skimmer prior to entering the refugium. I do not use GFO at all. An ATS will be in my near future as well. I heard somebody describe this method as a free market and I believe that's pretty accurate. I guess it all depends on what your definition of a refugium is. Except for 19W of light over the Macros and 19W of light over the chaeto, there really is no expense to running it this way since its all plumbed off my return pump. I also have a pretty good size criptic zone that could also be lumped in the same category.

It looks like we all agree that nutrient export in needed, we just have different ways of doing it.
 
I really looked into the MarinePure blocks but then ran into bunch of forums saying they leach Aluminum. Not sure if its true but I just went with the old school way.
 
sk8elenex92 said:
I really looked into the MarinePure blocks but then ran into bunch of forums saying they leach Aluminum. Not sure if its true but I just went with the old school way.
Click to expand...

I read that in a really long thread as well. It was Randy Holmes-Farley who originally had the Triton test done. After more testing, it turned out to be inconclusive, and/or negligible. There was another test that showed a brand of reef salt mix contained something like 4000% more aluminum than the amount "allegedly" leeched from the MarinePure. So far, I've been lead to believe that Marine Pure is essentially inert.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top