Biofilters are not needed!

[crsublette]

Yes, surface area and very highly oxygenated agitated media are both required and equally important.

Show me an oxygenated skippy bio-filter that has completed the nitrification cycle within 5 days from only using pond water, ammonium hydroxide, and everything else is sterilized.

Here is one that a hobbyiest conducted: new test tank. Read it carefully and notice the presence of nitrates within 5 days at post#176. Now, since this unit achieved nitrates this fast, then just think how fast it can adapt to adversity.


Now. I showed you mine. You show me yours. Where is the non-agitated, not oxygenated, static submerged bio-filter or even oxygenated skippy bio-filter or even bead filter testimonial that would be comparable to this achievement ??


For your documented labratory tests, then check out American Society for Microbiology. and, lets just narrow the scope to ammonia oxidation and do a key word search for: growth rates, freshwater ammonia oxidizing bacteria, freshwater Nitrosomonas oligotropha, freshwater Nitrosomonas europaea/eutropha.

 

[crsublette]

I have a small pot i grow lotus in i dont remember the gal i would think 30
I put some koi eggs in last year and had some small fry
They grew well in there and over winterd in the same pot
They move real fast i know there are atleast 10 koi in the tub 3" long

Waterbug has a point

And of course you are properly feeding them a healthy diet for them to grow quite well and thrive. That would definitely be an interesting thread to follow and see how soon you are registering ammonia in that water, especially once the lotus' growth begins to slow down. I bet in no time you will have to add another container and then another container, each with plants, just to sustain the ammonia produced by those 10 fish, with a proper feeding regiment.


Nobody is denying the point that plants have an impact on the biological filtration. This is very well documented in properly constructed veggie filters (i.e., aquaponic hobby). However, there is more surface area, due to the many plants, involved to obtain those results, where as I can make a smaller bio-filter unit, along with a denitrification unit to remove nitrates, that achieves the same with less surface area. Why? The surface area is simply being better utilized.

But all I really wanted to say is that 1) watergardens don't need biofilters and will agree that naked overstocked ponds will need them.

1) Tell me the sheer size of the watergarden and the number of fish and that will prove my point.

Eventually, the number of fish will multiply to the extent that the watergarden will have to consume much more space, much like an aquaponic system; otherwise, an additional bio-filter must be implemented.

This is not an indication of efficiency nor a suggestion that a "watergarden don't need biofilters". It all depends on how much space you are willing to compromise for plants, which is fine.

The purpose of biofilters is so that you do not consume so much space.

Which is more likely to happen... Plants going dormant or even dieing between the seasonal transitions or a properly built bio-filter becoming sterilized ?? It is a good thing algae is present to do what it does; otherwise, folk that solely rely on plants for a bio-filter would be in a world of hurt.

 

[DrCase]

I put the eggs in the tub for skeeter control
They only get a little bit of food in the morning
I might have to try and catch a few soon and rehome them to the big pond if they qualify

 

[HTH]

It is way to easy to make a generalization from observation and get it not quite right or push it too far.

A case in point is having green water and finding no ammonia, nitrite or nitrate. Some draw the conclusion that green water is not a result of excess nutrients. If it was we could measure nutrients every time we find green water, right. Not so. When a system is producing more nutrients then the bio filter (pond) can handle nature uses green water (suspended algae) to consume the nutrients. That it why the nutrients may be undetectable.

I am comfortable saying that some ponds do not require an external bio filter. An extreme example is one fish in a 1000 gallon pond. I am uncomfortable making a statement that is less general. People wanting to simplify things or save money will latch onto it and we will find them here asking what went wrong.

 

[dieselplower]

I was pretty surprised by the boldness of the thread title as well. Seems to be spreading misinformation.

 

[Mucky_Waters]

Perhaps the title of the thread should be "Bio filtration is not as important and mechanical filtration in water gardens".

It has always seemed to me that most backyard ponders who build skippys and such, tend to focus on stuffing them with bio filter media, even thou inadvertently most of the media ends up performing the duty of mechanical filtration material, and ends up capturing so much pond sludge that they really couldn't hold a decent bio-culture properly anyway. Better I think, to focus on filling their filters with better thought out mechanical filtration material, focusing on easy removal and cleaning, and then, if you think you need it, figure out another method of adding some sort of auxiliary bio-filtration.
Since Waterbug's name keeps coming up here, he often suggested setting up a trickle type bio-filter where you have water flowing over a pile of rocks. This has a lot of benefits like the fact that doesn't get clogged up with debris, so it needs very little maintenance, and it's well oxygenated since it is not submerged, also if done right can add some aesthetic value.

Being an avid water gardener with lots of plants, I can attest that my biggest problem is not how to deal with fish waste, but how to deal with dead plant mater, mostly dead and decaying algae. If not for the decaying plant mater I'd probably only need a fraction of the bio-filtration, but who knows if I really need what I currently have? The only way to find out for sure would be to slowly eliminate it until I start getting ammonia spikes. An experiment that I just don't have the time or interest to conduct.

And as far as relying solely on plants for surface area for bio-filtration, It begs to ask the question; what happens when the plants die back in the fall? At the same time you are losing your functioning bio media, you'll be needing extra bio filtration to help deal with the extra decaying vegetation in the pond.

 

[HTH]

For the most part I agree with what you posted. But I think you have made the point that having some backup bio filtration is a good idea so removing it would be counter productive. And that maybe a planted pond that does fine in the summer may need external filtration in the winter.

People use skippies with good results but I have the same ideas about them as you have. I try real hard not to have to pull anything apart to clean it and if I do I want it to be easy

I have torn down my temp holding pond and am in the process of creating several permant ones. Regarding dead plant matter. This is the result of 7 years of not cleaning the unfiltered holding pond. When the muck dries it is mostly plant fibers that have not broken down. Note this pond had lots of air and was very healthy with loads of natural wildlife.

 

[JohnHuff]

And as far as relying solely on plants for surface area for bio-filtration, It begs to ask the question; what happens when the plants die back in the fall? At the same time you are losing your functioning bio media, you'll be needing extra bio filtration to help deal with the extra decaying vegetation in the pond.

In the fall, the temp drops and I stop feeding the fish. I pull out the dead lily pads and the water hyacinths. I don't need any extra bio-filtration because the pond and fish will basically go into hibernation for the winter. The other plants are all potted and they stay in the pond even when it's iced over. The next season, they just start growing again and again, I just pull out any dead leaves that have accumulated.

An interesting example of how important plants are. In my first year of owning my house/pond I hired a guy to come and clean it during the fall. He vacuumed the bottom and pulled out all the water hyacinths saying that they were going to die in the winter anyway and I didn't need them. After he left, within a day or two, the pond was completely full of algae. It was so full of algae that I couldn't see an inch into the water. Now I leave the water hyacinths until pretty much they're dead.

 

[crsublette]

In the fall, the temp drops and 1) I stop feeding the fis I stop feeding the fish. I pull out the dead lily pads and the water hyacinths. I don't need any extra bio-filtration because the pond and fish will basically go into hibernation for the winter. The other plants are all potted and they stay in the pond even when it's iced over. The next season, they just start growing again and again, I just pull out any dead leaves that have accumulated.


2) An interesting example of how important plants are. In my first year of owning my house/pond I hired a guy to come and clean it during the fall. He vacuumed the bottom and pulled out all the water hyacinths saying that they were going to die in the winter anyway and I didn't need them. After he left, within a day or two, the pond was completely full of algae. It was so full of algae that I couldn't see an inch into the water. Now I leave the water hyacinths until pretty much they're dead.

1) I stop feeding the fis I stop feeding the fish. I pull out the dead lily pads and the water hyacinths. I don't need any extra bio-filtration because the pond and fish will basically go into hibernation for the winter.


Actually, you don't need extra bio-filtration since you have shown proper pond maintenance by pulling out the dead and stop feeding the fish. Fish will still feed, at reduced levels, during cold temperatures as low as 45*F; when better filtration is installed, their appetite is still present, even though at a reduced level, in 45*F water. I know this due to simply watching hobbyiests, with quite expensive koi, who actually do this. The fish are in a state of torpor, not hibernation, and they are still active. If you were to poke them with a stick, then the healthy fish would still swim away without issue.

It is as Howard suggests, that is chemical dilution. When chemical dilution is increased, then the less reliance on any type of mechanized bio-filter is reduced.


2) An interesting example of how important plants are. In my first year of owning my house/pond I hired a guy to come and clean it during the fall. He vacuumed the bottom and pulled out all the water hyacinths saying that they were going to die in the winter anyway and I didn't need them. After he left, within a day or two, the pond was completely full of algae. It was so full of algae that I couldn't see an inch into the water. Now I leave the water hyacinths until pretty much they're dead.

Since the plant bio-filtration was removed, if you were to increase your bio-filtration, then you would not have seen so much algae grown, that is just to have reduced it and assuming it is not a self nitrogen fixing algae or a bacterial algae. The typical mechanized bio-filtration is completely inefficient at reducing low traces, that is does not register on any test we have access, of phosphates and other trace minerals.

Again, nobody is denying the point that plants have an impact on the biological filtration. Plants are a very important part of the puzzle. However, to suggest plants and the already present surface area are absolutely the only part of the puzzle, this is entirely incorrect as well and very misleading.

The truth of the matter is it is all a matter of chemical dilution. I gaurantee you, as time passes with the fish multiplying with a proper feed regiment for the fish to thrive, the chemical dilution will be reduced and the plants alone will be quickly overcumb, that then leads to algae outbreaks. How do I know this? This is proven to be true from the obversation in the aquaponic hobby. This would have not have occured if also including a properly built, highly efficient mechanized bio-filter. How do I know this? I know this since I have seen mechanized bio-filters sustain unbelievable stock densities of fish. Are there still algae outbreaks? Most defintiely. Bio-filters are only efficient at processing particular chemicals and this is why folk should never suggest only mechanized bio-filtration since plants simply do absorb particular nutrients far better.

 

[Mucky_Waters]

In the fall, the temp drops and I stop feeding the fish. I pull out the dead lily pads and the water hyacinths. I don't need any extra bio-filtration because the pond and fish will basically go into hibernation for the winter. The other plants are all potted and they stay in the pond even when it's iced over. The next season, they just start growing again and again, I just pull out any dead leaves that have accumulated.

That's the answer I was expecting, and in fact exactly what I do and seems to work, although I think in reality the excess plant debris problem doesn't really become a significant problem until spring when the temps start to warm up again, but the plants haven't had a chance to start growing yet. That's when I think it's the most important to be checking water parameters and perhaps think about having some sort of auxiliary bio-filtration. I know it's when I run my UV sterilizer the most to control algae and hopefully kill off any parasites or pathogens that might become active before the fishes immune system gets up to speed.

 

[crsublette]

1) Perhaps the title of the thread should be "Bio filtration is not as important and mechanical filtration in water gardens".

It has always seemed to me that most backyard ponders who build skippys and such, tend to focus on stuffing them with bio filter media, even thou inadvertently most of the media ends up performing the duty of mechanical filtration material, and ends up capturing so much pond sludge that they really couldn't hold a decent bio-culture properly anyway. Better I think, to focus on filling their filters with better thought out mechanical filtration material, focusing on easy removal and cleaning, and then, if you think you need it, figure out another method of adding some sort of auxiliary bio-filtration.
Since Waterbug's name keeps coming up here, he often suggested setting up a trickle type bio-filter where you have water flowing over a pile of rocks. This has a lot of benefits like the fact that doesn't get clogged up with debris, so it needs very little maintenance, and it's well oxygenated since it is not submerged, also if done right can add some aesthetic value.

Being an avid water gardener with lots of plants, I can attest that my biggest problem is not how to deal with fish waste, but how to deal with dead plant mater, mostly dead and decaying algae. If not for the decaying plant mater I'd probably only need a fraction of the bio-filtration, but who knows if I really need what I currently have? The only way to find out for sure would be to slowly eliminate it until I start getting ammonia spikes. An experiment that I just don't have the time or interest to conduct.

And as far as relying solely on plants for surface area for bio-filtration, It begs to ask the question; what happens when the plants die back in the fall? At the same time you are losing your functioning bio media, you'll be needing extra bio filtration to help deal with the extra decaying vegetation in the pond.

1) Perhaps the title of the thread should be "Bio filtration is not as important and mechanical filtration in water gardens".

That would be the correct title. However, it does not have that eye pop, "wow" factor, that is not as attention grabbing. So, creating an exaggerated claim in the title and, bingo, instant attraction, fan faire, and unfortunately just adds to the noise out there that beginners will have to sift through.

Too many folk believe their experience indicates "truth of the matter" rather than just an observation of one particular piece in the puzzle. Too many folk believe their own little experiment holds more validity, a testament of them being closer to being an "expert" or a doctorate in the field, rather than, again, the experiment simply being an observation of one particular piece in the puzzle. Too many folk believe correlation equals causation.

This is why there can never be a serious, decent discussion on the gradation of biological filtration in this hobby. It would be too much like talking politics.

 

[Mucky_Waters]

1) Perhaps the title of the thread should be "Bio filtration is not as important and mechanical filtration in water gardens".

That would be the correct title. However, it does not have that eye pop, "wow" factor, that is not as attention grabbing. So, creating an exaggerated claim in the title and, bingo, instant attraction, fan faire, and unfortunately just adds to the noise out there that beginners will have to sift through.

Too many folk believe their experience indicates "truth of the matter" rather than just an observation of one particular piece in the puzzle. Too many folk believe their own little experiment holds more validity, a testament of them being closer to being an "expert" or a doctorate in the field, rather than, again, the experiment simply being an observation of one particular piece in the puzzle. Too many folk believe correlation equals causation.

This is why there can never be a serious, decent discussion on the gradation of biological filtration in this hobby. It would be too much like talking politics.

Beginners will just have to muddle their way through like everybody else.
Frankly the biggest problem I see with beginners is they usually don't have a clear idea of what they want to accomplish when building their ponds in the first place. Without a clear goal to shoot for they are left struggling with what they should be doing, and even when they follow advice and direction from others they are often disappointed in the end results because it's not what they expected.
Add to that the fact that there are so many variable in this hobby, ones persons advice and experience with their own pond may not directly apply to another pond. Things such are water volume, circulation, depth, temperature, KH, GH, PH, fish stocks, type of fish, frogs?, turtles?, rocks on the bottom?, no rocks? plant stocks, potted plants?, barefoot plants?, hours of sunlight per day, etc... All these things have an effect on how much and what sort of filtration is necessary, or desired.
So yeah, there can never be a decisive discussion on the subject water filtration, but I believe there can be a "serious, decent discussion on the gradation of biological filtration in this hobby," However you also have to temper that with the fact that my idea and your idea of what an ideal pond is, is likely a lot different than anybody else's idea of an ideal pond is, and all we're really left with is a bunch of people just talking about their own observations and theories. Of course I think we can all agree that my observations and theories are better than most. :nananananana:

 

[HTH]

Charles said

Too many folk believe their experience indicates "truth of the matter" rather than just an observation of one particular piece in the puzzle. Too many folk believe their own little experiment holds more validity, a testament of them being closer to being an "expert" or a doctorate in the field, rather than, again, the experiment simply being an observation of one particular piece in the puzzle. Too many folk believe correlation equals causation.

Agreed.

This is why there can never be a serious, decent discussion on the gradation of biological filtration in this hobby. It would be too much like talking politics.

I disagree. I think we can learn from each other. I have been at this for a few years and I can and do learn things from people with less experiance than I have. One has to keep an open mind and not think that your way is the only way.

I have been a bit disappointed in that people seem to have closed minds at times. Part of the interest for me is improving the process and pushing past how things have always been done. That can be at odds with people who are happy just to see their fish.

 

[JohnHuff]

1) Perhaps the title of the thread should be "Bio filtration is not as important and mechanical filtration in water gardens".

That would be the correct title. However, it does not have that eye pop, "wow" factor, that is not as attention grabbing. So, creating an exaggerated claim in the title and, bingo, instant attraction, fan faire, and unfortunately just adds to the noise out there that beginners will have to sift through.

Too many folk believe their experience indicates "truth of the matter" rather than just an observation of one particular piece in the puzzle. Too many folk believe their own little experiment holds more validity, a testament of them being closer to being an "expert" or a doctorate in the field, rather than, again, the experiment simply being an observation of one particular piece in the puzzle. Too many folk believe correlation equals causation.

This is why there can never be a serious, decent discussion on the gradation of biological filtration in this hobby. It would be too much like talking politics.

It appears though that Waterbug is gone, others are vying for his place. There is no need to ram this down my or others' throats.

I think most people understand the gist of my OP, which was not meant to be a new Law of Chemistry but a starting point for a friendly discussion.

The fact of the matter is that plants and natural surfaces will be adequate for most watergardens ...... until they become inadequate, at which point owners may wish to install additional biofilters. And this I proclaim in the year 2013, June 20th by Doctor Sir John Huff, Senior, otherwise known as John the Great, expert in all matters sundry and otherwise.

 

[HARO]

This post is starting to sound like a shoving match between schoolyard bullies, so I'm going to take my ball and go home!! :nananananana:
John