# Amount of bacteria on surfaces vs. filter media.



## actionyak (Mar 16, 2004)

Here's the spinoff to the ammonia thread. Is most of the beneficial bacteria in our tanks in the filter materia, ie bio wheels, bio balls, etc, or on the surfaces in our tanks such as sand, rocks, plants, etc? I guess maybe a better question would be what do you think the ratio is, since we all know it is on both?

My experience is limited to living through a couple of hurricanes several years back. I had no battery backup, no airpumps, nothing. We were without power for about three days each time and I didn't lose a fish. No spike in nitrites or ammonia. I have a 72 g with lots of rock and a sand bottom. I've got two emperor 400's with lots of nice buildup on the biowheels, but this experience led me to believe there was also plenty of bacteria on the other surfaces in the tank.


----------



## TKC747 (Dec 5, 2008)

I have a 20 gallon long with no substrate, and it is taking forever to hit the nitrIte spike, suddenly I got NitrAtes and no NitrItes and still some ammonia, but that's a different story. I think most people will have 2 inches of substrate and I think that can be quite substantially a difference when it comes to comparing bacteria in filter and on surfaces


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

most of the good bacteria is in the filter media.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

GaFishMan1181 said:


> most of the good bacteria is in the filter media.


Please support such random claims with some personal experience to support them...

I'm out of town this weekend with limited time to reply, so I will share details of my experiences and the conclusions I've drawn when I get back...

...I just hate to see random opinions pushed at people without anything to support them...


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

the thing i have found with filter media is that it provides a less disturbed surface where baccteria can be sustained, also it provides a growth surface where water constantly passes making it easier for the bacteria to do it's job. that being said

bacteria will grow on any surface it can find, i recently removed one filter and added a brand new one at the exact same time and did not have a spike at all, i also used that same filter i removed and placed it on a new tank and did have issues with a spike, so by that you would assume most of my bacteria is inside my tank and not on my filters, but you never really know, i don't think there is really any way to tell how much is where at any one time, you can hope though that there is a little bit everywhere, that way when you vac the substrate you don't kill too much bacteria, or when you scrub the glass you don't kill it off, same if you ever clean decor off and you really hope that it's not all in your filter just in case you lose power


----------



## steelers fan (Jun 26, 2009)

there is alot of bacteria in the substrate and decor but also alot in the bio wheels. i vigorously clean the filter media if not change it every week with waterchanges and have never had a spike...on that note i have also done complete teardowns of my tanks involving substrate change and complete filter cleaning repeated times also with no spikes. this leads me to believe that if you have bio wheels and train them to hold the majority of your bacteria they will do so. so it depends on what your maintainence schedule is i guess and what you do with you tank as to where the most bacteria grows.


----------



## steelers fan (Jun 26, 2009)

sorry...i should mention that i use emporer 400s with dual bio wheels. if theres a power failure i just drop the wheels into the tank until the power is restored


----------



## dwarfpike (Jan 22, 2008)

steelers fan said:


> i should mention that i use emporer 400s with dual bio wheels. if theres a power failure i just drop the wheels into the tank until the power is restored


One of the main reason I love them. :thumb:


----------



## steelers fan (Jun 26, 2009)

absolutely. *** had canisters in the past and yeah there silent and you can hide them. but like *** said before nothing moves the water like a good hob and with the tank being away from the wall a little i can change the backround as often as i like. not to mention ease of operation and cleaning. also like i said i have the bio wheels trained to take anything i can throw at them.


----------



## KaiserSousay (Nov 2, 2008)

> I guess maybe a better question would be what do you think the ratio is, since we all know it is on both?


From your own experiences you have shown the fact that no amount of external bacteria colonies can do it all, all the time.
Nothing beats the ability of an established tank to stand up to whatever we throw at it, short of the introduction of toxic substances.
Tanks and filters, Yin and yang..we disturb the tank, the filters bacteria will help reseed what we disturbed, as well as the reverse..
I don`t think ratios matter, just that there is a balance



> filter media is that it provides a less disturbed surface where baccteria can be sustained, also it provides a growth surface where water constantly passes making it easier for the bacteria to do it's job


Well said..


----------



## Rhinox (Sep 10, 2009)

dwarfpike said:


> steelers fan said:
> 
> 
> > i should mention that i use emporer 400s with dual bio wheels. if theres a power failure i just drop the wheels into the tank until the power is restored
> ...


and what about a power failure when you're not home?

Anyways, I was thinking about this a while back and I might have tried this if I wasn't already more than halfway through fishless cycling my tank. The idea is this: When you first set up your tank, do a fishless cycle with a bare glass tank and only bio media in the filters. When the tank cycles, add the mech filtration and decor. That way you can be sure that virtually all the bacteria is in the bio media, and you can clean the decor and mech filtration (sponges or whatever) all you wanted with tap water and never worry about disturbing the bacteria colonies.


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

i was just thinking about that, Rhinox, when he said he trained it.

once the bacteria colony has formed i would scrub down the glass as well, that way hopefully you will kill off a little bit of the bacteria and cause another growth bloom, or even start adding a slightly larger ammount of ammonia to increase the bacteria colony


----------



## bfg112 (Feb 13, 2009)

Rhinox said:


> Anyways, I was thinking about this a while back and I might have tried this if I wasn't already more than halfway through fishless cycling my tank. The idea is this: When you first set up your tank, do a fishless cycle with a bare glass tank and only bio media in the filters. When the tank cycles, add the mech filtration and decor. That way you can be sure that virtually all the bacteria is in the bio media, and you can clean the decor and mech filtration (sponges or whatever) all you wanted with tap water and never worry about disturbing the bacteria colonies.


This is a good idea, and I'm doing something like that with my fishless cycle now. I only have my sump running with bio-balls for bio media. Once the tank is cycled and I add fish, I am going to add a canister filter with mechanical media.

Now, since I am cycling my tank with only the sump I know the the sump has the capacity to grow enough bacteria to handle the full bio-load. However there is nothing you can do to keep bacteria from colonizing the canister filter and tank, substrate, decor etc. (short of cleaning them daily). So, it is good to know that your main soruce of bio-filtration is suficient but, once you add another filter or add decorations bacteria will grow on them and subsequently some bacteria in the bio-filter will die off.


----------



## MalawiLover (Sep 12, 2006)

Its simply a matter of availble surface area for bacterial colonization. Both nitrosomonas and nitrobacter (the two bacteria that cause the nitrogen cycle) are aerobic bacteria. They need exposer to oygen to respire and do their thing. The bio-media (due to is super porous designs) give the bacterias inredible amounts of colonization space while still allowing for ozygen to contact them. The surface areas of the substrate and decor, while definitely covered, can not match space wise for th bacteria. It is possible to have tanks with no filters, but those are always very lightly stocked, with lots of plants.


----------



## Cento (Mar 30, 2005)

Ohhhhh.... just you wait until *Toby_H* gets back... You're gonna hear it!!! :lol:

Toby_H and myself participated in a thread very similar to this a while back. It gets pretty heated. You get arguments from opposite ends of the spectrum. From: bio-media is a crock 'cause its all in the substrate, to: Bio-media is so technologically advanced now days, that other colonies outside the filter are irrelevant. Arguments on both sides were very convincing.

I think as far as ratio is concerned, short of a laboratory test, it would be very difficult to prove which holds the most bacteria or is the most reliable home for colonies. I think it boils down to there's more then one way to skin a cat.


----------



## TangSteve (Sep 20, 2009)

I would refer eveyone to a SW forum on this. There is no external bio filtration in reef tanks as it is all handeled by the sand and live rock.

In recent years there is a trend to have less live rock in tanks as it is the sand bed that is removing most of the waste in the tank not the LR as origannly thought. The LR is just a great transport vessel for bringing the bacteria colonies into the tanks.

Ask a reef keeper to put a bio-wheel on his tank and he will laugh at you for it is a nitrate factory, same reasom wet/drys fell out of favor with SW keepers years ago.


----------



## Rhinox (Sep 10, 2009)

> So, it is good to know that your main soruce of bio-filtration is suficient but, once you add another filter or add decorations bacteria will grow on them and subsequently some bacteria in the bio-filter will die off.


I don't think this would happen. Bacteria isn't going to die off or grow new colonies unless the bio load changes. Once you have a bacteria colony established in the bio media, that is where it will reproduce and grow more bacteria when the need arises. Bacteria colonies can double in 24 hours, so they can handle a rather large change in bio load in a relatively short time. It will take much less time for the established colony in the biomedia to double than it would take for a new colony to grow in another filter.

Thats not to say there won't be some moving around as bacteria becomes dislodged from one area and reattaches in another area. If bacteria didn't move around, you wouldn't be able to seed a new filter by running it on an established tank. But it doesn't happen instantly either. I would hazzard to guess that if you completed a fishless cycle using only bio media, you could clean the entire tank, decor, substrate, rocks, and mechanical filtration in clorine bleach every week and kept the bio media wet in tank water, and when you put it all back together you would never see a spike and all the bacteria would always remain in the bio media.

Now, the question is, do you really want to put all your bacteria eggs in one basket, or would it be better to keep it spread around, so a problem in one area won't devastate the entirity bio filtration? This is ultimately why I decided to just let the bacteria grow where it wants to...


----------



## MalawiLover (Sep 12, 2006)

I don't think its all in the filter, all the surfaces in the tank are definitely covered in it and that bacteria definitley adds to the filtering abilities of the whole system.

These areguments are actually getting kind of stupid. There is no right way across the board, just the way that works best for each type of set up. I have seen set ups that do not use any additional filtration aside from whats on the substrate and decor, however all of those set ups had very low stock and lost of plants and decor.

I agree that without an exact measure of the surface area of all the different types of substrate and decor out there there is not way to say "yes, this will or will not work with out a the additional coloy space" So we could each argue our side until we are blue in the face and we still won't have an actual, scientific answer.

Everyone is completely welcome to try the "filterless" method and I wish them luck. If it works, write a paper, but I am not going tell people they don't need a filter and I am not going to suddenly give up my filters.


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

all i say is it would be ideal for you to have a little bit of bacteria everywhere, if your filter dies you would hope to have some in the tank to help while you get a new filter, you also want it in your filter because more water will pass over that bacteria than any one spot in a tank, also in case you change decor or substrate you want to hope the filter can support the bio load enough to not kill your fish

where else do you get a bunch of people trying to get as much bacteria as possible lol


----------



## MalawiLover (Sep 12, 2006)

cjacob316 said:


> where else do you get a bunch of people trying to get as much bacteria as possible lol


The more the merrier. LOL


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

Toby_H said:


> GaFishMan1181 said:
> 
> 
> > most of the good bacteria is in the filter media.
> ...


it wasnt a random claim... it was the right anwser.. simple question...easy answer

but if you want facts.. i had a 46g bowfront with 15 saulosi for 4-5 monthes.... decided to switch to a "new" 55g aquarium ... NEW rocks,,,, NEW sand... the only thing i switched over was the filter... never had a spike of any type... nitrate lowered because of all the new water.

But never saw any ammonia or nitrite...

so if this isnt enough evidence for you please let me know and hopefully i can explain more...

OH and i was in a hurry when i wrote that post.. but either way i still stick to my claim that most of the good bacteria is in the filters.


----------



## TKC747 (Dec 5, 2008)

*MalawiLover wrote*


> Everyone is completely welcome to try the "filterless" method and I wish them luck. If it works, write a paper, but I am not going tell people they don't need a filter and I am not going to suddenly give up my filters.


I think you'd have to be a bit stupid to do that, no offense intended but come on guys, who would do without "extra" bacteria in the filter


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

it's not really extra bacteria, there are only as much as needed for the bio load, it's just a matter of how spread out they are


----------



## TKC747 (Dec 5, 2008)

that's why i put it in quotes :"extra", not extra

I think also that without a filter, you couldn't possibly have enough bacteria, that is for instance substrate couldn't handle all the bacteria needed...but I am not a SW expert so don't quote me on that but who would do without a filter, really?


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

extra means extra wether in quotes or not, there are not extra bacteria nor are there "extra" bacteria, just extra surface area


----------



## bfg112 (Feb 13, 2009)

GaFishMan1181 said:


> so if this isnt enough evidence for you please let me know and hopefully i can explain more...
> 
> OH and i was in a hurry when i wrote that post.. but either way i still stick to my claim that most of the good bacteria is in the filters.


No it's not enough. You left out the whole other side of the story. You moved your filter and fish into a completely new tank and everything was fine. And that's good, it proves that there is bacteria in the filter. However, just because you prove there is bacteria in the filter doesn't disprove that ther is bacteria in the tank, substrate and decor. The rest of the test would have been to put a new filter and fish in the old tank to see what happened. I'd be willing to bet that you would get similar results.


----------



## TKC747 (Dec 5, 2008)

so you think substrate and rocks could handle all the fitration needed?


----------



## bfg112 (Feb 13, 2009)

I do think substrate can handle the filtration... Under gravel filters use the bacteria in the substrate, we just add something to pull the water through the gravel. I know there are many differing opinions on UGF's, but they were very popular for a long time, and my experience tells me that they do work.


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

i think they can handle all the bio filtration needed because they did in my tank, as i said before i removed a mature filter and replaced it with a brand new filter and never had an issue

but you have to move the water and its nice to have mechanical filtration, so no i would not have a tank without a filter

and the bacteria is good whether its in the filter or in the tank, being inside the filter doesn't make it any better than being on a rock. does it make it more efficient? probably, but that's because of the filter, not the bacteria itself


----------



## TKC747 (Dec 5, 2008)

I have seachem matrix, and the research I've read says that flow rate of "dirty" water past the media, whatever that is whether it is in the filter or the substrate, has an effect on whehter filtration occurs. So you would need a UGF for the "filtration" to be effective, because it brings more dirty water past the media.


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

yes a ugf is a good way to make the bacteria in the substrate more efficient since it will contact more water


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

a powerhead properly placed to force water to pass by rocks and over the surface of the substrate where bacteria lives would be enough


----------



## TKC747 (Dec 5, 2008)

So I would say that even if you had bacteria in the substrate, it's not going to be as effective as the bacteria in the filter w/o ugf or pwerhead


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

that's because of the filter, not because of the bacteria


----------



## TKC747 (Dec 5, 2008)

So, who's gonna try a "filterless" system?


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

bfg112 said:


> GaFishMan1181 said:
> 
> 
> > so if this isnt enough evidence for you please let me know and hopefully i can explain more...
> ...


HAHA.... ok if anyone is dumb enough to try the opposite of what i did... i would LOVE LOVE LOVE to hear your results....

What i want you to do is take any tank at your house that has a full load of fish in it.. that is already cycled... and take the filters off.... take out all the filters,,, all the filter media and everything... then go buy a brand new filter with brand new media and put that on the tank...

if you test in a week and dont see any ammonia or nitrite register after doing all this then i will eat every single one of my words.. i will honestly print this topic out on paper and eat it...


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

have you not read my posts? i have already done it, and no spikes what so ever


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

removed old filter, replaced it with brand new filter, everything on it was brand new


----------



## TKC747 (Dec 5, 2008)

that's pretty amazing


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

so amazing that i dont believe it...

what did you have in there 10 new born fry??


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

i don't know why gafishman has apparently ignored or missed the posts i made earlier saying that same thing


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

peacocks haps mbuna and a pleco, all over 3 inches at the time was feeding twice a day, cut back more recently because i was having high nitrate issues, this is actually like my third filter in this system


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

what size tank was it?

how many fish did you have in there?

what type of filter were you running at first?

what type of filter did you change to?

Did you reuse any filter media at all?

What were your levels at before you did the switch?

how about after?

How often did you test after the switch?


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

People with planted tanks do the opposite all the time. Stuff a tank with established plants and substrate from another tank. Put a brand new filter on it if you want, but easier if you use some established media. Instantly cycled tank.

But realistically, to end this debate, someone needs to do a scientific study with baselines and not just throw a bunch of observations together. That's like saying "it never snows in Africa" because you never saw it snow when you were there.


----------



## bfg112 (Feb 13, 2009)

Does it snow in Africa? I wouldn't think so, but who knows?


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

2wheelsx2 said:


> People with planted tanks do the opposite all the time. Stuff a tank with established plants and substrate from another tank. Put a brand new filter on it if you want, but easier if you use some established media. Instantly cycled tank.
> 
> But realistically, to end this debate, someone needs to do a scientific study with baselines and not just throw a bunch of observations together. That's like saying "it never snows in Africa" because you never saw it snow when you were there.


First of all i know it snows in africa... second of all are you talking about a planted tank with fish in it or just plants because i would have no problem totally changing the filter and filter media from my planted tank if i didnt have my gourami, cherry barbs, bristlenose, and cory cats in there...


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

ugh ok i started with a 20 gallon (stupid of me) with a german red, albino eureka red, yello wlab, redfin borlyi, demasoni, pleco it had a tetra whishper that came with the kit

bought a 55 and a penguin ( i forget the model number but its the largest penguin that only has one wheel, not two)

set up the 55 using the same kind of sustrate, emptied my 20 into buckets moved all the substrate into the 55, and the decor then added the used water into the 55 and the new filter and then the fish, then slowly added fresh water over time, tested my levels constantly, nitrites and ammonia stayed 0

then added electric blue alhi, taiwan reef, benga peacock, swollowtail peacock, placidochromis electra, female hap sp. 44, male hap sp 44

moved some fish in and out because obviously this mix would never work

ended up with male and female sp 44's, yellow lab, taiwan reef, electra, benaga peacock, swallowtail peacock, flametail peacock, pleco

bought a new canister, took the penguin off added the canister, there is nothing on the pengun that can be used on the canister obviosuly, the canister was set up using a black sponge filter, brand new, white filter floss, brand new, and white ceramic rings, brand new and some brand new carbon as well, never saw any increase in nitrites or ammonia always remianed 0

recently cut back on feeding because of high nitrate issues and have cut back on fish due to size and agression issues, but not i have a nitrate of 5ppm and ammonia and nitrite of 0ppm

currently setting up a 20L for some shellies and i plan to use that old tetra whisper as a (bio filter), i plan to remove the rings from my canister place them in a mesh bag and place them into the filter and use a small penguin for mechanical filtration, now let's hope that there is some bacteria on those rings for that tank


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

Have a look at the top of Kilimanjaro.


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

i have never and dont think i will ever hear a modorator give the following advice:

Question: Hey my filter died tonight and i am going to buy a new one; what should i do>?

Moderator: Oh just throw away all of your old media out of your old filter and buy a new filter with new media..

NEVER would happen..

why?? because one of the main reason to have a filter is to have space for biological filtration...

Most moderators would answer that question: Take all of the media out of your old filter and put it into your new filter...

also you said that there is no way to take media from your penguin and put into a canister but that isnt true either... if you got inventive i am sure you could cut the penguin filter down and shove it into a compartment of a canister... atleast i know i could with my rena xp's... no problem... and i have own a filter like yours before...


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

*bfg112*


> Does it snow in Africa? I wouldn't think so, but who knows?


there are at least 10 mountains in africa that are highest than the highest peaks here in america that have snow almost year round because of the altitude, so i assume that the same applies to the peaks in africa


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

why would i cut my biowheel? i used it on a new tank, that would just be stupid


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

cjacob316 said:


> why would i cut my biowheel? i used it on a new tank, that would just be stupid


sorry didnt know you were talking about a bio wheel... thought you meant filter insert


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

and i would never suggest just throwing out an old fitler for a new one, just saying that i did it and never had issues, obviously i proved that it's not all about the filter


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

no i throw that stuff out every month, floss and carbon go in the trash monthly


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

cjacob316 said:


> and i would never suggest just throwing out an old fitler for a new one, just saying that i did it and never had issues, obviously i proved that it's not all about the filter


i didnt say you would suggest it... just saying a moderator never would... if they did then i would probably leave this forum...


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

it is high risk, and the funny thing is that i had more issues with the tank i moved the biowheel to

i think that my bacteria is so well established within my tank that it isn't really growing on my filter media


----------



## smellsfishy1 (May 29, 2008)

I have read multiple times in this thread that filterless tanks are always planted and lightly stocked.
I'd like to point out that I have seen multiple tanks that were unfiltered and heavily stocked with no plants.
All remained completely cycled and never had any spikes of ammonia or nitrite.

I am not polarizing to any side of any argument just stating what can be accomplished.
Personally I don't feel there is a side to take but different ways to achieve a biological balance.
Filters are a great insurance policy though, you must confess :thumb: .


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

smellsfishy1 said:


> I'd like to point out that I have seen multiple tanks that were unfiltered and heavily stocked with no plants.
> All remained completely cycled and never had any spikes of ammonia or nitrite.
> .


There's no reason not to be able to do that, as long as the fish load is increased gradually, and there are regular large water changes (or maybe even a continuous water change system) to transport out the nitrates/organics). Otherwise, the toxicity level would increase quickly. There is nothing magical about plants except that they utilize ammonia/nitrite/nitrates in photosynthesis and do a large part of the filtration for you.


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

GaFishMan1181 said:


> First of all i know it snows in africa... second of all are you talking about a planted tank with fish in it or just plants because i would have no problem totally changing the filter and filter media from my planted tank if i didnt have my gourami, cherry barbs, bristlenose, and cory cats in there...


In other words, you would have no problem changing the filter and media if you have no fish? Why's that? What do think plants do or don't do? In case you're not sure what a planted tank is, this is mine. See, there are fish in it.










Ok, how about saying ice is cold. Do you know that too? Stop with the attitude already, I was giving an example of a statement without facts, instead of empirical evidence. Everyone has an empirical example. "I put 17 comets into a 10 gallon and never cycled anything and never used a filter when I was 12 and they all lived". Do you have measurements of Ammonia, Nitrite, Nitrate, pH, etc? How about the fish growth rates? :roll:


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

GaFishMan1181 said:


> i didnt say you would suggest it... just saying a moderator never would... if they did then i would probably leave this forum...


get packing mate... :wink:

I've done a filterless planted tank, a filterless non-planted tank, I've bought brand new filters and used the brand new media-not the old, and I would advise any person asking questions to do that which I believe to be correct in their specific situation which MAY or MAY NOT include keeping old media/ using the new media only.

ammonia and nitrite utilizing bacteria will thrive wherever there is flow (oxygenated water) and food... in my aquariums, that tends to be more surfaces than just inside a filter. 
One tank I owned had NO substrate, no filter, and was very well stocked yet ammonia and nitrite remained at 0, nitrate at under 20ppm with 50% weekly water changes...

Perhaps we all want to try and be a little more open to each others experiences... watching a thread of good points on both sides still get buried in assumptions, gross generalizations and tangents can get frustrating.


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

number6

what did you use to push water around, just some powerheads?
also did you use something for mechanical filtration?
i'm just curious, maybe if just a few well placed poerheads with sponge prefilters would work well enough i could save myself some money on filters lol


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

*cjacob316*
I'm guessing you're asking about the substrateless, filterless setup. I had a bowfront tank with Cyprichromis , Julies, and even a few shell dweller fry. All were growing rapidly from fry and I dare say that they were outgrowing the setup since many had hit the two inch mark. A pump pulled water from the sump back up into the tank and that was it. large debris would collect down in the sump and I would use a turkey baster to pull it out once a day... all it took was one big draw from the baster. Once a week I'd pull out 50% of the water and then refill while adding Prime at the same time.

Bacteria likely grew on glass, and the large sheets of granite that took up the entire tank... Cyps loved the vertical stacked "plates".

I never added any filtration simply because I felt that I removed enough debris on my own since nitrates stayed low enough... why add what didn't seem necessary. I originally had intentions of using a HOB filter, but when I plugged it in, it made a horrid noise. It turned out to be a bonus though since the grow out system ran so well. I would likely repeat that setup if I ever moved to a house with a room that would work as a fishroom. :thumb:

With all that said... the filter media in the majority of established tanks is a critical success factor. Many good points have been made as to why this is... but there are no absolutes in this hobby... and that is absolutely what I will stick to! :lol:


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

Number6 said:


> With all that said... the filter media in the majority of established tanks is a critical success factor. Many good points have been made as to why this is... but there are no absolutes in this hobby... and that is absolutely what I will stick to! :lol:


a _critical_ success factor.. so if you are saying that in the majority of established tanks that filter media is crucial to having a successful tank. then if it is critical/crucial which also means indispensable then that would make me to belive you are saying without the filter media you are less likly to have a succesfull tank.

ok so basically as i said on page 1 ... 3rd person to post... the majority of the good bacteria is in the filter. if the majority of good bacteria was on the glass or substrate or rocks then he would of said filter media is not a critical or crucial or indispensable part of an aquarium.

so all these other 4 pages of arguing for nothing..

if toby wouldnt of called me out then this would of been a much better read for people instead it turn in to a whos got a bigger one contest...

also to 2wheelsx2.. i have a planted tank sitting 10 feet from my computer.. i know what one looks like. though yours is very nice i dont need to see what a planted tank looks like.

i havent been in the hobby for 20 years to be treated like a noob...i know i dont know everything and can always be more open minded.

i am glad to hear you can do a filterless setup and maybe i will try it one day, but for now i will stick with my filters..

to each their own


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

GaFishMan1181 said:


> also to 2wheelsx2.. i have a planted tank sitting 10 feet from my computer.. i know what one looks like. though yours is very nice i dont need to see what a planted tank looks like.


Not sure why you would suggest putting in a filter into a tank that is planted with no fish. That's an aquatic plant pot. Maybe you just like to argue? From your post here, you've picked an argument with 4 or 5 different people.

Show us a picture of your planted tank then. A picture says a 1000 words. Or don't, if you just have a lot of time and like to argue without backing up your arguments.

None of us here NEED to listen to your arguments with no basis, but we do, because it's an open forum to share opinion. What we DON'T NEED is that BS attitude.


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

2wheelsx2 said:


> GaFishMan1181 said:
> 
> 
> > also to 2wheelsx2.. i have a planted tank sitting 10 feet from my computer.. i know what one looks like. though yours is very nice i dont need to see what a planted tank looks like.
> ...


no problem my friend








one week before putting barbs in








different view








when i first put driftwood in

if you want to see my malawi fish i will be posting pics of them in the lake malawi section..

also i wasnt being sarcastic when i said your tank was nice... i like it better than mine but i still like mine too..

and you might want to look in the mirror cause i have felt some attitude from you as well..


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

GaFishMan1181 said:


> and you might want to look in the mirror cause i have felt some attitude from you as well..


I do realize that and I apologize for that, as I realized that I responded in kind to what I perceived as an attitude. Thanks for the comment on my tank. All my tanks are planted, whether they have cichlids in them or not, so I don't have any experience in bare or essentially non-planted tanks, hence my following this thread with interest.


----------



## GaFishMan1181 (Dec 17, 2008)

cool, lets just smash all of this then

sorry for being rude to anyone i was rude to or for trying to cut down anyones ideas by saying they were false or un believeable...

this is a great place for discussion and learning about this hobby.. i dont want to be the one to ruin that... so once again sorry.


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

That's a great attitude and allows us all to learn from one another. :thumb:


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

If you scrape bacteria off of the glass, it doesnâ€™t die. It becomes dislodged and drifts around until it finds a new surface to live on. This probably happens far more often than most of us realize. Did you know that most Ammonia Oxidizing Bacteria species (Nitrosomonas) have tails (flagella) and can swim?

Bacteria reproduces A sexually by splitting in half. Each little bacterium will grow, then when it hits itâ€™s maximum size, it splits in half becoming two identical little â€˜bacteriumsâ€™.

But keep in mind, if 1 ppm of ammonia is produced in a tank per day, and there is enough bacteria to oxidize 1 ppm of ammonia, one might mistakenly think the colony has reached equilibrium. It has not. Instead, all the bacteria that is eating, is growing, thus increasing itâ€™s potential consumption. This means other bacteria is starving.

If â€œallâ€


----------



## Number6 (Mar 13, 2003)

great post Toby...


----------



## bfg112 (Feb 13, 2009)

^ Agreed :thumb:


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

Cool. Learned something new. Didn't know they were flagellates.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

I hate it when I put a bunch of time into a post to help share information with people... and that post ends up bringing a thread to an end and then it gets lost in the mass of old threads...

So I'm very reposting the same thing just to keep it current 

I'd love to hear other bacteria related facts other people might know too :thumb:

Repost -

If you scrape bacteria off of the glass, it doesnâ€™t die. It becomes dislodged and drifts around until it finds a new surface to live on. This probably happens far more often than most of us realize. Did you know that most Ammonia Oxidizing Bacteria species (Nitrosomonas) have tails (flagella) and can swim?

Bacteria reproduces A sexually by splitting in half. Each little bacterium will grow, then when it hits itâ€™s maximum size, it splits in half becoming two identical little â€˜bacteriumsâ€™.

But keep in mind, if 1 ppm of ammonia is produced in a tank per day, and there is enough bacteria to oxidize 1 ppm of ammonia, one might mistakenly think the colony has reached equilibrium. It has not. Instead, all the bacteria that is eating, is growing, thus increasing itâ€™s potential consumption. This means other bacteria is starving.

If â€œallâ€


----------



## Rhinox (Sep 10, 2009)

Well, I guess I can add something. Yesterday, I went to home depot and bought a faucet adapter and a drinking water safe "garden hose". I'm fishles cycling my tank, and since my nitrates and nitrites are off the chart, I wanted to do a large water change to bring them back in line.

Well, I did something stupid... I started adding water BEFORE adding any prime to the tank. I don't know how much exactly, but by the time I realized what I did I had already added a substantial amount of water to the tank. I'm pretty sure my rocks, sand, and ~50% of the glass in my tank got a nice dose of chlorine tap water  . I did add the prime before turning the filters on though :thumb: But it made me think about this thread, and I wonder what that did to effect the progress of my cycle.


----------



## bfg112 (Feb 13, 2009)

I wouldn't think you did much, if any, damage. I didn't add any dechlor to my tank before I started my cycle and it cycled fine. My cycle finished in 4 1/2 weeks. I'm not ready to stock yet, so I'm just feeding my tank ammonia every day until I place my fish order at my LFS. Before I get fish I will do a large water change to lower nitrates and add dechlor.


----------



## cjacob316 (Dec 4, 2008)

it's probably because by the time the baceria started growing the chlorine discipated after being exposed to open air for a while because bacteria don't like chlorine, that's the whole point of chlorine


----------



## bfg112 (Feb 13, 2009)

I agree. I wouldn't add tap water to my system now without adding dechlor after. My point was I don't think he did any damage by having chlorine in the system for a few minutes before he added the prime. When I do water changes or top off my tank I always put the water in first then add the dechlor. I know ther is debate on exactly how to add water, but I've never had a problem adding water straight from the tap, then putting the dechlor in the tank.

I'm not saying that's the way it "should" be done, just that's the way I do it because it's easy and I've never had a problem.


----------



## Yajna (Oct 20, 2009)

I'll offer a couple thoughts. But they are just thoughts and things I'm curious about. I'm not suggesting anyone change their worldview because of what follows. But you can't have a discussion without ideas....

Nitrosomonas, in addition to having flagella, are also photophobic (they don't like light). If they can't avoid the light they have the ability to cover themselves in a slime coat or will form clumps. I can't find anything concrete about how this impacts their location in our aquariums, but it suggests a hypothesis that they would more likely be located in areas of our tank that are poorly lit. Sure, that would make the filter a good choice to land, but it would also make all the shadows in our rock work perfect homes. Again, I haven't found a study on this. But their photophobic property does make me very curious about how they act in our tanks.

As others have pointed out, our bacterial colonies must have oxygen and food. In the closed, circulating systems of our aquariums both of these requirements should be present in practically every square inch of water in our system. If not, you've got the dreaded dead zone somewhere. Otherwise, oxygen, ammonia and nitrites are going to be dispersed throughout the tank. You're not really going to find any of those things hanging out in just one spot in the tank whether it's the intake tube on the filter, the gravel, or the media in the filter itself. Given all that, I'm not totally convinced that our bacterial friends spend their day swimming around the tank looking for a piece of nitrite to eat. It's being brought to their doorstep no matter where they are.

I would like to see a study where someone measured the food resources in the water as it entered a canister filter and then measured the resources as it exited. I'm sure with sufficiently sophisticated instruments you could detect a difference. However, it is highly doubtful in my mind that you are going to find complete depletion of your oxygen, ammonia, or nitrites. (Although I have read that with a sufficiently deep fluidized sand filter you can knock out most of the oxygen.) If the bacteria in our filters just did a "once and done" with those resources, there would be no reason for all this over filtering we do. Also, if the majority of the resources are consumed by the bacteria at the "front" of our canister filter, all our bacteria are going to be hanging out on the sponges and never bother to sit at the next layer of our biostars/ceramic rings. I understand we put them behind our mechanical media to keep them from getting "gunked up", but if the resources are gone by the time they get to them they become pointless. Because the bacteria couldn't care less whether it's living on a sponge or a ceramic ring.

All that said, I think bacteria are on every surface in our tanks. If you could "train" your bacteria to stay on one surface in your tank (like you can train your dog to sit), you'd be on the way to a scientific nobel prize.


----------



## Rhinox (Sep 10, 2009)

> I didn't add any dechlor to my tank before I started my cycle and it cycled fine.


Well, I'm 5 weeks into cycling. I agree, if I was just starting, it wouldn't matter because the chlorine would dissapate so the bacteria would grow.

I did a roughly 80-90% water change, and I sprayed the new water coming in directly onto the rocks (to avoid churning up the sand too much). So any bacteria living on the surfaces inside my tank got a direct shot of chlorinated tap water for a few minutes before I rememberd to put the prime in.


----------



## 2wheelsx2 (Dec 7, 2005)

There was probably some die-off as a result of the chlorine, but it wouldn't have been a "massacre". At the levels in our water systems (Unless it's really high in Ohio?) there needs to be some dwell time for the chlorine to do its work. After all, it's not like you dumped straight chlorine into the tank.

I think it likely might have set you back a day or two but certainly shouldn't be catastrophic.


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

Using dechlorinator is important, but we should keep in mind that our tap water is not straight chlorine. Instead it is water with a very small amount of chlorine added. We (humans) use bacteria to digest our food and without that bacteria we would dieâ€¦ and we drink chlorinated tap water on a daily basis. So I am by no means suggesting we stop using dechlorinator, but I am suggesting that we not exaggerate the â€˜destructivenessâ€™ of chlorinated tap water.

Great info Yajnaâ€¦

I have read in many places that Nitrosomonas (Ammonia Oxidizing Bacteria) is photophobic (doesnâ€™t like light). Although we should keep in mind that it â€œprefersâ€


----------

