Best bio media - Page 2 - The Planted Tank Forum
 65Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #16 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-17-2020, 09:30 PM
Wannabe Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Apple Valley, CA
Posts: 1,908
I'm a big fan of Matrix. High quality and very affordable vs similar quality media.
Leeatl likes this.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
varanidguy is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #17 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 01:47 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
Edward's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: at home
Posts: 1,414
Quote:
Originally Posted by varanidguy View Post
I'm a big fan of Matrix. High quality and very affordable vs similar quality media.
Can you expand on that please?

ADA is using something similar, just little larger in size. Seachem says, “These macropores are ideally sized for the support of nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria. This allows Matrix™, unlike other forms of biomedia, to remove nitrate along with ammonia and nitrite, simultaneously and in the same filter. “

Have you experienced different results with this media than with others? I am looking for conversion of NO3 to nitrogen gas because in order for this to happen, certain bacteria need to feed on inorganic carbon, either from CO2 or carbonate CO3. There are other bacteria that do the same conversion but feed on organic carbon like fish waste and glucose leaked from plants.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Edward is offline  
post #18 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 02:38 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: PA
Posts: 2,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward View Post
Can you expand on that please?

ADA is using something similar, just little larger in size. Seachem says, “These macropores are ideally sized for the support of nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria. This allows Matrix™, unlike other forms of biomedia, to remove nitrate along with ammonia and nitrite, simultaneously and in the same filter. “

Have you experienced different results with this media than with others? I am looking for conversion of NO3 to nitrogen gas because in order for this to happen, certain bacteria need to feed on inorganic carbon, either from CO2 or carbonate CO3. There are other bacteria that do the same conversion but feed on organic carbon like fish waste and glucose leaked from plants.
I'm curious: once you get your anaerobic bacteria going, and measure a consistent NO3 reduction, have you ever tried enhancing the de-nitrification with things like vodka, methanol, etc.?

Also, as your NO3 came down, did you note any corresponding drop in KH? I'm wondering if KH might be a confirming indicator of anaerobic bacteria activity, since they should be consuming some of the CO3.
Deanna is offline  
 
post #19 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 02:58 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Apple Valley, CA
Posts: 1,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward View Post
Can you expand on that please?



ADA is using something similar, just little larger in size. Seachem says, “These macropores are ideally sized for the support of nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria. This allows Matrix, unlike other forms of biomedia, to remove nitrate along with ammonia and nitrite, simultaneously and in the same filter. “



Have you experienced different results with this media than with others? I am looking for conversion of NO3 to nitrogen gas because in order for this to happen, certain bacteria need to feed on inorganic carbon, either from CO2 or carbonate CO3. There are other bacteria that do the same conversion but feed on organic carbon like fish waste and glucose leaked from plants.
To be honest, I don't buy into the "full cycle" claims Seachem and Pondguru both make. It's not to be disrespectful or dismissive, but it takes very special conditions to achieve the complete removal of nitrates, of course barring massive water changes or massive plant mass with a small fish bioload.

What I have experienced with Matrix vs sponge, pot scrubbies, bioballs, et al is efficiency. Using the same filters, but with Matrix, has contributed to a more stable cycle. Of course it's anecdotal, but I've had good success with it so why change it? Plus it's pretty affordable for the amount you're getting. Is it dollar store pot scrubbies cheap where you can fill an FX6 for a few bucks? No...but I believe in the claims behind porous media. I believe tray for tray, Matrix, Biohome, Biomax, Substrat Pro and similar sintered media have considerably more capacity than cheap sponges and the like.

But, your question does make me curious...maybe an experiment would be fun.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
varanidguy is online now  
post #20 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 03:07 AM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 131
You might want to check on this Denitrifying Media information.
Somefishguy is offline  
post #21 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 04:44 AM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: PA
Posts: 2,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somefishguy View Post
You might want to check on this Denitrifying Media information.
I read this same article some time ago and decided to discount it. As they mentioned, their nitrate levels were in the 160ppm area but, admittedly, without better test equipment, they could not be certain that their readings weren't drifting. The test kits they used are not good at distinguishing such high values and, when diluted, may not be sensitive enough to catch meaningful changes that might be useful at lower levels. For example; would a 10ppm reduction be noticed at their 120-160ppm levels, even when diluted with smaller and smaller measurement changes as dilution increases? However, if our 15ppm NO3 tanks saw a drop of 10ppm, we would consider that mighty dramatic.

Had they run their tests at, say; a consistent contribution to maintain 20ppm levels (meaning no fish or plants and adding known N-NO3 quantities) and used objective, albeit expensive, testing equipment, I would be more inclined to accept the study.
Leeatl and varanidguy like this.
Deanna is offline  
post #22 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 06:13 AM
Wannabe Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Apple Valley, CA
Posts: 1,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deanna View Post
I read this same article some time ago and decided to discount it. As they mentioned, their nitrate levels were in the 160ppm area but, admittedly, without better test equipment, they could not be certain that their readings weren't drifting. The test kits they used are not good at distinguishing such high values and, when diluted, may not be sensitive enough to catch meaningful changes that might be useful at lower levels. For example; would a 10ppm reduction be noticed at their 120-160ppm levels, even when diluted with smaller and smaller measurement changes as dilution increases? However, if our 15ppm NO3 tanks saw a drop of 10ppm, we would consider that mighty dramatic.

Had they run their tests at, say; a consistent contribution to maintain 20ppm levels (meaning no fish or plants and adding known N-NO3 quantities) and used objective, albeit expensive, testing equipment, I would be more inclined to accept the study.
That last part is what I'm considering as an experiment but without the expensive laboratory equipment.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
varanidguy is online now  
post #23 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 11:53 AM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deanna View Post
I read this same article some time ago and decided to discount it. As they mentioned, their nitrate levels were in the 160ppm area but, admittedly, without better test equipment, they could not be certain that their readings weren't drifting. The test kits they used are not good at distinguishing such high values and, when diluted, may not be sensitive enough to catch meaningful changes that might be useful at lower levels. For example; would a 10ppm reduction be noticed at their 120-160ppm levels, even when diluted with smaller and smaller measurement changes as dilution increases? However, if our 15ppm NO3 tanks saw a drop of 10ppm, we would consider that mighty dramatic.

Had they run their tests at, say; a consistent contribution to maintain 20ppm levels (meaning no fish or plants and adding known N-NO3 quantities) and used objective, albeit expensive, testing equipment, I would be more inclined to accept the study.
OK, please post a test that proves this data wrong. Seachem has no data, no test and says itself it not does work. Contact Seachem like thousands have and ask for any proof that ANY of their products do what they say. They have no test anywhere that any of their stuff does what they say, although some medications do work, and Prime does de-chlorinate water. Seachem doesn't even have one patent on any of their products. Why is that? Contact Great Wave Engineering also and they have no test to prove BioHome works. If either did they would the data plastered all over their web site, and they don't. Just sorry to pop so many bubbles, but I fell for the hype also, did my research and learned. Marketing is great. Sorry. Anaerobic information is here.



The author is right about:


Belief perseverance, also known as belief persistence, is the inability of people to change their own belief even upon receiving new information or facts that contradict or refute that belief. In other words, belief perseverance is the tendency of individuals to hold on to their beliefs even when they should not.

OH, I did do a one year test of Matrix. Non planted tank, all fake. Nitrates never went down with over 6 liters of Seachem rocks in the tank. Had to do water changes like everyone.

Last edited by Somefishguy; 11-18-2020 at 12:24 PM. Reason: typo
Somefishguy is offline  
post #24 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 12:59 PM
Planted Member
 
ElleDee's Avatar
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Southeastern US
Posts: 165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somefishguy View Post
OK, please post a test that proves this data wrong.
I don't care a tiny bit about Matrix and if it works like it says or not, but one don't need one's own data set to dismiss the more bold claims on that particular website. I've said it before and I'll say it again: it has good information mixed with strong opinions and highly sus experiments. I don't believe it's the last word on anything.
Leeatl likes this.
ElleDee is offline  
post #25 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 01:31 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: PA
Posts: 2,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somefishguy View Post
OK, please post a test that proves this data wrong. Seachem has no data, no test and says itself it not does work. Contact Seachem like thousands have and ask for any proof that ANY of their products do what they say. They have no test anywhere that any of their stuff does what they say, although some medications do work, and Prime does de-chlorinate water. Seachem doesn't even have one patent on any of their products. Why is that? Contact Great Wave Engineering also and they have no test to prove BioHome works. If either did they would the data plastered all over their web site, and they don't. Just sorry to pop so many bubbles, but I fell for the hype also, did my research and learned. Marketing is great. Sorry. Anaerobic information is here.



The author is right about:


Belief perseverance, also known as belief persistence, is the inability of people to change their own belief even upon receiving new information or facts that contradict or refute that belief. In other words, belief perseverance is the tendency of individuals to hold on to their beliefs even when they should not.

OH, I did do a one year test of Matrix. Non planted tank, all fake. Nitrates never went down with over 6 liters of Seachem rocks in the tank. Had to do water changes like everyone.
I wasn't countering your “belief persistence” in what any of us might be willing to accept as proving a negative by virtue of not finding personally acceptable data. I was only pointing out the pitfalls of the nominal test in that link. I could counter by asking that you please post a test that proves the linked data right, but I prefer not to challenge, in this way, because credulity is a major issue in all things Internet. In fact, I don't believe that either of those two particular products provide significant de-nitrification ability.

Quote:
Originally Posted by varanidguy View Post
That last part is what I'm considering as an experiment but without the expensive laboratory equipment.
If you decide to do this, you may want to start a thread that would initially seek opinions on how to structure the test and allow everyone to follow the progress. One thing I would add, would be to supply CO2 for any anaerobic bacteria that does develop.
Leeatl and varanidguy like this.
Deanna is offline  
post #26 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 02:25 PM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deanna View Post
I could counter by asking that you please post a test that proves the linked data right, but I prefer not to challenge, in this way, because credulity is a major issue in all things Internet.

I did post my data to prove to myself that the media does nothing. The author said that he doubts anyone would run a one year test. Well, I did and he was right.
Somefishguy is offline  
post #27 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 02:32 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: PA
Posts: 2,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somefishguy View Post
I did post my data to prove to myself that the media does nothing. The author said that he doubts anyone would run a one year test. Well, I did and he was right.
Others,here on TPT, have found that de-ntrification works, but it's all anecdotal.

Like anyone, I also have my “belief persistence” attributes. For example, if we look at the home page of aquariumscience.org it asks, at great length, readers to simply have faith in the website because the website claims to be based in science and is founded by someone that claims more knowledge than others in the hobby. Maybe he/she does …who knows? However, my “belief persistence” is going to stay with the likes of 2hraquarist.com, which happens to disagree with aquariumscience.org on many topics, including de-nitrification. I, personally, can’t prove that either site is right or wrong, so I’m left with belief.
Leeatl, varanidguy, mourip and 2 others like this.
Deanna is offline  
post #28 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 03:13 PM
Newbie
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 2
Fell for the Biohome hype as well, the bloody thing recked my filter flow..
Suntek is offline  
post #29 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 03:54 PM
Algae Grower
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deanna View Post
However, my “belief persistence” is going to stay with the likes of 2hraquarist.com,
Which is a marketing site meant to sell you his own products so he will say anything. What folks don't understand is the the Aquarium Industry is Unregulated. That means the manufactures, marketing sales are allowed to say, print and publish anything they want without any proof or evidence that their product will work or do anything it says. Which is what we see everyday. Sorry that this is happening.

Last edited by Somefishguy; 11-18-2020 at 04:14 PM. Reason: typo
Somefishguy is offline  
post #30 of 59 (permalink) Old 11-18-2020, 04:15 PM
Planted Tank Guru
 
PTrader: (0/0%)
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: PA
Posts: 2,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somefishguy View Post
Which is a marketing site meant to sell you his own products so he will say anything. What folks don't understand is the the Aquarium Industry is Unregulated. That means the manufactures, marketing sales are allowed to say anything they want without any proof or evidence that their product will work or do anything it says. Which is what we see everyday. Sorry that this is happening.
True for all e-tailers that can act merely as distributors/hosts. Amazon is a perfect example.
Deanna is offline  
Reply

Tags
None

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the The Planted Tank Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome