• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up
  • You can now follow UKAPS on Instagram.

bio media for fluval 305

ceg4048

Expert/Global Moderator
UKAPS Team
Joined
11 Jul 2007
Messages
9,310
Location
Chicago, USA
Yes. Pot scrubbers, chopped up. If that's not stylish enough then activated carbon is always an excellent choice.

Cheers,
 

Trevor Pleco

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2012
Messages
280
Location
Cape Town
Yes. Pot scrubbers, chopped up. If that's not stylish enough then activated carbon is always an excellent choice.

Cheers,

Surely pot scrubbers chopped or not chopped have nowhere near the bio load capacity volume wise as say Eheim's Ehfissubstrat pro or Seachem's Matrix ? Interested to hear more as just I've taken some pot scrubbers out as thought I would upgrade them :) ...now where did I throw them ! Never thought of chopping them up though, guess that will also improve things..
 

ceg4048

Expert/Global Moderator
UKAPS Team
Joined
11 Jul 2007
Messages
9,310
Location
Chicago, USA
Well, I mean how much bio load capacity do you need? Nylon Scrubbies have a total surface area of about 400 sq. ft per cubic foot (about 7.5 gallons). If you chop them up you get even more. The branded sintered media typically have about 120,000 sq. ft per cubic foot. Activated carbon has about as much or more as the branded media.

Do people realize that plants are bio filters? That they do more than any bio-media can possibly dream of doing?

The other key advantage of scrubbies is that they don't block flow like the fancy sintered glass media do. So you get much better throughput due to less hydrodynamic drag. Are people aware of this? Do they realize that in a CO2 enriched tank, flow is king?

Oh, I forgot, here's another advantage; scrubbies cost £6 per six-pack at Tesco. Even cheaper if bought in bulk. 2 liters of Ehfissubstrat pro cost about £25.

Cheers,
 

Trevor Pleco

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2012
Messages
280
Location
Cape Town
Thanks ceg, interesting !
Well, I mean how much bio load capacity do you need?

I guess this opens up another debate and depends on so many factors. If I was investing in one of the more upmarket canister brands such as Fluval or Eheim, I would go for one of their respected biomedia products, be it a bit more costly. Having said this, I just bought a second FX 5 on Gumtree over the week end, when I opened it up... what did I find... three layers of scrubbies !
 

dw1305

Expert
UKAPS Team
Joined
7 Apr 2008
Messages
12,072
Location
nr Bath
Hi all,
Like Clive says it doesn't really matter. I like Siporax and Eheim "coco-pops", but I'm not going to spend a load of money on them, it really doesn't make any difference. Normally I use ceramic rings, floating cell media or alfagrog, because they are cheap and do the job.

Biological filtration is all about oxygen. There is a more complete explanation here: <Biological Media....Please help? | UK Aquatic Plant Society>.

cheers Darrel
 

Andy Dunning

Member
Thread starter
Joined
12 Jul 2013
Messages
40
Would my fluval 305 be ok for my roma 240. I do also have 2x hydor koralia 1600 for extea flow and movement. Taking on board what peeps are saying about types of bio media just want to know what media to put in each compartment of each chamber, 6 in total 3 layers of 2. Did just use pond foams before, different grades into shape of chambers and stack 1 on top of other then ceramic rings on top layer. Just like to know opinions please whats best for planted tank.
 

ceg4048

Expert/Global Moderator
UKAPS Team
Joined
11 Jul 2007
Messages
9,310
Location
Chicago, USA
Well, I mean, how many ways are there to say the same thing?
Put some of these in chamber 1. You probably still have some of these from when you were a kid. Your bacteria won't care.
12714486374_5b673bb9a1_z.jpg


If you have a specific need, such as removing leeching tannins from newly acquired wood, or if the water is otherwise discolored, you may want to think about putting some activated carbon or Purigen in the next chamber.

Manufactures have the audacity to sell plastic "bio-balls" as some magic media and by doing so they insult everyone's intelligence - and those stupid balls are actually less effective than toy soldiers. The soldiers have more surface area - look at all the creases.

Or, just continue to use whatever you used before. I really wouldn't even bother to do any grading. It just doesn't matter people. Stop paying ridiculous amounts of money for plastic.. If you love ceramic then go to a Greek wedding and pick up all the pieces of smashed dishes after it's all over and put it in the canister.

The Matrix isn't real....

Cheers,
 
Last edited:

Trevor Pleco

Member
Joined
21 Oct 2012
Messages
280
Location
Cape Town
lol, at least it's a green army ! Real pity about the one dude that was taken out by a python, guess he never even made the front line..
 

Andy Dunning

Member
Thread starter
Joined
12 Jul 2013
Messages
40
So superfish bio balls are not that good what Richard from aqua essentials suggested.
 

Andy Dunning

Member
Thread starter
Joined
12 Jul 2013
Messages
40
Also whats the best stuff to use to catch suspened particals and polishing water.
 

ceg4048

Expert/Global Moderator
UKAPS Team
Joined
11 Jul 2007
Messages
9,310
Location
Chicago, USA
So superfish bio balls are not that good what Richard from aqua essentials suggested.
No, that's not true at all. Bio-balls work about as well as toy soldiers. Scrubbies or any foam material will trap suspended debris as well. CO2 injected tanks need to have large frequent water changes and the water changes makes life easier for fish, plants and filters. My point is how much money do you like to spend?

When the tank is first setup there is a lot of debris and turbidity. These chemical media products remove the excess debris by adhesion or by flocculation but after a few months, habitual water changes will keep the water crystal clear, so you don't need to spend a lot of money afterwards. None of those fancy name brand media do anything more than what scrubbies or plastic bits do, despite all the techno-babble. Their only advantage over common household materials is that they have a higher surface area, which is not really needed because the plants are intercepting the toxic nitrogen compounds, and so essentially short circuits the process to some extent. Nitrifying bacteria steal oxygen from the water in order to perform their function, so what you should be thinking about is not how much bacteria you can house, but how effectively can you reduce the need for high bacterial populations.


Cheers,
 

Hanuman

Member
Joined
4 Jan 2019
Messages
625
Location
Thailand
For the record I am posting a link below on filtration media. It came to me as a revelation and I learn quite a lot. It is quite interesting how we have been brainwashed for decades by these manufacturers when simple common sense usually suffice. I urge everyone that still is arguing about filter media to read this thoroughly. I was shocked but now enlightened.

The rest of the website is also very informative and I would recommend anyone to read it.

 

Hufsa

Member
Joined
22 Aug 2019
Messages
431
Location
-
It took me a while to read through some of the articles from aquariumscience.org, but I am wondering if you guys agree with most or everything that he writes?
The filter media article is interesting but I must say I balk at some of the statements he makes in the other articles. For example that PH, KH and GH means virtually nothing to fish. Along with a lot of other very bold statements.

Its easy to be swayed by people who make definite statements and have so clear cut solutions for things, not just in aquarium keeping but general life. However I often find that those who express their doubts, recognizes how much it is that we do not know for sure, often are more close to the actual truth than those who claim to have it all figured out.

I tried reading through more of the articles but if his writings are incorrect it would waste a lot of time that I could spend otherwise.

Curious to hear your thoughts on this source and his claims.
 

Plant Heathen

Member
Joined
7 Dec 2020
Messages
40
Location
CT USA
For example that PH, KH and GH means virtually nothing to fish.
I haven't read the article and ill tell you from experience he's about 95% right. I'm not saying go nuts and put Africans in 5.5ph but you will do fine with keeping fish outside recommended parameters. Consistency is more important than the numbers. As long as everything stays around the same all the time you would be surprised at what fish can thrive in.
 

dw1305

Expert
UKAPS Team
Joined
7 Apr 2008
Messages
12,072
Location
nr Bath
Hi all,
The filter media article is interesting but I must say I balk at some of the statements he makes in the other articles. For example that PH, KH and GH means virtually nothing to fish. Along with a lot of other very bold statements.
I'd tend to agree, some of the articles are really good, some are definitely not so good and the ones on planted tanks are particularly poor.

I haven't read all the articles, but I think he keeps Rift Lake Cichlids, at relatively high densities, in non-planted tanks and that has coloured what he has written.

cheers Darrel
 

Similar threads

Top