This thing seems too small to be of much use as a refugium. What do you guys think
HOB refugium?
- Thread starter Joshuakahan
- Start date
I think it would be ok without the light next to a window. I would try java moss.
You'd be surprised at how effective it can be. I wouldn't make it my only source of filtration but it is viable. There's a sticky thread in the filtration section created by one of our retired Moderators that's very long about this very thing. Plant only filtration (why not popular in the hobby???) | MonsterFishKeepers.com
Algae scrubbers and terrestrial plants can have an amazing capacity for processing waste, more so than many aquatic plants. The terrestrial plant of choice if I recall correctly are Pothos which can be found fairly readily at places like Home Depot. They have their pro's and cons, pro they're often easier to maintain than a planted aquarium or true refugium, con they can be eyesore depending on your tastes and positioning a light source etc, etc.
There are many filtration choices that are very effective that we here in the States don't consider but are viable and are even the preferred method in other countries. For instance, Germany which is known for keeping fish such as Discus and other often times sensitive species often use Hamburg Matten filtration or sponge filters to great success. They also have the added benefit of being very economical to both run and maintain. The same goes for using terrestrial plants. As long as there's adequate light and you trim the roots and plant from time to time it makes for an economical and useful form of filtration.
Algae scrubbers and terrestrial plants can have an amazing capacity for processing waste, more so than many aquatic plants. The terrestrial plant of choice if I recall correctly are Pothos which can be found fairly readily at places like Home Depot. They have their pro's and cons, pro they're often easier to maintain than a planted aquarium or true refugium, con they can be eyesore depending on your tastes and positioning a light source etc, etc.
There are many filtration choices that are very effective that we here in the States don't consider but are viable and are even the preferred method in other countries. For instance, Germany which is known for keeping fish such as Discus and other often times sensitive species often use Hamburg Matten filtration or sponge filters to great success. They also have the added benefit of being very economical to both run and maintain. The same goes for using terrestrial plants. As long as there's adequate light and you trim the roots and plant from time to time it makes for an economical and useful form of filtration.
I’m gonna follow Kaveman on this and see how it turns out, maybe get one if it goes well
That's cool, I think you should also give that thread a look too. It's long with many replies from different members so you can get a more accurate overall representation of how practical it is or isn't and how you feel about it. The experiences of many is a valuable resource.
I was cracking up when I read this thread, because I found out, I was using the Hamburg Matten method , in my planted sump. Didn't know the term, I just call it a Porret Foam wall. "We don;t need no edguecation"!
Here it is when I first installed "the wall" in my 125 gal planted sump refugium.
It is a wall that fits the 22" height and 20" width of the sump, at one end.
I know it is considered a combo mechanical and bio filter, but beside the pump behind it, I use a couple bags of media and a porous lava rock block.
That section takes up about 10 % of the sump/refugium.
Because I use shrimp to help keep it clean,, it seldom needs to be rinsed
The rest of the refugium (about 90%) is heavily planted.
As an experiment I haven't been doing any water changes for about the last 6 weeks, just topping off for evaporation, and transpiration from the terrestrial plants, (which can be significant here in the tropics)
I check nitrate weekly.
I saw in the video, he considered 14 ppm pretty good, on the tank with that tiny refugium, which it may be, being such a tiny plant to heavy fish ratio.
Below is todays nitrate test from my tank.
I find a 3 to 1 plant weight to fish weight ratio is needed to reach my goal, undetectable nitrates, even after 6 weeks without a water change.
Here it is when I first installed "the wall" in my 125 gal planted sump refugium.
It is a wall that fits the 22" height and 20" width of the sump, at one end.
I know it is considered a combo mechanical and bio filter, but beside the pump behind it, I use a couple bags of media and a porous lava rock block.
That section takes up about 10 % of the sump/refugium.
Because I use shrimp to help keep it clean,, it seldom needs to be rinsed
The rest of the refugium (about 90%) is heavily planted.
As an experiment I haven't been doing any water changes for about the last 6 weeks, just topping off for evaporation, and transpiration from the terrestrial plants, (which can be significant here in the tropics)
I check nitrate weekly.
I saw in the video, he considered 14 ppm pretty good, on the tank with that tiny refugium, which it may be, being such a tiny plant to heavy fish ratio.
Below is todays nitrate test from my tank.
I find a 3 to 1 plant weight to fish weight ratio is needed to reach my goal, undetectable nitrates, even after 6 weeks without a water change.
Lol, well I'm glad I could be of assistance in id'ing the name of your filtering system. It really is a cool filter, it's a simple diy, easy to clean(even more so for you because of the shrimp) and cheap because of the low electrical load needed in its basic form and the material necessary for the build and maintenance which is made even more so as the Porret foam isn't just cheap but last for a long time. Combining it with plants was my instinct as well but not lava rock a clever an interesting addition to the filter.
