Vindicated! BRSTV investigates fuge lights!

Discussion in 'Equipment' started by Vhuang168, Jul 26, 2017.

  1. Vhuang168

    Vhuang168 Supporting Member

    Re: high powered fuge lights and no water changes
  2. roostertech

    roostertech reef noob

    For sure fuge is super beneficial, but I still don't think you need a crazy wattage expensive light lol. With my $20 18w grow light my nitrate is practically 0. I actually cut back on fuge time a little bit to bring up nitrate.
  3. Vhuang168

    Vhuang168 Supporting Member

    Give it some time.

    You must not feed heavily as I do or have as many fish. And you won't be able to, I guess is how I should phrase it.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  4. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics Supporting Member

    One corner they don't explore (and I totally get how it's not very feasible to do so) is if you have herbivores in your main display, then they can consume the algae that grows there. While yes some portion of the phosphate + junk is still going to remain in the water column when they poop, it allows the fuge algae to consume some of this and being as your herbivore fish can't get to that it does actually get removed (when you trim) from the system.
  5. JVU

    JVU Supporting Member

    I love how this series uses the scientific method to test reef hobby beliefs, and documents/explains it an accessible and intelligent video format. I think these refugium/macroalgae episodes are particularly helpful and interesting.

    I wasn't convinced the overpowered refugium grow lights made a difference either until they:
    1) showed that they do, and
    2) gave a plausible explanation that the refugium light needs to be able to out-compete the display light if you want your algae to grow in your refugium.

    It's not just about reducing nitrate and phosphate, but doing it by having algae grow where you want it.

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    Wlachnit likes this.
  6. Flagg37

    Flagg37 Colorado member

    I just trimmed about a basket ball sized amount of chaeto out of my fuge today. I left about 40% behind.
  7. JVU

    JVU Supporting Member

    That's a lot of frozen mysis

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
  8. Flagg37

    Flagg37 Colorado member

    I feed pellets almost exclusively.
  9. JVU

    JVU Supporting Member

    Well then that's a solid handful of pellets exported my friend! Basketball size chaeto!

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
  10. Coral reefer

    Coral reefer President

    There's no perfect method though. Macro algae and no water change needs ca rx and possibly other things dosed as well. Can certainly be done, just gotta get the right ratio of macro algae/lighting power to tank volume/bioload and replace the things that get used up.
  11. Flagg37

    Flagg37 Colorado member

    Agreed. That's why at the end of the video he said they were going to use the triton method on the brs 160; to replace those other elements.
  12. Gablami

    Gablami Supporting Member

    Are they still doing zeovit on the 160? There's trace in all the KZ additives for sure. (Sorry have not watched the brs vids recently)

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  13. Flagg37

    Flagg37 Colorado member

    They said they were stopping zeovit to be able to do this test.
  14. Coral reefer

    Coral reefer President

    I don't watch these things to be honest.
  15. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics Supporting Member

    Gotta say I'm a little (very) skeptical of the Trition method. In theory I can understand what's going on, water changes are very wasteful, but the whole method seems to be predicated on using THEIR service and then THEIR products to correct any problems, heck they even state you should use THEIR phosphate removal media... unless you start getting aluminum too high.

    But again I get the theory, deal with exporting anything "bad" (phosphate remover, macro algae, carbon), then simply top off whatever elements have been consumed by critters in the tank.
  16. gabloo

    gabloo Supporting Member

    That video clip made me buy chinese led black box for refugium. I will let u guys know how it goes after a few months.
    Currently, my refugium light is running longer and more intense than my display tank. By theory my refugium should in take more nutrient than my display tank.
  17. Vhuang168

    Vhuang168 Supporting Member

    Mine is a Chinese black (it's really white) box but made for horticulture since what we are essentially trying to grow are green plants.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    gabloo likes this.
  18. Kremis

    Kremis Supporting Member

    I guess it makes sense if you think about it. crappy light on refugium + powerful lights on DT = algae in DT. now that I think about it.. i should add some chaeto to my 28 gallon.... hmm maybe that would help with my sand bed diatoms issue...
  19. ashburn2k

    ashburn2k Webmaster

    i have 2 tanks 1 DT and 1 frag tank ( all uses the same sump), with the frag tank being new (1mo), it's still battling some left over diatoms and some GHA spots here and there. but no problems with DT with my sump running with grow lights (30watt full spectrum) for 24/7 with huge ball of chaeto. I even tried to put a rock of zoa with full of GHA on it and the hair went white and gone after few weeks.
    gabloo likes this.
  20. sfsuphysics

    sfsuphysics Supporting Member

    While that seems to make sense on the surface if everything is equal, the problem is by judging the setups behind him when they're talking... they did make everything equal and that in itself might lead you to some wrong conclusions of what you might need to successfully use macro algae as a nutrient export.

    What do I mean? Just look at the setups, how deep are those fuges? At about 1:40 of the video you get a good cross section shot, and you can see the fuges are in fact a reasonable fuge height compared to the size of the tank. But one thing that, IMHO, is not reasonable is the height of the fuge light, it's at the same height as the tank light, now this doesn't provide incredibly insightful results because yeah no duh a more powerful light will put more light energy into the tank than a less powerful light at the same height above the tank, and guess what things that use that light energy to grow will in fact grow faster including algae (ignoring spectral responses to keep things easy).

    Drop that light down to 1/2 the height so it's right off the surface of the water just like the light is that is over the main tank and you increase the total light energy by a factor of 3-4 (4 theoretically in a vacuum, but the air/water interface will reduce that a bit more), if you look at a paused frame of the same time code I mention above you'll see the cheap CFL bulb has MAJOR light spillage at that height, it illuminates the back tank/fuge/sump contraption they do the testing in fairly well, so if you drop that down to half it's height a lot of that steep angle stuff probably would be reflected back into the tank and actually end up helping grow that chaeto.

    So yeah, more power will grow chaeto faster, that much is undeniable, especially considering how much higher the algae's light saturation levels are compared to say corals. So again no shock that that 90W LED absolutely blew away the 15W LED with directional output and the 23W CFL multidirectional output bulb with a "reflector" of it. But if you take that 15W LED and drop it by to half the height, you might get similar results to a 45W LED, or about half the H380. So that might be able out compete the tank LED you have especially since Kessil's "H" series is specifically tuned for horticulture.
    Wlachnit likes this.

Share This Page