Inclinations of a no-filter media system.

[cheeks69]

Originally Posted by mps9506

Adding fish means adding food and adding nutrients. Fish are very ineffcient at uptaking nutrients, most of it goes right through them.
If I were to do what you are doing then I would recomend doing it with an invert system only.
JMO.

I agree with you but fish are not the only ones that live in the tank, many filter feeders, fauna/infauna and even certain corals will only thrive in this type of environment. If you are using macros and Xenia they're also absorving nutrients. Now if this was an SPS system then I would would say that environment wouldn't work but there are exceptions. There's a member at another site that has an SPS dominated system and only mud filtration no skimmer and it looks incredible.

Photo courtesy of POLO

[mps9506]

I'm not saying at all it can't be done, but from what I've seen, the vast majority of folks who try "natural" systems with no skimming and only live rock, and think they can get away without water changes, end up with serious algae woes. Espcially once they get some heavy duty lighting.
It is very difficult to mimic nature in our boxes. The ocean is not an entirely closed system.

[DaveK]

Originally Posted by EagleEyes

... my goal is to keep no kind of filter in it. Only a light, a power head, and my livestock. I think the key is to have all the nutrients cancel each other out, so that everything gets used up somehow. such as one unit of macro to cancel out the effluent from one other unit (such as a fish.)

I would say that it's possible to create such a system. However, it's a very difficult balance to maintain.

Before trying something like this, ask yourself these questions...

What am I trying to gain, or demonstrate with this kind of a system?

Am I willing to risk several disaters or total loss of livstock as I learn how this kind of a system works?

Am I enough of an expert and do I have enough experience with SW and reef aquqrium systems to set this kind of a system up, and, more important, to maintain it?

IMHO, there are very few people out there that should be attempting "no filter" kind of aquarium. Be sure you have the right reasons and the "right stuff" for this sort of project.

[My2heartboys]

Originally Posted by mps9506

I'm not saying at all it can't be done, but from what I've seen, the vast majority of folks who try "natural" systems with no skimming and only live rock, and think they can get away without water changes, end up with serious algae woes. Espcially once they get some heavy duty lighting.
It is very difficult to mimic nature in our boxes. The ocean is not an entirely closed system.

I will choose to agree and disagree as well. Somebody who hasn't had tons of experience and research hours under their belt should not be attempting this. While at the same time I will say that if you have done this method, I congratulate you and will ooggle all of the pictures you have, as for me I am not smart enough to do that type of thing. Just don't think you get into that type of tank management because it is cheaper. If you know what you are doing--yes, it can be cheaper. Otherwise you wind up with one expensive mess on your hands.

Just my 2 cents worth

Anne

[fishcrazy]

I'm assuming you are speaking of Robert Stark of ESV in New York (pp 52~54 in Paletta's book). Most people want more than 4 small fish when they have a 120g tank but if that's what you want, more power to you. I do want to point out what he lists as a negative in the book...

While such a simple system can result in a beautiful reef tank, it is limited as far as the number of fish that can be maintained due to the lack of an export mechanism (skimmer, algae filter, etc.) and a gas exchange device (aeration, skimmer, wet/dry filter, or reverse/daylight algae filter). Reef aquarists who desire large fish populations should seriously consider adding one of these peripheral devices).

[EagleEyes]

Fishcrasy: The lee eng chin style is where im going. I want a very very light bioload, and to only have to supplement the system.
mps9506: the ocean is one hundred times the size of our boxes and it has a VERY VERY light bioload for its size. Now if i were to create the same load to area ration then i may be on to something. Probably what Lee eng Chin was going for. Right FishCrasy?

[cheeks69]

Originally Posted by mps9506

I'm not saying at all it can't be done, but from what I've seen, the vast majority of folks who try "natural" systems with no skimming and only live rock, and think they can get away without water changes, end up with serious algae woes. Espcially once they get some heavy duty lighting.
It is very difficult to mimic nature in our boxes. The ocean is not an entirely closed system.

Yes I agree and I don't advocate this system especially because I love fish, but if you can excercise self control and maintain a low bio-load it can be done but this system isn't for everyone as has been mentioned several times.

If you do decide to go with this type of setup EagleEyes then I would suggest you do regular W/C's at least because supplementing can be very difficult to do accurately since many elements can very difficult to test for.

[Witfull]

Originally Posted by EagleEyes

mps9506: the ocean is one hundred times the size of our boxes and it has a VERY VERY light bioload for its size. Now if i were to create the same load to area ration then i may be on to something. Probably what Lee eng Chin was going for.

actually, According to the U.S. Navy, there are
actually 361.2 quintillion gallons of ocean water. also one must take into account the depths of the ocean. they sink decaying matter to the depths away from the more delicate life forms.

also the oceans have great oxygenating systems. first and formost-waves and currents, surface area, and even rainfall.

one thing the ocean doesnt have, that is a good export system. everything is either recycled or sunk into the deep ocean. some will say mangroves and other tidal grasses export. but in truth this is a recycling not export.

there are so many factors that we cannot duplicate in a tank that the oceans do. if you want to dedicate a 100g tank to a damsel or two for their lifespan (5-8yrs)(also know that you will need the hardiest of fish to accomplish this) go for it. but it will not be duplicating the ocean or the way it works. you will be creating a balancing act and a precarious one at that. fish and corals grow and will demand more, or die, and in such a balanced tank, one death would be a ecosystem disaster.

im not trying to discourage you, but as the others letting you know what you are up against and the challenges facing you. there is a reason this type of tank is not done by more people.

[EagleEyes]

yes good point Witfull. that is.. a VERY good point. quintillion? thats like 361,200,000,000,000

[EagleEyes]

oh like 7 more freakin zeros

[EagleEyes]

ok, is there an internet link to the lee eng chin method of this system? because if what you say is correct Witfull, then Lee eng Chin must have failed, where the theory still stands.

[Witfull]

no, he did not fail. if he had why do we still talk about him. he was a pioneer and helped bring reefing to the world.

Lee Chin Eng is probably the most frequently mentioned of these early pioneers of a "natural" methodology. In the early 1960's, Mr. Eng was living in Indonesia and maintaining successful reef aquaria using live rock, live sand, natural sunlight, regularly replaced natural seawater, and gentle water movement provided by air pumps.6 Widespread recognition of Mr. Eng's method was delayed, largely because widespread success was not possible at the time with this method unless the aquarist lived near the ocean. Many hobbyists around the world who lived near the sea and collected local rocks and algae, as well as used natural seawater for their aquaria, had similar success.

We also see methods we overlooked that have added to our success today such as those of Lee Chin Eng.

http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/20...ture/index.php

Advocates of natural methodologies have been around since the 1960s, when the first "reefkeeper," Lee Chin Eng, initiated many of the concepts and techniques that are fundamental to successful reefkeeping. Mr. Eng lived near the ocean in Indonesia and used many of the materials that were readily available to him from this source. "Living stones," which have come to be known as live rock, were used in his systems as the main source of biological filtration. He also used natural seawater and changed it on a regular basis.

http://www.ecosystemaquarium.com/html/backtonature.html

Originally Posted by Witfull

im not trying to discourage you, but as the others letting you know what you are up against and the challenges facing you. there is a reason this type of tank is not done by more people.

[mps9506]

I always thought of Lee Chin Eng as a pioneer of keeping corals alive, than a pioneer of no filter natural aquarium type systems...

[DaveK]

Originally Posted by EagleEyes

ok, is there an internet link to the lee eng chin method of this system? because if what you say is correct Witfull, then Lee eng Chin must have failed, where the theory still stands.

Here is another link that includes information about Lee Chin Eng's methods.
http://www.garf.org/news6p3.html

What I remember very little was ever published about his methods. You have a few general articles in TFH, and some metions in TFH books, but it's only in much later books, long after Lee Chin Eng passed away, that you see a full description. If you can find some of the old material around and look at the pictures of those early natural systems, most don't look like much by today's standards. Just a few fish and LR that seems to be overgrown with algea.

He was also reputed to be secretive about his exact methods. I'm not sure if this was true or if it was because the method was so simple.

We do have to give the man a lot of credit for being first. He also got people thinking in a different direction.

We also need to consider what the state of the art was in the mid 1960's. SW tanks were fish only, and set up with bare bottoms, dead coral, and rocks. Nothing was know about the nitrate cycle, and if all the fish died a month or so into the project, it was usually blamed on something in the tank being toxic. Filtration was simply carried over from FW systems at the time, and were mechanical with maybe some carbon. If you used undergravel filters, you were cutting edge. About the only parameters you could measure were SG and pH. We know how poor hydrometers are today. They were no better back then. The pH test kits available then were pooly made, and many always read toward the acid side. Nothing was known about the relationship of buffering and pH and often the wrong chemical was used to try to adjust it. You were doing really well if you could keep a tough fish like a damsel alive for 18 months. You were an expert if you kept a tang or trigger alive for a year.

Considering this, the method Lee Chin Eng used seemed to be fantastic. Yet few, if any, could duplicate the results, even when they imported their fish and LR from him.

[mattie]

as described above the berlin system works
i use this style of filter on all my reef tanks
quality live rock, high flow, high light, and big skimmer
its very easy to maintain a healthy enviromenr