Filter effectiveness ratio comparisons, Ziss and sponge

[Teakae]

I was wondering how I can compare filtering capacity across different types of filters. 
specifically, how does one Ziss bubbler compare to one air powered sponge filter or the same sponge filter powered by a power head.

I read in some posts that one Ziss bubbler is equivalent to one large sponge filter. That doesn’t sound accurate to me. If true it would make Ziss bubbler less attractive option since it is larger and more expensive than a regular sponge filter.

Based on what I read in aquariumscience.org chapter 7.1 fluidized K1 media has twice the surface area of a 30ppi sponge. I’m not sure if  Ziss bubbler is equivalent to fluidized K1. But that ratio seems to make more sense. 

But I am still not sure how exactly this Ziss bubbler sold at aquarium coop compares to the sponge filters. I would like to feel confident when swapping out filters that I am not inadvertently shorting an aquarium.

By the way I did calculate cubic inch of the sponge filters

Large 61.8

Medium 36.7

Small 18.4

Nano 8.1

[TheDukeAnumber1]

Being that many of us IIRC including Cory have never seen an aquarium that had filtration issues due to lack of surface area so I think the strengths of these filters lie in their other characteristics.

The ziss is really neat in that the media is directly oxygenated and self cleaning, the sponge filter is great as a safe and low maintenance way to collect debri.

IMO the best bio filtration is just to add air to an aquarium.

[Daniel]

Everything @TheDukeAnumber1 just said.

Most of what filter does is

• Provide a little flow
• Trap debris
• Home for bacteria

If surface area is your goal you might want to look beyond plastic and consider what is gained with aquatic plants. Not only are the surfaces of plants very complicated but are a good habitat for bacteria. Below is the money quote from this paper published in Nature:

In a nutshell the paper says not all surface area is equal and that plants have the best kind of surface area because the surfaces of plants release oxygen and exudates, which act as a substrate for microbial growth. The bacteria attach themselves to the leaves and form biofilms to get nutrients from the plants.

Like @TheDukeAnumber1 says:

1 hour ago, TheDukeAnumber1 said:

IMO the best bio filtration is just to add air to an aquarium.

 

 

 

[Teakae]

Wouldn’t available surface area available for bacteria to grow need to be sufficient to support the tank? Not saying flow rate and oxygenation isn’t important.  but wouldn’t surface area for the bacteria to grow be the first step? 

There is often talk about how new fish was added and the cycle was overwhelmed. Or how filter media is moved to jumpstart a new tank or instant cycle a new quarantine tank. 

I keep an overstocked fancy goldfish tank. So maximizing the filter capacity while minimizing real estate in the tank and time spent maintaining it would be important to me. I would like to know for example, if I can ditch a sponge filled HOB if I add one Ziss bubbler. 

[TheDukeAnumber1]

It does, but if you just have substrate then you have more than enough, and even then plenty of people manage to keep overstocked bare bottom tanks without ammonia spikes. Surface area is needed but oxygen can be more limiting, IIRC Cory has said the bacteria in an aquarium need more oxygen than the fish.

IMO the ziss filter is good for overstocked tanks and I would not hesitate to make the switch you're mentioning. That tumbling media is always clean, oxygenated, and working hard.

Edited March 9, 2021 by TheDukeAnumber1

[MJV Aquatics]

The Kaldnes K1/K3 media has gotten a lot of good press. In the aquarium it's likely as good or better than a large sponge filter. But call me an old fashioned naturalist, but I think deep sand and fast growing plants can't be beat in providing superior water quality between routine periodic partial water changes. 🙂

Edited March 9, 2021 by MJV Aquatics

[Anita]

1 hour ago, Daniel said:

Below is the money quote from this paper published in Nature:

In a nutshell the paper says not all surface area is equal and that plants have the best kind of surface area because the surfaces of plants release oxygen and exudates, which act as a substrate for microbial growth. The bacteria attach themselves to the leaves and form biofilms to get nutrients from the plants.

Like @TheDukeAnumber1 says:

 

 

 

I think this concept bears repeating → not all surfaces are created equally when it comes to bio-filtration. Rating bio-filtration efficiency between plants and plastic (or minerals) based on surface area alone is a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison. I.e., 300 sq in of plant surface area delivers more bio-filtration than the same surface area of plastic, stone, sand, foam because plant surfaces cultivate more microbial biomass per square inch. Plus, the plant tissues provide bio-filtering as well. 🌿In short, plants give you a bio-filtering two-for-one. 🤑

 

[egruttum]

On 3/9/2021 at 12:23 PM, TheDukeAnumber1 said:

oxygen can be more limiting, IIRC Cory has said the bacteria in an aquarium need more oxygen than the fish.

To do complete nitrification of ammonia to nitrate it takes 4.57 mg of O2 per mg of NH3.  It also requires a fair amount of alkalinity.  7.14 mg of alkalinity as CaCO3 per mg of NH3 (theoretical).  In actuality it takes slightly less alkalinity, probably because when denitrification happens (NO3 to atmospheric N2 gas) that returns a little alkalinity to the water.  So yes, proper dissolved oxygen is very important to nitrification.