Opinions on Bio-wheels

[IGKYA!!!]

What is the real value of a bio-wheel in terms of total biological filtration? In a tank of 55 gal+ with an undergravel filter and canister filter, what real benefit does the bio-wheel add?

Thanks for your opinion,
IGKYA

[pinballqueen]

Well, this sounds almost identical to the setup I had up until recently. The main benefit I could tell was additional water movement, and a little more in the way of bioload capacity, but there's not much of either that can be added, IMO. I did away with my HOB filter altogether because of a nematode problem I had (the little worms were living in the HOB filter, and the only way I could get rid of them was get rid of the filter... plus the thing made me need to "go" every time I was in the room with the tank...)

All of this depends on exactly what kind of other filtration you have, the bioload in your tank, etc. I had a VERY heavy bioload, so every little bit helped in my situation. Your experience may be different.

[NJ Devils Fan]

Like PBQ said, the biowheel is another place for your biological bacteria to grow on and help surface movement.

[JSchmidt]

I would suspect that the biowheel is a preferential site for bacterial colonization than gravel in a UGF. The biowheel gets a lot more exposure to oxygen than does the gravel, making it able to support greater numbers of bacteria.

I use biowheels on several tanks and I think they are probably a little better at handling abrupt changes in stocking levels compared to other types of power filters (e.g., Aquaclear and Whispers) and I bet they're much better at adjusting to increased bioloads than UGFs would be.

HTH,
Jim

[PunkMartyr]

Originally posted by pinballqueen
Well, this sounds almost identical to the setup I had up until recently. The main benefit I could tell was additional water movement, and a little more in the way of bioload capacity, but there's not much of either that can be added, IMO. I did away with my HOB filter altogether because of a nematode problem I had (the little worms were living in the HOB filter, and the only way I could get rid of them was get rid of the filter... plus the thing made me need to "go" every time I was in the room with the tank...)

All of this depends on exactly what kind of other filtration you have, the bioload in your tank, etc. I had a VERY heavy bioload, so every little bit helped in my situation. Your experience may be different.

I thought you were saying nematodes made you go but after thinking about how my hob's sound I know exactly what you mean

[wishmaster]

You said you had an UGF, HOB, and a Canister for a 55 gallon that seems like a lot of filteration to me. More is better in my eyes, I have never been a fan of HOB or UGF filtration setups do to the amount of noise and space they take up. Go with a quality canister like Fluval or Eheim.

[OrionGirl]

The other perk to a bio-wheel versus the UGF--much easier maintenance. You don't have to worry about what all nastiness is being sucked in, like you do with the UGF. And,
I agree that the wheel supports the bacteria a bit better, because of the availability of oxygen as well as the stable water movement. With UGF, you have to be careful decorations don't take up too much floor space and restrict the flow.

[FishmasteR2002]

When I first got into the hobby my friend had an UGF. The guy at my LFS told me about the bio wheel and I bought one. I haven't used anything since. Right now I am running a H.O.T. Magnum with a bio wheel pro 30 attachment. It is great. I wanted to do some experimenting with other HOB filters so I bought the Tetratec. I like them and they work great once you get them working right but they don't hold a candle to the Bio Wheel filters. I think they are great and work better than an UGF.

[GobyGuy5]

I have a biowheel on my 15 gallon community tank, and it's simply all the biofiltration I've needed, I don't have an undergravel filter, etc.

I know a Local Angelfish breeder, and he absolutely loved the things, they were on almost all of his tanks, and he had only praises for it's biofiltration abilites.

Also because the biowheel uses oxygen from the air rather than your water, doesn't that mean you'll have higher oxygen levels in your tank? (Just Curious :D )

[Tiger15]

Originally posted by JSchmidt
I use biowheels on several tanks and I think they are probably a little better at handling abrupt changes in stocking levels compared to other types of power filters (e.g., Aquaclear and Whispers) and I bet they're much better at adjusting to increased bioloads than UGFs would be.

HTH,
Jim

I think the statement is purely theretical speculation. There is no scientific evidence that other form of biological filtration aren't as effective in responding to abrupt change in bio load. I am not saying that biowheels aren't good biological filter. l have seen them used in a LFS where the fish are packed like sardine and the the biowheels are critical in providing the extra biological filtration .

However, I run my Penquen filters without biowheels. The reason I don't use them is that they back up the water slightly and cause bypass earlier. My tanks have sufficient water current and biological filtration in the substrate and elsewhere and so the biowheels are non-essential. There are many different forms of filtration that don't use biowheels at all and they are just as effective.

[Rocketman]

Canister filters, (as many may know,) are used primarly for biological filtering. This is because of the expanded surface area available for bacteria to colonize on.
With the canister you have, as well as an UGF for mechanical filtration, I could not justify the price for your system. Quite simply, you don't need it.
If, however, you had only a filter system with poor biological filtration, (such is the case on my 45 Gallon, where I use an Emperor in addition to my Whisper,) a filter outfitted with a bio-wheel, such as my Emperor, may do you good. Otherwise, simply unneccesary on your current set up.

If, however, you were simply curious about the overall effect of a bio-wheel, you can listen to those who have spoken before me. It gives provides an area for anerobic and aerobic bacteria to colonize on.
I believe the anerobic can only colonize on the filter cartridge itself though, as most will be unable to survive in an enviroment exposed to oxygen.

[Orbitorly]

Bio-wheel is just a place for bactiria to collect, and to get surface movement going.

I don't think you should get a UG, that's just my opinion.

[JSchmidt]

Originally posted by Tiger15


I think the statement is purely theretical speculation. There is no scientific evidence that other form of biological filtration aren't as effective in responding to abrupt change in bio load. I am not saying that biowheels aren't good biological filter. l have seen them used in a LFS where the fish are packed like sardine and the the biowheels are critical in providing the extra biological filtration .

However, I run my Penquen filters without biowheels. The reason I don't use them is that they back up the water slightly and cause bypass earlier. My tanks have sufficient water current and biological filtration in the substrate and elsewhere and so the biowheels are non-essential. There are many different forms of filtration that don't use biowheels at all and they are just as effective.

My statement that biowheels adjust better to changes in bioload WAS speculation (that's why I wrote "I bet..." rather than "I know..."), but it's not entirely theoretical. Filter media that provide the necessities - oxygen, food, attachment surfaces - are able to sustain larger bacterial colonies. UGFs are rather limited in at least several of those requirements, compared to other forms of filter. Take fluidized bed filters (FBFs) which combine lots of attachment sites with a relatively high flow of water (carrying oxygen and ammonia). It's a common observation that FBFs are excellent at accommodating rapid shifts in bioload. It stands to reason that other filters with similar qualities would share the ability to adjust more rapidly to changes in bioload. My experience with tanks that have a simple HOB filter (e.g., a Whisper) vs. a Penguin or Emperor also bears that out.

True, I've not done controlled lab work to back up my hunch, but it's based on more than a wild guess.

Jim

[Tiger15]

There were similar threads from time to time arguing about which filter is most effective. Without controlled experimentation, it's always guessing on pure theoretical ground.

Biological filtration can be achieved in many ways, even without a filter. A couple power heads and a thin substrate can do as good a job as any filter can, and the marine folks are favoring such a system called Berlin System.

In fact, biological filtration should be renamed biological coversion, because filtration implies that it removes something from water, and that it can occur only inside the filter. Neither is true.

Biological conversion can take place any where with oxygenated current and surface to attach bacteria. Some argued that 90% of the biological conversion actually takes place in the tank, and so bio filter regardless of the type contributes only a minor role. So whether it is a biowheel, canister or FBF doesn't matter unless one packs the fish like sardine in a bare tank.

All my tanks have combined turn over rate of 8 to 10 volumes per hour and so I do not need the service of biowheels. However, I still prefer Penquen over Whisper because it has a more powerful motor that never quits and the monolithic unit construction that is hard to break

[Rocketman]

Yes, Tiger. Whispers are anything but quiet, (maybe the loudest in the business, even though there's is the only one with a name that implies silence,) and the impellors break down often (making it more noisy,) and need to be replaced. Also, there is no customizability (word?) with a whisper - what they want you to put in is pretty much what you are stuck with.

Whatever you do, don't get a "Whisper"

[Tiger15]

Rocketman, I have to disagree with you about Whisper. I have several of them in use for a decade and I haven't had to replace a single impeller. They are not noisy to me except when the tank water is low and the water is falling. The one thing that is annoying to me is that the impeller needs to be kicked started from time to time when it gets dirty and the power is shut off. Penquen never has to kick start because it has a more powerful motor. But the trade off is that the Penquen motor uses twice as much electricity but I think it's worth it.

[Rocketman]

Alright, I wouldn't want to not respond to that. I must admit that Whispers may not be as bad as I make them seem, but they certainly aren't the best. They are loud, I maintain.

[JSchmidt]

Whispers: loud, poor at restarting after power outages, minimal sites for colonization... what more could you want from a filter?

Jim

[JSchmidt]

Originally posted by Tiger15
There were similar threads from time to time arguing about which filter is most effective. Without controlled experimentation, it's always guessing on pure theoretical ground.

Biological filtration can be achieved in many ways, even without a filter. A couple power heads and a thin substrate can do as good a job as any filter can, and the marine folks are favoring such a system called Berlin System.

In fact, biological filtration should be renamed biological coversion, because filtration implies that it removes something from water, and that it can occur only inside the filter. Neither is true.

Biological conversion can take place any where with oxygenated current and surface to attach bacteria. Some argued that 90% of the biological conversion actually takes place in the tank, and so bio filter regardless of the type contributes only a minor role. So whether it is a biowheel, canister or FBF doesn't matter unless one packs the fish like sardine in a bare tank.

All my tanks have combined turn over rate of 8 to 10 volumes per hour and so I do not need the service of biowheels. However, I still prefer Penquen over Whisper because it has a more powerful motor that never quits and the monolithic unit construction that is hard to break

I read many of those threads that cited the claim that 90% of the biofiltration occurs somewhere other than the filter. I never found any credible source for that, and it doesn't jive with the experience many of us have of taking a mature bio-filter from a stocked tank, placing it on a new tank and having no ammonia/nitrite spike at an equal bioload. If the filter carried only 10% of the load, I don't see how that could happen.

I agree that with filtration that turns out as much as yours, biowheels might not add much. But if a fish dies in my tank while I'm on a two week vacation, I expect a tank with a biowheel or FBF will better adjust to the increased load than a Whisper.

Interesting thread...

Jim

[Tiger15]

Originally posted by JSchmidt


But if a fish dies in my tank while I'm on a two week vacation, I expect a tank with a biowheel or FBF will better adjust to the increased load than a Whisper.

Jim

This is based on expectation. You have to run a control experiment to prove that.

When a fish dies, there will be an explosion of heterotrophic microorganisms that consume the dead fish and deplete oxygen,. If the system cannot replenish the oxygen, the nitrifiyer cannot mulitply and will start to die off leading to anoxic condition and ammonia spike. If the system can replenish the oxygen, nitrifyer will mulitply somewhere in response to the new food source, even in the water column, and there will be no crash, with or without biowheels.