Since Muhammed can't go to the Mountain . . .

[KoiCop]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roddy Conrad And certainly kitty litter is a superior potting media for the idea of a plant filter system for a koi pond as our good Ph. D. friend describes on his CD.

Actually, the anoxic filtration system is not a plant filter system. Not at all.

Dr. Novak states that the kitty litter and laterite baskets aren't there as a potting medium for a plant filter, they (the baskets) are the bio-filtration; the plants are there for aesthetic reasons, only, and are completely optional.

Here's a quote from the KV thread (post #7):

Another KoiVet member also asked me: "What effect does the winter have on the Anoxic Filtration System?" Assuming that the filtration system becomes “non-operational” once plants are removed . . . is a misnomer on his part.

This filtration system is not plant reliant and plants are only and enhancement to the filtration system but are not a constituent to its inner workings. The filtration system is bioclimatic and keeps working all year long by attracting positive ions out of bulk water. This magnetic attraction never stops just because of cold weather conditions. What we fond is that when most not all, conventional filtration systems run they clog, and when they clog, obligated anaerobic bacteria will soon turn any Nitrates into ammonium -Assimilatory Denitrification- and ammonium will then have to be converted back into nitrates, this then become a never ending cycle. The baskets also work with diffusion, never stopping, and never clogging by bio-film. It is also a scientific fact that redox will also improve when the filtration system is kept running all year. Some hobbyists that have added the biocenosis baskets to their ponds have noticed a 30-45 mV jump in redox. Even the president of the MPKS can validate this statement, for he has keep records on his redox for the past three years now. He uses such baskets in his pond now, which is an improvement to his already hi-end filtration system.

[JasPR]

Interesting. ORP meters will be effected by oxygen levels, and therefore water temperature and by pH. Did the kitty litter change the pH?

If the man already had a high end filter what did he need kitty litter filled plant baskets for?
And how did they manage to get started with the main filters already in equilibrium with the nutrient source?

If the ammonia is gone can it be 'more' gone?

And if the kitty litter baskets have special heterotrophic species that are better performers than traditional nitrifying species how do these nitrifiers manage to survive in the natural process of competitive exclusion?

And if this species can process ammonia in winter and stays robust as a result, where does it get this nutrient from as the fish are producing a mere fraction fo what they produce in summer?

I know I should stop, but I can't help myself----

JR

[Roddy Conrad]

Quote: Originally Posted by Brutuscz Roddy..I had a quick question. Have you ever used pulverized limestone to replace minerals. It is sold in home depot..40lbs for less than $3. It is 87%calcium. Some guys in the reef hobby are using it...just wondered if it had any practical application in a koi pond. My water is very soft..so, I was looking into it. Thanks for any advice.

Limestone won't dissolve fast enough in a koi pond to do any good, even the pulverized version won't dissolve enough to do any good.

Maybe in a reef tank it works differently.

And YES I tried it, didn't work at all.

[Brutuscz]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roddy Conrad Limestone won't dissolve fast enough in a koi pond to do any good, even the pulverized version won't dissolve enough to do any good. Maybe in a reef tank it works differently. And YES I tried it, didn't work at all.

Thanks for the advice. I have 80lbs of it in my garage..and didn't use it for the saltwater setup. In the garage it will stay!!!

[cppond]

Quote: Originally Posted by JasPR I think you can appreciate what I said earlier about a large filter that can not accommodate more fish- it is a valuable dilution factor. Plants, especially floating plants house bacteria as much as any other surface. And Carl, thanks for your response. I regret that I didn't make my points in your regard. But honestly, the INNOVATION is there, in the evolution of the fundamental concept of managing a closed system. This is why I said that those of a newer orientation are at a disadvantage as they have no grasp of the big picture and therefore lack perspective- this is an incubator for innocent arrogance. So plenty of INNOVATION from the raw stand pipe to bottom drain that delivers waste to an isolation sump or vortex. And then the answer unit and the rotating sceen and the auto flush and the --- ect. All part of the same big picture concept. Perhaps you are confusing yourself with the logic of what I'm saying? And perhaps you are thinking about other systems that don't involve biological principles like the way we communicate today compared to twenty years ago? Communication, medicine, manufacturing have all changed. But people still use their ears to listen and voice to speak. And people still die of infection just as they did in the caves. And we still make things- just more things , more efficiently. A koi pond is a giant, living digestive tract. This biology doesn't change. And because it is located outside, changing it would be like changing all the rules of surrounding nature. Even if you do no seeding of your new system whatsoever,the same species will come, only the start up and dominance will take longer- but it will wind up in the same place eventually ( if conditions are right). So we do not dominate anything- we influence it. And the principle is always the same- inorganic and organic waste management by encouraging an environment that is biologically conditioned by microbes that are also compatible with koi. So innovating ways to make this all more efficient and reliable is where my hubris lies. Fighting these realities due to lack of understanding and using bandaid upon bandaid or products to address one break down in the chain ( and actually gaining some level of success over that one breakdown) is where the innocent arrogant does harm. Not to themselves necessiarly, but to the hundreds that read this success in the moment as a 'new way' of ignoring the rules of nature. - JR

JR

I understood the syllogism of your argument, it is your premise that I reject. I am not taking the position that Dr. Novak's system has any merit. I don't know that it does or doesn't. The hubris lies in believing that we completely understand how the biological processes work, and that we cannot find different ways to take advantage of their function outside of the “traditional” koi pond system. Unlike in the examples of mass communications, etc., we did not create that technology, we are merely observers.

Even in the area of biological processes there is human innovation. We have utilized and improved strains of bacteria to consume oil slicks. That happens out in vast oceans, yet it can still be effective. There can be innovations in the utilization of biological function. For instance, it happens in waste management. NASA doesn’t experiment with water plants in waste management out of “innocent arrogance.” They are striving to expand our knowledge base and do not accept the status quo.

I realize that waste management is not the same as keeping koi, but is it really possible that in all human endeavors it makes sense to continue to try to find improvements and alternative methods to achieve better results, but in the koi hobby we have achieved perfection and there is no point in experimentation with other approaches? In mild terms, that sounds rather unlikely.

You state “the principle is always the same- inorganic and organic waste management by encouraging an environment that is biologically conditioned by microbes that are also compatible with koi.” Is it so outrageous to suppose that the same may be achieved by the utilization of plants or alternative bacteria, even if engineered? In fact, don’t we know that it is certainly possible to do so but that there are limitations in terms of practicality and scale? Is it impossible that the limitations of practicality and scale be resolved thru innovation? Haven't we resolved the limitations of practicality and scale of the the bacteria presently utlilized in our ponds by the creation of biomedia that can house larger volumes of bacteria in a smaller amount of space?

We know plants can process ammonia, is it impossible to devise a way to do so in an effective manner that can be practical for use with koi ponds, as we did for the bacteria? Perhaps it is. I guess that I am just too innocent and not arrogant enough to believe that in my lifetime we have found the one best solution for just about anything.

I am planning two koi ponds right now, and both will use traditional koi pond systems, though one may use the streamflow design. Why? Because it is the best system we currently have, and I don't have the inclination to do any experimentation with these ponds. However, I don't believe for a minute that improvements will not occur in the future. Perhaps we should resume this discussion in 20 years?