What's the best biological filtration media?

[Holyvision]

Any comments? I've been using ceramic rings for a while, but I always see foam sponge stars, plastic ball things, etc. Anyone know that the literal best media is for your biological filter?

[cocoa_pleco]

ceramic rings definitely. plastic balls (bioballs) are best in wet/dry filters but i use them in canisters too

[johnl]

I think they're all about the same but if I had to pick the best of the best I'd say porous ceramic rings.

[dev]

Ceramic rings in general, and Eheim Ehfisubstrat specifically. 18000 square feet surface per gallon of media is hard to beat.

[Fishguy2727]

Porous ceramic media is best in submerged uses, Biowheels are best in wet/dry uses.

[fishman2]

This very much depends on what you are using the filter for.

Fresh water, Salt water, $'s you want spend

For my purposes:

Best value for $'s, sand(fluidized bed) and sponge(HMF, Hamburg Mat Filter, even cheaper if you use air to drive it)

[Demjor19]

I use ceramic rings in all of my filtration.

[Sasquatch]

Ceramic rings are generally considered the best, but they can't be used alone, which is why you see the other media.

If you don't have a pre-filter (foam, filter floss etc....) small particulates get into the ceramic rings and block the pores. That means you have to clean them more often and it reduces their efficacity.

I use a floss prefilter, a sponge and then ceramic cylinders in my AC filters and I noticed a much better bio-filtration vs. sponge only when I switched.

[Holyvision]

Ceramic rings are generally considered the best, but they can't be used alone, which is why you see the other media.

If you don't have a pre-filter (foam, filter floss etc....) small particulates get into the ceramic rings and block the pores. That means you have to clean them more often and it reduces their efficacity.

I use a floss prefilter, a sponge and then ceramic cylinders in my AC filters and I noticed a much better bio-filtration vs. sponge only when I switched.

Yup, no worries, just wanted opinions before I swapped my carbon out for biological in my canister.

I only run carbon for about a month and a half on new tanks.

[BigMac]

Me too, my nitrites just went to 0. So, now I have to get into my filter and clean the sponges add some floss and ceramic media and remove the carbon.

This was the fastest I had seen a tank 0 out it's nitrites.

You title had me in here in a second because I'm about to buy more bio media.

[smaug]

ehfisubstrate pro.Its the round type,it looks like coco puffs,great stuff and lasts forever.

[james481]

I'll put my vote in for Seachem Matrix. Nice and small (marble size or smaller, easy to use in a variety of filter sizes), doesn't clog, dissolve or wear out, and is highly porous (makes it resistant to washing out the bacteria if you ever need to wash it). They claim that a liter of Matrix has the same surface area as 40 liters of bio-balls, but of course I have no way of verifying that claim. I do know it works quite well and is easy to handle. Although, for best "bang for the buck", you really can't beat a fluidized sand bed. 3 lbs of fluidized sand is supposed to be enough bio-filtration for a 200 G tank (at least according to the specs from one maker of these filters, but even if we go by the usual "half of what it's rated" that's still 100 G out of three pounds of media), but of course this media requires a special filter set-up to use (or you can build your own very easily as well).

[Fishguy2727]

Matrix does not have as much surface area as porous ceramic media.

[james481]

Matrix does not have as much surface area as porous ceramic media.

According to whom? I'm not saying you're wrong (quite the opposite, I don't know either way), but it seems that there isn't really any objective data on these things that I've found, but mostly marketing hype. Also, I question these figures anyways because the surface area of the media only matters if that surface is capable of supporting a bacterial film. Media like Matrix and ceramic rings have gobs of surface area that is tucked away inside the media that will, best case scenario get you a small population of denitrifying bacteria (Seachem actually advertises this as a benefit of Matrix) simply because not enough oxygenated water reaches the inside of the media to support nitrifying bacterial populations.

ETA:
Also, I think the surface area question is essentially a moot point, because any filter with enough flow for a given size of tank is going to hold plenty enough of either Matrix or ceramic media for a sufficient bacterial population to thrive. Perhaps if you're trying to run the smallest filter possible on a heavy bio-load system you may "run up against" the surface area limitation of your media, but I'd imagine at that point your tank would be highly unstable anyways.

[dev]

According to whom? I'm not saying you're wrong (quite the opposite, I don't know either way), but it seems that there isn't really any objective data on these things that I've found, but mostly marketing hype. Also, I question these figures anyways because the surface area of the media only matters if that surface is capable of supporting a bacterial film. Media like Matrix and ceramic rings have gobs of surface area that is tucked away inside the media that will, best case scenario get you a small population of denitrifying bacteria (Seachem actually advertises this as a benefit of Matrix) simply because not enough oxygenated water reaches the inside of the media to support nitrifying bacterial populations.

Eheim is not really known for their marketing hype. If they say 18,000 sq. feet per gallon, I believe them ;-)


ETA:
Also, I think the surface area question is essentially a moot point, because any filter with enough flow for a given size of tank is going to hold plenty enough of either Matrix or ceramic media for a sufficient bacterial population to thrive. Perhaps if you're trying to run the smallest filter possible on a heavy bio-load system you may "run up against" the surface area limitation of your media, but I'd imagine at that point your tank would be highly unstable anyways.

Enough flow will mostly relate to the ability of providing enough oxygen to the nitrogen bacteria. There is no set requirement on water flow for a given tank size, in planted tanks we tend to keep it at a minimum.

I would think that most of us look for good media to improve on the stability and minimize any spikes in ammonia or nitrate, and possibly give the ability to increase the biological load on the tank, not to minimize the filter size.

[Fishguy2727]

Someone on another forum said that Matrix was bette in the aspect of the possibility of (minimal) denitirfication, but that its surface area was much less than other ceramic porous medias.

I agree that there is little evidence for NEEDING the most surface area. I posted about on here and I think one or two people said they had or had heard of cases where adding some more biological media made a difference, but it seems rare and I can't remember the details of those situations.