icecool2

That's interesting that you would have such high nutrient levels then... I can only think of two likely causes: 1. The tank is not mature enough for the number of inhabitants. You need to do more water changes to supplement. 2. You are overfeeding and there is a large amount of waste that is just decaying in the tank. I would cut back your feeding. I only feed my tank once a week and I have fish that have been in there for years.

That's more than I would have stocked (fish-wise) in that amount of time. Take that with a grain of salt because I am VERY conservative in that regard. If you are getting positive tests for phosphates, you've got a nutrient problem. The problem with phosphates is that the level you read on the test is actually lower than the real level in your tank. Algae is so effective at pulling it out, you could read 0 and still have an outbreak. I'd recommend you start doing larger and/or more frequent water changes. How big is the tank, how much LR, how much LS? Are you doing anything other than water changes for nutrient export?

Glad to hear you are taking your time and letting things take their course. Chaeto will only grow if it has nutrients to support it. Given that your tank is new (and presumably empty) there isn't anything for it to feed on. The other algae all sounds like normal progression to me. If you want, you can siphon out the cyano during your water changes. The easiest way to get rid of it is to just leave the lights off for 72 hours. I'm a big fan of not adding any additional reactors, etc unless they are absolutely needed. A good example is a calcium reactor, absolutely needed if you have a heavy need for calcium.

I've had McCosker's with Melanurus without issues

Certainly beats any record of mine! I think my best is 2 minutes and that's with the fish stuck in my overflow. Call Guinness Book!!

Takes care of that pesky skin too.

Haha. You were more thorough in your answer

Ouch. Vinegar will dissolve the bristles and help with the swelling.

Wait, wait, wait. The flap is leaking? If yes, don't put silicone grease on the flap. Throw out the check valve and buy a new one.

I recommend strongly against this. There was a guy from NCPARS who wound up in the hospital because he tried to remove palys from his tank improperly.

The spring loaded ones do.

Less expensive than the Wye is a clear check valve. At least then you can see when it is getting fouled. In the end, I always would just assume the check valve will fail.

That's probably about as safe as you can get.

The assumption I believe hypertech is making is that you need the check valve because your return line will pull a siphon. If you place a small-ish hole just below the surface of the water, it breaks the siphon before you drain to the tip of the return nozzle.

The OP asked for a reliable check valve, not a reliable solution to flow back I personally never would rely on a mechanical device that has to moving parts to actually prevent a flood. An appropriately sized sump and a well designed return setup will serve you best.

I found the link I mentioned earlier.... This isn't a comprehensive list by any means, but it is certainly interesting data. http://www.manhattanreefs.com/lighting

These are expensive, but they are reliable and easy to clean: http://www.bulkreefsupply.com/store/1-5-george-fisher-wye-check-valve-swiss-made.html

Sounds like a nice build. You might want to reconsider the order you add your fish. I'd go for least aggressive first and end with most aggressive. Also depends on the size of the fish.

Chaeto will grow under just about anything. I've seen very good results with the "daylight" CFL bulbs. <br><br>I know plenty of people who run their fuge lights 24 hours a day and have thriving pod populations. <br><br>Your schedule should work just fine. <br><br>No need to harvest the pods.

The lesson I'm getting from this, as pointed out by A. Byrnes, is a good one for people to always keep in mind (vendors and customers): "Agree up front and get it in writing" Both sides obviously had a different view of what they were agreeing to in this situation. If it was clearly written down with dollars attached, this probably wouldn't have even come up on the forums. A lesson for us all.

Fair enough. No arguments here. There is a paper that Sanjay wrote that I need to fix and put up here. It talks about the light patterns and intensities of commercially made fixtures.

I'm not sure which is clearer, to edit my original post or to simply post again. I'll just post again to hopefully keep things on a clear timeline... Unfortunately, Philips does not provide us with a set of graphs like Cree does for the ES LEDs (at least not that I can find, but maybe someone will tell me to google for it). This of course makes this comparison more difficult since we can't easily compare the results side by side. It also does not appear that Philips lists the air temperature these tests were performed at. For this conversation, I'll just copy the verbiage from Philips' datasheet for the Rebel ES line: Lumen maintenance for solid state lighting devices (LEDs) is typically defined in terms of the percentage of initial light output remaining after a specified period of time. Philips Lumileds projects that LUXEON Rebel ES products will deliver, on average, 70% lumen maintenance (L70) at 50,000 hours of operation at a forward current of 1000 mA. This projection is based on constant current operation with junction temperature maintained at or below 135°C. This performance is based on independent test data, Philips Lumileds historical data from tests run on similar material systems, and internal LUXEON reliability testing. Observation of design limits included in this data sheet is required in order to achieve this projected lumen maintenance. (Source: http://www.philipslu...ds/17/DS61-pdf)

A link would have been just as easy and probably less contentious. For those interested, you can find it here: www.philipslumileds.com/uploads/17/DS61-pdf

I would love to correct my post with the most accurate information. Can you point me to your source material?

Yep, exactly. Much easier to compare the growth between the two shots.