No skimmer system

Reef Aquarium & Tank Building Forum

Help Support Reef Aquarium & Tank Building Forum:

This is really not a fair appraisal Mike, when you know that Luke is running a RUGF through coarse substrate. Luke is not running Anaerobic, so these buildups are being either taken up by live rock, animals, or chaeto, OR building up in the water to whatever levels they are controlled by water changes.

We're talking about more things here than just N and P, although "they" are the compounds that people "fixate" on. Other compounds could be building up in the water column, and time will tell on that depending on water changes.

> Barry :)
 
Barry...From what I understand from an older thread, I don't think Luke really does any water changes (atleast it is what I gathered). He tops off every month or 2 which means no water changes must take place otherwise it would be topped off then

post #6
http://www.reeffrontiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12904&highlight=cleaning+routine

and in the link below it also gave me the assumption that he doesn't do any water changes because he questoned why we do them so frequently to figure if he should do a waterchange...So maybe it's the chaeto and other things he relies on other than water changes:)

post 38
http://www.reeffrontiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12904&page=3&highlight=cleaning+routine
 
Last edited:
That's exactly my point in the second paragraph Krish. It is time that will tell.

I agree Barry...Time is a major factor for all of our systems that will determine how effecient etc they are. So hurry up on that plenum you are working on or RUGF and make this hobby a little less stressful for people like me!:)
 
DonW- I needed that cheato re-start because when I thought I would be fancy and order these 6500k bulbs to "improve" my cheato growth, I had a huge die-off, the cheato turned clear and I junked it all before it completely released everything back into the tanks. It was very lame, and I actually gave my old lighting (that always worked fine, dont ask me why I wanted to change it) away along with a bunch of cheato to a member the same day I "upgraded" to 6500k, so I didnt even have something I could swap back to try to save it. It was very lame. Now that I use 2700k, the cheato just grows right out of the water if I let it (in very short time), and stability has been 100%. I've never seen any clear areas again, and the physical structure feels very strong nearly like a fishing line consistancy. Even on the bottom of very dense thick mats, it doesnt get clear and soft anymore like it did before I was useing the 2700k lighting.

Well, just so nobody has to guess, I have 3 reef tanks down from 4 (due to girlfriend related whineing). One is a high flowing UGF with large crushed coral about 2.5" deep. Its only export system is a fuge with cheato, which is harvested for the export. This is my current favorite tank, and the one houseing the SPS corals. The only water change type deals it gets are from takeing water out to bag the frags and things I harvest from it. I add top off water, then occasionally check salinity, panic, and add a few cups into a bowl in the fuge to raise the salinity again. (fortunately this process has only had to occur a couple times). It gets lugols, and it has a Ca reactor which keeps Ca and alk right where I want the with no fuss.

The tank that used to be my favorite has no UGF, a DSB that has sand stiring critters in it, and a fuge filled with cheato for export. The fuge also has a huge engineering goby in it to make sure the sand stays well turned over, he is a very busy digger. I say that it used to be my favorite, because I came back from working about a week ago, and while I was away, an end on one of the T5s came unhooked from the canopy and dropped into the water while running for an unknown number of hours... I have since taken procautions against this from occuring. Just about everything was either melted, or in the super shriveled up protected state. I quickly pulled everything that didnt look completely melted into the other 2 tanks. Fortunately the anemones and livestock seem totally uneffected (puzzleing to me). Afterwards I did 2 back to back 95ish% water changes with cheap salt, let it run a day, and then another 95% change with IO. My waterchanges were to try to get out the large amount of copper and lead from the bulb end and wire that ionized into the tank through electrolisis. So, its definately been waterchanged now, but not as part of general maintence, more as kinda a OHH CRAP sort attempt at a repair. The live stock that I try to move back into it still doesnt look nearly like it did before the incident, so I'm going to give it more time to sort things out. It was a really really dumb thing, and I am now useing GFCI's that recognize the tanks water as a ground plane now, I really dont know why I wasn't before, it was very foolish. Poor tank, it was really my favorite, and anything I stuck in it just exploded with growth. It cured a bunch of sick animals, corals, anemones etc, I would stick anybodys critter/coral they had given up on in there, and miraculusly, just about everything that lived past the first few hours would make a full recovery. I really hope the tank comes back to its old self soon.

The last tank is my newest, its a frag tank I setup with a free 55gal tank and stand I got from a very nice member here. I just glued an acrilic partition in one side, stuffed it with cheato, and put a powerhead with a little hose on it dumping into the partition area like a little internal fuge with a spill over. I started out BB, because I figured, ehh, the bottom will have every available space covered with frags, it should be fine, just about zero bio load. Well, to be honest, it totally sucked. Stuff wouldnt grow for beans, and big fat plump coral frags I threw in there would shrink, along with zoos and other things. So, talked to a buddy who recomended I add some sand, and I did, and its looking a little better now, and things are finally at least increaseing in size (very slowly though) rather than decreaseing finally. I regret useing the super cheap salt mix with it too, if I could do that one over, I would definately have filled it with IO. Its never had dectable nutrients in it, and it gets fed brine shrimp pretty often, and there is only a 5mm long baby clown in there to be eating things, so I at least know the cheato is doing its job well. Possibily a little too well, and thats why soft corals dont thrive in it, but I really dont know. Somebody needs to make a useful set of nitrate and phosphate test kits with a range of perhaps 10ppb-200ppb, cause it seems so lame to always just read undectable when you KNOW there is a level of nutrients in everytank, and it would be very handy to know what it is. The plan is when I save up some money I will be able to get some more sand for it which will hopefully make things work better for its intended purpose. If anybody has some suggestions, I would love them, but I dont wana get this thread off topic.

So, for maintence, the threads that krish linked are perfect discriptions of what I do, and for tank setup, the above lets you not have to guess about things.
 
Last edited:
liveforphysics said:
Some of you may know that one of the largest and most sucessful closed reefs/breeding/aquaculture facilitys is Inland Aquatics. They use no skimmers, just algae. They have truely fantastic results. The systems are increadibly stable.

Inland Aquatics is a great facility to tour, they have done a lot for the hobby, you can't go wrong with their detrivore kits, and the fish are always in great health. However, they lost a ton of SPS. On a recent tour my club did, one thing I noticed was a large amount of loss in the back tanks...namely SPS, which was due to some issues last summer. Let me post some pics from our tour....they have more algae in their systems than I would ever care to have in a tank. The attached picture at the very bottom, is one from their new SPS frag system....which happens to have a SKIMMER on it :). It shows a very large vermetid snail...I've never seen one so large!

I think you can see some flatworms in this picture..
DSCF0721.jpg


DSCF0712.jpg


inland002.jpg


inland006.jpg


inland014.jpg


Click on image to enlarge (this is the one from the SPS system) View attachment 11382

If ever in the Terre Haute, IN area, it is worth a visit...their ATS are enormous!

BTW - photo credits go to Willy and btuck
 
You really cant compare a aquaculture companies tanks to that of a home reef. These people have full time staff to baby the tanks. They ship lots of coral in there systems water so they get plent of fresh mix to replace the shipping water.

Don
 
This is really not a fair appraisal Mike, when you know that Luke is running a RUGF through coarse substrate. Luke is not running Anaerobic, so these buildups are being either taken up by live rock, animals, or chaeto, OR building up in the water to whatever levels they are controlled by water changes.
I wasnt talking about Lukes system Barry;) Even if I was I dont think I could buy "these buildups are being either taken up by live rock, animals, or chaeto, OR building up in the water" kinda of concept anyway.

On the Inland reef tanks...well if that is a sucess story I dont think I want to be that sucessful.


Mike
 
On the Inland reef tanks...well if that is a sucess story I dont think I want to be that sucessful.


Mike


I'm with you Mike! The only green I like is this fellow smiling over here --->:D
 
Fascinating discussion. To clarify my previous post, I had the first tank running just less than 3 years without a skimmer prior to its dismantle. (Sad to say its been almost that long since its been up). Forgive my lack of 'catching' the shorthand, but I'm stumped on the "cheato" label. The rest I think I've caught on to. My refug had calerpa, mud, a small live rock and some 'sand' (fine coral sand) that was slowly replacing the mud. It produced enough live matter to keep the corals, shrimp, worms, assorted odds and ends and grazing fish happy. That is why I'm going from the hang-on to a 10 gallon underneath. A second question would be, what effect would my thoughts on running a skimmer on an occasional basis have? I felt that I really didn't need one then, but I read so much that says they are needed.
 
This is what we mean by "cheato", Chaetomorpha Sp. http://www.thinkreef.com/79/chaetomorpha-algae-refugium/

cheato_harvest.sized.jpg


This is me exporting a huge mass of nutrients, which occurs frequently.

This is all the filtration I need to keep my tanks with undectable nutrients, and prevent ANY pest algae from growing, and no visible detritus.

tank2_3.sized.jpg



I am really impressed that you also had an unskimmed tank. It seems to be quite the rare item to find these days with the bandwagon pushing high flow skimmers to everyone. I'm curious, what made you not skim TheBart?
 
Last edited:
Before starting a reef tank (spurred on by snorkling off Hawaii), I read whatever I could find. The book by Robert M. Fenner being one of the more thought provoking to me. The literature on the 'Miracle Mud' sounded interesting. Having been associated with the advertising industry in the past, I knew that the hype was likely massive, but thought the logic was interesting enough to try out. So I did, and proved to myself it could work properly. I was harvesting a lot of calerpa, and running the lights on the refug 24/7. I have had fresh water tanks before, many years ago. And have had ponds for maybe the last 15 or so years, and they are all non-skimmer systems.
I ran the tank with just live sand and rocks for about 2+ months before adding anything else to it, to build the smaller creature content to feed the much anticipated corals and other weird lifeforms. I then added frags slowly, and other creatures and fish last, also slowly. I plan on doing the same again. (loved to watch where the mushrooms would migrate to next).
I do have the carcass of the new case finished, and am ready to purchase the oak finish wood, so I hope to have things in order to populate in the next few weeks. Long - LONG hours at work slow things down!
Thank you for asking, I don't find many people interested enough in what I do with it to talk to. That is why I'm glad I found this group! Lots of brains to pick.
 
liveforphysics said:
This is all the filtration I need to keep my tanks with undectable nutrients, and prevent ANY pest algae from growing, and no visible detritus.

Exactly how long have you used nothing but chaeto in your tanks? No problem algaes yet...but wait...nobody escapes that altogehter...You have a DSB, right? I didn't see much detritus either when I had a DSB...where do you suppose it's going? It has nothing to do with the chaeto at all... :rolleyes:

liveforphysics said:
I am really impressed that you also had an unskimmed tank. It seems to be quite the rare item to find these days with the bandwagon pushing high flow skimmers to everyone. I'm curious, what made you not skim TheBart?

I would hardly call the advocation of skimmer useage as a "bandwagon" movement:lol: ...in the last 20+ years, I've seen lots of different equipment and methodologies come and go...but the skimmer has passed the test of time and has stayed around for a very good reason, it works well, and with a minimal downside.

MikeS
 
http://www.dtplankton.com/phytoplankton/about.html

This link says a couple of really general things about phytoplankton. Basically its not important for the corals themselves, but rather important for the macro fauna that the corals can eat (I witness live natural fauna being trapped in the polyps of SPS and other corals every night that I spy on the tank with the red light in the dark). This makes phytoplankton an indirect food source for corals.

Skimming removes phytoplankton.

Mike S. - I made it quite clear where the detritus goes. Law of conservation of energy and fauna processing etc... I give the old sand a stir for kicks occasionally, and it barely makes a haze in the water. The tank with the high flow UGF makes absoutly ZERO haze/cloud in the water when you stir the sand vigorously. The sand is extremely clean and clear of detritus in that tank in perticular.

I belive this sort of detritus reduction is only possible when one doesn't constantly keep the phytoplankton level zero'd out through high flow skimming.

When I peek at my tanks in the dark, its such an amazing circus of swarming macrofauna just covering everything, its unreal. When I skimmed, it was more like, yup, some little buggys come out at night (during this time I also had to siphon detritus, and always saw acumulation of detritus on the rocks and sand bed surface).

I am a firm beliver that perticularly due to the autotrophic nature of phytoplankton, that its roll as a food chain foundation in aquaria can't be underestimated. Much less eliminated as high flow skimming acomplishes very well.
 
Well thier you have it folks, and under ground filter and some algae and that all you need. It couldnt be more simple.


Mike
 
I think what I'm getting from this thread is that a person can do whatever is within their budget as long as they are willing to work for it. The amounts of algea I have seen in the "display" tanks here would never make it in my tank. That is to unslightly and I would do my best to fix the problem.
 
So after all the discussion, here is my take on what has been said:
There are three ways to do this, Chaeto only, skimmer only, or both (I am not counting in other forms of filtration right now such as carbon, phosban ect.)

So lets look at each individually, if anyone thinks I am missing the point on one of these please let me know.

Chaeto only:
Relies on the whatever is put in the tank to be broken down to basic levels (nitrate, phosphate, ect.) which are then consumed and used for energy, storage ect. This basically locks the undesired nutrients up in plant life whichs keeps it from the water. The way to remove these nutrients is to remove some of the Chaeto. That one is fairly straight forward. The cons of this method would seem to be that if the Chaeto ever died off it would release all those nutrienst back into the water which could cause death to many (if not all) corals as well as nusiance algae blooms.

Skimmer only:
Skimmers remove the waste products of the tank before they ever become ammonia, nitrite, nitrate making it less of a problem. Live rock should be able to take care of anything left. The cons of this method would be mechanical failure, removal of phytoplankton, ect. Some things necessary for a healthy tank. These reasons may change depending on what type of skimmer used, wet/dry skimmate, fast or slow flow, dwell time, amount of bubbles. For now I will ignore most of the small details.

Chaeto and skimmer together:
The skimmer would remove most of the initial waste leaving whatever is left to be broken down and locked up by the Chaeto. I like the thought of redundency, where there would be more than one system to remove the same things from the water. From what I have gathered here the cons of this system would be that if the skimmer is too effective it may rob the Chaeto of the nutrients it needs to continue growing which would cause a die off and possibly a nitrate and phosphate spike.

IMO and just going from what I interpret from what has been written this is potentially the most effective form of filtration as well as possibly troublesome. I have seen many people do it this way which would say to me that it is not a failed system. The catch being that you would want to watch both the skimmer and the Chaeto and make sure neither one screws up. Which of course would happen while you are on vacation and can't do anything about it.:D

Like I said earlier if I have missed anything here or misunderstood something please let me know. I am definitely understanding this subject better and am just trying to pull truth out of oppinions. I know that the methods I listed above are very generalized but I want to make sure my basic understanding is in the right direction before I try to get into details.

Thanks for all the comments on this topic.

Tim
 
I think what I'm getting from this thread is that a person can do whatever is within their budget as long as they are willing to work for it. The amounts of algea I have seen in the "display" tanks here would never make it in my tank. That is to unslightly and I would do my best to fix the problem.

I agree...I run a skimmer, do a 15 gal water change per week on my 75 gal, as well as siphon up whatever shouldn't be in the tank through a filter sock atleast twice a week now and I also plan on adding chaeto. In addition I have just over 5,000 gph of flow in my tank. IMO, my tank is still far from where I would want things and I know what I have to do to keep my tank optimum and let me tell you, it isn't "just a walk in the part". That's why I find it hard to believe when some people make it sound so simple that all you need is "this" and "that" and you'll have a wonderful almost maintenance free system. I think we are far from those days in my opinion...
 
Its all good folks have their choice to go what ever route they want, its their tank. In saying that their are a couple of misunderstanding here.
Relies on the whatever is put in the tank to be broken down to basic levels (nitrate, phosphate, ect.)
Nitrate is not the basic level, their are many more levels below that and/or branches from it. Phosphate comes in many forms and is also not the bottom rung. Algae can only use or uptake one form, same applies for Nitrogen based products.
which are then consumed and used for energy, storage ect.
N and P forms are reduced by bacteria not algae. The amount used as energy is minor and insignificant because we dont have anywhere close to the scale required. Also bacteria do not comsume those products, they melt them down through the use of enzymes and then do electron swaping which leaves biproducts. All of these biproducts with the except of dissolved inorganic form stay and are cycled.
This basically locks the undesired nutrients up in plant life whichs keeps it from the water
You make a huge jump here my friend. You have a sand bed that is populated by a variety of bacteria looking for various forms of N and P. This is all contained with in the bed based on the differing enviroments with in the bed. Chaeto can only absorb dissolved forms of inorgani P and N, These products are also very desired by bacteria. Now how much dissolved inorganic P and N do you think is going to get past all that bacteria and into a location where the algae resides?? The only amount that will get thier is when all the bacteria have bound up whatever it can, or the tank reaches a point of saturation (more food then the bacteria can bind). You are also assuming that even when this happens that the highly disirable form of N and P are going to make it past all the other forms of algae in the tank (not in a remote location) with out being taken. Good luck thier.
Yes their will be some disolved inorganic P and N that will make it to the chaeto. In the case of the tanks shown it is most likly coming from the saturation of nutrients trapped in the sediment below the algae in the refugium. Again thier is a net gain, basically the same as someone who used ferric oxide.
The cons of this method would seem to be that if the Chaeto ever died off it would release all those nutrienst back into the water which could cause death to many (if not all) corals as well as nusiance algae blooms
I dont think if the algae died it would kill any corals, brown them up and cause algae blooms sure, but death I would not think so. But their are a few more things to concider.
When you promote the binding of nutrients with in living organisms you are basically always in a state of upward flux. As in the population of bacterias, algaes, microfuanas and so on increase constantly. With this comes a few issues. Oxygen consumsion is the first, all of these critter use oxygen as respiration, you have to look at how much to DO you are removing from the actual critters you are trying to grow and keep in the first place. Also look to what may happen if a power failure occured? As living critters (biomass) these critters are susceptable to enviromental conditions. A temp swing could bring about a mass die off, if you think what algae releases into a tank when it dies is bad try to get your hands around what bacteria would release.
Each one of these critters comes with cons, algae releases and uses secondary metabolites such as growth inhibitors in order to ensure its survival in the wild from both preditors and things that encroach on its territory. What happens when it dies? or even when you grab a clump and rip it apart?. Also bacteria have natural biproducts that if given the proper enviroment (sediment) will thrive, such products are acetate, carbon dioxide, hydrogen,sulfate,ammonium,methanogens,sulfite, nitric oxide, dinitrogen to name just a few. What happens when you get a die off, or a powerhead digs in, or a fish digs into it??

Just to be clear here, the use of this type of filtration is OK. bacterial dependant systems are slow and not very efficient, as the expert who promoted these system say 3 to 4 small fish per 100 gallon tank with a 6 inch bed. When you add chaeto to that it would increase that bioload capability a little bit more. For me if the system could not handle effectively a decent bioload it would make sence to help it along by removing excess nutrients via skimming, stirring and so on.


Anyway somethings to think about.


Mike
 
Back
Top