Water Changes

[mojoreef]

No but it is far more practical then testing for the ones you can test for and dosing a proper amount, not to mention the huge cost associated with getting the lab grade chemicals to dose, the time to manually dose or the cost of a nice doser. The new higher end salts aren't nearly as bad as they used to be with far fewer non-desirables.

Yea salts are a little bit better now for sure, but they still have a lot of stuff that is not required, and if those things are not being used up in the tank, then the levels will just build up? I guess the same thing applies to most of the elements in the tank, Lets say you have a calcium level of 400 and you tank uses up 25ppm per week and you do a weekly water change with salt that has a 450 level in it? you will eventually end up with a very high level and this applies for every element in the system. Now once you have more of something you dont need it will either reduce the level of another element or increase your salinity?? Where as if you tested you could watch for that.

Or create a buffer to allow time to no kill stuff....

Agreed, it does dillute and does help to some degree I just perfered to deal with it more aggressively

Ah so its best to just let problems build up over time so it becomes a massive/complicated issue to fix down the line??:biggrin1: :angel:

No but you should be able to tell by the behavior of the tank inhabitants that something is not correct, or by the tint in the water, or growth of non-desirables, appearance of a large amount of filter feeders, etc etc etc.

Yes if you really know your tank and have the experence you can in some cases, but problems with inbalances will be big before you see the outcome in the inhabitants. Form that point it might be to late to save them, or the fix might put them further into harms way>

Good conversation

Mike

 

[akunochi]

Dude, It's too hot to go fishing...I hate word working...and lawn work makes my allergies get all meh. Oh and my boat is broke. soooo I sit here.

 

[Peppie]

Seth so in way your like The Bubble Boy. lol
To me you seem like the type of guy that would poke an angry badger with a very short stick, just to see if you could get away before he tore you a new one. lol

 

[akunochi]

Yea salts are a little bit better now for sure, but they still have a lot of stuff that is not required, and if those things are not being used up in the tank, then the levels will just build up? I guess the same thing applies to most of the elements in the tank, Lets say you have a calcium level of 400 and you tank uses up 25ppm per week and you do a weekly water change with salt that has a 450 level in it? you will eventually end up with a very high level and this applies for every element in the system. Now once you have more of something you dont need it will either reduce the level of another element or increase your salinity?? Where as if you tested you could watch for that.

Well that would work except for one thing. The minerals in the water are dissolved not a solid. Sooooooo You introduce a solution of 450ppm at manf suggested mix ratio which gives you a base value of 450 ppm. Your corals use 25ppm per week (weak sauce get more sps) and you do a bi weekly water change. This drops your base down to 350ppm. Now because the remaining calc is dissolved you remove a total of 30% water change. Which removes a VERY ROUGH 30% of the remaining base. So over time with no new calcium drawing additions you could end up with a slightly increased calc measurement. Honestly though because calcium is the building blocks of the entire reef the chances of you using and not something much higher is low unless you have no coraline, tube worms, clams, SPS or LPS....

Agreed, it does dillute and does help to some degree I just perfered to deal with it more aggressively

And that is totally fine for someone with the knowledge to properly calculate the dosage and either automate it or take the time to precisely dose it...

Yes if you really know your tank and have the experence you can in some cases, but problems with inbalances will be big before you see the outcome in the inhabitants. Form that point it might be to late to save them, or the fix might put them further into harms way

Perhaps, but the smallest things can tell you something is off....respiration rate, loss of apetite, polyp extension, etc etc etc. I think most people can tell when something is awry.

Good conversation

Mike[/QUOTE]

 

[akunochi]

Seth so in way your like The Bubble Boy. lol
To me you seem like the type of guy that would poke an angry badger with a very short stick, just to see if you could get away before he tore you a new one. lol

Well that does seem like a damn good time LOL....

 

[mojoreef]

Well that would work except for one thing. The minerals in the water are dissolved not a solid. Sooooooo You introduce a solution of 450ppm at manf suggested mix ratio which gives you a base value of 450 ppm. Your corals use 25ppm per week (weak sauce get more sps) and you do a bi weekly water change. This drops your base down to 350ppm. Now because the remaining calc is dissolved you remove a total of 30% water change. Which removes a VERY ROUGH 30% of the remaining base. So over time with no new calcium drawing additions you could end up with a slightly increased calc measurement. Honestly though because calcium is the building blocks of the entire reef the chances of you using and not something much higher is low unless you have no coraline, tube worms, clams, SPS or LPS....

Just because its disolves in water doesnt mean it goes away, its still their but in small bits (ions) Agreed to a point though, but calcium was a poor example by me, So what about stuff like silica, iodine, boron, iron, strontium or even the nasties like Aluminum, antimony, cadium, chromium, copper, lead?? those one tend not to get reduced and stay with in the system?

And that is totally fine for someone with the knowledge to properly calculate the dosage and either automate it or take the time to precisely dose it...

I was refering to using it for dilution of nutrients. I tend to follow into the camp of skim it with a skimmer, burn it with ozone, iradiate it with UV and so on, but thats just me.

 

[Krish]

Here's a little of an experience of mine with why I tested my water. When you add corals, they will use up so much calcium, alk etc. The more corals you add, the more the demand will come for these same trace elements to be supplied to the tank. We try to shoot for NSW (atleast I do) because in actuality, we are trying to replicate nature as best we can. So, on the testing, if you don't test for these things and don't have automated dosers, then how will you know if adjustments need to be made in your calcium dosing or alk to keep that proper balance? In my case, I used 2 part B-Ionic to dose. I would end up with an empty bottle of one of them and would still have half a bottle of the other (can't remember which was which). Added more corals, tested my water a few days after and realized I needed to increase some of my doseages to compensate for the increase of calcium and alk uptake. If left alone to run it's course without testing (when dosing or not dosing), at some point I'd imagine that alk, calcium and mag for eg will be all out of whack. Just my opinion though...

As for my thoughts on water changes, I like to do them weekly (10-15%) and the reason why I do it religiously this way is because I have OCD and feel like the more I clean to remove waste, the better my tank will be. I can have this all wrong and could be causing more harm than good but works for me. Don't allow the waste to remain in the tank then no excess nutrients to worry about.

Just my experience though and my 2 cents on it. Keep the feedback coming.

 

[akunochi]

Just because its disolves in water doesnt mean it goes away, its still their but in small bits (ions) Agreed to a point though, but calcium was a poor example by me, So what about stuff like silica, iodine, boron, iron, strontium or even the nasties like Aluminum, antimony, cadium, chromium, copper, lead?? those one tend not to get reduced and stay with in the system?


I was refering to using it for dilution of nutrients. I tend to follow into the camp of skim it with a skimmer, burn it with ozone, iradiate it with UV and so on, but thats just me.

I think we should defer this to the man with beer bottles in his tank....Paul B lol

 

[Krish]

I may be 100% wrong but I do believe that if you have a proper 1lb lr/gal minimum then you shouldn't have too much of an issue. My 55G was WAY overstocked and had a small Eshopps skimmer. Never did water changes, just dosed a few supplements every week. My CUC was very large and vast. I had a 3.5" sand bed in my DT, 2x large sand sifting stars and all the snails and crabs and so on..... Had a huge ball of cheato to help out. Never saw a speck of nusience algae. Everyone was growing too fast. thats when I upgraded to my 180G.

What about CUC's. Are they a real benefit or just a bandaid in hiding a problem? Yes, they do eat some of the waste and nuicance algae's in our tanks, but do they really help?? I mean they all poop as well so aren't they just adding waste back into the tank? I look at CUC's like this...You go to the beach and want the seaweed washed up on the beach removed. By you raking it up into one big pile and tossing it back into the water, what do you think will happen with the tide rolling back in? Did it solve your problem or benefit you any??

Thoughts???

 

[akunochi]

I think they do help and in response to your previous post in no way do 80% of reef keepers try to keep natural conditions. How can i say this? How many region specific tanks have you seen? NSW is not a constant throughout the tropic therefore there is NO NATURAL condition to be met for the ecosystem we create. The NSW for example off the coast of Wa is way low in ALK and Cal. Off Hawaii you will find a much different environment with higher silica level from the constant flow of lava into the areas etc. So to chase NSW is kinda a shadow game isn't it?

So I think CUC do help in the fact that they eat solids (IE algae) and take it off the rock. When they poop it places it into the water column and not affixed to the rock so it is easier to remove via skimmer etc.

 

[Krish]

I think they do help and in response to your previous post in no way do 80% of reef keepers try to keep natural conditions.

I will do a poll on this in a few days to see what people shoot for. Good poll idea to see what feedback we will get.

NSW is not a constant throughout the tropic therefore there is NO NATURAL condition to be met for the ecosystem we create. The NSW for example off the coast of Wa is way low in ALK and Cal. Off Hawaii you will find a much different environment with higher silica level from the constant flow of lava into the areas etc. So to chase NSW is kinda a shadow game isn't it

Depends...For me, all of my corals I had came from out of our waters and not a mixture of corals from different places in the world so I kept my water to the same specs (or as close to the same specs) of NSW here. Wild caught/obtained coral vs aquacultured (hope that was the right word) may make the difference here don't you think? Wouldn't one be hardier than the other? Also, what others do with their mixed species tanks though is a different story. Quite possibly, it could be the reason why some people have so many issues with their tanks is because they don't keep their water close to NSW or what is "natural" to a certain species of coral they have in their tank so a zoanthid from one part of the world may be doing great under your conditions, but an SPS coral from a different part of the world may not because it had a hard time adjusting. Just a thought...

So I think CUC do help in the fact that they eat solids (IE algae) and take it off the rock. When they poop it places it into the water column and not affixed to the rock so it is easier to remove via skimmer etc.

What if you don't have great flow? Where would it go then? The sandbed? If so, who will remove it if you don't do a water change then? Wouldn't this cause more problems?


K...Just a few points I wanted to add to the topic. Enjoying seeing all the feedback so will sit back and watch a bit.

 

[akunochi]

A poll to see what region people collect or a mix? Of course everyone is going to say "I try for NSW parameters"

You are in the other 20% Krish. Most people collect what is pretty not caring what region it is from. Aquacultured will be hardier that natural corals in a tank enviroment as they were raised there. Maricultured should have about the same hardiness as wild corals I would imagine. So I agree that your last sentence I think sums it up well. One coral may do well...another not because of differences in the region.

Finally....if you don't have good enough flow to move snail poop then you probably have too much cyano to care about your CUC anyway.

 

[Krish]

A poll to see what region people collect or a mix? Of course everyone is going to say "I try for NSW parameters"

You are in the other 20% Krish. Most people collect what is pretty not caring what region it is from. Aquacultured will be hardier that natural corals in a tank enviroment as they were raised there. Maricultured should have about the same hardiness as wild corals I would imagine. So I agree that your last sentence I think sums it up well. One coral may do well...another not because of differences in the region.

When I go to do the poll, I will pm you first and we can figure out the best way to set it up so it can be fair across the board. I'd say let's do it tonight, but seeing a new poll was just started, I figure we'd let that one run its course for a few days.

Finally....if you don't have good enough flow to move snail poop then you probably have too much cyano to care about your CUC anyway.

Haha!! :lol:

 

[Krish]

Come on guys...If you have anything to add here or just want to mention what methods you use, please feel free to do so. This topic is open to all to discuss so don't be intimidated by it.

 

[akunochi]

Yeah and i am so over having a discussion with just Krish.

 

[Krish]

Yeah and i am so over having a discussion with just Krish.

Haha!! I actually didn't intend on posting much feedback here on this thread. Want to get others participating a bit more andreally hope they will.

 

[mojoreef]

Good thread. Anyway I just wanted to show a bit of a look from the other side of the arguement. For me I am not a big fans of constant WC's as I believe they are to dependant on poor chemicals (Salt mixes) but in place of that I do dose required elelments which does take a bit more time and effort. In regards to using WC's for dealing with pollution again I dont use it but I do have an elaborate system for dealing with nutrients.

I think doing WC's is something most folks should do, it does add an amount of security to your systems overall health and will deal with nutrients to some extent. I also think testing is kind of a mandatory thng for tanks that are under two years old. In that time period their are far to many swings in the stability of tanks. It also allows you to get used to how different levels and so on effect your tank, once you have gained that experence then I feel you can expand those tests from weekly to some kind of monthly schedule, but to completely abandon it will eventually bring issues that are hard to fix after the fact.

anyway good talk folks


Mike

 

[user 26995]

OMG!!!!!!
I am supposed to change the water???
I do less than 10% every 7 to 10 days. Only because that is what I have read. I am guilty of not testing as often as I probably should.

I too was under the impression that I had to do at least 20% water change every week when I first started out. Thats from what I had read and from advise form another member of long ago. I talked to a couple others that have beautiful tanks and how often they did water changes and it wasnt nearly as often. My tanks always had some kind of issue going on with an algae of some kind or sps rtn'g. I stopped doing weekly water changes. I do dose trace elements and I dose for calc & alk. I add food for filter feeders. I probably overfeed my fish. Actually I know I overfeed my fish. I have heavy bio load on all my tanks. Its been over a year now and I probably do a 10% water change every 2 months just so I can get some of the detritus out of a an area that it builds up in. I dont have any issues with the algae like I used to. I think it allowed the tank to mature and stabilize.
This is just what I am doing and so far working out for me.

I don;t test.....ever

I haven't tested either in a couple of months, but I like to test at least every couple months. I dont make any drastic changes because of the results. So far I have had all good results.

 

[Krish]

I think they do help and in response to your previous post in no way do 80% of reef keepers try to keep natural conditions. How can i say this? How many region specific tanks have you seen? NSW is not a constant throughout the tropic therefore there is NO NATURAL condition to be met for the ecosystem we create. The NSW for example off the coast of Wa is way low in ALK and Cal. Off Hawaii you will find a much different environment with higher silica level from the constant flow of lava into the areas etc. So to chase NSW is kinda a shadow game isn't it?

How about let's tackle this statement for a sec as it is very interesting. If you have corals from all different parts of the world then how do you know what to shoot for with your levels? You have to shoot for something I'd imagine and have some guideline to go by wouldn't you? I mean I can't see you just grabbing a bag of salt and saying, "Umm...Lets dump two cups of salt in here today! That should do the trick and while I'm at it let me squirt some alk suppliment in there. You know what, I got a lot sitting around, let's make that two squirts!". I'm sure you nor anyone does this so where do you get your levels from (or should I say you and the other 80% of the people you say do this) concerning alk, calcium, mag, salinity, etc?? You have to go by some guideline which I'd imagine is what is considered the "general guildeline" of what NSW should be in this hobby which I think we'd all agree is close to these:

Specific gravity = 1.025/6 or 35ppt

Akl = 2.5 - 3.5 Meq/ l

Calcium = 410 - 450 ppm

Magnesium = 1300 -1350 ppm .

So, if I am reading your post correctly, 80% of the people in this hobby don't shoot for these levels (which is what we call "basic NSW parameters" for lack of a better term)???

 

[user 26995]

I think you only have to shoot for most of those levels if you are keeping stony coral.
My softy tank does not get dosed with calc or alk so those levels are probably lower than NSW. Well I know they are lower than NSW.

My 75 is mixed and I dose to the lower-mid range of the ranges you noted and just keep them stable. I think the coral will adjust to those levels if acclimated well and as long as there is not drastic change will adapt and thrive at what ever level you you are keeping them at. I have a couple pieces of sps that has taken a long time to adjust I guess, because I got them almost a year ago and one has just recently colored up and has polyp extension and has started growing. Another one is coloring up nicely. Others are growing like crazy. I would think just keeping the levels stable is going to supply the coral with what they need.
We all love the different coral and we all put coral in our tanks that probable dont realy get along with each other, let a lone live in the same region so keeping it stable and not necessarily at NSW levels for one or the other type of coral is about all we can do, isnt it? With the exception of those that keep species specific tanks. I just might do that one day.