System Stability

[fritz]

Nice thread! Only 2 areas I'd like to bring up. One, smaller water changes done at set times (daily, weekly, whatever) may seem to encourage stability, but don't mimic the real world. In the real world, wastes never build up to anything close to what occurs in our systems. I really don't beleive our animals "adjust" to this, and can't see where their removal would "shock' a system. Besides, on a real world reef, current can be quite high. This effect which we try to mimic with water flow is only partially helpful, as one of the biggest reasons for the benefit of high current is bringing in fresh SW to the reef 24/7. I don't have a reference for the actual volume turned over, but it's surely greater than 25% a DAY, let alone a week. Continuous water changes, like the dialyseas method is the best mimic for this. In the absence of such a mechanism, frequent, moderately large water changes (matched pH, T, S.G.) is the closest we can come to creating a natural, low waste, chemically stable environment.

One area not touched on is lighting. Lighting is kept on timers to maintain stable exposures in our tanks. In the real world, light varies by day, and by hour. Unless we're using complex timers with dimmers to mimic this, we are forcing our photosynthetic organsims to adapt to a completely artificial envornment, which, I beleive, is as important as chemistry. Granted, few of us have elabotate dimmers systems or automated lighting tracks. However, altering photoperiods can be, IMO, healthy for a tank. Even modest changes in timers from week to week, even switching intraday, might be more beneficial than just a fixed period, rather than helping our animals to "acclimate" to our set lighting arrangement. Maybe it should be the other way around.

Henry

While you are on the right track and this is true to a degree you're 100% wrong. The corals on a reef are not getting a 100% water change every second. The water that is about to rush past them is identical (for the most part) to the water that they are currently sitting in. Wild reef water is in essence NEVER changed. Think about this, let try and mimic the ocean to a degree. You setup an 80,000 gallon reef tank but only use an area 3 cubed to house your reef. Stock it with only 10 small fish and a few larger ones. Setup a few ports near the reef to blow out trace elements and other nutrients over the reef as occurs in nature. Use a 25 foot deep sandbed.
Venture a guess how often you'll need to do a water change.

Also keep in mind that sea water also has the benefit of each gallon containing 1.5 million or so zoaplankton not to mention the abundance of phyto.

Back to our very small and closed systems:
The point of this thread was;

1. Get an auto top off because stability is the key to success with a reef. If you don't have one buy one before you spend more money on anything else. Many tanks on here do not have an ATO and you'll be surprised what a difference it will make. If you dont' want to spend $200 on a tunze osmolator buy one of the many many cheaper ATOs that are out there.

2. As mentioned in number 1 swings to anything in your tank are bad. This includes dosing things such as two part. Adding one drop every 10 minutes is better than 100ml all at once. Try to find a way to dose this throughout the day

3. Water changes have the same rules as # 1 and # 2 but EVEN MORE SO! When you do a water change you are adding water with a slightly different salinity, SG etc. Different chemical makeup in terms of K,calcium, alk, mg, ph. Different concentration of nutrients, possibly slight different temp, different amount of disolved gasses etc. That's a WHOLE LOT MORE criteria to change than what was covered in numbers 1 and 2.

If changing small things like salinity and alk quickly is bad why would anyone think that changing the entire chemical makeup of your tank quickly could be good. The key to good reefing is stability. Our animals like stability in temp, light, photoperiod, gaseous makeup, ph, nutrients, trace elements, etc.

I'm tired.

 

[meschaefer]

Nice thread! Only 2 areas I'd like to bring up. One, smaller water changes done at set times (daily, weekly, whatever) may seem to encourage stability, but don't mimic the real world. In the real world, wastes never build up to anything close to what occurs in our systems. I really don't beleive our animals "adjust" to this, and can't see where their removal would "shock' a system.

I have to disagree, when I started using a phosphate remover, the sudden drop in phosphates caused some of my SPS to RTN.

 

[Kedd]

Another topic in keeping a reef tank stable is the addition of new animals (how much, how many, and when).
Once a tank is ?mature? if you can put a time frame on it, how quickly people stock it IMO has quite a bit to do keeping things in balance.
As with almost all topics in this thread, going slow and steady are key factors.

If your not sure your ready, your not.


When I first got into the hobby, and the tank was set up, all I could think about was what was the next fish I was going to add after work. LOL
Bad Idea!
I do understand how new hobbyist feel.
I?m just happy I had friends that shut that down quickly.

 

[Henrye]

While you are on the right track and this is true to a degree you're 100% wrong. The corals on a reef are not getting a 100% water change every second. The water that is about to rush past them is identical (for the most part) to the water that they are currently sitting in. Wild reef water is in essence NEVER changed. Think about this, let try and mimic the ocean to a degree. You setup an 80,000 gallon reef tank but only use an area 3 cubed to house your reef. Stock it with only 10 small fish and a few larger ones. Setup a few ports near the reef to blow out trace elements and other nutrients over the reef as occurs in nature. Use a 25 foot deep sand bed.
Venture a guess how often you'll need to do a water change.

Also keep in mind that sea water also has the benefit of each gallon containing 1.5 million or so zooplankton not to mention the abundance of phytoplankton.

Actually, I have to disagree. The flow of water over natural reefs has distinct effects on a local level. That is, there will always be a gradient immediately surrounding the reef and its inhabitants which will be naturally higher in waste and lower in reef building elements. As that "microenvirnment" is exposed to current and tidal forces, there will be a net "correction" for these factors. Waste removal and elemental replenishment will not occur by diffusion alone fast enough to assure a homeostatic balance at the reef/ocean interface. Movement is required to achieve dilution in a prompt enough manner to adequately achieve its very purpose of maintaining low waste product concentration and replenishment of elements required for survival. Microplankton/zooplankton needs to be transported in, elements need to be replenished at the micro-interface of reef/sea, and excess waste requires elimination.

We might measure our elements such as Ca, Mg, NO3 (and so on) and believe we're maintaining a homeostatic environment that simulates natural conditions. The problem is, our testing is insensitive to the actual concentrations of whatever we're testing for. Unless you're using a lab grade probe for testing electrical conductivity of your RO/DI water, your meter that reports 0 TDS, is wrong. It lacks the necessary sensitivity and accuracy to measure what is typically defined as pure water, generally <5 microsiemen/cm, by one measure. A refractometer helpful in measuring specific gravity, but not salinity (which is merely calculated from the s.g. measurement). Our water composition varies from natural sea water at the mercy of the manufacturer and batch lot. The same certainly follows for test kits for Ca, NO3, Mg, etc., with results described in ppm, yet with insufficient accuracy to not allow either a fair comparison in a real reef microenvironment, let alone the actual result even in our tank as no 2 test methods ever seem to yield the same absolute measurement.

Given the limitations of our ability to test accurately to assess stability, it is difficult to expect our mini-reefs to have any relationship to the stability a natural reef offers. What we do know is that assisting in waste removal, and replenishment of consumed elements, helps keep our tanks "healthy". So many methods have shown themselves to be successful for maintaining a "healthy" reef (I'm bothered by describing health, as we really have no objective way of measuring that either. Growth rates and polyp extension are probably poor approximations of healthy behaviors in a real reef) for relatively long periods (by our short standards) that there is more than one way to keep a closed system stable.

I agree with the need to replace evaporation at a rate that is close to that loss, as well as adding elements at rates that match their consumption. None of that addresses the need to keep our animals from sitting in their own waste products, at concentrations well beyond their normal environment. How to export that waste is still, and will continue to be, a major issue in long term management, and current methods will no doubt be supplanted by new and more efficient techniques.

Henry

 

[Chiefmcfuz]

Henrye, you're fired :lol2:

Just kidding good point (going to get my dictionary)

 

[Paul B]

One thing I would like to add about stability is the length of time the tank has been running. I don't really don't know why that is but I know the first ten years my tank was set up I had all sorts of problems, mostly diseases which seemed to come from no where. I would imagine a lot had to do with my inexperience. Anyway for the last twenty five years my tank has been very stable. Fish live to their normal lifespan unless there is an accident like getting sucked into a powerhead or some other malfunction of equipment. There is also hardly any disease. My reef got ich once in all those years and I don't quarintine. Before the tank was ten years old I just had to mention ich and everything would come down with it, now it is not a problem.
As I said I have no idea what it is about an old tank but it seems to be more stable as the years pass.
A reef also goes through cycles as it ages. You will not notice it for a few years. I get algae cycles, gorgonian cycles, amphipod cycles, mushroom cycles and now I am in a brittle star cycle. There are hundreds of the little suckers all over the place. The cycles last from a few months to a couple of years. I really can't say if these cycles are a good thing or a bad one but there doesen't seem to be a problem except when I want to keep a bubble coral and for some reason my tank wants to reproduce gorgonians.
All of these animals exude chemicals and the purpose of these chemicals is to keep other lifeforms from growing too close to them. I believe this is the reason some people can't keep certain animals for very long.
Have a great day.
Paul

 

[loismustdie]

Wow. I went to work a 24 and I come home to this. I'm glad to see this thread took off. Even more, I'm happy to see a few members are expressing interest in these techniques. I didn't read through in great detail just yet, but I'm glad to see some of the guys chime in who did. Paul B, thanks for getting involved.
Dylan (yes, I owe you an e-mail) you can get a single system, but a cheaper option in an Aquamedic Twin Doser for 2 part and a DIY floatswitch for ATO. You may even opt for the triple or quad system. You'll find a use for the other pumps.
Steven, the mod to the doser is better check valves. Awilda has mine. I'll be setting her tank up shortly with the improvements we are talking about on this thread. I'll take pics of the pump when I'm done to show the check valves and I'll give part numbers.
Nick, I love my calcium pumps. Set it up right off of the Dialyseas. It took 24 hours to cycle and I haven't had to touch it since. Very good investment. BTW, it's one of those things that I hate most about the dialyseas... as if it isn't expensive enough, every improvement needed to get the most out of the machine cost even more. Top quality stuff though and well worth the price.
Matt, Fred, Brett and Henry... all good points brought up by you guys on WC's. Like I said, I believe in small frequent. But overall, your system has to be set up to a point where small frequent WC's are even helpful. I change 2.5 GPD for 75 gallons per month.
Keep it gong and lets see some pics of what you are using in action. The point here is to give others ideas on how to apply these systems on their tanks.
Where's Shaun? I want that other thread to come back too.
chris

 

[dylanjs]

Chris, I got some advice from Russ, so I'm mid-build on that sump. Can't wait to hear about the Aquamedic mods as I just purchased a twin doser. How do you DIY an ATO, by the way?

 

[loismustdie]

Dylan, sounds good. DIY with float switches and a peristaltic pump. You should be able to do it for around $60. Glad the guys were able to help you. Time has not been easy for me to come by lately.

 

[dylanjs]

Chris, why would you use a float switch and peristaltic pump vs. a regular pump?

 

[loismustdie]

regular pumps are fine. I like slow and steady. Peristaltic for me.
To be honest, I'm fairly inexperienced with ATO. All the years I've been in the hobby, I've only had ATO since December. The reduced maintenance and improved results... I was kicking myself for not doing it sooner.
Slamajama may post his ATO.

 

[Paul B]

I have a DIY top off system that has been working for many years with no pump.
My RO/DI deposits water into a 7 gallon pail which is in another room and it is higher than my tank. The water flows by gravity above the ceiling to a float switch in the tank. The water goes through a 1/4" tube so even if the float switch failed the water would only enter the tank slightly faster than it evaporates. No chance of an overflow.
Paul

 

[meschaefer]

I have been using a float switch for years. The float switch is mounted in my sump, and connected to a maxijet 400, which sits in a freshwater reservoir. For a freshwater reservoir I use a 5 1/2 gallon glass AGA tank.

In a worst case scenario, the ATO would pump five gallons into my 65 gallon tank, with another 15 gallons of water in my sump. While not ideal, it is small enough volume that the salinity swing should cause minimal damage. I have only had a problem once in about five years, which was attributable to human error.

I used to ATO Kalk water. I used the same maxijet 400, as I currently use, and have been using that pump for a number of years. Some people have had trouble with calcium deposits causing the pump not to work, but I never had that problem. I clean the pump maybe once every six months if I am being diligent.

 

[loismustdie]

Paul, is that a Nurse style system?

 

[Paul B]

Paul, is that a Nurse style system?

I thought it was a "Paul" style system :bigeyes:

I don't know what a nurse style system is. I don't know what a lot of the technological things are in this hobby because I always built my own equipment. I figure if I can't make it, I don't need it. :smash:
Paul

 

[loismustdie]

yeah, a Nurse would be fairly easy to build. I'm sure you got something along those lines. Any pics? You'd be an asset in the DIY forum.

 

[Paul B]

OK I give up, whats a Nurse system?

 

[loismustdie]

It's a type of siphon system. When the water level dropped below the level of a tube, air gets in the tube and allows water to siphon into the sump until the water level is over the tube again. Simple. I didn't even think of this one for my tank. It's so easy.

 

[TimberTDI]

Whatever happened to the Nurce ATO? Did they get sued for copyright infringement?

Steven

 

[Paul B]

Oh thanks. I don't have a sump though. Wasen't popular in 72.:smokin:
Sounds simple though.
So far I haven't had any problems with my gravity system.
I can always depend on gravity.