Trace element removal

[Tangman1218]

Id like to keep this one going with thoughts and options with the advanced people. A lot of us have great advice, but this article I am about to post will help us more with newbie options and even options in our own tanks.

 

If you have read it, re-read it. I cannot begin to tell you the amount of thoughts I have based on this article. I hope I'm not the only one, but as we go, I will be bringing up possible solutions, questions and concerns and would appreciate all the advanced people adding insight and concerns as well.

 

http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-12/...ature/index.php

 

Tang

[lgreen]

Unless you have a super mega stocked aquarium and/or never do water changes I think trace elements are a joke.

 

I think people mess with their tanks way to much. The less I touch my tank (besides simple things like topping off the tank, cleaning the glass, and monthly water changes) the better it looks. I do toss in some seachem reef plus, reef complete, and reef builder liquid occasionally, but just as I feel like it.

 

I also don't really believe in test kits. I just watch my corals. A water change can fix just about anything.

[pitbullpooch]

thanks for the thread tang. now my question is are you wanting to figure out if a skimmer really does pull trace elements out of our systems as we discussed before? also we need to keep in mind were discussing nano reefs so the amount pulled out of a nano using a skimmer compared to large reef system are very different since the nano obviously has alot less to pull from to begin with and is effected alot differntly then a large reef . so my point is is it worth pulling the little bit of biolaod from a small system and at the same time removing the little amount of trace element we have to work with? normally a nano has more corals and less fish and a skimmer is mainly for removing fish waste. so is it worth removing what our corals need to remove fish waste when if you have live rock as a natural filter and maybe a refugium (which i dont even use and still have undetectable nitrates) you can keep your nitrates almost always undetectable without a skimmer. so another question why use something that can strip away something that helps our nano's when we still can have 0 nitrates with out it?

[Tangman1218]

Unless you have a super mega stocked aquarium and/or never do water changes I think trace elements are a joke.

 

I also don't really believe in test kits. I just watch my corals. A water change can fix just about anything.

 

I hear ya LG. I never use test kits either. The only tests I do are Salinity every once in a while and TDS.

 

About the Trace elements though...I dont want anyone to think ive had some incredible revelation regarding trace elements and that Im going to go all hoe- down on everyone, but read the article in its entirety and tell me what you think. Its quite possible we are all going to learn something valuable to pass on to others when the time comes.

 

Just to wet the whistle for you a little LG, Shimek states that water changes are good, but can also be damaging if done to often. This is one of those thingy questions I would like the advanced people to opinionate on. I'm eager to have Fosi read it. Although, he probably has

 

Tang

[pitbullpooch]

Unless you have a super mega stocked aquarium and/or never do water changes I think trace elements are a joke.

 

I think people mess with their tanks way to much. The less I touch my tank (besides simple things like topping off the tank, cleaning the glass, and monthly water changes) the better it looks. I do toss in some seachem reef plus, reef complete, and reef builder liquid occasionally, but just as I feel like it.

 

I also don't really believe in test kits. I just watch my corals. A water change can fix just about anything.

thank you. thats exactly how i run my tanks. do as less as needed and have less problems. thats exactly why i dont skim my nano's because if you keep sps like i do then you have to make up for the calcium and other trace elements that it skims out. the simple way is the easiest and most effective way from day one.

[lgreen]

Just to wet the whistle for you a little LG, Shimek states that water changes are good, but can also be damaging if done to often. This is one of those thingy questions I would like the advanced people to opinionate on. I'm eager to have Fosi read it. Although, he probably has

 

Tang

 

I agree totally with Shimek. I've never really understand why so many people on nano-reef advocate weekly water changes. I think more damage is caused by the instability created with weekly water changes personally.

 

I think we have discusses that article several times on here actually. I know the topic of trace elements and skimming has come up with some pretty deep discussions before. Hopefully you can get a good discussion going here, but you might also search for those threads is you are curious for additional insight.

[pitbullpooch]

I hear ya LG. I never use test kits either. The only tests I do are Salinity every once in a while and TDS.

 

 

Just to wet the whistle for you a little LG, Shimek states that water changes are good, but can also be damaging if done to often.

 

Tang

im the same way as far as test kits go. the water change part i agree on also. remeber my comment on the other thread about the water changes tang? i also have better sucess with less water changes and no skimming on anything less then 50 gallons. ive tried all methods of filtration and found that the less you do the better off you are. alot of people uy into the hype of dosing and skimming on nano's when it does more harm then good and cost alot more.

[Tangman1218]

thanks for the thread tang. now my question is are you wanting to figure out if a skimmer really does pull trace elements out of our systems as we discussed before?

 

also we need to keep in mind were discussing nano reefs so the amount pulled out of a nano using a skimmer compared to large reef system are very different since the nano obviously has alot less to pull from to begin with and is effected alot differntly then a large reef .

 

...so my point is is it worth pulling the little bit of biolaod from a small system and at the same time removing the little amount of trace element we have to work with?

 

No, you were completely right and I was wrong about skimmer removing trace elements. My apologies

 

The main case study had to do with a 50 gallon tank (191. some odd litres), but keep in mind the amount of sludge and skimmate and so forth in pounds that was being taken out (chart description(s). Now try to mentally proportion those numbers down to nano size (12 gallon lets say) with a comparable skimmer to fit that nano, and are you really removing very much to affect it if you do regular water changes? And if not, should we be doing weekly water changes because of the buildup of bad trace elements that could cause our systems to crash after a few years? These are some of the things Id like us to all tackle. One thing at a time though ( I know I threw 2 or 3 things out there)

 

I think it would still be beneficial, but in a controlled manner with a skimmer rated for the size of the aquarium. Im still a bit in the air though.

 

Tang

[lgreen]

thank you. thats exactly how i run my tanks. do as less as needed and have less problems. thats exactly why i dont skim my nano's because if you keep sps like i do then you have to make up for the calcium and other trace elements that it skims out. the simple way is the easiest and most effective way from day one.

 

Exactly. An interesting trend developed though over the last few years. People were doing bare bottom tanks, pumping the tanks w/ trace elements, calcium and you name it, and then doing water changes like mad. Basically just maintaining water chemistry, but not really a biological system. I think the mixing of this thinking with the real biology of reef keeping has left many confused and having no success.

[pitbullpooch]

Exactly. An interesting trend developed though over the last few years. People were doing bare bottom tanks, pumping the tanks w/ trace elements, calcium and you name it, and then doing water changes like mad. Basically just maintaining water chemistry, but not really a biological system.

 

and then having there systems crash after 6 months due to unstability...hmmmm wonder why lol

[lgreen]

No, you were completely right and I was wrong about skimmer removing trace elements. My apologies

 

The main case study had to do with a 50 gallon tank (191. some odd litres), but keep in mind the amount of sludge and skimmate and so forth in pounds that was being taken out (chart description(s). Now try to mentally proportion those numbers down to nano size (12 gallon lets say) with a comparable skimmer to fit that nano, and are you really removing very much to affect it if you do regular water changes? And if not, should we be doing weekly water changes because of the buildup of bad trace elements that could cause our systems to crash after a few years? These are some of the things Id like us to all tackle. One thing at a time though ( I know I threw 2 or 3 things out there)

 

I think it would still be beneficial, but in a controlled manner with a skimmer rated for the size of the aquarium. Im still a bit in the air though.

 

Tang

 

I see what you're getting at. I wonder how effective carbon is at removing trace elements?

[pitbullpooch]

No, you were completely right and I was wrong about skimmer removing trace elements. My apologies

 

it happens to the best of us. better to question then always believe everything your here. especially on the forums like you had said before. so i shake your hand for questioning me.

[Tangman1218]

I see what you're getting at. I wonder how effective carbon is at removing trace elements?

 

I think It was a contendor, but Skimmate, sludge, Caulerpa and Xenia were the top picks because of the moderate amount Shimek had to work with. It is in the article and Ill try to find it.

 

Tang

[pitbullpooch]

I see what you're getting at. I wonder how effective carbon is at removing trace elements?

from all the studys and tests ive read carbon removes some good trace elements but not near as many as a skimmers do. all i use in my reefs under 50 gallons is carbon besides flow and live rock ofcourse. oh and light helps somewhat but thats a whole other subject lol.

 

edit: forgot to add. my clams help out and there nice to look at.

[supernip]

Why does eating a fruit provide more benefits from the same compounds than taking a synthetic of that compound?

[pitbullpooch]

Why does eating a fruit provide more benefits from the same compounds than taking a synthetic of that compound?

hmmmmmm......

beacuse its the real thing.which means its natural and pure?

 

EDIT: im lost

[supernip]

what does that imply? natural and pure

[Tangman1218]

I think It was a contendor, but Skimmate, sludge, Caulerpa and Xenia were the top picks because of the moderate amount Shimek had to work with. It is in the article and Ill try to find it.

 

Tang

 

Okay, the Carbon thing had to do with something else....but lets tackle this one....

 

"Just about everything in a tank appears to be exported by skimming, albeit in often very low concentrations. Skimmer sludge appears to remove much more material on a per unit weight basis, although both Caulerpa and Xenia also concentrate some of the exportable materials in their tissues. Comparison with Table 1 will show that some items are significantly concentrated when compared to tank waters."

 

So, If we are getting more "wet" skimming,how much Trace element are we really removing? Enough to damage the balance of the system?

[icenine]

I've never really understand why so many people on nano-reef advocate weekly water changes. I think more damage is caused by the instability created with weekly water changes personally.

 

I think more damage is caused by slacking and not providing systems with enough clean water.

[supernip]

ilu icenine.

[pitbullpooch]

what does that imply? natural and pure

its not synthetic...

[Tangman1218]

I think more damage is caused by slacking and not providing systems with enough clean water.

 

Icenine and SUpernip, read the article

 

Tang

[pitbullpooch]

I think more damage is caused by slacking and not providing systems with enough clean water.

true...but when you really dont need to do a water change but you do it anyways it can do more harm then not changing it. alot of people do more then they need to do and that was his point.

[supernip]

ethanol is ethenol regularless of what made it. A lot of synthetics are made by bacteria.

 

But when you eat a fruit, there are other chemicals that can regulate absorption or even the shape of the desired compound. Much like what trace elements do.

 

Although they're in small quantities, you have to keep their concentrations in check, cause a lot of them act as cofactors/Prosthetics. Add that to the general solubility properties/ common ion effect of chemistry and you can see that the equation can get complicated fast.

 

Not knowing what your levels are, or to forgo regular water changes is an absurd idea. i'll finish this later. i have to go to the airport now

[icenine]

Icenine and SUpernip, read the article

 

Tang

 

I did