madness Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 I've heard people say that a skimmer and a refugium are redundant more than once before. But, I don't understand this. Don't they both provide different functions? Here's what I'm thinking a refugium does: Provide a safe haven for things that might get eaten in the main tank like pods and macroalgae. Exports nitrate through macroalgae consumption of nitrate. Exports nitrate through use of a DSB. Here's what I think a skimmer does: Removes proteins and other organic molecules from the water column before they decay and cause trouble. I realize that a result of the proteins decaying is nitrate which would be exported in the refugium. Other than that, what am I missing? Link to comment
wetworx101 Posted March 6, 2003 Share Posted March 6, 2003 You can have them both in one...heck I designed my current HOB fuge with a skimmer in the first chamber (havent used it yet), and they arent redundant, even though they may work against each other at times. Ideal would be to never use the skimmer, but just in case, I have one should something die in the tank or I overfeed one day. You are right about what you assume thay do... Link to comment
pipefish Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 Madness, I have one of these combination units which I have not hooked up. You are correct in that their functions overlap. The difference in my opinion is that a skimmer takes out stuff (very efficiently) but does not put any good stuff back in. The refugium whether from the algae, sand bed, miracle mud returns stuff to the aquarium. People who run skimmerless hardly ever add any additives to the tanks. I also agree that a skimmer is useful in emergencies. Sincerely, John Link to comment
madness Posted March 7, 2003 Author Share Posted March 7, 2003 Pipefish, thanks for the reply. This is kind of how I had worked out my future system. Skimmer & fuge together. I would use the skimmer for removing material and fuge for helping remove nitrates and adding stuff into the tank. I'm not sure if I will be running the fuge full-time or not. I'll have to work this out once I've got it all up and running. Any suggestions? Link to comment
Crakeur Posted March 7, 2003 Share Posted March 7, 2003 I am going to try running a skimmer in my fuge. Assuming the skimmer I purchased fits in the last chamber of the fuge. If it doesn't I will be swapping it out for a piccolo. I will post my observations once I have some. Link to comment
kimura Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 I'm currenly running a Skimmer/Fuge setup. Because of my inhabitants I wanted to run the skimmer along with the fuge. And because I travel I'm not able to do w/c's like i'd like to (i know..i know.....) . Link to comment
pipefish Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 Madness: My plan is to run the fuge continuously and only the skimmer when necessary (like cycling - some die off etc.). I have seen people go skimmerless for years with no water changes. My objective is to be as low maintenance as possible. That means - no water changes and minimal additives. Kep in touch with what progress you are making. Sincerely, John Link to comment
madness Posted March 10, 2003 Author Share Posted March 10, 2003 Pipefish: I'm converting my 29G FW planted tank in my living room to a seahorse-safe reef. I know they really like excellent water quality, so I think I'm going to do it the way you're doing it--refugium with skimmer at the ready. I'm going to try and do it without additives, which should be a problem since I'm not counting on a bunch of high-growth or SPS corals. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.