Marine tank fish only

[mr_tap_water]

I guess we have to agree that we disagree here. I would consider the idea of keeping fish only system at a lower SG to be an old and obsolete way of doing things. I know some LFS store still do this. The two main parasite diseases in SW are SW ich and SW velvet. Neither are affected by that slight lowering of SG. Having tried this both ways, way back in the BR (Before reefs) days, I found I got better results at 1.025 for SG. Although, I must admit that a lot of other things were done differently back then so there could have been other factors involved.

The critical part of my previous post is that a lower SG skews reading for calcium, alkalinity and magnesium. Fish only systems usually have a very slow rate of calcium depletion, especially compared to a reef system. You really shouldn't have to do too much beyond water changes to maintain it. You don't have anything like corals in the system that grow and consume a lot of calcium in the process.

In the system in question, I think the best approach is to get all the water parameters correct, and then use the calcium reactor to maintain the needed levels. The other serious issue is to treat the sick fish, and this is going to be fairly difficult in a system that large. Removing a fish is going to be difficult, and with parasitic diseases, it's safe to assume if one fish has it, they all have it.

Hi there
It may be a method that has been used for many years but it's still a method being used today just because it's old doesn't mean it's obsolete I believe both ways can be done successfully ie high or low sg but I do think you benefit by going lower from what I have read over the years. At the end of the day there is no really right or wrong just choices.[emoji846]
Have a little read of this food for thought maybe.
http://saltwateraquariumhobby.com/water-parameters/specific-gravity/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nanoreefing4fun]

related - another good read... this is from Randy Holmes-Farley, in the States many consider his advise as very sound

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-05/rhf/

small extract...

Salinity

There are a variety of different ways to measure and report salinity, including conductivity probes, refractometers, and hydrometers. They typically report values for specific gravity (which is unitless) or salinity (in units of ppt or parts per thousand, roughly corresponding to the number of grams of dry salt in 1 kg of the water), although conductivity (in units of mS/cm, milliSiemens per centimeter) is sometimes used.

Somewhat surprisingly, aquarists do not always use units that naturally follow from their measurement technique (specific gravity for hydrometers, refractive index for refractometers, and conductivity for conductivity probes) but rather use the units interchangeably.

For reference, natural ocean water has a salinity of about 35 ppt, corresponding to a specific gravity of about 1.0264 and a conductivity of 53 mS/cm.

As far as I know, there is little real evidence that keeping a coral reef aquarium at anything other than natural levels is preferable. It appears to be common practice to keep marine fish, and in many cases reef aquaria, at somewhat lower than natural salinity levels. This practice stems, at least in part, from the belief that fish are less stressed at reduced salinity. Substantial misunderstandings also arise among aquarists as to how specific gravity really relates to salinity, especially considering temperature effects.

Ron Shimek has discussed salinity on natural reefs in a previous article. His recommendation, and mine as well, is to maintain salinity at a natural level. If the organisms in the aquarium are from brackish environments with lower salinity, or from the Red Sea with higher salinity, selecting something other than 35 ppt may make good sense. Otherwise, I suggest targeting a salinity of 35 ppt (specific gravity = 1.0264; conductivity = 53 mS/cm).

Ron Shimek's article ^
http://web.archive.org/web/20030218...om/fish2/aqfm/1997/nov/features/1/default.asp

 

[Aliasger]

Hi guys! My levels have come up and all is well. Although what i wanted to know was has anybody using an ozoniser ? I have got sander's XT2000 with 6/8 hose. Now the thing is, as i connected these through the injector in the skimmer it showed air flow error in the ozoniser. So i need to connect a air pump. I tried using jbl a400 pro but the flow is still less. Is the error because of the air flow? Because in the ozoniser manual also it says less air flow. Anybody knows any high flow or strong air pump. The size of hose for air pump is also 6/8.

 

[DaveK]

I have used ozone before, and used it for a number of years. I do no recommend it's use today.

Ozone is something that has gone through several periods where it's use became a fad and then dropped off to almost no users. With the trend toward more natural systems, I can't see widespread use of ozone coming back.

Ozone can be very dangerous to your tank and to you if it is not properly used. The EPA has very low exposure limits for people. To use ozone properly you must filter the water exposed to ozone through carbon. If you are using ozone with a skimmer you must also filter the air coming out of the skimmer through ozone. No exceptions!

VIP note - There are some web sites out there that claim that you need not worry about ozone exposure in aquarium use. I consider these sites to be wrong, and refer you to the EPA guidelines mentioned above.

This brings up another important question. What do you expect to get out of the use of ozone?

Ozone can do several things well. It's good at killing bacteria in the water. It's also good at killing algae in the water. It can reduce nitrite to nitrate quickly. Note, it can not reduce ammonia to nitrite. It's been used to attempt to control parasite diseases in fish, but I have found that it is not very good at it. If it was, we'd all be using it.

On your specific questions. Your going to need to go out and get an industrial size air pump to use with an ozonizer the size your planning. It's several times larger than ones that would typically be used on a single home aquarium.

If you are going to use ozone, I highly recommend you use it in conjunction with a controller that can measure and control ORP. You don't want to overdose ozone. Raising the ORP too high, even if there is no free ozone in the tank is lethal to most of your livestock.

Lastly, after all that, I think your best course of action is not to use ozone at all.

 

[Aliasger]

Well firstly, i intend to use ozoniser to reduce the algal growth in the tank. I have been using ORP along and have kept it at 350mV. I know the consequences of using ozone. However i need to control the algal growth. I have been using activated carbon to reduce the excess ozone.
All i am having problem was the air flow. It says through injector in the skimmer it could be used but i am having air flow problem so wanted to know if a stronger airpump will work.

 

[DaveK]

As I previously stated, your are almost certainly going to need an industrial size air pump. You need not only enough air to drive the ozonizer but enough to drive the skimmer. Skimmers need a massive amount of air.

Most air pumps made for the aquarium market today are rather small. They don't begin to compare to the high volumes pumps made years ago when air driven filters were the only ones available.

If your trying to control algae, I think you'd be much better off using UV. It doesn't have all the control problems of ozone. You would need a fairly large UV unit.

Neither ozone or UV will control algae growing in a tank. They can only kill the algae and spores in the water column and pass through the filtration system.

An ORP reading of 350 isn't bad, but you might want something a bit higher. Make sure your ORP probe is properly cleaned and calibrated before you mess with ORP reading.