Tank Longevity (just ranting)

[lex]

I think every system should have a complete nitrate cycle. The process stops at nitrate and we have to do water changes to remove them. Using a combination of strong skimming, refugiums, DSB and cryptic zones this can be done. I intend on setting up a cryptic zone in the near future to try it out. Cryptic zones could be one of the missing links in a complete marine system but they are not very well documented so i'll give it a go first hand.

With the great barrier reef on it's last 20 years do you think as many specimens as possible should be collected to try and preserve them?

 

[Paul B]

With the great barrier reef on it's last 20 years do you think as many specimens as possible should be collected to try and preserve them?

No, they have a much better chance on the reef where they can at least re produce. We have a dismal record of raising saltwater tropical fish and I never heard of even one being raised and returned to the sea.

 

[lex]

from what ive heard just about every thing is doomed for the great barrier reef. five years ago they said 40 years, now its 20 so it could be even shorter the way global warming is going. looks like our oceans need a big water change (or giant chiller). sad isnt it and its our falt.

 

[brandon429]

I wanted to submit my proofs to the matter... I feel it's the amount and frequency of water changes, the stocking ratios between fish, their waste and their required feed and the reliance upon filtration machines that makes the lifespan predictable in the tanks we keep. Too many darn variables, and add to that your average reef tank keeper basically operates a functional sink that truly never outputs waste at the ideal rate, yet they input to it like it does. Old tank syndrome, 20% water changes monthly, permanent nitrate wars, 11+ fish with specialized concentrated urine to prevent cellular water loss in a relatively small marine environment, basically every tank you have seen--this is it for me so all my tanks are built oppositely.

I get the average problem from time to time but old tank syndrome I have really tried to control for about 9 years by doing things like keeping few or no fish within dense coral tanks (fish contribute to old tank syndrome faster than anthing I've seen, without em or with only 1 or two, average maintenance tasks will double+ your lifespan before eutrophic crash I've seen it time and time again). I'm talking about coral ecosystems, not just fish only tanks. FO tanks with complete detritus removal work great, but a reef tank takes tighter balances to keep it from being wrecked by primary producers and made into an eventual algae sink within a year or three so I put that into a video based on models I still have alive in my house.

When the mods decide to post up my new thread I have made some documentation about what I think keeps a tank going indefinately, and there's the tanks to prove it on the tape. For me it's about ridiculous water changes and keeping the size tank that allows them, in the end, nothing debates a system that can be replicated by others and currently what I see is most people advocating and replicating techniques that have limited lifespans. I'm just saying if you can keep a micro tank alive and non eutrophic for nearly a decade on this technique why should giant tanks be having issues in anyone's 3 year future as they do> just chattin

I think the number one issue here is too much bioload and too many variables we depend on to deal with it. slow the aging process, save a fish he he

 

[jimbojangles]

yeah... the big challenge is really packing everything into that small space.

i think having a refugium is the way to combat this... you gotta have realistic idea of what you can fit in there.

in reality, the longevity should IMPROVE as the tank matures.

things like deep sand beds, macroalgae, lots of LR make this a non-issue.

just gotta have natural filtration, the tank WILL adapt over time to pretty much whatever you throw at it within reason. just gotta be patient.

patience is paramount.

 

[brandon429]

hey thats a smart simple statement, that it should improve not decline. best way to put it regardless of the equipment used. \

 

[Paul B]

Brandon, I am not sure if I agree with your last post. I agree that almost everyone seems to think water changes will promote tank longivity, I say almost because I don't think it is the main thing or even near the top of the list. Of course we need to change water but I can only go by my tank and my bioload. My 40 year old tank has never experienced Old Tank Syndrome and I change very little water, only 20% about 5 or 6 times a year.
I also do not run a DSB as I feel they have a much too short lifespan for someone like me with a lifelong hobby. I want my tank to last as long as I do.
I really can't say why my tank has lasted but I do know that it can not be from a DSB or many water changes.
My bioload is also a little high, I have about 25 fish in this 100 gallon tank along with corals and a bunch of ten year old hermit crabs.
Many of the fish are spawning so I usually feed a lot to them. Also I don't use much "regular" aquarium foods, I go for fish eggs, some clams, live worms and some plankton/mysis. My nitrates are very low but I do add some bacteria from the sea which I believe is very important.
I also think my RUGF will last forever with no chance of crashing and very little maintenance a few times a year.
So to sum it up, yes, there are too many variables, my tank may be an anomely and maybe it can't be replicated, I don't know.
But I do know that whatever system you are using, should eliminate all of your nitrates without relying on water changes. Water changes are needed to replace trace elements and remove things not converted by bacteria but your bacteria should be removing nitrates if not, they are not working and something is wrong

 

[brandon429]

well written. it's tough to get natural nitrate reduction in most tanks that outpaces nitrogen production, it's ideal but not the norm which is why you have so many things like denitrators and refugiums, for those who can't do it through monerans alone. if you've achieved it where you tank fully processes it's bioload and you don't get continually climbing no3 rates then your tank has hit the golden balance and is definately the exception to the norm at the 40 year mark. well done! I have to use water changes because like most tanks without special accoutrements the nitrates continually climb above tolerable thresholds (months long for larger tanks, weeks in an aged nano) and it's again because the anaerobic zones may not be accounted for in the way common fish bioloading dictates.

so it's not that the bacteria aren't working, it's that in nano tanks it's tough to get anaerobic zones that dont produce hydrogen sulfide accordingly. it's better currently to do large water changes to keep export ideal, and since this is just what skimmers do it's not harmful as both of our tanks exhibit fine health with apparently opposing husbandry practices. If I had a large tank I certainly wouldn't be able to afford changing the water as I currently do so I guess I would seek to replicate what has worked for 40 years. by the way that's the longest standing single tank I've ever heard of without massive overhaul of the sandbed. if that's the original bed and rock from that long you deserve a moses icon man! good yob
B

 

[Paul B]

Brandon, it is the original dolomite gravel and all of the rocks have been in there for at least 30 years. The original "rock" was dead coral skeletons as there was no live rock for sale in the 70s and we all used dead coral as decoration. It was gradually replaced but some of the dead coral is still in there as base rock under the real rock. The water has never been all changed at once.

This is the original tank in about 1973 or so. You can see the dead coral we used as decoration. In about 1980 it was all transfered into a 100 gallon tank when I moved.