Any reason not to run UV sterilizer?

[MiamiZach]

So I had ich in my tank and have tried to let it go fallow for two months but there's two fish that absolutely won't go into the Fishtrap and have remained in there. They haven't shown any signs of ich in the past two months since the other fish died, so I'm not worried about them surviving, even though Ich can technically still be in the tank. Since the other fish died I've got about a dozen frags of coral to keep me entertained. The guy I buy my coral from said not to run easy sterilizer all the time. He said maybe a couple days a month. Since I'm hoping that the uv sterilizer can help minimize the ich still in the tank what are your some recommendations about how much I should be running it and whether the bacteria it will kill will affect my coral. Thanks for the input

 

[MrTuskfish]

Your hope that UV will get rid of ich, delaying real treatment, is a downside of UV that I often mention. IMO, UV is a great water polisher; but gives false hope to folks with parasite problems. It simply cannot cure or prevent ich.

 

[Pran]

yes I agree with Mr. Tuckfish

but I also heard if you put the flow very slow (it all depends on what UV and ur size tank) it will kill the free floating bacteria, but if its in the fish then it wont

 

[MrTuskfish]

yes I agree with Mr. Tuckfish

but I also heard if you put the flow very slow (it all depends on what UV and ur size tank) it will kill the free floating bacteria, but if its in the fish then it wont

Ich isn't bacteria, but as long as their dead, who cares. A UV unit with proper flow and perfectly maintained bulb & sleeve will kill SOME ich. With an ich infested tank, SOME isn't good enough. Only the ich, in the brief free-swimming stage (theronts) have any chance of being killed by the UV. But they have to find the UV intake before they find a fish host, that's a problem. Worse is the fact that theronts almost always emerge at night from their ''mothers'' living in the substrate, by the hundreds. Most fish sleep on the substrate. So the hundreds (thousands) of theronts would have to miss the fish sleeping on (near) it and get sucked into the UV. Just one theront, once finding a fish host is then safe from UV (and any meds, hypo, etc.) and is buried in the fish eating away. The white spot is not the actual parasite. It then falls to the substrate, safe from UV, etc., and the next generation, X100s) emerges. Fish in a HT/QT; treated with copper, hypo,or tank-transfer; while the DT stays fishless 8+ weeks is the only way to cure ich.

 

[snorvich]

What he said above. MrTuskfish gives excellent easy to understand advice.

 

[Triton_Z]

What he said above. MrTuskfish gives excellent easy to understand advice.

+1. It's tough advice, but MrTuskfish has posted a number of responses on the battle with Ich, and I agree you have to treat the fish.

UV has some powerful uses and I use a oversized unit on my 210, but you have to keep up with the maintenance (bulb changes, cleaning, flow regulation) to reap these benefits. I think most UVs get setup and end up poorly maintained and gunked up where they end up worthless to the system.

 

[snorvich]

UV is superb if used on multiple tanks sharing the same water to keep from spreading parasites among tanks. Within a single tank installation, it has some value but not as an ich eradicator. UV must be properly maintained and sized or it has no value whatsoever.

 

[E.intheC]

Worse is the fact that theronts almost always emerge at night from their ''mothers'' living in the substrate, by the hundreds. Most fish sleep on the substrate. So the hundreds (thousands) of theronts would have to miss the fish sleeping on (near) it and get sucked into the UV.

Vivid, nightmare-causing description! :eek1:

Good post though

 

[syrinx]

While there is some scientific studies that indicate the UV is often ineffective-what I see in the field is different. I think it is a great tool- as snorvich said it is vital in multiple tank systems- and it only stands to reason if it can help reduce passing infections to another tank- it should do the same in a closed system. It is not the end all some people think- but a very important tool that I would always recommend for fish only systems- or systems with sharks, eels or anemones. Healthy fish don`t get sick- and if it is only the UV increases water quality- then it does have value in preventing illness.

 

[MrTuskfish]

While there is some scientific studies that indicate the UV is often ineffective-what I see in the field is different. I think it is a great tool- as snorvich said it is vital in multiple tank systems- and it only stands to reason if it can help reduce passing infections to another tank- it should do the same in a closed system. It is not the end all some people think- but a very important tool that I would always recommend for fish only systems- or systems with sharks, eels or anemones. Healthy fish don`t get sick- and if it is only the UV increases water quality- then it does have value in preventing illness.

I agree; as long as folks don't get a false sense of security by assuming the UV will cure or prevent a parasite infestation in their DT. UV is great helper for many jobs; but its no substation for QT and more aggressive treatment of parasites. In a multiple tank system, UV CAN prevent an infested tank from passing the parasites to another tank because all of the bugs have to pass through the UV and are killed. In a closed system it may help some, but sure can't get all the bugs. IMO & IME, as long as hobbyists know how UV really works, are strict with UV maintenance; but still know its limitations----it can be a valuable tool. But, also IMO & IME, if ich is present in a system; any fish (regardless of health) is vulnerable; all it takes is a stressor or just timing. I can remember when almost every serious hobbyist used it; that isn't the case any longer. I guess there are two discussions here; 1.) UV as a maintenance tool and UV as an ich cure. 2.)I'm all for the 1st, not the 2nd.