Common Misconceptions In the Hobby

[fishdoc11]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659236#post10659236 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by capn_hylinur
Another misconception:
Bigger and more powerful protein skimmers are what is needed to be successful. I have been told that you can't have a big enoughskimmer. Yet common sense tells me that there must be adverse affects to skimming to much. So what is the "skim er scoop " on protein skimmers?

You can cearatinly have a successful tank without a good skimmer but having one cearatinly makes things easier IMO.
I would almost go so far as to say that stating you can skim too much is a myth. That's very hard to do IME.....of course it all depends on what you are trying to do, trying to keep etc...

FWIW, Chris

 

[fishdoc11]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659001#post10659001 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SDguy
The guy (or gal ) who sets up a beautiful tank and just does routine maintenance (or even pays for it) doesn't even frequent these boards, more than likely. At least from what I've seen locally.

I actually think the opposite to be the case. It would be interesting to see some sort of poll.

As far as "not intending" to hurt livestock there are lots of people that would argue that when you place livestock in your tank you are assuming responsibility for a living thing and being judicious about the risk you put that organism in would be a good idea. For most of us it can also be thought of as protecting an investment....in the form of money but more importantly in the time associated with keeping a tank. We all kill things in our reef tanks but taking large risks, while is it ones perogative, will often have unwanted consequences.

Chris

 

[davidryder]

Pictures are taken in a single frame of time. Nice looking tanks can be setup in 2 weeks - it's all about aquascaping. I don't need to know what I'm doing to buy a full stock of fish and corals and arrange them nicely. They will do well for a couple weeks, maybe even months. It doesn't take much to keep inhabitants alive for a short period of time.

Pictures can be misleading, to say the absolute least.

 

[SDguy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659295#post10659295 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by fishdoc11
I actually think the opposite to be the case. It would be interesting to see some sort of poll.


Chris

I agree...that would be a really interesting poll...not sure how people that aren't on the boards would participate though

 

[SDguy]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659236#post10659236 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by capn_hylinur
Another misconception:
Bigger and more powerful protein skimmers are what is needed to be successful.

Eh, not necessarily needed, but sure makes life easier, IMO/E.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659517#post10659517 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SDguy
Eh, not necessarily needed, but sure makes life easier, IMO/E. [/QUOTE

can you actually over skim and cause problems with the nutrient levels in your tank?

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659654#post10659654 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by capn_hylinur


can you actually over skim and cause problems with the nutrient levels in your tank?

Definitely.



Theres a simple solution though, and its one that very few people would have a problem with: Add more fish and feed more.

 

[owenb01]

It's a common misconception that you can't keep a blacktip in your 75.....right? :rollface:

 

[ihopss]

(Rules) Ideal conditions can be counted on.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659795#post10659795 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by wmullins
(Rules) Ideal conditions can be counted on.

Misconception: There are ideal conditions.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659729#post10659729 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
Definitely.



Theres a simple solution though, and its one that very few people would have a problem with: Add more fish and feed more.

rollface: :rollface: thanks Rich but-----------

I meant in being counter productive to the feeding of phyto cylopeeze to the tank.
I do it and I know others do it---when we go to feed the corals etc with our phyto etc we usually turn the skimmer and main pump off for 30-45 min.
But some phyto remains in the water column as do copopods if you are running a fuge
so is there not a danger is making a rich skimmite consisting of expensive DT?

Is there any formula you can go by for how big your skimmer should be in the relation to your tank(taking into consideration your biomass like you suggested):

 

[Sk8r]

I have a 54g [30g sump] and got an Aqua C EV 120 skimmer. It's made a real nice improvement over the Urchin, let me say. What it pulls out makes me real convinced I didn't want that in my tank. You can always slow down a strong skimmer---pepping up a wimpy one is ever so much harder.
I also piped the outflow back to the inflow chamber, so the microbubbles have to go back through the massive cheato ball, which acts as a particulate filter/bubblebuster, a kind of living filter sock that cleans itself [copepods.]

Misconception: the gallonage rating on skimmers means what it says. [Only if you have very little life in your tank].

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659859#post10659859 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by capn_hylinur
rollface: :rollface: thanks Rich but-----------

I meant in being counter productive to the feeding of phyto cylopeeze to the tank.
I do it and I know others do it---when we go to feed the corals etc with our phyto etc we usually turn the skimmer and main pump off for 30-45 min.
But some phyto remains in the water column as do copopods if you are running a fuge
so is there not a danger is making a rich skimmite consisting of expensive DT?

Is there any formula you can go by for how big your skimmer should be in the relation to your tank(taking into consideration your biomass like you suggested):

Another misconception: Corals eat phytoplankton.


They dont. Its too small. They eat the things that eat phytoplankton. (Zooplankton).

Any skimmer worth its salt is going to pull out DTs extremely quickly. Its really easy to skim out.

As to skimmer sizing, I wish. The ratings are all junk. Plus, its not just skimmer that decides nutrient load. Flow matters. Sponges help, refuges help, etc.


I'm kind of the oppinion that you buy a skimmer thats a little too big, and then just keep adding fish until your corals stop lightening up.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659903#post10659903 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
Another misconception: Corals eat phytoplankton.


They dont. Its too small. They eat the things that eat phytoplankton. (Zooplankton).

Any skimmer worth its salt is going to pull out DTs extremely quickly. Its really easy to skim out.

As to skimmer sizing, I wish. The ratings are all junk. Plus, its not just skimmer that decides nutrient load. Flow matters. Sponges help, refuges help, etc.


I'm kind of the oppinion that you buy a skimmer thats a little too big, and then just keep adding fish until your corals stop lightening up.

dynamite--I hope other dumb shumcks like myself read that misconception. At the price of DT too-and all the guys that I know that are busy making their own phyto and loading up their tanks with it to the point of cyano problems

What should we be feeding our corals---what products or brands?

 

[MiddletonMark]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10659903#post10659903 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
Another misconception: Corals eat phytoplankton.


They dont. Its too small. They eat the things that eat phytoplankton. (Zooplankton).

That's odd, because I've heard that certain corals can and do.

Among stony corals, it might be close to zero ... but soft coral and non-photosynthetic ones I don't think have been proven to not consume.

Heck, corals eat bacteria. If they can get that, I don't think size is a causative variable not allowing coral consumption.

 

[RichConley]

Mark, yeah, there are some, but the vast majority dont.

Theres better ways to feed your corals, and better ways to spend your money.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10660257#post10660257 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
Mark, yeah, there are some, but the vast majority dont.

Theres better ways to feed your corals, and better ways to spend your money.

please explain ol great mentor of the seas I dying to spend money on different things then DT

 

[RichConley]

Fish-goo, more fish, and a bigger skimmer. The whole idea is to keep the tank clean, but increase the amount of food available to the system.


You know how much fish-goo you can make for the same price as a bottle of DTs?

 

[Peter Eichler]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10660037#post10660037 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by MiddletonMark
That's odd, because I've heard that certain corals can and do.

Among stony corals, it might be close to zero ... but soft coral and non-photosynthetic ones I don't think have been proven to not consume.

Heck, corals eat bacteria. If they can get that, I don't think size is a causative variable not allowing coral consumption.

A very small amount of corals have been shown to ingest phytoplankton. It's believed that in many cases those that do ingest it probably don't have the proper enzymes to digest and utilize plant matter. Furthermore, even if a coral can ingest and utilize phytoplankton it would provide a very small percentage of their nutritional needs.

In short, corals are carnivores and should be fed as such.

Capn, for corals with smaller polyps DT's oyster eggs and Cyclopezze are the best coral foods on the market IMO. Various roe (urchin, fish,etc) would be another good food source but is a little tough to come by, but an Asian food market would be your best bet. With roe, the smaller the better.

 

[MiddletonMark]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10660257#post10660257 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
Mark, yeah, there are some, but the vast majority dont.

Theres better ways to feed your corals, and better ways to spend your money.

I agree ... but if we're talking about misconceptions, I think we should add

Misconception:Corals don't eat phytoplankton.

Some do.

It might not be an important part of their diet, many may not eat much if at all ... but some do, and for some, it could be important.

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10660334#post10660334 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Peter Eichler
In short, corals are carnivores and should be fed as such.

Actually, some corals might focus more on bacteria ... which isn't what I would call a `carnivore'.



Let's not get rid of misconceptions by passing along incorrect information that will just spawn further misconceptions.

The jury is out on what/how much corals get from this nutrient-source, but to dismiss it entirely, for all forms of coral, is tossing baby with bathwater. `Not fully understood/studied' should not equate `does not'.

And when things aren't clear-cut ... should we start further misconceptions by over-stating the case?

Corals are omnivores, and if we are to use wide categories like `coral' ... we should avoid overly lumping their characteristics unless we like creating inaccuracy. Corals are pretty diverse, after all.