Coral-only tank?

[reeflovin]

Has anyone set up a tank with only light-loving inverts?

I'm thinking of setting one up with clams, LPS, softies, maybe an anemone. But no shrimp, fish or crabs. Just wondering what the maintenance is like compared to a typical reef tank w/ fish

Would you even need a skimmer and refugium w/ algae?

 

[yongpanda]

You would definitely need a skimmer for that setup especially if you're keeping an anemone, which will require feedings. Although corals don't poop like fish, they excrete things that need to be skimmed.

With a coral only tank, I'd definitely be worried about the lack of nutrients in the tank and would advise that you dose things such as amino acids for sps, coral frenzy, and the like.

 

[happyclam]

Interesting, I would have thought that a protein skimmer would not be required in a system like that with no fish. I am considering setting up a tank like this as well for a little bit simpler maintenance, and I am interested as well to hear what other people have to say.

Here are my thoughts:
If this is a fish less tank, then no large amounts of food will be added on a frequent basis. No food added means nothing has to really be skimmed from the system. Instead, what ever nutrients are in the tank will just go to fueling coral growth. Soft corals are primarily photosynthetic and can't really be fed any man made foods, so I could see where they would be fine in a tank with bright lighting and no skimming. I do not have experience with the other animals though so I am not sure if it would work for them.

 

[nepenthes99]

Why would you not want fish in your reef? The goal of reefkeeping is to replicate the ocean as much as possible, and fish are a key part of a reef.

 

[mfinn]

Just because you have a box of saltwater doesn't mean you have to fill it with fish.
I currently have a 50 gallon tank with just branching lps and encrusting sps.
I do have a bunch of snails and hermits. They are to clean up the food I add for the corals and for algae control, which there is none.
I would also reccomend to the op that a skimmer and a refugium can really help with nutient export.

 

[LobsterOfJustice]

Fish poop is the best coral food there is!

 

[brandon429]

the corals must be fed, then you can skim/water change/refugium etc as normal to deal with the leftover proteins in the water column. The corals won't live without regular feeding, but they'll hold on for months relying on internal stores and a little photosynthate as they slowly decline.

The feed input may be less than with fish, but there must be some so whether or not you need skimming is the same as a setup using fish. some use skimmers, some dont

 

[brandon429]

corals are not classed as autotrophs that make their own food, so they must be fed.

 

[yongpanda]

think about how zeovit and prodibio work in the most general sense that you strip nitrates and phosphates from your tank keeping it pristine and then adding nutrients for the corals (over and over). If nutrients weren't necessary, then i'm sure zeovit and prodibio wouldn't spend the time developing their separate methods.

 

[sponger0]

I agree here. You will need to feed the corals since there is no fish to feed or poop in the tank. Also having a skimmer is a good idea for nutrient export.

Everything in our tanks works together to create a healthy reef. I dont see why not to have fish. I like my coral alot more than fish but I wouldnt go fishless

 

[reeflovin]

I'm trying to set up an ultra-low maintenance tank. Fish poop is obviously not important for corals because in the wild, poop is so diluted that it's virtually immeasurable. Seawater is prestinely clean. Maybe feeding the corals a squirt of filter-feeder food twice a month would be enough to make up for the lack of organics in the water, but I do not believe fish are a necessity in a reef tank

 

[bongarone]

I'm trying to set up an ultra-low maintenance tank. Fish poop is obviously not important for corals because in the wild, poop is so diluted that it's virtually immeasurable. Seawater is prestinely clean. Maybe feeding the corals a squirt of filter-feeder food twice a month would be enough to make up for the lack of organics in the water, but I do not believe fish are a necessity in a reef tank

If you have all the answers, why did you ask?

 

[waltj11]

Having a coral only tank, in my opinion, is more responsible because we would not be trapping fish in a tank, but i definitely see the need for fish if you are trying to recreate a reef. Although, reef tanks don't need to be exact replicas of natural reefs. Plus, I think there are less fish per gallon on a reef than in some of our tanks. I think that reeflovin is being moderately responsible by attempting not to hold fish. It's very interesting. Good luck!

 

[moshi1ry]

What walt?? So your saying taking corals out of the ocean is okay. I think people that feel like fish should not be kept in a tank fail to realize that fish are not humans. As in they do not have emotions and do not feel trapped! Obviously you should get the right fish for your size tank but i dont believe we trap fish in our tanks especially the people on reef central.
I guess i can understand not adding fish to the tank afterall its your bucket of salt water, but still fish play a very important role in our reefs. We would not have reefs without fish. Which is part of the reason our reefs are slowly shrinking away because of to much fishing! I would say if you want to have a coral dominate tank add a few fish keep it natural and it will also help your main goal out of growing corals!

 

[moshi1ry]

What walt?? So your saying taking corals out of the ocean is okay. I think people that feel like fish should not be kept in a tank fail to realize that fish are not humans. As in they do not have emotions and do not feel trapped! Obviously you should get the right fish for your size tank but i dont believe we trap fish in our tanks especially the people on reef central.
I guess i can understand not adding fish to the tank afterall its your bucket of salt water, but still fish play a very important role in our reefs. We would not have reefs without fish. Which is part of the reason our reefs are slowly shrinking away because of to much fishing! I would say if you want to have a coral dominate tank add a few fish keep it natural and it will also help your main goal out of growing corals!

 

[djp183]

Fish may well indeed have emotions. Keeping only sessile invertibrates is a cool concept - I have thought about doing it; kind of like an aquatic garden. But in the natural world fish and corals probably work together in symbiosis.

 

[waltj11]

Fish and corals work together no doubt. Why not explore this aspect of the hobby? I think the ultimate goal is to grow independent of the ocean to stock our aquariums. Corals seem easier to aquaculture than some rare types of fish. Good luck on your coral-only/possibly 1 or 2 fish, tank! haha.

 

[MatthewAD]

I think it is a reasonable way to go, if that is what you want to do. I have a plant-only freshwater tank, it is not an exciting tank, but it is fun over time.

 

[yongpanda]

feeding only twice a month in my opinion is too little. In the ocean, yes fish poop may well indeed be diluted by the volume of water in the ocean but there are other things that supply corals with food as well such as plankton and whatnot. Also have you also noticed that fish tend to be where coral reefs are - you don't see fish swimming miles away to take a dump.

But in all honesty, I've thought about the concept of having a coral only tank and yes it would have a little less maintenance but not by much. I'd say you should be feeding at least once a week since corals in the ocean have a constant supply of food. This would lead you to need a filtration system whether it be by refugium or skimmer or maybe both and other things combined.

 

[sponger0]

A coral only tank isnt low maintenance tank. A fowlr is much less maintenance