even a 'fish only' will benefit from running a skimmer

[Gary Majchrzak]

news flash: run a skimmer on your fish only marine aquarium. Not only will you lessen the need for water changes, but it can allow you to keep more fishes or more 'challenging to maintain' species.

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

Absolutely!! Excellent point for those who may not realize.

I've never run any saltwater tank with out a skimmer. (even FO) However, I suppose there are a great deal of people out there who run tanks without them.. Actually, I've seen it.

Even in "some" LFS.. LOL which I really can't understand in a fish shop that should "know better". & I'm not just talking about in-system holding tanks... But even on their BIG stand alone displays! (no skimmers) :hmm5:

 

[albano]

I've never run any saltwater tank with out a skimmer.

While I can't say 'NEVER', I can tell say that by the late 70s, I had added the 'optional' skimmer collection cups to the uplift tubes on my undergravel filters, on my MANY SW tanks!
They did 'work'!

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

Yes, there was much less available back in the 70's to 90's.
Methods also improved much and changed and some things were dropped entirely as well as new things coming around.

But of course, Hobbyists who started with "SALT" in the 2,000's didn't need to worry about that... thanks to those who trail blazed previously! LOL

 

[jfl14609]

Here is a interesting fact or should i say partial question. I have run skimmers on ever single tank that I have run. I adjust the water extremely low so I barely get skimmate I mean change once a month or so. Now I never have phosphate or nitrate problems and everyone who knows me always wonders how my tank is so stable after what I put it through haha. so is the benefit from nutrient export or aeration?

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

Well,

I don't really know what you do to your tank Jeff (LOL) and everyones is a bit different. Obviously some people control feeding levels and livestock to certain extents which can help some in managing water quality. (involved in the import of nutrients) But some people don't as much either! Some have tanks that are heavy import- needing heavy export to compensate.

Obviously Nitrate, phosphate, silicate, carbon dioxide and dissolved organic matter are what we're all concerned about.

There are factors involved that we all (or at least most of us eventually) deal with in various ways besides just skimming and aeration. But to simply answer your question between just those 2- both are essential benefits.

Skimming:
Foam fractionation obviously removes "some" dissolved organics from your system. Everyone's production so to speak in skimmer varies depending on model efficiency and bio loads with other factors like water changes you'll do.

Aeration: Not only in the skimmer,
but overall within the system- aeration and currents (vigorous water movement) help to reduce Co2. Co2 is naturally present and needed to an extent & of course is not removed entirely. But keeping it in proper lower levels is basically done through a combination of this stuff.

Overall, each of these are a basic benefit to your tank- as they are to anyones system. I'm sure someone could add a lot more to this in depth.
But the basic questions you posed, I think I've answered.

 

[der_wille_zur_macht]

Jeff, this article touches a bit on "wet skimming" (maximizing R) vs "dry skimming" (maximizing E):

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2009/1/aafeature2/

Like with many things in life, there are many ways to skin the cat. IMHO the most important thing is to try to get an understanding of the functions different types of equipment can provide and how that might or might not meet up with the requirements for running your own tank.

 

[Flanders]

How would running a protein skimmer necessarily allow you to keep more challenging to maintain species?

 

[Gary Majchrzak]

Here is a interesting fact or should i say partial question. I have run skimmers on ever single tank that I have run. I adjust the water extremely low so I barely get skimmate I mean change once a month or so. Now I never have phosphate or nitrate problems and everyone who knows me always wonders how my tank is so stable after what I put it through haha. so is the benefit from nutrient export or aeration?

do you put any skimmate back into the display? Some folks (not many) run a skimmer purely for the aeration function but that's a HUGE waste IMO.

IME/IMO (which is much. I've experimented with protein skimming a lot):
the benefit to any system with a skimmer is aeration AND nutrient export EXCEPT if you direct skimmate back into the display...and then you are losing one of the greatest benefits a skimmer has to offer.

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

I agree totally with all above.

But the idea of someone actually re directing skimate (which has been collected- possibly sitting in some "concentration" since it "may" sit for awhile in a cup...) back into their display- really scares me! Would someone actually do that !?
Skimate should be disposed of obviously. It's the main point of skimming. Reduction of excess waste which can be pulled from the system. Aeration working in part of the process to fraction the foam.. as well as a secondary benefit of just general increased oxygenation in the system.

But I've never heard of anyone letting skimate get back into their system!? Seems like a real dumb thing. LOL
Would someone seriously do this? Just saying...

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

How would running a protein skimmer necessarily allow you to keep more challenging to maintain species?

Gary should reply on this if he wants to. On specifically what he meant. With respect, I'm not going to put words in his mouth.

But as a simple general thought that makes sense- "Better Water Conditions" Cleaner from Skimming (Amongst anything/everything else we do for maintenance) would make keeping some more "Sensitive" species more possible.

Some are sensitive to water conditions that other fish tolerate in some tanks with No problem. Even "dirty" water so to speak, isn't a problem for some fish. Some coral tanks (specific corals- "some" LPS/Softies) even sometimes enjoy an "extent" of dirtier water.. than most of us commonly allow our tanks to be like. More "Nutrient filled" may be a better term than just "Dirty". But Regular Skimming keeps tanks from being like that- to the degree it can in combo with other things we employ in mantenance. Not that Skimming alone is the key to keeping sensitive species. Of course not. I know Gary does not mean that. But it's one of many tools you'll need to make it more possible to keep more sensitive species. I think that's what he is referring to and makes total sense to me!

 

[Flanders]

There are a lot of tools available to achieve desired water conditions. A skimmer is just one of those tools. It is by no means "necessary," even for SPS tanks.

I would also want to define sensitive species. Are we including dietary requirements? Seems a skimmer could be detrimental to live food populations.

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

There are a lot of tools available to achieve desired water conditions. A skimmer is just one of those tools. It is by no means "necessary," even for SPS tanks.

I would also want to define sensitive species. Are we including dietary requirements? Seems a skimmer could be detrimental to live food populations.

I see your point and understand what your saying. I don't disagree at all with the fact there are multiple methods and tools used by people in many different styled tanks as well. But being reasonable here- A skimmer for "MOST" people in the general hobby though is a main tool used. (If your using one at all) Specialized tanks some advanced hobbyists keeping out of the norm things will do different things than the main stream, yes. But it's not most people.

There are also various different theories and methods on keeping live food populations too. Some people isolate skimmer so it's direct contact does not come into play (so much) with a possible seperate (but still connected to the system) Refugium for pods and other life forms. Still other people just grow them in seperate systems too and add some from time to time for food. For some(Many) Skimming is 24/7. Others do periodic skimming. So as not to remove eveything all the time. I know what your saying.. some people do not use a skimmer.. Though they do employ other nutrient decreasing equipment and filter styles- with water changes.

Do you know "A LOT" of people keeping non photosynthetics that skimming could be occasionally detrimental too ? Or fish that will take ONLY live? Yes, there are some difficult species. Mandarins.. etc.. specimens slowly die off from starvation.. But many people who "know what they are doing" have systems compensating differently for that. Yet, it's not super common with the average hobbyist. Even some Dragonets "learn" if your lucky, to take frozen etc..

I'm interested in hearing more... Always learning.

I don't think dietary came into play specifically with talking about a skimmer in this case. BUT obviously for some species it's a factor. No disagreement there. I think the idea would be, there's still a way to effectively use a skimmer and still employ special dietary conditions as needed.

We could look up rare/hard to maintain stuff all day.. (LOL) but I'd rather not.
It could be a debate game- misguided.

If you want clarification how skimming would help some to keep "more sensitive" species (which I happen to agree for certain reasons with Gary, that I have thought of on my own..) since he refered to the "more challenging to maintain" himself- rather than discuss the specific ones he may think of- without knowing... Perhaps Gary will let you know "which" "challenging to maintain" species he was referring to in the general subject... if he wants to answer this.

But I can see (in my thinking) where he's coming from in general, with out needing to list specific species for sure...

Always interesting dialogue and thoughts here. Great information. Hopefully someone will have more input.

 

[der_wille_zur_macht]

At the risk of starting an argument,

I don't think dietary came into play specifically with talking about a skimmer in this case. BUT obviously for some species it's a factor. No disagreement there. I think the idea would be, there's still a way to effectively use a skimmer and still employ special dietary conditions as needed.

We could look up rare/hard to maintain stuff all day.. (LOL) but I'd rather not.
It could be a debate game- misguided.

We don't have to look very far. Many commonly kept corals eat bacteria:

http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-01/eb/index.php

Skimmers remove bacteria:

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2011/3/aafeature

Hence, skimmers might be considered detrimental to the food chain for our livestock.

I don't want to come off as anti-skimmer here, and it can be a useful tool for many types of systems, but I think Fritz put it best:

There are a lot of tools available to achieve desired water conditions. A skimmer is just one of those tools. It is by no means "necessary," even for SPS tanks.

Again, I think it's in anyone's best interest to try to understand exactly what they are trying to achieve with any given piece of equipment, then try to learn the heck out of how that piece of equipment might or might not help them reach their specific goals. Rather than blindly assuming the most common method is the absolute best, no matter what.

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

I'm not closed minded to what your referencing here. It's definitely a fair assessment to an extent.

I'm also well aware of people who are running quite different systems that employ less skimming and some none. Again, as I stated earlier some corals have even shown to appreciate (to an extent) less or no skimming in some systems. But I also do not believe that skimmers remove so much of everything, that one is always devoiding the system entirely of nutrient/element/ and some bacteria colonies which grow and may be used as food..

What's worse would be a question?.. a system that is allowed to grow to high in various compounds of waste or a cleaner system.. ? In "MOST" cases a cleaner system is more helpful to most corals as long as it's not devoid.. than one that may have negative imports building up ... eventually most corals do not like these conditions and decline.. There are other methods of reduction. But on average most hobbyists are using some Skimming in combination with fish/coral feeding management, with water changes and good live rock filtration assisted by some mechanical. Additional GFO use etc..

How many people do you know with BIG (or any size for that matter) systems, ("LOADED with a lot of FISH" and corals) who have success without skimming?? There may be some.. and I know for a fact there are people with really interesting specialist tanks who are going about it with some different- less orthodox methods.. But on average, how many hobbyists with successful tanks of either SPS, LPS, or Heavy FISH LOAD-with sps/lps Mixed reefs have continued success? Without employment of protein Skimming to some extent? (Combined of course with many other maintenance things we need to do)

How many "Tank of the Month" winners in history here, do absolutely NO Skimming? I'd find a number and all the diverse corals everyone keeps combined with that, very interesting.

Skimming "could" detract some things not desirable in "some" situations.
But I find it hard to ride on- that something the industry used to improve the hobby and fix things that did not work in the old days.. having a few decades to prove itself now, is something for the most part we should not be doing.
Things do change. But Skimming has become a key in the hobby for most people to improve exporting that hobbyists had more difficulties with in the past. It's also been proven to lengthen the regular health of modern systems in combo with "MUCH" other stuff we now do. Stuff that left out in the past led to premature losses of "Sensitive Species".

Not that there is no truth in the reference- there absolutely is.
(& I love Eric Bourneman)

But as a general good tool- I don't think Skimming is "Blindly" trusting the equipment to perform perfect for every situation. But possibly arguing it hasn't fit the bill for most and improved the hobby... is another sentiment that could be looked at as thinking "blind" as well.

 

[jfl14609]

I definitely dont put skimmate back into the tank thats just dumb (although people say my tanks is so stable i could pee in it although i wont try that). If that were the case why spend $500 on a skimmer just get a airstone. I just never monkey with it too much to get alott of skimmate. Over the years I have done both dry and wet skim even did the waterchange through the skimmer and to be honest its all been the same. But that being said I know people with smaller tanks and much higher bio loads and feed heavy. for the majority I never even run carbon or phos unless I get the urge Maybe I am just lucky!

 

[der_wille_zur_macht]

What's worse would be a question?.. a system that is allowed to grow to high in various compounds of waste or a cleaner system.. ?

But, are you automatically assuming a skimmerless system is "dirtier?" Go look in the ATS thread in the advanced forum. Many of the regulars have no skimmer, on a typical "mixed" reef tank, and all typical signs of how "dirty" a system is (i.e. nutrient levels) are low or non-existent.

How many people do you know with BIG (or any size for that matter) systems, ("LOADED with a lot of FISH" and corals) who have success without skimming??

Dozens. My first several reef tanks had no skimmers, plus all the folks mentioned above. Some of those guys have WAY WAY higher bioloads than is typical and are feeding insane amounts, yet their nutrients are immeasurable and the tank is thriving.

Again, I'm not trying to say skimmers are a bad choice for the average hobbyist by any means, but I do feel that to a large extent they are taken for granted as the "best" or "only" method for nutrient export. I think in the end, we're saying the same thing, just from different sides of the fence. I remember having this debate many years ago, except then I was arguing in favor of skimmers against the wet/dry status quo. The only thing we can really take for granted in this hobby is that there are more than one way to solve any given problem.

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

Cool.

Luck of sort- perhaps..
Could be that "maybe" your system is just simply keeping up fine with what you do(whatever that is)- based on tank size w/ (feeding wise/waste) and water changes/supplementations, skimming etc..

Maybe make an effort over a period of time to monitor/test more often... find some variables maybe.. at least know where your at, if you don't. Perhaps everything will stay mint. But you never know... a resurgence in Testing more regular(might help you see a spike or bad change before something noticably negative makes you notice once it's too late on some bad day)

One can always have one of those "things" sneak up on you..

 

[DEEP BLUE SIX]

Der Wille zur macht,

I'm totally cool with that.

The high load people who don't skim, I have to believe they somehow got their balance in check with liverock filtering enough and cycle turning over without eventually building up too many negative nutrients.. the systems are cleaning them out somehow- in balance.. perhaps with "Enough" of a water change on regular basis.

Otherwise, not much of an understood explanation that is full proof to follow for anyone..

I find it very facinating and do believe it! But How this would work more easily for most general hobbyists is something I find troubling... especially when so many people have seen problems they had before with exportation be solved by Skimming to get it done and have positive results.

I am going to check that thread though! BTW I enjoy your posts and links you've pinned before. Whether it's refresher or new to some, Very useful and good reads.

 

[jfl14609]

Cool.

Luck of sort- perhaps..
Could be that "maybe" your system is just simply keeping up fine with what you do(whatever that is)- based on tank size w/ (feeding wise/waste) and water changes/supplementations, skimming etc..

Maybe make an effort over a period of time to monitor/test more often... find some variables maybe.. at least know where your at, if you don't. Perhaps everything will stay mint. But you never know... a resurgence in Testing more regular(might help you see a spike or bad change before something noticably negative makes you notice once it's too late on some bad day)

One can always have one of those "things" sneak up on you..

I test weekly and never have much different results I have been doing the same thing for over ten years I guess it works for me. I may not know all the big words people use but I have found something tha works for me