Longest Time without water change?

[NeilFox]

I think when we are almost bragging about how long its been since we did a water change is simply not right. Animals are constantly taking vital nutrients out of the water and depleting the system. So, I believe water changes are very important. Have a great day!

That is precisely why you replenish the nutrients. The organisms in the aquarium don't take up all the nutrients at the same pace. While you will never be able to overdose nutrients by replacing salt mix (provided your mix doesn't have overly elevated levels). It is however, possible that you cannot make up certain elements fast enough. This is cetainly true in a heavily stocked SPS dominant tank. I don't think any of the posters has advocated not replenishing trace elements. Moreover; nearly every salt mix has a number of ingredients that serve absolutely no purpose whatsoever and in fact may be detrimental. Phosphorus and molybnium come to mind. What do they put that in there for?

 

[Beenalongtime79]

I think when we are almost bragging about how long its been since we did a water change is simply not right. Animals are constantly taking vital nutrients out of the water and depleting the system. So, I believe water changes are very important. Have a great day!

No one is really bragging, just sharing information and experience. Like others have said, we are replenishing minerals/nutrients through other means.

Cheers,
John

 

[jhawkor]

I agree, doing huge 30-50% water changes probably doesn't make any of your tank inhabitants happy and I never bought into the use of water changes as a nutrient export method. A good protein skimmer is an infinitely better solution. .

Cheers,
John

Good to hear everyone's stories, good and bad.

But isn't a water change the most efficient form of nutrient export? If I had a tank with really high nutrients, a large wc would be the fastest way to bring them down. I think protein skimming is more of a long term process.

 

[NeilFox]

But isn't a water change the most efficient form of nutrient export? If I had a tank with really high nutrients, a large wc would be the fastest way to bring them down. I think protein skimming is more of a long term process.

A water change is not a very efficient means of exporting nutrients at all. Some nutrients are water soluble and you may remove some nutrients and toxins; however, removing a chunk of algea will be alot more effective in the long run. The ideal situation is to reduce everything biologically then remove what you can. Nutrients are constanty being added. Some without any intervention from us. Ideally an established reef will be able to take care of most of this on it's own. Think of it like this. If you had toxic levels of ammonia because your prized anemone died; if you did a 50% water change you would have a 50% reduction of ammonia for about 5 minutes if you didn't remove the anemone.

 

[Beenalongtime79]

A water change is not a very efficient means of exporting nutrients at all. Some nutrients are water soluble and you may remove some nutrients and toxins; however, removing a chunk of algea will be alot more effective in the long run. The ideal situation is to reduce everything biologically then remove what you can. Nutrients are constanty being added. Some without any intervention from us. Ideally an established reef will be able to take care of most of this on it's own. Think of it like this. If you had toxic levels of ammonia because your prized anemone died; if you did a 50% water change you would have a 50% reduction of ammonia for about 5 minutes if you didn't remove the anemone.

NeilFox is correct.

The only way a water change would be more effective than a protein skimmer or any other form of nutrient export (ie. turf algae, macroalgae harvest) is if the phosphates/nitrates are presumed to only exist in the water column, when in fact that is almost never the case as organisms/detritus/organic debris/sand bed are constantly leaching them back into the water column, so if you do a large water change, all you get is a few minutes to hours of relief until the nutrients leach back into the water column. You've actually just changed the electrolyte gradient a little bit with your water change, and those nutrients will just leach back into the water column back to their previous values.

I don't see water changes as a real nutrient export mechanism, only really as a means of replacing trace elements and other electrolytes/chemicals back into the system.

Cheers,
John

 

[jhawkor]

Interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

 

[Beenalongtime79]

Interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

I do want to add one caveat, if you combine a water change with vacuuming up detritus from the sand bed or sump, then you are definitely extracting a good amount of the nutrients. However, a pure water change does little for resolving the overall organic load of your system.

 

[ReachTheSky]

This was an eye opening read.

I plan on using biopellets in my new setup with a hugely oversized skimmer so it'll be ultra low in nutrients. I'll also setup dosing pumps for 2-part. In this scenario, would you say that my original plan of bi-weekly 10% water changes is likely to be wasteful?

 

[NeilFox]

This was an eye opening read.

I plan on using biopellets in my new setup with a hugely oversized skimmer so it'll be ultra low in nutrients. I'll also setup dosing pumps for 2-part. In this scenario, would you say that my original plan of bi-weekly 10% water changes is likely to be wasteful?

With a new system probably a good idea to stick with the plan. As Rufio said vacuuming the detritus removes alot of nutrients. I should have mentioned that. A newer tank accumulates alot more detritus in my experience since the organisms that reduce waste products mature pretty slowly. Just keep a decent log, if things are looking good after a few months you can better determine what your water change schedual will be like. I'm currently changing water pretty frequently on my new system since I got alot of live rock. Stuff just seems to accumulate out of nowhere even if the param's look good. 10% is a good amount that won't throw things out of kilter.

 

[Paul B]

I don't particularly want all new water in my tank, There is a reason that new tanks with all new water don't look very well and the animals are not as healthy. A tank aquires health with age (and the experience of the owner).
Algae and bacteria contribute to tank health which is one of the reasons older tanks are much more stable than a new tank.
Just my opinion of course.

 

[Beenalongtime79]

I don't particularly want all new water in my tank, There is a reason that new tanks with all new water don't look very well and the animals are not as healthy. A tank aquires health with age (and the experience of the owner).
Algae and bacteria contribute to tank health which is one of the reasons older tanks are much more stable than a new tank.
Just my opinion of course.

Very true, a well maintained mature tank shows and usually everything looks very healthy. I think that with the level of current technology and information out there, the age old adage of frequent and sometimes large water changes is wasteful and possibly even detrimental to the overall goal we try to achieve which is of course stability of tank parameters to allow for continued homeostasis and growth of our organisms.

Cheers,
John

 

[Curtis72]

I don't particularly want all new water in my tank, There is a reason that new tanks with all new water don't look very well and the animals are not as healthy. A tank aquires health with age (and the experience of the owner).
Algae and bacteria contribute to tank health which is one of the reasons older tanks are much more stable than a new tank.
Just my opinion of course.

I agree 100% with this. There is a bunch of factors but if not changing water and your system is still healthy then why do water changes? There is no right or wrong way in reefing. We all do something different but it works for us, we aren't bragging just answering the question.

 

[mandarinfanatic]

paulb correct if you follow a reasonable maintenance regime. small waterchanges regulary dilute possible problems

sent from my galaxy s3

 

[Paul B]

Yes, I am not saying water changes are not important, but like most good things, they should be done in moderation.

 

[Ms Tanky Panky]

You Sir, are one to be admired as well as respected, for your contribution to the hobby we love and the freedom we all enjoy, many thanks NeilFox

 

[Paul B]

Tanky Panky, thank you, that is one of ther nicest things anyone has ever said to me.
Most people that don't agree with me call me things that I can't post here. :facepalm:

 

[buffalo123]

Yes, I am not saying water changes are not important, but like most good things, they should be done in moderation.

I agree, its amazing how many do weekly water changes and find very good success, and on the other hand those who do very few water changes and have success. Quite the dynamic hobby.
One would think seldom doing water changes would end up as a hairy algae reef. Yet not necessarily so , once a balance is found.

 

[PaulieReef]

Seriously amazing post. Was so worried I wasn't doing enough water changes (about 10% every other week) but apparently i am doing fine!

 

[mandarinfanatic]

my ten percent waterchanges on a weekly basis are a lot cheaper than buying new corals so i will continue doing em as a preventative measure rather than as a curative measure. i know that by doing regular maintenance my tank should never crash. i do not need the stress of wondering if today is the day my tank backs up on me!

 

[superman0440]

?????