No need for a protein skimmer?

[sal-t-dawg]

I was told by a young lady at a certain LFS that if you have enough surface movement that you dont need a protein skimmer. What do you think?

 

[NeveSSL]

You can certainly run a tank very successfully without a skimmer. And I suppose if you have enough surface movement, it might help to get the hydrophobic proteins to whatever gets them out since you don't have a skimmer.

So, in short, I would say she's potentially right. BUT, there are a LOT of details that are not covered by that lone statement. Such as, what is pulling all of those proteins/nutrients out if you don't have a skimmer?

Brandon

 

[sal-t-dawg]

She says that the movement is forcing oxygen into the water and neutralizing the sumthin or another....blah, blah, blah....

 

[troyman]

the skimmer removes protien water movement is not gonna take the place of that nor the filter if you ever seen the skim that comes from the skimmer process ull understand why

 

[rcmike]

I'll put it very simple. She's full of it. Surface movement isn't a substitute for a protein skimmer. You can go without a skimmer but there is more to it than that.

 

[sal-t-dawg]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14592525#post14592525 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by rcmike
I'll put it very simple. She's full of it. Surface movement isn't a substitute for a protein skimmer. You can go without a skimmer but there is more to it than that.

Like what?

 

[shanealanbeaty]

I am not going to pretend I know everything, but in nature, protein skimming comes from the wind correct? I know last time I walked the beach, I have noticed some places where there were like mini foam ponds, blown up on the beach.

 

[waynesworld]

Well I think you may have over simplified that because with that theory we just need to add a fan and we would get foam. The thing about the air making the foam is that it happens when the waves come in to a shallow area creating the breaking waves and taking air to the bottom of the ocean. Of course God is a better designer and is able to use aquascaping to design his system.

 

[MVlk]

As someone without a skimmer on my tank currently, I can definitely say I am existing without one. However, I hate every second I look at my tank without one. There is just no simpler method to remove the extra gunk that occurs in the system.

I am without one while I am in-process of relocating my tank and have room to hook my new MSX250 up.

 

[shanealanbeaty]

I defintiely agree Waynesworld, plus in a closed system, even if you were able to generate some foam with the injection of air bubbles, and artificial wind, there would still be the problem of collecting the foam to remove it from the tank.

 

[MVlk]

It sounds like the LFS person was referring to the ability of surface agitation to facilitate oxegyniation... Nobody in their right mind would state it can replace the protein removal capabilities of a skimmer. I do not even think that occurs in nature fully. Most protein issues are handled by the increase in biodiversity, not in wind and surface agitation. Now if my assumption is correct, why would and LFS employee think the primary function of a skimmer is oxygenation?

 

[poolkeeper1]

There should be some form of accountability for your actions, That being said I would be very weary of that LFS for ill informed comments like that. You can keep a tank without lots of equipment, but at what level of success??? Merely keeping things alive is not MY goal in this hobby It is to have them Thrive and Grow as in nature. If Skimmers were not needed Why do they have soo many on the market! If there was another method of removing excess protein from water we all would be doing it. You need to do some more reading on the evolution of reef keeping and learn some facts about proven methods for success. You could run a skimmerless tank but the benifits outway the, sorry I can't think of any negatives! Get my piont

 

[sal-t-dawg]

That was my first thought when she told me that.

 

[zoalogist]

Just a thought, but I wager she was refering to surface skimming particulate matter as opposed to protein skimming.

 

[cczarnik]

Here you go.... This should be a TOTM..

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=893433&perpage=25&pagenumber=1

 

[ai-reefer]

You can run a marine tank without a protein skimmer.

If you want to enjoy the hobby for a long time, want to maintain a clean tank and want your tank to evolve(so to speak) having a protein skimmer is esential.

When i first went to LFS they told me i don't need a skimmer. But ask anyone in the hobby, they'll tell you different.

You should checkout the skimmers for commercial aquarium, they are pretty impressive. Next time you go to a big public aquarium, ask someone that works there to show you the filtration. Protein skimmer are the first thing you'll see.

 

[andywe]

Perhaps a notion of temperment here. I would argue you can keep a tank successfully and have it evolve without a protein skimmer, but you then need to do frequent water changes. Surface agitation+water changes (a t least weekly) = removal of proteins. One of the biggest challenges we face as hobbyists is that most the skimmers on the market at a reasonable cost are not effective enough for long term tank cleanliness and evolution, so we do water changes at intervals based on our tanks water state to supplement.

Case in point: My nano has no skimmer and the water is in pristine condition and clear as a bell! I do a partial water change every 2-4 weeks.

My 180, which has a skimmer has very clear water with a little bit of floaty stuff in it (air, some sand/food.ect) and the skimmer seems to go through bursts of activity. More stuff=more activity. I do a partial change once every 4-6 weeks.

 

[waynesworld]

15% water change every 2 weeks?

40 gal system only 156 gal a year

my system over 3,000 gal

That is too much work for me.
But if a person wants to do a lot of water changing you can go without a lot of stuff. You can eliminate dosing.

 

[supertech99]

bill and I talked about this in leinght one meeting because i was a pro no skimmer. I decided to get one, and it turned out to be a good investment. I would tell you its not "necessary" but neither is your tank really. I have enjoyed excellent water quality since the skimmer and my nitrates have been at zero ever since (had issues between massive water changes in the past. for the ocean comments, if you were compairing the tank with the ocean it would be like one clownfish in a swimmingpool if you want to compare the amount of life in the ocean with the gallonage, if i had that kind of ratio in my tank i would not worry about skimming either! skimming will save you money in salt and water and suppliments also......so....not necessary but your corals will reward you for it with better growth and color.

 

[poolkeeper1]

Agree the Ocean is massive in size, We run closed Systems that need constant attention to Import Of vital nutrients and export of detrimental waste byproducts. There are a limited amount of ways to achieve this in closed systems. If I could only keep one form of filtration it would be a skimmer IMO the best for the money. Regular water changes, Addition of Ca,KH,MG Etc and Protein skimming are a formula for success.