Skimmers vs . . .

D0GFISH

New member
I've read several articles regarding the inefficiencies of skimmers and that the bacteria population in the tank does a similar job as skimmers but couldn't keep up with heavy feeding. Seems like another option would be to just boost the beneficial bacteria with a large sponge filter. Anyone have experience running without a skimmer and using GFO, chaeto or algae scrubber, sponge filter, DSB . . .
 
I just use an ats as my only filter and it works great, there are several others out there doing the same. Not having a skimmer works, it has been my most successful tank yet. I have been keeping salt water for 18 years.
 
Last edited:
+1 on the ATS. I have one in my tank ( with a skimmer also ) and it is getting my nutrient levels under control. PO4 is dropping very quickly and nitrates are less than 1ppm.
 
I've read several articles regarding the inefficiencies of skimmers and that the bacteria population in the tank does a similar job as skimmers but couldn't keep up with heavy feeding. Seems like another option would be to just boost the beneficial bacteria with a large sponge filter.

Bacteria are a great way to control some nutrients but you need a method to export them, such as a skimmer. If you do not, then the nutrients are still there and as soon as the bacteria die they will release those nutrients back into the water column. Since no filter for our tanks is 100% efficient you should employ several forms of export.
 
Hopped in here as I'm setting up a new tank. I was planning on having as much filtration as possible. Is there any issue running a skimmer, refugium with algae, live rock and live sand? Are there any disadvantages to running all of these systems? I'm looking for balance and stability. Hoping this is on topic, not trying to jack the thread.
 
Bacteria are a great way to control some nutrients but you need a method to export them, such as a skimmer. If you do not, then the nutrients are still there and as soon as the bacteria die they will release those nutrients back into the water column. Since no filter for our tanks is 100% efficient you should employ several forms of export.

Are there other methods of bacteria export besides a skimmer?
 
Hopped in here as I'm setting up a new tank. I was planning on having as much filtration as possible. Is there any issue running a skimmer, refugium with algae, live rock and live sand? Are there any disadvantages to running all of these systems? I'm looking for balance and stability. Hoping this is on topic, not trying to jack the thread.

Nope, absolutely not. What you've described is actually the most common set-up in modern reefkeeping.
 
Hopped in here as I'm setting up a new tank. I was planning on having as much filtration as possible. Is there any issue running a skimmer, refugium with algae, live rock and live sand? Are there any disadvantages to running all of these systems? I'm looking for balance and stability. Hoping this is on topic, not trying to jack the thread.

From my experience an ATS is far more efficient than a refugium and algae.
 
Hopped in here as I'm setting up a new tank. I was planning on having as much filtration as possible. Is there any issue running a skimmer, refugium with algae, live rock and live sand? Are there any disadvantages to running all of these systems? I'm looking for balance and stability. Hoping this is on topic, not trying to jack the thread.

No disadvantage and it is a perfectly fine way to do it.

Are there other methods of bacteria export besides a skimmer?

A skimmer is the easiest as a large percentage of bacteria are skimmable. An ATS will not do it, GFO will not do it, a small enough filter will do it, but that can also filter out planktonic life, not a good thing to do either. Water changes also work and have several other beneficial attributes. By far the easiest way is with a skimmer, I would not recommend a bacterial driven system without one.
 
I've read several articles regarding the inefficiencies of skimmers and that the bacteria population in the tank does a similar job as skimmers but couldn't keep up with heavy feeding. Seems like another option would be to just boost the beneficial bacteria with a large sponge filter. Anyone have experience running without a skimmer and using GFO, chaeto or algae scrubber, sponge filter, DSB . . .

One thing to keep in mind is that the surface area of a sponge (any sponge) is going to be absolutely dwarfed by the surface area of even one or two pieces of live rock that came from the ocean. It's a bit like activated carbon - a teaspoon has an external surface area that you can see of perhaps a quarter of a foot square. The internal surface area of the pores in this amount of carbon is measured in many hundreds of square feet.

That said, you could use a large, open network sponge such as that included with Eheim filters as a means of bacterial export, albeit an incredibly inefficient method compared with a protein skimmer. You would simply have to completely clean the sponge in soapy dishwater once every couple of days. The detergent would be necessary to ensure that you completely removed the biofilm and are "starting fresh".

But you would have to be extremely diligent about rinsing such a sponge to be absolutely certain that you removed all of the detergent.
 
Typically I see my skimmer working for just a small amount of time every day and the rest of the time it sits idle. It seems like an undersized skimmer that skimmed large amounts of bacteria (carbon dosing) round the clock could be just as effective??? Especially when used in conjunction with an ATS.
 
Sorry, but you will have to excuse me...kinda new around here. But I was reef keeping before there was such a thing. Been out a few years and not paying attention to hobby reef keeping.

Not long after the LFS got instant ocean, saw articles about that guy in the Philippines with live rock in there. I think he was doing massive water changes with NSW,(Lee Chueng or something like that). But he had real reef rock that he went out and collected. You could not buy LR here, but with some gasoline money and a mask/snorkel, around here you could just go get some.

And protein skimmers was the beginning of being able to keep a lot of things alive. Doing away with prefilter/ mechanical filter (sponges), made things better. Because keeping them dead was too much of a chore. Started to seem like mechanical filters were a good way to dissolve and distribute organics. If you were not cleaning them non stop.

And we were starting to think given enough rock you have plenty of surface area. And when you did not clean a sponge it went bio filter quicker than you would think. And bio filters with O2 and high flow are very efficient nitrate factories. Out went the sponges and pads, and the bio balls. Chasing nitrate with water changes got to be manageable. Manageable for the day, not under 1 mg/l like now.

So the questions. Are not nitrifying bacteria attached to a surface? Do they not consume one thing and release a waste product. I know harvesting algae removes DOM (dissolved organic matter). If we export bacteria are we just getting rid of a very small amount of biomass that could die and end up as DOM? Isn't the skimmer to remove DOM before algae or bacteria can get it? Detergent for sponges? What about bleach and sodium thiosulfate to keep from going biofilter?

What bacteria are we trying to export? Is it the bacteria coming from out of those NO3/PO4 munching filters with the synthetic carbon beads that I saw someplace here on RC?

I never really had yellow water way back when. I had a spot for it, but never really used carbon. I had no way of knowing but I was always afraid carbon would remove something I wanted. Wondered the same about skimmers, but still had to have it. A big question... what beneficial things are removed with protein skimmers?

If not for removing beneficial compounds with a PS, would it be best to remove DOM with a skimmer and let the ATS grow as it could find nutrients? And then export algae.

--John
 
Typically I see my skimmer working for just a small amount of time every day and the rest of the time it sits idle...

Ah, new post with me typing. Does it seem to those with ATS and PS that the algae eats the bad stuff before the PS can get it?

--John
 
Hmm - that's a lot of questions. Perhaps I can answer one that my specific educational background as a chemical engineer deals with. Yes, most nitrifying bacteria (as well as most bacteria, period) are associated with a surface in an assemblage called a biofilm.

When this biofilm is first forming, not very much of the bacteria get sloughed off into the water column. However, as the biofilm matures, an equilibrium is reached where the amount of bacteria that is sloughed off in to the water column equals the amount produced from cell division. The thickness of the biofilm is dependent on a lot of complicated factors (for example, the biofilm will be thicker in low-flow environments and high nutrient conditions), but ultimately an equilibrium is still reached.

A skimmer removes these sloughed-off bacteria, which is one of the ways this specific piece of equipment exports nutrients from the system. You are correct that a protein skimmer also removes dissolved organic matter before bacteria consume it as well. Exactly what the balance is between removing surface-active biomolecules vs. removing bacteria hasn't been scientifically studied as far as I'm aware (but I haven't exactly done a literature search on the subject, either).
 
An equilibrium is reached where the amount of bacteria that is sloughed off in to the water column equals the amount produced from cell division.

Thanks, that's the sort of thing I like hearing about. I always knew some nitrifying bacteria would be floating free. But I assumed their lifespan was short and reproduction would in a large part be replacing dead bacterial cells.

I've been saying that there is a lot of good stuff showing in the heterotrophic plate count. Now I'm starting to think there could be much more than I thought. One sentence from you and I'm building a better understanding. Thanks!

--John
 
Sorry, but you will have to excuse me...kinda new around here. But I was reef keeping before there was such a thing. Been out a few years and not paying attention to hobby reef keeping.

A lot has changed but a lot has remained the same, most of what worked 10 years ago still works today, with some added tweaks like organic carbon dosing to help proliferate bacteria, which in turn consumes nitrates and some phosphates.

Chasing nitrate with water changes got to be manageable. Manageable for the day, not under 1 mg/l like now.

This where controlled dosing of a carbon source has paid off, we can now easily manage nitrates to whatever level we want. I will add that many of us do not strive for natural reef water levels but have found better success with no3 of around 5.

So the questions. Are not nitrifying bacteria attached to a surface? Do they not consume one thing and release a waste product. I know harvesting algae removes DOM (dissolved organic matter). If we export bacteria are we just getting rid of a very small amount of biomass that could die and end up as DOM?
Yes
Isn't the skimmer to remove DOM before algae or bacteria can get it? Yes and I guess you can consider a skimmer both a chemical and mechanical filter. I often find uneaten food in my skimmer, I suppose it took a ride up the bubble column. :D

What bacteria are we trying to export? The above normal bacterial amount from dosing a carbon source
Is it the bacteria coming from out of those NO3/PO4 munching filters with the synthetic carbon beads that I saw someplace here on RC?
Yes, commonly referred to as bio-pellets, they are a solid carbon source which the bacteria feed on, it is the excess of these bacteria that skimming helps remove, which in turn is a nutrient export. In addition to the pellets people also use vinegar, vodka and at times sugar. Vinegar is probably the most widely used and the dosage is very easy to control.

I never really had yellow water way back when. I had a spot for it, but never really used carbon. I had no way of knowing but I was always afraid carbon would remove something I wanted. Wondered the same about skimmers, but still had to have it. A big question... what beneficial things are removed with protein skimmers? Some planktonic life and some trace elements and some salt are removed, with exception to the planktonic life, a simple water change replenishes and helps to correct the rest.

If not for removing beneficial compounds with a PS, would it be best to remove DOM with a skimmer and let the ATS grow as it could find nutrients? And then export algae. An ATS is a good way to remove some of the buildup although neither the ATS or skimmer does much for buildup of metals that we introduce from feeding, water changes still rule for correcting the levels of metals. The ATS will consume a small percentage of the metals though but the more we feed the more we introduce. It is debatable how much actual toxicity can come from a buildup of trace metals, but I see no real reason to not do water changes.

--John

Ah, new post with me typing. Does it seem to those with ATS and PS that the algae eats the bad stuff before the PS can get it? It is actually the other way around. Using a variety of nutrient removal methods is still my preferred way to dealing with nutrient export.

--John
 
Thanks sirreal. Agreed on all that. Makes sense. And I did think the skimmer would get first chance at removing DOM. Or more likely its simultaneous but the PS is faster. I have seen where some say the PS doesn't seem to do much. I wonder if those guys have a really great ATS, or they (inadvertently) have some mechanism breaking the foam, (like too much ozone or whatever else could do that). And then the ATS reaps the benefit. But it doesn't matter if all looks great and you have growth.

I can say I have only read a basic overview of the bio pellet reactor. With O2 in there it makes me wonder what bacteria are doing it. Not the normal anaerobic stuff. I need to go read the threads dealing with that. Pellets does seem easier and safer than other things. And I'm sure glad were not stuck using methanol like the big boys.

Now I'm in the early planning stages. Current plan is both ATS and PS.

--John
 
But.... I also always wanted to not have a PS. People were thinking about algae even 20 years ago. So who knows

--John
 
Back
Top