Some interesting opinions at last nights meeting.

[Justin74]

I too hope I am not associated with the hate on Bruce team Undeniably knows his stuff, and have respectively sought his advice myself, and hopefully will still be able to in the future!

I think a "Donahue" type role would really work as Mike suggested. It would give Bruce a chance to take a breath, stretch his legs, and give others a chance to share. Plus sometimes there will be very specific questions that some here may specialize in and would be able to ellaborate that may be related but outside the general scope of aquatic setups and husbandry, seeing how we are a great melting pot of various industries and professions.

Would also be a great way to get more familiar and aquainted with the various members

Thank you Bruce for heading the Q&A and taking on the task to answer any and all questions the club had, a task easier said than done.

-Justin

 

[WarrenG]

For skimming you really just want to catch the proteins, and they are willing to bond together and be removed. Perhaps the differences in results with, or without skimmers has to do with what the skimmer was removing, i.e much more than just proteins.

If someone says they don't like skimming, perhaps it's useful to know how much skimmate they were getting and what color it was.

 

[Buskey]

I think I need to throw in my two cents here.
I am new to this reefing business and one big thing that I have learned is that it is tough to get two of the same answers to a problem. Whether it is from a LFS or on this forum.
As we begin this dive into the tank world, we run into problems. We get cloudy water and someone says you need to run carbon? The next guy says do you have a fuge set up? Why not? What about a skimmer is the next piece of advice.
So the newbie is stuck trying to find answers to problems they are having and the same answer rarely comes up twice.
Some very good points were made in the meeting. I got the whole 400 watt MH bulb issue. I am in a business where lighting is very key and all bulbs are not created equal. But I am in that sort of business. Some people they think a 400 watt bulb means more light.
But it could be different on the Kelvin scale. But like everyone has said here in the thread, it works for some in this manner and it works this way for others.
There is no right or wrong answers (for the most part, like don't use brass fittings in your plumbing set up ((cough, cough)))
Thank you to all for putting on the meeting. It was our (son and I) first meeting and I am sure we will attend more in the future.

 

[WarrenG]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11204527#post11204527 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by CaptiveReefSystems

If you are not willing to speak up at the time of the discussion and question me or anyone else about a statement or potential fact, don't bring it to the forum here. I have little respect for those that ... are not willing to address the person face to face.

You may want to ask yourself why people do that. Perhaps it is about them AND it is about you. In lieu of dealing with direct confrontation in an environment where they may feel uncomfortable, some people prefer a scenario for discussion where they can be on more equal footing, be given more time to formulate their opinion, and/or receive support for their own opinion.

 

[MandM]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11204127#post11204127 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by robertloop
MandM is suggeting we're all ADDICTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Well. I suppose if acknowledgement is the first step..... "I'm a reef-aholic" and "My name is Robert" and dont forgett... "I haven't been dry for at least 10 years"

Whew! I feel so much better.

Hi Robert!
Great first step, admitting we are powerless over our addiction.

I personally like the Q&A, getting different opinions is a great way to get to hear about different methods and talk to the people who are having success with those things. There was a tremendous amount of content in Friday's meeting. Thanks to all the people that put it together.

I was like the newcomer that Bruce mentioned when I first came to the meetings. I followed the advice of several people, none of which were wrong, but sent me in differing directions.

 

[dots]

Whoa guys, I can see this whole "problem" was just a misunderstanding from the first post and was trying to explain where these "rules of thumb" come from and why.

90% of arguements come from a misunderstanding of what is being discussed and this is a perfect example of it.

A mountain is being created out of a mole hill and nothing good will come out of it and in fact will only cause people to be hesitant about sharing ideas.

Bruce and everyone else who contributes thier valuable personal time to the club deserve our respect and gratitude. I feel bad that the gentlemen feels he is being personally attacked and am the most disturbed about that.

I do not believe that the original intent of the thread was to slander anyone or speak harshly, perhaps to clarify but all of that is null at this point. This seems to be spinning/spun out of control and any hopes to salvage the topic or any discussion has been lost.

 

[jtarmitage]

Well, Bruce took on nearly every ongoing debate on RC, and did it in 20 minutes. It was clear to me that those were his opinions, and they came from maintaining various systems with many different designs. It took some "cajones" to step up and lay it out. IE) you don't need to blow $$$ on all these different gadgets. You could, but you could also save the $$$ and do it differently. Everything you do has an impact you didn't intend. Protein skimming and carbon not only perform the beneficial tasks you wanted, but also remove things from the system that you didn't want removed. So, if you use carbon and "excessive" skimming, you need to replace what was lost to balance the system. Alternatively you could use less carbon and less efficient skimming, or neither of the above, and not need to replace anything. But, then you need to have some other form of nutrient export. Bruce mentioned all of this, and while I may run my system differently and not agree with him entirely, he had very accurate points to deliver.
On another topic, I think posting on RC is a great way for everyone to get more information or more details on what was said, and provide a forum for discussion, AS LONG AS NOBODY IS ATTACKED FOR THEIR VIEWS OR COMMENTS. I don't believe this has been the case, and Bruce, I hope it hasn't been taken as such. You did a great job and managed to place yourself squarly into several controversies that are still ongoing. Thanks, and keep it up. I enjoy the banter and discussions.

 

[Justin74]

Well said.

Now back to the discussion >
Does anyone have any information regarding what skimmers pull out in regards to esential elements, or any analysis on the contents of skimate?

Ive heard it ever since Ive been in this hobby and people readily accept this information, but have never seen any documentation to support this thinking. Anyone?

-Justin

 

[Marc Daniels]

Interesting read regarding protein skimming.

http://www.asira.org/proteinskimmers

I read an article a few years ago where they found a "high" number of planktonic larvae in the skimmer collection cup. It was from snails, polychaete worms, etc. I tried to find the article but couldn't, like I said it was several (at least) years ago. I do remember that they felt that even though it was a high number, they felt that it was probably a pretty small percentage of the total planktonic larvae load in the test system.

Bruce, sorry I missed your Q&A but if I get the gist of the information...from your experience, would the tanks where you are seeing success not running carbon 24/7 and/or not protein skimming be receiving regular water changes? I find that when I have the time (ya, right!) to do my regular bimonthly changes that I don't have to run my skimmer or carbon at all. But, my tank was moderatly stocked in relation to the total volume.

Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't the main purpose of skimming to remove protein compounds before they have a chance to break down and get caught in the Nitrogen cycle, thereby adding to the Ammonia, Nitrite, and finally Nitrate levels? If you don't have any issues with these levels to begin with then skimming is sort of a moot point unless it is for other reasons.

Marc

 

[Justin74]

Good read Marc(glad you could drop in! Hope all is well with you and yours!), pretty much what I already understood it to be, although it did touch down that Mg could be effected, but didnt give much detail than that.

To me, skimmers pulling out good stuff seems more of a wives tail than actual quantifiable figures we should be truly concerned with, especially when weighed against the many benefits that skimming does provide. Sounds moreso that they either have a potential of being unecessary or invaluable to some systems, as opposed to a potential detriment of sorts which is the point I was trying to get across.

Just hoping to spread some facts and debunk the stigma skimmers have with trace elements( let alone the debate regarding trace elements themselves!, which would only compound the debate and making some moot regarding other aspects of adding and potentially removing them)
Even after analysis of the contents of skimate, it still leads to more questions that need answers. For example, was the element taken out of sollution? Or just a biproduct of carbonates that were already out of sollution and bound to organic matter? Good stuff. Easy to get lost with all the variables and limited information!

-Justin

 

[Marc Daniels]

Justin-

We are all, finally, doing fine. Added a new frag to the personal lineage on August 9th. Wife retired from the military in September so no more deployments.

I remember that Rob Toonen did some sort of analysis on skimmers a while back, but can't remember what he was targeting and can't find anything online. All I found was references to it in forums, but again no specifics.

I think the only two absolute facts in reefing (other than I can't grow green star polyps to save my life) is that every tank is different, and that there are more ways to maintain a tank than you can count and still be succesful. I have had success running heavy skimming and carbon 24/7 in the same tank that I have had success running no carbon or skimming in.

I think success is measured by two easy things...first do you have any nuisance growths like hair algae, cyano, etc. Second, are your corals increasing in mass, as in growing and are the fish healthy and active.

 

[rafael13]

Hey marc, do you have any of the scratch removal kits?

 

[Justin74]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11216751#post11216751 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by rafael13
Hey marc, do you have any of the scratch removal kits?

:lol: Saw that coming a mile away!

Congratulations to you both Marc! Good to hear her safe return, she has my gratitude!

-Justin

 

[Marc Daniels]

Thanks my friend.

 

[ned2getfish]

Bruce I think you info was very good info. I think this thread went south real fast. Like several of you said do whats best for you and your tank .What works for one person my not work for others.

 

[rafael13]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11216812#post11216812 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Justin74
:lol: Saw that coming a mile away!

Congratulations to you both Marc! Good to hear her safe return, she has my gratitude!

-Justin

 

[MrMikeB]

Given the potential lack of data on whether skimmers do pull out 'good' elements versus simple organic compounds, I will throw in my conjecture based on how I see the physics working.

In order to skim out a compound, the process of foam fractionation would have to work to remove such a compound in a concentrated fashion. Meaning that a skimmer would have to be able to take your magnesium, calcium, etc. and force it to the top of the collection cup through the fractionation process. My initial thoughts are that the physical size of the elements versus what is typically removed by a skimmer (long protein chains) would render the fractionation process pretty useless for removing these elements. A quick way to validate if the process does indeed work on these elements would be test the skimmate for magnesium, calcium, etc. (oh that sounds like fun). If skimming does take out these elements, you should see a high concentration of these ions in the skimmate. If you see similar results as your tank water, then it would lead me to conclude that the ions/water volume ratio being skimmed would be no different than if you took a cup (or so) of water from your tank and tossed it.

Thoughts?

(Note: I have not tried this, but sounds like it would be easy enough to test tonight)

 

[Justin74]

If you were to test your skimate Id wager you wouldnt even find the same concentration equivical to a cup of tank water. The only way most of those elements would see there way to the collection cup anyway is if they were bound to a protien. And again if that were the case would that elemental ion have been consumed from the column, and implemented into an animals' calcification process? Again, doubt it if its linked to a protein just cruisin along on the surface of the water

I would love to see your test results! Don't make me triple dog dare you! 'Cuz I will! :lol:

-Justin

 

[MrMikeB]

Well I am sure its not going to be scientifically conclusive - but its seems like a practical way to provide our own anecdotal evidence. Elements just don't disappear, so if they are being suspected as being removed, then we should see where they are being removed to.

 

[airinhere]

has anyone considered the bubble itself?

I think it would be matter of fact that the small amount of water used to create the bubble would have the standard quantity of trace elements and ather free floating materials in it.

Now the stuff we want/expect a skimmer to remove (both good and bad) is supposedly attatched/adhering to the surface of the water. This is what most people think of to the exclusion of anything else when they consider what is being skimmed out.

When my sprinkler leave water marks on the side of my car, it is because the quantity of water adhering to my car has a normal amount of material in it. When it evaporates, most of that material is left behind. Over time the cumulative effect is to create a thick layer of whitish crud on the side of my car.

This is exactly what I believe is going on as a seperate function to the skimming properties of a protien skimmer. As the bubbles are deposited in the collection cup, they deposit the normal amount of soluble materials that are present throught the water column. However, after skimming (getting a good cupful of skimmate) you would have an accumulation of a higher density of trace elements and other materials present in your cup than you would have in your water colum.

This activity would permit for an unusually high ability to remove trace elements, minerals and other desireable concentrations of substances.

I am not saying this is the whole truth, but I believe this is a critical element to look into regarding this topic.