Some interesting opinions at last nights meeting.

[Justin74]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11223430#post11223430 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by airinhere

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.

Everything was rational up to this part. I feel this is a leap of faith than fact. I understand the part where you bring up deposits(which would be reasonable to believe that ther more concentrated, since it's a built up substance), but thats just it, it is a deposit that fell out of suspension and wont be able to be tested for unless brought back to suspension via some form of acid to break the bonds to which there bound.

Any testing of elements would only be those that are still in suspension in the collection cup. Which may prove to be impossible seeing how it has collected ample protiens for any incoming elements to bond to if they werent bound already... We may never know, unless you were able to analyze each pocket of foam as it rose to the top but before it mixed with the collection...

-Justin

 

[airinhere]

The unspoken step there is the evaporation effect going on in the skimmer collection cup. The evaporation rate would be constant (maybe even increased) in the collection cup as compared with any water elsewhere in the tank. However, the main tank is being manually refilled or has an auto-topoff system replenishing the available water. The collection cup is not.

So 1 cup of skimmate could easily have more than 1 cup of original (pre-evaporation) tankwater in it.

And evaporation is based on total surface area, not overall quantity of water. This is where the bubbles would lead to a very high evaporative rate. This is the constant rate I am refering to.

Skimming very dry would increase this effect, while skimming wet would almost completely mask this.

 

[Justin74]

Good point However I think by wet skimming you would ultimately get similar effects just instead of evaporation it is going directly in the cup by wet skimming itself. Which along with these other topics Ive also heard wetskimming can directly effect salinity if left on too long unmonitored.
Time to get to the bottom of this..
You done yet Mike?

-Justin

 

[pbetito]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11216989#post11216989 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by 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.

Dale, you were at the meeting??

 

[airinhere]

I think the lowering salinity while wet skimming would just be a function of pulling a cup of skimmate (tankwater) out and having the auto topoff replenish the missing water with freshwater.
The lowering salinity would be based off of how many cups of water you removed from the tank.

Either way, I have to think that the amounts of material we are looking at losing here would not be readily evident in a single cup of skimmate.

First off, you should get more than one cup of skimmate weekly.

Then you should be doing weekly water changes anyways.

The amount in a collection cup compared to the overall amount in a display tank is almost negligible. Unless you went 2 or more weeks without a water change. Then your parameters could start getting screwy.

While I do feel there is credit to the concept behind "skimming out the good stuff" I do not think it is the trace elements that are the primary concern for most people.

My real concern is skimming out the phytoplankton and zooplankton that grows in my tanks. The bacteria that are beneficial and any other living item in my tank.

That is why I use macroalgae for my primary source of nutrient export. It is not going to remove any of the planktonic life in my tank, but does absorb the excess nutrients available in my water.
I also use carbon, which I know can be problematic, but I use small amounts and its primary goal is just to keep the water crisp and clear (macroalge,even chaeto can make your wter yellowish). Any other filtration/nutrient export is incidental.
I also am running GFO now, and I understand it can have a similar effect in absorbing beneficial stuff like carbon can. I choose to run GFO because it will last for a long time in my tank and soak up the phosphates I add during feedings (and I like to target feed often).
Lastly, I run filter socks on my drains. This is to keep any large detrius from getting into my sump.

A protien skimmer could do almost everything I am working towards here. Except leave the desireable planktonic and bacterial life in my tank. Perhaps the usefulness of this planktonic and bacterial life is marginal at best. I saw what my tanks looked like with my cheap DIY skimmers I modded up. (They worked great).

I like the results I am getting from the skimmerless system,but I do not recommend anyone else try it. I spend lots of time fiddling with my tanks. Skimming is much simpler .

But my tanks did run with less effort when I used skimmers.

 

[kdblove_99]

Good topic,

I just have one thing to add TOTM. I have never seen a TOTM that wasnt heavily skimmed that alone speaks volumes to me!

I for sure have never seen one that was completely skimmerless.

I think TFP/TIm actually uses 2 ER skimmers on his tank and from what i heard that tank is amazing. I know Johns tank at your reef is also very amazing and he defiently skims

 

[robertloop]

Hi airinhere
I read an article about a year ago that talked about phyto feeding and a skimmer. The results from the study was that there was almost no phyto in the skimmer or very little. I realize that without a link this post is dang near pointless though. It would require some web searching to find and I'm a little lazy at this point. (Still on my first beer after work.)

 

[Justin74]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11225181#post11225181 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by robertloop
Hi airinhere
I read an article about a year ago that talked about phyto feeding and a skimmer. The results from the study was that there was almost no phyto in the skimmer or very little. I realize that without a link this post is dang near pointless though. It would require some web searching to find and I'm a little lazy at this point. (Still on my first beer after work.)

Wait, isnt this where we demand your science, or be prepared to be lynched and grilled on RC ??

-Justin

 

[ned2getfish]

Maybe I was

 

[pbetito]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11225670#post11225670 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ned2getfish
Maybe I was

:lol:

I guess you are going for the strong mysterious effect.

 

[ned2getfish]

yep you know me just blend in

 

[airinhere]

I would be interested to see any literature about skimmer content analysis. Of course the materials being looked for would have to be present in the tank in the first place. And heavy skimming without any break to build up levels of planktonic organisms would be moot. But if the tank was being dosed with phyto, I would expect to see massive amounts of phyto in the skimmer. Even the DTs instructions ask us to turn off our skimmers when dosing. Presumably to keep from skimming the phyto out of the water.

Regardless, I think any of our current positions about filtration methods needs constant review and critique.

I was reviewing my earlier post when it occured to me that by using a filter sock, I might be stripping much of the beneficial things out of the water that I hoped to keep in there by not using a skimmer.

100 micron filter sock, anyone have any insight into what this would be able to strip from the water?

I am looking first at bacterial populations, then zooplankton and phytoplankton and then finally tiny microfauna like copeopods.

 

[GreshamH]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11226729#post11226729 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by airinhere
I would be interested to see any literature about skimmer content analysis. Of course the materials being looked for would have to be present in the tank in the first place. And heavy skimming without any break to build up levels of planktonic organisms would be moot. But if the tank was being dosed with phyto, I would expect to see massive amounts of phyto in the skimmer. Even the DTs instructions ask us to turn off our skimmers when dosing. Presumably to keep from skimming the phyto out of the water.

Regardless, I think any of our current positions about filtration methods needs constant review and critique.

I was reviewing my earlier post when it occured to me that by using a filter sock, I might be stripping much of the beneficial things out of the water that I hoped to keep in there by not using a skimmer.

100 micron filter sock, anyone have any insight into what this would be able to strip from the water?

I am looking first at bacterial populations, then zooplankton and phytoplankton and then finally tiny microfauna like copeopods.

Stay tuned. I just was at a lab this last weekend that did the first round of skimmer testing and now is doing a skimmate test. This is being conducted by a professior and some students with some extremelly expensive equipment I know it'll be published soon.

 

[GreshamH]

@ 100 micron your looking at stripping most adult zooplankton other then a few smaller species. No phyto or bacteria will be stripped though.

 

[Justin74]

Cool update Gresham Drop us a link if you can remember!

-Justin

 

[GreshamH]

It'll be in AAOL so just watch the magazine monthly

Two more things, phyto can be pulled by skimmers. Any one that wants to state otherwise I'll send 55 gallons of our skimmate to so they can test it themselves :lol:

As for skimmers pulling MAG, CA, ALK, etc. there is a test anyone can do that owns a refrectometer. You won't be targetting just one, but you'll know if it has higher total levels of all of them. It'll require dilution though.

 

[Larry Robison]

I once skimmed my reef so hard it turned into a fresh water tank.

Larry

 

[rafael13]

:lol: :lolspin:

 

[airinhere]

I once skimmed so hard, the collection cup was full of corals.

 

[airinhere]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=11229753#post11229753 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by GreshamH
@ 100 micron your looking at stripping most adult zooplankton other then a few smaller species. No phyto or bacteria will be stripped though.

This is what I was afraid of. One thing I amm looking to do is to create large populations of zooplankton in my tanks. I like the filter sock because it is great at getting the 'floaties' out of my tank. (technical term) I assume the nitrate development in the sock is the dead remains of zooplankton (amongst other things).

Maybe if I ran them submerged, they would be able to collect anything that sinks (ie dead or decaying matter) and allow the living (floating) stuff to escape. I know tis would reduce their usefulness, but it could maintain their usefulness in the tank for removing what I want to remove but still allow me to keep the stuff I want in my tanks.

Think that would work?