Are UV sterilizers worth it?

UV or no UV?

  • Yes! It helps reduce Ich

    Votes: 12 41.4%
  • Yes! It helps with water clarity

    Votes: 12 41.4%
  • Yes! Some other reason

    Votes: 8 27.6%
  • No! It does more harm than good

    Votes: 3 10.3%
  • No! It isn't really very effective

    Votes: 2 6.9%
  • I'm just here to read

    Votes: 7 24.1%

  • Total voters
    29
I don't really know any reason to get one. I mean do they actually solve problems? Maybe blooms but in all my years keeping tanks I don't think I have ever had a bloom of anything and I haven't seen data to suggest they actually solve blooms anyways. I don't gamble with ich management either and QT everything wet. Plenty of tanks do great without them...
 
I’ve had mine running for the last 11 months on my lagoon. I just pulled it out. Wonder what will happen to my system now?
How long has it been running. How old is the tank and what’s in the tank and how was it doing with the UV running?
 
I've never used UV sterilizers because of the fear that they would be detrimental to my pod population, but lately I'm wondering if the pros out weigh the cons. So, talk me into it. Should I use a UV sterilizer on my next tank?

Here is my take on this:

UV sterilizers

Ultraviolet (UV) sterilizers are also sold as a “cure” for Cryptocaryon. The problem is that most hobbyist-sized UV sterilizers do not have the power to make an effective kill on the relatively large Cryptocaryon parasite. Additionally, UV sterilizers are effective only on the tomite/theront stage, as this is the only point where the parasite is even present in the water column.

The question here is that tomites/theronts must leave the fish. Actually, some of them may get caught up in the fish’s mucus and stay attached until they become infective trophonts again. This means that UV sterilization will not eliminate active Cryptocaryon infections from a single aquarium. Where it does have benefit is in eliminating tomites as they pass through a filtration system from one discrete tank to another (like in a public aquarium or fisheries lab). Decades ago, diatom filters were touted as cures for ich and velvet. The same issue applies with them; there are adherent forms of these protozoans that can continue to infect the fish without ever having to leave the fish’s body. Even if they do, the “dwell time” factor means that some theronts will still be present in the water column to infect the fish

The argument can also be made that these units have no controlling effect on disease organisms that live on the fish directly and do not need to leave the fish during some part of its life cycle (some protozoans, trematodes and most pathogenic bacteria). The expected benefits from a properly operating UV sterilizer are simply a lowering of the free-floating bacterial and protozoan populations, as well as fairly good control (close to 100%) of these organisms when water flowing from one tank to another first passes through the UV sterilizer. Side-stream sterilization, where the irradiated water is returned to the same tank it was taken from is always less than 100% effective – too many of the target organisms are able to escape passing through the unit and are able to continue to reproduce. So; if one accepts this position, why then are UV sterilizers so prevalent? The primary reason is “they can’t hurt”. Using one on a system has no discernable drawbacks aside from cost. Secondarily, their use is firmly entrenched in both public and private aquarium industries. Finally, as mentioned, they do have specific uses for which there is some benefit. That said, do not expect these devices to control active diseases in your aquariums.

Never expose aquarium water treated with chloroquine to ultraviolet light, either through UV sterilization or natural sunlight. It is suspected that UV reacts with chloroquine to create compounds that either are toxic to the animals, or that reduce the effectiveness of the treatment – or both.
 
I don't really know any reason to get one. I mean do they actually solve problems? Maybe blooms but in all my years keeping tanks I don't think I have ever had a bloom of anything and I haven't seen data to suggest they actually solve blooms anyways. I don't gamble with ich management either and QT everything wet. Plenty of tanks do great without them...
Plenty tanks do well with them. Plenty tanks do well without skimmers. Plenty tanks don’t run Radions or Kessils. The fact is that no matter if there’s a study with a nice coloured spreadsheet or not large public aquaria almost without exception use them. At least here in Europe they do. Also in Aquaculture and in salmon fisheries here in Scotland they most definitely do. Yes they do other things and at least in foodstock fisheries the aim maybe not to eradicate but reduction at the very least. My personal experience in closed systems is if you have fish in a reef tank and you are at the stage of continuing to add stock: whether it be more fish and/or corals it’s big advantage. At least until your system is stocked and sitting pretty.
 
Here is my take on this:

UV sterilizers

Ultraviolet (UV) sterilizers are also sold as a “cure” for Cryptocaryon. The problem is that most hobbyist-sized UV sterilizers do not have the power to make an effective kill on the relatively large Cryptocaryon parasite. Additionally, UV sterilizers are effective only on the tomite/theront stage, as this is the only point where the parasite is even present in the water column.

The question here is that tomites/theronts must leave the fish. Actually, some of them may get caught up in the fish’s mucus and stay attached until they become infective trophonts again. This means that UV sterilization will not eliminate active Cryptocaryon infections from a single aquarium. Where it does have benefit is in eliminating tomites as they pass through a filtration system from one discrete tank to another (like in a public aquarium or fisheries lab). Decades ago, diatom filters were touted as cures for ich and velvet. The same issue applies with them; there are adherent forms of these protozoans that can continue to infect the fish without ever having to leave the fish’s body. Even if they do, the “dwell time” factor means that some theronts will still be present in the water column to infect the fish

The argument can also be made that these units have no controlling effect on disease organisms that live on the fish directly and do not need to leave the fish during some part of its life cycle (some protozoans, trematodes and most pathogenic bacteria). The expected benefits from a properly operating UV sterilizer are simply a lowering of the free-floating bacterial and protozoan populations, as well as fairly good control (close to 100%) of these organisms when water flowing from one tank to another first passes through the UV sterilizer. Side-stream sterilization, where the irradiated water is returned to the same tank it was taken from is always less than 100% effective – too many of the target organisms are able to escape passing through the unit and are able to continue to reproduce. So; if one accepts this position, why then are UV sterilizers so prevalent? The primary reason is “they can’t hurt”. Using one on a system has no discernable drawbacks aside from cost. Secondarily, their use is firmly entrenched in both public and private aquarium industries. Finally, as mentioned, they do have specific uses for which there is some benefit. That said, do not expect these devices to control active diseases in your aquariums.

Never expose aquarium water treated with chloroquine to ultraviolet light, either through UV sterilization or natural sunlight. It is suspected that UV reacts with chloroquine to create compounds that either are toxic to the animals, or that reduce the effectiveness of the treatment – or both.
Well put Jay. As a passing last comment I inadvertently received a call minutes ago from a friend who operates a salmon breeding facility and mentioned by way of his “what you up to” question that I was reading this thread. So why do you guys use UV I asked. His reply was “there’s a heck of a lot more in that liquid you’d rather wasn’t”. Of course he’s not referring to aquariums but still UV must kill other nasties besides the ones we most fear.
 
I've never used UV sterilizers because of the fear that they would be detrimental to my pod population, but lately I'm wondering if the pros out weigh the cons. So, talk me into it. Should I use a UV sterilizer on my next tank?

Oh, and it also depends on what type of "pod" you are producing. Amphipods and Isopods both reproduce through direct development, with the female releasing young from a marsupium. These would not be expected to go through the UV sterilizer except incidentally.

Copepods have a Nauplius stage that then develops into copepodites. I would expect those to be too large to be killed by UV. However, the circulating pump delivering water through the UV can damage/kill them pretty easily.

Jay
 
Hahaha. That’s what I figured bud
Maybe it's because I did marine biology, maybe because I have been in the hobby for my entire life, maybe because I was in the aquatic industry at the manufacturer/distributor level, selling UV's, maybe because I have been using them on my systems for 30+ years, I found his interview insightful....if you got nothing out of that, fine for you.
I've wasted enough time politely replying to your comments but I have neither the time, nor inclination to point out anything to you. If you found his discussion useless, great.
 
How long has it been running. How old is the tank and what’s in the tank and how was it doing with the UV running?
Had Dinos in April 2021 and the UV has been running since then. I don’t add fish regularly and the tank is filled with corals and inverts. Here it is as of now. UV has been off for an hour.
D8521271-658C-447D-A627-F7E10D099E21.jpeg
 
Had Dinos in April 2021 and the UV has been running since then. I don’t add fish regularly and the tank is filled with corals and inverts. Here it is as of now. UV has been off for an hour.
D8521271-658C-447D-A627-F7E10D099E21.jpeg
Dinos gone I trust?
 
Maybe it's because I did marine biology, maybe because I have been in the hobby for my entire life, maybe because I was in the aquatic industry at the manufacturer/distributor level, selling UV's, maybe because I have been using them on my systems for 30+ years, I found his interview insightful....if you got nothing out of that, fine for you.
I've wasted enough time politely replying to your comments but I have neither the time, nor inclination to point out anything to you. If you found his discussion useless, great.
Not your entire life bud. Not yet! You “did marine biology and were involved in the aquatic industry” Great! I was staff in the BBC Natural History Unit my entire working life. I’m now 64. I’ve dived every notable reef on the planet and have filmed from the Jungles of Borneo and come up close and personal with an angry and hungry Polar bear. I’ve been bitten twice by two of the worlds most venomous snakes and had a really angry close up encounter with a bull elephant who tried to end my days but ended up ending my Sony SX instead. That’s my working experience levelled at yours since you seem to think it relevant. I never once demanded you reveal a dang thing: only that if you make a statement to me that AB or C was useful then I find it naturally follows to ask just what that is. It also occurs to me that if you have “no inclination” to point out nor reply then the obvious thing to do is just that. With all due respect of course. I would like to ask this one thing of you however. Since you spent so much time in your working life selling the very item in question and that by your own admission have implemented them for over 30 years. You must surely have some reasonable input as to their efficacy?
 
Any way to get the full text without purchasing it from Science Direct? I would want to read the methods section. My guess is that they are using UV as a full flow system. Spotte has already described that with the proper dose, that achieves 100% kill rate for theronts. It is the side stream use, with higher dwell times that need to be studied in more complete detail.

Jay

p.s. - I just sent an email to our conservation science department to see if any of them can get me subsidized access to this...

 
He appears to be. Maybe didn’t read the entire thread.
You laid on the cynicism pretty hard back there. I even got confused in the scuffle and I've been sort of following along.
 
So, UV, Polyplab medic and metroplex in the food is a good three-prong approach to ich treatment. Or at least a decent placebo so we don't worry about our itty-bitty-wittle fishies... :)
 
So, UV, Polyplab medic and metroplex in the food is a good three-prong approach to ich treatment. Or at least a decent placebo so we don't worry about our itty-bitty-wittle fishies... :)
Now that’s new stuff for me. The Metroplex gig I mean. What’s the draught on that stuff?
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%
Back
Top