reefinginBD
Well-Known Member
Hey there, I will set up a reef tank, so I was wondering which one I should use first or will be better to use, Refugiums or Protein Skimmers?
Refugium VS Protein Skimmer
- Thread starter reefinginBD
- Start date
- Tagged users None
lulubap
Active Member
Was following this thread a bit to see if anyone thought the same, as I'm still not well versed in filtration methods. My LFS has a system that runs a chaeto refugium alongside a skimmer.
Why do you prefer one order over the other?
Koh23
Valuable Member
Well, honestly, i just always design sumps that some fuge/chaeto/whatever area comes before skimmer.
Mainly because skimmer chamber often require lower water level than rest, so, it's kinda hard to have chamber A with lower water level than chamber B....
Like this, first chamber, where overflow pipes comes in is highest, same level (or slightly lower, depending on design) is second chamber where is fuge, or even frag "tank", then skimmer chamber with lower water level, and last is return chamber with even lower water level....
Also, it's a believe from older times that fuge needs as more unfiltered water as it can get, after water passes mechanical filtration, skimmer, reactors, etc..... much things are stripped from water that is beneficial to macro algae....
Of course, downside of this arrangement is that some number of pods and "good stuff" from fuge ends up in skimmer, but, there is no way to know or count exact percentage or number, so, i don't bother myself with that thinking, at some point, every reefer comes to point where, if his system depends on stuff from fuge, he "transfer" production at some better, faster and secure level....
Mainly because skimmer chamber often require lower water level than rest, so, it's kinda hard to have chamber A with lower water level than chamber B....
Like this, first chamber, where overflow pipes comes in is highest, same level (or slightly lower, depending on design) is second chamber where is fuge, or even frag "tank", then skimmer chamber with lower water level, and last is return chamber with even lower water level....
Also, it's a believe from older times that fuge needs as more unfiltered water as it can get, after water passes mechanical filtration, skimmer, reactors, etc..... much things are stripped from water that is beneficial to macro algae....
Of course, downside of this arrangement is that some number of pods and "good stuff" from fuge ends up in skimmer, but, there is no way to know or count exact percentage or number, so, i don't bother myself with that thinking, at some point, every reefer comes to point where, if his system depends on stuff from fuge, he "transfer" production at some better, faster and secure level....
ReefGeezer
Valuable Member
I'd start the tank with a refugium full of live rock... no lights... no Cheato... no cycling... just live rock
reefinginBD
Well-Known Member
I was thinking of getting a protein skimmer and filling the refugium section with some old bio media that I have or something just so that the copepods can stay there and then add chaeto later if necessary. What do you think?
ReefGeezer
Valuable Member
A skimmer is certainly a good tool to have. I'm not big on biomedia though. It may address nitrate, but does little else.
I would recommend something more biologically active. Live sand and live rock would be my choice. It will address nitrate better, become part of other nutrient pathways, and provides a better environment for the pods. I believe that every dollar spent on live rock and live sand in the beginning saves two or more later on.
If I had to choose one first, I'd probably start with ocean cultured live rock and live sand in the refugium and to be honest, in the display tank also.
Randy Holmes-Farley
Reef Chemist
Staff member
Super Moderator
Excellence Award
Expert Contributor
Article Contributor
R2R Research
My Tank Thread
If the refugium is to be lit on the same time cycle as the main tank, I’d pick skimmer.
if it’s in reverse light cycle, then maybe refugium first.
if it’s in reverse light cycle, then maybe refugium first.
reefinginBD
Well-Known Member
Alr thanks!
Personally, neither. I’ve done, Refugium, algae scrubber, protein skimmer. After many years of messing about I’ve plumped for very aggressive aeration in sump with non porous media and 1% a day water changes, very occasional activated carbon, that’s it.
I did both. While cycling I kept my skimmer on to break it in and after the first few fish still kept skimmer only. I just turned on my refugium light a week ago and my tanks been up since May.
ReefGeezer
Valuable Member
I'd vote for no lights on the refugium.
RedoubtReef
Valuable Member
Both, not either or in my opinion.
Uncle99
10K Club member
I for sure run a skimmer as this not only is an export function, it keeps waters oxygenated. I use a skimmer and keep track of nitrate and phosphate. When it comes a point, for me it was about a year and a half, my nitrates/phosphate started rising even with 10% water change.
It was at this time I added a lit refuge which stopped the climb.
I only add stuff when I need too.
If ya mop up stuff to fast, you’ll just get grief.
It was at this time I added a lit refuge which stopped the climb.
I only add stuff when I need too.
If ya mop up stuff to fast, you’ll just get grief.
Randy Holmes-Farley
Reef Chemist
Staff member
Super Moderator
Excellence Award
Expert Contributor
Article Contributor
R2R Research
My Tank Thread
why?
ReefGeezer
Valuable Member
Cheato has been fickle for me. I think maybe there is too much competition for inorganic nutrients in my system. I have 15 decent size fish in my 90 that are fed very well. I can't imagine that there isn't quite a bit of nutrients flowing through the system. I've tried dosing iron, potassium. changing lights, adding flow, and even played it a little Aerosmith for a while. Nothing made it grow. Well, wait... it did grow while I dosed the nutrients I wanted it to bind! I finally gave up, threw away the light, and replaced it all with live rock and live sand.
I think the bacteria, sponges, tube worms. and other "cryptic" life that proliferates in dark fuges helps manage nutrients, be it in a different way, without the need for lights, harvesting, and etc. I know that life occurs under the rocks in lighted areas too, but we tend to use less rock in the display tank now. More in the sump/refugium is surely a benefit.
I know that little N&P is actually bound in the organisms themselves except for the amount bound in growing tissues. However, I think the cryptic organisms help the nutrient control process by converting organic nutrients so that they can be used by other organisms in the system. That's about the extent of my reasoning and knowledge though.
That's how I set up my sump; first chamber is full of live rock from my old tank. Then skimmer in the second chamber. There's no light in the stand, except small LEDs from Kassa power strips. Lots of sponges have grown on the rocks. With semi-cryptic live rocks chamber, I don't need to do any maintenance vs chaeto farm.
Admittedly, I'm not sure how efficient it is vs chaeto.
ReefGeezer
Valuable Member
I have the refugium with live rock and sand is in the first bay and the skimmer in the return bay. The center bay has been empty for a while.
areefer01
2500 Club Member
Maybe it is better if we ask what the OP believes a refugium is. Then what they want to use it for.
This goes without saying to you but a Skimmer != a refugium. Two different tools and purposes as one exports nutrients and the other provides a refuge or save haven for micro fauna and small creatures that would otherwise be a food source in the display.
