Thoughts on methods of eliminating water changes ?

[Elgringodiablo]

Zeovit in the US does not have a cal/alk/mag solution so you could certainly try using Zeovit as the nitrate and phosphate solution and Trition core 7 "other methods" as the major minor and trace element solution. Potentially combined with some of the zeo related nutritional elements like amino's and coral vitalizer but I wouldn't start with anything that adds other elements. Hard to say how it would work in the end but seems plausible. Certainly found a way to make it the most expensive tank in town : )

From a basic standpoint it makes sense. I am more curious if it would work well enough to offer a ULNS/LNS that doesn't require water changes and if the Zeovit would replace the GFO and refugium effectively.

I live in LA, no way would it be the most expensive tank in town .
Http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...e-250m-los-angeles-mansion-hits-market-965062
Someone here must have a $50k shark tank... Definitely not the most frugal approach though.

 

[RudyB]

Up until a week ago that I moved my 150 gal tank, I had not done a water change in 1 yr. I use Kalk connected to my A/T so it gets replenished as evaporation. That seems to maintain my levels. I add all other supplements as needed. I don't test for all of them. I kind of guess what I need. I tend to use less than what the recommendation is. Keep it safe and never add too much. Seems to be working for me. I do have a full fuge with mangroves and I use BRS Rox 0.8 along with BRS GFO. I also have a bio pellet reactor that flows to my protein skimmer. My water is always very clear the only thing that stirs it up is my Bullet goby. He does a great job. My system is a mix reef like I said the main display is 150 gal and my fuge is 40 gal.
I used to do a by weekly water change and then I started to test my water and kept finding that my levels where right on target. So I started to stretch my water changes and nothing on my levels going up. So I just stopped doing them. I do change my carbon and GFO once a month and my filter socks every week sometimes sooner depending on my Goby. I do test my water every week just in case. SO far so good. I hope now that my tank is on a new stand and location it will continue to be that same. For now while I get the tank settled again I may be doing some changes as I had an ammonia spike from the change. I have been doing water changes to bring it down and just last week I put my corals and fish back in. So far the only thing I lost was my anenomy. All levels seem fine and stable for now.
Good luck to everyone who is trying it and my suggestion is take it slow and little by little move away from water changes and see how your system respond to it. You could always do a water change if you need to.

 

[Mark Gray]

But shouldnt we try to improve. When I started in this hobby everyone used bio balls. We learned that these processed waste too fast and were nitrate factories. The hobby has evolved since then. Our goal has always been to replicate the ocean on a small scale. I have not used Triton and cannot advocate for the system. I do understand the logic behind the system and it appears to make sense. I think everyone is only focusing on the fact that we have been recommending for years to do water changes. But we need to view that in the context of why they were recommended. We had limited knowledge of what was happening in our tanks to the water. It made sense to on a regular basis add new water that had not been affected by the reactions in our tank. Most times it was a good thing. But sometimes it created a new problem. ICP testing allows us to have a view into the condition of our water. Is it perfect..No. Is it better then the hobby kits we use a home...dramatically better. It is my belief that we will continue to improve testing and get closer. Until then I would use a system that gets me closer to that ultimate dream.

yes I remember bio balls, and before that under gravel filters. Things have changed a lot. Maybe not all for the good lol

 

[bif24701]

Up until a week ago that I moved my 150 gal tank, I had not done a water change in 1 yr. I use Kalk connected to my A/T so it gets replenished as evaporation. That seems to maintain my levels. I add all other supplements as needed. I don't test for all of them. I kind of guess what I need. I tend to use less than what the recommendation is. Keep it safe and never add too much. Seems to be working for me. I do have a full fuge with mangroves and I use BRS Rox 0.8 along with BRS GFO. I also have a bio pellet reactor that flows to my protein skimmer. My water is always very clear the only thing that stirs it up is my Bullet goby. He does a great job. My system is a mix reef like I said the main display is 150 gal and my fuge is 40 gal.
I used to do a by weekly water change and then I started to test my water and kept finding that my levels where right on target. So I started to stretch my water changes and nothing on my levels going up. So I just stopped doing them. I do change my carbon and GFO once a month and my filter socks every week sometimes sooner depending on my Goby. I do test my water every week just in case. SO far so good. I hope now that my tank is on a new stand and location it will continue to be that same. For now while I get the tank settled again I may be doing some changes as I had an ammonia spike from the change. I have been doing water changes to bring it down and just last week I put my corals and fish back in. So far the only thing I lost was my anenomy. All levels seem fine and stable for now.
Good luck to everyone who is trying it and my suggestion is take it slow and little by little move away from water changes and see how your system respond to it. You could always do a water change if you need to.

I am willing to bet with carbon dosing that we could use bioballs again with success. In fact, lets test it @BRS!?

 

[klp]

In the seventies we were supposed to do water changes to control nitrates. Myself and a friend found we had nothing detectable so we tried no water changes just trace elements weekly (no list of ingredients just the label Trace Elements) using so many drop per gallon. Every time we added them the color of the fish improved. All we had in my tank was a hermit, coral banded shrimp, tube worm, some algae and 4 fish. Something was depleting the trace elements and when we re-added them as it improved the fish color visibly. That was a simple system we kept until we moved and sold the tanks off with no fatalities. Had the tanks running maybe 1 1/2 to 2 years at most. If Triton can maintain healthy animals in our tanks by doing what it does without water changes in complex systems it seems reasonable to me as I did it years ago on a "stone age" system, admittedly without the benefit of todays understanding or complexity. What mineral or trace element does what in fish biology? Interesting but I just want them healthy and long lived. If we can duplicate NSW as closely as possible that is all we need to do as far as the SW is concerned. We can get arguments on alkalinity, calcium, mineral level + or - NSW but NSW should be the baseline that we all strive for. I am going Triton when I setup my next tank after a long delay, hopefully later this year or early next.

 

[Ryanbrs Verified Sponsor]

I am willing to bet with carbon dosing that we could use bioballs again with success. In fact, lets test it @BRS!?

Bioballs are dead to me : )

 

[Scarybo]

Bioballs are dead to me : )

Awwwwww. Come on! A nice batch of bio balls in the sump with a large pad of filter floss on top. There is nothing better to get that 50-100 ppm of nitrates we all love.

 

[Jstn]

I wonder how does the Na to Cl ratio drift as one avoids water changes, in a perfect world Alk and Ca are consumed in equal mole ratios, but if a 2 part tank uses 10% more ALK than calcium how could a drift of higher sodium vs chlorine over time effect the tank? ( adjusting for stoichiometry)

 

[sneub]

I don't see how the 5-10% or even 25% water change can really reduce nutrients and add elements. If we do a 25% water change, this still leaves a majority of what we are trying to remove in the water. Same for elements, a small water change will only replace a fraction of the elements.

 

[bif24701]

Bioballs are dead to me : )

Most of the slim from my carbon dosing occurs on or near my skimmer, literally farthest thing from my dosing. Not saying it would be ideal nor anyway more beneficial than a skimmer.

 

[Mark Gray]

Awwwwww. Come on! A nice batch of bio balls in the sump with a large pad of filter floss on top. There is nothing better to get that 50-100 ppm of nitrates we all love.

I can remember hitting 20 one time but I don'tremember getting up to 50 NO3 but then again it was 20 or more years ago I Evan had a bio rocker who remembers them

 

[Big E]

reference please?

Here is some info to get you started--

Scan down to export of metal per macro algae. There's also a lot of good info on how much trace metals are in foods as well.
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-04/rhf/feature/

I'd focus on the metals that are commonly found in the commercial mixes or that have been popular/hyped or being dosed( Zn, Mn,Fe)

You can also search to find some levels of other elements like potassium that are being absorbed at high levels.

------------------------------------------

Gracilaria Parvispora dry weight analysis:

Nitrogen @ 2.50%
Phosphorous @ 0.082%
Potassium @ 13.54%
Calcium @ 0.555%
Magnesium @ 1.163
Sulfur @ 4.82
Zinc @ 139ppm
Iron @ 107ppm
Manganese @ 20ppm
Copper @ 7.0 ppm

Gracilaria is popular in some refugiums. A lot of people use chaeto...........if someone wants to they can send a sample to an independent lab and get similar results.

I believe the sample above was tested by Ward Labs.--http://www.wardlab.com/plant-services.php

You can also google search and may be able to find more on analysis of what is in chaeto or other specific algae.
------------------------------------------

Google search on "chaetomorpha metal uptake" you'll find a ton of info how effective algae is at absorbing metals.Do some searches on "chaetomorpha trace element uptake" or just algae uptake of trace elements

https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/rseau/2008-v21-n3-rseau2402/018776ar.pdf

------------------

I'd suggest watching this video as well--
Coral Reefs in the Microbial seas
https://video.search.yahoo.com/sear...=3d4fa48255695a1dfa7d2ec8627d9437&action=view

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I don't see how the 5-10% or even 25% water change can really reduce nutrients and add elements. If we do a 25% water change, this still leaves a majority of what we are trying to remove in the water. Same for elements, a small water change will only replace a fraction of the elements.

While water changes are never a perfect solution for adding or removing chemicals from a tank, they can make a big difference over time:
Here's what changing 30% monthly accomplishes for something that would otherwise just accumulate. The legend says nitrate, but it could be anything:

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-10/rhf/index.php

Figure 2. Nitrate concentration as a function of time when performing water changes of 0% (no changes), 7.5%, 15% and 30% of the total volume each month. In this example, nitrate is present at 0 ppm at the start, and is accumulated at a rate of 0.1 ppm per day when no water is changed.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I don't see how the 5-10% or even 25% water change can really reduce nutrients and add elements. If we do a 25% water change, this still leaves a majority of what we are trying to remove in the water. Same for elements, a small water change will only replace a fraction of the elements.

Following up, here's how it can add elements:

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-10/rhf/index.php

Figure 16. An overlay of Figures 14 and 15 to allow comparison of the differences between magnesium depletion using daily and monthly water changes equivalent to 30% per month. In this example, magnesium is present at 1280 ppm at the start, and is depleted at a rate of 0.4 ppm per day when no water is changed.

 

[jason2459]

... ICP testing allows us to have a view into the condition of our water. Is it perfect..No. Is it better then the hobby kits we use a home...dramatically better. ....

I disagree. It's ok for the major elements but will still get it wrong and has a range of accuracy. I find it just as accurate as proper testing methods with our hobby kits.

Its somewhat ok with the minor elements and some of them are wildly inaccurate.

It's terrible at the trace elements and often gets it wrong with some being better then others.

ICP-MS would be better. AA more so.


And yes, I have numbers to show this is so.

So no, we can't as hobbyists know everything about what's in our waters. What is building up. What is depleted. What is truly necessary or important. When dosing one thing many other impurities are often dosed as well.

Water changes are just one way to help. Import stuff and export stuff. Known and unknown. On my 20 gallon mantis tank its the only thing I do. On my 180 its automated but is just one part of my import and export methods.

But GlennF has gone longer then anyone I know with out a water change and has a beautiful reef. His last specific water change was in 2012. So, it can be done.

But overtime a change of water is about impossible to avoid through regular maintenance and some amount of seawater needs to be replenished.

Two good reasons that I can see to not wanting to do water changes are if you are a conservationist in general or in a drought stricken area. Otherwise, I personally see no reason not to do a water change at some level periodically.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Folks thinking about water changes need also to know that anyone who uses sodium bicarbonate/carbonate and calcium chloride for calcium and alkalinity is effectively doing water changes (especially in terms of export). This includes Glennf as well as folks using two part systems.

For example, in a tank requiring 2.2 dKH of alkalinity per day and the proportional amount of calcium will increase in salinity by about 64% over the course of a year. Since obviously folks maintain salinity, some water is removed.

That salinity reduction is equivalent, at least in terms of export, to about 8% changed monthly. It would also be equivalent to 8% changed monthly in terms of element import if the method used includes appropriate levels of all elements (as claimed by ESV/B-ionic and Balling methods).

 

[jason2459]

Plus say another 5%-15% from replacing seawater removed from skimmers depending on how wet or dry it is ran (if one is ran). Or when algae is removed and full of water. etc.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

Plus say another 5%-15% from replacing seawater removed from skimmers depending on how wet or dry it is ran (if one is ran). Or when algae is removed and full of water. etc.

Yes.

 

[Lasse]

Folks thinking about water changes need also to know that anyone who uses sodium bicarbonate/carbonate and calcium chloride for calcium and alkalinity is effectively doing water changes (especially in terms of export). This includes Glennf as well as folks using two part systems.

For example, in a tank requiring 2.2 dKH of alkalinity per day and the proportional amount of calcium will increase in salinity by about 64% over the course of a year. Since obviously folks maintain salinity, some water is removed.

That salinity reduction is equivalent, at least in terms of export, to about 8% changed monthly. It would also be equivalent to 8% changed monthly in terms of element import if the method used includes appropriate levels of all elements (as claimed by ESV/B-ionic and Balling methods).

Plus say another 5%-15% from replacing seawater removed from skimmers depending on how wet or dry it is ran (if one is ran). Or when algae is removed and full of water. etc.

Yes.

Will this mean that if anyone (as me) using the three part system - NaHCO3, CaCl and the normal salt premix (sometimes named NaCl free salt, sometimes named mineral salt but in reality - it is a premix containing all that a good sea salt need minuses the pure NaCl) – does not need any or lesser WC ?

I have recognize that using this type of Balling – I have to change around 3 litres a week with new fresh water in order to have a stable salinity. It will be 4 % monthly

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Scarybo]

I disagree. It's ok for the major elements but will still get it wrong and has a range of accuracy. I find it just as accurate as proper testing methods with our hobby kits.

Its somewhat ok with the minor elements and some of them are wildly inaccurate.

It's terrible at the trace elements and often gets it wrong with some being better then others.

ICP-MS would be better. AA more so.


And yes, I have numbers to show this is so.

So no, we can't as hobbyists know everything about what's in our waters. What is building up. What is depleted. What is truly necessary or important. When dosing one thing many other impurities are often dosed as well.

Water changes are just one way to help. Import stuff and export stuff. Known and unknown. On my 20 gallon mantis tank its the only thing I do. On my 180 its automated but is just one part of my import and export methods.

But GlennF has gone longer then anyone I know with out a water change and has a beautiful reef. His last specific water change was in 2012. So, it can be done.

But overtime a change of water is about impossible to avoid through regular maintenance and some amount of seawater needs to be replenished.

Two good reasons that I can see to not wanting to do water changes are if you are a conservationist in general or in a drought stricken area. Otherwise, I personally see no reason not to do a water change at some level periodically.

I'm not sure what you are disagreeing with me about. ICP testing is not perfect. It may not even be the best testing available. My point is it is better then hobby test kits and dramatically better IMO then just adding supplements without some idea of what is happening within the tank. I am not against water changes. There are times that they are vital and can potentially save your tank. What I question is the dogma that you need to change for example 10% a week. Why? The key to success in my experience has been stability. I try and avoid making changes without a reason. Yes.. a water change is included. For example if I were to see a build up of a toxic metal the first thing I would do is look for the source and then complete a series of water changes. Can regular water changes help reduce a build up or help maintain trace elements.. yes. But is it the best strategy to shock the system weekly with that change or would it be better to attempt to fashion a system that maintains correct levels and only requires a water change when something upsets that balance. That is what I am questioning in my thinking.