Best method of aeration?
- Thread starter eon aquatics
- Start date
This subject has been done to death. There is no definitive answer. The best method of aeration is the method that works for you.
Agree, matter of opinion and preference. After doing bubbles for years I came to prefer surface agitation alone from a filter or wavemaker (for being quiet), but I can attest to the fact that either or both will work.
Agree
I stopped using traditional aerators over 20 years ago, and just use water pumps and emphasize surface agitation.
Although if the fish are predominantly rheophillic, I attach a venturi tube to the outflow from the water pump, to add even more agitation.
water pump surface agitation video below
Flow
Airstones all the way for me. There is no way that I am going to run individual electric wavemakers and pumps in each tank; painfully inefficient in terms of energy usage, expensive to buy all those separate little buzzing gadgets, extension cords running everywhere, all those separate little impellers requiring cleaning and maintenance...yuck. Set up a new tank and start running more cords and more motors; no thanks. And all you get is aeration.
A central air pump and manifold delivering air to all parts of the fish room is my idea of perfection. Setting up a new tank, or a temporary quarantine, and all you need is another air line from the manifold and an airstone...plus, you can use all these airlines to power sponge filters, giving you aeration and also biofiltration.
I had a single tank in my library upstairs, and another single one in my den; for a long time I ran these with separate power filters and pumps. But, eventually, I just ran airlines up from the basement to those tanks...saving energy, reducing noise upstairs, reducing maintenance...no downside, IMHO.
A central air pump and manifold delivering air to all parts of the fish room is my idea of perfection. Setting up a new tank, or a temporary quarantine, and all you need is another air line from the manifold and an airstone...plus, you can use all these airlines to power sponge filters, giving you aeration and also biofiltration.
I had a single tank in my library upstairs, and another single one in my den; for a long time I ran these with separate power filters and pumps. But, eventually, I just ran airlines up from the basement to those tanks...saving energy, reducing noise upstairs, reducing maintenance...no downside, IMHO.
Although I had 20 tanks running when I lived in Wi, I filtered all 20 with 4 sumps, so 4 pumps, running 20 tanks. (5 tanks per sump)
And because almost all the fish I kept were riverine, I found the simple updraft type current of airstones, inefficient for providing the riverine flow I needed along the length of those mostly 6 ft tanks.
And because almost all the fish I kept were riverine, I found the simple updraft type current of airstones, inefficient for providing the riverine flow I needed along the length of those mostly 6 ft tanks.
135 gal in my office, 2 Eheims and a wavemaker-- practically silent, the computer is louder, only the current (or heater light) tells me it's on, same with tanks in other rooms-- again, just my preference, both can work but these days I like the quiet.
Hang on filters not as quiet, some not bad but ime you can hear even the quiet ones.
Hang on filters not as quiet, some not bad but ime you can hear even the quiet ones.
Last edited:
I really think that the whole "riverine fish" thing is starting to get a little bit carried away on MFK. We have people calculating how many times their tanks are turned over per hour as if this is the holy grail of fishkeeping. As a fisherman and a casual snorkeler, I spend a lot of time observing fish...usually with an eye towards catching and eating them
...and I have seen that fish living in fast-flowing water spend almost all of their time avoiding the fast-flowing water. They tend to be behind rockpiles, or in slack water stretches along the bottom or at the back of pools; predators may occasionally dart out into the flow to snatch a prey item, but then it's back into the quiet stretch. Flyfishing is largely predicated upon learning to "read" the water in an effort to find those quiet resting spots, because that's where the majority of fish are caught the majority of the time.I'm not suggesting that airlifts are as easy to use when creating current in a tank as circulating pumps and wavemakers are...but rather that we don't need our tanks to look like washing machines set on the Heavy cycle. That's not what the question was on this thread; not water flow, but rather aeration. The two go hand in hand, but they are not the same.
Now, if you are convinced that your tank needs X amount of water flow and purchase a water pump with that turnover rate in mind...and then compare it to a wimpy little 1/2-inch or 3/4-inch airlift tube in a tiny commecial sponge filter...of course the air lift will fall short. But airlifts can be as simple as an airstone...or as complex as many of the designs that are easily found on the internet, such as:
An airlift like that provides not only massive aeration...gas exchange to introduce oxygen and remove carbon dioxide...but can also move impressive amounts of water. With the water being drawn from one end of the tank and reintroduced at the opposite end, there can be significant flow, as shown here:
The HiBlow air pump in my fish room operates every tank I own...even the ones upstairs...and in a couple of them it moves several hundred gallons of water per hour via airlifts. It runs on 70 watts. Those with numerous tanks using multiple wavemakers and powerheads should add up the energy usage if they don't think that is noteworthy.
But, again, the question originally was about the "best" form of aeration...not filtration, not water circulation, but simple aeration. Does anyone truly believe that a strongly-bubbling airstone or two...in any tank of one or several hundred gallons capacity...is not providing all the oxygen possibly needed by the inhabitants?