opinions on a uv and a reef tank w/refugium

[mos90]

i know this has been gone over a 100 time but id like to do it again. some people say a uv with a refugium is a no-no, it can kill planktonic foods and damage pods passing threw the uv. some say its great but they plumb the uv before the refugium on its own pump so pods cant pass threw it.

also the gph is important. too slow of a water flow- 75000-90000 eol can kill planktonic food where 30000-45000 have little to no effect of them while still controlling algae and bacteria.

so for my 8w aqua uv i should run about 400-600 gph. im at about 350 right now. that is the most i can go with my current pump.

throw in some opinions on what u think about using a uv for this type of setup.

currently i only run the uv for 4 hours a day during the main lighting. i have noticed an increase in water clarity and less dust algae on the glass, corals still seem to be doing fine.

 

[nonstophoops]

i know this has been gone over a 100 time but id like to do it again. some people say a uv with a refugium is a no-no, it can kill planktonic foods and damage pods passing threw the uv. some say its great but they plumb the uv before the refugium on its own pump so pods cant pass threw it.

also the gph is important. too slow of a water flow- 75000-90000 eol can kill planktonic food where 30000-45000 have little to no effect of them while still controlling algae and bacteria.

so for my 8w aqua uv i should run about 400-600 gph. im at about 350 right now. that is the most i can go with my current pump.

throw in some opinions on what u think about using a uv for this type of setup.

currently i only run the uv for 4 hours a day during the main lighting. i have noticed an increase in water clarity and less dust algae on the glass, corals still seem to be doing fine.

I think using UV on any reef tank is going to be a trade off. Whether you want to make the tradeoff depends on the situation. The UV is going to kill some beneficial and some nuisance organisms while running on your system. So you will have less plankton, but also less algae and clearer water. If your water is already super clear and you don't have any algae, then the UV isn't doing a whole lot of good. But if you have some algae and your water is perfectly clear then the UV is probably more beneficial than detrimental. I think in most situations the UV is beneficial put before the refugium even though that means less live food for the refugium and system as a whole.

 

[mos90]

either way u look at it, using a uv will result in less food for the system.

maybe i will just use it randomly when i see some dust algae build up. idk. i just dont want to harm my system in any way.

 

[Heathd]

If water clarity and controlled algae growth are the two main reasons you using a UV, then maybe you could just do carbon and GFO?

 

[mos90]

i am using carbon and gfo already in a phosban reactor. still get some dust algae on the glass without running the uv.

 

[nonstophoops]

If water clarity and controlled algae growth are the two main reasons you using a UV, then maybe you could just do carbon and GFO?

I have been getting the same dusting of algae since I switched my lighting over. Nothing major, but just enough to be annoying on the front glass. It sucks too because that stuff doesn't come off well with the Magfloat. I am hoping the GFO and Chemipure will solve that issue. I looked at my fish journal, and I realized I had been slacking a bit on my water changes too. So it should go away, I hope.

 

[FLESHY]

I would not use gfo...seachem's phosphate product will not leach phosphates back into your tank, and doesnt have any of the other issues of GFO either. Purigen, matrix carbon, and phos whatever they call it is all I will be running in my reactor when my filtration is said and done. For now.

 

[nonstophoops]

I would not use gfo...seachem's phosphate product will not leach phosphates back into your tank, and doesnt have any of the other issues of GFO either. Purigen, matrix carbon, and phos whatever they call it is all I will be running in my reactor when my filtration is said and done. For now.

Is Seachem paying you to promote their products? lol

I believe you are talking about PhosGuard. From what I have seen every product out there says it doesn't leach. I read a few places saying that PhosGuard can leach aluminum. Not really sure what is true. Get we will see what happens with my GFO. GFO does pack together and thus lessen total surface area, but with some tweaking of the water flow I am not having any problems so far. PhosGuard is nice in this regard, being round. PhosGuard is also only supposed to be used short term(less than a week), however.

Purigen. I have to bring this up cause I find it almost comical. Here is a quote from the Seachem site about Purigen.

Purigen® is specifically designed to be an organic scavenging resin. When ion-exchange resins are filled to capacity by metals and other contaminants, Purigen® has barely begun to reach its potential. Purigen® generally ignores simple elemental compounds, having an extreme affinity for nitrogenous organics./QUOTE]

I do believe Purigen works, but based on there sales pitch I am not convinced it works better. Yes, I know there is a lot of BS marketing that goes into all these products, but does Purigen really have a brain? It "generally ignores simple elemental compounds"? So sometimes it looks at a compound and says, ahhh I'm not hungry for that, I will wait for something better to float by. Same with "having an extreme affinity," it doesn't decide, either the material DOES absorb it or NOT! If it actually doesn't absorb simple stuff and absorbs nitrogenous wastes then say that! It doesn't though, and by saying generally it makes me believe it is BS.

I like the Matrix Carbon because it is round as well. It will be more efficient in due to flow through rates and maximum surface exposure. I don't understand how they can say it will remove twice as much stuff as normal carbon. It may do it faster, but how can it hold more just because it is round? I mean I hope it does, because it is more expensive.

Not personally attacking you or your choices Flesh. I have been doing a lot of reading on this stuff lately and think that there is a lot of BS out there because there is no regulation and it makes it very difficult to pinpoint the best products. Particularly considering the costs of some of the them that say they are superior.

Sorry for hijacking the thread as well.

 

[FLESHY]

I have had great sucess with all of these products.

My tank is proof...water clarity is pretty insane, and getting better.

I am running probably half of what I should be running carbon wise. Water that clear from less than a cup of carbon? For a month?

Black diamond doesnt make stuff that good.

 

[nonstophoops]

I have had great sucess with all of these products.

My tank is proof...water clarity is pretty insane, and getting better.

I am running probably half of what I should be running carbon wise. Water that clear from less than a cup of carbon? For a month?

Black diamond doesnt make stuff that good.

I am not saying they don't work. I have seen your tank and they obviously do. I just question that they are actually superior to other stuff.