-
Folks, if you've recently upgraded or renewed your annual club membership but it's still not active, please reach out to the BOD or a moderator. The PayPal system has a slight bug which it doesn't allow it to activate the account on it's own.
Water changes, what do YOU think?
- Thread starter erid
- Start date
I dont do water changes often and none of my tanks(past and present) never seemed to suffer at all.
Here we go the debate 
For those of you not doing water changes, try doing 10% to 15% water changes weekly over a 6 week time period and then report your findings. Take pictures, lets see if there's any changes, better growth, etc.. I think it would be a fun experiment
For those of you not doing water changes, try doing 10% to 15% water changes weekly over a 6 week time period and then report your findings. Take pictures, lets see if there's any changes, better growth, etc.. I think it would be a fun experiment sinkingbeach said:Here we go the debate
I REALLY like that idea.
But that sounds like work :-\
I believe in over-filtration and changing your media more then water changes
Dont ask them, the will tel you to do 90% water changes a week. Just kidding guys. ;D
I do 25% changes every 2 weeks (Sundays). My logic since you have to do so much prep work to do the change (as far as making the water, aerating it, getting it up to temp, confirming the parameters match the tank), why not just do a bigger change less often.
My changes are around 30 Gallons (90 display and 30 Sump). So all I have to do it drain the sump with a Mag 9, drop the same mag9 in the water makeup can to pump back to the sump, then all done. Takes 15 minutes from drain to refill.
My changes are around 30 Gallons (90 display and 30 Sump). So all I have to do it drain the sump with a Mag 9, drop the same mag9 in the water makeup can to pump back to the sump, then all done. Takes 15 minutes from drain to refill.
I think doing a minimum of 5% a week is good and up to 10% if needed. I don't see the point in doing more then 10% a week unless you hit some type of problem with the tank. If you need to change out more then 10% to keep some type of level lower (IE nitrates) then I'd think husbandry practices need to be looked at/improved. (don't get mad at me for saying that, just my opinion).
In general with a good salt mix I'd say more then 10% a week is a waste of money in salt. Changing water out every week as opposed to biweekly offers a few pluses in my book.
Tank has less seesaw effect in parameters. This affects many things like the DOCS, inorganics and nitrate levels which you want to keep low. It also keeps your trace and minor elements closer to the same (weekly) without as much "dip" on things like iron and iodine that get depleted quickly.
Doing a smaller water change more often allows more "play" room. By this I mean you don't have to worry about matching levels nearly as much. For example if you do a 25% water change and your tank is normally 82F but your make up water is 68F (room temp) then the overall temp after the change will be roughly 78.5F where if you do a 10% water change it would end up as 80.6F.
2 more examples with alk after my sig. optional reading
Anyway, the point is that by doing smaller changes weekly instead of a larger change biweekly the water "matching" isn't as important. If you do 5% water changes you can all but skip the checking/matching of values. Trying to match the levels could make the difference for some people how often they do the changes. For some it's no big deal but for others it's a pain in the arse. BTW, just a general rule/principle but try and always check the calcium and alkalinity level of each new bucket of salt you buy after mixing just to make sure it was formulated correctly and that there wasn't a manufacturing glitch where the alk is sky high or something that would cause you untold grief.
I think the 5% change weekly is pretty easy to do also. Even on something around a 125g tank you'll have roughly 100 gallons so changing out 5 gallons is one bucket of water. You don't need to shut down the system or anything. A small MaxiJet with a hose can fill the bucket while the system keeps running. Most people's tanks can handle draining 5 gallons with no problem and keep right on running. After draining 5 gallons just add 5 back in.
It just seems to me that only having to lug one bucket each way (to and from the tank) when doing the water changes is easy enough that the "lazy factor" doesn't set in. I found I didn't make as much mess either or hardly at all this way. When doing larger water changes you try and rush it to get done faster and typically make a mess or spill a little here or there (at least I used to).
Carlo
Other example:
Say your tank normally runs at 11 dKH and you change out 25% with 8 dKH water you'd end up at 10.25 but if you do 10% water changes then you'd end up at 10.7 dKH.
Flip side to alk:
Take the opposite example where you try and keep your tank dKH at 8 but are using something like IO or RC that mixes up to around 11 dKH (example only). With a 25% water change you'd be at 8.75 dKH but with a 10% change you'd be at 8.3 dKH which is much closer to your target range.
In general with a good salt mix I'd say more then 10% a week is a waste of money in salt. Changing water out every week as opposed to biweekly offers a few pluses in my book.
Tank has less seesaw effect in parameters. This affects many things like the DOCS, inorganics and nitrate levels which you want to keep low. It also keeps your trace and minor elements closer to the same (weekly) without as much "dip" on things like iron and iodine that get depleted quickly.
Doing a smaller water change more often allows more "play" room. By this I mean you don't have to worry about matching levels nearly as much. For example if you do a 25% water change and your tank is normally 82F but your make up water is 68F (room temp) then the overall temp after the change will be roughly 78.5F where if you do a 10% water change it would end up as 80.6F.
2 more examples with alk after my sig. optional reading
Anyway, the point is that by doing smaller changes weekly instead of a larger change biweekly the water "matching" isn't as important. If you do 5% water changes you can all but skip the checking/matching of values. Trying to match the levels could make the difference for some people how often they do the changes. For some it's no big deal but for others it's a pain in the arse. BTW, just a general rule/principle but try and always check the calcium and alkalinity level of each new bucket of salt you buy after mixing just to make sure it was formulated correctly and that there wasn't a manufacturing glitch where the alk is sky high or something that would cause you untold grief.
I think the 5% change weekly is pretty easy to do also. Even on something around a 125g tank you'll have roughly 100 gallons so changing out 5 gallons is one bucket of water. You don't need to shut down the system or anything. A small MaxiJet with a hose can fill the bucket while the system keeps running. Most people's tanks can handle draining 5 gallons with no problem and keep right on running. After draining 5 gallons just add 5 back in.
It just seems to me that only having to lug one bucket each way (to and from the tank) when doing the water changes is easy enough that the "lazy factor" doesn't set in.
I found I didn't make as much mess either or hardly at all this way. When doing larger water changes you try and rush it to get done faster and typically make a mess or spill a little here or there (at least I used to).Carlo
Other example:
Say your tank normally runs at 11 dKH and you change out 25% with 8 dKH water you'd end up at 10.25 but if you do 10% water changes then you'd end up at 10.7 dKH.
Flip side to alk:
Take the opposite example where you try and keep your tank dKH at 8 but are using something like IO or RC that mixes up to around 11 dKH (example only). With a 25% water change you'd be at 8.75 dKH but with a 10% change you'd be at 8.3 dKH which is much closer to your target range.
I'm the furthest away of offering any "expertise" opinion since I've only been in the hobby for under 8 months, but I am adamant about doing weekly water changes of about 10% and am thrilled with the results.
---
Wendy
---
Wendy
ricwilli said:
so that makes me think............. The Algae needs the extra nutrients in the water to feed its growth so right now there may be too much nutrients in the water but if you keep doing that woudn't that start to take the good stuff out? (Remember, I am an begginer at this)
jazzsam said:
No. You're just making the nutrients that feed algae less abundant, so the organisms which feed on these nutrients need to be more competitive. Generally speaking, larger, or more complex organisms are adapted to soak up these nutrients more aggressively and out compete smaller, lesser organisms such as algae. This is how your refugium works. You're selectively encouraging a type of algae that we, as hobbyists, like (chaeto in most cases anymore, but there are still loads of people growing caulerpas so they can have a pretty variety and/or feed tangs), and using it to starve algae by out competing for nutrients.
So, the "water change" debate, or, rather, "shouting match" in some cases, has been around for a really long time, right from the very beginning of the hobby.
Now, to a certain extent, you need to guage your stocking and intention when gauging water changes. I will not argue that water changes are NOT necessary. Instead, from both my own experience, independent studies, and the experience of fellow aquatic hobbyists of both saltwater and freshwater, that waters changes are indeed necessary for the optimal health and conditions of the fish, and for a few reasons.
It has been proven in more recent times that the "fish grow to the size of their tank" is bunk by overstocking fish and doing massive water changes. This myth has been around for several years, that keeping a fish in too small of a tank would stunt their growth. However, there have been several interest studies into this. In one of my favorite examples, Jack Wattley, internationally known and respected discus breeder, overstocked discus fry to ridiculous proprotions in a few different groups. In one group, he barely did wataer changes, while in the other groups he increased both the frequency and percentage of water changes he did. The discus that recieved more water changes grew at a normal to increased rate and in prime shape, while the fry that recieved barely any water changes grew at a slower and, for lack of a better word, stunted rate, with a higher incidence of defects. Another study performed by a TFH editor involving oscars concluded with the same results, while studies with clownfish are smaller reef fish seem to be yielding the same results. The animals were offered water changes, the same food, and the same otherwise exact same conditions (pH, temp, equipment, etc.) The only thing that varied was the concentrations of wastes and metabolites that resulted from the different water changes. So, as a result of this, I always advise at least minimal water changes, and it has always paid off in the long run for every client I had ever recommended this too, for corals, inverts, AND fish.
However, as other people have pointed out, there is a point where you can do too much water changes. The trick is to gauge what corals you have and what their needs are. See, corals comes from all over the world with widely varying water chemistry, and certain corals rely very heavily on seasonal changes to take advantage of water composition and grow faster/ healthier. Take everyone's favorite love/hate corals, the Xenia species, mushrooms, gsp, and other soft corals dubbed "invasive." Allow the water to be more nutrient rich by doing less frequent or smaller water changes, and these corals can downright take over (rather like algae in nutrient rich water). However, there are many stony corlas which do not appreciate too rich of water and will waste away (although, there is still some debate over whether this is directly related to the water composition, or whether this is related to silts and algaes settling on the corals in question). On the flip side, even stony corals need some nutrients in the water, as noted by many would-be private aquaculturalists have noted in failed attempts to grow stonies faster in TOO pristine of environment (or they're just being too cheap to buy fish or possibly avoiding water changes by not having fish). So, balance, IMHO, is really the key.
Sorry for the long-winded response, but I was hoping to give a more even handed look at both the necessity for water changes and the need to not over-do it. Hope this answers your question and raises more of what is really best for the specific tank in question. ;D
O.k, I will start doing lets say a 10 to 20% water change a week. But I must warn you, I am a tad bit lazy and even more forgetful so if you does see me post many updates, dont be surprised.
monsterfishkeeper said:
I say try it with an open mind. The worst that happens is.... well.... you'll get some quality time up close and personal with your tank!