To Skim or not to Skim!!!

[ticklem]

So I tested my phosphates last night and got .07 so I am considering adding a minimax reactor with GFO to my nuvo 24.



Just curious though if it would be worth adding a skimmer on this size tank and what the best skimmer would be. Ive seen good things about the Aquaticlife Mini Skimmer 115, Tunze 9002 and 9005, and of course the IM skimmer. Or just Go skimmerless???

[Hentz]

I just purchased my Nuvo 24 a few days ago. Beautiful tank, I love it. I've also got a Nuvo 38 that sits next to it thats been running for 6-7 months now. Considering the minimal size difference, I used a skimmer on the 38 for a while then switched that over to my 26 Gallon (which is now my Nuvo 24) and its been off for about 1 1/2 - 2 months now from the 38 and its doing just fine. No water changes or anything and I've got amazing growth still!

[ddiomede]

I tried for quite some time to go without a skimmer but found that I really needed one. I had set up a tank originally with just a cpr aquafuge 2. No skimmer on that model. My tank ran fine parameter wise for a while, but then I started to see climbing phosphates and nitrates as well. This is with doing 20% WC every week! So I decided to do away with the aquafuge and get a sump and skimmer. About a couple months later, all of my parameters were in line with how they were when going skimmerless was working for me. IMHO, I think a skimmer is a necessity if you have fish. They remove organics from your water column before they have a chance to break down. If I had to make a choice between a GFO reactor and a skimmer, the skimmer would win hands down every time.

[dkeller_nc]

A skimmer is always a wise choice on a reef tank, unless that reef tank is full of non-photosynthetic plankton feeders, in which case it's a non-optional necessity.

It is absolutely possible to run a reef tank with no skimmer, but only if the bioload is kept low, fish feedings are scrupulously managed, water changes are frequent and/or the tank is heavily filtered through nutrient-absorbing media such as GAC and GFO. The threads that one sees that tout a reefer's success without a skimmer and without doing one or more of the above are generally short-term. Any reef tank will be just fine without a skimmer for few days, a week or even a few months. But during that time nutrients will be building in that tank, especially dissolved organic compounds. What usually happens is either an algae explosion after a few months, a tank crash, or an algae explosion followed by a tank crash.

But even in the above cases of careful husbandry, chemical absorption media, large water changes, etc..., having a skimmer means having a backup. If an animal unexpectedly dies in a nano, the skimmer can be a real lifesaver (literally).

[jwoyshnar]

Originally Posted by dkeller_nc

A skimmer is always a wise choice on a reef tank, unless that reef tank is full of non-photosynthetic plankton feeders, in which case it's a non-optional necessity.

It is absolutely possible to run a reef tank with no skimmer, but only if the bioload is kept low, fish feedings are scrupulously managed, water changes are frequent and/or the tank is heavily filtered through nutrient-absorbing media such as GAC and GFO. The threads that one sees that tout a reefer's success without a skimmer and without doing one or more of the above are generally short-term. Any reef tank will be just fine without a skimmer for few days, a week or even a few months. But during that time nutrients will be building in that tank, especially dissolved organic compounds. What usually happens is either an algae explosion after a few months, a tank crash, or an algae explosion followed by a tank crash.

But even in the above cases of careful husbandry, chemical absorption media, large water changes, etc..., having a skimmer means having a backup. If an animal unexpectedly dies in a nano, the skimmer can be a real lifesaver (literally).

There are many people's tanks that can debunk your theory. Many run algae scrubbers with great success without skimmers for years. I for one run a biocube with none of your above mentioned criteria. Tank is thriving and I even rarely do water changes. Fish are fed 3 times a day and anemone is fed 3 times a week.

[HUNTER1]

I had 40g with no sump amd skimmer with only canister and just fine even with sps. Yeah it's nice to have skimmer but the reef tank can run without one.

[jwoyshnar]

I just thought about another friend who's only filtration is a denitrator. His tank has been up for years like this and his tank is fully loaded with corals and fish

[Dazedman00]

I have a 3g that has a hang on the back filter that I do not have any filter media in. The tank has some live rock,star polyps, green pallies, ricordia, xynia, snails, hermits and a peppermint shrimp. I do water changes once a month.

With that said, if you setup the tank correctly it should be able to self sustain to a point with little unwanted algae or parameters.

Just my 2 cents.

ImageUploadedByTapatalk1375536916.418378.jpg

[smiz]

I've been running my biocube since the start skimmer less for about a year and a half now with no issues. I have five fish and feed every other day. The only filtration I have is a few filter pads, chemipure elite, and a large refugium. I've never run into a problem and I do 30% water change every month. I think as long as you have enough biological filtration your tank can keep extremely stable from you just doing water changes.

[Fishlab]

My parents are considering moving so I just tore down their 30g tank. It ran off the same deep sand bed and two maxi-jet power heads since 1999. It never had a protein skimmer, fish load was normal for that size tank (includes a 12 year old clownfish and yellow tail damsel I moved to my tank) that included clownfish pair, damsels, Bangaii Cardinalfish, etc. Corals were a wide variety of softies and LPS which are photosynthetic. It never registered nitrates (never had an issue so never tested phosphates) and water changes would go as long as three months.

Balance is more important than anything else. If your filtration system can handle a load you can make your own choices, things like nitrates need to be processed or removed. My tank has always had a skimmer because I didn't want to implement a DSB, etc.

[dkeller_nc]

Again, folks, it isn't just "skimmerless", it's skimmerless and careful husbandry, chemical filtration, and/or water changes. I have personally run skimmerless tanks, and it certainly can be done. Julian Sprung's wave tank is skimmerless, and it's spectacular.

But there are very good reasons that skimmers are recommended for reef tanks - it isn't hype. And at least in a forum setting, there are issues with recommending a set-up that is the exception rather than the rule.

It's about like running a reef on just tap water that has been carbon filtered to remove the chlorine/chloramine. If you live in a locality with clean, low-TDS water, it can be done. But it would be unwise to advise doing this in a forum, particularly when there are lots of lurker newbies that will just read the headline without reading and understanding the "ifs".

[myst]

Originally Posted by jwoyshnar

There are many people's tanks that can debunk your theory. Many run algae scrubbers with great success without skimmers for years. I for one run a biocube with none of your above mentioned criteria. Tank is thriving and I even rarely do water changes. Fish are fed 3 times a day and anemone is fed 3 times a week.

Did you even read his post? He said it is absolutely possible to run a reef tank without one. It's also absolutely possible to cross the street blindfolded and some of the people will get to the other side fine. The point of his post is that there is a much safer option.

[Dazedman00]

I know that. I wanted to provide another example of a reef without a skimmer.

[jwoyshnar]

Originally Posted by myst

Did you even read his post? He said it is absolutely possible to run a reef tank without one. It's also absolutely possible to cross the street blindfolded and some of the people will get to the other side fine. The point of his post is that there is a much safer option.

Why yes I did but clearly I doubt you did. He said that you have to do all of these things to make it successful which I wrote there are tanks that debunk that theory. Many run without skimmers, gfo, gac etc and rarely do water changes and feed allot and don't have issues.

[houstonhobby]

I have experiance with BRS GFO reactors with my planted tanks and they were a pain because the GFO clumps up quickly (I think it changes to a different chemical when it grabs a phosphate ion). Since I have a choice on saltwater between skimmer and reactor that is a no brainer. Gimme a skimmer

[Palting]

A skimmer is just one more way to remove dissolved organics. Organics are otherwise known as "junk". A skimmer is highly efficient at it's job when set-up properly. Successful reef tanks that don't have a skimmer likely have other efficient ways to remove the "junk". Otherwise, they will fail.

[dkeller_nc]

Originally Posted by jwoyshnar

Why yes I did but clearly I doubt you did. He said that you have to do all of these things to make it successful which I wrote there are tanks that debunk that theory. Many run without skimmers, gfo, gac etc and rarely do water changes and feed allot and don't have issues.

Uh no - That's precisely what I didn't say:

"It is absolutely possible to run a reef tank with no skimmer, but only if the bioload is kept low, fish feedings are scrupulously managed, water changes are frequent and/or the tank is heavily filtered through nutrient-absorbing media such as GAC and GFO."

Note the use of "and/or" to connote a conditional list where at least one item in the list is true, but some or all of them may be true as well.

[Fishlab]

What reef tank doesn't include careful husbandry? Is everyone with skimmers wildly over feeding, overstocking, and not doing water changes? I doubt it. A skimmer less tank isn't walking the edge of chaos nor rampant with limitations, it's just a different choice. Heck, I used to feed my parents tank aggressively trying to make nitrates (with no success). It also can't be considered "lucky" after 13-14 years. As far as I'm concerned it's the same as choosing lighting, sand or no sand, etc.

[Khemul]

This is the problem with skimmer discussions.

There is always someone who will jump in and yell in the background "but I did {insert method here} for years without a skimmer!". Which doesn't really help in the least.


On a 24 gallon...it really depends how much you want to keep up on water changes. I mean, a skimmer won't hurt, but a simple 5 gallon water changes is going to be in the 20-25% range, which could have a similar effect on the tank. It also depends on what you are growing, since a soft coral tank probably won't care either way what you do, but a SPS tank will.

[scolley]

The OP's original question stated having .07 ppm PO4 as if that low number might demonstrate there being no need for a skimmer. But we do not know WHY PO4 was 0.07 ppm? No. Algae can do that for you, and often does.

So IMO, unless the OP has an algae free tank - a skimmer is needed. And from personal experience I'd reccomend forgetting about the Tunze 9002 and getting an SCA 301.

[mgraf]

So many people here always say there are many directions and ways to do things in a reef, until you get to the skimmer discussion. Then some are just so dead set that a skimmer is the only way. Actually, it is usually the skimmer people that come in yelling. I personally run a skimmer, I have ran skimmerless systems. Both can work. Just depends on how you want to treat and maintain your system. I run an algae scrubber with a skimmer now. Some may tell me I'm wrong but, it works for me. Redundancy has never hurt me in this hobby.

[unreal45]

On that sized tank you don't need a skimmer. Keep the fish count and feedings low and you will be fine.

[dkeller_nc]

Originally Posted by ticklem

Just curious though if it would be worth adding a skimmer on this size tank and what the best skimmer would be. Ive seen good things about the Aquaticlife Mini Skimmer 115, Tunze 9002 and 9005, and of course the IM skimmer. Or just Go skimmerless???

By the way - I asked a LFS owner that sells/maintains a fair number of Nuvo tanks from IM what his opinion was of the Aquagadget Skimmate skimmers that are made for your tank. His assessment was quite positive - he noted that they are effective, not too expensive, and fit the IM tanks without any hassles.

[jwoyshnar]

Originally Posted by dkeller_nc

Uh no - That's precisely what I didn't say:



Note the use of "and/or" to connote a conditional list where at least one item in the list is true, but some or all of them may be true as well.

Yes I understood your and/or and what I am saying that there are people who do none of what you wrote and are very successful. That is what I meant by debunking what you said.

[Fishlab]

Originally Posted by Khemul

This is the problem with skimmer discussions.

There is always someone who will jump in and yell in the background "but I did {insert method here} for years without a skimmer!". Which doesn't really help in the least.


On a 24 gallon...it really depends how much you want to keep up on water changes. I mean, a skimmer won't hurt, but a simple 5 gallon water changes is going to be in the 20-25% range, which could have a similar effect on the tank. It also depends on what you are growing, since a soft coral tank probably won't care either way what you do, but a SPS tank will.

Why isn't the practical experience of a skimmerless tank relevant, especially when it contradicts the assertions of a post in a thread about skimmers?

A reef tank is all about balance of "nutrients in/nutrients out". I've stated how a normal reef tank was created that included several original fish over 10 years old, a multitude of spawning events, and over a decade of enjoyment without a skimmer to provide factual data for the OP to make whatever decision they want.