I am interested in changing less water. . . or maybe NO water. . . please educate me.

[Viking_Reefing]

I believe you have a small tank right? In that case there’s no reason to forgo water changes unless you happen to be physically impaired which makes doing them difficult. A small water change takes no time at all and it’s unequivocally the better option.
There’s really no point in going the no water change route for anything but really large tanks where cost and effort might start to be an issue.

The main problem is like Randy stated: things accumulate over time, both organics and elements. I wouldn’t even trust an ICP to find everything because they simply don’t test for everything that might make it in to your tank.

A long time ago there was the Triton craze where everyone was going to go without water changes…see how many stuck to it.
I have a bunch of friends who decided to go this route and they all stuck with for a time, some up to 3-5 years, but everyone eventually ended going back to water changes since their tanks just wasn’t doing well after a time.
The last holdout with a 3000L tank just recently said screw this since his tank was steadily going down hill. As soon as he got back to doing WC’s it bounced back.

This mirrors my own experience: I tried for a bit over a year and the tank was doing awesome at first but after some time it just wasn’t, even though I had no issues on my ICP tests. Started doing water changes again and what do you know, things got better.
I actually think I ended up doing more work without water changes since you really need to keep on top of elements, ICP tests etc.

On my current 1400L system I do 100L weekly. My old AWC setup broke about a year ago and I’ve been waiting for the ghl maxi doser 2.2 to be released so I’ve been doing them manually which has been a pain…even though having a sump room and a floor drain helps.
Got the maxi 2.2 setup two days ago and it will be changing out 15L daily and I’ll just get in and vacuum out gunk from the sand bed once a month.

 

[MoshJosh]

I believe you have a small tank right? In that case there’s no reason to forgo water changes unless you happen to be physically impaired which makes doing them difficult. A small water change takes no time at all and it’s unequivocally the better option.
There’s really no point in going the no water change route for anything but really large tanks where cost and effort might start to be an issue.

The main problem is like Randy stated: things accumulate over time, both organics and elements. I wouldn’t even trust an ICP to find everything because they simply don’t test for everything that might make it in to your tank.

A long time ago there was the Triton craze where everyone was going to go without water changes…see how many stuck to it.
I have a bunch of friends who decided to go this route and they all stuck with for a time, some up to 3-5 years, but everyone eventually ended going back to water changes since their tanks just wasn’t doing well after a time.
The last holdout with a 3000L tank just recently said screw this since his tank was steadily going down hill. As soon as he got back to doing WC’s it bounced back.

This mirrors my own experience: I tried for a bit over a year and the tank was doing awesome at first but after some time it just wasn’t, even though I had no issues on my ICP tests. Started doing water changes again and what do you know, things got better.
I actually think I ended up doing more work without water changes since you really need to keep on top of elements, ICP tests etc.

On my current 1400L system I do 100L weekly. My old AWC setup broke about a year ago and I’ve been waiting for the ghl maxi doser 2.2 to be released so I’ve been doing them manually which has been a pain…even though having a sump room and a floor drain helps.
Got the maxi 2.2 setup two days ago and it will be changing out 15L daily and I’ll just get in and vacuum out gunk from the sand bed once a month.

Thanks Viking (and everyone else who has posted). Seems like water changing is the way to go.

I currently do 5 gallons a week in both of my tanks, so 20% and 25% respectively, I am still considering backing off a bit as my nutrients are getting pretty low. . .

 

[Rusty_L_Shackleford]

I believe you have a small tank right? In that case there’s no reason to forgo water changes unless you happen to be physically impaired which makes doing them difficult. A small water change takes no time at all and it’s unequivocally the better option.
There’s really no point in going the no water change route for anything but really large tanks where cost and effort might start to be an issue.

The main problem is like Randy stated: things accumulate over time, both organics and elements. I wouldn’t even trust an ICP to find everything because they simply don’t test for everything that might make it in to your tank.

A long time ago there was the Triton craze where everyone was going to go without water changes…see how many stuck to it.
I have a bunch of friends who decided to go this route and they all stuck with for a time, some up to 3-5 years, but everyone eventually ended going back to water changes since their tanks just wasn’t doing well after a time.
The last holdout with a 3000L tank just recently said screw this since his tank was steadily going down hill. As soon as he got back to doing WC’s it bounced back.

This mirrors my own experience: I tried for a bit over a year and the tank was doing awesome at first but after some time it just wasn’t, even though I had no issues on my ICP tests. Started doing water changes again and what do you know, things got better.
I actually think I ended up doing more work without water changes since you really need to keep on top of elements, ICP tests etc.

On my current 1400L system I do 100L weekly. My old AWC setup broke about a year ago and I’ve been waiting for the ghl maxi doser 2.2 to be released so I’ve been doing them manually which has been a pain…even though having a sump room and a floor drain helps.
Got the maxi 2.2 setup two days ago and it will be changing out 15L daily and I’ll just get in and vacuum out gunk from the sand bed once a month.

I agree. I mean, whats the goal here? There are so many things in our tanks that we cant test for. For example, chemicals, toxins, growth inhibitors secreted by corals. The solution for polution is dilution. Also, i have never dosed trace elements. Good food and water changes. Imo water and salr are cheap. Bottled crap gets expensive fast. I know people that have tried no water changes, and ime theyre tanks start to go downhill for inexplicable reasons around the 18 month mark. No water changea is possible but imo its way more expense and effort than just doing watee changes.

 

[Koty]

IMO, the harder part of a no water change scenario is not what to add, but how to remove things that accumulate.

Randy, is there a compound with a known formula/structure that belong to these extra stable DOCs?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Randy, is there a compound with a known formula/structure that belong to these extra stable DOCs?

While there are individual compounds, the refractory organics that are only very slowly broken down in seawater form a wide range of structures:

Organic Compounds in the Reef Aquarium by Randy Holmes-Farley - Reefkeeping.com

Organics in the Ocean

The nature of the organic matter in the ocean is poorly understood. Part of the reason for this lack of understanding stems from the tremendous variety of organic material that exists. There is essentially no limit to the number of different organic compounds that are theoretically possible, and the fact is that many millions of organic compounds have been synthesized or identified. Identifying and quantifying every possible organic material in seawater is just not possible, at least with present day technology. Consequently, identifying the form organic materials take in the ocean most often involves grouping them into classes by a functional test, such as whether they can be extracted from the water with a hydrophobic solvent, whether they contain nitrogen or phosphorus, etc.

A small number of organic compounds have been individually identified and quantified in seawater, but they represent only a small percentage of the total mass of organic material. Those examined in detail include simple sugars and amino acids, and the very simplest organic molecules, such as derivatives of methane (CH4) or ethane (CH3CH3), including acetate (CH3CO2-).3

One interesting aspect of organic compounds in the ocean is that some have been there for thousands of years.1,3 Many organic compounds, especially in surface waters, are rapidly cycling between living organisms that consume and modify them, and the dissolved forms that are just floating about. Acetate, for example, can have a turnover rate as high as once per day on average in the water column, and once per hour or two in pore water inside sediments.3

With each turn of this cycle, some of these organic materials become more and more refractory. That is, they become less and less palatable to organisms, and are turned over more and more slowly. Eventually, some remain that are largely resistant to further biodegradation and processing, and these can then stay as DOM for many thousands of years. Essentially, they are the waste that is left after every organism has had its shot at using them.

The pathways for degradation of such refractory molecules are not well known, but likely reflect some rare biological events (rare bacteria encounter them, they encounter a rare enzyme, or they are acted upon by an enzyme that does not normally process them, etc.). The long term degradation likely also includes physical and chemical processes, such as oxidation by oxygen, ozone, or other oxidizing agents, and being hit by appropriate radiation (UV, x-rays, gamma rays, etc.).

 

[vlangel]

How often are you changing water? If once a month or less, how are you re-mineralizing your water between changes? If you never change water, what is your strategy?

I tend to run low/very low nutrients, I think I could get away with less water changes (also, water changes seem to stress things out a bit?), but don't want to stop changing water and starve my coral of the minerals they need. I posted about this the other day, but I think I was misunderstanding/asking the wrong questions. So please educate me on what you do?

I was a die hard weekly water changer. My tank is now coming on it's 7th year and is very stable. (It's a softie/macroalgae dominant system so easy stuff to keep). The macroalgae are keeping the nutrients in check so I have slowed water changes to every 3 weeks. I still add Coral Vite, iron, and 2 part for alk and calcium weekly. Since I use regular (purple box) Instant Ocean salt, my tank wasn't as dependant on the salt mix to supply my tank's needs.
Of course if have more high demand coral this will not work for you.

 

[Koty]

While there are individual compounds, the refractory organics that are only very slowly broken down in seawater form a wide range of structures:

Organic Compounds in the Reef Aquarium by Randy Holmes-Farley - Reefkeeping.com

Organics in the Ocean

The nature of the organic matter in the ocean is poorly understood. Part of the reason for this lack of understanding stems from the tremendous variety of organic material that exists. There is essentially no limit to the number of different organic compounds that are theoretically possible, and the fact is that many millions of organic compounds have been synthesized or identified. Identifying and quantifying every possible organic material in seawater is just not possible, at least with present day technology. Consequently, identifying the form organic materials take in the ocean most often involves grouping them into classes by a functional test, such as whether they can be extracted from the water with a hydrophobic solvent, whether they contain nitrogen or phosphorus, etc.

A small number of organic compounds have been individually identified and quantified in seawater, but they represent only a small percentage of the total mass of organic material. Those examined in detail include simple sugars and amino acids, and the very simplest organic molecules, such as derivatives of methane (CH4) or ethane (CH3CH3), including acetate (CH3CO2-).3

One interesting aspect of organic compounds in the ocean is that some have been there for thousands of years.1,3 Many organic compounds, especially in surface waters, are rapidly cycling between living organisms that consume and modify them, and the dissolved forms that are just floating about. Acetate, for example, can have a turnover rate as high as once per day on average in the water column, and once per hour or two in pore water inside sediments.3

With each turn of this cycle, some of these organic materials become more and more refractory. That is, they become less and less palatable to organisms, and are turned over more and more slowly. Eventually, some remain that are largely resistant to further biodegradation and processing, and these can then stay as DOM for many thousands of years. Essentially, they are the waste that is left after every organism has had its shot at using them.

The pathways for degradation of such refractory molecules are not well known, but likely reflect some rare biological events (rare bacteria encounter them, they encounter a rare enzyme, or they are acted upon by an enzyme that does not normally process them, etc.). The long term degradation likely also includes physical and chemical processes, such as oxidation by oxygen, ozone, or other oxidizing agents, and being hit by appropriate radiation (UV, x-rays, gamma rays, etc.).

IMHO, to fully accept that there are real degradation-resistant "refractory" organic molecules, such molecules should be defined, produced, and tested with potential bacterial sources (deep ocean samples?) to show that it is not biodegradable. Is it possible that these long-lived "refractory" organic molecules are so variable and rare/unique (low concentration) that there is not enough of them to support the evolutionary development of a specific enzymatic pathway that will utilize them?
Or maybe I'm completely off ?
Also, How relevant are these refractory molecules to the timescales and volumes of reef tanks?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

IMHO, to fully accept that there are real degradation-resistant "refractory" organic molecules, such molecules should be defined, produced, and tested with potential bacterial sources (deep ocean samples?) to show that it is not biodegradable. Is it possible that these long-lived "refractory" organic molecules are so variable and rare/unique (low concentration) that there is not enough of them to support the evolutionary development of a specific enzymatic pathway that will utilize them?
Or maybe I'm completely off ?
Also, How relevant are these refractory molecules to the timescales and volumes of reef tanks?

OK, you have a different opinion than chemical oceanographers who have studied them. They certainly have identified some, but it's not super useful and is very complicated to identify large numbers of low concentration unknown organics in the ocean.

To the last point, on how relevant they are, I cannot answer that in detail, but one does not need to invoke the fact that some in the ocean are almost totally resistant to biodegradation to know they accumulate in reef aquaria.

To some extent this point is self evident to reefers. If you do not use substantial organic export (e.g., GAC) or degradation methods (e.g., ozone), the water turns yellow from organics. Bacteria and other organisms are NOT removing them at a rate sufficient to prevent yellowing, and hence are not keeping organics at natural levels. They do not need to be resistant on a time scale of thousands of years, they only need to be resistant on a time scale of weeks to accumulate in a reef tank.

It would be presumptuous, IMO, to assume that the only thing these molecules did was absorb light, and not act as the toxins that some of them were originally synthesized by organisms to be. Nevertheless, I cannot prove these molecules are detrimental, especially after using GAC and other means to remove a significant portion of them (e.g., those that will bind to GAC).

 

[Koty]

Yes, indeed chemical oceanography is way out of my league. I agree that in any scenario, WC or not, with high bio load, all means of export should be maximized to eliminate organics accumulation. I thus use Chaeto and Aiptasia Refuge, carbon dosing (Elimi-NP/ Reef Actif and bio pellets), skimmer, promote sponge growth, GFO reactor, and GAC (in a bag). On the other hand, I hate WCs they are hard labor for me and need to be done very carefully to avoid parameter fluctuations (My personal opinion is that even the most careful large WC is an unavoidable serious parameter fluctuation). Thanks for all the information
My Aiptasia colony in the overflow:

The refuge full of "stuff":

The DT:

I cannot resist this one: Taken in the morning. That's a "feed us now!" look

 

[besskurz]

I don't to WC's, but my system is a jaubert.

Crabs, snails, Softies, anemones, sps, macros. No sump or canister no headache. Just like the oooocean dude

 

[mmadderom]

IMO, the harder part of a no water change scenario is not what to add, but how to remove things that accumulate.

If you have enough beneficial bacteria you shouldn’t have any “buildup”. I don’t even have a sump! Just an FX6 canister filter loaded up with top of the line bio filter media. Took it apart to “clean” it last week for the first time in 7 or 8 months and wasn’t much to clean. Between that, an Hob filter rated for 75 gal and HOB skimmer my 180gal seems to get plenty of filtration. Now, I do have a LOT of Fiji live rock which, I believe, is the real key. I think a lot/most live rock sold today just doesn’t measure up in filtration.

I do dose reef fusion a few times a week and roid rage weekly. My lps and sps are all healthy and growing well while the Zoa’s and softies grow much faster than I’d like even with cheap black box lighting and generic wave makers.

IOW I do everything opposite of what the “experts” claim is necessary. The only reason it makes sense to me is the tank is big enough that drastic changes don’t occur and High quality rock. And I stopped messing with it chasing numbers. Your animals and corals will tell if something is wrong. I think all of the dosing and whatever the newest gadget of the day is cause more problems than anything.

 

[ingchr1]

Thanks Viking (and everyone else who has posted). Seems like water changing is the way to go.

I currently do 5 gallons a week in both of my tanks, so 20% and 25% respectively, I am still considering backing off a bit as my nutrients are getting pretty low. . .

Maybe try backing off to every two weeks, then every three and so on. See how the tank responds.

I have 40 gallon AIO (31 gallons of water) and do a 5 gallon water change every two weeks. For a while I had it out to once a month, but the tank just didn't appear to be doing that well. Since I went to every two weeks, the tank is doing better. By better, the corals visually look better and my alkalinity consumption when up slightly.

I should also note that I have no mechanical filtration other than a skimmer. I also have an ATS.

Other changes I made in the past few months:

• Lowered tank temperature from 80.6F to 77.2F.
• Changed out the spectrum of light in my ATS. Since doing this my Nitrate has bottomed out from ~5PPM. My Phosphates have been steady around 0.3PPM for a long time.

While other changes have been made and could be contributing, I initially started to see improvement with the increase in water changes from once a month to once every two weeks.

For my tank, water changes every two weeks has been adequate and I do not find weekly as being needed. I may try pushing it out to every three weeks at some point and see how it goes.

 

[Laith]

...
Got the maxi 2.2 setup two days ago and it will be changing out 15L daily and I’ll just get in and vacuum out gunk from the sand bed once a month.

A bit off topic but I'm doing AWC currently using a Spectrapure III setup which I have been happy with, changing 20l a day. I originally wanted to get the GHL Maxi (the first version) as I run a Profilux controller but the thing was extremely loud so it was not an option as all my equipment sits in the stand under the tank... and I like quiet tanks!

Is the Maxi 2.2 any quieter?

On topic: I prefer water changes. Relying on the hobby grade ICP tests currently available just does not give me confidence, though I do an ICP test quarterly just to see if anything seems off. When I have seen ICP numbers that are supposedly out of the "normal" range I look at my tank and don't see anything wrong. Then the next ICP test (same company all the time) gives me normal numbers for the same element even though I have not changed a thing in the tank in terms of dosing etc...

 

[HB AL]

I'm going on 7 years without doing a water change. I've developed a simple, low maintenance system of doing things.

 

[Tamberav]

On my softy tank (with some LPS), I went a year without a water change, no dosing, no testing, no carbon, tank is still here, fish look great

I switched to soft corals so I could ignore the tank though, that was basically the goal (Life got busy).

I believe Sanjay's soft coral nano went over 20 years without a water change.

 

[besskurz]

I'm going on 7 years without doing a water change. I've developed a simple, low maintenance system of doing things.

Tell us more about it

 

[vetteguy53081]

How often are you changing water? If once a month or less, how are you re-mineralizing your water between changes? If you never change water, what is your strategy?

I tend to run low/very low nutrients, I think I could get away with less water changes (also, water changes seem to stress things out a bit?), but don't want to stop changing water and starve my coral of the minerals they need. I posted about this the other day, but I think I was misunderstanding/asking the wrong questions. So please educate me on what you do?

i went 7 years without water changes. It is imperative to have good filtration, skimming and do testing to assure tank is not getting away from you with elevated levels such as ammonia-nitrate and phos.
Ive always run Chemipure blue or elite if necessary and added aminos and Trace elements based on coral needs

 

[I never finish anythi]

First, you have to have great filtration that is making sure all the bad things collected in the water are being filtered out. This need to be based on biological filtration - which is constant - rather than a mechanical - which collects detritus building it up till you dump it - which leads to highs and lows. Chemical filtration - Carbon, Phos Dosing, Nitrate Dosing - Are also cyclical based on your schedule of changing and adding.

You need a biological filter that takes care of all your filtration needs. That maintains your water quality.

Depending on the livestock in your aquarium is going to determine what elements are being consumed from the water.

If you only have a tank of mushrooms, zoas, anemones, and xenia - You might not need to replenish anything at all.

If you have LPS or SPS - Which are pulling elements out of the water to build a calcified skeleton - then you have to replace those elements as they are consumed. This is going to vary for every tank because of the particular population of livestock consuming the elements.

And even once you figure out that you need a dash of this, a scoop of that, a dose of this - to maintain stability, as your tank thrives and grows as the livestock expands and gets larger and becomes a larger living mass - this consumption of elements is going to go up causing you to need to dose, dash, drop, scoop a little more. This is where various testing methods come in to play to keep those level stable.

You can dose the Base Elements - Calcium, Alkalinity, Magnesium and maintain a very happy system. Or you can get into dosing trace elements - which require more detailed methods of testing and test and dose for dozens of different trace elements.

Is one better than the other yes. Is the better method necessary to be successful... No. Does better dosing guarantee success... No. You have to be up on all your water parameters and maintain stability. Your tank has to be doing really well. You have to have a large bio-mass of calcifying livestock and then getting into tweaking adjustments for all the different trace elements will have a benefit.

Dave B

You can get auto roller filters that take away the crap 24/7

 

[Griev]

I've never done a water change on my 200. It's coming up on a two year anniversary.

This approach has has it's had it's ups and downs for me personally. While I do believe I would have had less headaches had I just started with regular water changes and then backed off to zero once the tank was more mature and I could understand what the parameters likely were based on looking at the algae and corals, being stubborn on my goal of zero water changes did force me to learn how to manage my tank right. Ultimately I think this has set me up better for long term success.

For export I use; corals (every time I add fish bioload, I also add more corals to eat the poop), reef diapers, skimmer, algae scrubber, and a little bit of Phosphat-e if my phosphates are creeping up too high. I have to dose nitrates to keep them from zeroing out.

For dosing/trace; I dose all-for-reef and feed high quality pellet and frozen foods. Haven't had an issue yet on ICP tests.

 

[HB AL]

Tell us more about it

Just saw this off to work remind me later.