The Other Way to Run a Reef Tank (no Quarantine)

[Lowell Lemon]

@Humblefish
That is one gorgeous tank and anything but sterile looking! Well done sir.

 

[Lowell Lemon]

So not to detract from the goal. Someone asked how to set up a Display Tank to reduce the possibility of fish losses.

Way back in 1980's a guy named George Smit wrote some articles on a new to America style Reef Tank. His method as recorded in FAMA was to use trays of dolomite gravel that the water trickled through until it ended up in a sump with some more chambers of dolomite gravel. The term given this method was called a Dutch Mini Reef with a Wet/Dry filter. As he outlined his method in print each month I copied the design and lay out of the filter and followed his recipe. He even gave lighting specs so I could build my own light system and copy as best as possible the lamps used. I remember some of the steps he outlined for establishing the tank.

First was to acquire and use only fresh or "seeded live" rock if possible. If you never experienced this struggle you have no ideal how foul smelling the "seeding process" was as many things died in transit like boring sponges, crabs, and worms, burrowed in to the rock so you could not remove them. My apartment stunk like none other and water changes barely made a dent. Yet, true to form the tank cycled and all sorts of life survived the purification process.

Second was to add inverts first and avoid fish for at least six months after the tank cycled. Also add macro algae like Caulerpa and Halimeda and get it established in the tank. During this time I noticed a large increase in micro-fauna including lots of pods and even free swimming plankton after the lights went off at night. I often used a flashlight and was surprised at all the lifeforms in the tank. I was watching the rebirth of a small ecosystem due to the live rock. Most of the available corals were LPS, Soft corals, and Gorgonians, and SPS was not available due to CITIES restrictions for the most part. Some limited sponges, crabs, feather duster worms, flame scallops, and Tridacna clams rounded out the available live stock. So the Mini Reef of the day was nothing like the tanks of 2019.

Finally, after the six month mark it was time to add some fish to the aquarium. Even then careful consideration was given to what types of fish you should keep in the Mini Reef. Many of the fish kept were damsels, clowns, blennies, very few Centropyge angels, very few basselets, sea horses, pipefish, and only a very few types of tangs. Never butterfly fish or other angels or large tangs. This was the system.

I do remember how strong the systems were in many respects. Very little problems with fish disease due to George's claim that the filter feeding inverts and Caulerpa were helping to prevent disease due to some "mythical" release of antibiotic qualities from the Caulerpa and the ability of the sponges and other filter feeders to remove water born pathogens. Initially no one had a good source of protein skimmers until Quality Marine brought in Sanders product line. Quality Marine then added Ozone generators and TMC U.V. sterilizers. This was all a new game in America but in Germany, Holland and other European countries it was already 20 years on and they were fragging corals and sharing them with fellow hobbyist. We were already 20 years behind the technology and husbandry techniques in Europe in the 1980's. I have some manuscripts translated and typed in English from German that provided a window into how far we were behind Germany then.

There is something I have gleaned from this experience that seems to make my tanks more successful in terms of fish health. That is the notion to build the ecosystem first and later add the fish. It always seemed to work much better than depending on bacteria in a bottle and fish first as you try to build up the ecosystem with corals and inverts after the fish. I have noticed on R2R the number of problems associated with relatively young tanks and relationship to fish disease. I think there is a relationship to immature systems and the prevalence of disease problems related to fish. Just my opinion based on having designed, built, stocked and maintained tanks for others as part of my old business. The rush to add fish is often the onset of problems. If I could get a customer patient enough to add the fish last the tanks were stable and fish often spawned. Any fish that died...just disappeared and no body was ever found due to the other consumers in the tank.

 

[MnFish1]

So not to detract from the goal. Someone asked how to set up a Display Tank to reduce the possibility of fish losses.

Way back in 1980's a guy named George Smit wrote some articles on a new to America style Reef Tank. His method as recorded in FAMA was to use trays of dolomite gravel that the water trickled through until it ended up in a sump with some more chambers of dolomite gravel. The term given this method was called a Dutch Mini Reef with a Wet/Dry filter. As he outlined his method in print each month I copied the design and lay out of the filter and followed his recipe. He even gave lighting specs so I could build my own light system and copy as best as possible the lamps used. I remember some of the steps he outlined for establishing the tank.

First was to acquire and use only fresh or "seeded live" rock if possible. If you never experienced this struggle you have no ideal how foul smelling the "seeding process" was as many things died in transit like boring sponges, crabs, and worms, burrowed in to the rock so you could not remove them. My apartment stunk like none other and water changes barely made a dent. Yet, true to form the tank cycled and all sorts of life survived the purification process.

Second was to add inverts first and avoid fish for at least six months after the tank cycled. Also add macro algae like Caulerpa and Halimeda and get it established in the tank. During this time I noticed a large increase in micro-fauna including lots of pods and even free swimming plankton after the lights went off at night. I often used a flashlight and was surprised at all the lifeforms in the tank. I was watching the rebirth of a small ecosystem due to the live rock. Most of the available corals were LPS, Soft corals, and Gorgonians, and SPS was not available due to CITIES restrictions for the most part. Some limited sponges, crabs, feather duster worms, flame scallops, and Tridacna clams rounded out the available live stock. So the Mini Reef of the day was nothing like the tanks of 2019.

Finally, after the six month mark it was time to add some fish to the aquarium. Even then careful consideration was given to what types of fish you should keep in the Mini Reef. Many of the fish kept were damsels, clowns, blennies, very few Centropyge angels, very few basselets, sea horses, pipefish, and only a very few types of tangs. Never butterfly fish or other angels or large tangs. This was the system.

I do remember how strong the systems were in many respects. Very little problems with fish disease due to George's claim that the filter feeding inverts and Caulerpa were helping to prevent disease due to some "mythical" release of antibiotic qualities from the Caulerpa and the ability of the sponges and other filter feeders to remove water born pathogens. Initially no one had a good source of protein skimmers until Quality Marine brought in Sanders product line. Quality Marine then added Ozone generators and TMC U.V. sterilizers. This was all a new game in America but in Germany, Holland and other European countries it was already 20 years on and they were fragging corals and sharing them with fellow hobbyist. We were already 20 years behind the technology and husbandry techniques in Europe in the 1980's. I have some manuscripts translated and typed in English from German that provided a window into how far we were behind Germany then.

There is something I have gleaned from this experience that seems to make my tanks more successful in terms of fish health. That is the notion to build the ecosystem first and later add the fish. It always seemed to work much better than depending on bacteria in a bottle and fish first as you try to build up the ecosystem with corals and inverts after the fish. I have noticed on R2R the number of problems associated with relatively young tanks and relationship to fish disease. I think there is a relationship to immature systems and the prevalence of disease problems related to fish. Just my opinion based on having designed, built, stocked and maintained tanks for others as part of my old business. The rush to add fish is often the onset of problems. If I could get a customer patient enough to add the fish last the tanks were stable and fish often spawned. Any fish that died...just disappeared and no body was ever found due to the other consumers in the tank.

Those huge trickle filters were unbelievable (and noisy).

 

[Paul B]

Science my friend. Here is one of the papers in which stomach contents of Labroides dimididatus were examined and no Ich was found.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...Diet_of_the_Cleaner_Fish_Labroides_dimidiatus

Also, the anecdote doesn't track - you don't build up an immunity to lice by eating lice.

I noticed you picked a cleaner wrasse to prove your point. I know many people wrongly add them to a tank to eat ich which I knew they don't eat but besides cleaner wrasses most fish in the sea eat other fish. I don't know if you dive but I have spent about 300 hours underwater and fish eat fish. Almost all fish in the sea have parasites on and in them. So, in my simple mind I can deduce that when a fish eats a fish it is also eating the parasites on and in that fish. I am not going to go into it again how fish become immune to parasites because you failed to read that but it is science, not something I pulled out of my imagination. The parasites it eats, and comes in contact with, it becomes immune to.

Thales, I notice you and MnFish1 have been posting a lot disputing many things I wrote, but neither of you have written an article on here. With all that knowledge you have why not share it in an article so we can all learn.
I wrote 7 articles on this forum alone and a book and have spoken 4 or 5 times at aquarium clubs. I also volunteer at the Long Island Aquarium and have been keeping fish tanks since 1953 or so.

I for one would like to learn what you guys propose on how to properly run a tank.
With all my mis-information or improper language of my ideas I am sure you guys can set us all straight.

 

[Hot2na]

Cleaner wrasses may not eat ich...but they will pick off adult size flukes....I always have one in my tanks....along with cleaner shrimp,pederson shrimp,bluestripe neon goby... all part of the "ectoparasite management team" or EMT for short ...lol !

 

[Paul B]

The term given this method was called a Dutch Mini Reef with a Wet/Dry filter. As he outlined his method in print each month I copied the design and lay out of the filter and followed his recipe. He even gave lighting specs so I could build my own light system and copy as best as possible the lamps used. I remember some of the steps he outlined for establishing the tank.

I remember that well and also had the book on it. I also built those trays of gravel over my tank which was already existing at the time. Now that gravel is on my reverse UG filter but much of it is still in there and it was a good concept and a good system.

 

[Sallstrom]

Isn't there any veterinarian on R2R? Could we try to invite any if there isn't already?
Just to get some professional opinions

How many do autopsies on deceased fish to figure out cases of death?

 

[atoll]

Btw - I have focused on CI for what I have brought up - god forbid - because there is a lot more data on CI than velvet. I am surprised that Atoll and Paul dont mention that. My guess is that if they added a fish weekly to their tank from the average internet supplier - that in 6 months all of the fish in their 'immune' tanks would be dead. When it comes to CI I agree that most healthy fish can fight it off - if its a strain that is not that virulent - and not in high concentration in the tank. That said - I think velvet is a different problem.

Really? I know little about CI other than the basics as I have had no experience of it since I started practicing my methods many many years ago. That is why I didn't mention it and I fail to see the relevance to this thread esp when so many fish die of both needlessly. I hear velvet is more deadly than CI. I don't know if thats true or not. I like to talk about my experinces a lot more than I have read about the things in this hobby hence why I often use the term I let my tank speak for my methods and the truth of the pudding. I hold my hands up compared to you and many others I am a novice when it comes to the subject of QT and medications.

 

[soflmuddin]

No Paul - that is science - it is also common sense. If everything a fish ate caused it to become 'immune' to that 'thing' - the fish would be immune to its own food - causing a multitude of problems. Come on.

That is just plain silly. Just because your immune to the negative effects of something doesn't mean your body doesn't use it for a benefit. We are a immune to toxicity of oxygen and our body's not only use it but require it. I thought you were an immuniolgist.

 

[Paul B]

How many do autopsies on deceased fish to figure out cases of death?

I do that all the time and have for decades.
I have also operated on quite a few fish to remove internal and external tumors. One of my first figure 8 puffers had an internal tumor that I excised. That fish lived another 8 years.

 

[Thales]

Isn't there any veterinarian on R2R? Could we try to invite any if there isn't already?
Just to get some professional opinions

For the last 11 years all of the QT I have done, and that has been done, at the Steinhart Aquarium is in conjunction and consultation with a full time vet.

How many do autopsies on deceased fish to figure out cases of death?

It depends on the cause of death, but many fish you can make a reasonable conclusion about death from just the animal that died.

 

[Thales]

I noticed you picked a cleaner wrasse to prove your point. I know many people wrongly add them to a tank to eat ich which I knew they don't eat but besides cleaner wrasses most fish in the sea eat other fish. I don't know if you dive but I have spent about 300 hours underwater and fish eat fish. Almost all fish in the sea have parasites on and in them. So, in my simple mind I can deduce that when a fish eats a fish it is also eating the parasites on and in that fish. I am not going to go into it again how fish become immune to parasites because you failed to read that but it is science, not something I pulled out of my imagination. The parasites it eats, and comes in contact with, it becomes immune to.

I would be happy to be wrong that eating crypto gives a fish immunity to crypto - if you can provide some evidence for me to look at I would love to see it. Not how you explain how it happens, something else supporting your point. If I missed that earlier I apologize, please help me out and post it again, it is a long thread.

Thales, I notice you and MnFish1 have been posting a lot disputing many things I wrote, but neither of you have written an article on here. With all that knowledge you have why not share it in an article so we can all learn.
I wrote 7 articles on this forum alone and a book and have spoken 4 or 5 times at aquarium clubs. I also volunteer at the Long Island Aquarium and have been keeping fish tanks since 1953 or so.

I was very active on reef forums for over a decade, they wear me out. I don't regularly follow any of them anymore, but do drop in from time to time.
I have posted links to 4 articles I have written as well as one talk in this thread. There is a link to my site in my sig that has all the hobby (dozens) and peer reviewed (7) articles and talks I have given (dozens, around the world). Here it is again - www.skepticalreefkeeping.org. I have been reefkeeping since 1982, and aquarium keeping since 1974. I was awarded the MASNA Aquarist of the Year in 2014. My work has been covered by main stream press like CORAL magazine, Science Friday, Adam Savage, Fox News. My work at the Steinhart aquarium has been seen by over 10 million people in the last 11 years.

Sorry about the resume, but it seemed that is what you wanted.

I for one would like to learn what you guys propose on how to properly run a tank.

Take a look at any of the links I have already provided. Or any of the links in my sig. Here is one that goes over the history of my tank and what had changed over time at that point.
http://packedhead.net/2012/evolution-of-a-10-year-old-reef/
Here is an article about ich
https://reefs.com/magazine/skeptical-reefkeeping-i/
Here is one about phosphate
https://reefs.com/magazine/skeptical-reefkeeping-ix-test-kits-chasing-numbers-and-phosphate/

With all my mis-information or improper language of my ideas I am sure you guys can set us all straight.

Yeah, that kind of 'woe is me' strawman is getting old. You are a seasoned reefkeeper with good ideas, and I think you should stop belittling yourself. Surely, you have the grit to be able to have a straightforward discussion about ideas, and examine information that shows something you thought made sense doesn't make sense. We are not having a competition about who is right, and we are not trying to win. We are trying to get a better understanding about what happens in our tanks. When I say, 'that doesn't hold up' I am not saying 'Paul is a bad person and a bad reefkeeper, don't listen to him', I am saying 'that doesn't hold up'.

 

[Sallstrom]

For the last 11 years all of the QT I have done, and that has been done, at the Steinhart Aquarium is in conjunction and consultation with a full time vet.



It depends on the cause of death, but many fish you can make a reasonable conclusion about death from just the animal that died.

Yes, we also have a vet to consult at work. Unfortunately not full time because we are a small aquarium and he's expensive
I was more thinking of a vet helping out here on R2R, kind of the same way as Randy HF help out with chemistry.

 

[MnFish1]

That is just plain silly. Just because your immune to the negative effects of something doesn't mean your body doesn't use it for a benefit. We are a immune to toxicity of oxygen and our body's not only use it but require it. I thought you were an immuniolgist.

We are not immune to toxicity of oxygen. In fact the air we breath contains about 21 percent oxygen. If your lungs were exposed to 100% oxygen for any length of time they would be permanently scarred.

In any case you're using the word 'immune' in your example in an odd way - and frankly I dont understand it at all in the context of what we're discussing
.

Really? I know little about CI other than the basics as I have had no experience of it since I started practicing my methods many many years ago. That is why I didn't mention it and I fail to see the relevance to this thread esp when so many fish die of both needlessly. I hear velvet is more deadly than CI. I don't know if thats true or not. I like to talk about my experinces a lot more than I have read about the things in this hobby hence why I often use the term I let my tank speak for my methods and the truth of the pudding. I hold my hands up compared to you and many others I am a novice when it comes to the subject of QT and medications.

Great. You have a lot of valuable experiences that benefit the forum and a beautiful tank.

 

[Thales]

Yes, we also have a vet to consult at work. Unfortunately not full time because we are a small aquarium and he's expensive
I was more thinking of a vet helping out here on R2R, kind of the same way as Randy HF help out with chemistry.

Gotcha! Vets that know aquatics are few and far between. Most of my interaction with our vet is convincing him of what to do!

 

[MnFish1]

That is just plain silly. Just because your immune to the negative effects of something doesn't mean your body doesn't use it for a benefit. We are a immune to toxicity of oxygen and our body's not only use it but require it. I thought you were an immuniolgist.

OH - I re-read this and understand what you're saying...

You didnt understand my post. Paul has said that when fish eat CI, for example - they become immune to it because here is an immune tissue in the guts - and then its processed in the kidney. He used different wording before - but as usual there is a lot of word shifting going on.

I made the point that just because you 'eat' a parasite it doesn't make you immune to that parasite - that you have to be infected by that parasite. SO - the point was that its ludicrous to say that eating CI makes you 'immune' - because the immune system doesnt work that way - fish dont become 'immune'/allergic to he foods they eat. (if they did that would have a lot of intestine problems)

Maybe here is a suggestion - the post you said was 'silly' was not directed at you. It was directed at Paul. Maybe let Paul answer questions directed at himself - and you answer questions directed at yourself - because you didnt understand the context of the comment I made.

By the way - again the 'immune' im talking is about the immunity thats developed when an infection by a virus, parasite, bacteria develops. There is no 'immune system' that protects or makes us 'immune' to the toxicity of oxygen. There are various enzymes in the body that 'mop up' oxygen products that are released by cells, etc - but it has nothing to do with the 'immune system' or immunity

 

[soflmuddin]

We are not immune to toxicity of oxygen. In fact the air we breath contains about 21 percent oxygen. If your lungs were exposed to 100% oxygen for any length of time they would be permanently scarred.

In any case you're using the word 'immune' in your example in an odd way - and frankly I dont understand it at all in the context of what we're discussion.




Great. You have a lot of valuable experiences that benefit the forum and a beautiful tank.

Ha! Your the one that proposed that if a fish could be immune to ich by eating it then it would also be immune to any food it eats.

I personally think the word immunity is used too freely in this discussion. I think we should be really referring to it as being resilient.


(i sent this message before I saw your response)

 

[MnFish1]

Yes, we also have a vet to consult at work. Unfortunately not full time because we are a small aquarium and he's expensive
I was more thinking of a vet helping out here on R2R, kind of the same way as Randy HF help out with chemistry.

A relative of mine is a veterinarian. The entire exposure to 'fish medicine' in vet school was a 1 hour lecture. Maybe we need a marine biologist to give their opinion on the science.. being discussed.. Oh wait.

 

[Sallstrom]

Gotcha! Vets that know aquatics are few and far between. Most of my interaction with our vet is convincing him of what to do!

I know what you mean. Our vet is an expert in birds and snakes..

 

[MnFish1]

Ha! Your the one that proposed that if a fish could be immune to ich by eating it then it would also be immune to any food it eats.

I personally think the word immunity is used too freely in this discussion. I think we should be really referring to it as being resilient.


(i sent this message before I saw your response)

Um.. you don't get it. I was saying that because fish DON'T become immune to food they eat it makes sense that not everything that goes into their mouths causes immunity. I was using that as a rationale why it doesnt make sense to assume that just because a fish eats CI that it will become immune to to CI (or more resilient - I think you might have meant resistant)

I personally think that if Paul used the word 'resistant' more often in his article there would be many fewer factual errors. Unfortunately - the word immunity has a specific definition. The phrase 'immune system' has a definition. When someone says 'quarantine destroys the immune system' a responsible reader of hopefully any forum would question this statement..

Again - I only made comments on the article based on the words Paul B used. If he meant something different than what he wrote - great - he could have said it 40 pages ago. But he keeps doubling down and changing the discussion. But - again were discussing this article. Other people jump in to defend Pauls 'method' - I havent and I havent seen anyone criticise his method.