Whats is the use of water changes when all paramaters are good?

[Lasse]

No WC the last 2.5 years - Tank - a little more than 4 years old

​

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Waters]

I do water changes to keep everything in balance and to remove detritus. Unless everything is tested for, trace nutrients can build up or be exhausted....depending on what you are, or are not dosing. It is easier for me to just do AWCs. That being said, both methods work just fine as proven by this thread

 

[HB AL]

My current tank is going on 5 years, wonder how long till it crashes, haven't had a crash in 25 years so I'm gonna bet a crash is not in the cards.

 

[MightyMO]

You are actually changing more water than I do and some people can go for years without changing water. It is not as important as many people think.
After having said that I still think some water changes should be done.
Carbon and phosguard do not remove everything and I don't even use any of them because they may remove some trace elements that I do not want to remove.

There are many trace elements in sea water that we can't or don't want to test for and it is just easier to change the water.

Sea water has every element on Earth in it including sulphur, gold, Protactinium, Amino Acids, vanadium and we don't have the slightest idea if most of them are needed or not. Even things like Krypton and other elements I can't even spell.

Those trace elements I am sure are slowly removed by your carbon, corals and possibly the fish.

​

Element	mg/kg Cl = 19.00 ‰	mg-atoms/L Cl = 19.00 ‰	Atomic weight (1940)	1/atomic weight	Authority
Chlorine	18980	548.30	35.457	0.02820
Sodium	10561	470.15	22.997	0.04348
Magnesium	1272	53.57	24.32	0.04112
Sulphur	884	28.24	32.06	0.03119
Calcium	400	10.24	40.08	0.02495
Potassium	380	9.96	39.096	0.02558
Bromine	65	0.83	79.916	0.01251
Carbon	28	2.34	12.01	0.08326
Strontium	13	0.15	87.63	0.01141
Boron	4.6	0.43	10.82	0.09242
Silicon	0.02 –4.0	0.0007 –0.14	28.06	0.03564
Fluorine	1.4	0.07	19.00	0.05263
Nitrogen (comp.)	0.01 –0.7	0.001 –0.05	14.008	0.07139
Aluminum	0.5	0.02	26.97	0.03708
Rubidium	0.2	0.002	85.48	0.01170
Lithium	0.1	0.014	6.940	0.14409
Phosphorus	0.001–0.10	0.00003–0.003	30.98	0.03228
Barium	0.05	0.0004	137.36	0.00728
Iodine	0.05	0.0004	126.92	0.00788
Arsenic	0.01–0.02	0.00015–0.0003	74.91	0.01335
Iron	0.002–0.02	0.00003–0.0003	55.85	0.01791
Manganese	0.001–0.01	0.00002–0.0002	54.93	0.01820
Copper	0.001–0.01	0.00002–0.0002	63.57	0.01573
Zinc	0.005	0.00008	65.38	0.01530	Atkins (1936)
Lead	0.004	0.00002	207.21	0.00483	Boury (1938)
Selenium	0.004	0.00005	78.96	0.01266	Goldschmidt and Strock (1935)
― 177 ―​ Cesium	0.002	0.00002	132.91	0.00752	Wattenberg (1938)
Uranium	0.0015	0.00001	238.07	0.00420	Föyn et al (1939)
Molybdenum	0.0005	0.000005	95.95	0.01042	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Thorium	<0.0005	<0.000002	232.12	0.00431	Föyn et al (1939)
Cerium	0.0004	0.000003	140.13	0.00714	Goldschmidt (1937)
Silver	0.0003	0.000003	107.880	0.00927	Haber (1928)
Vanadium	0.0003	0.000006	50.95	0.01963	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Lanthanum	0.0003	0.000002	138.92	0.00720	Goldschmidt (1937)
Yttrium	0.0003	0.000003	88.92	0.01125	Goldschmidt (1937)
Nickel	0.0001	0.000002	58.69	0.01704	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Scandium	0.00004	0.0000009	45.10	0.02217	Goldschmidt (1937)
Mercury	0.00003	0.0000001	200.61	0.00498	Goldschmidt (1937)
Gold	0.000006	0.00000002	197.2	0.00507	Haber (1928)
Radium	0.2 – 3 × 10−10	0.8 – 12 × 10−13	226.05	0.00442	Evans, Kip, and Moberg (1938)
Cadmium					Fox and Ramage (1931)
Chromium					Webb (1937)
Cobalt					Thompson and Robinson (1932)
Tin					Thompson and Robinson (1932)

― 1​

Krypton!!! Lol

 

[Pancake]

You are actually changing more water than I do and some people can go for years without changing water. It is not as important as many people think.
After having said that I still think some water changes should be done.
Carbon and phosguard do not remove everything and I don't even use any of them because they may remove some trace elements that I do not want to remove.

There are many trace elements in sea water that we can't or don't want to test for and it is just easier to change the water.

Sea water has every element on Earth in it including sulphur, gold, Protactinium, Amino Acids, vanadium and we don't have the slightest idea if most of them are needed or not. Even things like Krypton and other elements I can't even spell.

Those trace elements I am sure are slowly removed by your carbon, corals and possibly the fish.

​

Element	mg/kg Cl = 19.00 ‰	mg-atoms/L Cl = 19.00 ‰	Atomic weight (1940)	1/atomic weight	Authority
Chlorine	18980	548.30	35.457	0.02820
Sodium	10561	470.15	22.997	0.04348
Magnesium	1272	53.57	24.32	0.04112
Sulphur	884	28.24	32.06	0.03119
Calcium	400	10.24	40.08	0.02495
Potassium	380	9.96	39.096	0.02558
Bromine	65	0.83	79.916	0.01251
Carbon	28	2.34	12.01	0.08326
Strontium	13	0.15	87.63	0.01141
Boron	4.6	0.43	10.82	0.09242
Silicon	0.02 –4.0	0.0007 –0.14	28.06	0.03564
Fluorine	1.4	0.07	19.00	0.05263
Nitrogen (comp.)	0.01 –0.7	0.001 –0.05	14.008	0.07139
Aluminum	0.5	0.02	26.97	0.03708
Rubidium	0.2	0.002	85.48	0.01170
Lithium	0.1	0.014	6.940	0.14409
Phosphorus	0.001–0.10	0.00003–0.003	30.98	0.03228
Barium	0.05	0.0004	137.36	0.00728
Iodine	0.05	0.0004	126.92	0.00788
Arsenic	0.01–0.02	0.00015–0.0003	74.91	0.01335
Iron	0.002–0.02	0.00003–0.0003	55.85	0.01791
Manganese	0.001–0.01	0.00002–0.0002	54.93	0.01820
Copper	0.001–0.01	0.00002–0.0002	63.57	0.01573
Zinc	0.005	0.00008	65.38	0.01530	Atkins (1936)
Lead	0.004	0.00002	207.21	0.00483	Boury (1938)
Selenium	0.004	0.00005	78.96	0.01266	Goldschmidt and Strock (1935)
― 177 ―​ Cesium	0.002	0.00002	132.91	0.00752	Wattenberg (1938)
Uranium	0.0015	0.00001	238.07	0.00420	Föyn et al (1939)
Molybdenum	0.0005	0.000005	95.95	0.01042	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Thorium	<0.0005	<0.000002	232.12	0.00431	Föyn et al (1939)
Cerium	0.0004	0.000003	140.13	0.00714	Goldschmidt (1937)
Silver	0.0003	0.000003	107.880	0.00927	Haber (1928)
Vanadium	0.0003	0.000006	50.95	0.01963	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Lanthanum	0.0003	0.000002	138.92	0.00720	Goldschmidt (1937)
Yttrium	0.0003	0.000003	88.92	0.01125	Goldschmidt (1937)
Nickel	0.0001	0.000002	58.69	0.01704	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Scandium	0.00004	0.0000009	45.10	0.02217	Goldschmidt (1937)
Mercury	0.00003	0.0000001	200.61	0.00498	Goldschmidt (1937)
Gold	0.000006	0.00000002	197.2	0.00507	Haber (1928)
Radium	0.2 – 3 × 10−10	0.8 – 12 × 10−13	226.05	0.00442	Evans, Kip, and Moberg (1938)
Cadmium					Fox and Ramage (1931)
Chromium					Webb (1937)
Cobalt					Thompson and Robinson (1932)
Tin					Thompson and Robinson (1932)

― 1​

I agree, also unless your using ocean water, the salts your using are fortified with trace. There is no reason to believe that the salt you use for wc are any more element rich then dosing trace using additives. It just seems to be more efficient to dose trace than to attempt at supplementing trace through wc. It’s the efficiency of using a concentrate.

 

[Lasse]

I agree, also unless your using ocean water, the salts your using are fortified with trace. There is no reason to believe that the salt you use for wc are any more element rich then dosing trace using additives. It just seems to be more efficient to dose trace than to attempt at supplementing trace through wc. It’s the efficiency of using a concentrate.

I have said it before and I say it again. Regular WC with artificially saltwater is NOT a safe way to make sure that the level of trace is correct. Some of these traces concentrations are in the gram range per metric ton dry salt. There are no person (or company) that can guarantee an even mix of trace compounds in each batch if it is only needed some grams in one metric ton. There is salts that are based on eveproperated seawater - it could be better but rise other questions. I did the change to no regular WC because of better control of my water quality with help of trace elements and ICP test every 3 month.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[najer]

No water changes unless required.

 

[Paul B]

Krypton!!! Lol

	​
​ There is actually Krypton in seawater, thats why you never saw Superman swimming in the ocean Summary We have determined the solubility equilibrium concentrations of atmospheric helium, neon, argon, krypton, and xenon in water and seawater over the over a temperature range of approximately freezing point to about 35°C and a salinity range of 0 to roughly 36.7 PSU

 

[Pancake]

I have said it before and I say it again. Regular WC with artificially saltwater is NOT a safe way to make sure that the level of trace is correct. Some of these traces concentrations are in the gram range per metric ton dry salt. There are no person (or company) that can guarantee an even mix of trace compounds in each batch if it is only needed some grams in one metric ton. There is salts that are based on eveproperated seawater - it could be better but rise other questions. I did the change to no regular WC because of better control of my water quality with help of trace elements and ICP test every 3 month.

Sincerely Lasse

Hey Lasse, do you think ICP is even necessary? It seems to me that ICP is more a failsafe for a catastrophic event then something that would be beneficial as a routine. My logic is that since there is uncertainty to the trace requirements of corals, the information obtained from ICP is too precise and impractical for reef hobby purposes. In other words we don’t know what our target objective is so why are we buying specific data that we don’t have a strategy for nor a practical method to implement. Having said that, I think ICP is a useful tool when the tank is acting unusual despite solid parameters. Seems to me that the practical approach would be to use a general purpose dosing routine like Redsea color program, dose conservatively and test to see what works for you. This way you dose trace like a multivitamin to ensure that your known basis are covered. I know everyone does no WC differently and there are many methods out there, just wanted to see what your reasonings were on ICP.

 

[Lasse]

I use Triton as my ICP tester and I have done more than 25 tests of my aquarium and we have done more than 300 tests on different aquarium at my work during the last 4 years. Triton base their recommended figures on the content of different substances in natural salt water collected from many reefs around the world. There is nothing that says that the natural levels of different compounds is optimal for corals but - IMO - it is a good start.

For me - my ICP results when the aquarium works well is the most valuable for me. During this 4 years I have got some not wanted results but comparing with how my tank develop I could say that that level of copper, zink, silicon or whatever was tolerated. when I get problems (hope it will not happens) I can go back to my older results and sort out what´s important for what I see now. It give me a huge database for just my aquarium and I can also share my results and help people in panic for 400 µg of silicone and answer their question - will diatoms nuke my tank - with a huge No - i have had 20 000 µg silicone and the only problem was that I got silicone on my windows. With sharing our figures we can say - OK - you have 10 µg copper but do not panic - my copper have looks like this and i have nor have any problem

​

The ICP test is my best tool and I dose some compounds on a daily base and check every third month that I´m safe with my figures. Before ICP - it was no chance to dosing in a safe way. Just before the ICP tests come out on the market I run into problems with my old aquarium - with a couple of tests I understand that I had overdose with combined preparates - I don not say the brand - because it was not the brand that nuke that aquarium - it was me.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Uncle99]

I am confused about this thread.
For those not making regular water changes, are you indicating that you are NOT dosing any minor elements?

Some say they are not making any water changes but don’t indicate what they are doing to compensate, or, they have been successful in never changing water or ever adding back any of the minor elements.

I seen great tanks resulting from regular water changes and I have seen great tanks with no water changes but dosing the trace minor elements.

No water changes at all AND no dosing of minor elements does not make sense to me at all.
My system is definitely using up iodide, boron and potassium at a rate of 10% of CA uptake.

Is anyone willing to share a picture of their tank which has not had a water change in at least 1 year, is not being dosed through the same period, and contains a lot of corals.

This thread gives me the impression that some never change water and it’s actually not beneficial at all.

 

[Paul B]

Uncle99, the vast majority of tanks on these forums are under 4 or 5 years old and any tank can go for that time frame without doing anything.
People say they have "Great Success" with no water change, no dosing, no nothing and they started their tank last Tuesday.

I would assume, because many tanks can go for years with no water changes that those minor trace elements are utilized so slowly, that the tank can go for years. Eventually, I believe something will suffer. For instance our inverts, especially crustaceans need Iodine and won't live without it.

Our fish, like us need iron and copper. We don't does copper and most of us don't dose iron, but if they run out, the fish will die.
Our tanks get a little copper and iron from our plumbing but not much with RO/Di that we use now. Some of the minerals are also supplied in foods such as clams which are full of minerals.

Potassium, zinc and chromium is used by our bodies and probably fish. Does anyone here dose chromium?

 

[PacoPetty]

You are actually changing more water than I do and some people can go for years without changing water. It is not as important as many people think.
After having said that I still think some water changes should be done.
Carbon and phosguard do not remove everything and I don't even use any of them because they may remove some trace elements that I do not want to remove.

There are many trace elements in sea water that we can't or don't want to test for and it is just easier to change the water.

Sea water has every element on Earth in it including sulphur, gold, Protactinium, Amino Acids, vanadium and we don't have the slightest idea if most of them are needed or not. Even things like Krypton and other elements I can't even spell.

Those trace elements I am sure are slowly removed by your carbon, corals and possibly the fish.

​

Element	mg/kg Cl = 19.00 ‰	mg-atoms/L Cl = 19.00 ‰	Atomic weight (1940)	1/atomic weight	Authority
Chlorine	18980	548.30	35.457	0.02820
Sodium	10561	470.15	22.997	0.04348
Magnesium	1272	53.57	24.32	0.04112
Sulphur	884	28.24	32.06	0.03119
Calcium	400	10.24	40.08	0.02495
Potassium	380	9.96	39.096	0.02558
Bromine	65	0.83	79.916	0.01251
Carbon	28	2.34	12.01	0.08326
Strontium	13	0.15	87.63	0.01141
Boron	4.6	0.43	10.82	0.09242
Silicon	0.02 –4.0	0.0007 –0.14	28.06	0.03564
Fluorine	1.4	0.07	19.00	0.05263
Nitrogen (comp.)	0.01 –0.7	0.001 –0.05	14.008	0.07139
Aluminum	0.5	0.02	26.97	0.03708
Rubidium	0.2	0.002	85.48	0.01170
Lithium	0.1	0.014	6.940	0.14409
Phosphorus	0.001–0.10	0.00003–0.003	30.98	0.03228
Barium	0.05	0.0004	137.36	0.00728
Iodine	0.05	0.0004	126.92	0.00788
Arsenic	0.01–0.02	0.00015–0.0003	74.91	0.01335
Iron	0.002–0.02	0.00003–0.0003	55.85	0.01791
Manganese	0.001–0.01	0.00002–0.0002	54.93	0.01820
Copper	0.001–0.01	0.00002–0.0002	63.57	0.01573
Zinc	0.005	0.00008	65.38	0.01530	Atkins (1936)
Lead	0.004	0.00002	207.21	0.00483	Boury (1938)
Selenium	0.004	0.00005	78.96	0.01266	Goldschmidt and Strock (1935)
― 177 ―​ Cesium	0.002	0.00002	132.91	0.00752	Wattenberg (1938)
Uranium	0.0015	0.00001	238.07	0.00420	Föyn et al (1939)
Molybdenum	0.0005	0.000005	95.95	0.01042	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Thorium	<0.0005	<0.000002	232.12	0.00431	Föyn et al (1939)
Cerium	0.0004	0.000003	140.13	0.00714	Goldschmidt (1937)
Silver	0.0003	0.000003	107.880	0.00927	Haber (1928)
Vanadium	0.0003	0.000006	50.95	0.01963	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Lanthanum	0.0003	0.000002	138.92	0.00720	Goldschmidt (1937)
Yttrium	0.0003	0.000003	88.92	0.01125	Goldschmidt (1937)
Nickel	0.0001	0.000002	58.69	0.01704	Ernst and Hoermann (1936)
Scandium	0.00004	0.0000009	45.10	0.02217	Goldschmidt (1937)
Mercury	0.00003	0.0000001	200.61	0.00498	Goldschmidt (1937)
Gold	0.000006	0.00000002	197.2	0.00507	Haber (1928)
Radium	0.2 – 3 × 10−10	0.8 – 12 × 10−13	226.05	0.00442	Evans, Kip, and Moberg (1938)
Cadmium					Fox and Ramage (1931)
Chromium					Webb (1937)
Cobalt					Thompson and Robinson (1932)
Tin					Thompson and Robinson (1932)

― 1​

Now that’s a chart!

 

[Paul B]

Now that’s a chart!

Fortunately, I didn't write it.

 

[Uncle99]

Uncle99, the vast majority of tanks on these forums are under 4 or 5 years old and any tank can go for that time frame without doing anything.
People say they have "Great Success" with no water change, no dosing, no nothing and they started their tank last Tuesday.

I would assume, because many tanks can go for years with no water changes that those minor trace elements are utilized so slowly, that the tank can go for years. Eventually, I believe something will suffer. For instance our inverts, especially crustaceans need Iodine and won't live without it.

Our fish, like us need iron and copper. We don't does copper and most of us don't dose iron, but if they run out, the fish will die.
Our tanks get a little copper and iron from our plumbing but not much with RO/Di that we use now. Some of the minerals are also supplied in foods such as clams which are full of minerals.

Potassium, zinc and chromium is used by our bodies and probably fish. Does anyone here dose chromium?

Thanks PaulB, that now makes sense.
No water changes + no dosing of minors (or other sources) + time = trouble

I’m good either with WC and/or dosing.

Now heard from three reefers who are asking if they can stop water changes because members on R2R say it’s a myth. Wow info moves so fast these days.

 

[msjboy]

I think a tank of appropriate that has grown from frag to colony size and have enough micro fauna ( pods, liverock, sand etc) can grow into a self sustaining environment without need of water change except for water that has evaporated. ( Eg. look at those enclosed glass ecospheres with a shrimp, seaweed...snail.) but some luck comes to play as well. Reefer luminaries like Sanje has done it. Softy tanks which is less demanding for minerals from water changes , you will have a better chance but hats off to those like Paul who has SPS! Also, even the Jake guy over at reef builder says he feeds his new nano tank fishes only 3 times a week and hasn't done any water changes in several months for the fairly new softie nano tank. Secret is to keep it at a bonsai state without goal of growing the corals and fish super big. I also know a guy with a yellow tang 20 years old is not much bigger than ones you buy at stores... again, he feed his fish substitently.

 

[Uncle99]

I think a tank of appropriate that has grown from frag to colony size and have enough micro fauna ( pods, liverock, sand etc) can grow into a self sustaining environment without need of water change except for water that has evaporated. ( Eg. look at those enclosed glass ecospheres with a shrimp, seaweed...snail.) but some luck comes to play as well. Reefer luminaries like Sanje has done it. Softy tanks which is less demanding for minerals from water changes , you will have a better chance but hats off to those like Paul who has SPS! Also, even the Jake guy over at reef builder says he feeds his new nano tank fishes only 3 times a week and hasn't done any water changes in several months for the fairly new softie nano tank. Secret is to keep it at a bonsai state without goal of growing the corals and fish super big. I also know a guy with a yellow tang 20 years old is not much bigger than ones you buy at stores... again, he feed his fish substitently.

So, if that’s true, are you saying that the minor elements replenish themselves by age?

 

[msjboy]

I do not know where the elements would come from...from the rocks;algae;Fish / pod poop? I will leave that to the marine biologist. I have an 10 gallon apitisa tank ( was going to grow berghia) that is probably 7 years old. Never changed water or any except for evaporated water and a light and powerhead. Apitsa doing just fine as is.

 

[Uncle99]

Re: trace elements.

Those of you claiming the trace element argument please provide me proof and analysis of your favorite salt mix. Salt mixes arent regulated, have no standards, and the term 'trace element" can mean whatever the manufacturer wants.

The main reason for water changes is to export nutrients and keep some tanks from getting into triple digit nitrates. I personally think it's a waste of time and wasteful in terms of resources.

There are many studies about the uptake of minor elements in Stoney’s. Each one of them clearly indicate what elements have been found in coral skeleton.
Whether you WC in the minor elements or dose them, they are being used up over time. It’s likely that you can go some length of time before your corals suffer from the effects low or missing elements.
I can clearly see that at least the minor elements like iodide, strontium, potassium, and boron are being used at a rate which appears to be roughly 10% of the CA uptake.

 

[Uncle99]

I do not know where the elements would come from...from the rocks;algae;Fish / pod poop? I will leave that to the marine biologist. I have an 10 gallon apitisa tank ( was going to grow berghia) that is probably 7 years old. Never changed water or any except for evaporated water and a light and powerhead. Apitsa doing just fine as is.

Can you show me a pic of your tank which has not had a water change in 7 years?
I would find that fascinating.