The Puffer Forum

In next week I will start up my first Brackish tank and then suddenly this question appered in my head.
Can a UV-filter be used in a Brackish tank, our will it also destroy the salinity? It filtrates almost all bacterias out of the water and makes it very clean for less money then if I buy two normal pumps. So I thought of having one UV going for like 5 hours a day so that the water still have some bacterias and then an normal pump on 24 hours a day, on how many liters pr/hour you think that the pump need to be then?
Hope anyone can help me

Hello and welcome. Can you tell us more about the tank so we can answer your questions better?

A UV filter will not alter the salinity in your tank. They're useful to kill water-born bacteria, algae, and parasites. They're aren't necessary at all though. Is there a specific reason as to why you want to use one?

UV has no effect on the ssalinity, I do agree with that.

I also question why it is needed routinely..

Oh sorry I totally forgot to tell about the aquarium that I want to start. It is 112 l and I will like to have an GSP, I will opgrade to a larger aquarium by time.

I wantet to try a aquarium with UV becaus:
1. The positon of the aquarium where there will come in a bit of light.
2. Do not really now if my teory is right but I also thought that maybe it would kill some of the bacterias from messy eating and then I could save a bit on my water bill by lesser water changing and a lot more of just buttom cleaning.
3. Puffer has skin and can be and easy target for diseases which UV also kills.
4. Larger filters use a lot of power and then UV and a smaller filter would be cheaper.
Power and water is pretty expensive in Denmark!

Is it totally stupid thinking?

Maybe:

1. The positon of the aquarium where there will come in a bit of light.

ok .. it might kill free floating algae

2. I also thought that maybe it would kill some of the bacterias from messy eating and then I could save a bit on my water bill by lesser water changing and a lot more of just buttom cleaning.

It kills all bacteria.. both good and bad so +1-1=0 . A neutral stand point as far as the water is concerned, but your biofilter is not the water so you may have a bit of a bonus there. UV will also not reduce the rotting food left behind by the puffer. -water change + UV again you are neutral. Save on the water spend on the electricity.

3. Puffer has skin and can be and easy target for diseases which UV also kills.

no idea.. maybe another person can comment?

4. Larger filters use a lot of power and then UV and a smaller filter would be cheaper.

So what is going to take out the uneaten food?, poop, and other waste particles? Again that UV will take up electricity, and a low flow system may not be what you are looking for. AFAIK water should be cheaper than electricity.

you are always welcome to experiment

J-P wrote:Maybe:

1. The positon of the aquarium where there will come in a bit of light.

ok .. it might kill free floating algae

2. I also thought that maybe it would kill some of the bacterias from messy eating and then I could save a bit on my water bill by lesser water changing and a lot more of just buttom cleaning.

It kills all bacteria.. both good and bad so +1-1=0 . A neutral stand point as far as the water is concerned, but your biofilter is not the water so you may have a bit of a bonus there. UV will also not reduce the rotting food left behind by the puffer. -water change + UV again you are neutral. Save on the water spend on the electricity.

3. Puffer has skin and can be and easy target for diseases which UV also kills.

no idea.. maybe another person can comment?

4. Larger filters use a lot of power and then UV and a smaller filter would be cheaper.

So what is going to take out the uneaten food?, poop, and other waste particles? Again that UV will take up electricity, and a low flow system may not be what you are looking for. AFAIK water should be cheaper than electricity.

you are always welcome to experiment

Hmm... Think I will look a bit more on the cost ;P
My idea was to clean uneaten food and poop with one of those cleaners that clean and not take out the water. Do not now what they are called. I just saw one fore some month ago. Looked pretty smart

A UV filter would never reduce the need for water changes or decreased filtration capacity.

A very strong +1 to Flutter's comment, and to J-P's as well.

I suspect it is a case where apparent logical thinking gave you invalid solutions to your issues.

Remember, UV is a broad brush -as previously said, it kills indiscriminately, good and bad.

There are many misconceptions in this hobby - the commonest being that aquarium bacteria are a negative factor in fish keeping. That is contrary to fact. The manner in which we practice fish-keeping (semis-closed systems) requires many, many varying types of bacteria (and other invisible to the naked eye inverts along with barely visible ones), and massive numbers of those. Those critters digest the bits of uneaten food, which overall is a benefit. Because puffers are messy eaters, we may need to do a bit more upkeep than some other groups of fish require. But there are several different handling techniques for that need. Unfortunately, a larger filter is not necessarily better, not in and of itself any worse. The filter's appropriate function is set by the hobbyist - size and power use are not major factors and may not even be linked factors - some brands are highly efficient in power use, others may not be. Within a brand, power use is generally directly related to size. You can set a tank with carefully developed current to sweep most of the debris from the water column and rinse such units daily and you will markedly improve water quality at the cost of daily upkeep, or you can allow significant in-tank or in-filter digestion of food scraps and waste, and have some degradation of water quality which is corrected by partials. All techniques involved trade-offs. You pick the ones which fit your"willing to do" tasks.

Unfortunately, to the best of my knowledge, UV is not of central importance to any of those. "Skimming" in the sense of protein fractionation, is one of the highly beneficial techniques. As options, that would be far above UV on any potential list of my working equipment. Ditto for a larger tank or added plenum w/live rock, and/or a 24/7 lighted refugium for macroalgae. Uv would be no more than an occasionally useful tool, never a constant use item as are the other on that brief list.

If you have no personal experience w/high BW and SW, asking this sort of questions may well give you some good hints for the types of tank operation and upkeep items that will fit your personal needs. It can save you a lot of time and money in the long run.

RasmusL wrote: 4. Larger filters use a lot of power and then UV and a smaller filter would be cheaper.
Power and water is pretty expensive in Denmark!

For example, an Aquaclear 70 filter for your size tank uses 6 watts of power, that's very little consumption. How much power do UV sterizers consume?

Thank you everyone fore all the nice answers. Like RTR says I was just thinking logically ;P

Was thinking: Less stress to me and my fish, less money spend, less decises and I was also thinking a bit about those low nitrat, nitrit and amonia levels... And then the position of my aquarium ;P... But I just do it the old fashion way as always ;P

I am realy looking forward to setting up my new tank

JRC3 wrote:

RasmusL wrote: 4. Larger filters use a lot of power and then UV and a smaller filter would be cheaper.
Power and water is pretty expensive in Denmark!

For example, an Aquaclear 70 filter for your size tank uses 6 watts of power, that's very little consumption. How much power do UV sterizers consume?

Nice. Have never seen that one in Dk. A filter with 750 ltr/h normally use about 7-8 watt and then those about the level of ltr/h I want like the aquaclear use normally uses something like 20 watt. Here is the Aquaclear in Dk http://www.shoppinnet.com/?page=product ... n,-21-watt
were it says 21 watt.
The UV I was looking ad was using 9 watt and I would never have it on for more then about 6 hours a day.

Just remembered that we not use the same power in Dk as in USA. Thats why it uses a lot more here!

RasmusL wrote:Just remembered that we not use the same power in Dk as in USA. Thats why it uses a lot more here!

That's what I was thinking. Obviously our voltages are different and the frequency is a little different too...Though I don't know how much frequency (HZ) plays with efficiency and that could make the difference.

Nothing beats good, old-fashioned water changes!

Huge +1 to PP's comment.

You can always tell an "old" fishkeeper. Every time you visit, you recognize most of the tanks and fish. And they all do lots of water changes. Someone on another site had a wonderful signature line: "When you don't know what is wrong, do a water change. When you know what is wrong, do more water changes."