Refugiums and UV Sterilizers - A 'Mated Pair'?

[yearofthenick]

I went to my LFS last week and threw some ideas about the hobby at one of the workers to see what he thought...
First off, it seems that the UV sterilizers can be a bit taboo on this forum, which is fine. In fact, I wasn't going to add one because of all the mixed opinions, but then I spoke to this guy.
I just bought a 4'x2' 120 gallon tank and am currently in the process of buying all the other crap I'll need. I decided I definitely wanted a refugium as I want to recreate the ocean environment as much as possible by adding chaeto, pods, miracle mud... all that.
So I told this guy I wanted to do the refugium and he recommended a UV sterilizer as well. I was a little surprised by his recommendation as he was very strongly suggestive that the two should go hand in hand.
"The best combination you can do is a refugium and a UV... they should always be a 'mated pair' so to speak. Sure, the UV doesn't discriminate, and it will kill both the bad and the good stuff. But with the refugium, you're only adding good stuff to your tank, so eventually there won't be any bad stuff left."
Interesting concept!
He suggested that the UV be the first thing the water hits before going into the sump/refugium.
So what do you guys think about all this? Should I give it a try?

 

[fishfreak1242]

If you do get a UV, make sure that it has its own separate pump dedicate to it. You want it to have as slow a flow going through it as possible, or it will do nothing to affect your tank.

 

[yearofthenick]

What if I got like a 48" one?

 

[fishfreak1242]

That would work pretty well.

 

[mr_x]

i have never used a UV sterilizer, and i haven't seen any adverse effects. why woudl i want to build a refugium, just to kill off part of the benefit from it?

 

[yearofthenick]

Originally Posted by Mr_X
http:///forum/post/2707030
i have never used a UV sterilizer, and i haven't seen any adverse effects. why woudl i want to build a refugium, just to kill off part of the benefit from it?
The theory is that you're killing off both the bad and the good, but only adding the good. It may seem a little inefficient, but the concept makes sense in that no more bad stuff is being added to the tank. Only good.
Make sense?

 

[jake0110]

I am very interested to hear replies to this. I currently run a UV sterilizer with my 150 Gal FOWLR.
I am installing a refugium next week, so any additional knowledge would be great.

 

[stanlalee]

I dont see them as being a "mated pair" what so ever. at the rate I ran my UV (and most people with fuges for cultivating pods and food) it would only kill algae spores and bacteria not pods or parasites. no affect on the fuge or pod population at all. I didn't notice any difference at all to tell you the truth but for whatever reason it made me feel a little better having it. I've heard the argument UV should NOT be used with fuges because of its indescriminance (killing the good stuff you made a fuge for in the first place) but never the other way around. even that only applied to flow rate/wattage combinations that would kill parasites (and alter the make up of pod larvae and development). A UV plumbed into your return line unless its unusually high wattage (60w+ ect) isn't killing any microfauna or parasites. your talking flow rates like 80-150gph for normal size (18-40w) UVs to kill parasites and harm fuge population.

 

[mr_x]

Originally Posted by YearOfTheNick
http:///forum/post/2707279
The theory is that you're killing off both the bad and the good, but only adding the good. It may seem a little inefficient, but the concept makes sense in that no more bad stuff is being added to the tank. Only good.
Make sense?
what "bad stuff" am i adding to the tank?

 

[yearofthenick]

heck I don't know... It's one of the reasons I posted this thread.
Keep in mind Stanalee that I came on this forum against UV's... and only after a store worker's opinion did I decide to start this thread.
The only thing I can think of is algae and other parasites. But I also agree with stanalee that the flow rate would need to be really low and the wattage really high in order for it to work.
But goodwin9 has a UV on all of his tanks, and he has like 8 of them, one of which is 600 gallons and he's never had an outbreak of ich in any of his tanks... and he never QT's... he only floats his fish, and he has hundreds of fish. There's proof right there. With as many gallons he's running and as many fish in his home, there's no way he is that lucky. What else can keep the ich at bay? Chaeto? Mangroves? The only thing I can think of that is known to supposedly help erradicate ich from a tank without a QT is a UV... and garlic.
www.dakotareef.com is his website where he has live webcams of some of his tanks.

 

[mr_x]

that's not proof. ich lives on fish. if the fish are stressed, then the ich will surface. the fish rub against each other when they have it too, or when they fight(tangs do this alot). that will be enough to transfer it. i doubt it's because of the presence of a UV sterilizer.

 

[reefkprz]

I have a UV sterilizer, its in my closet on the floor. I only use it on my QT if I am treating an outbreak of some sickness in/on a new fish. since I havent had any new fish in a while it doesnt get used much. I dont run them on my tanks.
IMO they arent taboo, but the cost versus benefit IMO isnt worth the price of buying one. except in ceartain instances.