UV sterilizer on a reef set-up. Yes or No.

[ryebread]

Interested in finding opinions on UV sterilizers.
I am in the process of setting up a 120g Reef-Ready tank and all of the goodies. Before I can continue with the plumbing, I need to know if I should put a UV sterilizer on there. Probably a 25 watter.
I will not be using the UV hopefully ever. If I come into a situation where the UV would be useful I would turn it on.
I am well aware of the effects of UVs on reef tanks. I do not plan to run this on an everyday basis........just if needed.

 

[striker]

Not here. I've always heard they are only beneficial for fish only tanks.

 

[jefflg]

Always nice to be able to plan ahead for future wrecks. Not sure if I would go to the expense of getting one though. Wrecks can be managed and this "hobby" can be expensive enough. Just my 2 cents worth

 

[phoenixrising]

Rye--I have a UV (Aqua) plumbed into my reef tank for the same exact reason you quoted. I almost never use it, but it is there on a "just in case" basis.

 

[fshhub]

IMO, if you are not going ot useit, why have it?
in order for them to even possibly be affective as prescribed(which i think they are NOT) they need to be run more than just when a problem does arise. Plus, if you are going to plumb it in, there is another potential leak or problem that would not be there without it.
I do NOT like or reccommend them and feel strongly about it. BUT, if you are going to get one, get one to use. They are NOT a bandage to only be run for a day if something happens. If that is the plan, the odds of them helping are much less by that time. Even though I do not think they are really a help for their boasted ability to control ick, yes algae(including calupera and coraline) but not ick. JMO

 

[dburr]

Wont help.
Ick outbreak- All of the parasites will not go thru the UV. Most will drop to the floor, reproduce and find a new fish before it goes in the UV. Best method, hypo.
Mostly it will kill the pytoplankton for the corels.
If you are keeping a reef, most likely the water will be as close to perfect as you can keep it. A healthy enviroment- fish are happy- no ick or other parasites- no need for UV.
IMHO.
HTH

 

[eugenecjr]

I do have a quick question on this note. I do have one on my system, and I run it all of the time. I guess that I have not though about the effects of running it, but what are the negatives of a UV on a reaf system?

 

[hairtrigger]

ok ok ok.... I know most people seem to be against them, but I have one on my tank. I run it when adding new fish, or when I think I spot trouble. I don't run it constantly. And I have seen plenty of positive growth in my tank. Nice pods, worms, new coral colonies, frags, etc. It has saved me many times too. I have had some trouble with parasites and new fish, and have run it to prevent the parasite from breeding and starting the cycle over. (Some fish just too tough to catch in a big tank with lots of rockwork, even if I had a QT tank.) It worked, and cpmbined with natural remedies, things worked out well. I've lost many fish before I got a UV. Just my thoughts. Good luck.

 

[seaham358]

I had a problem when I first set up my system in late Sept. all my fish died except some green chromis. I borrowed a 30 watt UV and ran it for about 1.5 months with corals in my 125 tank. They all grew during this period and I added corals only during that time. I started adding fish after 1.5 months and am still adding today. I went about 2 months w/out a UV when I had to return the borrowed unit. I like the piece of mind of having it and I see no effects on the corals at this time. They are all doing good. I run it on its own pump in the sump so not all the water passes through it. Its your tank, so load it up!!!

 

[fshhub]

now let me get this one right
you set up in late sept?
then all your fish died
tehn you ran a UV for 1.5 months
and have now been without one for 2 months?
so, that would mean that mid november(or earlier) you put it on?
By mid november, depnding on the tank, you probably should have had nothing or almost nothing in your tank to start with, except for maybe a few damsels or chromis, which could die in a cycle anyway. Many fish, even if you were done cycling would not do well in that young of a tank, MANY of them.
A tank just under 2 months old, if the cycle is over, should only have 2 or maybe 3 HEARTY fish in it anyhow.
So, my point is, was it parasites that killed the fish? and the Uv that helped survival? Or just unstable water and/or an uncycled tank? Only reason I say or ask this is to make sure you don't get a false sense of security and rely on a piece of equipment that did not do what you may think it had done.
Ich, IMO is way too easy to avoid and care for and does not need an expensive piece of equipment that would harm your ecosystem. And Ich is not an every day problem, but a problem brought on by ourselves that could VERY easily have been prevented.

 

[ryebread]

Looks like so far the vote is NO.
Are there any beneficial aspects to the UV other than the "Ick Band-Aid"?
I am not worried about the cost of this equipment............
Would it be worth it in the case of a hair or bubble algae outbreak. Just trying to find different perspectives.

 

[overanalyzer]

Rye are you planning on running a fug? I would hate to see you spend money but if you have money to burn let me know ....
I've looked into them and have read a bunch of differnet items about them and one article I remember reading said they are essential in bare bottom tanks .... I would assume you are not going with a bare bottom (but I hate to assume)......
I would think a fug with good macro growth, a DSB and LR as proscribed would combine nicely with an au natural clean up crew and handle your algea issues. A handful of pro UV types use tap water or distilled water only and think the UV helps remove the nasty stuff ....
Personally I would not have one except on a FO or FOWLR .... with a lot of messy eaters where filtration would be stressed ....
but hey what do i know??

 

[64ivy]

I'm running about 80W of UV on my 500g reef and have done it since I set it up nearly 5 years ago (of course, I HAVE changed the bulbs a time or two since then ). I should also note that I DO have a barebottom tank. Anyway, I do not think this amount of UV in particular (this amount is considered very weak) effects the corals either positively or negatively but I'm not so sure about the fish. Until very recently, I never utilized a quarentene tank but none of my fish have ever had ick...and I've got a few ick magnets (Tangs). The only reason I set up a QT now is to give MO fish a chance to recover from the stresses of travel and build up their strengh as I somewhat of a 'rowdy' assortment of tankmates. Anyway, I've also never had an algae bloom which may or may not be due at least partly to UV. I can offer no scientific proof either way. All I go by is my experience and maybe a bit of superstition. So no way would I take mine off-line at this point. But then again, I don't go fishing without my lucky hat either .

 

[krux]

add a tee, put a cap on it, and continue with the plumbing. when you find out one way or another, you can buy or ditch the idea of uv, but by already having a capped off tee installed you can easily put it in down the line!

 

[barracuda]

I only would use it in FO system or in case i have few systems interconnected. In case of interconnected systems i would put UV between the tanks.

 

[poiboy]

I'm with HAIRTRIGGER. I re-did my tank in Dec with out the UV and within month got an outbreak of ich. Put the UV back on fed the fish garlic and now it's gone. I run it all the time and have seen no ill effects.

 

[aileena]

AFTER A ONE MONTH CYCLE I added my fish in my 29g and had tons of problems with algea and scratching fish. They scrached up against everything. I bought a 9watt double helix for like $100 a few weeks afterwards...after about a month the fish were acting great...
between the garlic and the UV the fish had no problems and algae was not an issue at all...
about a month ago, after nine months, I removed the UV. The fish are still fine, but I noticed a significant algae boom...had to go out and buy a larger clean up crew....and yes I use r/o water.
during the entire time I had the UV the corals grew a lot...I cannot say they have grown as much as w/o the UV because I have only had it off for about a month.
I think the benefits are great for the first 6 months when your adding fish and stablizing the tank.

 

[kyaney]

I have had many an argument on this board about this. And I'll start this out as I always do.....What ever works for you is best. I have one on each of my three tanks (120,90,75). They are all reef tanks. All of my inverts are thriving. I have had the tanks for many years and have never had a fungal, bacterial, or viral outbreak. I think they are very beneficial in keeping the algae levels down as well. I only turn them off when I put in DT's phytoplankton, and then only for about 6 hours. I hear over and over about the beneficial bacteria that are killed by them, but as I stated, I have never had an outbreak and all of my fish and inverts are thriving, some of them at an obnoxious rate. Just what works well for me.

 

[fshhub]

Originally posted by RyeBread
Looks like so far the vote is NO.
Are there any beneficial aspects to the UV other than the "Ick Band-Aid"?
I am not worried about the cost of this equipment............
Would it be worth it in the case of a hair or bubble algae outbreak. Just trying to find different perspectives.
hair definitely, bubble, ???not sure???
but presumably, I would have to sayyes, since it does kill free floationg spores. and will affect coraline and other types as well.

 

[azonic]

fshhub: I Have to disagree with you about it having a negative effect on caulerpa and/or coralline aglae. From my understanding and from what other's have told me, it kills algae in it's free-floating form...while it's still in the water column.....
How do you say it would effect caulerpa which would obviously not be running under the UV light. Also, with coralline, the major factor with that is calcium to get it growing....how do you say it would effect that?
As for hair algae or bubble algae that is already growing, my understanding is that it won't be removed by the UV because it's already attached itself to the rock.
Someone please do correct me if I'm wrong.
That said, Rye, I am also setting up a new tank, 125RR in the next month or two and I am having one plumbed into my system between the sump output and the tank input. Haven't decided which model or wattage yet.