Bo0ger1, show me your tank...

/The Conscientious Marine Aquarist

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/watrqualmar.htm

Marine Aquarium Water Quality

What is this ideal, this oxymoron, this mythical beast "Water Quality"?
Asked to name the 'secret' to successfully keeping marines, what would you
say? Buying the 'right' specimens? Proper acclimation, feeding? All these
are critically important; as is keeping parasitic and infectious diseases at
bay.
You may well recall, the third triad in our model of factors determining the
well-being of any system is suitability of the environment. For the majority
of situations/circumstances we are talking about water quality. Of the
controllable variables of aquariculture, it is the most important. Let's
make this perfectly clear; everything about the health of your system is
tied to water quality. If your fishes appear ill, do not first suspect
disease, refrain from changing their food, light, or anything else; check
the quality of your water. I swear more aquatic life has been 'saved' by
moving to new water, or executing a massive water change, than the use of
all medications combined.
To put this concept in more succinct terms: Nearly all livestock problems
start and end with the appropriateness of their liquid medium.
Let's work our way into a definition of what good water quality is and how
it is best approximated. You won't have to become a chemist or physicist, I
promise.
An Ideal Set-up:
Take a gander at the photographs of public aquariums offered in this
magazine. How do they keep the water in their tanks so clean and clear? I
know what you're thinking; "They must have super-filtration systems, with
digital dosimeters like a nuclear power plant, exotic towers, and a
full-time scientific staff." "Bob the Fishman lied; I am going to have to
become an engineer". Well, guess what, that gin-clear water is often due to
a sand filter, the beach. Some of these public aquariums dig sal****er wells
and pump up the seawater that percolates to it through the surrounding
porous rock. Good deal. Their "open circuit" and "semi-open" (recirculated)
systems return the barely used natural water back to the adjacent ocean.
We're not quite so fortunate with our "closed", recirculating units. Our
water starts out as good as we can make it and degrades from there,
chemically and physically. The use of various filter modes, additives and
maintenance only serves to slow down the pace; water quality dis-improves.
Be aware, but don't let this bum you out. The majority of organisms
available to the hobby have a wide tolerance and are adaptable to initial
and aged water conditions.
Natural Seawater
Is not used by most aquarists. Look in the hobby magazines; you don't see
many advertisements promoting gear for manipulating real seawater.
Synthetics are almost universally employed; huge public aquaria even use
them. For instance the "new" National Aquarium @ Baltimore. Even though it's
right on the Bay, they mix up and recirculate hundreds of thousands of
gallons of synthetic seawater.
Discussion and arguments for natural/synthetic sal****er I've covered before
(see Bibliography). Let's focus our attention here on artificial mixes; what
most everyone employs.
It's the Water, & A Lot Mo
The United States has gone from agricultural, to manufacturing, to services
and through the eighties well into the information age. Forget about
investing in the technical highway; get with a real booming field Sal****er
Mixes. I wish you and I got to have the money all the manufactures spend
advertising every month in the hobby magazines. Talk about a growth
industry.
Is there really that much difference (besides price) amongst all the brands?
Yes & No. Some are more "pure" in that they are composed to a greater degree
from "technical" and "reagent" grade constituents (yes, I used to teach
chemistry and physics). Others can portend they are more "complete" in that
they specifically have tested (more) vigorously for and/or added more
elements and compounds mimicking "real" seawater. Admittedly they vary in
initial pH, alkaline-reserve, re-dox, etc.; but ostensibly they all will/do
support most forms of captive marine life. Other factors in artificial
seawater-making loom large in consideration of "quality".
Some Background:
The composition of seawater in it's various salts (about 35 parts per
thousand), minerals, metals... is often presented as being of rigid, and
homogeneous constitution throughout the world's oceans. And the wildlife in
it being of narrow tolerance of change in this 'holy grail' consistent
medium.
This is only part of a/the big picture as regards the waters our livestock
hail from. Almost all are collected from places that are opportune to
humans, not surprisingly. They are typically shallow water, coastal, near
population (polluted) centers, that are subjected to varying specific
gravity, run-off, sewage, wave action induced pH fluctuations... What's
more, all living things show a broader-narrower tolerance /range to
environmental conditions.
Hence our chances at successfully meeting their needs in artificial media.
The principal ingredient, by weight and volume in a marine system is... H2O.
Your tap water has much more to it then Hydrogen and Oxygen. Ordinary mains
water sports dissolved and suspended gases, solids, other liquids, remnants
of, and organic life; and a sanitizer (usually chloramine). Here in Southern
California we regularly have several hundred parts per million (ppm) of
total dissolved solids (TDS) in our tap.
Does all this glop (non-scientific term) pose real problems for an earnest
marine aquarist? No, in all honesty, it's minor spuds (small potatoes)
compared with all the other contributing factors affecting the make-up of
your system's water.
Hear me out. The E.P.A., among other agencies, mandates just how much of
several (from the Middle English, meaning 'many') chemical and biological
species are allowable in potable water. For instance, tap must have a
concentration of less than 1.0 ppm total Nitrate (NO3). Further influences?
Have you thought of the ongoing effects from dissolving substrates, rock,
decor, feeding (one ounce of food in one million ounces of water would be 1
ppm), biological processes going on in your closed system? And what about
the interactions between all this and the salts and more you add to the
water?
If you've grown fond of lugging bottled water, utilizing reverse-osmosis, or
even distilled water, more power to you. But let's keep all this in
perspective. The bulk of undesirable "extras" in tap water can be either
ignored or easily removed either through an in-line chemical contactor"
(e.g. Aquarium Pharmaceutical's Tap Water Purifier (tm)) or commercially
produced conditioners.
Not to disparage the use of more "purified" water out of hand/proportion; my
point is that compared with other contributing factors, for marine systems,
ordinary treated tapwater is not a major source of concern in terms of added
nutrient, pollutants, metals... Freshwater biotopes (e.g. wild discus, some
killies) that appreciate far less in their water are a different matter.
Keeping Water Quality High: Filtration
Some of the general techniques used to preserve water quality will introduce
here; and discuss them more fully in upcoming issues.
Biological Filtration: is the sum-total of interactions between the micro-
(one's you can't see with the naked eye) and macro- (one's you can) life,
rendering less-noxious the waste-production of the latter. 'Sterile' new
marine systems don't stay that way for long. Colonizing microbes come in via
the air, water, items that find their way into the system, intentionally or
not. Eventually (after a few weeks) without adding desirable varieties,
beneficial microbes become established in a system sufficient to readily
process livestock wastes.
These processes are expedited by use of undergravel filtration, wet-dry
techniques, live-rock, fluidized bed, nitrate et al. scrubbers...
Chemical Filtrants: like activated carbon and specialized resins are used to
remove dissolved organics. They do also remove trace materials you want in
the system, but this is an agreeable trade-off.
Mechanical Means: of removing particulates; power filters, diatomaceous
earth, cartridge types, etc. take out suspended matter aiding their removal,
digestion by microbes.
Air-stripping, aka Protein skimming is a given for me; all marine systems
benefit from their use and should be outfitted with them. Where properly
built (a rarity) and used, skimming is supreme at improving water quality
via fractional removal of organics.
Ozone the tri-atomic (O3) form of Oxygen, added through a skimmer or by
itself raises reduction oxidation potential, adds to conversion or organics.
Ultraviolet Sterilization is of some, but limited value with other
filtration and system maintenance considerations taken into account. U-V's
are useful in reducing free-floating microbe populations and their
biological effects, nominally raising re-dox, oxygen and ozone levels.
To recap; it is my opinion that marine systems must be outfitted first with
working Biological Filtration, then with a protein skimmer, with or without
an ozonizer. Ultraviolet is and should be a last concern.
Loading otherwise known as stocking, crowding a marine system with livestock
is difficult to quantify, and seemingly impossible to control for aquarists.
Obviously, the less "fixed-carbon" (life), concomitant addition as food, the
minimized effects of induced-pollution, metabolite build-up... So small is
beautiful in stocking your system. Public aquaria allow as little as a few
ounces of livestock per hundred gallons of system water. My guideline is any
more than a cubic inch of any given mix of specimens per five gallons is
pushing it, asking for increased maintenance, and trouble.
Water Changes are the single most important means you have to reduce the
effects of captive containment, ultimate shift, loss of water quality.
Diluting ill-effects, adding "trace" materials from new seawater should be
done on a regular, consistent time schedule. Do not be sold on any given
technology that purports to make "water changing unnecessary". Frequent,
partial water changes are the least expensive, most effective way to ensure
and sustain aquariums successfully; period.
This being written (and believed), remember 'cleanliness is not sterility';
there are beneficial substances produced by life processes. You want to
vacuum clean only a portion of a system at any time. Depending of course on
your systems' size, configuration, particulars of filtration, circulation,
foods/feeding... probably ten to twenty percent every few weeks.
Supplements: The relative merits of additives will be covered later in a
piece titled Adjuncts to Water Quality
Test Gear: How can you tell when and to what degree your efforts are
necessary or productive? Hydrometers to measure specific gravity, test kits
of myriad types can be useful tools, "windows" for looking into changing
conditions in your water quality.
In Summary:
It is easy to see how easily our water quality degrades in such small,
overcrowded, often underfed captive systems. It can be bewildering to get
too involved in understanding, or worse, driving one aspect of "water
quality" without concomitant awareness of how that change affects other
aspects of chemistry, physics and biology of your system. Fear not, as most
appropriate livestock that has been collected and held properly is quite
tough and resistant to the vicissitudes of aquarium confinement.
Do learn the consequences of the major testable criteria of water quality,
avail yourself of the gear for evaluation (test kits), and be fastidiously
regular in your maintenance; in particular frequent, partial water changes.

Bibliography/Further:
Anon. 1974. Sal****er quality. Aquarium Digest International 2:4/74.
Bidwell, Joseph P. 1976. Water quality and the bioassay. Marine Aquarist
7:7/76.
Campbell, Douglas G. Water quality in the marine system, parts I & II. FAMA
6,7/95.
Dawes, John. 1988. Water quality in marine systems. Pets Supplies Marketing
8/88.
Emmens, C.W. 1989. Water quality in the marine aquarium. FAMA 8/89.
Fenner, Bob. 1989. Frequent partial water changes. FAMA 4/89.
Fenner, Bob. 1991. Seawater, natural or synthetic? (Which way to go?). FAMA
9/91.
Glodek, Garrett. 1993. The properties of seawater. FAMA 2/93.
King, John, M. 1972. Marine aquariums are NOT miniature oceans. Marine
Aquarist 3(4)/72.
Smit, George. 1989. The water quality factor in marine aquariums, parts 1 &
2. FAMA 1,3/89.
Sprung, Julian. 1996. Water quality: Sal****er; more than just numbers. AFM
6/96.
Thiel, Albert J. 1993. Introduction to water quality. FAMA 3/93

Buried in that excellent article is this -
"Do not be sold on any given technology that purports to make 'water changing
unnecessary'. Frequent, partial water changes are the least expensive, most
effective way to ensure and sustain aquariums successfully; period."

George Patterson
Those who do not study History are doomed to repeat it. Those who DO
study History are doomed to watch every one else repeat it.

/The Conscientious Marine Aquarist

Frequent Partial Water Changes



Probably the most important aspect of maintenance a keeper of an aquatic
system can do to optimize water quality and health of their charges is to
change some of the water is a regular basis. This Section deals with the
reasons for, and some rules of thumb as to how often, how much and how to
make these changes.
Rationale:
There are several major benefits of frequent partial water changes: Dilution
of nutrient, removal of particulate matter, reduction in microbial
populations and their metabolites. Results anticipated are faster, more
vigorous growth, reduced algae growth, color and odor.
It has been written in many fisheries, limnological and hobbyist texts that
along with temperature and photoperiod, metabolite ("wastes") build-up is
one of the three most important factors influencing the health, growth and
reproduction of livestock.
More specifically; in the trade, ammonia and other nitrogenous wastes are
recognized as the number one killer of aquatic life in captive conditions.
Not to say that all the "stuff" produced by the system's desiraable life is
toxic. Some metabolites, like pheromones, are actually known to have calming
effects. Therefore the concept of partial, not total water changes.
In doing these water changes we are interested in a dilution-solution; that
is, keeping these so-called waste products at tolerable levels.
There are several ways this is otherwise accomplished. Most common are some
forms of biological filtration and chemical filtration like carbon and
ion-exchange materials. The last are useful but often labor and money
intensive. Moreover, these chemical filtrants do remove desirable chemicals
as well.
As stated in so many previous Sections it is imperative vital that as much
extraneous materials: foods, dirt from decor, material from the immediate
outside environment be kept from getting in the system. What little does
make its way in should be removed by netting/vacuuming, diluted or removed
by making partial water changes.
Some potential pollution will probably be added to your system in the way of
food and chemical additives/fertilizer. Even without over- or mis- feeding
and/or fertilizing, freshwater evaporation adds to a decided negative
chemical effect on an aquatic system. This "Salton Sea Syndrome" occurs as
water evaporates leaving behind its' chemical constituents.
So enough of the reasoning for making water changes; onto the nuts and bolts
of how to do them:
How often:
Depending on your pump/filter/circulation system, stocking and feeding
regimen et al., partial water changes about once a week to about once a
month are about right. More frequent smaller amounts are better than
infrequent mega-changes, with one possible exception. Some writers advocate
an occasional massive change (50% or more) as a stop-gap measure to dilute
metabolites, nitrates in particular. I'd rather encourage you to stick to
regular, smaller volume changes; they're safer and accomplish about the same
ends.
Make a schedule/notebook for your system and keep track of what you do and
how it works for you. Patterns will emerge and give you a guideline for how
frequent you should change water.
How much:
Five to ten percent for larger systems and twice that for smaller is
generally sufficient. The chemical/physical/biological shock from changing
too much too soon is to be avoided.
Though some marine authors state that water treatment chemicals are
unwarranted with such frequent small percentage change, I'd encourage you
"to be safe, rather than sorry", and treat to remove chlorine/chloramine
unless you're preparing water a week or more in advance of use.
How to:
However it is achieved, the part of the water and what's dissolved in it are
mainly to be found at and in the bottom.
Solids are systematically removed from part, but never all of the bottom of
the tank and possibly sump by using a "gravel vacuum". We don't want to vent
all the beneficial microbes along with the solids, so a plan is made to move
the decor and vacuum a half, third, what have you, of the base in a given
water change period.
New water is replaced with pre-mixed synthetic of similar temperature and
specific gravity.
Summary:
Regardless of how well a system is designed and constructed, there will
always be maintenance. Frequent partial water changes are one of the best
ways of ensuring continuing success.
There are manufacturers who claim their products do away with the need for
frequent partial water changes. Their products may well extend the amount of
time between changing or ostensibly eliminate it, but at what economic cost?
With the proper tools and materials, water changes are a breeze. Water
changing is the cheapest, easiest, most sure method of diluting wastes and
replenishing buffering capacity, "trace materials", while concurrently
cleaning the system of undesirable solids and liquids.
Bibliography/Further Reading:
Bauman, Edward. 1994. Water wisdom; as if changing a little water will kill
you. AFM 12/94.
Branscome, Lee. 1985. How to stop carrying those buckets of water. FAMA
11/85.
Dow, Steve. 1986. Heavy water. TFH 5/86.
Fenner, Bob. 1999. Frequent partial water changes. FAMA 5/99.
Hanford, Wilber L. 1969. A change of water. TFH 5/69.
Mowka, Edmund J. 1979. Water changes in the marine aquarium; partial water
changes in the marine system are often neglected for a variety of reasons.
Here's why water changes are essential, as well as a method of calculating
the necessary amount. FAMA 12/79.
Ostrow, Marshall E. 1981. Water changes. TFH 5/81.

The "Perfect" Water Change Regimen?

A Healthy Habit For The Hardcore Fish Nerd!

By Scott Fellman

One of the best things that we can do to assure continuing success with our
captive marine systems is to perform regular water changes. So very simple,
yet so amazingly beneficial! Water changes achieve several valuable things,
including the dilution of dissolved organic wastes, nutrient export, and
replenishment of trace elements, just to name a few. When performed on a
regular basis, water changes provide the inhabitants of the closed marine
system a stable, consistent environment. And, environmental stability is one
of the keys to success in our hobby!

Water changes tend to be viewed by most hobbyists as a necessary evil; a
practice that we begrudgingly embrace to achieve a modicum of success with
our aquariums. Many hobbyists will do the occasional 10%-25% water change
once a month, once every couple of months, or even less often (oh, the
horror!)! There is, however, a better way!

5% Twice A Week. That's All I Ask!

As I just asserted, one of the primary benefits of the water change in a
closed system is the dissolution of dissolved organics in the water. In the
closed system, fish wastes and other organics are broken down by the
beneficial bacteria that reside in the sand bed, live rock, and filter
media. However, over time, the end products of the biological filtration
process (nitrate and phosphate, in particular) tend to accumulate in the
system. The accumulation of these products can lead to significant
degradation of your tank's water quality, and a reduction in the pH of the
tank water. The key to eliminating this problem is, of course, regular water
changes! If done consistently, regular small water changes can help dilute
organic wastes before they ever have an opportunity to accumulate in your
system. Trace elements will be replenished with fantastic regularity. Think
of the money that you'll save by not having to purchase all of those
additives you've been using!

"Ok", I can hear you saying, "I get the picture.Regular water changes are a
good idea. But how much do I have to change.And how often?" Less than you
think.but more often than you'd assume! My recommendation for an
easy-to-accomplish, highly beneficial water change regimen is to perform two
5% water changes per week. "Twice a week! What a pain! Is this guy nuts?"
Well, yes, but that's another topic for another time! Seriously, though,
this is a lot easier to accomplish than you might think.

Think about it. Five percent of your tank volume (that's only 5 gallons in a
100 gallon tank, or just 2.5 gallons in a 50 gallon tank), performed on,
say, Wednesday and Sunday. By following this routine, you're aquarium's
inhabitants are never more than 3 days from the next water change.and that
is some serious frequency, my friends! However, this is not a daunting task,
by any means. In fact, you can perform an efficient water change in as
little as 10 minutes (Trust me here- I timed it!) . Using decidedly "low
tech" methods, you can create a healthy, stable environment in your
aquarium. When I say "low tech"- I mean it! We're talking a flexible

plastic hose, nothing more! Sure, you could use one of those fancy
store-bought numbers, but the tubing works just fine for me!

Obviously, when conducting the water change, you need to be sure to utilize
high quality source water (such as RO/DI water), a good salt mix, and
similar specific gravity, temperature, and pH. Environmental consistency is
extremely important, and conducting water changes in a manner that breeds
consistency will assure stability in your aquarium! Another side benefit of
frequent small water changes is that you are "involved" with your tank on a
rather "intimate" level, on a very regular basis. You'll see what's really
going on in your tank, notice changes or sudden problems, and be able to
correct them in a rapid manner. You'll save money on additives, too! Rather
than spend tons of cash on lots of different trace elements, additives, and
assorted vitamin products, you'll be able to replenish the majority of these
compounds through these frequent water changes. Sure, you may need to
supplement calcium, iodine, and possibly, a few other compounds which your
animals utilize on a daily basis, but you'll use far less of them in many
cases.

And, while you're making these regular water changes, why not use the
opportunity to empty the collection cup and clean the neck of your protein
skimmer (you do use one, right?), replace chemical filtration media , and
clean mechanical filter pads and/or filter "socks"? By cleaning the
mechanical media within your system often, you'll help prevent detritus and
organics from building up within them, which can measurably degrade water
quality if left unattended.

Most amazing of all will be the noticeable results in your aquarium: Fishes
will display brighter colors, eat better, and be more alert and active than
you've ever seen them! Corals and invertebrates will display significant
improvement in color, growth, and recovery following imposed propagation
techniques. You'll enjoy a whole new dimension of success with your system.
Water parameters will remain more stable, nuisance algae will begin to
disappear from your system, and your tank will take on a visual clarity that
will astound you! All in all, your system will benefit enormously from the
employment of these frequent, small water changes. Give them a try, and
watch your system thrive as never before!

amen!
So far three people in this newsgroup do little or no water changes at all,
you, blackhole..., and myself.
It is true what you say, it is just lack of knowledge.
My system is similar to blackhole's except that I don't add any supplements
but I will start using them after seeing his tank.
I use Rowaphos for the PO4 and my circulation system is producing a lot of
debris with lots of PO4.
As soon as I change the lighting system, T5, I will post some pictures here.
See, the three of us have some level of knowledge on science. This people
rely on LFS for their decisions, feel sorry for them, lol
iy
"bo0ger1" .@. wrote in message
m...

Might be better to stand the question on it's head and ask those who do
water changes "what do you think they achieve". I don't need to remove
NO3 (It varies between 0 & 5ppm) or PO4 or anything else I can think of
right now. If adding trace elements is your reason, then you're
assuming that the salt mix you buy has the correct trace elements in it
(Some don't event get the Ca & alk. right).

I have been arguing with these nuckleheads for about 2-weeks regarding
unnecessary water changes. I have received 3-reasons that they do them.

1) In order to add trace elements/remove nitrate.
2) It's enjoyable
3) Because coral release toxic chemicals into the water ??

I think the real reason they do it is for a lack of understanding at the
chemical/biological level. It is easier for them to do a water change
than to grasp what is going on in their tank at a biological level.


BTW: It's not laziness either, I also have 4 FW tanks & they get 20%
changed every 2 weeks. Anyone got any live rock that works in FW?

"Inabón Yunes" wrote in
:

amen!
So far three people in this newsgroup do little or no water changes at
all, you, blackhole..., and myself.
It is true what you say, it is just lack of knowledge.
My system is similar to blackhole's except that I don't add any
supplements but I will start using them after seeing his tank.
I use Rowaphos for the PO4 and my circulation system is producing a
lot of debris with lots of PO4.
As soon as I change the lighting system, T5, I will post some pictures
here.

See, the three of us have some level of knowledge on science.

See, I'm curious. Why is it that you feel your "knowledge on science"
somehow trumps others' scientific skepticism? When you get past the ad
hominem attacks, assertions of superior authority, flame wars, nym-shifting
etc, what you have are basically attempts to have booger 1) show evidence
of the success of his assertions, and 2) specify further the conditions
under which he obtained his claimed success.
It seems to me like you're suggesting that, since booger's experiences
correlate with your own, that should somehow validate his unevidenced
assertions scientifically for the rest of us. If so, I think you need to
brush up on your science fundamentals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

Even with those two above points adequately addressed by booger, and
accepted as valid, your "knowledge on science" should also allow you to
discern that this amounts to a grand total of one (1) data point in
opposition to the accepted practice of small regular water changes. In
booger's case, you cannot even apply that data point to the realm of reef
aquaria (he has a FOWLR tank, remember?).
*shrug* Sorry, Inabon, my "knowledge on science" tells me that is not
sufficient data to warrant a change in my habits. Add yours, and
blackhole's contributions to the pile, and that is three (3) data points.
That's a start, and maybe even motivation to try some experiments myself
(I'd be pleased to try to mimic a setup like blackhole's) but its hardly
substantive enough to give your collective opinions any level of authority
in the matter.

This people rely on LFS for their decisions, feel sorry for them, lol

Mmm. Neither Delbeek, Tullock, Sprung, Fenner, nor Fellman work at my LFS.

Regards,
DaveZ
Atom Weaver

At least IY didn't reference a Grand Water Change Conspiracy by the Man,
to Keep a Brother's Reef Tank Down.

wrote:

Might be better to stand the question on it's head and ask those who do
water changes "what do you think they achieve". I don't need to remove
NO3 (It varies between 0 & 5ppm) or PO4 or anything else I can think of
right now.

I need to remove NO3.

George Patterson
Those who do not study History are doomed to repeat it. Those who DO
study History are doomed to watch every one else repeat it.

NO3 is a compound usable by plants.
They will do the job for you, all you have to do is harvest them. That will
also take care of the PO4 and other nutrients.
iy
"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:r%t8h.4864$J5.1127@trnddc04...
wrote:

Might be better to stand the question on it's head and ask those who do
water changes "what do you think they achieve". I don't need to remove
NO3 (It varies between 0 & 5ppm) or PO4 or anything else I can think of
right now.

I need to remove NO3.

George Patterson
Those who do not study History are doomed to repeat it. Those who DO
study History are doomed to watch every one else repeat it.

I need to remove NO3.

This is done by bacteria. Look into denitrification (anaerobic bacteria).


George Patterson
Those who do not study History are doomed to repeat it. Those who DO
study History are doomed to watch every one else repeat it.

atomweaver wrote:
In that respect, blackhole555 has contributed an order of
magnitude more content with one post, than you have in the last three weeks
at r.a.m.reefs.

It's been going one much longer than that - he used to post under the handle
"stoutman." In essence, he used to be fat, now he's just snotty.

As "stoutman", he stated he has a fish-only tank but couldn't understand why a
reef tank would be any different as regards water changes.

George Patterson
Those who do not study History are doomed to repeat it. Those who DO
study History are doomed to watch every one else repeat it.