UV Sterilizer questions

The only time I found one useful was when I had an ich outbreak. I used it for about 2 months and then was done with it. From listening to one of the speakers at springfest, it sounds like it is nearly impossible to keep the glass clean enough for it to actually kill what you want it to kill........the life on the bulbs is also not long. Just seems like a waste of energy to run them unless you are maintaining it on a daily basis and not sure it is a good idea to kill many good things to kill a few bad things.

 

i run a UV on all my tanks and love it i change my water every 3 days and take out the bulb and wipe it down and clean the bulb the bulbs are really cheap if you order them off line love that i don't have to worry my fish got ick i have mine hooked in my main pump along with my carbon and phosban reactor makes my water clear but so does the carbon

 

I had a great link bookmarked on my main pc but my motherboard died. It was an actual controlled study of UV effects on parasites in marine aquaria. Essentially, the findings were that UV sterilizers do virtually nothing in terms of parasite control when run in a closed loop (for purposes of this study, closed loop was defined as an inlet and outlet being a part of the same tank). They do, however, eradicate parasites between two tanks that are plumbed together. They are also useful for bacterial and algal (water column) blooms. This latter statement was not part of the study, however.
Not trying to step on any toes, but in this hobby there is a lot of perceived correlation and causation. I have seen many people state that their crpyt breakout was lessened by UV and all the while these same people were taking many other steps to try to control the parasite. In cases like this it is impossible to say which method, if any, actual helped destroy, slow, etc. the parasite.
I wouldn't imagine you would be hurting many pods at all, unless your are plumbing it into your fuge. Pods aren't in the water column all that often. If you have a healthy population growing in the tank, I wouldn't expect much of a decline as a result of the sterilizers (in much the same way that it doesn't help crypt eradication). This is assuming that you are NOT planning to plumb it into your return.

 

Try and find actual scientific data. There is a lot of anecdotal advice all over the web but not a lot of it is based on actual studies. If you get a chance to watch Sanjay Joshi's lecture on LED's, I'd do it. I will sum it up here in a sentence or two. 
Essentially, they work, but there is a much smaller spread of light. That is to say an average LED array will light a smaller footprint than a 250w metal halide (which is often the lightbulb of choice to compare them to). In terms of subjective statements, he had to say that he PREFERS the LOOK of the halides over the LEDs, but with all sorts of color combinations being added to these arrays that may change in the very near future.
Fact is, when replacing all light with LED, even hobbyists are performing a bit of a controlled experiment (ok, not really since there is only one group). There is only one form of light being used and there are LIKELY no other factors being changed between the before and after setup. In other words, if you continue to see growth, coloration, etc. it is likely very safe to say that your lighting is good.

 

I think it was Anthony Calfo's talk at springfest, it may be available to view here somewhere, not sure, but I'm pretty sure he was the one talking about it.

 

Actually the effectiveness of UV sterilizers (and LED's) have been studied much more quantitatively and the reports are less anecdotal than you might expect. This is especially true of UV sterilizers because they employed in a number of industrial and aquacultural applications. UV sterilizers will neutralize trophonts during a parasitic outbreak like ich, but aren't maximally effective because they cannot eradicate cysts that are deposited in the sand bed, nor the adult parasite that lives on the fish. Likewise UV sterilizers reduce and eliminate many species of bacterioplankton that we now consider beneficial in reef communities as a source of food for corals and is integral to probiotic/bacterial driven systems like zeolite and biopellet systems. UV sterilizers do improve water clarity and by reducing planktonic populations and producing a small amount of ozone that improves ORP slightly. They are best utilized to eliminate transfer of waterborn pathogens between tanks that share common filter systems (commercial or industrial set ups), and in fish only tanks where planktonic communities aren't of much concern as a food source.

 

To clarify, I was referring to the hundreds of posts/threads on the net that go along the lines of "I use UV to help control crypt because I see it working" as being the anecdotal evidence. I'll add some links to the studies I speak of once I get my new pc built and operational. In short, I would think the vast majority of people running UV are running it improperly. That is to say, it isn't doing much of anything in terms of parasite control.

 

Yeah, I get ya. I just wanted to make sure that everbody was clear that there are studies on these technologies. I see that you mentioned that as well. That's true, there are a lot of people who operate UV sterilizers incorrectly. Really in order to be maximally effective aerobic cultures of water passing through them should be studied at regular intervals after set up, and throughout the life of the bulb (which may range from 6-10 months). The quartz sleeve must be cleaned regularly to allow proper light transmission, a proper flow rate must be employed to maximize contact time, and thus an appropriately sized UV sterilizer should be chosen based mostly on the desired flow rate.

 

Just as "something to add for the sake of adding it" I personally wouldn't go with uv for any tank. Is there something you are worried about or are trying to control?

 

I second that notion I would not use a UV sterlizer on a reef display.

According to James Fatheree and a number of studies he cite in his book "Giant Clams in the Sea and in the Aquarium" clams (or rather their zooxanthellae) can synthesize 300% of their nutritional needs via photosynthesis, especially once their past a few centimeters. Furthermore, the installation of a UV sterilizer between your DT and a refugium will probably wipe out planktonic larvae from various types of meiofauna that you intend to maintain for a mandarin. Another significant threat to communities of amphipods and copepods that you will like to have in order to sustain a mandarin is the casual grazing of other fish in the DT that compete for these little morsels.

One consideration to combat this threat is to consider a deep or semi deep sandbed consisting of sediments of various sizes, although this will have implications for the deposit of detritus and nutrient loading long term, even the growth of cyano or dinoflagellates. I would refer to Calfo's work as well, or possibly John Tullock or even Jean Jaubert, on establishing a healthy sand bed community to prevent problems if you go this route. I had a deep sandbed and a plenum in a tank once 4 or 5 years ago and it was an excellent tank! When I removed it though I could see how disgusting it was!!! I guess none of my corals minded it as long as all the crap remained deposited for the most part!

 

It looks like im the only one with a good input on this, granted Im not taking anything away from what everybody else has said. I have a 75G Reef and I was having ich outbreaks and losing fish for...lets just say way too long. I threw a UV sterilizer in my sump, and I havnt had a problem since. I dont have a clam but I have a mandarin, and my sump is still loadddeeeeddd with copepods, ive even seen a bunch of them in the overflow in the display tank within some hair algae thats accumilated in there. Mandarins fat and happy, copepods everywhere, no more ich or dead fish loss. Im a happy UV customer. But thats just me!

 

Yeah I think it's possible to destroy cryptocaryon trophonts without killing all the copepod larvae. Plus the colony in your sump shouldn't be affected by a UV sterilizer. In reality it's probably a numbers game, some are going to survive the barrage of UV light. And on the other hand it could have been totally spurious, yeah although the outbreaks seemed to end with the introduction of UV, it may have by chance corresponded to a number of immunological responses that suppressed and/or alleviated the situation on it's own. That's the thing about aquaria, these aren't controlled conditions.