Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomikk
That is a fallacy. The actual movemement that is created by tiny bubbles around the area of the skimmer is far less than the entire footprint of your tank. If you look at the top of your tank, every micro-ripple is exchanging gases, CO2 for O2. Each of those ripples is supersaturated across the footprint of the top of your tank. This also includes your sump. BUT, the footprint of a skimmer, and its immediate surrounding area is vastly smaller than the rest of the tank.
Why don't you do an experiment with a heavily stocked tank. Take the skimmer offline, and keep the wavemaker in full blast mode. Then do the reverse.... I bet you that some of the corals could be affected by the latter method and not the former.
|
Interesting argument. My tank has a refugium filled with Cheato on a reverse day-time light cycle, it also has a large overflow and a 50 gallon sump, it is a lay down 135. I have a return pump that also powers my skimmer running at 2200 gph and my powerhead does 2000 gph. In my tank I feel that having my powerhead turn down to 1000 gph at night does not significantly reduce the 02 in my tank due to surface gas exchange, but does give my fish a respite from the current and a chance to get some good R and R. So I use my nighttime feature on my profilux / tunze combo, but I have no data to support my argument.