# UV Sterilizer Debate (if any)



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

So let's hear it - does anyone have an opinion re: UV sterilisers and planted tanks? I am trying to decide whether or not to purchase one for my discus tank. Is it a luxury you should get as "insurance" or is it just an unnecessary purchase? I'm nervous about discus - I'm not really considering one for the goldy tank, unless it is recommended.

Also, if you have one, how do you install it with an Eheim? Just between the output and the spray bar somewhere? Any particular bulbs that are recommended or does that depend on tank size? The tank is 37 gallons.


----------



## AaronT (Apr 26, 2004)

In the end, it's a luxury. I used one on my 75 gallon for a long time in a planted tank and it didn't seem to mess with nutrients like some people say it can. The water was always quite clear with it on. I had mine on an Eheim and it was connected between the filter and the spraybar as per the instructions. A 9 watt model is plenty for that size tank if you do decide to opt for the luxury.


----------



## erik Loza (Feb 6, 2006)

If I had a planktonic algae algae issue, there are other things I would do to resolve that problem that didn't involve spending money.... like changing the water more often. Perhaps some people benefit from them, though.


----------



## diablocanine (Jul 25, 2004)

IMO, it was a wise investment. I would not hard plumb it, make it portable so it can be used elsewhere if needed, maybe a friend will need to borrow it. No need to run one 24/7 but some folks do. I only run mine for 24 hours after a water change and when I get green water....DC


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

By portable, do you mean a hang-on?


----------



## diablocanine (Jul 25, 2004)

Telperion said:


> By portable, do you mean a hang-on?


Like this....DC

http://www.fellowshipofthefish.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=119


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

Wow, that is intense - ! I doubt I am that mechanically inclined so I will most likely go with a hang on unit like this:

http://www.drsfostersmith.com/Product/Prod_Display.cfm?pcatid=7999&N=2004+113778

(9 watt)

It seems like it shouldn't be too hard to dismantle and move it between my tanks since I have the syphon valves on the canister filters to stop the flow.


----------



## John N. (Dec 11, 2005)

The Coralife Turbo Twist would require you to move the whole canister filter or powerhead setup, since it's set inline with the tubing.

This might be a better option...A Hang On Portable UV. I couldn't find the exact UV sterilizer unit, but found only the bulbs for purchase. However, I'm sure it's out there somewhere either from petsmart or some other place.

-John N.


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

*Inline vs. hang-on*



John N. said:


> The Coralife Turbo Twist would require you to move the whole canister filter or powerhead setup, since it's set inline with the tubing.
> 
> This might be a better option...A Hang On
> 
> -John N.


Hmmm, the description says that the Turbo Twist unit can be used as a hang-on (9 watt). Are you saying that I am better off getting one that is purely a hang-on unit?

Do you get better results from inline installation, since the water would seem to be exposed to the light for a longer more concentrated period of time?


----------



## John N. (Dec 11, 2005)

As far as I know the Coralife doesn't have a pumping device of it's own, and requires an additional powerhead or canister filter to pump the water through it. "Simply connect to a water pump, powerhead, or on the return line of a canister filter."

The difference is; with the Hang On unit that I linked it has a powerhead pump already attached, and will work like a regular HOB filter.

With both products, you'll probably get similar results. You're right that the extra twists in the coralife will enhance water time contact with the UV light. But seeing that these units will be on for at least a day, the 100% of the tank water will probably pump through and be exposed. The HOB UV night take a little longer but it will do the job, and has the benefits of the "portability" that was discussed earlier.

BTW I'm not persuading you to get one over the other just offering options and information. I personally would get the Coralife if I were using it and never moving it. I would get the HOB if I wanted to use it on different tanks because of the easier portability.

*As for the Debate:* To use UV or Not, it's almost like the pH controllers. You can have them but they aren't necessary to run a sucessful tank. If I had the money to burn, I would get a UV just to give it the extra shine before a guest party. Otherwise, many folks are successful without one.

-John N.


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

John N. said:


> As far as I know the Coralife doesn't have a pumping device of it's own, and requires an additional powerhead or canister filter to pump the water through it. "Simply connect to a water pump, powerhead, or on the return line of a canister filter."
> 
> The difference is; with the Hang On unit that I linked it has a powerhead pump already attached, and will work like a regular HOB filter.
> 
> ...


Yes the write-up on the coralife does tell you to attach it to a powerhead ha ha I guess THEN you can hang it on.

It is odd that the one on the Petsmart site seems to have no brand which makes it difficult to search for! I am going to check out some other sites as well and see if I can track it down. The description seems to fit what I'm looking for perfectly.


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

what do you know, I found it on ebay http://cgi.ebay.com/9-watt-UV-Steri...TO-THE-US_W0QQitemZ330017032573QQcmdZViewItem

but now I am thinking it might be better to get the 24 watt in case I want to use it on my 55 gal. also, so still looking


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

wow i feel dumb. hey guys, check out this link -- ? lol!

http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/aquatic-store/7703-newest-product-we-are-offering.html


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

I use the 9watt coralife turbo on my 72g. If you have a canister filter you simply cut the return tubing where you want the UV and either put it under your cabinet or hang it on the tank with the included bracket. 

As I've mentioned in other threads, I run mine 24/7 and it's fanastic. It gives you more breathing room if things get stirred up and your afraid of getting GW. If your keeping discus in a planted tank it's a win, win IMO to have a UV, because it will create a less stressful environment by destroying many pathogens in the water that could lead to illnesses. There is no downside that I have been able to derive other than the initial price of about $70.


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

So in your opinion, is the inline UV steriliser better than a hang-on?


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

The effectiveness and what the UV destroys is based on the flow rate. As long as you can adjust that I don't think it matters whether it's hang on or inline. I think it's easier to put it inline and just forget about it. I personally don't like things hanging on my tank, so mine is in the cabinet where you don't see it. 

The coralife has a hang-on bracket which you could use, but it would still be considered in-line if it runs off the return of the canister. It's just aestitics.
You could attach it to a separate powerhead and hang it on the tank, but then you have tubes and such hanging on the back.


----------



## diablocanine (Jul 25, 2004)

Telperion said:


> So in your opinion, is the inline UV steriliser better than a hang-on?


An inline is not better than a portable or a hang on unless you only have 1 tank, I have 12 and use it as needed, no need to run 24/7. Cannister filters can exceed the manufacturers recommended flow rate for contact time. A 9 watt turbo twist is good for up to 125 gallons and has a recommended flow rate of 50-200gph, if your cannister filter pumps faster than that you are not using the product as designed and will not benefit from its use. I am using a powerhead with a rating of 100gph. A uv light needs contact time to do its job, the slower the flow the better it works. I had mine mounted in a sump and decided to make it portable because I have numerous tanks and want to move it around.........DC

Read this:

http://www.premiumaquatics.com/Merc...uct_Code=ESU-AF77070&Category_Code=Turbotwist


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

diablocanine said:


> An inline is not better than a portable or a hang on unless you only have 1 tank, I have 12 and use it as needed, no need to run 24/7. Cannister filters can exceed the manufacturers recommended flow rate for contact time. A 9 watt turbo twist is good for up to 125 gallons and has a recommended flow rate of 50-200gph, if your cannister filter pumps faster than that you are not using the product as designed and will not benefit from its use. I am using a powerhead with a rating of 100gph. A uv light needs contact time to do its job, the slower the flow the better it works. I had mine mounted in a sump and decided to make it portable because I have numerous tanks and want to move it around.........DC
> 
> Read this:
> 
> http://www.premiumaquatics.com/Merc...uct_Code=ESU-AF77070&Category_Code=Turbotwist


I think I should be okay - my canister filter is an Eheim 2213 rated at max pump rate of 116 gph. My 2215 on my 55 gal. is rated a max. pump rate of 164. The UV sterilizer will mainly run on the smaller tank with the 2213 so it looks like it would be fine. Thanks for pointing that out!


----------



## Laith (Sep 4, 2004)

Telperion said:


> So let's hear it - does anyone have an opinion re: UV sterilisers and planted tanks? I am trying to decide whether or not to purchase one for my discus tank. ...


Just to refer back to the original question and ask one of my own: are you seeing a specific problem with your tank that you think you need a UV?

If not, then you don't need one.


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

Laith said:


> Just to refer back to the original question and ask one of my own: are you seeing a specific problem with your tank that you think you need a UV?
> 
> If not, then you don't need one.


well not yet I don't see a particular problem, except for some tannins in the water that make it have a brownish tinge, because I haven't put the fish in yet. But I am concerned about water quality when I do. The concern about water quality stems from the fact that the substrate is natural - soil and onyx sand and the tank will house discus that I would like to grow out.

The UV sterilizer would just help to keep the water a bit cleaner which would help me to grow out my discus better. at least that is my hope. 

On another forum someone posited that a UV sterilizer can alter the effectiveness of your ferts, so I wondered what people here thought about UV sterilizers with planted tanks.


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

If your going to invest in expensive fish like discus, the one time cost plus replacement bulb once a year is well with it. There is simply no downside to a UV that we know of. If you look at most saltwater setups they almost always have a UV to help maintain all their expensive, sensitive fish more so then for algae control.

If you run it part time to simply clean up GW, than your only getting half the benefit of the UV.


----------



## diablocanine (Jul 25, 2004)

houseofcards said:


> If your going to invest in expensive fish like discus, the one time cost plus replacement bulb once a year is well with it. There is simply no downside to a UV that we know of. If you look at most saltwater setups they almost always have a UV to help maintain all their expensive, sensitive fish more so then for algae control.
> 
> If you run it part time to simply clean up GW, than your only getting half the benefit of the UV.


IMO, a diatom filter is a better choice for a Discus tank if you have to pick one. Discus need not be expensive, but do demand pristine water. I do not run my uv on my discus tanks for green water, I run them for 24 hours after a water change with a diatom filter as prevention. I disagree with your statement that a uv not run 24/7 is only giving half the benefit, I will need that proven to me, IME that is not true.......DC


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

diablocanine said:


> IMO, a diatom filter is a better choice for a Discus tank if you have to pick one. Discus need not be expensive, but do demand pristine water. I do not run my uv on my discus tanks for green water, I run them for 24 hours after a water change with a diatom filter as prevention. I disagree with your statement that a uv not run 24/7 is only giving half the benefit, I will need that proven to me, IME that is not true.......DC


We'll expensive is a subjective statement, but let's just say Discus are alot more than the tetras that most APC people put in their tanks.

The reason I say half the benefit if not running 24/7 is that your not killing off pathogens that could enter the water when you add new fish or plants.
Is that not correct?


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

diablocanine said:


> IMO, a diatom filter is a better choice for a Discus tank if you have to pick one. Discus need not be expensive, but do demand pristine water. I do not run my uv on my discus tanks for green water, I run them for 24 hours after a water change with a diatom filter as prevention. I disagree with your statement that a uv not run 24/7 is only giving half the benefit, I will need that proven to me, IME that is not true.......DC


So then you run a regular filter (like an Eheim) in addition to a diatom filter and also a UV at the same time (after a water change)? What is the advantage of a diatom filter if you are running a canister filter with UV? Is it just an additional mechanical filtration process? Would it be overkill to run all 3 at once (leaving out the issue of how long to run the UV since that still seems to be debatable)? And if you do run all 3 at once, do you still do 50% water changes every day for the discus? Or fewer water changes?


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

Telperion said:


> So then you run a regular filter (like an Eheim) in addition to a diatom filter and also a UV at the same time (after a water change)? What is the advantage of a diatom filter if you are running a canister filter with UV? Is it just an additional mechanical filtration process? Would it be overkill to run all 3 at once (leaving out the issue of how long to run the UV since that still seems to be debatable)? And if you do run all 3 at once, do you still do 50% water changes every day for the discus? Or fewer water changes?


You don't need alll three. I have an Eheim as well (Ecco 2235) and I run my UV (Coralife 9w) between the output and the spraybar down in my cabinet. You don't see it, don't have to worry about it and it keeps the water sparkling clear along with destroying pathogens and warding off any chance of Green Water. Some folks use diatom filters after an outbreak of GW and then clean it up with the Diatom filter, but IMO it's much easier just to setup the UV inline with the Eheim and it's preventive as opposed to reactive.


----------



## mazakman (May 10, 2006)

Here's a good article about sterilizers. Depending on the flow thur it will depend on what it will remove
http://www.drsfostersmith.com/pic/article.cfm?acatid=423&aid=440


----------



## snowy (Jun 6, 2006)

fwiw, some people do have concerns that fish raised with UV sterilization are far more likely to succumb to diseases when moved to non-UV tanks, as they do not develop a natural immunity to the common pathogens that are floating around in most tanks.

Whether or not that is relevant to your situation with the discus is up to you. However as your tank is semi-natural, in that you have used soil in the substrate, then I personally would not use UV on it as I suspect there may be plenty of good things floating around that would also be killed.

Generally I would use UV only on large, multi-tank systems such as in a shop or quarantine facility, or as a means to combat algal blooms in a pond.


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

snowy said:


> fwiw, some people do have concerns that fish raised with UV sterilization are far more likely to succumb to diseases when moved to non-UV tanks, as they do not develop a natural immunity to the common pathogens that are floating around in most tanks.
> 
> Whether or not that is relevant to your situation with the discus is up to you. However as your tank is semi-natural, in that you have used soil in the substrate, then I personally would not use UV on it as I suspect there may be plenty of good things floating around that would also be killed.
> 
> Generally I would use UV only on large, multi-tank systems such as in a shop or quarantine facility, or as a means to combat algal blooms in a pond.


Could you explain what you mean by "semi-natural" and "good things floating around the water"


----------



## jude_uc (Feb 7, 2006)

In general, you won't be killing off beneficial bacteria (at least not in any appreciable number) because non-pathogenic bacteria tend to form biofilms on all surfaces. So, the grand majority of the bacteria you want to keep won't be going though the filter. All is good. I would venture that one of the nicest things about UV sterilizers is the ability to kill off any free floating algae spores prior to germination. I think that likely gives you a bit more flexibility with algae problems.

-Adam


----------



## snowy (Jun 6, 2006)

houseofcards said:


> Could you explain what you mean by "semi-natural" and "good things floating around the water"


Telperion mentioned that soil was being used in the tank, which I tend to regard as a 'natural' element of the tank, as opposed to a substrate of commercially availabe product..


Telperion said:


> ... the substrate is natural - soil and onyx sand and the tank will house discus that I would like to grow out.


However as for the "good things floating around the water", *jude_uc* has wisely pointed out that most of the beneficial bacteria is indeed concentrated in bio-films attached to hard surfaces, so my comment is somewhat off the mark.
However I do suspect that a tank with soil in the substrate may have a higher proportion of free floating bugs, like rotifers etc. that generally aren't regarded as being harmful to fish, than would be in a tank without soil. But as I say this is just a suspicion.

I guess if discus are planned for the tank then it would be wise to eliminate as many potential hazards as possible, but in that case it may be safer not to use any soil - although if it has been boiled then that would probably have killed most bugs and their eggs or spores beforehand.


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

Getting rid of the soil will not be easy. Basically that entails a total tear-down of the tank. Plus I think the advantages of having the soil may outweigh the disadvantages as the plants will not be solely dependent on the water column for sustenance. I would like to not add any ferts or as few as possible to the discus tank. 

I'll add this thread as a link in the natural planted tank subsection.


----------



## Mr Fishies (Apr 9, 2006)

Telperion said:


> It is odd that the one on the Petsmart site seems to have no brand which makes it difficult to search for! I am going to check out some other sites as well and see if I can track it down. The description seems to fit what I'm looking for perfectly.


Try: http://aa-aquarium.com/showroom4.php?id=157&level=1

I have one, it does the job, helps clear up occasional green water but the powerhead is as noisy as heck. Unlike the one in the picture, mine arrived with a double or "Y" output powerhead that I found reversed flow in one side when the filter became a bit clogged...it sucked one of my oto's in to the impeller resulting in a rather cruel and untimely end.  It needs to be cleaned daily I think to prevent this.

I can't really recommend anything that kills the fauna, if I had the $$ to do it over, I'd try something different. When the bulb dies, I won't be replacing it.


----------



## dwalstad (Apr 14, 2006)

Laith said:


> Just to refer back to the original question and ask one of my own: are you seeing a specific problem with your tank that you think you need a UV?


I used UV sterilizers after my Rainbowfish were infected with a virulent strain of tuberculosis. I ran 9 watts constantly in my 45, 50, and 55 gal tanks for about 8 months. It worked! My Rainbowfish stopped dying and new fish I've added since are uninfected (so says recent vet report).

UV sterililzers are costly and cumbersome to set up, but in this situation they were a life-saver.

The Gamma UV sterilizer is nice because it comes with the rigid hang-on-the back plumbing as part of the setup. You just have to put it together and attach it to a powerhead with a little flexible tubing.


----------



## DataGuru (Mar 11, 2005)

Diana runs a UV in her rainbowfish natural planted tank because the rainbows have TB. It should reduce the amount of viable TB in the water assuming it's sized properly.

Another thing I worry about to some extent is bacteria in tap water. I saw a study the other day where aeromonas (I think it was) which is a common fish pathogen was living the biofilm on water pipes. Also, check your city's annual water quality report. They are required to test for coliform bacteria routinely. Coliforms are an indicator that their disinfection process didn't cut it. They report how many sample tested positive for coliform bacteria. If coliform bacteria made it thru disinfection, I wonder what other potential pathogens make it thru as well.

If you do get one, I'd suggest portable as well if you have multiple tanks. Right now, there's something in my goldie tank irritating them that I haven't been able to kill totally with PP or formalin/malachite green. So I've been running the UV unit on that tank and am seeing less fin flicking. Prior to that I had it outside on the pond taking care of some green water.

the thing is, you need different contact times to kill different things. It's harder to kill bacteria and parasites than it is to kill pea soup algae. So you need to make sure the flow rate and wattage are sufficient to kill free floating bacteria. 

I don't know much about discus. If they're more succeptible to disease than other fish, it might be worth it. Otherwise it'd be nice to have on hand.


----------



## SankysYuck (Aug 29, 2006)

A UV sterilizer is a great investment. I use them on all of my tanks, including a 36 Watt Turbo Twist on my Saltwater 210 gallon set-up. Every Tank I have designed and maintaned for my clients I have bought a UV sterilizer, even a 700 gallon aquarium I designed for a couple in Newport I bought a UV for them. 

To be honest with you I wouldnt run any aquarium without one especially a tank holding Discus. 

I'm not sure if a few people had some questions on the Coralife Models but they do not come with a pump. Therefore they must be run with a powerhead/pump/inline/ or canister filter. If you encounter a problem where say the UV requires a flow rate 100-200 gph and you have a canister filter that does 400 gph the solution is very simple. What you could do is simply T off the return line to the canister filter and connect the UV to the added barb and add a ball valve to the T'd off part where the UV is connected to regulate the flow. Either that or you could T it off like I said and Add a ball valve to the return line of the UV right where water is processed back to the aquarium. If you do not have a canister filter or any kind of return line then you will need a pump that will pump water through the UV and returned back to the aquarium. Prefferably it is best to keep the intake and return lines as far as possible, this will regulate water much better, so the clean UV water isn't being sucked right back up and so forth.... Sorry if I may have confused anyone in this big long book I wrote... lol Hope this helped


----------



## alvchong (Oct 21, 2006)

i got a question of installation...
where should i install the UV to output or input from/to canister filter?
i heard either way can, any reason cannot?


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

alvchong said:


> i got a question of installation...
> where should i install the UV to output or input from/to canister filter?
> i heard either way can, any reason cannot?


Ideally it should be hooked up on the output side, this way cleaner water is going through the UV which will reduce your maintenance (cleaning tube, etc). I run one 24/7 and only changed the bulb once in a year and cleaned it twice.


----------



## Telperion (Jun 12, 2006)

Update: I did buy one and attached it to my Eheim filter. It works WONDERFULLY. Now I want one for my other 2 tanks. Decided to go with angelfish instead of discus and am sooo happy with the result. They are trying to breed on a sword leaf - so now I'm reading up on that.

Thanks guys! The water is sooo clear now - no algae problems and very happy fish. \\/


----------



## alvchong (Oct 21, 2006)

another Q:
i got a Jebo UV 9w - now installed at the output tube of 1200L/H canister filter...

how do i know my flow rate is correct? reading many thread saying that the UV does not work if flow rate not correct.... how to measure?


----------



## rowmath (Oct 29, 2006)

Ultra violet light kills microbials if they are exposed long enough. Make sure the flow rate is within the manufacture specs.


----------

