SG at 1.019 - 1.020

[reefobsessed]

Years ago I was told by my lfs that I should keep my SG at 1.019. I keep it between 1.019 & 1.020 on a coalife deep six meter. My live stock seems to be very health and growing like weeds. My fish are healthy and seem very happy. Should I slowly raise this or leave it alone?? I drip every new addition.

[jackdp]

1.020 isn't insanely low. Do you only keep fish or are there corals? Many folks keep their reef tanks at 1.025 or so. NSW is around 1.026, if memory serves me the low SG thing used to be recommended to prevent parasitic and bacterial infections but isn't really practiced so much anymore. I would slowly raise it to 1.023-1.025 the fish may be a little stressed by 1.019. But keep in mind that the deep six hydrometers are not very accurate and can give false readings. You may want to double check your measurements against a good floating hydrometer or even better a refractometer.

[RodneyCK]

There was a scientific study I just read that found keeping fish in lower SG as you suggested was better for fish and corals in the long run. Fish survived longer and were not as susceptible to as many diseases.

This prompted me to do a search on this forum to see what everyone here recommended. Most threads I found suggested SG at much higher levels. If I find the article, I will post it here.

RodneyCK

[reefobsessed]

Thanks Rodney.. Id really appreciate any info you can dig up on this. I know I keep see 1.023 from everyone else on this site. BTY sorry about the 3 posts. I hear computers have come along way since 1980. Perhaps I should invest....

[fishfreek]

Duplicate. Plese only post once per question.

http://www.aquariumadvice.com/viewtopic.php?t=12576

[dralarms]

But keep in mind that the deep six hydrometers are not very accurate and can give false readings

Ok. Why are they now accurate? I have a brand new Coralife deep six, are you telling me I screwed up again?

[Biggen]

Ok. Why are they now accurate? I have a brand new Coralife deep six, are you telling me I screwed up again?

Well, they aren't THAT inaccurate. My deep six was .001 SG's off from my refractometer.

Refractometers are better, but the deep six *should* be fine.

[jackdp]

I've heard that some are dead on, some read low by as much as .005 pts and some can read high by as much. I had been using a glass floating hydrometer and replaced it with a deep six and the 2 readings were off by about .003 pts. Both types of instruments are calibrated to be used at a certain temperature. If you don't take this into account and use a correction factor then your measurement will also be off. The deep six style is supposed to be temp. corrected if you let it equilibrate for 30 seconds or so.

[dralarms]

Thanks, had me worried, after putting together 2 fw tanks and convincing my wife that we "needed" a sw setup. I sure don't want to tell her we need to spend more money on it. lol. I've been joking about wanting to get a 125 sw and she looked like she would shoot me.

[MT79]

That is ALOT of fish for a 46 Gal. tank!!

[gooyferret]

46 gal bow front sw, penguin 330, Skilter 250, 4 Blue Damsels, 4 Yellow Tail Damsels, 2 4-stripe damsels, 2 Bluefin Damsles, 4 Percula Clowns, 4 Condy Anemones.

Thats putting a hugh load on that tank in my opinion, hope you have good biological filtration. As for the SG tests i would personally feel that a digital would be the most accurate and expensive so the deep six works for me!

[gooyferret]

46 gal bow front sw, penguin 330, Skilter 250, 4 Blue Damsels, 4 Yellow Tail Damsels, 2 4-stripe damsels, 2 Bluefin Damsles, 4 Percula Clowns, 4 Condy Anemones.

Thats putting a hugh load on that tank in my opinion, hope you have good biological filtration. As for the SG tests i would personally feel that a digital would be the most accurate and expensive so the deep six works for me!