Quick Opinion Needed!

[jhemdal1]

All,

I need your opinion. If you read the following sentence in a book, what would you think?

"The term mini-reef actually refers to marine aquariums holding less than 8 gal (30 L)."


Thanks,

Jay Hemdal

 

[Len]

Hey Jay,

I think these terms are subjective, and someone will likely debate the definition of a "mini-reef." There's been heated (and rather silly) debates over terms like nano and mini and micro

 

[Anonymous]

Jay, I think the "mini" reef designation usually encompasses all of the others, below say 20 or 30 gallons.

Like Len said, it's subjective, but in my years doing this I've never heard that term limited to tanks below 8 gallons.

To me a Nano is anything below 20 gallons, while a 30 is still a mini.
Pico/micro anything under 5 gallons.

That's how I see it.
Since the term "nano" means one billionth, therefore VERY small, I'll always think calling a 30 gallon tank a nano-reef is silly, and I'll stick with Nano.reef.com's take that the line is 20 gallons.

In the end, as Len indicated - it doesn't matter.

Jim

 

[Anonymous]

Since the term "nano" means one billionth, therefore VERY small, I'll always think calling a 30 gallon tank a nano-reef is silly, and I'll stick with Nano.reef.com's take that the line is 20 gallons.

One billionth of what? If we're talking about the ocean, all our tanks are much smaller than "nano".

 

[Anonymous]

Since the term "nano" means one billionth, therefore VERY small, I'll always think calling a 30 gallon tank a nano-reef is silly, and I'll stick with Nano.reef.com's take that the line is 20 gallons.

One billionth of what? If we're talking about the ocean, all our tanks are much smaller than "nano".

Yeah I know. I'm not being literal. The kelp tank at the Monterey Bay Aquarium is a nano...you're preaching to the choir.

The point is that 20 years ago we were keeping old school, wet/dry 30 gallon reefs and undergravel filter FO tanks of the same size as a norm long before live rock became common and keeping a 7 or 10 gallon tank was practical. We never called them "nano's", but we did call the reefs of this size "mini"

"Nano" should mean something very small IMO...30 gallons isn't so small with regard to average aquarium size.

Again, everything I just said goes under the "who cares" umbrella...even though I care just a little.

 

[jrflanders]

Can a "newbie" toss in his two cents amongst you "heavy hitters" here? An 8 gal to me is smaller than a mini in my mind. In the reading I have done trying to learn about reefkeeping and all, nano's seem to include tanks up to almost 40g anymore. In my mind a mini is larger than a nano, while a micro is smaller than a nano. To me an 8 gal would be called a micro, but that's JMO. Anyway I really enjoy reading what you guys are talkling about and I feel I am learning a lot from you. Keep it up. Thanks.

 

[jhemdal1]

All,

I understand that this is a subjective measure, however the text that I quoted above is prefaced with the quote: "a nano-reef is one less than 35 gallons". How do THOSE two terms sit with folks? Here is the first one again:

"The term mini-reef actually refers to marine aquariums holding less than 8 gal (30 L)."

I will admit that I'm old skool - but in my usage, a mini-reef (or miniature reef in the old vernacular) is only a "mini" relative to the size of a real reef. So; a mini-reef is a thing, not a size. Recently, that has changed to just "reef tank", so there is now a size expectation with the term "mini-reef", that it is smaller than a "reef tank" - and I'd like to hear what folks think it is.

There is an important reason behind this. The editors of a book I wrote on mini-aquariums had one of their "experts" add that sentence, and to change my "nano-reef" definition from "around 15 gallons" to 35 gallons (yeah, I know there are many 20 to 25 gallon nanos out there now, but that is part marketing ploy by the manufacturers).

Thanks,

Jay
[/b]

 

[Anonymous]

It is not the size that matters, but how you stock it that counts.

 

[Anonymous]

Jay, have your editor Google the term nano-reef.

From Nanoreef.com

A small reef aquarium, generally 20 gallons or less. Also known as nanoreef or nano-reef.

From Wiki

A nano reef is a type of Marine aquarium, a reef tank of less than 20 gallons. The exact limit that distinguishes a nano reef from a regular reef is somewhat ill-defined (some claim that anything less than 40 gallons would qualify), but 20 gallons seems to be the generally accepted limit

I happen to agree, and we always called 10 or 7 gallon tank nano's as well.

"Mini" to me is a term that has fallen out, I don't use, and haven't for many years. Like you said we used to use it very loosely to describe reef tanks.

If it's 30 gallons or ever, it's a reef tank to me. Under 30, especially 20 and below it's in nano territory. Below 5, (and I mean BELOW 5, not 5 and under) it's a pico if need be, or micro, or whatever. However I stick with nano on anything from 20 down to 1 gallon. I think having too many subjective terms is silly...mini, nano, miro, pico...Pfff!!!

If you must use the term mini, then I would use it for tanks below 55 gallons, but bigger than 20 gallons.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Anonymous]

All,

I understand that this is a subjective measure, however the text that I quoted above is prefaced with the quote: "a nano-reef is one less than 35 gallons". How do THOSE two terms sit with folks?

I can accept that, semantically speaking of course. However, my own definition of a nano is a mini-reef that's under 15-20gals. I believe I've written the same when I was working with Bob at wetweb.

Here is the first one again:

"The term mini-reef actually refers to marine aquariums holding less than 8 gal (30 L)."

I will admit that I'm old skool - but in my usage, a mini-reef (or miniature reef in the old vernacular) is only a "mini" relative to the size of a real reef. So; a mini-reef is a thing, not a size.

Same here. A miniature reef is ANY system that can be held within the confines of an enclosed space. Even the one live coral display at LBAOP, in my opinion, is a "mini-reef". If it cannot duplicate the volumes seen in the oceans, then it is miniaturized.

Recently, that has changed to just "reef tank", so there is now a size expectation with the term "mini-reef", that it is smaller than a "reef tank" - and I'd like to hear what folks think it is.

A sign of the times, so to speak? I don't know about that, myself... I keep having to learn so many new terms, like logy, it's hard to keep up. :lol:

There is an important reason behind this. The editors of a book I wrote on mini-aquariums had one of their "experts" add that sentence, and to change my "nano-reef" definition from "around 15 gallons" to 35 gallons (yeah, I know there are many 20 to 25 gallon nanos out there now, but that is part marketing ploy by the manufacturers).

Thanks,

Jay

Ahh.. damn! I'd be getting my panties in a serious KNOT over that, don't be changing my definitions. When I was working with Bob, et al., on the NMA-RI book, I tried to be very careful not to change certain aspects of wording. My goal was the make that which may have been difficult for some to understand more understandable, to verify data (and what you're talking about is not a data set, it's a semantic issue that should be left to the AUTHOR(s) to determine, not an outside editor), and ensure grammar, spelling, and so on, all the basic stuff book editors should be worrying about (and, come to think about it, news editors as well, I see more and more news stories with horrid grammar and spelling/word usage mistakes).

It is my opinion that they should not change that aspect of your work.

 

[Anonymous]

Same here. A miniature reef is ANY system that can be held within the confines of an enclosed space. Even the one live coral display at LBAOP, in my opinion, is a "mini-reef". If it cannot duplicate the volumes seen in the oceans, then it is miniaturized.

I can roll with that.

 

[jhemdal1]

Thanks for all your input folks - I'll let you know how this pans out.

Jay

 

[Anonymous]

I sure would like to know, because what you've described sure "feels" like bad editing to me. The author should be able to make his own definitions for those terms that are not already well-defined otherwise without having to worry about someone else coming in and changing things around.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it.

 

[Anonymous]

All,

I understand that this is a subjective measure, however the text that I quoted above is prefaced with the quote: "a nano-reef is one less than 35 gallons". How do THOSE two terms sit with folks? Here is the first one again:

"The term mini-reef actually refers to marine aquariums holding less than 8 gal (30 L)."

I will admit that I'm old skool - but in my usage, a mini-reef (or miniature reef in the old vernacular) is only a "mini" relative to the size of a real reef. So; a mini-reef is a thing, not a size. Recently, that has changed to just "reef tank", so there is now a size expectation with the term "mini-reef", that it is smaller than a "reef tank" - and I'd like to hear what folks think it is.

There is an important reason behind this. The editors of a book I wrote on mini-aquariums had one of their "experts" add that sentence, and to change my "nano-reef" definition from "around 15 gallons" to 35 gallons (yeah, I know there are many 20 to 25 gallon nanos out there now, but that is part marketing ploy by the manufacturers).

Thanks,

Jay
[/b]

When I wrote the original nano reef FAQ waaaaaaaaaaaaaay back in 1997 I picked the definition as anything 20 gallons or less. I did so because at the time I recommended 50% water changes weekly as a means of coping with the then very limited selection of small, non-sump protein skimmers available commercially, and that once you got above 20 gallons or so a 50% weekly water change was a pain in the neck.

DC Potts, who wrote about nanos before me, felt that the proliferation of terms like nano, micro and pico and arguments over what size each consituted was even more ridiculous then I did. He once quipped that he planned to keep a femto-reef; two strands of cyanobacteria on a microscope slide.

 

[jhemdal1]

All,

After MUCH discussion with the publisher, it looks like they are going to relent and change the incorrect statement about mini-reefs being 8 gallons or less. We are going to compromise on the nano definition and go with the consensus of 20 gallons or less.
Ultimately, I'm going to add a line that these definitions are constantly changing, subjective at best and a much better way to describe a tank is not by one of these names, but by its attributes: "a 10 gallon marine reef tank" or a "2 gallon freshwater plant tank".


Jay

p.s. - my first "nano" article was a 1984 issue of SeaScope "A Miniature Ocean". I don't have a copy of that any more, and I don't recall what size I propsed back then.....

 

[Anonymous]

p.s. - my first "nano" article was a 1984 issue of SeaScope "A Miniature Ocean". I don't have a copy of that any more...

I know. I do have a copy of it, in storage somewhere

 

[Anonymous]

In fact, here you go. Now you have a copy of it again yourself:

http://www.instantocean.com/uploade...ceanKnowledge/SeaScope/Past/SS_Vol01_1984.pdf

 

[Nemo2007]

I never understood why the term micro represents tanks smaller than those descibed by the term nano. Especialy since micro is equivalent to 10(-6) and nano is equivalent to 10(-9). I can't make superscripts with the tools here. Anyway, that's my two cents. Otherwise, I agree with JimM and Seamaiden.

I read that article. I didn't see mention of a particular size tank in it. Perhaps I missed it.

 

[jhemdal1]

Ha! thanks for the article - that was about 25 years ago I guess. I thought I had talked about my 2 gallons windowsill aquarium in that one, I see that I didn't. George Smit would have just been getting started in the US, none of the European works had made it over here yet (at least in the midwest) - except Sanders ozone units. I didn't discuss lighting and filtration probably because there wasn't any choice in the matter - UG and HOB filter and a single tube flo bulb.

How about my blatant plug for Sea Garden algae nutrients? I also like the free Instant Ocean matchbooks in another issue that they were giving away as a premium--who would do that now days?


Jay

 

[Anonymous]

8) wow...I remember reading that article (and those flyers) in the wayback good ol days!
(...sigh...I feel old now)