what is all of this dsb crash talk i read?

[drtango]

I would love to learn more about SPS dominated aquariums that have been thriving with a DSB for 5 plus years. There are plenty of examples of long term success with soft corals and maybe LPS--more of a nutrient rich lagoonal environment. There's been a couple of TOTM recently, SPS dominated, that have pulled their sandbeds. All I'm convinced of is that a DSB did not work long term for me nor my SPS corals.

John

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Sorry, I don't have time to read 900 posts to find a bit of buried data. I've read many posts in that thread. But I didn't see any with such evidence.

Bomber, or anyone making such claims, can you provide a link to an exact post that shows data supporting the idea that a sand bed lead to an actual crash of an actual reef tank?

[hillrc91]

No Randy,

Bomber can't do it, and this blind, panic-stricken, hand-ringing hysterical rage against DSB's only serves to turn off aquarists to their benefits. He turns a blind eye to aquarists who have never had a problem with DSB's, and challenges the integrity of Bob Fenner and Anthony Calfo, simply because they sell the knowledge in a book.....

[MiddletonMark]

That's certainly not overstating the case

Have you read much of what Bomber has suggested to people? Or others who like the barebottom system? Or just the sandbed related discussion threads?

It may suprise you, but there are times when he suggests a sandbed to people. Perhaps you should research your `blind, panic-stricken, hand-wringing hysterical rage' a little first.

Either that, or get your head out of the blind, ignore-reality, what happens every time in nature can't happen in my tank, there can't be the slightest problem with my method sand.

Let's all play nice ... or at least research a bit first, please.

[Bass Master]

What's the big deal? If dsb isn't your cup of tea, use a coil denitrator. IMO you get better results with less hassle.

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

use a coil denitrator. IMO you get better results with less hassle.

Or macroalgae.

[wasp9166]

well, like i said , this is one thing im not going to worry bout, but this is getting good

[Bass Master]

Macro is out for me because I have nowhere to grow it. No light on sump, and I don't want it my tank. I just do a 5gal waterchange once a week. If I had a fuge, macro would be in it.

[Bass Master]

Should have added that a 5gal waterchange is a breeze on my 30 cube. If I had monster tank I would grow macro.

[Muttling]

I've got a 29 gallon that's pretty young (3 months since cycle) and still getting established, but doing quite well. (It's been 2 years since I had a serious tank going and feels good to be back in the saddle.)

I'm kicking around the idea of an "algae reactor." I am thinking aobut building a kalk reactor like vessel to put in my stand. I will pump water through it with a power head, put a light beside it, and stock it with cheatomorph.

[Bass Master]

Be cool if it works. But remember I have a 30 cube - not much room for anything else under my stand.

[DonJasper]

Originally posted by hillrc91
and this blind, panic-stricken, hand-ringing hysterical rage against DSB's

Originally posted by MiddletonMark
Perhaps you should research your `blind, panic-stricken, hand-wringing hysterical rage' a little first.

Originally posted by Xx_de_xX
My opinion is, if you've got a DSB, you're shouldn't be wondering IF it's going to crash, but when. .

All in one thread.

hillrc91:
I was hoping against hope that maybe you’d get some answers where I've failed. Which is interesting since the 'DSB crash due to phosphate build up' hypothesis should be so easily testable. But in a previous thread those Know More Than Me seemed to hint that the hypothesis is untestable. (maybe) !

I've come to use the term pseudoscience, rather than blind, panic-stricken, hand-ringing hysterical rage. Brings in that fatalistic Barnum and Bailey thing so I can observe the carnage from a distance.

[Bomber]

I'm not going to address the hysteria part, or even the I don't have time part.

Originally posted by hillrc91
Secondly, the information contained in that thread you mentioned is primarily focused on the open ocean, not the dynamics of closed aquarium environment, so it's not quite the apples to apples comparison that you seem to think it is.

Then why do the advocates/experts of DSB's claim that very thing? These systems were all supposed to be modeled after nature. Not only in the ability to handle waste (natural) but in their ability to produce food (natural).

Originally posted by Randy Holmes-Farley
Bomber, or anyone making such claims, can you provide a link to an exact post that shows data supporting the idea that a sand bed lead to an actual crash of an actual reef tank?

Randy, or anyone making such claims, can you provide a link to an exact post that shows data supporting the idea that a sand bed does not lead to an actual crash on an actual reef tank? Not hobby data, Yellowtang did his work as best he could and did not quote any hobby data, only scientific data.
Again, every single DSB pusher had stated over and over that they function "just like nature" are "natural". They have stated that they used scientific papers that they took from nature to not only model how these systems will work but to justify how natural DSBs are. Show the rest of us those scientific papers that these DSB systems were modeled to immitate.
Produce something from nature, a scientific paper, showing that marine sediments do not do these things, will last forever, anything - just find anything.

Now one more time, mainly because some of you are getting just plain silly about this. You have your opinion, I have mine. Do I think DSBs are the way to go for reef crest SPS type systems, nope. Do I think DSBs are the way for new people to go, yep. Do I think DSBs are the way for higher nutrient tolerant "softies", yep.

[Bomber]

Which is interesting since the 'DSB crash due to phosphate build up' hypothesis should be so easily testable. But in a previous thread discussion those Know More Than Me seemed to imply the hypothesis untestable!!

I doubt that they know more than you.

Do you know how many different forms phosphorous compounds take on in marine sediments? and where they might be found?

If you do, it's highly testable and has been done many times in the links Yellowtang provided in his thread.

[gregt]

I've had excellent success without a sandbed. In fact, better success than when I used sandbeds. I guess that makes me blind, panic-stricken, hand-ringingly hysterical.

I'm not anti-DSB. In fact, I still help people set them up if that's what they want. But I don't understand why all the name calling because someone has the "bad taste" to suggest that they aren't the holy grail they are made out to be.

DSB's, like any other method have their problems. Until people are willing to admit those problems there are going to be fierce arguments. Blaming the hobbyist for DSB failures is insulting and flat out wrong in most cases.

I still challenge all of you that are angry at those of us that are using the BB method to at least try it. I'm still amazed at how much less effort it is. My tank is awesome!!!!

[SeanT]

Sorry to clutter this thread.
But hey Bomber,
Check your PM box please.

[photobarry]

Originally posted by SeanT
Sorry to clutter this thread.
But hey Bomber,
Check your PM box please.

I think Bomber fell out of his chair.


The biological processes that occur in our tanks are part of a highly interconnected and complex system. Determining that one part of that entire system is 100% positively, without a doubt, to blame is scientifically impossible. However, when you see a number of older tanks with DSB's start to get uncontrolled algal growth on the sand and lower parts of the live rock, even though water tests indicate undetectable levels of phosphate and nitrate and there haven't been any changes in tank husbandry; that seems to be an indication that something is happening with the sand. At the very least, it is something worth investigating rather than ignoring.

[drtango]

I still challenge all of you that are angry at those of us that are using the BB method to at least try it. I'm still amazed at how much less effort it is. My tank is awesome!!!!


__________________
-Greg

I second the above--and Randy, I can't grow macroalgae anymore! When I took out my DSB, the basketball sized wad of chaeto in my refugium withered and died off--sadly, a forest of Halimeda went the same way. I still seem to be able to grow an occasional Valonia bubble, but we all know that stuff is an alien life form anyway.

I sure can't prove that moving to a low-nutrient environment killed my algae and allowed my SPS to thrive again, just another anecdote, but I remain sold. It's also very interesting to see my old live rock "clean itself", producing a surprising amount of detritus from 4 years of accumulation.

John

[gregt]

I can't grow macroalgae anymore!

I have this "problem" as well.

[Mr.Yuk]

GregT, in what way have you found that a DSB is more work than barebottom?

[Habib]

IMO any sandbed is a sink for nutrients.

If there are not much nutrients (detritus or other sort of nutrients) then they cannot get in the sandbed. But if there are they will.

For example here in Holland but also many other countries we clean out the sandbed (deep beds are very scarce on the Europe except for U.K.).

When we clean it out, say every month, a lot of detritus and strongly colored water is removed.

If a nutrient poor system is what one wants then one should seriously consider a system without major non-biological sinks for nutrients.

Of course one has to remove detritus from the bare bottom and the water column and also dissolved nutrients from the water column.


IMO a sandbed is a reservoir for nutrients and acts like a buffer for such nutrients.
A buffer with very complex properties.

If the sink has become saturated the water can start to get suddenly polluted and can cause serious problems.

Compare it to a tank which really needs a skimmer to keep it low in nutrients and the skimmer stops working but is not noticed. In a matter of days or weeks the system might be heavily polluted.
Assume that there are also pumps to aerate the tank so that aeration is not the problem.

[gregt]

Originally posted by Mr.Yuk
GregT, in what way have you found that a DSB is more work than barebottom?

More water changes, more "pruning" macroalgaes (both intentionally introduced and nuisance varieties), more cleaning the glass, more worrying about whether I need another "critter pak" or not, more screwing around trying to figure out how to get better flow without creating sandstorms, more worrying about a return digging a hole in the sand and releasing something horrible....

Not to mention the work installing the sand bed, waiting for the water to clear, moving the sandbed for an upgrade, eventually removing it when IMO it had failed and the algae growth was became so out of control I could not keep it in check.

[Mr.Yuk]

I have about 1" of sand.It's mostly cosmetic and to be able to look at cool worms. Ever heard of a problem blamed on that?

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Randy, or anyone making such claims, can you provide a link to an exact post that shows data supporting the idea that a sand bed does not lead to an actual crash on an actual reef tank?

I've never made the claim that they don't. Since I have never seen any data or experiments either way, I've never experessed an opinion (that I can recall ) except to state that I don't understand how it might happen.

Is the idea that nutrients alone cause a crash? Then why don't tanks with obviously elevated nutrients crash?

Maybe we have different definitions of crash?

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Which is interesting since the 'DSB crash due to phosphate build up' hypothesis should be so easily testable.

How would you test it? I don't see an easy way.