Reef Central Online Community

Home Forum Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences View New Posts View Today's Posts

Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Search Reefkeeping ...an online magazine for marine aquarists Support our sponsors and mention Reef Central

Go Back   Reef Central Online Community Archives > General Interest Forums > The Reef Chemistry Forum

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #51  
Old 01/30/2006, 09:06 AM
Randy Holmes-Farley Randy Holmes-Farley is offline
Reef Chemist
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Arlington, Massachusetts
Posts: 52,068
With all of these type of threads revolving around p, I am wondering why there is never any mention of polyphosphate accumulating bacteria?

I'm not sure what's to say about them. I don't know that they've been shown to thrive in reef aquaria, and if they do, what does one do with that information?
__________________
Randy Holmes-Farley
  #52  
Old 01/30/2006, 09:47 AM
inwall75 inwall75 is offline
Mantisfreak
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 1,644
PAB's (or PAO's) tend to live in the anaerobic area of sandbeds and LR. In fact, they liberate phosphorus from the CaCO3 and are partially responsible for the LR spitting out P. There's nothing we can do about them beyond avoiding P imports as much as possible and exporting as much P as possible.
__________________
Curt

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
  #53  
Old 01/30/2006, 12:45 PM
finneganswake finneganswake is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,175
I keep seeing "I swear nothing but the algae died off during cooking. I have pods galore," in these threads. I've got a question about this--what are these pods eating for the 3+ months they are in the trashcan? By definition, you are doing everything possible to remove detritus from the rocks--how are the detrivores going to survive this? The other thing pods tend to eat is algae--again, you're eliminating this food source.

It seems to me that you're focusing solely on the bacteria that survives. Why not just purchase dead rock? It's much more affordable and the bacteria you mention will eventually colonize the rock. It makes absolutely no sense to me that someone would spend HUNDREDS of dollars on live rock and then purposely kill off a large amount of the life you're paying for.
  #54  
Old 01/30/2006, 12:48 PM
finneganswake finneganswake is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,175
I've got a feeling that if I go home and test the poo that my fish "sheds," I'll find a large amount of phosphate but still have undetectable levels of phosphate in my water column. Given the unhealthy obsession with phosphate from many people on RC, it stands to reason that I should now "cook my fish," no? Yum
  #55  
Old 01/30/2006, 01:14 PM
MiddletonMark MiddletonMark is offline
troublemaker
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 13,532
Quote:
Originally posted by finneganswake
I keep seeing "I swear nothing but the algae died off during cooking. I have pods galore," in these threads. I've got a question about this--what are these pods eating for the 3+ months they are in the trashcan?
First off, where do you get this 3+ months? That seems suprisingly long ... where is this advice coming from? Or, is it just a straw man, a little over-exaggerated to make the point about how `those people have it wrong'?


Most people cure their rock for a month or more ... without feeding the tank.
By the end, shouldn't all the pods have also starved after this, by your suggestion here?

I mean, after being scrubbed, powerwashed, then exposed to air ... then boxed dry, shipped across freezing/burning tarmacs, set in a warehouse for a day or two ... the pods have not the slightest problem with this, but will up + die if kept in with `cooking rock'?

No offense intended, but give me a break.

If pods + other life couldn't survive cooking, I doubt they'd survive the process which brings Pacific LR to our tank. Just my opinion - but I don't see powerwashing as being `pod friendly'.

If it was only about the life on the rock, I don't see why anyone would ever buy Pacific rock. Yet, here we have people arguing how cooking will kill creatures that live through powerwashing, exposure, weeks without food, ammonia levels, shipping ... but not in clean water, without food input?

That defies logic, as far as I see it. Those same pods would have starved after the powerwashing ...
__________________
read a lot, think for yourself
  #56  
Old 01/30/2006, 01:17 PM
finneganswake finneganswake is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally posted by MiddletonMark
First off, where do you get this 3+ months? That seems suprisingly long ... where is this advice coming from? Or, is it just a straw man, a little over-exaggerated to make the point about how `those people have it wrong'?
Do you even read the rock cooking threads? You cook until the rock stops shedding--many people say this takes them months. That's one of the selling points--just look at how long it took for all of it to get out.
  #57  
Old 01/30/2006, 01:20 PM
Hobster Hobster is offline
Dirty Reefer
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 2,401
My difficulties of the whole "cooking" procedure is what to do with the corals in the tank?. I asked this in the "orginal" thread.
I have many sps corals firmly attached to my live rock. If I were to remove the rock for "cooking" I would need to chisel off large prtions of coral. In the process of course large pieces will break off.
Now that I have hacked off the corals and put the rock in other containers, I am supposed to (per directions) just put the corals back in the main tank with no live rock filtration?? The fish will not be stresed out either?

After seeing these guys on Discovery HD last night, I'd rather get a few of these.

http://www.darwinfoundation.org/gala...ineiguana.html
  #58  
Old 01/30/2006, 01:41 PM
Ereefic Ereefic is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 5,747
What creatures are being killed off from cooking the rock, and what role would they play in my tank?
  #59  
Old 01/30/2006, 01:51 PM
Sindjin Sindjin is offline
Martin's Aquarium '86-'91
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tampa
Posts: 1,426
Rock Cooking Generally takes 6 weeks....unless your rock is still shedding.

In tank curing takes longer. For example... my rock is still shedding a bit and its going on 4 months.
But then again... I am sort of FORCING the crud out by blowing off/out the rock, too.
__________________
SeaTest Hydrometer?.... $8.00
Seachem Marine Test Kit? ...$24.00
The look on my wife's face as I'm staring out into our 35 acre lake and wondering how much salt I'll need?... Priceless.
  #60  
Old 01/30/2006, 01:56 PM
Ereefic Ereefic is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 5,747
If you cook your rock and still have poor flow (allowing crap to settle on/into the rocks), your going to have problems much sooner than having good flow so crap doesn't settle. Maybe this is the real issue?
  #61  
Old 01/30/2006, 02:47 PM
gman0526 gman0526 is offline
Dance 4 Life
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,012
Why do we care about a couple of pods, sponges and featherdusters dying in a dark curing bin, when this rock goes through hell and back before it's stablished in our tanks? Maybe apart from "fresh" Florida aquacultured rock, all the rock that comes from the Pacific is probably out of water for about 90% of the time, or do you really think that they ship the LR with the added weight of SW to keep EVERYTHING alive? Some of this rock is even shipped on boats which takes even longer. Why do you think they powerwash the rock? So all the decaying crap doesn't make it to your door. Then comes the cycle when we sometimes see levels of ammonia so high that is a miracle even a single copepod makes it through it. And you mean to tell me that you're worried about a couple of featherdusters and pods that, according to YOU, won't make it in a "cooking" bin? Dude, you need to find a better argument than this to even come close to debunking the benefits of dark curing.

There's a good amount of people that have had success with dark curing. When are you going to set up a dark curing batch to disprove what they have accomplished? Other than that you're assuming and guessing, and we know what they say about assuming .

Like I told you the other day, proper husbandry should be the number one option, when that alone is not enough then consider dark curing. If you're setting up a tank and want to at least start with less nutrients in your rock, then dark cure your rock. Why start with the bucket half full when you can start with it on empty? You feel this won't help you? DON'T DO IT... by all means don't, but don't tell me I'm wrong because I want to do it and think somebody else can benefit from it. Find a better argument, we don't care what you "think", give me evidence or proof.

Now go and buy a recharge kit for your sandbed.... Oh wait, you don't need it, you didn't cook your rock. Peace
__________________
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." A.E.
  #62  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:03 PM
finneganswake finneganswake is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally posted by gman0526
Now go and buy a recharge kit for your sandbed.... Oh wait, you don't need it, you didn't cook your rock. Peace
Why does it not surprise me that the people who buy this cooking idea hook, line, and sinker are the same people who can't log off of Reef Central long enough to read a book and find out the exploding sandbed nonsense is just an urban legend cooked up by a few loudmouths of the net? Maybe if I had 15,000 posts I could convince you that your fish were shedding phosphate--oh my god, they do!!! Time to cook them!

As to the "nothing is going to live anyway" line of thinking regarding rock curing--I've seen sps live through curing. Good luck having that happen with cooking. I'm going to ask this question once more, because NOBODY has yet answered it--if you don't want the stuff that comes with live rock, why the hell do you pay so much for it when you could just get dead rock and wait a few weeks for naturally occuring bacteria to colonize it?
  #63  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:17 PM
gman0526 gman0526 is offline
Dance 4 Life
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,012
But I'm not talking about an exploding sandbed here. I'm talking about the valuable pods that are needed for a SB to function. Or are you going to discredit the "experts" you so diligently and readily quote? I know for a fact a DSB can function if it has enough critters and is properly setup, it can probably last indefinetely if taken care off correctly, just not my problem anymore and not the discussion in here. BTW, give me the actual book that says that "rock cooking" is wrong. There isn't any, because nobody has really thought about it until it became popular as an OPTION.

As far as the buying LR vs. buying base rock I haven't seen anybody saying that it has to be LR to be "cooked". And if you want a reason I'll give you one:

***Since most of the life in the rock will survive the "cooking" process, it will be there anyways and we cause anything catasthropic.

Now give me your PROOF, again not your opinion, that it won't work, that everything dies and that we are so wrong.
__________________
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." A.E.
  #64  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:22 PM
finneganswake finneganswake is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally posted by gman0526

Now give me your PROOF, again not your opinion, that it won't work, that everything dies and that we are so wrong.
This is from an earlier post of mine on this page:

Quote:
I keep seeing "I swear nothing but the algae died off during cooking. I have pods galore," in these threads. I've got a question about this--what are these pods eating for the 3+ months they are in the trashcan? By definition, you are doing everything possible to remove detritus from the rocks--how are the detrivores going to survive this? The other thing pods tend to eat is algae--again, you're eliminating this food source.
Can you answer this for me, because I would love to get ahold of the miracle pods that don't need a food source?
  #65  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:25 PM
JerseyReef JerseyReef is offline
Undecided..Newbie or Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ
Posts: 1,262
Cool Long Time Listener, First Time Caller

I haven't made a legitimate post on this BB for a very long time and with good reason. I guess this looks like a good opportunity to give my thoughts on the topic.

If placing your rock in a dark tub for an extended period of time helps to address extreme nutrient problems with certain rock, there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, if done correctly it works very well. However, not addressing the issues that caused the nutrients to build up in the rock in the first place, you're back to square one in 4-8 months time.

I guess I've been "cooking" my rocks for years. I have a 40gal tub with about 150 pounds of rock sitting in a water solution of ~ 20.0 ppt with a single powerhead (for water movement). Why? It's the best place for them at the given moment in time. I've rotated rocks out of this tub when it suits me or when I'm looking for something different with my aquascape. Have I used it to correct a problem rock? Yes, but only as part of a treatment, not as a cure.

Does "cooking" rocks work to "cure" algae problems with certain rocks? In short no, it's part of an overall treatment option, not a "cure". "Cure" can be a subjective term if used improperly. Cure can be defined as the eradication and elimination of an affliction. Based on that definition, the answer, cooking rocks are not a cure.

Subjecting rock to dark environments is a "treatment" option, not a cure. Sure it will kill organic matter that requires photosynthesis to live. The inorganic and organic build up in the rock (if that was the underlying cause for the algae) must be removed. If placing the rock in the dark is to be considered part of the overall treatment method in working to cure the rock of the algae problem, (again if the rock is the source of the build up in the first place) only then does placing the rock in the dark is worthwhile and provide any benefit. Just placing a rock in the dark without addressing it's root cause problem is a waste of time. You'll be looking to place that rock back in the dark in short order.

Now that being said, if had received rock from an unknown source (which most of us receive). I'd throw it into my dark tub and rotate it in when needed.

BTW - I just took a look in the tub. I see some signs of life on my rocks (few pods and worm or two scattered about) even at 20.0 ppt. Sunlight isn't need for all life forms to survive. The rock is most likely still full of life when placed back into the system.

I'm not sure if I'll post on a regular basis or not. Maybe I'll leave that up to Boomer to decide
__________________
Regards,

Mike
  #66  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:27 PM
gman0526 gman0526 is offline
Dance 4 Life
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,012
What do most pods eat? Detritus... right? I mean they're detrivors. What is that crap that come out of the rock? Most people calls it detritus as far as I know.
__________________
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." A.E.
  #67  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:32 PM
finneganswake finneganswake is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,175
Re: Long Time Listener, First Time Caller

Quote:
Originally posted by JerseyReef
Subjecting rock to dark environments is a "treatment" option
I have no problem with this at all. My problem is that it's being pushed as THE option to newbies who don't know any better. I posted earlier that I have no problem with experienced reefers trying out alternative measures, but telling someone who has no husbandry skills that they need to go to such extremes is unfounded given that the problem is probably as simple as too much feeding or crappy skimmer maintainance. Just try browsing the general forums without seeing 10 or 15 cooking threads.
  #68  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:34 PM
finneganswake finneganswake is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally posted by gman0526
What do most pods eat? Detritus... right? I mean they're detrivors. What is that crap that come out of the rock? Most people calls it detritus as far as I know.
Nice try--you know that part of the cooking process is moving that detritus out of the trashcan. Now if the magic pods have found a way to get it from the toilet back to the trashcan...
  #69  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:36 PM
RichardS RichardS is offline
Premium Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 169
IMO, the "rock cooking" is oversold as I said but I don't think the argument that your going to lose lots of desirable life on the rock is valid. Obviously those who have done are telling you it has not happened so I don't understand why people who have never done it would insist that everything is going to die.

A couple of years ago I had a 140 leak. I stuck all of the rock in a covered trash can on my porch with just a pump for circulation while I took the opportunity to upgrade to a larger tank. It ended up taking almost 6 months before the rock went into the new setup. The coralline was slighty bleached but quickly rebounded. Pods & worms (peanut, spaghetti, etc.) were plentiful on/in the rock. Even some discosoma's that were on the rocks survived and quickly regained their color once they were given light.

On the other side of the argument I think it is also invalid to claim all this good life is going to survive and then turn around and say the "bad" algaes are going to die off. They don't die either. I will bet that someone can "cook" their rock for ANY length of time and then stick it in a tank, dose some lawn fertilizer, turn the lights on and then watch the hair/nuisance algae go crazy. That's because they didn't die either.
  #70  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:38 PM
gman0526 gman0526 is offline
Dance 4 Life
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,012
Have you heard about the magic bacteria? They're a distant relative of the nuclear copepods? where do the magic bacteria find food? Within the magic rock that happens to be loaded with magic nutrients, that happened to be the food of the magic algae b4 it was placed in the bin. You are really not going to argue that the bacteria die too, right?
__________________
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." A.E.
  #71  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:40 PM
Ereefic Ereefic is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 5,747
Quote:
Originally posted by Ereefic
What creatures are being killed off from cooking the rock, and what role would they play in my tank?
  #72  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:45 PM
finneganswake finneganswake is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 1,175
Quote:
Originally posted by gman0526
Have you heard about the magic bacteria? They're a distant relative of the nuclear copepods? where do the magic bacteria find food? Within the magic rock that happens to be loaded with magic nutrients, that happened to be the food of the magic algae b4 it was placed in the bin. You are really not going to argue that the bacteria die too, right?
No, my argument is that you can save hundreds of dollars by buying dead rock and waiting for this bacteria to colonize the rock instead of cooking live rock.
  #73  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:46 PM
gman0526 gman0526 is offline
Dance 4 Life
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Originally posted by Ereefic
I can see some specialized herbivore feeding organisms die, other than that... let's see how the assuming and guessing goes
__________________
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." A.E.
  #74  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:49 PM
Ereefic Ereefic is offline
Moved On
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 5,747
Quote:
Originally posted by finneganswake
Nice try--you know that part of the cooking process is moving that detritus out of the trashcan. Now if the magic pods have found a way to get it from the toilet back to the trashcan...
The whole time it's cooking, it's shedding detritus into the cooking bin, giving the pods food, keeping them alive. You dunk and swish the rock, empty and clean the cooking bin and put new SW and rock back in. Rock sheds more, feeding the pods, so on and so forth. How does this kill pods?
  #75  
Old 01/30/2006, 03:50 PM
gman0526 gman0526 is offline
Dance 4 Life
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 1,012
Quote:
Originally posted by finneganswake
No, my argument is that you can save hundreds of dollars by buying dead rock and waiting for this bacteria to colonize the rock instead of cooking live rock.
And my argument is that you can save 100's of dollars in guess work and new equipment to control an algae breakout. May I say PO4 binders/reactors/media, blah, blah, blah.? For each "cooking rock" reccomendation ,there's one out there to get a PO4 binder media/reactor.

This is fun
__________________
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." A.E.
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Use of this web site is subject to the terms and conditions described in the user agreement.
Reef Central™ Reef Central, LLC. Copyright ©1999-2009