Bare Bottom with rdsb

[mxett]

I am in the process of removing my 2 inch sand bed because it is ugly and keeps migrating where I don't want it. Plus the fact that when I stir it accidently it is full of detritus after the tank is only 10 months!

I noticed reading through a few bb threads last night that people suggest greatly increasing flow and upgrading skimmers when going bb. I have had a rdsb next to my sump for about 3 months. Will this negate the need for these expensive suggestions? Why is it so bad for detritus to settle in a few spots on the glass? Surely syphoning it out every 2 weeks during a WC is sufficient? It sure is cleaner than having a sand bed, deep or shallow. Why is it that some bb systems struggle with algae and try to greatly improve their nutrient removal, yet others bb systems are way too clean and tyr to 'dirty their systme up' to avoid starving their corals with a sterile environment?

Questions to ponder. If you get those right, then try this one: what is the meaning of life?

[trueblackpercula]

I have been BB since the sart of my tank. I am also looking to find out more info myself on BB tanks I know there is a thread on it but most of the BB keepers have moved on. Its not that easy that i will say and takes time to make it work for you. here is a thread you just may want to read,
Michael
http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...ght=barebottom

[ricks]

Over the last 20 years I've had 5 large reef systems. All but one have been BB, and would never have another system with sand anywhere...

I find it much easier to keep clean, and my SPS have nice color and good growth.

Although more expensive to set up. You need lots of flow, a very good skimmer. And for SPS lots of light.

Once you get them dialed in, it's easy to mantain. weekly 10% water changes, I syphion the detrius out of the corners. Remove cheato from the fuge. And clean the skimmer, I've noticed with BB the skimmer seems to always need tweaking.

Happy Reefing

[RobTheReefer]

Originally posted by mxett
...Questions to ponder. If you get those right, then try this one: what is the meaning of life?

This one's easy. There is no meaning. Life is just another property of matter. Kinda like asking: what's the meaning of liquid?...solid?

Given the right conditions, matter will be solid or liquid, etc. Given the right conditions, matter will be alive.

[dots]

I love having a BB tank. Lots of flow, and no blowing sand issues good flow all around.

The debateable thing is the nutrient thing, this is how I think of it....(insert IMO here)

Using an analogy, pretend at some number "x" represents the total nutrients in your tank needed to produce "perfect" coloration. Within that "x", oversimplified, "x" is the sum of two parts. The first is the nutrients in the water column, and the second are the nutrients in the sandbed of a SSB or DSB tank. The older and thicker the sandbed, the more it contributes to "x", leaving less than what is available to be suspended in the water column.
Naturally, by optimizing growth rates with proper lighting and flow, "x" is variable. Too much, browning.....too little, fade. This is constantly varying due to natural biological cycles, but its amplitude (sin/cos function) is diminished by the sand bed due to the natural, slow, regular breakdown of waste material......or what I like to think of as a "nutrient buffer" adding so much to the total and releasing some back into the water at some given rate.
When you go to a BB tank, you take out that contributing factor to "x" and can increase the nutrients in the water column, ie: feed more and have more fish than you could before. However when I initially took out my sand, the level of nutrients swung hard and fast back and forth all the time, (remember sin/cos), and I could not get a handle on coloration, I was contantly swinging from too little to too much. Kinda like how hard it is to get stable params in a nano.....and you swing back and forth all the time. I ended up testing this threory by adding a small SSB in the sump that works well with the BB theory, the suspended material is pulled down the overflow and settles in the low flow remote SSB (2"d x 6"w x 12"l) where it is settled out and consumed by the organisms there. It solved the problem and "buffered" my nutrients, slowing the pendulum swing, but not going as far as back to a full sand bed. If I see colors are browning I back off how much I feed and the system reacts much quicker than a sand bed to color back up. Faded colors work in the same fashion.

I like this way of controlling the coloration and without that contributing nutrient factor added by the sand bed, I can feed more, fresh food and have more fish.

But let me stress, there are many ways to keep SPS and BB is just one way......even within that, my theory and way I currently keep mine is how I have come to use it which some will point out is not a true BB because I have drifted away from the ultra sterile philosophy.

Long story short, "different strokes for different folks" and just because they are BB, does not make them all alike within the style and the differences between them you see.

The better question: Did I help, confuse, or sound crazy with all my "x"planations?

[mxett]

Dots, your explanation was.......really really clever and well thought out. Thanks. I think I have a better understanding of the bb issues now. Whether I can be successful at bb reefing is yet to shown though.

[dots]

That makes two of us.....

[plyle02]

mxett,
I will merely echo what dots says and add in my own experiences. I currently run bb in my display, a 20 gallon sump, and a 20 gallon rdsb fuge. I have tried both ways, in fact many bb enthusiasts claim a fuge is not needed as a "true bb" tank should not require one. I have been able to bring nitrates to their lowest point with the implementation of the rdsb fuge. I test on Salifert at 2.5ppm. Before I had the fuge inline, I tested somewhere around 10ppm. I have followed many bb threads, and the best I can make of running as near perfect conditions as possible is the "less is more" theory with respect to live rock. My display has only about 50-60lbs of LR, and looking to remove more. I have lots of flow, very little settling of detritus, which is suspended in the water column for my over-powered skimmer to remove. IMO there is really no way of getting around the fact that lots of flow, lots of fish, heavy feedings, heavy skimming, and open space are good practices to properly maintain a bb tank. As for algae, we all know that nitrates and phosphates, generally speaking, lead to algae growth. GFO helps me in keeping phosphates nearly undetectable, and my rdsb fuge helps keep nitrates very low. The result is very little algae, a clean appearance, great water clarity, and nice colors.
Good luck, hope this helped.....

[jeffbrig]

Originally posted by trueblackpercula
most of the BB keepers have moved on.

It might be more appropriate to say that the more vocal BB advocates have moved on. There are still plenty of people using this method with success. My BB tank has been up about 2.5 years. This was my first attempt at running an sps tank, and I've actually found it to be much easier than I expected.

I'll share some of my experience running a BB tank:
I've skimmed wet, I've skimmed dry, never noticed any real difference in water parameters (other than having to frequently correct sg when skimming 1g/day). Currently, I'm back to skimming dry, it's simply less maintenance. Water clarity has always been excellent. Whether this is due to BB, level of skimming, running carbon, or something else entirely. I've also been able to get away with less lighting than most sps tanks run. I run ~320w of T5s primarily, plus two 250w halides that come on for 3-4 hours at "midday", and this is on a 250g tank.

Nitates have always been low or nonexistant. I've never run a phosphate remover. I designed a refugium compartment as part of my sump, but I haven't pruned my ball of chaeto in about a year. I guess the BB "experts" were right, if you're follow the methodology, there's not much excess nutrients for the algae to consume. So, my fuge has mainly become a holding tank for extra LR, so it's still providing some benefit in terms of biological filtration.

The only problem I've ever battled in this tank is the macroalgae Dicthyota, which came in on some LR. Unfortunately, it thrives in clean water, and it spread easily in my tank (you can see it in the pic below). Just recently, I found a naso tang that eats it, and it has all but disappeared.

All but a few of my corals have grown from frags or small aquaculture plugs. My success rate with sps is probably near 90%. Now I'm just waiting on everything to grow in.

[mxett]

Originally posted by jeffbrig
It might be more appropriate to say that the more vocal BB advocates have moved on. There are still plenty of people using this method with success. My BB tank has been up about 2.5 years. This was my first attempt at running an sps tank, and I've actually found it to be much easier than I expected.

I'll share some of my experience running a BB tank:
I've skimmed wet, I've skimmed dry, never noticed any real difference in water parameters (other than having to frequently correct sg when skimming 1g/day). Currently, I'm back to skimming dry, it's simply less maintenance. Water clarity has always been excellent. Whether this is due to BB, level of skimming, running carbon, or something else entirely. I've also been able to get away with less lighting than most sps tanks run. I run ~320w of T5s primarily, plus two 250w halides that come on for 3-4 hours at "midday", and this is on a 250g tank.

Nitates have always been low or nonexistant. I've never run a phosphate remover. I designed a refugium compartment as part of my sump, but I haven't pruned my ball of chaeto in about a year. I guess the BB "experts" were right, if you're follow the methodology, there's not much excess nutrients for the algae to consume. So, my fuge has mainly become a holding tank for extra LR, so it's still providing some benefit in terms of biological filtration.

The only problem I've ever battled in this tank is the macroalgae Dicthyota, which came in on some LR. Unfortunately, it thrives in clean water, and it spread easily in my tank (you can see it in the pic below). Just recently, I found a naso tang that eats it, and it has all but disappeared.

All but a few of my corals have grown from frags or small aquaculture plugs. My success rate with sps is probably near 90%. Now I'm just waiting on everything to grow in.

Nice tank!

When you say 'moved on' do you mean they have left RC as regular contributors, or they have decided that bb was not for them?

[trueblackpercula]

they have left Rc some by choice others not by choice. There have been heated debates of BB tanks and dsb/ssb In any case i have been sticking to Bb and it has been working for me.
Michael

[mxett]

Originally posted by trueblackpercula
they have left Rc some by choice others not by choice. There have been heated debates of BB tanks and dsb/ssb In any case i have been sticking to Bb and it has been working for me.
Michael

Heated debates!! , that makes me

Why do people get so upset about techniques? Its a joke.

I think a poll detailing success rates of dsb and bb may be very interesting. In each poll people could indicate whether their technique has been totally successful, partially successful (some problems) or very unsuccesful (many problems).

For example, if dsb has 30% total succes, 30% partial success and 40% no success, you could compare that data to bb, therefore getting an overall idea of which technique is easier or more successful in the long run.

I work in healthcare. It is easy to think that everyone will always be sick all the time, because that is all I see. Healthy people don't come for xrays/scans , because they don't need them! You get a warped perspective of reality.

Maybe rc is similar. We dont really hear much from those who are totally succesful, because they don't need much advice (although bragging is common and probably fair enough) so we tend to notice many threads about problems when generally speaking most people dont really experience many. Another issue to ponder.

Anyway, people, less of this , and more of this:

[javajaws]

BB here as well. I don't run a RDSB or any phosphate removers of any kind. Just good flow, good skimmer, good lights, a CA reactor, and some occasional water changes. The only real problem that I didn't cause directly was not enough nutrients....my corals would literally fade away. Nitrates and phosphates have always read 0 (salifert for both and D-D for phosphates). After adding more fish and daily feedings....bam! That was the last part of the BB formula I was missing (still unmeasurable nitrates and phosphates).

Its really pretty simple to manage nutrients in a BB tank. If your colors are too faded you don't have enough polution. If your colors are too dark or turn to brown then you have too much polution.

BTW, I think the majority of those BB reefers that moved on were those with a somewhat overly vocal opinion of "their method". Whether they were right or wrong wasn't the point...it was just their argumentative ways that really ticked people off.

[rutz81]

IME, I started BB, then decided(for no other reason than change of scenery) to add sand. It has become a PIA, in the sense that it blows around from time to time and I've had to dial my flow back a bit. In my opinion the best of both worlds is BB with a RDSB. If you run a filter sock before the RDSB it will prevent detritus from getting in the sand and fouling it up. This is just my theory of course and I am far from a scientist or anything.

[panic]

I ran bb for 1.5 years before just now adding a dsb in my fuge. I was having trouble with bleaching tips and couldn't keep any sort of monti. The rest of my sps, lps, and clams thrived. As my system got cleaner, I started losing some clams. I added sand and it stopped. I moved and added a bigger dsb in the fuge and now everything thrives, my colors of sps are a deeper color with less brown, and the montis are back at the attempt to overtake.

I spared no expense like the others who followed the "how to barebottom" thread of a million pages. I use the best equipment, employ obsessive husbandry, and consistancy of environment. The sand was the only thing that I never tried, and $10 later... who woulda thought? I will always have a bb display though

[mxett]

panic.....did you feed your bb lots? That seems to be what most bb's are saying, that they can eliminate under-nutrition issues by either getting more fish and feeding, or just feeding what they have more liberally.

Thanks for sharing your experience. Very interesting.

Who would have thought that we would eventually get to the stage where our reefs were 'too clean'. This was the holy grail 15 years ago, now everyones wants to get down and dirty again. Its like fashion, swings and roundabouts!

[KEstep]

I have crushed coral in my tank and a RDSB and a fuge (my chaeto never grows ). I do 20g water changes every 2 or 3 weeks and siphon all of the crushed coral and my nitrates are non detectable with a salifert kit. I attribute that to the RDSB. I seem to have pretty good color as well, however most of my corals are frags at the moment. I have a pretty heavy bioload, feed the crap out of my fish and even add DTs phyto and oyster eggs. My CC does blow around with the Vortechs but I just push it back to where it should be. I like sand because it just makes a reef look great and I also like to watch my sand sifter.