who out there goes with a bare bottom tank. Just live rock and no substrate?

[bluereefs]

Thats just the problem, they are so inefficient at consuming detritus that their only significant use comes from the bioturbation allowing diffusion of nitrate inputs to the facultative anaerobes.
Last few days I try to find any on line informations about detritus eating critters and only what I can find is detritus reduction by sea grases or bacteria and abysal acumulations,so far I dont find a single serious documents about critters ability to reduce detritus(in significant amounts).

[iCam]

Sometimes I wish I would have just out in a small sand bed for aesthetics, and just have a fuge. But, I can look back out how gross it was having CC bottom, and suddenly it's all a relief that I did the change.

[peterl23454]

Originally posted by peterl23454


heavy skimming see below...i use a turgey baster a few times a week and blow off rocks,everywhere i can get to . then i skim as wet as i can. i recently started experimenting with leaving it off for a few days..read that i was skimming out all micro foods out of column- i noticed my yel leather really swelled up during this time.

another quick?-for those that do this.what about the water that stays in the skimmer?does it go bad?and the skimmer is my major source of O2...airpump when it's not on? the dsb consumes alot of O2 right{batt backup airpump a must with dsb}?

still here? -with the old dsb thing i would think overfeeding is more of a problem here and 24-7 skimming would be encouraged.

dt's says most skimmers do not remove alot of live phyto{jus keep buying it}. have any of you seen a study on this-how much good stuff 24-7 skimming removes?


any one tried making a specific settling zone through baffles or something that would allow easy siphoning of only detritus?


5G reef,2X 500G DSB refugiums(1 seagrass,1 mangrove),olympic sized swimming pool abyssal settling filter(syphoned regularly)............that sounds about right from what i'm reading [/B]

[Mojoreef]

OK Ninong I'll bite. What exactly do these critters do for ya beyond stiring?? And what critters do you believe live beyond the Anerobic zone other then bacteria??
I noticed you referenced Rob Toonan. ROb told me that it was his opinion that most hobbists DSB's had the anoxic zone just a 1/2 inch below the surface.
But a question I really want answered if you could. What does an anoxic zone do for a hobbists tank????


MIke

[dendronepthya]

I don't know if you were quoting yourself or what there, but I'll take a stab at some of the questions.

dt's says most skimmers do not remove alot of live phyto{jus keep buying it}. have any of you seen a study on this-how much good stuff 24-7 skimming removes?

There are studies, yes, I just don't know if any of them are good. Then again, I have not seen a study that shows dosing live phytoplankton is that great either, but that is for another debate at another time.

any one tried making a specific settling zone through baffles or something that would allow easy siphoning of only detritus?

My sump basically became a settling filter. I think it works very nicely for that. If you have strong water movement in your display tank to keep detritus in suspension, it will eventually be carried down into the sump. There, it can be removed during a water change or whenever.

[Mojoreef]

OK Ninong I'll bite. What exactly do these critters do for ya beyond stiring?? And what critters do you believe live beyond the Anerobic zone other then bacteria??
I noticed you referenced Rob Toonan. ROb told me that it was his opinion that most hobbists DSB's had the anoxic zone just a 1/2 inch below the surface.
But a question I really want answered if you could. What does an anoxic zone do for a hobbists tank????


MIke

Come Join Us

[galleon]

Ninong,

If I understand you correctly, you are asserting that detritovores are necessary to break down detritus before bacteria get to it, and the bacteria in the deep sandbed are only for converting nitrate. Well, those bacteria are using nitrate for the anaerobic final electron acceptor in respiration. Bacteria still need an organic carbon and an organic phosphorous source. The most efficient solution is using detritus as a culture media.

Here is illustrative example. If you fed a triggerfish a thawed shrimp, some detrital material is going to result from this. Now, there is only one difference between whether that DSB dwelling detritovorous worm gets it before the bacteria or whether the detritovore is not present and it goes straight to the bacteria: the bacteria will have 10% less carbon from this one incident for detritus.

Bacteria are a large part (by volume and by mass) of detritus. Biomass is biomass, regardless of who owns it. Protein skimming does not work as a form of export in this situation, because the bacteria are using the nutrients in their biomass before they can diffuse. Bacterial behavior also operates so that it converts the organic phosphorous present in the detritus into orthophosphates, which cannot be exported. Algae and photosynthetic blue-green bacteria use them. All of this exchange functionally excludes the water column: the phosphates will be limiting, so water changes are not a good solution.

The good solution is getting rid of the bacterial/detrital conglomerate before they can fill the sink up and force feed the system phosphates.

[peterl23454]

Originally posted by dendronepthya
There are studies, yes, I just don't know if any of them are good. Then again, I have not seen a study that shows dosing live phytoplankton is that great either, but that is for another debate at another time.[/B]

anyone have links to these studies?


another quick?-for those that do this.what about the water that stays in the skimmer?does it go bad?and the skimmer is my major source of O2...airpump when it's not on? the dsb consumes alot of O2 right{batt backup airpump a must with dsb}?

[SPC]

Originally posted by galleon
Ninong,

If I understand you correctly, you are asserting that detritovores are necessary to break down detritus before bacteria get to it, and the bacteria in the deep sandbed are only for converting nitrate. Well, those bacteria are using nitrate for the anaerobic final electron acceptor in respiration. Bacteria still need an organic carbon and an organic phosphorous source. The most efficient solution is using detritus as a culture media.

Here is illustrative example. If you fed a triggerfish a thawed shrimp, some detrital material is going to result from this. Now, there is only one difference between whether that DSB dwelling detritovorous worm gets it before the bacteria or whether the detritovore is not present and it goes straight to the bacteria: the bacteria will have 10% less carbon from this one incident for detritus.

Thanks for that explanation Chris, this is the point I've been trying to make for a few pages now.

The sand bed critters only ADD to the total organic load, they DON'T take it away. There ONLY practical purpose is to stir the sand bed.
Steve

[galleon]

The sand bed critters only ADD to the total organic load, they DON'T take it away. There ONLY practical purpose is to stir the sand bed.

Exactly Steve. More critters = More biomass. End of story, law of conservation of matter. And skimmer/water change export doesn't work when your organics are being bound. Even on coral reefs, the only way algae can obtain nutrients is via benthic recycling. Phosphorous is always limiting in the water column, and enough physical (not biological or chemical) export is present to keep the benthic recycling limited and thus the supply of phosphate for algae down. Reefs that become lacking in physical export and can't limit the recycling are the ones that become benthically eutrophic and exhibit algal overgrowth.

[Ilikewater]

I have been trying to fallow this thread for quite some time and am having difficulty becuase of everyones view on this matter. I understand that there is a maximum amount of bacteria that is able to live in a DSB. And the reason for the crashes is becuase there is too much waste and not enough room for the bacteria to grow. Is this correct?

If that is correct than wouldn't replacing like a quarter of the sand bed, lets say every year, the bacteria would have to populate the area while still being able to brake down stuff.

I could be wrong but that is what i have gathered from this. If this is incorrect please tell me.

Thanks

[mswt5]

QUOTE]If that is correct than wouldn't replacing like a quarter of the sand bed, lets say every year, the bacteria would have to populate the area while still being able to brake down stuff.[/QUOTE]

Ilikewater....Do you really want to do that just so you can have 6 inches of sand taking up half of your tank??

[toddflash]

thats why when I put up my DSB its going in the sump / refugium so I can take part of it out each year just as if it was miracle mud...

[Ilikewater]

Well, i really don't want to have a DSB at all but i like the look of sand. I would never be able to look at glass as the bottom of my tank. In a perfect world i would have just a 1 inch deep sand bed, but many say that would just collect nitrates. I would like to not even have a DSB in my refiguim but would like the benefits of one.

Is it possible to have a 1 inch deep sand bed without having to worry about it collecting nitrates or cleaning it once a week?

[Bomber]

Originally posted by Ilikewater
Is it possible to have a 1 inch deep sand bed without having to worry about it collecting nitrates or cleaning it once a week?

Sure it is. But it's going to depend on how much you're asking that filter to process. If you have a light load in your system, you might not even have to clean it every month. If you have a heavy load, you might need to clean it every couple of days.

You could just have enough flow going on that it's swept up and a little more self cleaning too.

[Ninong]

Originally posted by Bomber:

George, I've always given you more credit than this. I'm sorry you've proven me wrong. You are just not able to discuss this without slams, trying to make it sound like I said something I didn't.

Bomber,

I have decided to withdraw from this discussion because you are correct, I was getting carried away with myself and saying things in a manner that I now regret.

My biggest error was in trying to reconcile some of your comments concerning deep sand bed methodology with the articles written by the so-called deep sand bed experts, the ones you say you studied prior to setting up your own deep sand bed.

After re-reading the three threads you started on The Reef Tank and all of your comments in this thread, I have come to believe that I am not the only one guilty of slams, as you put it. I suggest you re-read some of your own comments and tell me that they are not slams.

Early in this thread you made the following statement:

"I'm through looking for some magic way to leave poop in the tank. And I'm through trying to balance all these poop eating animals with the amount of poop in the tank and hoping it works. I have a siphon!

"I'm going new rocks, a new very shallow sand bed that I can clean and not worry about anoxic/anaerobic zones. The way I did it for decades before all this "new" crap from people that don't know what they're talking about."

I can only assume that is a reference to Dr. Shimek and Dr. Toonen, whose articles you claim to have studied prior to setting up your DSB.

You were kind enough to give me the benefit of your advice in a series of personal messages and I thank you for that. You also suggested I review the threads you had started on The Reef Tank concerning deep sand beds and I have reviewed them but I feel compelled to tell you that they strike me as being a thinly veiled attack on the credibility of the very people you once seemed to respect. You will, of course, say that you meant no disrespect, in which case I ask you to re-read the following opening lines from your threads on TRT:

This is the very first of the three DSB threads you started on TRT and the first one you suggested that I read:

"Is there a way to make a DSB work?

In fairness to DSB's and the people that love them.
Let's put our collective minds together and see what we can come up with to make them work.

OK, fair enough, it turned out that the conclusions reached in that thread were that DSB's do not work. I won't get into what was said, everyone is entitled to his own opinion.

This next thread is just your way of saying that you do not agree with the "let's get back to nature" approach of the so-called DSB experts.

"So what's really going on in these glass boxes?

Is it really a little slice of nature? Are there any processes going on that even closely resemble nature?"

This last thread of yours I would put in the 'slam' category:

"Some funny misconceptions I've read about DSB's

#1 That a lot of thought and "scientific" research went into developing DSB filtration.

#2 That DSB's are mimicking nature."

I am guilty of being among those who believed that a lot of though and effort did go into the articles that Rob Toonen, Ron Shimek and Joanthan Lowrie wrote on the subject of deep sand beds but, as we all know by now, I am easily confused.

[Bomber]

So this is a personal attack on me after all. Nothing more, nothing less.

Good for you George.


I had to tear a entire tank apart and start it over after only four years. I took the advise of the "sand bed experts" when I put that tank together in the first place. No one, not one single sand bed expert told me that I would have to take it down that quick. Every one of them said it was the only way to go, that it was the best way to go, that they had all tried and proven it, and that it would last forever.
I had no intention of taking that tank down after only four years, it was supposed to last forever. I had animals in that tank that were supposed to stay right where they were - forever.

AND taking that tank apart and having to redo it was expensive!

And I'm entitled to my opinion.

Edit >

OH and one other big burr in my butt. Now, almost everyone of them is claiming something is wrong with DSB's and recommending either taking them down after about four years, or making them only 1-2" deep, or siphoning them regularly, or replacing the sand and/or rocks, or some other manure.

Yep, so come to think of it. You just might have to listen to me complain for a while longer.

[mswt5]

There have been many different techniques used in reef aquariums since the very beggining. Most of the techiniques that have worked are still around while many others have come and gone. The DSB is interesting because its works very well for a fairly long while and because it is seen in nature you would think it would be the best way to run a reef. In developing these techiniques Im sure a LOT of thought and "scientific research" WAS put in to it, BUT I believe a lot of the theories where pulled from what occurs in the oceans and were applied to the aquarium. Our tanks cant even come close to the way the real ocean works.

[Bomber]

HEY

I just realized I missed a perfect opportunity to plug another board! Since I didn't bring it up.

The Think Tank is a forum I help moderate on The Reef Tank

Anyone is more than welcome to visit and read those threads. Make up your own mind.

We do have rules, please read the users agreement.

Keep in mind, it's called The Think Tank. The object is to make people think and not just hand them the answers. There's a lot of good natured 'devils advocate' going on.

The Think Tank > http://www.thereeftank.com/forums/fo...?s=&forumid=77

[saltshop]

Originally posted by Bomber
HEY

I just realized I missed a perfect opportunity to plug another board!

Gasp!!!

We do have rules, please read the users agreement.

...then I am out!

Keep in mind, it's called The Think Tank. The object is to make people think and not just hand them the answers.

...now I am really OUT!

I can't believe this thread is still going on...and on...and on..

[Bomber]

Good!

[saltshop]

Originally posted by Bomber
Good!

Oh..now that is just asking for trouble!

[Zoom]

I was reading your post about your 120G tank and i can see the problem that you have.
You already put a DSB and the critters that goes with it so you need for some one to tell you it is ok to have DSB in your tank.
Well if you like it go for it.
NO one goin to tell you one way or the other you have to decide for your self.
I know how you feel.
I been there.
Don't push the peoples limits we need there knowledge.
Now i will stop boring you with my broken English.
Enjoy.

[SPC]

Originally posted by Ninong
I am guilty of being among those who believed that a lot of though and effort did go into the articles that Rob Toonen, Ron Shimek and Joanthan Lowrie wrote on the subject of deep sand beds but, as we all know by now, I am easily confused.

[/B]

Ninong, I'm not exactly clear why you have decided to withdraw from this thread at this point, but that of course is your choice.

If you feel this strongly about the works of these men, I would like to see all of us be able to discuss their theories in an open forum such as this. No one that I know of is here to slam them personally, there are many however that do disagree with some of their DSB theories. I feel that it is important to get this all out on the table (something I didn't see when setting up my DSB) in order for everyone to be able to make an educated decision.

One other thing, I respect anyone who has dedicated themselves to a certain field. I believe that Rob and Ron have done many great things for this hobby and are very knowledgeable about natural sustrates and the fauna that live on and in them. What I do not believe however, is that either man is experienced enough in the woirkings of a DSB in a closed reef system to just follow blindly. Comparing what goes on in nature, to what happens in our closed system, is a very thin line we walk.

Oooops , one more thing, FWIW I believe a sand bed does in fact work just like Ron and Rob have proposed, in the short term. What I disagree with however, is that a DSB will not accumulate detritus over time and cease functioning properly. IMO, the bottom of any of our closed systems is going to be nothing more than a settling area. We can acknowledge this and try to get this detritus out, or let it accumulate over time and face the consequences of this decission.
Steve

[Ninong]

Steve,

I think that everything that is to be said has been said more than once already by all of us participating in this thread.

I have decided to go ahead with a DSB in my aquarium for a number of reasons, some of which may not be applicable to other hobbyists. It may crash at some point and then again it may not, but if I want to know what Ron Shimek's opinion is on the probability of my DSB crashing in spite of the fact that I am using a low metal salt, I will be sure to check out his forum. His answer may surprise some of the participants in this thread.

"Use of a low metal salt should prevent all of this, of course. Under those conditions, I don't see any reason why a sand bed should not be functional indefinitely." http://archive.reefcentral.com/forum...hreadid=229700

I really have nothing else to say anyway. It is painfully obvious that some of the participants in this thread do not agree with his opinion and that is their opinion. Fine. I think I'll leave it at that and move on.

Regards,