DSBs and Nitrates

[Weatherman]

Originally posted by Weatherman
I either change the conditions in the tank...

I should emphasize that “changing conditions� does not include quick fixes, or adding a lot of extra gadgets.

If high nutrients are the problem, there are simple techniques available to take care of that. They may not produce instantaneous results, but they will, probably, provide more long-lasting results (without potential negative side effects).

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I most certainly did not! Those were your words after I had posted something else. I just figured it wasn't worth getting into so I left it alone and didn't contradict you.

Has my DSB crashed?

[Bomber]

I'm sorry, my mommie won't let me play with you.

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

She doesn't like folks from the chemistry part of town?

[Bomber]

No, you're DSB had not crashed for you.

.....however

Here's the difference. I have one system that's set up to run continuously on canal water - no filtration. For the SPS that we cultivate, that system would be a crash for them.
It's all relative to what you're keeping in the system - and sometimes right down to the specific animal and not just the type of animal.
Another good example would be a deep water butterfly. Needs spotlessly clean water. I could put it in a system with a ricordea and a anemone and no filter.
Within a short period of time, the butterfly would die. That's a crash to the b'fly.
A little longer and the anemone would die. That's a crash to the anemone.

That stinkin' ricordea would probably live forever, multiply, and take over the whole tank! As far as the ricordea is concerned - there never was a tank crash.

...but don't ask the b'fly and anemone.

[Dag]

Bomber, are you suggesting that the ricordea caused or contributed to the butterfly and anemone crash?

[Bomber]

Nope, not at all.

As the tank got progressively dirtier - crashier - different things didn't tolerate it.

As the tank got dirtier, it was no longer suitable for the B'fly. So if you had set the tank up for the b'fly - it crashed.

As the tank got dirtier still, it was no longer suitable for the anemone. So if you had set the tank up for the anemone - it crashed.

The ridordea didn't really care how dirty the tank was, so to the ricordea the tank would probably never crash.

A tank crash is all relative to what the tank is supposed to support.

[MCsaxmaster]

How could we define a "crash" then? Assuming that sand beds are in some way causing the environment to become "dirty" (if you would, please define what you mean by this specifically), can't we then say any death in the tank is due to the sand bed crashing? I mean, there's no way to disprove the assumption here. If I have a tank with many corals, and lose an Acropora after a few years, am I do assume that the sand bed has crashed? What about all the other possible causes of mortality? How (especially if nitrate and phosphate have remained undetectable via hobbyist test kits) are we to differentiate a sand bed related "crash" from any other type of mortality? I mean, Acropora rarely lives beyond about 5-10 years in nature (though some do); are the seagrass beds in nature "crashing" and causing this mortality?

Best,

Chris

[Bomber]

Chris,

What are you asking? I'm pretty sure you're too smart to be asking about half of that.

[MCsaxmaster]

Haha, thanks

I guess what I'm getting at is, where do we draw the line? The past couple of years, folks have been telling other folks to pull the plugs on their sandbeds for every reason I can think of. At first it seemed the issue folks were complaining about was that the sandbed was releasing phosphate which encouraged algae growth. The problem was ultimately algae. Then the issue became that the sandbed was releasing dissolved nutrients of all sorts, again spurring on algae growth. Then (in recent times) it seems that any problem at all has been attributed to the sandbed, whether nitrate and phosphate are high, low, or undetectable and whether or not there is a lot of algae.

So, where do we draw the line between faulting the sandbed and looking at other issues that might be affecting corals (and others)? What are the characteristics the differentiate a sandbed initiated "crash" and one caused by something else?

Best,

Chris

[MitchMC]

Rob Toonen AKA "biogeek" will have an article out shortly in
Aquaculture that does an incredibily thorough job of testing out
sand beds and sedement size ect It will rock the sandbed world

Cheers
Mitch

[Weatherman]

Originally posted by MitchMC
Rob Toonen AKA "biogeek" will have an article out shortly in
Aquaculture that does an incredibily thorough job of testing out
sand beds and sedement size ect It will rock the sandbed world

Cheers
Mitch

Are you refering to this:

An experimental comparison of sediment-based biological
filtration designs for recirculating aquarium systems


Robert J. Toonen (1) and Christopher B. Wee (2)


(1)Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology, University of Hawaii at Manoa,
P.O. Box 1346, Kaneohe, HI 96744, USA

(2)Section of Evolution & Ecology, University of California, Davis, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616

[Bomber]

Originally posted by MCsaxmaster

Haha, thanks
I guess what I'm getting at is, where do we draw the line?

I know what you mean. But it's really no different than the way hobbyists react to light bulbs, pumps, or anything else really.

Think of it like a pendulum. When it's been swung one way for a long time, it will swing just that far the other way when you let it loose. Eventually it will settle back in the middle though.

I thought I pretty much covered how I think about it. A system that I set up for SPS types would have a totally different definition of crash than a system I set up for turtle grass.

[Bomber]

I'd be interested in seeing what he has to say about it. He's been a big sand bed advocate for a long time. But now that he's working with Charlie, it will be interesting to see if Charlie has had any effect on him.
With all that, they are still going to have to get around the phosphate issues. Unless someone can defy nature.....

Well we'll see.

[MitchMC]

Originally posted by Weatherman
Are you refering to this:

An experimental comparison of sediment-based biological
filtration designs for recirculating aquarium systems


Robert J. Toonen (1) and Christopher B. Wee (2)


(1)Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology, University of Hawaii at Manoa,
P.O. Box 1346, Kaneohe, HI 96744, USA

(2)Section of Evolution & Ecology, University of California, Davis, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616

that would be the one

[Reeferee]

that would be the one

Then this is the abstract I believe?

From:
An experimental comparison of sediment-based biological filtration designs for recirculating aquarium systems

Aquaculture, In review



An experimental comparison of sediment-based biological

filtration designs for recirculating aquarium systems





Robert J. Toonen1 and Christopher B. Wee2



1Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, School of Ocean & Earth Science & Technology, University of Hawaii at Manoa,

P.O. Box 1346, Kaneohe, HI 96744, USA

2Section of Evolution & Ecology, University of California, Davis, 1 Shields Ave, Davis, CA 95616



Abstract: Common sediment filtration designs for recirculating systems designed for marine ornamentals fall largely into two major categories: sandbed and plenum-based systems. To date, there has been no experimental comparison of the relative performance of these methods for handling nitrogenous wastes in marine aquaria. We compared nutrient levels in a factorial design of aquaria: 1) with or without a plenum; 2) with deep (9.0cm) or shallow (2.5cm) sediments, and 3) with coarse (2mm) or fine (0.2mm) mean particle sizes. None of these experimental treatments have a significant advantage in the processing of nitrogenous wastes in recirculating aquaria; final ammonia and nitrite concentrations were below detectable levels, and nitrate concentrations did not differ significantly among the experimental treatments. After an initial stabilization period, all experimental treatments responded equivalently to continuous ammonia input of up to 0.5 mg / L / day. Results were qualitatively similar whether experiments were carried out in the absence of animals in a lab with nutrient input via measured dosing of ammonium chloride, or in aquaria with live animals and natural sediments. Sediment depth and particle size had significant effects on a variety of water parameter measures throughout the experiment. Overall, coarse sediments had lower buffering capacity (pH, calcium & alkalinity) and much higher final phosphate concentrations than fine sediments. Death rates in the live animal experiments containing shallow sediments were roughly twice (2.91 ± 0.46) those of the deep sediment trials (1.47 ± 0.46). However, the presence or absence of a plenum had little effect on water parameters throughout the experiment. These results suggest that there is little benefit to be gained from the addition of a plenum plate beneath the sediments in recirculating aquarium designs.

[Bomber]

Overall, coarse sediments had lower buffering capacity (pH, calcium & alkalinity) and much higher final phosphate concentrations than fine sediments.

That's only because coarse sediments will hold more poop.

[MitchMC]

Originally posted by Bomber
I'd be interested in seeing what he has to say about it. He's been a big sand bed advocate for a long time. But now that he's working with Charlie, it will be interesting to see if Charlie has had any effect on him.
With all that, they are still going to have to get around the phosphate issues. Unless someone can defy nature.....

Well we'll see.

Are you referring to robs article?


I have Known Rob for years and he is a first rate scientist
Have only reviewed the methodology briefly but looks solid

I thought as some one who has� two PhDs� you would be more interested in his methodology that in someone’s influence on him

I Went to your home page to check out your CV very nice, most impressive

cheers
MitchMc

[Bomber]

Mitch, since you're so sure of yourself, why the slams?

[MitchMC]

No slams intended

(well ok the CV comment was a bit of a shot but..no more so than your charlie comment)

I find the hide behind a intrernet "persona somewhat' childish

I was expecting to find something more substantive from your homepage given 50 years experience in the hobby and two degrees than a timeshare advert.

I was looking for some of your published work, it might be interesting...

[Jamesurq]

What will be interesting to me is to track the participants in that little thing I do yearly and see if it's keeping the "crash" from occurring.

I really hope so.

[Bomber]

Originally posted by MitchMC
No slams intended

(well ok the CV comment was a bit of a shot but..no more so than your charlie comment)

I find the hide behind a intrernet "persona somewhat' childish

I was expecting to find something more substantive from your homepage given 50 years experience in the hobby and two degrees than a timeshare advert.

I was looking for some of your published work, it might be interesting...

Why? I don't owe you a thing. I'm not interested in his "methodology", I know the people that would be guiding him, Charlie would be one of them, and they are not about to let him go sideways. I'm more interested in all of their results.

You're the one hiding and throwing personal insults.

[Paul B]

I would like to add something about the definition of "crash".
My reverse UG filtered 34 year old reef almost always has some algae in it and thats the way I want it. Bomber once said that if my tank was all sps it would be called a crash, and he would be correct. But my tank is mostly fish, and LPS with only a few SPS corals all of which live a very long time. With the fish arguably dying of old age of from 10 to 18 years. Is my tank in a perpetual state of crash? maybe.
Here in NY we have lagoons literally chocked in ulva algae, but if you push away the algae you will find loads of very healthy animals that can live very nicely under those conditions. Is the lagoon crashing? maybe for some animals but for others it is paradise. You keep the sort of animals that will live under the conditions that you have designed your tank for. Baby tuna will not live in a reef tank even though it may be the same type of water and temp. but sea robins will have no problem.
Have a great Father's day.
Paul

[CaptiveReef]

Ahh we are diving into this subject again......... Well I have experienced no problems using a DSB, in fact I have found tanks to be more stable using a DSB than without.
The use of a DSB is a great way to control Nitrates, the nitrogen production benefits all reef life that has symbiotic algae in their tissues. The rate of Nitrate diffusion is faster using a DSB than just using Live Rock. I have had Berlin setup's that had high levels of Nitrates and when a DSB was added the levels dropped as soon as the bed stabilized after being added.
As far as algae in a reef tank, that contains SPS, LPS, Leathers, or what ever species purchased. Just add reef safe herbivore's to control the algae growth.
On the natural reef there are huge schools of tangs and other species that feed on marine algae's. The schools swim in and just clean all available algae on all surfaces.
The amount of algae on the reefs, and the rate in which this algae grows is incredible. With the amount of nutrients and amount of sunlight that the algae receives just spurs fast growth.
It's the Herbivore's that keep the algae in check.
Having marine algae species in the same tank as SPS corals is not a crashing tank, it's about as normal as you can get.
It's the gelvin (yellowing by products) produced by algae that will reduce the amount of light getting to the corals.
This gelvin is removed by using carbon and skimming, water changes.
Most hobbyists strive for reef setups that have corals, liverock, with little to 0 levels of plant life.
Having marine algae in my tank and using a DSB really isn't going to cause a crash.
This is always a great topic!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CaptiveReef

[romunov]

The rate of Nitrate diffusion is faster using a DSB than just using Live Rock.

Actually, water is pumped actively in a DSB by movement of inbed fauna, which is the point of a DSB anyway.