Richard,
>The primary reason offered in hobbyist literature for live rock in a reef tank is for chemical filtration, but none of the authors of those recommendations have offered any evidence to support their recommendations. The numbers are completely arbitrary. If a hobbyist wants live rock to glue things to, great. If a hobbyist wants live rock for coral or sponge settlement, great. The point of the article was that one does not have to have the "rocks in a box" look to have adequate chemical filtration and denitrification<
Certainly, I agree, one does not need the rocks in a box look by any means. Far less rock is needed in a tank to still have a healthy environment. I agree in general with what you are doing in your tank, and I think it will look fantastic in a few years. My only comment was that I did not want people new in this hobby to get the impression that it was a good idea to set up a tank with only sand. I really do think that the PARTICULATE/CHEMICAL filtration aspects of live rock are quite important. And, no, I cannot prove it with a chemical analysis (my day job keeps me too busy I'm afraid!).
Reply to ...was it James?:
>Then you go on to equate not providing this substrate to going back to the stone age of using ozone, canister filters, etc.
I think some of us...myself included might have missed the logical connection. Can you perhaps explain?<
This IS a logical conclusion. I believe live rock also offers settlement sites for sponge, corals, and other filter feeders. These filter feeders remove particulate, and dissolved organic material from the water colomn that would otherwise have to be removed by canister filters with filter floss, carbon (organics and coloring agents), ozone (organics and coloring agents).
FWIW, Richard is experimenting with a return to some of these devices. For a tank on the scale of his I think some of these devices (probably ozone in particular) might have some application. We cannot duplicate many of the chemical processes of the reef I'm afraid.
I did read the article this week. Wow, the size of the water changes blows my mind. I don't think I'd ever attempt more that 5% a month with a tank that size. I'm guessing that all the extra nutrients and trace elements in the artificial salt mixes probably would cause a lot of problems at that scale, particularly at start up when there are only a few (relative to the size of the tank) corals to consume the nutrients, etc.
- my $0.02, now my company's stock only needs to increase by 1000% and I'll be able to set up a tank like Richards!
- Greg Hiller
[ December 22, 2001: Message edited by: Greg Hiller ]</p>