Removed my sandbed

[polcat]

I guess if you did that quickly you could get rid of all the hydrogen sulfide. Oh yea they call that an under gravel filter. LOL.

Not exactly, if you read in that post

"You do not need or want large low or no flux dead zones in a DSB. You want a positive low transport rate of fresh septic material into and out of these zones. Depending completely on critters in a bed to do this is foolish. Most critters do not like to go into the large anoxic sulfide laden zones that quickly build up."

 

[Anonymous]

Understand. Was just thinking out loud. excuse my lame attempt at humor.

 

[polcat]

Understand. Was just thinking out loud. excuse my lame attempt at humor.

Excuse my newbieness (sp) guess I should have caught the humor :wink:

That is a pretty good thread though.

 

[shalegac]

If you don't have SPS then would there be a problem with stiring up the sand and filtering out all the nasties that get trapped? (If it is a stupid question I have a degree in Psychology not Biology :roll: .)

 

[jimb01414]

wow, ive heard of that but my ow my, roomers of nitrate leaching back into the aquarium because of the sand bed thats different dutch system 101. there called nitrate pockets and (get ready to learn) they can only be accumulated if there is either thicker grade crushed coral or sand on the bottom then a fine grade over it and if you stir up the gravel and release those pockets. acctually a deep sand bed can do wonders to your biological ecosystem, levels fluctuate very easy without a sand bed and it also looks unatural and retarded. sorry for the input

 

[Unarce]

it also looks unatural and retarded. sorry for the input

:lol: (Sorry, couldn't help it. You've even said I was retarded once)

 

[ChrisRD]

acctually a deep sand bed can do wonders to your biological ecosystem, levels fluctuate very easy without a sand bed

I've run the same system with a DSB and then with no sand. IME there was no noticeable difference in stability of parameters with or without a DSB. Personally, I didn't see any benefit to the DSB which is why I went back to BB after 2 years.

 

[Anonymous]

wow, ive heard of that but my ow my, roomers of nitrate leaching back into the aquarium because of the sand bed thats different dutch system 101. there called nitrate pockets and (get ready to learn) they can only be accumulated if there is either thicker grade crushed coral or sand on the bottom then a fine grade over it and if you stir up the gravel and release those pockets.

I don't understand what you are saying.

Pockets of hydrogen sulfide can be problematic in DSB's.

acctually a deep sand bed can do wonders to your biological ecosystem

How and what? Can you show any data?

levels fluctuate very easy without a sand bed

Old wives tale.

and it also looks unatural

Only at first. Once the coralline covers the bottom you don't even notice. Of course, it is a personal choice. Me, I never really liked looking at the gooey portion of the sand that showed against the front glass.

I also think the whole natural thing has got nothing to do with nature, but with how we are now used to seeing reef tanks.

and retarded. sorry for the input

The input is fine, the retarded part is unnecessary.

 

[ChrisRD]

I also changed the plumbing quite a bit. Basically I pulled everything that wasn't the return AMK 3000 (powerheads, OM squirt, mag 12 running one of the two 1 inch Sea Swirls) and replaced it with a Sequence 5800 running a 3/4 inch, 5 loc lined valved manifold on each side of the tank. My idea is to get the water moving around the tank in a circular motion - which is also why the aquascaping is so 'airy'. I don't have the Sequence yet, and the manifolds are being run by an extra AMK 3000.

So, have you had enough of the wavemaking/current-switching devices? Just planning on a bunch of static manifold returns with a ton of flow to create turbulence, etc.? What was your impression of the OM unit?

 

[Anonymous]

Loved the OM unit, and I still might use it. Gotta see what happens with the new pump that arrives tomorrow!

 

[Mighty Quinn]

Hello Everyone,

I have spent far too much time at work today searching the literature and finding information on phosphorus regeneration in sediments. All I can say is that I am very humbled by the amount of information that is available in the scientific literature on this topic.

I thought that many of you might want access to these articles, so I have made them available in pdf form at the following link:

http://mit.edu/qhorn/Public/Reef%20Aqua ... 0articles/

Obviously I have not read these through these articles in their completion. I simply have not had the time to read more than the abstracts. Some may apply to reef tanks, some may not. I should also add that I found many articles whose titles and abstracts were very applicable to this discussion, but I was not able to obtain electronic versions of the articles. That means that I will need to physically go to the library and copy the articles the old fashioned way.

I encourage all of you who are interested in this topic to at least open these documents and read through the abstracts.

Homework assignment has been given. Hope I didn't spoil your weekend!

Kindest regards,
Quinn

 

[polcat]

acctually a deep sand bed can do wonders to your biological ecosystem, levels fluctuate very easy without a sand bed and it also looks unatural and retarded. sorry for the input

I'm too retarded to run a DSB. Even with great husbandry it still crashed.

Quote from a marine bioligist with 57 years of reef experience "sand beds are like worm holes, detritus is transported to a sister galaxy".
A more specific quote" You ask a DSB to perform denitrification. That very process guarantees that it will also store poison (phosphate), will not process it - it can not, and can release it later. That is not a opinion, that is a fact." Marine sediments act like marine sediments.

I've read the articles that mighty quinn posted (thank you for posting them) and many others, they totally support the fact that ANY sand bed can and might release P back into the water column. On the other hand I have seen absolutely no scientific evidence that a DSB acts any differently. So unless someone can post research indicating otherwise I think this thread gets pretty simple....if you want a P limited system, loose the sand.

But my softie tank is doing great, well except for that HA I can't get rid of. Can I put some SPS in there? Gotta love it cause that sand bed does wonders for you biological ecosystem. Oh yea, some plants will help the process also. OK that was uncalled for :twisted: sorry, I am a nubee here, probably not making any friends :lol: Please forgive me I'm just a BB fanatic.

 

[DK]

I love these sand bed discussions....

Lets say that you believe that phosphate is bound to insoluable compounds and can ultimately reach levels that the sand bed can no longer hold............what I understand is that this P is RELEASED by bacterial action by reducing the ph (locally) to a level that will cause this. To me it is like a ca reactor. You always have some P being released from the media. So, why wouldn't a phosban reactor then represent the long term solution to this? If the P being released from the bed is removed by the reactor, you have it covered.

I have read some people having problems with Phosban reactors and RTN, but after reading some of the Coral articles, that may have been due to P limitation. So if you have measurable P, that would not be an issue.

As far as sand not being near corals, unless you are at the reef crest on a wall, there is always sand proximal to corals (at least where I have been diving- Pacific & Carribean).

Finally, I have had sand beds for over 10 years and the problems relating to algae growth I attribute to my own errors. I beleive any system can work (sand bed, bb, miracle mud, whatever) but if you exceed the limit of the system to neutralize the waste products, you will have trouble.....and it is always easy to point the finger at the system.

 

[Anonymous]

I love these sand bed discussions....

Me too!

If the P being released from the bed is removed by the reactor, you have it covered.

That is a near impossible balance to reach and won't help if you have sand 'events' like I had.

It is almost impossible to have an idea how much a p media reactor is adsorbing and at what rate. You would have to hope you were running enough of the p removing media at the time of a re rerelease, and you would have to hope that that media would remove it before it had a chance to damage corals. Being that p is highly bio reactive, I think the odds or a reactor removing it in time are small.

It seems to me it is easier to eliminate the potential by not having a sand bed, which also allows you to not rely or even run the p removing reactor.

There are ways of removing copper from tank water, but it seems to make more sense not to put it in there in the first place. That logic seems to hold for p as well. YMMV.

As far as sand not being near corals, unless you are at the reef crest on a wall, there is always sand proximal to corals (at least where I have been diving- Pacific & Carribean).

How proximal do you consider proximal?
IME diving (Pacific, Carribean, Andaman Sea, Sea or Cortez, GBR, PR) the 'margin of the reef' is near the sand, but the bulk of the reef is above and away from the sand.

Finally, I have had sand beds for over 10 years and the problems relating to algae growth I attribute to my own errors. I beleive any system can work (sand bed, bb, miracle mud, whatever) but if you exceed the limit of the system to neutralize the waste products, you will have trouble.....and it is always easy to point the finger at the system.

Sure. I can tell you with no doubt that the last 2 rtn events (no algae events for me - I think the RTN is way worse) in my tank occurred days after a sand bed disturbance. And with a sand bed there is no way to determine if you are anywhere close to exceeding the limits - you are just waiting and hoping that you aren't. Many people are comfortable with that, I am not.

 

[DK]

I would add that the release of P by the sand bed and the removal by the phosphate reactor happen very S L O W L Y. So any approach will take time...not days but months!!!!!! Even the poorly defined sand bed "crash" will theoretically take place over a couple of weeks or months.

As far as powerheads falling into the bed. The only thing I can say is follow Murphy's Law and secure those powerheads. Of course when this happens, you are sending billions of bacteria through the water column that usually aren't at that level and can overcome a corals defenses. I would say this event in not a P issue at all.

When I say proximal, I mean a few inches, feet or a couple of meters.
Each reef is a little different

Righty, I am not saying that you shouldn't have removed the sand bed, you have good reasons for doing so. I am just pointing out an alternative for someone else that has a P problem and perfers the look of sand.

 

[Anonymous]

I would add that the release of P by the sand bed and the removal by the phosphate reactor happen very S L O W L Y. So any approach will take time...not days but months!!!!!! Even the poorly defined sand bed "crash" will theoretically take place over a couple of weeks or months.

Even then you are guessing as to how much p remover to run and at what rate and when to change it. Then you are guessing

As far as powerheads falling into the bed. The only thing I can say is follow Murphy's Law and secure those powerheads. Of course when this happens, you are sending billions of bacteria through the water column that usually aren't at that level and can overcome a corals defenses. I would say this event in not a P issue at all.

You betcha - even the most secured powerheads and fall - or a rock could topple over. I think I made the analogy to sea apples in a reef; sure they look nice but what a risk.

When I say proximal, I mean a few inches, feet or a couple of meters.
Each reef is a little different

I do think the proximity is very important. I think the bulk of the corals in the wild are no where near as close as we keep sand to our corals.
More importantly, the sand near reefs has no where near the benthic life that is suggested for tank sand beds.

Righty, I am not saying that you shouldn't have removed the sand bed, you have good reasons for doing so. I am just pointing out an alternative for someone else that has a P problem and perfers the look of sand.

Sure - we're just talking!
Fighting a p problem is currently expensive guess work in this hobby, and is anything but a sure thing.
I don't know if I believe this, but I think it sound good - fighting a p problem with phosphate removing media is like fighting a shorting powerhead with a GFCI, sure you may get a temporary solution, but the real problem is still there.

I also think that Faux Sand Beds look just as good as real ones, and for the look of sand you certainly don't need more than an inch and a half of sand at most.

Great discussion!

 

[Anonymous]

let me see a good faux bed.
all that i have seen look nothing like a real sand bed.
are they doing an epoxy thing or what?

 

[Anonymous]

 

[Anonymous]

that's sand covered starboard?

at first glance it might, but upon closer inpection of the clams and stuff on the bottom it doesn't appear real to me.

 

[Anonymous]

Thats sand mixed with epoxy, no starboard.