why are we running DSB and is it for the right reasons

[StirCrazy]

after reading several posts of late on DSB problems (including the 37 pager on RC) I have come to queston weather a DSB is a long term nitrate reducer, or is it infact a nutrent/polutant sponge that has a finite life and will cause problems down the road. If it is the later, then how do we deal with the potential demise of our present DSB's and how do we set up tanks in the future to safe guard against this?

I have thought about this for the new tank I want to do and this is what I am thinking.

1, make a base in the display tank of agracreat (or something) that you can "glue" sand to to simulate the look of a sand bed.

2, have a large remote sand bed set up but only using sugar sand about 1 to 2" deep so you can get the denitrifacation benifits out of it, but leave it cheep enuf to dispose of it every few years. (what kinda of square footage of sand bed are we talking about to be a good bacteria driven denitrifyer for a givin size of tank?)

I liked the idea of having two remote sandbeds with staggered start dates.
that way you could change one bed every year so you only go 2 years on a spicific bed.

so lets hear the Idea's/opinions that I know we have on this board remember this is not intended to be a barebottom vs. dsb argument but rather a dessusion.

Steve

[Canadian Man]

Great Topic Steve!
Well my idea with my sand bed in my new tank is just 2 inches of sand. I have this same setup in my 90g currently. If I do need to change it in the future I guess I could syphion some of it out and add new sand but hopefully this is not nessecary.

I like the idea of a remote sandbed but you alway's hear that it's not as effective.

Would it not be as effective if you had a 230g display with no sand bed and you ran a 75g and a 100g with sandbed's plumbed into the main system?

Sand does look nice in a reef tank IMO though.

[Quinn]

Would be nice if someone conducted a true experiment on this. It could actually be done, you'd think RC could sponsor it or something. All this talk and no actual testing. I'd really like to know if I really needed to put 4" of sand in my tank, I would rather have done 2" or so.

[StirCrazy]

I will be the first to admidt that I went with a sandbed because everyone else was and all I could find to read about them was good.

I don;t understand how a remote sand bed could be not as good for nitrate reduction, if you get good flow throught it it will reduce. I to also think a bare bottom tank looks unfinnished, this is why I sugested making a bottom that looks like a sand bed.

the only regreat I would have is not haveing the feather dusters and such that grow out of the sand. but this could be acomplished by making holes in the bottom agracreat and filling them with sand

the reason I want to get the sand out of the main tank is that if infact they are a proverbial "ticking time bomb" then you can change out the bed with out disrupting the main tank simpaly by isolating that tank for a couple weeks while you pull out the sand and let the new stuff settle.

also this would allow you to stir the bed up when you do water changes and syphen out the junk with out clouding your main tank.

Steve

[StirCrazy]

Originally Posted by teevee

I'd really like to know if I really needed to put 4" of sand in my tank, I would rather have done 2" or so.

you can achieve denitrafication in as little as 1" of caribsea sugarsand, the 4" is the min recomended for the diversity of snad bed creatures.

Steve

[Aquattro]

Agreed. I had a 2 inch bed with no NO3 detectable. Dr. Ron "cohersed" me into adding sand to get 3 or 4 inches, as this was "better".....After 6 months with the deeper sand, I see no difference at all. To do it again, I would use 1-2 inches in the display tank and add it after the rock. That way portions could be removed down the road without tumbling any rock piles.

[Wilty]

I understand what your getting at but I don't understand how its a ticking time bomb. Is it the non-removal of trapped wastes that aren't getting eaten/broken down?

I'm a firm believer that a sand bed is needed in the main tank for reasons of feeding. Any food missed by the crabs/fish/corals get eaten by the brittle stars and other worms in the sand bed. Vacuuming the sand will kill all the life in the sand and I refuse to do it. I chose to use Cucumbers, Gobies and other sand sifters to move the sand around.

When I moved and had to pack up my tank, I lost a few fish when I accidently stirred my sand and spiked my nitrates. So I may need to rethink my own opinion lol

[Doug]

Guess I can put my 2-bits worth in, as I was part of the 40 pager.

I followed the trend also by going to deep sandbed. I dont know if they work long term or not, and wont argue that point. I can tell you none of mine did. They always had some sort of algae on them. When I moved twice, moving the sandbeds, they were the stinkiest crap I have smelled, worse than my skimmer gunk.

Now I am an experienced aquarists, I had tons of sand critters to "eat" whatever. I run top line filtration equipment. Never mattered. Most reef tanks I have seen in person, have cyno problems on their dsb.

They do remove nitrates, no doubt about that. I have always made sure when posting on removing my dsb, that I run a large turf scrubber, so nitrate removal is not a problem for me. That way someone does not copy me, just cause I did it. Its up to them.

I do have several inches of fine sand in the back, because of my wrasse. The front has rubble and/or Geo-Marine crushed coral. The animal used to clean it is called Doug Lowey & the python cleaner.

We are settin up a friends new 180 this weekend and his dsb from his 120 is going into the 100g rubbermaid sump. Its unlit this way and can be cleaned if necc. and still provides de-nitrification. His 180 bottom will have a fine layer of the same crushed coral.

[Fishster]

I have had my DSB's running for a couple of years now and I have been very happy with them. I have not seen any problem algea or any other problems with them. I am using them because I believe that they are closer to natural than a barebottom tank and they add to the biodiversity of the tank which is what I like about reef tanks. That having being said I have never cone through moving one which sounds like it could get ugly. Also it remains to be seen what happens after the 5 year mark if I see a dropoff in biodiversity this may be a factor. As it stands now I just don't see enough evidense to make me want to remove any sand.

[Wilty]

I was just thinking of just removing the waste/life from the sand in sections over time with a vacuum. Like a little every year so it doesn't get saturated. And not all at once to flux the system