Tank aqua scaping help

[albert_dao]

Originally Posted by Myka

Great post Albert! There is at least one advantage to having "more rock than you need" though...there is more capacity for denitration.

I don't want to come off as argumentative, but hell, in for a dime, in for a dollar...

Again, no. We still have a problem of Aerobic bacteria density = NH4 + various other organics x surface area***. Aerobic bacteria are the things pulling oxygen out of the water as it diffuses through the rock. Oxygen doesn't just "magic" into oblivion. A 50 gallon tank filled with 200 lbs of rock, all other things being equal, is going to have no less nitrate in it than a the same tank with 65 lbs of rock. Feed carbon, and we'll talk, but short of that, it's just not going to work. Same problem, different pile.


*** for the sake of discussion, let's assume our rock is porous and we have sand -- remember, you don't get to choose where your bacteria go, they do.

God, I feel like the next thing to pop outta my mouth is gonna be somewhere along the lines of "git off my lawn!".. haha

[intarsiabox]

Here's my thoughts: I like the islands on the left and right but centre island looks out of place. Possible to join the 2 rocks that make your centre island side by side and bridge the two other islands with an arch? This would give a more open appearence and leave lots of room on the sand bed for corals such as brains and other bottom loving types. As I don't see anything on your sand bed right now this may not be at all what you want it's just what I like.

[Coralgurl]

Originally Posted by intarsiabox

Here's my thoughts: I like the islands on the left and right but centre island looks out of place. Possible to join the 2 rocks that make your centre island side by side and bridge the two other islands with an arch? This would give a more open appearence and leave lots of room on the sand bed for corals such as brains and other bottom loving types. As I don't see anything on your sand bed right now this may not be at all what you want it's just what I like.

I like this idea of a bridge or arch. Those pieces of rock are heavy so I don't think theyll work. There is loads of room on the sand now, I moved all the corals on the rock for now except 1 brain who likes the front right corner and my bubble in the left corner. Back to looking for rods

[Coralgurl]

Originally Posted by daniella3d

I think that looks very good. Maybe just make sure that you have enough room in between to allow for enough coral growth.

I like the different level in the sand as well.

Thanks Daniella. There is room between the column and corners. I'm happy with the sides, just gotta figure out the centre.

The sand has been blown around, really deep on the left side, I haven't moved it...

[daplatapus]

I hope this isn't hi-jacking this thread, but I'm a bit confused with some comments made about moving rocks to the sump. Coral girl said in post #9 that's she's only got 150 lbs of rock for her 180 gallon. Given that the go to answer for "how much rock do I need?" is roughly 1-2 lbs per gallon I'd hardly call that over kill.
I would agree with Albert that there is a point that more doesn't do any good, but in my limited experience, I wouldn't have thought this tank was really there yet. The original question was about moving some of that 150 lbs of rock to the sump so there was more room in the display tank, not adding more rock to the display to get more filtering capabilities.
If the bacteria on 150 lbs of rock is processing all the tanks parameters well, I do not understand why it would matter where the rock is. If someone really likes the look of sand flats and the creatures that lived there, what would stop them from having no rock in the DT and 150 lbs of it in the sump? As long as there is proper water flow and maintenance in both tanks, there's no reason why it wouldn't keep water parameters in proper alignment, no?
I'm not trying to be argumentative either, just curious for my own benefit and others following along. Help me understand

[Aquattro]

Originally Posted by daplatapus

I hope this isn't hi-jacking this thread, but I'm a bit confused with some comments made about moving rocks to the sump. Coral girl said in post #9 that's she's only got 150 lbs of rock for her 180 gallon. Given that the go to answer for "how much rock do I need?" is roughly 1-2 lbs per gallon I'd hardly call that over kill.
I would agree with Albert that there is a point that more doesn't do any good, but in my limited experience, I wouldn't have thought this tank was really there yet. The original question was about moving some of that 150 lbs of rock to the sump so there was more room in the display tank, not adding more rock to the display to get more filtering capabilities.
If the bacteria on 150 lbs of rock is processing all the tanks parameters well, I do not understand why it would matter where the rock is. If someone really likes the look of sand flats and the creatures that lived there, what would stop them from having no rock in the DT and 150 lbs of it in the sump? As long as there is proper water flow and maintenance in both tanks, there's no reason why it wouldn't keep water parameters in proper alignment, no?
I'm not trying to be argumentative either, just curious for my own benefit and others following along. Help me understand

The go to answer, in my opinion, is created by people that sell rock. I have always, quite successfully, used ~1/2 pound per gallon. So at 150 pounds, in my mind, that's more than is needed.
Now, let's say we have the perfect amount of rock, and we want to open the landscape a bit. Moving existing rock to the sump removes it from an environment designed to keep it clean. This includes clean up crews, and more importantly, flow. The flow in my DT is about 9000gph. The flow through my sump is 10% of that, which will allow for settling and accumulation of detritus on the rock, which will lead it higher nutrients.
Rock is not an item where more is better. It has to be planned well to facilitate the removal of detritus. Even in a DT, if you have too much rock, you're going to get buildup of crud. I learned this years ago when I took apart a 150g with about 200# of rock. It smelled like a sewer and the water went grey as I removed the rock piles. Since then, I've kept a very open and minimal rock load, and had much greater success in my reef.

[albert_dao]

Originally Posted by daplatapus

If the bacteria on 150 lbs of rock is processing all the tanks parameters well, I do not understand why it would matter where the rock is. If someone really likes the look of sand flats and the creatures that lived there, what would stop them from having no rock in the DT and 150 lbs of it in the sump? As long as there is proper water flow and maintenance in both tanks, there's no reason why it wouldn't keep water parameters in proper alignment, no?
I'm not trying to be argumentative either, just curious for my own benefit and others following along. Help me understand

On top of what Brad said, take a look at this:



What I'm trying to illustrate is that no matter what amount of rock in your tank, its surface area will always pale in comparison with the of your substrate -- by a long shot!

One of the points I stress is that you don't get to pick where your bacteria go. They will always colonize surfaces best suited for their metabolism. In this case, surfaces that have:

1. proper texture
2. high oxygen exposure
3. high resource saturation.

The surface of sand allows for this more so than any measure of rock. So you will find the vast majority of biological activity within the top ~1/2" of sand, grade dependent. IMO, rock is mostly an aesthetic. Its filtration capacity, while good, are nowhere near the effectiveness that we give it credit for.

Regarding anaerobic processes: While it is true that this happens within your live rock, it's generally pretty minimal because of the ecology constraints I described in my earlier posts. That's why normal fish tanks struggle with NO3. Of course, there are bacterial solutions to this (probiotic/carbon dosing, zeovit, biopellets, sulphur denitrifiers, etc), but they are outside the scope of this discussion. I'm just pointing them out to cover my a$$ :P

[reefwars]

hey albert, this has been a very informative read , have you considered writing something up along these lines for others to read and learn from??

im sure there are alot of people out there that are confused about topics like this and would love to have a read like this easily available to them

cheers

[albert_dao]

Originally Posted by reefwars

hey albert, this has been a very informative read , have you considered writing something up along these lines for others to read and learn from??

im sure there are alot of people out there that are confused about topics like this and would love to have a read like this easily available to them

cheers

Nope

[Aquattro]

Originally Posted by albert_dao

Nope

lol!!