Advice on Nitrate/Phosphate problems

[Doug]

Originally Posted by Reefer Rob

Sand beds need to be cleaned?? The #1 rule of sand beds is... leave them alone. Let the critters do the work of stiring and cleaning. With enough current nothing will settle on them. Albert, I've read a lot of your posts, and I respect your opinions, but you need do need to chill a bit.

If I may use your post as a quote.

Where does the detritus go in an aquarium with a sandbed. I have had some very nice tanks with dsb,s but never long enough to qualify an answer for long term use. I now run bare and the amout of detritus build up is unbelievable, as many that have gone that route have suggested.

Most of bare bottomed tanks run more current than dsb tanks, so keeping it in suspension is not the question. I have had near everything available to "keep the sand clean", in some of my tanks. I never did then nor do I now understand how they keep the bed clean. Even believe even Ron suggested they have a limited life and should be partially removed & replaced at times, the same as our live rock.

I disagree that sandbeds are more work, if anything they are less work. What they are, is more $$$$$$$$, both for the sand & the critters needed to "keep them clean". My bare bottomed tank andmost others I know, need detrius siphoning nearly every water change, something I never did with a dsb.

I did like the look of my dsb,s despite their taking up of 4 inches of my tank and I liked many of the creatures I kept to clean it. But when I see the crap that comes from my tank & some of my older rock now, I just shake my head thinking of where it all went before.

[Dave C]

Having said all of that, I did some followup reading on RC and decided to buy some starboard and go bb on the 225g tank. I just know that watching the sand load up with crap will drive me nuts in the long run. This way I'll have the 65g tank with sand and the 225g without and I'll be able to make a educated comparison. Funny enough, the cost of the starboard including shipping & exchange was almost exactly what I was going to spend on the sand.

[Flusher]

Originally Posted by Doug

But when I see the crap that comes from my tank & some of my older rock now, I just shake my head thinking of where it all went before.

Doesn't it just dissolve into the water column, then gets removed by water changes and skimmers? That was always my understanding, coming from my freshwater experiences (minus the skimmer part, of course). Once I got into planted tanks, I quit siphoning the substrate completely. I never had a problem.

My nano tank has been running for a year with a 1.5 - 2" sand bed that I've never siphoned. I've never had nitrates register yet. Granted, a year isn't a long time, and such a small tank makes it easy to do weekly 15% water changes (that's total volume, not actual volume after accounting for whatever is taking up room in the tank). Also, I quite like the look of the colourful layers in the substrate. I guess this is the crap that drives some people nuts.

At any rate, with my new 24 G tank almost set up, I've decided to go with under 1" of fresh aragonite in all three of my tanks. Hopefully nassarius snails will do a sufficient job rooting through the substrate.
________
Ipad cases

[Doug]

Originally Posted by Flusher

Doesn't it just dissolve into the water column, then gets removed by water changes and skimmers? That was always my understanding, coming from my freshwater experiences (minus the skimmer part, of course). Once I got into planted tanks, I quit siphoning the substrate completely. I never had a problem.

Its the detritus that settles and build in piles where the current cant keep it suspended. I would say the organics would be in the water and removed by skimming ,{which also removes visable detritus}, and water changes.

My nano tank has been running for a year with a 1.5 - 2" sand bed that I've never siphoned. I've never had nitrates register yet.

I never had a nitrate problem with a dsb, as its excellent at denitrification. Its the build up of phosphates in the sandbed, as in detritus piles in barebottem, or in the sumps or in partical filters, like filter wool or the socks used now. Thats why they need cleaning on a regular basis.

It should also be noted, although I run bare now, {sounded funny}, I still see nothing wrong with running a shallow or dsb if one wishes. Its just that they also require maintance to keep them functioning correctly and not just a bunch of costly items from an lfs.

[reeferaddict]

Here's how I keep my DSB fresh.... Engineer Goby, Brittle Stars, Sand Sifting stars, Sand sifting snails and about 30 or 40 Cerith snails... I have no phosphates... nitrates down to <10ppm with the help of my biodenitrator, and not a spec of algae to be seen anymore... Christy will attest to that... Corraline is growing almost TOO much... and I finally have good polyp extension AND growth... And I feed what most of you would deem as too much... my fish are fat and healthy... Oh and did I mention that I'm getting some of the most spectacular colours I have seen?

DSB or BB is a difference in philosophy and approaches... there is no ONE way to do things in this hobby. Yes I would agree that DSB is more work and more $$$, but I love the look, and the animals that live in the bed... they make the whole ecosystem more interesting and like nature IMHO.

I am in the midst of setting up a 37g frag tank that will be BB just for the maintenance aspect, so it's not that I'm not open minded. Just a matter of preference IMO...

[Moogled]

If I were to reframe this "debate", I think most of us agree on this:

A DSB is indeed beneficial for the reef aquarium tank and has alot of perks. However, given the lack of resources in Calgary (Canada, even) to create such an environment, a barebottom tank seems like a much more sensible and practical choice.

Me and Albert don't disagree with the idea of a sandbed in itself, but rather we take into context what we have and don't have and then state our positions from there on.

[Reefer Rob]

I regularly blast my tank with a turkey baster, and I would say I usually get more detritus off my live rock than from my sand bed. Detritus should be consumed by the sand bed inhabitants, there sure seems to be a lot of action there in my tank. A labyrinth of worm tunnels and other little unidentified (at least by me) creatures- definitely one of the more fascinating areas of of my tank.
It's amazing where a little question about nutrient reduction can take us

[Reefer Rob]

So Chin, in your house analogy your skimmer is what... an outhouse

[Chin_Lee]

Regardless of who poops first and what eats the poop, the secondary poop eater will still poop something out in the end. We are hoping that the amount of nutrients in the secondary poop is substantially less than the first poop which in turn is substantially less that the raw food that was first consumed. The poop eating chain can continue as long as you have the right organisms that enjoys eating its neighbor's poop. And the key word is the "right" organisms. Does anybody know what are the right organisms to form this wonderful poop chain of poop eaters? I have my doubts that anybody does but even if you know what they are, are you able to acquire them in the correct proportion to faciliate chain poop eating?
As much as I enjoy DSB's au naturel look, its only logical to go BB UNLESS....
a) you are assured and guaranteed that you have seeded your DSB with the correct organisms AND
b) you have given the organisms the time it needs to propagate within your new DSB to accomodate the bio-load of your tank or you increase your bioload very slowly in order to allow the organisms in the sand to increase accordingly

Here is something that I had written previously in a post regarding the pros and cons of DSB and BB.

if you are contemplating on BB or substrate, go BB first. If you still don't like it after a few months, then add substrate. Otherwise its a PITA to do it the other way around.
I concur with the BB supporters - crud is inevitable and I feel that sand just hides it really well. some critters in your live sand will eat some of the crud but you will never have enough critters to sustain an aquarium environment's bio-load.
I can relate to this theory by this scenario - imagine yourself and your entire family being stuck in your house without any methods in which to remove your biological waste but a mysterious hand will continuously put food and water into your house to keep you alive. You are real happy for the most part because there's the big screen TV, computer, workout gym, various boardgames etc. However everyone dreads having to go to the bathroom but when they do, how many critters will be needed to live with you in your house to continuously eat and remove all that biological waste in your house? HOWEVER if that same mysterious hand can come in with a plastic tube and suck out all that biological waste, I think it will be somewhat ........ alright.