Tank aqua scaping help

[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!!

[Coralgurl]

Thanks to this thread, none of my excess rock (3 large pieces) went in the sump. Very informative and helpful and I appreciate all the feedback, advice and constructive criticisms!

Now, to clean up the equipment, wiring and overall appearance of my fish room...another thread????? lol, just kidding...

[Myka]

Albert, there is no argument to be had that there will only ever be enough nitrifying bacteria to compliment that amount of available ammonia. A person could not argue that. My experience is that there is often a lack of anaerobic bacteria for which there could be many reasons (poor rock density, rocks too small, etc). The sand bed is not usually a host to anaerobic bacteria unless a person has a very healthy, well-functioning DSB which is a rare thing for sure. For these reasons, it is definitely possible that more rock would provide more options (and thus more likelihood) for anaerobic bacteria populations which could then have a nitrate-lowering effect compared to a tank with a lack of anaerobic bacteria.

Coralgurl, go check out sphelps' tank journals for pics of really nice, clean, and organized sumps, cabinets, and fish rooms. I can never keep that tidiness up...