DSB, SSB or BB Experiences

[Reefer Rob]

LOL I was thinking about a SSB for esthetic reasons, now after the zoo bottom idea I'm thinking about BB for esthetic reasons. How about a fiberglass reinforced agracrete bottom moulded in a few pieces. I could be textured to look like rock (not sand), and sloped from say 3" in the back to near 0 in the front. I should still get the nutrient processing abilities of a sandbed, and the flow of a BB tank. The weight of the agracrete should be able to be included in the total weight of my live rock, thus reducing the cost of set up. My rock structures could also be attached with rods to the base for stability.

[ron101]

I had a DSB for several years and it became a big algae factory. The kind that carpets everything in the tank. Would never do one again. The theory of restocking sandbed fauna doesn't make sense to me. If they are constantly dying off - where are the nutrients going?

I also think that BB is the best for maintenance but I prefer the looks of some sand. I went with a thin layer of crushed coral that I vacuum with a syphon during water changes.

[albert_dao]

Zeovit Is The Future! Lol!

[fresh]

You guys keep forgetting one thing, "NO 2 TANKS ARE ALIKE"!!!

What works for one person, might not work for others, and what doesn't work for you, might be something that others swear by.

A couple of years ago, DSP was the big thing. A couple of years before that, crushed coral was the big thing. Today, BB is the big thing. And in a couple years from now, something else will be the big thing, and people will be telling you to throw away the idea of a BB because of so and so...

This is a cycle that never stops. It is partly a money scam, and partly proven facts and theories.

You have to decide for yourself. What looks you would like to go with, and then follow a type of maintenance that satisfies that look!!!

Many people have had successful DSB. Also many are still using crushed coral successfully. And today, I see a lot of BB tanks. They all look different, and they all have their pros and cons.

Just my 2cents!!!

[Reefer Rob]

Fresh, this is just the kinds of things I'm trying to get work through so I can make MY desision. I would like to hear from people who have had a DSB long term. My DSB has been running for 2 years, but I wouldn't consider that long term.

Zeovit?! Albert, SIT... STAY... NO BARK... good boy

[albert_dao]

Heh, honestly though, I LOVE Zeovit. It's a proven system (Europe) and you could run a fully stocked tank with almost no other forms of substrate and still be stable and algae free.

Eg. At work, our 200 gallon system has no substrates other than the Zeolites and maybe 75 lbs of live rock. It's fully stocked with corals, clams, has no detectable ammonia, nitrite, nitrate or phosphate. Another tank, the 150 gallon system has minimal rock, no sand and is fully loaded with coral and stocked with a million fish, all of which are fat. Again, this tank looks pristine!

[Chin_Lee]

Originally Posted by fresh

This is a cycle that never stops. It is partly a money scam, and partly proven facts and theories.

Fresh
I do agree with you on the most part. However I doubt that BB is a money scam since you're not buying anything for BB.
Also the DSB hype for the most part was timing of the eventual outcome. In theory as written by that good doctor, it sounded like a perfect solution. Fish poops and extra foods are eaten by critters in your "live" sandbed - what a wonderful theory but it took a few years for people to realize that they need the right critters in the right proportion to make it work correctly. Since then, the doctor has since changed his view somewhat to state that. How is an average aquarist able to stock 5-10 fish in his/her 100 gallon aquarium and expect that the 8 square feet of sand to house enough critters to eat all that bioload's waste? Compare this sand to bioload ratio in our aquariums to that of the ocean and one will realize that our aquarium's sandbeds would need to be extraordinary to accomplish that feat.
I'm sure another hype will come up sooner or later but regardless, a DSB is like playing russian roulette and the number of bullets in the revolver will depend on your fitration system, bioload, feeding frequency, and your dedication to your maintenance routine.
For the time being, go BB go.

[fresh]

you lazy bum lol

[Chad]

From everything I have read and Dr Ron himeself says something similar. That a DSB is not functional in anything less than 50 some odd gals. So don't even consider it if its not atleast that size.. you might have to search tho, cuz it might be a higher gal.. I just forget it.

I had a DSB in my 20gal.. and it eventualy went to crap because you just cannot get enough bio-diversity in such a small amount of area. So I had cyano issues, algae issues.. nitrate through the roof.. it was just a giant nutrient sink that filled up in short order.

Now I run a BB in my 50gal for over a year.. nitrates are zero, I didn't even "cook" my rocks.. but man did they shed, they shedded for about a year. I have one dead spot where all my ditirutus collects, I just syphon it out every week.

I do have a bit of a PH issue because of the lack of buffering from the SB.. but that is it and I just use Kalk to balance that out with a controller.

[ron101]

I havent read anything of R. Shimek's on DSBs recently but to me he lost alot of his credibility when the problems with them surfaced on a large scale. Much of his info on DSBs was personal opinion, not based on experimental evidence (a big no-no in the scientific community).

Like Chin-Lee said about bioload ratios as compared to the ocean. A DSB may be viable in a 100 gallon tank with a single 1" fish but who is going to stock it that way?