LR not any good?

nemofish2217 · 10/25/2007, 07:03 PM

I was reading a couple articles recently in i think FISH magazine, and the author basically said that there was no need for live rock if you implemented live sand and perhaps had some "mud" in your refugium. He said that LR can actually end up causing problems. I'm loving the idea of a large surface area tank with just a little rock so it looks more like the "ocean" really would... but i've always been anxious because of the LR issue.What do you guys think? thanks

Python73 · 10/25/2007, 08:21 PM

What in the world is "the LR issue?" Getting past that odd statement...

Can you run a tank without live rock? Yes. You don't need live sand, you don't really NEED anything more than:

- something that doesn't leak
- 80ish degree saltwater
- an air pump and a crude sponge filter
- fish

But really, that would look retarded, however well it managed to keep fish alive. Live rock really does three things. It participates in filtration, it is a home for beneficial microfauna, and it looks good. Don't want to see a bunch of rock in your display? Put it in a refuge style tank piped into your system. It will still do the important two from above.

There is always a way to set up your tank differently. Just figure out what the item you don't like does, and replace it with something else that does the same thing.

Good luck.

S !

nemofish2217 · 10/25/2007, 08:49 PM

The statement wasn't odd, it just needed a better explanation. What i meant was i have always been concerned that i need "1.5 to 2 lbs" LR per gallon.

My question is, does live sand and something like a refuge mud do as good of a job at the biological filtration and housing bacteria as LR? I figure i can load my fuge with rubble,chaeto, and mud or something. I think the look of a tank with some rock but a lot of open water for all of the fish would look cool. Plus, this is more what they do in the wild, right? i am just getting tired of seeing every tank (including my own) jam packed with rock. Sometimes, i think that can sometime look "retarted."

demonsp · 10/25/2007, 08:56 PM

You may be able to but the question is would you want to. If this is a reef tank then the fish will want LR for hideing and picking for food. LR also acts like a bioligical filter. Plus what to do with the frags of coral. IMO a salt water tank with no LR is just a FOWOLR. Kinda boring.

kawicivic · 10/25/2007, 09:02 PM

I guess it depends on what you are looking to keep. If the fish you want are open swimmers then you should be fine with just live rock in teh sump. At the same time, I think you should try to get as much live rock in the system as possible since it is so beneficial. Most shark and ray tanks that I have seen do not have much live rock in them. Actually, many aggressive tanks lack live rock that I have seen.

nemofish2217 · 10/25/2007, 09:02 PM

I would put LR in the tank, just not fill up the entire tank. I was thinking more like two or three small to medium "mounds" with perhaps sea grass surrounding. Yes, fish do depend somewhat on the rock for security, but fish such as tangs are open water swimmers. I know the LR offers biological filtration, so that is why i was asking if the other stuff (sand, chaeto, LR rubble in sump, and refuge mud) could do the same thing.

Skier1 · 10/25/2007, 09:08 PM

Maybe you are thinking of aquascaping more along the lines of this:

http://invincible569.squarespace.com/tank-progression/

rather than the ubiquitous "wall o rock"?

Python73 · 10/25/2007, 09:31 PM

Let me clarify my answer. Yes.

You can keep rock anywhere in your system, so long as it receives water flow and it is submerged it will do its job. There is no difference between rubble and big rocks filtration wise other than size. Assuming they are the same type of rock. Mud filters, sand filters, rubble filter all work if you set them up right.

My point was simply to illustrate that you can set up your systems however you want, so long as you follow a few basic principals.

Also, I believe that most tangs are not open water swimmers, but schoaling fish that by nature swim in packs in close proximity to the rocks that they both feed off of and hide in. Which has nothing to do with your setup, since you won't be having the proper number of any tang species to create a schoal. Set your rockwork up as you enjoy it.

S !

thefishgy18 · 10/25/2007, 09:41 PM

The reason that the article said LR was not as good as everyone thinks is because LR actually hordes excess phossphates. When phophates in the water column is removed due to the aquarist, the excess phosphate is then realeased form the rock and enters the water. This process continues until the phosphate lvls in the water reach equilibrium with the bacteria and organic tissue in the tank abilitie to break it down. resulting in a continous cycle of the aquarist battleing phosphates.

audio101 · 10/25/2007, 10:56 PM

Why stop with just live rock, might as well not get fish and corals since they can cause harm also.........

10/25/2007, 07:03 PM	#1
nemofish2217 Registered Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: South Carolina Posts: 1,606	LR not any good? I was reading a couple articles recently in i think FISH magazine, and the author basically said that there was no need for live rock if you implemented live sand and perhaps had some "mud" in your refugium. He said that LR can actually end up causing problems. I'm loving the idea of a large surface area tank with just a little rock so it looks more like the "ocean" really would... but i've always been anxious because of the LR issue.What do you guys think? thanks

10/25/2007, 08:21 PM	#2
Python73 Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Fombell, PA Posts: 1,832	What in the world is "the LR issue?" Getting past that odd statement... Can you run a tank without live rock? Yes. You don't need live sand, you don't really NEED anything more than: - something that doesn't leak - 80ish degree saltwater - an air pump and a crude sponge filter - fish But really, that would look retarded, however well it managed to keep fish alive. Live rock really does three things. It participates in filtration, it is a home for beneficial microfauna, and it looks good. Don't want to see a bunch of rock in your display? Put it in a refuge style tank piped into your system. It will still do the important two from above. There is always a way to set up your tank differently. Just figure out what the item you don't like does, and replace it with something else that does the same thing. Good luck. S ! __________________ Sam Pistachio PMASI Life Member "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."

10/25/2007, 09:31 PM	#8
Python73 Registered Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Fombell, PA Posts: 1,832	Let me clarify my answer. Yes. You can keep rock anywhere in your system, so long as it receives water flow and it is submerged it will do its job. There is no difference between rubble and big rocks filtration wise other than size. Assuming they are the same type of rock. Mud filters, sand filters, rubble filter all work if you set them up right. My point was simply to illustrate that you can set up your systems however you want, so long as you follow a few basic principals. Also, I believe that most tangs are not open water swimmers, but schoaling fish that by nature swim in packs in close proximity to the rocks that they both feed off of and hide in. Which has nothing to do with your setup, since you won't be having the proper number of any tang species to create a schoal. Set your rockwork up as you enjoy it. S ! __________________ Sam Pistachio PMASI Life Member "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."

10/25/2007, 09:41 PM	#9
thefishgy18 Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 12	reply The reason that the article said LR was not as good as everyone thinks is because LR actually hordes excess phossphates. When phophates in the water column is removed due to the aquarist, the excess phosphate is then realeased form the rock and enters the water. This process continues until the phosphate lvls in the water reach equilibrium with the bacteria and organic tissue in the tank abilitie to break it down. resulting in a continous cycle of the aquarist battleing phosphates.

10/25/2007, 08:49 PM	#3
nemofish2217 Registered Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: South Carolina Posts: 1,606	The statement wasn't odd, it just needed a better explanation. What i meant was i have always been concerned that i need "1.5 to 2 lbs" LR per gallon. My question is, does live sand and something like a refuge mud do as good of a job at the biological filtration and housing bacteria as LR? I figure i can load my fuge with rubble,chaeto, and mud or something. I think the look of a tank with some rock but a lot of open water for all of the fish would look cool. Plus, this is more what they do in the wild, right? i am just getting tired of seeing every tank (including my own) jam packed with rock. Sometimes, i think that can sometime look "retarted."

10/25/2007, 08:56 PM	#4
demonsp Moved On Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: el paso tx Posts: 7,634	You may be able to but the question is would you want to. If this is a reef tank then the fish will want LR for hideing and picking for food. LR also acts like a bioligical filter. Plus what to do with the frags of coral. IMO a salt water tank with no LR is just a FOWOLR. Kinda boring.

10/25/2007, 09:02 PM	#5
kawicivic Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Rockford Posts: 2,316	I guess it depends on what you are looking to keep. If the fish you want are open swimmers then you should be fine with just live rock in teh sump. At the same time, I think you should try to get as much live rock in the system as possible since it is so beneficial. Most shark and ray tanks that I have seen do not have much live rock in them. Actually, many aggressive tanks lack live rock that I have seen.

10/25/2007, 09:08 PM	#7
Skier1 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Rochester, NY Posts: 112	Maybe you are thinking of aquascaping more along the lines of this: http://invincible569.squarespace.com/tank-progression/ rather than the ubiquitous "wall o rock"?

10/25/2007, 10:56 PM	#10
audio101 Moved On Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Napa, CA Posts: 1,091	Why stop with just live rock, might as well not get fish and corals since they can cause harm also.........