Sand Bed Vs Bare Bottom - Page 2

greenbean36191 · 08/13/2007, 11:37 AM

Quote:

the thing people dont realize is that on the coral reef sand never sits in one spot it moves around a lot. One day its in hawaii, the next year it made it to austrailias reefs, and all of its detritus with it. Our tanks beds dont function like this at all.

Even where sps corals are predominant, the water is so strong that sand does not stay put. Its called the reef crest. Closer to shore, with alot less sps, is sand and algae, especially eel grass and caulerpas. I wonder why? Because its the sand supplying lots of nutrients to the plants(ie-detritus)

These are very cartoonish and unrealistic ideas of reef ecology. They're hardly strong arguments for one method over another.

LobsterOfJustice · 08/13/2007, 12:05 PM

I have sand, but other than that my tank is barebottom. What I mean by that is run my tank like I dont have sand. High flow so nothing settles and rots, skimming very hard and wet to remove it all before it breaks down. I just have sand for the looks.

Sand aside, the way I see it is there are two sides: process the waste and break it down, or remove it before it breaks down. You can do either with or without sand, but it happens to be that the most popular way to process the waste is DSB, and the most popular way to remove the waste is BB.

The Reefer91 · 08/13/2007, 01:31 PM

i think people should stop bashing each others methods. the idea that it is not natural for corals to be in a place with sand is a bit far-fetched, and the idea that SPS need sand is also ridiculous. both methods(DSB and BB) have one characteristic in common. if you don't research it, your tank will crash and burn in front of your eyes.

some of the arguement is also aesthetics. some like sand, some don't. but the arguement that some people make with phrasing such as "no sand, no decomposing" is ludacris and absurd. it's all a matter of research. i've seen alot of successful BB tanks, but there are just as many successful DSB and SSB tanks to match it. i like sand, so my opinion is a little bias, but i will also end up trying out a BB tank as well. i think there is no evidence to show that one method is better than the other.

sorry to rant, but there have been so many threads with this topic that evolve into wars, reefers insulting each others husbandry, it just gets out of hand.

and on a lighter note, the weather is beautiful here in Northern VA

boxfishpooalot · 08/13/2007, 04:08 PM

greenbean, explain to us how it all works then

Scissorhand · 08/13/2007, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Reefer91
i think people should stop bashing each others methods. the idea that it is not natural for corals to be in a place with sand is a bit far-fetched, and the idea that SPS need sand is also ridiculous. both methods(DSB and BB) have one characteristic in common. if you don't research it, your tank will crash and burn in front of your eyes.

some of the arguement is also aesthetics. some like sand, some don't. but the arguement that some people make with phrasing such as "no sand, no decomposing" is ludacris and absurd. it's all a matter of research. i've seen alot of successful BB tanks, but there are just as many successful DSB and SSB tanks to match it. i like sand, so my opinion is a little bias, but i will also end up trying out a BB tank as well. i think there is no evidence to show that one method is better than the other.

sorry to rant, but there have been so many threads with this topic that evolve into wars, reefers insulting each others husbandry, it just gets out of hand.

and on a lighter note, the weather is beautiful here in Northern VA

Agreed. I've seen pictures of successful reef aquariums that incorporate DSB, BB, or SSB. I think it really boils down to proper husbandry of each system.

virginiadiver69 · 08/13/2007, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by boxfishpooalot
greenbean, explain to us how it all works then

Please don't encourage "her"

mg426 · 08/13/2007, 04:49 PM

I have seen both methods in use. I just happen to like the look of sand.

law086 · 08/13/2007, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by King-Kong
The question of "BB vs. DSB" is more than aesthetics. Read the standard literature and common FAQs out there on the web for tanks, and then try it with a BB and watch how you fail (my first stab at BB failed because of this).

Most of the advice, hardware, and techniques are not geared for BB tanks. They are geared for DSB tanks and selling lifestock/merchandise.

Going BB requires different (and mostly less) hardware, less live rock, and typically more fish and feeding.

BB also allows you to get away with a ton less conistancy than DSB tanks (such as fluctations in SG, pH, temperature).

I will say one disclaimer; some people (Like Rich) advocate a kind of hybrid theory when using sand that incorporates a lot of BB theory. The overwhelming amount of advice and hobby literature, however, does not.

This is an interesting post to me, mostly because I tend to stay away from the sand bed debates and haven't done my homework on BB tanks (since I'm a fan of a SSB).

Can you explain how/why a BB setup would run better with less hardware, less rock and more fish/food? I'm also curious as to how/why a sand bed could affect the impact of PH (for example) fluctuations.

Thanks,
Ron

King-Kong · 08/13/2007, 08:15 PM

BB tanks require less light than their DSB counterparts. BB tanks can easily be sustained without MH for SPS corals, and most BB users have to cut back their MH photoperiods to amounts as low as 3hrs.

BB tanks also have a lot less carbon demands.. as such, they uptake far less alkalinity, allowing users to have thriving SPS tanks without calcium reactors (the large biomass of bacteria found in DSBs is the major user of carbon in tanks.. remove the hungry source, and well.. you dont need as much)

Because of the importance of flow carrying away detritus in a BB system, and the reliance on the protein skimmer as the core means of export, "less rock is more" in BB tanks. Having more rock only impedes flow, gives detritus a place to hide away and rot, and costs you money.

Most BB tanks, also, are run too nutrient poor. This means pastel colors in SPS corals, and reduced growth in LPS. To offset it, most BB users have quickly found that increasing their bioload over that with traditional DSB setups has almost become a requirement.

As for the pH related comment; there are 3 major factors that will cause the bacteria colonies in sandbeds to fluctuate. pH, temperature, and salinity. It's not so much that SPS corals need "absolute stability", as it is that sand beds require stability. Do a large w/c where pH and salinity dont match up? Bacteria fluctuates, changes nutrient level in tank, SPS corals have to deal with sudden change in water conditions, and arent happy as a result. Because this giant biomass doesnt exist at such quantities in a BB tank, there isnt the same population to anger.

insanefishguy · 08/13/2007, 08:20 PM

That was a very informative post. Thank you king kong. I feel the need to go out and buy a bunch of fish though. I removed my dsb a few weeks ago and have noticed a lightening of my sps. I was not aware of the light difference though. could explain why that is?

insanefishguy · 08/13/2007, 08:22 PM

Hey law086, you are right up 309 from me...

HBtank · 08/13/2007, 08:25 PM

Lots of opinions are being presented as fact in this thread...

Anyways, I use DSB in the display and my fuge. It is working for me but my personal philosophies are very far from the sterile concepts of most BB tanks. Anyways, I hope my ideas work.

Both should have massive flow to be healthy though. One distinct commonality.

Aqua Keepers · 08/13/2007, 09:08 PM

I vote KK's last post to be "The" BB explenation post of all BB eplenation posts.

law086 · 08/13/2007, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by King-Kong
BB tanks require less light than their DSB counterparts. BB tanks can easily be sustained without MH for SPS corals, and most BB users have to cut back their MH photoperiods to amounts as low as 3hrs.

Thanks for the follow up.

I think I got everything except this lighting comment. How does a BB tank require less light? I'm guessing it has something to do with the reflective properties of starboard.

Ron

uhuru · 08/13/2007, 09:57 PM

clearer water + less phosphates = less lighting required to maintain SPS color

at least that's how I understand it

usmcsgt · 08/14/2007, 04:31 AM

wow so much insight from everyone

King-Kong · 08/14/2007, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by insanefishguy
That was a very informative post. Thank you king kong. I feel the need to go out and buy a bunch of fish though. I removed my dsb a few weeks ago and have noticed a lightening of my sps. I was not aware of the light difference though. could explain why that is?

You can try 2 things;

-reduce your lighting period
-feed more / add more fish (just be sure your skimming / exporting can keep up with the new load)

-------------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by law086
Thanks for the follow up.

I think I got everything except this lighting comment. How does a BB tank require less light? I'm guessing it has something to do with the reflective properties of starboard.

Ron

BB tanks dont really need starboard for any other reason besides "protecting" the bottom of the tank (though many people will say the bottom of our tanks are plenty strong and dont need protection). But, with that aside, a brand new starboard will reflect a healthy amount of light back up under corals. I recently swapped my old bottom out for a new one (old one had some epoxy on it that was leaching silicates) and within a couple of weeks, all of my SPS corals (especially the tabling ones) had tons of polyp growth on the underside (where they were normally pretty sparse). Eventually the boards get covered in corraline anyways.. after a month in the tank, my new boards are about 1/4 covered already

But that's not really the reason for "less light".. the extremely powerful lights we're told to get are necessary because most DSB tanks have an over abundance of "fertilizer" available for the zooxanthellae in our corals. As such, these corals get deep dark colors.

If you dont have enough light you're left with dark brown corals. One way to fix it; blast them with light so you actually burn off the excess zooxanthellae. This is why such powerful lights are recommended, but unnecessary if you dont have the corals sitting in a tank with such an over abundance of nutrients and "fertlizer" readily available.

Then again, there are some BB tanks (take Leonardo's beatuiful BB cube) who have such huge bioloads and feed so much, that they use MH successfully with long photoperiods and really push the limits of growth on their acros (his stags grow like true weeds). So it really becomes a "balancing" act. I think Leonardo has over 20 fish in his 92gallon cube, and feeds pappone as well as normal food to the fish, but his corals are beautiful.

philpot · 08/14/2007, 05:47 AM

Great thread...
I too have just tore down my setup which had DSB in the sump refuge and SSB in the display. My maintanance slipped over the last year and the tank sort of crashed (macros went crazy and took over the tank). I was considering setting up with BB and no DSB in the sump as both had small areas of "blackness". I know this is down to flow but i keep mainly softies and don't want massive flow in the display (they just won't open up with too much flow). Anyway i think i have enough flow for BB so will give it a try.
Can someone tell me if my chaeto will still grow well in a sandless fuge??

Cheers.

Chris2500DK · 08/14/2007, 06:27 AM

Chaeto doesn't need substrate to grow.

rustybucket145 · 08/14/2007, 06:57 AM

Come on guys......

joeychitwood · 08/14/2007, 07:15 AM

Thanks for the very informative thread. I don't, however, understand why a simple discussion over sand in a tank always generates such emotion.

One question: do you think that a one-half to one inch layer of sand can be considered a bare bottom?

nattydread · 08/14/2007, 07:29 AM

Hey Kong, thanks for your insight into BB tanks. Im thinking of doing the same with a deep sand bed in my fuge.

Where is the best place to get a piece of starboad cut? Should it be sealed to the bottom of the tank with something? What color do you think reflects the best light? White?

thks

alwmalon · 08/14/2007, 07:37 AM

I have a 1-2" sand bed in my display but then I have a DSB in my fuge that acts as a safe haven for amphipods and coepods but also acts as an extra measure of biological filtration. This seems to work great for my SPS.

RichConley · 08/14/2007, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by LobsterOfJustice
I have sand, but other than that my tank is barebottom. What I mean by that is run my tank like I dont have sand. High flow so nothing settles and rots, skimming very hard and wet to remove it all before it breaks down. I just have sand for the looks.

Sand aside, the way I see it is there are two sides: process the waste and break it down, or remove it before it breaks down. You can do either with or without sand, but it happens to be that the most popular way to process the waste is DSB, and the most popular way to remove the waste is BB.

Lobster, thats got nothing to do with BB, and is just plain good husbandry.

The day that high flow and proper skimmers got labeled as "Barebottom only" was a HUGE setback in this hobby.

King-Kong · 08/14/2007, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by joeychitwood
Thanks for the very informative thread. I don't, however, understand why a simple discussion over sand in a tank always generates such emotion.

One question: do you think that a one-half to one inch layer of sand can be considered a bare bottom?

I would not consider it BB. It will trap detritus.

The major maintenance done on BB tanks is siphoning whatever small piles of detritus werent picked up by the flow. Most of the time these are small (let's say 2" areas) collections.

An entire bottom covered by sand (no matter how thin) just cant be considered BB.

Most of the flow a long the bottom of my tank is strong enough that if a snail lost it's footing, it rolls across the bottom until it hits the glass.

08/13/2007, 12:05 PM	#27
LobsterOfJustice Recovering Detritophobe Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Cary, NC Posts: 7,443	I have sand, but other than that my tank is barebottom. What I mean by that is run my tank like I dont have sand. High flow so nothing settles and rots, skimming very hard and wet to remove it all before it breaks down. I just have sand for the looks. Sand aside, the way I see it is there are two sides: process the waste and break it down, or remove it before it breaks down. You can do either with or without sand, but it happens to be that the most popular way to process the waste is DSB, and the most popular way to remove the waste is BB. __________________ If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. I remember when zoanthids were called things like "green" and "orange" and not "reverse gorilla nipple." Current Tank Info: 180g reef with all the bells and whistles

08/13/2007, 01:31 PM	#28
The Reefer91 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 1,250	i think people should stop bashing each others methods. the idea that it is not natural for corals to be in a place with sand is a bit far-fetched, and the idea that SPS need sand is also ridiculous. both methods(DSB and BB) have one characteristic in common. if you don't research it, your tank will crash and burn in front of your eyes. some of the arguement is also aesthetics. some like sand, some don't. but the arguement that some people make with phrasing such as "no sand, no decomposing" is ludacris and absurd. it's all a matter of research. i've seen alot of successful BB tanks, but there are just as many successful DSB and SSB tanks to match it. i like sand, so my opinion is a little bias, but i will also end up trying out a BB tank as well. i think there is no evidence to show that one method is better than the other. sorry to rant, but there have been so many threads with this topic that evolve into wars, reefers insulting each others husbandry, it just gets out of hand. and on a lighter note, the weather is beautiful here in Northern VA __________________ Dan "Every day we fade little by little, 'till there's nothing left of us but the lies we've sown." Current Tank Info: 20g L display: 2x65watt Coralife light, Octopus 150 needle wheel protein skimmer, 1 Koralia 2 and 2 powersweeps, and a DIY sump/fuge.....120G in the works!!!

08/13/2007, 04:08 PM	#29
boxfishpooalot Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: canada, Grande Praire, Ab Posts: 5,824	greenbean, explain to us how it all works then __________________ Its a good idea to have a refrence sample for alk test kits. 1.1350 grams of baking soda in 1gallon of distilled water=10dkh. Check your alkalinity test kit! Algae is Mother Natures phosphate remover Current Tank Info: 220 galon mixed reef.

08/13/2007, 04:49 PM	#32
mg426 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: maryland Posts: 6,923	I have seen both methods in use. I just happen to like the look of sand. __________________ I found a way to make a small fortune running a reef tank. Start with a large fortune. Unofficial President of the SEACLONE haters club Current Tank Info: 125 mixed reef 110 lbs LR, 1x250watt XM 20K MH 2x175watt XM 20K MH on Magetics 2X96 watt actinic PC, 220 watt VHO actinic, 30 gallon refugium, closed loop system powered by Sequence Dart MSX 200 skimmer 38 gallon sump, Oceansmotions squirt

08/13/2007, 08:20 PM	#35
insanefishguy Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Palo Alto, PA Posts: 822	That was a very informative post. Thank you king kong. I feel the need to go out and buy a bunch of fish though. I removed my dsb a few weeks ago and have noticed a lightening of my sps. I was not aware of the light difference though. could explain why that is? __________________ ~Joe Hylka Current Tank Info: 335 total gallon system: 125 mixed reef under HO t5'S, 40g fuge, 75g frag tank, 55g sump, and 40g water change reservoir

08/13/2007, 08:15 PM	#34
King-Kong Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Gainesville, FL Posts: 2,346	BB tanks require less light than their DSB counterparts. BB tanks can easily be sustained without MH for SPS corals, and most BB users have to cut back their MH photoperiods to amounts as low as 3hrs. BB tanks also have a lot less carbon demands.. as such, they uptake far less alkalinity, allowing users to have thriving SPS tanks without calcium reactors (the large biomass of bacteria found in DSBs is the major user of carbon in tanks.. remove the hungry source, and well.. you dont need as much) Because of the importance of flow carrying away detritus in a BB system, and the reliance on the protein skimmer as the core means of export, "less rock is more" in BB tanks. Having more rock only impedes flow, gives detritus a place to hide away and rot, and costs you money. Most BB tanks, also, are run too nutrient poor. This means pastel colors in SPS corals, and reduced growth in LPS. To offset it, most BB users have quickly found that increasing their bioload over that with traditional DSB setups has almost become a requirement. As for the pH related comment; there are 3 major factors that will cause the bacteria colonies in sandbeds to fluctuate. pH, temperature, and salinity. It's not so much that SPS corals need "absolute stability", as it is that sand beds require stability. Do a large w/c where pH and salinity dont match up? Bacteria fluctuates, changes nutrient level in tank, SPS corals have to deal with sudden change in water conditions, and arent happy as a result. Because this giant biomass doesnt exist at such quantities in a BB tank, there isnt the same population to anger.

08/13/2007, 08:22 PM	#36
insanefishguy Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Palo Alto, PA Posts: 822	Hey law086, you are right up 309 from me... __________________ ~Joe Hylka Current Tank Info: 335 total gallon system: 125 mixed reef under HO t5'S, 40g fuge, 75g frag tank, 55g sump, and 40g water change reservoir

08/13/2007, 08:25 PM	#37
HBtank Premium Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Huntington Beach, CA Posts: 2,957	Lots of opinions are being presented as fact in this thread... Anyways, I use DSB in the display and my fuge. It is working for me but my personal philosophies are very far from the sterile concepts of most BB tanks. Anyways, I hope my ideas work. Both should have massive flow to be healthy though. One distinct commonality. __________________ 80g Aiptasia dominated reef tank.. with fish and now a bunch of berghia! Current Tank Info: 80g tank, re-starting a reef after a zoanthid nudibranch plauge, followed by months of steady and unstoppable STN/RTN, crashed; stayed FOWLR for a couple years, currently an aiptasia dominated reef tank with fishies and BERGHIA Last edited by HBtank; 08/13/2007 at 08:43 PM.

08/13/2007, 09:08 PM	#38
Aqua Keepers Moved On Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Clearwater,Fl Posts: 2,915	I vote KK's last post to be "The" BB explenation post of all BB eplenation posts.

08/13/2007, 09:57 PM	#40
uhuru Registered Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Columbus Posts: 2,949	clearer water + less phosphates = less lighting required to maintain SPS color at least that's how I understand it __________________ August 2011 TOTM

08/14/2007, 04:31 AM	#41
usmcsgt Premium Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Pensacola Fl. Posts: 999	wow so much insight from everyone __________________ There are no such things as limits to growth, because there are no limits on the human capacity for intelligence, imagination and wonder. -- Ronald Reagan Current Tank Info: 100 Gal Mixed reef Cube.

08/14/2007, 05:47 AM	#43
philpot Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: UK, Northern Ireland Posts: 23	Great thread... I too have just tore down my setup which had DSB in the sump refuge and SSB in the display. My maintanance slipped over the last year and the tank sort of crashed (macros went crazy and took over the tank). I was considering setting up with BB and no DSB in the sump as both had small areas of "blackness". I know this is down to flow but i keep mainly softies and don't want massive flow in the display (they just won't open up with too much flow). Anyway i think i have enough flow for BB so will give it a try. Can someone tell me if my chaeto will still grow well in a sandless fuge?? Cheers.

08/14/2007, 06:27 AM	#44
Chris2500DK Registered Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Denmark Posts: 171	Chaeto doesn't need substrate to grow.

08/14/2007, 06:57 AM	#45
rustybucket145 Registered Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: valdosta, ga Posts: 3,707	Come on guys...... __________________ 400gals of various tanks in the same system. Current Tank Info: 2 175w MH, 2 VH0 Actinics, Lots of Live Rock, tons of copepods, a Fat Mandarin Goby, Niger Trigger, Yellow Tang, Falco Hawkfish, Bi-Color Pseudo, numerous soft, SPS and LPS Corals

08/14/2007, 07:15 AM	#46
joeychitwood Schrödinger's Mod Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 3,488	Thanks for the very informative thread. I don't, however, understand why a simple discussion over sand in a tank always generates such emotion. One question: do you think that a one-half to one inch layer of sand can be considered a bare bottom?

08/14/2007, 07:29 AM	#47
nattydread Registered Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: st. louis Posts: 406	Hey Kong, thanks for your insight into BB tanks. Im thinking of doing the same with a deep sand bed in my fuge. Where is the best place to get a piece of starboad cut? Should it be sealed to the bottom of the tank with something? What color do you think reflects the best light? White? thks __________________ If it it's not broken, don't fix it. Current Tank Info: 120 Oceanic tech, RK2 controller. Mrc sump. ER rs-180, Geo Kalk reactor w/ aqua medic doser/topoff, vortech x 2, Aquatinics solarflare,Phosban reactor, 40#s tonga, 75# Marco.

08/14/2007, 07:37 AM	#48
alwmalon Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Bloomington, IN Posts: 3	I have a 1-2" sand bed in my display but then I have a DSB in my fuge that acts as a safe haven for amphipods and coepods but also acts as an extra measure of biological filtration. This seems to work great for my SPS.