Are Deep Sand Beds, DSBs, dangerous to use in a marine aquarium?
- Thread starter JPMagyar
- Start date
Giovanni
AKA Flippa
I don't see why not. However moving that kind of weight around at maintenance time would be prohibitive for me.
Be courteous and read the thread and avoid a need for tedious repetiton for those who have read it already; it's all in here including a number of studies.
When claiming a benefit the onus for proof or at least a plausible explanation of the mechanisms goes with the claim . So :
What data do you have to support the notion that deep sand is a "nitrate sink".What does that mean? It doesn't sink in the sense that phosphate does. How does sand accomplish creating a "nitrate sink" in a bucket of deep sand? How does water move up and down to bring nutrients to dentirifying bacteria? What bacteria perform this function? How do they survive without organic carbon, oxygen, phosphate , bound nitrogen or other elements they need?
The smell that came from the sand at about 6 inches and deeper was amazingly horrible.
Do you think that smell was from a "nitrate sink"? I don't. Does anyone care to guess what it was?
Last edited:
Giovanni
AKA Flippa
Frankly I stopped reading when I got to back and forth bickering that bordered on personal attacks.
I simply wanted to educate myself as to your statement "It wouldn't do much beyond the first 1/2inch or so of depth in terms of gentrification. There just isn't enough force to move enough nutrients down for a significant effect." I understood that diffusion is what drove the nutrients down in the DSB, but that the deeper you go the O2 is consumed leading to the anaerobic conditions.
A simple link to the data would be great.
If you take exception with my posts, please just bash me in a PM and spare the rest of the community having to read it.
No bashing .
I simply disagree that deep buckets of sand are useful for dentirifcation and think it would be misguided for folks to go off filling buckets with sand and expecting nitrate to be sunk there. It's not sunk If you think otherwise explain it and answer the questions. Perhaps thinking about them may bring out something that hasn't been offered earlier.
An open response is necessary vs a pm.
I don't consider challenging a recommendation with which I disagree bashing ;it's just probing discussion and should be open not private to provide information for folks to make an informed decision regarding a particular method or recommendation.
Just read the thread and the studies therein to explore denitrification in terms of the bacteria, the nutrients and the fluid dynamics involved . An argumentative response to my post like "Do you have data to back that up?" would be fine if the thread wasn't full of information including studies already including some in the pages immediately preceding this one. It's there if you want it.
I disagree with the notion that a deep bucket of sand is going to reduce nitrate in any significant way with only diffusion as a force Diiffusion is slow and weak. Denitrifying bacteria are hetertrophic and facultative not obligate anaerobes as once thought. They need some flow to bring the nutrients they need to grow and denitrify in the process.. They do well with oxygen and engage in anaerobic reduction of nitrate even in their own mulm or very shallow areas when they exhaust the free oxygen provided the y have an ample supply of nutrients to sustain growth. .As noted on the preceding page posts 250 to 350 have a lot of information on this part of the discussion but there is lots more throughout the thread.
I simply disagree that deep buckets of sand are useful for dentirifcation and think it would be misguided for folks to go off filling buckets with sand and expecting nitrate to be sunk there. It's not sunk If you think otherwise explain it and answer the questions. Perhaps thinking about them may bring out something that hasn't been offered earlier.
An open response is necessary vs a pm.
I don't consider challenging a recommendation with which I disagree bashing ;it's just probing discussion and should be open not private to provide information for folks to make an informed decision regarding a particular method or recommendation.
Just read the thread and the studies therein to explore denitrification in terms of the bacteria, the nutrients and the fluid dynamics involved . An argumentative response to my post like "Do you have data to back that up?" would be fine if the thread wasn't full of information including studies already including some in the pages immediately preceding this one. It's there if you want it.
I disagree with the notion that a deep bucket of sand is going to reduce nitrate in any significant way with only diffusion as a force Diiffusion is slow and weak. Denitrifying bacteria are hetertrophic and facultative not obligate anaerobes as once thought. They need some flow to bring the nutrients they need to grow and denitrify in the process.. They do well with oxygen and engage in anaerobic reduction of nitrate even in their own mulm or very shallow areas when they exhaust the free oxygen provided the y have an ample supply of nutrients to sustain growth. .As noted on the preceding page posts 250 to 350 have a lot of information on this part of the discussion but there is lots more throughout the thread.
Last edited:
Giovanni
AKA Flippa
I never recommended using a DSB. Pursuant the OP's original question "Are Deep Sand Beds, DSBs, dangerous to use in a marine aquarium" I simply shared that for years I had a DSB albeit remote, and never had issues. I explained why I used it back then because I figured someone would ask that next.
Peace Out
OK Peace is good, lets move on.
I agree deep remote sandbeds remote are not inherently dangerous. I also think they are not necessary or very helpful beyond the first 1/2inch or so for anaerobic denitrificatrion without some force,like bioturbation to move things down. l I've used deep in tank sand beds and remote beds; didn't everyone a while back ? I still use one unlit with rock on it because io's there and adds surface area and a home for microfuana. With what we know now about the bacteria ,fluid dynamics and denitrification there are other options folks can consider from bare bottom to shallow beds to deep beds If they like sand in tank and want to keep sand critters and animals that need it for burying like certain wrasses , jawfish and anemones that's fine with some maintenance including some periodic replacemnt ,IMO. If I were adding a remote bed of sand for denitrification I'd use a large footprint with shallower sand and heavy flow across it probably some obstructions to current to enhance advection too.
I agree deep remote sandbeds remote are not inherently dangerous. I also think they are not necessary or very helpful beyond the first 1/2inch or so for anaerobic denitrificatrion without some force,like bioturbation to move things down. l I've used deep in tank sand beds and remote beds; didn't everyone a while back ? I still use one unlit with rock on it because io's there and adds surface area and a home for microfuana. With what we know now about the bacteria ,fluid dynamics and denitrification there are other options folks can consider from bare bottom to shallow beds to deep beds If they like sand in tank and want to keep sand critters and animals that need it for burying like certain wrasses , jawfish and anemones that's fine with some maintenance including some periodic replacemnt ,IMO. If I were adding a remote bed of sand for denitrification I'd use a large footprint with shallower sand and heavy flow across it probably some obstructions to current to enhance advection too.
tajaba
New member
I'm very sorry to bring this up again, but instead of making a new thread, I think this is a very good place to ask about the DyMiCo system?
From what I gathered, this is pretty much just a deep sand bed and some pipes.
Do you guys think this is the way to go?
If it does what they say it does here:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2012/2/aafeature
all the skimmer companies might go bankrupt in a few years
From what I gathered, this is pretty much just a deep sand bed and some pipes.
Do you guys think this is the way to go?
If it does what they say it does here:
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2012/2/aafeature
all the skimmer companies might go bankrupt in a few years
There is thread discussing that system in the Chemistry Forum.
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2087589&highlight=dymico
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2087589&highlight=dymico
tajaba
New member
miatawnt2b
New member
How about running a DSB with a plenum, but siphoning the water off under the plenum for your water changes? Seems that the real nasty crap would be in the plenum.
Big E
Premium Member
That was my experience with my plenum..........ran it for 3 years and when I took it down it was spotless. I had none of that accumulated detritus/gunk associated with old DSBs.
People seem to want to lump DSBs and plenums together and they aren't the same. The setup and especially the maintenance are completely different.
If one follows the original rules for setup and maintenance by Bob Goemans back when he wrote that book it will work fine and won't have any of the issues debated about over DSB's.
Big E
Premium Member
Yes, you don't do anything to the void area.
There is no need to mechanically move the water........these are the kind of things people want to change for no reason. I suggest getting a hold of the book.........it's very cheap and follow the setup and maintenance as described.
I personally haven't used a plenum and would be intersted in any documented measureable benefits since I'm always open to change.
I just can't see how it would contribute much to biological filtration ,since not much would happen in the stagnant water under the substrate given the sole reliance on diffusion , a weak force, for moving nutrients to the plenum space. I'd expect it to be relatively clean .
I just can't see how it would contribute much to biological filtration ,since not much would happen in the stagnant water under the substrate given the sole reliance on diffusion , a weak force, for moving nutrients to the plenum space. I'd expect it to be relatively clean .
Similar threads
