Bare-bottom Before/After Photos...

[raskal311]

Did the rocks clean it self after going BB or did you take them out and cleaned them yourself? Looks like the tank was in good shape prior to going BB. The alga on the rocks donââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t look the type that comes from an unhealthy tank. And other then better looking sps I think the before tank looks much better.

 

[PITSTOP]

raskal311 - When I switched over to bare bottom, I 'reset' the system. I emptied the display tank - dry - cleaned it inside and out with vinegar, scrapped all algae off the glass with a razer - the tank looked new again, cleaned the sump the same way. The rocks I obviously took out and picked them clean and scrubbed them with a hard brissle plastic brush and dunked them into several buckets of the reefwater that I saved. I then placed all the livestock into a 55 gallon temporary tank I set up using water from the reef I saved. I filled the main reef with new RO/DI and new salt and then let that season overnight (up to temp, up to salinity, aerated, etc.).

I did not cook my rocks, however if I was going to set up a brand new reef I would cook my rocks for 3 months.

 

[coralnut99]

I've got the same question as triggerfish. I'm more curious of how deep it was. I run shallow beds in my tanks, and until they matured, the algae problem was present on the sand as well. The first pic shows a snow-white sand. Could you also please supply some other system info, like lighting, photoperiod, and filtration?

I'm sure it's a hit with the kids!

 

[raskal311]

Do you think your problem with maintaining the tank was because it was Southdown sand? Or just sand in general? Iââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢ve seen Southdown and have to say its got to be a pain the $$ to maintain.

 

[Triggerfish]

i think i was a bit confused as to the intent of this thread.
i thought you were trying to relate some how the difference in the pics solely to removal of sand??

i don't even see the blue tip acro in the old pics?? where is it in there, if under algae then by removing the algae of course it would be more likely to color up...?

also you may be able to increase flow in the BB without a sand blast,,i think that's one reason folks go that way with sps setups.

not sure how a sand bed would be expensive to maintain..how much you paying for a few hermits?
also,, the tank will have the same waste as it did before,,no?
it will still need to be removed either by siphoning or with increased mechanical filters. if your rocks are set firm on the bottom that's where to look as stuff will accumulate under there..you should raise them up.

note: not attempting to argue either way the benefits of either approach..that has been done plenty already..
just directly responding to what you are posting here..

 

[PITSTOP]

Here is my classroom system - you can see pix in my gallery:

> 120 gallon diplay, 40 gallon sump, 10 gallon frag - barebottom

> AquaC EV 180 with John Guest fitting (for ozonizer) overdriven by a MAG 9.5 for wet skimming

> GEO 612 calcium reactor w/Pinpiont pH controller

> 2x250 DE MH's (10K AB's) + 2x110 VHO Superactinic

> three SEIO 1500 Superflows, 6 Maxijet 1200's (2 with hydor rotators)

> Lifereef Double overflow (1600 gph), MAG 18 return

> 2 phosban reactors - 1 with carbon, the other with Phosban

> Kalkwasser drip 1-2 times per week

> No additives at this time besides water changes

> Tropic Marin salt, 4-stage RO/DI

Here is an old pic of the entire system in the back of my lab with the DSB (Southdown) - too much algae for the SPS:

 

[MadTownMax]

I kinda liked the look of the algae in the before pic

Was that florida aquacultured rock - or did the macro come from somewhere else?

Personally I run my system with a very small amount of sand so it doesn't have the "sterile" look of BB, but seeing that tank full of macro is an interesting alternative type of tank to the clean SPS tank that you're running now.

In any case, wish I had some cool teachers with tanks when I was in school :thumbsup:

 

[Triggerfish]

that's the cleanest/whitest DSB i have ever seen.. was that mainly due to some type of DSB maintenance, if so, what exactly were you doing?

 

[coralnut99]

Hmmm. Did you run the Phosban reactor with the DSB?

 

[PITSTOP]

The DSB was 100% Southdown.

I cleaned the southdown in buckets many times before adding it to the system.

About keeping the sand clean, about once per week, I would remove the hood, stand on a stool, and gently mix the sand with my bare hand - while mixing the sand, I would pull up and algaes that were trying to move into the sand bed - it was fairly easy to keep the sand clean using this technique.

The rock is a mixture of Florida (TBS), Fiji and African aquacultured(Cami rock?)

I did have an amazing assortment of macroalgae - huge fronds of sargassum, rare red macros, etc.

Eventually, a real bad strain of caulerpa started to take over the system - it consumed everything - vines with tight clusters of grapes.

Even with 3 tangs (yellow, kole yellow eye and hippo) - none of them would even go near it - real toxic cr@p.

The toxic caulerpa was the main reason I nuked the system and went bare bottom - so, yes I too liked the intersting macros, but could not beat the deadly caulerpa.

 

[GregM779]

I don't think the SB was your problem either because that algae just looks like hitchhiker algae.
I do believe that southdown does cause more problems than the couple of bucks that you save by not buying LS. I used all aragalive when I setup my tank.

 

[PITSTOP]

Maybe so...

All I know is that with my bare bottom system I am not battling anything - just pure straightforward maintenance, which was my goal all along.

Instead of solving the next problem/issue, I can concentrate on water changes, simple cleanings and colorful SPS.

The lesson I am taking away from this is: If I were going to recommend an approach for taking care of a reef tank in a classroom, I would recommend bare bottom. IMHO easier to maintain and you do not have to spend $$$ on LS, or cleaning crews.

Come on, lemme hear the rebuttles!!! ;-)

 

[GregM779]

I don't want to start an argument but I still think that a proper SB is cheaper to run than a proper BB. To do the BB properly you need a very good skimmer and tons of flow which means more money on equipment. I spent about $100 for the SB in my 125g so in your 4 ft tank that should be about $66.
I also think a sandbed is less work, no siphoning, less waterchanges....

 

[PITSTOP]

You have a point, but I like the huge flow and wet skimming. I also like my skimmer a lot (I know it is not the best), but it does the job, built solidly, easy to clean and wet skims like a champ.

 

[raskal311]

I skim very wet and have 2-m1100, 2-MJ1200, 400gph after head loss on my return pump and plan on adding another m1100 soon on my 90gal and I also have a ssb without any problems with the sand moving around.

 

[10" Red Devil]

omg I liked the Algae! Am I the only one. It looked so great. Kinda like a marine planted tank.

Reminded me of a lagoonal tank, very nice!

 

[got2lb]

Man that's an awesome Bellus angel! I've really been thinking about getting one. They're pretty big $$$ though. Any problems with it nipping at anything?

 

[GregM779]

the flow in my 125g is a SEIO 1100 and 820 and a maxijet, my return is 1800GPH so there's about 3800 GPH through my 125g.

 

[PITSTOP]

About the Bellus - hardly any nipping at all - in fact I have never witnessed the bellus ever nipping at a coral - every once in a while she takes a little nip at the rock work, but that's it - she is primarily a planktivore - eats the frozen food like a pig! Paid $130

 

[PUGroyale]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6490578#post6490578 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by PITSTOP

Come on, lemme hear the rebuttles!!! ;-)

Clearly you're not an English teacher :lol: ...j/k. Just couldn't resist