Can bare bottom have Refugium w/ DSB?

[ONEMANBAND]

It should not be a Pro/Anti DSB or BB argument, the origional poster was inquiring about running a DSB fuge on a BB tank, and thats the question. . This goes against the premise of the BB method. So my answer is still NO. Does anybody see a plus side to adding the DSB fuge? If you run a DSB you should know that it is a living thing.

 

[barryhc]

Thanks "Dude".

"OMB", the bacteria aren't doing much with the Phosphates. The phosphates are mostly "sinking" into the bed. You really need to understand the functioning of a sand bed better before you can address the question. Here is where you can get some excellent information on DSB:

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=745968

I can't deal with Shimek's reccomendations. He is too rigid to understand his own observations, and beyond that he is just plain "fuzzy".

Who's starting an argument, I stated that they can operate together. They do not need to be mutually exclusive. I don't have a side.

The "premise" of BB, is to not put a bunch of gunk in a sand bed, and further, to use high flow with heavy skimming to remove most detritus before it can break down, and other organics and compounds, before they can build up. It works pretty well, but not perfectly, ask Mark. Finish up with water changes.

These are sound objectives. A remote DSB run properly, is not contrary to that premise.

The DSB in the fuge will keep Nitrates down. It will also reduce phophstes by "sinking" them.

> Barry

 

[icliao]

Since I live in Indonesia I have the luxury for low setup cost and I have done much experiment except pure bare bottom tank. I didn't liked the look then (and still prefer sand but ready to make the sacrifice.)

I have the following input purely based on my experience.

1. It is not difficult to keep coral alive and healthy regardless DSB, SSB or BB (supposingly) as long as other equipments are proper (skimmer, circulation and lamp and etc)

2. Live rock can become clogged. I had a nasty Bryopsis problem and after I replaced all my live rocks in my DSB system it never came back. (Already 8 months passed) I thought it is caused by my DSB initially.

3. So far I found DSB working fine and my 500GL has been up and running with DSB and refugium for over 3 years with amazing growth. The problem is I still get some nutrient and the color of my acroporas are still not maximum (it has improved) despite various efforts I made. (Additional good skimmer, additional circulation, upgraded lighting, coral feeding.)

I set up a 200GL tank for experiment purpose 5 months ago. In this tank I used SSB + DSB refugium. The nutrient is low phosphate 0.05ppm and Nitrate =1ppm with LaMotte tests but not 0 because I still have quick diatom growth. The color of the acropora is fine but not as bright as I initially bought.

My goal is not need to clean the glass so often:lol: but also very interested to see what happens if I remove all sand and refugium altogether.

 

[aurorafish]

This topic is beaten to death on this website. If its a BB display with a remote DSB then thats what it is!!!. Will it reduce nitrates? most likely since it will provide an anaerobic area for the nitrogen cycle to take place and Nitrogen gas will escape the system. Will it reduce phosphates? Seems to be a hot topic with many armchair quarterbacks and little scientific proof of the mechanisms occuring, the N cycle is pretty well know, the PO4 cycle is in a saltwater solution is subject of much debate among scientists/ experts as it is a highly reactive molecule and can follow many "paths" Does either substrate/lack of substrate make the corals grow without growing excess micro-algae? Thats up to the husbandry skills of the reefkeeper. Did I miss any beat to death DSB vs BB arguments?

 

[icliao]

I personally feel Nitrate and Phosphate can be easily reduce to a level where SPS can trive regardless DSB, SSB or BB such as below 5 ppm NO3 and 0.1 ppm of PO4 or below.

The main difficulty is to get optimal color of acropora. Sometimes even if the nutrient is undetectable but we can still see diatom and other algae growth to prove the nutrients are there.

Such as my 200GL only 1 ppm NO3 and undetectable PO4 (using Phosban and Rowaphos) and still I am not getting maximum color out of the corals.

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7113076#post7113076 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by icliao
I personally feel Nitrate and Phosphate can be easily reduce to a level where SPS can trive regardless DSB, SSB or BB such as below 5 ppm NO3 and 0.1 ppm of PO4 or below.

The Phosphate value should be reduced considerably for some sps species, to <.03ppm. There are other considerations as well.

I think you should go ahead and try the Bare Bottom set-up and find out how it does. The system, including the refugium, will have to work harder if you remove the sand bed.

You might want to get ready to add another skimmer ( maybe you have an old one sitting around ) especially if you decide to remove the refugium. You could also add Chaeto to the refugium if you keep it running and that would help a lot if you don't already have it. Cheap 2700K flourescent bulbs from the hardware store if you go that route.

I think if it was my system, I would go BB first, and keep the refugium. Run the system for at least a year to get a clear reading of it's functionality. Then remove the refugium as well, if the results aren't yet satisfactory.

Remember of course, that there is more to it than just "sand bed and refugium", or not.

Happy Reef Keeping ! > Barry

 

[scott_richards]

Sigh...and the wars start again.

When will it end!?

Make a new forum for bb and a new forum for dsb already!

 

[icliao]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7115510#post7115510 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
The Phosphate value should be reduced considerably for some sps species, to <.03ppm. There are other considerations as well.

My 200GL has less than 0.01 ppm of PO4 and 1 ppm of Nitrate, does that meant nutrient not a cause for my some of my acropora not getting maximum color?

 

[MiddletonMark]

I too would agree with Barry - mainly just because it's a LOT easier to remove the substrate than re-establish the 'fuge if you decide going BB on the fuge wasn't what you wanted.

I think you might struggle more with the BB [with fuge as is] - I guess you'll be the tester there - but IMO it's a lot easier to remove that later vs. the time it takes to have a mature 'fuge like you do now. Once you remove that - you can't get it back - and so I'd suggest running with it as-is for a good while, see how things settle. If you still have problems 6-9 months later, then remove it.

I'd give it 4-6 months as BB before doing much though - I found after 3 or 4 months my BB really turned a corner - it seems like the tank + user get better in sync after 6 months, and it might take that long to get it starting to `work right' IME.

To me, also - having part of the system stable through the display tank conversion isn't a bad thing. Given your tank is stocked, a little extra stability probably won't hurt ... and 9 months later, when the 'fuge would be [or not] revamped, the display will be the stable part

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7115605#post7115605 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by icliao
My 200GL has less than 0.01 ppm of PO4 and 1 ppm of Nitrate, does that meant nutrient not a cause for my some of my acropora not getting maximum color?

You had previously given values of .1ppm and .05ppm and then .01ppm for Phosphate, I'm just curious if there is a decimal point error anywhere ?

If not, then you are certainly in good shape with these numbers. There are organics that can't be read reasonably with standard test kits, as well as "cycling quantities", according to some, but that is beyond my current level of expertise to explain any better than that. Keep up the research, always !

Water changibg is a big factor in all systems. There isn't a magic number for it. It depends on "everything" ! You, the animals, the amount of testing, and feeding, all conspire to make water changing regimes highly variable.

Less water changing = more water testing, and more dosing.

Sand beds can actually help with this problem, by "sinking" many excess compounds, but they can't just sink forever without a means of export now can they? This depends as well on how selective you are with your foods.

> Barry

ooPS: Also, like Mark said, I think all systems need at least that 6 to 9 mos. for things to find an equilibrium. After that you can modify what equilibrium. Several thousand ways unfortunately, or fortunately, if you like !

 

[icliao]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7115753#post7115753 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
You had previously given values of .1ppm and .05ppm and then .01ppm for Phosphate, I'm just curious if there is a decimal point error anywhere ?

Hi Barry,

Sorry can't test 0.01 ppm PO4, it is a decimal error.

I have 2 tanks:

500GL:
NO3: Was 4 now 6 ppm (LaMotte)
PO4: 0.1 ppm (drop from 0.2 ppm after using Kalk reactor)

200GL:
NO3: Was 0 now1 ppm (LaMotte)
PO4: Was 0 and now 0.05 ppm?? (LaMotte) - I use 1liter of Phosban in this tank

Regarding PO4, since LaMotte tester color chart min is 0.2 ppm, it is difficult to tell. My 200GL is almost 0 (close to transparent but with hint of blue) and my 500GL is having very light blue. Both colors are below the test kit's range so I have to guess what it is.

My problem is even with my 200GL, so acropora not showing maximum color. Do you think it may be coming from my nutrient?