Sir,
I'm not about to suffer old tank syndrome since it's still at the (advanced) planning stage. I have, however, seen your articles on "old tank syndrome" and the possibility of heavy metal build-up.
I had considered constructing my planned DSB from a suitably sized aragonite sand. It seemed more natural, and I felt that there might be an advantage, as yet unquantified, as regards infauna (tho' they'll probably just eat each other anyway so why should I worry ! ).
I now wonder whether a silica-based sand could be better. On the basis that (from what little I remember from my wasted education) the crystalline structure would allow less adsorption (or is at absorption....see my problem ? ) of these metals and lead to greater longevity.
Similarly, a silicaceous alternative to LR might be fun.
Heavy metals to remain in the water column and removed via changes.
But I may be totally wrong in my basic assumption. Any advice ?
Many thanks,
kim
I'm not about to suffer old tank syndrome since it's still at the (advanced) planning stage. I have, however, seen your articles on "old tank syndrome" and the possibility of heavy metal build-up.
I had considered constructing my planned DSB from a suitably sized aragonite sand. It seemed more natural, and I felt that there might be an advantage, as yet unquantified, as regards infauna (tho' they'll probably just eat each other anyway so why should I worry ! ).
I now wonder whether a silica-based sand could be better. On the basis that (from what little I remember from my wasted education) the crystalline structure would allow less adsorption (or is at absorption....see my problem ? ) of these metals and lead to greater longevity.
Similarly, a silicaceous alternative to LR might be fun.
Heavy metals to remain in the water column and removed via changes.
But I may be totally wrong in my basic assumption. Any advice ?
Many thanks,
kim
