I would personally discard it.
Deep Sand Bed -- Anatomy & Terminology
- Thread starter Whys
- Start date
I would personally discard it.
The rotten egg smell is hydrogen sulfide gas. It is toxic to living things. It forms in areas where there is some organic material for bacteria to eat and no oxygen or nitrate for them to breathe. In anoxic areas( 0 NO3, 0 oyxygen) bacteria that can take the oxygen from sulfate(SO4) come into play and form the hydrogen sulfide as a by product of the sulfate reduction. Hydrogen sulfide will remain active for a few hours to a day once released to an oxic area( area with oxygen) and can be quite harmful during this time.. The sand bed is not receiving enough water in the deeper area to provide adequate nitrate and or oxygen. This occurs in older beds when live sand critters( bnethic fuana) that channel and open paths for seepage and transport diminsh and or the sand clogs up.The black deposits you reference are sufides which are depositied when the hydrogen sufide breaks down. So not seeing any and smelling rotten eggs is consistent.
If it were my tank I would remove the living things and then take the bed out.
Alternatively, you might try taking out small amounts and relplacing it with live sand to see if it can be revitalized and channeled. There is a risk that a significant release of hydrogen sulfide may occur and kill things.
newyorkstyles
New member
Replacing DSB
Replacing DSB
My sand bed clearly has alof of life in it and I can see the worms all over it in the sides of the tank.
My main concern is if I replace the entire sand bed with sugar grain size live sand, and do it in one shot, will my corals and fish perish due to the shock? I really don't have an issue replacing the whole sand bed in one shot. My plan is to remove all the mature water and rock, place them in bins, remove all the fishes, and just pull out the sand by using a large net and immediately thereafter add the new live sand. With this in mind, I am worried that it could cause havoc on my corals and fish with such a drastic change in one shot. Is it safe to say that it can be done, if the only change will be the sand bed, and all of the existing live rock and mature water will be returned to the tank?
Replacing DSB
My sand bed clearly has alof of life in it and I can see the worms all over it in the sides of the tank.
My main concern is if I replace the entire sand bed with sugar grain size live sand, and do it in one shot, will my corals and fish perish due to the shock? I really don't have an issue replacing the whole sand bed in one shot. My plan is to remove all the mature water and rock, place them in bins, remove all the fishes, and just pull out the sand by using a large net and immediately thereafter add the new live sand. With this in mind, I am worried that it could cause havoc on my corals and fish with such a drastic change in one shot. Is it safe to say that it can be done, if the only change will be the sand bed, and all of the existing live rock and mature water will be returned to the tank?
A disruption like that may cause harm. The loss of whatever denitrification is going on in the bed is one example. Netting fish and temporarily relocating them is another. But all in all I think hydrogen sulfide is a bigger risk. If the sand has lot's of life in it maybe the hydrogen sulfide was an isolated spot . Was it near buried rock? It's a tough call. If you get the fish and corals out before disturbing the bed, use the same rock and replenish with new sand and some of the old it can be done without much if any harm. On the other hand a sizeable hydrogen sufide release can be disastrous.
newyorkstyles
New member
The weird thing about all this is that the cyano and diatoms began to grow on the bed about three months ago when I first began to disturb the bed, in the front area only, in order to remove some of the algae growing on the font of the glass beneath the bed. I did this to give the main display a clean look. I would dig up this area and move the sand bed a bit backwards to clean the front glass. To do this I had to dig deep all the way to the bottom of the tank to get to the algae. I can post pictures of the life on the bed on here so that you all can have a better idea.
Here is an article by Randy H. Farely that may be of interest.
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-12/rhf/index.php#1
This from it:
"...Typically the half life of hydrogen sulfide under such conditions is less than a day, and can be only a couple of hours. In a reef aquarium where iron is dosed, the half life may be much lower as the added iron may accelerate the oxidation to even higher rates, potentially protecting organisms..."
So dosing some iron may be helpful. In my experience passing hydrogen sulfide water from my sulfur reactor through granulated ferric oxide(gfo) neutralized it very quickly . if your not running gfo I'd probably do so both for phosphate removal and for help with any hydrogen sulfide that may form.
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-12/rhf/index.php#1
This from it:
"...Typically the half life of hydrogen sulfide under such conditions is less than a day, and can be only a couple of hours. In a reef aquarium where iron is dosed, the half life may be much lower as the added iron may accelerate the oxidation to even higher rates, potentially protecting organisms..."
So dosing some iron may be helpful. In my experience passing hydrogen sulfide water from my sulfur reactor through granulated ferric oxide(gfo) neutralized it very quickly . if your not running gfo I'd probably do so both for phosphate removal and for help with any hydrogen sulfide that may form.
newyorkstyles
New member
Interesting article and very informative. This article had me thinking about my issue at hand and led me back to my aquarium to further investigate the issue. I have had DSB's since the very beginning of my addiction for this hobby back in 2004. I have always had 4 inches or more of fine sand on my main displays and this is the first time that I have had a problem like this. With that said, here is my recent discovery.
After checking my water parameters, which everything from nitrate to phosphates are reading zero, and really examining the DSB, I noticed that the sand bed has so much life and worms that I really began to reconsider examining the bed further before I replace it. What I did yesterday is that I removed several scoops of the sand all the way to the bottom from different sections to see if the rotten egg smell comes out of it. My discovery was that the sand was extremely clean and when scooped out, it not only not smell like rotten egg, it also contained the same creamy colored silt it did when I first added it. No dark scum or dirt was coming out of it. I was surprised to discover this and then realized that I was the one at fault for what was happening to the front part of the DSB.
It appears that for the last 3 months of my cyano problem, I had been moving and digging the front part of the bed to clean the glass of the algae that grows there. By disturbing the bed, I probably deeply buried many tiny white sea stars and god knows what else and hence after a while, these buried animals died and began to decompose, creating the cyano, as well as releasing the smell of death.
I have since simply siphoned this front area of the bed to clean it out well, and believe me you, it hurt me to do this because by siphoning out this area, I also siphoned out many worms and critters living within the bed. I guess it's OK to do this because the critters on the rest of the sand bed will repopulate this are in due time. I believe my success with this sand bed is mostly due because In my bed, I have over 60 nassarus snails, god only knows how many tiny white brittle stars, as well as other micro and macro fauna that came in the live rock, that keep the sand bed clean, healthy, and stirred.
I am not going to lie though, I freaked out when i smelled that rotten egg smell. My main concern was whether it was OK to replace it all in one shot without experiencing death of the animals and corals. Thank god this is not the case, but I want to thank all of you and TMZ for providing me with the information needed to take the right direction.
tastydog
New member
I just wanted to bring backup this topic because it kind of died off when it was getting interesting.
When I read, The Reef Aquarium, Vol. 3 by Julian Sprung, J. Charles Delbeek, in regards to RDSB they stated that a V shaped settling chamber could be used before the water enters the DSB chamber. You have to have the chamber large enough to allow the water to flow slow enough that detritus will settle to the bottom where it can be easily cleaned during weekly or bi-weekly water changes. Also, they stated that there was much success when the per hour flow was between three and five times the volume of the tank. They also stated that a size of approx 1/3 the volume of the tank seemed to be the standard that had measurable performance increases and still easily achievable from an engineering standpoint. The also seemed to only mention systems that had 10" of sand, but perhaps that is all I remember. They did bring up the hydrogen sulfide issue and never really resolved it saying that some people had great success with their 10" beds.
For my 90GAL:
This is the plan I have with the addition of a separate chaeto chamber. The first chamber is a V shape near a 40 degree angle and approx 10" wide and 18" deep. It will have a very small number of bio-balls at the top to break up detritus as it enters the settling chamber. The next 16" x 18" will be a 10" deep sand bed. The final 10" chamber will be the return and chaeto chamber. This will be lit 18 on and 6 off. I may make room for a small skimmer too, I do not know yet. I currently have an HOB I will probably run half the week. I plan to use a 40gal breeder for this. The flow rate will be approx 450gph, I am opting for the larger flow rate because I am over the 1/3 mark.
I believe this method solves the problems of having a need to clean the DSB for any reason and still removing excess detrius before it even reaches the DSB without using screens, filters etc which need constant attention even when you go on vacation, cost money, and are traps for bacteria. I could even ditch the bio-balls probably and have the same results. (This was again another recommendation by Sprung, Delbeeck.)
Any comments on this idea would be great. I thought it seemed to be the most sensible solution I have read.
Regards,
Brandon
PS: Great thread
Aquarist007
New member
I just wanted to bring backup this topic because it kind of died off when it was getting interesting.
When I read, The Reef Aquarium, Vol. 3 by Julian Sprung, J. Charles Delbeek, in regards to RDSB they stated that a V shaped settling chamber could be used before the water enters the DSB chamber. You have to have the chamber large enough to allow the water to flow slow enough that detritus will settle to the bottom where it can be easily cleaned during weekly or bi-weekly water changes. Also, they stated that there was much success when the per hour flow was between three and five times the volume of the tank. They also stated that a size of approx 1/3 the volume of the tank seemed to be the standard that had measurable performance increases and still easily achievable from an engineering standpoint. The also seemed to only mention systems that had 10" of sand, but perhaps that is all I remember. They did bring up the hydrogen sulfide issue and never really resolved it saying that some people had great success with their 10" beds.
For my 90GAL:
This is the plan I have with the addition of a separate chaeto chamber. The first chamber is a V shape near a 40 degree angle and approx 10" wide and 18" deep. It will have a very small number of bio-balls at the top to break up detritus as it enters the settling chamber. The next 16" x 18" will be a 10" deep sand bed. The final 10" chamber will be the return and chaeto chamber. This will be lit 18 on and 6 off. I may make room for a small skimmer too, I do not know yet. I currently have an HOB I will probably run half the week. I plan to use a 40gal breeder for this. The flow rate will be approx 450gph, I am opting for the larger flow rate because I am over the 1/3 mark.
I believe this method solves the problems of having a need to clean the DSB for any reason and still removing excess detrius before it even reaches the DSB without using screens, filters etc which need constant attention even when you go on vacation, cost money, and are traps for bacteria. I could even ditch the bio-balls probably and have the same results. (This was again another recommendation by Sprung, Delbeeck.)
Any comments on this idea would be great. I thought it seemed to be the most sensible solution I have read.
Regards,
Brandon
PS: Great thread
It certainly sounds like a good solution in theory. keep us posted as to how it is working for you
OrangeCrazy
New member
I have a question regarding DSB. I am currently in the design phase of setting up a 110 gal. tall reef. I'm going to run one sump (contents: oversized protein skimmer (possibly dualing PS), LR, PO3 reactor) then direct flow to my refugium. I intend to incorporate a DSB into my refugium. I know that the depth needs to be 4 to 6 inches. However I'm unsure about the foot print required for my set up. Any suggestions? Also I'm still debating mud vs aragonite. Anybody familiar with both and have a suggestion?
OrangeCrazy
New member
By foot print I mean how wide and how long do I need in order to provide a good denitrification zone for my tank?
tastydog
New member
OrangeCrazy:
For a heavily stocked 110 gallon tank, to be worth the space, money and time, in my humble opinion, the sand bed should be at least 18" by 18". However, using less, you may achieve fine results. If anything is to be learned from these 292 posts, it is that nothing is as it seems and when it comes to sand beds, mud beds or any of the like. There are many, many ways to do things. I have seen a DSB that was 8 feet by 4 feet for a 200 gallon system. There is no set formula to plug in. Much research still needs to be done to understand the limits and minimum requirements for a DSB to be measurably effective. So, to answer your question, the DSB should be as large you can facilitate, or feel necessary to facilitate with the bare minimum probably in the 12"l x 12"w x 5"d range and on the large end of the scale probably 16 square feet of surface area. Also, some people have great success with DSB's that are 10" deep as well. With all of that said, my original recommendation is what I would do myself. (18”x18”x6”)
Hope that helps some.
Regards,
Brandon
For a heavily stocked 110 gallon tank, to be worth the space, money and time, in my humble opinion, the sand bed should be at least 18" by 18". However, using less, you may achieve fine results. If anything is to be learned from these 292 posts, it is that nothing is as it seems and when it comes to sand beds, mud beds or any of the like. There are many, many ways to do things. I have seen a DSB that was 8 feet by 4 feet for a 200 gallon system. There is no set formula to plug in. Much research still needs to be done to understand the limits and minimum requirements for a DSB to be measurably effective. So, to answer your question, the DSB should be as large you can facilitate, or feel necessary to facilitate with the bare minimum probably in the 12"l x 12"w x 5"d range and on the large end of the scale probably 16 square feet of surface area. Also, some people have great success with DSB's that are 10" deep as well. With all of that said, my original recommendation is what I would do myself. (18”x18”x6”)
Hope that helps some.
Regards,
Brandon
OrangeCrazy
New member
tastydog:
Thanks for the help! I have spent A LOT of time reading on the DSB and every post or article that I've found only covers the depth and doesn't specify L&W. My plan is to custom build a Refugium that will go under my tank. This refugium will receive water from my sump (LR, Protein Skimmer, PO4 reactor-if needed) and will be solely dedicated to my DSB, Chaeto and return pump.
In the pictures that I've seen of other's set up some have a separate chamber for the Chaeto and some have it in with their DSB. Should I keep the Chaeto on top of the DSB or do I need to have a separate chamber for it? If I don't need a separate chamber for the Chaeto then I will be able to dedicate at least 30Lx18Wx6D to my DSB. But keeping my Chaeto with my DSB will cause my DSB to be well lit and some have said that they perform better without any light. Any suggestions?
Thanks for the help! I have spent A LOT of time reading on the DSB and every post or article that I've found only covers the depth and doesn't specify L&W. My plan is to custom build a Refugium that will go under my tank. This refugium will receive water from my sump (LR, Protein Skimmer, PO4 reactor-if needed) and will be solely dedicated to my DSB, Chaeto and return pump.
In the pictures that I've seen of other's set up some have a separate chamber for the Chaeto and some have it in with their DSB. Should I keep the Chaeto on top of the DSB or do I need to have a separate chamber for it? If I don't need a separate chamber for the Chaeto then I will be able to dedicate at least 30Lx18Wx6D to my DSB. But keeping my Chaeto with my DSB will cause my DSB to be well lit and some have said that they perform better without any light. Any suggestions?
TheFishMan65
New member
OrangeCrazy, since it is custom can you do two layers? Rig a small tank for the cheato that sits on top of (and spill into maybe) the DSB. I have read mixed articles, but IMO from my reading cheato on top of the sandbed is bad becuse you get too much detritus. I know others may/will disagree, but hey everyone has an opinion. You could even paint the dank black to block the light.
tastydog
New member
OrangeCrazy:
It is not necessary to build a separate chateo chamber at all. A healthy sand bed should take care of all detritus build up, and if it gets out of control, toss a fighting conch in there and if it starts to run out food, toss in the display tank if you don't have any hermits.
In general though, if the sand bed is small, then the chaeto might cause a buildup problem. From what I understand of your space limits, if I were you, I would just put the chaeto on top of the sand bed and call it good. It will work just fine and don't clean the sand bed! Just employ a decent crew in there and make sure it stays healthy and full. With the size of the bed you have, buildup should not be an issue.
The DSB will most likely not be measurably better if not lit. Remember most all of this stuff is not well researched or documented. So, do what _you_ think is best based on your readings but know that what we know works is a DSB and chaeto on top, everything else is a variation not well researched and just purported to be better.
Hope that helps,
Brandon
It is not necessary to build a separate chateo chamber at all. A healthy sand bed should take care of all detritus build up, and if it gets out of control, toss a fighting conch in there and if it starts to run out food, toss in the display tank if you don't have any hermits.
In general though, if the sand bed is small, then the chaeto might cause a buildup problem. From what I understand of your space limits, if I were you, I would just put the chaeto on top of the sand bed and call it good. It will work just fine and don't clean the sand bed! Just employ a decent crew in there and make sure it stays healthy and full. With the size of the bed you have, buildup should not be an issue.
The DSB will most likely not be measurably better if not lit. Remember most all of this stuff is not well researched or documented. So, do what _you_ think is best based on your readings but know that what we know works is a DSB and chaeto on top, everything else is a variation not well researched and just purported to be better.
Hope that helps,
Brandon
tastydog
New member
FWIW:
I have recently added a new sump/refuge to my 90 gallon. Right now I have not even added any substrate. (I am going with some lava rock because I don't think sand will be very effective at the size I have and I just want more homes for copepods and amphipods.) I just have chaeto. I have 3 chambers, one for the the entry of the water, one for the rolling chaeto and soon to be lava rock and the sump portion where the return pump sits. It is only a 20gallon tank and about half full of water at running height. Adding _just_ this to my system in only 4 weeks has helped my display tank tremendously. I have noticed an overall drop in nitrate even with the addition of more fish, clearer water and less algae growth on the tank walls. The detritus buildup in the refuge is easily taken care of by a couple hermits and a few snails to clean the walls.
This just gives one an idea how much can be done with so little
I will continue to update my successes and failures with my refuge. I had have a planned DSB, but I have to save some money for my 40 breeder first, not to mention the sand!
I do have a 4" bed in my display tank though.
Brandon
I have recently added a new sump/refuge to my 90 gallon. Right now I have not even added any substrate. (I am going with some lava rock because I don't think sand will be very effective at the size I have and I just want more homes for copepods and amphipods.) I just have chaeto. I have 3 chambers, one for the the entry of the water, one for the rolling chaeto and soon to be lava rock and the sump portion where the return pump sits. It is only a 20gallon tank and about half full of water at running height. Adding _just_ this to my system in only 4 weeks has helped my display tank tremendously. I have noticed an overall drop in nitrate even with the addition of more fish, clearer water and less algae growth on the tank walls. The detritus buildup in the refuge is easily taken care of by a couple hermits and a few snails to clean the walls.
This just gives one an idea how much can be done with so little
I will continue to update my successes and failures with my refuge. I had have a planned DSB, but I have to save some money for my 40 breeder first, not to mention the sand!
I do have a 4" bed in my display tank though.
Brandon
Aquarist007
New member
FWIW:
I have recently added a new sump/refuge to my 90 gallon. Right now I have not even added any substrate. (I am going with some lava rock because I don't think sand will be very effective at the size I have and I just want more homes for copepods and amphipods.) I just have chaeto. I have 3 chambers, one for the the entry of the water, one for the rolling chaeto and soon to be lava rock and the sump portion where the return pump sits. It is only a 20gallon tank and about half full of water at running height. Adding _just_ this to my system in only 4 weeks has helped my display tank tremendously. I have noticed an overall drop in nitrate even with the addition of more fish, clearer water and less algae growth on the tank walls. The detritus buildup in the refuge is easily taken care of by a couple hermits and a few snails to clean the walls.
This just gives one an idea how much can be done with so little
I will continue to update my successes and failures with my refuge. I had have a planned DSB, but I have to save some money for my 40 breeder first, not to mention the sand!
I do have a 4" bed in my display tank though.
Brandon
Here is my refugium setup for the tank
By far the use of chaeto macro algae outdoes the use of a deep sand bed for nitrate and phosphate reduction
Here is the tank upstairs --a 110 gal high like you are planning
Pcitures of my refugia/sand bed set ups and tanks are in the link at the end of this post.
I do not think remote dsbs are very efficient. Footprint is more important than depth in my opinion ,since it is unlikely that much carbon, nitrogen and phosphorous (all of which are needed by the faculative heterotrophic bacteria which perform denitrification ) will penetrate the bed in sufficient quantities without a force( channeling benthic fauna, advection ,etc. to get them there. While some diffusion of
these dissolved nutrients will occur it will be minimal.
In my experience , algae exudate fouls a bed under chaeto rather quickly and is messy. I use bare bottom or rock bottom under chaeto refugia for easier maintenance. I also use a deep sand bed 7 inches deepx 36 long x 24 high with about 5 inches of live rock on top to create advective flow(upwellling) uder and aroud the rock. Extra live rock is also kept in ambient light in the sump. Two crytic zones with extra live rock are also in play.
Here is the link:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1872264
note the filtration system is shown in post # 27 and in this earlier set of photos a from a couple of years ago:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1470923
I do not think remote dsbs are very efficient. Footprint is more important than depth in my opinion ,since it is unlikely that much carbon, nitrogen and phosphorous (all of which are needed by the faculative heterotrophic bacteria which perform denitrification ) will penetrate the bed in sufficient quantities without a force( channeling benthic fauna, advection ,etc. to get them there. While some diffusion of
these dissolved nutrients will occur it will be minimal.
In my experience , algae exudate fouls a bed under chaeto rather quickly and is messy. I use bare bottom or rock bottom under chaeto refugia for easier maintenance. I also use a deep sand bed 7 inches deepx 36 long x 24 high with about 5 inches of live rock on top to create advective flow(upwellling) uder and aroud the rock. Extra live rock is also kept in ambient light in the sump. Two crytic zones with extra live rock are also in play.
Here is the link:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1872264
note the filtration system is shown in post # 27 and in this earlier set of photos a from a couple of years ago:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1470923
