DSB Diagram -- Seeking Consensus

[Whys]

Sorry Tom, but I respectfully disagree.

I demonstrate NH4, NO2, NO3, N, and H2S, because these are of paramount importance. The first three get tested, the fourth is desirable, and the fifth is undesirable and can be tested with the nose. I can appreciate your attention to detail, but the way I see it, from the perspective of a newbie, the H2S simply comes from the anaerobic bacteria in the anoxic layer. We don't test for sulfate nor do we have much control over its presence. What we do have control over is the depth of our sandbed and what bacteria are present there.

I agree that the diagram should not be too simplified. But consider the current standard model (more or less) used by newbies in this hobby.

BTW, I have never encountered DOM or POM before. I do like those terms, but they strike me as too nuanced for a newbie. What newbies know is that there is detritus and that detritus gets broken down into ammonia.

I don't think it would be fair to call it inaccurate. It's simply generalized and, IMO, much improved from the standard generalization above.

I do very much appreciate your input and will take it into consideration, but if it's over my head, then it's probably over the head of other newbies. The diagram is intended for visual reference only and will come with explanation, as it is simply not possible to include every detail in a single diagram, nor necessary to do so.

 

[Aquarist007]

IMO you should have a basic diagram and small explanation for the new to the reef forum and a more detailed one with the chemistry involved for my blog

I think we should get Matt to weigh in on this one again.

Whys----Tmz is a self made expert on this stuff---he is very thorough researcher-----I would tend to go by what he says----just my opinion

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15062484#post15062484 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by capn_hylinur
IMO you should have a basic diagram and small explanation for the new to the reef forum and a more detailed one with the chemistry involved for my blog

I think we should get Matt to weigh in on this one again.

Whys----Tmz is a self made expert on this stuff---he is very thorough researcher-----I would tend to go by what he says----just my opinion

BTW
anerobic bacteria on your drawing---can't be in the oxygenated area---they need to be in the hypoxic (nitrifyers) and the anoxic area(denitrifyers)

 

[Whys]

Oh man... I feel like you guys are completely missing the point. This is the reason I started this thread in the newbie forum. This isn't a chemistry class. It is intended to be a generalization.

I don't question Tom's expertise, but that's exactly the issue. He's looking at this with an expert's eyes. When was the last time any of you ever looked at a basic saltwater aquarium book? There is no mention of sulfate. Why should there be? It's not relevant to newbies. And of course anaerobic bacteria don't belong in the hypoxic layer. That's why the Environmentalist's Diagram makes the distinction of "functionally anaerobic". But that's a bit of minutia that doesn't show up in NEWBIE texts. And why should it? The generalization that I always see and thus have used here is that "functionally anaerobic" is simply referred to as anaerobic bacteria.

You've all been in this hobby too long and some of you look at this from a highly educated point of view. You clearly don't recall what it means to be a newbie and are simply missing the point.

Capn, feel free to make your own diagram.

 

[Whys]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15062488#post15062488 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by capn_hylinur
BTW
anerobic bacteria on your drawing---can't be in the oxygenated area---they need to be in the hypoxic (nitrifyers) and the anoxic area(denitrifyers)

Wait a second... what diagram are you looking at? I don't have "anaerobic" in the "oxygenated layer" on any of them.

If you guys aren't even gonna try, then I'm just gonna do this on my own. Sheesh...

 

[Nanook]

I would not underestimate the "intelligence" of newbies. Heck, most reefkeepers want to know the specific details and if you don't include these, you negate their intelligence and your diagrams become incomplete....just my opinion though.

 

[rishma]

Whys - Your concept is great. I do understand the point and the intended audience; however, it is okay to have additional details that may not be fully appreciated by a newbie. The thing about this type of diagram is, if done well, people of all different knowledge levels can use it. If a newbie doesn't understand one part of a subtle detail, that is okay. They will still benefit tremendously from what they do grasp. Your diagram is very close to being detailed and accurate enough to be referred to by all levels of experience. My opinion is that there is more to be gained than lost by adding a few additional points of accuracy. By the time a newbie realizes they should understand these concepts, they are usually willing to try and digest the technical details.

I think the use of Particulate and Dissolved OM would be very good. The reader would gain the understanding you seek about the movement of detritus and the added benefit of understanding further breakdown into disolved organic matter. POM and DOM are in common use and carry over to discussions about protein skimmers, etc. The use of SD and LD do not add much to the understanding. The size of the POM is not that important for this discussion, its more important that we understand that detritus is there and breaking down.

One last thought. I have to generate similar illustrations of technical concepts as part of my work. I find that a lot of value can be gained by adding a text box on one side that gives plenty of room for written notes. It may make the diagram less elegant, but it goes a long way for people who have brains that process text better than figures. It also keeps from cluttering the nice diagram. For example, you could put a note #1 in the anoxic zone and writen text off to the side that says " When there is no more NO3 and there is still organic carbon, bacteria in the anoxic zone convert SO4(sulfate ) and create H2S".

 

[rishma]

Capn, feel free to make your own diagram.

If you guys aren't even gonna try, then I'm just gonna do this on my own. Sheesh...

Whys - be careful. You are on to something really good with your diagram but your responses appear to be increasingly defensive. Its is easy to ask for feedback, but sometimes it is hard to take. Consider it a compliment that people are willing to respond to your thread and try to help improve on your good work. When you respond in a way that seems defensive (even if you dont mean it to), it discourages the dialog.

Cheers

 

[Ninong]

Dr. Rob Toonen explained this in detail nine years ago: Part One and Part Two.

 

[Sisterlimonpot]

As far as the newbee forum goes I think that the chart (no matter what) has to be coupled with a brief description of what is taking place in each layer. I don’t think the chart alone will suffice. (I of course can look at it with my limited or no knowledge on DSB’sbut an understanding of LD, SD, H2S etc and know what I’m looking at. But to the extreme newbee they may not get past the pretty pictures) and if you use words like, “hyperhypoxic, DOM, POM” give a brief explaination of them. It can be done to teach the newbie some things that were put forth by tmz and capn but it’s all about how you present it to make it interesesting.


I for 1 like to know a little more than my mind can comprehend (it makes me think and knocks the cobwebs off) When that happens it gives me a better understanding of the concept. The hard part is to teach the newbies without them knowing that their being taught and losing interest. (It can be done WK does it everyday )


I know that you set out to simplify something and now it’s getting over complicated. But If I’m a gauge to your target audience, just in these 2 threads alone I learned enough information that I would be confident to have a DSB and understand what’s taking place in each of the zones. You definitely did what you set out to do.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15062736#post15062736 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Whys
Oh man... I feel like you guys are completely missing the point. This is the reason I started this thread in the newbie forum. This isn't a chemistry class. It is intended to be a generalization.

I don't question Tom's expertise, but that's exactly the issue. He's looking at this with an expert's eyes. When was the last time any of you ever looked at a basic saltwater aquarium book? There is no mention of sulfate. Why should there be? It's not relevant to newbies. And of course anaerobic bacteria don't belong in the hypoxic layer. That's why the Environmentalist's Diagram makes the distinction of "functionally anaerobic". But that's a bit of minutia that doesn't show up in NEWBIE texts. And why should it? The generalization that I always see and thus have used here is that "functionally anaerobic" is simply referred to as anaerobic bacteria.

You've all been in this hobby too long and some of you look at this from a highly educated point of view. You clearly don't recall what it means to be a newbie and are simply missing the point.

Capn, feel free to make your own diagram.

ouch---giving me a rasberry whys---for what---I was only trying to understand what was going on here and work as a team to tweak the drawing.
Now I am trying to understand what is going on with a fellow peer who I happen to like alot and have obviously ticked off

BTW
I still consider my self a newbie more then the rest of you and always feel appreciative when invovled in a discussion.
I just can't understand why "it seems" of late that alot of people are taking discussions so personally.
We are all hobbyists on here trying to help others and learn our selves at the same time.
With that concept in mind we are all on the same playing field and one the "same" team

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15063608#post15063608 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Sisterlimonpot
As far as the newbee forum goes I think that the chart (no matter what) has to be coupled with a brief description of what is taking place in each layer. I don’t think the chart alone will suffice. (I of course can look at it with my limited or no knowledge on DSB’sbut an understanding of LD, SD, H2S etc and know what I’m looking at. But to the extreme newbee they may not get past the pretty pictures) and if you use words like, “hyperhypoxic, DOM, POM” give a brief explaination of them. It can be done to teach the newbie some things that were put forth by tmz and capn but it’s all about how you present it to make it interesesting.


I for 1 like to know a little more than my mind can comprehend (it makes me think and knocks the cobwebs off) When that happens it gives me a better understanding of the concept. The hard part is to teach the newbies without them knowing that their being taught and losing interest. (It can be done WK does it everyday )


I know that you set out to simplify something and now it’s getting over complicated. But If I’m a gauge to your target audience, just in these 2 threads alone I learned enough information that I would be confident to have a DSB and understand what’s taking place in each of the zones. You definitely did what you set out to do.

I agree---and not just for the newbie forum
first KISS
second give someone the reefer can go away from here and try
third briefly give the rationalle or some links for more indepth reading if the poster seems to see fit.

in this example of setting up a deep sand bed I would want to tell the reefer
use 4 - 5 inches of sugar fine sand
a remote dsb is preferred
protect the top layer of life by not adding carnivores that consume the life there eg hermits
keep the flow through the rdsb light to slow
set it up so it is the first area the drain water flows through

Whys excellent diagram would come next demonstrating the reason for the advice
finally some links to dsb threads and articles--maybe even my blog:lol:

 

[tmz]

Scott,

As I 've said before you have the patience of a saint. I don't.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15062773#post15062773 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Nanook
I would not underestimate the "intelligence" of newbies. Heck, most reefkeepers want to know the specific details and if you don't include these, you negate their intelligence and your diagrams become incomplete....just my opinion though.

IMO it is not underestimating intelligence here but rather the sequence of how we teach someone new to the reef and how we develop the concepts
the old adage here Nanook
crawl before you walk---walk before you run
and IMO the way we do that here is to give information to new reefers that is practical in nature with the opportunity to look further for more explanation.
So much of this hobby is hands on---plumbing, electrical, lab work and testing ect ect so our advice should be practical.

Randy is the epitomy of great teaching here. In his posts he always gives you something practical to do, then his take on it and finally links you to one of his great articles.
Not once I have I seen him post to the reefer to go find the answer themselves

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15065231#post15065231 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by tmz
Scott,

As I 've said before you have the patience of a saint. I don't.

thanks--coming from you--one of my esteemed mentors-- it is appreciated.

I have always admired your patience on here too---yes you do have patience also.
I love the line you have used before "I think you owe me a little bit of an apology here---no a big deal but neverless a few words would suffice"

 

[jenglish]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15055751#post15055751 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Whys
Thanks for trying to shut down the conversation jenglish.

If you'll actually look at the diagram, you will realize that everything you mentioned is already illustrated.

Thanks for the bump.

Just managing expectations Whys

My point in discussing the hypo/an switch in common usage is not to say your diagram isn't correct, but those who have heard the reversed terminology for years may think your diagram is reversed instead of the terminology often used. I think this issue is better addressed by later posts talking about brief descriptions going along with the chart.

 

[Whys]

Sorry guys, I was feeling irritable and needed to spend some time doing something else. I am not unreceptive to your ideas and sincerely appreciate what each of you has added to the conversation.

It looks like we have our work cut out for us, but I do still believe a general concensus is possible and I will continue to work toward that goal. I'll spend the next few days considering your suggests and see if I can't come up with a more complete, combined, and refined diagram.

Thanks again for what you have all offered and I hope our conversation may continue to be productive. At times I am easily frustrated and I appologize for that. But please know that I am not detered, nor unappreciative.

I hope we can all find something we like in what ever I come up with.

Peace.

 

[Aquarist007]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15073807#post15073807 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Whys
Sorry guys, I was feeling irritable and needed to spend some time doing something else. I am not unreceptive to your ideas and sincerely appreciate what each of you has added to the conversation.

It looks like we have our work cut out for us, but I do still believe a general concensus is possible and I will continue to work toward that goal. I'll spend the next few days considering your suggests and see if I can't come up with a more complete, combined, and refined diagram.

Thanks again for what you have all offered and I hope our conversation may continue to be productive. At times I am easily frustrated and I appologize for that. But please know that I am not detered, nor unappreciative.

I hope we can all find something we like in what ever I come up with.

Peace.

:beer: :love2: just don't expect makeup sex from any of us

 

[Sisterlimonpot]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15074297#post15074297 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by capn_hylinur
:beer: :love2: just don't expect makeup sex from any of us

:lol: hopefully that wasn't his intentions.

 

[therealfatman]

Usually hydrogen sulfate is not a problem as usually the organic carbon is the first thing to be used up not the NO3 so as their is no need for the SO4 feeding organic carbon that is not there to need energy so therefore SO4 does not need to be shown. If excess organic carbon was such a problem there would not be so many posts on vodka dosing or dicussion of advection and diffusion. In the anoxic zone I would leave "toxic zone", H2S, NO3 out of the diagram unless you are wanting to display a sick nutrient sink deep sand bed. There is no reason to list any of these things on a diagram of the anoxic zone of a healthy well functioning deep sand bed. Anoxic or Oxygen deprived would be sufficient.

I fully agree with the KISS. Look at the size of the list of threads in the Chemistry section. It is quite small. Obviously that shows most Reef Aquarists do not want to know every detail or bit of terminology involved in a chemical or biological process, they usually want simple.

IMO High velocity flow is the key to sucess with a DSB whether in tank remote or RDSB. As fast as it can flow while still keeping the sand in place. Unless you like being bound to critters and there dragging nutrients into the sand that should have instead have been removed instead by a skimmer. The constant possibility of a toxic zone and hydrogen sulfide gas due to the work of the critters and slow flow and velocity of flow is reason enough to discourage slow flow in all but refugiums with sand beds. As these are refuges for critters such as pods that need nutrients and particulates and macroalgaes that can utilize organic nutrients better prior to their becoming nitrate.IMO