Dsb's work, what makes them work best?

[inwall75]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493031#post6493031 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
Not necessarily. Light, nitrogen, and growing space can all be limiting. I've run tanks that definitely seem to have been in the growing space zone.

Yes, necessarily. Phosphates are limiting.

We weren't discussing Carbon, Nitrogen, etc. so I put info in that was appropriate.

Please don't misuse my posts in the future.

 

[kbmdale]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493024#post6493024 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Weatherman
Not antagonistic. Just a simple question.

If you are going to use macroalgae to reduce nitrate, why use a sand bed?

Ok then by that logic, If your gonna manually remove all detritus and yuck stuff from your BB with a turkey baster, why bother with a skimmer.

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493093#post6493093 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by inwall75
Please don't misuse my posts in the future.

Okay, I missed some context. What was this issue?

 

[CaptainCoral]

It's simply an antagonistic question!

I use remote dsb refugiums, and to me, it isn't redundant to have macro and dsb's. The amount of maco removed from my systems varies in quantity and how often it's removed. Sometimes there is litte algae in the fuge and it's nice to know that the dsb is picking up the slack. There's nothing wrong with a backup plan in all areas of this hobby.

 

[Weatherman]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493111#post6493111 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by kbmdale
Ok then by that logic, If your gonna manually remove all detritus and yuck stuff from your BB with a turkey baster, why bother with a skimmer.

Different export mechanism for different size particles.

Siphon for anything too heavy to remain in suspension. Skimmer for suspended particulate and dissolved organics.

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493093#post6493093 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by inwall75
Yes, necessarily. Phosphates are limiting.

We weren't discussing Carbon, Nitrogen, etc. so I put info in that was appropriate.

Please don't misuse my posts in the future.

Well, after rereading your post, I don't think I was misquoting, so perhaps you could clarify what you mean.

 

[RichConley]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493034#post6493034 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by inwall75

After time, in non-carbonate substrates, the P will be processed amongst the bacteria and critters. In carbonate substrates, the P will be processed amongst the bacteria and critters. Some chemical reactions will occur but will be hampered by the bacteria for the most part.

I think thats what I'm trying to say. Whats it matter? After a little bit they will be working the same.

 

[kbmdale]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493166#post6493166 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Weatherman
Different export mechanism for different size particles.

Siphon for anything too heavy to remain in suspension. Skimmer for suspended particulate and dissolved organics.

Kinda like this:
Different export mechanism for different size particles.

DSB for anything too heavy to remain in suspension. Macro for suspended particulate and dissolved organics.

 

[Weatherman]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493209#post6493209 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by kbmdale
Kinda like this:
Different export mechanism for different size particles.

DSB for anything too heavy to remain in suspension. Macro for suspended particulate and dissolved organics.

Fair enough.

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6490287#post6490287 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by inwall75
OK....Knowing that MOST phosphates stay in your aquarium, here's my recipe for a succesful sandbed.

I don't particularly believe this. There are lots of processes occurring, and I don't see any reason to believe that PO4 must necessarily rise in substrates.

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493209#post6493209 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by kbmdale
DSB for anything too heavy to remain in suspension. Macro for suspended particulate and dissolved organics.

I think that's a good point that I missed.

 

[inwall75]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493130#post6493130 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
Okay, I missed some context. What was this issue?

It appeared that you were trying to steer the conversation away from the truth. I could very well be wrong. Phosphates are always limiting. Other things can be limiting as well. I'm sorry I jumped to conclusions.

 

[inwall75]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493230#post6493230 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
I don't particularly believe this. There are lots of processes occurring, and I don't see any reason to believe that PO4 must necessarily rise in substrates.

Which of these processes are removing phosphates?

 

[bertoni]

From Dr Shimek's booklet, "Sand Bed Secrets", about an amphipod Rhepoxynius abronius, native to the west coast of North America:

It has been found to prefer sediments of a specific particle size, 0.113 mm in diameter... not sediments 0.110 mm nor sediments of 0.115 mm...

Heavily excerpted, in part due to copyright worries, but the sense is fine. The book goes on to say that animals on difference grain sizes don't live as long, reproduce as well, or tolerate stress as well if they're not on the right sediment size.

 

[bertoni]

Any process that releases phosphate directly into the water column, any release of bacteria or animals or eggs, sperm, etc, will move phosphate from the sandbed into the water column, where they might be removed via a skimmer or incorporated into an organism like a coral or fish. Such a process can remove phosphorus from the sandbed.

 

[inwall75]

Let's be cautious with our posts for a bit here. I got a little aggressive with Bertoni. I apologized. It's over. Let's discuss the issue and be fruitful going forward.

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6492963#post6492963 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
Putting coarser substrates on top is unnecessary and possibly counterproductive, IMO.

I kind of like the "possibly" part here.

Often, the goal is to reduce sandstorms, but the larger grains at the top can effectively kill the rest of the sandbed by providing an unliveable environment for bioturbation.

Well, reducing sandstorms has been my point for sure. Now what size are these "larger grains"? And IF we establish what the size is of these larger grains, then what is the infauna that are going to be "killed"? I noticed that you stated that it "CAN be" the "rest of the sandbed".

Does mean that there is some portion of the sand bed that is not killed. This would be the portion that is not "the rest of" the sand bed.

Does this apply to the .5 to 1.5mm grain size that I have reccomended for "sand-storm resistance"? And if so, is 1/2" depth going to be as "lethal" as 1 1/2", or does even a 1/4" of this stuff "effectively kill the remainder of the sand bed"?

> barryhc

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493006#post6493006 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6483059#post6483059 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc

Now the Calcium and the Carbonate are going to get back into the water column by some process, and phosphate might do this as well, BUT there aren't any animals in the substrate to eat the Calcium and Carbonate, whereas it is a different case for the phosphate now isn't it?

Not quite right. There are bacteria that will consume calcium carbonate, and silica, for that matter. They dissolve it in order to do so. The rate can be pretty high. I definitely have an article that discusses this briefly, if anyone wants details.

I sure want the details, and it doesn't mean much, in context, so to speak, unless these bacteria are in the sand bed.

Thanks > barryhc

 

[inwall75]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493428#post6493428 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
Any process that releases phosphate directly into the water column, any release of bacteria or animals or eggs, sperm, etc, will move phosphate from the sandbed into the water column, where they might be removed via a skimmer or incorporated into an organism like a coral or fish. Such a process can remove phosphorus from the sandbed.

But that's the point isn't it? A lot of newbies want to set up a tank and they want to keep colorful fish and colorful coral. They hear from people that phosphates (which cause algaes and browning in SPS) are taken care of by a DSB. This isn't true. I have more DSB's than most will ever have. I'm not against them. But they don't do what a lot of people think they do. That's why I'm participating in this thread.

It's also why I prefer BB for my SPS tank. I've never once said you can't keep SPS with a DSB. Someone named Nathan showed me an awesome DSB tank with SPS. It is why I, (me, myself, personally) prefers BB for my SPS tank. If you want to keep a DSB with your SPS, fine. I don't really care.

I don't want this thread to turn into a DSB vs BB thread. If you want a DSB, let's understand what it does and does not do and let's figure out how to maximize it.

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493472#post6493472 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
I kind of like the "possibly" part here.

Does this apply to the .5 to 1.5mm grain size that I have reccomended for "sand-storm resistance"? And if so, is 1/2" depth going to be as "lethal" as 1 1/2", or does even a 1/4" of this stuff "effectively kill the remainder of the sand bed"?

> barryhc

I would put 0.5 to 1.5 in the "killing zone", given the recommended grain size distributions I posted. I wouldn't expect a sandbed plated with granules that size to function. Dr Shimek had a number of threads on this topic. If you need sandstorm-proofing, due to tank circulation, I think you're out of luck for a DSB. Maybe it'll work partially, but I think you're in the "bad bet" zone.