Dsb's work, what makes them work best?

[barryhc]

<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?

I use a sand bed because of the animals that either need, or prefer to live in it. Since I am going to have a sand bed for these reasons, I hope to make the best use of the sand bed that I can, in whatever capacity that presents itself, and/or that I can discover. That would include using macroalgae to export whatever I can with it.

> barryhc

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493514#post6493514 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
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

The bacteria in question are in the sand. I'll have to search through a CD to find the reference.

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493517#post6493517 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by inwall75
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.

I think phosphate is handled by a DSB. The export mechanisms I suggested are from the sand to the water column. I don't see any reason to believe those exports necessarily are going to harm any form of coral. The eggs, sperm, larvae, etc, can actually serve as food.

What harms certain corals significantly is a certain level of dissolved ionic phosphate in the water column, I think. Some phosphate is always present, although usually below our hobbyist test kits in healthy natural reefs, IIRC. Phosphate bound in a bacteria or some other organism isn't going to harm coral, and, as I stated, could be tasty food, instead.

 

[barryhc]

<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.

Good point Weatherman. You see, the VS part doesn't work. the whole system does what it does, and "magic bullets" are now left to "Penn & teller".

> barryhc

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493203#post6493203 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by RichConley
I think thats what I'm trying to say. Whats it matter? After a little bit they will be working the same.

Well, this is what I'm trying to understand, doesn't the Araganite "buffer" the water by dissolving, and isn't the Silica "less prone" to dissolving, and therefore "less prone" to clumping"? ?

> barryhc

 

[inwall75]

Bertoni,

They don't always leave in a "package" that you suggested. That CAN be a problem in some biotopes.

Even if they did, not all of the exports you mentioned will be utilized fully and will eventually break down to their components....phosphate being a major one.

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493393#post6493393 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by inwall75
Which of these processes are removing phosphates?

The "eat-poop-skim" process. Poop, I think I just flushed that paper down the toilet. :lol:

> barryhc

 

[inwall75]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493713#post6493713 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
The "eat-poop-skim" process. Poop, I think I just flushed that paper down the toilet. :lol:

> barryhc

Unfortunately, the drain of the plumbing system is STILL IN THE TANK!!!

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493406#post6493406 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
From Dr Shimek's booklet, "Sand Bed Secrets", about an amphipod Rhepoxynius abronius, native to the west coast of North America:



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.

I have read this information over 50 times. It simply does not answer the question.

I asked Anthony Calfo about .5 to 2 mm substrate at the surface for 1 1/2" deep with "oolitic" underneath at 3" depth, and he explained that it would not be a problem, to the infauna, or anything else.

Now I said myself, that we should avoid getting tied up in referencing authors, in preference to sharing the "information", and I have just done else wise, as have you, and I will try to get back to information, but I'm not as interested in who said it as whether it is true, and can be brought to the point of "MAKING SENSE".

Now, the "amphipod Rhepoxynius abronius", which requires .113mm particles is still going to survive reasonably in the .1 minimum size particles that I have recommended, so what is your point?

Do you have any idea where I came up with the .1mm minimum size from? Think about it ! ! !

> barryhc

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493698#post6493698 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by inwall75
Bertoni,

They don't always leave in a "package" that you suggested. That CAN be a problem in some biotopes.

Even if they did, not all of the exports you mentioned will be utilized fully and will eventually break down to their components....phosphate being a major one.

Absolutely true. My belief is that in a well-run DSB, phosphate in the water column is not an issue. That's backed up by my personal experience and measurements, and by Eric Borneman's long-term studies. With some luck, he'll be reachable soon, and I might be able to get some of the data, etc.

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493795#post6493795 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
Now I said myself, that we should avoid getting tied up in referencing authors, ...
> barryhc

Gee, and I like referencing authors.

Okay, so far as the argument, we'd have to go back to the biology texts, but I don't see how any significant layer of larger chunks is going to let the animals survive. Their ability to get at the detritus is going to be blocked, I think. I'm not convinced water flow would work either.

I guess I'll have to go through Dr Shimek's various posts to find more specific answers. He got asked about this approach a lot. I would guess it wouldn't work, based on the analogy to a natural enironment, and I've never needed to "armor" the sandbed, so my interest is a bit limited.

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493558#post6493558 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
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.

The "killing zone" heh, this is the "zone in which gobies are happy to function, and do their sifting. Maybe not "optimum", but "happy", yes.

"Plated" is a cute word, which applies generally to "ultra-thin" coatings that seal a surface.

"Coarser grain sizes" do not relate in any way to "plating".

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.

I don't need, or want any "luck" to be involved in how I operate my Reef tank. You can go back to reading and quoting "Shimek" all you want, but that is not going to bring a "new understanding" to this discussion.

I believe that sand-storm control can be accomplished quite readily in a reef tank with sand bed, and I don't but lottery tickets either.

> barryhc

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493795#post6493795 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
Now, the "amphipod Rhepoxynius abronius", which requires .113mm particles is still going to survive reasonably in the .1 minimum size particles that I have recommended, so what is your point?
> barryhc

Ooops, forget this part.

So I think I'm arguing about the particle size distribution. R. abronius likely isn't going to be found in our tanks, so the point wasn't about 0.113 mm, but rather about the specificity of the requirements for particle sizes.

 

[kbmdale]

Bertoni You got PM

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493752#post6493752 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by inwall75
Unfortunately, the drain of the plumbing system is STILL IN THE TANK!!!

You're jusy teasing me aren't you Curt? :lol:

> barryhc

 

[inwall75]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6494020#post6494020 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
You're jusy teasing me aren't you Curt? :lol:

> barryhc

I would never do that.

 

[inwall75]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493935#post6493935 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
Absolutely true. My belief is that in a well-run DSB, phosphate in the water column is not an issue. That's backed up by my personal experience and measurements, and by Eric Borneman's long-term studies. With some luck, he'll be reachable soon, and I might be able to get some of the data, etc.

Bertoni,

Eric is reachable on Marine Depot as we speak.

I'm not anti-DSB. I keep them. Phosphate in the water column is not an issue for many people's tanks including most of mine. I believe that it is an issue in one of my tanks and that would be my
SPS tank. It's not the end of the world but I like to be in charge instead of bacteria that I cannot control. As I've stated before, that's my choice at how I like to run that tank and if one wants to run their tank differently...more power to them. I believe that I could run that tank with a DSB but that is not how I choose to proceed.

 

[barryhc]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6493967#post6493967 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bertoni
Gee, and I like referencing authors.

Okay, so far as the argument, we'd have to go back to the biology texts, but I don't see how any significant layer of larger chunks is going to let the animals survive.

Come on John, "CHUNKS" ? ? ? Do you think that I, or anyone else is going to fall for that "flimsy SPIN" ? ? ? ?

And on top of it, you have decided to call this an "argument", what happened to all of that good old discussion stuff that we were "engaging" in?

Their ability to get at the detritus is going to be blocked, I think. I'm not convinced water flow would work either.

"Whose" ability to get at the detritus. Is this the Detritus that we want to keep up in the water column with high flow?

I guess I'll have to go through Dr Shimek's various posts to find more specific answers. He got asked about this approach a lot. I would guess it wouldn't work, based on the analogy to a natural enironment, and I've never needed to "armor" the sandbed, so my interest is a bit limited.

"ARMOR" heh? Gosh that sounds "thick and heavy" doesn't it? ?

Is .5 to 1.5mm "thick and heavy" ? ? ?

How big is 1.5mm anyway ? ? ?

Do you have any idea? Or do you have to rereference "Dr. Ron?

> barryhc

 

[bertoni]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6494152#post6494152 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by barryhc
Come on John, "CHUNKS" ? ? ? Do you think that I, or anyone else is going to fall for that "flimsy SPIN" ? ? ? ?> barryhc

I'm not trying to spin something. I do know how big a millimeter is. If I was an animal that was the size of some of the small nematode worms, or the smaller cirratulid worms, the 1.5mm chunk would be much larger than I am. When I looked at my sand, a lot of animals were pretty small in comparison to the aragonite substrate I was using, and I don't think many of the particles were even 0.5mm.

We need to think in terms of the size of animals and organisms we're trying to grow. Many of them are single-celled.

 

[barryhc]

Come on guys, what ever happened to the "rest of the story" anyway ? ? ? ?

All of this really "DANGEROUS" stuff that is controversial, "but isn't", is occuring below the "Hypoxic" zone, and as I said before, no one seems to be interested.

What's up, or "DOWN", I should say ? ?

> barryhc