<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=6474201#post6474201 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Sindjin
I used 50lbs of base rock from reeferrocks.com. It was really nice, porous rock.... I would reccomend it!
Your base rock is a lot nicer than the stuff we get in at the LFS. It's a terrestrial limestone that has close to zero porosity. The stuff you're describing sounds like it's much better for a reef tank.
Just because no one else has done one, here's a sum-up of what I think I've taken from this thread (or as a starter for new discussion points):
1) Good curing of liverock (cooking or some other good mode of curing) is essential for a healthy, non-nutrient-loaded DSB. We pretty much have a consensus on that. We still appear to be undecided on the mode of curing (as well as LR composition, base vs. natural), but there appear to be many that work.
2) Particle size is important, but undecided. So far, a lot of people seem to avoid using the extremely fine sands, but there doesn't appear to be any real downside to very fine ones except for the potential for sandstorms. On that note, sandstorms seem to be easily avoided with some good planning (personal note to retailers: do
not put gobies in sand tanks unless you want to play the "catch me in one minute or you won't be able to see me" game). There does seem to be a consensus that finer is better than coarse, due to the potential for nutrient traps (personally, I'm seeing one of those "moderation is key" scenarios, with the best results coming from mixed grades between the two extremes).
3) There are interesting thoughts on sand composition. It appears that (surprise, surprise) the different compositions (silica-based, calcite, aragonite) have distinct advantages and disadvantages. It also seems that they can all work with due planning (I prefer aragonite, but, having not tried the others, I can't really comment on them). There seems to be a fair consensus that mud would be less preferable, due to the fact that such mud is often used (but not always) when
more nutrients are required. Again, I can't comment on that, not having tried mud.
4) There is a general idea of bed depth, with the minimum around 3"-4" (with more emphasis on he thicker 4"), but there is not quite a general consensus. There are also some interesting ideas with uniform vs. varied thickness, again with both providing good results.
5) A lot of DSB "crashes" (quotes used because there is not quite a consensus on the meaning of that term) occur around 1-2 years of age. Personally, I think this is because of fanual extinctions and the concurrent loss of waste-processing ability, though I have no experimental data to back that up (there are, however, studies that have shown extinction around 2 years; they just haven't related that to processing ability). Of course, as this is the subject of the discussion, we most certainly have not arrived at a conclusion on this point (why DSBs fail at times). Personally, I think it will end up being a combination of many factors, including [but not limited to] faunal extinction and use of improperly cured live rock.
OK, I think that's where we are in the "DSB optimization" discussion. Please correct me in the likely event that I have forgotten something or been in error. I hope everyone else has found this discussion as enjoyable as I have.
