I am just wondering about this type of set up. What are the problems with it. I have always thought that Deep Sand Bed spells problems down the road. But why? aside from the gas pockets that can be released what are the other down falls. Also when setting one up is it true that is all you filtration + Skimmer. I am just wondering about this stuff. Any Info would be great!
How do we feel About Deep Sand Beds?
- Thread starter mjstover
- Start date
madadi
ReefOG
yes all you need is a deep sand bed and a skimmer, but you can get the same result with live rock and a skimmer.
i have a deep sand bed, but its in the sump. its about 6in or so. in the main display i have about 2in at most of sand. i like the look of sand but i dont like to look of very deep sand. yes it can be bad if you let it get dirty. the right critters will keep your sand clean. in the end its a matter of personal choice like so many things in this hobby.
i have a deep sand bed, but its in the sump. its about 6in or so. in the main display i have about 2in at most of sand. i like the look of sand but i dont like to look of very deep sand. yes it can be bad if you let it get dirty. the right critters will keep your sand clean. in the end its a matter of personal choice like so many things in this hobby.
jglackin
New member
Actually, live rock is not nearly as effective as a DSB. If you need a large amount of nitrification, due to a heavy load, a DSB in addition to LR might be preferred. The question is, no DSB, in tank DSB, or a Remote DSB?
I have a DSB in my tank, I like having the DSB, but if I could do it over, and had the space, I would do a remote DSB. With a remote DSB, all you need is a 5 gallon salt bucket, filled with live sand, and plumbed to your tank with bulkheads on each side of the bucket so that water can pass across the top of the sand. To me, this is more serviceable than a in tank DSB. But this is personal preference. I know some that have no DSB in tank or remote, but then they use denitrators along with LR. Some people prefer a glass bottom tank or starboard. I don't.
I have a DSB in my tank, I like having the DSB, but if I could do it over, and had the space, I would do a remote DSB. With a remote DSB, all you need is a 5 gallon salt bucket, filled with live sand, and plumbed to your tank with bulkheads on each side of the bucket so that water can pass across the top of the sand. To me, this is more serviceable than a in tank DSB. But this is personal preference. I know some that have no DSB in tank or remote, but then they use denitrators along with LR. Some people prefer a glass bottom tank or starboard. I don't.
aurora
New member
I have a 6" DSB in my 300G SPS tank running continuously for 6-7 years now without any problem. The sand is as white as when I first put it in. I hear a lot of people on this board claiming that their DSB was the cause of their tank's demise or their algea problem. I always wonder how they know for sure that it was the DSB. So many factors goes into how a tank does well that any one factor could potentially cause a tank to crash or not do well. I've also heard a lot people reported problem with disturbing an old DSB. I just moved last week all the 5yo HD sand from my 6" DSB in my 75g refugium into 15" tall clear plastic bins and had no problem whatsoever. I did this to convert 1/2 of the refugium into a prop tank and turned the current DSB in my refugium into more of a RDSB. It took me 2 hours to drain the 75G tank, scoop up all the sand to fill the clear plastic bin, and refill the tank. The process cause the water in the whole system to turn milky white overnight. I woke up the next morning with the tank crystal clear and all the livestock doing well. Actually, my corals may have actually liked the disturbance since I think I got better polyp extension for a few days after the change. It is my opinion that certain myth gets propagated in this hobby and gets passed on without any definite proof and for me "DSB crashing" and "don't ever disturb an old DSB" are such myths.
I challenge anyone with a supposed "bad DSB experience" to prove conclusively that the DSB is the cause of their problem as opposed to other reasons such as poor tank maintainance.
I challenge anyone with a supposed "bad DSB experience" to prove conclusively that the DSB is the cause of their problem as opposed to other reasons such as poor tank maintainance.
Last edited:
jglackin
New member
I have seen how disturbing a DSB can cause problems. You have a 300 gallon tank and, from what I am reading, you moved half of your DSB in your fuge. That may not be enough to cause problems for you, but I once changed the aquascaping in a 12 gallon nano and disturbed the DSB and killed everything. Pods, fish, corals, everything but two clowns. I had amphipods floating on top of the water in the morning. Not pretty.
i have personally worked on over a dozen tanks that had a dsb, and were having issues. we removed the dsb, replaced it with a ssb, and every tank this was done to made large improvements. i have actually never seen a dsb tank that didnt have problems, or that was doing very well. i am sure there are a few exceptions out there, but i have personally never seen it, all i ever see is tanks crashing from a DSB or hanving algae problems, or just stuff generally not doing well.
ReefTECK
New member
The biggest troubles you can run into with a deep sand bed is:
-burrowers releasing dangerous hydrogen sulfide deposits (black pockets you can see from the side of the tank.
-an inappropriate application of water flow will result in MASSIVE amounts of detrius.
To solve the first issue, plenum's have been shown to reduce or eliminate the build up of hydrogen sulfide (CORAL MAGAZINE Vol4 Issue #5)
You could also put in a nylon screen layer to keep many burrowers out of the lower sand bed where these deposits will accumulate. IME though, this does not really work, my 6" H. melenarus wrasse was still able to get way down in there. And the narssius snails could have also probably.
For the second mentioned problem, be sure to apply lots of water flow, get a couple of power heads that blow up, under, behind, below, in between, in front of, and all over the live rock residing on the sand.
Despite all this trouble, I would attest that it is quite possibly worth all the trouble. I didn't drop the cash to fill my new 75 with 4-6" of sand, but my 46 bow had a 5" sand bed, and I had lots of healthy micro invertebrate populations, and I also managed to go obsuredly long periods of time without doing water changes via a DSB's de-nitrification power.
Have Fun!
-burrowers releasing dangerous hydrogen sulfide deposits (black pockets you can see from the side of the tank.
-an inappropriate application of water flow will result in MASSIVE amounts of detrius.
To solve the first issue, plenum's have been shown to reduce or eliminate the build up of hydrogen sulfide (CORAL MAGAZINE Vol4 Issue #5)
You could also put in a nylon screen layer to keep many burrowers out of the lower sand bed where these deposits will accumulate. IME though, this does not really work, my 6" H. melenarus wrasse was still able to get way down in there. And the narssius snails could have also probably.
For the second mentioned problem, be sure to apply lots of water flow, get a couple of power heads that blow up, under, behind, below, in between, in front of, and all over the live rock residing on the sand.
Despite all this trouble, I would attest that it is quite possibly worth all the trouble. I didn't drop the cash to fill my new 75 with 4-6" of sand, but my 46 bow had a 5" sand bed, and I had lots of healthy micro invertebrate populations, and I also managed to go obsuredly long periods of time without doing water changes via a DSB's de-nitrification power.
Have Fun!
jglackin
New member
I have a 6" DSB with a plenum and a layer of screen about 1" over the plenum. I have an algae turf scrubber, a fuge full of chaeto, and a very large skimmer. My tank has been up since July 2007 and, until 1 week ago, my NO3 has been around 8 PPM. When I checked a week ago, it was around 5. I don't know if the DSB and plenum have finally started to kick in gear or what, but it looks like the nitrates are starting to come down.
I have critters growing all over my tank and fuge and no algae other than the fine film that will grow on the glass if you let it go. It's a trade off. I like the look of a SSB, but I like the critters and nitrification of a DSB. The RSB would be a good alternative.
I have critters growing all over my tank and fuge and no algae other than the fine film that will grow on the glass if you let it go. It's a trade off. I like the look of a SSB, but I like the critters and nitrification of a DSB. The RSB would be a good alternative.
HBtank
Premium Member
I know you are trying to help, but our post is riddled with myth and speculation. Take a look at the article below for a much better explanation of DSB usage and the real dangers they pose, which are much more minor than people have conjured up regarding toxic gas etc...
Dangerous pockets of hydrogen sulfide and detrius "buildup" really are just myths perpetuated by hobbiests with no evidence. And though DSB's need to be kept healthy, some of what your suggest could actually be detrimental, and your concerns are actually benefits...
I do agree though, flow is key, but then that applies to ANY reef tank, so it is sort of redundant to state in regards to a DSB. Flow is important regardless of substrate, they require no more or less IMO.
http://www.ronshimek.com/Deep%20Sand%20Beds.htm
Last edited:
aquaman67
Active member
I had a DSB for over 5 years until this weekend. The tank started leaking so I decided to tear it down and move the rock and livestock.
The DSB smelled pretty bad and when stirred was full of dirty silt.
I used TBS rock straight from the Gulf of Mexico, shipped in water so I imagine I had more life in my sand bed than those who use already cured rock.
There were tons of brown and red worms. They were not bristle worms either.
I hated to tear it down and had no other problems with the DSB.
The DSB smelled pretty bad and when stirred was full of dirty silt.
I used TBS rock straight from the Gulf of Mexico, shipped in water so I imagine I had more life in my sand bed than those who use already cured rock.
There were tons of brown and red worms. They were not bristle worms either.
I hated to tear it down and had no other problems with the DSB.
To be fair I think your comment about hydrogen sulfide gas as "myth perpetuated by hobbiests" is incorrect. There is plenty of evidence in the literature to back this up...starting with the first book on aquariums I ever read back in the 70's. The risk is low...but it still exists.
Mattmcf
I have to totally agree with you. Preference an proper maint and husbandry will allow success with just about any method.
Mattmcf
I have to totally agree with you. Preference an proper maint and husbandry will allow success with just about any method.
barbra
Active member
Aquaman, are you saying the worms were in the sand bed or in the TBS rock? I have a great number of worms in my DSB, very long ones that burrow all through it. It seems that all or at least most of my bristleworms live in holes in the rock and not in the sand bed itself, although they spend time there at night eating.
HBtank
Premium Member
I would be facinated to see a link on hydrogen sulfide as a normal occurance in a healthy DSB, this subject is huge with me.
In all my research I have seen it repeated that there is NOT persistant pockets of hydrogen sulfide in healthy DSB's. Right along with the notion that a healthy DSB just collects detrius into some sort of nutrient sink "stockpile", defying mother nature and decomposition and holding it for years. These ideas are just false. And what I consider the myth. Including statements such as "just look at the dark patches along the glass", which is in fact photosynthetic bacteria that is using the light available to it through the glass since it is on the sides of the tank.
Can it form? I am sure it can and has (Just leave some sand in a bucket for a week and then smell it), but it is not an issue with a properly constructed and maintained DSB. IMO and experience it would take some serious neglect and improper setup to get it to form. The same goes with detrius buildup.
I guess the problem I have is if we are going to use improper setups as examples of the dangers for a system as whole, where does it stop? Should we call BB tanks dangerous just because someone had 10x turnover and used no skimmer? Like I said, I can make some hydrogen sulfide with a scoop of some of my sand and a sealed bucket. But what was the cause, the bucket or the sand?
People seem to label DSB as the problem, instead of the true cause, improper setup or husbandry.
Last edited:
Let's see...where do I start. Hydrogen sulfide production in Marine sediments is a fact...basic marine biology 101. H2S production occurs predominantly in the anoxic regions of the sediment, the very region we depend on for denitrification to take place. Many factors determine to what extent H2S will develop, of which some could easily slip by and go unnoticed by the most conscientious aquariest. The release of and catastrophic effect of H2S may be unlikely, but to say that it does not exist is reckless. The Jaubert method after all was developed specifically to prevent or reduce the likelihood of developing H2S.
Don't get me wrong...I'm not knocking DSB...IT WORKS! But any sand bed can develop H2S, and given the right conditions, problems can arise...however unlikely.
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-02/eb/index.php
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-02/eb/index.php
Don't get me wrong...I'm not knocking DSB...IT WORKS! But any sand bed can develop H2S, and given the right conditions, problems can arise...however unlikely.
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-02/eb/index.php
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-02/eb/index.php
HBtank
Premium Member
From your article, which BTW spent almost not time on this subject. Thanks for the read, I guess:
"It was also later found in practice and in the literature that areas of anaerobic hydrogen sulfide production released gas that became oxidized quickly as it reached the aerobic surface sediments (see Hansen et al 1918, Mitterer et al 2001, for example), making it unlikely that the toxic gas would be released into the water column except in unusual cases; "
I see nothing that disputes my post. I guessed you missed the word "healthy" as well as "pockets". I most certainly understand that anerobic bacteria produces H2S.
Also, please expand on:
"Many factors determine to what extent H2S will develop, of which some could easily slip by and go unnoticed by the most conscientious aquariest."
And I definately did not say this:
"The release of and catastrophic effect of H2S may be unlikely, but to say that it does not exist is reckless."
I infact said it probably has and can happen. But as I said, I debate the myth that the DSB was the cause of the "crash", and it was just the end result of other factors that could crash any tank in time. i.e. Improper setup and husbandry.
I think the article I posted deals with the material we are discussing in a much more direct manner.
My problem is people often point to DSB as some uncontrollable tank crashing force, regardless of husbandry and setup. It seems that you agree somewhat, I do not.
"It was also later found in practice and in the literature that areas of anaerobic hydrogen sulfide production released gas that became oxidized quickly as it reached the aerobic surface sediments (see Hansen et al 1918, Mitterer et al 2001, for example), making it unlikely that the toxic gas would be released into the water column except in unusual cases; "
I see nothing that disputes my post. I guessed you missed the word "healthy" as well as "pockets". I most certainly understand that anerobic bacteria produces H2S.
Also, please expand on:
"Many factors determine to what extent H2S will develop, of which some could easily slip by and go unnoticed by the most conscientious aquariest."
And I definately did not say this:
"The release of and catastrophic effect of H2S may be unlikely, but to say that it does not exist is reckless."
I infact said it probably has and can happen. But as I said, I debate the myth that the DSB was the cause of the "crash", and it was just the end result of other factors that could crash any tank in time. i.e. Improper setup and husbandry.
I think the article I posted deals with the material we are discussing in a much more direct manner.
My problem is people often point to DSB as some uncontrollable tank crashing force, regardless of husbandry and setup. It seems that you agree somewhat, I do not.
Last edited:
aurora
New member
How can you have a true DSB in a 12G? What'd you do?...fill 1/2 of your tank with sand. From what I can gather, most problem with DSB stem from people not really having a DSB but a thicker than usual SSB and using the wrong grade of sand. A true DSB use very fine sand such as HD sand (the coarse stuff from CarribSea will not cut it) and has to be at least 5-6". The sand is so fine that detritus can only collect on top 1-2cm and get processed by the tank and surface grazers.
BTW, I moved all the sand in my 75G refugium into 2 tall container that fit inside my 75G. That's about 100lbs of HD sand. Below the top 1" of my 5 yo DSB the sand is as white as when I first put it in. All I can say is that my personal experience is very different from what people are saying on this board. I've always wondered how people know it's the DSB that's the problem. My suspicion is that they never had a properly set up DSB in the first place or it's a convienent scapegoat for some other poor reef practice.
BTW...this is what I meant by a full stocked SPS tank
Last edited:
Similar threads
