TBS Live Sand

[moses]

TBS advocates in their recipe to build a "bullet-proof" instant reeftank in which you purchase their sand as part of the "Package", that you need 1 lbb. of sand for every gallon of water. That translates into a relatively shallow sand bed of only 1-2" in standard aquariums.

So there will be no "DSB" per the TBSW recipe and therefore no anaerobic processing functions either. With this being this "guaranteed" way to have a happy healthy reef tank (per the TBSW website), it seems that they are now contradicting all the established DSB logic that has been advocated on many of the reef-related forums (including this one).

 

[docklink]

Re: TBS Live Sand

TBS advocates in their recipe to build a "bullet-proof" instant reeftank in which you purchase their sand as part of the "Package", that you need 1 lbb. of sand for every gallon of water. That translates into a relatively shallow sand bed of only 1-2" in standard aquariums.

So there will be no "DSB" per the TBSW recipe and therefore no anaerobic processing functions either. With this being this "guaranteed" way to have a happy healthy reef tank (per the TBSW website), it seems that they are now contradicting all the established DSB logic that has been advocated on many of the reef-related forums (including this one).

Yep..... and yet it seems to work (very nicely). Go figure

 

[moses]

I guess I was looking for more of a scientific explanation of how the TBSW live sand bed function in comparison into a DSB.

 

[phil519]

There are so many different types of aquariums - it would be almost impossible for the package to meet all of them to create a DSB. Inevitably you have some that have more or less.

So - if someone were to purchase a 75 package versus a 90 package - you're getting 15 more pounds of sand in a 90 but the dimensions of the tank (for the sand) is the same.

A dsb will be ideal at 4" - more or less and you're finding more problems than it being helpful - at least this is my understanding of it from reading Dr. Ron's helpful threads. 1~2" is almost purely for esthetics imo. 3" is asking for trouble and so is 5".

Some folks don't want the LS in the package and go with BB. Others want to add more sand to boost it to a 4" minimum per the DSB.

I wasn't keen on a DSB and felt that just enough sand to cover the bottom of my tank (but without creating a nitrate sink) would be nice. The package for me worked fine.

I guess I was looking for more of a scientific explanation of how the TBSW live sand bed function in comparison into a DSB.

A dsb simply has 4" of depth and tons of critters stirring the sand. TBS LS can serve the same purpose as long as you get that 4" depth. You can achieve that by adding dry sand or asking to purchase more from TBS.

Hope that helps!

 

[moses]

Phil thanks for response. IMO, the first 1-2 inches is aerobic nitrate processing and this part of the bed needs to be stirred constantly as nutrients sink downwards through the stirring action. Past the first 2 inches, you get into the low-oxygen areas of the sandbed where aneraobic bacteria finishes processing all that the aerobic bacteria and sand critters could not

 

[phil519]

I think we're agreeing. With 1~2 inches I'm just getting more area for bacteria to break down ammonia and nitrite - but not nitrates since there is high oxygen present. The only way for me in this scenario to reduce nitrates is to go with a powerful skimmer, fuge or regular water changes. One mitigating factor in the production of nitrates is obviously the bio load as well as the amount of LR in the tank.

I forgot to mention that DSB will not work for all sizes of tanks. I know folks like to have a dsb in their fuges - but per Dr. Ron - DSB are not scalable below a certain size. Just too small to hold the diverse array of critters needed to keep the bed stable.

 

[moses]

Yeah.... the first 1-2" of the sand bed for nitrite reduction and then a nice macro-algae fuge to uptake the nitrate (as a subsitution to the anaerobic processing of the DSB). I think I got the concept now.

Thanks

 

[H2OLUVSME]

also i beleive a bit more break down occurs in the rock as well as the deep areas of the SB. maybe the fact that TBS is a little more dense (as compare to figi, tonga, etc..) is an advantage by providing another low to zero oxygen area where the last step of the nitrogen cycle can take place.

 

[moses]

That is a good point... I wasn't really considering the whole package as a filter rather just the sand bed. But you're right as long as detritus can make it to the areas of low oxygen at the densest point of the rock then I guess you would probably have additional waste processing capabilities there too.

And there are many worms that burrow into rock making channels for detritus to get these spots

 

[smcnally]

I filled my tank with southdown and topped it off with TBS sand. I think it looks nice, and you still have your DSB.

 

[dennisd78418]

According to an article published in Marine Fish and Reef Annual Magazine, 2004, based on data collected by Ron Shimeck, I believe, both nitrification and de-nitrification take place in the top few centimeters of sand. On the microscopic level, a single sand grain has areas of low oxygen that allow aerobic and anaerobic bacteria to live for all practical purposes on top of each other. The study showed that there is so little water flow below the first inch or so of sand that it simply does not and cannot provide significant nitrate reduction. The article stated that 1-2 inches of sand is plenty for purposes of nitrate reduction. I'm no scientist, but I found the article persuasive.

 

[phil519]

While no doubt dr. ron is persuasive - I'm not sure if I follow what you are saying...not because i'm a smart-aleck - I really want to know more!

So...I'm confused by your last two sentences...:

The study showed that there is so little water flow below the first inch or so of sand that it simply does not and cannot provide significant nitrate reduction.

If there is no flow then there is no oxygen therefore nitrate reduction occurs...at least this is what I thought? I guess I point back at the sand bed article and read that Dr. Ron keeps his tank sand depth at 4".

The article stated that 1-2 inches of sand is plenty for purposes of nitrate reduction.

did you mean to say ammonia rather than nitrate?

Again - I'm just confirming...thanks!

 

[dennisd78418]

My recollection is that the article is based on data collected by Shimeck. I don't think the article was written by him (I could be wrong- this is from memory).

If there is little to no water flow, there is no way for the nitrate, which is disbursed in the water, to get deep into the sandbed, so a deep sandbed is ineffective for denitrification beyond the first few centimeters because the nitrate is trapped there and cannot penetrate deeper. You have to have water exchange to transport the nitrate into the sandbed- no water exchange, no nitrate reduction.

No, I did not mean to say ammonia rather than nitrate. The point of the article was that nitrification (conversion of ammonia ultimately to nitrate) occurs on the same sand grains as detrification (conversion of nitrate ions to nitrogen gas). It is not necessary to create a deep bed in order to establish low oxygen areas because these areas occur (on the scale of bacteria) on individual sand grains in the top layers of sand.

I wish I could say from experience that it works for me, but my sand bed is about 4" deep (I like the appearance), so I can't say for sure.

By the way, the TBS "sand" is not really very sandy. It is more like crushed coral and shell. I bought ten pounds of it to seed my sandbed, and it worked well. But it has a very difference texture from the sugar fine sand typically used.

 

[liverock]

According to an article published in Marine Fish and Reef Annual Magazine, 2004, based on data collected by Ron Shimeck, I believe, both nitrification and de-nitrification take place in the top few centimeters of sand. On the microscopic level, a single sand grain has areas of low oxygen that allow aerobic and anaerobic bacteria to live for all practical purposes on top of each other. The study showed that there is so little water flow below the first inch or so of sand that it simply does not and cannot provide significant nitrate reduction. The article stated that 1-2 inches of sand is plenty for purposes of nitrate reduction. I'm no scientist, but I found the article persuasive.

Exactly!

Think about it, we have thousands upon thousands of reef tanks set up all over the world with THE PACKAGE....all with about 1.25 inches of live sand. All these successful setups, long term reef tanks prove that a shallow sand bed works and works in the long run, I think that is what is important, not "how" it works as there are many ways to approach all situations some work better than others.

TBS

 

[liverock]

[

By the way, the TBS "sand" is not really very sandy. It is more like crushed coral and shell. I bought ten pounds of it to seed my sandbed, and it worked well. But it has a very difference texture from the sugar fine sand typically used. [/B][/QUOTE]


If you look at what is really in the ocean, it is what we send customers, if you look at what is sold in stores, it is not what the ocean has to offer, but a more of a product that people expect, white fine grain sand, like beach sand at Honeymoon Island.

As that is what folks have as an idea of what "sand" looks like. The truth is "sand" in the Gulf is bits of everything that is out there....shells, corals, ect. ect . ect. Most of the sand issue is perception, not reality. Like DSB, works ok, but is not great in the long run. In the Gulf there is no DSB, there is about 1.25-3inch layer of live sand, under that is a stinky dead putrid layer of gook, trust me I know as if we go a little too deep collecting sand, the product is worthless and very stinky. Thus I came to realize that the top 1-2 inches is what mother nature uses, and what we use.

TBS

 

[moses]

[

In the Gulf there is no DSB, there is about 1.25-3inch layer of live sand, under that is a stinky dead putrid layer of gook, trust me I know as if we go a little too deep collecting sand, the product is worthless and very stinky. Thus I came to realize that the top 1-2 inches is what mother nature uses, and what we use.

TBS

Wow.... that is the proof. By this perspective, DSB is just another invention of the mind and not really the end-all "best thing since sliced bread" solution of natural filtration systems.

I think based on Liverock's observations it is now possible to see why the TBSW package live sand with its coarse grains and shallow depth is just as if not more so effective than a DSB with its 4+" inches of wasted tank space.

Thank you for the input!

 

[kabboord]

Questionable logic?

Questionable logic?

"As that is what folks have as an idea of what "sand" looks like. The truth is "sand" in the Gulf is bits of everything that is out there....shells, corals, ect. ect . ect. Most of the sand issue is perception, not reality. Like DSB, works ok, but is not great in the long run. In the Gulf there is no DSB, there is about 1.25-3inch layer of live sand, under that is a stinky dead putrid layer of gook, trust me I know as if we go a little too deep collecting sand, the product is worthless and very stinky. Thus I came to realize that the top 1-2 inches is what mother nature uses, and what we use.

TBS
"

Am I the only one that finds this logic and reasoning a little questionable? Given the complexity and scale of the worlds oceans, and all the biological and chemical reactions going I think it might be a little simplistic to assume because the 'The spots where we do our diggin is only 2 inches deep so thats how the ocean works, yeehaw buy our stuff'. I seriously doubt the sandbed accounts for all the nutrient export. I'm pretty sure the chemistry invloved is far more complex. Given the small closed system of a reef tank, and the fact that a reef tank is 3 feet deep at the maximum, and the sandbed where you are drawing the sand from is under ten times the amount of water, receiving different light, currents and completely different systems of energy this logic seems overly simplistic and sophmoric. The further proof that 'everyone that buys the package says it works; (some how I doubt the ten people who have just started their tanks, who post zealously represent EVERYONE who bought THE PACKAGE) Myself and everyone I know who started their reef tanks was this excited when they originaly started their tank. This simplistic reasoning seems flawed and I don't think I would drop a bunch of money on sand based on this logic.

The only reason I post is over two years ago I spent a bunch of money on TBS rock. And all these posts and excitement remind me exactly of how I felt when I started my tank with the rock. Only I didn't realize two things. 1. its so dense compared to other rocks you have to by so much to give the appearance of the other cured rocks it comes out being more expensive. And 2. the whole concept of 'curing' rock which TBS has so zealously disregarded served a very real purpose. The purpose of live rock is coraline alga and its ability to break down amonia etc. and thus work as an effective filter. The theory is to buy live rock for the coraline alga which will spread and filter your tank. The idea was that when you cure it you get ride of everything else (yes even the pretty little sponges) and the mantis shrimp. The reason people did this is as you become more advanced in your reefing its really nice to know exactly whats in there (as mantis shrimp can really screw things up) in addition to all the other stuff. If you are new to reef aquariums, I'm sorry but you arent going to be able to keep sponges. I know many advanced reef keepers who have very limited success in this. I only write this because this 'fervor' towards TBS I only understand because I went through it when I started my first tank and bought all their rock. I wish now that I had a better understanding of live rock, its purpose and realistically the begining or intermediate reefers ability to keep 75% of the stuff on the rock. Dieing clams release A LOT of amonia. Dieing sponges turn your water bright orange. As all of that really cool life (that you dont see in anyone else tank but yours! even the guys with years experience) will slowly receed and slowly release all the nutrients and chemicals bound up within their cells. I had a gorgeous looking see squirt thing on one of my rocks, thank god the owner of the LFS explained to me that when they die they release poison, I got him out right as he was dieing.
I think most experienced reefers will agree that with a new tank, with new rock you will atleast encounter one significant alga bloom. A lot of stuff may not survive that bloom, and the only thing worse than a big bloom is a big bloom followed by significant die off.
My only desire is to offer my input from my experience with my tank. When I first started researching TBS it was really exciting, and it contradicted a lot of what the aquarium books I read had said. Not cure rock! well if you keep it in water it doesnt need to be cured! 1 inch sand bed! theres gunk below the gulf! TBS rock was instant gratification, and until troubles started all my reefer friends were envious of all the life and thought they were suckers for buying cured rock.
Anyways think hard about your decision, its a lot of money, and fads come and go. I'll be honest, I'm setting up my parents tank and since I live in the Tampa area I'll probably by TBS. But I'm going to tear all that pretty life off, and get all the creatures off it (I can seed copiopodes from my sand for them) and cure it in some manner, so its just rock and coraline alga. Thats the good thing abot the rock, tons of coraline alga and thats the whole idea of live rock. I just notice everyone is so excited about all the other life, generally not realizing that all that life will end up being a huge headache, and frustrate the ultimate goal of keeping and mainting specific selected species of coral.
The entire time I had my tank I ran 440 watts of VHO on a 90 gallon. Maintained calcium at 400, ph at 8.3 and alk at around 9. I dosed and tested, Magnesium, Strontium, Calcium, Bromide and Trace elemtns I never used anything but RO, and still had die off. If you are thinking of being any less diligent Think hard about the likelyhood of any of the life surviving. I have enclosed a picture of my tank after I got all the TBS rock, and my tank now. Along the way I added more TBS rock, and theres still just coraline alga (mind you lots because of my dosing) now.
I hope someone finds my input helpful. I'm not saying don't buy their rock, its good stuff. Just have very real expectations about maintaining the life that comes on the rock, and understand the consequences in terms of chemistry when the various life begins to receed. Nothing comes without hard work on a reef tank.
Hope this post saves some people some of the 100 of hours I spent on my tank.
As far as live sand, thats a lot of money to have a tank cycle quick or whatever their reasoning for live sand is. Heres a secret, before someone started selling sand, when you put a bunch of live rock in a tank, pretty soon your boring old sand, became LIVE SAND. Crazy huh? Another crazy little trick, get a bunch of the boring old regular sand, get maybe a gallon of live sand, put it in, and all those little organisms breed and spread pretty quick and all of a sudden you got a bunch of live sand. And the money you saved on paying to ship 40 lbs of sand, you can spend on something that will really matter, like lights.
I don't mean to be flip, I just see a lot of fervor and excitement, that I admitt consumed me, and I spent a bunch of money on, when if I had taken the time to research, or ask those experienced. Hope this maybe helped someone.



Heres the tank right after I got the rock

Here is my tank now, only the coraline alga remains.

A

 

[H2OLUVSME]

'The spots where we do our diggin is only 2 inches deep so thats how the ocean works, yeehaw buy our stuff'. I seriously doubt the sandbed accounts for all the nutrient export. I'm pretty sure the chemistry invloved is far more complex.

i didnt percieve this as what TBS posted


did you feed your sponges at all? i understand the importance of perfect water chemistry and it seems you took very good care of this. but, some corals (sun corals, sponges, etc..) need direct feeding. i understand that a lot of people wont go through the trouble to keep all of their splonges alive (or dont realize the care involved), but there are people who dont loose all of their sponges.

how is the rest of your "extra life"? i was interested in TBS because of all the critters. i got nassarius vibex snails, cerith snails, bristle worms, spaghetti worms, porcelain crabs, peppermint shrimp, micro stars, limpets, oyesters, clams and tons of other life that i could never have gotten from my LFS rock.

 

[H2OLUVSME]

OMT, this is not directed at you though, this is for every one considering TBS. MANTIS ARE NOT THAT BAD!! the ones that come on TBS stay very small and are actually very interesting critters. if you do a little research you will find out they only feed on small crustaceans and snails. they will eat barnacles, but they wont kill off all of your fish, they dont mess with corals, and they dont break glass!! ive ad one in a ten gallon for a few months now. he has barely made a dent in the hermit population and he hasnt killed any of my astrea snails. from wht ive read people keep them with docile fish, llmpets and stomatellas with no ill effects. it wold be easy to get turbo snails that are too big for them to eat and they dont seem to mess with the very slow nocturnal algae feeders.

please quit preaching that they are horrible unless you know what they eat and dont!!

 

[kabboord]

I fed the tank rotifers and phyto occasionally, and suplimented with bromide. The sponges is clearly what excited me the most and drew the most compliment. I researched it diligentlly, and feeding plankton and rotifers, and keeping your bromide right is what I found on the subject then (two years ago).
My point was that the average person starting their tank isn't going to have the knowledge to dcare for sponges; something in difficulty akin to SPS.

The first part of my comment was dealing with their reasoning behind using only 2" of sand for nutrient export, discarding a majority of writing on the subject for one artcle.

The only stuff left from the TBS rock is the coraline alga, as you can see, plenty of that is left, and is clearly the best thing about the rock. There is also a variety of snail (very long and skinny with a pointy shell, that a book I had said grazed on corals and were pretty nasty, that I had about three of, that I had to rid.

Regarding mantis shrimp. Most of what I have rid characterize them as nasty critters. As I understand most people find the tapping annoying, for a creature you hardly see. I would say that most experienced reef keepers find them a nuisance that at some point must be dealt with. I don't know any advanced reefers whos like, man love those mantis shrimp.

Returing to all the life, once I got soft corals and large polyp stony chorals, I knew exactly which species of crabs and shrimp I wanted in there, stuff I could be sure wouldn't give me problems. Given the nominal cost of turbo snails, sally light foots, and blue legged hermits, I thinkn its better to add there as see you necesarry in the quantity you desire and need, rather than have your tank populated with whatever happened to be on the rock at the time, and could later prove great heartaches. As this hobby 'takes hold' like I'm sure we all agree, and as you advance, you need more control over your tank and critters. There idea and theory of live rock and reef keeping, that whatever happens to populate this rock in the gulf, MUST be good or atleast harmless to the reef tank, again I think suffers from poor logic.