Why don't intermediate depth sand beds work?

[Paul B]

The first is Jason's mentioned above the second is Paul B. whose tank was 17 years old when he changed it out in December, and Ked L. who was one of the early TOTMs on RC. These tanks are all SPS dominant and healthy. I want to emphasize that Paul's tank was 17 years old, and he never once vacuumed or cleaned his sand. The tank was an in-wall style built into a corner diagonally and it was almost impossible to reach the bottom.

I guess this is a different Paul B than me. Is there another guy named Paul B?
I don't use a DSB and my tank is 42 years old not 17 and I do clean the gravel. So there has to be another Paul B that I never met but I guess he is on here.
I also believe DSBs are a rediculous Idea and I feel there is no problem with them for 6 years or even 10 years, but even my hermit crabs are older than that so it doesn't mean much. I feel they last about 10 or 12 years then "most" but maybe not all of them will stop doing whatever they are supposed to do. Not necessarily crash, just not work any longer.
How many 15 year old DSBs are here that have not changed out the sand? :fun5:
I am not an arguementative kind of guy so I may be wrong, if I am, just call me names :thumbsup:

 

[Dre59]

I love this thread!!!

Paul B :beer: You are the man!!

 

[power boat jim]

Right off the top of my head I know of 3 long running tanks with DSBs that neither clean them nor blow them so hard as to "suspend detritus". The first is Jason's mentioned above the second is Paul B. whose tank was 17 years old when he changed it out in December, and Ked L. who was one of the early TOTMs on RC. These tanks are all SPS dominant and healthy. I want to emphasize that Paul's tank was 17 years old, and he never once vacuumed or cleaned his sand. The tank was an in-wall style built into a corner diagonally and it was almost impossible to reach the bottom. DSBs as toxic tank killers is a THEORY NOT A FACT, and the existence of even one long term DSB is powerful evidence that tank crashes are the work of some other element other than the mere presence of a DSB.


Joe :beer:

I think what we need to look at is the difference between treating the tank water with a dsb and what the remnants of that treatment leaves behind in the sandbed. These are two very different issues.

Lets call a DSB by what it really is, its an anaerobic digester of sorts. It breaks down biomass (sludge), by using microbes, into a different somewhat more metabolized form of waste. The byproduct of this tranformation leaves you with some unpleasent "substances" including methane, hydrogen sulfide maybe some carbon dioxide. All bad things for a reef tank. The fact also remains that there is very little reduction in the biomass during this tranformation, which means, unless you physically remove this sludge that is left behind in the sand, it will not magically dissappear. Eventually any benfit provided by the sand will be overrun by the accumulation of sludge.

If people have had dsbs working in their tanks for a long time they are physically exporting biomass in a different manner. The laws of physics simply wont allow for an unlimited amount of mass to be packed into a limited amount of space.

 

[gbru316]

JP, don't you regularly remove detritus that accumulates on the top of your sand bed because you like having bright white sand?

 

[Dan Thrash]

I happen to be a fan of the RDSB in a bucket idea, while having a SSB (for looks) of BB in display. I haven't had a tank for a few years so I have yet to try it though. To combat the theory that these can crash in 10 years, if plumbed correctly, it seems that a RDSB in a bucket could 1) be changed out periodically and 2) be valved off if suspected to be causing issues. It seems rather easy and inexpensive to try. Am I off base here or missing something still?

 

[JPMagyar]

I guess this is a different Paul B than me. Is there another guy named Paul B?


I am not an arguementative kind of guy so I may be wrong, if I am, just call me names :thumbsup:

Yes, the Paul B I am friends with is a doctor in Stamford, CT and unfortunately he does not frequent any online forums, but he has had saltwater aquariums for over 20 years. I do have a picture of his new tank as I am using it in a magazine article I'm writing. Maybe I'll have to come up with a different name for you in this thread like Paul the Super Cool Ole Reefer Dude or something

JP, don't you regularly remove detritus that accumulates on the top of your sand bed because you like having bright white sand?

Yes, I need to come clean :lolspin: because although I am on the pro-DSB side of this discussion. I must admit that my display tank uses a shallow bed that I clean incessantly, and my 180 gallon basement frag system has a BB, and I vacuum my 300 gallon sump several times per year,

BUT,

based on my experiences with other people's tanks, I believe DSBs can work long term.



Joe :beer:


Paul B.'s new Tank

 

[gbru316]

Yes, I need to come clean :lolspin: because although I am on the pro-DSB side of this discussion. I must admit that my display tank uses a shallow bed that I clean incessantly, and my 180 gallon basement frag system has a BB, and I vacuum my 300 gallon sump several times per year,

BUT,

based on my experiences with other people's tanks, I believe DSBs can work long term.

HA! Thought so. I read your build thread, your tank is one of my favorites and is the reason that my dream tank is a large cube.

 

[Paul B]

I do have a picture of his new tank as I am using it in a magazine article I'm writing. Maybe I'll have to come up with a different name for you in this thread like Paul the Super Cool Ole Reefer Dude or something

Or call me the Paul B the bald guy. I can't believe that there are 2 Paul Bs with old tanks. Maybe that is the key, you need to call yourself Paul B.
Ok, maybe not.

 

[djkms]

Great read, thanks for the info guys!

My current system is only about 3 months old. I have a 2-3" sandbed (oolite) and have been leaving it alone for the most part. I was always told "don't disturb it!". Well I am pretty particular about keeping the tank clean and got tired of the algae and detritus that would sit on the top layer of the sand, so I started to rake it weekly. Well I did a water change last weekend and decided to siphon clean the top layer with my handy python attachment. I couldn't believe how much crap came up the tube and this tank is only a couple months in!

I am glad I found this thread as I was curious just how detrimental it is to siphon my sand every couple of weeks. Sounds like I should be in the clear from what I read here.

I do have a couple questions though. Would I be ok to siphon all the way down to the bottom or should I leave that layer alone? Also, would I be OK to siphon the whole bed every 2 weeks or should I only do it in portions? maybe 1/4 of the bed every 2 weeks or so?

 

[power boat jim]

Great read, thanks for the info guys!

My current system is only about 3 months old. I have a 2-3" sandbed (oolite) and have been leaving it alone for the most part. I was always told "don't disturb it!". Well I am pretty particular about keeping the tank clean and got tired of the algae and detritus that would sit on the top layer of the sand, so I started to rake it weekly. Well I did a water change last weekend and decided to siphon clean the top layer with my handy python attachment. I couldn't believe how much crap came up the tube and this tank is only a couple months in!

I am glad I found this thread as I was curious just how detrimental it is to siphon my sand every couple of weeks. Sounds like I should be in the clear from what I read here.

I do have a couple questions though. Would I be ok to siphon all the way down to the bottom or should I leave that layer alone? Also, would I be OK to siphon the whole bed every 2 weeks or should I only do it in portions? maybe 1/4 of the bed every 2 weeks or so?

Feel free to siphon as much sand as you like however often you like. I removed and replaced all my sand more then once. It can be tough on any critters living in it but if you have a wrasse or two the sand has probably been picked clean of anything beneficial already.

 

[Osteoclast]

I siphon weekly to remove detritus. Have 1-2 inch layer. Siphon to the bottom. Key to success in my view.

 

[elegance coral]

EC, I believe what you are stating as fact is not proven.

Please let me know the statements I've made that you would like supporting evidence for.

We know very little about what bacteria we are supporting in the anaerobic regions of an aquarium,

Why do we need to know this information?
If I create a compost pile in my back yard, I'll know very little about what bacteria is growing in it, but I'll still know that those bacteria are converting organic matter into fertilizer. If I have a six inch pile of rotting organic matter in my aquarium, I don't need to know the exact species of microbes involved to know that they are converting the organic matter into fertilizer.

They may have the POTENTIAL to become toxic if stirred up too much but that remains to be proven in some future scientific study. As of today such a possibility remains a scientific HYPOTHESIS and NOT scientific FACT, but I feel you are arguing as if it is in fact true.

Not only is it true, but the sand bed doesn't even need to be stirred up to release toxins, and we don't need a dedicated scientific study to show this. Known science clearly shows how this works.

Decomposition speeds up as oxygen levels increase. When a neglected sand bed is stirred up, organic matter from low oxygen levels within the sand is transferred to higher oxygen containing areas. This is clearly seen when a one of these sand beds are disturbed. The water becomes cloudy with rotting organic matter. A large portion of this material settles back out onto highly oxygenated surfaces within the aquarium, like the LR and sand. This sudden increase in the byproducts of decomposition can easily overwhelm a system and cause animals to die. This is very basic science, and I don't see how it can be disputed. Even Borenman himself witnessed this first hand.

The sand bed need not be disturbed to cause a similar effect. A new sand bed will be clean, with little rotting matter. We don't need to pull maintenance, or invest in filtration to offset the negative effects of rotting organic matter that doesn't exist. However, from the time that first little particle of tag poo, or dead bacteria settles in the sand, it will begin to release harmful substances into the systems water. Now we need to pull maintenance, and utilize filtration to offset the negative effects of this rotting matter. As time passes, the amount of rotting organic matter in the sand increases, and so does the fertilizers/nutrients/harmful substances/toxins that are released from that rotting matter. The filtration and maintenance employed today may not be sufficient for tomorrow. Once the production of harmful substances produced through decomposition exceeds the filtration's ability to remove it, animals die.

As you would hopefully agree, "poo" doesn't collect at the bottom of a tank DSB, BB, or otherwise.

Why would I agree with such a statement?

Waste is processed in our home aquariums on a continual basis and we have well established means to remove the by-products regardless of our substrate therefore a DSB is not a sink that collects "poo" indefinitely.

You're right, in that we have methods to offset the negative effects of rotting organic matter within our systems. The more rotting organic matter we have being "processed" in our systems, the more maintenance and filtration we needed to compensate for it. Why employ a method that pollutes our water and causes us to work harder to keep it clean? The fact that we may be able to keep the water clean in spite of the pollution being released from six inches of rot and filth doesn't change the fact that six inches of rot and filth pollutes our water and puts the lives of our pets in jeopardy.

Out of time for now
Peace
EC

 

[MIASDADDY]

While alot of it is over my head,I've really enjoyed reading this thread,I just joined this forum yesterday,and this is the only thread I've read so far.I have 2-4" of sand in my tank now thats about 6mo old.I've kept them both ways,bb,ssb,but never had more than about 4" in any tank I've kept with sand.One thing I've never even heard of is cleaning the sand,I was always told to not disturb it.So anywho,,thanks for the good read,,I can hardley wait to vac my sand this weekend,to see what comes out.

 

[Nano sapiens]

While alot of it is over my head,I've really enjoyed reading this thread,I just joined this forum yesterday,and this is the only thread I've read so far.I have 2-4" of sand in my tank now thats about 6mo old.I've kept them both ways,bb,ssb,but never had more than about 4" in any tank I've kept with sand.One thing I've never even heard of is cleaning the sand,I was always told to not disturb it.So anywho,,thanks for the good read,,I can hardley wait to vac my sand this weekend,to see what comes out.

Unfortunately, you'll find quite a few posts/threads where you'll see the "I don't disturb my shallow sand bed (SSB) and my tank is doing fine". If you see one of these, just check back in a year or two to see if the tank has had a major crash, is still running, has had the SB replaced or has itself been replaced.

Even though I have been in the hobby for quite a while (and typically vacuumed my SSBs), when I first set up a Nano tank five years ago (1" SB) I left the SB untouched to see if these Nano 'experts' were on to something. Long story short, high nitrates and phosphates, lots of nuisance algae and coral brown jelly infections a little over a year after set up. Lovely...

5 years on with the same tank and after this early misadventure, I am a firm believer that detritus has to be regularly removed from a shallow SB system for long term system health.

 

[Nano sapiens]

I can hardley wait to vac my sand this weekend,to see what comes out.

One note of caution, only vacuum SMALL sections at a time in an established SB that hasn't previously been regularly cleaned. Usually, this is done with every water change. If you try and vacuum large sections, or the whole thing all at once, you can release a lot of nasty waste products. Worst case, creatures will die and the tank crashes, best case you'll just get more algae/dyno/cyano blooms.

 

[Pallobi]

I'm not nearly as experienced as many of you, and Im not looking to be flamed, I get that enough in my own forum, lol... But I have a new 180g that is about 6 weeks old or so... I've had only two fish in there until about a week ago... I stirred up the sand after starting to read this thread 3 days ago... Holy crap was the water a mess... It went from crystal clear, to clouded as heck, and you could see all the none dust-like particulates in the water column... They all came from the sands surface and beneath... Pretty crazy...

I should mention my sand is roughly 1" to 1.25" in depth, some spots lower... I'm looking to add more sand, about 15 to 20 lbs to get the exact look and depth I'm going for...

I've been a barebottom, high flow reef type guy for some time now... I now have a sand bed, more moderate flow type reef now...

I couldn't imagine lettin that nasty stuff buildup in my sandbed... From now on, as long as I have sand, it will be raked and stirred very often... Even after doin this for a few days since coming across this thread, my sand basically stirs completely clean with very little dust or particles stirring up... That gives me great peace of mind, and I plan to do this for the duration of my tank's life...

I don't have the experience most of you do, but I do have a good mind, and I can observe and make rational conclusions based on what I've learned first hand... And from this setup and my first 3 years in the hobby (I used sand then too), I've learned that sandbeds, shallow or deep, can get quite nasty... I believe in clean water, especially for my sps, so I'm gonna keep rollin' with he cleanings, and feel good about the job my multiple carbon reactors, and skimmer are doing... Can't really think of a good reason not to keep it clean...

Jmo, worth less than two cents amongst some of you...

Cheers guys, GREAT thread... It's provoked muh thought and considerations on my end...

Neal :beer:

 

[Nano sapiens]

I believe in clean water, especially for my sps, so I'm gonna keep rollin' with he cleanings, and feel good about the job my multiple carbon reactors, and skimmer are doing... Can't really think of a good reason not to keep it clean...

All experiences and opinions welcome

One thing to watch out for is that frequent, aggressive detritus removal is very effective in reducing nitrate and phosphate. Along with WCs, GAC and skimming, it is quite possible to literally keep the water devoid of enough nutrients for the corals, especially SPS. If you see them turning pastel-pale (not white from bleaching) then just gradually increase your feeding until you see improvement.

Even in a 12g AIO Nano (high bio-load in relation to water volume), with regular vacuuming and WCs alone I can easily induce pale coral coloration in SPS by restricting the amount and frequency of feedings.

 

[JPMagyar]

Why do we need to know this information?

Because we know from research in waste treatment plants that bacteria exist that can live off such toxins as hydrogen sulfide. Do they exist in a DSB? Are there other bacteria that live in anoxic conditions that eat phosphate and do those bacteria live in a DSB? (P.S I challenge you to find a paper that shows that such bacteria do exist because in this case there is some research on the topic)

Not only is it true, but the sand bed doesn't even need to be stirred up to release toxins, and we don't need a dedicated scientific study to show this. Known science clearly shows how this works.

Show me one scientific paper where in DSBs or equivalent were tested in a controlled environment using proper scientific methodology and were shown to have released toxins. This is the heart of my complaint regarding your comments.

Known science clearly shows how this works.

What works? How a DSB releases toxins? Where? Show me the "known science". What do you mean by known science? Look below for what scientific method means and see if you get at what I'm arguing.

This sudden increase in the byproducts of decomposition can easily overwhelm a system and cause animals to die. This is very basic science, and I don't see how it can be disputed. Even Borenman himself witnessed this first hand.

Perhaps this is where you and I can simply agree to disagree. You are calling this statement "basic science". To me science means, use of scientific methodology.


Scientific Method (Wikipedia):

The scientific method (or simply scientific method) is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.[1] To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.

You are stating: A DSB leaches toxins.

That is a theory. Now show me how you or anyone else tested this theory and proved it to be true using the scientific method.

In the other case you just listed you are saying an aquarium sand bed can be stirred up and the resulting cloud of detritus can kill it's inhabitants. Show me where this has been tested and explained. I stir up my tanks and create clouds of mess all the time, and I don't lose any corals. What is the mechanism you are claiming causes death? Lack of oxygen? Toxin release? If toxins what toxins were involved? Did they come from the sand bed or were they introduced through daily additives or food or aerosol sprayed in the room. Just because someone stirred a sand bed and corals died is not proof that DSB are toxic. This is science. No one has studied this because it costs money and time. It is taken as fact by many because it seems logical. It is NOT science.

As you would hopefully agree, "poo" doesn't collect at the bottom of a tank DSB, BB, or otherwise.

Why would I agree with such a statement?

This statement was made regarding "poo". Poo means feces. Feces do not collect on the bottom of a tank because it biodegrades rapidly into other organic and inorganic material. So to say "poo" collects on the bottom of a tank is patently false.

You're right, in that we have methods to offset the negative effects of rotting organic matter within our systems.

Out of time for now
Peace
EC

Exactly, and some genuine SCIENTISTS have posited logical THEORIES incorporating other scientific research as to why a DSB may be one method of controlling waste in an aquarium.


Here are some questions about DSB that perhaps you can answer.

1) What is the precise list of toxins that exist in all DSBs after 5 years?
2) How much of those toxins exist in relation to total system volume?
3) Does a 5 year old DSB release toxins and if so by what means? Dissolution? Ionic exchange? Gaseous release?
4) Do the toxins found in a DSB depend on system inputs, and if so how do the inputs change the toxins?
5) At what level is hydrogen sulfide toxic to acropora? Do all acropora have the same sensitivity?




DSBs MAY be dangerous, and some anecdotal evidence exists to support this hypothesis, but this has never been proven through scientific method.



Joe :beer:

 

[JPMagyar]

Along with WCs, GAC and skimming, it is quite possible to literally keep the water devoid of enough nutrients for the corals, especially SPS.

What nutrients are needed to "feed" SPS, and what research has shown this?


Joe

 

[gbru316]

What nutrients are needed to "feed" SPS, and what research has shown this?


Joe

Plenty of anecdotal evidence noted by experienced hobbyists running ULNS have shown that tanks devoid of nitrate and phosphate (unmeasurable by hobbyist list anyway) result in poor coloration when combine with a minimal feeding regimen. An increase in feeding (or a decrease in carbon dosing/GFI) usually remedies this situation.