That's just an insane amount of reading! 8O :wink:
To summarize, some folks insists DSBs are ticking time bombs; others are saying that they aren't all their cracked up to be (for various reasons); still others are defending DSBs as godsends.
I've had a 9 year old DSB, and it's doing fine. I don't believe DSBs are the end-all-be-all of reefkeeping, and a false sense of security is admittedly dangerous. But I am convinced they are a great tool for captive reef aquaria.
To summarize, some folks insists DSBs are ticking time bombs; others are saying that they aren't all their cracked up to be (for various reasons); still others are defending DSBs as godsends.
I've had a 9 year old DSB, and it's doing fine. I don't believe DSBs are the end-all-be-all of reefkeeping, and a false sense of security is admittedly dangerous. But I am convinced they are a great tool for captive reef aquaria.
Yep, I agree Len. I've read it all and there are some interesting points, however - I think a lot of problems stem from people using sand that is to coarse, allowing detritus to settle into the bed. There is just now way that a sand bed comprised of sugar sized particles is going to become a detritus trap.
Jim
Jim
Live rock sheds detritus to where it can be easily vacuumed. Many detritovores also manage live rock better then digging. Please read the threads.
Detritus will not be completely processed by detritovores in the bed. It just won't happen. It becomes a sink. All of this is discussed in the threads.
Detritus will not be completely processed by detritovores in the bed. It just won't happen. It becomes a sink. All of this is discussed in the threads.
galleon":2h34sjz4 said:
no offense here, but are you wanting discussion on this?
i read a bunch of this already and taking in all the links and related and the info provided would take me all day.
i skimmed them and still saw nothing in these threads that directly pertained to my question.
the most i got was right here. you're likely right, the answer is probably in those threads somewhere but maybe it is past page thirty of the second link.
i am not a DSB fanatic. i use one and have had success doing so.
i just dont' see any compelling evidence that seals the deal here. some of these people having "DSB crashes" aren't using skimmers. others are dosing with elemental supplements.
some use macroalgae, others don't. some use carbon others don't. why are you convinced that the DSB is the culprit?
it seems the thinking here is 'because the DSB is failing to function it must not be capable of functioning'.
maybe i missed this part too.
i would think the sink analogy is fitting in some cases but i think they are miskept beds.
i am open minded here.
Interesting reading.
I have a dsb in the main tank and a remote dsb with macros. Every couple months I hit the main tank with a powerhead on a stick and blow the detritus around. Much of it goes through the overflow to the skimmer and macros. Sometimes I even place a filter bag over the overflow lines in the sump and manually remove the detritus.
I think people that think having a dsb means no cleaning are headed for trouble. It seems that some of the people advocating the removal of dsb's wanted to never have to touch the tank again. I think that kind of thinking is a mistake. A dsb is a tool, and in a closed system you have to make sure your tools are working correctly, and you have to perform regular cleaning of your tool. Heh heh, cleaning.
I think a DSB is a neat thing, I like how it looks, and I like the critters that live in it. I also know that nothing is perfect. I just don't want to see 'band wagon jumping' as the mainia of the month spreads.
I have a dsb in the main tank and a remote dsb with macros. Every couple months I hit the main tank with a powerhead on a stick and blow the detritus around. Much of it goes through the overflow to the skimmer and macros. Sometimes I even place a filter bag over the overflow lines in the sump and manually remove the detritus.
I think people that think having a dsb means no cleaning are headed for trouble. It seems that some of the people advocating the removal of dsb's wanted to never have to touch the tank again. I think that kind of thinking is a mistake. A dsb is a tool, and in a closed system you have to make sure your tools are working correctly, and you have to perform regular cleaning of your tool. Heh heh, cleaning.
I think a DSB is a neat thing, I like how it looks, and I like the critters that live in it. I also know that nothing is perfect. I just don't want to see 'band wagon jumping' as the mainia of the month spreads.
I am setting up my tank for the second time and it's the first time I'll have a DSB. I have about 4" of Southdown in the tank right now and I have 20lbs of live sand on the way in addition to about 80-90lbs of live rock. I had a much larger size sand before (Caribsea Aragonite) so I'm curious to see how this does.
I pretty much always tell people to put however much sand in the tank you want to look at. I've ran berlin tanks with NO sand, up to several inches of sand. Never have I had detectable nitrate, even in the no sand tank. However, that doesn't mean I think a DSB is a ticking time bomb.. we have sandbeds going on 6 years in the shop.
"some use macroalgae, others don't. some use carbon others don't. why are you convinced that the DSB is the culprit? "
Because its essentially a detrital sink. Detritus cannot be processed into non existance. Look at the last page of the RC thread and my reply to DKKA.
"no offense here, but are you wanting discussion on this? "
Well, yes and no, I really don't want to repeat myself on three different threads over and over again, which is what a lot of this has amounted to. I just wanted to provide you guys with the reading in case you didn't ever visit those other two boards. <shrug>
"the answer is probably in those threads somewhere but maybe it is past page thirty of the second link. "
Somewhere around there
Because its essentially a detrital sink. Detritus cannot be processed into non existance. Look at the last page of the RC thread and my reply to DKKA.
"no offense here, but are you wanting discussion on this? "
Well, yes and no, I really don't want to repeat myself on three different threads over and over again, which is what a lot of this has amounted to. I just wanted to provide you guys with the reading in case you didn't ever visit those other two boards. <shrug>
"the answer is probably in those threads somewhere but maybe it is past page thirty of the second link. "
Somewhere around there
liquid, my biases go to the non-deep sandbed side. There are many reasons (one of the explanations as to why those threads are so obscenely long), but in general: Sandbeds act as a detrital sink. On coral reefs phosphorous is the limiting nutrient in the water column. With concentrations averaging usually less than 1 umol liter-1, most of the nutrients that fuel reef productivity come from benthic recycling.
In our closed system, this is can become overwhelming. Dilution/relocation is a big solution in natural systems. By trying to replicate benthic processing activity via a sandbed in closed systems, we can massively skew levels of bacteria/organics/sinked detritus, concentrating what even on a natural reef would not be broken down on/in/by the reef. The sandbeds are claimed (by some, not to make a blanket statement) to be a natural alternative to removing the stuff via skimming/siphoning/whatever, but in reality, they are just concentrating it to way beyond anything natural. Something can't go to nothing, and it isn't removed by skimming or detritovores or N2 offgassing by a longshot. Hence all the detritus that builds up on a geologic scale in estuarine and abyssal environments.
In our closed system, this is can become overwhelming. Dilution/relocation is a big solution in natural systems. By trying to replicate benthic processing activity via a sandbed in closed systems, we can massively skew levels of bacteria/organics/sinked detritus, concentrating what even on a natural reef would not be broken down on/in/by the reef. The sandbeds are claimed (by some, not to make a blanket statement) to be a natural alternative to removing the stuff via skimming/siphoning/whatever, but in reality, they are just concentrating it to way beyond anything natural. Something can't go to nothing, and it isn't removed by skimming or detritovores or N2 offgassing by a longshot. Hence all the detritus that builds up on a geologic scale in estuarine and abyssal environments.
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
