Well i've come across many different opinions on this. Some say yes, some say never, and some say to a certain extent. I wanted a nice goby to keep the brown algae down and sand bed turned (because i orginally heard it had to be sifted) but i've heard alot of people tell me the goby will tear up all the organisms in my live sand. What is yalls opinion? And if it should be sifted and the goby is too much, what would be a good thing to keep down brown algae and stir the sand? Thanks for you help!
should a DSB be sifted or no?
- Thread starter tripleup05
- Start date
That depends what you want out of your DSB, and the sand sifting goby you are planning to get. Some goby will dig down far enough and fast enough to turn over the sand within a day, and some will only sift the top half inch or so of sandbed.
If you want the benefit of sand fauna breeding in your tank which inturn will be providing zooplankton to feed your corals, then I would suggest you get a sand star instead. Sand sifting gobies may deplete sand fauna population depending on the size of the goby and the open area of the sandbed.
If all you want is a nice clean looking sandbed, and could careless about zooplankton population and pods, then I would suggest you get golden headed sleeper. Golden sleeper will typically dig down about 0.5 to 1 inch of sand bed, and would typically not cause too much damage to the denitrification (anaerobic) zone of the sand bed past 1" depth.
If your sand bed is relatively shallow (less than 2"), and you are able to maintain a good maintenance practice and keep the NO3 down, you could try a orange spotted sleeper goby. These gobies are very aggressive in turning over the sandbed, and very deep too.
As far as engineering gobies, I personally do not like them in my tanks as their tunneling behavior could change the rockscaping dramatically especially if your rocks are not stacked very sturdy.
If you want the benefit of sand fauna breeding in your tank which inturn will be providing zooplankton to feed your corals, then I would suggest you get a sand star instead. Sand sifting gobies may deplete sand fauna population depending on the size of the goby and the open area of the sandbed.
If all you want is a nice clean looking sandbed, and could careless about zooplankton population and pods, then I would suggest you get golden headed sleeper. Golden sleeper will typically dig down about 0.5 to 1 inch of sand bed, and would typically not cause too much damage to the denitrification (anaerobic) zone of the sand bed past 1" depth.
If your sand bed is relatively shallow (less than 2"), and you are able to maintain a good maintenance practice and keep the NO3 down, you could try a orange spotted sleeper goby. These gobies are very aggressive in turning over the sandbed, and very deep too.
As far as engineering gobies, I personally do not like them in my tanks as their tunneling behavior could change the rockscaping dramatically especially if your rocks are not stacked very sturdy.
Hey thanks alot man. That helps alot! Well my tank is a 46g FOWLR with a 2" +- ( a little) live sand bed. So you recomend the golden sleeper goby? Basically I just want something to help keep the sand clean w/o harming the helpful bacteria livin in it (i paid a pretty penny for live sand lol!), and i love gobies so ya know i figured they'd be what i use. As far as using current to keep the algae off, i've tried that but usually just end up makin holes and dunes in the sand. Will this particular goby eat the algae if I cant get the current worked out?
Well, sleeper goby is after the live animal or animal matters in the sand. Algae may be consumed somewhat, but unintentionally.
The good thing is that in the process of turning over the sand bed, some algae gets burried back into the sand, and some will die off due to the lack of lights.
The good thing is that in the process of turning over the sand bed, some algae gets burried back into the sand, and some will die off due to the lack of lights.
Excellent...but just to make sure...this would be a great fish for me as long as I stay FOWLR. The whole reason i bought the live sand was for biological filtration. I'm not so worried about the fauna things...atleast for a good while. So the sleeper will atleast somewhat help with algae, keep the sand stirred some, and will only minimally harm the biological filtration critters in the sand bed? Sorry if i keep askin the same thing over...but i'm new and you know how it is...dont want to screw anymore up than you have to!
romunov":1jrrpo9v said:
this would depend on the DSB's size wouldn't it?
i do agree on the "little monster" part though.
Jimmy,
isn't the sand star a predator upon sandbed infauna?
i see you said "fauna" and i don't know if that is what you meant.
i am just trying to understand your point. i have always been under the impression that they will clean out a sandbeds life and then starve.
tripleup05,
i have a shallow bed about two inchish and i really like to use nassarius snails to keep it moving around.
i have heard mixed reviews as to them actually being detritivores as opposed to scavengers, but it really makes no difference to me. i like them because they move the bed very well.
throw in some food and you can watch the bed come alive.. for those of us with active imaginations, it's almost creepy sometimes
Podman":psuf9swx said:
A sand sifting goby also eats organic matter in the sand.
What I am wondering is what are the sand bed critters supposed to do that makes them critical to the functioning of a sand bed. From where I sit, I don´t see a thing.
The evidence I would be looking for is how much, what exactly and at what rate. I don´t actually see any need for any sand bed critters as there is always detritus in any sand bed with or without the critters.
Even Ron says that a DSB should be replaced every 5 years or so, and if the point of the sand is denirtification, I am not sure why anyone should be spending money on sand bed critters.
Furthermore, I know of no reefers who actually keep track of the sand bed infauna in any meaningful way. I guess, in short, I think adding/caring about sand bed infauna is akin to adding "essential elements" in a bottle to your tank - a waste of time, money and resources.
Righty":6lyok9yi said:Podman":6lyok9yi said:
A sand sifting goby also eats organic matter in the sand.
What I am wondering is what are the sand bed critters supposed to do that makes them critical to the functioning of a sand bed. From where I sit, I don´t see a thing.
they speed the process of nutrient breakdown. they clean cruddy corners and lick the bowl of the scum that would otherwise be left for algae or bacteria to consume.
of course this is not a permanent consumption... it is still in the system but, imo, it will be better utilized and contained (if only periodically) in an organism as opposed to left lying about waiting for dissolution or worse.
also, when nutrients land on the sand it is better that they are consumed rather than allowed to sink... i would think you would agree.
thus, if the larger fauna consume the sand's infauna there will be little to move the nutrient loads around... motion is better than stagnant in every way i can view it.
would you agree that LR is more functional with a pod population living within it? if so why?
The evidence I would be looking for is how much, what exactly and at what rate. I don´t actually see any need for any sand bed critters as there is always detritus in any sand bed with or without the critters.
Even Ron says that a DSB should be replaced every 5 years or so, and if the point of the sand is denirtification, I am not sure why anyone should be spending money on sand bed critters.
in my uneducated opinion, i don't think a rate or how much can be determined, and in the unlikely event that it is determined, i don't think these numbers and rates could be accurately maintained in any system.
anyone trying to calculate their tanks parameters to this degree is 'overthinking it' in my opinion.
there are simply too many variables to take into account.
i mean at what rate and exactly how many pounds of liverock do you need to perfrom your biofiltration?
Furthermore, I know of no reefers who actually keep track of the sand bed infauna in any meaningful way. I guess, in short, I think adding/caring about sand bed infauna is akin to adding "essential elements" in a bottle to your tank - a waste of time, money and resources.
this applies to more than sandbeds.
who keeps track of bristleworms, or snails, or knows how much calcium their corals consume? how much skimmate they produce?
if the guesswork was completely removed from reefkeeping i wouldn't find it that interesting.
i don't find sandbeds all that interesting to look at, but i can tell a healthy one from a sickly one on sight. the same can be said for the rock, or fish, or the entire tank in general.. i don't always need an exact rate or quantity to determine something.
just me?
tripleup05":24pvpaoa said:
The rule of thumb is don't add it if you don't test for it. 'Essential elements' is a particular product
.The idea of adding lots of trace elements is mostly not held by most experienced hobbyists. A balanced 2 part calcium and alk is about all you need (or kalk or a ca reactor). Waterchanges should make up any shortfalls.
Ok - just got back from 8 hours on a plane, so if I sound like a weenie its becasue I am beat and cant sleep. But, I am pretty happy because a whale buzzed me while I was diving!)
Can you find any evidence that isn't Ron just saying that is how it is that shows that the critters do it faster than the bacteria?
Bacteria work very very quickly.
I do agree, but why not let the bacteria do it?
I hate to say it, but bacteria!
Define functional. I don't mean that brashly, I think it is the crux of the discussion.
Then how can you possibly know if you have a 'healthy' number of infauna in your sand and why should you spend the money on recharge kits.
Nope - thats what I call the reefing 'feel'. Everyone develops it over time. What I am still not seeing is any actual evidence that the sand bed critters actually help the sand bed do what ever it is one is claiming it does. If we don't know if it is is beneficial (and we know there are definite downfalls to a sand bed - o2 consumption in a power outage for one), why bother? It feels like a marc weiss product description.
Hope that made sense!
Podman":3swmbyxl said:
Can you find any evidence that isn't Ron just saying that is how it is that shows that the critters do it faster than the bacteria?
Bacteria work very very quickly.
I do agree, but why not let the bacteria do it?
I hate to say it, but bacteria!
Define functional. I don't mean that brashly, I think it is the crux of the discussion.
Then how can you possibly know if you have a 'healthy' number of infauna in your sand and why should you spend the money on recharge kits.
A whole lot less than most people think!
People do keep track of how much they are skimming and how much calcium their corals are using. Maybe not directly, but I know when my ca drops or my skimmer isn't producing. As for bristle worms or snails - I put them in the same category as DSB critters.
Nope - thats what I call the reefing 'feel'. Everyone develops it over time. What I am still not seeing is any actual evidence that the sand bed critters actually help the sand bed do what ever it is one is claiming it does. If we don't know if it is is beneficial (and we know there are definite downfalls to a sand bed - o2 consumption in a power outage for one), why bother? It feels like a marc weiss product description.
Hope that made sense!
Righty":h4n6za8l said:Ok - just got back from 8 hours on a plane, so if I sound like a weenie its becasue I am beat and cant sleep. But, I am pretty happy because a whale buzzed me while I was diving!)
8) sweet!
i can look around later (can't hang out as long as i would like) but if you would allow me to, i can merely point to the speed in which a sizable chunk of fish feces can be devoured by any number of detritivores.
a nassarius will find food in very short order and have it out of the water column in a matter of minutes.
bacteria would take considerably longer to consume your average tang dropping or missed fish meal, etc.
add that the fecal droppings of a nassarius are much smaller than what it often feeds on and i would hope that would suffice as some sort of evidence on this topic or at least for this conversation at present.. i will look around tonight when i have a bit more free time.
i wouldn't think as quickly as animalia.. but then i am not that well versed in the behavior of bacteria.
well, honestly for fear of undesirable bacteria or nuisance algae.
i dislike the thought of letting it sit on an uninhabited bed.
if the sand bed is left with no bugs in it it looks unhealthy to me...meaning it will have black crud right below the surface andstarts to look packed underneath.
to date, the best my current sand bed has ever looked... to my visual examination from outside... was about the one year mark.
it had lots of tiny white brittles that i don't know how got in there (not the ones everyone complains about but real thin armed ones) and also lots of nassarius that i had added.
the sand was powder white throughout. the tank was very healthy at that time and i had a crazy pod population along with the tiny black and grey brittles on my rock. feather dusters were plentiful as well.
the time when i would feed every night you could see brittles would surface from out of the rock and stick thier arms out into the current, brain corals would expand, and my one clown would start begging like a dog.
when the tank was fed the nassarius would get cruising and everything that was added seemed to be completely gone within a minute.
i can't imagine bacteria outcompeting this tanks inhabitants.
since then unfortunately something went wrong in which i determined to be the Oceanic salt.. it seems like an accurate diagnosis at present.
I hate to say it, but bacteria!
if it is this versatile and functional then why aren't everyones sandbeds working?
hard for me to sum up.... "functional" as in efficiently converting reef wastes into removable compounds as well as performing the necessary ammonia/nitrogen filtration.
what i wanted to bring to the table with this is that if the inverts inside of the LR are not as beneficial as bacteria then why add the LR at all?
what function do these pods and worms serve if the bacteria can handle the load on it's own?
to clarify and FWIW, i never have bought a recharge kit.
i have bought snails but i prefer to rely upon the rock and "sand seed" to a great degree.
i tend to think a good sand bed takes a very long time to create.
i don't think thirty Galleons could sit down and crunch enough numbers to come to a precise number of calcium ions to add daily to a reef any more than i think they could decipher a perfect number of arthropods to add to the supporting cast of bristleworms in order to consume the average missed protein feed that was targeted at fish #2.
but, what i can say with some confidence, is that upon my own observations i can often see that something is wrong in my own tank...
that if a deficiency occurs and the bed starts to look unhealthy, i can take corrective measures and hopefully all will be well.
this is not only the sand... i am becoming a believer that LR needs a boost from some new stuff every now and then as well.
A whole lot less than most people think!
that is, until they load the tank with too many fish and start feeding huge amounts.
remember when people were doing this a few years ago?
it was acceptable to throw heaps of blender mush in the tank and rely on a four to five inch DSB to convert it?
i see sand beds as a functional addition to a reeftank if it is carefully observed like everything else.
i also tend to think (right or wrong) that a sand bed gives me the ability to use less rock which i find better looking
People do keep track of how much they are skimming and how much calcium their corals are using. Maybe not directly, but I know when my ca drops or my skimmer isn't producing. As for bristle worms or snails - I put them in the same category as DSB critters.
in the same vain as you cite people tracking the skimmer and calcium, i keep track of my sandbed critters.
i think so.
Nope - thats what I call the reefing 'feel'. Everyone develops it over time. What I am still not seeing is any actual evidence that the sand bed critters actually help the sand bed do what ever it is one is claiming it does. If we don't know if it is is beneficial (and we know there are definite downfalls to a sand bed - o2 consumption in a power outage for one), why bother? It feels like a marc weiss product description.
Hope that made sense!
all i am not clear on is why you find sandbeds to be so enigmatic in function yet you add other life such as LR without the the same speculation.
Podman":310f5bku said:Righty":310f5bku said:Ok - just got back from 8 hours on a plane, so if I sound like a weenie its becasue I am beat and cant sleep. But, I am pretty happy because a whale buzzed me while I was diving!)
8) sweet!
Totally sweet!!!
Let me know what you find!
The bacteria are there anyway.
I think that is because you don't see the bacteria doing their jobs.
In regards to bacteria they are - the nitrogen cycle.
There are three issues with sand beds that worry me - hydrogen sulfide build up, 02 depletion in a power outage, and re release of phosphates when/if the bed 'fills' or is disturbed.
Cause we like the look of it, and its de-nitrification capabilities.
More bio load!
Cool. I would rather spend the time and effort on coral!
It makes more sense to me to remove the missed food before it settles and rots.
But you can do that without the sand.
Makes sense.
Thats its own problem!
People are still doing it. It didn't make sense to me then.
Sure. I think you can get better functionality without the sand.
That said, if I were setting up a short term tank, I might use a sand bed.
I think you can go with less rock even without the sand.
Fair enough!
I don't think I find them enigmatic, I just don't see much evidence for them doing what people say they do. I add rock for its de-nitrification capabilities and its looks.
Fun discussion.
In theory, yes, but not in practice. We are not dealing with acres of fine sand...
See here.
I am pretty sure Ron doesn't say that.
I do. My tank is "DSB" and not a reef tank. I care more about polychaetes than corals. :wink:
That's right. However we do know that sand bed areas are a key component in C pathways on global scale. They provide living space for _bacteria_ and every other creature that utilizes it.
This is actually funny. It has been documented that sand beds are important in transfering energy (this is what "worms" do. They take energy out of detritus so there is less for the bacteria to convert and algae to incorporate in their mass - "better water". They go even even a step farther. They produce gametes which in turn feed your corals and other filter feeders) and there is only anecdotal evidence (see Shimek's article on this a few months back in reefkeeping magazine) of LR functioning as a means of filtration.
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:
