I vacuumed a four year old sand bed.......

[Anonymous]

Some fish dirty more than others. The difference between say... freshwater goldfish and a black skirt tetra.

If you put a tang in a tank, he's going to produce more waste than say, a clownfish. If you've got him in a tank that's really too small (for the sake of argument lets say 30 gallons)... you're going to need to do more water changes to compensate for that fact.

J.

yes and then no.
wouldn't it be true to say that a goldfish "dirties" more because it constantly grazes? same said for the tang? the higher consumption explains the increase in organic waste.

i don't know that the fish selection can be held accountable for the entire system's buildup of excess nutrient (within reasonable confines).
if your scenario is posed where a tang or a perc of equal measure could be placed inside a well established system, i don't think you would have poorer water conditions with the tang as the addition... given the system input remains constant in each given scenario and the tank size is large enough for the tang kept.
a tang may crap more and eat more but if the aquarist only adds "X" amount of nutrient it doesn't matter.

a tang is bound to eat more nuisance algaes so it could be said that it creates more "dirt" and i suppose this is accurate but the excessive (meaning the amount more than the perc would create) "dirt" that it excretes was already existing inside the system.
i could argue that the amount of nutrient consumed by the tang sped the process of those nutrients breakdown. more will gas off and be skimmed out as opposed to being bound inside the tank.


now, you have a good point if the aquarist feeds more for a particular species (which they do and need to).
so my only reason for typing this is, it would be more accurate to refer to the amount of input (content specific) that a fish requires, rather than the amount of waste it puts off, as being problematic in system buildup.

not to nitpick or anything :wink:

 

[EmilyB]

Whatever, it is awesome now. 8)

I don't think it is fair to comment until you have hit the four year point :?

 

[Anonymous]

I don't think it is fair to comment until you have hit the four year point :?

:? i have...and then some

 

[Anonymous]

Unless you have the infinite power of nature in your small glass box, my friend, it has a finite limit.

as does your tank live rock is no more impervious to the laws of physics then a DSB

If you feel your poop collection and your critter/bug farm is doing something for you, whatever it may be, I highly encourage you to continue it. However, don't argue what you or anyone else can't and has not been able to prove.

and the same to you a DSB is every bit as "proven" as anything else out there.

Does a DSB work? Yes, in nature they do have a role and function. Do they work in a tank or close system? It depends how you define "work".

yes they work. they are working for a good many people as we speak.

I rather spend my time enjoying my corals and fish than looking at bugs and the poop they live in.

and i would rather look at a nice looking tank with less rock and a sandy bottom.

I am not attacking anyone here. I am just stating what seems the obvious to me. You are free to disagree as I am.

i am friendly as well, i just don't see the need for pointing at a DSB as an unproven means of keeping a reef.
DSBs have limitations as does BB or algal turf or mud filter, etc.

 

[EmilyB]

if it ain't broke don't fix it... 8)

 

[Anonymous]

Dimaggio,

If you are doing things like the guy you met, it seems like you are working your butt of maintaining all that equipment and doing waterchanges rather than watching your tank. :wink:

You can believe what makes sense to you and do what works for you. I aplaude you because in a sense you are doing no different than me. However, I can tell you that commons sense tells me that you cannot continue to pour poop and biological waste in a sand bed, regardless of how many critters are in it. Physics tell you that one object only can occupy one space at one time. The poop may be eaten by the critter to a small degree, but the critter can't make it disappear. It has to produce waste too. Unless you have the infinite power of nature in your small glass box, my friend, it has a finite limit.

Thats why this thread was about vacuuminig a sandbed.

If you feel your poop collection and your critter/bug farm is doing something for you, whatever it may be, I highly encourage you to continue it.

I know you said you weren't attacking anyone, but the above is easily a passive aggressive attack. This isn't encouraging anyone, its belittling those who like sandbeds. As is...

Do they work in a tank or close system? It depends how you define "work". I rather spend my time enjoying my corals and fish than looking at bugs and the poop they live in.

I have a 4 inch sand bed. Ask me what I spend my time doing.

:mrgreen:

 

[Anonymous]

if it ain't broke don't fix it... 8)

That is the most stupid saying ever made up by a lazy person.

So if you have a Model A that still runs, you don't buy a new car. The basis for modern society is continual improvement of everything from medicine to manufacturing. If we just accept what we have now and only respond to fix something when it breaks than there would be no progress. We had a cure for cancer. We went to the barber shop and were "bled". Why change?

 

[Carpentersreef]

Good grief. Cheer up cwa... :roll:

Stop trying to stir up detritus.

Mitch

 

[shr00m]

a dsb shouldnt be a collection of poop, you should have enough current that debris never settles on the bottom, it should be skimmed out. I cant really argue for a DSB i just kinda did it because the guys in the IRC chan acted like only a moron would setup a tank without a DSB and the research at the time seemed to suggest it was the thing to do... now im beginning to think maybe it was just a bandwagon thing, i do like the look of my sand bed and my tank is doing wonderful, its been up 8 months only though.... b4 dsb i only ran crushed coral. if i ever decide to remove the DSB ill go with a very shallow sand bed, bare bottom looks crappy for sure, no critters or anything.

so i guess it turns out DSBs may be a good thing if properly maintained but not gods gift to man for reefkeeping as most were claiming just 8 months ago... backpeddlers.

 

[Anonymous]

as does your tank live rock is no more impervious to the laws of physics then a DSB

Pod, live rock doesn't fill up. As bacterial turgor pressure pushes on particulates, they get shed from the rock. When the same pushing happens in a bed, the particulates have nowhere else to go. Make sense?

 

[Anonymous]

So if you have a Model A that still runs, you don't buy a new car. The basis for modern society is continual improvement of everything from medicine to manufacturing. If we just accept what we have now and only respond to fix something when it breaks than there would be no progress. We had a cure for cancer. We went to the barber shop and were "bled". Why change?

So you buy a new car every year, needed or not? Do you get chemo just in case?

 

[Jolieve]

You do make a very good point dimaggio. I think... a lot of this hobby is trial and error. Every system is unique, no two tanks have the exact same livestock, filtration system, etc. So... what works in one tank, does not necessarily work for everyone else and you should go with what works for you.

Logic would tell me that a sand bed would become a nutrient sink much like carbon can leech materials back into your tank, one would think a sandbed would too eventually. But... no one's managed to show me anything other than a sandbed becoming a phosphate sponge over time. I don't understand how a high phosphate content could cause a tank to crash.

I'm not a scientist, just a hobbyist trying to understand this whole process.

J.

 

[Anonymous]

It depends on what you mean by crash. For the anti sand people 'crash' seems to mean sustained algae blooms.
However, people have that kind of problem in all different kinds of system, so to carte blanche blame the sand seems like a mistake to me.

 

[dgasmd]

OK, so before we keep going back and forth about something that may mean different things to both, please describe or define for me the statement: my sand bed works. What does it do that "works"? What are you getting from it as part of its "work"?

 

[Anonymous]

A good looking tank, with diverse critters in it, with good water quality, that I hardly ever have to touch.

Your turn!

 

[Anonymous]

as does your tank live rock is no more impervious to the laws of physics then a DSB

Pod, live rock doesn't fill up. As bacterial turgor pressure pushes on particulates, they get shed from the rock. When the same pushing happens in a bed, the particulates have nowhere else to go. Make sense?

yeah. i saw Bomber explaining this at RC last night after i posted this.

i can't say i fully understand.

a sand bed is not uniform in compression so why would there be no movement from the same pressures occuring in the bed?

 

[Anonymous]

I have witnessed Righty's righteous tank. It is righteous.
So is the sandbed (which also houses a 'fuge, btw). He surprised and amazed me with what was happening with "doomed" creatures and frags that got tossed in there. Pretty cool shiznit.

Pod, the "dirtiness" of goldies has less to do with their day-long grazing than other physiological processes they exhibit, for a myriad of reasons. I'll leave that bit out, but consider that guppies and platies graze all day long, but even if gram for gram are the same size, don't create as much of a waste control issue as goldfish.

 

[shr00m]

gram per gram the fish might not make the difference, but the amount they eat gram per gram will equal the same amount of waste, so really its based more on the amout of food eaten.

 

[Anonymous]

That is not the only factor to be considered.

 

[shr00m]

that may be true but you cant argue the amount of waste a fish produces directly depends on the amount it eats. meaning one fish isnt going to produce less waste from eating the same amount of food as another.