Put the gloves on and let's talk DSB.

[mojoreef]

No EK your dead on. If you see a patch of cyano or hair, you can bet the farm that thier is a Food source right under it that it is feeding on. the stirring of the bed and grinding with the fingers will break those bound and allow the bacteria (thats loaded with phosphates) the doc' (which are loaded with phosphates) the detritus (which is loaded with phosphates) to be suspended, with the syphon right thier to suck them out, you have now just broke the cycle and are exporting. You are taking away an ammount of the food source that is feeding the algae and so on. This my friend is exportation, just like triming the macro algae in your refugium, out of site out of mind.

Mike

[Scooterman]

I know it isn't an easy task in keeping up a 4" To 6" DSB in your main display. So many in here has one, how do you keep it up? Do you have rocks on some type of rack system? Is water running through your rack? What critters did you add to your system? When you change water, do you vacuum the surface of your DSB or never.

When I had a DSB, I had algae problems often but I can't say it was only the DSB. I always wanted to suck up the loose stuff off the top but was told not to, in order for a DSB to work properly, you needed to feed it. How is circulation problems overcome with all the sand? I had to make sure all water movement was neutral or pointed up & still had bare spots in the middle. Is a skimmer needed in a true DSB system?
Just a few questions.

[EdgeKrusher]

next question. when doing this type of maintenance how deep do I want to go when "grinding the substrate"?

Thanks

EK

[jks1]

Wow, this is an awesome post. Another point Mike- if one has a DSB on an established tank, can you just siphon it all out to remove it or will you be releasing everything from the anaerobic zone and harming the above sand inhabitants in the process?

[sharks]

OK here is a conversation I was having over at NJRC. Am I off in my way of thinking here? Here is my quote…

I have a 3-4 DSB in the 120 and 4-6 in the REF. IMO so long as you keep the correct critters in the DSB it will last for years. I do rely on physical removal as much as possible. I rinse all the sponges almost daily. Rinse all frozen foods well. And use only RO/DI water. While testing you read no phosphates but they are in there. Bonded up in organics…
Algae’s, calerpra, and the like. They take it up almost as fast as it is added. Now I’m no expert so here is what I have been studding lately. There is a difference between organic and inorganic phosphate. Your test kit only measures one type(I believe inorganic?) . And the other is bonded into the fauna. I did a search on Phos-Ban from 2 little fish. Look on all the boards and you will be on the same path as me. Interesting stuff there.
I know I over feed, but I do change a lot of water. (20% a week) But I have this crap in there out competing the REF for the nutrients. http://www.globaldialog.com/~jrice/...e/lobophora.htm
I will test the phos-ban myself and post when I have results.

Back to DSB’s. I disagree with the majority that 4-6 inches is needed. I have half that and after 14 months I see the anaerobic zones. You need to remember that back in the day when plenums and DSB first started we heard all the horror stories. But back them we were also adding gobies, horse shoe crabs, and sand sifting stars! Akk! All the wrong animals for a DSB.
You have the right snails and the cuke will help. I love fighting & queen conchs they eat cyano from the sand. The only catch is you need to keep enough sand bed exposed…a tank packed with LR is no good for them.

OK so what is the cause of toxic tank syndrome? DSB toxicity? One word, the end product, DETRITUS. That is what is building up in the substrate and unless we physically remove it the detritus becomes toxic in time. I do it daily by rinsing the sponges. I hope to prolong the life of the bed. The more fauna you have the further it is broken down, also helping further the system. But alas eventually it can be broken down no further. So I plan at some point that I will have to start replacing little by little my DSB. Heavy handed feeders, people who don’t change water, and the lack of the correct animals in there will led to the replacement sooner rather then later.

IMO it is a personal preference. Do you like the look and life from a DSB? If so plan on at some point replacing it. Just like everything else in reefing GO SLOW ;-)
I will at some point start replacing a few Lbs here and a few there. Occasionally I will add new live sand to boost the fauna that the fish and natural predation has depleted.

OK looking back this post is huge for me and I could go on. I hope some of this long-winded post helped.
S

OK so I may not be as technical and know the exact make up of the end product but the bottom line is at some point it has to go.
If we have a remote DSB isn’t the detritus in the live rock going to do the same thing at some point? Not everyone has monstrous flow in his or her bare bottom or Berlin style systems to account for NO settlement. I take no issue with changing a little here and there. I want to add new LS to increase the diversity and well let’s face it. Looking at a reef at night with a red flashlight is and amazing show of life.

Awesome thread gang
Learning every day
S

[mwrager]

Thats how my head feels after reading all the posts here

[Cosmic]

Alot of great information gathered here. I concur on most of what is said about DSB's, and I DO agree there is a Finite end to them, but in most cases that Finite end is going to be Way longer than the tank was set up anyways. At least if you're a responsible reef-keeper like me

I still advocate, and use, DSB's in my systems. I have a 2 yr old bed 3"-4" in the 135 reef at the shop, a 5 yr old 4" dsb in my 75 gallon main tank (at home), a 9" DSB in the attached 55gal refugium (6 months old), and a 2" dsb (using silica sand no less) in my 10 gal nano w/ dwarf lion.

All of these beds are maintained on a weekly basis by siphoning free-floating crud from the bed's surface. I kick up a very fine layer from the top, but otherwise leave the bed untouched. I also have an overflow sponge in place, rinsed bi-weekly, and a filter sock on the overflow from the tank to catch any other lg debris.

My main system at home (the 75 w/ 55 refugium) has extremely fast-flowing water (Over 30X's/hour) and my bed does not stir like I hear so many people having problems with. However, I also went with a more diverse bed, including several grades of substrate, from a majority being fine sand to a minority of crushed coral. The top is a more diverse region and I think helps to keep the bed from being blown away.

I have to mention the fact that the 5yr DSB at home was upturned once about 6 months ago, when the refugium was added. My old tank broke a seal on the bottom and had to be replaced. I tore the bed out and drained off all the brown "sludge" that settled to the top of the buckets the sand was put into. I then re-used the sand and added an additional 40# of Florida Live sand from the Gulf. Otherwise, the bed has been in operation "as-is" since it went into the tank, with the exception of the maintenance tasks outlined above. I lost one staghorn during that whole tear-down and set-up, and had a few corals bleach for a few weeks before re-gaining color.

I think that rinsing out those buckets made a huge difference in the lifetime of my DSB, and it showed me that it's not impossible to do this maintenance task if needed every few years. I'm not saying that it's something I'd enjoy, but it did seem to give more life to my DSB. Shortly before the old tank popped the seal, the same dsb, undisturbed, was starting to have red slime issues that I could not overcome. After the new tank was in place, the red slime has not been seen, although red planaria flatworms have infested my tank in it's absence

The refugium has not shown much in the way of sand diversity in the deeper layers. It has certainly taken off in the way of life, with tons of bugs and worms, not too mention lots of chitons and other asstd tiny snails. The macros have all taken off as well, but nothing IN the sand layers to speak of.

One last thing that I think helps my system to work well is the fact of the bare-bottom initial sump chamber. This is where the filter sock collects water from the tank, and gets siphoned as needed. Because of the waterflow in my system, the detritus gets carried out of the main tank (hard for things to settle in a tsunami ) and deposited into the sponge, filter sock, or first sump chamber. Whatever manages to get past that is THEN deposited to the fuge for waste management.

As you can see, I have lots of methods for nutrient export in-line to handle most of the organics. Doing this isn't going to make my DSB invincible, but it certainly helps in giving it longevity.

[mojoreef]

When I had a DSB, I had algae problems often but I can't say it was only the DSB. I always wanted to suck up the loose stuff off the top but was told not to, in order for a DSB to work properly, you needed to feed it. How is circulation problems overcome with all the sand? I had to make sure all water movement was neutral or pointed up & still had bare spots in the middle. Is a skimmer needed in a true DSB system?

Just a few questione eh!!, lol flow is a tough one to overcome when you have a DSB and I dont really have an answer for that one beyond having to be very creative. The critter is a DSB must be feed or they will die, however in most of our tanks that is not an issue. A dsb is always in a state of flux, its populations will rise and fall based on the ammount of food it has. A skimmer is the only form of exportation beyond nitrogen based products you got, so IMHO yes.

EK you want to stay in the areobic zone. most of the time its is in the top 1 inch, but if you look at the glass you can see a line in the sand marking it, just go slow.

JKS removing a bed completely while everything is still in thier is a no no. thier is no way to get rid of the toxins before they hit the inhabitants. A way folks have gone around this is by slow removal.

Sharks I am with you buddy, I like the look of sand on the bottom and enjoy the life that inhabits it. I am not trying to bash DSB's, the idea here was to explain how it works and try to figure out how to make it better. I myself new of its limitations but still installed one in my last tank.
A couple of things on your post. Personally I dont think this so called old tank syndrome has anything to do with DSB's. They are more the product of peoples poor husbandry catching up to them, that and rumors. End product detritus is a fact but again that takes time and good husbandry can help prolong it. I am in no way saying for folks to get rid of thier sand, I just want them to know how it works and discuss some of the things that can make it better.
Having a lot of infuana is really needed and must be replenished constantly (natural selection and lack of recruitement will deplete a bed quickly). But the main source of all the good in a DSB is the bacteria, they reduce it, critters just turn it into finer particles. The problems of a dsb are in the dsb and have to be dealt with in the dsb, water changes and sponge filters and so on, will take care of what is in the water, but not whats locked up in the bed.
On the LR, thats a good question. Everything that happens in a dsb happens in a LR just a less because of surface size. The main big difference in a live rock is that it doesnt have a bottom, so through biological action and processing thing still move down through the rock and once they hit the bottom the detritus and end product will shed. A dsb cant do this as thier is no place to shed except up, and gravity has a say in that.

MIke

[Boomer]

Just

and Mike and Cos fit my line of thinkin', although some may disagree. I was a nut when it came to keeping a clean tank

Scoot nice commnet, short to the point

[Maxx]

Travis youre a S*** disturber

Sorry, this had me rollin' Mike....just wanted to share that w/ you...
as far as DSB's go....(MY opinion...take it for its worth...not much),
I'm not a fan of anything that adds to the maintenance levels of my tank. I feel that there are two basic ways of reefkeeping...maintenance intensive, or expensive....I don't like combining the two. It makes no sense to me. I'm purchasing a Calcium reactor in order to make my tank more stable and to give me break from constantly adding two part....additives...(I am redundant man, redundant man am I!....) I purchased timers to make the lights go on and off same time every night...makes the tank more stable and I dont have to remember to do it. I have an RO/Di set up so I dont have to run to the fish store every week. I have spent the last 5 months planning out my upcoming system so that I can enjoy it w/o driving myself nuts trying to keep up w/ maintenance. I have an auto topoff set up in mind so I dont have to add water to the tank everyday..I can now go 4 days....
Theres a reason I have a couch in front my aquarium ladies and gentlemen....and its not to be comfy while I'm removing my sandbed every four years. I don't quite grasp the concept of putting something in the tank, that I know will have to come out 3-5 years later, which will probably kill/or stress something that I have in my tank while its being removed.
Don't get me wrong, I think that a DSB or just an SB has a place in reef aquarium keeping. I can definately see the benefits and I understand the appeal of the DSB look. But its just not for me. I'm not looking for a maintenance free tank. I like playing w/ my tank and thinking of new ways to do something. But I also don't want to add to my scheduled work load of tank maintenance.
I guess what I'm saying is that I've planned this tank out fairly extensively, w/ the intent of making things as easy as possible for myself. Thats why I'm moving away from the DSB in the maintank mindset.

[mojoreef]

Maxx that sounds like a topic for a new thread

mike

[Maxx]

I'm gonna have to run to the gym before I can start a new thread properly...but rest assured, I will...and its got Mojo written ALL over it!
Nick

[tankgirl]

Hi Mike and all,

TG Dr. Ron has already addmitted that dsb's dont export and merely act as recycling centers. So lets not bring him into this conversation, he is the one that got us hear in the first place.

I don't think we can leave Shimek out of this post. My understanding is that he and Rob Toonen are the biggest promoters and proponents for DSBs and considered experts on them?

I tried the remote DSb also, its pretty much the same thing as ones in the tank, with the exception that you must make sure you gett all the food and waste from the tank into them in order for them to be effective.From thier all the same rules apply. his size comment was basically if you have a 90 gallon tank and a refugium with a remote DSB it must be the same size as the tanks surface in order to be as good as one in the main.

Mike, those weren't the comments I read by Shimek. Here are some of his comments from;
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...agenumb er=1&

"Without specific feeding of the remote bed, it simply will not be functional enough to work well over time. This means you have the ridiculous situation of specifically feeding a sand bed whose original purpose in the main tank was to get rid of excess food."

"Having a bit of sand in a refuge tank to provide some habitat for sand dwelling animals is fine, but it ain't a DSB and shouldn't be considered as such."

"The problems is that it is effectively impossible to get most of the detritus and excess food from the main tank to the remote one. The particulate food will lodge in and amongst the rocks, etc., and not get transferred. If that material doesn't make it to the bed, the organisms in beds starve and the bed loses functionality. The amount of water movement needed is really impossible to reach. Given the overcrowded nature of reef tanks plus the heterogeneity of the surfaces, there really is no way to efficiently flush the material to a remote DSB. If there were, it would work, but there ain't and it doesn't. "

gregt says; "a remote DSB is the worst of both worlds. The bed "starves" and the nutrients added do not get "absorbed" by the bed, therefore are available to do harm."

shimek replies;
"Hi Greg, Right on target! THANKS!!!"
-----------
We can ignore all that, but I think it's important to the thread.

[mojoreef]

TG you always ask the hardest questions, lol
Yep Dr. ron and rob are big promoters, so is sam gamble and martin moe.
The problem I have with ron is that it always changes and it has so many gaps. its really hard to tell what he is talking about at any given time.

"The problems is that it is effectively impossible to get most of the detritus and excess food from the main tank to the remote one. The particulate food will lodge in and amongst the rocks, etc., and not get transferred. If that material doesn't make it to the bed, the organisms in beds starve and the bed loses functionality. The amount of water movement needed is really impossible to reach. Given the overcrowded nature of reef tanks plus the heterogeneity of the surfaces, there really is no way to efficiently flush the material to a remote DSB. If there were, it would work, but there ain't and it doesn't.

Hmmm... Ron is basically saying that tier is now way to properly plumb a system and create water flow that will take the detritus out of the tank and deposit it in a remote dsb. I believe it is possible if you get creative (would I do it again...nope) but it can be done if someone really wanted a DSB in their system. I have a BB and I effectively remove it from the tank and to my skimmer, minute by minute day by day and so on. I just dont think he understands what we can do.
and yea greg comes up with some pretty funny stuff.

Mike

[jimeluiz]

Tagging along and I admit I have not read EVERY word.

I'm all for creating a healthy environment, including above and below the sand. My question - and it can be quick if it is misplaced here - is about sand sifting star. I read hear the need to export the gunck that will crash your dsb. And I watch my star 'clean' the surface of the sand, stir the sand, and certainly CONSUME some of the smaller critters doing their best to consume the crud fallen into the sand.

I have been coached that the nasty notion here is the sand sifter will out-eat the critters so that eventually there is a diminishing return. A life-less dsb will not do its thing and a sole sand sifter could not keep up with the task. Right?

What about the fact that the sand sifter does not horn into every nook and cranny of the dsb? Wont the little critters multiply ahead of the beak of the star?

I guess I'm checking in on this partly because I have yet to turn away from the sand sifter (forgive my newbie point of view - perhaps) and partly because I am reading about the need to export detritus. And the star apparently is doing some of that function (or do I have that wrong? Is she just eating algae and critters?!?)

I don't mean to drift off topic...