Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Senior Member MINIATUS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    258

    DSBs Frustration

    I just tore down my tank again because of a Salt problem. And now I'm rethinking the DSB again. I've studied it and read and read articles over and over again. The latest is failure of the sand bed after a few years. What do you use Bare bottom, 1 inch sand bottom or full blown DSB.

    MINIATUS

  2. #2
    Senior Member tang_man_montreal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    5,821
    I find myself rethinking DSB's as well. I have several thoughts which I'd probably like to implement on my next tank.

    How does the idea of 2 remote DSB's and a 1" substrate in the main tank sound? Maybe even a bare bottom or starboard would work here.

    When I say 2 remote DSB's, think of 2 large rubbermaid containers (maybe even troughs) plumbed into the main system. The reason for 2 DSB's is that you can take 1 down and replenish it, while maintaining a fully functional DSB elsewhere to seed the other.

    Throw in liverock, eggcrate shelves and lighting, and you could even eventually have a propagation/grow out zone. The possibilities are endless.
    I am Homer of BORG... Prepare to be..OOOO!! DONUT!!!!!!

  3. #3
    Senior Member MINIATUS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    258
    Sounds good but that would have to be down the road and finding the room for it.Might put a small refugium in the sump also.

    MINIATUS

  4. #4
    Senior Member fishprick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    113
    2 - 4 INCH HAS PROVEN ITSELF FOR THE MANY OF THE TANKS SETUP IN THIS CITY.........LONG TERM RESULTS.

    I personally would go 3 inch........However when I setup my new 280 or bigger I'm going with a 1 inch because I will be using the Ecosystem setup.

  5. #5
    Senior Member ALRHA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,842
    if you use a DSB but every now and then just turn over some of the sand, you will not have the crashing problem because it will be "refreshed" (just my theory)
    Albert
    My Photos

  6. #6
    ijo
    ijo is offline
    Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6,610
    Were not even sure its the DSB thats crashing... or are we?

    IJO

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    5,122
    O.k. Here we go with my theory on this subject...
    DSB's have not been around all that long or at least have not been the "in thing" all that long. A couple years ago, everybody started using them ( myself included) and we are beginning to see the results of a long term test. The truth is that DSB's DO have a finite life. No matter how well or much we try to seed them, they will never always be as fresh as the actual ocean bed is. There have been lots of excellant setups, Tanks of the Month, huge systems, small systems, etc.. that are all succumbing to the typical symptoms which are coral growth slowdown, unhealthy corals, fading in colors, RTNing, dying even corals, etc... We are only now seeing the results. If you go on RC and do a search on this subject, there are quite a few long and extensive threads discussing this. As I am in the process of planning out my upgrade to a bigger tank at the moment, I too have decided to go with about 1/2" of sand in the main tank and remote sumps with a DSB and probably even a plenum in one. Plenums have been around longer and have many positive "longer" term results. I also happen to have a friend who has a maintenance company that he has been running for many years and specializes only in reef setups. We have also talked about this subject because he had placed DSB's in a lot of the tanks he manages when the whole DSB thing became popular. He has also been maintaining lots of tanks that use the older styled Plenum setup. Surprisingly, most of the plenums are doing better than the DSBs and now when the situation allows it, he is changing out the DSBs. Even his own tank that he recently moved and upgraded is now running with only 1" of sand in the main tank for all the same reasons that were affecting his older tank. I am also finding my sandbed to be less than satisfactory at the moment. In Europe, DSB's have never been or still aren't popular for certain reasons that I'm not sure of exactly, but I have a strong feeling it is because of the same things that we are seeing now.

    Fishprick,
    Out of curiosity, why are you going to use only 1"because of the Ecosystem? You're not going to put the Miracle Mud in the main tank, are you?
    I used to use the Miracle Mud and did not find it did anything special compared to how I've been running it for quite awhile now with out the MM. Do you want to run a system skimmerless? What is your reasoning for going with the Miracle Mud? I'm not trying to be negative as I really want to hear your ideas as to why you will use it. As I said, I personally have gone both ways and I'd like to discuss this too with you. Have you used it before?

  8. #8
    Senior Member fishprick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    113
    I've been using the miracle mud ecosystem setup for the last year and a half and have had really good results compared to using a skimmer and dosing my system with supplements.

    I am one to try new things where others look at it in ill fate.

    The 3 things I do differently than what is called for by the Manufacturers of the Miracle Mud is .............I have never done weekly water changes....they call for a 5% per week.....in the beginning I was doing them every 2 weeks ...then 4 weeks ...then 6 weeks.....then 8 weeks just wanting to test the system.
    The second thing I changed was the sandbed depth.....they call for one inch max........I placed about 2 inches of the regular size grained substrate and 1 inch of the oolitic substrate........one of the reasons they call for such a shallow substrate is the fact that the MM would be competing with the deep sandbed for nutrient export/bacterial colonization. (this component of the equation was not done on purpose....I just failed to read it)

    The third idea I did not agree with them with was the vacuuming of the substrate on a monthly basis........too many critters being removed.......I have hundreds of tiny brittle stars, copepods, spaghetti worms etc.......and from seeing results up past the 5 year mark....even ten year marks that have never touched their sand beds.....I guess I wanted to try.
    ( the only disruption of the sand is the leopard wrasse.....they sleep under it for protection)

    This is my first true reef system......my first tank was a fish-only predator tank with Live Rock.........I gradually started adding soft corals and LPS's to the predator tank and by the end had quite a nice Predator/ reef system.........the predator fish were comprised of a : Dragon Wrasse, Lunar wrasse, stars and striped Puffer, Pygmy Jewel puffer, Yellow Margin Trigger fish, and a Splendid Dotty back along with a couple of cleaner shrimp and about 50 hermits........all in a 55 gallon..........which I eventually changed over to the ecosystem 40 hang-on system.

    The whole reason for me was to try something others had no temptation with......I gathered info from as many avenues as I could over months before trying this......Mr. 4000, Mike Palletta, Fenner were a few I spoke with on this product...including the Ceo of the ECOSYSTEM.

    hope this gives you an idea

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    5,122
    FishP,
    You DO now that Leng Sy now advocates using a skimmer alongside his product, no? In the beginning, his whole strongpoint in the marketing of the MM was that you didn't need any other means of nutrient export such as a skimmer, but nowadays, he admits that he might have been a bit hasty or overconfident. He came to this conclkusion while having many discussions with Bob Fenner.
    If it is working well for you, then that is great to hear. How often do you change the MM? The istructions say 50% every 1 or 2 years ( I can't remember which it is right now). I personally, have not found a difference that justifies it's high cost. It was advertised that he gathered it at some secret location in the beginnning, but after some studies were done on it, it was found out to be terrestial in origin with a high iron and organic content. One of the magical properties of this mud was that Caulerpas had to be used in conjunction with it for nutrient uptake and when people did this, they found that the Caulerpas were growing at an alarming rate and came to the conclusion that they must be swallowing up LOTS of the nutrients therefore the system worked. In reality, while they were consuming the nutrients ( just as any other plant would consume fertilizer easily) it was the high content of Iron in the MM that was also contributing to the fast growth. Caulerpas grow nicely when they have a supply of Iron too. Do you know about the "Kent Mineral Mud"? I have seen it used by a friend and it is EXACTLY the same stuff at a lesser cost. You might want to use that when you buy more. So you say you are using the original hangon refuge made by the manufacturer? Are you using any lighting directly on it and what? Also, what types of algaes are you growing in it?

  10. #10
    Senior Member Flame*Angel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    3,332
    This a recent post from here:
    http://reefcentral.com/forums/showth...90#post1916390
    by Dr. Ron Shimek. When I set up my tank I followed his recommendations for a deep sand bed and have had no problems with it.

    *****************************************
    I can think of no other part of any marine system that is as well documented online and in the print media as deep sand beds. All of the relevent information is "out there."

    These are not new constructions or ideas, this type of system has been used routinely in marine research facilities since the early 1950s, and I believe Rob Toonen documented the first use in keeping corals as being in 1908, and that individual got his corals to spawn....

    So... 95 years ago, DSBs were used successfully by people keeping corals; and significantly more successfully than by most modern aquarists (probably because the fellow used natural sea water).

    The properties of the beds are well-known, both by work done in the bed and by their similarity to natural environments. The dynamics of nutrient transfer and processing in DSBs are for all intents and purposes identical to natural environments with the same sediment properties, and the same types of animal distributions.

    These beds are true microcosms of the real world. They function as almost perfect analogues of normal, natural, sand beds. And as in nature, both import and export are necessary for proper functioning. With adequate feeding of a system, and adequate export, the beds will maintain an more-or-less steady state of nutirent concentrations. Excess materials are exported out of the bed and often go to feed other tank inhabitants. Growth in these organisms (corals, soft corals, or algae) can be harvested and exported from the tank removing non-gaseous materials. There is no accumulation of phosphates, sulfates, etc., for example, as these are exported in biomass.

    As we can find a complete range of animal arrays in the scientific literature - from "nobody home" to very rich arrays, we can predict well what will happen the same types of beds in aquaria. Similarly, we can see changes in beds in aquaria, and match those to results of known changes in the real world.

    They have a track record of working in research situations going back 50 years or more. The instructions for establishing and maintaining a functional DSB are pretty straight forward, and exceptionally easy to follow.

    So....

    If hobbyists have trouble in systems with sand beds, either

    the bed is set up improperly,
    the bed has not been maintained properly,
    or the other components of the system are at fault.
    Generally, this latter means that the bioload for the system is far too high. In these situations the problem is not a build up of excess food, or detritus, but is either an accumulation of nitrogenous wastes from all the animals in the system or an accumulation of some other toxic materials such the heavy metals injudiciously added as "trace metals."
    *****************************************
    Susan

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. My LFS frustration...
    By Leafster in forum ARRG
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-11-2004, 03:58 AM
  2. RC frustration
    By john rock in forum Reef Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 11-25-2003, 04:38 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •