BB vs Sand bed

[cMidd]

Howdy everyone

Just wanted to get some discussion going on this topic. I am about to set up my 75gal again soon, and am having a hard time deciding what I want to do! Here's some pros/cons I can think of for each.

BB (bare bottom) : no sand

Pros - easy detritus removal, aesthetics, said to be good over time as DSB can cause too much anaerobic zone, nutrient control, higher flow, less dead spots

Cons - less biodiversity, aesthetics (less natural), limits on wrasses/gobies?, higher flow (for some coral no good)

Sand bed : 1-2" of sand

Pros - biodiversity(worms, pods, micro stars, etc), natural look, home for many creatures, gobies/wrasses can burrow, BIODIVERSITY!!

Cons - detritus build up, flow/dead spot problems, anaerobic zone never stops growing(it is thought that eventually it will all be anaerobic and be unable to support aerobic life), can cause water quality issues.

Whew, that was long. I'd be more than happy to supply links for information and in depth conversation.

Let me know what the rest of you think!!!

Collin

[FarmerTy]

Never ran a bare-bottom tank before but have had success with 1-2" layer of sand. A con I heard about having a barebottom is if you are a neat freak, you'll spend a lot of your time vacuuming out pieces of sediment or liverock that falls onto your bare-bottom. I'm not a big fan of the unnatural look of a bare-bottom either but I heard the benefits of stable water parameters outweigh the look sometimes.

[Nwehrman]

Debating the same thing...

[cMidd]

Ty, I have never personally ran a BB either. It does seen appealing in some ways, like the flow you can generate and the way you can really open some caves with the rock work.

[+brian.srock]

Thought a deep sand bed was more than 4"? I use a shallow sand bed with 1" - 2" in my DT. In my frag section of my sump I have a BB although it's never really completely BB. I think as long as you have critters or yourself to manually stir the sand bed then it doesnt matter. Its when it goes unchecked for a long time then gets stirred that I've hearded of people having issues from. In the sea there are tons of creatures and water movement that stir up the sand beds but not so much in our tank.

[cMidd]

Thought a deep sand bed was more than 4"? I use a shallow sand bed with 1" - 2" in my DT. In my frag section of my sump I have a BB although it's never really completely BB. I think as long as you have critters or yourself to manually stir the sand bed then it doesnt matter. Its when it goes unchecked for a long time then gets stirred that I've hearded of people having issues from. In the sea there are tons of creatures and water movement that stir up the sand beds but not so much in our tank.

True Brian, but there's also SO much more water and SO much more sand in the ocean(not to state the obvious) but anaerobic zones constantly grow - bottom to top - in the ocean it's not a prob. In the aquarium, it can be a problem. Also the sand bed is generally only stirred to the anaerobic zone, if you stir down there you potentially risk releasing sulfur, etc.

There's some pretty in-depth talk about this on TRT-I don't know much of the science behind any of it besides the basics. But I do know there are some very hardcore BB supporters, and some very hardcore DSB or Jaubert Plenum method supporters.

As far as DSB, you're right. I was talking about just 1-2" of crushed coral or sand (i.e. Jaubert Plenum method).

[cMidd]

So, also the argument comes up as to the "natural look" of sand vs BB.

In a "natural reef" the sand can be several hundred feet below the coral most of us keep. A different environment entirely at that point.

Yes, at the bottom there IS still sand, but near the SPS colonies most of us enjoy to keep and grow, realistically is there sand near them?

Food for thought. again, I have always had a 1-3" sand bed. Just brain storming other options.

[+brian.srock]

I do plan on adding another bag of sand to my sump in the near future since I do enjoy all the activity in my refugium now that I've weened my tank off of vodka and Bio hooked me up with some sand and micro fauna. I'll never have as much sand as subsea in my tank though.

[cMidd]

Haha, I hear that. I am really leaving towards a BB, if I don't like it I will just siphon sand into it

[+brian.srock]

who needs sand when you can do an anenome bottom?

[esacjack]

I've been tossing around the idea of a bb on my new tank. However, I think with enough microfauna and sand sifters, detritus build up can be minimized, as well as anaerobic zones. But to my understanding, you DO want some anaerobic zones in your sand bed. What about creating a drop in container for the sump to house a 7 or so inch sand bed? A plastic box made of screening material and diffuser grids, would be sufficient to hold sand in. Suspend it off the bottom with some 1" pvc, and you'll achieve some flow through of the sand.

hey, speaking of subsea, where has he been hiding out? I've tried pm'ing him several times..

[FarmerTy]

I heard he no longer contributes to ARC but I don't know why.

As for the BB, if aesthetics is your main deterrent to running BB, I've seen some people mock up white arylic floor panels and glue sand to it have the look of a sand bed.

[cMidd]

Ty-not so much the aesthetics as just wanting to try something new. I think propping up rocks with acrylic rod bases would create some really cool flow to mess with.

[Timfish]

I'd say it's really a question of personal taste. So many people are successful with bare bottom, shallow sand or DSB any approach obviously can be successful. As far as anaerobic areas I've seen DSBs with no anaerobic areas and shallow sand of less than half an inch with anerobic areas. As far as the relative location of sand deposits to reefs there probably are areas on a lot of fore-reefs that do not have sand deopsits near by but alot of the corals on the reef flat areas and lagoons are going to be closely associated to sand deposits. The reef edge and reef slope are going to be more variable but there are still areas that will have sand deposits.

[cMidd]

I'd say it's really a question of personal taste. So many people are successful with bare bottom, shallow sand or DSB any approach obviously can be successful. As far as anaerobic areas I've seen DSBs with no anaerobic areas and shallow sand of less than half an inch with anerobic areas. As far as the relative location of sand deposits to reefs there probably are areas on a lot of fore-reefs that do not have sand deopsits near by but alot of the corals on the reef flat areas and lagoons are going to be closely associated to sand deposits. The reef edge and reef slope are going to be more variable but there are still areas that will have sand deposits.

Really can't argue with any of that. At the end of the day like I said-I'm going to try a BB just to see if I like something new.

Mainly wanted this thread for information purposes.

I've seen that people believe to have a "live sand" bed, it needa to be 4-5" deep, and that a 1-2" bed needs to be "vacuumed" for maintenance. (Not saying I agree with this, can link sources if requested.)

The only things I am 100% sure about when it comes down to it is this.

Sand = ability to keep "sand critters" and burrowing fish, less flow (on bottom/around bottom of LR), and again some people like the aesthetic.

BB = easy maintenance, increased flow, some people like it for aesthetics, but no "sand critters". Also the possibility of less biodiversity.

[cMidd]

From a "micro" perspective it would go something like this::

The bacteria on LR is self cleansing of phosphates (i.e. leaching we sometimes see), because the bacteria within exerts what is called turgor force. Sand is contained in our aquaria on every side but the top-meaning the bacterial flock (the detritus coming off LR, etc) is either removed manually, skimming, or it settles in a low flow place (the sand bed.) it builds up in the sand bed until the bed becomes "full", and the turgor pressure from the bacterial flock in the sand bed pushes up(into the only non-contained direction) and releases itself back into the water column. Hence we have measurable Phosphates.

That's the idea behind the concept anyway.

[esacjack]

Wow. Thats great info man.

From a "micro" perspective it would go something like this::

The bacteria on LR is self cleansing of phosphates (i.e. leaching we sometimes see), because the bacteria within exerts what is called turgor force. Sand is contained in our aquaria on every side but the top-meaning the bacterial flock (the detritus coming off LR, etc) is either removed manually, skimming, or it settles in a low flow place (the sand bed.) it builds up in the sand bed until the bed becomes "full", and the turgor pressure from the bacterial flock in the sand bed pushes up(into the only non-contained direction) and releases itself back into the water column. Hence we have measurable Phosphates.

That's the idea behind the concept anyway.

[esacjack]

and I mean that honestly, not sarcastically

[cMidd]

Haha I saw the clip and laughed- sarcastically or not at least it's there

[esacjack]

now you have me seriously contemplating going bb. What about using some sand just under the rock placement to create a gradient like effect of sand to bare bottom? (does anyone else feel just a littttle bit naughty about calling bare bottom?)

[cMidd]

Lmao! That's funny.

I think there are alternative ways to have a "false bottom", just look up a few. For me, I'm going to try the coraline all over. And I'm sure I won't be able to resist a few zoa and chalice colonies