Limitations of DSB's - Page 17

aquaticsdeptleader · 05-08-2003, 08:04 AM

Tom i have no data to back up my opionons they are simply that but dr ron believes sand beds have a viable life span of 4 to 7 years so if hes the guru i guess i can use him as my data. in regards to the food in all honesty the majority of the corals that we strive to keep do not need to be fed as mentioned above by others. the big thing here is the reduction of excess waste in the tanks, the simplest easest way to do this is decrease the amount of food you put in the tank and unfortunatly a dsb increases the amount of food necassry to be put in the system. as a realtivly new hobbiest who enjoys learning about this very much i believe the most important aspect of this thread is the teaching if you asked me a few months ago what type of filtration would have been best i would have said dsb hands down and theres many people who are like me that fail to relize the future problems that is what is important about threads like these.

in regards to the bio diversity mentioned in tanks with dsb as said above the dsb allows you to mask sins and keep hard to keep stuff for a few years, in mho this just makes dsb even worse now anyone can keep or atleast try to keep the "hard to keep stuff" amounting to more needless deaths.

jim

Spanky · 05-08-2003, 08:21 AM

Just something to think about with this whole water quality feeding thing.

Corals are able to absorb organic compounds directly from the water. Absorption takes place continually through the surface cells BUT it's not linear, it's inversely proportional to the concentration found in the water column.

In other words, with LOW concentrations the absorption rate was high - with HIGH concentrations the adsorption rate was low.

The cleaner you keep the system, the better you're feeding your corals. The dirtier it is, the more you starve them.

OR in other words, you've been told to feed feed feed without any reference as to how much. Dump that food in there for that sand bed. The higher nutrient load is shutting down the absorption pathways which the corals would use to acquire what little carbon/nitrogen they would need and forcing them to rely on their ability to capture prey to acquire it.

So again, you have to decide the definition of "coral". Are you talking soft coral that lives in a high nutrient environment, or hard reef crest coral that doesn't.

aquaticsdeptleader · 05-08-2003, 08:33 AM

Jerel

out of curosity more then anything what is the reasoning behind the inversly propotinal absorbtion rates.

jim

Spanky · 05-08-2003, 09:16 AM

Jim

test test and more test.

aquaticsdeptleader · 05-08-2003, 09:27 AM

sorry let me be more specfic what is the answer to or the hypothsis for this question why in increased nutrient water does the corals abailty (or perhaps desire?) to absorb said nutrients decline?

thanks Jerel

jim

NewReefer · 05-08-2003, 09:30 AM

Would you extend the life of your DSB also if you keep a cleaner tank, if you go against the Good Ol Dr. and don't feed that bed? If you keep a cleaner tank, and not feed as much, do you need to have your DSB so FULL of life? Would it be ok to have a DSB that is not that loaded with fauna? I guess that is another thought, do we need to have that DSB functioning to its maximum when your bioload isn't that demanding, and your LR is already almost enough to take care of the system? HUH what? Tell me?

NewReefer · 05-08-2003, 09:32 AM

Lookey at that DUCK, he went nuts!

aquaticsdeptleader · 05-08-2003, 09:54 AM

the answer scott is no one knows there is no hard or fast rule there is not really any formula x,y,z yields b for this, if you like the sb then keep it for what its really worth another small microcosim within your micro reef where you can learn about and enjoy watching for a minimum of 4 years those animals which inhabit it

jim

Spanky · 05-08-2003, 09:56 AM

Jim,

That I really can't answer. I think it's more a case that people noticed they declined in high nutrient systems and set out to figure out why. Back in the late 60's to mid 70's we were all high rollers, Govt money was pouring in for these kinds of studies. So people had the money and time to figure out the small stuff.

Somebody help the duck!

Scott, you're going to walk a fine line with that. Enough fauna to keep the sand bed moving and stirred up, enough food for them, etc.

Spanky · 05-08-2003, 09:59 AM

I think Jim said that better than I did.

SPC · 05-08-2003, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
You're talking about out the old dirt road behind Chapman Field, aren't you?

Now you've got me all misty eyed and melancholy

Actually at Gables By The Sea, Jerel. This was back when there was still open land down by the Bay in this subdivision, I'll bet there's none now

.
Steve

NewReefer · 05-08-2003, 10:15 AM

Science is amazing huh, last night I saw them drilling a tunnel 35 miles long through the Swiss Alps but when it comes to a DSB there seems to be a lack or inadequate information, in a system that has been used for years and quiet successfully. I think 4 year minimum is not an accurate statement, how many people you know personally that has had one that long or longer and what are they doing with it? How many researchers studied the DSB over a period of years and proved this in a closed system under a typical aquarium load?

SPC · 05-08-2003, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
Jim,

That I really can't answer. I think it's more a case that people noticed they declined in high nutrient systems and set out to figure out why. Back in the late 60's to mid 70's we were all high rollers, Govt money was pouring in for these kinds of studies. So people had the money and time to figure out the small stuff.

My question is "why" does the stony coral do this Jerel? Is it a defence mechanism to shut down? Do these high nutrients actually cause internal/external damage?
Steve

aquaticsdeptleader · 05-08-2003, 10:41 AM

its triggered by the amount in the water column it would be interesting to know what evoulationary event or series of events selected for this trait.

jim

aquaticsdeptleader · 05-08-2003, 10:56 AM

thank you spc i think that is what i was trying to ask in the first place

scott

there is far to much diversity with in ocean sand beds although sb are not new tech there popularized use is fairly new as is there use in times of which man has kept a recorded history of such things ( i think the egyptcians were more interested in keeping and looking at the corals then actualy your system is better then my systm nan nah nan nah perhaps they were more evolved then us) so lack of avaiable data sheer biodiversity and the multiatude of diffrent system setups leaves us with no cut and dry setup requirments.

jim