Bare bottom reef tank better?

[Nick Barbier]

I'm breaking down my 125g mixed reef tank with a 9 year old sand bed and am thinking about going with a bare bottom tank. But I have a few questions first.

1. Is a bare bottom tank better than a tank with substrate?
2. Which type of tank takes longer to cycle?
3. Which type of tank is more stable?
4. Would adding Max Spec Biosphere Balls to the sump increase the stability due to more surface area for nitrifying bacteria?
5. Can I use bio balls in the sump to replace the sand in the tank?

 

[TX_REEF]

1. Better depends on your opinion. It'll be easier to keep mechanically clean, you can run higher flow without creating sandstorms (pro for SPS systems), and no risk of crash due to disturbing a mature sand bed down the road. The pros for sand include visual appeal (again, opinion), additional habitat for biological filtration, pods, worms, sand sifting fish and inverts.
2. Shouldn't be a difference as long as there is sufficient rock or other bio-media.
3. No difference, unless you disturb a mature deep sand bed, which can create instability
4. Shouldnt be necessary if you're using rock
5. see #4

 

[X-37B]

I'm breaking down my 125g mixed reef tank with a 9 year old sand bed and am thinking about going with a bare bottom tank. But I have a few questions first.

1. Is a bare bottom tank better than a tank with substrate?
2. Which type of tank takes longer to cycle?
3. Which type of tank is more stable?
4. Would adding Max Spec Biosphere Balls to the sump increase the stability due to more surface area for nitrifying bacteria?
5. Can I use bio balls in the sump to replace the sand in the tank?

You can use any bio media but
If you use live rock nothing else is needed.
This is my old 120 bb. My new 170 will also be bb.
The 120 was started with 50% live and 50% caribsea dry rock.

 

[MrGisonni]

Bare bottom is the way to go IMHO. i have a piece of beige acrylic sheet siliconed to the bottom. It looks natural, and I have no issues with excessive nutrients. My skimmer and rocks take care of them. Other than for aesthetics, if feel sand is an unnecessary headache. FWIW

 

[Nick Barbier]

1. Better depends on your opinion. It'll be easier to keep mechanically clean, you can run higher flow without creating sandstorms (pro for SPS systems), and no risk of crash due to disturbing a mature sand bed down the road. The pros for sand include visual appeal (again, opinion), additional habitat for biological filtration, pods, worms, sand sifting fish and inverts.
2. Shouldn't be a difference as long as there is sufficient rock or other bio-media.
3. No difference, unless you disturb a mature deep sand bed, which can create instability
4. Shouldnt be necessary if you're using rock
5. see #4

You bring up a good point. I've always had sand beds in all my tanks for many, many years. And I like having pods, and inverts in my tanks. I just don't like having to deal with old tank syndrome several years from now due to an aging sand bed saturated with nitrates.

 

[Nick Barbier]

You can use any bio media but
If you use live rock nothing else is needed.
This is my old 120 bb. My new 170 will also be bb.
The 120 was started with 50% live and 50% caribsea dry rock.

Did you find this tank to be more or less stable than a reef tank with substrate?

 

[X-37B]

You bring up a good point. I've always had sand beds in all my tanks for many, many years. And I like having pods, and inverts in my tanks. I just don't like having to deal with old tank syndrome several years from now due to an aging sand bed saturated with nitrates.

I had plenty of pods and inverts in my old 120 bb.

 

[X-37B]

Did you find this tank to be more or less stable than a reef tank with substrate?

Just as stable as any system with sand.
My old bare bottom 20g nano.
I had 3 peppermint shrimp in this system.

 

[Nick Barbier]

Bare bottom is the way to go IMHO. i have a piece of beige acrylic sheet siliconed to the bottom. It looks natural, and I have no issues with excessive nutrients. My skimmer and rocks take care of them. Other than for aesthetics, if feel sand is an unnecessary headache. FWIW

I'm breaking down my 125g mainly because of old tank syndrome. The 9 year old sand bed is saturated with nitrates and I can't seem to lower the nitrate level no matter how many water changes I do or how much NOPOX I dose. I am so not looking forward to having to put new live sand in it. I've never had a bare bottom reef before, but I've always wanted to try it. If I do go bare bottom, what brand of beneficial bacteria would you recommend to supplement the bacteria already on the live rocks?

 

[exnisstech]

I keep 3 tanks all bare bottom, 2 started with sand but I removed it. I like sand when it's clean but I can never keep it looking clean. It always gets covered in diatoms, cyano and other uglies that don't seem to be a problem in BB. I have plenty of pods, worms and such in the DT but also keep refugiums in the sump. Never used bio balls or any of that stuff. I add trays of rock rubble. Works out well if I need to seed a new tank, just remove a tray of rubble and toss it in the new tank.

 

[Js.Aqua.Project]

1. Is a bare bottom tank better than a tank with substrate?
   1. Subjective, I like the more natural look of a tank with sand, but bare bottoms allow for a much higher flow rate from the return and powerheads for SPS
2. Which type of tank takes longer to cycle?
   1. Take about the same
3. Which type of tank is more stable?
   1. Having run both I've found sand to help create a more stable tank long term, more places for nitrifying bacteria and pods to live
   2. "Old Tank Syndrome" can be avoided by having a targeted cleanup crew that helps keep your sand bed turned over and prevents build up of excess nutrients
4. Would adding Max Spec Biosphere Balls to the sump increase the stability due to more surface area for nitrifying bacteria?
   1. Logically yes, more surface area equals more places for nitrifying bacteria to set up shop
5. Can I use bio balls in the sump to replace the sand in the tank?
   1. I am not of fan of plastic bio-balls at all, I find they just become detritus traps, I'd recommend any of the rock/ceramic based balls over the plastic

 

[Nick Barbier]

Just as stable as any system with sand.
My old bare bottom 20g nano.
I had 3 peppermint sheimp in this system.

Nice tank!

 

[exnisstech]

I'm breaking down my 125g mainly because of old tank syndrome. The 9 year old sand bed is saturated with nitrates

Have you considered removing the sand vs tearing down the tank? It what I did.

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

I setup my current build barebottom. Only thing put in initially was an elegance coral and thats it. Had pods just week or 2 later.

either sand or barebottom can be better lol. Depends on care level. I have personnally less issues with barebottom.

They both can take same time to cycle. Depends on method. Im starting to not like the word cycling becuase its never done cycling. On going process. More like bacteria building or establishing.

More surface area provides more bacteria and can handle larger loads. This will mainly apply to fish as corals and such usually have low bio load. It never hurts to add more surface area. The amount of nutrients available will determine the fauna and bacterial diversity and amount. You can put any where you like as well.

Pretty much just parroting everyone else lol.

 

[Nick Barbier]

1. Is a bare bottom tank better than a tank with substrate?
   1. Subjective, I like the more natural look of a tank with sand, but bare bottoms allow for a much higher flow rate from the return and powerheads for SPS
2. Which type of tank takes longer to cycle?
   1. Take about the same
3. Which type of tank is more stable?
   1. Having run both I've found sand to help create a more stable tank long term, more places for nitrifying bacteria and pods to live
   2. "Old Tank Syndrome" can be avoided by having a targeted cleanup crew that helps keep your sand bed turned over and prevents build up of excess nutrients
4. Would adding Max Spec Biosphere Balls to the sump increase the stability due to more surface area for nitrifying bacteria?
   1. Logically yes, more surface area equals more places for nitrifying bacteria to set up shop
5. Can I use bio balls in the sump to replace the sand in the tank?
   1. I am not of fan of plastic bio-balls at all, I find they just become detritus traps, I'd recommend any of the rock/ceramic based balls over the plastic

I do like the natural look of a sand bed, especially for pods and inverts. Old tank syndrome is my only concern. That's why I'm having to tear down and rebuild my tank. My 9 year old sand bed is saturated with nitrates and excess nutrients. No matter how many water changes I do or how much NOPOX I dose, I can't seem to lower the nitrate level. I have taken the live rock rubble out of the sump and will be replacing it with Max Spec Biosphere Balls when I rebuild the tank.

 

[Nick Barbier]

I keep 3 tanks all bare bottom, 2 started with sand but I removed it. I like sand when it's clean but I can never keep it looking clean. It always gets covered in diatoms, cyano and other uglies that don't seem to be a problem in BB. I have plenty of pods, worms and such in the DT but also keep refugiums in the sump. Never used bio balls or any of that stuff. I add trays of rock rubble. Works out well if I need to seed a new tank, just remove a tray of rubble and toss it in the new tank.

Can you post a few pics of your BB tanks?

 

[Nick Barbier]

I setup my current build barebottom. Only thing put in initially was an elegance coral and thats it. Had pods just week or 2 later.

either sand or barebottom can be better lol. Depends on care level. I have personnally less issues with barebottom.

They both can take same time to cycle. Depends on method. Im starting to not like the word cycling becuase its never done cycling. On going process. More like bacteria building or establishing.

More surface area provides more bacteria and can handle larger loads. This will mainly apply to fish as corals and such usually have low bio load. It never hurts to add more surface area. The amount of nutrients available will determine the fauna and bacterial diversity and amount. You can put any where you like as well.

Pretty much just parroting everyone else lol.

Thanks Ben, the more comments I read, the more I'm leaning toward a bare bottom tank. Can you recommend a beneficial bacteria supplement for the Max Spec Biospheres that I will adding to the sump? I know the bacteria will eventually come from the main tank to help populate the new biosphere balls, I just want to help it along a little.

 

[Js.Aqua.Project]

I do like the natural look of a sand bed, especially for pods and inverts. Old tank syndrome is my only concern. That's why I'm having to tear down and rebuild my tank. My 9 year old sand bed is saturated with nitrates and excess nutrients. No matter how many water changes I do or how much NOPOX I dose, I can't seem to lower the nitrate level. I have taken the live rock rubble out of the sump and will be replacing it with Max Spec Biosphere Balls when I rebuild the tank.

Opinion based thoughts/questions:

I think "Old Tank Syndrome" is based on many variables not just saturated sand, sand can hold detritus which breaks down and can become excess nutrients in the form on NO3/PO4. But "OTS" is also causing by imbalanced trace elements.

You've mentioned high nitrates, how high are they?

Other than nitrates, what other OTS symptoms is your tank showing?

To help with build up in the sand bed I employ a lot of sand sifting/sand dwelling creatures. By having them constantly turn the sand over the detritus gets into the water column a then through the mechanical filtration.

Mathematically water changes don't make sense to me. If you're only doing 20-30% then you're only potentially reducing 20-30% of what's there and only replacing 20-30% of what's been used with the new salt. So normal water changes alone make it near impossible to fix a problem. But even if you go to say, 20-30% daily (impractical in a large tank) or 50% weekly you will never remove everything nor replace everything and the more you repeat it the more you get away from your goals.

I carbon dose with vodka now, but previously used NoPox. I've found that given a long enough period of time they do work, but can be hard to use after the problem has already gotten too big. A lot of patience is required to let them bring the NO3 down and in my opinion water changes when carbon dosing almost do more harm to the process than good.

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

Thanks Ben, the more comments I read, the more I'm leaning toward a bare bottom tank. Can you recommend a beneficial bacteria supplement for the Max Spec Biospheres that I will adding to the sump? I know the bacteria will eventually come from the main tank to help populate the new biosphere balls, I just want to help it along a little.

You can either use live rock from someones tank or your prior build as long as you keep wet, or I use frytz. With frytz you can add live stock right away. But just dont over do it. Coral is actually a great way to establish bacteria. Low nutrients but still adds for bacteria.

 

[Nick Barbier]

Thanks Ben, the more comments I read, the more I'm leaning toward a bare bottom tank. Can you recommend a beneficial bacteria supplement for the Max Spec Biospheres that I will adding to the sump? I know the bacteria will eventually come from the main tank to help populate the new biosphere balls, I just want to help it along a little.

Opinion based thoughts/questions:

I think "Old Tank Syndrome" is based on many variables not just saturated sand, sand can hold detritus which breaks down and can become excess nutrients in the form on NO3/PO4. But "OTS" is also causing by imbalanced trace elements.

You've mentioned high nitrates, how high are they?

Other than nitrates, what other OTS symptoms is your tank showing?

To help with build up in the sand bed I employ a lot of sand sifting/sand dwelling creatures. By having them constantly turn the sand over the detritus gets into the water column a then through the mechanical filtration.

Mathematically water changes don't make sense to me. If you're only doing 20-30% then you're only potentially reducing 20-30% of what's there and only replacing 20-30% of what's been used with the new salt. So normal water changes alone make it near impossible to fix a problem. But even if you go to say, 20-30% daily (impractical in a large tank) or 50% weekly you will never remove everything nor replace everything and the more you repeat it the more you get away from your goals.

I carbon dose with vodka now, but previously used NoPox. I've found that given a long enough period of time they do work, but can be hard to use after the problem has already gotten too big. A lot of patience is required to let them bring the NO3 down and in my opinion water changes when carbon dosing almost do more harm to the process than good.

I dose daily Oceans Blend 2 part to keep the Alk, Ca, Mg and trace elements in the tanks early in the morning before the lights come on. I've read that doing water changes actually defeats the purpose of adding 2 part or three part solutions. My nitrates are between 150 and 200 ppm. That's one of the reasons I believe my tank is going through OTS. I also dose NoPox, and was doing Red Sea Reef Energy amino acids until was told that it promotes the growth of cyanobacteria. There's so many opinions out there, not sure what to believe.