Bare Bottom tanks?

[Bjhatcher80]

My local aquarium store guy is very adamant that my tank should be bare bottom, but I have friends in the hobby that don't agree. Is there any real reason to go bare? Aesthetically I could go either way.

He's also very anti LED lights, but the idea of those seem highly appealing to me. There's so much to learn and read at this point I feel lost with all the conflicting advice.

 

[Dog Boy Dave]

This tank is bare bottom with LEDs

Do your home work. Start small and learn the lessons. There are good arguments for a lot of different ways to proceed. Look at peoples tanks. Ask your self, is this what I want to do? DO I have the resources to do this? Find a mentor.

YES there are real reason why you NEED to go bare bottom if you expect LONG TERM Success. If you wanna redo the tank every five years or so then sand in main display will often last that long sometimes. Seldom longer in my experience. Lights have lots of pros and cons. If your water quality is good you can grow great corals under any light. If your water quality is substandard then it doesnt matter what kind of lights you use.

 

[keokea]

I have sand in both tanks, it is a chore maintaining them. We're in the process of siphoning out sand every water change. Almost bare bottom in my 67 gallon
I also run leds but that's my preference, no comments on lighting

 

[rajkovich207]

I think my question applies to this topic if you dont mind me hijacking the thread a little. My LFS is very adamant about having no sand behind the rock work but its ok to have it in the front of the tank, and having a power head blowing across the bottom of the tank back there. Also I am planning on putting a fuge below my BC29, and he keeps telling me not to put any sand down there because it will cause large parameter swings, as well as you cant clean the sand, so the detritus buildup will cause even worse parameter swings (unless I can find a new stand the light for the algea will not be on a reverse cycle) what are your thoughts and opinions on these sugestions?. TIA, Tony

 

[Young Frankenstein]

Very nice tank Dog Boy, but why would there be an issue if you clean your sand ? why you say 5 years, unless you are referring to DSB without cleaning it, and it does mater what light, and i do agree water quality also means water clarity, so light penetrates easier.

 

[Connie]

I am interested in going bare bottom too. I have too many bristleworms. Would it cut down on that population?

 

[Dog Boy Dave]

Very nice tank Dog Boy, but why would there be an issue if you clean your sand ? why you say 5 years, unless you are referring to DSB without cleaning it, and it does mater what light, and i do agree water quality also means water clarity, so light penetrates easier.

I have seen lots of tanks with sand in the main display. Most dont last more than 5 years. I say five because of watching and counting since around 1987. Some last longer. Most dont last near that long. Sand in the main display is very hard to keep clean and almost impossible to keep clean in a large tank. It can be done but why would you bother?

I did not say lights dont matter. I did say that I have grown and colored corals under many different types of lights. If the water quality is good then corals will thrive and show great colors under many kinds of lights. Water quality is much more important than lights. If someone is blaming their lights for poor coral health or color then they dont know what they are doing. If the intensity is sufficient then SPS corals will thrive and color up no matter which type of light you choose.

I wouldnt try to define water quality as it applies to sps by measuring the turbidity of the water. In most instances, light penetration isnt the issue when dealing with water quality as it applies to SPS.

 

[Young Frankenstein]

Agreed, nice work. Cleaning sand will prevent the 3 to 5 year limit, but most of us get lazy I have seen a 300g loaded with huge sps, wiped out over the weekend due to sand never cleaned, the person decided to go bare bottom after.

 

[Pappy]

I think you'll be okay regardless of what you do. Sand or no sand is aesthetics. I have sand in one tank and bb in another. The sand increases biological filtration but isn't necessary IMO. I have never cleaned my sand and was told not to. The gobies, nassarius snails, etc...do their jobs well. It all boils down to what you want.

As far as lighting, I feel people against LEDs, are generally people who tried fixtures they were unhappy with because of lack of spectrum, bad coverage, etc...but many LEDs on the market are excellent and lots of people have had great success with them including myself. LEDs are the most powerful light out there IMO and you don't have to change bulbs! Also the overall appearance (with full spectrum fixtures) is far better.

So to summarize when you decide what YOU want just research and visit other reefers with different setups from local clubs and decide which is the best setup for you!

 

[Mike&Terry]

I disagree that sand vs bare-bottom is aesthetics only. There are consequences of the decision either way, and there are many other factors that influence the success of that decision such as flow, aquascaping, stocking choices, husbandry, etc.

We choose to go with shallow sand bed for the looks of it, to enable us to keep the kinds of animals we like (e.g., leopard wrasses), and to promote stable, natural processes. The shallow sand bed is absolutely sustainable indefinitely without causing problems, but requires upkeep. For example, we find that stocking benthic livestock such as sea cucumbers, fighting conchs, nassarius snails, brittle stars, etc., are desirable and very helpful with keeping the SSB viable. We also frequently stir and vacuum the SSB to keep the detritus from accumulating. Having a well designed flow pattern in your tank is necessary (true if you go bare-bottom or otherwise) to help keep detritus in the water column and into your filtration systems.

As far as the lighting choices, that is a whole other can of worms.... As Dave mentioned, do your homework. Read all you can about the experiences of others and make informed decisions. The advice from your LFS may not be bad, but remember it is just one data point. Online forums provide a wealth of additional info that can help educate and enlighten before you spend any of your hard-earned cash.

 

[ritter6788]

I had a 4 inch sandbed in my tank for 3+ years. I had issues after a couple of year and started to vacuum the sand during water changes and the funk was unbelievable. There were improvements but I was still having algae issues. I recently moved the tank and removed the sandbed in the process. My tank has been 100 times better since and my sps are growing faster. I even stopped using GFO and my phosphates have been at spot on levels. I'm a member of the BB club from now on.

 

[kes]

I prefer sand for the looks, as it allows light to reflect making the tank appear brighter, and for fish/inverts I like to keep - sand burrowing wrasses, sand sifting starfish, etc. But, I keep it at only 1-2 inches and never DSB.

 

[robert]

I think my question applies to this topic if you dont mind me hijacking the thread a little. My LFS is very adamant about having no sand behind the rock work but its ok to have it in the front of the tank, and having a power head blowing across the bottom of the tank back there. Also I am planning on putting a fuge below my BC29, and he keeps telling me not to put any sand down there because it will cause large parameter swings, as well as you cant clean the sand, so the detritus buildup will cause even worse parameter swings (unless I can find a new stand the light for the algea will not be on a reverse cycle) what are your thoughts and opinions on these sugestions?. TIA, Tony

I'm frankly surprised - Your LFS is right. the buffer point of coral sands is actually 7.6-7.8 and actually fights you in maintaining stable cal/alk/pH. (unless you keep your pH at 7.8)
Keep a substrate if you keep fish/inverts that require it. but then only in areas that you can easily reach for cleaning/changing.

In a system where parameters are kept elevated (like most successful reef systems), the minerals are always precipitating and with them they bind phosphates and other minerals and metals. Keep your sand above 8.0 pH and your simply collecting this in your sandbed (you can't siphon it out) - drop you pH below 7.8 and your sand bed leeches this accumulation back into your water. This will happen in a DSB in your sump. When everything is new it isn't a problem, but as your tank ages and accumulates precipitated sands it becomes one.

A good example of this is oolitic sand collected from pristine reef sites (a very pretty precipitated sand). Dissolve it in a weak acid and you'll find among other nasties, phosphate at ~35ppm, copper at 39ppm and silicates at ~20,000 ppm. The stuff which precipitates in your tank is equally dirty. (probably minus the silicates)

I know I'm preaching heresy here - but I can back it up.

It sounds to me like your LFS is spot on with their advice.

 

[Young Frankenstein]

Feeding and type of food also has allot to do with DSB. Pellet food certainly pollutes a DSB but if you clean it one every 2-3 months I don't see a problem, only benefits.

 

[Mike&Terry]

A good example of this is oolitic sand collected from pristine reef sites (a very pretty precipitated sand). Dissolve it in a weak acid and you'll find among other nasties, phosphate at ~35ppm, copper at 39ppm and silicates at ~20,000 ppm. The stuff which precipitates in your tank is equally dirty. (probably minus the silicates)

I know I'm preaching heresy here - but I can back it up.

This is very interesting...thanks for posting this. Are there any references to these numbers? I'd like to read more.

 

[ChoxRox]

Does someone have a link or something on the "proper" way of cleaning a sandbed? (sorry to hijack)

 

[robert]

This is very interesting...thanks for posting this. Are there any references to these numbers? I'd like to read more.

Sure. Water over reefs (and in our tanks) is supersaturated with regard to aragonite. How that happens is rather interesting as well, but I won't hi-jack the thread.
Here's the link: Short Take: Oolitic Sand Analysis — Advanced Aquarist | Aquarist Magazine and Blog

 

[FisheriesOmen]

I don't think it's a "Reef Tank" without a Sandbed. I look at the tank and go "Oh, what lovely corals in a glass box." It's just not a Natural and COMPLETE Eco-System without the sand bed. I keep sandbeds because they are beneficial. They provide homes for various micro organisms, look natural, hold base rock in plac and help with water quality. To me it's like with FW. If you go for a no-plant system then you can see the crap accumulate on the bottom and you HAVE to do something about it. Where as with a planted tank the poop's nutrients are used by the plants. See the link missing in the chain?

 

[ritter6788]

This tank is bare bottom with LEDs

Scoreboard^^^

 

[FisheriesOmen]

Scoreboard^^^

I win.