Live rock? Is it worth the risk?

[ScottB]

For years I've spent hours per week in the dinoflagellate mega-thread "Are you tired".

I am convinced that dead rock starts should be considered only for advanced reefers. It can be done with considerable patience and skill, but for the average reefer or newbie it is just too painful with too many course corrections and interventions required.

Do some research on live sources and buy as much as you can afford.

 

[Forty-Two]

For years I've spent hours per week in the dinoflagellate mega-thread "Are you tired".

I am convinced that dead rock starts should be considered only for advanced reefers. It can be done with considerable patience and skill, but for the average reefer or newbie it is just too painful with too many course corrections and interventions required.

Do some research on live sources and buy as much as you can afford.

This. I've come to the same conclusion.

 

[Tankandspank]

Excess phosphates

Except the problem with Marcorock is that it has no phosphates. In fact - it sucks all of the Phosphates in unless you are dosing at a high level; and if you dont - you get dino's as a result of having no phosphates.

The real story here is that there is no 'perfect path'. All methods have risk. Dry Rock is, IMO a bigger problem and more expensive in the long run than live rock. In fact Im starting to slowly come to the conclusion that the BRS 'methods' with dry rock are problematic at best, but perhaps at worst actually intended as customer engineering ( more problems to solve, more chemicals, more intervention, more $$$ spent).

I did 50/50. In hindsight I wished I had done 80/20 Live to Dry. 50/50 is good, but Ive still gone through a round of diatoms etc, and the leeching of phosphates Im getting from the Indonesian dry rock is a bit annoying (solvable but annoying).

Can anyone else weigh in on this Macrorock discussion. DanConnor says it has excess phosphates and needs to be cured while Forty-Two is saying it sucks up phosphates and will cause problems secondarily. Seems like exact opposite statements. Overwhelming for a new reefer >.<

 

[Forty-Two]

Can anyone else weigh in on this Macrorock discussion. DanConnor says it has excess phosphates and needs to be cured while Forty-Two is saying it sucks up phosphates and will cause problems secondarily. Seems like exact opposite statements. Overwhelming for a new reefer >.<

Here's a couple of threads for you:

Phosphate testing and dosing should be part of the tank cycle process.

When a new hobbyist asks how to cycle their tank, we should be encouraging them to test and if needed, dose for phosphates during their initial cycling process. This is especially true if they are using mined dry rock and sand. After doing everything I could possibly think of as I started up my...

www.reef2reef.com

A year in, and uglier than ever…help!

I honestly don't think your tank is in that bad of shape. I'm 7 months in and sort of similar to yours now. Your parameters aren't bad. I run radions also but at 50% schedule so 40% intensity. Maybe get a sand sifting starfish who has been cleaning mine well. You have a LOT of open space for...

www.reef2reef.com

 

[ScottB]

Can anyone else weigh in on this Macrorock discussion. DanConnor says it has excess phosphates and needs to be cured while Forty-Two is saying it sucks up phosphates and will cause problems secondarily. Seems like exact opposite statements. Overwhelming for a new reefer >.<

I can speak ONLY for Marco rock that it will not release PO4 into clean salt water after 2-3 weeks in a bucket with a pump. Hanna measured 0.0.

OTHER sources of dead rock could be loaded with PO4 depending on a lot of factors. Is it "recycled" rock from a dirty tank that was broken down? Was it sourced from an estuary?

You would use the "curing" process to learn whether or not you should be stripping PO4 or ADDING PO4 to the rock. Just one of many reasons I say that (total) dead rock starts are not suitable for most reefers.

If you can trust a live rock source, do that. If unsure, then quarantine the rock for a while.

 

[Forty-Two]

I can speak ONLY for Marco rock that it will not release PO4 into clean salt water after 2-3 weeks in a bucket with a pump. Hanna measured 0.0.

OTHER sources of dead rock could be loaded with PO4 depending on a lot of factors. Is it "recycled" rock from a dirty tank that was broken down? Was it sourced from an estuary?

You would use the "curing" process to learn whether or not you should be stripping PO4 or ADDING PO4 to the rock. Just one of many reasons I say that (total) dead rock starts are not suitable for most reefers.

If you can trust a live rock source, do that. If unsure, then quarantine the rock for a while.

An example of this would be my Indonesian Dry Rock - which was once....live rock. While its been cleaned and cured, its still leaching PO4 into my tank.

As I mentioned above - the issue with the MINED dry rock, and also I suspect the 'Man Made' dry rock (which they call 'Live Rock' when it is NOT) such as 'Real Reef Rock' - is that they tend to absorb Phosphates until a certain point, at which they will 'rebound out' until they find equilibrium with the tank. This generally causes havoc.

 

[Timfish]

Welcome to R2R!

I wouldn't set up a system without quality maricultured or wild live rock. Maybe this has already been posted but here's Aquabiomics article on establishing healthy microbiomes:

Establishing a Healthy Microbiome in a New Aquarium Using Live Rock

Studying the effects of live rock in a newly established aquarium shows that high-quality live rock promotes the rapid establishment of an effective biological filter and a microbial community similar to those found in mature reef tanks.

www.reef2reef.com

As far as pests, I've gotten a lot more from other aquarists than on maricultured or wild live rock I've gotten.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

For years I've spent hours per week in the dinoflagellate mega-thread "Are you tired".

I am convinced that dead rock starts should be considered only for advanced reefers. It can be done with considerable patience and skill, but for the average reefer or newbie it is just too painful with too many course corrections and interventions required.

Do some research on live sources and buy as much as you can afford.

My opinion this is where all the confusion starts.
Starting from 0 with "real live rock" may bring in a lot of troubles a newbie will not be able to handle. One does not start a reef aquarium without the basic knowledge and skills needed to cycle and condition a tank. One does not need " live rock" , entering a lot of insecurities and surprises, for cycling a tank. Entering " live rock " , which represents a lot of bio-load, will for certain need a lot of course corrections and the experience to make the right decisions. One can use "live rock" after the tank has completed its first two cycles this for conditioning the tank but depending on how much rock is entered a lot of patience and skill will be needed to condition the tank not only for what is coming but for what is already entered.
One of course can use so called " cured live rock" but my opinion this is just a waste of money. ref: MB Anthias 2018 2019
Live rock is used to enter marine diversity. The filtration capacity is unknown, will be very unstable and unreliable and is not manageable. it will bring in bio-load which may be used for installing carrying capacity but it will not provide the carrying capacity needed . This only will be the case after a long period of time and a certain balance is found .
Entering "real life rock" will increase the carrying capacity needed very fast. A conditioned aquarium system has been prepared for what is coming and a certain carrying capacity has already been installed before the rock is introduced. A lot of starters do the opposite and introduce " live rock " for conditioning the tank which is not the way to go,. Often the " live rock" will fool the tank. That is why so called " cured live rock" was introduced to support the " live rock" business
For starters " conditioned rock" may be recommended.
Conditioning an aquarium system and installing the carrying capacity needed can easily be managed using a biofilter, a refuge.

 

[ScottB]

My opinion this is where all the confusion starts.
Starting from 0 with "real live rock" may bring in a lot of troubles a newbie will not be able to handle. One does not start a reef aquarium without the basic knowledge and skills needed to cycle and condition a tank. One does not need " live rock" , entering a lot of insecurities and surprises, for cycling a tank. Entering " live rock " , which represents a lot of bio-load, will for certain need a lot of course corrections and the experience to make the right decisions. One can use "live rock" after the tank has completed its first two cycles this for conditioning the tank but depending on how much rock is entered a lot of patience and skill will be needed to condition the tank not only for what is coming but for what is already entered.
One of course can use so called " cured live rock" but my opinion this is just a waste of money. ref: MB Anthias 2018 2019
Live rock is used to enter marine diversity. The filtration capacity is unknown, will be very unstable and unreliable and is not manageable. it will bring in bio-load which may be used for installing carrying capacity but it will not provide the carrying capacity needed . This only will be the case after a long period of time and a certain balance is found .
Entering "real life rock" will increase the carrying capacity needed very fast. A conditioned aquarium system has been prepared for what is coming and a certain carrying capacity has already been installed before the rock is introduced. A lot of starters do the opposite and introduce " live rock " for conditioning the tank which is not the way to go,. Often the " live rock" will fool the tank. That is why so called " cured live rock" was introduced to support the " live rock" business
For starters " conditioned rock" may be recommended.
Conditioning an aquarium system and installing the carrying capacity needed can easily be managed using a biofilter, a refuge.

Now I am confused.

First I am assuming carrying capacity = nitrogen cycling. That is the easy part. You can establish that without understanding anything or doing anything. Add water, dead rock, bottled bacteria and a fish.

But now you are on your way for 12-18 months gyrating through GHA, chrysophytes, cyano, dinoflagellates, dying corals, replacing corals. Over time, you have been accidentally introducing enough bacterial microbial diversity that it eventually settles down. Why not START there? Of course the biome will be a little noisy for a few months but you are a year ahead of the game.

I've set up a couple dozen systems in just the last few years. Sometimes clients just cannot afford enough/any live rock even though I strongly encourage it. At 6 months, the difference in how the different tanks look is night versus day. It does not HAVE to be maricultured ocean rock, but rock from a well established display or even the sump will make a huge difference for biome health and diversity.

"rock from a well established display or even the sump will make a huge difference for biome health and diversity." Is this what you mean by "conditioned"? If so, we may be in more agreement than I thought.

 

[Gregg @ ADP]

Live rock, and I don’t even cure it. Straight out of the box and into the tank.

 

[jfoahs04]

For years I've spent hours per week in the dinoflagellate mega-thread "Are you tired".

I am convinced that dead rock starts should be considered only for advanced reefers. It can be done with considerable patience and skill, but for the average reefer or newbie it is just too painful with too many course corrections and interventions required.

Do some research on live sources and buy as much as you can afford.

100%

I fully understand the desire to use dry rock, bottled bac, etc. to get started. The obvious benefit is that it eliminates the risk of introducing reefing's most annoying troublemakers (aiptasia, majanos, vermatids, flatworms, etc.) from the start.

But I think starting "sterile" like this only gives the illusion of control. The reality is that a "sterile" tank isn't really sterile. This is why algae will grow pretty quickly even in a tank that's just salt water and dry rock. The sandbed, rock, and even glass and plastic in your tank leech all sorts of stuff that helps nasties (dinos being chief among them) grow. The air brings in bacteria and even more stuff that causes even more growth. Even the most careful, thorough reefers among us cannot avoid that.

The problem with starting "dry" is that you are essentially creating an environment with zero/limited competition so nasties like dinos can take over quickly and be extremely difficult to eliminate (just read the dino thread). With established live rock, you may get some hitchikers you don't want, but you have a biological baseline that makes it a whole lot easier beat or prevent a dino takeover. Tanks started with live rock find a balance a lot quicker than the tanks started with dry rock. Some of those crash before they can find a balance. I think gluing vermatids occasionally or killing the occasional aiptasia is a small price to pay for that stability.

Most of the reefers who have kept tanks long-term (a decade or longer) welcome the biodiversity as it equips the reef better to deal with problems (and there are always problems to deal with).

 

[ScottB]

Live rock, and I don’t even cure it. Straight out of the box and into the tank.

Favorite source(s)?

 

[GrampsReef]

I am a serious newbie and have been doing a ton of research and am torn between live rock and/or dry rock.

I am think of doing 50/50 of dry and live but don't know if it is worth the risk of pests and parasites. What is your opinions? Is there any precautionary measures I could take?

My lfs (more of a local fish wharehouse) has a variety of live rock in a massive tank where I could examine them. He also has a massive tank of rock that comes in dry and he soaks them him self in a closed system. I feel the "pre-soaked" and conditioned rock is a great alternative to straight dry rock but I would still want to add at least a few small peices of live... UGH so torn on my options!

Please send help[emoji305] Thank you

 

[GrampsReef]

I am a serious newbie and have been doing a ton of research and am torn between live rock and/or dry rock.

I am think of doing 50/50 of dry and live but don't know if it is worth the risk of pests and parasites. What is your opinions? Is there any precautionary measures I could take?

My lfs (more of a local fish wharehouse) has a variety of live rock in a massive tank where I could examine them. He also has a massive tank of rock that comes in dry and he soaks them him self in a closed system. I feel the "pre-soaked" and conditioned rock is a great alternative to straight dry rock but I would still want to add at least a few small peices of live... UGH so torn on my options!

Please send help[emoji305] Thank you!

I just started my 55 gallon tank on October 25th with 50 pounds of live rock. Added another 30 pounds on October 29th. My take finished its cycle on November 5th (maybe sooner). I added fish on November 8th after a 10% water change. Rechecked all parameters on November 9th and everything is right where it should be. I cannot say live rock is the way to go but I would do it again.

 

[a.t.t.r]

Yes live rock or at the very least seed rubble is a must.

 

[fishybizzness]

I have another thread going in which I suggest that dry rock is one of the causes of new aquarist quitting after the first year. I have gotten alot of discussions on both sides, dry vs live. I still believe that dry rock is definitely 10 times harder in the first year than live ocean rock.

 

[tharbin]

I recently set up my first ever reef tank without live rock. I won't do it again and I'm now starting to look for a nice small chunk of live rock to supplement the tank. I got out of the hobby for 14 years and just decided to re-up. Things have changed a little, some for the better and some for the worse.

I had a few Fish Only with Coral Skeletons tanks back many many years ago but when I started reef keeping it was live rock only, or living rock if you were in Florida or somewhere in tropical waters. Yes you got "pests" that made the tank unsightly if you looked for it, just like a reef. Yes you got aiptasia, you just killed them after the initial thrill of "look a baby anemone" wore off. Yes you got bristle worms and probably had to cull them from time to time. You even occasionally got Mantas Shrimp or some other rather nasty surprise but you also got macro algae, tunicates, sponges, gorgonians, mushrooms (I still can't bring myself to pay for a mushroom), tube worms, amphipods, etc.

All part of what makes a reef function. This new tank is much too sterile. Everything is a balancing act requiring my input instead of the natural functions of the reef inhabitants. It will probably get there eventually without the live rock because I buy coral mainly from local reefers so those critters will make it in someday. If I bought only from coral farms, maybe it would never get there. Too soon to tell.

No live rock will not give a picture book "reef" that is really just sustaining reef inhabitants in an overly regulated environment. It will give you what most of us proport to have; "a slice of living reef".

Is live rock worth the risk? Absolutely, unless you want a pretend "slice of the reef".

 

[costaricareef]

For years I've spent hours per week in the dinoflagellate mega-thread "Are you tired".

I am convinced that dead rock starts should be considered only for advanced reefers. It can be done with considerable patience and skill, but for the average reefer or newbie it is just too painful with too many course corrections and interventions required.

Do some research on live sources and buy as much as you can afford.

This^. Learn from the experience of others!

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Now I am confused.

First I am assuming carrying capacity = nitrogen cycling. That is the easy part. You can establish that without understanding anything or doing anything. Add water, dead rock, bottled bacteria and a fish.

But now you are on your way for 12-18 months gyrating through GHA, chrysophytes, cyano, dinoflagellates, dying corals, replacing corals. Over time, you have been accidentally introducing enough bacterial microbial diversity that it eventually settles down. Why not START there? Of course the biome will be a little noisy for a few months but you are a year ahead of the game.

I've set up a couple dozen systems in just the last few years. Sometimes clients just cannot afford enough/any live rock even though I strongly encourage it. At 6 months, the difference in how the different tanks look is night versus day. It does not HAVE to be maricultured ocean rock, but rock from a well established display or even the sump will make a huge difference for biome health and diversity.

"rock from a well established display or even the sump will make a huge difference for biome health and diversity." Is this what you mean by "conditioned"? If so, we may be in more agreement than I thought.

The easy part?

The carrying capacity is the ability to reduce a certain amount of ammonia within a certain short period of time. it is representative for the max bio-load in function of its ammonia production.
Reducing ammonia is done heterotropic (needing organic carbon), autotropic by nitrifiers ( using inorganic carbon) and Photo-autotropic ( needing inorganic carbon and light energy) We first may install the carrying capacity needed and then introduce the fish. We do not need any bottled bacteria. In marine bio-filters ammonia reduction is meanly done by archaea. Understanding the nitrogen and carbon cycles, providing what is needed, will make it possible to manage the nutrient availability as desired and keep the balance between consumers and producers. Removing nitrate has very little influence on the carrying capacity, producing nitrate is essential.
It is logic if one introduces media on which active biofilms are growing this will fasten up everything . Or not if the introduced biomass has not the ability to adapt to the changing conditions or does not find what it needs to support oneself in the new environment. It is on us to provide all what is needed, which is often not the case. Without understanding anything or doing anything introducing a fish is not a good idea.
For a balanced nitrifying biofilm to grow on calcium carbonate media depending on the capacity needed it will take at least 3 to 4 weeks. Installing the same carrying capacity using only heterotrophs, it will take <1 to 3 days,

A system is cycled if the nitrogen and carbon cycles have been completed and all organisms needed to do so are present. A life support system is conditioned when the carrying capacity meets the bio-load and the organisms needed to cycle the tank are present in sufficient quantities meeting the demand. If the introduction of a big fish is planned the system should be conditioned for what is cumming before the fish is added, this to avoid that fish will be the one to many. Using only rock the carrying capacity can not be managed as desired.

 

[Reefstick555]

We started our tanks with a scaffolding of dry rock, then seeded it with a LR layer on top. It wasn't three days in and we had critters to stare at. The only issues we had was the emergence of a emerald "crap" crab. Everything else became food for the invertebrates we put in after cycling.
It was nice to have life in the tank while it cycled - IMO.