Poll: Biggest Controversy in Reefing?

jabberwock · Apr 5, 2023

StatelineReefer said:
No controversy there. Clownfish are terrible.

We know that, but every new tank post I see in trouble starts with, "Two clown fish..."

vlangel · Apr 6, 2023

BeanAnimal said:
Lol - no DSB option?

LOL, I forgot about that one and I am on the wrong side. All my tanks except the seahorse display had DSBs.

jackson6745 · Apr 6, 2023

Dead rock vs. live rock.

Garf · Apr 6, 2023

How about porous reef rock (dry or live) v calcite mined non porous boulders, like mine?

BeanAnimal · Apr 6, 2023

Garf said:
How about porous reef rock (dry or live) v calcite mined non porous boulders, like mine?

I am not sure what the controversy would be. Surface area is surface area for the most part. The more porous the rock, the more surface area for bacteria to grow. It also follows that deeper pores would have less flow and/or offer benthic or anaerobic areas... with the most porous "rock" being rock crushed into gravel.... or sand

X-37B · Apr 6, 2023

MoshJosh said:
Start a peaceful discussion about LEDs, T5s, and MH. . .

Now thats funny but true.
Hard to have a conversation without it getting shut down, lol.
They all work. Go with what you like and focus on stabiliy and you will be ahead of the game.

Garf · Apr 6, 2023

BeanAnimal said:
I am not sure what the controversy would be. Surface area is surface area for the most part. The more porous the rock, the more surface area for bacteria to grow. It also follows that deeper pores would have less flow and/or offer benthic or anaerobic areas... with the most porous "rock" being rock crushed into gravel.... or sand

Fair enough, add “whilst barebottom” lol.

JoJosReef · Apr 6, 2023

Tank size for ________ fish.

X-37B · Apr 6, 2023

JCM said:
Mmmhmm Mmmhmm. But have you considered switching to the correct team?

50/50 live/dead for the win, lol.

BeanAnimal · Apr 6, 2023

Garf said:
Fair enough, add “whilst barebottom” lol.

More surface area = more room for bacteria.
Deeper pores = more area for benthic and possibly anaerobi fauna/flora

How much surface area is needed or where is the point of diminished return for a given bio-load? No clue.

I think logically for a given bio-load one could get away by volume with less of the porous rock than the dense rock.

Crustaceon · Apr 6, 2023

aquakj said:
I think Live vs Dry rock is really good one! Im team Dry Rock !

I've used both and both work perfectly fine. IME, there's no reason dry rock won't work so long as you have a little bit more patience than if you went with live rock plus, you don't get hitchhikers.

Garf · Apr 6, 2023

I’ve got another one, porous rocks v plastic bioballs

Crustaceon · Apr 6, 2023

BeanAnimal said:
More surface area = more room for bacteria.
Deeper pores = more area for benthic and possibly anaerobi fauna/flora

How much surface area is needed or where is the point of diminished return for a given bio-load? No clue.

I think logically for a given bio-load one could get away by volume with less of the porous rock than the dense rock.

I don't think any of that is as critical as people believe and I wouldn't be surprised if the bacteria coating the panels/sump and equipment is at least close to sufficient in most systems. Consider how anaerobic bacteria still has to have some degree of flow to it, otherwise how would that bacteria be able to access the nutrients it needs to process them and how would that processed water exit that space? So that effective space can't be too deep into even a porous rock's surface. I see it as "square footage" of porous surface being more important than the old mindset of "pounds of rock per gallon". It's like my testing with the deep sand bed I just removed from my nem tank. That was a 6" dsb. Did it help denitrify any better than the 1/2" of crushed coral I run now? Nope. Not in my testing anyways and it's probably because so little water transfers back and forth through those deeper grains of sand in the dsb to make a difference.

doubleshot00 · Apr 6, 2023

Qt then lighting.

X-37B · Apr 6, 2023

jabberwock said:
No brainer in my opinion. I have done both. I will never do anything but ocean live rock again, if I am able.

Long time live rock guy here. I now support 50/50 live/dead.
Put the dead on the bottom and live on the top.
I started doing it this way in my 120 and it works well. Within 6 months you wont be able to tell live from dead.

BeanAnimal · Apr 6, 2023

Garf said:
I’ve got another one, porous rocks v plastic bioballs

I think that comes down to the type of fauna/flora inhabit the various surface areas. I think both have a place, but are not analogous.

BeanAnimal · Apr 6, 2023

Crustaceon said:
I don't think any of that is as critical as people believe and I wouldn't be surprised if the bacteria coating the panels/sump and equipment is at least close to sufficient in most systems. Consider how anaerobic bacteria still has to have some degree of flow to it, otherwise how would that bacteria be able to access the nutrients it needs to process them and how would that processed water exit that space? So that effective space can't be too deep into even a porous rock's surface. I see it as "square footage" of porous surface being more important than the old mindset of "pounds of rock per gallon". It's like my testing with the deep sand bed I just removed from my nem tank. That was a 6" dsb. Did it help denitrify any better than the 1/2" of crushed coral I run now? Nope. Not in my testing anyways and it's probably because so little water transfers back and forth through those deeper grains of sand in the dsb to make a difference.

I don't disagree at all. As for the benthic or anaerobic processing (same with a DSB) and I am not sure that "flow" in terms of water flow is what would be the driver. I think osmotic flow, as well as bacterial boundaries and migration would come into play (thus why those zone exist in the first place).

How important? I can't answer that.