Why is detritus bad?

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I don’t have any fishes or friends that do this kind of thing, don’t judge me for disassociating myself from them.

I guess folks have discussed what it is and why they think it should be dealt with, but I think it is good practice to mimic a storm surge and flush it out of the system like the ocean that pushes out into the abyss where the sun doesn’t shine.

I have seen coral that RTN’d from stirring up a tank and not removing the mulm from the situation.

I think it should be dealt with (removed) now and again. My problem is that I am too lazy to do anything about it lately. I am concerned that it will cause a problem when I do stir it up.

Huh? Why'd you quote me?

 

[KrisReef]

Huh? Why'd you quote me?

I was going to comment on your funny post, but I forgot. Sorry for this confusion. I feel bad like I ate mulm now. Please forgive.

 

[ZzyzxRiver]

So, now I’m worried I’m handling detritus wrong in my nano: I use a turkey baster and just go nuts on the rock. The water turns super cloudy, some gets exported in the water change, some of it ends up in the filter, and the rest settles back on the surface of the rock instead of in the cracks.

Am I doing it right?

 

[MnFish1]

Re-thinking my position - Yes - Detritus should be removed. It's a closed environment - the ocean washes detritus away. Now - I'm not saying the tank has to be totally cleaned every day - but - yes - I am not sure there is benefit to the AVERAGE aquarist to have a bunch of detritus - and I will ask my expert @Lasse

 

[MnFish1]

I was going to comment on your funny post, but I forgot. Sorry for this confusion. I feel bad like I ate mulm now. Please forgive.

You always feel bad for commenting late lol:

 

[MnFish1]

So, now I’m worried I’m handling detritus wrong in my nano: I use a turkey baster and just go nuts on the rock. The water turns super cloudy, some gets exported in the water change, some of it ends up in the filter, and the rest settles back on the surface of the rock instead of in the cracks.

Am I doing it right?

if you're tank is fine, you're doing it right for that tank

 

[Lasse]

I am not sure there is benefit to the AVERAGE aquarist to have a bunch of detritus - and I will ask my expert @Lasse

And I never ever taking away any detritus at all. Its a part of my system.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Its important to mention that detritus can be both of organic and inorganic nature. The inorganic detritus is of no concern (often its the end product of the bacterial breakdown) and the organic part is the food resource for both many fishes, invertebrates, fungus, bacteria and other organism active in the decomposing process.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Nate Chalk]

Soooo we have a definition and some possible reasons for both to be ok and not ok.


Perhaps we need a vocabulary change?

 

[SantaMonica]

I think the basic reason for the "bad" moniker is the resulting nutrients, not the detritus itself. Over long enough time it all turns into silt, like the bottom of the sea.

 

[brandon429]

It's rare to have detritus caused crashes. Using turkey basters is OK, but that stirs around waste compared to the full removal benefits shown in rip clean threads

 

[vetteguy53081]

Detritus part of the ecosystem in a tank and even stream and rarely causes issues even when stirred. If there is excess build up in a corner or under rock areas, siphon to reduce content.

 

[BeanAnimal]

It's rare to have detritus caused crashes. Using turkey basters is OK, but that stirs around waste compared to the full removal benefits shown in rip clean threads

I have to ask, two pages ago you attempted to weave the web that detritus causes tank crashes and livestock deaths. I kind of called you out. But now suddenly they don't for the sake of broaching the subject of rip-cleans.

Help me understand the self-contradiction, it is befuddling. I don't disagree with the point, but rather the lack of consistency in your position.

Forgive me, but I literally get the impression that you pace the room contemplating just how to broach one of your three favorite subjects in every thread and will resort to saying just about anything in an attempt to weave them in.

I don't know how else to say it. I think there was a day where your contributions were honest attempts at logical and thoughtful conversation, but now every contribution feels like a contrived means to get traction on "rip cleans" and "new cycling science" more than anything else.

 

[radiata]

FWIW,
Ugly is in the eye of the beholder...

 

[BeanAnimal]

FWIW,
Ugly is in the eye of the beholder...

If nobody told you aiptasia were pests…

 

[Nate Chalk]

So we don't remove detritus. Because it's part of the eco system.

Need new vocabulary used. For inorganic vs organic.

Each having their own set of rules.

Ahhh ha

 

[BeanAnimal]

In general most people use detritus or nutrients for the former and mulm for the latter.

 

[Nate Chalk]

In general most people use detritus or nutrients for the former and mulm for the latter.

Big yikes. Is it coke, pop, soda or soda pop.

 

[Nate Chalk]

And I also disagree with rip clean.

And moreso with lasse.

 

[radiata]

If nobody told you aiptasia were pests…

Indeed, they are! I'm currently waiting for my elbow length gloves to arrive before I begin total eradication. I've got my liter of Sodium Hydroxide Solution, 2.0M, just standing by.

I don't intentionally remove detritus from my DSB. I have a Sand Dollar that does that. It pre-dates my record keeping. It traverses my sand bed daily - it is visible as a flat hump on the sand bed. I additionally added a "Sea Biscuit" this past January. It dug right into the sand bed when I added it to the tank, and I haven't seen it since. But, but based on previous experience, I will only see that it is alive and well when its wanderings bring it into contact with the front pane of glass of my aquarium. The benefit of having both critters is that my DBS now gets churned at two different levels.