BASEROCK: Dead rock v.s. Live Rock?

[majesticangelfish]

Reef Aquarists,
After some research which ignited my "raising the questions" concerning the BASE-ROCK on the bottom of the tank before structure up the LR over it.
I have visited few of lfs and I have seen that they using LR as the baserock. I do not recall by seeing any of lfs that use dead rocks as baserock. However why are they bother to recommend to customers to use dead rock as a BASEROCK!? (To generate money by knowing that dummies will screw up the LR caused by any possibilities of side-effect from dead rock?)
I am asking you whether YOU use LR or DR as a BASEROCK of your reef structures in your tank.
Thanks
P.S. As I recalled by seeing from {EDIT LINK} about using the " Arch-type" as a base rock and said that they are an excellent for cave building in the reef system to house the fish. Anyone care to show photo what arch rock is like? Are they part of Limestone? Thanks again.....

 

[cmdr]

From what I have read and through my experience, base rock becomes live rock over a period of time. I have one large base rock that is sort of hollow that my clownfish has called his home. It has coralin algae and purple grass of some sort and all kinds of tiny little redheaded feather dusters. It is fun to watch it evolve.

 

[y2says]

You can use tufa or lace rocks as your base rocks to save some money. However, I found a place that sells uncured liverocks for 1.99/lb. Email me and I give you the number.
saysl@yahoo.com

 

[templar]

I use lace rock as base rock and its fine and has grown all the stuff that my live rock has as well. Hence it is now "live rock".

 

[nm reef]

When I first bought rock for my reef I got approximately 20 lbs of base and 20-30 lbs of cured LR......the same reef now has 100+lbs of fully cured LR....I'd challenge anybody to try to figure which was the origional 20 lbs of base...its all coraline covered and all looks the same....heck....I bought it and there is no way I can tell.....personally I think that any type of "base" rock will provide a solid foundation and with quality LR will become LR over time

 

[broomer5]

Live rock is live rock - we all know what it is, and how great it is. We are on a mission to get our hands on the very best we can.
Base rock is and always will be base rock. It may have bacteria growing on it, and may eventually have coralline algae completley covering it, or other plant life - but it is still base rock.
It will add to the appearance of having a tank full of live rock, it is less expensive to buy and therefore many of us choose to use it as a base. But base rock does not offer the exact same benefits as true live rock does.
If I had my choice and and unlimited budget - I would have 100% premo live rock thoughout all my tanks. But ..... I have to use some base to keep costs down.
LFS - they get it cheap so they use it 100%.

 

[templar]

Broomer I just have to disagree with saying that base rock that has turned into live rock isn't "true" live rock. Because basing it on that, your saying that aqua-cultured live rock isn't "true" live rock? ALL live rock, at one time was base rock.

 

[broomer5]

Templar
You're entitled to disagree with what I said.
I'm just stating my opinion.
I suppose it depends on one's definition as to what live rock actually is.
My personal definition is that live rock is not really "rock" as a geologist would describe it. It's not sedimentary, igneous or metamorphic. Live rock in the true sense was once a living coral, and is the backbone to a natural reef. Very porous in nature, and is made up almost entirely of calcium carbonate, cemented together with years of coralline algae growth and encrusted with all types of organisms.
Other forms of rock that hobbyist use, including limestone, tufu, lace rock, man made rock from concrete or other aggregates, were never a living thing. They are rocks, that are mined or gathered from many sources.
I don't consider aquacultured rock as "true" live rock. You can call it anything you want to, but its internal structure is far from natural dead coral live rock. Break a piece of "true" live rock in half and look at the inner structure.
Now break a piece of aquacultured rock or limestone in half - if you can - and check it out. It will not look the same - and is no way as porous. It's a ROCK !
I have base rock in my tanks now. It works fine for adding stability and I use it for my first layer in stacking, only cause of the unreal expense of really nice "true" live rock.
I agree with you that over time, it is sometimes hard to "visually" tell the difference, and the base rock will indeed look very nice in our tanks. Coralline growth, bacteria on it's surface and to some degree within any pores is still beneficial as well.
But I have to disagree with your last statement that "ALL live rock, at one time was base rock."

 

[cyn]

I was under the impression that if you placed the live rock on the bottom of the tank and then added sand that you would kill all of the stuff living on the burried rock. This was why I used 'dead' rock for the base of my reef. Please correct me if I was/am wrong.
Confused,
cyn

 

[coraltrapper5020]

in my 29 I have once live rock, in the sand then my live rock on it.

 

[mrfish]

I saw a video about reef tanks and one guy used house bricks as the base rock, and then covered them with live rock. The tank was brill so i guess it don't matter much, if you look after the tank properly.

 

[jamie1010]

most fresh &sea water contain calcium carbonate all limestones are formed when the calcium carbonate crystallizes out of solution. it leaves the solution in many ways, and each produces a different kind of limestone. the first group includes limestones that form almost completely without the aid of organisms. it is formed when water evaporates. such as in hot lagoons and coral reefs.this white lime mud is deposited on the bottom of the sea. it slowly hardens in even layers.chalk is an example of this. when spring water evaporates on land, calcium carbonate forms a crust over moss, dead leaves, and the ground it buils up a mound this is called "tufa" evaporation of water in caverns forms another variety called travertine,often used for tile.the second group of limestones forms by orgfanisms that draw calcium carbonate out of the water and use it to make shells and bones,the animals die the shells are broken up by the waves into sand and mud. most of all limestone layers in all parts of the earth were once coral sand and mud. A limestone called "coquina" formed of shells and coral occurs in florida. it is used to make roads and buildings.so "base" rock and "live" rock are chemically the same. Broomer5 please tell me how you tell the difference.im guessing the "live"rock you like is more porous. but both kinds of limestone can be porous or dense.to me it sounds like any kind of limestone would work but the lighter the better,because it would have more surface area for bateria to form,and it all would be alive after the flora and fauna would attach themselves to it.

 

[jamie1010]

im guessing "arch" rock is archetecturing rock like they would use to side buildings and houses. it is usually slab shaped and very stable for building because of it.just a guess though

 

[broomer5]

jamie1010
Since you asked me a direct question, I feel obligated to reply to you.
I read and understand your post regarding the various types of limestone, how they are formed and what they are traditionally used for.
I do not disagree that the "chemical" composition of each type you presented may indeed be quite similar. I do however feel that a good quality Figi live rock, harvested as natural reef rubble, is by far a better type of rock to use in our saltwater reef tanks or FOWLR systems, as opposed to the types of limestone you have mentioned.
From a chemical composition, they may all be the same. But from a visual structural stand point, Figi live rock appears more porous, has a more intricate internal structure, and would seem to me to have a greater surface area than a hunk of sedimentary limestone.
1) White lime mud, which is sedimentary - that is mined from beneath ancient seabeds - or chalk as you pointed out - although may be used as base rock - is not live rock. I can tell the difference by looking at it.
2) Tufa - Is used quite often as a base rock as well. It is called Tufa - it looks like Tufa - it smells like Tufa - It is sold as Tufa. It is not live rock either.
3) Travertine - I'm not familiar with this type of rock - but I see where you mention it is used as tile ??? I'd guess that if I held a chuck of this stuff in one hand, and a chunk of Figi in my other hand - I would not have any trouble telling them apart.
4) Coquina - I've seen it. It's an aggragate of sand and shells, which are clearly visible as you look at it. As you stated, it IS used extensively in Florida as paving material for roads, sidewalks and such. I'd have to say it would be easy to tell what it is when comparing a sample to Figi live rock too.
Have you ever split a chuck of really nice Figi live rock in half and actually looked at the internal structure. It amazes me. Whether you crack open some Figi, Marshall Island or other premium "live rock", in doing so ... you'll see what I am desperatly trying to explain. It IS very porous, with channels leading deep into it's structure. That's why most feel it is such a wonderful rock for bacteria to populate.
Crack open a chunk of chalk sometime. Or break off a piece of tile. Look at it, and I hope you'll see what I am talking about.
I did not intentionally mean to draw out a long debate over the use of any of these rocks as a base rock in our tanks. I will repeat - I use base rock in my own tanks for my own persoanl reasons.
I only wanted to point out in my original posts that it's a matter of definition.
Live rock by definition is not base rock.
Base rock by definition is not live rock.
They are by nature different things, and when discussing them should be addressed as such.
Base rock be it
Limestone
Tufa
Sandstone
Is and always will be base rock.
Aquacultured rock by definition will always be aquacultured rock.
Live rock by definition will always be live rock.
It's only a matter of semantics.
If someone want to put 90 lbs of base rock in their tank, and seed it with 10 lbs of Figi, and the base rock becomes completely encrusted with nice coralline, obviously has bacteria growing on or in it, and any other biological growth that may appear on it .... then turn around a year later and say they have 100 lbs of live rock now - that's their decision.
Personally I prefer to call a spade a spade.

 

[aztec reef]

i agree with broomer, you cannot compare base rock with live lr. the only way i would consider base rock will be if i had 100g+ tank and maybe not even. cause for base i would use live rubble under sand and not much maybe a single layer cause there will be about 4" of sand. i would't use base rock in my tank just because i dont think they serve the same benefits. to me base rock is any type of dead rock it just takes up room and yeah it grows calupera and bacteria, same thing my powerheads do. i did do all lr in my tank with no base under sand since i have 4"sandbed i would'nt want baserock under sandbed or my tank will look like a sand tank. since i got a 29g. i have 100%lr you cant tell me that 20%lr & 80% baserock has the same benefits.
why do some people use a bigger % of lr than baserock? they say its to save but would't they save more if they did it the other way around. if your concerned is to save money then why dont do like 50% lr / 50% baserock since they say it will become live(imo not as fast as lr) plus the only thing it will grow is algea and some bacteria. just like my powerheads.
if saving is your priority why not use most of base rock and few lr lbs to seed?
i dont see any point in base rock. other then to take up room when you can't afford tons of live rock. like 250lbs+