Best sand for dsb in reef?

[robdog696]

Setting up my new 150g in a few days. I have only done barebottom tanks thus far. My lfs also does barebottom, so he's not a good resource for info on this. He recommends cc. I don't like the look of cc. I have decided to go sand only because it looks better. But there are so many different types of sand that my head is spinning. Any help would be appreciated. What I'm looking for is something I can make a 2-4" sandbed. I want some Super Tongan Nassarius Snails, which burrow in the sand. If I understand correctly, special grade reef sand would be the best thing if I'm going to do a 2" sandbed. I like the look of the fiji pink sand, though. Would it be the best sand for a dsb (4-4.5")? I'm really scared of adding a sandbed. I'm afraid it is going to crash my tank. What is the safest way to do a sandbed? Thanks in advance!

 

[geoj]

If you want to be safe go with a fine sand 2-3 inches deep and some live rock. Using the shallow sand bed method.
I keep hearing DSB crashed!

 

[robdog696]

Well, I'll be moving my rock from my 58 over. I have over 100 lb in the 58. Prolly about 150. I'm prolly gonna add another 50-100 lb in the 150, as well. In fact, one of the reasons I don't want to do a dsb is because I have so much rock. I don't want to put egg crate under it, I don't want it half buried in sand, and I don't want it toppled by a goby or jawfish. I thought "special" reef grade sand was best for a shallow sandbed? I just don't understand the difference between the sizes of sand. I plan to have a flame wrasse pair, a threadfin dartfish, and Super Tongan Nassarius Snails. These will be the only critters I have that bury in the sand. Is the reason you recommend fine sand because I mentioned the snails?

 

[bang guy]

In my experience a mix of grain sizes with most of the sand being very fine works best.

 

[robdog696]

At what depth, Bang? @ 2"???? If I'm going to do it this way, can I be a cheapskate and buy home depot play sand. I remember seeing somewhere on this board a long thread about playsand. Someone had some pink playsand that I thought looked awesome. I'll have to do some searching for that thread.

 

[curve]

I have red sand in my tank but it is not playsand.

 

[geoj]

The snails is a small part of it the fact that a fine sand at 2-3 inches has been the main stay for successful tanks for many years is why I use it myself. It may not turn nitrate over as well as a DSB but this is what I task LR for, this goes with reefs well.

 

[bang guy]

Originally Posted by Robdog696
http:///forum/post/2601453
At what depth, Bang? @ 2"???? If I'm going to do it this way, can I be a cheapskate and buy home depot play sand. I remember seeing somewhere on this board a long thread about playsand. Someone had some pink playsand that I thought looked awesome. I'll have to do some searching for that thread.

IMO a sandbed should be 1/2" (Shallow) or more than 3" (Deep). If you're going to have deep then you need to make sure it has a good variety of works, crustaceans and other sand bed animals to keep the bed healthy.
Playsand that is pure Calcium carbonate or pure Silica is good stuff if you can get ahold of it. Most playsand is not pure and is not acceptable for a sandbed.

 

[beth]

The thing to remember about the deep sand bed, is that its not just "sand". DSB is actually a ecological filtration system that must be set up right and maintained right. Particle sizes of the sand, as Guy said, is key, and getting the correct mix of sand dwelling detritovores, and maintaining the populations of those detritovores is totally essential.

 

[1journeyman]

To add to both Beth and Bang.
*Depth is critical. Just as Bang said. 2-3 inches is a dangerous range. Go shallow or deep.
*As Beth said, understand a deep sand bed is not just a load of sand. I prefer a base of aragonite (calcium based) sand with a healthy dose of live sand (true live sand. Not the packaged stuff in stores, but fresh live sand. The live sand sold here is exceptional and a great way to seed your sand bed.)
*Brisk current in your tank. Make sure you have plenty of current blowing across your sand bed. If detritus, fish food, etc. is landing on your sand bed and not rolling across it you need more current.
*Good protein skimming
*NO SAND SIFTERS. These fish and inverts eat the beneficial pods, worms, micro stars, etc. and sterilize your sand bed.

 

[robdog696]

Ok, so since I'm scared to death of a deep sand bed, I should go with a 1/2" sandbed? I read that wrasse prefer a 2" sandbed. What are the negatives to doing a sandbed this deep without a large cleanup crew? Would I just be creating a waste storage facility? LOL! Thanks!

 

[geoj]

You will need to siphon it this is why I say to use the correct method.

 

[flricordia]

double post goof

 

[flricordia]

There was a study done at the Waikiki Aquarium in the Marine Fish and Reef 2007 annual issue titled 'Plenums: Path Toward Thriving Tanks'. It was a year+ study done on I believe DSB, SSB, PSB and BB and the effects of each on phosphates, nitrates and other parameters. I recall pros and cons of each system. DSB presented the problem of stagnate areas that would produce dead zones that produced methane. I would have to reread the article to recant exactly the results of each. I do believe that the plenum SB had the most favorable results after 6 months in operation.

 

[robdog696]

Thank you so much. I will google plenum sandbed and see what I can find. I run barebottom right now, so I'm looking for the most favorable alternative. I have even considered adding just a tiny layer of special grade reef sand not even a half inch deep so it is easily vacuumed but you cannot see the glass. I love having a barebottom tank. The only two negatives are people expect sand and eventually you get a very thin layer of sand from lr debri that just looks silly. Thanks again for all the replies. BTW still want some of your rics, flricordia. But looks like it's gonna be a while till I get this new setup ready for corals... if you have anything for sale by then.

 

[robdog696]

Wow, here is what I found. Very interesting. Thought a lot of others might be interested as well. First, here is the link. http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2005/6/aafeature This is a study of the effects of 24 different sandbeds in 24 identical aquaria. For those that don't care to sort through a long boring article, I have copied and pasted the bulk of the conclusion. My own take on it is that a 2.5 cm (1") sandbad made of fine sand had the best results. Here is the exact wording:
However, similar to the results seen with ammonia and nitrite processing, there was no significant differences in the ability of any of the experimental treatments (plenum vs. DSB, deep vs. shallow, or coarse vs. fine sediments) to reduce nitrate in these closed systems.
The significant differences among the experimental treatments were almost entirely in the buffering capacity of the sediments rather than the biological breakdown of nitrogenous waste products. The largest differences among the treatments were seen in the final concentration of phosphate: coarse sediment treatments had roughly 17 times the final concentration of aquaria in fine particle treatments!

 

[florida joe]

I would certainly not want to go against anything the experts on the boards say on the mater of sand size in a DSB. That being said I have some information on that subject since it also is of concern to me in my ongoing refugium project.
According to Shimek (1998) who is one of the most vocal proponents of the DSB method of substrate, the sand should be very fine. This contradicts with other methods that use coarse gravel (for example the Jaubers method). DSB proponents describe the sand grain size of choice have adopted the term sugar fine. While the functioning of the sand bed, as a biological filter is not affected whether the sands silicate based or calcium carbonate based, the majority of DSB proponents use aragonite sugar fine oolitic sand from the Bahamas. According to Shimek, the size choice matters because sediment particle size determines the acceptability of the sediment to the organisms living in it. he suggests a grain size range averaging about 0.125mm, and adds that with an average size finer than this sediment can pack to tightly together. I fond no reference to the superior effect of mixing different size sand. I would suggest you do a little more research on the mater of sand size yourself before you make a decision and IMO a DSB should be at least 5 inches deep in a tank your size

 

[robdog696]

Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/2604018
I would certainly not want to go against anything the experts on the boards say on the mater of sand size in a DSB. That being said I have some information on that subject since it also is of concern to me in my ongoing refugium project.
According to Shimek (1998) who is one of the most vocal proponents of the DSB method of substrate, the sand should be very fine. This contradicts with other methods that use coarse gravel (for example the Jaubers method). DSB proponents to describe the sand grain size of choice had adopted the term sugar fine. While the functioning of the sand bed, as a biological filter is not affected whether the sands silicate based or calcium carbonate based, the majority of DSB proponents use aragonite sugar fine oolitic sand from the Bahamas. According to Shimek, the size choice matters because sediment particle size determines the acceptability of the sediment to the organisms living in it. he suggests a grain size range averaging about 0.125mm, and adds that with an average size finer than this sediment can pack to tightly together. I fond no reference to the superior effect of mixing different size sand. I would suggest you do a little more research on the mater of sand size your self before y you make a decision and IMO a DSB should be at least 5 inches deep in a tank your size
I don't think you understood my post correctly. I think we are both saying the same thing. This test showed that the depth (2.5 cm vs 9.0 cm) or type (plenum vs. dsb) had no measurable effect on the nitrate processing ability of the sb. In fact, the only thing that was affected was the buffering capacity, and even then only with regards to phosphates. The fine sand (.2mm) had the best results with concern to this one measurable difference. because I don't want anymore sand than necessary, I will go with the lowest sandbed used in this experiment. That was 1", though (according to this article) depth of the sb is completely irrelevant. Like you said, grain size is all that matters.

 

[florida joe]

Originally Posted by Robdog696
http:///forum/post/2604031
I don't think you understood my post correctly. I think we are both saying the same thing. This test showed that the depth (2.5 cm vs 9.0 cm) or type (plenum vs. dsb) had no measurable effect on the nitrate processing ability of the sb. In fact, the only thing that was affected was the buffering capacity, and even then only with regards to phosphates. The fine sand (.2mm) had the best results with concern to this one measurable difference. because I don't want anymore sand than necessary, I will go with the lowest sandbed used in this experiment. That was 1", though (according to this article) depth of the sb is completely irrelevant. Like you said, grain size is all that matters.
The only reservation I have with a sand bed of only 1 inch is the limited area for denitrification to take place. With such a shallow depth I would think any movement with in the sand or on it would oxygenate it thus making denitrification imposable

 

[geoj]

I was wrong once, You see I had thought I was wrong. Turns out I was not. I love it when a plan comes together.