Your Thoughts on Reestablishing LR?

[scopus tang]

Hey Folks, have a question and looking for some input. I've always been an advocate for using man-made rock and/or reusing old rock. Back in the old days when I first got started, we always used to take the rocks and corals out, bleach them and then reestablish them in the tank (boy have we come a long ways since then). Obviously the bleaching killed everything on the rocks. Well recently I talked to a salesperson for one of the online sights, and they said dry rock will never establish the internal bacteria colonies nor come as alive as "real" LR. Kind of figured that that was just a sales hype. Then recently I ran across some similar opinions in another thread. Kind of curious as to other peoples thoughts/opinions. Can you take old LR, that has been dried out, place it in a tank, and will it recolonize and become just as good a biological filter and "real" LR?

 

[spanko]

My answer would be yes. The bacteria are going to colonize in the areas they normally do. Aerobic and anaerobic. That for the biological filtration purposes. The rock will probably not have the diversity in life forms and fauna that rock from the ocean has though. Seens it would take quite some time to me to have that type of "life" on the rock.

 

[florida joe]

Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/2932752
My answer would be yes. The bacteria are going to colonize in the areas they normally do. Aerobic and anaerobic. That for the biological filtration purposes. The rock will probably not have the diversity in life forms and fauna that rock from the ocean has though. Seens it would take quite some time to me to have that type of "life" on the rock.
+1 Bacteria yes, little live surprises we get from fresh harvested live rock no

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/2932939
+1 Bacteria yes, little live surprises we get from fresh harvested live rock no
I understand that of course the "dead" rock will not simply generate the little live "surprises" (some good; like feather dusters and macroalgaes and some bad; like aiptasia and nusiance algae), but will it propogate from other live rock and move onto the "dead" rock?

 

[keith burn]

I got 300lbs of dry l/r from my lfs.
It was in a 55gal can for 2y.
Added to my sump and about one year it looked good.
Moved to my d/t and it is going to be hard to tell what is what
It looks like the time may be like 2years or so.

 

[florida joe]

Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/2932950
I understand that of course the "dead" rock will not simply generate the little live "surprises" (some good; like feather dusters and macroalgaes and some bad; like aiptasia and nusiance algae), but will it propogate from other live rock and move onto the "dead" rock?
I guess you would have to look at it in terms of would it want to. Would it need to or is it forced to if that makes any sense

 

[florida joe]

Randy I had a thought. Proximity may be a factor. When your attempting to reseed your dead rock It may be a good idea to place the dead rock in a 5 gallon bucket with a nice active piece of live rock. Maintain temp and water movement and brush the live rock daily enticing cross colonization and perhaps relocation for critters

 

[locoyo386]

Hi,
This is what I have read in multiple sites. Not sure as to how knowledgeable are the people writing on this subject. Nor do I know if they are reliable resources aswell.
I have read that as far as what is consider true "live rock" NO. This is only possible by removing the live rock directly from the sea. The rock will have a vast variety of life forms bacterial to micro and macro organisms. Some of these live organism will eventually die in the home aquarium, thus becoming a different type of "live rock". This is more of what the majority of the hobbiest think of as "live rock". This rock will still host nitrifying bacteria, but most likely will not host denitrifying bacteria. Will have some varieties of live organism (micro and macro), but no where neer as the rock coming directly from the ocean.
Also I have read that cultivating "live rock", is no different than what the "base rock" will become in a typical home aquarium. Meaning that when a "base rock" is placed iside the aquarium, it will not be more alive by putting it near a "live rock" (directly from the sea) than it would be all on its own. Basically what I understood was that the most we can get from the rock we consider "live rock" is nitrifying bacteria and the typical critters that are common in the home aquarium but NOT the whole spectrum of life that a "live rock" from the ocean hosts. Does this make a difference in the home aquarium? I am uncertain of this.
Once again this is just what I have read as so far. Currently I am running two tanks with the two types of rock. The one they sell as "live rock" and the one that is considered "dead rock (base rock)". It is too soon to draw conclusions, but no major differences as of now. Both tanks have very similar water quality, neither one being better than the other. The only noticeable difference has been that the "base rock" took longer in establishing the nitrifying bacteria. As any other benefit, I have not seen significant differences yet (nitrates are the same). Take into account that the tanks have not been running for a long enought time to draw conclusions.

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/2933221
Hi,
This is what I have read in multiple sites. Not sure as to how knowledgeable are the people writing on this subject. Nor do I know if they are reliable resources aswell.
I have read that as far as what is consider true "live rock" NO. This is only possible by removing the live rock directly from the sea. The rock will have a vast variety of life from obacterial to micro and macro. Some of this live organism will eventually die in the home aquarium, thus becoming a different type of "live rock". This is more of what the majority of the hobbiest think of as "live rock". This rock will still host nitrifying bacteria, but most likely will not host denitrifying bacteria. Will have some varieties of live organism (micro and macro), but no where neer as the rock coming directly from the ocean.
Also I have read that cultivating "live rock", is no different than what the "base rock" will become in a typical home aquarium. Meaning that when a "base rock" is placed iside the aquarium, it will not be more alive by putting it near a "live rock" (directly from the sea) than it would be all on its own. Basically what I understood was that the most we can get from the rock we consider "live rock" is nitrifying bacteria and the typical brittle worms and other critters that are common and the the whole spectrum of life that a "live rock" from the ocean hosts.
Once again this is just what I have read as so far. Currently I am running two tanks with the two types of rock. The one they sell as "live rock" and the one that is considered "dead rock (base rock)". It is too son to draw conclusions, but they do not seem to be any difference as of now. They both a very similar water quality, neither one being better than the other. The only noticable difference has been that the "base rock" took longer in establishing the nitrifying bacteria. As any other benifit, I have not seen significant differences yet. Take into note that the tanks have not been running for a long enought time to draw conclusions.
Interesting points of reference locoyo386. I look forward to following your experiment - do you have a thread going on it somewhere? If so, I would love to tag it and follow along.
I personally would tend to disagree on the definition of LR, as I think most people in the hobby would define LR as what we have in our tanks, rather than what occurs in the ocean (although technically they are both LR - or if you prefer to get really technical like Joe, you will argue that the rock itself is actually not alive). Certainly I wouldn't argue the point that there are some things on oceanic LR that will not survive in our aquariums. I still tend to think that dead LR should recolonize with those things that are typically in a home aquarium such as denitrifying bacteria. After all, if it will establish in the bottom of a DSB, why wouldn't it be able to establish itself back into the rock? I do know from experience that man-made LR will grow all kinds of critters and I assume bacteria as well, since I rely mainly on a DSB for denitrification I can't say for sure that the bacteria are established in my rock; Here's what mine looked like when I set it up
"http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii7/rowlandr/Reef%20Diary/Corals/January%202008/RSFirstCoralsJan1708.jpg" border="0" alt="" />

and here's what it looks like now. Not quite one year yet.

Its covered with feather dusters and coralline algae and I assume with bacteria. Of course those things had to be introduced, which I did with small pieces of LR taken from my other established tank or purchased with corals on them.

 

[spanko]

I think that the cross "pollination" from live to dead rock will occur. Worms, stars, algae will move to the base over time. The catch here as loco pointed out is that what was on the rock as it came out of the ocean may not survive in the environment that is our aquarium. I have to believe that light penetration, chemical balance, wave factors, pressure differences etc. etc. are going to have some impact on the life that has evolved in the difference that is the ocean compared to our tanks. But what does survive will migrate.Of this I have no doubt. Growth rate of those that do migrate is again a variable that may be at the mercy of the difference between our tank and the ocean.
Loco one point to you, as long as there are anaerobic areas the denitrifying bacteria will colonize, and there are those areas in rock. Just because we see nitrates in our tanks does not mean we do not have denitrifying bacteria, only that we do not have enough to deal with out bioload. Many ways have been experimented with to try to create areas large enough to colonize enough to handle all of the nitrate produced. DSBs Plenums etc. It is still all about balance. What is the tank producing as opposed to what can the bacteria handle.

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/2933221
Hi,
This is what I have read in multiple sites. Not sure as to how knowledgeable are the people writing on this subject. Nor do I know if they are reliable resources aswell.
I have read that as far as what is consider true "live rock" NO. This is only possible by removing the live rock directly from the sea. The rock will have a vast variety of life from obacterial to micro and macro. Some of this live organism will eventually die in the home aquarium, thus becoming a different type of "live rock". This is more of what the majority of the hobbiest think of as "live rock". This rock will still host nitrifying bacteria, but most likely will not host denitrifying bacteria. Will have some varieties of live organism (micro and macro), but no where neer as the rock coming directly from the ocean.
Also I have read that cultivating "live rock", is no different than what the "base rock" will become in a typical home aquarium. Meaning that when a "base rock" is placed iside the aquarium, it will not be more alive by putting it near a "live rock" (directly from the sea) than it would be all on its own. Basically what I understood was that the most we can get from the rock we consider "live rock" is nitrifying bacteria and the typical brittle worms and other critters that are common and the the whole spectrum of life that a "live rock" from the ocean hosts.
Once again this is just what I have read as so far. Currently I am running two tanks with the two types of rock. The one they sell as "live rock" and the one that is considered "dead rock (base rock)". It is too son to draw conclusions, but they do not seem to be any difference as of now. They both a very similar water quality, neither one being better than the other. The only noticable difference has been that the "base rock" took longer in establishing the nitrifying bacteria. As any other benifit, I have not seen significant differences yet. Take into note that the tanks have not been running for a long enought time to draw conclusions.
Interesting points of reference locoyo386. I look forward to following your experiment - do you have a thread going on it somewhere? If so, I would love to tag it and follow along.
I personally would tend to disagree on the definition of LR, as I think most people in the hobby would define LR as what we have in our tanks, rather than what occurs in the ocean (although technically they are both LR - or if you prefer to get really technical like Joe, you will argue that the rock itself is actually not alive). Certainly I wouldn't argue the point that there are some things on oceanic LR that will not survive in our aquariums. I still tend to think that dead LR should recolonize with those things that are typically in a home aquarium such as denitrifying bacteria. After all, if it will establish in the bottom of a DSB, why wouldn't it be able to establish itself back into the rock? I do know from experience that man-made LR will grow all kinds of critters and I assume bacteria as well, since I rely mainly on a DSB for denitrification I can't say for sure that the bacteria are established in my rock; Here's what mine looked like when I set it up
"http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii7/rowlandr/Reef%20Diary/Corals/January%202008/RSFirstCoralsJan1708.jpg" border="0" alt="" />

and here's what it looks like now. Not quite one year yet.

Its covered with feather dusters and coralline algae and I assume with bacteria. Of course those things had to be introduced, which I did with small pieces of LR taken from my other established tank or purchased with corals on them.
Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/2932985
I guess you would have to look at it in terms of would it want to. Would it need to or is it forced to if that makes any sense
Actually Joe, it does indeed.
Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/2933082
Randy I had a thought. Proximity may be a factor. When your attempting to reseed your dead rock It may be a good idea to place the dead rock in a 5 gallon bucket with a nice active piece of live rock. Maintain temp and water movement and brush the live rock daily enticing cross colonization and perhaps relocation for critters
I would tend to agree Joe that prosimity will no doubt be a factor, and I have read of those who brush or scrape their rock to encourage cross colonization, especially of coralline algae. Its not something that I've ever done myself.

 

[spanko]

I think that the cross "pollination" from live to dead rock will occur. Worms, stars, algae will move to the base over time. The catch here as loco pointed out is that what was on the rock as it came out of the ocean may not survive in the environment that is our aquarium. I have to believe that light penetration, chemical balance, wave factors, pressure differences etc. etc. are going to have some impact on the life that has evolved in the difference that is the ocean compared to our tanks. But what does survive will migrate.Of this I have no doubt. Growth rate of those that do migrate is again a variable that may be at the mercy of the difference between our tank and the ocean.
Loco one point to you, as long as there are anaerobic areas the denitrifying bacteria will colonize, and there are those areas in rock. Just because we see nitrates in our tanks does not mean we do not have denitrifying bacteria, only that we do not have enough to deal with out bioload. Many ways have been experimented with to try to create areas large enough to colonize enough to handle all of the nitrate produced. DSBs Plenums etc. It is still all about balance. What is the tank producing as opposed to what can the bacteria handle.

 

[locoyo386]

Hi there,
Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/2933244
I think that the cross "pollination" from live to dead rock will occur (I would agree with this if a time line can be established for the growth of the migrating organisms. This is one of the man things I hope to establish with the experiment. If the "live rock" allows for faster growth than the "base rock", than I might be closer to drawing the conclusion that they might migrate to the "base rock". Once this is noted, than I could place a "base rock" near the "live rock" and if the "base rock" allows fster growth than the original "base rock" by itself did, than I might say with certainty that it does migrate.) Worms, stars, algae will move to the base over time. The catch here as loco pointed out is that what was on the rock as it came out of the ocean may not survive in the environment that is our aquarium. I have to believe that light penetration, chemical balance, wave factors, pressure differences etc. etc. are going to have some impact on the life that has evolved in the difference that is the ocean compared to our tanks. But what does survive will migrate.Of this I have no doubt. Growth rate of those that do migrate is again a variable that may be at the mercy of the difference between our tank and the ocean. (also can be from tank to tank, maybe no two tanks can really be exactly the same. Lately I have noticed a slight difference. The remperature begins to varie more on the "base rock" tank. The temperature in this tank varies from 78-81 degrees wherre in the other tank the temperature is more stable around 79-80.5 degrees. Is this do to the different poristy of the rock?, maybe. Is it the equipment?, I sure hope not. Temperature affects life, it might afecct micro and micro life even more. Do not know and I would imagine it would be very difficult to figure out.)
Loco one point to you, as long as there are anaerobic areas the denitrifying bacteria will colonize, and there are those areas in rock. Just because we see nitrates in our tanks does not mean we do not have denitrifying bacteria, only that we do not have enough to deal with out bioload. (I agree with this, but the opposite could also be true. Just because there are areas where it could live, it does not imply it's there. Eitherway I think that this might be more difficult to prove or notice, than I originally imagined.) Many ways have been experimented with to try to create areas large enough to colonize enough to handle all of the nitrate produced. DSBs Plenums etc. It is still all about balance. What is the tank producing as opposed to what can the bacteria handle.

 

[locoyo386]

Hi scopus,
I do not have a thread as I do this. I am doing it so I can determine how much bio-load a set weight of rock can handle.
As for the subject of this thread, I agree, the "live rock" used in home aquarium is considered "live rock". One would have to determine how alive a rock would have to be to establish the definition of :live rock". The rock inside the home aquarium is by all means alive. The critters that live in the rock, cuold and most likely migrate to ther surfaces. Does this imply that all living orgamisms do? I do not know. Do the bacterial and micro organisms have to be present in the rock so as to allow the macro and critters to populate it? I do nt know this.
As to denitrifying bacteria, I do believe it is difficult to come to the conclusion that it is indeed present inside the rock. One sure way to know this, is if there is a way to quatify the amount of nitrate that is being converted? This might be possible with a very small, constant and mesurable bio-load. Personally I belive that the bacterial and micro organisms do not migrate from one rock to the other. This is just what I have concluded by readings, and not by experience or observation.

 

[spanko]

I would challenge your conclusion as there are many micro organisms that in fact are motile (yes not a misspelling I mean motile). And being so do populate all "pleasing to them" areas in the tank.

 

[locoyo386]

Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/2933305
I would challenge your conclusion as there are many micro organisms that in fact are motile (yes not a misspelling I mean motile). And being so do populate all "pleasing to them" areas in the tank.
Sure I agree, just by shear difinition. How do we track this motile microorganisms in our tanks? Do we place a sample of water in a micro-scope and see them move? What type of motile microrganisms exist in our tanks? Not only that, but are they present with wnd without the "live rock"?

 

[scopus tang]

Originally Posted by locoyo386
http:///forum/post/2933294
Hi scopus,
I do not have a thread as I do this. I am doing it so I can determine how much bio-load a set weight of rock can handle.
As for the subject of this thread, I agree, the "live rock" used in home aquarium is considered "live rock". One would have to determine how alive a rock would have to be to establish the definition of :live rock". The rock inside the home aquarium is by all means alive. The critters that live in the rock, cuold and most likely migrate to ther surfaces. Does this imply that all living orgamisms do? I do not know. Do the bacterial and micro organisms have to be present in the rock so as to allow the macro and critters to populate it? I do nt know this.
As to denitrifying bacteria, I do believe it is difficult to come to the conclusion that it is indeed present inside the rock. One sure way to know this, is if there is a way to quatify the amount of nitrate that is being converted? This might be possible with a very small, constant and mesurable bio-load. Personally I belive that the bacterial and micro organisms do not migrate from one rock to the other. This is just what I have concluded by readings, and not by experience or observation.
certainly tracking as you pointed out is difficult, but if microorganisms - like coralline algae - migrate, why wouldn't bacteria. If might be possible to break apart a established "dead" LR and try to culture bacteria, but of course anaerobic bacteria wouldn't grow in a typical culture. Interesting . . . interesting . . . off to class, have to pick this up when I return.

 

[spanko]

Maybe our teacher, the original poster, can get in to more detail but suffice it to say;
As an aquarist I am not sure that there is a necessity to track them but to be aware that they do exist.
Yes and there are stains that need to be used also.
Aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. Rotifers. Cyanobacteria, Vibrio etc. etc etc.
Sometimes I believe that there is a line where we are over thinking things. I am not accusing you of this Loco and wonder if you are better served taking some courses at the local educational institute in your area on marine biology to satisfy some of your more thoughtful curiosity.
Don't get me wrong, I love your inquisitiveness but I am not sure that your questions can be answered to your satisfaction by those of us that are hobbyists. But I speak for myself and not for the rest of the people here so take it for what it is worth.

 

[locoyo386]

Hi there,
Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/2933361
certainly tracking as you pointed out is difficult, but if microorganisms(yeah, but are they there because of the "live rock"?) - like coralline algae - migrate, why wouldn't bacteria.(this is an interesting question that I do not have an swear.) If might be possible to break apart a established "dead" LR and try to culture bacteria, but of course anaerobic bacteria wouldn't grow in a typical culture. Interesting . . . interesting . . . off to class, have to pick this up when I return.
Sure Scopus, some macro or critters will most definelty migrate. Bacteria is of more of a question than anything else. Take nitrifying bacteria, lives on the surface of media inside the tank. It gets established there by the presence of nutrients (food). I do not know for sure if it indeed lives on the water column. If it does than, sure it might migrate from one to the other. I on the other hand do not think it does. I do not believe that there is a very stable molecule for the bacteria to attach to. Well I do not know this for a fact. Take H2O, does the bacteria attach to it and thus reach supension inside the tank? maybe - do not know. Same goes for any other molecule. Well you do have protein strands (food particles as whole or broken down into big enough but smaller strands) that might provide enough surface for the bacteria to colonize and migrate. If so, they would not be migrating at will, but they could well reestablish themselves on another rock rock they land on. This might be possible, I guess. If bacteria can be air borne, than maybe it is possible to have water borne bacteria.
My suggestion to this question would be the following;
In an already setablished tank. place two pieces of "base rock (dead rock)".
One next or on top to a "live rock", the other as far away as possible from any and all "live rock". The one near or on top of the "live rock" should look and become more alive faster than the other one. I would not brush or do anything to the rocks, just let them be. If after several months you do notice a difference between the two, than you have answeared your question. Otherwise, assumptions can be made and new theories established.
Sure there are other factors involved, such as livestock carrying this organisms to the far away rock. The living organisms that live on and inside the sand. It might still be worth a try though.

 

[locoyo386]

True True, their is such thing as over thinking.
Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/2933366
Maybe our teacher, the original poster, can get in to more detail but suffice it to say;
As an aquarist I am not sure that there is a necessity to track them but to be aware that they do exist.
Yes and there are stains that need to be used also.
Aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. Rotifers. Cyanobacteria, Vibrio etc. etc etc.
Sometimes I believe that there is a line where we are over thinking things. I am not accusing you of this Loco and wonder if you are better served taking some courses at the local educational institute in your area on marine biology to satisfy some of your more thoughtful curiosity.
Don't get me wrong, I love your inquisitiveness but I am not sure that your questions can be answered to your satisfaction by those of us that are hobbyists. But I speak for myself and not for the rest of the people here so take it for what it is worth.

To aswear the original question in a simplistic form, Yes, you can place dried out rock in a tank and it will recolonized with bacteria in time. It will provide biological filtration. Will it be as good as the other live rock, I do not know that. My opinion is that it will.
Originally Posted by Scopus Tang
http:///forum/post/2932730
Hey Folks, have a question and looking for some input. I've always been an advocate for using man-made rock and/or reusing old rock. Back in the old days when I first got started, we always used to take the rocks and corals out, bleach them and then reestablish them in the tank (boy have we come a long ways since then). Obviously the bleaching killed everything on the rocks. Well recently I talked to a salesperson for one of the online sights, and they said dry rock will never establish the internal bacteria colonies nor come as alive as "real" LR. Kind of figured that that was just a sales hype. Then recently I ran across some similar opinions in another thread. Kind of curious as to other peoples thoughts/opinions. Can you take old LR, that has been dried out, place it in a tank, and will it recolonize and become just as good a biological filter and "real" LR?