Guys with minimalist scaping...

[Rehype]

It's pretty easy... cycle the rock in a bucket for two months with a heater and a powerhead. Every few days, blow the crap and debris off the rock with a powerhead. Then add the rock to the tank with fresh clean saltwater. Wait a week or two. Then add the sand. Wait another week... add fish and corals and enjoy.

 

I always enjoy watching the folks who cycle the rock with the sand in their tank already. How are you ever gonna get the rock clean? You're starting off with crap everywhere that you'll never get out of the sand.

 

+1 to that method. i just did a bit of rescaping and i used this method on the rocks and additional sand i wanted to add to the tank. The only difference is i cycled the rock for about 6 or 7 months(not for any particular reason though)

[dan06277]

It's pretty easy... cycle the rock in a bucket for two months with a heater and a powerhead. Every few days, blow the crap and debris off the rock with a powerhead. Then add the rock to the tank with fresh clean saltwater. Wait a week or two. Then add the sand. Wait another week... add fish and corals and enjoy.

 

I always enjoy watching the folks who cycle the rock with the sand in their tank already. How are you ever gonna get the rock clean? You're starting off with crap everywhere that you'll never get out of the sand.

 

No algae blooms. No algae problems. Coralline is a bigger problem on my glass than algae. It's great. Sometimes I do run a filter sock with carbon and gfo and stir up my sand bed and crank my MP10 up. That counts as nutrient export. Skimmer doesn't hurt. Extra rock in the sump is a plus. It's not rocket science.

This should be a sticky in the beginners forum.

[RayWhisperer]

Kgoldy. Re-read my post. Especially this part...

"Now I'm not saying run out to the quarry and get the densest piece of limestone you can find. There has to be some sort of porous nature to it."

 

Another thing, leaving any rock in a tank for a month is essentially worthless. There will be little to no de nitrifying organisms present. This is because these organisms colonize at a much slower rate than what you are imagining. A DSB will take at least 6 months before it would be suitable as a means for nutrient export.

 

BTW, this

Is a very dense piece of LR. Notice, it has a porous surface.

[HecticDialectics]

Didn't that tank crash tho Ray?

[RayWhisperer]

No.

[HecticDialectics]

No.

 

:hi5:

 

 

I prefer that type of rock. It's far more interesting than that boulder pukani crap everyone gets as dry rock.

[Deleted User 6]

post a new pic of the tank ray.

[RayWhisperer]

Once the new coralz have colored back up, I will. Stupid birdznest can't take the light. Bleached out completely. Just starting to color up again. Montiz and tabling acro are loving it, though.

[kgoldy]

Kgoldy. Re-read my post. Especially this part...

"Now I'm not saying run out to the quarry and get the densest piece of limestone you can find. There has to be some sort of porous nature to it."

 

Another thing, leaving any rock in a tank for a month is essentially worthless. There will be little to no de nitrifying organisms present. This is because these organisms colonize at a much slower rate than what you are imagining. A DSB will take at least 6 months before it would be suitable as a means for nutrient export.

 

BTW, this

Is a very dense piece of LR. Notice, it has a porous surface.

 

 

Got it. But, I don't think you understood what I was saying at all. The "rock in a tank for a month" thing had nothing to do with presence of bacteria- it was to say that the core likely has little to no exposure to the water (and therefore nutrients) in the tank.

 

My overall point is that a DSB works because there is something (i.e. worms) physically forcing water and nutrients into oxygen depleted zones. The core of a dense rock is a lot like an immature DSB.

[dday80]

For my 28 nano I created my minimalist scape. Then added approx. 4 lbs of LR and 2lbs of LS from an established tank. Its a longer wait time to add livestock, but worth it in the end in my opinion. I started with a CUC 6 weeks from start and then first fish and corals at 8 weeks. I also run a skimmer and a chaeto fuge in the back. Success so far.

[RayWhisperer]

If that were the case, the finest sand you can get would work fine for a DSB. Southdown is REALLY fine sand. Think sugar, or finer. Every tank I've seen with a DSB made of southdown sand has failed. These are tanks of people I know. Large tanks, very large tanks.

 

The worms and other fauna keep the sand from "stagnating" for lack of a better word. The water and sand bed do all the work as far as moving water through. The bacteria and other microorganisms consume the nitrates and convert it to nitrogen. Again, a simplified version of what really takes place.

 

While I'll fully agree with you. My rock, in no way, shape, or form, will come anywhere close to being as effective as a mature DSB. It will, however, do the job to my satisfaction. Coupled with weekly 1 gallon water changes, all the nasties we check are holding at zero. The only other precautionary measure I now take is changing the filter pad every third day. I feed this tank heavily, so some measure has to be taken to trap the suspended particulate matter.

[Amphiprion1]

Got it. But, I don't think you understood what I was saying at all. The "rock in a tank for a month" thing had nothing to do with presence of bacteria- it was to say that the core likely has little to no exposure to the water (and therefore nutrients) in the tank.

 

My overall point is that a DSB works because there is something (i.e. worms) physically forcing water and nutrients into oxygen depleted zones. The core of a dense rock is a lot like an immature DSB.

 

^^ This is what I was waiting for someone to mention. The problem with the bucket curing method, while great for extracting any excessive nutrients, also starves many of the organisms in the rock. The diversity is highly reduced and the function of the rock itself is compromised as a result. It is almost like running half empty (or half-full) in terms of filtration. It is the concerted action of both that makes rock function well, just as in a sand bed.

[Rehype]

^^ This is what I was waiting for someone to mention. The problem with the bucket curing method, while great for extracting any excessive nutrients, also starves many of the organisms in the rock. The diversity is highly reduced and the function of the rock itself is compromised as a result. It is almost like running half empty (or half-full) in terms of filtration. It is the concerted action of both that makes rock function well, just as in a sand bed.

 

Its true the diversity of life is reduced during curing but the most important denitrifying bacteria is left in tact and is still efficient as a biological filter. The bacteria will colonize as nutrients are added to the aquarium but this needs to be done slowly. Most reefers add too many fish and begin 2-3 feedings a day right after their cycle ends which adds excess nutrients to an already fragile system. The biological filter has little to no time to adjust and thats why most have so many problems with high nitrates,phosphate and nuisance algae. As someone already mentioned it can takes months for a system to mature enough to sustain additional livestock and feedings.

[RayWhisperer]

Maybe I'm getting too old to see right. However, Rehype. You should consider making your sig a bit larger. I just looked at it without looking at your user name. I thought it said Herpes.

[Rehype]

Maybe I'm getting too old to see right. However, Rehype. You should consider making your sig a bit larger. I just looked at it without looking at your user name. I thought it said Herpes.

 

BTW your sig is hilarious ray

[HecticDialectics]

^^ This is what I was waiting for someone to mention. The problem with the bucket curing method, while great for extracting any excessive nutrients, also starves many of the organisms in the rock. The diversity is highly reduced and the function of the rock itself is compromised as a result. It is almost like running half empty (or half-full) in terms of filtration. It is the concerted action of both that makes rock function well, just as in a sand bed.

 

Your concerns aren't really warranted imo. Diversity of life has absolutely nothing to do with live rock being an effective filter. That is live rock's primary job. You can seed extra life later.

[Amphiprion1]

Its true the diversity of life is reduced during curing but the most important denitrifying bacteria is left in tact and is still efficient as a biological filter. The bacteria will colonize as nutrients are added to the aquarium but this needs to be done slowly. Most reefers add too many fish and begin 2-3 feedings a day right after their cycle ends which adds excess nutrients to an already fragile system. The biological filter has little to no time to adjust and thats why most have so many problems with high nitrates,phosphate and nuisance algae. As someone already mentioned it can takes months for a system to mature enough to sustain additional livestock and feedings.

 

True, there are still plenty of bacteria left. However, how can you get the nutrients to the bacteria within the rock in sufficient concentrations for them to do their job more efficiently? Water motion helps a lot, obviously, but fauna play a role in this. Their collective movement of pore water in and out of the rock is a big part of what keeps the whole system working and doing so effectively. It's an interesting dynamic that is often under-appreciated and diminished in many of the efforts aquarists go through to "cure" their rock.

 

Your concerns aren't really warranted imo. Diversity of life has absolutely nothing to do with live rock being an effective filter. That is live rock's primary job. You can seed extra life later.

 

Maybe not in the short term, but it plays a large role in system stability as it ages. Besides, cost-wise, it makes little sense to kill off an initial jump start of diversity only to try to recoup it later. Why not preserve as much as possible and add on later?

 

Maybe I tend to think about much longer periods of sustainability than the typical setup life span, though. It seems like most people are either upgrading or changing their tanks around too often to see very many aging dynamics.

[Rehype]

True, there are still plenty of bacteria left. However, how can you get the nutrients to the bacteria within the rock in sufficient concentrations for them to do their job more efficiently? Water motion helps a lot, obviously, but fauna play a role in this. Their collective movement of pore water in and out of the rock is a big part of what keeps the whole system working and doing so effectively. It's an interesting dynamic that is often under-appreciated and diminished in many of the efforts aquarists go through to "cure" their rock.

 

Thats why its recommended to use a powerhead during the curing process to accommodate this exchange. The natural die off that will occur during this period will provide more than enough nutrients to sustain the bacteria during this period.

[Amphiprion1]

Thats why its recommended to use a powerhead during the curing process to accommodate this exchange. The natural die off that will occur during this period will provide more than enough nutrients to sustain the bacteria during this period.

 

I don't mean a source for the nutrients but how they will physically arrive to the site where bacteria are able to act upon them within the rock. External water motion is only so effective at getting it deeper within. To get the most out of rock, you need something to get nutrients and clean water circulating into the rock even further.

 

In any case, the above may not necessarily be essential (and I know proliferating worms isn't everyone's cup of tea), but I think it may be an extra step in the right direction

[MyLittleGremlin]

If that were the case, the finest sand you can get would work fine for a DSB. Southdown is REALLY fine sand. Think sugar, or finer. Every tank I've seen with a DSB made of southdown sand has failed. These are tanks of people I know. Large tanks, very large tanks.

 

The worms and other fauna keep the sand from "stagnating" for lack of a better word. The water and sand bed do all the work as far as moving water through. The bacteria and other microorganisms consume the nitrates and convert it to nitrogen. Again, a simplified version of what really takes place.

 

Nitrogen then is exported by doing regular water changes

 

Very fine powdered sand leads to failure due to it packing tightly which does not allow oxygen that is a must needed element in the sandbed for the Nitrogen Cycle to function properly.

 

My interpation as to the Key to Min Aquascaping is..... good sandbed and very porus but min rockwork for surface area for growing bacteria, strong flow to eleminate any dead spots in the aquarium so water is well oxygenated and weekly water changes to eleminate Nitrogen. Refrug with Macro/Skimmer are a plus and keep filter material in filter clean.. Then keep the BioLoad simple.

 

Seems like we apply all of the above in reefing to maintain our little tanks. Well, almost. Min Aquascaping is using less Rockwork.

[Rehype]

I don't mean a source for the nutrients but how they will physically arrive to the site where bacteria are able to act upon them within the rock. External water motion is only so effective at getting it deeper within. To get the most out of rock, you need something to get nutrients and clean water circulating into the rock even further.

 

In any case, the above may not necessarily be essential (and I know proliferating worms isn't everyone's cup of tea), but I think it may be an extra step in the right direction

 

 

Well in the case of porous live rock these "tunnels" have already been created by other organisms and are the pathways to established colonies of bacteria deep within the liverock. While on the other hand a brand new sandbed would take quite a bit of time for similar organisms to create these same conditions. Not to mention most new reefers dont have adequate enough setups or patience to support a true denitrifying sandbed.

[MyLittleGremlin]

Well in the case of porous live rock these "tunnels" have already been created by other organisms and are the pathways to established colonies of bacteria deep within the liverock. While on the other hand a brand new sandbed would take quite a bit of time for similar organisms to create these same conditions. Not to mention most new reefers dont have adequate enough setups or patience to support a true denitrifying sandbed.

 

 

Surface space for 'Nitrifrying" bacteria is not deep inside the rock.... only on the surface area of the rock itself and everything else that the water flows over or inside the aquarium (sandbed, filters, pumps, rockwork, etc. Deep holes harbor dirt and it has to be blown out with a turkey baster when routine maintance is done. Not to do so leads to a nitrate problem down the road.

[Rehype]

Surface space for bacteria is not deep inside the rock.... only on the surface area of the rock itself and everything else that the water flows over or inside the aquarium (sandbed, filters, pumps, rockwork, etc. Deep holes harbor dirt and it has to be blown out with a turkey baster when routine maintance is done. Not to do so leads to a nitrate problem down the road.

 

Thats not accurate at all...not sure where you heard that.And not to be mean but your jumping in the middle of a discussion about curing liverock using the bucket method and live rock being an efficient biological filter and your comment is totally out of context...

 

only on the surface area of the rock itself and everything else that the water flows over or inside the aquarium (sandbed, filters, pumps, rockwork, etc. Deep holes harbor dirt and it has to be blown out with a turkey baster when routine maintance is done. Not to do so leads to a nitrate problem down the road.

 

Your right that nitrifying bacteria is found on just about every surface of your aquarium but we are specifically talking about denitrifying bacteria which can only be found where there is little to no oxygen like deep within the crevices of liverock or a deep sandbed.

[MyLittleGremlin]

Thats not accurate at all...not sure where you heard that.And not to be mean but your jumping in the middle of a discussion about curing liverock using the bucket method and it being an efficient biological filter and your comment is totally out of context...

 

I beleive this discussion was about min aquascaping... and not how to cure live rock in a bucket. Did I post in the wrong thread?

 

I am sorry for treading on your toes even though my post count is that of a newbie. I do not mind being told I am wrong but it does not need to reflect as to one having a bad day.

[Rehype]

I beleive this discussion was about min aquascaping... and not how to cure live rock in a bucket. Did I post in the wrong thread?

 

I am sorry for treading on your toes even though my post count is that of a newbie. I do not mind being told I am wrong but it does not need to reflect as to one having a bad day.

 

Well if you follow the course of the entire discussion certain topics were raised about the filtration methods used with minimal aquascaping and i was just sharing my experiences and thoughts on the subject. my apologies as I didnt mean to sound rude as it has nothing to do with your post count but i was just correcting some misleading information.