# Deep sand beds!



## neven

One of the things i noticed right away when i first took the step into marine was all the choices to make.

First it was FOWLR vs softie vs SPS tank
All in one vs Drilled vs Overflow box
a whole ton of equipment choices
and lastly, Bare bottom vs shallow sand bed vs Deep Sand bed vs plenum

With the latter, i've noticed that many limit it to Bare bottom vs Shallow sand bed though, and write off the other two. Well for me i took an interest in deep sand beds, and through much reading i've found much of the negative to be either related to people making mistakes or people just discrediting it without trying it.

So what is a deep sand bed? Its more then 4 inches of sand in your display tank, or 4-8 inches on avg in your sump. What a deep sand bed is not, is a bucket full of sand used for denitrification (this is called a remote deep sand bed, and very much different). What it does is host lots of life, many micro critters and a lot more bacteria to aid the tanks biological filtering capacity. the many details of what it does can be summed up through a few articles i found, which i find no point regurgitating when i can just link them for those interested to read.

Ron Shimek's Website...Deep Sand Beds
DSB article - CALFO
BioGeoChemistry, Meiobenthology & Microbial Ecology of the Sandbed. - Nano-Reef.com Forums

lastly, im not saying its a fix all your problems solution, im just saying its a valid method of filtration that is often overlooked


----------



## Flear

what i could find on deep sand beds myself, ... 3" inches or more of fine grade sand, pool filter sand recommended for freshwater for it's consistent size so it doesn't compact. (i've heard oolite recommended for saltwater, i'm on the fence about this)

recommended sounds like 4-6" of sand

lots of critters in the sand to keep the top healthy and expand the aerobic layer.
the extra depth to assist the anaerobic and anoxic layers so they can all work together to reduce and/or eliminate ammonia, nitrate, nitrite.

concerns then are H2S killing the tank, ... so do not stir your sand unless you want to kill everything.
as the H2S is produced in the lowest layers as this gets diffused back up through the sand it reacts with available oxygen neutralizing it so it's safe.

those that have looked into it that far and still follow the religion that you have to do regular water changes then argue hormones, because there are no toxins in the tank for them to worry about.

there is concern about the sand getting clogged with mulm, but anyone who has tried a deep sand bed has not experienced this from what i've heard. in the real world people have found that this isn't the case either.
one lady would use the deep sand bed to compost dead fish, without affecting the water column, in an over-crowded tank.

i do think what a healthy deep sand bed is capable of is seriously underestimated.
a significant part of it's productivity comes from the critters constantly turning it over.
it's a huge biological filter the size of the aquarium base with a football fields worth of surface area for the beneficial bacteria to grow on.

Neven, i agree, it's very valid method of filtration that is overlooked, dismissed, and ridiculed.
as people take from it little bits and pieces and ignore the rest, some of the parts they're dismissing are critical to it's health and capacity to do it's job. then they complain because it's not working.

it's harder to find info on freshwater deep sand beds.
about as hard as it is to find critters for freshwater sand beds


----------



## albert_dao

Oh dear...

Honestly, DSB's are probably the worst possible thing you could do setting up a tank for one simple reason: WHY BOTHER?

Every other method is 100 times easier and x-factor/risk free.


----------



## neven

there is always a naysayer everywhere. 100 times easier and risk free approaches? There are risks with every approach. A proper deep sand bed takes time to establish thats it, and you cant overfeed, but wait, your shouldn't even overfeed a tank anyways. Every piece of equipment can fail, a deep sand bed? well if you dump a ton of food in, or overstock the crap out of your tank, then yes, otherwise the only maintenance to the bed is really adding some more critters in there, can be easy as adding a lb of crud from an LFS live rock holding tank bottom. The only reason i even have a skimmer is because i got it for $30, but man was it a pain to get going, and all it takes is me to hit a knob to go through the head ache again. before then, my tank was fine anyways, nitrates and phosphates don't even register. My first DSB i did wrong with almost no flow and way too small, it just ended up a detritus trap, but now, i cant believe how easy it is to maintain.

Now lets talk about those equipment failures, you know for the risk free approaches. You have filter socks, they can be forgotten about and throw the tank off. Skimmers can break down, then where does the organic mass break down, i hope you have a refugium, but wait, some people say those are horrible as well because the room in the sump can be used for better equipment or certain medias. Heaters burn out and pumps break too. Media that is relied on can be forgotten aswell. then there is the bulkheads, they can leak, tanks can crack, no sump? well top offs could be missed often and give the tank a salinity swing. Then there is your stock, everything you add will not be 100% clean, even those who go 100% base rock, they still need to add stock. ohhh and then there is water changes if you do them, can get the salinity or temp wrong and stress your stock. Risks are everywhere and i don't see how a deep sand bed changes things.

If in a few years mine fails me with the massive tank crash some naysayers yell that will happen, i will gladly come here and share my experiences and say i was wrong with my approach, but its working now, with no signs of failing yet. So perhaps try to contribute your own experiences with this form of reef keeping if that is the reason you are against them, but be sure to be detailed about how it was set up. Otherwise, bow out of the discussion because its not being constructive.


----------



## The Guy

Comes down to personal preference, some people like the more natural way some don't. I use approx. 2" of crushed coral and lots of LR which seems to work for me, is there really a right or wrong way? It's up to you IMO.


----------



## mikebike

I have not ventured into Salt water tanks.

I realy appreciate this discushion as it gives a newbe a chance to review the options.

Thanks to all contributors.

http://www3.telus.net/mikebike/Xmas.jpg


----------



## Flear

Albert, i agree with neven

how is maintaining a piece of equipment so it doesn't break down and needs regular cleaning easier than a sand bed that you get to walk away from and forget about ?

the cost of sand is going to be cheaper than your pumps & sumps, and skimmers, and filters.
there is no electrical cost for maintaining a sand bed either vs. every other piece of equipment you have.

i've come across a lot of people that have deeper sand in the back of the tank, shallower in front, all i can guess from that is no one likes the deep sand bed as they dislike the extra 4" of sand vs. using that for your water column.

i've never heard of anyone complaining about a deep sand bed who has actually tried it though.
the DSB failing because only some parts were done and people expected it to work while unknowingly crippling it from the start is to be expected.

sometimes things don't work for people because they want instant results and don't want to accept the person who already has those results spent months or years getting there.

i've heard of a scallop that sat in the corner of the aquarium and grew till it separated the seal holding the aquarium together.
-does not mean the aquarium was bad
-does not mean you shouldn't have scallops in your tank.

i've heard of a lady who would bury her dead fish deep in her DSB, evidence of H2S clearly visible in the sand bed around the dead fish, in a tank that was overcrowded to start with. in time the H2S evidence faded, no crash or other ill effects.

Albert, but that's not why is it, ... is it just because you don't understand what is going on?
i'll agree, many things are easier to throw money at till the problems go away.

neven, in regards to a crash, ... i'm curious what that means for an aquarium
from a simular question i asked in another forum about a deep sand bed in reef/marine tanks. the estimate was given that after 4 years or so these tanks had algae problems.
from a planted tank perspective, ... why not have plants to deal with these potential issues ?

i know plants for saltwater tanks are hard to come by  that does make it hard.
from a planted tank perspective plants will use nutrients in the substrate.


----------



## albert_dao

Whoa, boy. Okay, I'm going to just copy and paste a previous response to this argument that I posted on another forum:



> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Myka View Post
> Ron Shimek recently wrote a great article about DSB in the Coral Magazine entitles Dragonets (Nov/Dec 2011). Ron Shimek is definitely the DSB expert of the hobby. If you don't have access to the Coral Magazine (you can order back issues online) you can check out Ron's website. Ron Shimek's Website...Deep Sand Beds


UUUUURRRRRRGGGGGGHHHH, Ron Shimek

Look, love the guy's science as much as the next hobbyist, but I still have to argue against the recommendation of a sand bed.

Why? Because, through no fault of his own, attaching his name to a method has basically given people a free pass to setting up what is usually a disastrous bed of creeping death. Most people think 'sand bed', see his name as a proponent and just settle it there -- "but Ron Shimek said it was spiffy, so it MUST be the best!" The problem is that they don't bother to READ into why sandbeds work and why what they're doing is exactly the WRONG THING.

Hint: Read the article and pay careful attention to grain size.

But let's say we do follow the rules and use the proper grain size. Then what? Then we can't use high flow! As a mental exercise, what two scenarios are likelier?

1. Hobbyist A has a sand bed of the proper grain size and is able to seed it with the proper diversity required for long term operation of a DSB.

2. Hobbyist B spends money and buys readily available powerheads for flow. Flow rocks. Flow is the single most important consideration for the long-term maintenance of a reef.

The problem with assuming the first proposition is that we are setting up reef tanks with animals collected from (get this) reefs! Sand and reefs are two different habitats. The animals and materials collected from reefs pretty much fulfill none of the duties that are so important to making a sand bed work properly. NONE. Why? For the same reason that gorillas make bad seagulls. They're different.

But what about live sand?

No. No one orders live sand. Try to buy it at your store, I dare you to. Not going to happen. Hell, I don't even remember the last time I've seen it offered on the transship and wholesale lists. And no, that bagged stuff from Caribsea is not live sand. It's merely seeded with bacteria. It has zero diversity. No worms, no brittle stars, no foraminoforans, etc, etc. In that article, it says:

"One organism's poison is another's nutrient."

This is true, but if you're missing any links in the chain, it falls apart.

*TL : DR - You can all theorycraft as much as you want, but good luck finding the proper biota to support a DSB longterm or post-accidental stirrup. *

Source: Me, and I've torn down more DSB's then all you (combined) have set up, twenty times over (no hyperbole). For what it's worth, I've been a professional aquarist for over a decade and have operated as a hobbyist, a large scale breeder, a wholesaler and a high end retailer.


----------



## neven

Inland Aquatics - Detritivores
theres one source where you can buy some of the fauna, while you may not be able to buy all the fauna you need from the LFS, you can get quite the variety of fauna from LR, other peoples sand and through sources like i listed. It may not be the real biodeverse system in the wild, but you can definately work up to a functional system for home aquaria. sure theres lots of people who just throw a sand bed in and expect it to work, because he said to try it, but there are also a lot of people who do their research and attain success at this. So your saying your experience with it is people doing it wrong and you fixing it, rather than something you've done personally?


----------



## albert_dao

But let's address this point by point:



The Guy said:


> Comes down to personal preference, some people like the more natural way some don't. I use approx. 2" of crushed coral and lots of LR which seems to work for me, is there really a right or wrong way? It's up to you IMO.


You're right. But I'd also be right to say that if you're skilled enough, you could operate a SW aquarium with nothing but an airstone. This does not mean that it is practical, nor ideal, especially given the context of our discussion (a board where the SW hobbyist is mostly inexperienced).



neven said:


> there is always a naysayer everywhere. 100 times easier and risk free approaches? There are risks with every approach. A proper deep sand bed takes time to establish thats it, and you cant overfeed, but wait, your shouldn't even overfeed a tank anyways. Every piece of equipment can fail, a deep sand bed? well if you dump a ton of food in, or overstock the crap out of your tank, then yes, otherwise the only maintenance to the bed is really adding some more critters in there, can be easy as adding a lb of crud from an LFS live rock holding tank bottom. The only reason i even have a skimmer is because i got it for $30, but man was it a pain to get going, and all it takes is me to hit a knob to go through the head ache again. before then, my tank was fine anyways, nitrates and phosphates don't even register. My first DSB i did wrong with almost no flow and way too small, it just ended up a detritus trap, but now, i cant believe how easy it is to maintain.


You make it sound like doing the devil's work, lol.

First off, I've not even mentioned any of my methods and you're already engaging in a witch hunt.

Secondly, the equipment involved is pretty much bare minimum for any saltwater tank, DSB styles included:

- Powerheads for flow
- Return pump from the sump (I'm going to assume a sump)
- Adequate lighting
- Protein skimmer (Yes, you NEED one if you have a DSB, don't kid yourself)

Third, if any of those equipment's operations go awry, you're SOL whether or not you have a DSB or otherwise.



neven said:


> Now lets talk about those equipment failures, you know for the risk free approaches. You have filter socks, they can be forgotten about and throw the tank off. Skimmers can break down, then where does the organic mass break down, i hope you have a refugium, but wait, some people say those are horrible as well because the room in the sump can be used for better equipment or certain medias. Heaters burn out and pumps break too. Media that is relied on can be forgotten aswell. then there is the bulkheads, they can leak, tanks can crack, no sump? well top offs could be missed often and give the tank a salinity swing. Then there is your stock, everything you add will not be 100% clean, even those who go 100% base rock, they still need to add stock. ohhh and then there is water changes if you do them, can get the salinity or temp wrong and stress your stock. Risks are everywhere and i don't see how a deep sand bed changes things.


I hate to be THAT guy, but this is a strawman argument. No one is suggesting that none of these things is possible. Personally, I do not use filter socks, they're an archaic throwback to the days of bioballs. Heaters are heaters. You need one whether you're running DSB, zeovit, berlin, or just juking away with crappy Petcetera advice. Media has it's uses, again within and without the context of a DSB. All these issues you mentioned are not relevant to my admittedly shoehorned/inelegant phrasing of "risks free reefing".



neven said:


> If in a few years mine fails me with the massive tank crash some naysayers yell that will happen, i will gladly come here and share my experiences and say i was wrong with my approach, but its working now, with no signs of failing yet. So perhaps try to contribute your own experiences with this form of reef keeping if that is the reason you are against them, but be sure to be detailed about how it was set up. Otherwise, bow out of the discussion because its not being constructive.


No prob. Like I said, I've torn down plenty of DSB's and retooled tanks to run flawlessly for the past decade. I'm not your everyday hobbyist. I do this for a living (no, I'm not trying to sell anyone anything) and part of that living entails that my clients have the easiest, most trouble free experience possible. I have a 100% success rate post DSB with all of my installations.



Flear said:


> Albert, i agree with neven
> 
> how is maintaining a piece of equipment so it doesn't break down and needs regular cleaning easier than a sand bed that you get to walk away from and forget about ?
> 
> the cost of sand is going to be cheaper than your pumps & sumps, and skimmers, and filters.
> there is no electrical cost for maintaining a sand bed either vs. every other piece of equipment you have.


See my points above. The rhetoric of demonizing equipment is a false dichotomy. It's not a matter of DSB *OR* equipment. It's DSB *OR* another method with less "mystery magic voodoo".



Flear said:


> i've come across a lot of people that have deeper sand in the back of the tank, shallower in front, all i can guess from that is no one likes the deep sand bed as they dislike the extra 4" of sand vs. using that for your water column.
> 
> i've never heard of anyone complaining about a deep sand bed who has actually tried it though.
> the DSB failing because only some parts were done and people expected it to work while unknowingly crippling it from the start is to be expected.
> 
> sometimes things don't work for people because they want instant results and don't want to accept the person who already has those results spent months or years getting there.


Well, there's two things at play here:

A: They haven't had their tank long enough for it to cause problems.
B: They haven't accidentally stirred up their sandbed --- This is an inevitability, BTW, don't kid yourself.



Flear said:


> i've heard of a scallop that sat in the corner of the aquarium and grew till it separated the seal holding the aquarium together.
> -does not mean the aquarium was bad
> -does not mean you shouldn't have scallops in your tank.
> 
> i've heard of a lady who would bury her dead fish deep in her DSB, evidence of H2S clearly visible in the sand bed around the dead fish, in a tank that was overcrowded to start with. in time the H2S evidence faded, no crash or other ill effects.


So? I've heard of a guy who skydived, failed to deploy his parachute and lived to tell the tale. Doesn't mean we should all go free falling from airplanes expecting it to be a regular Sunday. To put it less abrasively, what said and rumored lady did was spread irresponsible information. That's the sort of anecdote that creates unreasonable expectations and disappointment. And I must stress, that is anecdotal. Where's the evidence? Who's the lady? Where's her documentation? How can she confirm that her sandbed was responsible for any decomposition (vs nutrient sequestration, an undesirable issue with a delayed feedback loop). My point is that, given the nature of the board, we stick to safe and easy to understand methods.



Flear said:


> Albert, but that's not why is it, ... is it just because you don't understand what is going on?
> i'll agree, many things are easier to throw money at till the problems go away.


Careful with the ad hominems there buddy. They do not address the core issue. I've not suggested spending any money on anything. Tell me, what's cheaper? A tank with all the equipment you need to run a reef... Or a tank with all the equipment you need to run a reef + 200 lbs of sand?

And for the record, I am VERY familiar with the biology involved in our reef tanks. I am not opposed to a DSB because they don't work (within narrow thresholds, they can). I am against them because they set a bad precedence for what a successful reef aquarium should be to the average reef hobbyist.



Flear said:


> neven, in regards to a crash, ... i'm curious what that means for an aquarium
> from a simular question i asked in another forum about a deep sand bed in reef/marine tanks. the estimate was given that after 4 years or so these tanks had algae problems.
> from a planted tank perspective, ... why not have plants to deal with these potential issues ?
> 
> i know plants for saltwater tanks are hard to come by  that does make it hard.
> from a planted tank perspective plants will use nutrients in the substrate.


Because there are no saltwater plants unless you count sea grasses (not suitable for a typical, dynamic reef setting) or mangroves (these are NOT nutrient solutions, more like magnesium hogs, but I digress). Both of these true plants have glacially slow growth rates and nutrient uptakes when compared to the average FW plant, so no dice.


----------



## albert_dao

neven said:


> Inland Aquatics - Detritivores
> theres one source where you can buy some of the fauna, while you may not be able to buy all the fauna you need from the LFS, you can get quite the variety of fauna from LR, other peoples sand and through sources like i listed. It may not be the real biodeverse system in the wild, but you can definately work up to a functional system for home aquaria. sure theres lots of people who just throw a sand bed in and expect it to work, because he said to try it, but there are also a lot of people who do their research and attain success at this. So your saying your experience with it is people doing it wrong and you fixing it, rather than something you've done personally?


Yah, because the average hobbyist can be totally persuaded to mail order $120, post shipping (+ DFO documentation, + customs, +, +, +) for some worms, microscopic echinoderms and foraminiferans. A bit too optimistic, wouldn't you say? And no, the biota from the liverock is NOT suitable for a DSB. Why? for the same reason we don't have camels in the Canadian prairies. I mean, they COULD live there... Right up until the first snow fall. Same deal. These animals are not suitably adapted to life in sand and mud. And now matter how much you want it to be the case, it's just not so. You get to choose faith and beliefs (and personal incredulity), but you don't get to choose your facts.

Of course I'm weighing in with my experience of people doing it wrong. And you know why? Because *EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM INSISTED THAT THEY WERE DOING IT RIGHT.*


----------



## AdobeOtoCat

Never mind 

Sent from my SGH-I727R using Tapatalk 2


----------



## albert_dao

For the record, the Inland detrivore kit is NOT a DSB kit. Let's take a closer look:

Miniature Brittle Stars : 6 (Not a DSB organism)
Baby Bristle Worms : 12 (reasonable DSB candidate, but there are tens of thousands of species and these may or may not be the right animal)
Stomatella varia : 3 (this is an algae eating snail... Not a detrivore)
Micro Stars : 6 (as in Asterina? This star combs surfaces for bacterial films, does not turnover sand, again, no dice)

Plus a few mysis and gammarus. None of these are proper DSB detrivores. Proper DSB's should have a diverse set of species numbering in the hundreds. Literally, if you pulled up a cubic centimeter of oceanic silt, you will find hundreds of animals including annelid worms, spaghetti worms, marine nematodes, protists, foraminifera, innumerable echinoderms, crustaceans, hell, even a few fish might be present. The point is, some overpriced kit hibby jibbied together by some dude's swishing their nets around in a live rock vat are, by no means, complete "detrivore" kits. It's laughable that this is even a product...

Edit: If anyone wants one of these "detrivore" kits locally. Let me know. I have hundreds such packages available and I'll part them out for the low, low price of $50. Hell, first six buyers get 5x the listed quantity Inland is offering. LOL


----------



## MEDHBSI

The thing that nuked my tank when i did a deep sand bed was not moving the sand around enough. When the air is all gone in the deep sand bed bacteria cant consume the waste and then it starts creating really harmful bacteria. I always tell people now to use a stick and move the entire bed around once a week.


----------



## albert_dao

AdobeOtoCat said:


> What is the point of having macro algae then in a tank? Since theyre suppose to uptake excess nutrients. I have those red seaweed things in my sump right now....sorry im just so confused because i was going to do a deep sand as well but only provided that i get sand from another deep sand hobbyist and take every precaution for limited oxygen exposure....
> 
> Sent from my SGH-I727R using Tapatalk 2


Macroalgaes are there to compete with less desirable and harder to control microorganisms for nutrients. It works (sorta), given that you export those nutrients every few weeks by tossing out biomass (said algae).


----------



## neven

I'd gladly take a kit if someone was going out your way from here. While I know inlands kit is rather sparse for types of species and vastly over priced ( one of the reasons I've yet to buy one). There are a few other sources with species available that are indeed meant for a sand bed. But its hard to get a Canadian source. My main reason for a DSB is because I like the critters and I find it interesting. Its just the method I chose to go with. My personal set up is in sump so it doesn't get disturbed minus the critters. Communicating with Dr shimek atleast gave me a few pointers on making an In sump version work. I knew I'd mess with the display tank too much for a dsb

Sent from my SGH-I897 using Xparent Green Tapatalk 2


----------



## albert_dao

neven said:


> I'd gladly take a kit if someone was going out your way from here. While I know inlands kit is rather sparse for types of species and vastly over priced ( one of the reasons I've yet to buy one). There are a few other sources with species available that are indeed meant for a sand bed. But its hard to get a Canadian source. My main reason for a DSB is because I like the critters and I find it interesting. Its just the method I chose to go with. My personal set up is in sump so it doesn't get disturbed minus the critters. Communicating with Dr shimek atleast gave me a few pointers on making an In sump version work. I knew I'd mess with the display tank too much for a dsb
> 
> Sent from my SGH-I897 using Xparent Green Tapatalk 2


Okay, so I feel the need to press the point:

If the resources are not available for the average hobbyist to do DSB properly, why bother advocating it? Is that not irresponsible?

In any case, I was joking about the kit. Hell, if you ever pop by, feel free to help yourself to as many "detrivores" from my system as you please. I have plenty, despite the obvious lack of a sandbed...

<__<

>__>

As far as Ron Shimek is concerned, I'm of the persuasion that his overenthusiastic endorsement of a DSB is doing nothing good for the hobby. That's an opinion. Take it as you will.


----------



## Algae Beater

this is again the classic example of cramming a large, species rich system into a small closed environment without understanding the basics of the trophic system. This is painfully similar to the beginnings of keeping stony corals in marine aquariums, back when they were funny brown sticks that died after a few days/weeks. here we are a few decades later, and the needs of these organisms are at the very least understood at a basic level, and look at the results. 

Stating that all reefs have deep sand beds in nature is accurate, but expecting to emulate similar conditions in your aquarium is fool hardy.a few of these conditions are: biodiversity, stability and trophic influences, seasonal variation, nutrient supply in appropriate quantities, breeding, tidal influences and the natural ability of waves to shift the upper layers of substratum REGULARLY. and not mention that if something goes wrong (organism death) you have an exponentially larger volume of water/substrate to dissipate the sometimes toxic substances and import new organisms. 

DSB, as already stated is a comparability misunderstood, labor intensive and improperly used methodology (compared to other reef keeping tactics). want confirmation? look at how many DSBs are regarded as successful in large institutions. places where by most standards the maintenance regime is 10x better than your average aquarist's system. I struggle to remember any affiliated with a reef, and I have toured many of these places behind the scenes. there are a few displays with sand beds for displaying certain organisms, but again as an appropriate means of nutrient export and water filtration? none. 

one may enjoy watching critters typically affiliated with a DSB in their aquarium, but not supplying them with ideal conditions or at least a modicum of proper conditions is not responsible. 

DSBs, Bioballs, ATS, these are all methodologies that have been replaced over the years to limit catastrophic failure of reef systems. learn from the experience of someone like Albert who has given you many reasons why this is not only a dated and archaic method of building a reef, but an extremely risky one at that.


----------



## Flear

Albert, do you have anything possitive to say ?
all i hear you doing is knocking something you don't like. because as you stated - personal opinion.
if your going to make it your lifes mission to discredit something, ... good job, you'll be known for accomplishing nothing.

as far as a professional in the aquarium hobby. what are your credentials ? years of experience ? i've been a human my whole life, does that make me a professional ? sadly no, i have not done anything with my life to warrant recognition by those in the community, no nobel prizes, no books, no scientific advancements

i'm a freshwater person myself.
i look at all sources on deep sand beds to find out any additional info i can.

if you thought critters for a marine deep sand bed were hard to come by, try looking at freshwater.
this does not mean freshwater deep sand beds do not work, it means we have to be even more diligent looking for burrowing detritus feeders. it means we have to learn more because someone isn't there spoon feeding us. and i'm not giving up because no one is spoon feeding me and giving me all the help to make my life easier.

if your going to say they don't work because you've seen more than once they failed. open your eyes to look at what you can find for the ones that do work.

if i've got to search this hard to find everything that's been suggested is somewhere between "hard to find" to "does not exist this side of the US/Canada border". you could spend a fraction of the time and effort and get all the answers and critters you say are needed but not available in your LFS. there simply are more burrowing detritus feeders for saltwater, especially inside the hobby.

Albert, if your knocking a DSB because your opinion and you don't want to look, ... many people call that lazy
your not finding everything in your LFS, ... isn't that "lazy". don't knock it because your lazy, it's not appreciated.


----------



## Flear

MEDHBSI

if your stiring your DSB once a week, ... from my understanding, isn't that counter productive ?

sand that is closest to the top is going to be filled with bacteria that gains it's oxygen directly from the water
as the water/sand bed reaches deeper depths the available oxygen in the water is zero, and the bacteria at those depths gain their oxygen by dealing with Nitrites.
but, ... mixing those bacterial layers around is going to be burying bacteria that require oxygen, and exposing bacteria to oxygen that will kill them. killing everything that was moved.

mixing every week is going to leave the deeper layers deprived of oxygen very quickly, and the bacteria at those depths will die, ... then there's worries of ammonia spikes if the ammonia is not dealt with by the upper layers of your sand before it enters the water column.

everything i've come across points out the importance of those critters to expand the aerobic layer to provide more sand & bacteria to start the process of reducing ammonia in the tank.

listening to peoples arguments on to have a deep sand bed or not.
it sucks to hear things get simplified to "it crashed", i'll have to look up what this is about some time to find out what it means.

in a freshwater bed the purpose of the critters is to turn the sandbed over, to assist in breaking down organics that the sand bed has collected.
those organics are then available for plant roots growing in the sandbed.

plants in a saltwater substrate are much harder to come by though, but they are out there, even for sale in the hobby.

what i have heard for saltwater deep sand beds running 3-4 years ran into nutrient problems in the sandbed that led to algae problems, ... the solution, ditch the whole thing.

this makes sense as those nutrients will accumulate in the bed if there is no where for them to go.
but to ditch the whole thing prematurely because this part of the ecology in the tank is not considered, ... sounds a little short sighted to me.

freshwater's concerns for deep sand beds then turn to H2S. very toxic, yes, also produced at the lower levels of the sand bed. for this to move into the water column the H2S has to pass through the upper layers of the sand bed where it readily reacts with available oxygen before reaching the water column and is neutralized.

reading peoples comments for and against the sand bed don't talk about what is going on. in freshwater or saltwater, everyone talks as if it's an absolute. no one goes into details or understands why it works, no one talks about what about it didn't work.

so the beds that don't work, why did they fail ?, well as albert has done a fine job explaining, he simply does not know why they fail, he's just against them. the freshwater community that is against them talks about H2S and how toxic it is, but they politely decline investigating that as toxic as H2S is it's very reactive with oxygen and is neutralized before it reaches the water column

at least this is what i have come to understand after searching for months on the subject.
i am still searching for more answers to farther understand what is going on and what is needed to promote a healthy Deep Sand Bed that does all that is expected of it.

it still leaves me searching for answers on roots, roots will aerate the substrate, this tends to defeat the lower levels that are needed to reduce Nitrate to nitrogen


----------



## neven

should also note that many who keep a dsb swap out 1/4 of the bed every 2 years


----------



## Flear

the aragonite substrate recommended for marine deep sand beds i came across an article somewhere that mentioned with it's particle size is expected to have a half-life of 18-24 months. so what starts as a 6" sand bed slowly turns into a 4" bed, 3" bed, 2", ... as it slowly dissolves. a courser grain size would dissolve significantly slower
this suggests they'd be adding more a couple times a year

Neven as i mentioned earlier concerning nutrient buildup, would this be why they change a 1/4 of the bed ?


----------



## albert_dao

Flear said:


> Albert, do you have anything possitive to say ?
> all i hear you doing is knocking something you don't like. because as you stated - personal opinion.
> if your going to make it your lifes mission to discredit something, ... good job, you'll be known for accomplishing nothing.


I don't know where you got that it was a personal opinion. I've stated facts and common sense...



Flear said:


> i'm a freshwater person myself.
> i look at all sources on deep sand beds to find out any additional info i can.


Well, my dear stars, I'm sure glad you've brought your A game to the table with that spot of transparency. I am *NOT JUST* a freshwater person, MYSELF. But... details... Such... a... hassle...



Flearif said:


> as far as a professional in the aquarium hobby. what are your credentials ? years of experience ? i've been a human my whole life, does that make me a professional ? sadly no, i have not done anything with my life to warrant recognition by those in the community, no nobel prizes, no books, no scientific advancements
> 
> you thought critters for a marine deep sand bed were hard to come by, try looking at freshwater.
> this does not mean freshwater deep sand beds do not work, it means we have to be even more diligent looking for burrowing detritus feeders. it means we have to learn more because someone isn't there spoon feeding us. and i'm not giving up because no one is spoon feeding me and giving me all the help to make my life easier.
> 
> if your going to say they don't work because you've seen more than once they failed. open your eyes to look at what you can find for the ones that do work.


I like how you've gone ahead and put words in my mouth, discredited me and made judgements about my character based off of one thread where I've presented well thought out and reasonable arguments, all for the sake of confirming your confirmation bias. By your definition of experience and qualifications, I'd be shorthanded by having nothing short of a hand-written accolade from the Ron Shimek or some other "god" of the aquarium (lol) praising my common sense against his dubious recommendations... Sorry I wasn't able to get that for ya buddy. I can assure you, however, that I have had a larger bird's eye view of the industry and resulting footprint in the last five years than your DSB God.

I also like how you also went ahead and completely ignored Algae Beater's detailed account of the downfalls of a DSB.

To be clear, I couldn't care less whether you want to go ahead and run a DSB or jump off a bridge. I do care about the likes of mikebike and other newbies, who are looking for informative and rational debate on the topic. But it looks like I've bitten off more than I can chew given that you aren't capable of debating without calling me names or stating irrelevancies as facts.

You know what your problem is? You WANT to believe in a DSB so badly that you're only finding the information that confirms your findings and disregarding the mountain of evidence that it's just not worth it. You're also "debating" with me with a notably strong dislike for my personal being despite having neither met me nor having any idea of what I am all about. And all of this, to put it as delicately as possible, is becoming farcical.



Flear said:


> if i've got to search this hard to find everything that's been suggested is somewhere between "hard to find" to "does not exist this side of the US/Canada border". you could spend a fraction of the time and effort and get all the answers and critters you say are needed but not available in your LFS. there simply are more burrowing detritus feeders for saltwater, especially inside the hobby.
> 
> Albert, if your knocking a DSB because your opinion and you don't want to look, ... many people call that lazy
> your not finding everything in your LFS, ... isn't that "lazy". don't knock it because your lazy, it's not appreciated.


As I've already stated, I am not arguing on behalf of yourself. I am entering this hilariously atypical debate for the sake of those who aren't so sure about whether or not to start a DSB. Think about that for a moment.

And no, you won't be able to find the proper biota for your heroic experiment. Reread Algae Beater's post a few times.



Flear said:


> MEDHBSI
> 
> if your stiring your DSB once a week, ... from my understanding, isn't that counter productive ?
> 
> sand that is closest to the top is going to be filled with bacteria that gains it's oxygen directly from the water
> as the water/sand bed reaches deeper depths the available oxygen in the water is zero, and the bacteria at those depths gain their oxygen by dealing with Nitrites.
> but, ... mixing those bacterial layers around is going to be burying bacteria that require oxygen, and exposing bacteria to oxygen that will kill them. killing everything that was moved.
> 
> mixing every week is going to leave the deeper layers deprived of oxygen very quickly, and the bacteria at those depths will die, ... then there's worries of ammonia spikes if the ammonia is not dealt with by the upper layers of your sand before it enters the water column.
> 
> everything i've come across points out the importance of those critters to expand the aerobic layer to provide more sand & bacteria to start the process of reducing ammonia in the tank.


So why don't you just skip this entire habbub? You know what the secret to long-term reef tank success is? Eliminating variables that you don't understand/are out of your control. I'm sorry, but the idea that we can simulate the oldest and most complex living ecosystem on our planet in a closed situation is a bunch of malarkey.



Flear said:


> listening to peoples arguments on to have a deep sand bed or not.
> it sucks to hear things get simplified to "it crashed", i'll have to look up what this is about some time to find out what it means.


I'm sure your epic journey of discovery will be very productive.



Flear said:


> in a freshwater bed the purpose of the critters is to turn the sandbed over, to assist in breaking down organics that the sand bed has collected.
> those organics are then available for plant roots growing in the sandbed.
> 
> plants in a saltwater substrate are much harder to come by though, but they are out there, even for sale in the hobby.


Not only are they not available, they don't do jack squat. I'll even give you a hint: Look up turtle grass and mangrove root function.



Flear said:


> what i have heard for saltwater deep sand beds running 3-4 years ran into nutrient problems in the sandbed that led to algae problems, ... the solution, ditch the whole thing.
> 
> this makes sense as those nutrients will accumulate in the bed if there is no where for them to go.
> but to ditch the whole thing prematurely because this part of the ecology in the tank is not considered, ... sounds a little short sighted to me.


No, it sounds like someone wasted hundreds of $$$ on sand that would have been better spent on a nice evening out in the city.



Flear said:


> freshwater's concerns for deep sand beds then turn to H2S. very toxic, yes, also produced at the lower levels of the sand bed. for this to move into the water column the H2S has to pass through the upper layers of the sand bed where it readily reacts with available oxygen before reaching the water column and is neutralized.


FW's substrate concerns have nearly zero analogues with those of SW. They are of different composition, have completely different ecologies, and drawing parallels between the two is like comparing a Ferrari to grade school social studies.



Flear said:


> reading peoples comments for and against the sand bed don't talk about what is going on. in freshwater or saltwater, everyone talks as if it's an absolute. no one goes into details or understands why it works, no one talks about what about it didn't work.
> 
> so the beds that don't work, why did they fail ?, well as albert has done a fine job explaining, he simply does not know why they fail, he's just against them. the freshwater community that is against them talks about H2S and how toxic it is, but they politely decline investigating that as toxic as H2S is it's very reactive with oxygen and is neutralized before it reaches the water column


Here you go again, putting words into my mouth. I know exactly why they fail. It's called ecology. Listen, here's another part where you've put words in my mouth -- I've tried the sand bed experiment on three occasions. Once at a store I worked at (where I had pretty much unlimited budget and still had access to real live sand). Once from scratch with a new client. And once from an establish, remote sand bed at another clients (who was a Marine PhD, no less). On all occasions, we shut down the DSB and converted to shallow substrate and high flow. Far easier and all those establishments ran for at least five years (the former and the last are still happily running, FYI) with no issues.



Flear said:


> at least this is what i have come to understand after searching for months on the subject.
> i am still searching for more answers to farther understand what is going on and what is needed to promote a healthy Deep Sand Bed that does all that is expected of it.
> 
> it still leaves me searching for answers on roots, roots will aerate the substrate, this tends to defeat the lower levels that are needed to reduce Nitrate to nitrogen


Yeah, good luck on that buddy. Try saving yourself some time by doing the following search:

How many species of true (rooting) plants are found in marine habitats

Oh darn, I went ahead and spent the 3 seconds it took to figure that out: Sea Grass, Turtle Grass (which is, by all accounts, just sea grass), and Mangroves. Functional vascular root systems for our purposes? N/A.

_Edit: I can't speel_


----------



## spit.fire

This thread is funny

For the record Albert is THE most knowledgable person I've ever met when it comes to reef aquariums. He makes me look like I know nothing about saltwater.... Although most of what I know I've learnt from him and Paul 

Btw neven, how long have you been running saltwater? Wasn't it just last week that you were breaking tanks trying to plumb them?


----------



## neven

Well this topic has run its course and has turned into a yelling match. There are links for info for those interested In it and Albert has given his advice in the matter from an experienced reef keepers point of view dealing with the aftermath of dsbs on other peoples tanks.


Personally my experience doesn't compare but I at least do research intensively methods of aquarium keeping and do my best to ween out information based on it works for me vs expert advice with credentials. And yes I play devils advocate with the methods Im leaning towards.

Me cracking a tank has no bearing on whether or not dsbs work, that had to do with me not listening to my gut and brace the tank properly And then forgetting about that when attaching an external overflow box. Looked pretty slick for the day I had it running. But heh not so Much slick when my wire woke me up yelling

So yea mods if you could close this topic before it gets more passionate.

Sent from my SGH-I897 using Xparent Green Tapatalk 2


----------



## Algae Beater

no this topic has run its course and is trying to be ended the way all debates on DSBs are, with the rational idea of ecology and closed system dynamics prevailing over an archaic notion of how a particular system MIGHT work in captivity.

this topic has been debated literally hundreds of time times on other reef forums and in several books. as has been said in the past, the search function can save time and effort.


----------



## albert_dao

.. Wouldn't it make more sense to STICKY the topic? Or we can do this again in three months....


----------



## Flear

so grasses & trees for saltwater for rooting, ... got it.
yes, that would limit things for sure.

of the 3 you set up, why did they fail ?
"ecology" is also the same word used for why things succeed
that they failed is one thing, why did they fail ?

i'm aware that saltwater & freshwater are as different as apples and oranges, ... haven't found a single freshwater deep sand bed that didn't have plants, ... so the day i put one together sounds like the first time that's ever going to be done. that can be compared with a saltwater DSB. they do have different ecologies, but the critters functions in those different ecologies are the same, a burrowing detritus eater is a burrowing detritus eater. they turn the top inch or so of substrate with their passing, eat available nutrients, assist in their farther breakdown, and poop them out.

i do understand that there are some significant differences between what critter is doing what function, but the functions are more important are they not ?

freshwater has plenty of algae eaters of various types, it's not specific that you have the exact species to handle any particular algae, just so long as the critter you have deals with the algae in question.

it's not to say saltwater can never be compared to freshwater because they are so drastically different, there are always going to be similarities. if no work is being done to identify those similarities, progress won't be made. if we can identify similarities on what worked we can find functional equivalents. and things start looking closer and more alike instead of more different.

for substrates, saltwater keeps going to aragonite, will have a tenancy to raise your PH, and calcium. nothing says that it should be marine only. unless the PH and Kh are too high for your freshwater fish. it suddenly becomes a function instead of a difference.

if i wanted to believe in it so bad i'd be doing it. and win or loose i would blame whatever was convenient at the moment.

i'm not here to argue, neven isn't here to argue.

we can all understand your experiences say they fail, what goes wrong in them that causes them to fail ?
we don't say someone died because they were shot, because being shot in the leg is likely survivable, being shot in the lungs can cause drowning, heart - stops pumping blood, ... it's not just because they were shot., youtube is full of people who have shot themselves in embarrassing places, and they live to keep quite about their mistakes (they're not going to talk about how dumb they where)

did they fail because ammonia spikes ?
nitrates spikes ?
nitrite spikes ?
phosphate spikes ?
PH ?, GH, KH ?
too much or not enough O2, CO2 ?

you've seen them fail, countless times you've explained, ... well just stated you've seen them fail. you've blamed "ecology", ... so what was it about the ecology that failed ?, it's a fairly big word for 7 letters (not making fun, just looking for answers)

i don't mean to sound like "i just don't believe you here", but your asking me to believe you on faith.
faith can be a great thing, or it can be a horrible thing, but if we don't ask what is going on, we're being asked to have faith because, ... we don't know.

i'm skeptical, because of that i look for more answers, a DSB is one part of one of the answers i'm looking for, the impossible self-sustaining aquarium, ... there's an impossibility, but maybe it's not, maybe the definition of "impossible" is "we just don't know how to do it", so a few of us keep looking for answers. we're reluctant to say "sure i'll believe everything you say" because it doesn't satisfy our search for more, it asks us to be satisfied with less understanding.

everything is progress, advancing things, understanding more, and from that understanding make the next step
like the undergravel filter. much searching about why it's not good to use, ... i come up with "just take my word for it"
"just take my word for it" at one time was the same argument for why people should use it.

now up for debate is the deep sand bed "just take my word for it".
we've heard promises of what it's expected to do, they caught our attention
we've heard what is needed, so we checked to see if we could, or what would hold us back if we couldn't
if we were stubborn we looked to overcome those obstacles.
we've proceeded cautiously so we are confident that we have covered our bases.
some of us have searched and found people reporting their own tests and findings of a deep sand bed.
and those reports lived up to the promise, at least for the first year & half (after that the person failed to continue irregular updates)
some of us have found people who have taken the plunge and their findings (lacking posted results) agree with the promise for longer than a year.

to say "it doesn't work" and leave it at that. enlighten us, educate us. tell us why.

but saying don't do it because you've come across a bunch that 'crashed' and 'failed', why did they fail ?, what went wrong in the bed, what went wrong in the water column ?, what went wrong in the tank ?

how does it amount to someone having been shot, was it the bullet that killed them, or falling off the building that did it ?

what happened ?, too much or not enough of what ?

if your saying i'm discrediting you, of course, your asking me to trust you on faith with things i can find that say contrary.

i could say things just were not explained well enough, a lack of communication, fine.

if your trying to save me hardship by saying "it just simply does not work". if i was going to believe that answer i would have accepted it and kept quiet.

if you don't know why, i'll accept that, if you do know why, share, enlighten us.
if your not sure why they failed, i'm sure you've seen enough to have an idea what the fish were going through to give a guess of what went toxic. something.

because till we have an understanding of what we're up against. we're going to continue the same way we have before.

if we're being defensive and argumentative and saying things that get under other peoples skin, ... it's not good.
myself, neven, hundreds of others, and hundreds more who haven't heard of deep sand beds yet, are all looking for answers. some will be satisfied with "they just don't work", some are going to want to know why, want to know if it's something critical that was missing that can be compensated for. to find something that fills that missing & needed function. or they'll find there is nothing there.

when that missing critical piece is found, then everything changes, because the argument is not "it just doesn't work", the argument is "it fails because of this"

all i've heard is nutrient buildup in saltwater tanks as the "this is where they fail"
and that can be solved with rooted plants, ... from your findings rooted plants in the saltwater community are limited
the nutrient buildup takes years to reach critical levels, fine, plant roots will take time to establish themselves.

it's not a catch all answer. it's not THE solution, it's a solution for one problem with the deep sand bed.

i won't say it's perfect, at least not easy, we talked lots about the burrowing detritus feeders earlier, and not just any will do, those that will feed from the beneficial bacteria in the sand bed we don't want, but that's another answer for one problem, and we can find out how to solve that problem too (don't include that particular critter)

in years, maybe it will be replaced with the next promise, maybe it will be expanded to be a regular part of everyone's aquarium and there will be "kits" out there, for now, like you know, there's no such thing. years down the road we don't know what will happen. will it be expanded upon, or identified it's one problem after another. will it be moved to strictly freshwater, again, we don't know.

we've got stats, we've got diagrams, we've got promises. we've got success stories, not a lot of success stories, we've got a lot of horror stories too, ... but we don't know why those horror stories failed, we just know they failed.

was it substrate nitrate cycle related ?, we're not sure, that's something that seems to be lacking.
was it a process that the substrate started that reacted poorly with the water column, we're not sure.

albert, if you know they fail, give me a direction to look.
did they fail for a lack of substrate critters as you suggested from earlier posts ?
what happened, ?

i know i keep going back to this in one form or another, but ...

if you don't know, believe it or not, that's helpful, lets us know it's not normal issues, how about symptoms in the tank ?, those are definitely helpful.

you've got lots of experience of them not working, share, educate us. so that we might know where to look, things that we have to consider and not overlook or take for granted.

because if your trying to save us from heartache, ... if it's not working, ... it may be your approach.


----------



## Flear

honestly i do give people a hard time, even people i admire all their input, i have given them a hard time. sometimes because of a lack of communication, sometimes because some information somewhere i've found conflicts with what they've said.

those that can explain the parts i didn't understand previously, yes i listen to what they have to say.
i'll still give them a hard time the next time confusion arises. ... maybe it's a bad quality, maybe i want a better understanding than they were initially willing to give.

it could be argued i want more info, it could be argued not enough info was given to begin with.


----------



## albert_dao

Umm, I'm going to be as succinct and direct as possible with my reply to your wall of text:

WHY BOTHER? REEFS ARE EASY TO MAINTAIN. 25 min/week and bam, you have a pristine reef that:

A. grows corals of all flavors
B. keeps fish happy
C. wows your friends and family
D. makes you happy
E. doesn't tail up on you for no goddamn reason
F. won't piss off your S/O.
G. is reasonable in costs

I don't know what other motivation you'd need to ditch the whole idea of:

A. having a wall of muddy greyish-white crowding your display panel
B. every other thing I've said in this thread

Wanna see something? Here are the results of 25 minutes of my time each week:



























































































Etc, etc, etc...

Again, 25 minutes a week. Less if I'm feeling particularly lethargic. When you can show me a DSB setup that can top that with equal or less effort, long-term, I will submit to the idea of pursuing the agenda. Until then, I will stick with my ultra simple, no nonsense, no arcane sorcery juju, ultra slacker method of easy, practical and cost-effective reef keeping. I would encourage others looking to get their feet wet to do likewise.

There, I'm done with this. Screw it. It's 3 AM and I'm typing out an veritable essay for an audience of exactly three people over the next week. How stupid do I feel.


----------



## DBam

Well I've enjoyed sitting back and reading this thread and learning from it, and I've never even been a SW keeper. Your audience is a little broader than you might have thought Albert, I'm going to remember this stuff.

@ Flear, the answers to your questions, which I honestly couldn't continue to read past a point, are ALL already answered in Albert's earlier posts. Ecology isn't a magical 7-letter word. He touched on some key ideas: interaction and dynamics at the community level, metabolic processes, occupying of niches, landscape-level structure and function, and heterogeneity in systems that can't be replicated in an artificial environment. Knowledge is power, and, well, I'll leave you with that.


----------



## Algae Beater

I have never had such difficulty convincing people of what basically has been unanimously decided over the past 15-20 years by droves of reef keepers the world over...

and I have seen those corals in person, no shopping, no nonsense just effective and intelligent maintenance and setup


----------



## Flear

Algae beater, maybe you can explain the things that albert is overly generalizing and summarizing then.

why do they fail ?
granted all my searching has been around 'what makes them work'
what i've come across for why they fail is never really more explainable than "they just do"
and obviously that argument is not working.
i'm not going to give up on something i can see something that could be done to correct those issues.
so, i may not want to admit it, i'm open to hearing what could go wrong that i am not aware of.
---

Albert, you may not like how i'm trying to get answers, but that's all i'm trying to do.

your going to rant and holler, and it sounds like name calling. you could have said the same stuff to calmly explain the whats and whys. the ranting and hollering diminishes my perception of your credibility, regardless of your actual credibility.

what do you consider a 'long-term' deep sand bed ?
for a test, i've been thinking 6mo. just to find out how deep each layer in the DSB developed into as 'short-term'

you've got something that works for you, good for you. no one is saying "don't do that", no one is saying, "your going to get typical results doing the same things everyone else is doing for the same reasons" but that is the assumption.

you keep going back to the feasibility based on a lack of usable critters to benefit and make the deep-sand bed work. i know that some of the critters recommended are actually more harmful to the theory behind a DSB, so i leave these ones out.

with everything remaining, ... are they compatible with each other ? if they die, will they foul things up or are there critters available to deal with the dead and prevent toxic spikes ?

i'm not going to agree with all the information i've come across, particularly how deep a DSB should be, a deeper sand bed still only has developed X depth of aerobic beneficial sand. it's not going to be 'more' capable than a DSB that isn't as deep (excluding those that are not deep enough to begin with) and deeper that sufficient is somewhere between potentially dangerous to a waste of sand at the expense of the water column.

what grade of sand to use, something not talked about very well, pool filter sand has been suggested, not sure if this amounts to #0 or #00 sand, hard to find what size those grades include. but there is the "courser grades require deeper sand, finer grades do not need to be as deep", sadly, 'as deep as what to begin with? what grade of sand to begin with?'

there aren't enough answers i've found i consider reliable to start with to say what is needed to make them work. there is a lot of "just get these things and go from there." that's not understanding, that's faith. the same kind of talk i've heard about why they don't work "they just don't."

argue as much as you want, but without an understanding of what is needed, why it's needed (it's function), how much is needed. what is going on, what to look for. what is going to go wrong if each step is not done correctly. how is anyone to know why it doesn't work ?

bio-diversity of critters in the sand bed, or a lack there-of, or the critters selected being inappropriate for use to keep the sand bed healthy. 

i could assume (we know where that leads, but it's still a good place to start), that as far as critters will dig down into the sand is going to be universal for several things. saltwater vs. freshwater, identifying the depth of the aerobic layer, expanding the aerobic layer, keeping the aerobic layer healthy. in freshwater that's a little over an inch (burrowing critters depth - seems to be universal for the 3 critters i've come across), kinda about the same depth recommended for a minimum substrate regardless of what it's composed of.

sand grain size plays it's part in "is this enough to reduce the ammonia levels to zero?" that's it. that's all to be gained. if the sand size is too course, there isn't going to be enough bacteria to do this job for the amount of ammonia being produced by the oxygen consuming critters, by the breakdown of organic particles, be it poop, breathing, excess food, a death in the tank (plants, fish or other).

but there is no information i've come across that covers, how much bio-load can be handled.

maybe the confusion about deep sand beds failing is concerns about the burrowing critters in the sand bed dying off. i don't know, ... so find critters that can reproduce out of control if food for them is available or constantly replenish the critters in the sand bed. because the deep sand bed isn't about the deep sand bad, it's about the water column.

i'm more familiar with freshwater, a single snail is all i can find, the few worms tend to stay local and do not roam the sandbed. no one talks about copepods or rotifers or scuds/amphipods. clams are not talked about for substrate health, only for water filterers and worries of them dying.

as albert mentioned, things that walk/crawl ontop of the sand (plants included) are going to contribute nothing to the the Deep sand bed or any depth of substrate, aside from adding mulm. things that strip the beneficial bacteria from the sand are going to go against any against a deep sand bed could offer. it does not mean deep sand beds don't work, just that there are some clear bad choices out there advertised as 'recommended'.

the aquarium is the most backwards thing we have for "pets". it's always a self-contained eco-system no matter what we may want to do about it or what we have to do to keep it running.

heavy metals, diseases, Oxygen & CO2, toxins, algae, parasites, temperature, feeding, breathing, more water parameters than we think of for ourselves or any gardens we may have. things that are 110% outside of their natural elements that would handle everything that we have to do to keep them alive. to say maintaining a deep sand bed is unnatural tends to ignore the whole aquarium as being unnatural.

but we've learned some basics about aquariums, some through observation, some through science, some through trial-and-error. and there are some surprisingly beautiful aquariums out there. we've advanced beyond "just keep them alive" to a million things that can be done and still things thrive. we've learned what to watch out for, and so long as those levels are safe, are tolerable, even favorable, we're having tanks that breed for the critters in there are relaxed and have all their needs met in a relatively stress free environment.

we've learned what works, we've learned what doesn't work.

but ... to say something doesn't work and not point out why, of course we're not going to take you seriously.

the deep sand bed isn't about the deep sand bed, it's about the water. pointing out a lack of bio-diversity that is commonly available for the sand bed is not a failing of the sand bed, it's a failing of the bio-diversity that is commonly available for the health of a functional deep sand bed.

going several steps farther, a self-sustaining aquarium (last thoughts say this won't work, but not giving up), that's a 10 year test in my mind. and that could fail because the wrong organism populated out of control because what ate it was not plentiful enough. or it could fail because it ate till it's food source was completely extinguished. leaving a very small area to create the balance.

so a deep sand bed fails, why did it fail ?, wrong bio-diversity ?, inability to maintain the health of the water column ? unbalanced bio-diversity ? too much fish poop ?, sand grade too fine ?, not fine enough ? get plugged with mulm ? (actually doesn't happen in nature it seems, just changes what is going on) was it fish in the tank ? (diggers that make a mess of everything ?)
temperatures ?, PH ?, (can also effect if the beneficial bacteria are available to do their job - or just stop)

colder water holds more O2
PH 7.5-8.5 there is lots of nitrification/denitrification going on, under 6.0, your tank is going to die if it's depending on a DSB and there's nothing you can do about it.

no one talks about those things in a deep sand bed. which would leave the unhappy person who lost everything grasping at straws not knowing what happened when his neighbor's tank is thriving

Albert, i wasn't asking about water perimeters on the failed deep sand beds to point the finger and say "see it's not the deep sand bed", what is going on in one part of the aquarium is going to affect the whole aquarium, and the whole aquarium is going to go back to it's source. sometimes it's a short answer, sometimes it's going to be a cascading domino effect leaving everyone baffled till someone asks about something previously overlooked.

people didn't give up on flight because a few people died and dozens of failed attempts, some people persisted and found the answers needed to make it work. it didn't always fit the original theories, some of those would never work. but people still tried.

those that didn't work. the inventor (would-be inventor) either gave up, or they looked back and asked some very important questions "what failed?" and "what, if anything could be done differently/about it to make it work next time?"

those that gave up didn't ask questions anymore. they simply decided it can't work. even people who dismissed the wright brothers without ever seeing them. because of opinion.

maybe a deep sand bed is not a good approach, maybe it's a too complicated approach. maybe it's just not perfected yet and is the right approach. pointing the finger and saying ecology, (and all that it means) explains nothing. ecology includes bacteria, plankton, nitrogen cycle, oxygen cycle, calcium, iron, and so many other elements, it includes temperature, PH, water hardness, the food-chain. (we can take for granted gravity till we are spaceborne)

everything turns into a function. it's very easy to see those required functions when we know what fills it. if there is a required function and we don't know what fills it, basic thinking tends to overlook that missing part. but maybe someone does, someone else.

i'll continue searching, i'll continue asking questions, i'll continue finding other people who want to talk about their findings and experiences. i'm pretty sure many of those people will be naive, following a promise but don't know what it means to make it a reality. many will be people who will insist you/me/someone has the complete right answer, or they'll say it's all BS and smoke and mirrors. some will be people who have tried it, and failed, but they were curious and wanted to know what happened, how it was set up, and where things went wrong. some will be curious and want to work with it and see if things can be done to prevent those mistakes again. some will be lucky and sit with their luck. some will be constantly looking to improve on their system if they do get it working.

but any progress needs answers, what did not work, what went wrong, what went right, what could be done to correct the things that went wrong.

maybe the whole thing will be cascading dominoes of problems that isn't worth the effort.

or we could give up.

albert, from your pictures looks like you are running a business, good for you. i would not suggest a deep sand bed as in your position it runs somewhere between disaster and costing valuable floor space for an experiment.

but, if i was worried about hardship and disappointment at things failing, i would have stopped looking when i heard they can fail, that there are safer ways out there. anyone in here who has looked at this thread with any curiosity knows there are safer things out there.

so your not saving anyone. if you know it will never work, be confident in that and smile, laugh at us foolish people, know you won't ever be such a victim. but stop telling others to give up and quit because you don't like the idea.

when asking what went wrong in the Deep sand beds you've had to fix (put in a regular substrate) what was it that went wrong ?, i've mentioned several times a deep sand bed isn't about a deep sand bed. so what was the sand bed doing or not doing, what did it have too much of or not enough of.

i can't take your experiences critically when your given blanks about what needs to be addressed in a tangible manner


----------



## albert_dao

Easy answer to 2,192 words in four: Hydrogen Sulfide + Nutrient Accumulation.


----------



## Algae Beater

plain and simple trophic web collapse. 

lacking certain keystone species, or nourishment/habitat for said species is the single most common cause of ecological collapse. without these species others cannot exist and the whole system breaks down. 

Lets assume that you can get good quality "live sand" and put it in your closed system. on the off chance you manage to get a higher on the trophic (lets crudely call it food web) animal which may have a range in the wild of several hundred square feet rather than the dozen or so in your aquarium, it has minimal chance of survival. without inputs from the ocean water and the ability to search out food in other areas the lifestyle of said organism is doomed to death by its evolution into its niche. one enough of these (usually predatory) organisms have died, the system becomes overrun with the prey, and eventually the food for this one time prey item disappears. and the cycle then repeats itself on and on until the ecology of the environment and its diversity are so simplified that scarcely anything survives where there once was a rich community. and the odds of it restarting again in a closed system (sometimes even and open one) are slim to nil. 

other causes aside, this is why deep sand beds will inevitably fail. you cannot begin to understand the complexity of the community and number of species found in one cubic foot of marine sediment.


----------



## Flear

hydrogen sulfide is produced at the lower/lowest layers, i'm aware, as this diffuses back into the water column it's gotta go through the aerobic layer where it eagerly reacts with the available oxygen and is neutralized.

i've seen a tank where a lady buried her dead fish and critters in the substrate under the idea of providing lots of nutrients for the beneficial bacteria.

one of the visual symptoms of hydrogen sulfide is black substrate, which was heavily visible on the glass by the dead gorami.
given time that faded (hydrogen sulfide was no longer produced) and never had any problems with any of the fish in the tank.

nutrient accumulation, ... the idea is sound, i'm aware from your posts about the lack of rooting plants in the saltwater aquarium. i haven't come across anyone talking about their deep sand bed in the freshwater community that has had it running for over 2 years, ... let alone the 4 years i heard it took till nutrient problems were serious in saltwater DSB


----------



## Algae Beater

chiefly we are talking about saltwater. 

blackened substrate is a symptom of and Anaerobic zone, which typically results in H2SO4 a VERY toxic gas. and if you think a gas such as that is that quickly neutralized ... wow... 

most freshwater/saltwater substrates in nature are anaerobic once you get past the first inch or so. Unless the material is vigorously moved about by the water. Regardless of O2 levels, the densities of microbes in surface layers will rapidly consume any available oxygen. this is just fine as through the history of the earth plants and animals have evolved to occupy this zone. 

and the woman who did not remove a dead fish better have had a HUGE tank. that is one of the stupidest things i have ever heard... unless she loves buying chemical filter media or doing water changes. doing that is horrible and stressful for EVERYTHING ELSE in the tank. there is more than enough nutrients for bacteria in leftover fish food and fish waste.


----------



## albert_dao

Decomposing fish in her tank....

Man, that's the equivalent of feeding your kid shots of vodka and Jager, with a side of antifreeze, just to see if they can handle it. Maybe they can, and you'd never know to til you try... But you shouldn't do it. Why? Because it's a stupid thing to do.


----------



## Flear

the lady i mentioned about her deep sand bed burying her fish. rather small actually, by my standards. i'd have to reread her thread on her forum to find that info again, but it was a rather small tank, as she mentioned, about 3x the standard stocking rule of thumb. as she described, water changes only for medication, i don't know about a filter.

it's not that H2SO4 is 'that quickly neutralized', fine sand works for slowing down diffusion in both directions, into the sand bed, and back out of the sand bed, gives the toxin lots of time to be neutralized.

it's one thing to point out worries, the same worries i've heard over and over. the one ladies tank and her treatment of the tank is the most extreme i've heard in many ways, and it's still safe for all the critters, shrimp included.

but, ... freshwater planted tank, comparing apples and oranges, ... that or it shows how much an improvement adding plants, especially rooting plants to a deep sand bed can enhance their functionality.

so if your calling it irresponsible, fine, it is clearly irresponsible by common understandings.
does not take away from the truth and the reality that it actually works.

what it does is point out all the nay-sayers are going off fears for why they don't want to try it. or emphasizes a deep sand bed is blamed when other culprits are responsible.

a hydrogen sulfide test kit, she wanted one, i searched for such a thing, seems they do not exist. leaving finding detected readings to observations only.

and everything survived, ... so someone is going off fears, (not founded) or they're blaming the deep sand bed for things it's not responsible for. either way no one is talking about what was found that could explain their tanks crashing, ... the one thing that on and on isn't explained.


----------



## Flear

albert and algae beater, ... it's easy for me to explain away your pointed out concerns for possible failings of deep sand beds, ... i've heard the same arguments before by people who have never done a DSB, and i've heard where those concerns are unfounded. and seen things pushed beyond all reasonable understanding and still came through successfully.

so what happened in the DSBs you know of that caused them to fail ?, what tanglble thing ?
i've yet to hear it


----------



## deepRED

This is getting comical. What CAN be done, and what should be AVOIDED based upon experience and common sense are very different things. Just because something "works" in one instance does not mean it is a good way to go about it.


----------



## albert_dao

Dude... Just do your DSB. It's fine. We are all okay with it. It's your tank, your time and your money. 

As far as I can tell, your questions have been answered in one form or another several times already....


----------



## Algae Beater

jeez

haven't i already answered WHY they fail? 

you set up a DSB on a true closed system using standard and available items. If in 5 years its still humming along without adding anything besides more sterile sand ... let me know

hundreds have gone before you and failed if not THOUSANDS. Time and time again. We have told you how and why. some of the best reefers on the planet could not maintain such a system in the long term. if you think its easy for you to explain years of established and peer-reviewed science, then you my friend are in the wrong field. pick up ANY ecology book, and the same answer will be presented.


----------



## albert_dao

Algae Beater, I can't help but feel that we've been trolled, bigtime.


----------



## Algae Beater

clearly, he has made about 20 posts on a new account and his IP does not match his location = TROOOLOLOLOLLL


----------



## Flear

some are made from work, some are made from home.

i've still got some searching to do to find more answers, ... i'm not finding them from you 2 though, not finding any concerns i haven't already come across and had answered and explained in additional research.

the concerns you 2 have explained are kinda minor as i've got some answers.

rooted plants in the substrate, while they solve a nutrient problem raise another potential problem of reducing or eliminating the anaerobic/anoxic layer(s) that i'm currently trying to track down. not having much luck as it seems it's not looked at much in reference to it's relation to lower layers of deeper substrates.

but if that's the extent of your concerns for why it can't work, ... that's the same as saying it does work with everything i've come across in all my searching the last few months. (several hours a day - lots of searching)

i'm not asking to call you wrong, i've got better things to do with my life. like searching for potential concerns i haven't heard answered already. both of you have raised none.

so 5 years running, ... no not interested in adding any additional sand, ... that sounds like it will cause ammonia spikes as it smothers the aerobic layer of the substrate. (that is a concern i have seen other people experience)

deep sand beds, much like searching for alternatives like rockwool for substrate don't seem to be an area people really understand much of what is going on and is riddled with rumors, fears and missinformation.

if your the experts, i need better experts to talk with.


----------



## The Guy

Okayyyyyyyyyyyyyy!! enough this is getting tired now, lets move on folks!!


----------



## DBam

The Guy said:


> Okayyyyyyyyyyyyyy!! enough this is getting tired now, let move on folks!!


Yeah... This is getting to be a time waster now. Speaking of wasted time...



Flear said:


> that's the same as saying it does work with everything i've come across in all my searching the last few months. (several hours a day - lots of searching)
> i'm not asking to call you wrong, i've got better things to do with my life. like searching for potential concerns i haven't heard answered already.
> 
> ...if your the experts, i need better experts to talk with.


----------



## fkshiu

It's been a nice long civil debate by everyone, but perhaps it's time now that we can all agree to disagree?


----------

