PDA

View Full Version : Barebottom - Drawbacks?


DEIGNAN14
06/29/2009, 03:04 PM
Ok- I am almost sold on the bare bottom approach for my next reef.

I am planning to do a DSB in conjunction with the fuge - but I am wondering what if any drawbacks are involved with bare bottom show tanks.

Aside from aesthetics are there any other negatives to keep in mind?

Thanks!
J

Cozmo4
06/29/2009, 03:11 PM
What type of livestock do you plan to keep? Many fish (and beneficial inverts) require a substrate.

DEIGNAN14
06/29/2009, 03:27 PM
I am in it for the SPS.... I am planning for a med-low bioload. I realize I will have to be careful about livestock and certain inverts- but is it really limiting in terms of what you can keep?

Crazed
06/29/2009, 03:28 PM
I know this kind of falls under aesthetics, but unless it's properly cleaned I imagine a barebottom tank would show detritus and algae more than substrate, where it just kind of blends in until it's consumed/decomposed.

DEIGNAN14
06/29/2009, 03:36 PM
I am not sure - I am planning on a heavy flow system so I figured a bare bottom tank would actually be "cleaner"

Without substrate to consume it - I figure detritus will end up in the water colum where it will get skimmed out or delivered to the fuge...

Does this make sense? Anyone go bare bottom and find detritus to be an issue?



Am

Reefbox
06/29/2009, 03:44 PM
I think the white starboard looks pretty amazing as a base when it is sealed in so nothing gets under it. Detritus is not a problem when you have good flow keeping it in suspension.

SWINGRRRR
06/29/2009, 03:45 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15276946#post15276946 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Crazed
I know this kind of falls under aesthetics, but unless it's properly cleaned I imagine a barebottom tank would show detritus and algae more than substrate, where it just kind of blends in until it's consumed/decomposed.

Thats part of the point. You can see the poop and siphon it out yourself. Takes me 5 minutes every couple of days to clean my bottom. Ill never have a sand tank again.

To the OP. There are probably 100's of threads answering these questions. You should try a search instead of clogging an already overloaded system.

luther1200
06/29/2009, 04:43 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15277016#post15277016 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SWINGRRRR


To the OP. There are probably 100's of threads answering these questions. You should try a search instead of clogging an already overloaded system.


What a riduculous statement. There are 100's of threads on every topic. That is the point isn't it? If nobody ever made a thread about a topic that has already been talked about it would be a very stagnant and boring site. I suggest if you feel its being clogged than keep your comment to yourself and thats 1 more post that won't be "slowing " you down.

SWINGRRRR
06/29/2009, 04:48 PM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15277306#post15277306 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by luther1200
What a riduculous statement. There are 100's of threads on every topic. That is the point isn't it? If nobody ever made a thread about a topic that has already been talked about it would be a very stagnant and boring site. I suggest if you feel its being clogged than keep your comment to yourself and thats 1 more post that won't be "slowing " you down.
Well, thank you freedom of speech. And I’ve paid my dues to the site so I’m trying to help however I can.


I provided my experience to the thread as it pertains to the post. Then I simply offered a suggestion for searching. If he’d take 5 seconds to search, he'll find way more info that asking the question and waiting.

If you have a problem with what I posted, you should have reported it instead of trying to police the post yourself. As per the UA, please stay on topic.

terryagi
06/30/2009, 07:29 AM
Another aesthetic "issue" is that it doesn't look natural.

+1 on starboard though.

Whisperer
06/30/2009, 07:36 AM
Over time, the bare bottom will be colonized by coralline algae. I have shrooms and zoanthids on the bottom as well. Water turbulence will prevent too much accumulation of detritus at the bottom. One drawback with BB is that I have to change my filter sock every 5-6 days. I can't imagine that filth lingering under the sandbed.

James77
06/30/2009, 07:59 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15277328#post15277328 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by SWINGRRRR

If you have a problem with what I posted, you should have reported it instead of trying to police the post yourself. As per the UA, please stay on topic.

He was merely defending himself, and he was correct to do so. I see no where in the user agreement it says to keep on topic. If you think a topic has been rehashed too many times, just ignore the thread.

James77
06/30/2009, 08:08 AM
Deigan, aesthetics is pretty much the only drawback. BB allows you almost unlimited flow and the ability to keep the tank with minimal detritus/gunk.

I personally grew tired of the sterile look, and I don't like the way coralline looks on the bottom. But I hate the sand dunes and storms of DSB tanks. On my current tank, I used a starboard bottom and covered it with ~1" of coarser sand(caribsea seafloor grade). You can get alot of flow without it blowing around, and still looks like a sand bed. I hit the sand with a powerhead every couple of weeks to free any detritus in it.

SWINGRRRR
06/30/2009, 08:09 AM
Im suggesting the OP search. He (assuming he's a he) hasnt even re-visited this post since, so it must not be that important to him anyway.
This my opinion, you have yours, lets move on about it.

jmann
06/30/2009, 08:46 AM
I have had a DSB and run BB in the past and now have a SB. 1/2" of courser substrate 1/2mm to 2mm size and love it. I just put a sock on the dump tubes into the sump and stir the bed with a stick before water changes.

DEIGNAN14
06/30/2009, 08:51 AM
I guess I am the "OP"??

Swingerrrr -- thanks for your insight and your suggestions. I am well aware of how to search. I chose to start a fresh conversation and that is my prerogative to do so.

I appreciate everyone who took the time to comment and share their experience with BB. Especially those that spoke up in defense of the site and the community...

mdt178
06/30/2009, 09:05 AM
In my previous heavy flow BB tank, if a frag got knocked off or fell down, it's probably was going to disappear under the rocks before I had a chance to retrieve it.

Superstretch18
06/30/2009, 09:07 AM
I've run both barebottom and with sand and I don't think I would ever run another tank without sand.

Aesthetics is a big part of it, but you also limit the biodiversity in the main tank. Granted, if you are running a fuge, you are going to at least be cultivating it elsewhere. But for me, personally, I find the life that comes with a live sand bed to be one of the most interesting parts of owning a tank. That's really just my personal preference though...

I would question whether having a fuge on a low nutrient sps tank is going to be beneficial. The extremely low nutrient levels are going to make cultivating macro harder. Also, keeping sand out of the main tank, just to create a nutrient sink in the fuge's dsb is going to be counter productive. If the macro winds up growing well, it's likely because the DSB is providing nutrients, which if that is the case, you might as well have sand in the main tank.

This is all my internal thought process, so I'm not shooting down your plans, by any means. Just if I was doing a low nutrient bare-bottom system, I'd go with the biggest skimmer I could afford/fit, kill the fuge and possibly consider dosing vodka...

Rich D
06/30/2009, 09:10 AM
I LOVE the look of BB and love a starboard bottom even more. I wish I could have one but my dad doesn't like aesthetics of it.

regarding detritus and other gunk settling on the bottom, that is one of the biggest reasons to get BB; when its building up, it is very easy to siphon it or blow it out from under rocks and corals without creating a sand storm. If you have mostly or purely SPS then you can really have a ton of flow and never have anything settle on the bottom.

SWINGRRRR
06/30/2009, 09:13 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15280746#post15280746 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Superstretch18
Just if I was doing a low nutrient bare-bottom system, I'd go with the biggest skimmer I could afford/fit, kill the fuge and possibly consider dosing vodka...

Based on about a year of research, and tons of searching and reading, this is basically my exact set-up. I have stopped dosing vodka for 2 weeks though as I am dosing MB7. But what do I know?

The aesthetic thing is a personal opinion. I don’t really miss the way the sand looks. Everyone that sees my tank is taken back by the cleanness, and the corals. Usually after about 5-10 minutes of looking they all go "Hey, where’s the sand?"

DEIGNAN14
06/30/2009, 10:08 AM
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15280746#post15280746 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Superstretch18
I've run both barebottom and with sand and I don't think I would ever run another tank without sand.

Aesthetics is a big part of it, but you also limit the biodiversity in the main tank. Granted, if you are running a fuge, you are going to at least be cultivating it elsewhere. But for me, personally, I find the life that comes with a live sand bed to be one of the most interesting parts of owning a tank. That's really just my personal preference though...

I would question whether having a fuge on a low nutrient sps tank is going to be beneficial. The extremely low nutrient levels are going to make cultivating macro harder. Also, keeping sand out of the main tank, just to create a nutrient sink in the fuge's dsb is going to be counter productive. If the macro winds up growing well, it's likely because the DSB is providing nutrients, which if that is the case, you might as well have sand in the main tank.

This is all my internal thought process, so I'm not shooting down your plans, by any means. Just if I was doing a low nutrient bare-bottom system, I'd go with the biggest skimmer I could afford/fit, kill the fuge and possibly consider dosing vodka...


Thank you man! This is the stuff I need to hear! :) The idea behind the fuge is not to cultivate macro - but to eliminate nutrients and feed the tank with pods etc... I agree that a nutrient sink is a nutrient sink - so I am going to be giving this one some more thought...

huskysglare1
06/30/2009, 10:25 AM
crazed, not to be mean, but have you tried the search engine here? it fails 90% of the time. i get didly swat when i try searching.,

Whisperer
06/30/2009, 10:32 AM
You will never get anywhere near a DBS when you see the stinking mess that are under it over time. Talk about Unforgettable.

DEIGNAN14
06/30/2009, 10:50 AM
been there done that - don't mind the low tide smell believe it or not!

I am mostly concerned about sandstorms and cleanliness. Also, Im in sales and I move frequently. I enjoy everything about moving a tank - aside from dealing with the sand!

cabrego
06/30/2009, 12:01 PM
The biggest problem with my BB tank is debris build up from rocks chipping over time, the debris does not syphon out so I have to scooop it out.

stanlalee
06/30/2009, 12:35 PM
the biggest drawback is detritus build up. If your set up like a typical SPS you have low flow LPS on the bottom (usually the only place they can go and not be blasted with flow). Bare bottom requires a good bit of flow down low to keep things suspended. theres a small window between enough flow down low and ability to keep low flow LPS like acans and blasto down there. I had it set up where everything settled in one back corner so I could just siphon it out at water change time but I didn't like doing that so I adjusted flow accordingling. I have over 75x turnover as is but in the future I'm going to place a Vortech MP10 out of sight and mind down low behind the rocks with its only purpose to pulse and keep detritus suspended.
Other than that bare bottom is more cleaner and hassle free for me. I can rip across a magfloat like I'm mad at it. In my tank with sand I have to be so careful. Basically I and the inhabitants can do anything we wish without stirring up a mess or clouding the tank. I love bare bottom!

luther1200
06/30/2009, 01:30 PM
I have a SSB and a 3" SB in the fuge. My DT SB is only 2". I didn't want a DSB in the DT but wanted the look of the sand. I just don't like BB. If you have a BB tank you have to have it totally packed with corals so it doesn't look funny, IMO. And I don't really like the "packed" look. I prefer a more open aquascape.

Alaskan Reefer
06/30/2009, 02:01 PM
The biggest drawback to BB is inability to keep some LPS -- the flow you want in a BB makes it very hard to place LPS and keep them happy. You also can't keep most fish that rely on sand and/or pods for happiness/food.

The other problem is the Sand People and their hate for the BB look constantly pervading BB threads. I like how it looks -- pink cutting boards of purity to me wins over the light brown shifting outhouse.

Rich D
06/30/2009, 06:50 PM
pink cutting boards of purity to me wins over the light brown shifting outhouse.

HAHAHA that was deep

mortis13
06/30/2009, 07:47 PM
the biggest problem with bare bottoms is that when cold your cheeks go red and if slapped, may sting. apart from that, go for it.

jenglish
06/30/2009, 08:45 PM
If you are looking to emulate a reeftop and go all SPS, and you have no critters that need sand, then it is just a matter of aesthetics. The detritus being easy to see is good as long as you clean it up. With proper flow it should end up settling out in the sump or filter sock anyway.