Less is more
 

Just wanted to pass on some thoughts on rock. I'm sure everyone is aware of the problems I had in my old 155g. After tearing it down and selling all the rock, I calculated about 287 pounds total in there. This, IMO, is the casue of the entire issue with my tank crashing.

My new 75g has about 70 pounds of rock, with lots of flow and swimming room. Even with this little rock, nd no sand, I have no measurable nitrate and almost no settleing of detritus on the rocks.

Lesson I've learned is to err on the side of caution when adding rock, as too little is better than too much, IME.

Just my thought for the day. Going for a bike ride now, bubye.

Couldn't agree more. Have had great success doing what you describe, Brad. Circulation in and around the open structures is key.

But I also use a sandbed. :mrgreen: Call me a troglodyte.

Well, not that a sandbed is bad, but a lot of the selling of DSB was to eliminate NO3 altogether. My point of no sand was that even without it, the rock removed all NO3, even at less than a pound per gallon.

But ya, leave the 90's behind man!! :razz:

Pics, Brad, pics :exclaim:

post
 

About time some one said that, I agree totaly, you can have the bigest tank around and it is not worth anything when it is chalk full of rock

Re: post
 

To play devils advocate and knowing how passionate reefers can get about the "proper way" to set up a tank, I would like to say that it all depends on what you want for a tank. I personaly got into the hobby for the sheer diversity of critters that are in these tanks. When I look into my tanks I'm not just looking at the corals or the fish, i'm looking at the brittle stars, the worms and the pods and these all come with lots of rock :lol:. I would love a big tank chalk full of rock (and no fish)

Marie, nothing wrong with that at all, although mechanically, the more rock you have, the harder it is to keep clean and well aerated. I had more rock than water in my 155g, and eventually all the life you describe died from lack of clean algae-free rock to graze on. There comes a point where there can be too much (to filter and keep critter friendly).
There is a guidline of 1 to 1.5 pounds of rock per gallon, which is reasonable, I'm just saying try not to go much beyond that unless you've planned flow and detritus removal accordingly. Again, YMMV.

One thing I always thought about a bare bottom tank was, that glass is just ugly. I saw a pic on here somewhere and it was of a bare bottom tank but the bottom was covered in Coraline algae, it looked AWESOME. I could sure go with a bare bottom like that. Just my two cents.

Doug

lol, I'm not argueing with you but that comment struck me as very funny, the critters i was describing graze on the algae on the rock, not on the rock itself :lol:

Marie, the problem was the algae on my rocks killed anything that grazed on it. Watching all my snails just lying there dead wasn't very exciting!! :razz:

while i agree with less, my last setup on my 90 had almost 150lbs, now im at about 75. there must have been a reason for algae was killing your inhabitats beyond the fact that you had so much rock. ive seen tanks with piles of rock and slow flow that are well balanced and thriving.

Are you sure it was algae and not slime from the black lagoon :eek: :razz:
Oh and here's 2 smilies to show i'm harmless :biggrin: :biggrin: :razz:

Females of the species are rarely harmless, what's the catch??

Doug

Dang, i have no quick comeback. I must be getting old :rolleyes:

The "algae" were actually dinos, thus toxic. Overall though, the tank became eutophic over a year or so, and detritus build up was the cause, or so goes my best guess. I think you're not getting how much rock I actually had. It was packed full, top to bottom!!

Like having 130lbs in a 75g
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...7Image0003.jpg

Almost. Now add 50 pounds :razz:

To emphasize the point of my post, all I'm saying is that filtration wise, having less rock is not a bad thing. I have a much easier time managing water quality, I have enough room to mount my corals, I have enough room for my tangs to swim and hide, AND I still have no NO3.

I used to run the 75 with at least 130 pounds and no problems, I'm just saying that you don't NEED that kind of rock. If you want it, fine, nothing wrong with that.

reply
 

Wow :eek: Pretty intense thread.
Brad, that much rock must have breached (sp) a buffering threshold or something, and your flow/filtration just couldn't keep up. Both sides of this debate are valid in regards to what you are trying to achieve with your reef. This is an 80 lbs patch reef in my 65g, 80g with sump.
http://www.canreef.com/photopost/dat...1full_tank.jpg

Not all rock has the same density, either. IMO, it's not useful to compare my 50 lbs of rock to someone else's 50 lbs of rock because of possible differences in density.

reply
 

For sure, I have two base rocks that account for over half the total weight of my pile.

In my 37g, I have about 20 lbs of rock, most of it light weight and stacked with lots of holes.

http://www.lostmymarblz.com/37g-may-2005-2.jpg

reply
 

Bev, how long until my caps look like that?

Danny,

I think it depends on a number of factors. Lighting, keeping chemistry up to snuff (alk, Ca, Mg), possibly low nitrates. The massive orange cap in the 37g (24" high) was started about a year ago from two toonie sized frags and kept under a single 6500k MH until two months ago when I changed the lighting to 14000k ARC MH. Can't tell if it's grown much, but that may be because it's so big already.

Am closely watching the green cap on the left side of the towering rock. It's growing quite well. There are other, much smaller green cap frags on that same rock. They were kinda frags of frags and have taken a bit of time to establish their "growing edges". These are the frags that I believe poisoned me wuth their slimy edges :rolleyes:

reply
 

Ooooh, I guess I'll have to be careful when handling them. I've had my orange cap for over a year but I've gone through some drama with the tank. Now I have them up hight under my 250 watt 14k ARC as well.
Wanna race? :mrgreen: :razz:

Can't even see the cap in your pic :razz: Might want to race, though, if our caps are comparable. Also, my MH is only 175w.

Would you say then that you should use a 1:1 ratio for rock to size of tank?
I always read about 2 lbs for ever gallon of tank. I was never sure how I was going to fill my 30g with 60lbs of rock and still be able to get any water in!
I thought I was just cheap, now I know I was doing it right all along! :lol:

Interesting finding though!

Walter

A lot does epend on the kind of rock. From what i understand, the aquacultered rock from florida is very heavy and wouldn't take up so much room in the tank. Fiji rock is light and porous and you would need half as much to take up the same space

Walter, with the current rock we're seeing on the market, closer to 1:1 would be my recomendation. Going higher isn't bad, but will give detritus more places to hide.

Speaking about hiding places in rock for detritus, how many people here tureky baste their rock for detritus export?

I do, every week the day before water changes :biggrin:

reply
 

I don't do it regularly but it does get done from time to time. Right now I have my flow setup so that my rocks get blown pretty good, this comes at the expense of my sand getting the detritus. Thats were the reef crew comes in.