Survey Reefers re: vacuuming sand bed.

[MnFish1]

I have experience, not opinions. They are hugely different.

What in the history of me posting online to help people reef leads you to believe that I am not well read and studied in addition to being well practiced? There are no facts that biodiversity decreases over time, just a few people who showed something under a small set of conditions. I will also admit when I am wrong.

I could easily commission some literature that shows that it increases by leaps and bounds with other conditions. That is as much of a fact as any other literature. Neither are actual facts.

Why is all of this so hard for you? I know that you like to be a contrarian and often lack the self awareness to see what is going on, but in what world do people quote literature over well-studied people with experience? It is not some noobie, thumb-sucker feeling, belief or interpretation (opinion) that a well-cared for tank can keep diverse critters over time when well cared for - I have done it with direct involvement (experience). This seems like somebody needs Robin Williams to give the speech to Matt Damon about how they don't know anything just from the literature.

You keep saying 'what I like to do' - yet your ignore that 90% of my posts are in the disease forum helping peopl with that. What you say 'I like to do' is not reality'. - When I disagree with someone I say it - just because you have 20 badges does not make you immune to that. The science and the one person as far as I know - says biodiversity decreases over time - if you disagree with that - thats your right. Doesn't mean I have to agree with you. No matter whether you have 1 month or 100 years experience. This has been discussed at length on other threads. If you want to prove me wrong - do some research beyond your experience - which no one can question - but - I guarantee microbiologic assessments on biodiversity is not one of those pluses.

 

[MnFish1]

Apologies - I meant to ask you to quote these references: "I could easily commission some literature that shows that it increases by leaps and bounds with other conditions. That is as much of a fact as any other literature. Neither are actual facts."

The only way biodiversity increases in aquaria significantly is addition of bacteria or other organisms subsequent to the first measurement. Otherwise it tends to decrease overtime - you can start with Taricha's post: https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/b...y-10-month-microbiome-data-from-brstv.974070/

Then go to google scholar - and read the science that supports what he says

 

[brandon429]

I read some pretty authoritative claims here in this thread about what sandbeds do

And then I took time to select 'find all threads' from jda's page and bean animals page too

And there's not one single instance of them fixing an outbound sandbed problem for anyone at any time, and they've never originated any thread where multiple people post them sandbed challenges to work live time

There's not one single time where they arranged someone else's tank to get the results they state firmly

Not once

All the words are posted on threads *other people made* but they don't get into actual job to see them through

That's holding the hobby back. They could be using time to make verified forward strides in the hobby


I learn a lot about reefers abilities by searching out jobs they solicit and finish for others- by selecting find all posts and see how they've spent their last year

 

[MnFish1]

To be fair, this thread is a discussion specifically about systems with 'sand beds', and as such my post should be viewed in that context. Nor did I state or even imply that any one tank has anywhere near the 'biodiversity of the ocean'.

BTW - I don't want to belabor this point, but - the conversation 'should one vacuum or not', had many people suggesting that keeping a sand bed 'as is', not vacuuming detritus, etc 'increases biodiversity'. My point were merely 1) since many people have no sand beds, yet great tanks - IME vacuuming or not does not make a difference one way or another.

 

[jda]

That is as dumb as saying that since people that are bald don't have dirty hair that it is doesn't matter if people with hair wash it or not.

 

[MnFish1]

That is as dumb as saying that since people that are bald don't have dirty hair that it is doesn't matter if people with hair wash it or not.

Yes, you're correct it's 'kind of' dumb' - except - another analogy closer to what I was trying to say would be - Should people wash their hair or not? If one is looking at the ability to run a marathon, whether one washes their hair or not doesn't matter as much as training daily.

Since you like 'experience' over 'studies' - if you re-read the thread - there are people with successful tanks who:

1. Never touch their sand bed with a vacuum
2. Vacuum it regularly either in whole or in part
3. Dont have any or don't have much sand
4. Believe that the sand bed and detritus increases 'biodiversity' (i.e. so best not to vacuum)
5. Believe that the sand bed and detritus does not increase 'biodiversity' (thus it doesn't matter).
6. Some combination of 1-5. or other reasons to vacuum or not to vacuum.

Leading to my comment which you felt was 'dumb'

 

[jda]

It all matters to those with the experience and intelligence to understand the nuance and apply to each specific situation.

 

[MnFish1]

It all matters to those with the experience and intelligence to understand the nuance and apply to each specific situation.

In reality, its practically impossible to answer this question definitively (whether to vacuum sand or not) because each system is different, each level of experience is different, bioloads are different, filtration is different, etc. which is likely the difference between the replies seen here. Each tank is 'an experience'.

 

[paintman]

200 gallon tank. Every Sunday afternoon I turn all the powerheads up and whip the snot out of my tank with fresh filter socks and skimmer set wet.. Turkey bast every last inch of rock and sand while running a 1800 gph power filter. let tank and powerfilter twist tank like a tornado overnight. Next morning remove powerfilter and slow tank down to normal. CRYSTAL CLEAR WATER AND THE CORALS LOVE IT! I have zero algae issues in tank but grow it like a weed in my scrubber. Phos and nitrate are always 0.05 and 4-8.

 

[Tavero]

I don't want to speak for Tavero, but this is one place where research and studies from waste treatment plants do not work for reef tanks, IMO. In many waste treatment plants, the bacteria are lost downstream and they have to make new ones constantly, as well as perform their function of no3 => n2. This does require some sort of carbon for the new organic tissue to grow to replace the lost bacteria. In our tanks, the bacteria population is in a stable place and we don't have to constantly replace them en masse.

If your point was that they don't need carbon to process no3 into n2, then that is correct.

Even going back to the 1990s, some of the speakers at shows cautioned about using waste treatment studies for much in our tanks. There are PLENTY of waste treatment studies out there. DSBs were more in use back then and inquiring minds could find waste treatment analysis in books or on microfiche in many locations.

That was my point. In order to 'multiply' there has to be some carbon - but in our tanks I believe thats clearly present. The main issue happening in a sand bed (as you said) which is NO3 -->N2 does not require it.

Technically jda is correct but bacteria doesn't exactly need a lot of oxygen if it isn't multiplying because that's literally the only thing it usually spends energy for. Carbon is also needed for other bacterial functions like protein synthesis. I think that's also the whole concept of of the vodca method (under aerobic condions)

There isn't actually much loss of bacteria in (properly working) waste water treatment plants. Bacteria is removed manually as sludge which looks suspiciously similar to aquarium detrius. Without removal the bioreactors would be full to the brim with sludge in no time. In my opinion that's also the reason why vacuuming the sand bed once in a while isn't such a bad idea. I can't reach all spots anyway so there is always some detrius left to perform hypothetical denitrification. I actually think we couldn't remove all of it even if we wanted to.

 

[MnFish1]

Technically jda is correct but bacteria doesn't exactly need a lot of oxygen if it isn't multiplying because that's literally the only thing it usually spends energy for. Carbon is also needed for other bacterial functions like protein synthesis. I think that's also the whole concept of of the vodca method (under aerobic condions)

There isn't actually much loss of bacteria in (properly working) waste water treatment plants. Bacteria is removed manually as sludge which looks suspiciously similar to aquarium detrius. Without removal the bioreactors would be full to the brim with sludge in no time. In my opinion that's also the reason why vacuuming the sand bed once in a while isn't such a bad idea. I can't reach all spots anyway so there is always some detrius left to perform hypothetical denitrification. I actually think we couldn't remove all of it even if we wanted to.

I was talking about bacteria in general - which is usually multiplying, not just those in a water treatment plant.