• Folks, if you've recently upgraded or renewed your annual club membership but it's still not active, please reach out to the BOD or a moderator. The PayPal system has a slight bug which it doesn't allow it to activate the account on it's own.

Bare Bottom

C

cgunther

I am considering going bare bottom with my 150gal setup. The crushed coral I put in some time ago is getting funky and is a pain to keep clean. I have a ton of live rock and no fish at this point. Just some corals and small inverts. I'm thinking about only keeping corals/clams at this point in the game, maybe a few small fish. What are the pros and cons of going bare bottom?
 
J

jonathan.

IMO, the cons are alk and calcium swings.

I had tons of trouble keeping both steady with barebottom and running a NeoZeo tank.

I went back to sugar fine aragonite after battling it for a few weeks. Doing super frequent water changes helped, but it was just too much to keep up with to keep them in check.
 
M

mnat

Officer Emeritus
Staff member
Moderator
You probably want to get rid of the crushed coral anyway as it traps a lot of gunk. We just switched out our crushed coral for live sand which helps. I have never run a bare bottom tank before, but the live sand base adds some stability to the tank.
 
onefish2fish

onefish2fish

i agree. the crushed coral is bad news, same with the incorrect depth of sand.
your either going to want no sand, less then 1" or more then 4" anything else traps detritus and debris IMO.
 
C

concept3

jonathan. said:
IMO, the cons are alk and calcium swings.

I had tons of trouble keeping both steady with barebottom and running a NeoZeo tank.
Click to expand...


Never had that problem with the Alk/Ca swings. Could it have been the Zeo method? I have a Calcium reactor, and it's dialed in with the inhabitants calcium uptake so no major swingage here



Cons: can't keep sand sifting critters, not so "natural" look,

Pros: crazy water flow, ability to siphon out detritus quicker and efficiently, not so "natural" look. Think of it as living abstract art :D
 
H

ham

i'm going with the bare bottom look. i have sand now but am pulling it out a little at a time. trying to change it up a bit.
 
C

cgunther

I took about 1/2 of it out today. Didn't want to stir things up too bad. See if it's easier to manage. Next time I clean it I may take more. I guess it's a good idea to have some substrate.
 
M

mgonz

bare bottom is much eaiser to keep clean but i think it looks to unnatural. i personally like the natural look.
 
A

anothermineral

For those that don't like the BB look, you might want to try this. I put a few fast growing Zoa frags on my BB tank and they've started covering the bottom of the tank. I estimate that in ~ a year, I won't be able to see the bottom of my 210G.
 
J

jonathan.

concept3 said:
jonathan. said:
IMO, the cons are alk and calcium swings.

I had tons of trouble keeping both steady with barebottom and running a NeoZeo tank.
Click to expand...


Never had that problem with the Alk/Ca swings. Could it have been the Zeo method? I have a Calcium reactor, and it's dialed in with the inhabitants calcium uptake so no major swingage here



Cons: can't keep sand sifting critters, not so "natural" look,

Pros: crazy water flow, ability to siphon out detritus quicker and efficiently, not so "natural" look. Think of it as living abstract art :D
Click to expand...

Well, if you have a calcium reactor, that's one thing.

On a 39G tank, I don't have one of those.

You lose the buffering capability of the aragonite, which is a big thing.

If anyone went BB, I'd really, really recommend them to go remote DSB as well in the sump somewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top