[Rob]

My sump is rather large and has started to accumulate grey detritus on the bottom. I've considered vacuuming it out, but it also has detritovores... I've found brittle stars, different worms, copopods (some of them have grown quite large, about 2mm!) and whatnot.

If I disturb the sediment, I cloud up the water for a while.

So I'm considering alternatives.

My sump is quite large and incorporates several chambres seperated by baffles. So I'm considering a sand layer in one of them. Should help keep down the nitrates as well.

Has anyone gone down this particular road before? Thoughts?

[organicreefer]

sand would work,but i prefer to syphon the detritus out of the sump as part of my regular water changes.yes there is life in there,but think about it,they are there to eliminate the detritus ,right.so it makes more sense to just syphon it away.youll lose some critters too yes but theyll never get to the end of all that gunk anyway.

[SPasse]

Hi All,

I use a sump as a “settling” pond and use a “mud bed” rather than sand in my sump/refugium. But a DSB in the sump is a very popular approach.

My DSB just happens to be in the main tank.

The highest populations of micro fauna were to be found in my mud bed.

But I consider this a very good thing.

Rather than removing detritus, I believe in setting up systems in your tank to “process” it. Detritus is a key element in the detrivore food chain, not something to be removed by the aquarist.

Regards,

Scott Passe

[Papa Doug]

This is a 55 gal. tub. It contains a 3 inch sandbed, small pieces of liverock, a 300 watt heater, a temp controller probe, a ph monitor probe, a Euroreef skimmer, a calcium reactor, and the turf scrubber on top.

I have always had good luck with a sandbed in the sump, even with different style sumps and things in it. I also have a sandbed in my overflow. All beds are crawling with life, so food is consumed at all three levels.

[Rob]

Scott wrote:
I use a sump as a “settling” pond and use a “mud bed” rather than sand in my sump/refugium.
[...]
Rather than removing detritus, I believe in setting up systems in your tank to “process” it. Detritus is a key element in the detrivore food chain, not something to be removed by the aquarist.

Scott,

Can you give further details about your mud bed? How to do it, a link perhaps? What does the material consist of? This sounds like a worthwhile project to try.

I agree with you absolutely about processing detritus rather than removing it; however, in the last year my results have been mixed. I'm getting a bit desperate, because no matter how many water chages I do, it seems that I have a "nitrate factory" somewhere in the system. Nitrate levels go down for a couple of days after a water change, then go right back up there.

Don't remember the number, but it it the level at which corals decline, and the reagent in the test kit becomes dark red rather than yellow. Am using RO/DI water, everything "by the book". Sand bed is about 4" deep on the average. Maybe it's not deep enough?

Recently I increased circulation in the tank by adding a few large powerheads. Now the tank hums and buzzes 24/7. Great. This is by way of preventing detritus from landing on the mossy "live" rock. Too early to tell if it's made a difference.

Thoughts?

[organicreefer]

detritus something not to be removed?!?!?!
i have to disagree completely,yes try to process as much as you can ,but ime,even with diligent syphoning and water changes ,there is never a shortage of detritus in a closed system with fish.if you suspect there is ,just feed a little more,better to have fresh food than rotting detritus..........jmo

[Rob]

OK, so perhaps some detritus is recycled and some is not... but how about keeping it stirred up to keep it in the water column?

If I increase circulation in the main tank any further, I'll need some kind of coarser sand to keep the powdery South Down, down.

What about periodic mechanical filtering?

I don't know, guys, I'm open to new ideas. It's interesting how much disagreement that there is, after three-odd decades of people trying to keep a reef tank.

[kevinpo]

Back in the '85 when I set up my 100 gal tank they were just starting to add small pieces of live rock and bare bottom tanks were very popular. You could vacuum the detritus off the bottom anytime it built up. The tanks back then were lit buy Vitalights (with the twist in them) and actinics were just coming out. There were no halides at that time. The tanks of that time still built up nitrates no matter how clean you kept the bottom and I did water changes every 3 weeks or so of 25 gallons to keep them down. Today I have a refugium/sump combination that has a 4-5" sand bed (120 lbs) and is lit on a reverse lighting schedule. I grow 6-7 different types of macro algae there and have never been able to get a nitrate reading even when using a low range test kit. My tank is what I would consider maximum stocked (29 fish).

This is just my experience so TIFWIW
Kevin

[Palmetto]

You definately need to get rid of the detritus.

Fighting Conchs are fantastic creatures to keep that stuff clean. They only get up to 3" max (unlike Queen conchs) and do not climb the glass and knock things over on top of the rocks- they just run around that sandbed with that funny little elephant trunk cleaning up the stuff that would rot. I absolutely love 'em.

I run a deep sandbed in the sump- Of course, the sump on our 75-gallon showtank is a 75-gallon tank with an 8" Southdown bed seeded with Fiji, Gulf, and other Live Sand and planted with mangrove pods, macroalgae, and some low-current corals. (and a couple of big Derasa clams). The bottom tank is lit by 440 watts of VHO and one extra 40Watt NO Actinic. (The top tank has 2 x 250-watt MH and 2 x 65 PC Actinic.)

I prefer the deeper sandbed in the low-current , higher nutrient bottom tank that I keep planted. I have run this setup unskimmed for a month at a time, although I am putting an old RedSea Berlin Turbo in there because I am going to add more fish.

[Barry N.]

I have sand in all my sumps.

Hey Darren

Barry

[EMS503]

I am considering re-doing my sump. How about some pics. of these sumps with sand. Thanks

[Poseidon]

Wow this an OLD thread....

It's fun to see how what was new has become the standard, but I think I read somewhere that the DSB is better suited to be in the tank rather then the sump.

But I too agree a DSB is the way to go, plus I like keeping a good sized colony of Xenia as a natural filter Nitrate Sponge!!

My .02

Mike

[Minh Nguyen]

I have a 6 inches sandbed in my refugium/sump. I also have 2X250 MH in it. this is where I keep things that need a little special care. New fishes, sick corals (LPS) that are not doing well. I have area of high flow, low flow, high light, low light. I can also reach the coral very easy to feed them. I had a cleaner shrimp in the refugium also when I have new fish by have since remove him because he can take food away from the food I gave to corals and anemones. I got 5 species of magco-algae growing in the refugium, two types of sea grasses, and one type of water plant in my refugium (I got the seed from Corpus Christi Bay)
Minh Nguyen

[mrok12]

Originally Posted by Minh Nguyen

I have a 6 inches sandbed in my refugium/sump. I also have 2X250 MH in it. this is where I keep things that need a little special care. New fishes, sick corals (LPS) that are not doing well. I have area of high flow, low flow, high light, low light. I can also reach the coral very easy to feed them. I had a cleaner shrimp in the refugium also when I have new fish by have since remove him because he can take food away from the food I gave to corals and anemones. I got 5 species of magco-algae growing in the refugium, two types of sea grasses, and one type of water plant in my refugium (I got the seed from Corpus Christi Bay)
Minh Nguyen

I have a maco sand bed in sump A and Sump B is for the skimmer. I find it works well to maintain larger plankton