Live Rock Saturation?

[Scooterman]

A few nights ago MikeS mentioned how LR isn't really considered a Bio-Load, if this is true then how can the LR shed a whole year? Somehow it is feeding & living & pooping per say. Just one rock in a tub & it will shed for who knows how long, shedding is proof of life right? What would a tub full of LR be considered just shedding in a tub, if not a bio-load?

 

[CarlaW]

I know Nikki boiled a bunch of smaller rocks last nite Scooter, I'm gonna be real interested to find out what was in the bottom of that container.
Can you say Live Rock gumbo? Maybe she took some pics.

 

[tasos]

LR is our bioload and filtration unit together!We don't boil LR....We just put a flow around the rock and make waves with hand once a wail.....That is my opinion,allright!

 

[Scooterman]

I'm sure it will be nasty, but the outcome I think sill be nice it just will take time to start all over with nakked rock.
tasos I don't think that is completely true, you have to also consider fish, & corals and other living inhabitants, also this wave won't help rock that is clogged.

 

[NaH2O]

A few nights ago MikeS mentioned how LR isn't really considered a Bio-Load, if this is true then how can the LR shed a whole year? Somehow it is feeding & living & pooping per say. Just one rock in a tub & it will shed for who knows how long, shedding is proof of life right? What would a tub full of LR be considered just shedding in a tub, if not a bio-load?

That was a good chat. I'd have to pull up the log, but I think what MikeS was saying is the rock isn't necessarily a bio-load, but more of a product of its environment. Maybe he can clarify for us.

I still think the rock is part of the load on the tank. It can only filter so much, right? The detritus it produces, instead of being bound up, are now free in the tank. In my situation, has the rock begun to recycle the nutrients, instead of process it out? The algae on and inside the rock, block the end products from getting pushed out, so the bacteria recycle it? This would leave any new nutrients to be used by algae, or the algae are feeding on the end products of bacterial processes? BTW - I did take time to blast my rock.

I find it interesting that szidls, after a year of cooking, is still seeing detritus shedding, when the only thing feeding the rock was itself. This leads to another question....can live rock be too porous? Maybe the Pukani rock is subjected to high nutrient water, and it is saturated before even getting it? Certainly, if there is as much sponge associated with it (as seems to be the case with mine) the sponge had to be filtering something to sustain itself.

I boiled some smaller pieces of live rock last night. Total rolling boil hours are 1-1/2. I am waiting for the water to heat up to continue the boil process. The rocks still look pretty green after that boil. So, it needs to go for longer today.

The first is the preboil rocks, and the second is when I starte the water back up today....

 

[Scooterman]

I used my gas grill & a large open pot, looks like your using a steamer right? I wonder if that will get hot enough? I also use a pressure washer to remove a ton before cooking.

Oh yea that part of rock shedding over & over wile cooking I'd like more thoughts on that, think there would be a time that the rock would just die if left cooking or would it continue to cook for a very long time?

 

[NaH2O]

No...its a turkey fryer...goes up to 400F. I have it set to 225-300F. I have the lid on it because it is cold outside, and I wanted it to get really hot. There are holes in the lid for the vapors to escape.

 

[jlehigh]

I am not in a place to contribute answers but i wanted to let everyone know this discussion is great!

LR has been tagged as the bread and butter in an established salt water aquarium providing a means of biological filtration in addition to homes for various forms of life.

This discussion calls into question some of the rarely explored flaws and risks that come with Live Rock outside of hitchhikers. Anything with holes in it has the potential to collect dead particulate and living matter be it in various forms. In Live Rock lots of stuff is trapped as flow rarely passes all the way through the rock at a rate that would keep the majority of particulate from settling. It is then up to the various living forms of matter to eat the dead forms before it turns into things we perceive as bad for the tank, be it PO4, Nitrates, and other forms of Amonia.

I guess it could be argued that in a tank with extensive skimming and flow the filtration benefits of LR are somewhat negated making the rock a nutrient sponge more than a filtration mechanism.

I know in my case the large quantity of rock i had became more of a problem than a help so I removed over 100lbs. Now logically you would think a tank with a heavy bio-load like mine would take a hit and I would end up with an increase in dissolved nutrients... This was not the case. Why? The amount of rock I had negatively impacted the travel of the flow in my tank, while also trapping detritus preventing my other mechanical means of filtration from doing their job.

I Niki's case the rock work appeared open so we are apples and oranges.. For some reason the rock seems to have locked in nutrients and became an automated alage feeder.. hmmm

Scott, your experience is really interesting to me.. to have rock shed crap even after a year of 'cooking' and no feeding..

Just thinking out loud at this point:
If we result to boiling our LR making it DR then reseeding the goals is to remove all forms of matter, good and bad. The rock still has value to us as it contains so much surface area to house beneficial bacteria but then again can also house lots of particulate.. I guess boiling is in a sense a reset enabling hobbyists to control everything going into and out of the rock from that point on..

 

[MikeS]

A few nights ago MikeS mentioned how LR isn't really considered a Bio-Load, if this is true then how can the LR shed a whole year? Somehow it is feeding & living & pooping per say. Just one rock in a tub & it will shed for who knows how long, shedding is proof of life right? What would a tub full of LR be considered just shedding in a tub, if not a bio-load?

That's a good question Scooty. I suppose the answer depends on how we define biolaod, and where in the cycle of events taking place in our tanks biologically you want to start looking at it.

Ok...why is the rock shedding? Basically, because bacteria in and on it are processing nutrients and these are the byproducts of said production, right? Of course all the higher organisims in and on the rock, all the fauna and floura are contributing to this as well, and those could be considered bioload in and of itself, but the impact of these on the bioload of a tank itself I would classify as minimal at best. Of course this will vary from rock to rock...some will be rich in secondary life like that, others will be more devoid of it. But suffice it to say I think on average the majority of shed you see is due to bacterial activity. Is this a bioload on the tank? In a way, yes....but I think the degree to which you see shed is dependant on the system in the first place...ie how much nutrients are present for the bacteria to deal with. So really, it is almost a chicken or the egg kind of deal..the bacteria are causing the shed, but the nutrients must be present in the first place for the bacteria to process.

As for live rock shedding the whole year round...well, if it's in a tank with fish and other organisims, then there is a constant input of nutrients for the bacteria in the rock to deal with, and the cycle never ends. Which brings up an interesting point...if you have rock in a tank that is constantly shedding, perhaps this is an indicator that your bioload is too high for the rock...ie not enough mechanical removal of nutrients vs. the rock.

Two observations in my tank history lead me to believe this...first...with a DSB I saw virtually no shed from my rock, but once the sandbed went into flux, it started to shed. Once I moved that rock to a BB setup, it REALLY started to shed. This leads me to belive that the decrease in the DSB's ability to keep up with things biologically put an increased load on the rock. Once I moved it to the new BB setup, where there was no DSB (even in the limited capacity mine was functioning at) the shedding increased.

The other observation I made was with 100lbs of new rock I got in July. These went right into a cure tank. They shed a lot at first, but the shedding tapered off with time as nutrient levels in the tank and in the rock dropped off. The amount of shed is residual to the amount of nutrients available to be processed....

That was a good chat. I'd have to pull up the log, but I think what MikeS was saying is the rock isn't necessarily a bio-load, but more of a product of its environment. Maybe he can clarify for us.

Yes it was a very good chat with Nikki, Scooty, Charlie and all the others, a lot of interesting points were brought up...this is IMO a pretty complicated issue here...I hope my above post clarifies my point a bit...

I still think the rock is part of the load on the tank. It can only filter so much, right? The detritus it produces, instead of being bound up, are now free in the tank.

Yes it is initally, but IMO only to the degree to which it introduces nutrients into the system to start with. With the exception of newly introduced rock saturated with nutrients, the rock itself isn't introducing load on the system, on the other hand it's trying to deal with it. In an established system, the byproducts of the rock are going to be limited by the amount of nutrients available to be processed. The load comes from us feeding the higher organisims in the tank...the shed is the rock processing already present nutrients. So in the long run, I still don't see LR as a "load"....it's simply part of the reduction/recycle process, and is ultimately responsive to the nutrient load existant in the tank.

In my situation, has the rock begun to recycle the nutrients, instead of process it out? The algae on and inside the rock, block the end products from getting pushed out, so the bacteria recycle it? This would leave any new nutrients to be used by algae, or the algae are feeding on the end products of bacterial processes? BTW - I did take time to blast my rock.

Great points Nikki....well, as mojo likes to point out...there is exporting and then there is recycling...and the whole thing is one very complicated mess... In this respect, the LR is in many ways no different than a DSB really...lots of factors can interfere with free nitrogen gas off from the system...so yeah, the rock is just the same as a DSB in many ways (only difference is the size of the substrate...:lol: )....you end up recycling a lot of these nutrients back into the system. But it is all dependent on the amount of nutrients available to be exported/recycled in the first place, right? The rock itself isn't putting the nutrients into the system in the long run. That's the point I've been getting at

This leads to another question....can live rock be too porous? Maybe the Pukani rock is subjected to high nutrient water, and it is saturated before even getting it.

That's one I have no idea on really....I'll take a blind stab at it with some ideas...:lol: I'd say no...less dense=less material to soak up nutrients...nitrate reduction may perhaps be inhibitied a bit...but no, I don't think it can be too porous...

Hope this helped clarify some of my thoughts...

MikeS

 

[Scooterman]

MikeS you didn't mention your thoughts on the fact that the rock was shedding in a cooking state (tub , salt water mix, circulation & heater) so why was it constantly shedding without a load other than itself? I observed this myself for more than several months, lots of shedding daily just rocks. I can't argue with you on whether the rock is a small or large bio-load on a tank, & mentioning that maybe we need more lr than the rule of thumb even for a small bio-load if BB, I know I had lots of rock compared to my load. I would of had to fill the tank to the brim with rock to do as you mentioned & it probably would shed that much more. How can your tell rock is or isn't shedding with a DSB? Is there any actual studies on this, just live rock in a tank with controlled conditions? I'm not trying to argue here I'm trying to learn so don't take me wrong, I know observation comes a long way here & experience but I see too many variables not to question these thoughts.

 

[gman0526]

MikeS you didn't mention your thoughts on the fact that the rock was shedding in a cooking state (tub , salt water mix, circulation & heater) so why was it constantly shedding without a load other than itself? I observed this myself for more than several months, lots of shedding daily just rocks.

I'm gonna try to answer this with my thoughts . The rock is shedding in the tubs because is already loaded with nutrients when we place it to "cook" without the need to add any extra input. We ususally stop the "cooking" process when we see the shedding on the rocks diminished significantly to a point we beleive the loaded nutrients are exahusted. Then we have the scenario presented by MikeS where in a "established" tank we see constant shedding even after the rock has been "cooked" which IMO relates to the tubs and "cooking".

As for live rock shedding the whole year round...well, if it's in a tank with fish and other organisims, then there is a constant input of nutrients for the bacteria in the rock to deal with, and the cycle never ends. Which brings up an interesting point...if you have rock in a tank that is constantly shedding, perhaps this is an indicator that your bioload is too high for the rock...ie not enough mechanical removal of nutrients vs. the rock.

I hope I made sense

 

[Scooterman]

We ususally stop the "cooking" process when we see the shedding on the rocks diminished significantly to a point we beleive the loaded nutrients are exahusted.

Not the case these rocks shed as much from day one to 60 days later.

 

[NaH2O]

I still need to go back and read the past several posts, but I had a thought. All this talk about the shedding process, maybe we should get deeper into what live rock is actually doing, then we can figure out what's going on, and how the shedding does or doesn't play a role. We already know liverock is full of bacterias, but lets talk about what the bacteria are doing and what they are processing.

 

[gman0526]

Not the case these rocks shed as much from day one to 60 days later.

Well IME the shedding was diminished as the cooking process went on.

 

[MikeS]

Not the case these rocks shed as much from day one to 60 days later.

Well Scooty...there could be a lot of different factors that could contribute to prolonged shedding...the rock could be excessively high in nutrients to start with, some condition in the cure tank could be inhibiting the biological process taking place in the rock...or a combination of these...ect....I'd imagine each situation is unique into itself in that respect... Some rocks will shed out quickly, where others may not...

Originally Posted by Scooterman
MikeS you didn't mention your thoughts on the fact that the rock was shedding in a cooking state (tub , salt water mix, circulation & heater) so why was it constantly shedding without a load other than itself? I observed this myself for more than several months, lots of shedding daily just rocks.

Hopefully my above answered that a bit Scooty...could be any number of factors causing it...hard to say. In my case...they shed for a few months then tapered off...perhaps your rock was much higher in nutrients to start with...

I still need to go back and read the past several posts, but I had a thought. All this talk about the shedding process, maybe we should get deeper into what live rock is actually doing, then we can figure out what's going on, and how the shedding does or doesn't play a role. We already know liverock is full of bacterias, but lets talk about what the bacteria are doing and what they are processing.

We'd probably have to bring mojo in on that one to get a really good explanation...

MikeS

 

[Scooterman]

I agree MikeS, my rock was full from my viewing & I do agree that would take much longer probably 6 months to a year I'd guess, to really see the cooking process work well enough to be worth anything. I had to change water out of the tubs often, & blow the rocks thoroughly before each change, I was sucking out lots of goop but what I didn't understand is how the algae was still alive & well it wouldn't die. I'd even go to the point of using a brisk plastic brush on the rock to remove what I could. To me the pressure washer did an awesome job on the outside of the rock, then I boiled it, maybe removing the outside crust I should of tried to continue cooking maybe the inside would of survived & the rock would of caught up with itself? Regardless I did like the white clean rock it cycled continuously for about two months before I started seeing results which then no algae was on them. I did notice one thing though & this is for those that are cooking rocks, when you reinsert them into the main tank don't put them next to rock with algae problems it just seems to spread certain types that is. I wonder if we took a new tank & filled it with pressure washed rock, then boiled clean then rinsed well & inserted into a new tank all of it, then seed this new rock somehow without infecting it, would this work & would it extend the usable life of the rock. I do think that I had my rock in a DSB for some time, maybe that was the first big problem I had, the BB it couldn't keep up at that point. I also want to know is there a larger requirement of rock in a BB system with lots of skimming, or the reverse with a light bio-load?
the end

 

[MikeS]

I agree MikeS, my rock was full from my viewing & I do agree that would take much longer probably 6 months to a year I'd guess, to really see the cooking process work well enough to be worth anything.

Good points Scooty...again I think it would depend on the rock, some will cure (cook) out quickly while others may take longer...

what I didn't understand is how the algae was still alive & well it wouldn't die.

Was your cure tank lit? or in the dark?

I wonder if we took a new tank & filled it with pressure washed rock, then boiled clean then rinsed well & inserted into a new tank all of it, then seed this new rock somehow without infecting it, would this work & would it extend the usable life of the rock.

Again, I think this would depend on your system...the bacterail populations in the rock are going to respond to available nutrients (among other things) and are always going to be trying to find an equilibrium...but starting with rock that is as free of nutrients as possible isn't a bad idea IMO...but I also think you want the rock to have some bacteria as well....boil it and then cook it in a seperate tank for awhile I'd say....

I also want to know is there a larger requirement of rock in a BB system with lots of skimming, or the reverse with a light bio-load?
the end .

well, in either case, I'd say the more biological pressure you can remove from the rock (or any other bacterially driven system like a DSB for example) by mechanical means and a sensible bioload the better off you are going to be...

MikeS

 

[mojoreef]

Great thread folks! I have to admit I havent read all the posts here so bear with me if I go over so stuff that has already been gone over.

As per LR shedding and how long. Lr is a living ecosystem it is designed to uptake and release, so in that it should continue to release as long as it can up take, and in saying that it does not necessarly need to get food from an outside source (well eventually but how long??). In looking at LR some say its a bacterial playground..sure, some say it houses a great and grand diverse ammount of critter...sure. Its all of that and more with different degrees on each rock.
I think its safe to say the dominant player in LR is bacteria as it is on the entire planet. If you break down the role or stratagy of bacteria from its complex nature, thier basically going to RE-cycle nutrients and biproducts whiles stealling a little to use for respiration or energy. So if you put an apple in a container with no other life forms beyond bacteria how long would it take to disapear?? I would say quite awhile and it will constantly evolve.
So in relating this to shedding. When you get LR (lets use pukani) you are getting a chunk of LR that is fully involved. It has a full bacterial system, sponge system, bug system, algae system and a variety of higher life forms. In transport an amount will die off or be on its way to checking out. We stick the LR in a bucket or the tank and start the cure. We concider LR cured when we dont get a reading of Nitrate or ammonia, what does that mean?? It means that the bacterial population has risen up to meet the amount of available food. It doesnt mean that all that dead or dieing stuff has disapeared, in reality that stuff is just involved in a very large cycle. Remember nothing goes away unless you remove it or it is completely used as energy.
So now you have cured your LR for 2 months, some stuff has fallen off and been removed but most all of the interior stuff is still inside and being used as a continious food source in the bacterial cycle. Now you add fish and food and so on and you enlarge the cycle. So in reality your never really starting fresh unless the rock is empty, which LR never is.
Pukani is a form of rock that comes from deeper water, the deeper the water the more sponge will be present with in it. This sponge will either die of from air contact or die off from a lack of what was feeding or enviromental changes, some will survive. For me I actively removed the sponge to lessen the load and thus the cycle. I believe Nikki cycled her tank with the rock fresh.
In cooking LR you are taking the ecosystem I discribed and reducing outside food source. This will give you a gain, but how much?? and how long will it take bacteria to eliminate the interior food source when its stratagy is basically just to cycle it?? This is one of the draw backs of natural filtration, we may want it to be the great self relient ever going filtration system...BUT the bacteria have thier own plan, and that plan is not to just eat all the food and die, its to survive and it does so by cycling and cycling is a very slow process when looked at from a filtration point of view.


Anyway tired for now, but lets talk some more.


Mike

 

[MikeS]

Thanks for weighing in Mike...

All in all....would you classify Live Rock as "bioload" on the tank, or more of a response to the system? I say initally it contributes to bioload, but in the long run, it is more of a response to the individual system it is in...

MikeS

 

[Curtswearing]

As for live rock shedding the whole year round...well, if it's in a tank with fish and other organisims, then there is a constant input of nutrients for the bacteria in the rock to deal with, and the cycle never ends. Which brings up an interesting point...if you have rock in a tank that is constantly shedding, perhaps this is an indicator that your bioload is too high for the rock...ie not enough mechanical removal of nutrients vs. the rock.

Two observations in my tank history lead me to believe this...first...with a DSB I saw virtually no shed from my rock, but once the sandbed went into flux, it started to shed. Once I moved that rock to a BB setup, it REALLY started to shed. This leads me to belive that the decrease in the DSB's ability to keep up with things biologically put an increased load on the rock. Once I moved it to the new BB setup, where there was no DSB (even in the limited capacity mine was functioning at) the shedding increased.

Mike, I found the above point interesting. Here's why. When I first started with my 75g reef, I had LR, a DSB, and an Ecosystem filter. After a while, I decided that I didn't want to have the bioballs that were part of an Ecosystem filter. I recall that this action resulted in my DSB (that had always stayed nice and clean previously) was now always dirty on the top. I couldn't figure it out at the time because I wasn't feeding any more than I previously had. After a short while, this problem just went away on it's own.

It's quite possible that taking out the bioballs put more demand on both my rocks and my DSB and while they were adjusting to the new conditions, the bacteria in my rocks were having to expand their populations quickly. As a result were shedding more for a while. I never once had any Ammonia problems so I removed my bioballs quicker than most people recommend.

A different point I want to discuss. It seems to me that we have been curing our rocks for a shorter period of time than we used to. I've been reading some old recommendations from people who are no longer in the hobby and they would consider how quickly we start up our tanks to be reckless. As a result, I'm not sure that I would consider "cooking" to be any specific action other than extended curing.

I know that LR constantly sheds, even after "cooking" ends. You couldn't stop it if you wanted to unless you took off the heater and/or changed the specific gravity substantially. Just because you aren't seeing a lot of shedding, it doesn't mean that everything is 'done'. The bacteria populations have just balanced out to the point that they are not increasing substantially. Even if most of the dead animals, algae, and adsorbed phosphates are now gone, bacteria are still dieing daily and being cannibalized. Basically, the rock is now recycling as opposed to exporting.

Oh well, those are my ramblings for now.