Vacuum sand?

seds · Post by **seds** » 31 Jan 2007, 04:06

How does one go about vacuuming sand with a siphon? wouldn't it just get sucked up? Just wondering' in case one day I get a sandy substrate.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 31 Jan 2007, 10:22

Yes, it needs a bit more care and attention when you have sand in the tank than if you have gravel. Fortunately, the sand also prevents most of the muck from falling down below the surface, so you don't need the same "dig it into the substrate" action with the vacuum when you siphon it out - just hover near the substrate and the muck is sucked up. Of course, it's almost inevitable that a small amount of sand gets sucked up, but you can either ignore that, or let it settle in the bucket if you're not siphoning into the drain directly. But you're doing it wrong if you get so much sand dragged away that you notice it "going away".

--
Mats

seds · Post by **seds** » 31 Jan 2007, 18:48

Thanks for the info Matsp!

So... You dont have to dig as deep...
and some of the sand might get sucked up inevidably.

I see... >_>

I was thinking of sand so that I might be able to grow plants... Blue fake rocks wont cut it huh?

kcmt01 · Post by **kcmt01** » 01 Feb 2007, 02:42

One of the web sites that sells plants recommends about an inch of peat moss, with a couple inches of sand on top. I'm thinking that you wouldn't want to vacuum too deep on that set up, as you would stir it up too much. Also, if you have enough beneficial bacteria, the fish manure would be good for the plants, as would their respiration (CO2). It's funny, but it seems that fish-oriented web sites seem to want plants to benefit the fish, and plant-oriented web sites concentrate on what's best for the plants; no one seems to be interested in "balance". For instance, I just can't see using CO2 injection for my plants when that should be the fishes' job. Maybe I should start a new thread on the subject of: Organic Balance In The Aquarium.

MatsP · Post by **MatsP** » 01 Feb 2007, 11:46

kc, I agree, I use a "natural balance" as best as I can, but an aquarium will always be a compromise between what's best for the fishes and what's best for the plants (assuming planted aquarium in the first place). Unfortunately, if you have enough fish to generate CO2 levels to promote really good plant growth, you probably will have problems getting the fish to survive for very long. On the other hand, if you add CO2 to the water, you're taking away oxygen, so you can't have so many fishes for that reason (yes, the plants provide oxygen during the day, but not at night when lights are out - in fact they USE oxygen at night).

But like so many things, finding the right balance is a case of "which do you find most important". I'd rather have happy fish with a few less plants than a "rainforest under water" with a few fish...

--
Mats

seds · Post by **seds** » 02 Feb 2007, 03:04

[/But like so many things, finding the right balance is a case of "which do you find most important". I'd rather have happy fish with a few less plants than a "rainforest under water" with a few fish...]

Yeah, me too.

But, then again, I have only ever used plastic plants...

kcmt01 · Post by **kcmt01** » 02 Feb 2007, 03:29

MatsP, I vote for what's best for the fish, if push comes to shove. So if it comes down to what's best for some exotic plant or my cheap little White Clouds, I guess I'd skip the exotic plant and just raise the cheap plants like java fern.