Live rock and live sand are not a must
BUT the more of it you have the better filtration you will have and this meens less work for you in the long run.
The ONLY filtration system that I have in my 75gal REEF tank is ALL NATURAL (aprox.100lbs Live rock, 3" Live sand, about 30 hermit crabs, about 30 assorted snails, 1 sand sifting sea star, 4 cleaner shrimp. ect) and a protien skimmer in the sump.
If you are doing a Fish only w/live rock, I would put about 15lbs.
If you are doing a Reef, I would put about 30lbs.
A 30 gal. is pretty small for a saltwater tank and needs more attention than larger tanks, The more water the better.
But I am actually just setting up a 30gal tall for my wife's Seahorse tank. (same as fish only)
I started it 3 days ago
I put 3" of sand in it 3 days ago and seeded it with 2 cups of sand from my reef tank today.
I will be adding 15lbs of GOOD Live rock in a couple of days and about 6 each hermit crabs and snails a couple of days later.(total 7-8 days)
I will cycle the tank like that(NO FISH) the live rock will do a great and very fast job of that along with adding Brine Shrimp for the crabs and critters in the rocks to eat.
The total cycle time will be about 3-4 weeks from when I filled the tank until it's ready for it's first Seahorse.
DO NOT ADD A LOT OF LIVESTOCK AT 1 TIME, your system WILL crash if you do.
Eg. add 1 fish and maybe a soft hardy coral and wait at least 2 weeks before adding more fish.
BE PATIENT.
2007-03-25 13:26:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
This Site Might Help You.
RE:
is having live rock a must? and how much do i need per gallon? and is it al right to use coditioner bio spira?
i would like to start a salt water tank. I talked to a few pet shops and one said i need 2lbs per gallon but when i talked to a few other ones they however much you want. i said how would 5-10lbs for a 30 gallon tank be both said that would be great i went back to the first pet shop then they...
2015-08-06 15:13:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Yigal 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Depends on what type of set up you desire. For example a Fish Only (FO) set up requires no live rock (and is pretty much set up like most freshwater tanks in that you utilize hang on back or canister filters, etc).
Fish Only with Live Rock (FOWLR) set ups, as indicated, require live rock to perform as the filtration (generally 1-2lbs per gallon).
Bio-spira generally works as long as it has been refrigerated up until use and is added in a tank with 0ppm ammonia/nitrite (basically, you add it in a new tank at the same time you add your fish). It's not a chemical, it's refrigerated LIVE benefical bacteria which abbreviates the cycling period.
There's a bio-spira for freshwater and saltwater, so make sure you get the correct type if you choose to use this product.
2007-03-25 12:58:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by Kay B 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
General rule for live rock is 1 pound per gallon, the more the better. It really depends on what you are going to put in the tank. If you want to set up a reef tank then you should get at least 5-10 lbs per gallon.
As for rushing the cycle...don't its not worth it in the end. Adding conditioners is fine, depending on the brand, make sure it won't hurt your fish. I always add Cycle to my prepped water (water I will be using for a water change)
Your tank is going to have to go through the amonia/nitrate cycle, adding fish to the tank with amonia present will definatly kill the fish, I'd wait until you virtually have no nitrates in the tank before adding anything.
When you do add something, buy molly's, damsels or green chromis', cheapest fish to start.
You could be looking from 2-3 weeks to a couple of months depending on water quality, before you can add fish
2007-03-25 11:51:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why must something have created the universe? Ask yourself this - what created the something that created the universe! Your belief that something must have created the universe is due to the inductive reasoning - every effect I know has a cause therefore every effect must have a cause. This is contradicted by the schoolboy question if x caused everything what caused x? If you follow the cause and effect chain back far enough there must have been a primal uncaused cause the fact that the uncaused cause had no cause means we have disproved the inductive axiom by contradiction. Not everything effect has a cause. That being said, the whole of science is based on the search for the cause of every effect if we accept that some things are truly spontaneous we can lazily give up the search for a cause so an element of blind faith is necessary to motivate us to look for a cause in order to deepen our understanding.
2016-03-22 15:24:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
For the best answers, search on this site https://shorturl.im/avYmc
The Big Bang physically cut off any history of what could be before it, if the concept of before even makes sense without time as a dimension. A current idea being worked on by some cosmologists is that our universe exists as part of a multiverse of many other universes -- perhaps an infinite number of them. Each universe would begin with its own Big Bang. The time-space of each universe is separate from all the others. It used to be that science couldn't answer the question about the origin of the universe or of the Big Bang, but that didn't mean we should make up an answer (such as a god) and say that it was the cause. Within the last few decades scientists have discovered some good answers. Quantum mechanics shows that "nothing," as a philosophical concept, does not exist. There are always quantized particle fields with random fluctuations. Quantum mechanics also shows that events can occur with no cause. There are many well-respected physicists, such as Stephen Hawking, Lawrence Krauss, Sean M. Carroll, Victor Stenger, Michio Kaku, Alan Guth, Alex Vilenkin, Robert A.J. Matthews, and Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek, who have created scientific models where the Big Bang and thus the entire universe could arise from nothing but a random quantum vacuum fluctuation in a particle field -- via natural processes. In relativity, gravity is negative energy, and matter and photons are positive energy. Because negative and positive energy seem to be equal in absolute total value, our observable universe appears balanced to the sum of zero. Our universe could thus have come into existence without violating conservation of mass and energy — with the matter of the universe condensing out of the positive energy as the universe cooled, and gravity created from the negative energy. I know that this doesn't make sense in our Newtonian experience, but it does in the physics of quantum mechanics and relativity. As Nobel laureate physicist Richard Feynman wrote, "The theory of quantum electrodynamics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And it agrees fully with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as she is — absurd." For more about the Big Bang and its implications, watch the video at the 1st link - "A Universe From Nothing" by theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss, read an interview with him (at the 2nd link), or get his new book (at the 3rd link). And, see the 4th link for "The Universe: Big Bang to Now in 10 Easy Steps." "The total energy of the universe is precisely zero, because gravity can have negative energy. The negative energy of gravity balances out the positive energy of matter. Only such a universe can begin from nothing. The laws of physics allow a universe to begin from nothing. You don't need a deity. Quantum fluctuations can produce a universe." - Lawrence Krauss, physicist
2016-04-08 23:06:39
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋