# Black Diamond Sand cutting cories



## nickandjess2008 (Jul 4, 2020)

Personally, I am using Fluval shrimp stratum mixed with Laterite (there is also regular gravel underneath that, too. I know, way too much substrate...). I just didn't feel like taking out the Laterite. It works fine and I haven't had any problems with their barbels at all, at least, none that I ever noticed. I have 9 cories and have had some so long that they died of old age, so, I would say that it is safe. It is about 18 bucks on Amazon for 4.4 pounds, or 8.8 pounds for $21. It is a dark brown color. Not as dark as the BDBS, but, I do think it is close enough that you would be happy with it.
I have no personal experience with them growing back, but, according to these threads, they do, just not to the size they were before injured (a couple people mentioned this), but, as I haven't owned one with injured barbels, I can't comment on whether that is true or not.
https://www.fishforums.net/threads/cory-barbels-gone.364855/ 
Here's some other links talking about this, too. 
https://www.aquariacentral.com/forums/threads/will-cory-catfish-barbels-grow-back.279635/
Corydoras With No Barbels - PlanetCatfish.com
https://www.myaquariumclub.com/albi...this-morning-my-cory-in-my-10-...-806519.html

According to all these threads, they will! I guess that is good news for you. 1 person said that it took over 6 months for them to grow back, so, I guess just be patient. Another comment says that Cory's do use them to hunt for food, so, just watch the one without barbels and make sure that it is eating enough. You should keep an eye on him daily. I do agree with that, it may have a little trouble finding food, but, as food is given to him daily (or whatever your schedule is) it shouldn't be too big of a problem, imo. Like I just said, just make sure it is getting enough food and keep an eye on him. He should be fine, though. I would (personally) get some of Kordon's Fish Protector and add it every day or two for a little bit, or maybe Melafix. Something like that. I have one that has long fins and his fins got injured. His fins started to rot away and the Fish Protector has made a significant difference. Stopped the rot dead in it's tracks.
As far as the stratum goes, it seems like it is perfect for plants. It has a lot of nutrients in it and it has the consistency of dirt or clay. It is little pebbles and it will compact over time, but, not so much that the plants get their roots through it. I used to use just plain laterite on top and never had any problems, as far as the cory's were concerned. I hope this doesn't come off as conceited, but, I have used a lot of different types of substrate and never had a problem with this, but, I always kept it in the back of my mind when looking for a substrate, meaning, I made sure that it wasn't sharp because I knew that I would have a cory or two in there. Again, I don't want that to come off as being cocky, mean or anything like that. 
I would like to ask you this: what kind of plants are you growing in your tank? The stratum is good (imo) for stuff like Crypts and other plants that feed through their roots. I have 2 Crypt Wendtii's (green and red) a few Parva's and others that root feed and they all do great with this. I just have an inch or two on top of waaaayyyyy too much substrate, so, depending on how much substrate you have already, you could just put a small layer of this stratum on top of what is already there, kind of like I did.
I have also used regular rounded aquarium gravel in the past and haven't had any issues. I have used Laterite and no issues with the cory's either. I hope this helps you in some way. Good luck with your tank, I hope it does well!

Edit-I always keep Cory's, I just love them! I have kept them my whole life in every last aquarium I have had, that is about 30 years! I just love them, they look like an old man with a beard, I just love those guys! 
Also, the common answer to this will probably be just sand (you can always add some Flourish tabs to it if you want to), I think, but, what I have said above is just my experience with Corydoras. Good luck!

Edit 2: Since this is a thread about cory's and there is the problem of him eating enough, I wanted to add this. I recently got this off of Amazon https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00025K1GG/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1
They are tubifex worms and are shaped into a cube. They are on sale for $7 and usually sell for $8.50. I have been taking a cube with those long, aquascaping tweezers and holding at the bottom so that the cory's can come and eat it. They absolutely LOVE them!!! The other fish get a treat as well, because the cory's knock off a bunch of worms while they themselves are trying to eat them. It is SO much fun! I thought maybe you could do this with the one that lost his barbels? It would be a great source of protein for him to heal with and it is just a whole ton of fun to do! I tap the tweezers against the glass and they learn after doing this once or twice that it is feeding time and come running. Once they are done eating, all mine sit in a row on the bottom. Just a thought, this way you can be certain that he is getting food. I really hope he makes it and doesn't die on you. I would appreciate it if you let us know how he does. Good luck!


----------



## Bunsen Honeydew (Feb 21, 2017)

Sorry to hear about the problems you are having. My question is why you think that the BDBS is what is at fault? Blasting sand isn't any sharper than a typical sand (its harder) and many folks keep cories just fine with BDBS, myself included.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Bunsen Honeydew said:


> Blasting sand isn't any sharper than a typical sand (its harder)



Can you explain this statement. How is sand "sharper" than blasting sand?
Also, blasting sand has been found to contain sharp pieces of wire, is that also not ( in your opinion) as sharp as sand?


----------



## Bunsen Honeydew (Feb 21, 2017)

Discusluv said:


> Can you explain this statement. How is sand "sharper" than blasting sand?
> Also, blasting sand has been found to contain sharp pieces of wire, is that also not ( in your opinion) as sharp as sand?


The thing with pieces of wire is an exception, not the rule. I've used 15-20 bags of BDBS (more than I have needed, but I bought the wrong mesh) and haven't seen it, and from what I understand its fairly rare. There is a misconception that blasting sand is sharper than other sands, but sands are selected for blasting based on their hardness, not the sharpness of the particles. I haven't handled any that felt any more sharp/abrasive than a PFS or play sand.


----------



## reddhawkk (Dec 28, 2011)

Saf-T-Sorb works well and is only a few $ per large bag (I forget the weight).


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Bunsen Honeydew said:


> The thing with pieces of wire is an exception, not the rule. I've used 15-20 bags of BDBS (more than I have needed, but I bought the wrong mesh) and haven't seen it, and from what I understand its fairly rare. There is a misconception that blasting sand is sharper than other sands, but sands are selected for blasting based on their hardness, not the sharpness of the particles. I haven't handled any that felt any more sharp/abrasive than a PFS or play sand.


 There have been just as many people who have had issues with BDBS as there have been others who have not. Forums are full of testimony of the ill effects of this medium on corydoras. Ian Fuller, one of the most notable researchers on corydoras species states that in no circumstances should this material be used with corydoras in the aquarium. It is the number one reason Red Blotch disease has become so common in corydoras species in the aquarium. 

Thanks for sharing your own experience with BDBS and opinion thereof. But others have had different experiences and the experts on corydoras species do not agree that blasting sand is an appropriate medium to keep these fish on.


----------



## Aparker2005 (Jun 4, 2014)

I've got chain sword, crypts, water sprite, Java fern, jungle Val, and anubuius.

I'm wanting to go back to natural sand color, but pfs just did nothing for my plants. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Bunsen Honeydew (Feb 21, 2017)

Discusluv said:


> There have been just as many people who have had issues with BDBS as there have been others who have not. Forums are full of testimony of the ill effects of this medium on corydoras. Ian Fuller, one of the most notable researchers on corydoras species states that in no circumstances should this material be used with corydoras in the aquarium. It is the number one reason Red Blotch disease has become so common in corydoras species in the aquarium.
> 
> Thanks for sharing your own experience with BDBS and opinion thereof. But others have had different experiences and the experts on corydoras species do not agree that blasting sand is an appropriate medium to keep these fish on.


Your mileage may vary, I suppose. I'm not an ichthyologist, just a materials chemist that worked in the scouring business for some years at a well known abrasives manufacturer and thought I'd pass on what I know of the material.


----------



## novato (Aug 22, 2019)

Aren't both bdbs and pfs inert media?


----------



## Aparker2005 (Jun 4, 2014)

I thinky pfs didn't allow the roots to breathe much. It compacted way more compared to the bds

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Bunsen Honeydew (Feb 21, 2017)

Aparker2005 said:


> I thinky pfs didn't allow the roots to breathe much. It compacted way more compared to the bds
> 
> Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


Its very possible. The med grade of BDBS is suggested over the fine for that reason. I have mostly fine in my tank now and I am doing fine, but I may have the MTS to thank for that.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Bunsen Honeydew said:


> Your mileage may vary, I suppose. I'm not an ichthyologist, just a materials chemist that worked in the scouring business for some years at a well known abrasives manufacturer and thought I'd pass on what I know of the material.


 Interesting that you say you are an expert on the material/ in the business yet you say this : "sands are selected for blasting based on their hardness, not the sharpness of the particles". 



According to this expert, hardness is only one criteria that is utilized to determine a mediums abrasiveness. This link gives far more criteria in the selection of abrasive. Also notice that shape is also a very important criteria. Blasting sand is angular and sand is rounded. Angular materials cut more deeply at less velocity than rounded materials. 

https://www.graco.com/us/en/contrac...ow-to-choose-the-right-blasting-abrasive.html

Im no materials chemist, but seems to me some of the information you gave as an expert on the topic at hand was partial.

Looks to me like silica sand is not as hard as BDBS. It is also rounded, not angular. 

Abrasive Name Mesh Sizes Hardness Density Shape 
Silica Sand 6-270 5-6 2.65 Rounded

Coal Slag 12-80 6-7.5 2.7 Angular


----------



## Bunsen Honeydew (Feb 21, 2017)

Discusluv said:


> Interesting that you say you are an expert on the material/ in the business yet you say this : "sands are selected for blasting based on their hardness, not the sharpness of the particles".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think you are drawing primary conclusion from the margins again here. I may have better stated it by using qualifiers. Here's a better attempt at it with a better disclaimer. I am a materials chemist that has years of experience in developing for a scouring business. That company is also a well known abrasives manufacturer. My particular area of expertise is not in the area of sand blasting, but I have had some fairly extensive collaborations with the pure abrasives folks. There is a market for shaped abrasives, and I would expect a marketing document to extol those virtues. I have done specific work in the are of microreplicated shaped abrasives, and understand the benefits associated with them. In the work I have seen in comparing materials often has coal slag or garnet as the comparison point. It is my understanding of the subject that the hardness of the material is the primary criteria, with shape playing a secondary role. This doesn't mean that they have no role, and showing that they have a contribution doesn't refute that the hardness is the primary selection criteria. Shaped materials are an area that I am not going to discuss in any kind of detail. Again, your mileage may vary. 

All of this aside, I have scooped 300lbs of the material from a 37" tall tank before and didn't feel like it had any ill effect on my hands. Because there is so much variability in this material, maybe that isn't particularly meaningful? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Bunsen Honeydew said:


> I think you are drawing primary conclusion from the margins again here. I may have better stated it by using qualifiers. Here's a better attempt at it with a better disclaimer. I am a materials chemist that has years of experience in developing for a scouring business. That company is also a well known abrasives manufacturer. My particular area of expertise is not in the area of sand blasting, but I have had some fairly extensive collaborations with the pure abrasives folks. There is a market for shaped abrasives, and I would expect a marketing document to extol those virtues. I have done specific work in the are of microreplicated shaped abrasives, and understand the benefits associated with them. In the work I have seen in comparing materials often has coal slag or garnet as the comparison point. It is my understanding of the subject that the hardness of the material is the primary criteria, with shape playing a secondary role. This doesn't mean that they have no role, and showing that they have a contribution doesn't refute that the hardness is the primary selection criteria. Shaped materials are an area that I am not going to discuss in any kind of detail. Again, your mileage may vary.
> 
> All of this aside, I have scooped 300lbs of the material from a 37" tall tank before and didn't feel like it had any ill effect on my hands. Because there is so much variability in this material, maybe that isn't particularly meaningful? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯


 I see that, to you, hardness is a primary factor. But, I have yet to see that echoed in materials I have read online ( let alone as it relates to BDBS being used on aquarium with corydoras). Can you direct me to a resource I can read that explains how hardness is a more important criteria than shape ( roundness or angularity?). 



Another source: This expert does not give a hierarchical listing of considerations when choosing an abrasive material. He includes shape in his analysis of the 4 criteria of abrasives. Stating that:


_"Shape: Shape can be from spherical to angular. Spherical (round) abrasives work by peening the surface, while angular abrasives cut into the surface, displacing some of the surface material, leaving pits, described as profile. Profile is measured as the difference from the bottom of the pits to the top of the displaced material." _


http://www.mrsandmaninc.com/techinfo/AbrasiveSelection.pdf

PS I may be drawing primary conclusions from this, yes. I am not an engineer, but I can do research, give me some materials that describe/substantiate how hardness is a much more important criteria to consider when determining how an abrasive will work on/against various surfaces.


----------



## gjcarew (Dec 26, 2018)

That's funny, I had almost the exact opposite experience from you. When I had BDBS my pygmy corydoras had dainty little barbels that were unaffected by the substrate. But I saw very limited root development in the sand! 

You could definitely go with an aquasoil, which is really all I use nowadays. If you prefer to stick with sand, @Seattle_Aquarist uses HTH Pool Filter Sand which seems to be working to grow plants in his discus tank. @Deanna swears by the CaribSea Peace River Gravel, which is probably what I would try next if I was going to go back to a non-soil based substrate. It seems to me that grain size is important for plants-- too small and the substrate compacts which hurts root development and water flow to the root zone. Too large and the roots can have trouble anchoring in the substrate, plus any root tabs you put in there will just be immediately exposed to the water column. The Peace River gravel seems like it would be a nice middle ground as a very fine gravel/very coarse sand. Plus the grains are nice and rounded so your cories should be fine on it.


----------



## Bunsen Honeydew (Feb 21, 2017)

Discusluv said:


> I see that, to you, hardness is a primary factor. But, I have yet to see that echoed in materials I have read online ( let alone as it relates to BDBS being used on aquarium with corydoras). Can you direct me to a resource I can read that explains how hardness is a more important criteria than shape ( roundness or angularity?).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Perhaps the example from your own quote will help illustrate what I am referring to.



> 2. Hardness: based on Mohs scale of 1-10. 1 being talc, 10 being diamond. Glass is +- 6 on the Mohs scale. Hardness determines cutting ability. *Example: You could not cut
> a steel pipe with a plastic saw.* Abrasive must be harder than the surface to be abraded or removed.



In this example, should I care how sharp the plastic saw is?


----------



## novato (Aug 22, 2019)

The difference in both your rooting with bdbs is interesting. I've pulled some plants and they have extensive rooting. I have a medium size, can't remember the number, so that must be the difference between your tanks. 
I've noticed it feels very sharp compared to sand if it gets under my fingernails, but I haven't noticed any problems with my bottom feeders.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Bunsen Honeydew said:


> Perhaps the example from your own quote will help illustrate what I am referring to.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Your cryptic answers mean what exactly? Perhaps you might be clear and explain. Perhaps making this a teaching moment to the layman instead of trying to just say "I am the expert on this topic" and do not have to explain. I am very much all for science and experts, but when they talk over the layman's head and act condescendingly when questioned you only further perpetuate the notion that science is not for the masses.

Edit: On second thought-- do not explain here. Send to me direct message. Im sure the OP has no no interest ( or anyone else) in what you and I are going back in forth with. I hope that the OP will look to experts in ichthyology as more pertinent in the matter than a materials chemist. You have your area of expertise-- stay in your lane.


----------



## ElleDee (May 16, 2020)

I also really like Caribsea Peace River. I just use it as a cap, but it's really nice to plant into, has a natural color, and is polished and not sharp. I have also used Gemstone Creek from the same line and it's very nice looking but not as easy to plant into and probably would be tough on plant roots as it's a larger gravel. It's polished too, so I bet it would be fine for cories. I wouldn't try Gemstone Creek as a stand alone substrate, but the two match.


----------



## gjcarew (Dec 26, 2018)

novato said:


> The difference in both your rooting with bdbs is interesting. I've pulled some plants and they have extensive rooting. I have a medium size, can't remember the number, so that must be the difference between your tanks.


I was using medium grit as well. I suppose the level of root growth is kind of subjective-- compared to aquasoil it was a lot lower but I haven't used any other sands I can compare it to. I've also seen lots of people growing plants beautifully in BDBS so take what I say with a grain of salt!


----------



## Bunsen Honeydew (Feb 21, 2017)

Discusluv said:


> Your cryptic answers mean what exactly? Perhaps you might be clear and explain. Perhaps making this a teaching moment to the layman instead of trying to just say "I am the expert on this topic" and do not have to explain. I am very much all for science and experts, but when they talk over the layman's head and act condescendingly when questioned you only further perpetuate the notion that science is not for the masses.
> 
> Edit: On second thought-- do not explain here. Send to me direct message. Im sure the OP has no no interest ( or anyone else) in what you and I are going back in forth with. I hope that the OP will look to experts in ichthyology as more pertinent in the matter than a materials chemist. You have your area of expertise-- stay in your lane.


I don't get this narrative of me being condescending because I have a different opinion based on my own experience, and trying to make a point about a material that has some misconceptions about it.

If you'd like to talk more about abrasives, feel free to reach out via PM.

I don't really understand where this went off the rails, but my apologies for sidetracking the thread OP.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## JCombra (Oct 11, 2018)

After reading this thread, I guess I consider myself very lucky, My Cory's love rooting around my BDBS . I have 6 in a 20L and they have been rummaging around in there for a couple pf years with no ill effects. Very Interesting read....

Jim


----------



## Blackheart (Jul 5, 2011)

I have personally used BDBS in the past and honestly I didn't care for it. I can't comment on the issue with the fish as I only had tetras in the tank. It didn't really honestly seem to harsh though. It was soft enough. I won't ever use it again though. 

Personally, I use Caribsea sunset gold sand. This is the route I will always go for my tanks personally as long as I can still buy the product. Beautiful natural colors and all my plants are doing great in it. The price I understand is not for everyone though. They are normally 30+ dollars for one bag at Petsmart. Ridiculous. I found the same product on amazon for around 16 dollars a bag at the time. I needed 4 bags for my 33 long, but still, at only 16 bucks a bag, it wasn't too bad cost-wise.


----------



## varanidguy (Sep 8, 2017)

My cories have been on BDBS for years, with good, healthy barbels. They root around in it and have had multiple spawning events. I don't bother collecting the eggs as they hide them in the dense undulata crypt forest in the corner of the tank, but some fry have made it to adulthood on their own. 

Of course, YMMV.


----------



## Aparker2005 (Jun 4, 2014)

My 20g has it as well and the cories are fine. But my 125, every one ends up losing them. So weird. Parameters are all good. 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


----------



## germanblueramlover (Jun 9, 2013)

I was under the impression barbel loss was more linked to infection than the substrate itself? Don't have a source for that unfortunately as it's a memory of something I've read in previous threads, but I thought the consensus was that a dirty substrate was more harmful than one that is sharp, or water conditions that in other ways are not ideal for the cories? 

I've always used CaribSea sunset gold and noticed barbel loss issues with my cories - it turned out the temperature was too high for them so they weren't thriving overall, and I assume that's the cause there since my loaches in the same tank have had absolutely no issues.


----------



## Kubla (Jan 5, 2014)

I'm pretty sure BDBS and PFS (what the heck is "regular sand") are both harder than corydoras so what difference does it make if one is harder than the other? I hear about BDBS being an issue with corydoras so why not khuli loaches, bristlenose plecos or dozen of other species. Why is it the whiskers? wouldn't it cut their bellies if it's an issue? Why doesn't it bother ottos, are they that tough?
I understand anecdotal evidence but how can loads of hobbyist raise these fish for years on this medium if it's an issue? I understand that successfully keeping corydoras on BDBS is not proof that it's safe, but having issues when it's in your tank is no proof that it's not.


----------



## Bunsen Honeydew (Feb 21, 2017)

Kubla said:


> I'm pretty sure BDBS and PFS (what the heck is "regular sand") are both harder than corydoras so what difference does it make if one is harder than the other? I hear about BDBS being an issue with corydoras so why not khuli loaches, bristlenose plecos or dozen of other species. Why is it the whiskers? wouldn't it cut their bellies if it's an issue? Why doesn't it bother ottos, are they that tough?
> 
> I understand anecdotal evidence but how can loads of hobbyist raise these fish for years on this medium if it's an issue? I understand that successfully keeping corydoras on BDBS is not proof that it's safe, but having issues when it's in your tank is no proof that it's not.


The issue was the misconception that blasting sand is going to be more problematic, or even what most would consider sharp under normal circumstances. 

The attention was on whiskers, because that was what the OP was experiencing.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

There is no misconception about BDBS. Those of you who havent experienced any issues with this medium-- excellent. 
Other people have. Just because you haven't doesn't nullify all the incidences of those who have. 
The consensus on this forum is that it poses no issues. 
Go outside this forum onto fish forums, ask experts in bottom-dwellers (not just corydoras, actually) what they recommend. It will not be BDBS. 

The problem is whiskers in this case, yes. The issues of bacterial growth/fungus are secondary to the sharp materials rubbing on whiskers and bottoms of fish. Tissues and whiskers get eroded, secondary bacterial infections get a hold where if the proper medium ( a substrate with rounded, as opposed the angular edges) was used the bacteria would not be able to proliferate.

Bump:


Kubla said:


> I'm pretty sure BDBS and PFS (what the heck is "regular sand") are both harder than corydoras so what difference does it make if one is harder than the other? I hear about BDBS being an issue with corydoras so why not khuli loaches, bristlenose plecos or dozen of other species. Why is it the whiskers? wouldn't it cut their bellies if it's an issue? Why doesn't it bother ottos, are they that tough?
> I understand anecdotal evidence but how can loads of hobbyist raise these fish for years on this medium if it's an issue? I understand that successfully keeping corydoras on BDBS is not proof that it's safe, but having issues when it's in your tank is no proof that it's not.


 Regular sand is sand with rounded edges- not angular. If you look at the care of bottom-dwellers on reputable sites it is universal to put these fish on substrate that is composed of sand particles that are rounded. 

Take the Kuhli loach, since it was brought up. On Simply Fish it states that: "


_"Use a soft, sandy substrate since this species likes to dig and tends to spend some of its time completely buried. When coarser gravel is used it may become stressed or damage itself, and feeding behaviour can be inhibited."_

_And:_

_"Depending on locality the substrate may be composed of peat, mud or sand with the fish typically abundant in piles of leaf litter."_
https://www.seriouslyfish.com/species/pangio-semicincta/


This is one example.


----------



## Kubla (Jan 5, 2014)

I understand the problem here is whiskers. That's my point, with BDBS the problem is always whiskers. I've seen dozens of postings about this, it seems odd to me that I never see any other issues with corys or other fish. I would think with soft bellies rubbing against it constantly that would cause issues.
I'll err on the side of caution and not put any in my tank. Ironically, I was at an LFS today for the first time in months. They usually have a great stock of corys and I planned on getting some but didn't see any I was interested in.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Via Ian Fuller- Icthyologist who has a Facebook page Corydoras World: 

*Corydoradinae Habitat conditions*_

"There are constantly discussions held on social media channels as to the correct substrate for Corydoradinae catfishes. So, I decided to put some of the facts together based on personal observation in many species of Corydoras’s natural habitats.

The first thing to remember with this group of fishes is that they are primarily filter feeders. They do not have cutting or crushing teeth like some of the predatory Catfish, nor do the have rasping teeth like the grazing Loricariid Catfish, these fish will sift the substrate, which in the majority of cases is sand. 

Smooth sand which been created over millions of years by the constant tumbling action of moving water, whether it be the oceans tidal and wave actions or the constant varying flow of rivers. The more the flow and tumbling action the finer the sand becomes. 

Natural river sand.

In some areas the sand found can be fairly course, and grains could be as large as one millimetre, or as fine as caster sugar, the one thing that will be common is that the grains will be smooth and not sharp and gritty like quarried sand as use in the building industry. 

Over many years I have spent many hours watching, and filming Cory’s feeding, in some cases it is quite comical, especially with the larger straight (Lineage 8) and curved (Lineage 1) snouted species who tend to bury the deepest, Some almost completely burying themselves when they dive right in searching out the food they sense is there. I have taken video clips of the feeding actions of several species from different lineages. And all, even the smallest species will mouth the sand. "_

Bump:


Kubla said:


> I understand the problem here is whiskers. That's my point, with BDBS the problem is always whiskers. I've seen dozens of postings about this, it seems odd to me that I never see any other issues with corys or other fish. I would think with soft bellies rubbing against it constantly that would cause issues.
> I'll err on the side of caution and not put any in my tank. Ironically, I was at an LFS today for the first time in months. They usually have a great stock of corys and I planned on getting some but didn't see any I was interested in.


 You may not see them but I do in the fish section when people come over to the other side wondering what the redness and inflammation is on their fish. I dont just help here, I also help on other forums. I see the connection of BDBS and corydoras whiskers and bacterial lesions on stomachs all the time. This bacteria is primarily an aeronomas bacteria. It pretty straight-forward to identify. 

Its yours and everyone else's prerogative to say the connection between BDBS and bacterial infections doesnt exist. Fine. But, when someone comes on here asking if there is a connection I will give my side. All the rest of you can give your counter-narrative.


----------



## Kubla (Jan 5, 2014)

Thanks! That answered all my questions in quick read from an expert that actually sounds like he knows what he's talking about.


----------



## BOTIA (Dec 23, 2003)

Bunsen Honeydew said:


> The issue was the misconception that blasting sand is going to be more problematic, or even what most would consider sharp under normal circumstances.
> 
> The attention was on whiskers, because that was what the OP was experiencing.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


I have had loaches for many years on bdbs and pool filter sand. Both when used with o+ root tabs have grown plants quite nicely. MY loaches, over 7 species have had no problem with their whiskers and love digging for snails in BDBS.


----------



## burr740 (Feb 19, 2014)

My personal experience it has never been a problem. Ive kept dozens of Cories in BDBS over the years and they always seem to love it. They'll dig down up to their eyeballs eating stuff










Im not discounting the experiences of others, just sharing mine.


----------



## GoodOldDays (Mar 24, 2014)

Discusluv said:


> Can you explain this statement. How is sand "sharper" than blasting sand?
> Also, blasting sand has been found to contain sharp pieces of wire, is that also not ( in your opinion) as sharp as sand?


Never heard of wire. I’ve been using it in (4) 75s and 40s for many years without any problems. If anything I have way too many dories because they won’t stop breeding......15 in a 75.


----------



## gjcarew (Dec 26, 2018)

Discusluv said:


> I see the connection of BDBS and corydoras whiskers and bacterial lesions on stomachs all the time.


I think one of the issues is the whole conversation is very much my anecdote vs. your anecdote. The fact that an expert has his own anecdotes is by no means any sort of definitive proof. 

The whole "it's not natural" argument doesn't hold any water for me either. Nothing about keeping tropical fish in small glass boxes is natural. Fuller points out that many corydoras live on a substrate of mud and mulm, and while that works in nature it doesn't in our fish tanks. 

In order to cut through the confirmation bias/Baader-Meinhof phenomenon that this topic is subject to, I did a search for "corydoras damage barbel" on google and indexed the forum results based on website, species, and substrate. A few notes on the methods:

- I did not include results where the author did not mention their substrate type, or where the author the athor was not specifically talking about observed damage to their corydoras' barbels
- In general, people are far more likely to use sand or gravel in their tanks than other substrates, therefore you would expect to see these show up more often 
- I did not find any tanks with BDBS in the first 15 results, so I did another search isolated to ThePlantedTank since BDBS is often used for planted tanks.
- Sample size was very small seeing as I have a job I'm procrastinating doing right now. That said, unless somebody can come up with a better set of observations it's the best we currently have.

Full results are below. 

The results from Aquariumadvice.com and Fishlore (n=8) were split equally between sand and gravel. Only one of the sand results specified a type of sand that MIGHT be similar to BDBS, Caribsea's Tahitian Moon Sand. Two specified "soft sand." 

The results from Plantedtank.net (n=9) were 5 Eco Complete, 3 sand, and one gravel. None of the sands were BDBS. Maybe I have a skewed perception of the number of people who use BDBS on this forum but I would expect that if it was bad for cories, at least one tank with BDBS would have shown up. The big surprise was how often people who use Eco Complete reported damaged cory barbels, especially considering it doesn't seem like that many people use it as a substrate. 

Overall results suggest that sand (any sand, not specifically BDBS) might be marginally worse than gravel, though this is most likely due to a larger amount of the population using sand for cories than using gravel. Eco-complete was the worst. BDBS and and clay-based aquasoils didn't even show up, implying that they might be good candidate substrates for keeping corydoras barbels healthy.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

gjcarew said:


> I think one of the issues is the whole conversation is very much my anecdote vs. your anecdote. The fact that an expert has his own anecdotes is by no means any sort of definitive proof.
> 
> The whole "it's not natural" argument doesn't hold any water for me either. Nothing about keeping tropical fish in small glass boxes is natural. Fuller points out that many corydoras live on a substrate of mud and mulm, and while that works in nature it doesn't in our fish tanks.
> 
> ...


 Um, okay. 

As long as you are satisfied by this rudimentary set of data points ( and others I see) lets just make it a forum ideology. 

Fish are fine on BDBS. Ill will never say another word. 

Furthermore, since I am so wrong about red Blotch disease in corydoras and its connection to BDBS I will stay out of the "help me with my sick fish department". 

Obviously, I dont know what the hell Im talking about ... 

I mean look at that data.

Edit: Isnt it crazy how science /scientists that study a particular animal, mineral, or any other natural phenomena of the world all their lives are now considered to be just as "anecdotal" in their recommendations as a guy who haphazardly puts together a a few data points on his lunch break. Gotta hand it to all the societal movements toward anti-science and anti-intellectualism. Now every one can be a scientist. Kudos!


----------



## Deanna (Feb 15, 2017)

Discusluv said:


> I will stay out of the "help me with my sick fish department".


Please don't do this!


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Deanna said:


> Please don't do this!


Well. Im obviously speaking outa my---


----------



## gjcarew (Dec 26, 2018)

I tried not to give the impression of certainty. I wouldn't call myself satisfied with the dataset by any means. As I tried to make clear I have know idea what the population looks like (as in what percentage of fishkeepers use BDBS/other substrates). As a result this dataset almost certainly demonstrates some unknown sampling bias. 

Still, if BDBS was that bad for corydoras I would expect it to show up at least once in a random sample in a similar way to how Eco Complete kept showing up in the sample. It was a rudimentary attempt to get real, unbiased data. And yes, I am just a guy on his lunch break. If we subtracted what I know about fishkeeping from what you know about fishkeeping, we could probably fill a decent sized book. But that doesn't make the data any less valid. I'm sure I don't need to point out other times "common knowledge" has been wrong. 

Scientists are not infallible, and their word is not gospel. I'm sure that once Dr. Fuller concluded that BDBS causes harms corydoras barbels he stopped using it. Maybe he never even started using based on the physical characteristics of the product. Neither of these are necessarily a scientific conclusion. I also don't doubt your experience in seeing lots of people saying their corydoras have lesions on their bellies and barbel wear. But human attention works in a weird way where we pay more attention to things that confirm what we already know. When it comes down to it, you are both adding one more point to a wider dataset. What you have is a hypothesis, not a conclusion. "Forum ideology" would be claiming certain conclusions with no data, not the attempt (however rudimentary) to resolve that lack of data.

I don't appreciate the suggestion that I'm anti-intellectual. It appears that I'm the only person so far who has approached this with any kind of scientific method. You may disagree with my methods or conclusions, but there is no reason to disparage me. Also, everyone CAN be a scientist. Science is a process that is not limited by the credentials of the person doing the research. Your argumentum ad verecundiam is the opposite of scientific.

I have a degree in ecology and evolutionary biology, by the way, so if you were wondering I quite literally am a scientist.


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

gjcarew said:


> I tried not to give the impression of certainty. I wouldn't call myself satisfied with the dataset by any means. As I tried to make clear I have know idea what the population looks like (as in what percentage of fishkeepers use BDBS/other substrates). As a result this dataset almost certainly demonstrates some unknown sampling bias.
> 
> Still, if BDBS was that bad for corydoras I would expect it to show up at least once in a random sample in a similar way to how Eco Complete kept showing up in the sample. It was a rudimentary attempt to get real, unbiased data. And yes, I am just a guy on his lunch break. If we subtracted what I know about fishkeeping from what you know about fishkeeping, we could probably fill a decent sized book. But that doesn't make the data any less valid. I'm sure I don't need to point out other times "common knowledge" has been wrong.
> 
> ...



My argument um ad.. verecu.. what? 

Nice. 

The question of corydoras health and substrate is a done deal. it has been for a long time. It has been decided by consensus of the forum. Aint gonna hear no different from me. Not gonna hear a peep out of me from now on.
Carry on.


----------



## IKeepShrimp (Dec 27, 2019)

Guys can't we just agree to disagree D:

We are just talking about best practices (and really preferences) to catfish husbandry. No need to jump down each others throats! Its like they used to tell us in my old PhD program: Academic politics are the most bitter and vicious form of politics, because the stakes are so low. I'm sure we trust that we are all competent enough to not harm our fish or engage in behavior that we can see is causing visible damage. There might not be a definitive answer available at the moment as to BDBS and cory whiskers but its just that, some sand and some whiskers. Nothing to get upset over and no need to take things personally, I think all of you guys make great contributions to the forum and the collective understanding. Let's not let disagreements get overblown!


----------



## Discusluv (Dec 24, 2017)

Thank you @IKeepShrimp That was an excellent way to bring it into perspective. I am sorry to all. I just have been extra emotional of late. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------

