# ADA Power Sand & Amazonia Aqua Soil



## Francis Xavier

Powersand isn't a substrate to grow plants per se like Amazonia. It's large and porous - the primary purpose of it is to serve as a great biological filter by offering more surface area for it to grow in and as a method to keep the substrate oxygenated (since most soils like amazonia get compacted over time and can lead to oxygen being cut off and anaerobic bacteria growing (which is really bad!)), it also serves as an excellent substrate level for roots to get nice and rooted. Ideally you'd place a thin layer over the entirety of the tank.

Amazonia normal and amazonia powder are the same thing compositionally - powder is just really really tiny, which enhances aesthetics as well as making it easier for smaller plants, like HC to get planted in.

So once you lay down the substrate system it's going to be mixed and won't be able to be separated again You're layering powder on top of a medium sized substrate on top of a large grained substrate. You will see the occasional piece of Power Sand drift it's way up to the top of the soil bed since it's less dense than aquasoil. These can be individually removed when they pop up with a pair of tweezers easy enough.

The key, when you're laying down the aquascape, is to put down the thin layer of power sand, then lay down a medium to thick layer of amazonia normal and finalize your hardscape then. Once it's finalized, top it off with a decent layering of powder. Finesse and slow pouring is key.

With driftwood - if you intend for it to be removed without causing massive disturbance, the best bet is to lay it on top of the substrate without digging it into it. However, once you get a thick carpet of plants going, it's really really difficult to cause massive soil disturbance since the plants will be very very firmly rooted into the three layers of substrate. But again, when removing pieces like that just take it slow, be careful and surgically remove it, then put it back in just as carefully. I've removed rocks embedded in the substrate for various reasons after a near-full carpet is in without disturbing the substrate and was able to put it back in no problems.

However, for rescaping, it's kind of difficult to re-use the soils. You can definitely re-use the soil just fine - i've done it before, but the soils will be mixed together and you'll probably have to hand push the power sand back down into the depths of the soil again with a pair of tweezers, which takes time and patience, and then apply a new layer of powder type for aesthetics / easier planting.

In a rescape scenario it's best to just use a fresh batch of power sand, aquasoil normal and powder, and just use the old stuff to grow some stuff emmersed in a farm setup or put it in a planter or something.

Just Plan ahead, do your aquascaping heavy lifting before putting any soil in the tank, get a relative final picture in your head for the scape, put down the power sand and normal amazonia, then place your hardscape in the tank and finalize it. Once it's finalized fill the tank in with powder type. Generally, it's too late to do big rescapes once you've filled in soil and water without redoing your whole setup (regardless of substrate choice).


----------



## shaman

My main worry is, since this is my first attempt at a planted tank, algae is quite likely. What if algae grows on my plants, it would be really hard to remove algae from HC & hairgrass. Also, if i screw up my stems and want to remove it and start over with a new batch, will it mess the substrate? Thanks a lot for the comprehensive info!


----------



## Francis Xavier

First: You will get algae. The best aquascapers in the world get algae. It is -exceedingly- rare that you don't get algae at all in a setup ever and something that's treasured as pretty lucky. I've had it happen once on my Mini S setup - and I know that system by -heart- and know what exactly I need to put into it when since i've just had it and scaped it so much.

The best way to deal with algae is to have a conservative light period (8 hours or so a day) with consistent lighting schedules, consistent water parameters, and algae eaters. to help. I found that it works really well to grow things emmersed for the first few weeks to let the carpet plants grow in nice; more plant density = less algae potential as a basic formula.

When algae does get on your plants, depending on type - algae eaters (amano shrimp, otocinclus catfish, nerite snails (the do more glass work though)) are great. Otherwise spot dosing with h202 (hydrogen peroxide) with a syringe will also make algae literally fizzle away. 

Removing plants when they're newly planted is easy - they haven't rooted yet. But whenever you remove firmly rooted plants, especially plants with really really deep roots (like stems) you're going to disturb the substrate, sometimes it's even really difficult to get them out. HC for example will grow really compact and firm in the substrate so when it's a full carpet you can pull it out in one clump and roll the stuff like grass sod.

Just take it easy, don't worry too much, do your research. It's a learning curve but you'll get the hang of it. Take it a step at a time, be patient and thorough.

Also - when you fill the tank with water, fill it very very slowly, I always got (for a Mini S) a piece of airline tubing and drained water out of a bucket into the tank over a rock or plate on the powder. You need to gently fill the water in so you don't cause the powder to go everywhere.


----------



## shaman

Cool, thanks for the info. Was very healpful. Will look up info on how to grow HC emmersed.


----------



## plantbrain

Francis Xavier said:


> Powersand isn't a substrate to grow plants per se like Amazonia. It's large and porous - the primary purpose of it is to serve as a great biological filter by offering more surface area for it to grow in and as a method to keep the substrate oxygenated (since most soils like amazonia get compacted over time and can lead to oxygen being cut off and anaerobic bacteria growing (which is really bad!)), it also serves as an excellent substrate level for roots to get nice and rooted.


Are any of these claims stated by ADA in the least real or are marketing muckery? Don't plant roots have aerenchyma which allows them to grow in anaerobic soil? Where do plants grow naturally? In anaerobic soilroud:
Does this have ANYTHING to do with compaction or lack of O2?
Have you measured O2/Redox in lake sediment or river sediments? Aquariums?
Why does DIY soil, Worm castings, and plain old ADA As alone do so well without ADA PS? Bio filtering: is this not the job of the filter and the plant's themselves? Is the surface area on the clay ADA AS not much higher than the pumice power sand?

I've never, I mean never..........had any issues with anaerobic conditions producing sulfides in any ADA AS sets where power sand was not used, even at 14" depths over several years. Nor have I ever heard of it happening.

So why do folks repeat this baloney from ADA's marketing group when it has no merit either biologically or at the more practical hobbyists level?
Not going after you personally or anything, but the issue in general.

Why repeat this manure?
This is the same marketing rubbish that Dupla claimed with their heating cables. 



> Amazonia normal and amazonia powder are the same thing compositionally - powder is just really really tiny, which enhances aesthetics as well as making it easier for smaller plants, like HC to get planted in.


Aesthetics could be argued, but rooting is fine for HC in normal ADA AS. I've grown plenty over the years. The powder is.....well, dust like pwoer and ends up settling. What about that whole thing about transfer of O2 to the root zone? Adding a fine compacted tiny grain sediment will enhance this, so it's counter to the power sand "logic".



> So once you lay down the substrate system it's going to be mixed and won't be able to be separated again You're layering powder on top of a medium sized substrate on top of a large grained substrate. You will see the occasional piece of Power Sand drift it's way up to the top of the soil bed since it's less dense than aquasoil. These can be individually removed when they pop up with a pair of tweezers easy enough.


If you keep the tank for long time, or decide to rescape things, then it does make a mess eventually, then you end up having to buy all new stuff.
Since I use only ADA AS alone, I can and have reascaped about 4 times and should get 5-10 years life out of the ADA AS. Others' have layered stainless steel mesh between the layers, but this is a PITA IMO/IME.
If you uproot things much and are not careful , it becomes a tacky mess, but importantly, why bother with power sand to begin with?

*ADA tells us we should buy it, but my plants sure do not.*



> The key, when you're laying down the aquascape, is to put down the thin layer of power sand, then lay down a medium to thick layer of amazonia normal and finalize your hardscape then. Once it's finalized, top it off with a decent layering of powder. Finesse and slow pouring is key.


I'd say the key is figuring out which part of the sediment is really doing the job over time and then questioning whether or not you should even mess with the power sand and dust added to the top. If you test this, you will not find any significant difference because the long nutrients are contained in the ADA AS. PS has a general fert, but this does not last long, maybe 1 month or so.......anyone can add a general ferts to the bottom or osmocoat etc and not deal with pumice/PS cost etc.



> With driftwood - if you intend for it to be removed without causing massive disturbance, the best bet is to lay it on top of the substrate without digging it into it. However, once you get a thick carpet of plants going, it's really really difficult to cause massive soil disturbance since the plants will be very very firmly rooted into the three layers of substrate. But again, when removing pieces like that just take it slow, be careful and surgically remove it, then put it back in just as carefully. I've removed rocks embedded in the substrate for various reasons after a near-full carpet is in without disturbing the substrate and was able to put it back in no problems.


Yep, me too........but would it not be nicer not to hassle with it?



> However, for rescaping, it's kind of difficult to re-use the soils. You can definitely re-use the soil just fine - i've done it before, but the soils will be mixed together and you'll probably have to hand push the power sand back down into the depths of the soil again with a pair of tweezers, which takes time and patience, and then apply a new layer of powder type for aesthetics / easier planting.


Yes, certainly a PITA. So my question goes to what I initially said about why bother with PS?



> In a rescape scenario it's best to just use a fresh batch of power sand, aquasoil normal and powder, and just use the old stuff to grow some stuff emmersed in a farm setup or put it in a planter or something.


Or not use power sand and dust to begin with:icon_idea



> Just Plan ahead, do your aquascaping heavy lifting before putting any soil in the tank, get a relative final picture in your head for the scape, put down the power sand and normal amazonia, then place your hardscape in the tank and finalize it. Once it's finalized fill the tank in with powder type. Generally, it's too late to do big rescapes once you've filled in soil and water without redoing your whole setup (regardless of substrate choice).


Yes, but the problem is ...few folks plan that far ahead, most are works in progress, we change our mind often, rescape etc. We should have this option without dealing with Power sand and there seems to be no trade off against not using powersand or the dust. I used the dust in the nano tanks I use to keep, but water changes had it all over the place, in larger tanks, it can stay put a little easier or if I was much more careful, but if I did it, most other folks will have the same type of experience a few times as well. 

I started off using PS, then tried a few tanks without it, lo and behold.......a test.......and the results showed no difference, others also did this, again, similar results. The group supporting the use of power sand seems to have always used it+aqua soil, so there's no way they can say either way and must reply on the marketing claims from ADA and whatever the bag says........

Ignorance is not a good argument.

So have you used ADA AS alone and if so, what where the results that you could attribute solely to the differences of powersand? I could not and no one else have I've spoken or emailed in quite a few years. Die hard ADA fan boys/girls........folks selling ADA.......but they do not test the stuff like this either. They do whatever ADA complete system suggest, whether one part is the source of the difference or not, and do not question.

Others question it, modify and test. Sometimes ...things do not turn out well, other times like this, they do and we see we can make the system cheaper, easier and simpler. This benefits all, but maybe raises doubts about believing 100% ADA statements and marketing. But you should not believe everything marketing companies tell you anyway:icon_idea

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## jsenske

Geez Tom-- still on the "stop the use of Power Sand at all costs" campaign I see. 
I'll grant you being theoretically right on every scientific point, no arguments, as I don't do the type of research your do, I just aquascape. But Amano himself is not a "marketing company" and there's no "marketing companies" ordering people to use Power Sand. This discussion is old as dirt itself and I refuse to perpetuate it, but all it is is Amano's way of doing it based on his experience and belief as to what works and why. Perhaps he is "wrong" in some technical or theoretical (and potentially accurate) way, but he's not trying to trick anybody or deceive, rest assured. Your proposal generally suggests something sinister with the incessant references to "marketing companies telling people what to do." 

Hardly anyone in the U.S buys or uses Power Sand anyway so don't worry, your campaign is already a success.

I will go on the record saying here: NO, you do not need nor require Power Sand to grow nice plants using Aqua Soil. But it was designed with the idea that Power Sand is a beneficial complement to Aqua Soil, and Amano was using Power Sand long before Aqua Soil, but whatever on all that.


----------



## shaman

plantbrain said:


> Are any of these claims stated by ADA in the least real or are marketing muckery? Don't plant roots have aerenchyma which allows them to grow in anaerobic soil? Where do plants grow naturally? In anaerobic soilroud:
> Does this have ANYTHING to do with compaction or lack of O2?
> Have you measured O2/Redox in lake sediment or river sediments? Aquariums?
> Why does DIY soil, Worm castings, and plain old ADA As alone do so well without ADA PS? Bio filtering: is this not the job of the filter and the plant's themselves? Is the surface area on the clay ADA AS not much higher than the pumice power sand?
> 
> I've never, I mean never..........had any issues with anaerobic conditions producing sulfides in any ADA AS sets where power sand was not used, even at 14" depths over several years. Nor have I ever heard of it happening.
> 
> So why do folks repeat this baloney from ADA's marketing group when it has no merit either biologically or at the more practical hobbyists level?
> Not going after you personally or anything, but the issue in general.
> 
> Why repeat this manure?
> This is the same marketing rubbish that Dupla claimed with their heating cables.
> 
> 
> 
> Aesthetics could be argued, but rooting is fine for HC in normal ADA AS. I've grown plenty over the years. The powder is.....well, dust like pwoer and ends up settling. What about that whole thing about transfer of O2 to the root zone? Adding a fine compacted tiny grain sediment will enhance this, so it's counter to the power sand "logic".
> 
> 
> 
> If you keep the tank for long time, or decide to rescape things, then it does make a mess eventually, then you end up having to buy all new stuff.
> Since I use only ADA AS alone, I can and have reascaped about 4 times and should get 5-10 years life out of the ADA AS. Others' have layered stainless steel mesh between the layers, but this is a PITA IMO/IME.
> If you uproot things much and are not careful , it becomes a tacky mess, but importantly, why bother with power sand to begin with?
> 
> *ADA tells us we should buy it, but my plants sure do not.*
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say the key is figuring out which part of the sediment is really doing the job over time and then questioning whether or not you should even mess with the power sand and dust added to the top. If you test this, you will not find any significant difference because the long nutrients are contained in the ADA AS. PS has a general fert, but this does not last long, maybe 1 month or so.......anyone can add a general ferts to the bottom or osmocoat etc and not deal with pumice/PS cost etc.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, me too........but would it not be nicer not to hassle with it?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, certainly a PITA. So my question goes to what I initially said about why bother with PS?
> 
> 
> 
> Or not use power sand and dust to begin with:icon_idea
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but the problem is ...few folks plan that far ahead, most are works in progress, we change our mind often, rescape etc. We should have this option without dealing with Power sand and there seems to be no trade off against not using powersand or the dust. I used the dust in the nano tanks I use to keep, but water changes had it all over the place, in larger tanks, it can stay put a little easier or if I was much more careful, but if I did it, most other folks will have the same type of experience a few times as well.
> 
> I started off using PS, then tried a few tanks without it, lo and behold.......a test.......and the results showed no difference, others also did this, again, similar results. The group supporting the use of power sand seems to have always used it+aqua soil, so there's no way they can say either way and must reply on the marketing claims from ADA and whatever the bag says........
> 
> Ignorance is not a good argument.
> 
> So have you used ADA AS alone and if so, what where the results that you could attribute solely to the differences of powersand? I could not and no one else have I've spoken or emailed in quite a few years. Die hard ADA fan boys/girls........folks selling ADA.......but they do not test the stuff like this either. They do whatever ADA complete system suggest, whether one part is the source of the difference or not, and do not question.
> 
> Others question it, modify and test. Sometimes ...things do not turn out well, other times like this, they do and we see we can make the system cheaper, easier and simpler. This benefits all, but maybe raises doubts about believing 100% ADA statements and marketing. But you should not believe everything marketing companies tell you anyway:icon_idea
> 
> Regards,
> Tom Barr


Thanks for the info, always good to hear conflicting opinions! Hate forums where everybody says the same thing!

From what I understood of Francis Xavier's post, Power sand was helpful for bio filtration and not for plants. So did you compare tanks with power sand and tanks without power sand based on time taken to decrease ammonia readings? I'm new to this hobby, but I feel this comparison may be better. Correct me if I am wrong.

I have read several posts of people growing HC quite well without powder, although people who do use powder praise it for growing HC...Have you noticed much difference? In Australia Powder is VERY expensive, and I wonder if it is worth it. Powder is $103 AUD + shipping for 9l compared to $49 AUD + shipping for 9l of normal amazonia. Does powder justify the extra $54?


----------



## Mr. Fisher

I've grown plants in aquasoil with power sand and aquasoil without power sand.
Power sand is not required (I would get the size that is intended for your aquarium), but aquasoil for whatever reason was designed to be used in conjunction with it.

This being said, I bought two 6ltr bags of medium power sand special for my tank (iwagumi w/ hc carpet). I also skipped the powder form of amazonia aquasoil. HC does just fine in normal amazonia, plus you don't have to worry about mixing all the soil.

about algae:

for the first two or three weeks do 6 hour lighting periods, then work your way up (1 hour more per week) till you reach 9-10 hours.

I also do daily >50% water changes daily for the first few weeks.

Plant densely from the start. 

If you do these things religiously, you shgouldn't have too much of a problem with algae. 

in short: use power sand if you'd like or skip it. I'd suggest using all amazonia normal type (rather than using powder type).


----------



## shaman

So if I used only normal amazonia, would it be more forgiving to rescaping? The only reason I am worried about rescaping is, I'm not sure if I can truly visualize what i want my tank to look like, until it develops a little.


----------



## Francis Xavier

I've used aquasoil normal alone, powder alone, I've used them all together, and I've used them just aquasoil normal + power sand. But my average scape life hasn't really lived past a year either, I rescape on a semi-regular basis for no other reason than the pure enjoyment of rescaping a tank. When it comes down to it my true passion in this hobby is stone arrangements and creation. 

I'm not a scientist, a horticulturist or an agriculturist. I don't even take a particular enjoyment in measuring my water parameters. I mean sure, I'll do it when I absolutely have to, but at the end of the day taking measurements doesn't interest me that much. I also don't have the time, resources or want to make the most accurate test of the system. 

If you want to set up multiple tanks with all the same universal parameters with the only variance being the consistency of the soil system and measure the results over a period of 3-5 years (that'd be a lot of tanks!), then by all means go for it and let me know how it goes. I'd probably read the results for the sake of knowledge and be very interested, but doing that kind of testing itself isn't my passion. If you're going to make this a question of exact science, I would just assume that that would be the starting point for a real experiment, not the thing that forms the final conclusion.

Here's what I do know. Using Power Sand isn't some great Amano innovation or secret, it's just old gardening tradition. I mean, even my mom and uncle, who are both avid gardeners, use some kind of porous 'substrate' whether it's pebbles or what not at the bottom of all of their planters, or in their gardens outside, or in any container they plant something in (whether it has a drainage ditch or not). Those pebbles don't serve the purpose of -growing- the plant through nutrient supply, but rather, as I understand it, as an ideal layer for roots to get firmly rooted, provide for drainage, and keep the soil aerated. 

While there are differences between aquarium plant growing and traditional gardening, power sand is just that same medium as it's gardening equivalent. 
Of course your plants will still grow with just aquasoil. Power Sand is just a root system substrate, it just supposed to help roots stay oxygenated support 'flow' and stay healthy. It just helps things stay firmly and healthily rooted and is supposed to be a long-term solution. I mean, technically you could probably just use pebbles to serve the same purpose.

Am I wrong? Maybe, but you know what? the system worked the first time I did it, it worked the last time I did it, and I've never had to worry about whether or not it worked from start to finish. That has real value - it works...why go out of my way to lambast the system if it...works? That just isn't my gig. There was a question about Power Sand and the system, and I answered it. There is no greater conspiracy here.

As far as powder type is concerned - it just refines the look of the aquascape and helps with getting smaller plants like HC planted in. If i'm planting individual nodes of those small plants, I for sure love to use powder for that very reason. Powder definitely changes the aesthetic appearance of a fresh aquascape, but that's really up to individual preference, at the end of the day if your goal is to have a full carpet it -probably- doesn't matter too much if you need to save money. If you're kicking up too much powder type soil when you fill your tank, you are doing something wrong and filling the tank too quickly or putting the hose just straight in the tank...thats why you put down something to break up the impact of the falling water.

In regards to people not planning their aquascapes ahead - that's fine, but really, when working with any soil-based substrate, home made, aquasoil, eco-complete, whatever; it doesn't matter. Re-doing a scape with -any- soil system is a royal pain. Thats why whenever anyone asks for aquascaping advice post-filling I always kind of groan because it's usually too late to do it easily.

If your thing is just to get on a soap box about the issue and call Amano some evil marketer, fine, that's cool. I dig it. I've got things that I'll get up on a soap box about too. (I know this translates horribly in text, I'm not being sarcastic or rude or anything). So if you want this to be a debate about marketing being 'evil' or if you want to make this debate about the precise science behind this stuff, cool. Just pick one or the other and I'll play ball.

Frankly, marketing is a great thing when it has substance behind it. Marketing is only evil if it has nothing to back it up. ADA marketing, whether we'd like to admit to it or not, is what has gotten the hobby to where it is today. Precisely because it has substance behind it.


----------



## Francis Xavier

Shaman - no matter what you use, if it's soil based, and your rescape involves moving big things around at early stages, it's going to make it annoying. Regardless if it's the full system or just aquasoil normal or any other soil substrate. It'll always be a bit of a pain.


----------



## plantbrain

jsenske said:


> Geez Tom-- still on the "stop the use of Power Sand at all costs" campaign I see.
> I'll grant you being theoretically right on every scientific point, no arguments, as I don't do the type of research your do, I just aquascape. But Amano himself is not a "marketing company" and there's no "marketing companies" ordering people to use Power Sand. This discussion is old as dirt itself and I refuse to perpetuate it, but all it is is Amano's way of doing it based on his experience and belief as to what works and why. Perhaps he is "wrong" in some technical or theoretical (and potentially accurate) way, but he's not trying to trick anybody or deceive, rest assured. Your proposal generally suggests something sinister with the incessant references to "marketing companies telling people what to do."
> 
> Hardly anyone in the U.S buys or uses Power Sand anyway so don't worry, your campaign is already a success.
> 
> I will go on the record saying here: NO, you do not need nor require Power Sand to grow nice plants using Aqua Soil. But it was designed with the idea that Power Sand is a beneficial complement to Aqua Soil, and Amano was using Power Sand long before Aqua Soil, but whatever on all that.


I agree with you on the addition of PS to ADA AS later on, since PS came long before.

I do not think he is trying to trick anyone either, but I've never said he is either. I'm harsh on Penac as well, but I've got a reasonable argument against Penac, as well as power sand. Marketing is being done here by using old heat cable statements about flow and risk of anaerobic areas etc. Some of these statements read almost verbatim from the days of old cable debates.

Selling products to the hobby based on this has to have come from somewhere and some had to add that to the marketing label, does not matter if it's me in the garage or a multinational, marketing is still marketing.

We all do it if we sell anything. I do it to sell weeds. 

I like ADA AS and use it and suggested quite often, I'm not out picking on ADA nor Amano or you. I just question this and Penac, maybe a few other homeopathic additives that are suspicious. I think many do. 

Tanks, the AS, good stuff..........
See??*It's fair*, I am critical of some things, and supportive of others.
I'm not on any campaign ......I suggest folks to buy ADA AS tanks etc...and go to your site and other ADA vendors. I quite actively support you more than you think, perhaps you see it, maybe not, you love the hobby, so does Amano, that's enough reason for me.

Folks can also DIY PS as well and get around the issues of it coming up via stainless steel mesh etc. If they chose to get the PS, then I tell them to be careful uprooting and help from there. 

While I might tell folks a plant is easy, many do not have the same ease, so my own marketing hyperbole can get the better of some folks as well. No one is immune from it.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain

shaman said:


> Thanks for the info, always good to hear conflicting opinions! Hate forums where everybody says the same thing!
> 
> From what I understood of Francis Xavier's post, Power sand was helpful for bio filtration and not for plants. So did you compare tanks with power sand and tanks without power sand based on time taken to decrease ammonia readings? I'm new to this hobby, but I feel this comparison may be better. Correct me if I am wrong.
> 
> I have read several posts of people growing HC quite well without powder, although people who do use powder praise it for growing HC...Have you noticed much difference? In Australia Powder is VERY expensive, and I wonder if it is worth it. Powder is $103 AUD + shipping for 9l compared to $49 AUD + shipping for 9l of normal amazonia. Does powder justify the extra $54?


Well, you are in Oz.........I know some about the products and folks there, ADA AS is good, but cost a fair amount. There's the UP AQUA which is really good IME that folks use down there. It is similar to ADA AS but they add some activated carbon and it's really clear start up. See Aquarium life forms, there's plenty of folks that will help you locate and evaluate products on that forum.

http://www.aquariumlife.com.au/forum.php

Here's some HC grown without PS in my tank:










180cm x 25 cm worth

I still have the same ADA AS, some 3 years old now. It's still got most of the stuff, just missing N mostly, so I dose KNO3 to account for it.

I think it'll last a good 10 years or more if you add some N, or have a good size fish load + lower light. We do not have this other brand in the USA, so ADA AS is the main option for a commercial brand here. 



Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain

Mr. Fisher said:


> I've grown plants in aquasoil with power sand and aquasoil without power sand.
> Power sand is not required (I would get the size that is intended for your aquarium), but aquasoil for whatever reason was designed to be used in conjunction with it.
> 
> This being said, I bought two 6ltr bags of medium power sand special for my tank (iwagumi w/ hc carpet). I also skipped the powder form of amazonia aquasoil. HC does just fine in normal amazonia, plus you don't have to worry about mixing all the soil.
> 
> about algae:
> 
> for the first two or three weeks do 6 hour lighting periods, then work your way up (1 hour more per week) till you reach 9-10 hours.
> 
> I also do daily >50% water changes daily for the first few weeks.
> 
> Plant densely from the start.
> 
> If you do these things religiously, you shouldn't have too much of a problem with algae.
> 
> in short: use power sand if you'd like or skip it. I'd suggest using all amazonia normal type (rather than using powder type).


+1 follow this advice.

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## shaman

Appreciate the advise! Will look into up aqua! Cheers.


----------



## plantbrain

Francis Xavier said:


> If you want to set up multiple tanks with all the same universal parameters with the only variance being the consistency of the soil system and measure the results over a period of 3-5 years (that'd be a lot of tanks!), then by all means go for it and let me know how it goes. I'd probably read the results for the sake of knowledge and be very interested, but doing that kind of testing itself isn't my passion. If you're going to make this a question of exact science, I would just assume that that would be the starting point for a real experiment, not the thing that forms the final conclusion.


You do not need a huge set up to demonstrate falsification. All the test in the world might not prove you ever right, but only 1 or two will prove you wrong. you need some significant difference, something real that a person with good common sense can see, and is not the result of ADA AS.




> It just helps things stay firmly and healthily rooted and is supposed to be a long-term solution. I mean, technically you could probably just use pebbles to serve the same purpose.


So why do you assume there is any basis for this for aquatic rooted plants?
Do they grow in poorly drained or well aerated soils? 



> Am I wrong? Maybe, but you know what? the system worked the first time I did it, it worked the last time I did it, and I've never had to worry about whether or not it worked from start to finish. That has real value - it works...


Does this logic justify the fact that power sand works or not and is the cause? Correlation does not imply cause. I could say Chinese mung beans make my plants grow since I added a couple to my filter. Does not in any way demonstrate I am correct in what I said.



> why go out of my way to lambast the system if it...works? That just isn't my gig.


Misinformation and myth that is used to sell something, whether intentional or not does no one in the hobby any good. Power sand might make you feel good, it might help sales etc.......you might believe it helps etc etc....... but does it really help planted tanks? No, not after a few weeks and folks do lots of water changes then anyway. 

I still get folks claiming PO4 excess causes algae, should I roll over and not address the myth? Just let it ride? I could easily, but that's not my gig. I'll question it. Not everyone will.



> There was a question about Power Sand and the system, and I answered it. There is no greater conspiracy here.


Not on your part and I doubt on anyone's. Just repeating old tired myths whether folks where aware of not, and that's the point, folks should be aware that they are myths and have little factual basis. then we learn more and ask questions, if not PS, then what about the ADA AS?? How do aquatic plants differ from terrestrial plants in their sediments? 

This way you learn more, but many are fine with accepting whatever and do not question and test things.





> Re-doing a scape with -any- soil system is a royal pain. Thats why whenever anyone asks for aquascaping advice post-filling I always kind of groan because it's usually too late to do it easily.


Truer word have not been spoken.



> If your thing is just to get on a soap box about the issue and call Amano some evil marketer, fine, that's cool.


I'm not sure either way he has anything to do with it. Nor suggest there's any conspiratorial agenda here either. Marketing does what it does, using old myths is part of that. Often there's little background into the labels and statements. Just prevailing dogma. Often I do not know enough to say much about a great many products, diet pills? I know betterroud:
But when I do and about a topic I have looked at a fair amount, then I do know some.




> Frankly, marketing is a great thing when it has substance behind it. Marketing is only evil if it has nothing to back it up. ADA marketing, whether we'd like to admit to it or not, is what has gotten the hobby to where it is today. Precisely because it has substance behind it.


Anyone with common sense can suggest "the substance behind it" is ADA AS and not the PS. You even said there was not much difference, so have others, so that's not the issue or the "substance behind it". I am not, nor have criticized ADA at the larger scale company wide, there's no such justification. Specific products? Yep, other ADA products I have done the opposite and supported. So it's fair and the logic is fairly rational. 

The same issue was discussed with Jeff. 

Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## plantbrain

Francis Xavier said:


> Shaman - no matter what you use, if it's soil based, and your rescape involves moving big things around at early stages, it's going to make it annoying. Regardless if it's the full system or just aquasoil normal or any other soil substrate. It'll always be a bit of a pain.


Since they are in Oz, there's another product Up Aqua that's pretty good if you move stuff around actually, do not make as nearly as messy muck. I got to use it and see it, it's blacker also that ADA. N/A here in the USA though. 

I know Fishchick in Brisbane has it and a couple of LFS in Sydney, likely Melbourne also. None for us though:icon_frow

I deep vacuum the ADA about once a year as I uproot and move things around a lot, and then do a few large water changes while I'm doing it deal with excess muck. Not too bad, about 2-3x the water changes/mess per unit area as bad as plain Flourite is with it's mulm. I just redo smaller areas, say 1/8 of the tank any one time. Keeps it fair clean and running good. If the plants are not trim med or uprooting is not required, then it does not matter, I just leave it.

Less work.

Overall, the cost still adds up whether you displace the PS with more ADA AS, so you still need to fill the same volume. So add another bag or two of the ADA AS instead. 


Regards, 
Tom Barr


----------



## Francis Xavier

First off, I think you've handled the debate well; I know some of what I wrote could come across badly. So thanks for not getting the wrong idea.

We both agree that Aquasoil does at least most of the heavy lifting as far as perpetuating plant growth and providing nutrients. Meaning you won't necessarily notice an immediate difference on outward appearance between scenarios using Power Sand and those that do not.

When we take out all of the x-factors from this debate, the core of the disagreement lies in: Power Sand being a myth. The question that needs to be asked is: is judging the value of Power Sand based on whether or not plants grow the correct criteria to judge with? 

It might sound completely crazy, but what if the benefit of Power Sand isn't something that can necessarily be seen easily? That means that the whole time it has been judged against criteria that isn't part of it's purpose is.

My observation has been, up until this point, that when I used Power Sand and would go to remove plants for a rescape or what-not, that the root systems tended to be more firmly entrenched and larger (bigger diameter, more 'intricate') than when I did not use Power Sand; in other words, in cases that I had power sand my roots had the tendency to reach much deeper than they did in cases using only normal or only powder type. 

The only reason I hesitate to make that statement is that I've never set up an 'official' experiment to test Power Sand - there could have been other random variables at play, you could argue that it's perception even. But that has been my observation. It could even be plain dumb coincidence.

So when I see Amano using Power Sand and using PS for as long as he has (and while he has cut other things out, like those old-school substrate heaters), and I see gardeners using what is basically power sand in their planting patterns, and I see that it works for me; and that roots are thicker and deeper when I have power sand in there it leads me to believe that PS does do what it's advertised for doing and does work well as a component of a system that promotes both good plant growth and long-term sustainability. I often heard reports of aquasoil burning out in growth rates for people who don't use PS in the 6 month range - or in other words that it had short-term longevity. But that's unconfirmable data since there's no way of telling what parameters may or may not have changed over the course of time for those people - I just know that I've never experienced aquasoil 'burning' out and not being effective. So i'm pretty skeptical when it comes to being told something doesn't work. 

The first step to me seems like there needs to be an established criteria in which to judge PS against first. Or in this case, rather, has it been judged in the past against the correct criteria. Or maybe that's all hogwash.


----------



## houseofcards

plantbrain said:


> ...I deep vacuum the ADA about once a year as I uproot and move things around a lot, and then do a few large water changes while I'm doing it to deal with excess muck. Not too bad, about 2-3x the water changes/mess per unit area as bad as plain Flourite is with it's mulm. I just redo smaller areas, say 1/8 of the tank any one time. Keeps it fair clean and running good. If the plants are not trim med or uprooting is not required, then it does not matter, I just leave it.


I do same thing. I have completely changed some of my scapes by redoing just a 1/4 of the tank at a time. Unfortunately many people want to get it done in a hurry instead of rescaping over 4 or so sessions. Doing this with big water changes I've never had any real problem with the tank. My 1/2" hose is my best aquascaping buddy as I have it ready when I do these makeovers.


----------



## jsenske

Very detailed and intelligent replies, Tom. I get your point, and it's well taken. 

Regarding using the powder type: I think for the initial planting for a beginner using HC, you will find that the thread-thin and shallow roots of HC will stay planted better until it gets a foothold. 
For- rescaping, I probably wouldn't concern myself with it (the powder type that is) too much, though a fresh top dressing of AquaSoil is always nice to put a clean "cap" on things after all that jostling around.


----------



## Green Leaf Aquariums

plantbrain said:


> Since they are in Oz, there's another product Up Aqua that's pretty good if you move stuff around actually, do not make as nearly as messy muck. I got to use it and see it, it's blacker also that ADA. N/A here in the USA though.
> 
> I know Fishchick in Brisbane has it and a couple of LFS in Sydney, likely Melbourne also. None for us though:icon_frow
> 
> I deep vacuum the ADA about once a year as I uproot and move things around a lot, and then do a few large water changes while I'm doing it deal with excess muck. Not too bad, about 2-3x the water changes/mess per unit area as bad as plain Flourite is with it's mulm. I just redo smaller areas, say 1/8 of the tank any one time. Keeps it fair clean and running good. If the plants are not trim med or uprooting is not required, then it does not matter, I just leave it.
> 
> Less work.
> 
> Overall, the cost still adds up whether you displace the PS with more ADA AS, so you still need to fill the same volume. So add another bag or two of the ADA AS instead.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Tom Barr




Tom! It will be coming to the USA very shortly. I have a few bags as samples to work with. 










Also Oliver K. product will be in around August


----------



## shrimpnmoss

Francis Xavier said:


> Here's what I do know. Using Power Sand isn't some great Amano innovation or secret, it's just old gardening tradition. I mean, even my mom and uncle, who are both avid gardeners, use some kind of porous 'substrate' whether it's pebbles or what not at the bottom of all of their planters, or in their gardens outside, or in any container they plant something in (whether it has a drainage ditch or not). Those pebbles don't serve the purpose of -growing- the plant through nutrient supply, but rather, as I understand it, as an ideal layer for roots to get firmly rooted, provide for drainage, and keep the soil aerated.
> 
> While there are differences between aquarium plant growing and traditional gardening, power sand is just that same medium as it's gardening equivalent.
> Of course your plants will still grow with just aquasoil. Power Sand is just a root system substrate, it just supposed to help roots stay oxygenated support 'flow' and stay healthy. It just helps things stay firmly and healthily rooted and is supposed to be a long-term solution. I mean, technically you could probably just use pebbles to serve the same purpose.


+1 On Frank's explanation. Logic tells me the substrate will compact over time. With a lava rock or power sand base the base layer will never compact to the density of the Aquasoil above it. The extra space will allow for better bacterial growth and movement of O2 and other nutrients in the substrate system. This is the reason I use either a lava rock, powersand or even regular aquarium gravel as the bottom layer of a substrate system. As long as the particle size of the base layer is larger than the layers above it the principle makes sense. 

No scientific comparisons, no side by side comparisons...just common sense.


----------



## Jeffww

Green Leaf Aquariums said:


> Tom! It will be coming to the USA very shortly. I have a few bags as samples to work with.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also Oliver K. product will be in around August


That oliver knott substrate is a riot. I just can't take a product with a smiling man giving a thumbs up sign on the bag seriously. Get me some of that contro soil though and I'll be all over it. Although I doubt I'll ever use anything other than fluval stratum again. 

I personally use a small layer of eco comp on the bottom of my stratum tank. Plants don't seem to root well in clay ball substrates. Sure they make large root systems but they're not very tightly held in the substrate. Adding some kind of sand layer or eco comp layer gives them more permanence...that's the only thing I can think of.

Anyways at least they're not trying to market ADA tourmaline :icon_roll


----------



## plantbrain

jsenske said:


> Very detailed and intelligent replies, Tom. I get your point, and it's well taken.
> 
> Regarding using the powder type: I think for the initial planting for a beginner using HC, you will find that the thread-thin and shallow roots of HC will stay planted better until it gets a foothold.
> For- rescaping, I probably wouldn't concern myself with it (the powder type that is) too much, though a fresh top dressing of AquaSoil is always nice to put a clean "cap" on things after all that jostling around.


I've done this myself a few times. I had good results with HC usign the DSM, so I have not used the powder type for this, in my nano tanks where I did try the powder type it was too light and fluffed up a lot.

I am interested to try some of the new ADA AS.

I think most of the issues come from the water treatment from the different types of additives they use for corrosion control in distribution systems in tap water. 

I have used it widely in extremely hard water and very very soft water without any issues. The longevity would suggest *at least a decade except for N.*

As it(sediment) ages, some more KNO3 would be wise to add. This could be added to "dope" the ADA brighty series if folks are sold on those products and ease/habit of use. NO3 just will not bind to clays, NH4 does quite well, but is attacked by plants and bacteria.


----------



## plantbrain

Francis Xavier said:


> First off, I think you've handled the debate well; I know some of what I wrote could come across badly. So thanks for not getting the wrong idea.


I am mean and old, you are young and not mean(yet! I'll wait a few more to see:redface



> We both agree that Aquasoil does at least most of the heavy lifting as far as perpetuating plant growth and providing nutrients. Meaning you won't necessarily notice an immediate difference on outward appearance between scenarios using Power Sand and those that do not.
> 
> When we take out all of the x-factors from this debate, the core of the disagreement lies in: Power Sand being a myth. The question that needs to be asked is: is judging the value of Power Sand based on whether or not plants grow the correct criteria to judge with?


What is the correct criteria then?
Careful here..........

How does a plant grow?

These questions sound simple, but they are not.



> It might sound completely crazy, but what if the benefit of Power Sand isn't something that can necessarily be seen easily? That means that the whole time it has been judged against criteria that isn't part of it's purpose is.


This what you are stating is that the results are non significant.
If they cannot be measured, seen etc........then that is the definition of non significant.

You have to demonstrate the results you see are from this product to argue for them. There is no way to debate around this one. I can say the same thing about Penac for example or the power of prayer and the planted tank.

I do not test nor measure belief however.
That's more for the preachers.



> My observation has been, up until this point, that when I used Power Sand and would go to remove plants for a rescape or what-not, that the root systems tended to be more firmly entrenched and larger (bigger diameter, more 'intricate') than when I did not use Power Sand; in other words, in cases that I had power sand my roots had the tendency to reach much deeper than they did in cases using only normal or only powder type.


There is less obstruction, there is also less nutrients and the tackier grains vs soft clay will adhere better, but this does not imply better, more growth or root health. We are concerned with the shoot growth mostly for our goals. Roots play a role, but less so. 

The other issue is doing a side by comparison vs one tank vs the other. 
How would you test root growth for example? Would the roots simply not grow longer since they do not have ample nutrients in the PS whereas the roots in AS only, need not go far to obtain a source??

I can see this in plain sand also, but the AS does better for the shoot than plain sand alone. Even when the water column is non limiting in both cases.



> The only reason I hesitate to make that statement is that I've never set up an 'official' experiment to test Power Sand - there could have been other random variables at play, you could argue that it's perception even. But that has been my observation. It could even be plain dumb coincidence.


Who knows, I would be skeptical of my own belief.



> So when I see Amano using Power Sand and using PS for as long as he has (and while he has cut other things out, like those old-school substrate heaters), and I see gardeners using what is basically power sand in their planting patterns, and I see that it works for me; and that roots are thicker and deeper when I have power sand in there it leads me to believe that PS does do what it's advertised for doing and does work well as a component of a system that promotes both good plant growth and long-term sustainability.


and so it gets back to belief, nothing more.
*Amano is as susceptible to the powers of belief as much as you, myself and anyone.* Why would he be any different? Folks need to be careful when they place so much belief. 

I get questioned and grilled about some very basic plant stuff often times. I do not expect obsequious behavior:icon_redf
Embarrasses me.



> I often heard reports of aquasoil burning out in growth rates for people who don't use PS in the 6 month range - or in other words that it had short-term longevity.


This is likely due to the decline in N, something I measured with sediment analysis. the rest stays there, but the N drops off, see the above post to Jeff.

This is informative and tells us how we can modify and get more out of the product, we learn more about the product and the plants this way.
"Belief" would not have eluciated this. 

We learn little by "belief". 
Only blind acceptance.



> But that's unconfirmable data since there's no way of telling what parameters may or may not have changed over the course of time for those people - I just know that I've never experienced aquasoil 'burning' out and not being effective. So i'm pretty skeptical when it comes to being told something doesn't work.


Same here. I need to be sure, this is why I've used several lines of evidence for support:icon_idea



> The first step to me seems like there needs to be an established criteria in which to judge PS against first. Or in this case, rather, has it been judged in the past against the correct criteria. Or maybe that's all hogwash.


So you want to suggest a "control"?

Dry weight plant biomass of the organ of interest, in this case, "roots".
Several stem plants are planted in pots, carefully rinses and then the root biomass and the shoot biomass of each is carefully dried at 70C for 48 hours and then weighed.

How long should a test run?
Which species should be chosen?

There is no evidence it has been judged against ANY criteria.
I suggested using it with and without PS. Others followed suit.
Most have not noticed a difference.

Most have noticed a difference with ADA PS vs plain sand or flourite/EC etc..........but one has ferts, the others do not.

It gives more wiggle room in dosing and for all the myths regarding the hobby about water column excess ferts causing issues.......this gets around some of that while still placating the myths, and getting decent growth.

Still, I do not measure one's belief, a minister/Philosopher will be glad to have such a debate, but not me. It's like Science vs Religion. 
What might be a control for excess PO4 = algae?
What might be a falsifying example?


----------



## thewife

Tom - ADA is very clear about the purpose of Power Sand. It is not meant to enhance plant growth. It's purpose is bacterial growth.

Book of ADA: 

[/QUOTE]Porous volcanic stones secure the water circulation and organic nutrients promote the growths of bacteria.[/QUOTE]

The fact that plants WILL take up some of this organic material is beside the main point. The powersand special is already coated with dormant bacteria - and clear super, for what it's worth. Ecology 101: bacteria form the basis of ecological systems. Why is this important? Because for one, bacteria break down macromolecules into usable nutrients for plants. 

You should know this. 

Would you get bacterial growth in your substrate without using power sand (or a porous equivalent)? Absolutely. But you risk creating anaerobic pockets and compacting your soil. You can avoid that by having plants with large, extensive root systems to break it up, but if you doing a nano iwagumi and all you have is some HC with maybe some E. tenellus or hydrocotyle, you'd probably be better off to secure long-term stability. Many people DO mix something like porous rock into their soil for exactly that reason. Some people choose to buy powersand for that reason. What brand you use doesn't really matter and comes down to a personal choice. 

Figure out what your goal is, and plan accordingly.


----------



## Jeffww

thewife said:


> Tom - ADA is very clear about the purpose of Power Sand. It is not meant to enhance plant growth. It's purpose is bacterial growth.
> 
> Book of ADA:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Porous volcanic stones secure the water circulation and organic nutrients promote the growths of bacteria.
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that plants WILL take up some of this organic material is beside the main point. The powersand special is already coated with dormant bacteria - and clear super, for what it's worth. Ecology 101: bacteria form the basis of ecological systems. Why is this important? Because for one, bacteria break down macromolecules into usable nutrients for plants.
> 
> You should know this.
> 
> Would you get bacterial growth in your substrate without using power sand (or a porous equivalent)? Absolutely. But you risk creating anaerobic pockets and compacting your soil. You can avoid that by having plants with large, extensive root systems to break it up, but if you doing a nano iwagumi and all you have is some HC with maybe some E. tenellus or hydrocotyle, you'd probably be better off to secure long-term stability. Many people DO mix something like porous rock into their soil for exactly that reason. Some people choose to buy powersand for that reason. What brand you use doesn't really matter and comes down to a personal choice.
> 
> Figure out what your goal is, and plan accordingly.
Click to expand...


I think there's a few issues with the idea that PS can prevent anaerobic pockets. The assumption :

PS creates an aerobic area for bacteria to colonize. 

The issue here is that to assume this benefit you have to assume that at the bottom of the AS there is already sufficient oxygen/water movement for the PS to become aerobic. That means even without the PS there wouldn't be an anaerobic spot in the first place. The way it works defeats itself. If you were to put PS in say the middle of the substrate then it would be plausible as a bio filter but at the bottom; I doubt it. 

Additionally the bacteria in the sand that may be there may or may not actually help. It might speed your cycle up but it would have happened anyways. The rather moist AS is already a pretty good place to get your starting bacteria from.


----------



## thewife

Anaerobic pockets form because of soil compaction. PS prevents compacting -> therefore prevents anaerobic pockets. You put it at the bottom when you set up, but it doesn't stay there...it'll float around through the middle areas. And you do very much need bacteria - not just for cycling. 

If you sterlilized your aquarium after "cycling" you would be right back at square one. You need a healthy population of those little guys coating every bit of available surface, including substrate. Heck, the saltwater guys even buy "live" sand in addition to live rock and fancy filter materials.


----------



## Jeffww

thewife said:


> Anaerobic pockets form because of soil compaction. PS prevents compacting -> therefore prevents anaerobic pockets. You put it at the bottom when you set up, but it doesn't stay there...it'll float around through the middle areas. And you do very much need bacteria - not just for cycling.
> 
> If you sterlilized your aquarium after "cycling" you would be right back at square one. You need a healthy population of those little guys coating every bit of available surface, including substrate. Heck, the saltwater guys even buy "live" sand in addition to live rock and fancy filter materials.



You're not getting my point. How does it prevent compaction if it's *underneath *all that soil. How do small grains of grit prevent anything? I mean if it got mixed with the AS it'd only make compaction worse. The point of putting PS under the AS is to make _space?? _underneath the soil? I'd imagine it's similar to the UG filter grates we used to put in reef tanks in DSB tanks. That made sense. In DSB you HAD to have some way to get some water underneath otherwise you'd gas your fish. But with AS which is already a light substrate and VERY uniform (prevents the very impaction which you claim) in size there would be no point. 

This is how impaction works: Say you had a jar of marbles of a uniform size. There would be consistent spaces and no blockages. However if I were to add smaller bits of glass beads the beads would fill in the space and prevent movement between them. Uniformity prevents this issue. Additionally, has anyone actually _measured _if any flow actually occurs in the substrate? I mean think about it. I'd imagine trying to force water through ANY susbtrate would be like breathing into a pillow. We don't even have any flow directed _at _the substrate. Most of the aerobic bacteria we have in our substrate is focused at the surface anyways. That's where the fish crap is, that's where the food is. A filter's biological purpose is to get the crap to the bacteria and concentrate it enough to create dense colonies. And THEN there's the issue of a population limit. At a certain point no matter how much bioavailable space there is the bacteria are limited by the amount of ammonia and other wastes that are present. I run about 1 gallon of bioceramic in my filter. I'm not really sure if adding a few hand fulls of sand UNDER my substrate is going to do me much good.


Yes I understand plenty about bacteria and bacteria culturing. I always have a few litres of pure strain rhodospirillum going for my pond...and I do plenty of culturing at work in the lab and at school...


----------



## thewife

Aquasoil disintegrates slightly after a while...I'm watching it do so as we speak. Even if you start with the uniform material, it's not necessarily going to stay that way. If you wanted to assume that it DID stay uniform forever, you're still going to have other smaller particles get into it which would fill up said space - with or without a filter. If you don't have bacteria in your substrate, how is that junk going to decompose? 

Talking about population limits is sort of pointless when you have no idea how many or what species are living in your tank. Sure, you can bet on some nitrifying bacteria, but what else? There are probably well over a hundred species living in there, and I doubt all of them use ammonia. Some of them may nibble on sulfates, for instance.


----------



## Jeffww

thewife said:


> Aquasoil disintegrates slightly after a while...I'm watching it do so as we speak. Even if you start with the uniform material, it's not necessarily going to stay that way. If you wanted to assume that it DID stay uniform forever, you're still going to have other smaller particles get into it which would fill up said space - with or without a filter. If you don't have bacteria in your substrate, how is that junk going to decompose?
> 
> Talking about population limits is sort of pointless when you have no idea how many or what species are living in your tank. Sure, you can bet on some nitrifying bacteria, but what else? There are probably well over a hundred species living in there, and I doubt all of them use ammonia. Some of them may nibble on sulfates, for instance.



The ones in question are nitrobacter amongst other species..Whatever chemotrophic bacteria we have aren't going to be there in amounts we care about. Additionally if AS is just going to disintigrate anyways how is your silly sand going to stop it from clogging up itself? I really don't understand where the logic is. On top of that you haven't addressed the fact almost 0 water flows through your substrate as compared to your filter which moves hundreds of gallons per hour. 

And plus just because there are different species doesn't mean space isn't a factor. At a certain point no matter how much space you have you can't have more bacteria than there is food for them...Just like plants it doesn't matter how much ferts you have if you don't have enough light.


----------



## thewife

If you had the same water in your substrate that you put in there on the day that you set up your tank, your substrate would be a wreck. Obviously water does get into your substrate...seeing as how it's wet. Notice that water molecules and oxygen are itty bitty little things and aren't really deterred by a little bit of substrate when they're bouncing around willy-nilly in your aquarium. Did I say you had oceanic currents running through it? I don't recall that I did. There is certainly enough movement to allow a small exchange of oxygen and other goodies. I also said that AS disintegrates SLIGHTLY, at least enough to ruin your uniformity. Finally, it's not "my" sand, silly or otherwise. I don't have any in my tank. In retrospect, I wish that I had done it.

And what are amounts that you care about in terms of population? A few billion? A couple trillion? What's your upper limit here? It's pretty likely that you have a handful of species that live in your filter, some that live on the glass, some that live in the substrate, some that live in your plants and in the guts of your fauna...all of those have specialized functions the same way that bacterial crusts in the desert have specified functions at different depths.


----------

