Does the surface area of live rock really matter?

[143MPCo]

Came across this articular and wanted to share with the club, please take a look and post you concerns or any comments you might have, thx!

Does the surface area of live rock really matter? <--link

 

[Eckolancer]

My tank is pretty bare and sandless with all man made ceramic rock

 

[phillrodrigo]

It makes a ton of sense. The only part I hate is "Tonga branch for the win" not a fan of Tonga branch.

 

[143MPCo]

It makes a ton of sense. The only part I hate is "Tonga branch for the win" not a fan of Tonga branch.

I'm with you on that one, don't much care for Tonga....

This is the interesting point, at lease to me it is:

"The real take away message is to stop getting caught up on the inconsequential details of how hypothetical things are supposed to work, widen your view and try to look at the big picture. In the case of live rock and porosity, just buy a slab of stupidly expensive ceramic biomedia, stick it in your sump, and use as little live rock as you need to hold up your corals or to build the aquascape that you really want – and reach for the less porous rock every chance you get."

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

While I do not know how much utility the pores in live rock provide, they seemed to have neglected denitrification.

I find their comment below to be rather one sided:

"But let us ask you, have you ever seen or heard of a reef tank with a real ammonia problem? Seriously though, we’ve never walked up to a reef tank and seen animals with symptoms of ammonia or nitrite burn. The case in point is that discussing live rock in terms of its surface area for bacteria is a complete waste of time."

What if, instead, it read:

"But let us ask you, have you ever seen or heard of a reef tank with a real nitrate problem? Seriously though, we’ve never walked up to a reef tank and seen animals with symptoms of elevated nitrate (such as algae). The case in point is that discussing live rock in terms of its surface area for bacteria is a complete waste of time."

That may put it in a slightly different context.
Bear in mind that it is a presentation by someone selling a product.

 

[Useful_Idiot]

I know when PC was open they had some pretty well stocked rack systems with very little live rock in them and not much attached to them and it wasn't an issue. I read that article and immediately doubted stocking up on marco rock this time around. But after some more thought I disagree with the logic of detritus building up inside to the point of crashing the system and am gonna buy marco rock anyways. I haven't seen a type of non porus rock that looks good.

 

[143MPCo]

While I do not know how much utility the pores in live rock provide, they seemed to have neglected denitrification.

I find their comment below to be rather one sided:

"But let us ask you, have you ever seen or heard of a reef tank with a real ammonia problem? Seriously though, we’ve never walked up to a reef tank and seen animals with symptoms of ammonia or nitrite burn. The case in point is that discussing live rock in terms of its surface area for bacteria is a complete waste of time."

What if, instead, it read:

"But let us ask you, have you ever seen or heard of a reef tank with a real nitrate problem? Seriously though, we’ve never walked up to a reef tank and seen animals with symptoms of elevated nitrate (such as algae). The case in point is that discussing live rock in terms of its surface area for bacteria is a complete waste of time."

That may put it in a slightly different context.
Bear in mind that it is a presentation by someone selling a product.

Hello Randy, I value your opinion highly so thank you for chiming in:thumb:. When read that way one would have to agree, it seems essentially a clever tactic used by marketers to raise awareness and drive up purchases of a specific product. What's your take on live rock/dry-rock/man-made for starting a new tank setup?