pepetj

I hope you can help me clarify a few issues on live rock.

I found so far that highly porous rock is better than less porous ones. Fiji live rock is way more porous than Caribbean live rock. Is that the case?

So another question comes up: If a highly porous rock is expected to weight less than a more dense one (keeping volume constant)... Would that mean that the lbs per gallon guideline would indeed need to be adjusted? (Either more volume of highly porous rock to achieve the weight guideline or would it be wise to use less weight safely?)

I have access to no Fiji live rock what soever. But I found a 20lbs piece that occupies somewhat more space than the other type weighting 20lbs I've collected. So I figure it has a lower density, more porous; it seems to be a fragment of coraline rock that is not that old. The "dead tissue" of the rock inner core looks quite white isntead of yellowish/old. I found it in an "unbalanced" environment (where algae take prominence over vanishing corals). I figure it was slammed in that place by a storm or maybe man-made disturbance (adjacent to a public beach with probably not too much contamination) -I found a couple of human made solid waste (old frame for lenses, two piece of small plastic containers) in around 0.5 square mile area as I snorkeled for a few hours (Last Sunday, looking for some macroalgae and Turtle Grass).

Thing is I like that rock shape. It came with more tiny crustaceans, and my Mandarin Dragonet made it home. It allowed me to free some space at the substrate area.

Pepetj
Santo Domingo

beachcomber

I can't profess to know much, but surface area might count for a lot, as opposed to density, suggesting not to change the formula. Just an idea.

locoyo386

Hi there,
Price of live rock I am assuming is like pricing anything else. Cost and all will determine the price of rock, in this case per pound of rock.

As far as quality of rock, well it depends on alot of things. It tends to be a great jubject of discussion on many forums. My opinoin is that rock basically serves two purposes; it houses micro and macro-organism and it provides surfaces for bacteria to colonize. The first is more so what you really want from the rock. You want critters to live there, the ones that breack waste and excess food in the tank. The second is more debateble, specially when it comes to pourosity. More pourus rock allows for housing of critters but also provides areas with low oxygen. The later is what brings debate. The rock will provide areas for bacteria, that deal with ammonia and nitrites, to colonize. The debate is wether it provides areas for the bacteria that deals with nitrates aswell. When the rock is pourus, it is said that this can be acheived because these areas will low oxygen. The debate is wehter it does happen or not. I have two setups to tey to determine if this is a significant plus pr not. Up to now I have not found significant proof that rock will provide this benifit in the home aquarium.

rt12

I agree surface area would allow for more filtration and area for things to grow on