compareing aquatic jungles to reefs

[SnakeIce]

if you compare a freshwater planted jungle that has high(for freshy plants) lighting, co2 added, full fertilization schedule, with what ever larger fish that can raise its own young going at it and a full compliment of nitch fillers and comunity denitzens

and

a reef aquarium, live sand, live rock, and what all is needed for that kind of set up

say they are both 150 gallons just for purposes of comparison

how much do these tanks differ in cost to set up, cost of upkeep, time to upkeep, the amount of time from filling empty tank to having a filled in great looking tank, the minimum personal knowlege needed to be succesful at it

could one with little knowlege of either have a coach here or in personal aquaintance be able to, with their help and direction achieve either one of these set ups

and finally if you have had a semblance of both or currently keep both why one or the other

[plantbrain]

Good question(s).

Keep in mind that reefs are critters, plants are plants, they are not equivalent.

Cost: certainly the reef far exceeds the cost of planted tanks. Initial cost and long term cost. Electrical cost will be higher(more light generally), more pumps etc. Livestock cost are extremely high for reef tanks, if things die, then restocking is rough. Production rates in planted tanks far exceeds any other. Reefs can/do produce frags worth$(takes along time) but the volume of plants can be staggering if $ is your goal.
Lighting cost are higher with reefs for bulb replacements etc.

Know how: reefs require more and knowing what will go with what. Coral wars happen. Plants can be mixed anyway. Plants have overall general habits. Corals can vary. But it depends on the species you pick, most places that sell corals can tell what will do well etc. It's not too dauting, but is a money pit for many folks.

Upkeep: The reef once established is easier to maintain, less trimming, likely fewer water changes etc, but SW water changes need to have the water pre mixed etc, plants use the tap. But you end up dosing the same one way or another for each tank type.
The choice of critters or plants can dicate how much upkeep you do and also the lighting.

Time: planted tanks are very tough to beat here. The key is getting enough stock from the start and being able to keep up with a few things.

Your live base rock is something that may take a while to cure in your tank and will also cost a fair amount.

Why not have a reef and a planted tank?
I think many have the goal of a 150 gal Rift cichlid, plant, reef, etc
It's difficult to say which is best.

Regards,
Tom Barr

[Andy16]

Well i think that learning about planted tanks was way harder then reef tanks. A reef tank would be more money for sure. Corals are more expensive and you need mroe light, and salt, and if you want fish a filter of somesort and a protein skimmer.

[Timmain42]

I'm with Tom Barr and Andy. I've been contemplating this myself for about two years now, and finally went with the planted tank. Although any tank has a higher initial cost, in the long run all you'll be paying for on the planted is tap water, elec., various easy-to-obtain fertilizers and shrimp/otos from time to time.

With salt, you're in it for the water, the salt, nutrients and foods, calcium and calcium and CALCIUM... you get the idea.

[gcvt]

The reef tank will indeed cost a small fortune :) Good sand, live rock, salt, good water, livestock, supplements, lighting, plumbing, food, electricity...it adds up fast and none of it's cheap.

On maintenance, I spend far more time on my main planted tank (50g) than I do on my main reef tank (100g). The constant plant pruning, weekly water changes and filter cleanings take up most of my time. I can go weeks between water changes on the reef.

Reef tanks take much longer to mature than planted tanks. It's not uncommon to find livestock that require at least a one-year-old tank to thrive/survive.

Both tanks are great in their own way, but the reef tank is more interesting to watch.

[GulfCstAquarian]

I used to keep reefs but I gave it up because of the cost and time involved. Not only is live rock expensive ($4 a pound. Need 1-2 lbs per gallon), but lighting requirements are twice that of planted tanks.
Aside from cost, I just didn't feel like keeping up with the constant maintenence. Mixing kalkwasser and setting up a drip. Pre-mixing salt water for water changes, CONSTANT testing of Calcium and nutrient levels to make sure things are in check.

My planted tank pretty much takes care of itself. CO2 pressure is set. Lights go on and off. I feed the fish and I trim a few plants once a week (and make money on the trimmings). There is some water testing early on while you are establishing a fertilizer regimen, but once that is set you generally only need to test every week or two just to make sure you're still on track.

Cost and maintenence aside, I did find Reefs more interesting with the incredible diversity of flora and fauna found on live rock. Someday I'll have another setup, but I want it to be low-maintenence (Ca reactor, etc.). Only bad things happen quickly in reefs, so if you don't have patience, you've got a better shot with planted tanks.

[tanker]

I have a 100gal heavy planted tank and a 100gal semi reef (has fish). The Reef cost a fortune to set up but requires a lot less work. My planted tank requires weekly maintainence. I use the same lights for both tanks (just different bulbs).