Texas Holy Rock

Has anyone ever used this in SW? I read some posts about people using different kinds of rock to try and turn into live rock without much success but havnt found much about Texas Holy Rock. I have a bunch of it leftover from a cichlid tank I had set up awhile ago and its very porous, I was wondering is I could use it as baserock in addition to liverock.

 

The title is redundant. Everything in Texas is holy!

As to the rock, my understanding is that it is mostly harmless, but too dense to serve any useful biological function so probably best to avoid in SW. My personal experience is it tends to develop unpleasant looking algae as compared to more typical reef choices.

 

Depends on the rock,,,,dont know about Texas Holy Rock but I have used some other dry rocks, one was even man made and it now is teaming with life and covered in corraline algae!

 

THR is better for FW african cichlid tanks as it buffers the PH. I used to have a ton of it in my old FW mbuna tank. I would say it wouldn't work great for SW (as someone mentioned before, too dense).

You can grab some Marco Key Largo dry rock and seed it with a little bit of LR. I just ordered a 25lb box and it's really nice, impressed with the quality of the rock, great price, & fast/free shipping: MarcoRocks Aquarium Products

 

THR is strictly freshwater. It will mess with pH. I'd get some Marco rock. I have some and it ROCKS! 110$ for 50lbs!

 

Well no THR for SW then thanks for the help guys!

 

I'm going to jump in and say I have had excellent success with THR.

I've never had a sump or refugium or anything. Just a lot of rock and a HOB skimmer.

I did an experiment a few years ago when I got in a debate about its effectiveness. I took a wet piece of rock out of my tank and weighed it then let it dry. No change.

Then

almost a year later, for kicks, i weighed it again and it was measurably lighter (I forget the exact numbers, but it was enough to be significant compared to same test on regular LR). There might be a thread where I posted it somewhere here.

The whole thing about bacteria and cycling and rock being porous has to do with aerobic and anaerobic bacteria. IMO, the key piece in the hobbiest version of the nitrogen cycle is the anaerobic.

It stands to reason to me, for now, if that rock was lighter and it took longer to lose that water, that THR is a better host for anaerobic bacteria than "regular" LR. Density is directly relevant to how much O can fit in there and O atoms are rather small

THR is dense, I give that. But it isn't lead and it does absorb water. Just slowly. Given time with a balance of THR and "regular" I think hobby tanks have more efficient nitrogen cycles in the long run.

I currently run, I don't know, maybe a 1:3 ratio of THR:regular LR

I'm not an expert, just my thoughts on the subject.

 

Funny you brought that thread up, I did that with you a few years back and I just looked it up the other day, I'll see if I can find it again.

Funny, I found the thread but apparently we (meaning I) never posted the final weight. I checked through our PM's and can't find it, I know I have it somewhere though.

 

I remembered it was somebody

 

Do you think it is safe to use the same rock that was in a FW tank in a SW tank? It had been out and dried for months so Im sure everything is dead but could it be holding nitrates or phosphates?