# Will this rock work in my vivarium?



## nightowl (Dec 13, 2010)

I found this rock along a trail near my home. Can I put this rock in my vivarium I am planning on building?


----------



## Mitch (Jun 18, 2010)

Pour vinegar on it - If the vinegar bubbles then don't use it. Also I would clean it with a bleach solution before using it too.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Ya do the vinegar test, but its hard to say for sure without knowing more about where you found it and what tends to be around there, or doing some tests for hardness and cleavage etc.... Just from looking I'm thinking it reminds me of feldspar, but I'm no geologist so I wouldn't want to bet on that. Could just be limestone or some type of sand stone too. If it has areas that are smooth and rounded kinda like glass, might even look almost transparent or translucent, (you'd have to look really really close possibly to tell any of this), it is probably feldspar or some kind of quartz based mineral which should be safe but again, hard to say.


----------



## Enlightened Rogue (Mar 21, 2006)

Dumb question of the day...what does the vinegar do?

John


----------



## Eric Walker (Aug 22, 2009)

not that dumb john, I was wondering the same thing. I have never heard that before.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Will fizz if the rock is reactive to acid. I think this test applies more for aquariums but still you don't wanna put rocks like limestone in your viv(which will likely have slightly acidic soil) and alter the PH to much...also FYI at least according to one thing I read after a brief search, some rocks that might not be safe can still pass the fizz test. Type "rock vinegar test" into google for more info.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

If there is exposed carbonate on the stone, the acetic acid reacts with the carbonate realising carbon dioxide. 

I have a question... The reason people don't recommend carbonate based stones (like limestone) for some aquariums is because it can buffer the pH and hardness up into undesirable ranges. In a enclosure where the stone may not be part of a water feature, what is the real concern? 

Ed


----------



## tim13 (Feb 1, 2011)

Wouldn't the carbonate in the stone add calcium to the enclosure?


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

tim13 said:


> Wouldn't the carbonate in the stone add calcium to the enclosure?


Not necessarily. If the stone did contain calcium carbonate, that doesn't mean that it will decompose and release calcium (and this is ignoring a lot of other potential metal ions that could also be in the carbonate matrix (like magnesium)). In the enclosures, one of the major acids that the stone would be exposed to are humuc acids ( tannins are part of that group) and calcium humates are insoluble... this would lead to the a insoluble precipitate across the stone that would actually significantly reduce or prevent the loss of any ions from the carbonate areas.


----------



## tim13 (Feb 1, 2011)

So it's still safer to go with a rock that has a neutral PH, even though a slightly basic rock would likely be okay to.


----------



## Pumilo (Sep 4, 2010)

Do NOT bake it to sterilize! Rocks can explode from pockets of water in them.


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Ed said:


> If there is exposed carbonate on the stone, the acetic acid reacts with the carbonate realising carbon dioxide.
> 
> I have a question... The reason people don't recommend carbonate based stones (like limestone) for some aquariums is because it can buffer the pH and hardness up into undesirable ranges. In a enclosure where the stone may not be part of a water feature, what is the real concern?
> 
> Ed


Personally assuming the stone isn't something that could be broken down by acids or water to release metals or other chemicals/elements that may be harmful I think the impact would be minimal. Really assuming there is no risk of the things I just mentioned then throwing off the PH as you said is the only worry I can think of but I don't know of a reason that would have much effect on the frogs other then the water they absorb through their skin would be less acidic with stones buffering the PH in the moisture trapped in the soil (and without constant water running over the stones eroding them I would assume this to be minimal). Perhaps the plants may not like it? Might not be good in a viv pond either. There seems to be a vague mentality that if its fish safe its frog safe, and vise versa, or maybe its just "error on the side of caution"...eh I don't know.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

tim13 said:


> So it's still safer to go with a rock that has a neutral PH, even though a slightly basic rock would likely be okay to.


 
Why would you say that? 

Ed


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

Dendro Dave said:


> Personally assuming the stone isn't something that could be broken down by acids or water to release metals or other chemicals/elements that may be harmful I think the impact would be minimal. Really assuming there is no risk of the things I just mentioned then throwing off the PH as you said is the only worry I can think of but I don't know of a reason that would have much effect on the frogs other then the water they absorb through their skin would be less acidic with stones buffering the PH in the moisture trapped in the soil (and without constant water running over the stones eroding them I would assume this to be minimal). Perhaps the plants may not like it? Might not be good in a viv pond either. There seems to be a vague mentality that if its fish safe its frog safe, and vise versa, or maybe its just "error on the side of caution"...eh I don't know.


Hi Dave,

When the rocks react with the humic acids, they will form a insoluble salt which is going to be deposited on the surface of the stones. This is going to reduce or prevent much of the ions from releasing from the surface of the stone. The amount that is released is going to be relatively small and may raise the pH of the soil touching the stone. The pH of a peat based substrate can be as low as 3.6 (so soiless mixes like ABG can have a very low pH) so these stones will increase the pH of the touching substrate but the amount is going to be pretty small in the lifespan of the enclosure (for example how many enclosures are still set up after ten or 20 years). 

There are some rocks that are going to be a bigger risk as they are much less stable (such as sand stone) but in general all because a rock reacts with an acid doesn't mean it isn't safe to use in an enclosure with terrestrial amphibians. 

People worry about the pH when it comes to stones but don't bother to check the effluent levels of other substrates.. When I used calcium bentonite in a flow through system I had a pH of 8.6 in the water coming out of the tank... 

Ed


----------



## Dendro Dave (Aug 2, 2005)

Ed said:


> Hi Dave,
> 
> When the rocks react with the humic acids, they will form a insoluble salt which is going to be deposited on the surface of the stones. This is going to reduce or prevent much of the ions from releasing from the surface of the stone. The amount that is released is going to be relatively small and may raise the pH of the soil touching the stone. The pH of a peat based substrate can be as low as 3.6 (so soiless mixes like ABG can have a very low pH) so these stones will increase the pH of the touching substrate but the amount is going to be pretty small in the lifespan of the enclosure (for example how many enclosures are still set up after ten or 20 years).
> 
> ...


Ya I've wondered how much of an tangible/practical impact there would be. Like when we were discussing semi precious stones and fluorescent minerals for vivs. Many of the really cool ones are metal ores or contain other stuff that in theory could be dangerous, but I question how likely anything is to be released in harmful quantities and forms on a practical level. Malachite is one I was thinking about since copper is generally bad, plus it is supposedly very sensitive to acids according to wiki.

I mean really is anything bad going to happen with a stone sitting in some moist soil for a few years or do we need thousands of years of wind/rain erosion before sufficient amounts of a toxic substance would be released? Thats a good point too about the ph of the soil. Given how acidic most viv soils probably are they could maybe stand having their ph raised a bit, might even be beneficial.


----------



## slipperheads (Oct 17, 2007)

Ed said:


> If there is exposed carbonate on the stone, the acetic acid reacts with the carbonate realising carbon dioxide.
> 
> I have a question... The reason people don't recommend carbonate based stones (like limestone) for some aquariums is because it can buffer the pH and hardness up into undesirable ranges. In a enclosure where the stone may not be part of a water feature, what is the real concern?
> 
> Ed


If the enclosure is sealed, it can be a problem. It's not good for the plants OR the frogs. 

I don't suggest using stones from outside solely because of their weight, I go with foam all day. But if you up to the challenge go for it . Highly recommend doing a bleach wash and letting it dry first.


----------



## Ed (Sep 19, 2004)

§lipperhead said:


> If the enclosure is sealed, it can be a problem. It's not good for the plants OR the frogs.


Based on? Examples and rate of weathering? Solubility of the humic salt? 


Ed


----------



## nightowl (Dec 13, 2010)

Thanks everyone! I will try the vinegar test today when I get home and update you all on the results. Pending the results I will also perform the bleach cleaning as well.

I did not know there were so many responses. I have instant notification on and I only received one alert .

Thanks again!


----------



## nightowl (Dec 13, 2010)

Finally got a chance to pour vinegar on it and there was no fizzle so I guess it will be safe to use once I break a few pieces off. Thanks again for all the responses!


----------

