PDA

View Full Version : Zeovit discussion


eidels
05/02/2012, 06:43 AM
Very sorry about your tank. But it raises lots of questions as Zeo is so enticing but shrouded in mystery. Did you have a refuge and DSB. Beforehand and were you having a bacterial die off after 2 months of Zeo already? I wish I had a marine microbiologist/chemist grad student so could get to the bottom of this

Allmost
05/02/2012, 09:02 AM
Very sorry about your tank. But it raises lots of questions as Zeo is so enticing but shrouded in mystery. Did you have a refuge and DSB. Beforehand and were you having a bacterial die off after 2 months of Zeo already? I wish I had a marine microbiologist/chemist grad student so could get to the bottom of this

please read more on zeovit and familiar yourself with it, before pulling up so many old threads, asking why Zeovit kills bacteria :)

it doesnt, its a bacteria driven system :)

eidels
05/02/2012, 10:02 AM
I have read at length which is why I have so many questions. The system smacks of alchemy with drops of this and that and no science behind it other than heresay comments about which drops affect other drops and subjective results on coloration tank crash cyano Ryan etc

Allmost
05/02/2012, 10:12 AM
I have read at length which is why I have so many questions. The system smacks of alchemy with drops of this and that and no science behind it other than heresay comments about which drops affect other drops and subjective results on coloration tank crash cyano Ryan etc

no science behind it ? :) lol
smacks the chemistry ?
tank crash, cyano and Ryan ? lol is Ryan a pest :P [Im kidding]

that shows u have not studied enough.

PMing you the "science" of bactrioplankton systems :) you need to research to get to the science. it doesnt come to you, and many many reefers [unfortunely] just like to hear "how many drops" instead of getting a better and deeper understanding, its good that you are looking for the underlying reasons. but get ready to read !

eidels
05/02/2012, 10:28 AM
I want my tank to be an ecosystem sustaining a multitude of organisms and have a working premise on how to control browning Zooanthelae. Ideally I want a system that benefits from the best of both worlds. That is my goal simple and the information is scattered and sketchy and protected. The results of zeovit are spectacular and can advance the science of reefs but I don't see any of that discussion on the forums. I stand by all the questions I've asked and will be indebted to any that through experience or scientific knowledge that can help me

Allmost
05/02/2012, 10:32 AM
I want my tank to be an ecosystem sustaining a multitude of organisms and have a working premise on how to control browning Zooanthelae. Ideally I want a system that benefits from the best of both worlds. That is my goal simple and the information is scattered and sketchy and protected. The results of zeovit are spectacular and can advance the science of reefs but I don't see any of that discussion on the forums. I stand by all the questions I've asked and will be indebted to any that through experience or scientific knowledge that can help me

1. check your PM :)

2, you are looking at wrong place to get info on Zeovit :) maybe go on google, and search Zeovit and see what comes up ? maybe the zeovit site ? :)

I just think its ignorant of you to not research and complain about info not finding you. as I see your posts in other threads, you do not know what zeovit is or does, so why not read on it ?

anyways, I guess some like to just hate blindly ...

eidels
05/02/2012, 10:44 AM
I've read Sprungs last text in depth He devotes a paragraph to Zeovit. Also texts on corals as well as Inverts and refugiums . Little is published in these on vitamin or essential amino acid deficiencies in coral. Likewise little is published on Zooanthelae biology other than a basic understanding of what symbiosis is. Controlling nitrates is the science of the 80's. Zeo is controlling ammonium at the expense of every other nutritional requirement or that's the working hypothesis. But in nature this doesn't happen. The future maybe partially removing ammonium selectively and I'm sure there there is a solution out there.

Allmost
05/02/2012, 10:48 AM
I've read Sprungs last text in depth He devotes a paragraph to Zeovit. Also texts on corals as well as Inverts and refugiums . Little is published in these on vitamin or essential amino acid deficiencies in coral. Likewise little is published on Zooanthelae biology other than a basic understanding of what symbiosis is. Controlling nitrates is the science of the 80's. Zeo is controlling ammonium at the expense of every other nutritional requirement or that's the working hypothesis. But in nature this doesn't happen. The future maybe partially removing ammonium selectively and I'm sure there there is a solution out there.

if you are going to make up stuff, and not read the science I have presented, then I have no interest in this discussion, and perhaps that is why you are not finding any info on it ? cause u like to assume ?

anyways, Im out, I tried to help you and show u where to get info, and you ignoring it makes it obv that you just like to assume and bash something u have no Idea about ..... bacterio plankton systems.

PS. if you researched here, you would see that zeovit does not work base don removing ammonia ;) I can just tell you that your assumptions are wrong.

if you like to stick to a paragraph u have read against published science and info from the manufacturer. .. .then be my guest ...

eidels
05/02/2012, 10:59 AM
Frustrated maybe a little, hating couldn't be farther from the truth and please accept my apology for having irked you. I have read certainly not enough but all it has done has brought up a thousand questions. Most say too pricey, too time consuming, whatever. I'm not willing to just throw away my 85 gal refugium DSB a tank full of fish and a desire to sustain filterfeeders but I'm also not willing to give up on getting the Zeo results. All or nothing is mostly what I have found. I'm looking for perhaps a compromise which thus far is at a standstill

Allmost
05/02/2012, 11:04 AM
I have PMed u the answer, u chose to not read it.


sorry ...


you keep saying zeovit kills bacteria and filterfeeders, which is simply not correct. so ...

littlec984
05/02/2012, 11:33 AM
no science behind it ? :) lol
smacks the chemistry ?
tank crash, cyano and Ryan ? lol is Ryan a pest :P [Im kidding]

that shows u have not studied enough.

PMing you the "science" of bactrioplankton systems :) you need to research to get to the science. it doesnt come to you, and many many reefers [unfortunely] just like to hear "how many drops" instead of getting a better and deeper understanding, its good that you are looking for the underlying reasons. but get ready to read !

For my own research could you PM me that info as well

tmz
05/02/2012, 06:55 PM
Hold down the personal stuff folks ;it's not helpful.

For clarification, Zeo systems rely on a media for bacteria that consume inorganic N and P to grow on , an organic carbon mixture to feed them and supplements to put back what they take out as the bcteria are skimmed out of the aquarium or by products are adsorbed by granulated acivated carbon.
I don't use the zeo system because I don't know what's in the mixtures and the manufacturer won't tell . I prefer: to use soluble organics ( vodka and vinegar) which are close to the end of the acetogenisis process , not to dose supplements and not to dose to a point of zero N and/or P . My corals do very well in terms of color ,growth and health with PO4 at .04ppm and NO3 at 0.2ppm. The bacteria find places to grow if the aquarium system has enough surface area so using zeoliths isn't necessary but many like the convenience of using it in a contained area .

If I were to remove a significant amount of rock or sand or whatever holding these facultative heterotrophic bacteria , things would change in terms of nutrient( C ,N and P ) levels and probably unbound metals and other trace or minor elements ; the food chain would also lose a member at it's base;the same is true if zeo media is removed.

Also, if I were to stop dosing organics the bacteria would wane in place contributing to nutrients and organics in the aquarium.
The same is true for a zeo system which is basically a bacteria culturing system with lots of trace supplements and a strong emphasis on stripping nutients to 0 or near zero,perhaps starving some corals and tinkering with color via various supplement additions which are of dubious value to coral health,imo and experience.. I just don't find them necessary but lot's of folks enjoy toying with them .
The zeo folks have garnered many testimonials from enthusiasts who are happy with the product and that marketing strategy serves them well but in essence it's an organic carbon dosing system . As such it increases bacterial populations which convert inorganic N and P which are not removed by skimming or adsorbents like gac into organic forms which are bio available, attracted to the air water interface of skimmer bubbles and some of which have an affinity for granulated activated carbon.

bertoni
05/02/2012, 10:05 PM
Hold down the personal stuff folks ;it's not helpful.


I agree. If someone chooses to ignore you, move on.

Allmost
05/03/2012, 08:51 AM
thanks and sorry, didnt understand why this person is posting on all threads trying to bash Zeovit, thanks TMZ.

eidels
05/06/2012, 08:34 PM
Moving on, I've skimmed through most of the abstracts you referred me to Almost and will again at length. Extremely helpful!! I haven't grasped that the Zeo phytoplankton cultures are so potent as to outcompete DSB bacteria cultures to extinction. In my mind for that to happen the media itself Fixates ammonium so as to be unavailable to said bacteria. Also that would explain why bio pellets coexist with DSB. Please take this as an invitation to criticize my understanding.

If controlling browning Zooanthelae overgrowth (as well as algae) by limiting dissolved nutrients is the ultimate and deserved goal then by doing that we in fact turn the corals into partial non photosynthetic corals so to speak. Now facing feeding the coral particulates in densities high enough to thrive and then removing them for water quality I understand the need for powerful skimming gac and frequent water changes. I've seen at least one system running two skimmers. A much better understanding of other developed nutritional deficiencies would help immensely.

I also don't feel a comfort level in creating a stable environment using Zeo with a substantial fish load including Mandarins as I move closer to embracing the ULNS approach. Any Experience, knowledge and further references is immensely appreciated and again Almost I apologize to you and anyone else I ****ed off

puffin04
05/06/2012, 10:09 PM
From zeoguide Zeolites
Think of these as porous man made rocks that absorb something, specifically reef toxins (I would say nitrate and phosphate but nobody knows for sure if these actually remove them or help bind them so your skimmer can easily remove them). Zeovit uses a mixture of different zeolites that have been found to best reduce toxins in a saltwater system. Exactly how they work has been much debated; from a theory of bacterial colonizing to locking-up or removing ammonia, to a transformation process of nutrients to a different ion. Sorry, I have no idea of how it works just that it does.

Randy Holmes-Farley
05/07/2012, 05:05 AM
FWIW, the "theory" of the zeolite binding ammonia and helping bacteria consume the ammonia makes no sense when one works through the implications, so that is not happening.

IMO, the zeovit zeolite is just a convenient place to get bacteria to grow. There is no evidence that I have seen that it does anything else useful.

Allmost
05/07/2012, 10:07 AM
Moving on, I've skimmed through most of the abstracts you referred me to Almost and will again at length. Extremely helpful!! I haven't grasped that the Zeo phytoplankton cultures are so potent as to outcompete DSB bacteria cultures to extinction. In my mind for that to happen the media itself Fixates ammonium so as to be unavailable to said bacteria. Also that would explain why bio pellets coexist with DSB. Please take this as an invitation to criticize my understanding.

If controlling browning Zooanthelae overgrowth (as well as algae) by limiting dissolved nutrients is the ultimate and deserved goal then by doing that we in fact turn the corals into partial non photosynthetic corals so to speak. Now facing feeding the coral particulates in densities high enough to thrive and then removing them for water quality I understand the need for powerful skimming gac and frequent water changes. I've seen at least one system running two skimmers. A much better understanding of other developed nutritional deficiencies would help immensely.

I also don't feel a comfort level in creating a stable environment using Zeo with a substantial fish load including Mandarins as I move closer to embracing the ULNS approach. Any Experience, knowledge and further references is immensely appreciated and again Almost I apologize to you and anyone else I ****ed off


I was just trying to bring to you the info you are missing.

but I am with Randy, and none of the papers I sent you said what u are saying .... I have no Idea where u are making those up from ....but dont say I said it ... that is just wrong !

I wont try helping you again but please dont put words in my mouth :)

eidels
05/07/2012, 10:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace
... I assumed that dosing too much Start2 was very similar in risk as dosing too much Vodka (this is the main risk Randy talks about on RC when dosing a carbon source).
There are risks associated with the over-dosing of ZEOproducts ... but they're not generally the same set of risks associated with over-dosing ethanol (excessive "vodka dosing").

Dr. Holmes-Farley is quite correct in pointing out the O2 depletion risks associated with excessive dosing of either vodka or table sugar. Ethanol (vodka) and glucose-fructose disaccharide (table sugar, AKA saccharose) are readily utilized by a wide array of bacterial heterotrophs. The rapid growth which results can (1) overwhelm other bacterial competitors (and inhibits the biogeochemical processes which they would normally perform), (2) overwhelm the ability of bacterial predators to keep their biomass in balance, and (3) increasingly scavenge O2 from the water column.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace
... especially the tank crashes because of O2 depletion... I was not aware that this does not occur with Zeovit like it does with Vodka. ...
It's not that O2 depletion can't occur, it's just that over-dosing either ZeoBak and/or Start2 doesn't screw up the R* rule and P* rule dynamics fast enough for O2 depletion to emerge as quickly as it can occur with either vodka or sugar over-dosing ... what you get is a nasty bacterial bloom instead. It's perhaps worth noting that if the ZeoBak and Start2 over-dosing is not corrected, it is quite possible that O2 depletion might develop.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace
... I assumed that dosing too much Start2 was very similar in risk as dosing too much Vodka ...
The primary risks associated with either vodka or sugar over-dosing are (1) rapid O2 depletion, and (2) extinction of other bacterial strains in the system which perform other necessary biochemical processes (resulting in a virtual, so-called "monoculture").

This is where folks need to start ingesting generous portions of sodium chloride crystal aggregates before evaluating what follows ... the absence of the specific identities of either the bacterial strains or the carbons sources places what follows somewhere along a continnum bounded by informed but undocumented opinion ... and mindless babble. This is not a happy place to be if you're trying to talk about the science. Having said that ...

The risks associated with over-dosing Start2 are different. There are three areas where ZeoBak strains are "doing their thing" (in association with the other strains present in the system) ... the surface matrix of the ZEOvit media, the water column and associated tank surfaces, and the surface matrix associated with coral tissues. It's the surface matrix associated with coral tissue(s) that most interests me. Review the graphic I posted earlier ...



Check out the microbiota loop. After reflecting that there's a BIG question mark in the middle of it, consider this: The microbiota loop interfaces with the coral-zooxanthellae loop on the tissue of the coral. This interface is where nitrogen, phosphorous, iron, amino acids, amino acid precursors ... and many other "things" ... are made available to the coral for ingestion.

This ingestion is largely ... but not exclusively ... driven by kinetics. In other words, what is ingested is largely (but not exclusively) dependent on the concentration of that thing at the interface.

If you skew the concentrations at the interface, you skew the amount that is ingested by the coral. It's NOT that simple (there are these things called translocation and facilitated transport) ... but that's the heart of my observations regarding Start2 risks.

From my current perspective, the over-dosing of Start2 has the potential to skew the products of bacterial respiration ... which skews the concentration of "things" at the microbiota-coral interface ... which skews what is "ingested" by the coral ... which can produce some very nasty results.

It's my opinion ... as in undocumented speculation ... that the "problem" with the original Start formulation was that it did what it does too well. Things happened too fast (over-dosing didn't get the user time to respond) and the results of "bad kinetics" took place. If I had to bet money, I'd say that it was the form and concentration of acetic acid that was problematic. I'd also bet that a little esterification and dilution solved the problem quite nicely ...

... at least, that's what my nose thinks ... ... ... but I digress ...


Anyway ... that's the bad news, but there's definitely important good news. From this same perspective, it also follows that if you don't over-dose Start2, what you get is an ability to manipulate what is transported and ingested by the coral ... with arguably desirable and stunning results.


Apologies for the length, folks ... HTH



Horace ... check out the interface again. Have you considered what other "stuff" not listed as part of the loops in the diagram (but wildly important to how the loops behave nonetheless) might include? Hint ... calcium, bicarbonate, and ... [drumroll] ... potassium.


Not the science ... JMO

eidels
05/07/2012, 10:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace
... I assumed that dosing too much Start2 was very similar in risk as dosing too much Vodka (this is the main risk Randy talks about on RC when dosing a carbon source).
There are risks associated with the over-dosing of ZEOproducts ... but they're not generally the same set of risks associated with over-dosing ethanol (excessive "vodka dosing").

Dr. Holmes-Farley is quite correct in pointing out the O2 depletion risks associated with excessive dosing of either vodka or table sugar. Ethanol (vodka) and glucose-fructose disaccharide (table sugar, AKA saccharose) are readily utilized by a wide array of bacterial heterotrophs. The rapid growth which results can (1) overwhelm other bacterial competitors (and inhibits the biogeochemical processes which they would normally perform), (2) overwhelm the ability of bacterial predators to keep their biomass in balance, and (3) increasingly scavenge O2 from the water column.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace
... especially the tank crashes because of O2 depletion... I was not aware that this does not occur with Zeovit like it does with Vodka. ...
It's not that O2 depletion can't occur, it's just that over-dosing either ZeoBak and/or Start2 doesn't screw up the R* rule and P* rule dynamics fast enough for O2 depletion to emerge as quickly as it can occur with either vodka or sugar over-dosing ... what you get is a nasty bacterial bloom instead. It's perhaps worth noting that if the ZeoBak and Start2 over-dosing is not corrected, it is quite possible that O2 depletion might develop.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Horace
... I assumed that dosing too much Start2 was very similar in risk as dosing too much Vodka ...
The primary risks associated with either vodka or sugar over-dosing are (1) rapid O2 depletion, and (2) extinction of other bacterial strains in the system which perform other necessary biochemical processes (resulting in a virtual, so-called "monoculture").

This is where folks need to start ingesting generous portions of sodium chloride crystal aggregates before evaluating what follows ... the absence of the specific identities of either the bacterial strains or the carbons sources places what follows somewhere along a continnum bounded by informed but undocumented opinion ... and mindless babble. This is not a happy place to be if you're trying to talk about the science. Having said that ...

The risks associated with over-dosing Start2 are different. There are three areas where ZeoBak strains are "doing their thing" (in association with the other strains present in the system) ... the surface matrix of the ZEOvit media, the water column and associated tank surfaces, and the surface matrix associated with coral tissues. It's the surface matrix associated with coral tissue(s) that most interests me. Review the graphic I posted earlier ...



Check out the microbiota loop. After reflecting that there's a BIG question mark in the middle of it, consider this: The microbiota loop interfaces with the coral-zooxanthellae loop on the tissue of the coral. This interface is where nitrogen, phosphorous, iron, amino acids, amino acid precursors ... and many other "things" ... are made available to the coral for ingestion.

This ingestion is largely ... but not exclusively ... driven by kinetics. In other words, what is ingested is largely (but not exclusively) dependent on the concentration of that thing at the interface.

If you skew the concentrations at the interface, you skew the amount that is ingested by the coral. It's NOT that simple (there are these things called translocation and facilitated transport) ... but that's the heart of my observations regarding Start2 risks.

From my current perspective, the over-dosing of Start2 has the potential to skew the products of bacterial respiration ... which skews the concentration of "things" at the microbiota-coral interface ... which skews what is "ingested" by the coral ... which can produce some very nasty results.

It's my opinion ... as in undocumented speculation ... that the "problem" with the original Start formulation was that it did what it does too well. Things happened too fast (over-dosing didn't get the user time to respond) and the results of "bad kinetics" took place. If I had to bet money, I'd say that it was the form and concentration of acetic acid that was problematic. I'd also bet that a little esterification and dilution solved the problem quite nicely ...

... at least, that's what my nose thinks ... ... ... but I digress ...


Anyway ... that's the bad news, but there's definitely important good news. From this same perspective, it also follows that if you don't over-dose Start2, what you get is an ability to manipulate what is transported and ingested by the coral ... with arguably desirable and stunning results.


Apologies for the length, folks ... HTH



Horace ... check out the interface again. Have you considered what other "stuff" not listed as part of the loops in the diagram (but wildly important to how the loops behave nonetheless) might include? Hint ... calcium, bicarbonate, and ... [drumroll] ... potassium.


Not the science ... JMO

IridescentLily
05/07/2012, 11:05 PM
After the last two posts I feel like i'm insane.


:lol:

eidels
05/07/2012, 11:45 PM
I keep coming back to why Zeovit phytoplankton cultures out compete traditional DSB cultures to extinction. The zeoguide intro alluded to possibility of NH3 fixation of zeolith as quoted above. ( note Puffin04 was logged on to my computer which I failed to realize)

Perhaps this is the reason;

Ammonia-oxidizing lithoautotrophic ("nitrifying") bacteria are unusual. They are neither heterotrophic like animals (using organic carbon molecules as a source of carbon and energy, and oxygen gas as a terminal electron acceptor) or photoautotrophic like plants (using CO2 as a carbon source and the sun as an energy source). Like heterotrophic organisms, these bacteria get energy from a chemical (in this case an inorganic chemical: ammonia); like photoautotrophic organisms they get the carbon they need from CO2.

Ammonia-eating bacteria are also peculiar in that they play two distinct and inverse roles in the nitrogen cycle: they act as both nitrifiers and denitrifiers.

"Classical" denitrifying bacteria are anaerobic; they use nitrites and nitrates in place of oxygen as terminal electron acceptors during anaerobic respiration. In the process nitrites are transformed into nitrogen-oxide gases, NO and N2O, a process called denitrification via dissimilatory reduction.

Nitrosomonas marina and other ammonia-oxidizers use nitrites as terminal electron acceptors, too, when oxygen levels are low. But they can also use oxygen as a terminal electron acceptor. And oxygen is essential in another process: the extraction of energy via the conversion of ammonia to hydroxylamine, an example of a process known as nitrification. These curious bugs act like anaerobes but require oxygen, and they nitrify and denitrify at the same time.

In a paper published in Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Karen Casciotti and Bess Ward of Princeton searched several varieties of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria for the gene nirK, which codes for a copper-containing dissimilatory nitrite-reductase enzyme in classical denitrifying bacteria. Their goal was to determine whether the NirK enzyme was responsible for denitrification in ammonia-oxidizing bacteria.

The situation, they discovered, is complex. NirK was found in some ammonia-oxidizers, but not in others. In those organisms where it was detected, substantial variation in the nirK genetic sequence was observed. The organisms found to contain nirK fell into two main groups, divided according to similarities in the nirK sequence. The first group contained most of the nirK-containing ammonia-oxidizing bacteria. The second group contained mainly classical anaerobic denitrifying bacteria, but it also contained one ammonia-oxidizing bacterium, collected from the Chesapeake Bay.

The nirK gene was not detected in several other ammonia-oxidizing bacteria, suggesting an even greater variety of dissimilatory reductase enzymes. These bacteria may have contained genes resembling nirK, but they were not similar enough to yield a PCR match.

The nucleic-acid sequences of all the organisms in both nirK-containing groups were similar in the region that codes for the copper-containing active site. This means that the resulting enzymes are probably functionally quite similar, even if they vary considerably in other parts of the genetic sequence.

Casciotti, Karen L. and Ward, Bess B. Dissimilatory nitrite reductase genes from autotrophic ammonia-oxidizing bacteria. Appl. and Env. Microbiology .

bertoni
05/08/2012, 01:00 AM
Okay, new thread created.

Randy Holmes-Farley
05/08/2012, 05:05 AM
I keep coming back to why Zeovit phytoplankton cultures out compete traditional DSB cultures to extinction. The zeoguide intro alluded to possibility of NH3 fixation of zeolith as quoted above. ( note Puffin04 was logged on to my computer which I failed to realize)



Yes, some folks make the claim about ammonia binding to the zeolite making the ammonia more available to bacteria, but they are wrong in their guessing about what can happen to bacteria and ions bound to surfaces.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you are talking about, but I think you may be misusing the term "phytoplankton". That implies a photosynthetic organism that is suspended in the water. That wouldn't apply to a nonphotosynthetic bacterium growing on a zeolite.

eidels
05/09/2012, 10:03 AM
Yes I certainly meant bacterioplankton. Ultimately when traditional DSB cultures are rendered obsolete then they are simply not in the food chain. Creating sizeable bacterioplankton cultures via various methods all potentially could do this yet only zeo states this as a result. GAC and Phos reactors must also impact the "health of the DSB"

Interestingly I have recently achieved one of the end results purported by zeo users. My PO4 is 0 and NO3 is 1 after adding a Phos reactor (as well as GAC). I added a 3inch pink birds nest that was very dark and browned out but which had good growth and polyp extension. After 2 weeks or so the coral is the faintest of pale pink almost white! the last vestiges of brown are just dots on some of the branches. Similar effects are noticeable on a pink stylophora. Zooanthelae conquered? Pink pigmentation precursors are now the rate limiting step. But what they are I have no idea.

Randy Holmes-Farley
05/09/2012, 11:14 AM
Zooanthelae conquered?

:lol:

Conquered, or killed, poisoned, starved, whatever you prefer to call it, and depending on which zeo product you used.

eidels
05/14/2012, 10:30 PM
LOL!! Can we maybe discuss at least what bacterioplankton cultures and heavy skimming deplete from a system. Iodide and Fe replacement for example?

shiladitya1991
05/15/2012, 12:56 AM
:mad: Mindboggling thread

Randy Holmes-Farley
05/15/2012, 04:57 AM
LOL!! Can we maybe discuss at least what bacterioplankton cultures and heavy skimming deplete from a system. Iodide and Fe replacement for example?

Bacteria will deplete lots of things, but iodide is rapidly removed by algae in any system, and IMO is not worth monitoring or replacing.

Bacteria don't use much iron, but heavy skimming will likely remove it (and other metals like copper, although copper is usually elevated, IME, not depleted relative to NSW), as will algae and other organisms. I recommend dosing it if you are trying to keep macroalgae.

Some zeovit users seem to be concerned with potassium, but when I was dosing vinegar so heavily that my water was hazy with bacteria (and skimming them out), I measured potassium and it was not depleted in my tank relative to NSW.


There probably are other things that are depleted, but what they are and whether they are any different than what is depleted simply by growth of in tank organisms is not really known.

Silicate is rapidly depleted by diatoms and sponges, and I dose that to my system. :)

eidels
05/15/2012, 07:25 PM
Yowza, silicates!!! a new wrinkle for me to vegetate over:rollface:!. I just read your link to PO4 primer on the vodka thread, fascinating and most helpful, thanks. I have to have some bound PO4 in my rock as I have localized growths with perfect numbers; the reason I'm considering bacterioplankton. Zeo states 4 types of bacterioplankton in Zeobak versus monocultures with vodka. Any advantages in your mind? Also I read a post on less cyano problems with vinegar vs vodka. What gives? And why the heck should cyano even surface at all when it's dependant on the same elements you are stripping from the system with bacterioplankton. I assume one of the reasons so many tanks don't have a sand beds in the display tank.

Randy Holmes-Farley
05/16/2012, 04:49 AM
Zeo states 4 types of bacterioplankton in Zeobak versus monocultures with vodka. Any advantages in your mind? .

I'm pretty sure that neither the zeovit folks nor anyone else has never monitored bacteria types when dosing vodka to a reef, so I think the whole monoculture issue (often pushed by commercial products) is undemonstrated.

Further, I've never heard a clearly articulated reason why, even theoretically, one should be concerned with the numbers of different bacterial species growing in the tank.

But if someone is, it is easy enough to dose vodka and vinegar yourself. :)

tmz
05/16/2012, 07:47 AM
I don't see how a monoculture is even possible even if it were undesireable.

It's certainly not harmful to limit dosing to soluble organic carbon sources near the lower end of the bacterial cascade,ime( vodka and vinegar for 3.5 years). Different bacteria proliferate at different levels for carbohydrates( polymers) , sugars(monomers) ethanol(vodka) and acetic acid (vinegar). At some point it all goes to acetate. The process is known as acetogensis. There may be other pathways in action There will still be polymers and monomers in a reef tank even if not dosed from foods and by products of photosynthetic organisms.
Dominance related to a carbon source is another matter and the effect on corals does vary. Sugar for example is problematic ,stressing corals to browning and receding, ime, even in very small doses. Since polymers go to sugars , I avoid them too. Glucose in excess has been shown to increase coral mortality.

eidels
05/23/2012, 03:01 PM
I finally found the info I read on zeovit absorbing NH4. From Sprung 3.pg306. Zeovit is naturally occurring or manufactured porous structure that acts as an ion exchanger. Ammoniium is exchanged for potassium or sodium. Its been used for years in freshwater aquaria to rapidly reduce ammonium concentrations. Interesting. Though substantially less effective in saltwater. It also creates a large surface area for bacterioplankton cultures thus acting as a biological filter as well. Probably supplying nutrients in the process.

This would explain in part why it needs to be stirred so often as well as needing replacement so often.

Randy Holmes-Farley
05/23/2012, 05:48 PM
I finally found the info I read on zeovit absorbing NH4. From Sprung 3.pg306. Zeovit is naturally occurring or manufactured porous structure that acts as an ion exchanger. Ammoniium is exchanged for potassium or sodium. Its been used for years in freshwater aquaria to rapidly reduce ammonium concentrations. Interesting. Though substantially less effective in saltwater. It also creates a large surface area for bacterioplankton cultures thus acting as a biological filter as well. Probably supplying nutrients in the process.

This would explain in part why it needs to be stirred so often as well as needing replacement so often.

It is well known that ammonia binds to zeolites like clinoptilolite and we've discussed that many times. However, it is not evident what value that is in a reef aquarium.

Bacteria may well grow nicely on it, but it most definitely does not make that ammonia available to bacteria, unlike some zeo folks claim. That is the dispute I have with their claims. :)