Probiotic or beneficial bacteria, in general, are used to improve water quality through degradation of solid and dissolved wastes.
These strains of bacteria are usually Heterotrophic bacteria, and there are many different strains that are used that perform specific jobs in the Aquarium.
These bacteria CAN, be naturally occurring in the aquarium, and if regular cleaning and water changes are performed, the natural bacterial population may be large enough and effective enough to control solid and dissolved wastes, but in most cases, the aquarium needs a little help.
These heterotrophic bacteria reproduce so quickly (every 30 minutes or so) that not only do they very quickly eat themselves out of a food source, but the rapid cellular reproduction means they they mutate into less effective forms of the strain they first started as, and become less and less efficient at the job they do.
More often than not, probiotic bacteria need to be dosed every 7-14 days in a closed system like an aquarium or pond, depending on the type, brand and effectiveness of the bacteria. These Bacteria usually have a wide range of salinity, pH and temperature they will operate in, and most often than not will opperate in both freshwater and saltwater aquariums, although some bacteria will be more effective in either fresh or marine environments, the majority of heterotrophic bacteria (and even some Autotrophic bacteria, such as those responsible for nitrification such as nitrosomonas, nitrobacter, nitrococcus, nitrosococcus, nitrospira, nitrosospria, nitrosolobus) will operate in both fresh and saltwater
The strains included in most good probiotic bacteria supplements will be chosen because they are very effective at specific jobs, such as organic waste reduction, nitrate reduction, phosphate reduction, disease suppression etc.
And so, by adding these bacteria every week to two weeks, you keep a good colony of efficient strains of bacteria in your aquarium suited to reduction of waste, and therefore your tank stays cleaner, for longer.
Dosing in freshwater Tanks:
Although dosing for every tank is going to be different, generally you can judge the dose rate needed by the level of solid waste in your substrate, and the nitrate levels in your aquarium. Most manufacturers will provide detailed dose rates for their Bacteria cultures and these are good starting points.
Using these two indicators to determine dose rates obviously will only work with bacterial mixes that actually reduce nitrate and solid waste and you will need to try for yourself to determine which bacteria is the one for you.
At the start of dosing, having an idea of waste levels in your substrate and nitrate levels will give you an idea of how well a given bacterial mix is working in your aquarium. Using a dose rate that well and truly reduces these waste products to start with will then allow you to "work backwards" and determine a dose rate by measuring your nitrate levels and monitoring your water clarity and level of waste in the substrate, once either of these indicators start to increase, simply increase the dose rate slightly until you no longer have either problem and you can continue dosing from there.
Strangely enough, compared to marine aquariums, enough organic carbon seems to be liberated from the breakdown of organic waste to fuel the waste reduction process and dosing more bacteria seems to be better (to an extent). Perhaps this is due to the breakdown of the bacteria that have previously digested the waste products releasing organic carbon that is then taken up next time by bacteria when it is re dosed, much like PHA (or similar compounds) based Bio-pellets used in Marine Aquariums.
Although there is still a certain amount of waste that is leftover after dosing and running a course of pro biotic bacteria in freshwater aquariums that need to be removed manually, the amount of this waste compared to what would be present without dosing is orders of magnitude less.
The reason this doesn't work that well on a consistent basis in marine aquariums in my opinion, is because the biological recycling or nutrients is much more complex in a marine environment, and therefore consistent breakdown of waste and dead bacterial cells, if not removed by protein skimming, is taken up by other organisms (which may not be beneficial in a marine aquarium, such as cyano bacteria), or will simply breakdown into the waste by-products (to an extent) previously digested and only reduce nutrient so far, and since low levels of nutrient are required in most cases for reef systems, more "enhanced" and effective removal of these bacterial cells is required to maintain a higher level of water quality. But more on this later.
Dosing In Marine Aquariums:
Dosing In marine Aquariums, as mentioned above, when not using a protein skimmer will only get you so far, but it will still work, I use a Bacterial product in my 25 liter skimmer less nano and it maintains close to zero nitrate and phosphate levels around 0.5ppm, this is enough to encourage some corraline algae growth, however does not enhance water quality enough to keep SPS corals or some corals that require a higher standard of water quality.
To remove enough of this bacteria to reduce overall waste levels, not only does the bacteria have to be efficient enough to break down and digest the majority of the waste in the first place, but you also need to remove as much as the new biomass that is produced, in order to harvest the nutrient locked up in its cell structure, otherwise, as is the case in freshwater systems, the bacterial biomass left over breaks down and nutrient removal slows down, this is not so much of a concern in a freshwater system as generally, most inhabitants are able to endure levels of phosphate, and other waste products without any long term issues, and the low levels of waste achieved by using a Probiotic bacteria are FAR lower than usual, and thus, enhanced removal is not really necessary.
Unlike dosing in freshwater systems, in marine systems, bacterial dosing is usually used in conjunction with organic Carbon dosing, as mentioned in my previous blog post, organic carbon accelerates the reproduction of bacteria to increase the speed and amount of nutrient uptake. Therefor it makes sense, that if accelerating the uptake of nutrient, for the most effective nutrient removal you should use the most effective bacteria by using a probiotic bacterial mix that contains bacteria chosen to be efficient at specific types of waste reduction.
However, when using organic carbon to accelerate bacterial production in marine systems, less seems to be more.
Even though it seems to be extremely beneficial to dose probiotic solutions in marine aquariums, dosing less bacteria seems to achieve a better result, and I have a theory as to why.
As you know, marine environments are ion soup, making it the ideal place for bacteria to proliferate, as such marine environments are extremely biologically complex. Especially when adding organic carbon, the bacteria proliferate quickly, and in some cases I think too quickly, resulting in bacterial blooms that reach critical mass, and then die, which results in a larger quantity of biomass being produced then that which was present before dosing, which then breaks down into nutrient.
By adding smaller quantities of bacteria, the nutrient is digested (and then removed by protein skimming) at a slower more "controlled" rate, resulting in better nutrient removal. Unlike freshwater systems, larger volumes of bacteria are needed because in a freshwater system organic carbon is not fuelling rapid reproduction of the bacteria being added, and therefore not only is more bacteria needed to break down the waste, but the bacteria added does not spike exponentially as there is a certain degree of biological control in that there is a limitation on the amount of organic carbon present to fuel biomass growth.
Some things to remember when choosing and dosing bacterial products are:
- not all bacterial supplements are created equally, you must research your chosen bacterial product and make your own findings, monitoring of water parameters and water quality are very important in this regard
- When dosing bacteria, oxygen can be depleted, ensure good aeration is provided and do not exceed manufacturers dose rates lightly, as I have said, some systems will need higher volumes of bacteria than others, but exceeding manufacturers dose rates should be done with caution, and slowly, whilst carefully monitoring water quality and oxygen levels.
- dosing bacterial supplements dose not reduce the need for water changes, it does in most cases improve water quality and reduce waste, but water changes do more than simply remove waste products from the aquarium, it replenishes salts and minerals, replenishes pH and removes the end products of bacterial reduction like staining and generally freshens up your water.
- in marine aquariums, in most cases, when dosing a bacterial supplement, you must have a protein skimmer, and unless you have a lot of experience with marine ecosystems and bacterial driven systems and dosing, I would not recommend even trying to run a bacterial system without a protein skimmer
- although heterotrophic bacteria can have long shelf lives owing to the fact that they can form spores or go dormant in liquid form, they are much better off being kept in the fridge. When looking for a bacterial product, one that recommends it being kept in the fridge (or is being kept in the fridge by the aquarium store) and has a range of dose rate information, but albeit is still very concentrated are things to look for that more often than not indicate a product that is worth trying.
Other advantages to dosing Bacterial Probiotics:
- the reduction of nitrate to nitrogen gas results in carbonates used up in the nitrogen cycle to be re-released back to the aquarium, providing a degree of "re-buffering" for the water, keeping your pH more stable.
- dosing bacterial products results in a process called competitive exclusion, by which bacteria out-compete disease causing bacteria resulting in a lower likelihood of fish contracting disease, and because most diseases are bacterial, or start off as bacterial disease, this reduces a vast percentage of chances of your fish catching disease. This, and the improvement in water quality overall, results in the fish having a better immune response, which results in much healthier fish tank inhabitants.
- Further to this, some bacterial supplements have have specific disease reducing bacteria that produce antibacterial/antimicrobial substances that directly harm/denature/kill other bacteria that can potentially cause disease.
- heterotrophic bacteria can in some cases perform ammonia and nitrite reduction as well, this is referred to as heterotrophic nitrification, and in general is not as effective or as long lived as autotrophic nitrification, but still is very beneficial.
- Probiotic waste assimilating bacteria remove the vast majority of solid waste (the good ones do anyway) which improve the nitrifiers ability to process ammonia and nitrite, this results in a faster functioning nitrogen cycle which means your tank can resist or cope with changes in ammonia levels faster, processing waste quicker. It also means solids wastes will be broken down faster into other compounds including ammonia, resulting in a tank that doesnt have as much chance of building up harmful by-products.
- heterotrophic bacteria in Probiotic bacterial supplements create biofilms, in these biofilms (and in the water column) solids wastes especially are broken down into "simpler" elements and "chopped" up into finer particles. Once this is done, the bacteria then microfloculate these small particles by incorporating them into their biofilm, these are then easier to collect by mechanical filtration.
- An interesting fact about bacteria and pre-filter sponges, in the course pre-filter sponge often included in cannister filters and other sorts of filters, a huge amount of bacteria is present. Most people will wash these off when they clean their denser, finer filter pad. Whilst you really have no option with the dense filter pad, the coarser, more open cell sponge can easily be squeezed out in water from the tank and be relatively well cleaned, this removes the solid waste but retains the bacteria. Sponges and media that are loaded with bacteria are "stickier" and will collect more waste as they collect micro fine particles in their biofilms.
- along these lines again, dosing pro-biotics will help keep you biofilter media cleaner, just like it keeps your substrate cleaner allowing for increased nitrification. However, there will still be a point where the biofilm on the outside of the media will get too thick and the hetertrophic bacteria will risk smothering the nitrifying bacteria already on the biofilter media. Every couple of weeks when you open your canister filter to check and clean the prefilter sponges, have a look at your biofilter media (noodles, bioballs etc) and if needed, give them a slosh in water from the tank to remove any mulm, you will find you will get a much better result with more regular maintainence.
----- On a side note, anyone who recommends a canister filter only needs to be pulled apart and looked at/cleaned every couple of months (and i have heard of people recommending only every 6 months) is completely incorrect. Even in a lightly stocked aquarium you would want to pull it apart and at least have a look at the impeller and give that a clean, and Activated carbon should be replaced every 3-4 weeks in a normally stocked aquarium anyway. Look at it this way, the more often you maintain your canister, the more waste you remove from your system on your pre-filter sponges, and this is waste that can break down into ammonia and other waste products in your aquarium. That, coupled with checking the impeller and checking for blockages means that the canister runs smoother and you should get a longer service life out of it.
So that's it really, at least that's all i can remember at 2am, if you have any questions or comments please feel free.
G
Sunday, 4 March 2012
Friday, 2 March 2012
Nutrient reduction using Organic Carbon - Nitrate deficiency
A phrase I hear all too often is, organic carbon dosing (whether it be referring to vodka, Vodka vinegar sugar dosing/VSV, Commercial supplements like zeofood/ReefBiofuel/NO3:PO4X or Bio-pellets) reduced my nitrate to Zero but doesn't reduce phosphate, so i have discontinued/taken them offline, OR, so i am running GFO, or some other phosphate absorbing product in conjunction with it.
In any marine system that is already, or will possibly use, a bacterial driven system to reduce nutrient (I.E. organic carbon dosing) it is usually (NOT ALWAYS, but more often than not) organic carbon limited. That means, for bacteria to take up nutrients and waste, they need an organic carbon source in order to reproduce more and take up more nutrient.
A certain amount of organic carbon is liberated when organic wastes are broken down by bacteria (and the enzymes they produce) but more often than not, there is not enough organic carbon liberated in relation to nitrate and Phosphate levels in the aquarium for bacteria to reduce these nutrients as well.
And thus, you need to add more organic carbon.
Now when you add organic carbon, you get an increase in bacterial production and an increase in nutrient uptake by bacteria, let me say right now, that an efficient protein skimmer processing a good portion of the overall system volume and flow is ESSENTIAL to remove this bacteria.
When bacteria proliferates, it takes up more nutrient, and to get the nutrient out, you need to remove the bacteria through protein skimming.
Enter the redfield ratio. Now, let me be the first to say that this doesn't exactly apply to Bacteria, it mostly applies to phytoplankton nutrient uptake, and bacteria may take up levels of organic carbon:nitrate:phosphate differently to phytoplankton, but it has been proved time and again that applying this rule to organic carbon dosing works.
The redfield ratio is:
106:16:1, OR 106ppm Organic Carbon to 16ppm nitrogen to 1ppm phosphorus
In simple terms, in order to accelerate uptake of nutrient by addition of organic carbon, you need 106ppm of organic carbon to reduce 16ppm of nitrate, and you need 106 ppm of Organic carbon and 16ppm nitrate to reduce 1ppm of phosphate.
As i said, the ratio is not exactly this, and there are other elements like iron, that are believed to be involved, but the general idea to keep in mind is that you need organic carbon, nitrate and phosphate in these types of ratios to reduce overall nutrient.
It is believed, and i must say i agree to a certain extent, that bacteria need both nitrate and phosphate (and organic carbon obviously) to reduce them both effectively. Now there are certain types of phosphate (and indeed nitrate) specific bacteria that will mostly only target either nitrate or phosphate, and these are commonly included in good probiotic bacterial mixes (more on this later in another post) and do help, and can be an exception to the redfield ratio and the belief that bacteria need both nitrate and phosphate to reduce both effectively, but in general, and for the most part, the redfield ratio still applies.
Thus, looking at the redfield ratio, you can see that nitrate is very easily reduced, and phosphate isn't, and so when people say, "all my nitrate is gone but my phosphate is still high", it is not that organic carbon dosing is not working, it is that the entire requirements of an organic carbon dosing system are not being met. In other words......... YOUR NITRATE LIMITED BROTHER!!!!!!!!!!
Simple solution, add more nitrate! AND possibly more organic carbon. obviously if your nitrate limited you need to add nitrate to remove your leftover phosphate levels, but, if the level of phosphate is too high, then just like to remove phosphate you have to add more nitrate because you are nitrate limited, you may have to add more organic carbon simultaneously as by increasing the ratio of nitrate to phosphate, you may have also decreased the ratio of organic carbon to nitrate, and therefore may have (to a certain extent) become organic carbon limited again.
I personally have reduced phosphate levels from 1.6ppm to 0.1ppm in 6 hours using nitrate dosing, I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS, it is simply an example to show how well it works.
Nitrate can be added in the form of ammonia (adding ammonium chloride), urea, or mixing up a solution of something like potassium or calcium nitrate.
I have personally used Seachem's Flourish Nitrogen to achieve VERY effective nitrate dosing/phosphate reduction in the past, but am now using potassium nitrate alone. Off the top of my head Flourish Nitrogen is potassium nitrate and Urea, and seems to work very very well.
I have also heard of people using ammonium chloride successfully (urea in flourish nitrogen would break down into ammonia and therefore perform the same action). Which is the better option i can not comment exactly but i personally believe that adding ammonia based nitrogen may possibly be better as the elemental nitrogen/nitrate being produced is being done so by bacterial/biological action and may have different ions/enzymes/proteins, amino acids bound with it, or produced in certain ratios to it, that make it a more effective and biologically available form of nitrate/nitrogen, but i cannot confirm this for sure.
It may also be that the nitrogen used by the bacteria to remove the phosphate is not consisted of nitrate ions alone, and the bacteria could be using nitrogen directly from the ammonia or urea, although I have no evidence to back it up, the super fast reduction of phosphate in my above example (1.6ppm to 0.1ppm in 6 hours) may be an insight into this, as the reduction of phosphate happened so quickly, and it was Seachem Flourish nitrogen which was used in this example. this however is open to argument as it also contain potassium nitrate, AND the urea would also have to be broken down into ammonia first, but it is an interesting thought either way.
Obviously adding ammonia based nitrogen needs to be done carefully and slowly.
The things you need to do when entering into an organic carbon/bacterial driven system for nutrient reduction in marine aquaria are:
- know the in's and out's of your particular bacterial driven system (VSV, biopellet) BEFORE applying them to your system i.e. research research research
- stay on top of the nutrient demand, this kind of system, especially when nitrate limited, can possibly need DAILY dosing and attention in order to keep the system stable and operating a low and balanced nutrient level
- have not only a good, but an EXCELLENT skimmer, i cannot stress this enough, in fact, with any marine system, go for the best skimmer you can afford, and aspire to get better if the skimmer you have has shortcomings on your system, it is the backbone of any good marine system.
- have a set of very accurate, high quality test kits to monitor nutrient levels
- and finally, dose these element in accordance with YOUR TANK, not anyone else's, and make changes and additions SLOWLY, every tank is different, albeit the basics are the same, but your tank will run differently, even if every other parameter (water flow, size and design of skimmer, tank size, salt mix etc) is the same, I can almost guarantee that it will run differently in some way or another to any other tank.
On the flip side, something as simple as feeding more and/or adding more fish can increase your nitrate levels sufficiently, but a few things to consider are, your tank may not be big enough, you may not want to add anymore fish, AND feeding more will (however slight) add more phosphate to you tank as well. Any of these reasons may be a good argument to add more nitrate chemically, instead of biologically.
Finally might i say, before applying, or indeed, writing off a filtration/nutrient control method completely, DO YOUR RESEARCH, it can mean the difference between a excellent system, or total disaster, this applies to using a system incorrectly, and also taking it offline without understanding why it isn't working, and/or addressing the main issues causing the problems or concerns in the first place.
Happy Fish keeping
G
In any marine system that is already, or will possibly use, a bacterial driven system to reduce nutrient (I.E. organic carbon dosing) it is usually (NOT ALWAYS, but more often than not) organic carbon limited. That means, for bacteria to take up nutrients and waste, they need an organic carbon source in order to reproduce more and take up more nutrient.
A certain amount of organic carbon is liberated when organic wastes are broken down by bacteria (and the enzymes they produce) but more often than not, there is not enough organic carbon liberated in relation to nitrate and Phosphate levels in the aquarium for bacteria to reduce these nutrients as well.
And thus, you need to add more organic carbon.
Now when you add organic carbon, you get an increase in bacterial production and an increase in nutrient uptake by bacteria, let me say right now, that an efficient protein skimmer processing a good portion of the overall system volume and flow is ESSENTIAL to remove this bacteria.
When bacteria proliferates, it takes up more nutrient, and to get the nutrient out, you need to remove the bacteria through protein skimming.
Enter the redfield ratio. Now, let me be the first to say that this doesn't exactly apply to Bacteria, it mostly applies to phytoplankton nutrient uptake, and bacteria may take up levels of organic carbon:nitrate:phosphate differently to phytoplankton, but it has been proved time and again that applying this rule to organic carbon dosing works.
The redfield ratio is:
106:16:1, OR 106ppm Organic Carbon to 16ppm nitrogen to 1ppm phosphorus
In simple terms, in order to accelerate uptake of nutrient by addition of organic carbon, you need 106ppm of organic carbon to reduce 16ppm of nitrate, and you need 106 ppm of Organic carbon and 16ppm nitrate to reduce 1ppm of phosphate.
As i said, the ratio is not exactly this, and there are other elements like iron, that are believed to be involved, but the general idea to keep in mind is that you need organic carbon, nitrate and phosphate in these types of ratios to reduce overall nutrient.
It is believed, and i must say i agree to a certain extent, that bacteria need both nitrate and phosphate (and organic carbon obviously) to reduce them both effectively. Now there are certain types of phosphate (and indeed nitrate) specific bacteria that will mostly only target either nitrate or phosphate, and these are commonly included in good probiotic bacterial mixes (more on this later in another post) and do help, and can be an exception to the redfield ratio and the belief that bacteria need both nitrate and phosphate to reduce both effectively, but in general, and for the most part, the redfield ratio still applies.
Thus, looking at the redfield ratio, you can see that nitrate is very easily reduced, and phosphate isn't, and so when people say, "all my nitrate is gone but my phosphate is still high", it is not that organic carbon dosing is not working, it is that the entire requirements of an organic carbon dosing system are not being met. In other words......... YOUR NITRATE LIMITED BROTHER!!!!!!!!!!
Simple solution, add more nitrate! AND possibly more organic carbon. obviously if your nitrate limited you need to add nitrate to remove your leftover phosphate levels, but, if the level of phosphate is too high, then just like to remove phosphate you have to add more nitrate because you are nitrate limited, you may have to add more organic carbon simultaneously as by increasing the ratio of nitrate to phosphate, you may have also decreased the ratio of organic carbon to nitrate, and therefore may have (to a certain extent) become organic carbon limited again.
I personally have reduced phosphate levels from 1.6ppm to 0.1ppm in 6 hours using nitrate dosing, I DO NOT RECOMMEND THIS, it is simply an example to show how well it works.
Nitrate can be added in the form of ammonia (adding ammonium chloride), urea, or mixing up a solution of something like potassium or calcium nitrate.
I have personally used Seachem's Flourish Nitrogen to achieve VERY effective nitrate dosing/phosphate reduction in the past, but am now using potassium nitrate alone. Off the top of my head Flourish Nitrogen is potassium nitrate and Urea, and seems to work very very well.
I have also heard of people using ammonium chloride successfully (urea in flourish nitrogen would break down into ammonia and therefore perform the same action). Which is the better option i can not comment exactly but i personally believe that adding ammonia based nitrogen may possibly be better as the elemental nitrogen/nitrate being produced is being done so by bacterial/biological action and may have different ions/enzymes/proteins, amino acids bound with it, or produced in certain ratios to it, that make it a more effective and biologically available form of nitrate/nitrogen, but i cannot confirm this for sure.
It may also be that the nitrogen used by the bacteria to remove the phosphate is not consisted of nitrate ions alone, and the bacteria could be using nitrogen directly from the ammonia or urea, although I have no evidence to back it up, the super fast reduction of phosphate in my above example (1.6ppm to 0.1ppm in 6 hours) may be an insight into this, as the reduction of phosphate happened so quickly, and it was Seachem Flourish nitrogen which was used in this example. this however is open to argument as it also contain potassium nitrate, AND the urea would also have to be broken down into ammonia first, but it is an interesting thought either way.
Obviously adding ammonia based nitrogen needs to be done carefully and slowly.
The things you need to do when entering into an organic carbon/bacterial driven system for nutrient reduction in marine aquaria are:
- know the in's and out's of your particular bacterial driven system (VSV, biopellet) BEFORE applying them to your system i.e. research research research
- stay on top of the nutrient demand, this kind of system, especially when nitrate limited, can possibly need DAILY dosing and attention in order to keep the system stable and operating a low and balanced nutrient level
- have not only a good, but an EXCELLENT skimmer, i cannot stress this enough, in fact, with any marine system, go for the best skimmer you can afford, and aspire to get better if the skimmer you have has shortcomings on your system, it is the backbone of any good marine system.
- have a set of very accurate, high quality test kits to monitor nutrient levels
- and finally, dose these element in accordance with YOUR TANK, not anyone else's, and make changes and additions SLOWLY, every tank is different, albeit the basics are the same, but your tank will run differently, even if every other parameter (water flow, size and design of skimmer, tank size, salt mix etc) is the same, I can almost guarantee that it will run differently in some way or another to any other tank.
On the flip side, something as simple as feeding more and/or adding more fish can increase your nitrate levels sufficiently, but a few things to consider are, your tank may not be big enough, you may not want to add anymore fish, AND feeding more will (however slight) add more phosphate to you tank as well. Any of these reasons may be a good argument to add more nitrate chemically, instead of biologically.
Finally might i say, before applying, or indeed, writing off a filtration/nutrient control method completely, DO YOUR RESEARCH, it can mean the difference between a excellent system, or total disaster, this applies to using a system incorrectly, and also taking it offline without understanding why it isn't working, and/or addressing the main issues causing the problems or concerns in the first place.
Happy Fish keeping
G
Sunday, 29 January 2012
Trials in pH stability, getting to the magic 8.4
Or dare I say it, even 8.5. Let me paint a picture for you;
After having no luck securing an economical and reliable supply of Kent Marine Tech M for treatment of bryopsis algae, I started looking Abroad.
And so I emailed Anthony Calfo, who I have dealt with on a business level in my time in wholesale, asking if he knew of anywhere I could get bulk quantities of it, freighted over from the USA, without a massive price tag (a pipe dream I know but hell, worth a shot).
The answer I got back, was not only interesting, but brilliant.
Long story short, attaining a stable pH, 8.4-8.5, consistently, would not only rid your aquarium of many ailments such as cyano bacteria etc, but also KILL bryopsis algae.
Using a Kalk slurry recommended by Anthony I proceeded to mess with the holding and display tanks at work to get to this magic number.
IT WORKS. Plain and simple, using Kalk to get to a higher pH kills bryopsis.
Now, here is the sticky part, I have too Much CO2 in my water, working in an insulated fish room means lots of CO2, and without a clean Air source I can’t get the pH up consistently, even using drip systems to dose Kalk water.
so I started to look into CO2 scrubbers using Soda Lime as an absorbent on the skimmer suction line, as this is where most of the CO2 is getting dissolved into the tank water, this crap is expensive in Australia, (anyone who knows where I can get some cheap, it would be much appreciated if you could let me know).
I found a supply at a scuba diving store for use in regulators, and ordered some anyway, but that afternoon had a brainwave on the drive home from work.
If Kalkwasser works by grabbing the CO2 in the water and binding it to the hydroxide ions to form Bicarbonate and carbonate and the remaining hydroxide ions, in conjunction with the lack of CO2 forming carbonic acid, allows the pH to climb, then why can’t I use this to treat the air intake on the skimmer?
I got home, and a quick search told me people on many forums have already tried this with success, however, it doesn't usually last very long.
the next morning I drilled a few holes on a large 2 liter jar (old kalkwasser jar actually), put a tube right to the bottom of the jar, stuck the now extended skimmer intake tube in the other hole, filled it halfway up with water, put 5 teaspoons of Kalk in it, screwed on the lid, and turned the skimmer on.
Theory was, as the bubbles travelled through the Kalk saturated water, the CO2 would, theoretically, bind to the Kalk and CO2 free air would enter the void above the water, to then be sucked into the skimmer intake.
Kalk had just finished dosing from the night before and Ph was sitting at about 8.3. Over the course of the day, through the hours of the day, pH sat stable at 8.25 or there abouts right up until the time I went home.
Came in the next morning, pH had dropped to 7.8 (again), Sweet Jesus there must be some CO2 in this room, no wonder I get headaches all the time!!!!
So I re-dosed another 2 tablespoons of Kalk and the pH climbed to around 7.9 and finally to around 7.98 before I dosed Kalk again for the night this afternoon.
Lesson 1. This experiment into the Kalk CO2 stripper showed that it is in fact CO2 lowering the pH, and that the amount of time it took to saturate it with CO2 and stop working indicates there is a hell of lot of CO2 in the fish-room. I'm going to need to take some drastic steps to decrease the CO2 getting into the tank, whether it be a Soda Lime based stripper or ducting the air intake to the skimmer outside.
Lesson 2. Increasing pH on a more constant basis can, and does kill bryopsis, keeping it up on a more constant basis (through the use of clean air intake on the skimmer and Kalk) should eradicate the bryopsis quicker.
Lesson 3. Increased pH in the marine aquarium, although not a necessity sometimes, can, and definitely in this case has, unlocks a marine aquarium unlike any that can be achieved by normal means, growth is better, coralline algae is brighter and more prolific, and you get less issues with problem algae. Corals also love it, frags grow quicker, and it precipitates a certain portion of phosphate as well.
Something interesting about the lack of CO2, higher pH and dying bryopsis, I read a paper, back when I was first researching possible alternatives to this bloody irritating algae, and it said bryopsis thrives with excess CO2 and bicarbonates in the water, just like all plant matter I guess, and is the same principal and a CO2 driven freshwater planted tank.
I tried a few things like Aquvitro Balance (a hydroxide blend) to eliminate the bicarbonates and re-establish the buffer/carbonate balance, bicarbonates having CO2 in them, and it didn’t really have an effect. Now I realize it was CO2 itself in the air, DUH.
All these little bits of information have fit into place, and I don’t think I would have stumbled upon it had it not been for Anthony Calfo, thanks buddy, you deserve the credit here.
I might add, that I have also been aggressively limiting nutrient, both nitrate and phosphate, and also increasing Magnesium, although not with Kent tech M, and it was most definitely not getting results before I started with Kalk.
Lack of Co2 and a higher pH also results in a stronger calcified skeleton on stony corals, another Plus.
Anyone who reads this, and is having problems with any problem algae, or simply wants to increase the level of their pH and subsequently the quality of their Aquarium, decrease the Co2, by using a scrubber on the skimmer intake or ducting the suction outside, and start dosing kalk, you won’t regret it.
After having no luck securing an economical and reliable supply of Kent Marine Tech M for treatment of bryopsis algae, I started looking Abroad.
And so I emailed Anthony Calfo, who I have dealt with on a business level in my time in wholesale, asking if he knew of anywhere I could get bulk quantities of it, freighted over from the USA, without a massive price tag (a pipe dream I know but hell, worth a shot).
The answer I got back, was not only interesting, but brilliant.
Long story short, attaining a stable pH, 8.4-8.5, consistently, would not only rid your aquarium of many ailments such as cyano bacteria etc, but also KILL bryopsis algae.
Using a Kalk slurry recommended by Anthony I proceeded to mess with the holding and display tanks at work to get to this magic number.
IT WORKS. Plain and simple, using Kalk to get to a higher pH kills bryopsis.
Now, here is the sticky part, I have too Much CO2 in my water, working in an insulated fish room means lots of CO2, and without a clean Air source I can’t get the pH up consistently, even using drip systems to dose Kalk water.
so I started to look into CO2 scrubbers using Soda Lime as an absorbent on the skimmer suction line, as this is where most of the CO2 is getting dissolved into the tank water, this crap is expensive in Australia, (anyone who knows where I can get some cheap, it would be much appreciated if you could let me know).
I found a supply at a scuba diving store for use in regulators, and ordered some anyway, but that afternoon had a brainwave on the drive home from work.
If Kalkwasser works by grabbing the CO2 in the water and binding it to the hydroxide ions to form Bicarbonate and carbonate and the remaining hydroxide ions, in conjunction with the lack of CO2 forming carbonic acid, allows the pH to climb, then why can’t I use this to treat the air intake on the skimmer?
I got home, and a quick search told me people on many forums have already tried this with success, however, it doesn't usually last very long.
the next morning I drilled a few holes on a large 2 liter jar (old kalkwasser jar actually), put a tube right to the bottom of the jar, stuck the now extended skimmer intake tube in the other hole, filled it halfway up with water, put 5 teaspoons of Kalk in it, screwed on the lid, and turned the skimmer on.
Theory was, as the bubbles travelled through the Kalk saturated water, the CO2 would, theoretically, bind to the Kalk and CO2 free air would enter the void above the water, to then be sucked into the skimmer intake.
Kalk had just finished dosing from the night before and Ph was sitting at about 8.3. Over the course of the day, through the hours of the day, pH sat stable at 8.25 or there abouts right up until the time I went home.
Came in the next morning, pH had dropped to 7.8 (again), Sweet Jesus there must be some CO2 in this room, no wonder I get headaches all the time!!!!
So I re-dosed another 2 tablespoons of Kalk and the pH climbed to around 7.9 and finally to around 7.98 before I dosed Kalk again for the night this afternoon.
Lesson 1. This experiment into the Kalk CO2 stripper showed that it is in fact CO2 lowering the pH, and that the amount of time it took to saturate it with CO2 and stop working indicates there is a hell of lot of CO2 in the fish-room. I'm going to need to take some drastic steps to decrease the CO2 getting into the tank, whether it be a Soda Lime based stripper or ducting the air intake to the skimmer outside.
Lesson 2. Increasing pH on a more constant basis can, and does kill bryopsis, keeping it up on a more constant basis (through the use of clean air intake on the skimmer and Kalk) should eradicate the bryopsis quicker.
Lesson 3. Increased pH in the marine aquarium, although not a necessity sometimes, can, and definitely in this case has, unlocks a marine aquarium unlike any that can be achieved by normal means, growth is better, coralline algae is brighter and more prolific, and you get less issues with problem algae. Corals also love it, frags grow quicker, and it precipitates a certain portion of phosphate as well.
Something interesting about the lack of CO2, higher pH and dying bryopsis, I read a paper, back when I was first researching possible alternatives to this bloody irritating algae, and it said bryopsis thrives with excess CO2 and bicarbonates in the water, just like all plant matter I guess, and is the same principal and a CO2 driven freshwater planted tank.
I tried a few things like Aquvitro Balance (a hydroxide blend) to eliminate the bicarbonates and re-establish the buffer/carbonate balance, bicarbonates having CO2 in them, and it didn’t really have an effect. Now I realize it was CO2 itself in the air, DUH.
All these little bits of information have fit into place, and I don’t think I would have stumbled upon it had it not been for Anthony Calfo, thanks buddy, you deserve the credit here.
I might add, that I have also been aggressively limiting nutrient, both nitrate and phosphate, and also increasing Magnesium, although not with Kent tech M, and it was most definitely not getting results before I started with Kalk.
Lack of Co2 and a higher pH also results in a stronger calcified skeleton on stony corals, another Plus.
Anyone who reads this, and is having problems with any problem algae, or simply wants to increase the level of their pH and subsequently the quality of their Aquarium, decrease the Co2, by using a scrubber on the skimmer intake or ducting the suction outside, and start dosing kalk, you won’t regret it.
Thursday, 19 January 2012
Plan and Purpose
Seeing that the internet is rife with misinformation, and in an effort to further develop my knowledge base for my own experience i have started this blog.
Dedicated to Aquarium and Aquaculture (and all aquatic sciences for that matter), I hope that I can increase the knowledge base of any hobbyist who may happen to read it, post questions that need answering and ultimately further everyone's expertise, and enjoyment for fish keeping.
I have worked in the Aquaculture and Aquarium Industry for over 8 years, having designed Aquaculture and aquarium systems, working in both water quality and water biology related areas of the commercial sector in Australia.
I have no degree in any Aquatic science, and in some ways i found this to be an advantage, as it has forced me to assess information with high level of scrutiny. This has given me an insight into the current state of, and rate of development of the Australian aquatic industries. I hope to be able to, at the very least, pass on some of my knowledge to people, so that they may learn about this great hobby, so that it can advance further.
After all, some of the greatest developments in this industry, came from people with no qualifications at all, just real experience, attention to detail and ultimately a love for what they do.
And so, determined to at least educate people to be able to see the difference between good and bad, right and wrong, fact and totally and completely incorrect, misguided, uneducated and sometimes unethical information that some people may give to the unsuspecting hobbyist, so begins my WAR, my MISSION, a JOURNEY, to help people discover what is possible when it comes to captive aquatic environments.
G
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)