Bacterial Diversity Methods

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

One situation where I think bacterial additions may be a good idea is when you know that you have the wrong profile.

In particular, I'm referring to cyano. Once it gets well established, and especially when organic carbon dosing, it may very well be useful to add different species, assuming you can find a source that has bacteria in it that will thrive in your tank with your type of organic carbon added.

One potential way to do this is to get such additions from other reefers. I know that when I dose a lot of vinegar, I get lots of bacteria growing on my GAC that I periodically clean off. That white stuff (whether it is one species or hundreds of them) could easily be collected and might help seed a different aquarium that is having problems with cyano when dosing organic carbon.

 

[teesquare]

Good point Randy! Perhaps in our near future we will have products available to us in the same vein of thinking....pro-biotics for aquariums for one.

T

 

[mhaith]

One situation where I think bacterial additions may be a good idea is when you know that you have the wrong profile.

In particular, I'm referring to cyano. Once it gets well established, and especially when organic carbon dosing, it may very well be useful to add different species, assuming you can find a source that has bacteria in it that will thrive in your tank with your type of organic carbon added.

One potential way to do this is to get such additions from other reefers. I know that when I dose a lot of vinegar, I get lots of bacteria growing on my GAC that I periodically clean off. That white stuff (whether it is one species or hundreds of them) could easily be collected and might help seed a different aquarium that is having problems with cyano when dosing organic carbon.

Actually Cyano is my EXACT problem for which I am attempting to find a solution. So often, I see great tanks employing carbon dosing, that have a problem with Cyano (my own included). Randy, you are aggressively carbon dosing. Do you have Cyano and if not, can I please arrange to get a vial of white goop? Maybe we can market it as Randy's White Goop and make our fortune

On another note, and I may be a masochist but I am fascinated with this theoretical discussion on the benefits and/or liabilities of ecosystem diversity.

It would seem that caves are the perfect example of a balanced, yet fragile and tenuous ecosystem. Wouldn't this be due to a lack of biodiversity and the prevelance of organisms that have dominated without the ongoing influx of competitive pressures? Should that be the long-term goal for our systems or am I thinking too far into the future?

My question keeps coming back to the fact that: yeah, in the short term, a balanced, highly specialized system is desirable but wouldn't a diverse ecosystem with smaller on-going bacterial 'disruptions' be preferrable to 'putting all our eggs in one basket'?

 

[teesquare]

My initial response would be YES - in favor of bio diversity.
But....it would still need to be nutured, and supplimented with "refreshing" doses of given cultures.

So, it seems to me that we would still want or find it desireable to do so in a more knowing manner, lest we have more problems to tend to!

 

[Paul B]

It is easier for us to make assumptions based on observation (as to the overall health and success of a tank) but - here we are talking about micro-observation. I have not seen any evidence - other than each of our anecdotal visual observation.......
Anyone aware of any long term studies that would be relevant?
T

While I am not a bacterioligist, chemist or scientist I do have a 40 year old reef that has had bacteria added from the sea every few weeks for all of that time. Just today I collected bacteria. So it may not be a scientific study, I do offer proof that it can work and I have never had OTS

 

[teesquare]

Yeah - but Paul...We do not have reverse flow undergravel filters. We could not possibly compare to that!:lol:

Just kidding Paul! Glad you joined in. What do you mean by OTS?

T

 

[philbo32]

Yeah - but Paul...We do not have reverse flow undergravel filters. We could not possibly compare to that!:lol:

Just kidding Paul! Glad you joined in. What do you mean by OTS?

T

OTS = Old Tank Syndrome

 

[teesquare]

Thanks Phil!

I was afraid it was something involving my mental health...oh wait...I *DO* keep fish in a glass box!!

T

 

[mhaith]

40 years. now that's the long-term I'm talkin' bout!

 

[teesquare]

Yep - I think Paul lives in a wet suit -and lives by the water, so water changes are VERY cost effective!

 

[Spracklcat]

Goodness where to begin. Lots of good discussion here. As background, I am a marine microbiologist currently doing work surveying bacteria in open and closed marine systems. So:

1. Probiotics are good. There are poducts out on the market that are sort of tank-treatments, and also a very few specifically to influence the bacterial population of fish. In aquaculture there has been a ton of research into this, and to sum it up "Probiotics=Good". Remember though they are talking about animal health, not system health.

2 .While I have not done the metagenomic analysis, I have surveyed many tanks just by seeing what grows on typical and marine bacterial media, quantitatively and qualitatively. I understand that the data this gives is not complete, because not everything will grow. However, it's a good enough sample to compare tank to tank.

Almost without fail, the tank populations were different in quantity of bacteria and number of types depending on the tank inhabitants. So, an anemone-alone tank would look one way, a full reef completely different (if I become un-lazy I'll post pictures which give you a quick visual interpretation). Interestingly, systems that were fed with natural seawater that had been filtered but NOT sterilized were all different (interesting because they were getting a frequent infusion of new bacteria that should be the same for every system). Also without fail, every tank had multiple species of bacteria UNLESS there was something wrong. An example is a tank that was having chronic fish losses was a near monoculture of Vibrio.

3. Other interesting observations: the surface of a coral has a different population of bacteria than the water it sits in, and different corals in the same tank will have their own particular flora (this has been known for years, I didn't do anything new).

My opinion about diversity: First think about the way you are applying the product--it's going into the water column, which is already pretty diverse. The workhorse bacteria of the system are going to be in biofilms on surfaces and beneath surfaces. So, can you directly inoculate that? Not really. So I don't think adding a bacterial supplement will cause any long-term change in an established system.

Bacterial additives may be useful for two things:

1. The old carbon dosing. Theoretically there is no reason carbon dosing should work, yet it seems to. Adding bacteria to utilize that carbon may speed things up.

2. A "sick" system may benefit from the addition of bacteria to outcompete pathogens.

--Christine

 

[GreshamH]

Ahh you found this Christine. I meant to email both you and Gary to join this one

 

[philbo32]

Perhaps mono-culture was a misnomer. Is there a dispute that biodiversity decreases within a closed system?

The topic is not so much quantity of bacteria as much as diversity. I am operating under the assumption that a variety of strains is preferable in a healthy ecosystem. Do you disagree?

Do you have proof that the biodiversity you add from so called live rock decreases within a closed environment. IME after you add live rock you get an explosion of species from it, as a lot of the living organisms originally on the rock die due to long transportation times from natural environment (without fresh or flowing seawater in a sealed bag/box) plus cold temperatures during shipping, then most LFS sell you the live rock and place it in a bag with no water which encourages more die off. Your left with a small number of species which actually survive the journey and a lot of spores to start the next generation.

There are a lot of bacteria in natural sea water (around 20,000 species of bacteria per litre; source = http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5232928.stm ) and around a million cells of bacteria per drop (source = http://www.jstor.org/pss/2834324 ) and theres a large number of bacteria which can produce endospores which allows the bacteria to stay in a dormant state, bacteria can survive for a very long time (millions of years) in this state.

Most micro-organisms have very good survival strategies, and until someone monitors what bacterial strains are in a tank and what dormant endospores are in there I do not think it is possible to get rid of large numbers of bacteria from your closed system. There will be fluctuations in the population dynamics of the species within your system as there is in nature. Bacteria are very adaptable and can withstand a wide variety of different and changing conditions.

Bacteria can still colonise your fish tank even if you do not use live rock, just adding fish and the water from your LFS will innoculate your system with enough aerobic nitrifying, organic and anaerobic bacteria to completely cycle your tank, this has been seen in FO systems.

The reef tank has many niches within it and food sources that it will allow a variety of microorganisms to fluorish together each having a preference for certain molecules. Bacteria can also evolve quickly in closed systems to breakdown a new type food source.


So to answer your questions; yes there is a dispute that biodiversity decreases in closed systems, although I have not seen any evidence to support either theory.

I agree a variety of strains is preferable. Are you talking about strains of bacteria or species? There will be a large variety of bacterial strains in your system and a number of species.

 

[GreshamH]

http://www.manhattanreefs.com/forum/advanced-reefs/17495-bacterial-analysis.html

Shaun did a study but it never got published on the net, it was done in a talk at one of the MR fragswaps. I was there and IIRC he found very few strains and very little bacteria in the water column, well relative to what is found in the ocean itself.

http://zeovit.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5770

That thread is by Gary who I'll push to post in this thread

 

[philbo32]

http://www.manhattanreefs.com/forum/advanced-reefs/17495-bacterial-analysis.html

Shaun did a study but it never got published on the net, it was done in a talk at one of the MR fragswaps. I was there and IIRC he found very few strains and very little bacteria in the water column, well relative to what is found in the ocean itself.

I would love to see the methods and results for this experiment, do you know what method was used for detecting bacteria? Plus where aboutst were the samples taken from the tank? I would expect less bacteria in the water column compared to the biofilm on the surfaces of decor in the tank.

 

[Paul B]

Yeah - but Paul...We do not have reverse flow undergravel filters.

We all can't have perfect tanks.

A "sick" system may benefit from the addition of bacteria to outcompete pathogens.

I also agree with this. Again I only have to offer my experience from my tank.
I don't know if it has anything to do with it but my fish do not ever experience any diseases including paracites. (some of them are almost 20 years old) This sounds odd to many people due to the fact that I add local NY mud, water and flora and fauna almost every week right from the sea with no quarantining or treatment of any type.
I am not speaking of 3 or 4 years, I am speaking decades.
I can and do often add fish with obvious ick and invariably the fish will either die or become cured but never has any other fish contracted the paracite.
I add bacteria by collecting mud from the Long Island Sound and place it in a container in the tank. A small amount of the mud I inject right into my UG filter. I remove the container in a few days.
A few years ago there was a study called Biosphere or something like that where they sealed in the dome various species from different areas to see if it would prosper with no outside influences. (I am sure you know of it)
It failed. Weeds took over much of the farm areas and ants replaced much of the insect life.
I believe the bacteria in a long running tank will do the same thing.
All of the surfaces in a reef are covered in bacteria but I doubt all of those types of bacteria will work for us.
I am sure many of them do not convert anything useful for us although they may be dominant strains of bacteria. That is the reason I believe and always have that an old tank need infusions of "fresh" bacteria from the sea. Not from a LFS because those bacteria will have gone through much of what a tank goes through and not from another reefers tank for the same reason.
So to sum it up, I may be completely off here, but this is my experience and as far as I know there are no very old tanks that do not add bacteria from the sea to study.

 

[teesquare]

Your observations concur with mine Paul. Of course, you have 10 years on me:rollface:

 

[Agathos]

I still have a hard time understanding that adding a relatively small volume of "fresh" bacteria to a much larger tank volume with mature and established bacterial ecosystems will have much effect exept to cause die-off of the newcomers. ONLY if they are better equipped at utilizing the tank's available nutrition and reproduces more quickly than the oldtimers (or if the produce an antibiotic that affect the oldtimers), will they be able to establish themselves as a dominant species in the tank.

Most likely, if the newcomers are the same species that where found in the tank at initial startup and ultimately lost against the oldtimers, they will fail again.

The idea of probiotics is to add a beneficial microorganism to a system where it will be of temporary use. For instance adding bacteria to improve gut flora in humans. These will not established themselves permanently, if so we would probably already have them there! So the only way adding bacteria to established tanks with a stable bacterial ecosystem in the hope that their biochemistry would somehow affect the tank positively, will succeed, is if this is done repeatedly, like Paul B apparently does with good effect.

For tanks that DON'T have a stable bacterial ecosystem newcomers may actually thrive, because there is some non-utilized, or sub-optimally utilized, source of energy available. So if OTS (old tank syndrome) is a reality (that old tanks experience a weakening of bacterial ecosystem stability) then new bacteria added may establish themselves permanently and even become a major species in the tank, to the benefit of the bacterial ecosystem and its other inhabitants.

In general the bacterial ecosystems in tanks should be stable, so OTS should not be an issue. But I can imagine that different remedies we add to the tanks which are not supposed to harm the bacterial flora may affect the different bacterial species differently, causing instability in the ecosystem. I can also imagine that accidental fluxations in water chemistry, temperature, etc, will affect some species and strains more than others, resulting in loss of stability. In such cases, where a biochemical niche has been opened up, newcomers may establish themselves permanently to the benefit of the tank.

 

[Agathos]

Double post, please delete this.

 

[Paul B]

Do bacteria suffer after a long period of inbreeding as animals do?
I don't know, but if that is the case, new bacteria would possably help re colonize the tank.
Would the bacteria that were initially started in my tank in 1972 still be re producing?
Just a theory.