Cooking Live Rock - Exact Process?

[Bomber]

Just because you didn't get it does not mean that clarification was not provided.

What do you want to see documented? What research studies? The ones that show that denitrification takes place, nutrients are transported across oxygen gradients, using bacteria alone? No worms involved?
How about just how rust is formed in marine environments and those nutrients are transported across boundaries using only bacteria? No worms are involved in that one either.

I know the DSB gurus and hobby material says something else.

 

[nickb]

I have no connection to Richard (and don't agree with a lot of what he is saying). However, if you do the google search suggested by SeanT, you do not find information on turgor in the way you are describing it. I've worked in the biological sciences for many years and am not ignorant of terminology and research methods. The 'clarification' provided in SeanT's message simply defined 'turgor=pressure'. I was suggesting that it would have been more helpful to have explained that, in this context, the standard definition of turgor had been expanded to mean something else.

As for the research, I am talking about research to directly address the statement from SeanT. The assertion has been made that pressure from bacterial growth inside micro-crevices in LR forces detritus and organics from the rock, reducing the amount of both in the LR. I asked if there is any evidence that this process takes place. The question still stands.

My question has nothing to do with whether denitrification takes place, rust formation and rust transport, nutrient transport across oxygen gradients, etc.

 

[Bomber]

Of course there's evidence.

One more time.

"What do you want to see documented? What research studies? The ones that show that denitrification takes place, nutrients are transported across oxygen gradients, using bacteria alone? No worms involved?
How about just how rust is formed in marine environments and those nutrients are transported across boundaries using only bacteria? No worms are involved in that one either."

Those are both perfect examples of bacterial pressure "turgor" "inside micro-crevices".

Do bacteria take up room? Of course they do. If you start out with one bacteria in a closed space that only one will fit in, what happens if you give it more food? What happens if it divides? It takes up twice as much space.
What happens if you keep adding more food? They've got to go somewhere.

 

[nickb]

I'm not sure why we are having so much trouble communicating on this point. SeanT said the following:

Do bacteria take up room? Of course they do. If you start out with one bacteria in a closed space that only one will fit in, what happens if you give it more food? What happens if it divides? It takes up twice as much space.
What happens if you keep adding more food? They've got to go somewhere.

Again, I agree: bacteria take up space. Provide them with appropriate nutrients and they will divide. However, this doesn't neccesarily mean that they will push out detritus. Maybe instead, the bacteria just grow along the 'exit' path from the crevice, leaving the detritus behind.

So, again to be clear, is there evidence that bacterial growth inside LR 'pushes' detritus out of the rock?

 

[Marshall]

Having recently started this process I can say that if the bacteria are not pushing the detritus out, they are at least loosening it up. You swish and you swish and stuff comes out until it looks like no more is coming out. Then you come back in 2 weeks and do it again and more stuff comes out...

I am doing this on both 'live' and 'dead' rock. While there is definitely way more stuff coming from the 'live' rock, the 'dead' rock (where everything has already died months ago) spews new stuff every swishing time. I attribute this to the bacteria because nothing else is happening that would cause new junk to spew forth. There is no new die off on the 'dead' rocks.

Cheers!

 

[Bomber]

So, again to be clear, is there evidence that bacterial growth inside LR 'pushes' detritus out of the rock?

You have no idea that we're talking about bacterial detritus here, do you?

 

[NwG]

Are you banging you head off the doorframe again Boomer?
I like it when you do that......


I am not an expert, but when I explained this process to my micro-bio prof. he had me bring in a smaal chunk of LR to show the other students what bacteria can do.... Next time I go down there I will try to get some of the pics we took with the scope... Have some very cool ones at 100x
Nate D

 

[nickb]

Enough is enough. I attempted to contribute my knowledge to this discussion. I asked a question for the purposes of learning. Why have the replies (mainly from Bomber) not contributed to that learning but have largely criticized me?

If I have mis-understood, then educate me in a non-confrontational, non-demeaning manner. My comments, questions and interpretation are reasonable. Detritus comes from many sources other than bacteria. Turgor has a standard definition which differs from that used here (look at the articles in SeanT's google search and nearly all the articles talk about turgor and its effect on bacterial wall configuration).

A more useful reply would be something like: I think there may be some misunderstanding here. We are using turgor in a different sense of the word. Also, most of the detritus in crevices is created from bacterial death. So. bacterial growth would tend to remove those dead bacteria from the crevices, etc. If you look at other source of detritus (like dead algae), this mechanism wouldn't be relevent.

Such a reply educates, makes me feel respected and moves the dicsussion forward. All the current approach does is make me feel lousy. There's an old tactic that if there is no substance to your message, attack the person asking questions. I'm not saying that is going on here. But, this approach is not the way to win converts and support.

 

[NwG]

"A few years ago we needed a word to describe bacterial pressure/migration/bacterial transportation of nutrients in marine sediments. Turgor was the word that was adapted as a catch all word to describe that. We all understood that it was a new adaptation of that word and understood what it meant."

I was thinking we got that out of the way... Yes we are most likely incorrect in the use of the word.. We just needed something to discribe it... Lets end that part of this...

It may be a few weeks before I go back to the micro-bio lab at my school, but from the pics we took with the scope you can clearly see both dead bacteria, and various detritus being transported from the rock (algae, sand, odd stuff....) When the holes were flushed with a water, the process would restart within a few hours...
this is the only study I can provide, because I did it....
I will try to get the pics, they may be gone by now... but I will check

 

[nickb]

NwG: that is helpful information.

I agree about turgor. I was synopsing the past few messages because I was upset over the direction it had taken. I don't want to re-visit that either.

I suggest that we leave this whole discussion alone for a while. If you can get any photos, that would be great for a future posting.

 

[SeanT]

A more useful reply would be something like: I think there may be some misunderstanding here. We are using turgor in a different sense of the word.

Nick,
In Bomber's first post he stated:

A few years ago we needed a word to describe bacterial pressure/migration/bacterial transportation of nutrients in marine sediments. Turgor was the word that was adapted as a catch all word to describe that. We all understood that it was a new adaptation of that word and understood what it meant.

Maybe that got overlooked?

Sean

 

[Bomber]

Maryann Beth Elizabeth!

Nick, I really did not mean for my posts to come across that way. Go back and read them again, this time without the chip on your shoulder, and see if they really are all those things.

Now, I gave you examples. Just because you don't like or maybe understand those examples does not mean anything other than "I gave you examples".

 

[nickb]

I didn't start this exchange with a chip on my shoulder. When your first post to me starts with this comment: 'Sorry guys, arguing for the sake of arguing is a moot point.', it does not set a tone for open discussion.

I have re-read what you said. I ask you to do the same with an eye to determining if there might have been a more effective way to communicate your 'lessons'. You also might consider if my apparent difficulty in understanding your examples might be becuase they were not well explained? Maybe, to you, it is obvious how rust production relates to detritus in LR, but to me the link is tenuous in the extreme.

I can't see any point in continuing this argument and so will be dropping out of any further discussion which might arise.

 

[Bomber]

How's this one.

You put two cows in a pasture, one male one female. You give them unlimited food. One day when the pasture is wall to wall cows, where do the extra ones go?

 

[nickb]

I'd say that your premise is invalid: after a point in time the cows will be unable to reproduce due to physical limits even with unlimited food. And they won't be able to excrete waste products safely and thus will get ill and die off in a mass epidemic.

I do see your point. It makes a reasonable hypothesis and may very well be true. But competing hypotheses can also be put forward. That's why I was asking about empirical evidence to support the theory.

 

[Bomber]

Sheesh, it's not a hypotheses Nick. It's exactly what happens, we just needed a word, one word to describe it.

What you see and what being described is "bacterial detritus". Incorporated into all those little bacteria are the nutrients. Just like the cows would export nutrients when they get pushed out of the pasture.

 

[Marshall]

Just like the cows would export nutrients

Does that mean I can put a cow in my fuge?? :lol:

 

[nickb]

I joined this thread because I was interested in the cooking idea and was considering applying it to my own LR. I'm still planning to go that route so I am not a sceptic. But, I am interested in the scientific basis. We need more hard science in reefkeeping.

I see this as a hypothesis. It has been suggested that keeping LR in darkened containers with regular removal of detritus will reduce the level of accumlated nutrients (presumably meaning available nutrients). It is further suggested that part of the mechanism involves bacteria in micro-crevices converting nutrients into bacterial detritus which is expelled from the crevices by the development of pressure in the crevices (bacterial turgor) due to uncontrolled bacterial growth.

That looks like a testable hypothesis. It looks like a very reasonable hypothesis. Certainly, one gets lots of detritus. But, until someone provides evidence to support it, it remains a hypothesis in my mind. The micro-photos would help with the 'expelling' part. Could one test the bacterial role in this process by running small rocks which are 'live' and 'dead' through the same process and testing levels of detritus removed? Maybe chemically digest the rocks to release the nutrients, measure the levels remaing in the rocks at various stages and compare the live and dead rock? And so on.

One might make an alternate hypothesis that the detritus is coming only from the LR surface and includes algae, food, etc. plus parts of the argonite matrix. This will give lots of detritus, would remove nutrients but would have nothing to do with bacteria. Do we have the evidence to disprove this alternate?

 

[Weatherman]

One might make an alternate hypothesis that the detritus is coming only from the LR surface and includes algae, food, etc. plus parts of the argonite matrix. This will give lots of detritus, would remove nutrients but would have nothing to do with bacteria. Do we have the evidence to disprove this alternate?

Everything has to do with bacteria.

 

[Marshall]

Could one test the bacterial role in this process by running small rocks which are 'live' and 'dead' through the same process

If you guys weren't so caught up in arguing a few posts back I said I was doing this I'm cooking rock that is dead and rock that I just pulled from my tank.