Culturing your own Phytoplankton

Anthony,

Thanks for your comment, I am only looking for clarification..There is no intention of desrespect.

Fredfish,

Why do you say itÃ"šÃ‚´s really alive? Cause if not, itÃ"šÃ‚´s pretty misleading to use the term "live".
 
I was also under the impression that it was not live as in 'living'/culturable.

(and no worries purplehaze... I was making a pre-emptive statement for all parties :p)
 
the seafarm website states the following for their phyto-feast-live product:

Is Phyto-Feastâ„¢ Really Alive?

YES! All four species of marine microalgae are alive and will stay alive for weeks or months, depending on the species and storage conditions. Phyto-Feastâ„¢ has been induced to become "quiescent", having minimal outward signs of life. This allows the algae to stay alive in a state of "suspended animation" without depleting their reserves and nutritional value.

Claims:

1. All the microalgae that goes into Phyto-Feastâ„¢ are grown at our farm in California and are harvested live and packed and shipped "farm fresh" every week.
2. Once harvested the algae are induced to become "quiescent" in "suspended animation." At the time of bottling 95% or more of the algae are alive.
3. In this quiescent state metabolic activity and respiration are reduced to minimal levels and the nutritional value of the algae and the integrity of the cell membranes are preserved. The process is similar to cryopreservation where alga can be frozen live for years and remain viable.
4. Not all of our algae species are equally hardy and after a few weeks some of the more delicate cells begin to expire. However some cells will remain viable for two months or more.
5. Because of the unique quiescence process that is applied to the algae, the cells remain intact and they retain their full nutritional value long after they have ceased metabolic activity. Properly stored, a bottle of Phyto-Feastâ„¢ will provide the same value at two-plus months that it did on the first day.






for their instant algae product they say:

Instant AlgaeÃ"šÃ‚© is a non-viable algae product, meaning that it cannot be used to start a culture. However very few aquaculture applications need microalgae that reproduces, and there are several advantages to having a non-viable product
 
I think its the "induced" and "preserved" wording for the Phyto-Feast that has some folks (myself included) a bit confused.

Point blank... can it be cultured? Has anyone tried this?

I'm certainly not reticent at all to give it a try... just bogged down with travel and work for at least some weeks/months longer. If no one else tries it first... I'll buy some and give it a shot around Christmas (hopefully) :) Of course... we really need more thana few folks to do it to get a decent consensus. Anyone game? Be sure to buy it randomly from an LFS if so.
 
Quote from ReedÃ"šÃ‚´s site:

Is Live Algae Better? Reef organisms require a phytoplankton (microalgae) feed that provides all the nutrition necessary for full health, vitality, and vibrancy. To ensure maximum nutritional value you must first start with high quality algae, then make sure the cells remain intact so the nutrients don't leak into the water. Phytoplankton are very small and any breach of the cell membrane will release the cellââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s valuable contents. Intact phytoplankton are able to deliver their nutrients to your animals rather than dispersing them into the water

Live Algae Disadvantages - Live phytoplankton need a lot of light and nutrients to stay alive. When algae are stored in the dark, in media without nutrients, they must consume their own proteins, lipids and carbohydrates to stay alive. Depending on the level of metabolic activity, the algae's nutritional value can fall rapidly as the cells starve. Live phytoplankton also respire, consuming oxygen in the dark. Live and biologically active microalgae sealed up in the dark can quickly consume all available oxygen and become anaerobic. When this happens the algae will start to die from a lack of oxygen. At the same time anaerobic bacteria begin to grow, rapidly resulting in the classical smell of decomposition - hydrogen sulfide (smells like rotten eggs).

Summary - Reef organisms are not "smart" enough to differentiate between algae and dead algae, so it's up to you to provide them with the best quality feeds. "Live" algae ensures that the nutrients inside the cells will be available to your to your animals, but does not ensure that there will be any remaining nutrients in the cells. The best quality algae will be harvested at "peak" nutritional profile, then put into hibernation (quiescence) to keep that peak profile.

Suspended Animation / Hibernation (Quiescence)

The best process for obtaining the benefits of live algae without the disadvantages is to place the live microalgal cells in a state of suspended animation (also called quiescence or hibernation). This process reduces the metabolic activity of the live cells to minimal levels, allowing long term storage without the depletion of oxygen or the loss of nutritional value. A commonly used form of suspended animation is cryopreservation in which algal cells are frozen alive and intact and can be revived later.

This all seems like voodoo magic word games. The way it reads it sounds like Reed is using a cyropreservative to preserve the algae or some preservative. You canââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t centrifuge the algae, add something to it....ââ"šÂ¬Ã…"œto place the live micro algal cells in a state of suspended animation (also called quiescence or hibernation).ââ"šÂ¬Ã‚ without using a preservative, natural or artificially. Even if you are using Vit. E or some very natural product you are using a preservative. You may or may not be using something like BHT but its the same thing, a preservative, if your putting anything at all in the algae to preserve it natural or unnatural. One way or another is very suspect that you donââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t label it. I just feel like they are trying to use word games to confuse people in to thinking the product is alive. When the product was first introduced it was ââ"šÂ¬Ã…"œaliveââ"šÂ¬Ã‚ and now they use terms like ââ"šÂ¬Ã…"œlive,ââ"šÂ¬Ã‚ quiescence, suspended animation. These all lead one to believe that they are preserved cells. Why not just come out and say they are viable or non viable; fresh or preserved (naturally or unnaturally). Its just seems like they are intentional confusing people. To say that your products donââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t contain preservatives is a bit unlikely when you are adding something to mask the smell and not labeling what that is. Many people use the products to produce animals for their livelihood and not to label what is in the product is very very suspect and dishonest.

Again no disrespect, but its hard to get a handle on reality sometimes. Many of us have bought enough snake oil to last a life
:rollface:
 
I have heard these concerns from other aquarists... and I have the same wonder myself.

The wording seems very strategic and stands out. It has the ring of a formerly live product that is now chemically fixed (preserved).

That does not make it a bad product, of course! Thats not the issue here. Simply consumer confusion and curiousity. And for me personally... a preference to use truly live phyto.

I also differ/disagree that filter feeders can't tell the difference between live and dead. On the contrary... a majority IME can, do and are very discriminating on particle/prey size, texture, composition!

I'd like to see the studies that led the Reed folks to the conclusion that "Reef organisms are not "smart" enough to differentiate between algae and dead algae..."

I cannot imagine any such data exists to support this for any kind of majority enough to validate the statement. Species list?

If Randy cares to chime in... my question simply is as above: Can this "live" product be cultured out? Or is the "hibernation" non-reversible=dead/fixed algae?
 
From further down the page from "is live algae better?":

"1. All the microalgae that goes into Phyto-Feastâ„¢ are grown at our farm in California and are harvested live and packed and shipped "farm fresh" every week.
2. Once harvested the algae are induced to become "quiescent". At the time of packaging 95% or more of the algae are alive.
3. In this quiescent state metabolic activity and respiration are reduced to minimal levels, preserving the nutritional value of the algae and the integrity of the cell membranes. In concept, the process is similar to cryopreservation where alga can be frozen live for years and remain viable.
4. Not all of our algae species are equally hardy and after a few weeks some of the more delicate cells will begin to expire. However, due to our quiescence process, the cells lose none of their functional qualities or nutritional value. Many of the cells will remain viable for several months.
5. Because of the unique quiescence process that is applied to the algae the cells remain intact and they retain their full nutritional value long after they have ceased metabolic activity. The quiescence process delays any biological decomposition of the product for many months. Properly stored, a bottle of Phyto-Feastâ„¢ will provide the same value at two-plus months that it did on the first day. "

From the above it seems clear that the algea is live. Point two: its 95% live at the time of packing. Point three: there is still metabolic activity.

If this is a proprietory method of maintaining live algea at high densitys, it would be quite reasonable for Reed to not publish its methods/contents.

Purplehaze. Rather than posting speculation here, why don't you just email Randy and ask him?

By the way, if you were to use the phrase "very very suspect and dishonest" to describe me or a company I created, I would find it very offensive, particularly if you didn't first contact me. "voodo magic word games" is not neutral language either.

Anthony, I would love to test out Ried's phyto live, but I can't get hold of it here in Canada. I hope you are able to try to culture it.

Fred
 
it is the whole "at the time of packaging" that is largely the question here. Is the product also preserved/fixed "at the time of packaging" ?

Indeed, lets not speculate. We'll find some known and trustworthy aquarists to test it out.
 
Anthony Calfo said:
I also differ/disagree that filter feeders can't tell the difference between live and dead. On the contrary... a majority IME can, do and are very discriminating on particle/prey size, texture, composition!

I'd like to see the studies that led the Reed folks to the conclusion that "Reef organisms are not "smart" enough to differentiate between algae and dead algae..."

I cannot imagine any such data exists to support this for any kind of majority enough to validate the statement. Species list?
Anthony, do you remember either Rob Toonen and Eric giving a presentation in Pittsburgh about feeding corals? I am leaning towards Rob as it would make more sense because of timing and his studies, but I can't recall the details or find my notes. The one thing that stuck out in my mind is someone was able to feed a filter feeder tiny balls of plastic that were of the appropriate prey size. Do you have any recollection about that?
 
I dont remember too much, but I do remember that it was Rob Toonen, and the study was done with clams. It showed that they would eat anything(plastic beads) if the particle size is right. Are they getting nutrition from the plastic beads though?
 
Of course not, but whether or not they distinguish between live or dead phytoplankton is questionable.

Do you recall, was it Rob that performed the actual study or did he simply reference it? I would really like to read the paper for myself before commenting too much.
 
Good point... and yet, by the same line of logic - just because a panther grouper, for example, will eat Cheerios and beernuts does not mean that all marine fishes (or even its Order alone: Perciformes) will eat and survive on Cheerios and Beernuts.

And the overwhelming majority of marine/hobby fishes are members of that Order and, as such, are more closely related to each other than (and more likely to have similar family traits to) what we call "filter feeders" or even "corals!" The latter still being dramtically different physiologically in so many ways.

The plastic ball example IMO likely applies only the slimest minorty of filter-feeders.

More importantly... what some of us are largely talking about here is the product advertising! Not the product potential. Its just not clear enough. If someone floats a claim(s), well then... we'd like to be convinced that the claim is true.

I would, at least, like to know that any claims are true and verifiable before adding a product to my systems with tens of thousands of dollars of corals in it and countless living creatures depending on me for their very lives ;) This hobby has no organized consumer advocacy as you know. Its up to us (consumers) to evaluate the merit of each and every product with little assistence otherwise.

And to reiterate... a principal concern for me at least is if the "hibernation" process is a chemical fix. Is the product truly alive... or was it merely alive at the time of packaging? If the latter... then what killed it? What was the process of preparation? And how does that then reflect on the advertising claims that started the discussion?

That is something I'd very much like to know before feeding it to to my filter feeders.

I don't put anything into my body that doesn't list the ingredients clearly... and I personally do not use products for my livestock that don't fit the same criteria.

I'm going on the premise that Phyto-Feast is a safe and useful product, indeed!

Its just raised some questions and neither the label nor website are clear enough for me. As a consumer... I'm going to information gather longer before I actually try it in living aquaria.

If we can't find Rob's info on a thorough web search, we'll e-mail him.
 
An FYI too... in my characteristically long-view approach to information exchanges - this conversation is largely an excerise in (hopefully) constructive discussion about evaluating products. For the purpose of archiving and for reaching many aquarists with the hope of reminding them/us all to apply sensible measures on other/future products and being better consumers.

The best thing for everyone is if we closely examine a manufacturers product and claims and that it stands up to the scrutiny!

How wonderful for everyone then. :) The hobbyist, the manufacturer and everyone in between!

I'm sure if we all did more of this, then there would not be so many (or such severe) backlashes to the endless stream of products that come out each year which turn out to be false or even harmful (low grade seasalts, numerous algacides, various so-called "reef safe" ich cures... we've seen them come and go each year and heard or even experienced some awful stories about them :(

Being educated consumers is simple and the only good path here.

The phyto discussion has been good so far... now lets get some folks to run trials with it and eliminate some variables :)

Please do not limit your experiments to only one brand either! Make it fair and useful/interesting.
 
Last edited:
Anthony,

This has become an interesting thread. I would be intersting in helping out but I have a potential conflict.

Rob Toonen
Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology
PO Box 1346
Kaneohe, HI 96744

** edited out phone and e-mail pending Rob's permission for public posting in an archived forum - Anthony Calfo.


I know that Rob has done a lot of work for DTs in regards to feeding. Being in Hawaii (Coconut Island) now he would have some restrictions to over come. I know that DT cites Rob's expermints in his product literature. I would think he would be a great choice to run a trial if he could get the permits and had time. Have you guys seen his website, he seems to have figured out how to get 30 hours out of a day.

http://www2.hawaii.edu/~toonen/index.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cheers, Andy :)

I do have tremendous admiration for Rob. Always have... he's an amazing and interesting fellow.

But lets keep this discussion and any trials very open ended... not about a specific Reed product or a DTs product,etc. solely.

I rather see this as some home-grown consumer advocacy ala Consumer Reports style.

And so... let's avoid any folks with affiliations to any specific manufacturer. (sure... many aquarists have taken free samples given out randomly to the public at trade shows and hobby events. Thats fine. But lets not employ helpers with interest beyond that).

I for one have had both pleasant and... er, "debating" discussions with both Mr. Reed and Mr. Tagrin. I reckon they both might love or hate me equally :) I do feel even-handed with both FWIW.

Most folks that use these products are regular hobbyists... unqualified amateur (aquarium) professionals at best.

Let's keep it simple at first and just reduce some variables to answer questions and address marketing claims:

For starters... which packaged products are live or not.

Take a few commonly available brands... give them some same/equal) fertilizer and light and see if they grow out. simple enough.

If all are live... and all grow/sustain... then in some ways thats good enough for most folks. "Yes... X, X, and X are all live"

Or versus any known or discovered dead phyto products, most consumers I believe would agree that live is better than dead.

Whether dead is as useful (readily taken or not) is irrelevent to this point here. Consumers will believe individually and variously that live is better (nutrionally, receptive to filter feeders... whatever) IMO and want to know that when gathering information and wanting to make a buying decision. Especially in light of superlative advertising claims.

In a nutshell... I personally am just looking for practical consumer info.
 
My intention is not to speculate. For a start, itââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s just confusing that Reed first offers his product as Phyto-feast TM LIVE and changes it to Phytofeast LIVE TM . Was 100% alive now is ââ"šÂ¬Ã…"œliveââ"šÂ¬Ã‚ ââ"šÂ¬Ã‚¦

He claims that the algae is in a suspended animation, in order to achieve that you have to add a preservative or a fixative like methanol or DMSO. You have to inundate the cell to a point where it stops functioning normally. So what preservative is he actually using and is their a possibility of it being harmful? It could be 100% natural or artificial!! The producer does not tell us what it isââ"šÂ¬Ã‚¦just tries to confuse us.

Additionally the producer is adding a high powered caramel flavoring sugar to his algae to mask the smell (Ethyl Maltol). Why would he do all this and not come out and say that his product is preserved or fixed, naturally or unnaturally and that he has added a sugar to make things smell more pleasant. I have bought many products that are nothing more than hype, some honest information would be a nice change. For a manufacture to state that his product will
..... retain their full nutritional value long after they have ceased metabolic activity. The quiescence process delays any biological decomposition of the product for many months. Properly stored, a bottle of Phyto-Feastâ„¢ will provide the same value at two-plus months that it did on the first day.

This would mean that things will be exactly the same, which is ridiculous, because we all know that fatty acids degrade over time, and some degrade very quickly. The only way to prevent them from degrading would be to add a preservative or to keep them at ââ"šÂ¬Ã¢â‚¬Å“80C other wise they will degrade. That is just basic biochemistry.

Again I mean no disrespect to Reed in anyway, but we all get tired of hype and disingenuous information that is designed to confuse.

Check out this links:

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=137494&papass=&sort=1&size=medium&thecat=

http://reefcentral.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=137495&papass=&sort=1&size=medium&thecat=
 
[degredation over time and particle clumping/clotting]

it has been a big concern/criticism from me at large about bottled phyto in general, and unrefridgerated ones in particular----> IMO, they have to be very, very fresh to be used optimally. As they age, degenerate, clump, clot... whatever - they are less and less useful. Particle sizes increase (clumps really) and nutritional value inevitably decreases.

So I am a fan of live phyto (obviously).
 
Well said Anthony:

Many people from reefs.org know me as a very strong and sometimes overly outspoken advocate for the home aquarist that is not on these boards and is sucked into advertising that not factual or confusing. I personally take offense to ads by companies which have large ad budgets specifically that target the under informed hobbyist. I am not saying that is what is happing here, but I sure would like to see straight forward advertising.

Anyway a good consumer report type project would be wonderful.

Products would be restricted to algae or all invert filter feeding food?

I can offer to have the fatty acid word done for this project, I have a fellow grad student that runs all my shrimp samples. We could get him to run the fatty acid profiles, heââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢s not affiliated with any group at all and I think I might be able to have him slide them in with my samples without much additional work..

I however am working on a very successful calanoid copepod project (we are going to unleash it at MOââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢06) with and receive free algae from an algae company. Therefore I donââ"šÂ¬Ã¢"žÂ¢t think it would be ethical to do anything other than provide some contacts for fatty acid testing if needed.

Again, I think you have done a great job here keeping things civil, these types of discussions wheather about sea salts or other products tend to get a bit heated.
 
outstanding Andy. Much thanks for the offer and especially your candor.

I too am very pleased to see this life in this thread without a flame fest. Indeed, flames happen too easily at large on message boards :( Ridiculous when so. You can't get that (usually) wasted time of your life back. A pity to see folks waste energy on such fights rather than run civil and constructive debates.

Let's take some days/weeks to see who is able and interested to do what with looking at these products. My advice again is to start small if only to be systematic in addressing issues and eliminating variables: Algae products first... live vs dead issue.

Then if we like we can get into nutritional issues later (great thanks for the fatty acid analysis support!)

Spin-offs to other filter-feeder foods, etc possible.

This is likely out of the scope of ability for any one single person (time/money constraints). But lets see what we can do by pulling together.

Consumer advocacy has to start somewhere :)

Indeed many good folks are of this mindset. My friend Steven Pro is rather outspoken about such issues as well (though he already has two pending projects to finish presently). Many others are the same. We must not only stand up for ourselves... but the majority of the participants in this hobby are not represented on this or any message board! Yet their success or failure does impact our participation in the hobby via prices, product quality and availability... legislation, etc.

We simply must police ourselves and be educated consumers! I can't think of anybody more interested and better able to take care of us... than us :)

I'll try to get back to this thread as often as possible before Christmas (between cities and airports!) :D

kind regards to all,

Anth-
 
Curiouser and curiouser...

So, purplehaze, before posting here you had in your hands a not so inexpensive report analysing for suspected preservatives?

Leads one to ask, who would commision such a report and why?

hmmm...

Not so live product, not entirely forthright poster. Wnat gives?

Fred
 
Back
Top