Lets talk about Vodka/sugar dosing
- Thread starter stony_corals
- Start date
- Status
Tony B (UK)
Important cool title
Very interesting thread, superbly detailed and very informative.
I'm going to give it a whirl and see if it reduces my NO3 to zero, I'm also interested to see if zero nitrate improves the colour of my corals.
Thank you to every one for sharing their knowledge on this subject.
Regards,
Tony
I'm going to give it a whirl and see if it reduces my NO3 to zero, I'm also interested to see if zero nitrate improves the colour of my corals.
Thank you to every one for sharing their knowledge on this subject.
Regards,
Tony
Greetings All !
FWIW ...
"sweet spot" ratio for marine bacteria.
Strange that everyone overlooks oxygen in the discussions of what facultative aerobes might be doing, isn't it?. (Go back and read Redfield's article from the 1930s. He didn't casually discard oxygen as a variable ... he just decided he could ignore it because he was focused on limiting factors regarding phytoplankton.)
ratios documented for marine bacteria only get within ~20% of Redfield's Ratio ... with many showing significantly greater variance. Forgive me, but I don't find a ratio derived from observations regarding phytoplankton, and which shows such significant differences with regards to marine bacteria field data, to be particularly useful to folks trying to refine dosing formulae for their system.
JMO ... no offense intended ... :thumbsup:
The observation regarding the variability between strains is quite insightful, and worthy of emphasis. I would also add that when and where the bacteria C:N ratio numbers get sampled is critical. Season, latitude, geography (Baltic Sea vs. Antarctica), locality (fringing reef vs. lagoon), and "media" (sediment vs. open water ... vs. test tube) have a profound impact on the ratio numbers that are recorded.
Nasty as the implications for these types of discussions may be, it may turn out that extrapolations from field data may be virtually useless for aquarium application. Happily, there are some folks working on some things that may prove quite illuminating with regards to what's going on with DOC and coral microbiota in marine aquaria. Stay tuned ... the band is just warming up.
because you will never, ever get it out."
Thomas Cardinal Wolsey (1471-1530)
Nitrogen ... NOT nitrate ... is the critical variable. When the hardcore European reefkeepers who pioneered carbon-dosing strategies want to tweak the N variable in the C:N ratio, they don't reach for a nitrate compound. They reach for ammonium chloride, or a protein that will be metabolized into urea. When one wants to "cleanly" and efficiently tweak the pathways in a metabolic cascade, one should manipulate the reactants, enzymes, or substrates ... not the products.
BTW, what is one of the primary products of either the metabolism of "food", or, the respiration of an increased fish population?
HTH
:thumbsup:
Counter-intuitive as it may seem, massive encrusting, slower-growth corals (like Montipora species) in natural ecosystems generally have a higher metabolic rate compared with branching, faster-growth corals (like Acropora species). It shouldn't be surprising that the first expression of the effect(s) of carbon-dosing on the metabolic functioning of a marine aquarium (... both "good" and "bad" ...) happens with a genus like Montipora. From my twisted little perspective, the growth response of a Montipora specimen is much more diagnostic than the color response of an Acropora specimen.
FWIW ...
With loud applause to you for making the effort to focus on the numbers ... it needs pointing out that the Redfield Ratio is the wrong starting point for evaluating the C:N:O<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12869694#post12869694 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by kmckay
... The Redfield ratio is around 106:16:1 (C:N
"sweet spot" ratio for marine bacteria.Strange that everyone overlooks oxygen in the discussions of what facultative aerobes might be doing, isn't it?. (Go back and read Redfield's article from the 1930s. He didn't casually discard oxygen as a variable ... he just decided he could ignore it because he was focused on limiting factors regarding phytoplankton.)
While I concede that in reefkeeping cyberspaces one man's nice general ratio is another man's intolerable statistical blunder ... I would respectfully point out that most of the reliable, "general" C:N
ratios documented for marine bacteria only get within ~20% of Redfield's Ratio ... with many showing significantly greater variance. Forgive me, but I don't find a ratio derived from observations regarding phytoplankton, and which shows such significant differences with regards to marine bacteria field data, to be particularly useful to folks trying to refine dosing formulae for their system.JMO ... no offense intended ... :thumbsup:
The observation regarding the variability between strains is quite insightful, and worthy of emphasis. I would also add that when and where the bacteria C:N
ratio numbers get sampled is critical. Season, latitude, geography (Baltic Sea vs. Antarctica), locality (fringing reef vs. lagoon), and "media" (sediment vs. open water ... vs. test tube) have a profound impact on the ratio numbers that are recorded. Nasty as the implications for these types of discussions may be, it may turn out that extrapolations from field data may be virtually useless for aquarium application. Happily, there are some folks working on some things that may prove quite illuminating with regards to what's going on with DOC and coral microbiota in marine aquaria. Stay tuned ... the band is just warming up.
"Be very, very careful what you put into that head,
because you will never, ever get it out."
Thomas Cardinal Wolsey (1471-1530)
Am I the only one who finds the assertion that one should dose NO3 to get at PO4 reduction strange ... and ironic? :lol:
Nitrogen ... NOT nitrate ... is the critical variable. When the hardcore European reefkeepers who pioneered carbon-dosing strategies want to tweak the N variable in the C:N
ratio, they don't reach for a nitrate compound. They reach for ammonium chloride, or a protein that will be metabolized into urea. When one wants to "cleanly" and efficiently tweak the pathways in a metabolic cascade, one should manipulate the reactants, enzymes, or substrates ... not the products. BTW, what is one of the primary products of either the metabolism of "food", or, the respiration of an increased fish population?
HTH
:thumbsup:
Welcome back. Have a nice little break there? Personally, I don't take offense to anyone that can make a compelling argument. But I do have to disagree on some of these points, even if a bit nit picky.
Though growth is an important indicator of growth, I believe TomRep is suffering from a swing in dKh. Anytime parameters in the water drastically change over a short period of time, growth can be inhibited. In the same general thought, it would not surprise me if dosing carbon sources to drop NO3/PO4 levels in a short period of time caused growth inhibition.
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12903554#post12903554 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mesocosm
While I concede that in reefkeeping cyberspaces one man's nice general ratio is another man's intolerable statistical blunder ... I would respectfully point out that most of the reliable, "general" C:N
Out of curiosity have you come across a bacterial species that has a higher necessity for P than for N?
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=12903554#post12903554 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by mesocosm
Am I the only one who finds the assertion that one should dose NO3 to get at PO4 reduction strange ... and ironic? :lol:
Nitrogen ... NOT nitrate ... is the critical variable. When the hardcore European reefkeepers who pioneered carbon-dosing strategies want to tweak the N variable in the C:N
You'd think someone would reach for the ammonium acetate at some point. Since acetate has been used to reduce both N/P and ammonia has that nice property of causing increased zooanthellae growth within corals. However, haven't there been reports of "browning" occurring with corals fed by this manner from such increase? By adding a nitrate there would be no such growth from feeding the zooantheliae. Which would not be beneficial to the reef, unless bacteria produced actually feed the corals indirectly.
For urea production from protein, couldn't you supplement the amino acid arginine into the water column? Why go through all this trouble when you could feed all your fish and corals at once by just feeding a multitude of food from the seafood aisle at the grocers? This would stimulate urea production by your fish, feed your corals, and in the end create N/P for vodka to reduce.
miwoodar
Likey the bikey
Hey folks - Thanks for this continually awesome thread. I've been lurking for a while...not posting so much. I wanted to chime in though and say that my tank is still doing well and a big credit goes to you guys/gals! These days I'm just dosing vodka on my 65 between 1 and 1.5mL/day. I think I'm going to go back to VSV once my dosing bottle runs out though. I'm also going to be buying a bottle of off the shelf AA's (Zeovit).
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=12310941#post12310941
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=12310941#post12310941
mwladdicted
Post Count D-M-S
wat can i use to messure out .5 ml ? would an eye dropper work?
MammothReefer
Active member
Hmm not to detract here but I seem to be stuck @ 20ppm, it's now been several weeks. I stopped increasing the dosage and leveled at about 40ml a day... I just can't get that last 20ppm of nitrate out of the tank. Thoughts? I don't really think it's a hot idea for me to be adding P though in an effort to reduce N as I may very well have phosphates but just not have them detectable by my kit as I do have algie, and diatoms in my tank. These 20% weekly water changes are starting to take there toll on me.... Really wish I kept my 90g setup at this point in time hahah. Ah.. The good ole days of 20 gallon water changes.. ..now I'm changing more water weekly then the entire volume of my old system..
Other stats.
Salinity 1.026
PH 8.05-8.15
ALK 9.5 (trying to reduce to about 8-8.5)
Calcium 440
Mag ?? need a new test kit
Phosphates undetectable.
Other stats.
Salinity 1.026
PH 8.05-8.15
ALK 9.5 (trying to reduce to about 8-8.5)
Calcium 440
Mag ?? need a new test kit
Phosphates undetectable.
Last edited:
glassbox-design
New member
Phosphates undetectable.... with what kit?
MammothReefer
Active member
API
This is an interesting question. Yes an eye dropper would work but you need to work out some simple math before using it. A teaspoon is equivalent to ~4.9mL. Count how many drops it takes to fill a level teaspoon and then divide 4.9 by that number. This will give you how many mL per drop you receive from that eyedropper. Then you can figure out how many drops you need.
If you have test kits laying some have 1mL syringes you can use also.
I think it's a matter of taking a step back and asking some questions. Are you feeding heavier now than before? If not are you still pulling out more skimmate than before? If so then I would argue that the dosing is still working well. Next, how is the algae problem in your tank? Would you say that it's decreasing slowly? If so, then I would say you are dosing enough to more than enough. 500 gallons is a lot of water volume and it may just take time to get the levels down. Again, I'm wondering if your DSB is not functioning like it should and at this moment you are leaching nitrates from that back into the water. If so when this runs out your nitrates will plummet.
At 20ppm 20% water changes are only dropping the nitrates by 4ppm. If you are currently experiencing leaching into the water you may not see a change. I would just work at stabilizing your tank parameters.
MammothReefer
Active member
Feeding ALOT less then before, maybe 1/4. If that. My skimate really picked up for a few weeks now it's steady but I'm not emptying my cup everyday maybe a few times a week now. Algie is tough to say I never had alot of algie on the rocks. Only diatoms, and some small patches of cyano I also have 4 tangs.. Algie is about the same but i have no issues supporting a huge ball of macro algie that I added to my frag tank a little bit ago.
I have two 90g displays, 46 refuge, 75 gallon sump, around 280 gallons.
two weeks ago I upped feeding to 10 cubes total of frozen brineshrimp daily, will move to mysis when out of brineshrimp (have 18 blister packs)
30 or soo fish total, never had any nitrate (api), used to use GFO.
and carbon. might continue carbon.
one 90 is a dsb, the other 90 is bb, fuge has ssb.
220# or soo of liverock.
I just started dosing VSV - the glass box recipe
200ml vodka
50ml vinegar
1.5 tbsp sugar
I dose:
7 ml VSV for my 280 gallon system. daily
18 ml AA's daily
10 ml Bac daily
I will use seachem fuel AA's
I will also use seachem stability or Hagen Cycle for a bacteria source, start with stabilty then go to hagen.
today is day 2.
sg ~ 1.025-26 (swingarm....)
API test kits:
no phosphate
no nitrate
ca: 420
alk: 9
temp: 78-82
primary goal: get rid funky algae in frag area of sump.
improve coloration of sps.
at a standstill in the hobby, needed something new.
two weeks ago I upped feeding to 10 cubes total of frozen brineshrimp daily, will move to mysis when out of brineshrimp (have 18 blister packs)
30 or soo fish total, never had any nitrate (api), used to use GFO.
and carbon. might continue carbon.
one 90 is a dsb, the other 90 is bb, fuge has ssb.
220# or soo of liverock.
I just started dosing VSV - the glass box recipe
200ml vodka
50ml vinegar
1.5 tbsp sugar
I dose:
7 ml VSV for my 280 gallon system. daily
18 ml AA's daily
10 ml Bac daily
I will use seachem fuel AA's
I will also use seachem stability or Hagen Cycle for a bacteria source, start with stabilty then go to hagen.
today is day 2.
sg ~ 1.025-26 (swingarm....)
API test kits:
no phosphate
no nitrate
ca: 420
alk: 9
temp: 78-82
primary goal: get rid funky algae in frag area of sump.
improve coloration of sps.
at a standstill in the hobby, needed something new.
Greetings All !
... :lol:
Gledhill, M., McCormack, P., Ussher, S., Achterberg, E.P., Mantoura, R.F.C. and Worsfold, P. (2004) Production of siderophore type chelates by mixed bacterioplankton populations in nutrient enriched seawater incubations. Marine Chemistry, 88, (1-2), 75-83.
JMO ... your mileage will vary.
ratio strikes me as an entirely reasonable husbandry choice with a lot of conceptual appeal ... particularly within the context of a refined carbon-dosing strategy.
JMO ... HTH
:thumbsup:
Thanks. I've recently been hired by an RC sponsor that sells some of the "probiotic" products, so I've felt the need to be more circumspect about how I post. But I figured no one with access to the administrative tools pulldown menu would care if I started ranting incoherently about Redfield Ratio stuff ...
... :lol:
No ... "environment" is clearly the dominant factor in observed nutrient uptake rates, but there's also some fascinating evidence regarding the importance of a bacteria's genetic composition for determining its ability to produce proteins that can bind and sequester chemicals (... like P and Fe ...) out of the water column. For example:
Gledhill, M., McCormack, P., Ussher, S., Achterberg, E.P., Mantoura, R.F.C. and Worsfold, P. (2004) Production of siderophore type chelates by mixed bacterioplankton populations in nutrient enriched seawater incubations. Marine Chemistry, 88, (1-2), 75-83.
All I'm saying is that having to dose a metabolic product to compensate for a dosing formula that didn't get you where you wanted to go strikes me as more than a little ridiculous. Doesn't it make more sense to tweak the dosing formula to get it right in the first place?
JMO ... your mileage will vary.
Because the nutrient pool will distort until it reaches a new equilibrium (which necesitates a new dosing regiment), and you get other products introduced into the water column besides urea. Even so, the use of fish biomass & its associated feeding regiment as a tactic to manipulate the N
ratio strikes me as an entirely reasonable husbandry choice with a lot of conceptual appeal ... particularly within the context of a refined carbon-dosing strategy.JMO ... HTH
:thumbsup:
glassbox-design
New member
Congrats Gary :thumbsup: I hope we have some Meso-Inspired products to look forward too.
melev
Well-known member
Somehow, I became unsubscribed to this thread.
Genetics, Here's my math - so tell me if I have it wrong.
My system is a 280g reef with DSB, LR, Refugium. Add my huge sump, and the 20g angled tank. I believe the water volume is 364g total, minus 30% for LR putting my total water volume at 255g. I change 3 cups of carbon weekly.
If it is .1 ml per 25g, then I need 1 ml for my system.
Day 1 - 3, 1ml daily
Day 4 - 7, 2ml daily
Week 2, 2.5 ml daily
Week 3, 3 ml daily (if PO4 and NO3 didn't drop at all).
NO3 today was around 35ppm, and PO4 was .25ppm, but I just dosed Blue Life Phosphate Control tonight so it might hit 0 in the morning. If the PO4 stays near 0, this dosing may just focus on NO3 for now.
I have 80 proof Vodka, and dosed 1ml tonight.
Out of curiosity, would there be any problem with filling up all the syringes for the week, so they are ready and primed? Or is it better to keep drawing it out of the bottle each day?
Genetics, Here's my math - so tell me if I have it wrong.
My system is a 280g reef with DSB, LR, Refugium. Add my huge sump, and the 20g angled tank. I believe the water volume is 364g total, minus 30% for LR putting my total water volume at 255g. I change 3 cups of carbon weekly.
If it is .1 ml per 25g, then I need 1 ml for my system.
Day 1 - 3, 1ml daily
Day 4 - 7, 2ml daily
Week 2, 2.5 ml daily
Week 3, 3 ml daily (if PO4 and NO3 didn't drop at all).
NO3 today was around 35ppm, and PO4 was .25ppm, but I just dosed Blue Life Phosphate Control tonight so it might hit 0 in the morning.
If the PO4 stays near 0, this dosing may just focus on NO3 for now.
I have 80 proof Vodka, and dosed 1ml tonight.
Out of curiosity, would there be any problem with filling up all the syringes for the week, so they are ready and primed? Or is it better to keep drawing it out of the bottle each day?
I was wondering about this as well, as I'm not around the house all week, only 4 days a week, so I could have another family member dose the tank while I'm gone. (Of course all dosing regiments should be observed in case something goes wrong).
The question I would have is whether the alcohol evaporates (to understand this, leave a shot of goldshlager out overnight. see how delicious and sweet it tastes the next day) while in the syringe, and even if you left a shot out over night, or the bottle open for a few days (yes it will evaporate from the bottle if left open)? I'm guessing that since the important part of dosing is the ethanol in the alcohol body, that since it's the ethanol that evaporates, you can't use what is left over for dosing... Or you'd have to use much more of it to introduce the same quantity of ethanol.
Sorry for the de-rail, but answer Marc's question first, as I'm interested in that answer as well.
Looks like a good schedule to follow. The only thing is you may not see reduction quickly due to the DSB. I would be interested to know if you also observe this like many have stated. I think within the first two days you will note an increase in skimmate production. It will come off as a black gunk and smell horrible. Even if you can't detect a N/P decrease up front, the increased skimmate is pulling out something that will eventually show up on the test kits.
I have 200gal system and found I use 4mL Red label Smirnoff equivalent to get very little nitrates/phosphates (both undetectable with hobby kits) even when I feed at incredibly high levels. I mention this as a guide in what your final dose may look like. On a 250gal system, it wouldn't surprise me for you to top out similarly at 4-6mL / day to keep levels undetectable.
The only issue would be evaporation. If you have ends to seal the syringe and prevent this I don't see a problem with it.
- Status
