N/P reducing pellets (solid vodka dosing)

[daveonbass]

I don't know HOW to be any more clear. THEY DID NOT WORK. Only the WC can be attributed to the REDUCTION in NO3. If the pellets were working then they would/should have "reduced" the NO3 more, but they did not. The rock/sand/skimmer can easily account for maintaining the nitrate where it was, even when BP were NOT in use (that's key here). I currently have 5-10ppm NO3 levels, all attained ONLY by WC. Those are the facts. I can't be any more clear.

 

[daveonbass]

yes bluereef, thank you. And yes they are the same size.

 

[Moser]

I really dont know how bp can work without bacteria, bacteria is esence of carbon dosing, Dave writed that he left the bp in reactor just unpluged but the sea water was inside, no cloudines, no bacteria string, no mulm... nothing, just clear water and clear bio pellets, what is clear sign that there was no bacteria at all, actually I find amazing that after 10 days in still water he do not get bacterial bloom inside the reactor. Once I made similar action, due to bacterial bloom I just turn off the reactor, with the bp and water inside, after 3 days smell from reactor was unbelivable and he was completly cloudy, it took me loot of washing to remove bacteria and smell from bio pellets.

Also I am prety sure that after months of use Dave pellets are same size as they was in the begining, if they worked they will be smaller and smaller due to bacteria population. I have working and not working bp, not working bp are in use a few months, they are the same size as they was in the begining, working bio pellets are very much reduced in size.

I have pellets x 6/12.

Many of my pellets are the same size.... a few get reduced to shells and break up. I have not yet added any further after topping up to 1.75L for a 500L tank (prob no need for a while).

We have the relevant bacteria in our tanks. What we don't actually know is if the dosed bacteria are actually any different to what is already there. We are just assuming they are. So there is no evidence that we actually need them in every tank as they may actually just be supplementing the levels of bacteria that are already there.

The issue regarding an eventual monoculture is well propagated, but as far as I know lacks an evidence base.

I also have never had mulm in my reactor. What I do have is a reduction of nitrate to 0 from 30. My phos is lower but needs some phos remover.

So what is different in my system to say Dave's?.... very little it seems, maybe a slightly lower drop in nutrients, but everything else seems very similar?.

Mo

 

[Moser]

I don't know HOW to be any more clear. THEY DID NOT WORK. Only the WC can be attributed to the REDUCTION in NO3. If the pellets were working then they would/should have "reduced" the NO3 more, but they did not. The rock/sand/skimmer can easily account for maintaining the nitrate where it was, even when BP were NOT in use (that's key here). I currently have 5-10ppm NO3 levels, all attained ONLY by WC. Those are the facts. I can't be any more clear.

OK... so your Berlin system is working for you. Why not stop the pellets and leave well alone?.....
If it's not broken don't try to fix it.....

Mo

 

[daveonbass]

mo: the difference between yours and mine is (i suspect) you did regular WC's, and potentially dose/dosed "something". I did not. Can you say beyond a shadow of a dought that it WAS the BP doing any of that reducing, or could it be attributed to other things? (do you run a fuge, dose vsv, dosed vsv, regulat WC, raising lowering feeding, skimming more/less?) all I tried to do is see if the BP ALONE would remove NO3, so far my reports are "no."

as for the berlin method. I agree, I was just wanting to see if the BP would work, if they still do not by the end of the year (yes I'm on board for a while) then I probably will stop using them. Maybe the new ones will kick in by then, they say it hasn't ever taken much longer than 4 weeks for the SWC BP's to work, and that they have a 100% success rate so far. We'll see, I hope my system doesn't break their winning streak.

 

[bluereefs]

Sorry I dont understend what this mean : I have pellets x 6/12

Principle of bp (hopefully I get that explanation right) is producing bacteria only inside the reactor with bio pellets, those bacteria will be then skimmed out together with nitrogen, small percentage of bacteria will escape skimmer but will act as a food for invertebrate and corals. Esence/main goal of bp is producing bacteria inside the reactor, only in severe cases of bacterial bloom bacteria will be visiblle inside and outside of reactor, as well in aquarium gllass, rocks, pipes.. in most cases with functional bp reactor they will be not visible unless the reactor get disconected from the water suplies and bacteria start to produce in reactor what lead to production of hidrogen sulfid. Acording to manufacture instruction there must be adequate flow to prevent production of hidrogen sulfid.

That is the basic principle of bio pellets.

Still water in reactor (functional reactor) must lead to hidrogen sulfid, if there was no hidrogen sulfid there was no bacteria, if there is no bacteria then bp do not work.

Here is the picture from Tatuvaj bio pelets, he use slow flow because he wont big bacterial bio mass as a food for invertebrate

It is obviously how many bacteria bp can produce, they must, that is their job. If you disconent your reactor for few days and inside the reactor are not bacterial boom then they IMO dont work either. Nitrate reduction is one of the sign of working bio pellets but nitrate can be reduced without bio pellets with water changes, stabilization of aquarium, less feding, ... etc... other wise every reefer who have nitrate will must buy some of the carbon system or use freee one to reduce the nitrate and there are many example of nitrate reduction without carbon dosing at all.

 

[Moser]

mo: the difference between yours and mine is (i suspect) you did regular WC's, and potentially dose/dosed "something". I did not. Can you say beyond a shadow of a dought that it WAS the BP doing any of that reducing, or could it be attributed to other things? (do you run a fuge, dose vsv, dosed vsv, regulat WC, raising lowering feeding, skimming more/less?) all I tried to do is see if the BP ALONE would remove NO3, so far my reports are "no."

as for the berlin method. I agree, I was just wanting to see if the BP would work, if they still do not by the end of the year (yes I'm on board for a while) then I probably will stop using them. Maybe the new ones will kick in by then, they say it hasn't ever taken much longer than 4 weeks for the SWC BP's to work, and that they have a 100% success rate so far. We'll see, I hope my system doesn't break their winning streak.

Hi My tank had

BP reactor.
Skimmer (the same I started the tank with)
Balling solutions for alk/ca and Mag.

Nothing else until phos remover added more recently.

No fuge. No DSB. No WC. No hands in the tank.
Just left the tank to do it's own thing for a few months.

re-measured and then added the phos media.

There is nothing else I could attribute it to.

Mo

 

[Moser]

Sorry I dont understend what this mean : I have pellets x 6/12

Principle of bp (hopefully I get that explanation right) is producing bacteria only inside the reactor with bio pellets, those bacteria will be then skimmed out together with nitrogen, small percentage of bacteria will escape skimmer but will act as a food for invertebrate and corals. Esence/main goal of bp is producing bacteria inside the reactor, only in severe cases of bacterial bloom bacteria will be visiblle inside and outside of reactor, as well in aquarium gllass, rocks, pipes.. in most cases with functional bp reactor they will be not visible unless the reactor get disconected from the water suplies and bacteria start to produce in reactor what lead to production of hidrogen sulfid. Acording to manufacture instruction there must be adequate flow to prevent production of hidrogen sulfid.

That is the basic principle of bio pellets.

Still water in reactor (functional reactor) must lead to hidrogen sulfid, if there was no hidrogen sulfid there was no bacteria, if there is no bacteria then bp do not work.

Here is the picture from Tatuvaj bio pelets, he use slow flow because he wont big bacterial bio mass as a food for invertebrate

It is obviously how many bacteria bp can produce, they must, that is their job. If you disconent your reactor for few days and inside the reactor are not bacterial boom then they IMO dont work either. Nitrate reduction is one of the sign of working bio pellets but nitrate can be reduced without bio pellets with water changes, stabilization of aquarium, less feding, ... etc... other wise every reefer who have nitrate will must buy some of the carbon system or use freee one to reduce the nitrate and there are many example of nitrate reduction without carbon dosing at all.

6/12 is 6 months.

It is assumed that the bacteria use C:N in the same (Redfield) ratio as phytoplankton (116:16:1). The ratio for bacteria hasn't directly been measured as far as I'm aware.

When bacteria proliferate, they use up the C:N to build their DNA. That is how the nutrients are used up and why most systems are carbon limited ( as you use much more carbon in comparison to N and and Phos)..

If there is no P, they become Phosphate limited and thus in rare instances, carbon dosing doesn't work.

The bacteria are blown off the pellets and skimmed out of the system and this is how bacterial driven systems work.

If you leave the pellet filter top open enough, the filter will not go anaerobic and you shouldn't get any H2S production. You may also not get a build up of bacterial slime as Nitrobacter and Nitrosomonas cultures can die off quite easily. So, just because you don't get a build up, it doesn't mean your system isn't working.

Mo

 

[ari5736]

My smaller reactor has now been offline and open for 24 hrs no bloom. Will check again tomorrow morning.

 

[daveonbass]

well mo, I'm gald that they are working for ya. Wanna trade pellets? Haha. Like I said, I hope my new ones work better this time. I'll keep everyone posted.

 

[bluereefs]

If you leave the pellet filter top open enough, the filter will not go anaerobic and you shouldn't get any H2S production

Just for the record, the filter/reactor when I get hidrogen sulfid production when he was off have open top.

 

[ari5736]

Great news, my large reactor (the one that went through a bloom when I took it offline over the weekend and left the cap off for 1 day after the weekend) has brought my tank down to between 5-10ppm, when it was just >20 ppm last week with no water changes since then. I rinsed the pellets as per bluereefs advice before putting them back online, and I will continue to update progress.

As for my small reactor that has now been left open for about 36 hours, still no bacteria bloom. That reactor has been hooked up to a 45 gallon for about 3 months with sky high nitrates, no sand bed, filled with live rock and huge water changes within the past couple of months to bring down nitrates due to feeding frozen mysids. I am still hopeful that I will get a bloom in the reactor like I did on the big one as they are filled with the same stock of pellets. If not I will swap some pellets between reactors in order to attempt to activate pellets.

 

[tmz]

A few thoughts:

The pellets are a source of organic carbon .There is no reason, I can fathom, bacteria won't consume them for the C along with N and P.Wether or not using polymers as an organic carbon source is the best alternative for carbon dosing is an open question but the pellets are certainly not a "scam".

Personally,I have concerns about using polysaccharide sources such as starches and or the sucrose/glucose/fructose they can produce . I am also a bit skeptical that the organics from the pellets remain in the reactor sufficiently to prevent surges in organic carbon in the tank.

There are measures of CNP ratios for various bacterial biomass which vary somewhat from the Redfield ratio. But we don't know which bacteria we have in a given system. Generally, I am skeptical abut dosing bacteria since there are plenty in a reef tank.

Wether or not a particular type of polymer is better than the other(which pellet or other carbohydrate source is best) or wether using polysacharides as opposed to ethanol or acetic acid is the best way to provide organic carbon at all is, I think, an open question.

I'm alarmed to see folks allowing reactors to stagnate.
When you allow water to stagnate(in an open or closed container)
with organics in it, O2 and NO3 will deplete to 0 as faculative heterotrophic bacteria use them up. Then obligate anaerobic bacteria that reduce sulfate take over drawing O2 from sulfate (SO4) . This happens anywhere there is sulfate for respiration and C for food.Seawater has plenty of sulfate(2700ppm). The odor some are experiencing when opening a stagnant reactor is hydrogen sulfide(sewer gas) , a toxic gas by product of the SO4 reducing bacterial activity.
You do not want to introduce stagnant water into your aquarium or breathe much of it either.

 

[bluereefs]

tmz, what is the problem asociated with to many organic carbon in the tank?
Is there a way how we can see if we have to many organic carbon in the tank?

Can you explain the situation when bp was leaved in stagnant water inside the reactor or even outside the reactor (in jar for example) for 10 days without any efects?

 

[tmz]

tmz, what is the problem asociated with to many organic carbon in the tank?
Is there a way how we can see if we have to many organic carbon in the tank?

Can you explain the situation when bp was leaved in stagnant water inside the reactor or even outside the reactor (in jar for example) for 10 days without any efects?

Hello,

Organic carbon is the third nutrient. It is often ignored because we as hobbyist can't measure it. Relatively new very expensive equipment is available for scientific research and has been used to gather data on organic carbon levels in the sea,surveyed reef tanks and aquariums as well as it's effects on corals. In brief, it feeds non photosynthetic bacteria, and in excess it is thought to upset the corals holibont bacteria creating pathogenic activity.

Here is one article with a good amount of detail and references in it:

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/8/aafeature3

I don't think there is a practical way to tell the levels
of organic carbon in our tanks. But certainly adding more via a carbon source will raise it without attention to export via skimming and even more so granulated activated carbon. This is why I think the pellets could be good if they do in fact keep the carbon out of the tank as opposed to direct tank dosing methods such as sugar for example.. Monitoring orp drops might give some indication that it is building up but not with any precision or reliability, in my opinion.

I can't explain why organic carbon in water would not be taken up by bacteria. Perhaps the observation was inaccurate or influenced by some unknown external variable or the actual pellets used were not biodegradeable( ie had no organic carbon in them).

 

[davyr]

Hello again,
Just thought i would give you guys another quick update on my levels. Checked my nit and phos again this morning and they still seem to be the same phos.0 and nitr 5-10 i (i think,thats with my son & daughter & wifes eyes :lmao so that is after a month and 2 days :sad1:. Still seem to be struggling to get them under 10. I feed flake twice a day and a mysis cube every other day with flake and a 1" sheet of nori. Just got to mention i am still doing water change's but only 4 gallon every week.

 

[crendon2003]

So I just wanna ask how does the Color of your corals compare to u people using the pellets as before if u were using vodka or gfo with ac? (Did u see better color with vodka or pellets?)

 

[davyr]

So I just wanna ask how does the Color of your corals compare to u people using the pellets as before if u were using vodka or gfo with ac? (Did u see better color with vodka or pellets?)

I have noticed since using B/P's that my softies are bleaching but i have been assured they will come back to full colour but i don't know when as they have been this colour for a few wks now.

 

[ari5736]

Today I got a bacterial bloom in the display from my large reactor. A little bit concerned. I do have tons of circulation, huge skimmer, and air pump/stone in the display, but nevertheless the cloudy water makes me a little nervous.

On my smaller reactor that has been offline for a few days now, I may be starting to get a bloom, and will check again this evening.

 

[dg3147]

So I just wanna ask how does the Color of your corals compare to u people using the pellets as before if u were using vodka or gfo with ac? (Did u see better color with vodka or pellets?)

I think that my colors are re-browning very slowly with pellets. I tried starting a thread on this looking for others' experience as well --perhaps I'll give it a bump today.

The pellets did drive my NO3 down to zero though. I am thinking about adding on a very small dose of vodka to my pellets.