N/P reducing pellets (solid vodka dosing)

[sirreal63]

I don't know Dave, you don't have any more water volume than I do, we feed the same thing. I think you are wise enough to know that the distributors aren't going to do any real testing when they don't have to, they all hang out online and let us do the testing. There may be a couple who tried it but as far as actual R&D, not happening because it would cut into their profit margins. If I had the same situation as you, I would be trying anything I could to initialize them. I have never used MB7 so I can't say that is the real deal, but I have used VSV for years and it does work, and so far so have the pellets, my vodka is used strictly with OJ now.

I don't see the reasoning behind not enough pellets, but it is easy to test...add a liquid carbon source, if your N and P come down then you know you are carbon limited and add more pellets or use the two in conjunction. The bacteria should be self limiting, at least that is my observation in my tank.

 

[Moser]

yes. Two main ones.

the first is the important one. The manufacturers don't say it's nessiccary. That's a big reason for me...cause this method is supposed to just work,

Dave,

Do you have a link to where the manufacturer's say it's not necessary to dose bacteria with biopellets please?. I would be interested to have a read.

Thanks
Mo

 

[philbo32]

After all what else could be limited in that situation?

Bacteria that breakdown nitrate and phosphate require carbon source as a food source, they also require correct levels of potassium for the bacterias metabolism to function correctly. The potassium tests available aren't brilliant but they do work, it would be a good idea to check it when you can afford it. I have put a black plastic bag around my reactor to stop cyano and other light loving organisms growing on the pellets and using up phosphate. Hope this helps.

 

[drummereef]

Dave said he dosed MB7 and it didn't help, that should put the argument to rest...

Anyway, I think this bacterial discussion borders on threadjacking...

I'm sorry you feel this way and cannot constructively participate in a valid discussion on carbon dosing, as this is a carbon dosing thread. He didn't say how long or at what rate he was dosing (among other factors) so it's entirely a valid conversation.

well my tank is stable...and still no real effect from the pellets. And I dissagree with you on the common sense part. If the people selling it say that dosing isn't nessiccary, then it shouldn't ever be needed...THAT should be what is common sense.

buyer/user: Do I NEED to dose bacteria with these pellets?
manufacturer: No, it is not "nessiccary" for them to work.
buyer/user: Ok, I'll dose if I think I should anyways...

that doesn't make sense. Not to me at least...

again, my biggest problem though is not that (cause I tried doseing MB7, and it still didn't work), it's that I'm too broke to keep buying a product that didn't help...

Dave, this is entirely incorrect. From my understanding, Warner Marine is currently designing a bacteria product to supplement their ecoBAK pellets. Wait until they all jump on board... Jon stated to me that he simply doesn't "trust" what's in other manufacturer's bacteria supplements so they are designing their own proprietary blend. Why would a company rely on someone else's product for optimal performance? I don't see anywhere on NP's site or any other bio pellet manufacturer that they specifically don't recommend or don't require bacterial supplementation (correct me if I'm wrong ). Where are you getting this information??? You have to remember carbon dosing is not new technology, but the pellet forms are. You must be willing to adjust your philosophy when trying products like these or you will continue to frustrate yourself.

 

[Toadally]

I ran the Vertex bio pellets for a couple of months with so so results. I took them off line a couple of days ago because I ordered a new Next Reef reactor and I'm going to use the NP pellets.

Now, from what I observered for those couple of months is that it takes a long time for the bacteria to etablish in the reactor. I also dosed MB7 for most of that time period. The results I witnessed from using the pellets was cleaner glass and sand.

I still had algae growing on some of my rocks, so the presence of po4 was still there. I think the pellets will work given time and establishment, but I also think that using something along with the pellets like GFO, GAC, and bacteria would be beneficial as well. I don't think the pellets are the magic bullet everyone was hoping for.

 

[daveonbass]

sirreal: I don't know what your bioload is, and you already did vsv. So that alone coule easily be what has helped your pellets along. As far as R&D, the original NP BioPellet distributor claimed to have done R&D for this purpose before trying to market them...its at the beginning of this thread...a long time ago.

moser: I don't have a specific link...BUT plese feel free to show me a package from any brand of pellets that says "make sure you dose MB7 along with the addition of the BP." I have yet to see one endorsement for that. Feel free to show me the opposite.

philbo: that's an interesting idea. But it's also the first I've heard mention of it here...this is really the only forum where I get my BP info. Personally I think it makes more sense that I'm PO4 limited more than K limited. My reactor in under the stand...and there are no lights under there...and it's a closed back stand. So NO light Is in there. There is no cyno or algae in the reactor or the sump....and now there is no cyno in my tank. (hooray)! There is a little algae on one rock but the rest seems to stay relatively spotless...

btw, I have 250ml of bp in a 58g tank...this is LESS than was originally recommended by the first NP pellets. Do you all really feel this is enough to work on this size tank? It is half of what I had before, and those pellets never started working. Just seems like more would be the answer if less couldn't cut it.

 

[daveonbass]

sounds like you are all using the reverse argument.

"I" say that they don't specifically state to dose extra bacteria. (with this new exception)

"You" say that they don't state NOT to dose extra bacteria.

see the difference?

BUT...they have said that to reduce PO4 that we will potentially need to continue to run GFO. So in that instance they are being honest and precise, telling us TO do something. So IMHO they would/should do the same for the potential need for extra bacterial doseing. But no one has yet come out that specificly and said...YES, dose bacteria to get this stuff started...

and on a personal note...if you do need to dose then wouldn't that prove even more that the pellets don't really do much. After all they are useless without dosing...yet I would bet that the dosing can be successful WITHOUT the BP. (MB7 being a case in point...)

I'm sorry you feel this way and cannot constructively participate in a valid discussion on carbon dosing, as this is a carbon dosing thread. He didn't say how long or at what rate he was dosing (among other factors) so it's entirely a valid conversation.





Dave, this is entirely incorrect. From my understanding, Warner Marine is currently designing a bacteria product to supplement their ecoBAK pellets. Wait until they all jump on board... Jon stated to me that he simply doesn't "trust" what's in other manufacturer's bacteria supplements so they are designing their own proprietary blend. Why would a company rely on someone else's product for optimal performance? I don't see anywhere on NP's site or any other bio pellet manufacturer that they specifically don't recommend or don't require bacterial supplementation (correct me if I'm wrong ). Where are you getting this information??? You have to remember carbon dosing is not new technology, but the pellet forms are. You must be willing to adjust your philosophy when trying products like these or you will continue to frustrate yourself.

 

[Toadally]

Using the pellets is the same thing as using vodka. It's just in a different form. Would you use vodka and not use bacteria? It just seems logical to use bacteria along with the pellets. It certainly dosen't hurt anything by doing so....

 

[Moser]

Dave

You've been going on and on and on and on about how the pellet producers say you don't have to dose bacteria and that is why you shouldn't have to do it and won't but you have no reference to this claim at all?.

Most users who beta tested the np biopellets worked without dosing bacteria, so there was never a bacterial product developed. Because they didn't mention to dose bacteria, it doesn't mean they claim it should never be done, just that they haven't endorsed it.

They also haven't claimed this will work in every case. So for you to claim ( as you have previously done) that these are a dud is very harsh.

Also, for the number of 50% water changes ( biological dilutions) you have done, I'm not surprised they haven't worked for you.

Don't you think it's about time you gave these up and tried something more your style?. Ie just keep doing the water changes??.

Just a thought?

Mo

sirreal: I don't know what your bioload is, and you already did vsv. So that alone coule easily be what has helped your pellets along. As far as R&D, the original NP BioPellet distributor claimed to have done R&D for this purpose before trying to market them...its at the beginning of this thread...a long time ago.

moser: I don't have a specific link...BUT plese feel free to show me a package from any brand of pellets that says "make sure you dose MB7 along with the addition of the BP." I have yet to see one endorsement for that. Feel free to show me the opposite.

philbo: that's an interesting idea. But it's also the first I've heard mention of it here...this is really the only forum where I get my BP info. Personally I think it makes more sense that I'm PO4 limited more than K limited. My reactor in under the stand...and there are no lights under there...and it's a closed back stand. So NO light Is in there. There is no cyno or algae in the reactor or the sump....and now there is no cyno in my tank. (hooray)! There is a little algae on one rock but the rest seems to stay relatively spotless...

btw, I have 250ml of bp in a 58g tank...this is LESS than was originally recommended by the first NP pellets. Do you all really feel this is enough to work on this size tank? It is half of what I had before, and those pellets never started working. Just seems like more would be the answer if less couldn't cut it.

 

[Moser]

Not quite!.
You're saying they didnt say to dose bacteria, so I shouldn't have to, ever.

We are saying just because they didnt say it, it doesnt mean it should never ever have to be done ever......

Mo

sounds like you are all using the reverse argument.

"I" say that they don't specifically state to dose extra bacteria. (with this new exception)

"You" say that they don't state NOT to dose extra bacteria.

see the difference?

BUT...they have said that to reduce PO4 that we will potentially need to continue to run GFO. So in that instance they are being honest and precise, telling us TO do something. So IMHO they would/should do the same for the potential need for extra bacterial doseing. But no one has yet come out that specificly and said...YES, dose bacteria to get this stuff started...

and on a personal note...if you do need to dose then wouldn't that prove even more that the pellets don't really do much. After all they are useless without dosing...yet I would bet that the dosing can be successful WITHOUT the BP. (MB7 being a case in point...)

 

[daveonbass]

Using the pellets is the same thing as using vodka. It's just in a different form. Would you use vodka and not use bacteria? It just seems logical to use bacteria along with the pellets. It certainly dosen't hurt anything by doing so....

I don't know much/anything about VSV. But yes, I would not add bacteria while dosing vodka. It's called "vodka dosing" and not "vodka/bacteria dosing." and again I'm ignorant in this one cause I have yet to try it...but I was under the impression that the VSV was what the bacteria eats and grown in population from. So why do you need to dose more bacteria? And better yet...why dose vodka, if you can simply DIRECTLY add the bacteria you want from a bottle? Just skip the vodka. (vsv)

 

[Moser]

and on a personal note...if you do need to dose then wouldn't that prove even more that the pellets don't really do much. After all they are useless without dosing...yet I would bet that the dosing can be successful WITHOUT the BP. (MB7 being a case in point...)

No it doesn't.

Mine and many others have had them work without bacterial dosing!.

And please don't insult my intelligence by saying it was some other associated technique or husbandry that dropped nutrients!!.

Mo

 

[Yogre]

I'm sorry you feel this way and cannot constructively participate in a valid discussion on carbon dosing, as this is a carbon dosing thread. He didn't say how long or at what rate he was dosing (among other factors) so it's entirely a valid conversation.

I'm quite happy to continue in a thread on carbon dosing... I'm enjoying myself a great deal and learning a ton. I was only concerned that since the original thread title was "N/P reducing pellets (solid vodka dosing)" I was participating in a threadjacking. Don't want to do that, but if y'all think it's cool I'll gladly join back in.

I'll throw this out there: a comment was made somewhere on this forum recently (darned if I can find it) that of all the products we put in our tank the bacterial supplements are probably the sketchiest (my term!) in terms of knowing their ingredients.

Also, with regard to adding bacteria. The carbon sources we dose (to include the solid forms) may well only be taken up by certain species of bacteria. My thinking is that these species will rapidly reach equilibrium with the nutrient levels in our tanks. Further additions of species that are not competitive may actually increase the nutrient levels in our tanks as they die, if not taken up by inverts. It's of course unknown what species of bacteria we're trying to encourage, but surely it can't be all of them that may exist in a reef tank, and eventually some equilibrium will be established. Given bacterial reproduction rates (geometric) I have to wonder if additions after the appropriate species are established are necessary.

 

[Toadally]

I don't know much/anything about VSV. But yes, I would not add bacteria while dosing vodka. It's called "vodka dosing" and not "vodka/bacteria dosing." and again I'm ignorant in this one cause I have yet to try it...but I was under the impression that the VSV was what the bacteria eats and grown in population from. So why do you need to dose more bacteria? And better yet...why dose vodka, if you can simply DIRECTLY add the bacteria you want from a bottle? Just skip the vodka. (vsv)

Some reading for you.... http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2008-08/nftt/index.php

 

[Yogre]

Also, for the number of 50% water changes ( biological dilutions) you have done, I'm not surprised they haven't worked for you.

Mo

Mo, compared to the biofilm that exists on our substrate (sand, rock, decor, even pumps etc.) the amount of bacteria in the water column is pretty low is it not?

 

[daveonbass]

mo: your second post...uhm...you just repeated what I had just said...why? That's exactly what I said. You just added the word "ever" to the statements. Same difference. Your argument can be sad for a lot of stuff...just because it's omited. But again I refer you to the specificity of the need for GFO still. Why be specific on one count and vague on the rest. I'm not buying it.

as far as my WC's. I have yet to see evidence that I am destroying the populations of bacteria. Many nano tanks thrive on near 100% WC's. Calfo has proven that this is a viable method of keeping marine tanks healthy. I'm not cleaning the BS, and I'm only changing the water...so the bacterial populations in the sand, rock, sump, and reactor are all untouched. I'm just removing water to reduce the the NO3 levels. (understandably though, some other stuff is removed, but the benfit out weighs the cost)

lastlyl try to remember that I'm doing this till the supplier tells me to stop. They and I want to see if a case like mine can ever get these to work. If it were JUST up to me I would have probably stopped them by now. But at the same time, now that I can get a bacterial bloom in just the reactor, gives me hope that one day they will wrk in the whole tank.

 

[daveonbass]

No it doesn't.

Mine and many others have had them work without bacterial dosing!.

And please don't insult my intelligence by saying it was some other associated technique or husbandry that dropped nutrients!!.

Mo

hey mo, calm down...i said "IF". No one is trying to insult anyone...I personally am just throwing out what I have observed. If they "worked" for you while still doing all the other stuff that works for others that don't use BP, then more power to you. They "dont work" for me so I'm not as easily convinced yet.

besides that was not a question directed to JUST you...i was asking the whole board.

 

[daveonbass]

mo, compared to the biofilm that exists on our substrate (sand, rock, decor, even pumps etc.) the amount of bacteria in the water column is pretty low is it not?

+1

 

[sirreal63]

There are numerous types of bacteria in our systems, not just nitrifying ones. Dave you have nothing to lose by adding a liquid carbon source and mixing the old BP ones with the new ones you got. If you are just trying to discredit the product, which I do not believe you are, then what have you got to lose?

 

[Rwpdunne]

They didnt work for me i used them for three months and the n03 didnt go below 4ppm and that was from about 15ppm i tried everything with them low flow fast flow medium flow the corals didnt look too healty so in the end i pulled the plug and started zeovit a proven ULNS 8weeks into it and the tank looks a lot better i know i have to dose daily but this takes little time