Testing for bacterioplankton?
- Thread starter dingodan87
- Start date
bif24701
New member
dingodan87
New member
jason2459
Well-known member
Yep, just after looking at some pulsing xenia which was fascinating.
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?p=24785930
jason2459
Well-known member
Amscope or Omax on Amazon are decent and budget friendly. Could always look for a used one.
What ever the budget allows really.
This is the setup I got
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01BPJJ70I/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1
I used to have a really basic one not that powerful until it broke. I'm really pleased with that one I got to replace it. Looking at other options for it like phase contrast and eventually a higher resolution camera.
Quoting from Feldman's research on bacterial counts in aquaria "Aquaria subjected to active filtration via skimming present water column bacteria populations that are approximately 1/10 of those observed on natural reefs."
You may be seeing a lot in a microscope but when researchers actually quantify what's going on compared to what's found on reefs and in skimmerless systems there's a profound difference. Skimmers are also removing only those bugs that have hydrophobic qualities. Since the mid '80s skimmers have been touted as needed for a reef system but no one actually looked at what they were doing. We now have the science showing skimmers are impacting both the populations and species diversity of the microbes in our aquariums.
As I stated before Rohwer's book and de Geoij's thesis work are just starting points for learning about the roles of microbes and DOC in reef systems. When we look at the types and roles of DOC on reefs and skimmers are most likely removing only labile forms that sponges need to make DIC (Dissolved Inorganic Carbon aka HCO3 aka alkalinity) which is needed by corals to build their skeletons and leaving the refractory forms that are only used by heterotrophic bacteria it seems to me the writing is on the wall as far as skimmers are concerned.
jason2459
Well-known member
I don't believe skimmers are required. I also don't see anything saying they hurt.
The reseach found has shown both data points are valid. So, basically anyone can find something to back up their argument. You state counter points yourself.
And in the end I agree more reseach would be useful.
Heck one advanced aquarist article just recently shows UV is useless against bacteria in our aquariums. If that is not generating enough impact a skimmer certainly won't.
The reseach found has shown both data points are valid. So, basically anyone can find something to back up their argument. You state counter points yourself.
And in the end I agree more reseach would be useful.
Heck one advanced aquarist article just recently shows UV is useless against bacteria in our aquariums. If that is not generating enough impact a skimmer certainly won't.
Last edited:
SantaMonica
Well-known member
This may have been linked to before, but just in case...
Advanced Aquarist Feature Article for December 2013: Coral Feeding: An Overview
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2013/12/aafeature
The picture in the article shows that in the 1000 litre test tank:
98% of the food particles go to the skimmer when there are 2 coral colonies
71% of the food particles go to the skimmer when there are 40 coral colonies
92% of the food particles go to the skimmer when there are 2 coral colonies, when skimming is cut in half
55% of the food particles go to the skimmer when there are 40 coral colonies, when skimming is cut in half
"This trade-off between food availability and water quality can be circumvented by using plankton-saving filtration systems"
"Corals are able to feed on a wide range of particulate organic matter, which includes live organisms and their residues and excrements (detritus)."
"...bacteria [...] can be a major source of nitrogen."
"...when dry fish-feed or phytoplankton cultures are added to an aquarium, a part of this quickly ends up in the collection cup of the skimmer.
"...mechanical filters (which can include biofilters and sand filters) result in a significant waste of food."
"Detritus is a collective term for organic particles that arise from feces, leftover food and decaying organisms. Detrital matter is common on coral reefs and in the aquarium, and slowly settles on the bottom as sediment. This sediment contains bacteria, protozoa, microscopic invertebrates, microalgae and organic material. These sedimentary sources can all serve as coral nutrients when suspended, especially for species growing in turbid waters. Experiments have revealed that many scleractinian corals can ingest and assimilate detritus which is trapped in coral mucus. Although stony corals may ingest detritus *when* it is available, several gorgonians have been found to *primarily* feed on suspended detritus."
"Dissolved organic matter (DOM) is an important food source for many corals. [...] scleractinian corals take up dissolved glucose from the water. [algae produces glucose] More ecologically relevant, corals can also absorb amino acids and urea from the seawater"
Advanced Aquarist Feature Article for December 2013: Coral Feeding: An Overview
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2013/12/aafeature
The picture in the article shows that in the 1000 litre test tank:
98% of the food particles go to the skimmer when there are 2 coral colonies
71% of the food particles go to the skimmer when there are 40 coral colonies
92% of the food particles go to the skimmer when there are 2 coral colonies, when skimming is cut in half
55% of the food particles go to the skimmer when there are 40 coral colonies, when skimming is cut in half
"This trade-off between food availability and water quality can be circumvented by using plankton-saving filtration systems"
"Corals are able to feed on a wide range of particulate organic matter, which includes live organisms and their residues and excrements (detritus)."
"...bacteria [...] can be a major source of nitrogen."
"...when dry fish-feed or phytoplankton cultures are added to an aquarium, a part of this quickly ends up in the collection cup of the skimmer.
"...mechanical filters (which can include biofilters and sand filters) result in a significant waste of food."
"Detritus is a collective term for organic particles that arise from feces, leftover food and decaying organisms. Detrital matter is common on coral reefs and in the aquarium, and slowly settles on the bottom as sediment. This sediment contains bacteria, protozoa, microscopic invertebrates, microalgae and organic material. These sedimentary sources can all serve as coral nutrients when suspended, especially for species growing in turbid waters. Experiments have revealed that many scleractinian corals can ingest and assimilate detritus which is trapped in coral mucus. Although stony corals may ingest detritus *when* it is available, several gorgonians have been found to *primarily* feed on suspended detritus."
"Dissolved organic matter (DOM) is an important food source for many corals. [...] scleractinian corals take up dissolved glucose from the water. [algae produces glucose] More ecologically relevant, corals can also absorb amino acids and urea from the seawater"
dingodan87
New member
The thing is when it comes to nps the concentration of food and detrital matter in a closed system could be much higher than nature. Skimmerless seems to have hany benefits on regular systems but are those benefits surpased in such a heavily fed system. Could skimming more or less even things out? I havent yet seen a study that focuses on a heavily fed tank.
Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G903W using Tapatalk
Similar threads
