Vodka and Sugar

[TAMike97]

Ok basically this will generate a bacteria bloom --> the bacteria need phosphate to grow --> bacteria removed by skimming --> lower phosphate levels.

Anyone using this for phosphate removal? Also How much vodka/sugar would you use for a 75 gallon? about 85 gallons total.

 

[robthorn]

hey mike I have used this method but have never achieved an actual bloom that you could see. I am sure you can do it but I wouldn't recommend it. I would think if you reached a bloom it might be an indication of a weak and unstable condition.
I have seen and used 1 ml per 100 gallons. I have also seen 12 ml per 100 gallons. half of that dose is done twice a day. I personally do not recommend that much but some others would. there was also a time were I was using 2 ml per 100 gallons.
understand that a 75 gallon tank actually has about 55-60 gallons of water in it. your tank is undersized because they screw you when measuring. it's not inside water volume. then your rock plus sump,skimmer and whatever else you have. I would recommend a starting dose of .5 ml per 100 gallons and work up if you feel you need too. I would go up .1 ml per week. this is a daily dosing schedule. some people do a little more everyother day or 2 times per week.
for more complete info you can contact john at fish and other ichthy stuff .
good luck
also the cheapest vodka is just as good for bacteria as the most expensive.
I have heard bad things about dosing household sugar. not sure why but I have just seen more trouble than vodka.
robert

 

[TAMike97]

Thanks Robert.
I almost forgot TWV.. Accounting for rock and glass.. I have seen graphs that say it takes 2 weeks for this to start working. This will only be a temporary solution while I get my Fuge going. Im getting one of those 100G Rubbermaid stock tanks. Ill be putting my ER skimmer and Fuge in there I just have to plumb it all together.

 

[guntercb]

Does anyone have any links to articles talking about dosing Vodka?

also the cheapest vodka is just as good for bacteria as the most expensive

So you don't want yuppy bacteria????? (-:

 

[robthorn]

well mike before you get started with vodka some including myself have experienced an algea bloom of sorts after stopping the dosing. myself I was adding coral food and other stuff but stopped everything at once and big time algea. I cannot say why this happened or if it truely had anything to do with the vodka or not. I have heard others with the same claims. i have also heard plenty of people stop using it with out any problems whatsoever.
it's really a toss up but if you have phosphates you want to remove this is a good way in my opinion. it does work.

 

[angelsil]

So you don't want yuppy bacteria????? (-: [/B]

My fish aren't getting top shelf.

 

[TAMike97]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=8123236#post8123236 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by guntercb
Does anyone have any links to articles talking about dosing Vodka?

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php#13


Here is a tank I found that doses vodka...
http://www.reefland.com/rho/1105/feature7.php

Here is an abstract from Eric Borneman:

Enzyme-labeled fluorescence (ELF) and bulk alkaline phosphatase (AP) activity enzyme assays were used to evaluate the phosphorus (P) status of phytoplankton communities in San Francisco and Monterey bays. Both regions exhibit spatial and temporal variability in bulk AP activity with maximum activities during the early spring and summer periods of high biological productivity. ELF analysis revealed pronounced differences in the makeup of organisms responsible for AP activity in these two environments. In Monterey Bay dinoflagellates are responsible for the bulk of the AP activity. Diatoms infrequently exhibited AP activity. Dinoflagellates that comprised only 14% of all cells counted in Monterey Bay accounted for 78% of AP-producing cells examined. The presence of AP activity in this group suggests that changes in P sources, concentrations, and bioavailability could disproportionably influence this group relative to diatoms in Monterey Bay. In San Francisco Bay, AP production, indicated by ELF, was associated primarily with bacteria attached to suspended particles, potentially used to hydrolyze organic compounds for carbon, rather than to satisfy P requirements. Our results highlight the importance of organic P as a bioavailable nutrient source in marine ecosystems and as a component of the marine P cycle.

Comments:

From the above abstract the following part is, in my opinion, the most interesting for aquarists:

"In San Francisco Bay, AP production, indicated by ELF, was associated primarily with bacteria attached to suspended particles, potentially used to hydrolyze organic compounds for carbon, rather than to satisfy P requirements. Our results highlight the importance of organic P as a bioavailable nutrient source in marine ecosystems…"

Phosphate, if chemically bound to organics, usually can't be taken up by bacteria. Bacteria excrete an enzyme called alkaline phosphatase for that purpose, which splits the phosphate from the rest of the organic molecule. This allows the phosphate to be taken up by bacteria as a source of phosphor. Bacteria usually do this (excrete the enzyme) if the free inorganic phosphate concentration is very low. The most striking part of the study is that bacteria used the enzyme not to make the phosphate part, but to make the organic part bioavailable. The bacteria (in that particular environment) were apparently not phosphor-limited but organic carbon-limited. That is, it appears as if enough inorganic phosphate (the type of phosphate measurable by hobby test kits) was present in the water, but simple organic carbon compounds were not.

If something like that occurred in an aquarium not limited in inorganic phosphate but limited in simple bioavailable organics, then it would have implications. The organic phosphate compounds would be split by bacteria to obtain the carbon part before most of them could be skimmed out. This would result in an increase in phosphate's concentration because the bacteria would not care about the extra phosphate released. That is, the bacteria would not take the phosphate up and would leave it in the water.

This could be prevented if sufficient simple, non-phosphate containing, organic carbon compounds were present so that bacteria would not be limited by them, reducing their need to split the phosphate-containing organic compounds just to use the organic part and not the released phosphate part. I would speculate that this might be one of the mechanisms for reducing, at least partly, the phosphate concentration by the addition of certain simple organic carbon compounds, e.g., ethanol.

A different mechanism proposed elsewhere is that organic carbon fuels bacteria's growth and multiplication. This growth and multiplication requires phosphor and nitrogen, thus reducing the phosphate and nitrate/nitrite/ammonia concentration.

The mechanism which I proposed (based on the above abstract) is, therefore, different. If organic carbon (but not phosphate), is limited, and if it is dosed, it may reduce the bacteria-driven breakdown of organic phosphate compounds. This would keep them intact for longer periods and might increase the likelihood of their removal by skimming.

Results for phosphate and nitrate concentrations over time during an ethanol (Vodka) dosing experiment, published by Michael Mrutzek and Jörg Kokott in 2004, if measured accurately, support the mechanism I suggested by the initial decrease in phosphate concentration only, and not by the nitrate concentration. This mechanism is probably followed (after a few weeks of dosing) by the bacteria growth/multiplication fueling mechanism. This "fueling mechanism" results in a decrease in both phosphate and nitrate concentrations as opposed to a reduction of only phosphate in the initial part. Note the initial drop in phosphate only, followed by a "steady-state" period and then a drop in both nitrate and phosphate, from a graph of their results:
http://www.korallenriff.de/wodka_diagramm_jk.jpg.

 

[guntercb]

Mike,

Thanks for sharing that information. One comment on the tank you linked that doses vodka does not seem like the typical tanks I see. I do not know anyone that has diffused air that kicks in to stir up particalate matter. I do like the high turn over pumps that kick on every 6 hours. He also changes the filter floss in his filter socks every day and does 25% water change every two weeks. His maintence routine seems impecable. I wonder what his system would do if he stopped dosing vodka?

I do know there are some wastewater plants that dose organic carbons to help lower the P in the water.

I wish there were more articles on this. I would like to learn more, but I don't think would dose any thing that I cannot measure. Currently the only items I check in my tank water are Ca and Alk levels. So I do dose Calcium and Alk. But that is it.

I would like to hear more stories about the vodka dosing? Does anyone use vinegar? It seems like it would be a cheaper.

Just curious.

Later,
Chris

 

[TAMike97]

Here is another article.

http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=924884

I dont think this is artificial I just think by doing this we are giving the bacteria a little kick in the butt.

Here are the possible Carbon sources... from the link above

butyrate
acetate
isobutanol
lactate
pyruvate
ethanol
glucose
gluconic acid
glutamic acidbutyrate
acetate
isobutanol
lactate
pyruvate
ethanol (Vodka)
glucose
gluconic acid
glutamic acid

 

[TAMike97]

Update on dosing vodka....
I have been dosing vodka 1ml/day for a few weeks now. I went up to 1.5 then 2ml/day. When I was doing 2ml/day, I noticed thick filmy white strands stuck to the SEIO's and glass and rocks. These are the bacteria colonies that grew from the excess carbon. I went back down to 1ml /day once a day. I have not noticed any bleaching or loss of color. Actually my acros I was having trouble with are coming back very strong and coloring up due to 0 nitrates or phosphates.

Just thought I would share my results.

Does anyone use Fauna Marin products?

 

[Kubi]

Mike,

thanks for sharing your experience.
I tried the sugar method. It did not do a thing for my tank. 2wks adding a 1/4 tsp every other day. Maybe I did not add enough, I just could not feel comfortable adding sugar to my tank.

 

[wsurf4me]

Any updates? I was considering this on my 156 gallon.

 

[TAMike97]

Everything is doing great. Now that my phosphates are reading 0 everything is great. My Orange cap that almost bleached is almost fully recovered. The tissue growing back more and more everyday and coloring up too. All corals recovered fully(from phosphates not dosing vodka). PE is good at night. My tricolor pocillipora frag is growing like crazy. I couldnt tell you if any corals lost color because they were already bad before I started dosing. I am happy with the results just dont think I would do this on a regular basis. Maybe as a once in a while treatment. If you are going to do it I would recommend adding slowly starting at .5ml and going up to maybe 2-2.5ml twice a day and then coming back down gradually 2.5,2,1.5... to 0. Make sure you have a good skimmer... Good luck