Which bacterial method is best for SPS?

BradR

New member
Ok, starting up a new SPS tank and am debating traditional filtration (rowa, RDSB) vs the new fandangled methods. I've been reading about zeo, neo, probidio, vodka, vinegar, sugar, etc but am pretty confused. I'd be willing to test once a week once things are stable but that's about it. Any suggestions?
 
OOH! Neo! I want to try that, that sounds pretty sweet! ;) Just playing. They're all really just nutrient reduction methods by boosting and maintaining larger than normal bacterial populations. I've read a lot about Zeo, tried Prodibio, and tried vodka. To me Zeo seems to be the most complete/well thought out method. It's also the most intensive, requiring daily dosing regimens and stirring the zeo rocks (and most expensive). None of the methods really require an exorbitant amount of testing, as most of the resulting effects of the methods are very difficult to test. I guess very low nutrient levels is the most reasonable thing you would want to test for on a regular basis that would be a direct result of proper methodology. Other than that, your standard reef tests should be done just like normal pH, KH, Ca, Mg, etc. If you apply any of these methods properly you'll get very low nutrients, personally I just don't know if it's worth it. You can keep very low nutrients with reduced feedings, regular water changes, heavy skimming, dsb, and the other more traditional methods as well. People with all different combinations can all point to great results from someone practicing that method. Most can also point to disasters.
 
Yea, if you ever wanted to go on vacation you'd have to have someone care for your tank pretty intensively. Considering how often Murphy's Law seems to come up w/ aquariums maybe it'd be best to keep it really simple and avoid those disasters.
 
I just started the zeo a few weeks ago and i am loving the results my polyp extension is nuts I just started with zeostart2 zeobac and zeofood7 ordered some more products should be here next week cant wait
 
A General Review of The ZEOvit System
by GaryW (Mesocosm)

The purpose of the ZEOvit system is to easily and reliably create, and maintain, a poor nutrient environment in marine aquaria similar to a the natural reef environment. The goal of the system is to reduce nutrients as nitrate and phosphate without lowering the levels of important minerals, like calcium and magnesium, and carbonate hardness, which are also adjusted to a natural reef environment.

In order for the ZEOvit method to be successful, a few fundamental husbandry techniques and equipment components must also be included in your aquarium's design and operation. These requirements include strong and efficient skimming, lighting appropriate and sufficient for the aquarium's inhabitants, regular weekly water changes, addition of elements at low levels, non-excessive addition of nutrients, and optimum and stabile water parameters (Ca, Mg, KH, Salinity).

The five basic components of the ZEOvit system interact to effectively reduce nutrients, and establish water conditions close to the parameters corals encounter in the natural habitats. The five basic components are:

1. A Balanced Mix of zeolites (ZEOvit).
2. A Microorganism Solution (ZEObak).
3. A combination of Bacteria and Coral Food (ZEOfood)
4. Bacteria Food (ZEOstart)
5. Constant Filtration with Activated Carbon

The reduction of nutrients and the establishment of a poor nutrient system results from the interaction between ZEObak, ZEOfood, ZEOstart, and the zeolite filter media (ZEOvit).The three different zeolites of the media were chosen because of their ability to reduce certain toxins in a balanced manner. It is important to "clean" the ZEOvit filter media daily to maintain optimum performance. The filter device which holds the ZEOvit (commonly referred to as a "reactor") is specifically designed to accomplish this task within a minute. However, it is not detrimental to overall system performance if you are unable to perform this task for several days.

The interaction between ZEObak, ZEOfood, ZEOstart, and the zeolite filter media (ZEOvit) produces a "mulm". The "mulm", released from the ZEOvit material, contains bacteria that is used as food by the corals. This is very important because it provides nutrients to the animals, and has a very positive impact on the colors, polyp extension and vitality of the corals. Large Polyped Corals (LPS) react with fully expanded tissue.

Certain other elements are adsorbed as well, and require replacement to counteract depletion. We strongly recommend replenishing those elements, and we offer supplements to be used with this system for that purpose.

The ZEOvit method can be successfully used with bare-bottom (BB), shallow sand bed (SSB), deep sand bed (DSB), and Berlin-style system designs. The use of live rock (LR) is not required. UV sterilizers, ozonizers, and nutrient exporting macroalgae refugia are not compatible with the ZEOvit method.

This post is just a brief review of the ZEOvit system. More background information, and detailed methodolgy instructions are presented in the ZEOvit "Guide."

http://www.korallen-zucht.de/files/z..._english-1.pdf

We strongly recommend to read and understand the guide before you start with the system. It contains vital necessary information to have success with the system.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14834771#post14834771 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by BradR
Yea, if you ever wanted to go on vacation you'd have to have someone care for your tank pretty intensively. Considering how often Murphy's Law seems to come up w/ aquariums maybe it'd be best to keep it really simple and avoid those disasters.

This is not true for zeo. I still like to have someone watch my tank but I dont bother having them dose most of the time. The zeo system does not crash when not attended to it just might not be as polished. The same would happen to some of the so called simple systems with GFO. If that needed to be changed during a vacation only nutrient levels would rise.
 
Greetings All !


Just for the record ... the "A General Review of The ZEOvit System" post was written in early 2006, and is merely a distillation of several sections of the first ZeoGuide. While it remains a valid "entry level" synopsis of Korallen Zucht's promotional materials regarding Mr. Pohl's "explanation" of his ZEOvit methodology, a few (but not all) of my personal opinions regarding the mechanisms by which the ZEOvit system effects nutrient reduction and perceived coral coloration differ significantly from what Korallen Zucht would have us believe.

After all, there's a reason I call myself a ZeoHeretic ... :lol:



HTH
:thumbsup:
 
Ah, don't kid yourself, that's a great little synopsis. Even after reading through all the Zeo material, some of the associations between even the basic parts of the system are a little muddled. There's no question after reading your "review."

Just curious, but what are some of those differences in opinion you mentioned?
 
I put my tank on a vodka regimen a couple months ago and I think I saw some improvement in water clarity and slowed algae growth, but as was mentioned earlier it requires a lot of dedication. I have to go out of town for a week or so at a time every couple of months and that breaks down any kind of dosing regimen, I don't trust leaving those kind of additives on automated dosers.
 
Greetings All !


It's hard to get into a discussion of carbon-dosing strategies within the context of it being part of the set of "new fandangled methods". Nutrient enrichment for the purpose of manipulating the biogeochemical behavior of bacteria certainly goes back to the work of Beigerinck and Winogradsky in the mid-late 1800s, and arguably goes as far back as 3500 BCE with the emergence of sewer systems (... depending on what you want to count as "evidence"). So the commonly held reefkeeper notion that we're talking about something "new" leaves me more than a little amused, but I digress ...


<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=14836942#post14836942 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by woz9683
... Just curious, but what are some of those differences in opinion you mentioned?
I have a different take on: the role & capabilities of ion-exchanging media within carbon dosing strategies; the over-emphasis of bacterial growth (vs. metabolic processing) as the fundamental mechanism of nutrient reduction; the true capacity of foam fractionation devices to remove unattached, free-living bacteria from the water column; what's happening both chemically & biologically as systems progress through various "phases"; the distinction between correlation vs. causation when examining chemically stimulated shifts in perceived coral coloration; the risks & long-term consequences of chemically induced zooxanthellae expulsion; the role of trace element ratios in marine aquaria; and the role of heavy metal ions in terms of both bacterial guld behavior & scleractinian husbandry in marine aquaria. Some of these differences are significant (within my twisted little perspective, at least), while others might be reasonably defined as "nit-picky" and trivial.

In the broader conversation (disconnected from the various proprietary product lines), I find the whole notion that carbon dosing strategies are capable of "replicating" or "mimicking" the water column characteristics of natural reef ecosystems to be delusionary nonsense. But I do find the notion to be really good & creative ...

... marketing. ;)

Similarly, I find the assertion that something called a "ultra low nutrient system" can be generated through the application of a carbon dosing strategy to be a staggering lack of appreciation of the quantitative difference between parts per million (the units of measurement of our reef tanks) vs. hundredths of micromoles (the unit of measurement of the water columns associated with real world reefs). The inability of the advocates of the ULNS label to determine a meaningful definition for the term is conspicuous, and those who are currently attempting to formulate such a definition are to be commended. No offense intended, folks ... seriously ... apologies if any is perceived. I am content with reefkeepers believing whatever they choose to believe. More power to you all and whatever terms you wish to use.

JMO ... which along with $3 will get you a tall cafe mocha at Starbucks ... :lol:




I hasten to add that there is much that I agree with in terms of what Korallen Zucht has to say, including ... the value (on several levels) of Mr. Pohl's clever & insightful application of trial-and-error experimentation, the legitimacy & utility of chemical supplementation of bacterial guilds to achieve sustained nutrient reduction within reef aquaria (especially within Berlin-style configurations), the cost effectiveness of carbon dosing strategies, carbon dosing as a legitimate & safe means of manipulating zooxanthellae density within scleractinian coral host tissue, the application of various elements & compounds to manipulate both the perceived color expression & the metabolic functioning of scleractinian corals, the value & utility of bacterioplankton as a scleractinian nutrient source, and the legitimacy & utility of selecting a husbandry strategy that best fits the reefkeeper's personal interests and ecosystem goals.

JMO ... ;)


And as long as I'm in ranting mode ... I find the increasing willingness of reefkeepers to apply carbon dosing strategies as a solution to nuisance algae, sustained elevated NO3 levels in the water column, and/or cyanobacteria outbreaks to be more than a little disturbing. Mucking with the underlying aquatic geomicrobiology of the ecosystem in their care ought to be a last resort ... not an initial response. Folks experiencing these issues in their captive ecosystems would be well advised to address any issues by changing their husbandry practices to incorporate "minimalist" concepts (elimination of excess nutrient introduction, exercising adequate patience, achieving chemical parameter stability with an absolute minimum of chemical supplementation ... et cetera), and to correct underlying lighting, filtration, and flow system design flaws within their system before applying a carbon dosing strategy.

FWIW ... your mileage will vary.
:thumbsup:




BTW, my answer to the question posed in this thread's title is Korallen Zucht's ZEOvit system ... with honorable mention of Fauna Marin's Ultralith System.

JMO
:rollface:
 
Last edited:
well mesocosm.... your knowledge of bacterial systems far exceeds mine so could you send me the "bacterial systems for dummies" version?...lol.

i think many of us are guilty of trying things in our reefs that we don't fully understand and after reading your post i realize just how little i understand concerning the bacterial activities within my reef. since i don't fully understand such systems i try to duplicate the methodologies of those that have tanks that i admire, figuring if i copy what they're doing i should get the same results. so far vodka dosing has been working well for me with improvement in coral coloration and while from what you're saying its not the best way to achieve algae control, it sure did wipe out the little bit of bryopsis i had in the tank. again i can't tell you why its working or if will continue to work, but from what i gather you're not condemning all carbon sources, but maybe those that market it under false pretenses?

while i don't understand all of what you wrote i appreciate the knowledgeable insight and would appreciate any literature you would recommend that explains carbon sources and bacterial systems within our tanks. thanks again.
 
Well, I don't understand a lot of the technical information, but I get the general idea. I agree with you wholeheartedly on the fact that husbandry practices should be the first thing examined and improved before resorting to one of the bacterial methods though.
 
I <3 Gary's posts,that one post will get my mind going for weeks..

I especially like the mention of "Minimalist concepts" in regard to husbandry as apposed to aesthetics :). Thanks Meso!
 
Back
Top