Analyzing a Bacterial Method for Dinoflagellates (and cyano?)

[User]

@neilp2006
Have you aeen this? I think it could be effective for chrysophytes as they seem similiar to dinos.

No- hadn’t seen this. Been a little distracted with the news from CA. I’ll give it a read but sounds simple enough.

@Randy Holmes-Farley : any thoughts on if this could be effective against Chrysophytes algae? I was about to attempt a peroxide treatment and addition of bacteria would be simple to incorporate

Thanks!

 

[User]

Typos... sorry

 

[JAMSOURY]

After the first session, dinos came back in a couple days. Just finished the second session, at 3 days later, no dinos. I’m about to run my third session to finish it off. Again, will post if it ever comes back after the third

 

[User]

After the first session, dinos came back in a couple days. Just finished the second session, at 3 days later, no dinos. I’m about to run my third session to finish it off. Again, will post if it ever comes back after the third

You're doing the whole induced bacterial bloom then skim them out protocol?

 

[JAMSOURY]

You're doing the whole induced bacterial bloom then skim them out protocol?

Yes, exactly as described in the instructions.

 

[User]

Yes, exactly as described in the instructions.

How big is your system volume?

And final Q-?have you measured nitrate and phosphate afterwards?

I’d hate to do all that and then crash stuff out with zero nutrients

Thanks!

 

[JAMSOURY]

How big is your system volume?

And final Q-?have you measured nitrate and phosphate afterwards?

I’d hate to do all that and then crash stuff out with zero nutrients

Thanks!

The tank is 200 gallons. I haven’t measured nitrate and phosphate yet. I’m assuming they’re low. No losses on coral or fish yet, although I just have some acros. I’ll probably dose it to good nitrate and phosphate levels right after my third session

 

[Tjm23slo]

And final Q-?have you measured nitrate and phosphate afterwards?

I’d hate to do all that and then crash stuff out with zero nutrients

You should expect the nutrients to be very low, probably measuring near 0 at the end of the 7 day regiment. When you come out feed well to bring up nutrients slowly. Judge nutrient needs based on dKh numbers. If you are dosing, you will either see no difference in the dKh or as I would expect you will see a rise in the values as your corals are going into protection or Hurricane mode. They will not consume as much of anything. When the bacteria bloom subsides the dKh consumption rises and nutrients are needed.

I am feeding lightly through out this week as compared to heavy my first time.

I did a round one, incorrectly, but it really knocked back the Dinos. (I dosed nutrients from Day 3-7, causing a huge bacteria bloom and still ended up NO3 ~2 and PO4 ~0.03) After 3 weeks, I have good microfauna growing, green film algae, Diatoms and Cyano, but a few patches of Dinos.

I am going back to the well one more time and running this again by the book. I think a part that doesn't get described is to scrape the glass and blow off the rocks, so that the bacteria bloom can more easily get at the Dinos. You'll see white stringy stuff floating around from areas you blew off or scrapped. Dino stress. (at least I assume)

 

[User]

You should expect the nutrients to be very low, probably measuring near 0 at the end of the 7 day regiment. When you come out feed well to bring up nutrients slowly. Judge nutrient needs based on dKh numbers. If you are dosing, you will either see no difference in the dKh or as I would expect you will see a rise in the values as your corals are going into protection or Hurricane mode. They will not consume as much of anything. When the bacteria bloom subsides the dKh consumption rises and nutrients are needed.

I am feeding lightly through out this week as compared to heavy my first time.

I did a round one, incorrectly, but it really knocked back the Dinos. (I dosed nutrients from Day 3-7, causing a huge bacteria bloom and still ended up NO3 ~2 and PO4 ~0.03) After 3 weeks, I have good microfauna growing, green film algae, Diatoms and Cyano, but a few patches of Dinos.

I am going back to the well one more time and running this again by the book. I think a part that doesn't get described is to scrape the glass and blow off the rocks, so that the bacteria bloom can more easily get at the Dinos. You'll see white stringy stuff floating around from areas you blew off or scrapped. Dino stress. (at least I assume)

Thanks for the info

My current problem isnt Dino’s, it’s chrysophytes caused by literal zero NO3 and PO4. A friend suggested I look here so I’m trying to determine if this might be a useful strategy for me too.

I already planned to do peroxide treatment and I have waste away on hand to treat a small underlying cyanobacterium issue. Yes- I have Chrysophytes and cyano... combining the two might be an option, but the strategy of intentionally creating a massive bloom to starve the tank of nutrients seems counterintuitive in a ULNT since it’s already starving

 

[JAMSOURY]

I’m wondering if this method will clean your fresh tank of beneficial bacteria? Creating a fresh like tank environment which might be bad for sps, since they seem to need or do good in an established tank. What are your thoughts?

 

[taricha]

A few more comments and observations from me messing around with it. (and doing it almost but not totally by the book).

Safety -
The o2 deprivation risk is real as has been noted by ongoing reports of livestock loss and direct measurements of dissolved O2. The method as published has you starting off with bacteria additions and vodka, and by day 2 you are adding Waste-Away, a large carbon dose (3.3mL vodka / 10Gal), AND stirring up the sandbed all at once while skimmer is off. No practical way to know how much food/grunge is in your system available for the bacterial bloom and thus it may bloom more vigorously than expected.
The safety measures in the method are insufficient.
Aerating for 24 hr before is irrelevant (to O2), because tanks are already at 90 or 95% dissolved O2, and a strong bloom of cloudy water can process the vodka quickly and consume the O2 down very fast within a couple of hours - under an hour if insufficiently aerated.
And the other safety measure of watching pH is unreliable: pH tracks CO2 and not O2. CO2 shifts happen more slowly, but O2 can drop a lot faster. Also the difference between pH measured in my system when O2 went below 10% vs when it was 30 or 40% was only about 0.10 pH units. And it's easy to have pH miscalibrated by that amount.
Pulling outside air is also irrelevant (to O2) - it only has a different ratio of CO2 than indoor (the tank will be flooded with CO2 anyway from the vodka consumption - hence the pH drop).


If I were to recommend a safety step in addition to the method as described, (measuring O2 directly is great if available) I'd add a pre-step. Criticism and disagreement welcome.

Possible Suggested Pre-step for dirty tanks: use Waste-Away alone, according to Dr. Tim instructions, including turning on skimmer (UV etc) if cloudy water appears. Do that until the Waste-Away only bloom fades. This way, tanks with a large pool of comsumable grunge can bring that load down before starting a combination bacteria/carbon/sand stirring methd. After waste-away runs its course and tank water is clear, then I would proceed with the method.


Also I think the method's description of aeration as an aqua-lifter and a wooden airstone makes people think that a little bubbling will keep things safe. Not even close. Think more like skimmer running full blast with the cup off and high tank to sump turnover. Understand you'll be adding a LOT of carbon to a bloom that already looks like this:

More comments later on other aspects, but that's enough for now.

 

[Dan_P]

A few more comments and observations from me messing around with it. (and doing it almost but not totally by the book).

Safety -
The o2 deprivation risk is real as has been noted by ongoing reports of livestock loss and direct measurements of dissolved O2. The method as published has you starting off with bacteria additions and vodka, and by day 2 you are adding Waste-Away, a large carbon dose (3.3mL vodka / 10Gal), AND stirring up the sandbed all at once while skimmer is off. No practical way to know how much food/grunge is in your system available for the bacterial bloom and thus it may bloom more vigorously than expected.
The safety measures in the method are insufficient.
Aerating for 24 hr before is irrelevant (to O2), because tanks are already at 90 or 95% dissolved O2, and a strong bloom of cloudy water can process the vodka quickly and consume the O2 down very fast within a couple of hours - under an hour if insufficiently aerated.
And the other safety measure of watching pH is unreliable: pH tracks CO2 and not O2. CO2 shifts happen more slowly, but O2 can drop a lot faster. Also the difference between pH measured in my system when O2 went below 10% vs when it was 30 or 40% was only about 0.10 pH units. And it's easy to have pH miscalibrated by that amount.
Pulling outside air is also irrelevant (to O2) - it only has a different ratio of CO2 than indoor (the tank will be flooded with CO2 anyway from the vodka consumption - hence the pH drop).


If I were to recommend a safety step in addition to the method as described, (measuring O2 directly is great if available) I'd add a pre-step. Criticism and disagreement welcome.

Possible Suggested Pre-step for dirty tanks: use Waste-Away alone, according to Dr. Tim instructions, including turning on skimmer (UV etc) if cloudy water appears. Do that until the Waste-Away only bloom fades. This way, tanks with a large pool of comsumable grunge can bring that load down before starting a combination bacteria/carbon/sand stirring methd. After waste-away runs its course and tank water is clear, then I would proceed with the method.


Also I think the method's description of aeration as an aqua-lifter and a wooden airstone makes people think that a little bubbling will keep things safe. Not even close. Think more like skimmer running full blast with the cup off and high tank to sump turnover. Understand you'll be adding a LOT of carbon to a bloom that already looks like this:

More comments later on other aspects, but that's enough for now.

With regard to stepwise waste reduction, are we guessing at how much waste we need to clear when we choose Waste Away?

And with regard to carbon dosing, is the thinking that ethanol will help heterotrophic bacteria consume organic matter that it would not ordinarily consume in the absence of a simple carbon source?

 

[Tjm23slo]

Thanks for the info
Yes- I have Chrysophytes and cyano... combining the two might be an option, but the strategy of intentionally creating a massive bloom to starve the tank of nutrients seems counterintuitive in a ULNT since it’s already starving

While reducing nutrients is a side effect, I understand the intent is to create the bacteria bloom to consume the dinos, other stuff and rebalance or reset the bacteria culture in the tank. The bubbling there to displace CO2 from the water column, it also helps lift up the detris and coral slime to hopefully get to your overflow and either caught by mechanical filtration or skimmer.

In theory, with the slime gone, less need for as much flow or food, since there is less membrane for light to get through.

After your are complete, you should bubble in the evening (lights out) still with fresh air (less CO2) and still carbon dose some vodka to keep feeding the good bacteria.

I am on day 5, will complete the regiment then let the tank "recover" for 3-4 days and run it one more time.

 

[User]

While reducing nutrients is a side effect, I understand the intent is to create the bacteria bloom to consume the dinos, other stuff and rebalance or reset the bacteria culture in the tank. The bubbling there to displace CO2 from the water column, it also helps lift up the detris and coral slime to hopefully get to your overflow and either caught by mechanical filtration or skimmer.

In theory, with the slime gone, less need for as much flow or food, since there is less membrane for light to get through.

After your are complete, you should bubble in the evening (lights out) still with fresh air (less CO2) and still carbon dose some vodka to keep feeding the good bacteria.

I am on day 5, will complete the regiment then let the tank "recover" for 3-4 days and run it one more time.

I’m pretty sure there’s no evidence to support the idea that bacteria can or do in fact directly consume dinoflagellates.

Thanks

 

[Cruz_Arias]

Federation Proceedings 37 (13), 2759-2764, 1978
Like neutrophils, phagocytizing macrophages undergo a" respiratory burst" in which significant quantities of oxygen are drawn into the cell. The consumed oxygen is not used in oxidative phosphorylation but, rather, in the formation of superoxide anion (O2) and H2O2. These oxygen metabolites and the products of their interaction, in particular hydroxyl radical (OH), have been implicated in the killing of ingested bacteria by neutrophils. Their role in macrophage microbicidal activity has not been fully defined. However, activated macrophages, which mediate increased resistance to infection in vivo, have a markedly increased capacity to generate O2 and H2O2 in vitro when stimulated by phagocytosis or surface perturbation. The enhanced capacity of activated macrophages to generate highly reactive oxygen metabolites during phagocytosis could contribute to the improved microbicidal and tumoricidal activity of these cells.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

I'm enjoying the speculations and skepticism...

Please keep in mind in discussing this old regimen, yet effective regimen a few key points:

Bio chemistry, organic chemistry, degassification of CO2, biological remediation, osmotic pressures of gases in liquid, biological out- competition, phagocytosis, bacterial predation, pH to Alkalinity studies on o2 and co2 saturation, and studies on very fine bubble gas interactions in stabilized liquids.

Thank you!

 

[User]

Federation Proceedings 37 (13), 2759-2764, 1978
Like neutrophils, phagocytizing macrophages undergo a" respiratory burst" in which significant quantities of oxygen are drawn into the cell. The consumed oxygen is not used in oxidative phosphorylation but, rather, in the formation of superoxide anion (O2) and H2O2. These oxygen metabolites and the products of their interaction, in particular hydroxyl radical (OH), have been implicated in the killing of ingested bacteria by neutrophils. Their role in macrophage microbicidal activity has not been fully defined. However, activated macrophages, which mediate increased resistance to infection in vivo, have a markedly increased capacity to generate O2 and H2O2 in vitro when stimulated by phagocytosis or surface perturbation. The enhanced capacity of activated macrophages to generate highly reactive oxygen metabolites during phagocytosis could contribute to the improved microbicidal and tumoricidal activity of these cells.

Phagocytosic macrophages are VERY FAR from a bacterial lineage. This reference has nothing to do with bacteria consuming Dino’s

Not to be a pedant, but I find threads like this can get caught up I no misinformation and misplaced assumptions very quickly.

And just do we know I’m not talking from a place of inexperience- I’m a microbiologist abc endocrinologist with 24 years in the field.

Thanks

 

[Cruz_Arias]

I'd suggest, respectfully, to actually find the studies regarding these aerobic digesting bacteria. I've played around with this particular strain in the Waste water treatment facilities.

They are extremely aggressive and consume particulates (including other organic, cellular animals) rabidly, when exposed to normalized oxygen levels, which are lacking in our glass boxes, we call aquariums.

 

[User]

I'd suggest, respectfully, to actually find the studies regarding these aerobic digesting bacteria. I've played around with this particular strain in the Waste water treatment facilities.

They are extremely aggressive and consume particulates (including other organic, cellular animals) rabidly, when exposed to normalized oxygen levels, which are lacking in our glass boxes, we call aquariums.

Which strain?

Also- if there are studies relating to ‘this strain’ that demonstrate direct consumption of dinoflagellates by a bacterium, why did you referenceca paoer about mammalian phagocytic cells that had zero relevance to the question posed?

I’m all for reading the research papers and will happily learn something new. But no one has the time to trawl random pubmed search criteria a d go through hundreds of references. Especially since there apparently is some inside knowledge some people have that would greatly benefit everyone here if they shared the info.

So, which ‘strain’ are we talking about.

 

[Cruz_Arias]

Random?
If bacteria and waste water treatment is a key component in your day to day career, wouldn't it be prudent to know all aspects of what processes every component does? I would tend to think so.

If you're disagreeing with me based on a personal opinion or personal feeling towards me, great. Please identify your distaste of me; not the science behind the regimen.