Aquabiomics tests before and after adding Eco-balance

[IntrinsicReef]

@telegraham - Have you seen this? I thought you might be interested based on your recent posts about bottled bacteria and AquaBiomics testing.

@IntrinsicReef - You mentioned alternating the weekly dosing of Eco-Balance and Waste-Away. How did you do the dosing? Did you just follow the directions on the bottles? One week of one, then the next week of the other? I'm just curious about how you went about it.

I did the Waste-away first, which immediately sent the ORP up by about 20%. I did another week of Waste-Away then 3 weeks of Eco-Balance. No rhyme or reason on the dosing. Just followed the instructions. I just wanted to get a before and after snapshot of adding bottle bacteria to a tank that hadn't had any bacteria dosed in 4 years.

 

[Spare time]

For reference, Eco-Balance is a Bacillus blend.

 

[telegraham]

For reference, Eco-Balance is a Bacillus blend.

Based on a contaminated sample I sent in for testing, I assume you're correct, but do you have data to share? Thanks in advance.

 

[telegraham]

@telegraham - Have you seen this? I thought you might be interested based on your recent posts about bottled bacteria and AquaBiomics testing.

Thank you. I'd enjoy seeing the results a month after EB or WA were stopped.

@IntrinsicReef ... nice seeing that pelagi! I need to find a local with a good population for introduction into my one-year-old reef. Appreciate the share.

 

[IntrinsicReef]

Thank you. I'd enjoy seeing the results a month after EB or WA were stopped.

@IntrinsicReef ... nice seeing that pelagi! I need to find a local with a good population for introduction into my one-year-old reef. Appreciate the share.

I have been thinking about doing another one. It has been well over a month since I have dosed bacteria in that system, but I am curious if the populations reverted back based on what they were consuming. Or the bottled bacteria caused any long term shifts. I will order another test and let you know.

 

[telegraham]

I have been thinking about doing another one. It has been well over a month since I have dosed bacteria in that system, but I am curious if the populations reverted back based on what they were consuming. Or the bottled bacteria caused any long term shifts. I will order another test and let you know.

Very cool, and thank you!

 

[GlassMunky]

The fact he shared that aquariums with UV have no Pelagibacteraceae has great implications to me.

this is a straight up lie.

This tank had a UV run the entire time it was setup

 

[IntrinsicReef]

this is a straight up lie.

This tank had a UV run the entire time it was setup

I was paraphrasing his comments based on 2 video interviews he did. I will have to go back and see exactly what he said. Saying that it is a lie based on one tank, compared to analyzing trends in hundred or thousands of tanks seems a bit extreme though.

 

[GlassMunky]

I was paraphrasing his comments based on 2 video interviews he did. I will have to go back and see exactly what he said. Saying that it is a lie based on one tank, compared to analyzing trends in hundred or thousands of tanks seems a bit extreme though.

Eli and his whole company are nothing more than a scam in my eyes.
Take a look around this site for reviews of them…. I’m not the only one.

You said he claimed that no tanks with UV have that bacteria. I showed evidence that it’s false.

I also sent in the same sample taken at the same time but labeled differently and got wildly different results.

Nothing he does is useful in any way. The tests are not accurate or repeatable, his customer service is non-existent, and the data you do get (3-6 months later) is useless in any practical manor.

My experiences from using them for around 9 months

 

[IntrinsicReef]

Eli and his whole company are nothing more than a scam in my eyes.
Take a look around this site for reviews of them…. I’m not the only one.

You said he claimed that no tanks with UV have that bacteria. I showed evidence that it’s false.

I also sent in the same sample taken at the same time but labeled differently and got wildly different results.

Nothing he does is useful in any way. The tests are not accurate or repeatable, his customer service is non-existent, and the data you do get (3-6 months later) is useless in any practical manor.

My experiences from using them for around 9 months

Like I said. I paraphrased and didn't quote him. He probably didn't say never, but that it was obvious to him as he analyzed trends. I also said "almost always" at the beginning of this post. Again, just paraphrasing from memory.

There were no Pelagibacteraceae in either test which I remember Eli saying is almost always the case with UV on tanks.

Also, you didn't show evidence proving anyone wrong. You just said you run UV on your tank. That is not evidence. But, I am not really concerned with one tank.
I am just concerned with sharing information on an interesting new aspect of the hobby. Thanks for sharing your experience. I wish you had pictures of your tank or more information on the setup shared so your data might be more helpful.

 

[Isaac Alves]

I do appreciate this thread. Definitely an aspect of the hobby that is getting a lot of attention the last few years.

 

[Spare time]

Based on a contaminated sample I sent in for testing, I assume you're correct, but do you have data to share? Thanks in advance.

I emailed Dr Tim's awhile ago as I was curious what was in the bottle.

 

[telegraham]

I emailed Dr Tim's awhile ago as I was curious what was in the bottle.

Thanks. I'm sending in a sample.

 

[brandon429]

post #29 is correct

if you merely mention the word DNA, buyers will pay you in droves to "dna" their reef tank, and because they want to believe it's valid and useful info, it is. they will make large inferences from the reports and feel confident in the direction it tells them to take their reef (what to buy from Eli, eventually)

I'm amazed anyone buys into what Eli says, his early posts on here were sham science and it was brazenly apparent he was selling stuff within the first week he posted on the site.

regarding his ability to play up capitalism and create a buyer market using hot term word hype, total credit to him. Dr. Tim did the same thing with 'stalled cycles'

 

[telegraham]

post #29 is correct

But GlassMunky stated it better. "In my eyes" carries with it more clarity than this is how it is statements san data. There are some with whom I chat regarding results and from them I learn what I can learn from the data. And as most should, I also temper my expectations with some common sense. Playing in this space is part of my hobby. Totally cool if it's not for others.

I also enjoy the passion here, so that's fun.

Lastly, there are debatable tidbits like pelagi in a UV-served tank. That's a total outlier based on hundreds of other data points, and one potential reason is that the UV was inop. If that's not the case, then it's a valuable test in terms of looking for other outliers in the future. That adds even more fun.

 

[AquaBiomics]

Eli and his whole company are nothing more than a scam in my eyes.
Take a look around this site for reviews of them…. I’m not the only one.

You said he claimed that no tanks with UV have that bacteria. I showed evidence that it’s false.

I also sent in the same sample taken at the same time but labeled differently and got wildly different results.

Nothing he does is useful in any way. The tests are not accurate or repeatable, his customer service is non-existent, and the data you do get (3-6 months later) is useless in any practical manor.

My experiences from using them for around 9 months

This is simply incorrect on all fronts.

If your tank has that much Pelagibacteraceae while running UV there is something very unusual about your UV setup. We've seen at least one case where there was a burnt out bulb. Flow rate issues can cause similar problems.

For the record we've never, never had 3-6 month turnaround and our current turnaround is 2-4 weeks. Its DNA sequencing, not CSI. Universities do this stuff on a 6-12 month timescale. But if you don't find it useful you are of course free to go elsewhere. Plenty of other clients, including university researchers, do find it useful.

False statements arent useful though, lets keep it factual.

 

[IntrinsicReef]

@AquaBiomics Do you have any insight into Randy's observation as to the compared relative abundance of bacteria in the two samples at the beginning of this thread?

The graphs are relative abundance. There's no indication that I can see whether any of the initial populations of bacteria declined. Is there such data? Maybe you just added more bacteria on top of what was already there? That would give a very different interpretation than if the new bacteria displaced existing bacterial populations.

 

[GlassMunky]

This is simply incorrect on all fronts.

If your tank has that much Pelagibacteraceae while running UV there is something very unusual about your UV setup. We've seen at least one case where there was a burnt out bulb. Flow rate issues can cause similar problems.

For the record we've never, never had 3-6 month turnaround and our current turnaround is 2-4 weeks. Its DNA sequencing, not CSI. Universities do this stuff on a 6-12 month timescale. But if you don't find it useful you are of course free to go elsewhere. Plenty of other clients, including university researchers, do find it useful.

False statements arent useful though, lets keep it factual.

i love how you now try and come in here and tell me my tank is wrong because it doesnt align with your data rather than your data being messed up or inaccurate.
The tank was a brand new setup and ran for about 9 months. that was after about 6 months of monthly testing by you.

you absolutely had 3 month turnaround times back in 2020.... and cue the covid excuse in 3...2...1....

you just dont know what youre talking about or how to interpret your own data so make stuff up. your whole company is a scam, and youre a straight up liar. I hope you go out of business.


Its not just me, you're terrible at business and theres countless threads here on R2R with numerous experiences...

 

[GlassMunky]

Aquabiomics - A terrible company

As the saying goes, "A company is only as good as its customer service", well its nonexistent with Aquabiomics. Today is the 3-month anniversary of me sending in my sample, no report, no response, no refund, no customer service, it's absurd. I know Eli received my sample and I know that it was...

www.reef2reef.com

Aquabiomics - Very poor experience, stole my money

I feel that I've given @AquaBiomics a fair chance to make this situation right but they have chosen to ignore my emails. I purchased a Microbiome – Snapshot test kit on July 2nd 2023. I sent in my sample and it was confirmed as received by @AquaBiomics on July 17th 2023. I got an automated...

www.reef2reef.com

Anyone in AquaBiomics Batch 60?

Has anyone gotten their AcquaBiomics results back from batch 60? I sent my sample in on September 30th, results were initially expected on October 20th, but the "results date" was continually pushed back and now shows November 29th. The website has shown "Data in hand! Reports within 24 hours."...

www.reef2reef.com

@AquaBiomics
these were just the first 3 to pop up in a 2 second search......

 

[GlassMunky]

Lastly, there are debatable tidbits like pelagi in a UV-served tank. That's a total outlier based on hundreds of other data points, and one potential reason is that the UV was inop. If that's not the case, then it's a valuable test in terms of looking for other outliers in the future. That adds even more fun.

the tank had UV run from its start to its end. it actually was a brand new UV unit, brand new bulb everything was new, so it was fully operable. it was a Pentair 40W SMart UV running at about 200 Gph.

This was the same tank 6 months earlier. almost no Pelagibaceraceae