Daniel@R2R
Living the Reef Life
I decided to give this a try. Anyone have any experience with it? Curious about it and other Prodibio products.
BioDigest by Prodibio
- Thread starter Daniel@R2R
- Start date
- Tagged users None
jenreefer
Well-Known Member
I have used it from the beginning of my new tank build. I have had great success with it, actually too good. My nutrients were at zero and had to back off how often I dosed it to get nutrients up in my tank. I am using the entire line and cannot complain. We will see how it does long term. I have only been running it for 6 months.
Brian Treadwell
Active Member
Use it once a week along with VSV , The VSV glass box method , I have had great success with it.
OP
OP
Daniel@R2R
Living the Reef Life
Does anyone know if I need to use Bioptim with it? I know it CAN be done, but I'm wondering if I MUST use those 2 products together for BioDigest to work.
Bioptim is food for the bacteria.I always just use both , you get better results that way instead of using only BioDigest alone.
Rick.45cal
2500 Club Member
I believe that's what the Bioptim is. I am extremely interested in this. I like the idea of only having to do it once every 15 days! How easy is that.
I love the idea of not having to do as much work.
jenreefer
Well-Known Member
I have used them separately with success.
DaveMorris
MACNA2016 Co-Chair
I use Bioptim along with BioDigest. I really like the results.
Rick.45cal
2500 Club Member
I ordered the Biodigest and the Bioptim. Once I burn through my NOPOX supply, I think I will ditch the zeo reactor and start a fuge with macros and then start using the Prodibio. Please keep this thread updated @mdbannister with your experiences, especially starting out and switching your tank over too it.
NCreefguy
Valuable Member
I've been using the Biodigest,Bioptim,Iodi+,Stronti+,Coral Vits and Reef Booster. Everything has been clean and happy in my tank. I only use half the dosage of Reef Booster though as it takes my skimmer almost two days to get back to normal after a full dose.
Rick.45cal
2500 Club Member
TheEngineer
Formerly icecool2
There was a story on here within the last few months of a few people who have had tanks crash from what may have been a bad batch of this stuff. The OP lost a LOT of fish and corals overnight.
I'll see if I can find it.
I'll see if I can find it.
TheEngineer
Formerly icecool2
JonasRoman
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2015
- Messages
- 899
- Reaction score
- 1,269
I am hesitating all(almost) these kind of products because of several considerations:
1)I do not believe that lack of a certain bacteria/bacterial function mostly depends on lack of that cell-population, but more lack of environmental factor such not enough carbon source and/or not enough with anaerobic zones (if we are talking about denitrification).
2) Aerobic heterotrophic bacteria you have automatically(and also anaerobic sorts for sure), so I do not believe that the carbon source-method is depending on adding bacterial culture at all. They are already there.
I think that the best way to regulate a certain bacterial growth is to establish the correct environmental factors. So for instance if you have high nitrate you probably have not enough with anaerobic zones (very common today with too thin sandbeds in the display-tank), and the action is to establish anaerobic zones, by more sand (or even better a DSB) or an external nitrate reactor (very easy and well-working device at least according to my experience). If we talk about nitrification is it probably never a deficiency of that, no none experience high nitrite besides the first weeks..or?.. And if we wants to promote bacterial growth of aerobic heterotrophic sort(a majority of bacteria is of this sort), we only have to supply with carbon, not the bacterial itself. And concerning carbon there is no rocket science or anything mysterious behind the different brands. Carbon source is extremely cheap where ordinary ethanol, methanol, acetate, works perfect.
And, I also do not believe in monoculture-developing. Thats it is very hard to achieve, in a environmental that consists of extremely lot of organic compounds and microorganisms. And IF you achieve that, it is mostly not possible to cure that with adding good bacteria. In my occupation (I work as surgeon) I can tell, that if you have a pathogenic bacteria it is not working at all adding some good bacteria. The concurence-theory with PRObacteria (adding good bacteria) is mostly not working against patogenic bacterie. The same reason it do not believe it works adding probiotic bacteria to concur cyanobacteria. We have all tried these and it does not work i should say.
Concerning the other addings such minor elements, we know very little about the positive effects. I think that it is quite common with overdosage concerning minor-trace-elements and also concerning some macro elements such Potasium, as all these consumes very very little, some of them hardly no consumption at all. Potasium for instance if you not uses zeolit, has a very low rate of consuming, and same for strontium. I think Iodid, is maybe the only elements that really depletes and also that replenish of this have proven benefits. I have a big SPS tank, and never replenish nothing more than Iodide, (besides that the Ca-reactor gives), and measures with Triton lab ICP-OES once a month almost, and never have had a lack of a minor elements (except when I tried the Brightwell salt, where bromide is very low).
Maybe we shall lay more money in ICP-OES-testing and more single dosing according to that results (which I guess would lead to a drastic minimizing of selling trace-elements...) to avoid overdose? That is my believe as we have the new technique today
Sorry for extensive "answer"...this is so interesting my friends:_)
Jonas Roman
1)I do not believe that lack of a certain bacteria/bacterial function mostly depends on lack of that cell-population, but more lack of environmental factor such not enough carbon source and/or not enough with anaerobic zones (if we are talking about denitrification).
2) Aerobic heterotrophic bacteria you have automatically(and also anaerobic sorts for sure), so I do not believe that the carbon source-method is depending on adding bacterial culture at all. They are already there.
I think that the best way to regulate a certain bacterial growth is to establish the correct environmental factors. So for instance if you have high nitrate you probably have not enough with anaerobic zones (very common today with too thin sandbeds in the display-tank), and the action is to establish anaerobic zones, by more sand (or even better a DSB) or an external nitrate reactor (very easy and well-working device at least according to my experience). If we talk about nitrification is it probably never a deficiency of that, no none experience high nitrite besides the first weeks..or?.. And if we wants to promote bacterial growth of aerobic heterotrophic sort(a majority of bacteria is of this sort), we only have to supply with carbon, not the bacterial itself. And concerning carbon there is no rocket science or anything mysterious behind the different brands. Carbon source is extremely cheap where ordinary ethanol, methanol, acetate, works perfect.
And, I also do not believe in monoculture-developing. Thats it is very hard to achieve, in a environmental that consists of extremely lot of organic compounds and microorganisms. And IF you achieve that, it is mostly not possible to cure that with adding good bacteria. In my occupation (I work as surgeon) I can tell, that if you have a pathogenic bacteria it is not working at all adding some good bacteria. The concurence-theory with PRObacteria (adding good bacteria) is mostly not working against patogenic bacterie. The same reason it do not believe it works adding probiotic bacteria to concur cyanobacteria. We have all tried these and it does not work i should say.
Concerning the other addings such minor elements, we know very little about the positive effects. I think that it is quite common with overdosage concerning minor-trace-elements and also concerning some macro elements such Potasium, as all these consumes very very little, some of them hardly no consumption at all. Potasium for instance if you not uses zeolit, has a very low rate of consuming, and same for strontium. I think Iodid, is maybe the only elements that really depletes and also that replenish of this have proven benefits. I have a big SPS tank, and never replenish nothing more than Iodide, (besides that the Ca-reactor gives), and measures with Triton lab ICP-OES once a month almost, and never have had a lack of a minor elements (except when I tried the Brightwell salt, where bromide is very low).
Maybe we shall lay more money in ICP-OES-testing and more single dosing according to that results (which I guess would lead to a drastic minimizing of selling trace-elements...) to avoid overdose? That is my believe as we have the new technique today
Sorry for extensive "answer"...this is so interesting my friends:_)
Jonas Roman
@JonasRoman
Doesnt using a calcium reactor dissolve media that would also contain trace elements such as potassium and strontium?
I don't have one but seems like I have read something like that, maybe..
So if that's the case, couldn't someone who uses a different strategy for alk/ca like kalkwasser or 2 part benefit from trace elements being supplemented?
I agree that they should not be added blindly, I think you should be testing for anything you are dosing
Doesnt using a calcium reactor dissolve media that would also contain trace elements such as potassium and strontium?
I don't have one but seems like I have read something like that, maybe..
So if that's the case, couldn't someone who uses a different strategy for alk/ca like kalkwasser or 2 part benefit from trace elements being supplemented?
I agree that they should not be added blindly, I think you should be testing for anything you are dosing
