BRStv 12 tank study, invincible diatoms?

[shwareefer]

I just watched the whole series and the most virulent 'ugly' that prospered in their test tanks was a particular variety of diatom which ultimately could only be beaten by bottles of live pods.

I've never heard of diatoms that don't exhaust their supply of silicates and self distruct.

So either they continued to introduce silicates (to sell pods) or it wasn't diatoms or what else could it be?

 

[Dan_P]

I just watched the whole series and the most virulent 'ugly' that prospered in their test tanks was a particular variety of diatom which ultimately could only be beaten by bottles of live pods.

I've never heard of diatoms that don't exhaust their supply of silicates and self distruct.

So either they continued to introduce silicates (to sell pods) or it wasn't diatoms or what else could it be?

I thought they were Dinoflagellates that the pods ate.

 

[rtparty]

Diatoms never go away. They may not overrun other things once the tank is established but they are always there.

The BRS tanks also aren't the standard tank where they were adding other things as they went.

 

[shwareefer]

I thought they were Dinoflagellates that the pods ate.

That would make more sense but Ryan repeatedly said orange diatoms and even showed a microscope slide of them.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I thought 4 tanks beat them...it was either diatoms or dinos I'm thinking about...

 

[shwareefer]

I thought 4 tanks beat them...it was either diatoms or dinos I'm thinking about...

They did but that wasn't my point. It's excepted that diatoms require silicates to flourish and the reason they disappear in new setups is the silicates run out. So how can there be a many months long plague diatom infestation in test tanks that only do water changes and feed two clownfish unless you are also adding silicates?

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

They did but that wasn't my point. It's excepted that diatoms require silicates to flourish and the reason they disappear in new setups is the silicates run out. So how can there be a many months long plague diatom infestation in test tanks that only do water changes and feed two clownfish unless you are also adding silicates?

Oh ok I see what you mean. Tbh there were other things in the series I didn't agree with as well...

 

[rtparty]

They did but that wasn't my point. It's excepted that diatoms require silicates to flourish and the reason they disappear in new setups is the silicates run out. So how can there be a many months long plague diatom infestation in test tanks that only do water changes and feed two clownfish unless you are also adding silicates?

If excess silicates meant diatoms, my tanks would have them everywhere 24/7. My silica comes back high on every ICP test I do. Yet, I don't have diatoms.

I highly doubt BRS was adding silica (which feeds sponges more than diatoms) to sell a few more bottles of pods.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

One measurement they used that I didn't quite understand was the "balance". Im sure they explained it somewhere and I just missed it but it sounded like it is a comparison between the DNA analysis of each tank compared to an average tank but how do they determine that it's best to have a tank that's close to the average? How did they determine that a tank with an altogether different DNA analysis wouldn't be beneficial in some way or to certain organisms?
What do you guys think?

 

[GarrettT]

If excess silicates meant diatoms, my tanks would have them everywhere 24/7. My silica comes back high on every ICP test I do. Yet, I don't have diatoms.

I highly doubt BRS was adding silica (which feeds sponges more than diatoms) to sell a few more bottles of pods.

I test silicate quite often using a Hanna LR checker and found the opposite to be true. Silicate depletes rather quickly in an aquarium unless dosed. When added, I see a strong response in diatoms (which is why I do it).

 

[shwareefer]

If excess silicates meant diatoms, my tanks would have them everywhere 24/7. My silica comes back high on every ICP test I do. Yet, I don't have diatoms.

I highly doubt BRS was adding silica (which feeds sponges more than diatoms) to sell a few more bottles of pods.

I only know diatoms require silicates not that any excess guarantees their visible presence. By the same analogy many hobbiests with perfect big 3 chemistry can't grow coraline yet the conditions appear like it should prosper.

I too mostly have faith in BRS presentations (naively or not). I just don't understand diatoms being the long term victorious 'ugly' out of the slurry of nasties they added to the test tanks.

 

[TheReefDiary]

I just watched the whole series and the most virulent 'ugly' that prospered in their test tanks was a particular variety of diatom which ultimately could only be beaten by bottles of live pods.

I've never heard of diatoms that don't exhaust their supply of silicates and self distruct.

So either they continued to introduce silicates (to sell pods) or it wasn't diatoms or what else could it be?

I don't think they introduced silicates to keep the diatoms around to sell more product. Enough people in this hobby already love spending a ton of money .

 

[jimfish98]

It's all fine and entertaining, but lacks real world reef keeping in the testing. Layers of defense is referenced a lot, but they took out all of the layers when we need a measure of performance with the layers. I don't think anyone in here would go 25 weeks without a CUC being introduced. I would take the top 5 "performers" of their testing plus a bare bottom, and rerun the tests with a matching CUC across the tanks. Could run duplicates of each tank where the other half gets pods during the beginning so you can start comparing the layers.

 

[TheReefDiary]

It's all fine and entertaining, but lacks real world reef keeping in the testing. Layers of defense is referenced a lot, but they took out all of the layers when we need a measure of performance with the layers. I don't think anyone in here would go 25 weeks without a CUC being introduced. I would take the top 5 "performers" of their testing plus a bare bottom, and rerun the tests with a matching CUC across the tanks. Could run duplicates of each tank where the other half gets pods during the beginning so you can start comparing the layers.

The purpose of the experiment was to run without a CUC. I agree redoing the experiment with a CUC this time would be interesting.

 

[jimfish98]

The purpose of the experiment was to run without a CUC. I agree redoing the experiment with a CUC this time would be interesting.

Running without a CUC just gives us useless data though. Nobody is running their system like that. It reminds me of the new F150 Lightning that bragged about having a 200+ mile range then drivers hooked up a trailer with half of its max payload and the range dropped below 80 miles. Things need to be measured in real world application to get value out of the data.

 

[TheReefDiary]

Running without a CUC just gives us useless data though. Nobody is running their system like that. It reminds me of the new F150 Lightning that bragged about having a 200+ mile range then drivers hooked up a trailer with half of its max payload and the range dropped below 80 miles. Things need to be measured in real world application to get value out of the data.

but we already know the power of CUC and what they do.

and i agree about the lightning. no one cares about a perfect scenario for an electric vehicle, you need a realistic range.

 

[Spare time]

They did but that wasn't my point. It's excepted that diatoms require silicates to flourish and the reason they disappear in new setups is the silicates run out. So how can there be a many months long plague diatom infestation in test tanks that only do water changes and feed two clownfish unless you are also adding silicates?

Its hard to not add any silicates to a tank. Even in 0 tds water there can be some. Plus, silica shouldn't "run out." If they die, the silica is still in the system. However, many people run media that may remove silicates because they are trying to control phosphates in a new tank. This is one of those things where you have to be careful as its not "accepted" (unless you meant expected?) that they run out of silica. that diatoms simply run out of silica in a tank other than by what is popular to say around here.

 

[Spare time]

Running without a CUC just gives us useless data though. Nobody is running their system like that. It reminds me of the new F150 Lightning that bragged about having a 200+ mile range then drivers hooked up a trailer with half of its max payload and the range dropped below 80 miles. Things need to be measured in real world application to get value out of the data.

It isn't useless. But you made a good point that the practicality of the results in real life of any study (be professional or not) is something to consider

 

[shwareefer]

Well you guys have raised an interesting point. The pods were just a cuc. A mono-species army of anything that eats algae and detritus likely would have the same results.

 

[razorskiss]

The basic idea is fairly sound, IMO. They are asking: What steps taken at the establishment of a new tank make the fundamentals of the system the most resilient against nuisance microbe outbreaks? If the fundamental system is already robust enough to minimize or shorten outbreaks then a small CUC would be expected to be able to keep the remainder more easily under control and small variations in maintenance or the accidental introduction of new pests is less likely to cause a major outbreak as well.