Benepets - How quickly does it consume PO4?

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Randy, I've never seen you jump in on a thread like this with so many oppinions and suspicions but not specific data. I really like much of what you contribute but this seems off for you. This product has been around for quite a while in our hobby and for me, and many others, it has more than proven itself and it's results. Do you have experience specific to this product? Your replies just seem odd to me.

Sorry my replies seem odd, but I only expressed one opinion (which, interestingly, matches your experience) and pointed out several facts based on the actual benepets description. Not sure how that is unusual or problematic.

My opinion:

"I’m skeptical of the whole concept of dosing organisms such as bacteria or phytoplankton to reduce nutrients, at least as an ongoing thing, but some folks seem to claim it works for them (others say no)."

Your experience:

"I've never heard that Benepets consumes PO4 only that it doesn't increase it. That has been my experience with it as well. I think i heard a few users say they saw reduction of PO4 but that seems to be an exception and not the rule from what I've read."

My fact based comments using their own statements:

Statement from them:

"Benereef doesn’t have a high protein content but rather a high carbohydrate content which is important because if you have a higher surplus of proteins and they are broken down you reach ammonia levels that are toxic to your system and reef inhabitants."

My comment #1
"Their ammonia toxicity comment leads me to have little confidence in their knowledge of reef tanks."

That statement of my personal lack of confidence in them cannot be incorrect, but I'm surprised that I'd need to justify it after posting that ammonia claim. Do any experienced reef aquarists believe that feeding foods with high protein will lead to ammonia levels so high that it causes toxicity? I have read hundreds of thousands of posts with reefers with all sorts of chemistry issues, and not once do i recall ever reading of anyone who had toxic levels of ammonia in an established reef tank for any reasons, and obviously not because they fed too much protein. In fact, dosing amino acids is a tried and true way to provide foods to some types of reef aquaria. No one gets toxic ammonia levels from doing that.

My Comment #2
"As to a food that is high in carbohydrate, that will spur bacterial growth just like sugar, ethanol, etc, and that has the potential to lower nutrients."

The only other comment that I think I made about this product is that a high carbohydrate food is that the high carbohydrate would likely be providing an organic carbon dosing effect. If one simply thought of it as a normal food plus extra carbohydrate, then that's exactly what some types of organic carbon dosing are. Reef Actif by Tropic Marin is a carbohydrate, for example, as are several fo teh DIY organic carbon dosing systems folks have used.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

What claim did the manufacturer make that is not supported? I don't see anything about that in this thread.

Then either you did not read my post closely, or you agree that feeding foods too high in protein leads to toxic ammonia levels:

"Benereef doesn’t have a high protein content but rather a high carbohydrate content which is important because if you have a higher surplus of proteins and they are broken down you reach ammonia levels that are toxic to your system and reef inhabitants."

Science Behind Benepets

benepets.co

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I am curious of Randy's opinion on his reply.

I don't believe I ever expressed any opinion on whether it would lower phosphate other than to say that

" but the product seems essentially be organic carbon dosing built into a food. Assuming that is correct, the answer may be highly variable in both time, and in any effect on phosphate, since organic carbon dosing generally carries those variabilities."

That seems EXACTLY what is reported here with only two data points: variable results with one person saying they saw no effect, and a posted quote saying the did.

On the whole concept of dosing organisms like phyto or bacteria to reduce N and/or P, that's a much more lengthy discussion of both actual peoples experiences (again, highly variable) and the theory of when and how it may or may not work.

These are my comments on that concept overall, not necessarily specific to benepets.

1. Some folks claim that dosing bacteria such as MB7 lowers nutrients for them. Others see no such effect. All reef tanks are organic carbon limited for bacterial growth, so just adding bacteria and not any organic food for them will likely run into a limitation after a few days of MB7 using up available organics so all it can take up is limited to what the existing number of bacteria dosed actually can consume without growing (expanding in numbers) to any great extent. So one might get some N or P drop when first used, but then what happens to these bacteria? If they are remove3d somehow (skimming?) then that could be a useful but perhaps short term export method. If they are consumed by heterotroph filter feeders or other organisms, then much of the N and P in them will be released back to the water, just as a consumed food particle is. In that sense, it may possibly even add back more N and P than it removed. The potential for removal by skimming and the potential of other dosed or fed organics may be why folks see variable results with bacterial additives on N and P.

2. Phyto seems to have a bit more potential, if it actually can sustain itself in the system, and grow (it does not need an ongoing organic carbon source). But it seems in most systems that self sustaining phyto does not happen. Maybe some of them do expand in numbers before being eaten or removed, but one does need to keep adding it to get an ongoing effect. Thus, the same concerns about bacteria relating to what happens to the N and P in it when it is consumed remain.



.

 

[Benepets]

Benepets - How quickly does it consume PO4? Seeing one is following the recommended dose.

Is this going to strip my phosphates in a month? Few months? Year?

Sorry we are late to the thread. The Short answer is that Benereef is not going to consume your PO4. It's just not going to contribute more PO4 than you already have and in some edge cases (reported by some users) it may help reduce PO4. So unless you are one of those lucky few you will still need to use other methods to remove the PO4 that you already have. Thanks for asking the question.

 

[Benepets]

Without getting caught up in some of the opinions already expressed, lets see if we can fill in some details and maybe add some context. @Randy Holmes-Farley is referring to the video by our Marine Biologist. In general, excess proteins (from a chemistry standpoint) do breakdown to produce Ammonia which is toxic to marine life at relatively low levels. A mature reef is much less likely to result in toxic levels due to established biome and filtration but it could happen. It is more likely to happen in a new system that does not have a fully established and robust biome yet. It is not intended to imply that any of these foods will product toxic Ammonia levels in captive reefs only that chemistry speaking they could.

High protein and high carbohydrates are pretty general terms and without some means of quantifying the reference makes it hard to address. In the context of the video and the discussion about the protein and carbohydrate levels in our food the reference would be other foods used in the hobby. Our Benereef food is nearly half the protein level of a large majority of other food offerings. So those other foods could be considered high protein. Our carbohydrate level is also significantly higher than those same foods, so yes ours could be considered high carbohydrate. High enough to be considered carbon dosing would be a stretch but technically speaking carbohydrates are a carbon source. The key here is are those carbons available long enough and at a high enough level to produce the result of straight carbon dosing? Our testing does not show that to be the case. Another indicator of that is that the vast majority of users do not see reduction of nutrients as we mentioned. This can be attributed to a few factors. First they may not be reducing other PO4 contributors when adding Benereef into their husbandry. Second their PO4 consumers are still relatively low in their uptake so having orthophosphate availability may not result in any significant reduction. Of course there are other factors as well.

The best takeaway we can give is that having foods that are highly bio-available, Redfield neutral, highly nutritious and highly digestible not only reduces the initial bio-footprint but also results in the inevitable animal and coral waste being much less likely to increase system bio-load. This is true even if the perceived benefit of pre and probiotics and beneficial bacteria are not considered in the equation.

We hope that helps answer some of the questions bought up in this thread. There is a lot being learned about reef inhabitant nutrition right now and we believe there are going to be some pretty significant leaps coming from the research happening. We are working hard to be part of all of this.

 

[SauceyReef]

@Randy Holmes-Farley I appreciate your insights, info, and opinions as always. It probably is an entire lengthy discussion in itself, but you summed it up well for me.

@Benepets thank you very much for replying! Quite a few people are saying it drops PO4 for them. It would be fun to do a survey for people who use your product and regularly check their nutrients. I feel like it would be around 50% have dropped PO4 based off speaking with others, but that is a guesstimate. And C.Eymanns info sounded so good! I wonder where he got this or if he made a lot of that up.. The core issue with his point as Randy is explaining I think is the N/P needs exported somehow even if bacteria or microorganisms are consuming it and being consumed.

 

[Garf]

daily sand stirring to "kick up" detritus and more importantly bacteria

I like that idea, could automate it, probably.

 

[brandon429]

I've been using this food for 3 years straight exclusively, good stuff. I never thought adding it would lower phosphate, I just think it's naturally low phosphate feed because of the lack of invasion tradeoff I see in using it, and my system isn't skimmed all the organics stay in tow

Maritza the vase reef has been feeding it exclusively for going on ten years now, that says alot about a feed. to be the sole nutrient input for a decade

Benepets: I read your typed response and thought it was well-said. Nothing about your description impacted me as misleading, and I'm trusting your product to run my 18 year old reef tank and it keeps working out well.

 

[SauceyReef]

Without getting caught up in some of the opinions already expressed, lets see if we can fill in some details and maybe add some context. @Randy Holmes-Farley is referring to the video by our Marine Biologist. In general, excess proteins (from a chemistry standpoint) do breakdown to produce Ammonia which is toxic to marine life at relatively low levels. A mature reef is much less likely to result in toxic levels due to established biome and filtration but it could happen. It is more likely to happen in a new system that does not have a fully established and robust biome yet. It is not intended to imply that any of these foods will product toxic Ammonia levels in captive reefs only that chemistry speaking they could.

High protein and high carbohydrates are pretty general terms and without some means of quantifying the reference makes it hard to address. In the context of the video and the discussion about the protein and carbohydrate levels in our food the reference would be other foods used in the hobby. Our Benereef food is nearly half the protein level of a large majority of other food offerings. So those other foods could be considered high protein. Our carbohydrate level is also significantly higher than those same foods, so yes ours could be considered high carbohydrate. High enough to be considered carbon dosing would be a stretch but technically speaking carbohydrates are a carbon source. The key here is are those carbons available long enough and at a high enough level to produce the result of straight carbon dosing? Our testing does not show that to be the case. Another indicator of that is that the vast majority of users do not see reduction of nutrients as we mentioned. This can be attributed to a few factors. First they may not be reducing other PO4 contributors when adding Benereef into their husbandry. Second their PO4 consumers are still relatively low in their uptake so having orthophosphate availability may not result in any significant reduction. Of course there are other factors as well.

The best takeaway we can give is that having foods that are highly bio-available, Redfield neutral, highly nutritious and highly digestible not only reduces the initial bio-footprint but also results in the inevitable animal and coral waste being much less likely to increase system bio-load. This is true even if the perceived benefit of pre and probiotics and beneficial bacteria are not considered in the equation.

We hope that helps answer some of the questions bought up in this thread. There is a lot being learned about reef inhabitant nutrition right now and we believe there are going to be some pretty significant leaps coming from the research happening. We are working hard to be part of all of this.

For some reason I did not see this when I said my earlier reply. Based off your takeaway - do you think that is simply because highly bioavailable & nutritious food has more of the elements consumed by the micro-organisms and coral in the tank? Thus the waste has far less actual byproduct?

Thank you for the extensive reply and info. Much appreciated and I hope the same thing.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Without getting caught up in some of the opinions already expressed, lets see if we can fill in some details and maybe add some context. @Randy Holmes-Farley is referring to the video by our Marine Biologist. In general, excess proteins (from a chemistry standpoint) do breakdown to produce Ammonia which is toxic to marine life at relatively low levels. A mature reef is much less likely to result in toxic levels due to established biome and filtration but it could happen. It is more likely to happen in a new system that does not have a fully established and robust biome yet. It is not intended to imply that any of these foods will product toxic Ammonia levels in captive reefs only that chemistry speaking they could.

High protein and high carbohydrates are pretty general terms and without some means of quantifying the reference makes it hard to address. In the context of the video and the discussion about the protein and carbohydrate levels in our food the reference would be other foods used in the hobby. Our Benereef food is nearly half the protein level of a large majority of other food offerings. So those other foods could be considered high protein. Our carbohydrate level is also significantly higher than those same foods, so yes ours could be considered high carbohydrate. High enough to be considered carbon dosing would be a stretch but technically speaking carbohydrates are a carbon source. The key here is are those carbons available long enough and at a high enough level to produce the result of straight carbon dosing? Our testing does not show that to be the case. Another indicator of that is that the vast majority of users do not see reduction of nutrients as we mentioned. This can be attributed to a few factors. First they may not be reducing other PO4 contributors when adding Benereef into their husbandry. Second their PO4 consumers are still relatively low in their uptake so having orthophosphate availability may not result in any significant reduction. Of course there are other factors as well.

The best takeaway we can give is that having foods that are highly bio-available, Redfield neutral, highly nutritious and highly digestible not only reduces the initial bio-footprint but also results in the inevitable animal and coral waste being much less likely to increase system bio-load. This is true even if the perceived benefit of pre and probiotics and beneficial bacteria are not considered in the equation.

We hope that helps answer some of the questions bought up in this thread. There is a lot being learned about reef inhabitant nutrition right now and we believe there are going to be some pretty significant leaps coming from the research happening. We are working hard to be part of all of this.

FWIW, I did not watch a video. I took the offending words directly off your web site, copied and pasted here, and I stand by my point of it being misleading. Your explanation does not make it less misleading.

I started to debate additional points that you made here, but I deleted them and will just let this go.

 

[Benepets]

@Randy Holmes-Farley I appreciate your insights, info, and opinions as always. It probably is an entire lengthy discussion in itself, but you summed it up well for me.

@Benepets thank you very much for replying! Quite a few people are saying it drops PO4 for them. It would be fun to do a survey for people who use your product and regularly check their nutrients. I feel like it would be around 50% have dropped PO4 based off speaking with others, but that is a guesstimate. And C.Eymanns info sounded so good! I wonder where he got this or if he made a lot of that up.. The core issue with his point as Randy is explaining I think is the N/P needs exported somehow even if bacteria or microorganisms are consuming it and being consumed.

@SauceyReef Here is what we currently know from the reports of users seeing reduction in PO4 on their systems. Nearly all of them have either significantly reduced or replaced their other foods with Benereef or a combination of Benepets products. This significant or complete reduction of PO4 addition to their systems is seen as a result of Benereef when in fact it is a result of their system having PO4 consumers removing the residual PO4 from their system and limited or no additional PO4 sources adding more. We specifically chose to Engineer our food to be neutral over removing nutrients as removing them becomes much harder to control the levels without careful measuring of food at each use. By being neutral it allows a much larger range of food to be used without impact. We believe this is preferred over the risk of bottoming out nutrients due to removal of too much.

 

[Benepets]

I've been using this food for 3 years straight exclusively, good stuff. I never thought adding it would lower phosphate, I just think it's naturally low phosphate feed because of the lack of invasion tradeoff I see in using it, and my system isn't skimmed all the organics stay in tow

Maritza the vase reef has been feeding it exclusively for going on ten years now, that says alot about a feed. to be the sole nutrient input for a decade

Benepets: I read your typed response and thought it was well-said. Nothing about your description impacted me as misleading, and I'm trusting your product to run my 18 year old reef tank and it keeps working out well.

Thank you @brandon429. We appreciate that trust in our products very much. Maritza is a great example of the long term use of our food and we have followed that journey from the start. We feel the same way about that success being a testament to our product.

 

[Benepets]

For some reason I did not see this when I said my earlier reply. Based off your takeaway - do you think that is simply because highly bioavailable & nutritious food has more of the elements consumed by the micro-organisms and coral in the tank? Thus the waste has far less actual byproduct?

Thank you for the extensive reply and info. Much appreciated and I hope the same thing.

@SauceyReef you read that very well. That is in fact what we are saying. Not all nutrient inclusion results in nutrient absorption. Bio-availability plays a commanding role in the absorption level achieved. Absorbed nutrients are not part of waste from any organism be it fish, coral, invertebrate or other micro-organism.

 

[Benepets]

FWIW, I did not watch a video. I took the offending words directly off your web site, copied and pasted here, and I stand by my point of it being misleading. Your explanation does not make it less misleading.

I started to debate additional points that you made here, but I deleted them and will just let this go.

That statement is a direct quote from the video mentioned. The full context is a little more clear in the video than in the small excerpt posted in the product highlights section. We have asked the Marketing folks to work on improving the wording of the text based on your response. Thank you for helping us to improve our messaging to our customers. That's much appreciated.

 

[brandon429]

I didn't think the product description written by you was a problem

Just my opinion.


I was able to double my sps frag size on it this last year. People who read aquaculture magazines routinely encounter choices in % protein by weight food options, nitrogen control options directly impacted by such choices, roi for cost per unit of weight you have to add to a reef tank to get mass results


What's hilarious is that over the course of one year I've used an estimated .3 grams by dry weight

So that's .3 grams per year in my reefbowl. How many grams was in the blue small bottle I bought from your site? maybe it's eleven years worth heh. I'll have to buy replacement packs when my old one is still 99.99% full i think that's pretty good ratio of goods.

 

[brandon429]

I've read my share of ads

I didn't think that was oversold. Maybe someone with a quarantine setup wants a lower protein food sustenance for assistance in systemic loading. Maybe they want a lower nitrogen dietary constant for their animals, who knows.

Maritza told me it worked in text, and then it did for sure in my system with far less dissolved organics it seems going off scum layer development rates between other feeds we can test- like reefroids

I get less invasions on this feed even when I push it sometimes.


Of all food ever ran through the reefbowl for years at a time this one is the most conversion to coral mass % feed I've ever seen. A tiny trace amount fed my reef liberally for a year. What you did with the protein % never factored in my usage of the item, the referral came from a trusted source.

 

[Benepets]

I didn't think the product description written by you was a problem

Just my opinion.


I was able to double my sps frag size on it this last year. People who read aquaculture magazines routinely encounter choices in % protein by weight food options, nitrogen control options directly impacted by such choices, roi for cost per unit of weight you have to add to a reef tank to get mass results


What's hilarious is that over the course of one year I've used an estimated .3 grams by dry weight

So that's .3 grams per year in my reefbowl. How many grams was in the blue small bottle I bought from your site? maybe it's eleven years worth heh. I'll have to buy replacement packs when my old one is still 99.99% full i think that's pretty good ratio of goods.

The smallest jar is 40g. You have pretty close to 11years at your current usage rate. We recommend you use the jar within 2 years of opening it so you may want to consider increasing your feedings a bit so you don't throw most of that jar away. Don't worry we have more 40g jars available. Maritza says feed more.

 

[SauceyReef]

Update: Benepets definitely does not raise Nutrients levels, and may even be helping lower them. My tank has been reacting to it very well! I will definitely keep using this product. All the Gorgs go crazy every time I feed.

 

[VintageReefer]

I’ve been using benepets since late 2020. Not exclusively. But it is one of the foods I rotate through in a weekly variety.

I frequently recommend it to others also. I have not noticed it ever lowering phosphate, but my phosphates are always low. I did notice it doesn’t raise phosphate, which is very important to me and a reason why I like it so much more than that other brand of food, especially in smaller tanks.

The other brand was kicked out in 2020 and benepets moved into my regular lineup ever since.

 

[Lavey29]

@SauceyReef Here is what we currently know from the reports of users seeing reduction in PO4 on their systems. Nearly all of them have either significantly reduced or replaced their other foods with Benereef or a combination of Benepets products. This significant or complete reduction of PO4 addition to their systems is seen as a result of Benereef when in fact it is a result of their system having PO4 consumers removing the residual PO4 from their system and limited or no additional PO4 sources adding more. We specifically chose to Engineer our food to be neutral over removing nutrients as removing them becomes much harder to control the levels without careful measuring of food at each use. By being neutral it allows a much larger range of food to be used without impact. We believe this is preferred over the risk of bottoming out nutrients due to removal of too much.

It sure doesn't lower phosphates in my system but is very good at raising them and I've tried it multiple times for several months at a time.