mcarroll's Favorite Chemistry Links

[mcarroll]

I just added Item #10 in the General section.

It's a link to a document PNAS.org posted on global nutrient cycling. It's to the article's abstract, but the full article is there for free there! It's got some GREAT info in it!

A quote from the abstract will be best to explain (emphasis mine):

Animals play an important role in the transport of nutrients, but this role has diminished because many of the largest animals have gone extinct or experienced massive population declines. Here, we quantify the movement of nutrients by animals in the land, sea, rivers, and air both now and prior to their widespread reductions. The capacity to move nutrients away from hotspots decreased to 6% of past values across land and ocean. The vertical movement of phosphorus (P) by marine mammals was reduced by 77% and movement of P from sea to land by seabirds and anadromous fish was reduced by 96%, effectively disrupting an efficient nutrient distribution pump that once existed from the deep sea to the continental interiors.

 

[mcarroll]

Just added to the "Carbon Dosing / Related Issues" section:

Maybe carbon isn't the "problem" with your nitrate/phosphate issue after all.
http://jeb.biologists.org/content/214/16/2749.long?trendmd-shared=0

High phosphate uptake requirements of the scleractinian coral Stylophora pistillata
Claire Godinot, Renaud Grover, Denis Allemand, Christine Ferrier-Pagès
Journal of Experimental Biology 2011 214: 2749-2754; doi: 10.1242/jeb.054239

 

[Kungpaoshizi]

Heck ya, nice lists guys!
Though can you put in parenthesis next to the redfield ratio link (not directly applicable to carbon dosing, but pretty close)

I know I'm nitpicking, but I hate it when people slam the redfield ratio down like a bible in a debate... heh

Looks like I have a bit of reading to do though! Thanks fellas!

 

[mcarroll]

Redfield ratio is still interesting – something not enough people are aware of.

And it may be most interesting because it (ultimately) lead me to the info in that last link...I don't even think it's about the carbon. I think most people carbon dosing aren't aware of what they or doing, that they are stressing their corals, or that there appears to be a better way....at least if you have corals in your tank.

You literally choke your tank's nitrogen cycling by depriving it of phosphate....which could obviously factor into a tank's nitrate issue.....which is what people use carbon dosing for.

Look at it another way....if you've exceeded the redfield ratios of PO4 and NO3 (i.e. both are accumulating)....then you should be aware that your tank was that far out of whack. That's the scenario if you have BOTH no3 and po4 accumulating.

It's complicated, not simple....and Redfield helps people to understand that. (Or should.)

Rather than leaving the issue over-simplified – "Carbon dosing is easy, takes care of algae and has no side effects."

That doesn't do anyone any good....you'll just continue seeing people (for example) using carbon dosing for PO4 issues and wondering about "burnt tips" while they blame alkalinity., but you can't understand that too well if you don't grasp Redfield.

Carbon dosing looks like the magic bullet that so many folks portray it as....when it's not magic at all. It just doesn't kill your corals immediately, so it's acceptable to lots of people.

IMO people with fish-only tanks are the only ones who should really be carbon dosing – there are no corals to stress out.

Everyone else should be taking a step back from the excessive fish populations (and associated feeding) that "necessitate" carbon dosing in the first place. Run more conservative tanks. Pay attention to the Redfield ratio. Don't believe in magic bullets.

(Check out that biologists.org link that just got posted if you haven't already!)

 

[mcarroll]

To start with, there's some info on the subject of Activated Carbon and bacteria...
Occurrence of Mycobacteria in Water Treatment Lines and in Water Distribution Systems
Appl. Environ. Microbiol. November 2002 68:11 5318-5325

A few good quotes make this seem a worthy read! We have plenty of mystery diseases to account for, and we know from Stephen Pro's well-publicized incident that mycobacteria can be problematic in our tanks. And most of our fish are definitely immunodefficient. (Right @Paul B ?)

...our results show that mycobacteria can colonize and grow on granular activated carbon and are able to enter distribution systems.

This means that carbon is a protected breeding ground – a source – for mycobacteria in our systems.

Some species are also pathogenic for humans or animals, causing pulmonary and cutaneous disease, lymphadenitis, and disseminated infections. These organisms are an increasing health risk, especially in the growing immunodeficient population.

(Edited for clarity and brevity...click the link!!)

Changing gears to the subject of RODI water and bacteria, there's this...
Analysis of Bacteria Contaminating Ultrapure Water in Industrial Systems
Appl. Environ. Microbiol. April 2002 68:4 1548-1555

Needs more of a look as this refers to industrial ultra-pure water systems, which may each have their own peculiarities and bear little or no resemblance to our systems, but this was still interesting due to their use of the word "indigenous":

A considerable proportion of the bacteria present in UPW (50 to 90%) were cells that did not give a positive signal with CTC stain. Bacteria isolated from the UPW systems were mostly gram negative, and several groups seem to be indigenous for all of the UPW production systems studied.

 

[mcarroll]

Problems with the website....can't edit the first post.

 

[jason2459]

Interesting articles. We know bacteria growth can hinder media efficience of GAC and why many may change the media out sooner then need be or use less so it can be changed out monthly or sooner.

Also to note not all microbacterium is bad as with bacteria in general. Even there's good E. coli and bad.

 

[revhtree]

#chemistry

 

[mcarroll]

Saving comment here...

• Occurrence of Mycobacteria in Water Treatment Lines and in Water Distribution Systems (Appl. Environ. Microbiol. November 2002 68:11 5318-5325)
  A few good quotes make this seem a worthy read! We have plenty of mystery diseases to account for, and we know from Stephen Pro's well-publicized incident that mycobacteria can be problematic in our tanks. And most of our fish are definitely immunodefficient. (Right @Paul B ?) "...our results show that mycobacteria can colonize and grow on granular activated carbon and are able to enter distribution systems." and "Some species are also pathogenic for humans or animals, causing pulmonary and cutaneous disease, lymphadenitis, and disseminated infections. These organisms are an increasing health risk, especially in the growing immunodeficient population."
  (Edited for clarity and brevity...click the link!!)

• Analysis of Bacteria Contaminating Ultrapure Water in Industrial Systems (Appl. Environ. Microbiol. April 2002 68:4 1548-1555) Needs more of a look as this refers to industrial ultra-pure water systems, which may each have their own peculiarities and bear little or no resemblance to our systems, but this was still interesting due to their use of the word indigenous: "A considerable proportion of the bacteria present in UPW (50 to 90%) were cells that did not give a positive signal with CTC stain. Bacteria isolated from the UPW systems were mostly gram negative, and several groups seem to be indigenous for all of the UPW production systems studied."