Pros: Unique in depth article about a topic that has been speculated about but there really hasn't been much data to support the claims that I have seen. Shows what is really happening when we are cycling our tanks and makes some connections to how it will effect the tank as it matures but doesn't make any broad claims based off of the limited data that was gathered.
Cons: Follow up after a year or so would be interesting to see if the dry rock catches up in any way to the live rock.
Great article that provides data that touches on issues that the reefing community has experienced in the past but has only made assumptions to why we run into these issues when we start a tank with different kinds of rock. This article provides a solid base with several avenues to expand on the data.
Interesting article. I have to admit I couldn’t go thru the whole thing. I am starting a new build using the basis of live rock. I am trying to do an instant tank sourcing live rock and sand. My goal is to fill and fully stock a tank in a day and keep it long term. Fingers crossed
Pros: Good lay out of test in easy to understand methods. Well written for both the layman and scientist.
I have noticed a bias by at least two reviews towards dead rock. Funny how you try to make up some cons to the study to support your stubborn views not supported by the results. Live rock works in the lab and in the experience of many successful reef keepers. Why struggle to establish a tank when all the evidence points to a simple solution?
Pros: A clear report, good use of diagrams and charts
Subject matter of high interest and importance
Results clearly reported AND finding highly relevant
Leaves the reader intellectually thirsting for more information
Nice experimental setup.
Cons: Author did not spend enough time describing the role of bacteria families in the biochemistry. What do they metabolize? Are they all aerobic? What fraction are actually pelagic?
Not enough information on limitation of the method? What is the rate or chance of observation of benthic bacteria in a water sample.
The water chemistry results stopped at forty days and we are left wondering about the water chemistry when the nasties appeared 2-3 months later. No mention of the NO3, PO4 or alkalinity. Also, missed an opportunity to demonstrate just how similar/dissimilar the systems were with regards to levels of Si, Fe, Ca and dissolved organic carbon. Might have provided very useful insights.
Another serious flaw in the work. No identification of what nasties were.
An important area of knowledge is becoming available to us: the aquarium microbiome. We suspected bacteria were important determinants of healthy aquaria but now we are on the verge of understanding why. This article is an introduction to the subject matter and a report on a clever experiment. By necessity, the article is short and to the point, leaving us hungry for more information and with many questions to ponder and Google.
Pros: explained his method and findings very well
easy to understand
Cons: didn't go into depth in how to establish bacterial communities on dry rock
didn't have dry rock with bacterial supplements or live rock with bacterial supplements
Good article but would like to see a follow up with more examples but its unrealistic to ask this. Essentially it was great but I would like to of seen more use of bacterial supplements to imitate what happens in most home reef tanks
I was fortunate enough to see some original drafts of this article and the experimental tanks in person while the data were being collected. I can say that this is high quality original research performed by a Ph.D. scientist specifically for the aquarium hobby. It is well written and should be easily understandable by most hobbyists. Importantly, this article provides actionable information for reefkeepers who are setting up a new system. Hopefully, this is the first of many articles by this contributor!