Bacteria Confusion

[Paul B]

There are (as of yesterday) 10,875, 321 people in this hobby. (I made that up, it could be 125 or 37) and 97% of them love to give advice. 84% of that 97% of hobbyists started in this hobby last Tuesday.
The internet is a really cool invention because you could have been brought up on a mountaintop in Tibet by a bowlegged Sherpa who wears a Speedo and hunts Yeti's and once in your life seen a picture of a coral reef in National Geographic and you can give advice about how to keep a Moorish Idol and many people would take your advice as fact.
Before you take advice from anyone about anything in reefing make sure he (or she) has had a tank at least longer than the lifespan of an amphipod.
Just my opinion of course. :cool:

Some do, and some live on surfaces. I've never seen anyone quantify the relative numbers in reef tanks, and I'd be hard pressed to even see how one would do it.

17,734. There are 17,734 bacteria in a reef tank. Give or take 3. Prove me wrong. :eek:

 

[Waterjockey]

This article may clear up some of your questions;

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2011/3/aafeature

Towards the latter part they discuss carbon dosing, skimming, etc and it's effect of bacterial concentrations in the water column

 

[jantje]

Hi Guys,
Bacteria.....
The most people see them as single creatures, but is not true.
Bacteria live like people in a city...we call this city a biofilm.
So aerobic and anaerobic live together...see it as layer.
Nitrification vs denitrification is also....

Anoxic vs. Anaerobic
In discussing the technology behind this nitrate reduction, it is important to understand the difference between anoxic and anaerobic condition

Anoxic conditions exist when the water does not contain elemental oxygen (usually in the form of dissolved oxygen), but there is oxygen in the form of oxygen-bearing inorganic compounds like nitrates (NO3-) or sulfates (SO4-). This oxygen can be used in the oxidation of organics in the tank. As in most oxidation-reduction reactions, when one species is oxidized another has to be reduced. It’s kind of a zero-sum game.

In order to establish an anoxic or anaerobic environment, there are two factors that have to be addressed: oxygen transfer rate and oxygen utilization rate (OUR). This is true whether you are looking to achieve the anoxic condition in a liquid medium or a biofilm. Oxygen can be transferred passively through the air/water interface, or actively through the use of aerators, waterfalls, fountains and the like.

The oxygen consumption rate will be related to the organic load, which is determined by a few factors:

• How many fish will this tank hold and how many can the bio-exchange really support?

• How much work will the new owner have to do to maintain the tank? How easily is this system cleaned?

• Will the mechanical filter remove sufficient waste to allow the bio-reaction to occur naturally?

The organic load in the tank creates oxygen demand, and the bacteria convert it to carbon dioxide, water and (additional) bacterial cells. In most cases, in a filter it is most desirable to have anoxic rather than true anaerobic activity. The reason for this is that many anaerobic metabolites are malodorous and, in some extreme cases, can be toxic. A tank can even become “too anoxic,” as measured by something called oxidation-reduction potential (ORP), when sulfates are chemically reduced to hydrogen sulfide (the source of that notorious rotten egg smell).

The Solution
Fortunately, it is relatively easy to get into the “sweet spot” where water is anoxic enough to reduce nitrates, but not so anoxic that hydrogen sulfide generation occurs. You also avoid true anaerobic metabolism, where a lot of foul-smelling, possibly toxic byproducts like butyric acid can be produced. The answer: an anaerobic biofilter.

For most anaerobic biofilters for tanks, the biomass grows on a fixed film on the media in the filter. While this biofilm may seem just like a slimy layer on the media, even a thin biofilm contains millions of bacteria per square inch, many layers deep.

The biofilm is an often misunderstood and vaguely accepted terminology. In a biofilm (see diagram 1) you will generally have a thin film of water that clings to the outside of the biofilm due to the adhesive and cohesive properties of water. It is these same properties of water that provide for capillary action in plants and help water get to the top of the tallest of trees. Soluble organics and some inorganics, like ammonia, diffuse into the biofilm through this layer of water.

In the first layer of the biofilm, there is an aerobic zone. The depth of the aerobic zone is determined by the strength of the water in terms of oxygen demand and loading per unit area of the media, and the dissolved oxygen content in the water. As the oxygen is consumed as it diffuses through the biofilm, and organic and inorganic compounds are still present, an anoxic section develops.

In this section, any oxygen-bearing compounds will be utilized as what are called “electron acceptors,” providing a means to oxidize the organic compounds to carbon dioxide, while reducing the oxygen-bearing inorganic compounds to nitrogen gas (from nitrates) and hydrogen sulfide (from sulfates). Fortunately, the utilization of nitrate is preferred over the utilization of sulfate and most water will have more nitrate than sulfate.

The process dynamics of diffusion and biological activity in a biofilm.
The key to getting the correct dynamics in the anaerobic or anoxic filter is proper sizing of the filter with respect to loading. If a filter is oversized and the loading is too light per unit area of surface area, there will not be enough oxygen demand to create an anoxic zone. However, if the loading per unit of surface area is too great, the film may grow too thick and create a true anaerobic zone, which can lead to undesirable results. So, an oversized or undersized filter may give less than the desired results.
One of the best filtermedia which can hold an biofilm is so called KNS Kaldness K1....google for it.
It is a moving bed filtermedia which holds excellent a biofilm and you can easily control the thickness of the biofilm thus the concentration of nitrate just by adding filtermedia or take it away.

Hope this gives some ideas ..

 

[brandon429]

denitrification hardly ever occurs to a measurable degree in reeftanks using natural materials arrangements so we have to carbon dose, use marine pure blocks etc.

not denying its occurring, but the article should state that getting measurable results varies such that its no longer the arrangement ruling the hobby, for all the 90s we tried to pull that off.

the older thought was add some sand, don't touch it, allow it to build up sand stirring microoganisms, and it will reduce your nitrate

same for the deep recesses of live rock...some do pull that off, Randy's tank is setup in ratio to pull it off if I remember correctly.

enter biopellets, carbon, skimming, ats, water changes all to make up for that plan working about 15% of the time for the masses any dsb reef is setup. agreed a few do pull it off.


imo full column water changes isn't harming the denitrification which rarely occurs anyway, or the nitrification either.

we wouldn't be using the offsets listed above if it was possible to manage the bioloads we want with natural materials arrangement...biofilms included. to me those are oceanic studies not something we replicate well in tanks. I enjoy rereading it to try and memorize all those metabolism steps though, that's great biochem.

 

[Waterjockey]

One tidbit I found interesting in the article I linked was that 1 day old (newly) mixed saltwater had 10x the bacteria than a typical reef tank.
Instead of "stripping" the water column of bacteria by frequent or large waterchange, if the water is mixed the day before, it's putting a ton more bacteria in than likely exists in the water you are taking out.

 

[brandon429]

that's awesome I did not see that w go back and reread

we live in a filthy world heh

one of my jobs just out of school was to simply test/plate/ and try (fail) to keep a slaughterhouse decently clean of e coli and generalized aerobes and listeria.

those rascals are so resilient to all manner of harshing, it was never ending toil and we couldn't even get the tap water under control. simply pressure washing the whole facility with scalding hot tap water was upping our counts, not lowering them lol. going back to reread what you posted

peroxide-wimpy sterilizer
bleach-wimpy
various sprays-wimpy

quat ammonia was the best we could do but has such hazards around food prep it wasn't indicated on most surfaces, only for bootwash. chasing bac all day long in the air and on surfaces was one fun, low paying job.

our air samplers would fan the sample across agar plates, then we'd grow them out and class them/log them

what we breathe daily should scare you all lol even in a home. none of this has anything to do with reefing, its to help the OCD sleep better who may read and ponder it all

 

[Sir Chris]

Water changes are natural u think in nature he same water is in the same place always. Current brings life and nutrients and building blocks. Sure bacteria is needed but not a tank full. That's garbage. I work at a shop and a parts store and people try and fix blown headhaskets with pour in crap. And that if anything Fix's temporary. Then ruins all ur cooling components. Fix the problem. I tell em. So pour in **** is just a gimmic besides dosing essentials.

 

[Sir Chris]

Most salts r

One tidbit I found interesting in the article I linked was that 1 day old (newly) mixed saltwater had 10x the bacteria than a typical reef tank.
Instead of "stripping" the water column of bacteria by frequent or large waterchange, if the water is mixed the day before, it's putting a ton more bacteria in than likely exists in the water you are taking out.

designed 2 be used within a few hours of mixing. U lose trace elements by it sitting. 2 days is my max and it's constantly airaited somit doesnt settle and stagnate. IMO

 

[Sir Chris]

denitrification hardly ever occurs to a measurable degree in reeftanks using natural materials arrangements so we have to carbon dose, use marine pure blocks etc.

not denying its occurring, but the article should state that getting measurable results varies such that its no longer the arrangement ruling the hobby, for all the 90s we tried to pull that off.

the older thought was add some sand, don't touch it, allow it to build up sand stirring microoganisms, and it will reduce your nitrate

same for the deep recesses of live rock...some do pull that off, Randy's tank is setup in ratio to pull it off if I remember correctly.

enter biopellets, carbon, skimming, ats, water changes all to make up for that plan working about 15% of the time for the masses any dsb reef is setup. agreed a few do pull it off.


imo full column water changes isn't harming the denitrification which rarely occurs anyway, or the nitrification either.

we wouldn't be using the offsets listed above if it was possible to manage the bioloads we want with natural materials arrangement...biofilms included. to me those are oceanic studies not something we replicate well in tanks. I enjoy rereading it to try and memorize all those metabolism steps though, that's great biochem.[/QU

denitrification hardly ever occurs to a measurable degree in reeftanks using natural materials arrangements so we have to carbon dose, use marine pure blocks etc.

not denying its occurring, but the article should state that getting measurable results varies such that its no longer the arrangement ruling the hobby, for all the 90s we tried to pull that off.

the older thought was add some sand, don't touch it, allow it to build up sand stirring microoganisms, and it will reduce your nitrate

same for the deep recesses of live rock...some do pull that off, Randy's tank is setup in ratio to pull it off if I remember correctly.

enter biopellets, carbon, skimming, ats, water changes all to make up for that plan working about 15% of the time for the masses any dsb reef is setup. agreed a few do pull it off.


imo full column water changes isn't harming the denitrification which rarely occurs anyway, or the nitrification either.

we wouldn't be using the offsets listed above if it was possible to manage the bioloads we want with natural materials arrangement...biofilms included. to me those are oceanic studies not something we replicate well in tanks. I enjoy rereading it to try and memorize all those metabolism steps though, that's great biochem.

do u use marine blocks and if so I wanted 2 use in my gravity refug vs sand and just chato and some others like pulsing Xenia. So does the marine pure do a good job or just stick with a big chunk of bukani for pods as I want it clean and b able 2 suck up settlement. So the bricks r enticing but I've got mixed reviews. Any response helps. Thanks.

 

[john.m.cole3]

do u use marine blocks and if so I wanted 2 use in my gravity refug vs sand and just chato and some others like pulsing Xenia. So does the marine pure do a good job or just stick with a big chunk of bukani for pods as I want it clean and b able 2 suck up settlement. So the bricks r enticing but I've got mixed reviews. Any response helps. Thanks.

I use the brick. Game changer for me. I have it arranged vertically with water just going over the top by a quarter inch. I want to lay it flat and remove the 20 pounds of live rock in the sump once I set up my display refugium. The brick is the only form of marine pure that can produce an anoxic zone. I kniw reefers like diesel that got rid of their marine pure bricks bc their nitrates stayed at zero.