Bacteria in a bottle, Myth or Fact

[MnFish1]

Very true @MnFish1
If i was to take all products and use fish food in tanks along with bacteria to cycle, All products will perform just about the same, 2-3 days to cycle the tank.

Which would suggest that there is no particular advantage to Fritz over the others? (i.e. the one's that seemed to work) - based on this study. Because all over the forum on various forums one sees - well Fritz seems to work the best based on these studies - and (unless one believes as I do that true nitrifying cycle with nitrifiers i.e. Fritz is better than cycling with heterotrophs (@brandon429 ????). I guess I would make that clearer in the results.

 

[Dr. Reef]

I started the poll not to get a winner but to see what product is being used efficiently by others,
As per my studies, I already know Fritz Turbostart 900 performed the best followed by Bio Spira and Dr Tim.
Surprisingly the poll reflects exactly the same results.

 

[MnFish1]

Update:
@cbleehk sent me a bacteria they can easily purchase in Hong Kong. He wanted me to test this bacteria but its not available in USA. So he was generous to have purchased and shipped it to me. I receive his package today. I wanted to personally thank him and if others can do the same i will be much obliged.
Thank you @cbleehk

Its made by http://www.equoitaly.com

 

[Big G]

Here's my 2 cents worth. Have used a variety of bio starters. Mostly Bio Spira. Problem with it is sometimes the cultures are old or poorly stored. The most valuable to me has been the Seachem Stability. It doesn't cycle the fastest or faster than say a good bottle of Bio Spira, but it does appear to set up a more stable long term QT. When using it, according to the data I have collected in my QT logs, I have had the fewest needs to do water changes over a 30 day copper and 15 day or so General Cure treatment. That alone is more important to me than a quick ammonia + nitrite + nitrate start cycle.

 

[Victoria M]

Here's my 2 cents worth. Have used a variety of bio starters. Mostly Bio Spira. Problem with it is sometimes the cultures are old or poorly stored. The most valuable to me has been the Seachem Stability. It doesn't cycle the fastest or faster than say a good bottle of Bio Spira, but it does appear to set up a more stable long term QT. When using it, according to the data I have collected in my QT logs, I have had the fewest needs to do water changes over a 30 day copper and 15 day or so General Cure treatment. That alone is more important to me than a quick ammonia + nitrite + nitrate start cycle.

I have previously shared this, I know. I have found Stability to be a reliable product for QT also. I recently added Fritz 9 to my QT practice and have been happy with that too.

 

[MnFish1]

Here's my 2 cents worth. Have used a variety of bio starters. Mostly Bio Spira. Problem with it is sometimes the cultures are old or poorly stored. The most valuable to me has been the Seachem Stability. It doesn't cycle the fastest or faster than say a good bottle of Bio Spira, but it does appear to set up a more stable long term QT. When using it, according to the data I have collected in my QT logs, I have had the fewest needs to do water changes over a 30 day copper and 15 day or so General Cure treatment. That alone is more important to me than a quick ammonia + nitrite + nitrate start cycle.

I have used mostly stability as well

 

[MnFish1]

I started the poll not to get a winner but to see what product is being used efficiently by others,
As per my studies, I already know Fritz Turbostart 900 performed the best followed by Bio Spira and Dr Tim.
Surprisingly the poll reflects exactly the same results.

But that’s not quite true or is it. If you add carbon from the start the ones that lower ammonia. (Some didn’t). Are equivalent or almost equivalent to fritz or am I incorrect. The seneye experiments will be interesting

EDIT you already answered that they were equivalent. Cross posted. Sorry

 

[mikeyn]

Which would suggest that there is no particular advantage to Fritz over the others? (i.e. the one's that seemed to work) - based on this study. Because all over the forum on various forums one sees - well Fritz seems to work the best based on these studies - and (unless one believes as I do that true nitrifying cycle with nitrifiers i.e. Fritz is better than cycling with heterotrophs (@brandon429 ????). I guess I would make that clearer in the results.

You can't cycle with heterotrophic bacteria. You need nitrifiers.

 

[MnFish1]

You can't cycle with heterotrophic bacteria. You need nitrifiers.

Thanks - as I said - I agree with you. others think the if the ammonia drops - its as good no matter what the bacteria in the bottle is. In these studies (we dont know whats in the bottles) - after adding fish food to the tank, the ammonia drops as quickly as fritz. I have an idea why - but - Im curious - (and I dont know if the other products are marketed as such) - if you jump start with heterotrophs - and allow oligotrophs to seed the tank naturally as @brandon429 suggests - is there really a difference. Again not a debate - but a question.

 

[MnFish1]

Thanks - as I said - I agree with you. others think the if the ammonia drops - its as good no matter what the bacteria in the bottle is. In these studies (we dont know whats in the bottles) - after adding fish food to the tank, the ammonia drops as quickly as fritz. I have an idea why - but - Im curious - (and I dont know if the other products are marketed as such) - if you jump start with heterotrophs - and allow oligotrophs to seed the tank naturally as @brandon429 suggests - is there really a difference. Again not a debate - but a question.

Frankly - it seems like Fritz has had a lot of free advertising - because it works at xxxx ammonia levels. The question is - are the bottles containing heterotrophs as good (based on ammonia levels they are) - If indeed they contain heterotrophs (no one knows). Ive used your product I know it works. But - the conventional wisdom based on the study here is that it is far superior than others - I'm not sure I agree.

 

[Victoria M]

Frankly - it seems like Fritz has had a lot of free advertising - because it works at xxxx ammonia levels. The question is - are the bottles containing heterotrophs as good (based on ammonia levels they are) - If indeed they contain heterotrophs (no one knows). Ive used your product I know it works. But - the conventional wisdom based on the study here is that it is far superior than others - I'm not sure I agree.

Well, if I have fish in a tank and I have an ammonia spike, I want to to come down quickly. Fritz might be best for that.

 

[MnFish1]

Well, if I have fish in a tank and I have an ammonia spike, I want to to come down quickly. Fritz might be best for that.

agreed -but based on what?

 

[Dr. Reef]

I like to put this to rest as well by using 6 products and adding fish food with bacteria and see how fast they all cycle the tanks.
This will show if one has advantage over the other but I agree with @mikeyn that you cannot cycle a tank with hetrotorph bacteria. I can test this by dosing 0.5 ammonia after cycling to see if they still are able to reduce anmonia.

 

[MnFish1]

I like to put this to rest as well by using 6 products and adding fish food with bacteria and see how fast they all cycle the tanks.
This will show if one has advantage over the other but I agree with @mikeyn that you annot cycle a tank with hetrotorph bacteria.

I dont disagree - but what do you base this on?

 

[Dr. Reef]

Heterotrophic bacteria are basically sludge removers. They require carbon source as their primary fuel with an uptake of ammonia.
If one was to cycle with such bacteria you may see a reduction of ammonia over time as this bacteria does not live in exact ratio against ammonia being produced like true nitrifier bacteria does. This Heterotrophic bacteria will continue to grow in numbers and much much faster than true nitrifier bacteria and consume large amounts of carbon and along with ammonia which buys one enough time till true nitrifier bacteria starts to colonize.
I bet somehow if we could restrict true nitrifier bacteria to enter a tank cycled with hetrotorph bacteria we will find out after a while tank may not hold cycle when fish waste and fish food start to add lots of carbon to the tank and this bacteria will take it up more and more while ammonia will be taken up less.

 

[MnFish1]

Heterotrophic bacteria are basically sludge removers. They require carbon source as their primary fuel with an uptake of ammonia.
If one was to cycle with such bacteria you may see a reduction of ammonia over time as this bacteria does not live in exact ratio against ammonia being produced like true nitrifier bacteria does. This Heterotrophic bacteria will continue to grow in numbers and much much faster than true nitrifier bacteria and consume large amounts of carbon and along with ammonia which buys one enough time till true nitrifier bacteria starts to colonize.
I bet somehow if we could restrict true nitrifier bacteria to enter a tank cycled with hetrotorph bacteria we will find out after a while tank may not hold cycle when fish waste and fish food start to add lots of carbon to the tank and this bacteria will take it up more and more while ammonia will be taken up less.

The key word there was 'bet'. BTW - as I already stated - I think nitrifying bacteria (autotrophs) are optimal. The problem is this study - doesnt differentiate between which is better or worse long-term. Again my bet is that Fritz (type) is better - but - there is no way to make that conclusion based on this study. They all performed equally given the right substrate. This doesnt take away from what you've done - but - Though Fritz seems to be the winner - these studies suggest its the equivalent of the others - not superior. No offense to your work. If you do a Dr Tim's method the heterotrophs don't work. I personally think this is a silly way to do it (no offense to Dr. Tim). I have used stability many times with excellent results short and long-term. As have many others. So - (though Mikeyn) has a theory - he also has a vested interest - I do not. I find Fritz and Stability to be equivalent when followed per the instructions. The fact that Mikeyn says a tank can't be cycled with heerotrophs may be true - but in the meantime - autotrophs are growing as well. Heterotrophs may be a jump-start.

 

[MnFish1]

You can't cycle with heterotrophic bacteria. You need nitrifiers.

I agree with you - as I said in one of my posts. There is a debate here (and on another thread) about this topic. You're the expert here (certainly not me) - How would you say that people that use something like stability or any of the other bacteria have success with the products that have no refrigeration required. (It has been suggested that these must contain heterotrophs). Do you think its that the heterotrophs take care of the minimal amount of ammonia produced by fish - and the nitrifies build up on their own - or another reason?

 

[MnFish1]

I like to put this to rest as well by using 6 products and adding fish food with bacteria and see how fast they all cycle the tanks.
This will show if one has advantage over the other but I agree with @mikeyn that you cannot cycle a tank with hetrotorph bacteria. I can test this by dosing 0.5 ammonia after cycling to see if they still are able to reduce anmonia.

The question is 'what is a cycle'. Because re-reading your post above - you say you can't cycle a tank with heterotroph bacteria. The next sentence you say you can test (after cycling) by adding ammonia. If heterotrophs cant 'cycle a tank' Your 2 sentences kind of contradict each other.

BTW - we don't know for sure what bacteria are contained in some of the products whether its a mixture of heterotrophs, autotrophs or some of the newer bacteria that can live in harsh conditions - such as the Archaea 'Archaea carry out many steps in the nitrogen cycle. This includes both reactions that remove nitrogen from ecosystems (such as nitrate-based respiration and denitrification) as well as processes that introduce nitrogen (such as nitrate assimilation and nitrogen fixation).[177][178] Researchers recently discovered archaeal involvement in ammonia oxidation reactions. These reactions are particularly important in the oceans.[127][179] The archaea also appear crucial for ammonia oxidation in soils. They produce nitrite, which other microbes then oxidize to nitrate. Plants and other organisms consume the latter.'

 

[fogcutter]

Been following this thread with great interest and I'm going to parrot many others in saying ...thanks! Not new to reefing but I haven't cycled a tank in a very long time. Not to stray too far off topic...what I'm seeing from this thread/s is that after I've filled my tank with LR and sand I can dump the appropriate amount of one of these products and have a cycled tank ready for fish in days. Am i getting that right? Conventional wisdom on cycling can last as long as 4 months and these products cut that down to days? Trying to understand.

 

[brandon429]

There are times during tank rescues, unplanned moves or upgrades, where quick bioload support is required and these bottle bac can be harnessed to work, but yours seems like an origination question

Ideally we are dealing with quarantined fish + fallow-passed substrates to have the best chance for your fish investment when being quick-added

In my cycling threads we require at least 12-15 days submersion time with bottle bac and ammonia added, before fish, if the disease protocol isn't wanted by the keeper. This is safe, allowing extra days. If you needed a true instant start that can be designed, but it's rarely used since a couple weeks prep is easy and works without variation.