"Biodiversity is dead, long live biodiversity" 10 month microbiome data from BRStv.

[taricha]

This was more than I bargained for and checked out pages ago. Was more than my ADD can tolerate. Best I can gather there’s likely no way to really know therefore I’m just going to continue with my approach of seeding with every bacterial product I can get my hands on along with live rubble mixed in and let the hunger games begin. Seems best I could grasp end of day some will survive. Some won’t. Every tank is different therefore which will and won’t a big unknown. Survival of the fittest will continue to be my approach. Anyone disagree please let me know and why.

At a minimum. Seems I can’t rely on those biome tests I was hoping I could. Crap shoot again

Well, these threads get a little long and hairy.
I gather your question is that your current method for a tank start or refresh is to add a mix of multiple different bacteria bottles and live rubble and let them settle out over time - and you'd like to know if that method is giving you a good robust bacterial community, and if the microbiome test can confirm that result.

The live Rubble is likely to contain strains that will seed and become the eventual stable community - it will also contain strains that will fade out over time. The Bottled bacteria is likely to contain strains that are more temporary in nature - may do something for a short time and then are not detected afterwards. Adding bottled bacteria does create a response in the bacterial community - a response much like adding nutrients or carbon dosing. Here's more detail on the bottled bac side...

e) bottled bacterial products
linkq3e
“There’s always a very short list of [bacterial] ingredients, 2 or 3 - maybe some might have 7. Almost none of those seem to persist very long in the aquarium.” and even if they all did, that small number of types would do almost nothing for measured diversity.

linkQ3e2
“The components of bottled bacterial products are not the components of a reef tank microbiome, in a venn diagram there’s little intersection between those two circles. The viewer can interpret that how they wish.”
These products DO have an effect on the microbiome of the tank. These effects are seen over and over. If you dose most bottled bacterial products, you will see a bloom in the family Fusobacteriaceae (one of the families Eli has said increase from carbon dosing). But this family is not a component of the bottled products. A lot of the effects that we see from bottled products probably come from the addition of nutrients in the bottles that feed bacteria resident in the tank already.
It seems they are selecting bacteria for the bottles intended for a specific purpose “consuming ammonia” “degrading polysaccharides form algal cell walls” but having those bacteria become part of the ongoing community is not an expectation and it doesn’t seem to happen.
Eli says he thinks they are overused in the hobby and adding to an established tank is probably not a sensible use of the products.

And here's some info about live rock/rubble

Q13 Under what situations does Eli think that live rubble and live sand/mud are useful for the bacterial community?
LinkQ13
Eli has done experiments using live reef rubble (live rock in the form of dead coral skeletons) to establish a good community to start a tank and live sand/mud to enhance a community in an established tank. Perhaps the added surface area of sand/mud makes it more useful in a system already established. But it may be that both materials are good in both situations, but the experiments are as listed above.

Regardless of your starting material, the early microbiome results will show a "wild west" - so you have the right idea on that. And over a time scale of months - that community will settle down into a stable mature community. Many reef tanks converge to a very similar mature stable community. But it is possible to have certain effects cause some tanks to converge to a different unusual stable community.

Microbiome reports are useful on a number of these questions. In my opinion a useful report for what I think you are asking about would be if you had two reports at say 4 and 6 months and it showed that the bacterial community was stable, and a lot like typical mature reef communities.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

It would really do a lot in the way of adding credibility to the results if there was another lab or company with a lab doing the same type of work. I always have to take information with a grain of salt if the company analyzing the sample or product is also the company selling the product or a cure for the tank the sample came from.

 

[taricha]

True @livinlifeinBKK, I'm always skeptical of something that is offered in this hobby that few or no one can verify. I will say - at least on the coral pathogen side of things, this is actually happening. University microbiology labs are also testing the emerging story of the connections between captive coral disease, specific bacterial species, and their treatments with antibiotics. So far the results I'm aware of are telling the same story whether by aquabiomics or academic labs.

I'm doubtful this hobby can support multiple water DNA testing services when the benefits of such services are so debatable and the info provided so technical. Feels like a small potential pool of users.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

True @livinlifeinBKK, I'm always skeptical of something that is offered in this hobby that few or no one can verify. I will say - at least on the coral pathogen side of things, this is actually happening. University microbiology labs are also testing the emerging story of the connections between captive coral disease, specific bacterial species, and their treatments with antibiotics. So far the results I'm aware of are telling the same story whether by aquabiomics or academic labs.

I'm doubtful this hobby can support multiple water DNA testing services when the benefits of such services are so debatable and the info provided so technical. Feels like a small potential pool of users.

Good to hear that the university studies seem to align with those performed by Aquabiomics

 

[GARRIGA]

Well, these threads get a little long and hairy.
I gather your question is that your current method for a tank start or refresh is to add a mix of multiple different bacteria bottles and live rubble and let them settle out over time - and you'd like to know if that method is giving you a good robust bacterial community, and if the microbiome test can confirm that result.

The live Rubble is likely to contain strains that will seed and become the eventual stable community - it will also contain strains that will fade out over time. The Bottled bacteria is likely to contain strains that are more temporary in nature - may do something for a short time and then are not detected afterwards. Adding bottled bacteria does create a response in the bacterial community - a response much like adding nutrients or carbon dosing. Here's more detail on the bottled bac side...


And here's some info about live rock/rubble


Regardless of your starting material, the early microbiome results will show a "wild west" - so you have the right idea on that. And over a time scale of months - that community will settle down into a stable mature community. Many reef tanks converge to a very similar mature stable community. But it is possible to have certain effects cause some tanks to converge to a different unusual stable community.

Microbiome reports are useful on a number of these questions. In my opinion a useful report for what I think you are asking about would be if you had two reports at say 4 and 6 months and it showed that the bacterial community was stable, and a lot like typical mature reef communities.

Thank you for that. Much easier to digest and explains why perhaps certain products are marketed as ongoing maintenance. I've always assumed that any bacteria added would just self replicate overtime but at a minimum now I know I can shot gun at start to get the process going although probably with just the one product or two (for example One and Only to introduce nitrifiers followed by MB7 or waste away to introduce herotrophic) since the rest aren't adding usefulness diversity to the mix but still need live ocean material to best establish that community. Rock rubble being the most practical for me since I can place that in a reactor (I'm assuming) to seed the tank and still have my dry rock for the architecture. I like me those purple arches I can't deny. This is what I gleamed from your response and that I've read early on in this thread and other sources.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Thank you for that. Much easier to digest and explains why perhaps certain products are marketed as ongoing maintenance. I've always assumed that any bacteria added would just self replicate overtime but at a minimum now I know I can shot gun at start to get the process going although probably with just the one product or two (for example One and Only to introduce nitrifiers followed by MB7 or waste away to introduce herotrophic) since the rest aren't adding usefulness diversity to the mix but still need live ocean material to best establish that community. Rock rubble being the most practical for me since I can place that in a reactor (I'm assuming) to seed the tank and still have my dry rock for the architecture. I like me those purple arches I can't deny. This is what I gleamed from your response and that I've read early on in this thread and other sources.

That's another thing I've always been skeptical about...it doesn't seem adding a few grams of crushed up rock would do much if anything in regards to populating a large or even medium sized tank. Also they live on surfaces so I'd doubt throwing them in a reactor is really going to be very effective overall...i think your idea is to scatter the bacteria all over the tank but if a few bacteria are surrounded by hundreds of others, I don't think they'll make it too long unless there's something very special about that particular bacteria

 

[GARRIGA]

That's another thing I've always been skeptical about...it doesn't seem adding a few grams of crushed up rock would do much if anything in regards to populating a large or even medium sized tank. Also they live on surfaces so I'd doubt throwing them in a reactor is really going to be very effective overall...i think your idea is to scatter the bacteria all over the tank but if a few bacteria are surrounded by hundreds of others, I don't think they'll make it too long unless there's something very special about that particular bacteria

Thought process being as the colony expands within the rubble inside the reactor that would flow into the main tank. Benthic bacteria must have a free swimming stage otherwise tanks of old setup with nothing but damsels and dry rock would never self populate with functioning nitrifiers. Plus sticking the rubble in the main would require tank current to spread as well. Don't think they crawl from rock to rock. As I understand it.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Thought process being as the colony expands within the rubble inside the reactor that would flow into the main tank. Benthic bacteria must have a free swimming stage otherwise tanks of old setup with nothing but damsels and dry rock would never self populate with functioning nitrifiers. Plus sticking the rubble in the main would require tank current to spread as well. Don't think they crawl from rock to rock. As I understand it.

If they're on rubble then a majority of them will not be free swimming. You're correct that some will be scattered and dispersed through the aquarium, but again, if they naturally form biofilms they are going to be very vulnerable to competition initially. Also, the environment conditions both biotic and abiotic affect settlement and how easily they'll form their biofilm. Some actually can migrate on their own. This is why I don't see a few grams of gravel being very effective. I certainly wouldn't expect them to multiply very quickly on new surfaces either although that depends on the species.

 

[GARRIGA]

If they're on rubble then a majority of them will not be free swimming. You're correct that some will be scattered and dispersed through the aquarium, but again, if they naturally form biofilms they are going to be very vulnerable to competition initially. Also, the environment conditions both biotic and abiotic affect settlement and how easily they'll form their biofilm. Some actually can migrate on their own. This is why I don't see a few grams of gravel being very effective. I certainly wouldn't expect them to multiply very quickly on new surfaces either although that depends on the species.

But multiple eventually they will and all I seek is seeding the tank with these bacteria vs trying to source a display full of Fiji which now only exists in other’s tanks. Do have GOM as a source but I’m also not looking to build a rock of walls 80 style. Partial to those ledges and only option is finding seed material and letting time solve it for me.

As you stated. Some will dislodge and become available to populate elsewhere. Fact is everything develops a biofilm where none existed. They migrated there somehow. I’m just facilitating the selection of what migrates and housing outside the main yet in the direct flow that interacts with it.

Am I wrong in assuming at some point in the future that isolated will eventually dominate the landscape? Reefing is about patience and expect everything will take longer than wanted.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

But multiple eventually they will and all I seek is seeding the tank with these bacteria vs trying to source a display full of Fiji which now only exists in other’s tanks. Do have GOM as a source but I’m also not looking to build a rock of walls 80 style. Partial to those ledges and only option is finding seed material and letting time solve it for me.

As you stated. Some will dislodge and become available to populate elsewhere. Fact is everything develops a biofilm where none existed. They migrated there somehow. I’m just facilitating the selection of what migrates and housing outside the main yet in the direct flow that interacts with it.

Am I wrong in assuming at some point in the future that isolated will eventually dominate the landscape? Reefing is about patience and expect everything will take longer than wanted.

Just addressing your last question here...no, your not wrong in assuming that eventually some of the bacterial strains will firm biofilm of some consistency. It won't be like the original biofilm coating the rubble and some strains will spread at a much faster rate than others and be more agressive so there will be less evenness among strains I'd imagine with a few being almost completely dominant. That's sorta my point. It's advertised (are least from my understanding) to increase the biodiversity in your tank by a large margin. However, I would expect it to spread very slowly and unevenly and a lot of the original biodiversity will not be able to build much of a population at all. I wouldn't say the waiting game needs to be as drawn out as possible for success. Yes, patience is very important but the algae, dinos, and other undesirables won't be so patient and wait. They'll also change the community structure of the biofilm.

 

[GARRIGA]

Just addressing your last question here...no, your not wrong in assuming that eventually some of the bacterial strains will firm biofilm of some consistency. It won't be like the original biofilm coating the rubble and some strains will spread at a much faster rate than others and be more agressive so there will be less evenness among strains I'd imagine with a few being almost completely dominant. That's sorta my point. It's advertised (are least from my understanding) to increase the biodiversity in your tank by a large margin. However, I would expect it to spread very slowly and unevenly and a lot of the original biodiversity will not be able to build much of a population at all. I wouldn't say the waiting game needs to be as drawn out as possible for success. Yes, patience is very important but the algae, dinos, and other undesirables won't be so patient and wait. They'll also change the community structure of the biofilm.

I don't worry about algae, dinos or others issues such as cyano. My test tank has gone through most of that although no dino that I was aware of. Could be the blackout period until fully cycled. Started with dry rock and only additive being bacteria in a bottle plus some wild damsels, CUC and introduced red algae via the CUC. Had diatoms to start but only because I started with tap because I did some de-chlorinated tap for a while as part of my experiments. CupriSorb solved that although I'm guessing time would have also as the silica were consumed. Fact is that's the first time I've ever had diatoms including FW.

As for what will survive a great unknown and since adding live rock to the display not an option then this may be my only remedy plus ocean direct sand not feasible nor do I want sand in the display. Will be using 2LF Reborn as I am now. Old skeletons but doubt any bacteria remain. Although does serve as rubble once seeded for the main. Thinking perhaps I can mix all in a Brute and circulate for several weeks to seed the dead coral skeletons. Other option being just place the ocean rubble in the display since goal is to go fishless until fully cycled as I did last and that might be more efficient than the reactor since then I can just hide that rubble behind the ledges. I have time to decide.

That most fit to survive in my little slice of life all I can expect and I'm fine with that plus another reason for the reactor being the addition of new live rubble to replace the old thereby constantly introducing new strains and let the hunger games decide.

As for live sand, something I've considered is placing that in a fluidized bed reactor. Nothing more complicated then reducing flow until it shuffles internally. Constant erosion of dead bacteria might also dislodge that still living and perhaps a better dispersion than rubble plus considerably more surface area thereby considerably much more bacteria. Still working out the logistics of my closed loop system to make this all work. Although simple manifold can make this happen and supposedly that sand has been found to contain actual live bacteria. I take that with a grain of salt but what other options are there?

Why cherish these discussions. Constanly brings new avenues of thought that will hopefully end in better results.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

I don't worry about algae, dinos or others issues such as cyano. My test tank has gone through most of that although no dino that I was aware of. Could be the blackout period until fully cycled. Started with dry rock and only additive being bacteria in a bottle plus some wild damsels, CUC and introduced red algae via the CUC. Had diatoms to start but only because I started with tap because I did some de-chlorinated tap for a while as part of my experiments. CupriSorb solved that although I'm guessing time would have also as the silica were consumed. Fact is that's the first time I've ever had diatoms including FW.

As for what will survive a great unknown and since adding live rock to the display not an option then this may be my only remedy plus ocean direct sand not feasible nor do I want sand in the display. Will be using 2LF Reborn as I am now. Old skeletons but doubt any bacteria remain. Although does serve as rubble once seeded for the main. Thinking perhaps I can mix all in a Brute and circulate for several weeks to seed the dead coral skeletons. Other option being just place the ocean rubble in the display since goal is to go fishless until fully cycled as I did last and that might be more efficient than the reactor since then I can just hide that rubble behind the ledges. I have time to decide.

That most fit to survive in my little slice of life all I can expect and I'm fine with that plus another reason for the reactor being the addition of new live rubble to replace the old thereby constantly introducing new strains and let the hunger games decide.

As for live sand, something I've considered is placing that in a fluidized bed reactor. Nothing more complicated then reducing flow until it shuffles internally. Constant erosion of dead bacteria might also dislodge that still living and perhaps a better dispersion than rubble plus considerably more surface area thereby considerably much more bacteria. Still working out the logistics of my closed loop system to make this all work. Although simple manifold can make this happen and supposedly that sand has been found to contain actual live bacteria. I take that with a grain of salt but what other options are there?

Why cherish these discussions. Constanly brings new avenues of thought that will hopefully end in better results.

It really does bring new thoughts out! Regarding the chlorine, Cuprisorb only removes heavy metals...the chlorine almost certainly evaporated. You could actually just leave it to sit for 24 hours and a majority of the chlorine would be gone. Not sure about chloramines however...they were likely just at a low concentration.

 

[GARRIGA]

It really does bring new thoughts out! Regarding the chlorine, Cuprisorb only removes heavy metals...the chlorine almost certainly evaporated. You could actually just leave it to sit for 24 hours and a majority of the chlorine would be gone. Not sure about chloramines however...they were likely just at a low concentration.

Chlorimine was removed with prime. What I meant by de-chlorinated. CupriSorb also removes silica which fed the diatoms and they were gone shortly after using it. Plus I wanted to ensure no copper via tap introduced. Never changed color therefore could be none existed. My tap is actually pretty good. Low phosphates, although I don't worry about that, either. Tap is checked every hour, 24/7/365 and any containments and the city sends out immediate alerts. Been through one past 14 years. Granted it might have other safe for humans but not corals and main will be RODI but I wanted to experiment. In the 80s I didn't even know what RO was and knew none using it. Might explain lack of success but we new to remove chlorine. No chloramine then, either.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Chlorimine was removed with prime. What I meant by de-chlorinated. CupriSorb also removes silica which fed the diatoms and they were gone shortly after using it. Plus I wanted to ensure no copper via tap introduced. Never changed color therefore could be none existed. My tap is actually pretty good. Low phosphates, although I don't worry about that, either. Tap is checked every hour, 24/7/365 and any containments and the city sends out immediate alerts. Been through one past 14 years. Granted it might have other safe for humans but not corals and main will be RODI but I wanted to experiment. In the 80s I didn't even know what RO was and knew none using it. Might explain lack of success but we new to remove chlorine. No chloramine then, either.

I think it's debatable that Prime actually does anything but you did fine with it I suppose. What do you mean by your last sentence?

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

This is my form or reef rubble btw...

 

[GARRIGA]

I think it's debatable that Prime actually does anything but you did fine with it I suppose. What do you mean by your last sentence?

Prime being disputed as to resolving ammonia but not de-chlorination.

In the 80s our tap was just chlorine. Ammonia wasn't added where I lived. this came about later to prolong the effectiveness of chlorine. As I understand it and why today you can't just let tap sit overnight to gas off chlorine. Need something such as Prime (Safer is cheaper) to break the bond.

 

[GARRIGA]

This is my form or reef rubble btw...

Are you using it as purely filtration or expecting it to seed the main display. Regardless if in sump or reactor they both perform the same.

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Are you using it as purely filtration or expecting it to seed the main display. Regardless if in sump or reactor they both perform the same.

It's not rubble, those are actually full size pieces of real ocean rock...I'm using it in the display for all the benefits...seeding, aquascaping, and everything else it was doing last week in the ocean

 

[livinlifeinBKK]

Prime being disputed as to resolving ammonia but not de-chlorination.

In the 80s our tap was just chlorine. Ammonia wasn't added where I lived. this came about later to prolong the effectiveness of chlorine. As I understand it and why today you can't just let tap sit overnight to gas off chlorine. Need something such as Prime (Safer is cheaper) to break the bond.

Well chlorine naturally reacts with any organic material to form chloramines...not only ammonia

 

[GARRIGA]

It's not rubble, those are actually full size pieces of real ocean rock...I'm using it in the display for all the benefits...seeding, aquascaping, and everything else it was doing last week in the ocean

I know they aren't rubble. Thought because on egg crate it was being used in a sump.