Fritzyme 9 modified cycle

[Garf]

I´m awaiting your next test result. If you read my 15 steps - you will see that I suggest a PO4 dose too. (not vinegar though) Even the autotroph nitrificators need PO4 !

Generally adding of DOC will favour heterotrophs and disfavour the autotrophs. However the second stage bacteria - when they kick in - will convert produced NO2 quickly into NO3. I have seen 1- 2 mg/L NO3 been converted into NO3 in less than 10 hours when it kicks in

Sincerely Lasse

12 hrs after adding 2ppm ammonia, bloom still well underway.

I might just ditch the water, see what the rock can do without all that 3 dimensional stuff going on it the water, where I’m sure is where most/all of the activity is taking place.

 

[Garf]

I´m awaiting your next test result. If you read my 15 steps - you will see that I suggest a PO4 dose too. (not vinegar though) Even the autotroph nitrificators need PO4 !

Generally adding of DOC will favour heterotrophs and disfavour the autotrophs. However the second stage bacteria - when they kick in - will convert produced NO2 quickly into NO3. I have seen 1- 2 mg/L NO3 been converted into NO3 in less than 10 hours when it kicks in

Sincerely Lasse

Nitrate is zero

With that high C/N ratio, there's a bunch of possibilities.
"Simultaneous heterotrophic nitrification/denitrification" is a thing that comes up in research papers.
Also, you grew a bunch of biomass, all forms of N are fair game if that much C is around.

so, it appears, lol.

I think you are ascribing things to things that do not relate - and IMHO - you have too many variables to tell anything except - that your tank can process ammonia quickly (which is good)- IMHO - nothing can be judged as to what bacteria, etc are doing the job. One issue with experimental design - promoted in this forum - is giving your thesis - and performing the experiment - as compared to adding multiple more variables after the fact.

on the upside, this messing about has prompted me to test the nitrate in my display for the first time in ages.

 

[Garf]

Ditched the water, left a biofilm of unknown origin on the ceramic rock (hopefully), rinsed tank and equipment in tap water. Any requests before I add ammonia and phos?

 

[taricha]

This is nice, @Garf . It seems that whatever bacteria is eating the ammonia, it still had plenty of punch left for the second round. I'm not convinced that there wasn't still some organic carbon left either as the vinegar or a by-product. So I'm interested in what will happen after your volume water change.
In either case, this gives a good demonstration/baseline for me for later, if I can't get heterotroph bacteria to bring the ammonia down to Zero from fish food. Acetate seems a very effective carbon source for this purpose in a saltwater system and not just in the published papers.

 

[MnFish1]

I´m awaiting your next test result. If you read my 15 steps - you will see that I suggest a PO4 dose too. (not vinegar though) Even the autotroph nitrificators need PO4 !

Generally adding of DOC will favour heterotrophs and disfavour the autotrophs. However the second stage bacteria - when they kick in - will convert produced NO2 quickly into NO3. I have seen 1- 2 mg/L NO3 been converted into NO3 in less than 10 hours when it kicks in

Sincerely Lasse

Agree - however, I believe 0.5 ppm was added which is a little high - and could also favor heterotrophs over autotrophs no?

 

[MnFish1]

Ditched the water, left a biofilm of unknown origin on the ceramic rock (hopefully), rinsed tank and equipment in tap water. Any requests before I add ammonia and phos?

I would keep replicating the experiment - I think you're adding too much PO4 - but since you started with 0.5 - I would merely continue that. I would buy a new bottle *unopened bottle of H2O2 - if you want to try that again.

 

[Azedenkae]

Thought I’d go “live bacteria” route for cycling a QT as the wife is itching to get a few fish in her tank. The most available bacteria by me was Fritzyme 9, so that’s what I went with.

Tank, ceramic rock, heater, Circulation pump were all bleached for 24 hrs then allowed to dry for 24 hrs prior to start up.

1) 40 liters of RODI / saltwater (Tropic Marin Classic) was added to the tank at 30ppt.
2) Tank heated to 26C
3) Added 50mls white vinegar (tank pH at 7.4 to 7.6ish), a bit vague but didn’t fancy messing with pH probes.
4) Added TriSodium Phosphate to 0.5ppm tested Hanna/API combo
5) Added Fritzyme 9 (8 ounce) as suggested by fritz for new startups.
6) Added 2ml Dr Tim’s ammonia.

The TAN according to API was good enough on 2ppm (photo is next to a freshwater card so you can ignore the color chart)

Tank tested this morning, a little over 18 hrs after bacterial addition has showed a 50% reduction in NH3/NH4, an increase in Nitrite and pH. In particular pH is now above 7.8
The Seachem ammonia alert has only now started to indicate a slight tinge, presumably due to the pH increasing, but still safe.

Tank is cloudy.

Fuzzy pics;

I am surprised FritzZyme 9 worked that fast!

I would not be surprised if it was FritzZyme TurboStart 900, since that is known to work super fast, but for the non-concentrated version to work that fast... whew!

 

[Lasse]

It looks like the system have processed 3 mg/L NH4 - this - with total conversion be around 10 ppm NO3. You should be able to get some colour on a NO3 test.

and could also favor heterotrophs over autotrophs no?

As long as it is readable numbers of PO4 - its not the limited factor - but DOC is IME. I do not know if Autotrophs or Heterotrophs is best in low concentrations of PO4 though.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[MnFish1]

It looks like the system have processed 3 mg/L NH4 - this - with total conversion be around 10 ppm NO3. You should be able to get some colour on a NO3 test.

As long as it is readable numbers of PO4 - its not the limited factor - but DOC is IME. I do not know if Autotrophs or Heterotrophs is best in low concentrations of PO4 though.

Sincerely Lasse

This was my thought - that as long as PO4 was not zero, that was enough for obligate autotrophs. However heterotrophs - which grow much fasters - compared with autotrophs which double in hours/days as compared to minutes for heterotrophs - would use much more PO4 - and could be limited by low PO4. In all of the experiments done by Dr. Reef, and myself - I don't recall ever seeing a bacteria bloom - when ammonia (alone) was used with low levels of PO4.

 

[Gumbies R Us]

Following along, this has been an interesting to read

 

[taricha]

To keep in mind for this discussion and comparison with published papers.
50ml vinegar was added to 40L.
Approximately 50g * 5% = 2.5g acetic acid.
2.5g * 40% carbon = 1g carbon =1000mg.
1000mg/40L = 25 mg/L Carbon added to 2 mg/L Nitrogen.
12.5 : 1 ratio of C:N by mass (or 14:1 by moles).

This is a good ratio to expect heterotrophic nitrification. Published papers commonly use C:N values around 10:1 and above and below.

 

[MnFish1]

To keep in mind for this discussion and comparison with published papers.
50ml vinegar was added to 40L.
Approximately 50g * 5% = 2.5g acetic acid.
2.5g * 40% carbon = 1g carbon =1000mg.
1000mg/40L = 25 mg/L Carbon added to 2 mg/L Nitrogen.
12.5 : 1 ratio of C:N by mass (or 14:1 by moles).

This is a good ratio to expect heterotrophic nitrification. Published papers commonly use C:N values around 10:1 and above and below.

Can you clarify? What do you mean C:N values 10:1 above and below? (because that implies any ration of C:N would expect heterotrophic nitrification - and are you saying that these amounts would favor heterotrophs over obligate autotrophs?

 

[taricha]

More stuff on the context for how to think of a 10:1 C/N ratio....

"The effect of C/N ratio on the NH4-N removal efficiency of strain N31 is shown in Fig. 4B. There were significant differences among C/N ratios of 0-5 (P < 0.05), then the NH4-N removal efficiency remained stable for C/N ratio 5-20, reaching removal percentages of approximately 90%. However, some heterotrophic nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria have depressed nitrogen removal performance in nitrification medium with a C/N ratio less
than 10 (17,33). The tolerance of strain N31 to a wide C/N range extends its application scope to include aquaculture ponds or systems with low C/N ratio of 3-8 and treatment of wastewater or sediment with high C/N ratio by carbon source addition (18,19,34). This result is consistent with the excellent heterotrophic nitrification performance of B. methylotrophicus L7 at the C/N ratio of 6-20 (12)."

Here's the fig 4B referenced.

Characterization of novel Bacillus strain N31 from mariculture water capable of halophilic heterotrophic nitrification–aerobic denitrification[pdf]​

 

[Garf]

I’ve added some aeration, lol

 

[Lasse]

pH?

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Garf]

pH?

Sincerely Lasse

8.2

 

[MnFish1]

@Garf - IMHO - you need to determine the things listed at the top of the experimental forum - then do the experiment and report it. That is/was AFAIK - the reason for this forum - so to avoid just random things/"experiments" being considered as such.

 

[MnFish1]

More stuff on the context for how to think of a 10:1 C/N ratio....

"The effect of C/N ratio on the NH4-N removal efficiency of strain N31 is shown in Fig. 4B. There were significant differences among C/N ratios of 0-5 (P < 0.05), then the NH4-N removal efficiency remained stable for C/N ratio 5-20, reaching removal percentages of approximately 90%. However, some heterotrophic nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria have depressed nitrogen removal performance in nitrification medium with a C/N ratio less
than 10 (17,33). The tolerance of strain N31 to a wide C/N range extends its application scope to include aquaculture ponds or systems with low C/N ratio of 3-8 and treatment of wastewater or sediment with high C/N ratio by carbon source addition (18,19,34). This result is consistent with the excellent heterotrophic nitrification performance of B. methylotrophicus L7 at the C/N ratio of 6-20 (12)."

Here's the fig 4B referenced.

Characterization of novel Bacillus strain N31 from mariculture water capable of halophilic heterotrophic nitrification–aerobic denitrification[pdf]​

This is interesting - but IMHO - has nothing to do with the current experiment, etc. Nor do C:N Ratios. So though it seems like science is being thrown at something - IMHO - it's not accurate. This single strain of bacteria - has nothing to do with the real world.

 

[Garf]

@Garf - IMHO - you need to determine the things listed at the top of the experimental forum - then do the experiment and report it. That is/was AFAIK - the reason for this forum - so to avoid just random things/"experiments" being considered as such.

Ahh, didn’t notice that, cheers.

 

[MnFish1]

Ahh, didn’t notice that, cheers.

It wasn't a criticism. - Just - trying to figure out what you're trying to prove?