- Joined
- Nov 17, 2020
- Messages
- 84
- Reaction score
- 91
- Location
- NJ
- What state or country do you live in
- New Jersey
The arrogance and the hubris I just have to respond. You are going to run cytology ? Fancy Jargon. And what exactly are you going to do and how are you going to conduct the “cytology” experiment ? What exactly will you prove, what is the actual hypothesis you plan to “prove it “? After all, it’s just science, right ? Are you going to swab two different rocks and count bacteria under a microscope? Or perhaps you would use flow cytometry? But of course as you know, that only shows cell type and size, scattering etc so you would need to couple it with some type of genetic sequencing technology. So do you plan to use a technique similar to environmental DNA, in which you would use PCR to look for and identify and then amplify the identifying genetic sequence fragments of certain bacteria ? Which Bacteria ? How do you know which bacteria you will be looking at ? Are you going to look for just nitrosomonas ? How would you even identify if you are looking at nitrosomonas? Do you have access to commercially available PCR primers that could amplify a nitrosomonas sequence, or would you have to synthesize them yourself ? Or maybe you plan to use something like proteomics or identification of certain mRNAs or proteins specific to the bacteria in question ? In which case I assume you have access to advanced liquid chromatography mass spectrometry systems with data processing software that require phd level training and experience to operate and interpret the data ? Suppose you somehow are able to accomplish one of these and suppose you somehow establish a quantitative correlation between, let’s say, abundance of nitrosomonas spp. on dry cycled rock vs wild ocean rock. Do you think that actually proves anything ? Where did you obtain the sample ? From the surface of the rock? Or would you drill into the rock and take samples from the interior ? How would you ensure that signals you are somehow measuring are from the bacteria on the rock and not contamination from the surrounding environment ? Do you honestly think that just the presence or even relative abundance of nitrosomonas spp, a single species, is the sole contributor to biological stability ? There are probably millions of species present on live rock. In fact I know so. If you were to sample and then shotgun PCR amplify the extract or a sample from actual live rock, the number of hits you would get against a database would be off the charts. My bet is if you used a sequencing technology of some sort on the ocean live rock, and ran it through a database of known microbial sequences such as a basic local alignment search tool, you would likely even find some that probably have no known match or alignment.If I had the extra money / didn't care getting scammed id buy some "live rock" and run cytology to prove it, someone wants this experiment done send me some supplies ^,^ , id wager, that you will have a more robust cycle with dry rock and coralline spores, pure nitrosomonas a copepod and bush style macroalgae
, I think people run into mistakes in other places and end up thinking its the rock /cycle of the tank or failing to forget that what goes in has to come out or perish , that rock aint the reason you overdosed beneficial bacteria , alot died, and now your phosphates 2.0 :D (just an example) -- alot of time people think the rocks are leeching phosphate but its not that at all, youre adding way too much bacteria and when it dies its converting straight into organic phosphate.
As a side note, ill actually take and drop some rocks in the local ocean this coming spring/summer and cycle some dry rock myself to run this test :D -- sad truth is the current state of all reefs around the worlds ***** grim, where are they pulling healthy reef from arent we at like 80% mortality in past 10 years?
Last edited:


