Waste Away: Is it really bacterial? Or chemical? What does it do?

[fermentedhiker]

Thanks, this will save a lot of time

Bacteria in a bottle, Myth or Fact

Call me old school, back in the day we placed a deli shrimp in a tank to kick start the cycle. When tank reached 1.5-2 ppm ammonia we pulled it out and waited sometimes weeks to months for bacteria to colonize and drop ammonia and nitrites down to 0 to make tank safe for livestock. With recent...

www.reef2reef.com

to make it easier to find since it's a bit older. He's running a new set of experiments with improved testing but no data has been posted in that one yet.

 

[Dan_P]

That was ammonia testing not sludge digestion testing. Ts thread is the first I’ve seen of this kind

My fault, sorry, I got off topic.

 

[brandon429]

I got confused at the pacing lol - thought fermented had seen this as a test for nitrifiers hey this is a good busy thread nite I’m on 5x at once

 

[Dan_P]

Bacteria in a bottle, Myth or Fact

Call me old school, back in the day we placed a deli shrimp in a tank to kick start the cycle. When tank reached 1.5-2 ppm ammonia we pulled it out and waited sometimes weeks to months for bacteria to colonize and drop ammonia and nitrites down to 0 to make tank safe for livestock. With recent...

www.reef2reef.com

to make it easier to find since it's a bit older. He's running a new set of experiments with improved testing but no data has been posted in that one yet.

Thanks! This helps. I remember glancing at this. It is now 88 pages! It will take a few cups of coffee to get through this thread.

 

[chefjpaul]

Amazing work and dedication.

 

[Greg P]

Excellent work @taricha
You've answered some of my suspicious thoughts

 

[taricha]

are there any measurable oxidizing characters for the solution, abiotic means

I don't think so. I'm guessing some of our tests might have picked it up if there were, but not sure. The main reason I don't think so is that we measured lots of organics in the media, and if there were also an oxidizing agent, it might be hard for that combo to stay stable in the bottle without the oxidizer substance reacting with the organics.

First, in your attempt to culture something from the product you used saltwater and stated that it should be ideal. My understanding(which admittedly is anecdotal) is that the bacteria that are supposedly contained in the product do not successfully reproduce or survive for very long in our tanks which would make using saltwater as a culture medium a nonstarter correct? Since these "bacteria" are supposedly based on wastewater management bacterial science wouldn't that be the place to start in terms of how to culture and what species might/should be involved?

Thanks for thoughtful reply and questions.
I'm with you. I was making all the same arguments to come up with reasons why the bacteria could do something meaningful that your aquarium bacteria don't, yet need to be re-added over and over. As I got further into it, those explanations all seemed less and less likely.
Even if this unlikely explanation (WA Bacteria for Reefs don't do well in saltwater) were true, W.A. bacteria (in theory) ought to consume uneaten food and waste - that's gotta be a minimal claim of what the product does. If they do that, then their activity would show up as oxygen consumption. But it doesn't.
Experiment 5:

WA that has been centrifuged to concentrate the bacteria in a pellet, then that pellet added to the sample shows no O2 consumption. All the oxygen consumption happens as a result of the Media in the WA bottle. WA boiled ("media") and Raw ("whole") WA ought to show a difference in oxygen consumption if the bacteria consume anything, but there is none.

And here's another experiment - Bonus Experiment 1 - along the same lines.
Two samples of tank water and one had grunge from my dirty sandbed added.

Day 3: Grunge was added to red data
Day 7 (stars): centrifuged pellet of WA bacteria/particles was added
Day 22 (X's): whole raw WA was added

So seemingly no oxygen consumption (aka digestion of organics) can be attributed to the solids in WA added on day 7. But a massive consumption of organics occurs upon adding the recommended dose of the WA media on day 22.

I have to say I don't buy the line of reasoning that they are a carbon/phosphorous source as a reason for them working(if they do) Most people using these products will be in a situation that isn't likely to be limited in nutrients and carbon dosing and it's effects(and how long they take to kick in) are fairly well documented at this point, and don't line up with the weekly dosing regimen these products typically recommend.

I'm not aware of anything that WA is confirmed to do other than what can be explained as an effect of a rich blend of novel carbon sources (consumption doesn't quite follow pattern of vinegar or vodka), plus some biologically relevant amounts of Phosphorus.

WA can produce a cloudy water bacterial bloom, It can reduce nutrients (P and especially N), it can slow nuisance growth.

What WA effect are we saying can't be from Organic Carbon blend + Phosphorus?

 

[Zerobytes]

Hey. Way over my head. What's the verdict in layman's terms?

 

[taricha]

Hey. Way over my head. What's the verdict in layman's terms?

WA sure looks a lot like a sophisticated carbon dosing cocktail.

Summary: If there's viable effective bacteria in Waste Away that do anything important in an aquarium context, I have no idea how to prove it. All the tests that I can come up with show the opposite. On the other hand, the effects of Waste Away are easily demonstrated, but a close analysis shows that all those effects can be accounted for by the chemistry of the Waste Away media. ...
I like and will continue to use Waste Away, but as a carbon source / nitrogen reduction / bacterial growth medium, not as a source for bacteria themselves.

 

[Charley]

Shouldn't Dr. Tim weigh in?

 

[taricha]

Shouldn't Dr. Tim weigh in?

@DrTim has posted on these forums before.
Manufacturers aren't required to tell us what's in their products, and these are just results of tests that anyone else could do and confirm, so there may not be much to say.
But if we got these results badly wrong, then yes. It would be helpful to know, and he'd probably want to weigh in.

 

[Charley]

@DrTim has posted on these forums before.
Manufacturers aren't required to tell us what's in their products, and these are just results of tests that anyone else could do and confirm, so there may not be much to say.
But if we got these results badly wrong, then yes. It would be helpful to know, and he'd probably want to weigh in.

Really curious.......had a bad case of dinoflagellates. On Reefdudes youtube there was a protocol to follow that was very specific that involved Dr. Tim's and ATM, plus vodka dosing and some hydrogen peroxide. Worked perfectly....... so it really makes this so confusing. It works, it doesn't work and everyone is clueless. But the tests above was great to see and much appreciated.....

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Shouldn't Dr. Tim weigh in?

manufacturers are welcome to comment in threads about their products (at least in this chemistry forum). Don’t be misled, however. Some don’t even understand their own products. I expect Tim knows his products well, but that doesn’t apply to all so don’t just blindly accept what they say.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Really curious.......had a bad case of dinoflagellates. On Reefdudes youtube there was a protocol to follow that was very specific that involved Dr. Tim's and ATM, plus vodka dosing and some hydrogen peroxide. Worked perfectly....... so it really makes this so confusing. It works, it doesn't work and everyone is clueless. But the tests above was great to see and much appreciated.....

when the detailed basis of how things work is often not understood, it can be hard to say where it will work and where not.

For example, if peroxide worked by making iron less bioavailable, the effects it has may depend on the amount and type of iron in the system, which is something reefers rarely know.

 

[Charley]

manufacturers are welcome to comment in threads about their products (at least in this chemistry forum). Don’t be misled, however. Some don’t even understand their own products. I expect Tim knows his products well, but that doesn’t apply to all so don’t just blindly accept what they say.

Well, whether ones bottle of bacteria or bacteria's works or not is one thing. But to perhaps simply be particulates floating around in a solution is another. Was going to use Dt. Tim's time release gel as maintenance for good bacteria going forward. Now.......

 

[Dan_P]

Really curious.......had a bad case of dinoflagellates. On Reefdudes youtube there was a protocol to follow that was very specific that involved Dr. Tim's and ATM, plus vodka dosing and some hydrogen peroxide. Worked perfectly....... so it really makes this so confusing. It works, it doesn't work and everyone is clueless. But the tests above was great to see and much appreciated.....

To be totally objective, you really don’t know why the protocol worked. Most of the actions taken could have been totally useless but one, possibly none of them. Also, it is very likely that the next time you follow this protocol or someone else follows this protocol, it will not work. Happy to hear you cleared up your dino issue though.

 

[Dan_P]

Well, whether ones bottle of bacteria or bacteria's works or not is one thing. But to perhaps simply be particulates floating around in a solution is another. Was going to use Dt. Tim's time release gel as maintenance for good bacteria going forward. Now.......

I always wondered why you have to keep dosing bacteria. If there is food in the aquarium and you introduce bacteria that like the food, end of story. They reproduce and do their job. The gel product makes no sense in this light.

 

[Charley]

I always wondered why you have to keep dosing bacteria. If there is food in the aquarium and you introduce bacteria that like the food, end of story. They reproduce and do their job. The gel product makes no sense in this light.

Ok, much appreciated....others have said the same and taking into serious consideration.

 

[Charley]

To be totally objective, you really don’t know why the protocol worked. Most of the actions taken could have been totally useless but one, possibly none of them. Also, it is very likely that the next time you follow this protocol or someone else follows this protocol, it will not work. Happy to hear you cleared up your dino issue though.

Well thanks. The person who suggested this protocol I believe is the public water treatment line of work. Been 3 months, dinoflagellates still gone.......I know its anecdotal....what can I say? I followed his protocol to the t and worked beautifully while all other methods failed

 

[Charley]

Ok, much appreciated....others have said the same and taking into serious consideration.