Discussion about bacteria supplements

[Discusapisto]

Mod edit: Created this thread from a pre-existing one found here http://www.aquariumadvice.com/forums/f24/swapping-gravel-for-eco-complete-191035-6.html#post1787434

No need to drop the cash on a product IMO. Just keep testing and watching, and change water as needed- your original plan will work just fine. You'll have plenty of bacteria in your filter and the colony should quickly multiply to the point where it can handle your bioload.

I didn't know if they saved their filter media or not was just throwing a suggestion out there. And yes it does help cycle a tank and keep fish alive we have ran multiple test in a lab using various bacteria additives and stability was one of the best. At the lfs I worked at we would swap out gravel in fully stocked tanks with ug filters put brand new gravel in. Which means all the bacteria was lost, we added bacteria additives in like stability and never lost a fish. I've seen it work at least a hundred times so I'm sold and have seen lab test so don't tell people it don't work unless you really know all the facts. I know what you are saying as well if the filter wasn't disturbed or dried out than yes the tank should remain cycled.

 

[jetajockey]

And ec does have a nice bacteria culture in it so all should be fine.

Whether it is 'fine' or whether it actually has the autotrophic nitrifiers found in aquaria are two different things. It even says on their site that they utilize heterotrophic bacteria, which is along the lines of your average sludge remover/waste reducer type stuff, and is the basic idea behind a lot of different bacteria additives.

As far as gravel swaps go, there is some conjecture about the actual amount of nitrifiers present in aquarium substrate. There is definitely some, but the general consensus is that the vast majority is in the filter media itself, or in an area with high water flow (for nh3+o2 to feed on).
Re: Stability
I could claim that I've tested this product for years in a lab and that you don't know all the facts, also. I've only tested it on a hobbyist level with some very basic writeups and logs. There are a few reasons why I don't trust stability, and I could go over them with you, but it's beating a dead horse when most of this information is easily found via google or a thread search here.

How about showing us some data from all of the lab work you did? That'd definitely help draw some more informed conclusions on the subject.

 

[Discusapisto]

Whether it is 'fine' or whether it actually has the autotrophic nitrifiers found in aquaria are two different things. It even says on their site that they utilize heterotrophic bacteria, which is along the lines of your average sludge remover/waste reducer type stuff, and is the basic idea behind a lot of different bacteria additives.

As far as gravel swaps go, there is some conjecture about the actual amount of nitrifiers present in aquarium substrate. There is definitely some, but the general consensus is that the vast majority is in the filter media itself, or in an area with high water flow (for nh3+o2 to feed on).
Re: Stability
I could claim that I've tested this product for years in a lab and that you don't know all the facts, also. I've only tested it on a hobbyist level with some very basic writeups and logs. There are a few reasons why I don't trust stability, and I could go over them with you, but it's beating a dead horse when most of this information is easily found via google or a thread search here.

How about showing us some data from all of the lab work you did? That'd definitely help draw some more informed conclusions on the subject.

Re:fine- by fine it was my fault I meant to separate it into two sentences I could see the confusion I was simply agreeing that ec does have bacteria in it. And I was just saying all should be fine assuming he kept the filter bacteria alive. Re:gravel swap and filter bacteria I'm aware of the relationship of what bacteria does what and where it is found. I was making a statement about a lfs I once worked at that utilized ug filters and removing all the gravel. Re: stability- I'm not claiming anything I know, that's the difference between people on this site who went to school and got the degrees and put the time in and the people on here that just are opinionated and stubborn that pass along bad advice or they think cause google says so it must be right. Jeta I've had pleasant talks with you on here and I have pm's from people on here that you know your stuff so I'm not sure why you are taking this so personal. Send me your email and I'll go copy all my reports and studies and trips and photos and lab results heck I'll copy my two ichthyology degrees and send them to you I have nothing to hide trust me. It's gonna take some time to send it all but it's all there I've dedicated my entire 32 years on this planet to fish keeping and the science and hobby of it. I'm on here keeping things realistic not forcing my opinion of products or ways to keep fish I just wanna see good advice passed around. There's more than one way to grandmas house if you know what I mean.

 

[aqua_chem]

One of the issues that I have with these products is that they don't seem to make sense at face value. Assuming that they contain nitrosoma and nitrobacter sp., what are they eating? More than about 4 ppm of ammonia causes suppressed activity in nitrobacter (nitrite eating bacteria) and higher concentrations of either nitrite or ammonia can lead to their death. How do you provide enough reduced nitrogen to last a significant amount of bacteria more than a few days? If these products had very short shelf lives and were stored in refrigerators, then we might be talking, but otherwise it doesn't make much sense. They would starve long before they got to a tank.

Also, were these studies published? I have access to SciFinder and similar resources, and I would like to read them. Otherwise, feel free to CC me on said emails.


On a non-related note, didn't one of the roads to grandma's house have a rather cross wolf on it?

 

[Discusapisto]

One of the issues that I have with these products is that they don't seem to make sense at face value. Assuming that they contain nitrosoma and nitrobacter sp., what are they eating? More than about 4 ppm of ammonia causes suppressed activity in nitrobacter (nitrite eating bacteria) and higher concentrations of either nitrite or ammonia can lead to their death. How do you provide enough reduced nitrogen to last a significant amount of bacteria more than a few days? If these products had very short shelf lives and were stored in refrigerators, then we might be talking, but otherwise it doesn't make much sense. They would starve long before they got to a tank.

Also, were these studies published? I have access to SciFinder and similar resources, and I would like to read them. Otherwise, feel free to CC me on said emails.

On a non-related note, didn't one of the roads to grandma's house have a rather cross wolf on it?

Lol Chem I think your right there deff is a wolf on one of those roads that's part of the fun I guess The studies are published thru the university of North Carolina. There is a mailing list you can get on and they will send you anything you want. Alot of it is still ongoing and part of their program on bacteria life in and out of the aquarium or bodies of water. So it's not a open and shut case as of yet I was just recommending said product because it does help, to what extreme is still being hammered out to this day. And your dead on about shelve life of bacteria most does die off rather quickly in fact as you stated most of the refrigerated kinds do have a longer shelve life because it slows their metabolism down but even they will starve eventually. I never recommended keeping any bacterial additive for too long honestly if buying any said product I'd use it all in the first few days of purchase. Storing it longer than say a week well than it's pretty much rancid water by than. Each company uses different strains of bacteria some kept secret some are not a quick search on each company website will yield which strains are used it's personal preference really. Heck I'm old school I like to use another established tanks media to start a new tank or the old flake food strategy. But there has been times where stability has proven it's worth in gold so I'm open to new ideas in the tank cycling world. And I agree for what each company charges for these products is a bit extreme it's a racket really. But if used promptly can save you money on fish loss in certain scenarios.

 

[aqua_chem]

Do you know who's lab is doing the primary research or who the main authors on papers are? I could find it like that too.

The issue is that once you add processing, shipping, and handling in, these things have already been sitting, uncooled, for 3-4 days minimum by the time they hit the shelves. Further, they are probably kept on the shelves for months at a time. They might once have had viable bacteria in them, but by the time that they are bought, there population will have decreased to a trivial level.

 

[Discusapisto]

Do you know who's lab is doing the primary research or who the main authors on papers are? I could find it like that too.

The issue is that once you add processing, shipping, and handling in, these things have already been sitting, uncooled, for 3-4 days minimum by the time they hit the shelves. Further, they are probably kept on the shelves for months at a time. They might once have had viable bacteria in them, but by the time that they are bought, there population will have decreased to a trivial level.

Oh I agree unless you are buying right off of the assembly line than yes by the time they reach you significant amounts have died off that's why I always check the production date it's on the box product was shipped in any good lfs should have that information on hand at least mine here does anyway. My professor has retired but I'll make a few calls and get you the info on those studies I myself would like to hear what new findings they have come up with since I took part in them. I have a few colleagues still working down that way I keep in regular contact with who would know how to get the exact info you are looking for. Shouldn't be a problem at all.

 

[aqua_chem]

Even if he retired I can still find his old papers if he was publish. You can PM his name and any other primary investigators working on the project and I can find them.

The issue is that probably 80% of what's available at LFS is not going to be fresh. The odds of finding some that was made within a week or so is very small in most cases.

 

[jetajockey]

Re: stability- I'm not claiming anything I know, that's the difference between people on this site who went to school and got the degrees and put the time in and the people on here that just are opinionated and stubborn that pass along bad advice or they think cause google says so it must be right. Jeta I've had pleasant talks with you on here and I have pm's from people on here that you know your stuff so I'm not sure why you are taking this so personal.

I'm not really taking it personal, just be ready to bring some evidence when you are basically telling someone they don't know what they are talking about, otherwise it just looks like you are trying to pick a fight.

If you have proof of your claims, by all means, prove the naysayers and 'google experts' wrong. Not everyone here is going by google or just parroting things, there are many that have a lot of experience with these products and subjects. They might not have biology degrees or claim lab testing, but that doesn't mean their statements are invalid, and if anything they are on the same level as yours (i.e. conjecture) until you put some documentation up to prove your claims.

Seachem, along with most other bacteria supplement companies, keep their products basically shrouded in mystery, that's another reason why I start off on a bad foot with them. A few, like fritzzyme and dr tim's, actually spend some time to break down what happens and why, and what the product is exactly and how it works, rather than some customer reviews/testimonials which are a complete joke in the advertising world.

As far as stability goes, aqua_chem pretty much nailed it. The basics on nitrifying bacteria that we do know is that they are aerobic autotrophs, which means that they have a limited shelf life. As to how long that is, it's been debated, but I believe Dr Hovanec claimed the shelf stable form of biospira/tetra safestart to be good for up to a year barring extremes. The more trustworthy (imo) products have an expiration/use by date on them.

I know the stuff that the fish wholesaler sends is in a liquid suspension and kept cold in transit. I tested it on a few dozen tanks when I had it available and it worked, although it did still take about 2 weeks to completely cycle.


I think that one thing that is often overlooked in the cycling process is the bacterial activity in the substrate, and it plays a key part. Obviously it can be done without a substrate, as there are bare bottom tanks, but it doesn't necessarily mean that the activity in the substrate is useless.

I appreciate your input on the subject and it looks like you have a lot to offer.

 

[Discusapisto]

Problem with all the "boosters" is that they still need fish to cycle they are not for the fish less cycle by no means I'd never use a bacterial booster without fish being added with them. I wasn't picking a fight I believe I was the one attacked first by everyone for simply recommending a product that would "help" not solve a problem. Since I've joined this forum I've been attacked several times by the little mafia of people who think they are better than everyone else on here. I've been a lifelong hobbyist and took it a step further and got the schooling as well I never stated I'm better than anyone else. Severum mama said product was a waste of money I simply told her not to say a statement like that if you don't know all the facts pro or con. And it's been down hill from there I don't have to prove myself or credentials to any one I could easily ask jeta or Chem for yours as well since we don't know each other from a hole in the wall. But I trust you guys just by your information and great conversations I've had with you guys since I've joined and would never throw around accusations especially knowing how much time and effort as well as money goes into getting most degrees in science. It takes 10,000 hours to become a master at something and most hobbyist who have kept fish or studied the hobby that long are by all means just as credible as any scientist. My problem Is with all the bad advice given on here and at times I jump in to help but the bad taste everyone has left in my mouth this far makes me want to cancel this site. It's sad really I'm a member on APC and Aquaria central and I've never seen this much of a personal attack on anyone on those sites. I have made some good friends on here already and they keep me coming back so I'm here for them.

 

[Discusapisto]

And yes jeta seachem does shroud their products in mystery especially stability I too like bio-spira it deff is one of the better ones out there.

 

[jetajockey]

I agree that a lot of bad advice floats around on forums. And generally speaking, this one has become more proactive at trying to deal with it when it comes up. Obviously we all have differing opinions on things, but it's good to hash it out, and as far as credentials go, I don't need those, I just want evidence or some kind of data that proves a contrary position. It's not only so that the person can prove that they are correct, but it can teach us all something, and once it's in the forum it can be searched and brought up later by people to learn and reference to.

The only reason I even got involved in this thread is because it sounded like your response was a little bit much. It basically told someone they don't know what they are talking about, and that you do, so if that's the case I wanted you to bring it. If you know something that 'x' person doesn't, explain and show them why, just saying you have credentials isn't enough. If you don't have direct data evidence on hand, then just break down the reasoning why 'x' product works, rather than just because you are 'in the know', so to speak.

You know how it is on forums, everyone kinda goes with the flow. Some forums believe all bacteria boosters are bull hockey, and another forum thinks they are all fantastic. Some forums think that a 2 gallon tank is fine for a betta, while others would nail you to the wall for even suggesting it in a build thread.

A good discourse between those that disagree on a subject, combined with some sort of evidence, is the way that stigmas and mantras are broken. When i first started here I caught all kinds of flack for even suggesting fish-in cycling. Many writeups, documents, and tests threads later and I think a lot of people have come around and have a better understanding of the process, and that it's not inhumane as some believe.

 

[aqua_chem]

I think that you may be confusing our critical skepticism with personal attacks. Unfortunately, when you enter into an established culture like any forum has with ideas that go against the status quo beliefs, the burden of proof falls on the new ideas. One of the reasons I started posting on this site was that I couldn't stand some of the malarkey that was being peddled (air stones being bad for a planted tank, grrr!). Because of a background in molecular kinetics and such, I could must an argument that could debunk that claim. I rarely see it around anymore, but it used to be everywhere (not that I'm claiming that I single handedly killed this rumor, but I like to think that I helped ).

However, these threads where two opposing viewpoints come to a head and duke it out have become my favorite type of threads. Someone brings up an idea that someone else disagrees with. He brings up several points that discredit the opposing viewpoint. The other side responds to his concerns and offers up more proof of his idea. This process repeats until a consensus is reached or a mod closes the discussion for getting off topic (Jeta ). Maybe one of the two original arguers has his opinion changed, maybe not. The beautiful thing about this form of debate is that it anyone reading it comes away with a much more detailed understanding of the topic from BOTH perspectives. Many forums end up becoming echo chambers for the status quo beliefs, with readers never really getting the outside views. Whenever someone comes in with an opposing viewpoint, very often they only just heard it repeated somewhere else and they get squashed. Rare is the opportunity to debate with a more complete picture of an opposing belief in circumstances like these, but it's just these threads that can have the best information.

One of my favorite threads like this came up here: http://www.aquariumadvice.com/forums/f12/a-challenging-question-on-bacteria-177052.html

So while I'm sorry that you feel like you were being personally attacked, I can assure you that it was more critical skepticism than simply brushing you off as a nobody for whatever reason.


Also, as Jeta said, talk is cheap but data, either well documented anecdotal of empirical, is what is really needed to challenge the status quo belief.

 

[Discusapisto]

Jeta and Chem both great points and I don't think you guys are the ones that are the lil mafia on here btw. And I know as far as you two go it's not personal attacks you just want facts and proof and I do understand that it's the very reason I stay on here because when I was losing faith in this forum I came across you guys on different threads and read your stuff and I was like finally people on here that take it that extra step. So my apologies to severum mama or anyone else my thread offended it wasn't meant to be a knowledge or boasting battle. Sorry if it was taking out of context but again I was just offering my help. I just feel 85% of the hobbyist on here are new or sorta new to all this and I don't wanna throw so much technical stuff or big words their way when they are trying to learn. I mean go back to when you first started out sure we all wanted help or guidance but did we care what the names of bacteria in are filter were or how to pronounce scientific names? No we didn't we just wanted to keep our betta alive or the right food for our goldfish. Those at the advanced levels of the hobby such as you two fine I'll elaborate my theories and technical interest but for the rest I keep my advice simple such as recommending x product because it's readily available it works and it's beginner to moderate skill level friendly. I love this hobby because no one will ever master it, it's impossible it's ever changing and new species of plant, fish,coral, invert showing up at rapid paces. Plus technology constantly changes and it keeps things interesting and challenging. If we overwhelm our newbies to the hobby they are gonna leave it but if we take our time and build everyone up to the proper skill level than they will appreciate it. And for the ones at the higher levels than yes these meeting of minds will prove very helpful. And as far as airstones being bad for planted tanks or fish in cycles I don't blame you guys one bit for taking that head on I woulda been their right along with you

 

[Discusapisto]

http://theaquariumwiki.com/Bacteria_bottles,_do_they_work?. Here's a great article for all of us to read. Our topic kick started my brain and I forgot I have this article saved on my computer it covers both points.

 

[Discusapisto]

http://theaquariumwiki.com/Bacteria_bottles,_do_they_work%3F. Here's a great article for all of us to read. Our topic kick started my brain and I forgot I have this article saved on my computer it covers both points.

Plus jeta mentioned dr. Hovanec and I forgot I saved this.

 

[jetajockey]

Thanks for the article link. I've read this one in the past and it has some good info, but according to the links and references section it takes from the seachem forum itself, which is a definite bias towards the product and it's viability. I posted in that forum while testing stability and while the techs seemed informative they also push their product like true salesmen, so I had to take it with a grain of salt.

I still would like to see some data on it, I tested it briefly and have seen a few other hobbyists test it with mixed results.

Since stability claims that it can withstand temperature extremes, has no limitation on shelf life, works 'harder' in the presence of a higher concentration of nitrogenous waste, as well as claiming that their product has spore form bacteria, it really kinda goes against all of the other science that you'll find on the subject. There's a general consensus across the board that all of the nitrifier species (unlike the heterotrophs commonly marketed as nitrifying bacteria) are unable to form spores and have are individually sensitive to different factors ranging from temperature to pH levels.

Looking at it as a whole, it just doesn't add up, either their product DOES have the right bacteria in it and they make a lot of claims of it being so resilient just to sell it (since it's a blend it could have both, and they could still claim it since the heterotrophs can take the punishment even though the proper nitrifiers would be long gone before it hit the shelf), or it doesn't have the same nitrifying bacteria that we've been discussing.

 

[Discusapisto]

Yes I agree jeta as I've looked over some reports and papers I myself am becoming swayed in your direction, my old professor emailed me today and said seachem would never send their lab results to compare his findings with their's so he assured me something is up with them. He thinks they are using a land based bacteria or just filling their bottles with some sort of food water for the nitrifying bacteria. I don't work for seachem or do I use their whole product line so I'm starting to have my doubts is it snake skin oil or not. I contacted my old friend who owns a lfs I once ran and all the tanks he sets up brand new if he's outta bio-spira(now under tetra) he uses stability but he also doses with prime daily so are his fish just surviving till the cycle kicks in or is the bacteria really working. I looked over the few labs I took part in and we used prime and amquel and other ammonia removers in our test so I can honestly say we didn't use just stability but than again we never lost a fish or had ammonia spikes so I'm pretty stumped myself. As far as seachem goes I sent their tech support a email today I'm waiting to hear back from them I'll keep you posted what I find out. I sent a barrage of tough questions I'll see if I get blocked like my professor did. I'm really glad this topic came up I'm back on the trail of bacteria and it feels great you guys challenged me and the old brain is alive and thinking hard again.

 

[jetajockey]

Yes I agree jeta as I've looked over some reports and papers I myself am becoming swayed in your direction, my old professor emailed me today and said seachem would never send their lab results to compare his findings with their's so he assured me something is up with them. He thinks they are using a land based bacteria or just filling their bottles with some sort of food water for the nitrifying bacteria. I don't work for seachem or do I use their whole product line so I'm starting to have my doubts is it snake skin oil or not. I contacted my old friend who owns a lfs I once ran and all the tanks he sets up brand new if he's outta bio-spira(now under tetra) he uses stability but he also doses with prime daily so are his fish just surviving till the cycle kicks in or is the bacteria really working. I looked over the few labs I took part in and we used prime and amquel and other ammonia removers in our test so I can honestly say we didn't use just stability but than again we never lost a fish or had ammonia spikes so I'm pretty stumped myself. As far as seachem goes I sent their tech support a email today I'm waiting to hear back from them I'll keep you posted what I find out. I sent a barrage of tough questions I'll see if I get blocked like my professor did. I'm really glad this topic came up I'm back on the trail of bacteria and it feels great you guys challenged me and the old brain is alive and thinking hard again.

I look forward to hearing their response. I'm not an anti-seachem person at all, I absolutely love Prime/Safe as well as a few of their other staples. When I first tested stability I did so assuming that since they had such a large name with other great products that this one would fall in line, but after digging and researching I began to reconsider.


Can't wait to see what you come up with.

 

[Discusapisto]

I think I am too jeta I'm deff reconsidering. I do love prime and excel that's for sure, i just can't believe they are dropping the ball on stability it's sad really but hopefully I hear back from them. Being such a large company and all I hope they have great customer service and answer my questions.