Bacterial Starter Research

[TwoTankAmin]

There has been a lot of debate on this site as to whether bacterial additives actually work. Those who argue they don't clamor for research showing they do. The problem has always been there is little incentive for any independent entity to undertake such research. The issue is one of who would underwrite the costs of the research that would not be involved in some fashion with selling such products.

Well here is an interesting piece of research published in early 2006 entitled "Elevated salinity selects for a less diverse ammonia-oxidizing population in aquarium biofilters" The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of salt on the nitrifying bacterial communities. It looked at both sw and fw systems. So what did this have to do with bacterial additives?

The researchers chose to jump start their aqauariums using a bacterial product I had mentioned in other posts. All the research I had found into this product to date was limited to abstracts. This study is available in its entirety. Here is the abstract:

The activity and changes in the structure of the community of the ammonia-oxidizing bacteria belonging to the Betaproteobacteria were monitored in freshwater and artificial seawater biofilters for two months after inoculation with a commercial nitrifying consortium. Both in freshwater and artificial seawater, ammonium oxidation proceeded immediately after addition of the inoculum, although initial activity in artificial seawater was lower than in freshwater. Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterial community of the inoculum and the freshwater and the artificial seawater aquaria as a function of time showed that initially only one dominant ammonia-oxidizer, closely related to Nitrosomonas marina, was detectable in all the systems. The fingerprint of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterial community in the artificial seawater biofilters continued to be dominated by this single band. In the freshwater aquaria, in contrast, the composition of the ammonia-oxidizer community became more diverse after one month, with 4–7 new bands appearing in the denaturing gradient gel fingerprint. Since the inoculum is cultivated at an average salinity of 11 g l[sup]−1[/sup], it is argued that the elevated salinity selects for a less diverse ammonia-oxidizer community in the inoculum and the artificial seawater aquaria.

The researchers basically set up tanks, dosed them with the bacteria in a bottle and then tracked it all. They tested what was in the bottle and then tested for the next two months what was in the tanks. Their goal was not to evaluate the product but to see what bacteria ended up in the tanks. It was a fortuitous side effect that it also provides some very good independent data on the product.

Happy reading for those who care http/onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1016/j.femsec.2004.10.001/full

 

[mrvillicus]

great info thanks

 

[raptorrex]

There has been a lot of debate on this site as to whether bacterial additives actually work. Those who argue they don't clamor for research showing they do. The problem has always been there is little incentive for any independent entity to undertake such research. The issue is one of who would underwrite the costs of the research that would not be involved in some fashion with selling such products.

Well here is an interesting piece of research published in early 2006 entitled "Elevated salinity selects for a less diverse ammonia-oxidizing population in aquarium biofilters" The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of salt on the nitrifying bacterial communities. It looked at both sw and fw systems. So what did this have to do with bacterial additives?

The researchers chose to jump start their aqauariums using a bacterial product I had mentioned in other posts. All the research I had found into this product to date was limited to abstracts. This study is available in its entirety. Here is the abstract:

The activity and changes in the structure of the community of the ammonia-oxidizing bacteria belonging to the Betaproteobacteria were monitored in freshwater and artificial seawater biofilters for two months after inoculation with a commercial nitrifying consortium. Both in freshwater and artificial seawater, ammonium oxidation proceeded immediately after addition of the inoculum, although initial activity in artificial seawater was lower than in freshwater. Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterial community of the inoculum and the freshwater and the artificial seawater aquaria as a function of time showed that initially only one dominant ammonia-oxidizer, closely related to Nitrosomonas marina, was detectable in all the systems. The fingerprint of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterial community in the artificial seawater biofilters continued to be dominated by this single band. In the freshwater aquaria, in contrast, the composition of the ammonia-oxidizer community became more diverse after one month, with 4–7 new bands appearing in the denaturing gradient gel fingerprint. Since the inoculum is cultivated at an average salinity of 11 g l[sup]−1[/sup], it is argued that the elevated salinity selects for a less diverse ammonia-oxidizer community in the inoculum and the artificial seawater aquaria.

The researchers basically set up tanks, dosed them with the bacteria in a bottle and then tracked it all. They tested what was in the bottle and then tested for the next two months what was in the tanks. Their goal was not to evaluate the product but to see what bacteria ended up in the tanks. It was a fortuitous side effect that it also provides some very good independent data on the product.

Happy reading for those who care http/onlinelibrary...004.10.001/full

a fascinating read, to be sure.
but, as it was not the purpose of the research, no control was used.
that would have been helpful, for our purposes, anyway.

 

[Bugdozer]

There has been a lot of debate on this site as to whether bacterial additives actually work. Those who argue they don't clamor for research showing they do. The problem has always been there is little incentive for any independent entity to undertake such research. The issue is one of who would underwrite the costs of the research that would not be involved in some fashion with selling such products.

Well here is an interesting piece of research published in early 2006 entitled "Elevated salinity selects for a less diverse ammonia-oxidizing population in aquarium biofilters" The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of salt on the nitrifying bacterial communities. It looked at both sw and fw systems. So what did this have to do with bacterial additives?

The researchers chose to jump start their aqauariums using a bacterial product I had mentioned in other posts. All the research I had found into this product to date was limited to abstracts. This study is available in its entirety. Here is the abstract:

The activity and changes in the structure of the community of the ammonia-oxidizing bacteria belonging to the Betaproteobacteria were monitored in freshwater and artificial seawater biofilters for two months after inoculation with a commercial nitrifying consortium. Both in freshwater and artificial seawater, ammonium oxidation proceeded immediately after addition of the inoculum, although initial activity in artificial seawater was lower than in freshwater. Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterial community of the inoculum and the freshwater and the artificial seawater aquaria as a function of time showed that initially only one dominant ammonia-oxidizer, closely related to Nitrosomonas marina, was detectable in all the systems. The fingerprint of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterial community in the artificial seawater biofilters continued to be dominated by this single band. In the freshwater aquaria, in contrast, the composition of the ammonia-oxidizer community became more diverse after one month, with 4–7 new bands appearing in the denaturing gradient gel fingerprint. Since the inoculum is cultivated at an average salinity of 11 g l[sup]−1[/sup], it is argued that the elevated salinity selects for a less diverse ammonia-oxidizer community in the inoculum and the artificial seawater aquaria.

The researchers basically set up tanks, dosed them with the bacteria in a bottle and then tracked it all. They tested what was in the bottle and then tested for the next two months what was in the tanks. Their goal was not to evaluate the product but to see what bacteria ended up in the tanks. It was a fortuitous side effect that it also provides some very good independent data on the product.

Happy reading for those who care http/onlinelibrary...004.10.001/full

a fascinating read, to be sure.
but, as it was not the purpose of the research, no control was used.
that would have been helpful, for our purposes, anyway.

It says ammonium oxidation proceeded immediately. We don't need this research to contain a control as it has been long established by all those who have done a fishless cycle that the ammonia doesn't start dropping immediately without anything added to the tank. That works perfectly as a control for our purposes. By demanding a control, you are suggesting the possibility of the ammonia disappearing from the water by some mechanism that does not involve bacterial action.

 

[raptorrex]

There has been a lot of debate on this site as to whether bacterial additives actually work. Those who argue they don't clamor for research showing they do. The problem has always been there is little incentive for any independent entity to undertake such research. The issue is one of who would underwrite the costs of the research that would not be involved in some fashion with selling such products.

Well here is an interesting piece of research published in early 2006 entitled "Elevated salinity selects for a less diverse ammonia-oxidizing population in aquarium biofilters" The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of salt on the nitrifying bacterial communities. It looked at both sw and fw systems. So what did this have to do with bacterial additives?

The researchers chose to jump start their aqauariums using a bacterial product I had mentioned in other posts. All the research I had found into this product to date was limited to abstracts. This study is available in its entirety. Here is the abstract:

The activity and changes in the structure of the community of the ammonia-oxidizing bacteria belonging to the Betaproteobacteria were monitored in freshwater and artificial seawater biofilters for two months after inoculation with a commercial nitrifying consortium. Both in freshwater and artificial seawater, ammonium oxidation proceeded immediately after addition of the inoculum, although initial activity in artificial seawater was lower than in freshwater. Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterial community of the inoculum and the freshwater and the artificial seawater aquaria as a function of time showed that initially only one dominant ammonia-oxidizer, closely related to Nitrosomonas marina, was detectable in all the systems. The fingerprint of the ammonia-oxidizing bacterial community in the artificial seawater biofilters continued to be dominated by this single band. In the freshwater aquaria, in contrast, the composition of the ammonia-oxidizer community became more diverse after one month, with 4–7 new bands appearing in the denaturing gradient gel fingerprint. Since the inoculum is cultivated at an average salinity of 11 g l[sup]−1[/sup], it is argued that the elevated salinity selects for a less diverse ammonia-oxidizer community in the inoculum and the artificial seawater aquaria.

The researchers basically set up tanks, dosed them with the bacteria in a bottle and then tracked it all. They tested what was in the bottle and then tested for the next two months what was in the tanks. Their goal was not to evaluate the product but to see what bacteria ended up in the tanks. It was a fortuitous side effect that it also provides some very good independent data on the product.

Happy reading for those who care http/onlinelibrary...004.10.001/full

a fascinating read, to be sure.
but, as it was not the purpose of the research, no control was used.
that would have been helpful, for our purposes, anyway.

It says ammonium oxidation proceeded immediately. We don't need this research to contain a control as it has been long established by all those who have done a fishless cycle that the ammonia doesn't start dropping immediately without anything added to the tank. That works perfectly as a control for our purposes. By demanding a control, you are suggesting the possibility of the ammonia disappearing from the water by some mechanism that does not involve bacterial action.

and you are the one that claims the "good" science.

you can make no conclusions, regarding our discussion, unless you have a control to compare it with. and it was never the intention of the researchers to do so
quite apart from the fact, for hobby users, we would need to know that the product used, was the standard retail pack. not one supplied directly, by the maker.
now, before you blow up. i am not suggesting anything nefarious happened.
but, because of the type of study. this information was not needed, nor recorded (well, publicly anyway) so we just don't know.

i made no comment as to what might happen in the control. bacterial, or otherwise. (that's why one is needed. to see what does happens in it)

I suggest you read what i write. not what you think i will write.

as for fishless cycles.(sadly, may first cycle was fish in) I guess I've only done 5 or 6. to be honest i didn't measure the ammonia (other than to confirm the amount, once added) until after the first week. by then the ammonia was dropping, on all but one, occasion.

 

[Bugdozer]

you can make no conclusions, regarding our discussion, unless you have a control to compare it with.

i made no comment as to what might happen in the control. bacterial, or otherwise. (that's why one is needed. to see what does happens in it)

I suggest you read what i write. not what you think i will write.

as for fishless cycles.(sadly, may first cycle was fish in) I guess I've only done 5 or 6. to be honest i didn't measure the ammonia (other than to confirm the amount, once added) until after the first week. by then the ammonia was dropping, on all but one, occasion.

1. Untrue, depending on the experiment and the conclusion, and as I've said, the large number of people doing fishless cycling make an excellent control group. The control does not have to be conducted by the same researchers to make it valid.

2. You do not need to explicitly state what would happen in the control in order for me to draw conclusions from why you think one is necessary. The only possible reason for having a control without any starter media (that I can think of) would be to see if immediate removal of ammonia occurred in it in order to prove or disprove that the starter media was the cause of the ammonia removal. Since we already know that tanks without starter media never immediately remove ammonia, the only purpose a control tank would have is rendered useless, because we already know the attributes of a control tank at that point in time. If you wish to claim that there is another reason to have a control, please state it. Simply saying "you need a control" without explaining your reasoning, serves no purpose.

3. I did read what you wrote, however I failed to take into account your misunderstanding of what a control tank would be for. I mistakenly attributed to you a modicum of understanding of experimental design, and for that I apologise.

4. We can eliminate your experiments with fishless cycling from our control group, then, because you did not test the water after a few hours after you added ammonia. Now, why is that? Why didn't you test it 12 hours after you started? The defence rests.

 

[TwoTankAmin]

Bugdozer- ty for stating the obvious. I mean really- you don't have to not shoot people to prove that shooting them causes harm or death. Some people will never believe no matter how much proof you offer.

 

[Justaerin]

So on the basis that ammonia was being removed from the start we can say that whichever product they did use worked, would it then be valid to suggest similar products to keepers that will be cycling tanks in future? Or would the best bet be to continue cycling in the normal fashion?

 

[TwoTankAmin]

First off, they identified the product they used.

The biofilters were inoculated with 10 mg l[sup]−1[/sup] volatile suspended solids of a standard commercial nitrifying consortium (ABIL, AVECOM, Belgium) at the start of experiments.

You can see the English version of the Avecom site here http/www.avecom.be/ECMS_CLIENT/pages/showpage.php?name=home

There is lots of research in which this product was used- all these scientists saw fit to use ABIL as a part of their research.

Here are some papers you can read in their entirety:
An improved nitrifying enrichment to remove ammonium and nitrite from freshwater aquaria systems
Improved performance of an intensive rotifer culture system by using a nitrifying inoculum (ABIL)
Characterization of an Autotrophic Nitrogen-Removing Biofilm from a Highly Loaded Lab-Scale Rotating Biological Contactor

Then there is the following from Google for research you would have to pay for to read the full study. All these scientists saw fit to use ABIL as a part of their research:


Partial nitrification achieved by pulse sulfide doses in a sequential batch reactor
TH Erguder, N Boon, SE Vlaeminck… - … science & technology, 2008 - ACS Publications... Materials and Methods. Seed Sludge and the Ammonium Feed A dense nitrifying
suspension (ABIL, ammonium-binding inoculum liquid) obtained from AVECOM
(Wondelgem, Belgium) was used as the seed sludge. The synthetic ...


Production of acylated homoserine lactones by Aeromonas and Pseudomonas strains isolated from municipal activated sludge
F Morgan-Sagastume, N Boon… - Canadian journal of …, 2005 - ingentaconnect.com... Biomass samples The biomass samples screened for AHL activity consisted of activated sludge
flocs, granular biomass of a nitrifying culture (ABIL; Avecom, Belgium), flocs of an actively
nitrifying–denitrifying sludge (HANDS; Avecom), and biofilm from an oxygen-limited ...


Start-up of autotrophic nitrogen removal reactors via sequential biocatalyst addition
K Pynaert, BF Smets, D Beheydt… - … science & technology, 2004 - ACS Publications... For the AAOB, a nitrifying enrichment culture (Ammonium Binding Inoculum Liquid, ABIL, Avecom,
Beernem, Belgium) was chosen (19), grown at optimal temperature and pH conditions on a
synthetic NH 4 + -rich wastewater and mainly cultivated for use in aquaculture to ...


The use of ozone in a high density recirculation system for rotifers
G Suantika, P Dhert, G Rombaut, J Vandenberghe… - Aquaculture, 2001 - Elsevier... The control experiments were run using identical equipment except ozone injection into the protein
skimmer. The biofilters were seeded with nitrifying bacteria (10 5 CFU ml −1 ; ABIL Aqua, Avecom,
Belgium) 6 days before the inoculation of rotifers in the culture tank. ...


Biological removal of 17 [alpha]-ethinylestradiol by a nitrifier enrichment culture in a membrane bioreactor
B De Gusseme, B Pycke, T Hennebel, A Marcoen… - Water research, 2009 - Elsevier... 2. Materials and methods. 2.1. Nitrifying sludge. A commercially available NEC (ABIL) was kindly
provided by AVECOM nv (Belgium). The culture is industrially produced by providing both
ammonium and nitrite to support the growth of the nitrifying bacteria. ...


Short-term kinetic response of enhanced methane oxidation in landfill cover soils to environmental factors
A De Visscher, M Schippers… - Biology and Fertility of Soils, 2001 - Springer... The nitrifying culture (ABIL, commercially produced by Avecom, Beernem, Belgium)
was a specific enrichment of Nitrosomonas species, containing about 1 g of nitrifier
biomass dry weight per liter on a total of 10 g of total solids per liter. ...


Sustained nitrite accumulation in a membrane‐assisted bioreactor (MBR) for the treatment of ammonium‐rich wastewater
S Wyffels, P Boeckx, K Pynaert… - Journal of Chemical …, 2003 - Wiley Online Library... 3 KH 2 PO 4 and trace elements. Nitrifying sludge (ABIL, Avecom, Belgium) with
complete nitrification (NH 4 + → NO 3 − ) capacity was used as reactor inoculum.
After installing the submerged membrane module, a volumetric ...


Influence of manganese and ammonium oxidation on the removal of 17 [alpha]-ethinylestradiol (EE2)
I Forrez, M Carballa, H Noppe, H De Brabander… - Water Research, 2009 - Elsevier... a monoculture of Ps. putida MnB6 (LMG 2322), which is a manganese oxidizer,
and with a mixed culture of Ps. putida and a nitrifying enrichment culture (ABIL,
Avecom nv, Belgium) was set up. The Ps. putida was cultivated ...


Biological removal of 17α‐ethinylestradiol (EE2) in an aerated nitrifying fixed bed reactor during ammonium starvation
I Forrez, M Carballa, N Boon… - Journal of Chemical …, 2009 - Wiley Online Library... To test such seeding strategy, preliminary tests were performed with commercially available
Ammonia Binding Inoculum Liquid (ABIL, Avecom nv, Belgium) and conventional activated sludge
dosed at 2.5% (v/v). Both inocula were able to remove 8 µg EE2 L −1 d −1 (data not ...


There are other bacterial starter products that can and do work, despite the naysayers. Those who doubt do so using anecdotal evidence as opposed to the sort of lab studies which would indicate to the contrary. I am about to purchase some of DrTim's One and Only again as I need to get a couple of filters cycled for a pH between 6.0 and 6.5. I will start by cycling using this product at pH 7.0 and then I will begin to drop the pH in .2 increments waiting for things to stabalise (be able to oxidize all the ammonia dosed in under 24 hours) at which point I will lower the pH again.