NBL- there is a difference between the nitrifying bacteria in general, which would include all strains, most of which are not the aquatic ones. Some can process nitrogen differently when challenged or as their normal mode. The problem is most of them are not in tanks and therefore their capacities are not immediately relevant.
I have read a lot of the literature and when it comes to the specifics of the tank and other aquatic nitrifiers, there are not a lot of alternatives. Here is what I can see:
1. The nitrosomonas marina like strain is most likely the one in fw tanks. However, others may be present in small numbers or may be the only ones if the ideal strain was not.
Surveys of cloned rRNA genes from the enrichments revealed four major strains of AOB which were phylogenetically related to theNitrosomonas marina cluster, the Nitrosospira cluster, or the Nitrosomonas europaea-Nitrosococcus mobilis cluster of the subdivision of the class Proteobacteria. Ammonia concentration in the reactors determined which AOB strain dominated in an enrichment...........
Enrichments of the AOB strains were added to newly established aquaria to determine their ability to accelerate the establishment of ammonia oxidation. Enrichments containing the Nitrosomonas marina-like AOB strain were most efficient at accelerating ammonia oxidation in newly established aquaria. Furthermore, if theNitrosomonas marina-like AOB strain was present in the original enrichment, even one with other AOB, only the Nitrosomonas marina-like AOB strain was present in aquaria after nitrification was established. Nitrosomonas marina-like AOB were 2% or less of the cells detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis in aquaria in which nitrification was well established.
from
http
/www.drtimsaquatics.com/wp-content/files/scientificpapers/hovanecAEM_Dec01.pdf
2, Dr, Hovanec states this in his fishless cycling instructions:
Do not add ammonia removers to bind the ammonia – overdosing with these products will just increase the cycling time.
from
http
/www.drtimsaquatics.com/resources/fishless-cycling
3.. NH3 is the preferred substrate for the aerobic autorophic bacteria. It is the one they can use with the greatest efficiency w/o a non-natural aid being added. However, they can also process NH4. I can show you a very interesting paper dealing with nitrification at pH levels as low as 4.0. The strain of the AOB are similar but not identical to those intanks but the NOB are the same ones. The point of the study was to investigate several hypotheses as to why this was possible:
1. A special strain of acid tolerant bacteria was at work; or,
2. The was some sort of mechanism which got the acid pH high enough near the bacteria to convert ammonium (NH4) back into some amount of ammonia (NH3) they could then take in; or,
3. There was a way for the bacteria could to use urea instead of ammonia (NH3).
Here is basically what they discovered:
Conclusions.There is no evidence for either the conducive microenvironment hypothesis or the common existence of specific groups of acid-tolerant nitrifying bacteria. Instead, physiological adaptations to low pH could be shown for various AOB and NOB. Under acidic conditions, subgroups of nitrifiers, such as Nitrosospira spp., N. oligotropha, and Nitrospira spp., seem to profit from their strong substrate affinity. The adaptation process is slow and possibly linked to the expression of additional cellular functions, e.g., ammonium transporters.
from full study here
http
/aem.asm.org/content/72/6/4283.full (This is one of the more lay person friendly ones I have read. There isn't a barage of completely unintelligible stuff.)
The key thing I took from this is that to process something besides NH3, the bacteria must gave transporters that will do so. The bacteria were not using urea, but they did locate 11 such transporters in the AOB showing they were able to process NH4. The specific strains involved were ones that can survive and reproduce on ammonia levels even lower than those the strains that dominate in our tanks do. The additional energy used to process NH4 instead of NH3 was not a huge deal since they need such a small amount to get by. For me the implication is that to process some more divergent form of ammonia, the bacteria must have a way to transport it inside before they can do anything with it.
I suppose there might be a way to fool the bacteria into thinking something that looks like ammonia but really isn't can be used and the bacteria takes it inside. But I really have no clue re that.
It gets more puzzling if we look at a few statements from the SeaChem site:
1. Prime works by removing chlorine from the water and then binds with ammonia until it can be consumed by your biological filtration (chloramine minus chlorine = ammonia).
The bond is not reversible and ammonia is still available for your bacteria to consume. Prime will not halt your cycling process.
2. A salicylate based kit can be used, but with caution. Under the conditions of a salicylate kit the ammonia-Prime complex will be broken down eventually giving a false reading of ammonia (same as with other products like Prime®), so the key with a salicylate kit is to take the reading right away. However, the best solution ;-) is to use our MultiTest: Ammonia™ kit... it uses a gas exchange sensor system which is not affected by the presence of Prime® or other similar products.
It also has the added advantage that it can detect the more dangerous free ammonia and distinguish it from total ammonia (which is both the free and ionized forms of ammonia (the ionized form is not toxic)).
1 and 2 both from
http
/www.seachem.com/support/FAQs/Prime.html
What interests me is they are pretty careful never to use the term ammonium. The closest they seem to get is ionized vs unionized. They are basically saying that NH3 is very bad and that
NH4 is not toxic. Now this is a real hum dinger of a thing to say if you think about it in regards to how often we read "get that .25 ppm of ammonia out of a tank fast."
At a pH of 7.4 and a temperature of 78F (25.6C) and total ammonia reading on an API kit of 1.0 here are the facts: .015 ppm is NH3 and .985 ppm is NH4. That means 1.5 % is NH3. And then you put this together with the huge pile of research that says no fish are at risk at under .02 ppm of NH3. And those which are most sensitive are the salmonids and these are not in aquariums. So we have science telling us there is not enough ammonia (NH3) in this example to harm any fish and we have SeaChem telling us ammonium (NH4) is non toxic.
But I also wonder how the test right after adding Prime would show total ammonia at 0 but if tested a day later it would read more than 0, but be a false reading. There must be 0 for both NH3 and NH4 for there to be a 0 reading on the right away test. If there is 0 total ammonia right after one adds Prime and the next day there is a "false" reading, exactly what is the ammonia test, which is supposed to detect only NH3 and NH4, showing a reading for if not these things?
And ow I am going to throw the old curve ball, SeaChem makes a product called AMGuard. here is what they say about it:
AmGuard
Product Description
AmGuard™ safely, rapidly and efficiently
removes toxic free ammonia. It is safe to use during tank cycling and is ideal for treating unexpected emergency situations. AmGuard™ reacts with free ammonia within minutes and does not alter pH. Ammonia can exist in two forms: free and ionized. It is only the free form that is toxic.
Traditional ammonia test kits convert all ammonia to free ammonia by raising pH to 12–14; at this pH no ammonia removing product can function, and thus a false positive reading will result. Use
Ammonia Alert™ or
MultiTest™: Free & Total Ammonia to directly monitor levels of free ammonia. AmGuard™ also removes chlorine and chloramines.
from
http
/www.seachem.com/Products/product_pages/AmGuard.html
The difference in price is negligible between Liquid Amguard and Prime. Amguard can actually bind ammonia for a longer period of time and can control ammonia at higher concentrations. Amguard also removes chlorine and chloramine but Prime has a wider range of benefits.
from
http
/www.seachem.com/support/FAQs/AmGuard.html
And this is why I am so curious about how ammonia detoxifiers work. There seems to be some mystery abut it there really is no need for I think.
I have begun the chain of contacts of people smarter than I by a long shot and if I learn anything good, I will report it.