Raptorrex - I have challenged you all over this site to refute anything I say or to support the opposing views you state using published, peer reviewed scientific research or any other credible independent source. You have not once been able to do so. I think the only one here who looks the fool is not me. I have quoted studies and articles from PhDs at universities and government labs all over the world. Over 95% of them, or more, have no connection on any level to or with Dr. Hovanec. His name appears nowhere in the quote and article I referenced above. You also refer to some partner of his who does not even exist?
even your DR H admits his bottled bacteria are nowhere to be seen after a short time in the tank.
No he does not. You have made this up also. If you read the article above, it references dozens of researchers and papers which all say that the bacteria do not die off when low food and/or oxygen levels are present. But because Dr. Hovanec has said the very same thing regarding the bacteria in a bottle, which he does sell it, Raptorrex has repeatedly stated it is therefore not true due to Dr. H's financial interest in the sales. Raptorrex assures us that 10% of the bacteria die off every day. So not only is Dr, Hovanec wrong and lying, but all the names above must be doing the same. I would love to hear Raptorrex's reason why all of those other people have lied. Maybe Dr. H paid them to (even the ones who's referenced research was published before Dr. H became involved with the sale of bottled bacteria)?
The reason I only include the most relevant quote is not because I have failed to read the entire article or research paper, but because I think most readers here would not want to see a reproduction of a 10 or 20 page research paper. Aside from attributing all quotes to their source as a matter pf course, I include a link to the full paper for every quote just so those who want to read it all can. You on the other hand are unable to provide or cite references for anything you state in your posts.
I have seen the article mentioned above by fluttermouth. It is not published in a traditional peer reviewed journal but rather on an online site that seems to publish mostly what the established peer reviewed journals turn down. While they claim to be peer reviewed, they really are not in terms of the traditionally accepted methodology. In fact, I contacted Dr. H. asking him about this very paper, here is what he replied.
I am familiar with this paper - their conclusions are not supported by their own data and their paper was rejected by peer-reviewed journals which is why the only place they could publish was an online and non-peer reviewed.
They vastly overstate the importance of AOA as the 'dominant' ammonia oxidizing in freshwater aquaria.
OldMan47- please reread that article. The 10 weeks is stated in terms of how long a sample population was starved for ammonia, not the recovery time. For the most part it refers to individual bacteria recovering extremely rapidly and the entire population completely recovering in maximium times of 5 to 6 days (or less). (Starve times are reported in weeks while the recovery times are reported in hours.) This is certainly faster than any fishless cycle from scratch, even one with a jump start, would take. The longer recovery times are typically associated with the smallest number of survivors. Moreover, they look at a variety of nitrifiers, many of which are not found longer term in our tanks. Some of which are the ones mentioned for longer recovery times.
As for the implication for the average hobbyist what it means is the following:
- If you have a fully cycled tank and have to remove the fish, you can "re-energize" the cycle pretty fast if there have been no fish or other ammonia sources present for some time. All you have to do is add ammonia and depending how long the tank was starved for this food, one's bacterial colonies will return to full functionality in anywhere from a few hours to as much as a week or so.
- The bacteria we all need are a lot tougher than most think. Once established in a tank, you have to do some serious stuff to kill them. Other studies I have linked to on this site show that chlormaines don't wipe them out (and may actually have the reverse effect). Chlorine is much better deadlier for this though at the dosages it is used to treat the drinking water we get from our taps, it still doesn't kill off the entire colony.
- Urban myths abound on fish forums. Being able to see what is actually true will enable folks to be better fish keepers. Knowing the facts about the bacteria will also help avoid the common problems I see reported all the time. And not believeing urban myths about them is even more important.
Ammonia levels rose marginally but with water changes everyting went fine and I lost no fish.
