Cycle

[Bignose]

Part of the reason posts like this have no place in the scientific forum is that science is NOT a poll. Science is completely evidence based, and as I wrote above, there is almost no evidence that most of these products works. The science is that in the US, only Bio-Spira has the correct bacteria species that are the dominant ammonia oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB) in fishtanks. The others may have species of AOB and NOB, but they aren't the ones that colonize fishtanks.

If there is good evidence to the contrary, then I've never seen it.

Polls have nothing to do with a scientific discussion -- it is all about bringing evidence to the table. If some evidence isn't good enough, then you bring better evidence. Better in the sense of more objective or unbiased, better controls, better design, more conclusive data, etc. It isn't about what side gets the most votes. And, this isn't to say that there aren't unanswered questions in science -- because there are many -- but the way to answer the questions would be to seek more and better evidence. It is never a vote that settles questions.

 

[rewlyn]

thanks and with the bio-spira will ot survive the thip to aus

 

[P&J]

nitrAtes: 10-20ppm

Thank you. Hopefully someone that knows a little more about this can answer as to whether this is what should be expected if it were a working bottle of cycle. Although it could just be water.

Mike

Yes, I think it should be expected, but I don't think it means anything. Why would there be any ammonia, nitirite, or nitrate in there? It's supposedly a bottle of bacteria used to process those (first two) items. The only way to test would be to fishlessly cycle two identical setups, one with the bacteria-in-a-bottle, and one without.

-P

 

[Jonathangerous]

AOBs and NOBs are incredibly fastidious, and, as with all fastidious bugs, different water quality parameters within micromolar deviations can result in massive ecological shifts. I don't trust any product that states that they can seed your aquarium without hassle with a set group of bugs.

 

[Jonathangerous]

"The science is that in the US, only Bio-Spira has the correct bacteria species that are the dominant ammonia oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB) in fishtanks."

I've heard this spread around here and there, but this is more or less wrong. Each aquarium has its own unique chemical environment. Different bugs will predominate in different tanks dimply due to what's in the tap. It is an incredibly complex situation and one cannot generalize to that degree, especially when dealing with bacteria. Coldwater and warmwater tanks, too, culture different genera and different serotypes of bugs. etc. etc.

Bio spira, if I recall correctly, stands behind nitrospira spp. as a dominant NOB. However, there is a reason that, for so long, nitrobacter was thought to be a nitrate/ite metabolizing powerhouse. Large (N) throughput systems have often been found to carry more bacter than spira, not even bringing up the purported diversity within each of these genera. I wouldn't trust Bio-spira any more than I would cycle.

 

[rabbut]

Any chance you have evidence with regards to the different genra and serotypes colonising for different chemical situations do you? Intrinsically the statement makes sence, but I've never seen evidence to back that up

 

[Bignose]

Bio spira, if I recall correctly, stands behind nitrospira spp. as a dominant NOB. However, there is a reason that, for so long, nitrobacter was thought to be a nitrate/ite metabolizing powerhouse. Large (N) throughput systems have often been found to carry more bacter than spira, not even bringing up the purported diversity within each of these genera. I wouldn't trust Bio-spira any more than I would cycle.

Yes, there is a reason. The reason is that nitrobacter is the dominant species in wastewater treatment facilities, and it was just assumed that they were the same. And, both nitorbacter and nitrospira are similar, so it was easy to assume that they were the same. Here's hoping that your fishtank looks nothing at all like a wastewater treatment facility. The conditions are significantly different, and the evidence is there that nitrospira is dominant in typical home aquaria conditions.

 

[fry_forever!]

I know most people say not to, and I mostly stopped using it, but I from time to time use it when for whatever reason I have a nitrite or ammonia spike. It literally settles it within a couple hours. Doesn't when I don't use it.
I also use it for setting up new tanks, even though lots of people say the bacteria's dead. It works for me.
But it's not very often that I am in those situations, so I basically never use it.
Interesting poll. lol I new almost everyone would say no.

 

[Jonathangerous]

“Any chance you have evidence with regards to the different genra and serotypes colonising for different chemical situations do you? Intrinsically the statement makes sence, but I've never seen evidence to back that up”

Well, first of all, as any microbiologist worth his or her salt would say, that’s how bacteria work. But if you want some good, fleshed out reading on the subject matter, Whang et al published a fine article on ecological nitrification and taxa comparisons in different conditions. It was published in chemosphere, but I forget the title. If you want to read further and less detailed works, a lot of the big papers in NOB biology (Nobary, Schramm, etc.) talk about it. Not sure if I spelled nobary correctly or not.



“Yes, there is a reason. The reason is that nitrobacter is the dominant species in wastewater treatment facilities, and it was just assumed that they were the same. And, both nitorbacter and nitrospira are similar, so it was easy to assume that they were the same. Here's hoping that your fishtank looks nothing at all like a wastewater treatment facility. The conditions are significantly different, and the evidence is there that nitrospira is dominant in typical home aquaria conditions.”

Not true. Regions with high ammonia and nutrient fluctuation tend to favor nitrobacter and not nitrospira—that is to say, those conditions found in nature tend to allow for predominance of nitrobacter in many instances. Thus, the main reason for nitrobacter’s purported relegation to numero uno NOB is because all the evidence suggested as such—no one has ever tested the very sterile, controlled biosphere within the freshwater aquarium until relatively recently. Nitrospira are supposedly dominant in freshwater aquaria because nitrate to ammonium ratios are high, and the chemical environment is nonplastic and constant. I don't disagree with that, but to say that Nitrospira is THE organism for aquarium NOB activity is ignorant, imo.

Like I said, the aquarium environment is weird—most bugs commonly associated with the N cycle are nowhere found (nitrobacter, some very common nitrosomonas spp.).

(Edited to remove any semblance of a swear word --Bignose)

 

[Bignose]

“Yes, there is a reason. The reason is that nitrobacter is the dominant species in wastewater treatment facilities, and it was just assumed that they were the same. And, both nitorbacter and nitrospira are similar, so it was easy to assume that they were the same. Here's hoping that your fishtank looks nothing at all like a wastewater treatment facility. The conditions are significantly different, and the evidence is there that nitrospira is dominant in typical home aquaria conditions.”

Not true. Regions with high ammonia and nutrient fluctuation tend to favor nitrobacter and not nitrospira—that is to say, those conditions found in nature tend to allow for predominance of nitrobacter in many instances. Thus, the main reason for nitrobacter’s purported relegation to numero uno NOB is because all the evidence suggested as such—no one has ever tested the very sterile, controlled biosphere within the freshwater aquarium until relatively recently. Nitrospira are supposedly dominant in freshwater aquaria because nitrate to ammonium ratios are high, and the chemical environment is nonplastic and constant. I don't disagree with that, but to say that Nitrospira is THE organism for aquarium NOB activity is ignorant, imo.

It is true. Nitrobacter is all over wastewater treatments:

Just a small sample of dozens of easily found papers that back this up:

Nitrifying bacteria in the influent to a wastewater treatment plant - Influence and importance on nitrifying capacity
Author(s): Sanden B, Bjorlenius B, Grunditz C, Dalhammar G
Source: WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Volume: 34 Issue: 1-2 Pages: 75-82 Published: 1996
Times Cited: 4 References: 9 Citation MapCitation Map
Conference Information: 18th Biennial Conference of the International-Association-on-Water-Quality (Water Quality International 96)
SINGAPORE, SINGAPORE, JUN 23-28, 1996
Int Assoc Water Qual
Abstract: Cells of Nitrobacter sp. were enumerated in the influent to Bromma wastewater treatment plant using monoclonal antibodies in a competitive ELISA. By comparing this method with the most probable number technique we conclude that the immunological method is much more relevant for determining Nitrobacter sp. The amount of Nitrobacter sp. cells in the influent was measured once every second month during one year. Examinations concerning variations during one week and one day respectively were conducted. Finally a mass balance was constructed describing the amount of nitrifiers at different sites in the plant. The analysis showed that the amount of Nitrobacter sp. cells varies during the year but no obvious pattern could be observed. At the middle of an average week higher amounts were recorded. The major part of the nitrifiers was found in the biological unit and most of them have entered the wastewater treatment plant by the influent. Only small quantities were found in water from secondary clarifiers, filters and different sludge streams. 90% of the incoming cells of Nitrobacter sp. in the influent were captured in the plant. 5% of the bacteria were lost with the effluent and another 5% with the digested dry solids. Copyright © 1996 IAWQ.


Use of immunofluorescence technique for studying a Nitrobacter population from wastewater treatment plant following discharge in river sediments: First experimental data
Author(s): Bonnet C, Volat B, Bardin R, Degranges V, Montuelle B
Source: WATER RESEARCH Volume: 31 Issue: 3 Pages: 661-664 Published: MAR 1997
Times Cited: 8 References: 17 Citation MapCitation Map
Abstract: Nitrobacter colonies, associated with particles in water treatment plant discharges, and their survival after discharge, were studied to assess their inoculation potential in rivers. Diversity and location of Nitrobacter colonies in flee particles (size range 0.45-500 mu m) were studied using immunofluoresence methods. The qualitative and quantitative composition of Nitrobacter colonies, expressed by five of its serotypes (AG, DE30, W, LL and X14) is not related to the size of the particles on which they fix. This lack of correlation makes it possible to assess the overall impact of a wastewater treatment plant effluent on a sedimentary area in a microcosm. Nitrobacter combined with discharge particles (10(10) cells g(-1) dry hoc) can settle in freshwater sediments in a week (106 cells g(-1) dry sediment). If discharge is continuous, the Nitrobacter cells carried in the effluent could thus colonize river sediments. © 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd.



In situ characterization of nitrifiers in an activated sludge plant: detection of Nitrobacter Spp.

Author(s): Coskuner G, Curtis TP
Source: JOURNAL OF APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY Volume: 93 Issue: 3 Pages: 431-437 Published: 2002
Times Cited: 17 References: 28 Citation MapCitation Map
Abstract: Aims: The purpose of this work was to investigate microbial ecology of nitrifiers at the genus level in a typical full-scale activated sludge plant.

Methods and Results: Grab samples of mixed liquor were collected from a plug-flow reactor receiving domestic wastewater. Fluorescent in situ hybridization technique (FISH) was used to characterize both ammonia oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and nitrite oxidizing bacteria (NOB) in combination with Confocal Scanning Laser Microscope (CSLM). Fluorescently labelled, 16S rRNA-targeted oligonucleotide probes were used in this study. Both Nitrosomonas and Nitrosospira genera as AOB and Nitrobacter and Nitrospira genera as NOB were sought with genus specific probes Nsm156, Nsv443 and NIT3 and NSR1156, respectively.

Conclusions: It was shown that Nitrosospira genus was dominant in the activated sludge system studied, although Nitrosomonas is usually assumed to be the dominant genus. At the same time, Nitrobacter genus was detected in activated sludge samples.

Significance and Impact of the Study: Previous studies based on laboratory scale pilot plants employing synthetic wastewater suggested that only Nitrospira are found in wastewater treatment plants. We have shown that Nitrobacter genus might also be present. We think that these kinds of studies may not give a valid indication of the microbial diversity of the real full-scale plants fed with domestic wastewater.


And then, have you read the paper

Nitrospira-like bacteria associated with nitrite oxidation in freshwater aquaria
Author(s): Hovanec TA, Taylor LT, Blakis A, Delong EF
Source: APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY Volume: 64 Issue: 1 Pages: 258-264 Published: JAN 1998
Times Cited: 72 References: 18 Citation MapCitation Map
Abstract: Oxidation of nitrite to nitrate in aquaria is typically attributed to bacteria belonging to the genus Nitrobacter which are members of the alpha subdivision of the class Proteobacteria. In order to identify bacteria responsible for nitrite oxidation in aquaria, clone libraries of rRNA genes were developed from biofilms of several freshwater aquaria, Analysis of the rDNA libraries, along with results from denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) on frequently sampled biofilms, indicated the presence of putative nitrite-oxidizing bacteria closely related to other members of the genus Nitrospira. Nucleic acid hybridization experiments with rRNA from biofilms of freshwater aquaria demonstrated that Nitrospira-like rRNA comprised nearly 5% of the rRNA extracted from the biofilms during the establishment of nitrification. Nitrite-oxidizing bacteria belonging to the alpha subdivision of the class Proteobacteria (e.g., Nitrobacter spp.) were not detected in these samples. Aquaria which received a commercial preparation containing Nitrobacter species did not show evidence of Nitrobacter growth and development but did develop substantial populations of Nitrospira-like species. Time series analysis of rDNA phylotypes on aquaria biofilms by DGGE, combined with nitrite and nitrate analysis, showed a correspondence between the appearance of Nitrospira-like bacterial ribosomal DNA and the initiation of nitrite oxidation. In total, the data suggest that Nitrobacter winogradskyi and close relatives were not the dominant nitrite-oxidizing bacteria in freshwater aquaria. Instead, nitrite oxidation in freshwater aquaria appeared to be mediated by bacteria closely related to Nitrospira moscoviensis and Nitrospira and marina.

This is the primary paper that provides evidence for Nitrospira as a primary home aquaria NOB. There is not a similar paper defending any other NOB species. Maybe this paper is wrong, but at the moment, the best current evidence is for Nitrospira.

 

[Jonathangerous]

“It is true. Nitrobacter is all over wastewater treatments: etc etc etc”

I think you missed my point. I never said it wasn’t. My point is that that is not the reason it was assumed that nitrobacter was the main constituent of NOB/AOB community biofilms in aquaria. It is because the taxa is so dominant elsewhere. It should be noted in many situations, in fact, wastewater treatment facilities maintain higher cultures of nitrospirae.



“This is the primary paper that provides evidence for Nitrospira as a primary home aquaria NOB. There is not a similar paper defending any other NOB species. Maybe this paper is wrong, but at the moment, the best current evidence is for Nitrospira.”

I am well versed with the paper. The key phrase is “Nitrospira like proteobacter”. That HARDLY limits the relevant taxa to nitrospira alone. The only thing that the paper really eliminates is beta proteobacteria (nitrobacter and the like). I see no conflict between what they are saying and what I am proposing.
It does NOT state exclusively that all aquarium NOB activity is attributed to nitrospira, because that’s not only wrong, it’s terrible science.


“Microbial communities associated with filter materials in recirculating aquaculture systems of freshwater fish” is a more recent, slightly more relevant article about a more generalized view of aquarium microbial ecology.

 

[Duck and Dive]

At my LFS they told me that all cycle is, is just pure ammomia in a bottle.