ZEOvit. Lets talk

[invincible569]

Thanks Invincible for the bone, allbe it a small bone, lol. So If part of the concept of dosing bacteria is replace bacteria that may have been eaten or taken out of the equation and thus keep the tank more stable in regards to nitrifing, then what is the concept behind feeding them in the reactor with the zeofood?
Dosing them as a food source? ok I can buy into that right now.

Are all of you folks bare bottom now or is it a mix of BB and substraight folks?


Mike

The reason for dosing bacteria close or into your ZEOreactor is for the same reason elsewhere. After tumbling the rocks, it frees existing bacteria and therefore create real estate for new dosed bacteria. It is my theory that the concentration of NH4 will be stronger around the zeolite rocks since NH4 is strongly attracted around this area because of the "magnet" the zeolite has for NH4. What does nitryfying bacteria like? NH4. Therefore there is a NH4 feast for bacteria in this area which will also cause an increase of bacteria colonization on the rocks at faster speeds. After a while WetWebMedia published an article by Jens Kallamyer that stated the same theory.

Im using DSB. So its definitely a mix of both.

By the way, I sent you back a PM, but your box was full.

 

[invincible569]

Boomer,

Ion exchange is the exchange of one type of electrically charged particle for a different type. For nitro bacteria, its a conversion of NH4+ to NO2- then to NO3- which is a two-step aerobic biological process. This means that no ion exchange is made by this type of bacteria. The fight for NH4 from bacteria and the zeolite would be pretty strong as they both compete for the same element. The only difference is that the zeolite will attract other elements as you stated but will be limited by the amount of ions it has used up. I dont feel that this process takes a couple of hours because you can definitely see a difference in water clarity after tumbling the ZEOvit rocks the next day. It gets to a point where you tumble your rocks and then you do not see a difference. This is another sign of when its time to reload your reactor.

 

[Forestal]

very interesting stuff this....way outa my league, i'm just starting to dose kalk for cripes sakes, never mind those fancy city slicker calsum ractors

this is starting to awaken those dormant brain cells from organic chem...i think i will do some research on the chemistry, still cant get my head around the zeolite thingy

Mike, I like your thinking on this, using the essentially gutloaded bacteria as coral food, and possibly recycling the zooxanthellae (less of them but keeping the healthy hearty ones?)
i have a dsb and underskim becuase i am in debt to my ears from school loans, finally got a good skimmer used, but can't figure it yet..anyway sorry...

nutrient poor systems seem tough to keep...if you are giving the maintenance calories to corals from lighting and then just enough food for the bacterial population, it seems to me missing a feed or two, you risk a big bacterial die off and cycle..'

one other question...do the zeo users have any fish in their systems? if so , how do you feed fish and keep them healthy in a nutrient poor system...i'm just a dummy so if it is obvious sorry

 

[steve-s]

Ion exchange is the exchange of one type of electrically charged particle for a different type. For nitro bacteria, its a conversion of NH4+ to NO2- then to NO3- which is a two-step aerobic biological process. This means that no ion exchange is made by this type of bacteria.

I'm a little lost. If that's the case, what's the point of the Zeovite?

Nitrification does not need special media, just surface area. If nothing is being exchanged between bacteria and the Zeo media, why not simpley use the same system and employ similarly sized crushed coral?

The only thing I can gather from this is it's the lack of pourus area's/ion exchange in the Zeo allowing for the free/easy release of the nutient bound bacteria making it easier for the system to process and or release???

Cheers
Steve

 

[gqjeff]

Jeff my friend that is not my intension. Personally I dont care how anyone has their reef tank running, its thier tank. I think this system is interesting and I would like to know more about it, that is why I asked Scott to start it.
At Reef Frontiers we dont try to slam systems or concepts, we try to understand and explain them. From that each individual member gets enough information to make thier own individual choice.


Mike[/QUOTE]

Mike, no offense taken. Scott is a very good friend of mine aswell... I too also do not care what system anyone runs as long as it works for them.. That is what is important. I would love to be able to tell you exactly how it works also but I am unable to tell you exactly why and how myself. It does make sps look like I have never had them look before. I was a DSB user from way back.. This new system is faux sandbed also so I am sure that is also a key ingredient into the coloration I am getting... I love this system though and stand by it 110%.... Has saved me time from dosing kalk and this and that.. a couple minutes a day and I am done heheheh...

 

[NaH2O]

I can for sure buy into the hypothesis Mike has presented. I certainly see where bacteria could be using a bunch of good nutrients, then the corals indirectly get those "good nutrients" by consuming the bacteria. I also see that the first part of the system would be nutrient removal, and the second part is with the bacteria - starting to make sense (apologies for reiterating all that was said - trying to get a handle on it). Now,

it seems to me missing a feed or two, you risk a big bacterial die off and cycle..'

I am thinking that as long as the zeolith gets shaken, and "cleaned off", it would be able to take up the ammonia of a bacterial die off, so there would be no issues there. Someone please correct me.

 

[Boomer]

Hey Steve what are you doing answering post

You are 100 % correct so I'll take part 2

Vin

The only difference is that the zeolite will attract other elements as you stated but will be limited by the amount of ions it has used up.

What elements, those zeolites sitting in seawater with an Is (Ionic Strength) of 600mmol will have done about all the ionic exchange they are going to do in a few hours, for the rest of their life in that water. You can tumble them all you want. Those ions that were exchanged will stay at their activity site.

What ions left the zeolite to begin with and if they did leave where did they go and what they were replace by what ? I hope you are not saying the zeolite can recharge itself. The exchange chemistry is going to be a tad of NH4+ and a bunch of Mg++ and Ca++ and maybe a few other ++ ions. These types of zeolites are the exact same thing many water softeners are made of. The only way to recharge them is to put them in a highly concentrated solution of salt, such as NaCl.

Your own statement says that zeolite has no bearing on the live of bacteria at all, hence forth it is only a media for them to grow and being a zeolite my mean nothing (see below)

Steve again

The only thing I can gather from this is it's the lack of porous area's/ion exchange in the Zeo allowing for the free/easy release of the nutrient bound bacteria making it easier for the system to process and or release???

Yes, exactly and different species may get released off of other zeolites with greater ease, different rates, etc., a reason for 3 zeolites So the zeolites have no real chemical reason at all, other than maybe some likeable surface chemistry, which may aid in the process. A further reason why the zeolite seems to work so well.

One needs to try other media in a ZEO reactor to see what happens i.e.,, snider stone, clay minerals, other porous mineral that are not zeolites, that have a similar surface structure Step 1. Step II ;Would be does the surface chemistry (meaning other ions than those on zeolites) bare a reason.

This all seems to show there is very little facultative denitrification going on in these zeolites. If there was, then I will argue the zeolite has no bearing at all, as there would be PA ( Proximity Association) and the laden nutrient rich nitrifies would be on the surface for FAD bacteria. Just like they do in many locations in a tank. Believe it or not PA nitrifiers/denitrifies take place right on the "stem" and "leaves" of aquatic plants, although it is limited. They make a FAD environment for themselves to live in.

I think we are getting somewhere :lol:

 

[Boomer]

Nikki

I do not think anything is going on as far a the zeolite taking up ammonia. The bact pop it appears needs to be removed to a lower denstiy pop, otherwise they do not function at proper capacity. All the saking or the type of tumbling Vin mentioned would never reomove them all, so there would still be a base of nitrifers.

 

[OUinLA]

Hello all. ZEO dealer/user here. Just wanted to get that out of the way.

Since the BEGINING we've been saying that the corals are feeding on "enriched" bacteria, but have been told that is impossible so since we cannot prove or disprove, we kind of keep quiet now.

I don't know everything about the system, probably don't know much at all. But what I do know is it has a great carbon source that doesn't mess up your tank and it possibly is helping with photosynthesis in some way.

About dosing bacteria, as mentioned before, and some new. It's possible that one of the components is creating a bacterial bloom (like vodka). If so, then it's also possible that overtime the bacteria populations become mono (like vodka). so by adding bacteria on a regular basis (2 times a week average) we keep the bio diversity of these populations. There is more too it than that because we know that at least one of the bacteria species is a "special" species.

 

[Boomer]

O'

Since the BEGINING we've been saying that the corals are feeding on "enriched" bacteria


To get it out of the way

I have no problem with that idea at all

but have been told that is impossible

I do not see why it is impossible

so by adding bacteria on a regular basis (2 times a week average) we keep the bio diversity of these populations. There is more too it than that because we know that at least one of the bacteria species is a "special" species.

I have no problem with that idea either


Is this a ZEO thread theat is finally getting somewhere. ???

 

[mojoreef]

OUinLA great to have you jump on the thread. I avoided pretty much all of the earlier zeo threads on most boards so I am coming in kinda clean here (no comments please Boomer!)

I also see no reason why enriched bacteria would not work, actually its a pretty good idea, Pain staking to develop but a real good plan.

About dosing bacteria, as mentioned before, and some new. It's possible that one of the components is creating a bacterial bloom (like vodka). If so, then it's also possible that overtime the bacteria populations become mono (like vodka). so by adding bacteria on a regular basis (2 times a week average) we keep the bio diversity of these populations. There is more too it than that because we know that at least one of the bacteria species is a "special" species.

Well see thats the hard part, In doing this your kind of riding the wave. If the bloom dies off you could be subjected to a whole series of algae blooms, consuming the decaying bacteria. I think this is where the use of heavy skimming and carbon play an important role

Boomer you never gave me a reply about the ammoniatized zeolites??


Mike

 

[OUinLA]

It makes sense to me too (enriched bacteria). If I remember correctly, the claim was that bacteria process these elements (AA's, vitamins, etc) extremely fast and thus the coral would get minimal or no benefit from elements the bacteria has consumed.

That being said, would you rather eat a healthy cow, or an unhealthy cow? Not exactly scientific, but it should illustrate the point. Also, I believe that corals are really pretty effiecient predators and consume what's in the water very fast (vitamins, bacteria, etc)

 

[reedman]

By George...I think we're getting somewhere. So this is an elaborate live coral food dispensing system that provides a high quality food source while maintaining a diverse biological population. Makes a lot more sense than previous explanations.

Now, my question is the claim that the system reduces nutrient levels. Is this because of heavy skimming? lower nutrient import (less P laden food entering the system)? bacteria breaking down the nutrients into a form that the corals can consume? I just don't get that part.

Great thread. The most informative Zeo thread I've read...let's keep this going.

 

[scottw]

2 full days and everyone is getting along whoo hooo.. I am glad I started this one, good idea Mike ..

I def think a lot of the idea in getting nutrient levels down, has something to do with skimming. I produce 100% more darker skim mate and twice as much, I cant wait until I hook it up on a real skimmer i.e. my new BK.

 

[mojoreef]

It makes sense to me too (enriched bacteria). If I remember correctly, the claim was that bacteria process these elements (AA's, vitamins, etc) extremely fast and thus the coral would get minimal or no benefit from elements the bacteria has consumed.

Yea nitrogen-fixers; use organic and amino acids as carbon and energy source. Vitamins are basically organic compounds that generally function as coenzymes. From what I remember about the biology here and to put it into simplier terms, they would give the bacteria its reducing power (energy). Now trying to estimate how much would be used up prior to ingestion by say a coral would have to many factors involved to make a hard guess. But it would be easy to say that it wold hyperize its reduction capability and then transfer some percentage of its stores to what ever ate it. I dont think you could blanket statement that ALL the elements the bacteria is exposed to would burn off as energy like the AA's and vitamins would though.
A way I guess someone could look at it also would be if you have created such a large and over population of bacteria (larger then the food source of the tank could support) and then constantly added them and then constantly hyperized them with food sources that would increase thier reduction power, now cut them loose on the tank with limited amounts of nutrients for them to reduce, the percentages of loaded bacteria being available for consumtion might be higher?? not sure

Also, I believe that corals are really pretty effiecient predators and consume what's in the water very fast (vitamins, bacteria, etc)

Well if you are talking about SPS, they are very effective at slim netting. This slime they put out is very hard to reduce and is like candy to bacteria and other forms of microscopic life. Now if the water was over loaded with hungreay bacteria (again because thier are more bacteria then food source) yea it would be liking that they would be capturing a good catch??


Mike

 

[mojoreef]

Reed

So this is an elaborate live coral food dispensing system that provides a high quality food source while maintaining a diverse biological population. Makes a lot more sense than previous explanations.

To a point here, its not really a coral food, its more like a bacteria food. But then the over load of bacteria (which is the natural food source for corals) would feed the corals.

Now, my question is the claim that the system reduces nutrient levels. Is this because of heavy skimming? lower nutrient import (less P laden food entering the system)? bacteria breaking down the nutrients into a form that the corals can consume? I just don't get that part.

Well we are still trying to figure that one out. Part of the system is that the zeolites take up amonia and ammonium. From all the studies I have seen so far this type of zeolite can do that, or it can only do a little bit in a saltwater system. So that part is still up in the air. But beyond that a brief concept here would be that the use of an artifically size bacteria population gives the tank alot more reduction power (thus fixing alot of nutrients) which are then pulled out via the skimmer and/or carbon use.

On the zeolite I thought this study might shed some light into its performance in saltwater
http://www.worldfishcenter.org/Naga/Naga24-1&2/pdf/aquabyte 4.pdf


Mike

 

[mojoreef]

2 full days and everyone is getting along whoo hooo.. I am glad I started this one, good idea Mike ..

Isnt that what reef boards are SUPPOSED to do :idea:



Mike

 

[Boomer]

Mike, sorry have been slow on some questions

This will be long with some new info, never mentioned on ZEO threads, or in this hobby, as far as I know

First, and for you, while doing a search for Reedman I ran into this article which has been brought up, which stared all the arguing. It is this article that is full of a lot of nonsense. My analogy to the watermelon and a Mac truck, with trailer. So if anyone wants to know why let me know

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/cav1i3/zeovit/Zeolite_Filters/Zeolite_Filters.htm


ammoniated

It may help accelerate things in the beginning. Bacteria can do some amassing things to a point (see below). However, I still find this so called ionic exchange theory amusing. Lets assume there is nitrification and denitrification going on the zeolite like LR or SB and there was some ammonia in the zeolite do to ionic exchange from FRESH zeolite. Bacteria do their thing and do what, coat the zeolite. We now have PA, both nitro and dentiro going on. As I said in the other post the denitro's are going to be the inner layer and it is the outer layer, the nitro's, that need the ammonia, just like LR or SB.

One would have to suggest that the denitro's are some how pulling the ammonia off the ion site, replacing it with something and then passing the ammonia right through itself to the nitro's. Why, what for, when the nitro's have all the ammonia they need in the water column. Nitro's excrete NO3- to the denitro's but denitro's only excrete things like N2 gas or sulfides (which may get passed to the zeolite) to the water column. And for sure we do not want the OAB (Obligated Anerobic Bacteria) doing their thing to any degree, which can take place in a poor SB. You expose these guys to O2 and things in your tank will be dead.

But there is more than meets the eye here You are always told that denitro's use NO3- and convert it to N2 gas ( you kinda see that above). This is not always the case. Some denitro's, as I alluded to in the other post can produce their own FAD environment. Such bacteria often do not need NO3- at all, the can use ammonia as their N source and excrete N2 gas . Which means what, you do not always need a two layer system, some dentrio's can do it all :lol:

There is also indications that Mn++++ can oxidize ammonia to N2 and that NO3-can be reduced by Mn++ to N2. Then there are other bacteria that can reductively dissimilate NO3- to ammonia. So in short, ammonia can be altered by a number of processes and producing a variety of products. Bacterial biogeochemistry is a very complicate issue and fills pages in such books as;

Bacterial Biogeochemistry: The Ecophysiology of Mineral Cycling

Microbial Ecology of the Oceans

So where does that leave me ? There is not ionic exchange going on between the zeo and the bact's. And for the sake of argument, if there was how would the zeo recharge itself, when, it is still coated with bact's. The bact's would have to pull elements out of the water column and by magic put these ions back into the zeolite, only to pull them out by ion exchange,. Pretty much nonsense. The only alternative is that the bact's are dissolving the zeo and pulling things out. So what would those be, that they would need ?

Chemical comp of Clino's
(Na, K, Ca)2 - 3Al3(Al, Si)2Si13O36-12H2O, Hydrated Sodium Potassium Calcium Aluminum Silicate

What would the bact's possible assimilate out of that other than water. If you go to the index of my two books the elements, Na, K, Ca, Al, Si, are not even in the index, so what does that tell you ? Although bact's can process things with these in them, they have no need for them. Into the zeo for ionic exchange and for what and are they going to pull out ?

Reedman

No I do not have access to that, it is a PH.D thesis. However, there are one or two on line articles that discuss seawater and the use of zeo's in regards to ammonia uptake. Lets assume that ammoniated zeo's or zeo's that have a high affinity in seawater for ammonia, would benefit these bact's. So what it would be short lived and you would have to replace the zeo. It can not recharge itself and is nonsense for the bact's to be capable of recharging it only to pull those same ions right back out again. Neither of my two books even remotely make a remark that bact's do/can ionic exchange with a media. I think some people are trying to compare plants and bact's.

I see Mojo posted a link for you

I almost for got Invin

It is my theory that the concentration of NH4 will be stronger around the zeolite rocks since NH4 is strongly attracted around this area because of the "magnet" the zeolite has for NH4.

How could that ever take place when the rocks are covered/coated with bact's ? It would have to be a virgin site, like new zeo. Tumbling will not create that.NH4+ is a weak "magnet", compared to the likes of Ca++, Mg++, etc.

 

[mojoreef]

Hey leave my plant theorys alone

However, I still find this so called ionic exchange theory amusing.

I am close to that conclution to but still want to explore a few things.

We now have PA, both nitro and dentiro going on. As I said in the other post the denitro's are going to be the inner layer and it is the outer layer, the nitro's, that need the ammonia, just like LR or SB.

Would it have to be this way Boomer?? If the zeolites did give off ammonia and through enzymes the bacteria was able to free it up. the nitrifing bacteria would form directly on the surface and create a biofilm. Now all along tank water is running through the reactor and depositing detritus and simular. Could the dentrifing bacteria then develop thier own enviroment between the areboc bacterial film and the detritus (even with in the detritus) then when the reactor is shaken it doesnt release the bacteria (to tight of a bond with the biofilm in place) but does release the detritus which would then be saturated with bacteria??
Not a strong field for me here so just guessing really. The only way I see nutrient removal is here by it being bound up by bacteria and the stuff associated with them and then being removed via carbon and skimming.


Mike

 

[Boomer]

Would it have to be this way Boomer?? If the zeolites did give off ammonia and through enzymes the bacteria was able to free it up. the nitrifing bacteria would form directly on the surface and create a biofilm. Now all along tank water is running through the reactor and depositing detritus and simular. Could the dentrifing bacteria then develop thier own enviroment between the areboc bacterial film and the detritus (even with in the detritus) then when the reactor is shaken it doesnt release the bacteria (to tight of a bond with the biofilm in place) but does release the detritus which would then be saturated with bacteria??

No, that can work, I have no problem with most of that. Bact's can work in may ways. Some bact's, cyano and algae can get there C right from "dissolving " carbonates. However, the same applies as I have stated a number of times, once the ammonia is used up and it will/may be used up quickly on the zeo, it is gone and nothing is going to replace it. NH4+ is not just going to diffuse right through the bact's to a site on the zeolite for them to just remove it. Lets say it can diffuse, why on earth would the bact's let it pass by, only to remover from the zeo.? And if so, what is the ion that is going to bring about an ionic exchange ? So the zeo no longer has a real chemical function, once the ammonia has bee used. And to the next issue ; Where is it that enough ammonia is going to be exchanged in seawater to begin with ?