Bottled Bacteria, AquaBiomics. Just what's in your bottles

[telegraham]

Doc Ryan is not getting on a boat, and skimming the ocean to collect his Magic Bug Juice.

I generally agree with this, but there is one exception. This is BioDigest.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I do like the idea Salem is going in, in that we may be able to shift the more favorable strains by what we carbon dose.

I have not followed most of the bacteria testing of tank water threads since I have yet to be convinced it is useful, but how would one decide what strains are useful?

Again, this may be showing my unfamiliarity with with Aquabiomics can actually do, but the difference between harmful and desirable bacteria may be so minor that I am not convinced they can actually tell important but fine differences.

Take E. coli in the human GI tract. Some are normal and beneficial. Some are horrendous and cause all sorts of problems. Can an Aquabiomics test actually distinguish all of the good strains of E. coli from all of the bad strains? Where does that good vs bad info come from?

If they could not do this for the very well studied human GI tract, how can we hope to do it in the far, far less studied field of bacteria in reef tanks?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Understand.

A functional description of the product, what it does and how it grows, could be sufficient to suspect the product is snake oil. This we have for a smattering of products. Calling all the versions of this product snake oil might be rushing things. A list of a product’s contents could give a more balanced assessment.

I think this is a very good point. I am sure that these folks don't share their sources or methods with each other, even if they can analyze each others contents.

One product may be made in good faith with good research, methods (lab quality and controlled fermentation, etc.) and QC and another simply a money grab using water from the Seine.

I think this all started with Marineland and Biro-Spira - which to my knowledge is/was a specific lab produced product, or at least marketed as such.

Feels kind of like the wild west as these products gain popularity and use scenarios or recommendations (proven or just marketing hype.

 

[telegraham]

I have not followed most of the bacteria testing of tank water threads since I have yet to be convinced it is useful, but how would one decide what strains are useful?

Again, this may be showing my unfamiliarity with with Aquabiomics can actually do, but the difference between harmful and desirable bacteria may be so minor that I am not convinced they can actually tell important but fine differences.

Take E. coli in the human GI tract. Some are normal and beneficial. Some are horrendous and cause all sorts of problems. Can an Aquabiomics test actually distinguish all of the good strains of E. coli from all of the bad strains? Where does that good vs bad info come form?

If they could not do this for the very well studied human GI tract, how can we hope to do it in the far, far less studied field of bacteria in reef tanks?

If this is anything beyond rhetorical, and you're interested in reducing unfamiliarity, contact Salem Clemens at Reefbuilders, Andrew Bouwma over on Humblefish, or Eli Meyer at AquaBiomics.

 

[Reef Puncher]

i would pitch in for like the top 5 most popular. keep it simple and cheap. the most popular are like Fritz turbo start, Dr Tims, microbacter 7, bioDigest, etc. do those. id love to know.

 

[telegraham]

like Fritz turbo start, Dr Tims, microbacter 7, bioDigest, etc. do those. id love to know.

I have done BioDigest (see above), Tim's Eco-Balance (S. marcescens, B. pumilus, B. subtilis, B. licheniformis), and MB7 (B. subtilis, B. licheniformis, B. pumilus).

 

[brandon429]

to determine utility of bottle bac strains, someone set up this test and I'll take the social heat for it. we need this real test, not with vials and guesstimates about nh4 levels but the simple observation about crashing tanks vs non crashing tanks


I say bottle bac can keep a tank from crashing that would otherwise crash without it, that's useful. hospital tanks, scape changes, emergency setups. lots of reasons to use bottle bac

get two 5 gallon empty nano reef tanks

stack both half full of white base rock and nothing else

set up one with water and three clownfish day 1, begin feeding as normal. take pics of the tank on day 3


the utility test:

in the other tank, input a bottle of fritz and the same three clowns, feed as normal. show me pics of that tank on day 3


utility will be established, and nobody will care which strains made the utility tank stay alive.


chem and microbio flexers like to get and post details, clades that were found, complex biochem pathways on and on and on and on and on but daily reefers just like the fact the cycle comes from the bottle as soon as it's tipped. they like not having to wait 30-90 days to start, just like they enjoy downloading songs faster than 45 mins per song

a Moore's law exists for reef tank cycling. bottle bac are the transistors so far in the evolution.

regular reefers like myself do not care what strains do this job, nor if the initial inoculations are short lived and replaced by proper species later on. nobody in the real world cares about that, they care about the ability to cycle instantly from a bottle.


people who run massive fish sales warehouses where they pre-quarantine fish use bottle bac in the ways stated to avoid crashing. if it worked without $ bottle bac, Dr. Reef wouldn't pay for it. he uses hundreds and hundreds of gallons of fritz per year. he buys direct in bulk/large containers of it if we read his posts about the business. able to handle thousands of pounds of fish within instant holding systems, no crashes.

*if photosynthetic systems were practical, useful, helpful in any way he'd be using those vs pricey bottle bac**

big utility is every single thread we can search using these terms: "reef tank cycle bottle bac with fish"

what you see after that search: 450,000 pages of links where everyone debates cycle status due to an api post, or a red sea ammonia reading, but the fish are always alive. check the posts. we're not even on a gradient of loss... there isn't any. check the searches, link us a mere 5 recent failed bottle bac cycles from the return lot where fish actually died. = quite a challenge, because bottle bac works so well. even from the ones we can find, from 2015, those can easily be disease losses just the same.




bottle bac works, there's 1000 pages of tests online. what Dan and T have done alone establishes amazing detail from their threads.

 

[BeanAnimal]

to determine utility of bottle bac strains, someone set up this test and I'll take the social heat for it. we need this real test, not with vials and guesstimates about nh4 levels but the simple observation about crashing tanks vs non crashing tanks

Asking kindly, can we not turn this into another ammonia/tank crash melee? The topic here is much broader and more with regard to an assay (as best we can) of what is in these bottles. While claims are part of the discussion, that topic is broad as well.

 

[telegraham]

While claims are part of the discussion

Chasing claims is a bag of cats. My interest is the what. What's inside and who sells same same what.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Chasing claims is a bag of cats. My interest is the what. What's inside and who sells same same what.

Agree 100%


The whole "What does it do" is certainly a very broad topic. It (as in any of them) may or may not help "cycle", be "food" or even give you or your fishes a higher chance of acquiring necrotizing fasciitis...

Yet - so many just pour it in. The more I ponder this, the more baffled I actually become. It is beyond a "trend". It (the pouring in of "bacteria" of unknown origin or composition) has become a mainstay.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

If this is anything beyond rhetorical, and you're interested in reducing unfamiliarity, contact Salem Clemens at Reefbuilders, Andrew Bouwma over on Humblefish, or Eli Meyer at AquaBiomics.

I'm interested in hearing how they identify good strains vs bad. It's not rhetorical, but I also do not have the time to chase down and debate things that should be stated up front by anyone making such claims. I'd certainly read it if it was in a concise place to read, as opposed to watching videos looking for nuggets of info.

Except for suspected pathogens and bacteria associated with BJD, I don't see Aquabiomics addressing good or bad bacteria on their web site..

for example:

"There is an established process for designating a bacterium as a pathogen that requires completing a series of experimental steps (e.g. infecting healthy corals with the pathogen and documenting the appearance of disease symptoms). Some of these steps are especially challenging with reef-building corals, so the list of “official” coral pathogens can lag behind the state of our knowledge about likely pathogens.

In this recently added section of the microbiome report, we screen for several suspected pathogens associated with known coral diseases. There is evidence linking these bacteria to coral diseases, but they have not been formally designated as pathogens yet."

 

[Moe K]

Chemical and genomic characterization of a potential probiotic treatment for stony coral tissue loss disease​

Marine probiotics: increasing coral resistance to bleaching through microbiome manipulation​

 

[Moe K]

My whole rabbit hole adventure into reef bacteria started with some kind of pathogen killing my torch corals. I wouldn't get what I would say was brown jelly disease but something was killing them one by one for months. I tried antibiotics and it would stop the death temporarily and just pick back up a few weeks later. Multiple aquabiomics tests showed 3 pathogens in my tank. Multiple in tank antibiotic treatments and they were still present. I am firmly against antibiotics in our hobby now.

Searching for alternative cures and different reefing habits I found the crt concoction and PNS bacteria. In full transparancy I also microdosed bleach to kill ostreopsis dinos (probably because of all the antibiotics). It was a combination of those that showed my final aquabiomiics test could not detect 2 of the 3 pathogens and the one still present was reduced. Very bad experiment on my part since I dosed 3 different things in the tank but it could just as likely been from the PNS bacteria or crt concoction. Or a combination of those with the micro dosing of bleach. What ever it was it eliminated pathogens where antibiotics could not.

I tried to get others that were suffering from torch coral loss to try the PNS bacteria or crt concoction but ultimately evertime they seemed to just jump right into the antibiotics train because of social media.

Take it with a grain of salt.

 

[taricha]

Take E. coli in the human GI tract. Some are normal and beneficial. Some are horrendous and cause all sorts of problems. Can an Aquabiomics test actually distinguish all of the good strains of E. coli from all of the bad strains? Where does that good vs bad info come from?

Aquabiomics detects individual strains and can categorize what is found to more specificity than the species level.

That is, they can separate one E Coli from another.

Your E Coli illustration actually works really well with Vibrio in reefs tanks.
Vibrio is likely in every reef tank. It's a common member of the coral holobiont. Some members of vibrio are bad actors, but many great tanks have lots of vibrio with no harmful effects.
Aquabiomics can tell vibrio fortis from another vibrio, and even one strain of vibrio fortis from another.
But the complication that is beyond their reach is that conditions act as triggers for otherwise harmless vibrio hanging out in the coral community to turn on lots of pathogenic traits and become virulent.
Salem has advocated for Eli to add this ability. (The techniques already exist) but understandably they aren't in a hurry to offer a product another level of complexity beyond what the customer base is currently trying to navigate.

Fortunately, there are a lot of cases where the good/bad identity isn't conditional. An enormous number of coral infections show up as one particular strain of Arcobacter, for instance.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Fortunately, there are a lot of cases where the good/bad identity isn't conditional. An enormous number of coral infections show up as one particular strain of Arcobacter, for instance.

Interesting, but what do we do with that data?

"Ohh look high levels of Arcobacter a.eatscorals... grab the Anti-Arcobacter nanites son, we will wipe them out"

"Well dad, all we have is cipro can I pour it in and wipe everything out?"

I (honestly) would somewhat not want to know what is in there! I don't use bottle bacteria but if I did I would like to know that I am not putting something like that in, however.

 

[taricha]

Interesting, but what do we do with that data?

"Ohh look high levels of Arcobacter a.eatscorals... grab the Anti-Arcobacter nanites son, we will wipe them out"

"Well dad, all we have is cipro can I pour it in and wipe everything out?"

I (honestly) would somewhat not want to know what is in there! I don't use bottle bacteria but if I did I would like to know that I am not putting something like that in, however.

In the particular case of arcobacter, we actually have protocols with cipro and oxalinic acid that seem capable of eliminating arcobacter, while leaving the rest of the community testing as basically normal.
But that's really a best case scenario.
And your point applies well to most everything else.
People with Vibrio are trying all manner of interventions and I haven't seen persuasive evidence that any are very good.

 

[lakai]

I generally agree with this, but there is one exception. This is BioDigest.

What does this even mean? Is Pseudomonas a important strain to be dominant in our tanks? If so, why? For what reason ? Is it just important for basic nitrification for just fish (subject has been beaten to death and revived every year with the same outcome) ? What about for coral? Which strains are important to have? Whats the baseline for those with long term successful tanks. Until people become educated with all these strains and their effects as long as well as methods on how to make corrections. I don't see how knowing any of this can be useful. I'm extremely interested in being more educated on the subject but it is difficult to get past a million people chiming in with some ammonia riff raff when the word bacteria is mentioned.

 

[BeanAnimal]

In the particular case of arcobacter, we actually have protocols with cipro and oxalinic acid that seem capable of eliminating arcobacter, while leaving the rest of the community testing as basically normal.
But that's really a best case scenario.
And your point applies well to most everything else.
People with Vibrio are trying all manner of interventions and I haven't seen persuasive evidence that any are very good.

Tangent but still contextual... Paletta resorted to fairly heavy antibiotic dosing a year or to ago to fix STN and or try to rid the system of vibrio, etc. after a Microbiome test. I think it helped the STN but can't remember the details of the other stuff.

 

[Dan_P]

Can you post/screen print the data from you account or is the info privileged ?



Like I said; perhaps all these manufacturers are doing is selling bottled poo, but regardless the source and type of cultures seems very relevant thanks to your info



exactly…, I’m adding the Microbacter 7 product descriptions and benefit promises for context,
slightly related: I’m also looking up Aquabiomics services

anyway
MB7:
Complex system of non-pathogenic aerobic and anaerobic microbes, as well as natural enzymes, specifically formulated to establish biological filtration in new aquarium set-ups, and to enhance the rate of nitrification, denitrification, and organic waste degradation in marine and freshwater aquaria through complete nutrient remineralization.
Supplied in a state of suspended animation for maximum longevity.
Formulated utilizing extensive data compiled by microbiologists.

Benefits

• Rapid reduction of organic carbon, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, and phosphate.
• Digestion of uneaten/undigested food, excreta, detritus, and other latent organic material, resulting in cleaner and healthier aquarium substrate
• Reduction of organic compounds into nutrients that encourage the growth of photosynthetic organisms
• Greatly-reduced hydrogen sulfide production.
• Increase in dissolved oxygen concentration.
• Limits availability of pre-existing phosphate to undesirable forms of algae and cyanobacteria.
• Increased water clarity.

Instructions and Guidelines

Shake product well before using. Mix appropriate volume of MicrōBacter7 (see below) with 250-ml (~8 fl. oz.) of aquarium water in a clean container prior to addition to aquarium. If using a pipette to dispense MicrōBacter7 below water level of container or aquarium, be sure to thoroughly clean pipette with fresh water prior to placing tube back into MicrōBacter7 bottle; failure to do so will contaminate the product. Best results may be obtained by adding mixture to external biological filtration system (if applicable). Do not add to pump intake port(s). For best results, use within 1-year of purchase date. Grossly overdosing MicrōBacter7 will not significantly increase the effectiveness of the product, nor the rate at which it enacts changes in aquaria. The following recommendations are based upon extensive testing and will produce the best results in most aquaria.

Medium- to High-nutrient Systems, or to seed Biological Filtration in new aquaria:
To effectively decrease the concentration of available nutrients and waste material in all marine and freshwater aquaria, add 5 ml (1 capful) per 25 US-gallons (94.6 L) [≈4 drops per gallon (3.8 L)] of aquarium water daily for the first two weeks of use; the impact that MicrōBacter7 has on an aquarium is most evident within this period. Turn protein skimming and UV-sterilization off for a period of 4 hours following addition to aquaria. A noticeable difference in water clarity is typically apparent within 30-minutes of dosing. Follow same instructions for new aquarium start-up. Thereafter, switch to “low-nutrient” dosage (below).

Stable, Low-nutrient Systems:
To maintain a low concentration of available nutrients in all marine and freshwater aquaria, 5 ml (1 capful) of MicrōBacter7 per 50 US-gallons (189.3 L) [≈2 drops per gallon (3.8 L)] of aquarium water no more than once each week; alternately, add 1 drop per 50 US-gallons daily (or 1 drop per 25 US-gallons every other day). Turn protein skimming and UV-sterilization off for a period of 4 hours following addition to aquaria. Dosage may be adjusted according to perceived benefit to aquarium, however it is recommended that the dosage not exceed 1 drop per 10 US-gallons per day. With time, hobbyists may determine that decreasing the dosage and/or dosing frequency by up to 50% sufficiently maintains a low-nutrient environment. During changes in biological filtration or when increasing the aquarium bioload, dose 1 drop per 25 US-gallons daily for one week, then resume “low-nutrient” dosage.

Caution
Keep out of reach of children. Not for human consumption.

Ingredients
Purified water, proprietary blend of natural enzymes and non-pathogenic, beneficial microorganisms.

Technical Background

The concentration of dissolved and particulate organic materials in any aquatic environment can have a significant impact on the overall appearance of, as well as the health of organisms residing within, that system. Relatively low-nutrient environments are characterized by high water clarity, lack of unpleasant odors, and absence of microalgae and cyanobacteria; this is collectively a result of the lack of nitrogen-, phosphorus-, and carbon-based waste available. Aquaria that are relatively rich in available nutrients have characteristics opposite to the afore mentioned, and are typically not desirable because of the resultant appearance of the system and the difficulty of maintaining healthy aquarium inhabitants.

Brightwell Aquatics MicrōBacter7 is a selective complex of extremely effective microbes and enzymes that rapidly reduces the concentrations of organic nitrogen, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, phosphate, and organic carbon in all marine and freshwater ecosystems, leading to greatly improved water quality; better water quality typically leads to healthier aquarium inhabitants. MicrōBacter7 does not require refrigeration, however storage in a cool, shaded area will prolong the activity, and maximize the shelf-life, of the product.

MicrōBacter7 does not require refrigeration, however storage in a cool, shaded area will prolong the activity of the vitamins. Refrigeration will maximize the shelf-life of the product.

I wonder if the enzymes in MB7 are the same ones used in laundry detergents.

 

[taricha]

Tangent but still contextual... Paletta resorted to fairly heavy antibiotic dosing a year or to ago to fix STN and or try to rid the system of vibrio, etc. after a Microbiome test. I think it helped the STN but can't remember the details of the other stuff.

yep, he ramped the antibiotic up and up to really high doses to get rid of vibrio.
I consider his experience a demonstration that abx or at least his choice of abx is not a good way to target vibrio.