Could we utilise the Redfield ratio a little better in aquaria?

[HomebroodExotics]

That is the purpose of the constant spamming of some users, most likely sponsored by companies.
There has been a movement for some time to disrupt any conversation that envolves the use of carbohydrates in reef aquaria. Most likely due to this being the main ingredient in many shelf products designed for reef improvement.
I’ve mentioned several times that I can prove the concept.
Although it seems at the moment the issue are my banners.

People will laugh but you are actually correct about this. Companies pay a lot of money to put their own users on forums to cause chaos along with other state actors as well. I applaud you for being aware of this.

As far as Redfield goes my advice to you is this. I believe that redfield says that a particular phytoplankton is made up of carbon nitrogen and phosphate. If we feed our aquariums regularly we typically have an abundance of nitrogen and phosphate. But the food lacks enough carbon to provide dogestion for everything else in the aquarium. Simple carbon sources will provide a boost to the bacteria for digesting the nitrogen and phosphate in the aquarium. I hope this helps.

 

[MnFish1]

Technically is not a theory. As I’ve done it many times now. The difference was that I would have to dose large quantities of live phytoplankton into the system to be able to get the carbohydrates available, I also needed to rely on bacteria to break those carbohydrates into forms that this organism could use it.
This time around I intend to extract those carbohydrates and only use them instead of using the live phytoplankton. If that makes sense.
The effects shouldn’t differ much from someone that doses live phytoplankton regularly. With the benefit that no pollutants are being added by parts of the phytoplankton that can’t be broken down by bacteria and the fertiliser used to grow the culture. Basically will be a 2.0 upgrade from my automated phytoplankton dosing unit.

I think you are running on a trail that gets narrower and narrower until you reach a ledge. I would carefully read the papers and interpretations of the Redfield ratio - to help decide whether your ideas make sense. perhaps start here: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1017/S0967026201003456

 

[twentyleagues]

Technically is not a theory. As I’ve done it many times now. The difference was that I would have to dose large quantities of live phytoplankton into the system to be able to get the carbohydrates available, I also needed to rely on bacteria to break those carbohydrates into forms that this organism could use it.
This time around I intend to extract those carbohydrates and only use them instead of using the live phytoplankton. If that makes sense.
The effects shouldn’t differ much from someone that doses live phytoplankton regularly. With the benefit that no pollutants are being added by parts of the phytoplankton that can’t be broken down by bacteria and the fertiliser used to grow the culture. Basically will be a 2.0 upgrade from my automated phytoplankton dosing unit.

But we are still not sure if its bacteria or protozoa that are actually doing the "work" here? So this all boils down to getting a different source of carbs to fuel n & p regulation? How does one extract the carbs only from phyto and is it worth the squeeze?

 

[sixty_reefer]

Except - IMHO - you can't use it as a tool. That was the point. I know you want to use it - but it makes no sense scientifically.

If there isn’t any other source of carbon in the tank I believe it can be used as the chart illustrates.
Hopefully the test run may demonstrate that in a good or bad way.

 

[MnFish1]

If there isn’t any other source of carbon in the tank I believe it can be used as the chart illustrates.
Hopefully the test run may demonstrate that in a good or bad way.

There are multiple sources of carbon in a tank - CO2 is a source of carbon, for example. so is ever food fed to the tank

 

[HomebroodExotics]

There are multiple sources of carbon in a tank - CO2 is a source of carbon, for example. so is ever food fed to the tank

Yes but it’s not the same as sugar or vinegar.

 

[sixty_reefer]

There are multiple sources of carbon in a tank - CO2 is a source of carbon, for example. so is ever food fed to the tank

don’t say that to loud lol, there was two pages of folks mocking as I said that.
For this exercise I’m only focus on DOC and not DIC as the Protozoa is heterotrophic.

 

[sixty_reefer]

I think you are running on a trail that gets narrower and narrower until you reach a ledge. I would carefully read the papers and interpretations of the Redfield ratio - to help decide whether your ideas make sense. perhaps start here: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1017/S0967026201003456

It’s a long one, I will definitely read that in the morning and reply to it.

 

[MnFish1]

Yes - sorry. I skipped a couple pages - I wasn't notified of the thread

 

[sixty_reefer]

But we are still not sure if its bacteria or protozoa that are actually doing the "work" here? So this all boils down to getting a different source of carbs to fuel n & p regulation? How does one extract the carbs only from phyto and is it worth the squeeze?

Can’t be sure yet, although Protozoa levels were always high under microscope in past projects.
The method intended to use is by rehydrating freeze dried phytoplankton, then boiling it and adding enzymes to break down further more complex carbohydrates forms in phytoplankton. From what I read I should be able to end up with a liquid solution of simple and complex carbohydrates by adding the enzymes to it. I have never done this before although I’ve seen a video from the chap that does PNS (I believe that’s the name) and he feeds he’s cultures in a similar way.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Yes - sorry. I skipped a couple pages - I wasn't notified of the thread

To be honest you haven’t lost much mate. The thread is a mess back there.

 

[twentyleagues]

Can’t be sure yet, although Protozoa levels were always high under microscope in past projects.
The method intended to use is by rehydrating freeze dried phytoplankton, then boiling it and adding enzymes to break down further more complex carbohydrates forms in phytoplankton. From what I read I should be able to end up with a liquid solution of simple and complex carbohydrates by adding the enzymes to it. I have never done this before although I’ve seen a video from the chap that does PNS (I believe that’s the name) and he feeds he’s cultures in a similar way.

So say it works as intended what are the possible benefits over not caring whether its bacteria vs protozoa and phyto carbs vs vinegar or vodka?

 

[ReneReef]

don’t say that to loud lol, there was two pages of folks mocking as I said that.
For this exercise I’m only focus on DOC and not DIC as the Protozoa is heterotrophic.

Seriously? At that moment the discussion was on heterotrophic bacteria.
The very definition of them is their inability to use inorganic carbon. So in the context @Hats_ was correct.

You keep twisting and turning. Blaming others for misunderstanding your, changing the context or nature of your remarks to talk yourself right.

 

[Hats_]

To be honest you haven’t lost much mate. The thread is a mess back there.

Wonder whose to blame for that?

 

[Hats_]

So say it works as intended what are the possible benefits over not caring whether its bacteria vs protozoa and phyto carbs vs vinegar or vodka?

Aside from all the pollutants in the phytoplankton i wouldnt bet on much change compared to more pure forms of carbon

 

[sixty_reefer]

Seriously? At that moment the discussion was on heterotrophic bacteria.
The very definition of them is their inability to use inorganic carbon. So in the context @Hats_ was correct.

You keep twisting and turning. Blaming others for misunderstanding your, changing context or nature of your remarks talk yourself right.

If you remember correctly the carbon dioxide conversion come from the part were the discussion turned to all tanks are “carbon” limited and I was trying to tell you that my view is that they are carbon balance. And on that context I’ve asked you if you saw many tanks that are Co2 limited.

 

[Hats_]

If you remember correctly the carbon dioxide conversion come from the part were the discussion turned to all tanks are “carbon” limited and I was trying to tell you that my view is that they are carbon balance. And on that context I’ve asked you if you saw many tanks that are Co2 limited.

Dude, just stop with your "limited" everything. We cant test for DOC so you can't say it is true, youre making assumptions without basis

 

[sixty_reefer]

So say it works as intended what are the possible benefits over not caring whether its bacteria vs protozoa and phyto carbs vs vinegar or vodka?

There’s a chance that I could end up with a system that has a more efficient nutrient recycling system resulting in less prone to algae blooms or nuisance bacteria blooms.
If you look at most coral foods on the market and bacteria cleaning products they tend to say in the ingredients “carbohydrate” in many different forms.
Is the carbohydrate feeding the coral, bacteria or Protozoa? There isn’t a effective way to know until we do the leg work.

 

[sixty_reefer]

I believe you

Dude, just stop with your "limited" everything. We cant test for DOC so you can't say it is true, youre making assumptions without basis

I believe you have stated your view several times. Thank you

 

[14 foot reef]

Fuel...............................Fire.
I'm going on R2R Vacation until this thread stops.