12 hrs after adding 2ppm ammonia, bloom still well underway.
Nitrate is zero
so, it appears, lol.
on the upside, this messing about has prompted me to test the nitrate in my display for the first time in ages.
Agree - however, I believe 0.5 ppm was added which is a little high - and could also favor heterotrophs over autotrophs no?
I would keep replicating the experiment - I think you're adding too much PO4 - but since you started with 0.5 - I would merely continue that. I would buy a new bottle *unopened bottle of H2O2 - if you want to try that again.
I am surprised FritzZyme 9 worked that fast!Thought I’d go “live bacteria” route for cycling a QT as the wife is itching to get a few fish in her tank. The most available bacteria by me was Fritzyme 9, so that’s what I went with.
Tank, ceramic rock, heater, Circulation pump were all bleached for 24 hrs then allowed to dry for 24 hrs prior to start up.
1) 40 liters of RODI / saltwater (Tropic Marin Classic) was added to the tank at 30ppt.
2) Tank heated to 26C
3) Added 50mls white vinegar (tank pH at 7.4 to 7.6ish), a bit vague but didn’t fancy messing with pH probes.
4) Added TriSodium Phosphate to 0.5ppm tested Hanna/API combo
5) Added Fritzyme 9 (8 ounce) as suggested by fritz for new startups.
6) Added 2ml Dr Tim’s ammonia.
The TAN according to API was good enough on 2ppm (photo is next to a freshwater card so you can ignore the color chart)
Tank tested this morning, a little over 18 hrs after bacterial addition has showed a 50% reduction in NH3/NH4, an increase in Nitrite and pH. In particular pH is now above 7.8
The Seachem ammonia alert has only now started to indicate a slight tinge, presumably due to the pH increasing, but still safe.
Tank is cloudy.
Fuzzy pics;
As long as it is readable numbers of PO4 - its not the limited factor - but DOC is IME. I do not know if Autotrophs or Heterotrophs is best in low concentrations of PO4 though.
This was my thought - that as long as PO4 was not zero, that was enough for obligate autotrophs. However heterotrophs - which grow much fasters - compared with autotrophs which double in hours/days as compared to minutes for heterotrophs - would use much more PO4 - and could be limited by low PO4. In all of the experiments done by Dr. Reef, and myself - I don't recall ever seeing a bacteria bloom - when ammonia (alone) was used with low levels of PO4.
Can you clarify? What do you mean C:N values 10:1 above and below? (because that implies any ration of C:N would expect heterotrophic nitrification - and are you saying that these amounts would favor heterotrophs over obligate autotrophs?
8.2
This is interesting - but IMHO - has nothing to do with the current experiment, etc. Nor do C:N Ratios. So though it seems like science is being thrown at something - IMHO - it's not accurate. This single strain of bacteria - has nothing to do with the real world.More stuff on the context for how to think of a 10:1 C/N ratio....
"The effect of C/N ratio on the NH4-N removal efficiency of strain N31 is shown in Fig. 4B. There were significant differences among C/N ratios of 0-5 (P < 0.05), then the NH4-N removal efficiency remained stable for C/N ratio 5-20, reaching removal percentages of approximately 90%. However, some heterotrophic nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria have depressed nitrogen removal performance in nitrification medium with a C/N ratio less
than 10 (17,33). The tolerance of strain N31 to a wide C/N range extends its application scope to include aquaculture ponds or systems with low C/N ratio of 3-8 and treatment of wastewater or sediment with high C/N ratio by carbon source addition (18,19,34). This result is consistent with the excellent heterotrophic nitrification performance of B. methylotrophicus L7 at the C/N ratio of 6-20 (12)."
Here's the fig 4B referenced.
Characterization of novel Bacillus strain N31 from mariculture water capable of halophilic heterotrophic nitrification–aerobic denitrification[pdf]
Ahh, didn’t notice that, cheers.
It wasn't a criticism. - Just - trying to figure out what you're trying to prove?
