Waste Away: Is it really bacterial? Or chemical? What does it do?

[DrTim]

Appeals to authority can be dicey. But what's in the bottle is in the bottle, regardless of who does the testing. That's one of the things we like about science.


I'm glad you mentioned that, because it gives me chance to emphasize.
I didn't say that, and it's not my position. If Dr Tim said he put bacteria in the bottles, I'll take his word for it. I haven't demonstrated otherwise (didn't try to) and probably couldn't prove that negative anyway.

I said that the effect of the media without the bacteria is large and easily measured, and the effect of the bacteria apart from the media is undetectable with the same methods.
I also didn't say it doesn't work, or does nothing. I am saying it does a lot, but the effects that can be measured are due to the media, not the bacteria.

Oh, one more thing It's been brought up a couple of times as to contacting Dr Tim with Qs. He answered a series of relevant questions about the WA bacteria in this thread. His answers informed the testing approach.
He was asked for "proof" that it works, and responded that the 'proof' is the results [meaning testable/observable water parameters] So I did some tests.

I think I only have one real question for him, this one.

"taricha' you wrote in your summary - "If there's viable effect bacteria in Waste-Away that do anything important in an aquarium context, I have no idea how to prove it". Where you intended to or not - the response where the same as saying the bacteria are and the product is worthless. That is how people read it. And you have no proof.

There are 3 questions all lumped together:
1) are the bacteria alive? Test: dilute the bacteria in a liquid growth medium like LB-media. After 24 hours do a live/dead stain. Standard microbiology

2) ok, the bacteria are alive what do they do? Do they reduce nitrate and phosphate? Do they digest grunge?
Tests - add nitrate and phosphate and a 1% LB-media in aerated flask, measure NO3 and PO4, add WasteAway in the correct dilution to the flask. Measure NO3 and PO4 over time. Have controls - flasks without NO3 and PO4, flasks without bacteria,

3) The test for grunge is hard because you have to show the grunge can be digested (that is why you to have controls and you have to make it repeatable.

 

[Michael Gray]

While this continues. Me dosing waste away to try to help my Dino's does this product lower po4 and no3 like other bacteria products.

 

[Dan_P]

"taricha' you wrote in your summary - "If there's viable effect bacteria in Waste-Away that do anything important in an aquarium context, I have no idea how to prove it". Where you intended to or not - the response where the same as saying the bacteria are and the product is worthless. That is how people read it. And you have no proof.

There are 3 questions all lumped together:
1) are the bacteria alive? Test: dilute the bacteria in a liquid growth medium like LB-media. After 24 hours do a live/dead stain. Standard microbiology

2) ok, the bacteria are alive what do they do? Do they reduce nitrate and phosphate? Do they digest grunge?
Tests - add nitrate and phosphate and a 1% LB-media in aerated flask, measure NO3 and PO4, add WasteAway in the correct dilution to the flask. Measure NO3 and PO4 over time. Have controls - flasks without NO3 and PO4, flasks without bacteria,

3) The test for grunge is hard because you have to show the grunge can be digested (that is why you to have controls and you have to make it repeatable.

Dr. Tim, your information is very enlightening. I admit to chuckling when I read your suggestion of using LB medium to culture WasteAway bacteria. Medium used in @taricha experiments was a mighty poor fare by comparison, almost like water versus beef broth! I don’t think many of us thought about that level of nutrient richness to observe WasteAway bacteria activity.

By the way, i have been toying with the idea of using COD or BOD as a very rough measure or index of how “nutrient rich” the substrate is. I know very blunt instrument. I believe that I will try to add the “WasteAway Index” to my tools, in which I measure “how well the substrate supports WasteAway bacteria growth”. It will be very interesting to see whether the strong COD-BOD correlation will include the WasteAway Index. Or maybe it will complement it.

Thanks for the inspiration!

Dan

 

[DrTim]

You're welcome.
I think one needs to separate out the 3 questions:
1) are the bacteria alive? You cannot assume that the aquarium water has enough organics plus you want something repeatable so add a little LB medium to make sure there are enough nutrients in the water (and don't forget some aeration). Then measure cloudiness or live/dead stain.

2) do the bacteria assimulate phosphate and nitrate? Ok, you showed on #1 that you can that the bacteria are alive and growing. You have testing model. Now add PO4 and NO3 to some (should always have replicates) and to 1/2 add Waste-Away to the other 1/2 no waste-away and measure NO3 and PO4.

A confounding factor in 1 & 2 is that you should really start with sterile seawater since you want to show that is Waste-Away bacteria you are testing not bacteria that were already in the water.

3) For the sludge test - I am trying to think of an analog that can be repeatable - have ot get back on this one.

Have fun!

 

[DrTim]

While this continues. Me dosing waste away to try to help my Dino's does this product lower po4 and no3 like other bacteria products.

Yes it will - do you have high nitrate and phosphate?

 

[DrTim]

@DrTim , I respectfully ask again, if you could help us understand your product better. Perhaps you could point out what inaccuracies you feel have been made, and help us understand how how WA works. Again, not asking for the secret recipe.

I don't really want to subject everyone to re-read my original post which is #80. Did you get a chance to read it?

A quick summary:
Waste-away was used a too high a concentration - more is not better.
There is no evidence that the 'grunge' used in the test was biodegradable - no controls.

How Waste-Away works -
Waste-Away is a combination of several heterotrophic bacteria that I isolated from aquariums and I found are good at consuming nitrate and phosphate and degrading organics. I do not buy bacteria from the ACME Bacteria Company - I isolated these.

Organic material is constantly added and/or produced in an aquarium. It can be dead organisms, feces, dead algae and bacteria, fish food, etc. Bacteria degrade or mineralize this material. If nature did not have this process nothing would decay. But some bacteria will produce exopolymer susbtances (EPS) etc and form a biofilm - that stick coating or slime on the tubing, pipes, filter pads etc. clogging these. Other bacteria (like some in Waste-Away) can be used to degrade this EPS and reducing clogging. But as I mentioned in the another post - not 100% of the material can be degraded that is why you get a build of material over time in the substrate and other areas.

As Sanjay and others showed years ago in an article in Advanced Aquarist on-line - your skimmer removes a significant percentage of bacteria from the water and it seems to be selective. As you reduce the bacteria in the water column you give bacteria/other organism that live on surfaces a better chance to survive because your have reduce their competitors. This can lead to cyano and GHA etc because they are not removed by the skimmer.

The general idea behind bacteria additives is to add back the bacteria the skimmer has removed. Now that assumes there is enough carbon in water which maybe is not always the case.

A product like RedSea NOPOX (or vodka dosing) assumes that there is not enough carbon in the water and that by adding carbon you will promote the bacteria already in the water to grow and assimulate the NO3 and PO4.

The conclusion of the OP was that my claim that Waste-Away worked by adding bacteria to the water which remove NO3 and PO4 was wrong based on his tests and that Waste-Away works solely because it acts as a carbon source like vodka or NOPOX.

Regards

 

[DrTim]

I think this thread is great. I do feel that some constructive input from DrTim would be great since Waste Away is sold as a bacterial agent.

@DrTim , how do we grow this bacteria to see it under a microscope and actually confirm. Not that I want your trade secrets, I don’t, but I like to know what I’m adding to my tank.
What family/strain of bacteria am I adding to my tank when using waste away?
How long is this bacteria expected to live and multiply once added?
Is it a phagocytic bacteria?



If it has bacteria, we should be able to prove it. That was kinda my initial post reasoning.... it’s not that I didn’t read your initial experiments. Although I think my post read that way so I’m sorry. I just still had some questions about the real existence of the bacteria. I was thinking more along the lines of a PCR analysis to see what strain or family of bacteria we are adding when using Waste Away.

The bacteria are Bacillus - why do a PCR analysis? Send a sample to AquaBiomics and for $99 you'll have answer.
But can I ask - what is that going to tell you?
They bacteria divide every 20 to 30 minutes but there are many things in the aquarium that remove/kill them.

 

[DrTim]

In fairness to @taricha (who started the thread and ran the test's) , he did not call your product snake oil. He stated that he has used it, and that it does work, and that he would continue to use it, but that he believed it worked differently then what was described on the bottle (saying he thought it was more carbon source then bacteria.

You're right he did not explicitly state that but he pretty much implied that and reading though the replies that is the take of many readers who posted phases/words like 'protecting consumers from 'magic' bottles, snake-oil, "why is it still being sold by so many people and not shut down" etc. so he got his biased point across, IMO.

 

[Michael Gray]

Yes it will - do you have high nitrate and phosphate?

I dose my po4 to stay at .1. And no3 8 to 10. And I dose to keep it there if it falls below that

 

[Copingwithpods]

Miller535 - the reason I generally only response to posts that deal with my products is to set the record straight. For other posts some people think I am only trying to sell something. I wish it where different but the general feeling I get (I could wrong as posts no feeling) is that I am more unwelcome because I am a manufacturer trying to get you buy something rather than an experience hobbyist and scientist who has something to add.

I assure you that you are extremely underestimating us/me and this community as a whole. We as a whole would love nothing more than for you to step up (as you have as of late) and input some constructive criticism and empower those testing your product to bring us the consumers greater knowledge of what we can realistically expect. I think any of us that have ever kept a tank for longer than a month know that there are no such things as easy fixes. What most of us are looking for is that what we are adding to our tanks is helping in some way, that's all. I know I can't expect your product or any other for that matter to 100% get rid of ditritus. That's unrealistic and should not be expected of any product. Your turn around in this thread is greatly appreciated and I encourage you to keep that up as it lifts all of us out of this muck of uncertainty. Like stated before BRS is constantly testing their products and their findings which are published often be it good or bad and we all love them for it because the only thing we love more than results is transparency. I'm sure I won't be the only one to encourage you to be more active on here and other public media outlets as it is a great resource. We all love you and your products and I think that's why so many of us were taken back by your less that lack luster response to the OP. Non the less you have come back strong and provided some avenues for future testing and peer review which I think is all we really wanted.

As I go digging in my recycle bin for the that bottle I hope that the OP can now evaluate the new test criteria and pull up a second, more refined batch of conclusions for the product. To be fair Dr. don't take this personally, we don't know what your stuff does or MB7 or vibrant (and why it kills some corals and inverts) or any other bacterial additive. All we want is answers.

 

[CoralClasher]

I don't really want to subject everyone to re-read my original post which is #80. Did you get a chance to read it?

A quick summary:
Waste-away was used a too high a concentration - more is not better.
There is no evidence that the 'grunge' used in the test was biodegradable - no controls.

How Waste-Away works -
Waste-Away is a combination of several heterotrophic bacteria that I isolated from aquariums and I found are good at consuming nitrate and phosphate and degrading organics. I do not buy bacteria from the ACME Bacteria Company - I isolated these.

Organic material is constantly added and/or produced in an aquarium. It can be dead organisms, feces, dead algae and bacteria, fish food, etc. Bacteria degrade or mineralize this material. If nature did not have this process nothing would decay. But some bacteria will produce exopolymer susbtances (EPS) etc and form a biofilm - that stick coating or slime on the tubing, pipes, filter pads etc. clogging these. Other bacteria (like some in Waste-Away) can be used to degrade this EPS and reducing clogging. But as I mentioned in the another post - not 100% of the material can be degraded that is why you get a build of material over time in the substrate and other areas.

As Sanjay and others showed years ago in an article in Advanced Aquarist on-line - your skimmer removes a significant percentage of bacteria from the water and it seems to be selective. As you reduce the bacteria in the water column you give bacteria/other organism that live on surfaces a better chance to survive because your have reduce their competitors. This can lead to cyano and GHA etc because they are not removed by the skimmer.

The general idea behind bacteria additives is to add back the bacteria the skimmer has removed. Now that assumes there is enough carbon in water which maybe is not always the case.

A product like RedSea NOPOX (or vodka dosing) assumes that there is not enough carbon in the water and that by adding carbon you will promote the bacteria already in the water to grow and assimulate the NO3 and PO4.

The conclusion of the OP was that my claim that Waste-Away worked by adding bacteria to the water which remove NO3 and PO4 was wrong based on his tests and that Waste-Away works solely because it acts as a carbon source like vodka or NOPOX.

Regards

I’ve had a bacteria question for some time now. What are the micro nutrients needed for good bacteria growth? Can those nutrients be depleted from the tank and should they be added as a prebiotic?

 

[Rick Mathew]

Miller535 - the reason I generally only response to posts that deal with my products is to set the record straight. For other posts some people think I am only trying to sell something. I wish it where different but the general feeling I get (I could wrong as posts no feeling) is that I am more unwelcome because I am a manufacturer trying to get you buy something rather than an experience hobbyist and scientist who has something to add.

Dr Tim…Hi my name is Rick and I want to say I completely understand your need to “set the record straight”. As you said “it is your career, your reputation and your business” and in essence the product is you!
I would want to do the same!

In the world that I came from, which has nothing to do with aquariums, water, fish or coral but polymers, I often found myself as the Chief Technical Officer in the same situation. The challenge came for mostly competitors who reported information that put our products in a bad light….Generally technical performance… Not responding to this swiftly and appropriately could cost literally millions of dollars in business. Our approach was quite simple, although often a lot of work. First assume they were correct. This would often mean replicating their work and analyzing the outcome. And yes there were times when they were correct and we had to “scramble” to fix it. Fortunately most of the time however they were not correct and we created a clear story with solid data and experimental results that clearly refuted their position. By doing this in this way the data and experimental results did the correcting and made our technical position even stronger. You have a chance to do the same.

As to the point you make about being “unwelcomed”. I do not think this is correct, as a matter of fact I would guess the exact opposite is true. Having scientists with your knowledge and experience are much valued on this forum and would have a great deal to add…Randy Holmes Farley being a good example. I believe you would be welcomed here…And yes you are trying to sell something and from my perspective that a good thing…for without selling something there is no resources to advance our hobby. I believe good vendors like yourself are the prime innovators and investors in any market. Besides that you have a great deal more to offer than a product!...Skills, knowledge and experience that is not contained in the bottles of your product ,but in your willingness to interact with the community…I think you would be very welcomed here!!

From all that I know about your company it is well respected and provides products that work. I personally have used your products and have been very satisfied. The post by @taricha did nothing to change this opinion…as a matter of fact I read “The effects of Waste-Away are easily demonstrated”…ie. It works…He was just unable to get the spores to activate…I see that you posted how this could be done… this will go a long way in advancing the conversation in a positive direction.

I say all of this (in more words than you may want to read) to say I support your position of vigorously defending your product I would have just gone about it in a different way….Imagine if you would have posted post #121 as your first post…As you can already see the conversation would have been much more productive and saved a lot of negative emotional investment.

Respectfully
rick

 

[taricha]

Wow! @DrTim your replies over the past day have been really fascinating.
This info below works well as an answer to my repeated question...

is there an experiment that you can suggest that would demonstrate the bacteria in a bottle of WA doing something other than what the media in WA does?

...and the info below, is really illuminating!

1) are the bacteria alive? You cannot assume that the aquarium water has enough organics plus you want something repeatable so add a little LB medium to make sure there are enough nutrients in the water (and don't forget some aeration). Then measure cloudiness or live/dead stain.

2) do the bacteria assimilate phosphate and nitrate? Ok, you showed on #1 that you can that the bacteria are alive and growing. You have testing model. Now add PO4 and NO3 to some (should always have replicates) and to 1/2 add Waste-Away to the other 1/2 no waste-away and measure NO3 and PO4.

A confounding factor in 1 & 2 is that you should really start with sterile seawater since you want to show that is Waste-Away bacteria you are testing not bacteria that were already in the water.

3) For the sludge test - I am trying to think of an analog that can be repeatable - have to get back on this one.

Here's why I find it so interesting: Because the effects of adding a recommended dose of WA into aquarium water are huge, and very easily measured. I can think of a few markers - N, P, cloudiness - that every hobbyist in this forum could observe as the effects. I have a few more pieces of equipment so I could show large WA effects a half-dozen ways I can think of.
But you are saying the effect of the bacteria in WA is difficult to measure, and may not always happen in aquarium water, if organics are low.

This is only a hair-width from saying the same thing about WA that I am.

I said that the effect of the media without the bacteria is large and easily measured, and the effect of the bacteria apart from the media is undetectable with the same methods.
I also didn't say it doesn't work, or does nothing. I am saying it does a lot, but the effects that can be [easily] measured are due to the media, not the bacteria.

Again, great info...

The bacteria are Bacillus

combination of several heterotrophic bacteria that I isolated from aquariums

Other bacteria (like some in Waste-Away) can be used to degrade this EPS

In fact, Dr Tim's post 126 here is so good it's worth reading a couple of times

How Waste-Away works -...

So good I hesitate to even point it out, but three persistent pieces of incorrect info you keep repeating...
1)

Waste-away was used a too high a concentration

Despite the fact that it's been stated repeatedly that in Experiments 4,5, (& bonus experiment 1, post 27), the product was used at the correct dose: 1mL in a gallon, and 1/8mL in 0.5L. In those cases all added to (not so clean) straight tank water.
You and @Dan_P provide some tantalizing info as to why the bacterial activity may not have been detectable, although used exactly as directed.

2)

so your saying the bacteria are dead since you can't find viable bacteria. And at the same time you saying those dead bacteria aren't doing anything

This strawman was not and is not my position. As has been pointed out repeatedly by myself and others.
The obvious and easily measurable rapid effects of WA in an aquarium context are due to the media and not the bacteria. While we can't be responsible for everyone who barely reads our writing and takes the wrong info away, I will take responsibility for this poor writing:

If there's viable effective bacteria in Waste Away that do anything important in an aquarium context, I have no idea how to prove it. All the tests that I can come up with show the opposite.

"the opposite" is vague. It could mean "tests did not show.." which is true, or "tests showed there was none..." which is not accurate. It's bad writing and I'll edit the post immediately. Sincere apologies.

3)

I think it is obvious you are bias. Yes, everyone has biases but you work to limit them in science. Yours are on full display.

The least relevant thing in this whole thread is my prior opinions, but this is completely wrong, and you repeatedly suggest it as a reason to ignore the results. My initial assumptions were that WA bacteria digested organics and was a helpful bacterial additive, and I repeatedly promoted that on this board...
here's receipts from the months before I started this thread.
4/18/19

Obviously Tims is very effective at eating away what's in the tank

5/24/19

so a rapid bacterial intervention [of WA] that burns through all of it in a short time ought to help a lot

6/27/19 I started a whole thread (24 pages now) about using WA combo to battle dinos.

I've seen this method posted about and tried here and there. It has more than enough success to warrant its own thread and a closer look.

9/9/19

Dr. Tims also has a slow release version... [promoting WA gels]

9/11/19

I'm increasingly coming around to the idea that a "good bacteria" intervention [with WA] should be part of all treatment protocols

11/6/19

Waste Away etc. Probably most accurate to call these aerobic heterotrophs. They go in, break down and consume waste of a few different forms

11/27/19

waste-away definitely consumes a lot of grunge

But again, it doesn't matter what I thought, because what's in the bottle is the same regardless of who does the testing.

 

[taricha]

As I go digging in my recycle bin for the that bottle I hope that the OP can now evaluate the new test criteria

Oh, you better believe I have more tests!

As I mull over DrTim's post 126 some more...

I have two additional tests I want to do (and a 3rd in my head). One @DrTim will not like (that's easy), and one that he will like (that's hard). And a 3rd, hypothetical test that he would LOVE if I can ever get the right conditions.

The first, A nutrient reduction NO3 and PO4 test so simple that anyone who reads this chem forum could replicate it. It tests whether the rapid nutrient reduction from WA is attributable to the bacteria or the media.

The second, I think I may have enough info now to demonstrate the spores in WA are viable (or not), and can be cultured and their digestion of aquarium organics quantified. This assumes we're being given correct, and sufficiently complete info
(even if successful, it sadly won't address the question of "do the WA bacteria matter?" in an aquarium context.)

The 3rd is a longshot, more a fantasy than anything I'm likely to do soon, but if I can ever culture up enough harmful dinoflagellates to get a testable amount of dino mucous, it might be possible to demonstrate WA bacteria do (or don't) digest the EPS that makes up the sometimes toxic mucus. (Cyano makes lots of EPS too, but I don't think I can confidently separate it from the cells).
I promise I'll try if I ever grow enough dinos for it.

 

[Miller535]

Yes it will - do you have high nitrate and phosphate?

@DrTim , I am a little confused about this. When I asked about waste away lowering my ph, you said ammonia was created, and basically caused a mini cycle. Would a mini cycle not create more NO3 and PO4, not reduce it? I believe you that it lowers NO3 and PO4, I am just still trying to understand this. Thanks.

 

[taricha]

Would a mini cycle not create more NO3 and PO4, not reduce it? I believe you that it lowers NO3 and PO4, I am just still trying to understand this. Thanks.

I posted a demonstration of WA reducing NO3 and PO4 in post 47...

Starting nutrient level: 51ppm NO3, 2.61ppm PO4
I then split it into 3 bottles that I bubbled continuously in the dark. Control got nothing, 2nd got double recommended doses of Waste Away, and the 3rd bottle got vodka that was 1/6th of the WA ...

So here's what it looks like

Stars indicate which days WA and Vodka were added.

 

[Reefer1978]

Dear @DrTim I am honestly very surprised how defensive and unhelpful you sound in your comments. You could also participate in the science, ask Taricha for his sample and show us your own test on it, setup your own test with a live camera feed if you are so concerned we won't believe your results.

From your comments here's what I internalized:

1. None of you are scientists, so just trust me cause you are all doing it wrong
2. Add the product, trust me it works
3. You are not going to see everything disappear, as not everything will disappear, but again just trust me as a scientist that everything that could disappear did indeed disappear.

I am sorry but I am one of those people who used your product many times, as well as Fritz 460, and notices no impact what so ever. Thus I came looking for this thread, and at first was very happy to see a vendor actually helping the community, and very quickly disappointed as soon as I got to post 80.

As far as @taricha goes, I've met him through reef2reef years ago when he started extensive testing on how to defeat dinos in aquaria, when the most common response was "use dyno X". For years he's been nothing but helpful.

 

[DrTim]

I’ve had a bacteria question for some time now. What are the micro nutrients needed for good bacteria growth? Can those nutrients be depleted from the tank and should they be added as a prebiotic?

It depends on the type bacteria to some extent:
1) all bacteria need phosphate.
2) Nitrifying bacteria which are autotrophic (meaning they use inorganic carbon for their carbon requirement) are helped out by iron and tiny tiny amount of copper.
3) Sludge degrading bacteria which are heterotrophic (meaning use organic carbon for their carbon requirement) need trace amount of zinc, copper, manganese, cobalt and others. A very dilute synthetic seasalt is not that bad of a medium.

 

[DrTim]

Dr Tim…Hi my name is Rick and I want to say I completely understand your need to “set the record straight”. As you said “it is your career, your reputation and your business” and in essence the product is you!
I would want to do the same!

In the world that I came from, which has nothing to do with aquariums, water, fish or coral but polymers, I often found myself as the Chief Technical Officer in the same situation. The challenge came for mostly competitors who reported information that put our products in a bad light….Generally technical performance… Not responding to this swiftly and appropriately could cost literally millions of dollars in business. Our approach was quite simple, although often a lot of work. First assume they were correct. This would often mean replicating their work and analyzing the outcome. And yes there were times when they were correct and we had to “scramble” to fix it. Fortunately most of the time however they were not correct and we created a clear story with solid data and experimental results that clearly refuted their position. By doing this in this way the data and experimental results did the correcting and made our technical position even stronger. You have a chance to do the same.

As to the point you make about being “unwelcomed”. I do not think this is correct, as a matter of fact I would guess the exact opposite is true. Having scientists with your knowledge and experience are much valued on this forum and would have a great deal to add…Randy Holmes Farley being a good example. I believe you would be welcomed here…And yes you are trying to sell something and from my perspective that a good thing…for without selling something there is no resources to advance our hobby. I believe good vendors like yourself are the prime innovators and investors in any market. Besides that you have a great deal more to offer than a product!...Skills, knowledge and experience that is not contained in the bottles of your product ,but in your willingness to interact with the community…I think you would be very welcomed here!!

From all that I know about your company it is well respected and provides products that work. I personally have used your products and have been very satisfied. The post by @taricha did nothing to change this opinion…as a matter of fact I read “The effects of Waste-Away are easily demonstrated”…ie. It works…He was just unable to get the spores to activate…I see that you posted how this could be done… this will go a long way in advancing the conversation in a positive direction.

I say all of this (in more words than you may want to read) to say I support your position of vigorously defending your product I would have just gone about it in a different way….Imagine if you would have posted post #121 as your first post…As you can already see the conversation would have been much more productive and saved a lot of negative emotional investment.

Respectfully
rick

Thanks Rick - I do understand but these threads are quick and testing take time and as you point out reactions (especially negative one) get out fast.
I will set up some tests and post methods and results so they can be repeated by others (a hallmark of all science) but this does take time.
In the meantime, thank you and I will consider your advice before I set phasers to full.

 

[DrTim]

@DrTim , I am a little confused about this. When I asked about waste away lowering my ph, you said ammonia was created, and basically caused a mini cycle. Would a mini cycle not create more NO3 and PO4, not reduce it? I believe you that it lowers NO3 and PO4, I am just still trying to understand this. Thanks.

There are different bacteria is Waste-Away. Some consume NO3 and PO4 - let's call this group 1. Others degrade organics which produces ammonia (group 2). Group 2 is working organic material on filter pads, in the substrate etc - they're on surfaces. Group 1, however, are in the water column. Your skimmer, filter sock if clogged enough, UV etc remove Group 1. This is why some people initially see an increase in ammonia/nitrate because Group 2 is producing ammonia/nitrate faster than Group 1 can consume it because Group 1 is being removed all the time unless you turn some things off.