The Planted Tank Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
716 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
In my effort to 'educate' myself on "dosing" I stumbled upon a "dosing and fertilization video" where the guy describes, Day 7 as his 45-50% water change day. On day 7 he mentions using Beneficial Bacteria after he resets his tank. I've never heard this approach before, figured I'd bounce it off the Forum.

DD
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,277 Posts
In my effort to 'educate' myself on "dosing" I stumbled upon a "dosing and fertilization video" where the guy describes, Day 7 as his 45-50% water change day. On day 7 he mentions using Beneficial Bacteria after he resets his tank. I've never heard this approach before, figured I'd bounce it off the Forum.
I'm not sure why he adds nor does he explain what adding BB would do on the water change day. Your resetting the tank based on ferts not getting to far out of range, but there's no reason I can think of that you'd have to boast BB.

He lost me when he said excess DOSED ferts cause algae. Every tank that is dosed has excess ferts, if not something would be deficient and the plants would suffer.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,705 Posts
I'm not sure why he adds nor does he explain what adding BB would do on the water change day. Your resetting the tank based on ferts not getting to far out of range, but there's no reason I can think of that you'd have to boast BB.
Agreed. Knowing what we know about water changes not affecting the beneficial bacteria numbers, it doesnt appear clear why he chooses to use the bacteria in this situation. I do so because of that temporary rebuilding that happens between adding additional bioload --where the biofilter builds to match bioload. For instance, when adding fish.

Or, in the other case, when cleaning a filter and losing some beneficial bacteria and during that time when the biofilter works to rebuild numbers to match bioload.


My situation is a little different than others, however. I have high bioload in fish and lower density planting than many here. Where someone else with high density planting and low bioload in fish can rely on plants to take care of any temporary ammonia that may result form a sudden decrease in available beneficial bacteria to match bio-load, I do not have that. I use the beneficial bacteria in particular situations to aide me when I know I am adding bioload to my system or taking it away.



Even established systems can go through a mini-cycle when medicating, after cleaning too vigorously, or adding livestock that taxes your biofilter. Depending on the equivalency of plant mass to livestock- some can worry less than others about this occurrence.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,277 Posts
Agreed. Knowing what we know about water changes not affecting the beneficial bacteria numbers, it doesnt appear clear why he chooses to use the bacteria in this situation. I do so because of that temporary rebuilding that happens between adding additional bioload --where the biofilter builds to match bioload. For instance, when adding fish.

My situation is a little different than others, however. I have high bioload in fish and lower density planting than many here. Where someone else with high density planting and low bioload in fish can rely on plants to take care of any temporary ammonia that may result form a sudden decrease in available beneficial bacteria to match bio-load, I do not have that. I use the beneficial bacteria in particular situations to aide me when I know I am adding bioload to my system or taking it away.
.
Yes, true, You have one of the harder set of parameters to deal with. High bio-load low plant mass, so I could see someone in that situation needing the boast to BB when adding fish, etc. You also have a more difficult job in controlling algae since for me anyway it all starts when some of that ammonia sneaks into the water column from a higher fish load and/or poor maintenance
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
347 Posts
I know Seachem recommends adding Stability after water changes but I don't know anyone who actually has.

I see it as a way for a company to try and get more money from you. Seeing as BB are self regulating ie increase colony to deal with more ammonia amd nitrite and decrease colony when there isn't enough to support a larger colony. If your tank is cycled it is a waste to add more BB.

On the other hand. If you're using chlorinated water and you're doing a 50% WC maybe you risk damaging your BB colony. Esspesually if you're filter is running during the process.

I never add BB to a cycled tank unless there's a reason like a big plant die off, or I'm adding several more fish.



Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,277 Posts
The same guy that put out that video and states to add BB after every water change also states in another video that stem and root plants absorb 4 - 400% more nutrients through their roots than the water column so we have to feed them through the roots.

Like to see the study on the 4 - 400% and tell all the stemmie guys here who have inert substrates and tanks full of healthy colorful plants who are doing only water column dosing that they're doing it wrong and have to feed through the roots.

He's actually comparing root tabs, but at the 50 sec mark you could see him discuss this. At the end of the day, be wary of internet videos. Hobbyists actual tanks and what they're doing carries far more weight.

 

·
snails are your friend
Joined
·
3,092 Posts
4 to 400% is an awfully big range!

I have mixed thoughts about bottled bacteria to begin with. When I opened my store, I had over 70 tanks/racks to cycle and used filter squeezed water on a few, used several major brands of bottled stuff like Cycle, as well as control tanks that got no BB. Some even got the fancy glass vials of BB but I forget the brands now. In the end, there was no rhyme or reason to which tanks cycled faster fishless, though to my recollection the two fastest were seeded with filter water. This was 2007 though, and I've seen evidence to believe that they've come a long way since. In my recent shrimp rack and the ADA was spiking ammonia well over 5 PPM in two tanks. I used the newer Tetra Safe Start product and to my surprise the NH4 reading was .5 in less than 48 hours. But my question about the Tetra product is, what are the contents of that bottle? Is it truly only bacteria in suspended animation? They surely couldn't survive on a warehouse and then store shelf for months or a year in a sealed container with no food or oxygen, could they? Does the product contain anything else that could bind or chemically remove ammonia? Nothing to suggest that on the ingredient panel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,277 Posts
4 to 400% is an awfully big range!
I'm trying to find the plant by plant breakdown of those numbers. >:)

As far as the BB and the water. Certainly there is bacteria in the water, but obviously nothing to concern us with the cycle since we can remove 99% of it and no new cycle.

Other than when I first started in the hobby, I have not used any BB products nor have I even seeded the tank with ammonia so can't comment on what exactly is going on in those bottles.. Since we are talking planted tanks, i simply put the plants in and do large water changes. I tinker with things for a the first 4-weeks keeping up with water changes, making sure the plants are growing and then I SLOWLY add fish. Between the water changes and the small amount of fish added at a time, the tank always stays low on ammonia and it eventually can hold a full tank of fish.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,705 Posts
Another instance of my routine use of Stability:

I recently had a fish spawn on a flat rock in another tank. I put rock with eggs in an entirely un-cycled 10 gallon tank. I started the tank out with recommended dose of Stability for newly cycling tanks and add a bit after each daily water change. I change 50% water daily.

There are about 60-70 Ram cichlid fry in this tank.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,197 Posts
The same guy that put out that video and states to add BB after every water change also states in another video that stem and root plants absorb 4 - 400% more nutrients through their roots than the water column so we have to feed them through the roots.
I guess my stem plants didn't get the memo.:wink2:

But it's not surprising, as many of these internet videos leave me scratching my head. IMO, even some of the well known ones are providing dubious advice at best, with much of it being well dated.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
716 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
4 to 400% is an awfully big range!

I have mixed thoughts about bottled bacteria to begin with. When I opened my store, I had over 70 tanks/racks to cycle and used filter squeezed water on a few, used several major brands of bottled stuff like Cycle, as well as control tanks that got no BB. Some even got the fancy glass vials of BB but I forget the brands now. In the end, there was no rhyme or reason to which tanks cycled faster fishless, though to my recollection the two fastest were seeded with filter water. This was 2007 though, and I've seen evidence to believe that they've come a long way since. In my recent shrimp rack and the ADA was spiking ammonia well over 5 PPM in two tanks. I used the newer Tetra Safe Start product and to my surprise the NH4 reading was .5 in less than 48 hours. But my question about the Tetra product is, what are the contents of that bottle? Is it truly only bacteria in suspended animation? They surely couldn't survive on a warehouse and then store shelf for months or a year in a sealed container with no food or oxygen, could they? Does the product contain anything else that could bind or chemically remove ammonia? Nothing to suggest that on the ingredient panel.
How long did you have to keep the Tetra Safe Start going once you got the Ammonia down to 5PPM? My first shrimp tank is on the near horizon.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top