TwoTankAmin
Fish Connoisseur
The problem I have is that what Wb states goes against the science that has been in place for a many many decades. Science has been culturing and researching bacteria for a very long time. What was said was this;
(Dr. Tim is Dr. Tomothy Hovanec himself. Here is a summary of his published research http
/www.drtimsaquatics.com/resources/library-presentations/scientific-papers
Here is biographical info for him http/www.drtimsaquatics.com/about here is even more deatiled info http/web.archive.org/web/20050307102048/http/www.marineland.com/drtims_Currvitae.asp )
I think most reasonable people would construe what you said above as meaning bacteria in a bottle is sold as a cure (or perhaps "snakeoil"). This is simply incorrect. I am sorry if it bothers you that I am unwilling to let such a statement go unchallenged and perhaps to influence newbies. Nor is it relevant to the facts if Wb wont use these products or that I will. That is a choice and her right. However, to imply/state they are not a viable solution or are sold as something they are not is not her right in the absence of some sort of reasonable scientific proof. She must show why they do not work not just state that she wont use them. The implication of saying that she wont is that they do not work and/or they are not natural in that they are not the same ones that would appear over time anyway.
So to the OP I would suggest before you accept Wb's opinion, you might ask her to provide some sort of evidence that what she states is based on some scientific basis and not just an opinion. I have tried to provide some actual science and expert explanations from people who have spent a lifetime not only keeping fish but studying the microbiology involved in tanks for many decades. They write papers in peer reviewed scientific journals and sport Ph.Ds at the end of their names. They have spent a lot of time in labs doing research into this subject. Plus there was evidence from professionals who just study the bacteria and other things about them but that will apply in tanks as well.
The way science studies bacteria in tanks is this. They remove filter media and substrate from tanks. They then clone the bacteria etc. in them to increase the numbers greatly to facilitate studying them. They use genetic analysis, electron microscopes, special probes and a lot of sophisticated and very pricey equipment. The goal is to identify the specific bacteria and processes at work. The same reproductive process that they use to study these critters is used to reproduce them to bottle as well. For what is in a bottle to be effective, it must be what is known to work in established tanks. When one starts a tank, they must start with some bacteria or it never cycles. The more bacteria with which you start, the less time it takes to have sufficient numbers to do the work needed. The same applies to colonizing the other bacteria in our tanks besides the familiar nitrifying ones. What is the difference between a laboratory controlled process (bottled starter bacteria) and removing the bacteria from an established tank in media or substrate and plopping it into a new tank to seed it? The only real difference is if you take the media/substrate out of a tank and let it sit drying out for a while, it does very little or nothing to help as much of the bacteria will have died off. In the bottle is stays wet and in a state of dormancy and ready to go back to work. There is science to prove this beyond any reasonable doubt
And then lets look at thiose bacteria that reproduce by making spores. These can last for a heck of a long time waiting for water to bring them to life. When such spores are stored and then added to a tank, they also work exactly as they do in nature.
Neither my opinion nor Wb's opinion have any bearing on how things actually work or do not work. These things are not a question of opinion, they are discovered and explained by people far better educated and experienced than either of us. And these are the sort of people I have quoted and relied upon for what I have said. They are most certainly better educated in the science of microbiology itself as well as having spent a lifetime of hands on work to arrive at their understanding of things things than I or Wb.
So if you are really curious about the facts, here is how one can find them. You use Google, but not the part of Google most use. You use something called Google Scholar. This search function only looks at the scientific literature- research, articles and books - to include in results. What you will find is the actual science rather than the information we so often encounter on many fish sites. http/scholar.google.com/
If you search for info only from 2000- 2015 and type in "cyanobacteria" you get back 138,000 results.
If you search for info for "causes of cyanobacteria outbreaks" you get back 9,160 results.
And if you put aside the specific topic of the study and focus on what underlying conditions are needed to cause such outbreaks, you will see the same theme in pretty much all of the literature- excess organics. And the way nature deals with these is via a complex web of microorganisms. There are a whole lot more microrganisms in our tanks than the ones which process ammonia to nitrate. Just ask how the organic wastes in a tank are converted to ammonia and you will be off to the races.
Wb- I am sorry of you dislike my approach, it is not meant as a personal attack on you in any way (I have a lot of respect for your knowledge of bettas). My objection is in regards to what you have stated on this specific subject. I would challenge anybody who said it, not just you.
(Dr. Tim is Dr. Tomothy Hovanec himself. Here is a summary of his published research http
/www.drtimsaquatics.com/resources/library-presentations/scientific-papersHere is biographical info for him http
/www.drtimsaquatics.com/about here is even more deatiled info http/web.archive.org/web/20050307102048/http/www.marineland.com/drtims_Currvitae.asp )I think most reasonable people would construe what you said above as meaning bacteria in a bottle is sold as a cure (or perhaps "snakeoil"). This is simply incorrect. I am sorry if it bothers you that I am unwilling to let such a statement go unchallenged and perhaps to influence newbies. Nor is it relevant to the facts if Wb wont use these products or that I will. That is a choice and her right. However, to imply/state they are not a viable solution or are sold as something they are not is not her right in the absence of some sort of reasonable scientific proof. She must show why they do not work not just state that she wont use them. The implication of saying that she wont is that they do not work and/or they are not natural in that they are not the same ones that would appear over time anyway.
So to the OP I would suggest before you accept Wb's opinion, you might ask her to provide some sort of evidence that what she states is based on some scientific basis and not just an opinion. I have tried to provide some actual science and expert explanations from people who have spent a lifetime not only keeping fish but studying the microbiology involved in tanks for many decades. They write papers in peer reviewed scientific journals and sport Ph.Ds at the end of their names. They have spent a lot of time in labs doing research into this subject. Plus there was evidence from professionals who just study the bacteria and other things about them but that will apply in tanks as well.
The way science studies bacteria in tanks is this. They remove filter media and substrate from tanks. They then clone the bacteria etc. in them to increase the numbers greatly to facilitate studying them. They use genetic analysis, electron microscopes, special probes and a lot of sophisticated and very pricey equipment. The goal is to identify the specific bacteria and processes at work. The same reproductive process that they use to study these critters is used to reproduce them to bottle as well. For what is in a bottle to be effective, it must be what is known to work in established tanks. When one starts a tank, they must start with some bacteria or it never cycles. The more bacteria with which you start, the less time it takes to have sufficient numbers to do the work needed. The same applies to colonizing the other bacteria in our tanks besides the familiar nitrifying ones. What is the difference between a laboratory controlled process (bottled starter bacteria) and removing the bacteria from an established tank in media or substrate and plopping it into a new tank to seed it? The only real difference is if you take the media/substrate out of a tank and let it sit drying out for a while, it does very little or nothing to help as much of the bacteria will have died off. In the bottle is stays wet and in a state of dormancy and ready to go back to work. There is science to prove this beyond any reasonable doubt
And then lets look at thiose bacteria that reproduce by making spores. These can last for a heck of a long time waiting for water to bring them to life. When such spores are stored and then added to a tank, they also work exactly as they do in nature.
Neither my opinion nor Wb's opinion have any bearing on how things actually work or do not work. These things are not a question of opinion, they are discovered and explained by people far better educated and experienced than either of us. And these are the sort of people I have quoted and relied upon for what I have said. They are most certainly better educated in the science of microbiology itself as well as having spent a lifetime of hands on work to arrive at their understanding of things things than I or Wb.
So if you are really curious about the facts, here is how one can find them. You use Google, but not the part of Google most use. You use something called Google Scholar. This search function only looks at the scientific literature- research, articles and books - to include in results. What you will find is the actual science rather than the information we so often encounter on many fish sites. http
/scholar.google.com/If you search for info only from 2000- 2015 and type in "cyanobacteria" you get back 138,000 results.
If you search for info for "causes of cyanobacteria outbreaks" you get back 9,160 results.
And if you put aside the specific topic of the study and focus on what underlying conditions are needed to cause such outbreaks, you will see the same theme in pretty much all of the literature- excess organics. And the way nature deals with these is via a complex web of microorganisms. There are a whole lot more microrganisms in our tanks than the ones which process ammonia to nitrate. Just ask how the organic wastes in a tank are converted to ammonia and you will be off to the races.
Wb- I am sorry of you dislike my approach, it is not meant as a personal attack on you in any way (I have a lot of respect for your knowledge of bettas). My objection is in regards to what you have stated on this specific subject. I would challenge anybody who said it, not just you.
