Vodka Dosing killing my entire tank!!!!

[Graffiti Spot]

Sarah, red sea no3p04 mix is a carbon source, so you were carbon dosing to reduce nutrients.

 

[Sarah24!]

Most of the people who are successfully using carbon sources in their system are not worried about alk or calcium depletion. It seems your main concern though is the loss of nutrient removal when dosing is stopped and I don't think any of the people successfully using a carbon source are worried about that either. I think most find if they slowly reduce the carbon input into their tanks to stop dosing things balance out quite normally and go back to where most started at, with higher nutrient levels that the tank could not naturally lower itself. I really don't believe a tank is going to completely or mostly loose its ability to reduce nutrients naturally just because it was using bacteria as nutrient removal, which is what your trying to say your main concern is right?

lol wasn’t sure if this was to my response or others

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Hello,

So I read the thread and it is very interesting. In following Randy’s equations they make since and I get that. But my question is (if mentioned already I missed it) why do this vodka dosing in the first place? Yes, Randy has proven that won’t crash a tank (think on page 2 and 3), but we all know several things will crash tanks. My question is why even do any of this at all?

Now I’m not a naturalist etc etc etc but in the ocean etc it doesn’t dose vodka lol. I’m not quite sure what we accomplish by doing this. (Maybe I missed it if so sorry) but if the loads are correct most don’t have issues. I have had my nitrates spike and I did lots of water changes on a large system. Now the highest mine ever spiked to was probably 40 ppm. I allowed this because I was mis lead to believe that 20-40 ppm nitrate would give more color to coral. Well my coral hated it and I went back to 2-5 ppm. To drop this daily and not do damage I used the Red Sea no3/no4 mix. Tested daily and reduced the dosage or tapped it off to my desired level.

Now working with medicine (sorry it’s not off topic promise) certain meds even in humans must be tappersd off. Some even after being tappered off still must be induced or taking by the patient. Two meds come to mind Xanax or aka short a benzodiazepines. Even if a patient is placed on these, and wants to get off one would tapper it slowly. Now because it’s a benzodiazepine even after the tapper is done the chances of the person going through severe withdrawal is high, not just for a week but for life. Another med not quite as bad is like prednisone, it starts large and is tappered. Stopping it suddenly will drastically affect said patient. If it’s tappered off then no big deal, but can cause other life long problems etc.

So where does my point lead to, if we are medicating our tanks we need to understand clearly the medicine we are using. Even though my nitrates stay at 2-5 ppm my tank gets a very small dosage of the no3/no4 noprox. It clearly states that once levels are reached to dose a tiny amount daily, this is similar to a benzodiazepine. You can take a larger dosage to get symptoms under control, and tapper off but you risk major probelms if you stop all together. The other reason I bring this up and is similar to benzodiazepine for humans is that once you start this, vodka dosing you can’t really stop. We have all agreed that having zero nitrates and or zero phosphates can crash a tank, the water is stripped to clean. Yes it depletes nitrates, but once one starts one by theory has to dose to increase nitrates and phosphates to prevent the water being stripped.

Now from reading what Randy has written dosing this vodka has been shown to not kill fish crash tanks etc. but what I would like to ask is, have we tested this vodka dosing with every option? Example with medicine certain meds will not work with others. Is it possible, that if said person was dosing vodka and something else, it would cause a possible toxin?

When it comes to dosing I try and keep things simple because when things go wrong, I have less to figure out in the short time we have. If one is vodka dosing, and using gfo, who knows what that’s just more risky in my opinion.

So what is the actual benefit of vodka dosing? Do the benefits out weigh the risks? Why would one result to this type of dosing? Now I’m not saying it’s bad, Randy has proven it’s not bad etc. But I’m afraid that most people simply don’t understand it. With Randy being a Chemist or scientist (sorry if I labeled that wrong in advance going off your labels). I’m pretty sure he is dead on accurate with how he mixes things for his tank. Now compared to the standard person, with or with out experience, how well do they understand it?

Again sorry if I missed a few things was try to remember what everyone said and some posts were long like mine. Also I have no experience with any dosing other than general like alk, calcium, and the basic no3/4 for nitrates and phosphate. I use a protein skimmer and two uvs in my sump. I do use the filter socks, and then microfiber pads before the returns. But I havnt had any issues with algae or much of anything else. I have had some cyano break out, which drove me nuts. But when I added a sand sifting goby it had all but gone away. I have a tiny bit but the goby is making short work my sand bed and keeping it clean.

I can tell you why I did it. I dosed vinegar not primarily to reduce nutrients or algae, but as an easy way to provide foods for filter feeders such as sponges.

Other nutrient export methods do not provide that advantage.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

FWIW, the degradation of organics is a big process in the ocean, and is entirely natural. Acetate (the organic in vinegar) is thought to be the largest turnover organic in the ocean, and may be the most common organic in sediment pore water.

 

[Sarah24!]

Hello,

Ops didn’t see your post below it that so I guess it is. So he the redsea is a form of carbon dosing which your correct. But with that said it’s still a type of medication, that we are using to counter some adverse affect aka high phosphates and or high nitrates. The problem is, once it’s introduced the livestock inside the tank will become addicted to it, coral fish etc. How is it not possible that they could possibly have a withdrawal from this carbon dosing as well? I mean as other have put it, we don’t do a autopsy on the dead fish do we or coral.

It has also been shown that this carbon dosing will strip water to clean, and corals will starve. Tanks have crashed because there were no nitrates or phosphates.
It would be similar to a person with high blood pressure even, they take meds to lower the pressure to keep the heart healthy. What’s the result when they stop, the pressure builds right, it’s unstable, and can lead to a heart attack.

Now yes I’m comparing a complex living system to a simple (to an extent). But it wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume tank inhabitants could aka become addicted to types of dosing. When you say most are not worried, and that the tank can’t not lower these naturally is very similar to a human. The human body may not be able to lower stress, anxiety or even the blood pressure, so we aka dose it to keep levels in a healthy state. If we can become addicted to aka dosing per say, why can’t the tank inhabitants?

So if we are dosing or medicating our tanks to keep them healthy, what are the adverse affects of such if we stop? Have there been studies that indicate tank inhabitants can become addicted or reliant upon the methods we use to keep the system in balance?

Edit sorry Randy didn’t see the notifications on your other two posts which I’ll read quick

 

[Sarah24!]

FWIW, the degradation of organics is a big process in the ocean, and is entirely natural. Acetate (the organic in vinegar) is thought to be the largest turnover organic in the ocean, and may be the most common organic in sediment pore water.

This is absolutely correct when we are dealing with the ocean. It balances like you said naturally and is a large process. But in terms of our tanks, they probably don’t have that process (or as significant) as the ocean does. But like the ocean it does it consistently correct. So if the ocean naturally never stops doing this, shouldn’t it be the same if we introduce the process into our tanks?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Hello,

Ops didn’t see your post below it that so I guess it is. So he the redsea is a form of carbon dosing which your correct. But with that said it’s still a type of medication, that we are using to counter some adverse affect aka high phosphates and or high nitrates. The problem is, once it’s introduced the livestock inside the tank will become addicted to it, coral fish etc. How is it not possible that they could possibly have a withdrawal from this carbon dosing as well? I mean as other have put it, we don’t do a autopsy on the dead fish do we or coral.

It has also been shown that this carbon dosing will strip water to clean, and corals will starve. Tanks have crashed because there were no nitrates or phosphates.
It would be similar to a person with high blood pressure even, they take meds to lower the pressure to keep the heart healthy. What’s the result when they stop, the pressure builds right, it’s unstable, and can lead to a heart attack.

Now yes I’m comparing a complex living system to a simple (to an extent). But it wouldn’t be unreasonable to assume tank inhabitants could aka become addicted to types of dosing. When you say most are not worried, and that the tank can’t not lower these naturally is very similar to a human. The human body may not be able to lower stress, anxiety or even the blood pressure, so we aka dose it to keep levels in a healthy state. If we can become addicted to aka dosing per say, why can’t the tank inhabitants?

So if we are dosing or medicating our tanks to keep them healthy, what are the adverse affects of such if we stop? Have there been studies that indicate tank inhabitants can become addicted or reliant upon the methods we use to keep the system in balance?

Edit sorry Randy didn’t see the notifications on your other two posts which I’ll read quick

You call it medication, but I’d call it food for bacteria. It isn’t really a medication.[emoji3]

 

[Lasse]

Correct, we have discussed the issue, which inspired me to do more research about the issue.
In a closed aquarium the cycles are not completed certainly not when using a skimmer.
Ebeling, J.M., Timmons, M.B., Bisogni, J.J., 2006. Engineering analysis of the stoichiometry of photoautotrophic, autotrophic, and heterotrophic removal of ammonia–nitrogen in aquaculture systems. Aquaculture 257, 346–358.
This paper, includes the waste production, ammonia transition, growth, respiration, consumption and decay; Ebeling is a most re spected researcher and a name in the research for aquaculture. Commercial aquaculture systems are buffered based on this paper and they have to add alkalinty, systems based on carbon dosing without any nitrification capacity. Practice proves that Ebeling En Co has correctly expressed the alkalinity consumption.
Claiming other papers are wrong or incorrect is not a good approach for any discussion when these papers prove otherwise.

Can´t open that document - get the answer - forbidden But I would love to read it

I think that you high lite one important issue with dosing organic carbon in a reef - it will lower the nitrification rate of the system. It is among the first things people that work with nitrification in professional system learns. Lover the organic carbon in the system in order to optimize the nitrification rate. You will learn this if you work with recirculated fish farms or waste water treatments farm. There you are right. But in order to have a good classic denitrification (Anaerobic respiration for the formation of ATP without oxygen)you need organic carbon in form of DOC (dissolved organic carbon). It is needed in the process as a terminal electron donator (nitrate (NO3−) is the terminal electron acceptor in the same process - the anaerobic respiratory electron transport chain which is needed in order to form ATP).

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Sarah24!]

You call it medication, but I’d call it food for bacteria. It isn’t really a medication.[emoji3]

Hello,

Well generally no I don’t call it that, but the effects and the symptoms of it are similar to medication. Definitely not saying what your doing is incorrect Randy. I’m just saying because your a chemist you know the exact dosage amount and mixture solution by heart. Those getting into this it’s like self medicating. They may and probably don’t understand the advesre affects if they do not do it properly.

Myself I use the redsea no3/no4 solution, as others mentioned it’s s carbon based solution. But if I use it incorrectly it will cause harm. In addition, the point that I have used it, as possible made my tank dependent upon that. Yes it’s used to fuel and feed good bacteria, but they now become dependent upon it (in theory). That’s all I’m trying to point out to others when they have bad luck with vodka dosing.

 

[Graffiti Spot]

To answer sarahs question as to why many of us dose a carbon source. Nutrient removal first off and the ability to manage nutrients by adding nutrients, a lot of people do this to stay off of phosphate removers and water changes. The

lol wasn’t sure if this was to my response or others

Sorry, that was more towards Banthias post.

 

[madweazl]

Hello,

Well generally no I don’t call it that, but the effects and the symptoms of it are similar to medication. Definitely not saying what your doing is incorrect Randy. I’m just saying because your a chemist you know the exact dosage amount and mixture solution by heart. Those getting into this it’s like self medicating. They may and probably don’t understand the advesre affects if they do not do it properly.

Myself I use the redsea no3/no4 solution, as others mentioned it’s s carbon based solution. But if I use it incorrectly it will cause harm. In addition, the point that I have used it, as possible made my tank dependent upon that. Yes it’s used to fuel and feed good bacteria, but they now become dependent upon it (in theory). That’s all I’m trying to point out to others when they have bad luck with vodka dosing.

I've dosed vodka/vinegar on occasion as needed. At about 12 months, I had higher nitrates but phosphates were at desirable level. Adding a carbon source was a good choice in this situation so I started dosing. All the "instructions" I've seen clearly state to back off after you see the initial decline so it is all meant to be done responsibly. If you go outside that window, the only person to blame is yourself.

It has worked well for me (as recently as last week) and many others. I will continue to use it as (if) necessary and wouldn't hesitate to do it again. Like anything in this hobby, you can make or break a system really easy if you're oblivious to the potential outcomes. With that said, I've come off organic carbon dosing twice without a gradual step and didn't notice any adverse effects but perhaps that is due to not over dosing the system to begin with.

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Hello,

So I read the thread and it is very interesting. In following Randy’s equations they make since and I get that. But my question is (if mentioned already I missed it) why do this vodka dosing in the first place? Yes, Randy has proven that won’t crash a tank (think on page 2 and 3), but we all know several things will crash tanks. My question is why even do any of this at all?

Has Randy proven carbon dosing won't crash a tank?

 

[madweazl]

Has Randy proven carbon dosing won't crash a tank?

Have you proven it does?

 

[Sarah24!]

Hello,

So to clarify all I was trying to say is that when we dose it’s similar to medication which I gave examples of. I was asking if it’s possible that our corals fish systems could become addicted to the carbon dosing, vodka etc. if they could become dependent upon them.

If so what are the adverse effects and or withdrawal symptoms of such procedures. Carbon dosing, vodka, noprox etc yes it’s not officially medicine, but neither is alcohol, and we can become dependent upon that correct.
I just simply asking if any tests have been done to see the adveate efffects, and or if once we start it, if it must be continue regardless.

Not to mention carbon dosing feeds other bacteria it’s food a stimulant what ever some may consider it as. It is proven to reduce nitrates and phosphates correct. Yet, we all know what happens when they hit zero. Tanks crash, coral starve etc right. So now we have to start dosing nitrates to boost them as we dose carbon or vodka to reduce it correct. Doesn’t this seem redundant and or a waste?

The ocean does it naturally, so have we studied how it accomplishes this and implemented it into our tanks? Just seems like the more we mess with them, we break them. Have we thought of ways that our systems can naturally stabilize itself with our our interference?

 

[Lasse]

Hello,

So to clarify all I was trying to say is that when we dose it’s similar to medication which I gave examples of. I was asking if it’s possible that our corals fish systems could become addicted to the carbon dosing, vodka etc. if they could become dependent upon them.

If so what are the adverse effects and or withdrawal symptoms of such procedures. Carbon dosing, vodka, noprox etc yes it’s not officially medicine, but neither is alcohol, and we can become dependent upon that correct.
I just simply asking if any tests have been done to see the adveate efffects, and or if once we start it, if it must be continue regardless.

Not to mention carbon dosing feeds other bacteria it’s food a stimulant what ever some may consider it as. It is proven to reduce nitrates and phosphates correct. Yet, we all know what happens when they hit zero. Tanks crash, coral starve etc right. So now we have to start dosing nitrates to boost them as we dose carbon or vodka to reduce it correct. Doesn’t this seem redundant and or a waste?

The ocean does it naturally, so have we studied how it accomplishes this and implemented it into our tanks? Just seems like the more we mess with them, we break them. Have we thought of ways that our systems can naturally stabilize itself with our our interference?

IMO You are right that dosing DOC can give some "addicts" effects. But not on an individual level - the effects will be at the "system" level. It will alter the microbial ecosystem a lot. The nutrient cycles will have different pathways in the aquarium. The way Randy use dosing of DOC favour filter feeders in a way that´s difficult to do in another way. It is a method I use by myself but I use juice of Chaeto - grown in my own system - as a bacteria fuel. This have not crash my aquarium and I just recycle different compounds.

Can DOC dosing crash an aquarium - IMO - yes. It is a powerful tool and if you are unlucky it can create a ecosystem of a huge amount of bacteria pathogenic to corals and other animals. IMO - it is impossible to judge in forehand, hence use use the method very carefully. Start with a very low dose and ramp it up when you not see any negative effects.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

By the way - I use the word DOC - dosing instead of carbon dosing. The reason is that - IMO - the term DOC (Dissolved Organic Carbon) is what you use. If you use the word carbon dosing - you do not know if you dose organic or inorganic carbon. To add CO2, NaHCO3 or Na2CO3 you dose carbon too - but inorganic C. DOC and DIC favour different type of bacteria - heterotrophic contra autotrophic bacteria.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Has Randy proven carbon dosing won't crash a tank?

lol

I don't claim to have proven that.

In fact, I'm 100% certain I could crash any reef tank with carbon dosing done inappropriately.

I could also crash one with other food fed inappropriately, other filters used inappropriately, in fact, almost anything reefers do can crash a tank if not done right.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The ocean does it naturally, so have we studied how it accomplishes this and implemented it into our tanks? Just seems like the more we mess with them, we break them. Have we thought of ways that our systems can naturally stabilize itself with our our interference?

Yes, we know how organics are consumed in the ocean, at least in general terms, and we are just boosting that natural process to higher levels.

I'm not sure how that is different than, say, boosting the process of algae taking up nutrients by setting up an ATS or macroalgae refugium, boosting the binding of nutrients to mineral surfaces with GFO/lanthanum/calcium carbonate, boosting denitrification by adding more low O2 regions with various porous blocks, etc.

I need to stress this point: Everything we do already happens in the ocean. We are just increasing the processes to accommodate our unnaturally high feeding rates per unit volume of water.

 

[hart24601]

I starting dosing carbon, vodka and or vinegar, years ago to combat high nutrients. It didn't take long for me to get levels where I wanted them, however what I also noticed was an explosion of filter feeders, tube worms and sponges for example. That was around 5 years ago I played around with it and have had a few systems where I examined low amounts of carbon dosing with and without and what I noticed was that it really seems to boost the food chain from the bottom up, and what seems to me, an improved ecosystem in my tanks. For the past couple years I carbon dose not for nutrients, but to boost the food web in the tank. Not scientific or conclusive, however it's my experience and I feel a great asset in our little glass box of reef life.

 

[Graffiti Spot]

I've dosed vodka/vinegar on occasion as needed. At about 12 months, I had higher nitrates but phosphates were at desirable level. Adding a carbon source was a good choice in this situation so I started dosing. All the "instructions" I've seen clearly state to back off after you see the initial decline so it is all meant to be done responsibly. If you go outside that window, the only person to blame is yourself.

It has worked well for me (as recently as last week) and many others. I will continue to use it as (if) necessary and wouldn't hesitate to do it again. Like anything in this hobby, you can make a break a system really easy if you're obvious to the potential outcomes. With that said, I've come off organic carbon dosing twice without a gradual step and didn't notice any adverse effects but perhaps that is due to not over dosing the system to begin with.

I starting dosing carbon, vodka and or vinegar, years ago to combat high nutrients. It didn't take long for me to get levels where I wanted them, however what I also noticed was an explosion of filter feeders, tube worms and sponges for example. That was around 5 years ago I played around with it and have had a few systems where I examined low amounts of carbon dosing with and without and what I noticed was that it really seems to boost the food chain from the bottom up, and what seems to me, an improved ecosystem in my tanks. For the past couple years I carbon dose not for nutrients, but to boost the food web in the tank. Not scientific or conclusive, however it's my experience and I feel a great asset in our little glass box of reef life.

I agree with both and had the same experience, its a great benefit to a well established reef. A lot of the issues I have seen are from newer reefers who didn't understand it completely and a lot of their tanks were only a few months old. Adding almost anything new to a tank thats not mature is going to cause an issue. With an anywhere near mature reef I don't see ammonia showing up when backing off of a carbon source in normal way. In a reef that wasn't established well in the first place, who knows what the effects would be. I like this topic but I don't understand some of belgian anthias abbreviations or wording, but that just leads me to research myself when I get time, which I like doing a lot.
A lot of people are scared of the white snot or bacteria matts that form when carbon dosing because people say its a sign of overdosing. When they form in areas in the reef it can be irritating but I have not seen any bad effects from them being in dedicated areas, and a lot of people new to carbon dosing get scared when they see them and start changing the dosage. Thats when I see people start reporting issues with their tank. Just my experience, I don't have experience with fish only tanks and don't see why carbon sources would be used for them in the first place.