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

[DrTim]

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.

Sorry you feel way. Kinda sound like me who internalize the PO was calling me and my work a lie!
I never said just trust me I am scientist.
I never said you're wrong but I am not going to tell you why.
I pointed out the problems, I suggested correction or another way if possible.
I will try to be more clear and less confrontational.

 

[andrewey]

As a casual reader I'm a bit saddened by the tone this thread evolved into.

As a lover of science, I want to thank everyone who pushes the envelope in discovering more about the microbiome of our little glass boxes. Thanks for all the tests and the tests to come!

 

[biom]

...
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.

I suppose you already did lot of research on the topic but but still this one could be useful "Isolation and Characterization of Exopolysaccharide Secreted by a Toxic Dinoflagellate, Amphidinium carterae Hulburt 1957 and Its Probable Role in Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs)" (full text available in ResearchGate) in which they find out EPS produced by Amphidinium is galactose (73%) and glucose (27%) and it was demonstrated that Bacillus pumilus utilizes it. Having in mind Dr. Tims statement there are Bacillus strains in WA it is a good starting point.

 

[biom]

...
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.

I suppose you already did lot of research on the topic but but still this one could be useful "Isolation and Characterization of Exopolysaccharide Secreted by a Toxic Dinoflagellate, Amphidinium carterae Hulburt 1957 and Its Probable Role in Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs)" (full text available in ResearchGate) in which they find out EPS produced by Amphidinium is galactose (73%) and glucose (27%) and it was demonstrated that Bacillus pumilus utilizes it. Having in mind Dr. Tims statement there are Bacillus strains in WA it is a good starting point.

 

[biom]

...
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.

I suppose you already did lot of research on the topic but but still this one could be useful "Isolation and Characterization of Exopolysaccharide Secreted by a Toxic Dinoflagellate, Amphidinium carterae Hulburt 1957 and Its Probable Role in Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs)" (full text available in ResearchGate) in which they find out EPS produced by Amphidinium is galactose (73%) and glucose (27%) and it was demonstrated that Bacillus pumilus utilizes it. Having in mind Dr. Tims statement there are Bacillus strains in WA it is a good starting point.

 

[Rick Mathew]

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.

Thank you for your kind reply...Make your day a great one

rick

 

[Rick Mathew]

In a discussion of this sort it is good to remember a trustworthy saying...."A gentle answer turns away anger, but a sharp word causes anger." Prov 15:1

I have found at least for me, anger trumps reason...A foundation of good science.... Just my thought for the day

 

[Miller535]

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.

Ah, thank you @DrTim . That makes perfect sense. I suppose I ignorantly assumed there was one type of bacteria, and or one process going on.


Another question if you don't mind. On the bottle it says the first time you dose it to do a half dose, then in 48 hours do another half dose. And if I understood it correctly, after that you can weekly do a full dose. The half dose dropped my Ph a little more then I would like (down to about 7.79) for a few hours. Would it be ok if I always dosed in half dose followed by another half dose in 48 hours? Or do I need the full dose to reach full effectiveness? And is there a better time of day to use waste away? I have seen some bacteria in a bottle that say to use with the lights off.

 

[Dan_P]

In a discussion of this sort it is good to remember a trustworthy saying...."A gentle answer turns away anger, but a sharp word causes anger." Prov 15:1

I have found at least for me, anger trumps reason...A foundation of good science.... Just my thought for the day

Rick, sincerely, thanks you.

I wonder if there is a banner for “R2R Ambassador”? I know someone who just earned it.

Dan

 

[Rick Mathew]

Rick, sincerely, thanks you.

I wonder if there is a banner for “R2R Ambassador”? I know someone who just earned it.

Dan

Most welcome...Peace and quiet gives time to truly think and ponder...

rick

 

[DrTim]

Ah, thank you @DrTim . That makes perfect sense. I suppose I ignorantly assumed there was one type of bacteria, and or one process going on.


Another question if you don't mind. On the bottle it says the first time you dose it to do a half dose, then in 48 hours do another half dose. And if I understood it correctly, after that you can weekly do a full dose. The half dose dropped my Ph a little more then I would like (down to about 7.79) for a few hours. Would it be ok if I always dosed in half dose followed by another half dose in 48 hours? Or do I need the full dose to reach full effectiveness? And is there a better time of day to use waste away? I have seen some bacteria in a bottle that say to use with the lights off.

Neve recommend dosing Waste-Away at night (with the lights off). The bacteria consume oxygen while working and at night you tank is, in most cases, consuming oxygen. This can lead to oxygen depletion and animal death.
During the day with the lights on the system is producing oxygen which can help counter act the bacteria oxygen consumption.
How much to add and how often is a moving target because every tank is different - the best way is to continuously dose a small amount which is why we developed the gel.
The issue is that there no way to know how much particulate and dissolved organics are in the system and everyone's NO3 and PO4 is different. So we stress adding a little, observing, if the water is hazy do not add more until it clears and slowly increasing the dosage over time.

 

[Miller535]

Neve recommend dosing Waste-Away at night (with the lights off). The bacteria consume oxygen while working and at night you tank is, in most cases, consuming oxygen. This can lead to oxygen depletion and animal death.
During the day with the lights on the system is producing oxygen which can help counter act the bacteria oxygen consumption.
How much to add and how often is a moving target because every tank is different - the best way is to continuously dose a small amount which is why we developed the gel.
The issue is that there no way to know how much particulate and dissolved organics are in the system and everyone's NO3 and PO4 is different. So we stress adding a little, observing, if the water is hazy do not add more until it clears and slowly increasing the dosage over time.

I see, and Thanks Dr. Tim. That was likely my problem when I used it then, I added at night. So one last question, Why is the recommended time for the skimmer and UV to be off such a large range? If memory serves me it says 12-24 hours. That is quite the range.

 

[Daniel@R2R]

This is a very informative discussion. Thanks to everyone who is participating and sharing knowledge.

 

[taricha]

Here's a quick demonstration that anyone on this chem forum could replicate.
Four identical 500mL bottles get tank water enriched* with NO3 and PO4, I went to around 50ppm NO3 and 1.5ppm PO4 so roughly 10x my typical tank levels.

Bottles equally aerated in the dark at room temp. After a couple of days, make sure nutrients are still tracking similarly in the 4 bottles, then add the different treatments.
1 gets nothing, 2 gets recommended dose (1/8mL) of normal Waste-Away, 3 gets sterilized WA (frozen/boiled), 4** gets same dose of WA bacteria/spores - no WA media.

every 2 to 3 days Check NO3, PO4 and add another recommended dose of each treatment.

Results? Will the NO3 and PO4 consumers show effects?
We'll see in a week!

*Micro-Algae Grow from Florida aqua farms Guillard "f/2" medium + ascorbic acid
**(the only part most people can't do) centrifuged 5 min 4000rpm, supernatant poured off, pellet of solids/bacteria/spores resuspended in equal volume tank water.

 

[biom]

Interesting experiment but I have some concerns here.

Couple of days bubbling the enriched with NO3 and PO4 (with no organic carbon added) tank water that contains normal for your tank bacteria will result somehow stabile PO4 and NO3 levels because the organic carbon will deplete and become the limiting factor for bacteria growth and multiplication.

When receive some organic carbon from WA media the bottles 2 (recommended dose WA) and 3 (recommended dose WA media only) will show probably similar rates of NO3 and PO4 reduction, because they will receive the same amount of organic carbon. It will be not possible to confirm if all the N and P is consumed by normal bacteria in your tank water or part of them is consumed by bacteria in WA in bottle 2. This will be the case, only if there is significant difference in the speed WA bacteria consumed P and N in comparison with normal for your tank bacteria, (which I doubt will be the case).

The bottles 1 (control) and 2 (centrifuged WA spores/ bacteria) probably will show similar results in NO3 and PO4 reduction, because the media is still organic carbon limited. And this will not be proof WA spores /bacteria are not viable because the media is already carbon limited and all the bacteria (not only WA’s ) will be not able to multiply.

I think it would be far simpler, easier and receive reliable results (if you want only to proof if there are (or not) viable bacteria in WA) is to conduct standard microbiological test with sterile LB (tryptone, yeast, salt) enriched agar and centrifuged WA spores / bacteria.

 

[taricha]

I think it would be far simpler, easier and receive reliable results (if you want only to proof if there are (or not) viable bacteria in WA) is to conduct standard microbiological test with sterile LB (tryptone, yeast, salt) enriched agar and centrifuged WA spores / bacteria.

You are correct about the limitations here. I'm not aiming (in this test) to demomstrate viability of WA. I'm checking WA behavior under a set of plausible aquarium conditions. The next test will be more tailored to getting the WA bacteria what they may need to grow while still being somewhat aquarium-ish conditions (fish flake + organic carbon).

 

[Miller535]

Thank you for everything you do here @taricha . Between doing things like this, and the algae/dino threads you do, it must be like a full time job.

 

[taricha]

Heh. @Miller535 reef puzzles make a good outlet when I'm not talking about physics. We all gotta have our outlets

 

[biom]

@taricha Any updates? I'm really curious.

 

[Michael Gray]

Im currently using it along silica to battle Dino's. I'm gonna do silica and wa for this last week and then stop and see what happens