My 5 Gallon Nano

[wade1]

He showed that there is considerable variability even between identical tanks.

That is true, there is variability. However, that variability was not sufficient to negate effects derived from the experiment, which means, you can draw conclusions regarding his data set. And they are unrelated to this topic as they relate only to reduction of nitrogen in small closed systems based on sandbed type.

I'd love to see a well balanced study done to validate these claims as well. Its not hard, it just takes setting it up properly. And since the claim is for nano tanks, it really wouldn't be hard nor costly to run.

 

[Anonymous]

I disagree.

Define hard scientific proof. Asking for a government funded scientific study on products used in this hobby just doesn't seem realistic to me. I have never seen such definitive studies of dsb's, liverock, etc. used IN a closed system. Just theories on how it should work with the caveat that every tank is different.

Ecoaqualizer, zeovit, etc. do not provide ANY absolute statements in regards to what results those products wil yield. Just things like clearer water, happier corals etc.

Snake on the other hand is giving an extremely inexpensive and simple test AND is stating exactly what measurable results you will get BEFORE hand. Like I said, so far it has worked exactly has he defined beforehand. Therefore, I don't think it can be put into the category of ecoaqualizers or the multitude of wonder products out there.

huh?


theory, hypothesis, experimentation, proof/disproof should be the chain of events needed-data helps, too

what about 'hard scientific proof' don't you understand?

 

[skylab1]

I'd love to see a well balanced study done to validate these claims as well. Its not hard, it just takes setting it up properly. And since the claim is for nano tanks, it really wouldn't be hard nor costly to run.

So do I, who do you think should run the study?

The problem I see is everytime say a publication want to run a test and publish the result, advertiser came down on them like ton of brick, so it get squashed.

Where can you find some one or some lab that is welling to run the study or test that have no commercial benefit in this hobby and will publish the result without pressure from the advertisers.

 

[FragMaster]

Commercial benefit is the whole idea guy. Good PR means good sales.
Good products mean good sales. SO it only makes sense that documentation with scientific data would help sales and get the word out to comsumers about it.
I have NEVER heard of a company with a GOOD product who are CONFIDENT in thier prodcut comming down on a publisher for testing its product for accuracy/results and posting reviews. Not to mention it is FREE ADVERTISING.

Can you point us to one ?

 

[bookfish]

Richard S. wrote"As to BOD, snake is refering to detritus. Arguing the definition seems pointless to me."

I'm sorry I feel compelled to post here again but in my training, science, hard science that is, is technical, exacting and relies on accurate communication and definitions. If someone is going to make "scientific" claims and then mixes up definitions, it calls their whole body of work into question.

 

[Anonymous]

So then it should be a simple task to take a picture of those same mushroom corals fully opened, right?

That is correct, and I will do so as soon as I got my camera back from the shop today I hope.

:?:

:?: :?: :?: :?:

 

[FragMaster]

He did in the other thread under general discussion.

 

[Anonymous]

Thank you.

Those mushrooms still look in pretty bad shape to me.

Mushrooms from my old tank, the same day I added them:

 

[FragMaster]

Further backing up my idea that this crap will NEVER work in a reef aquarium.

 

[Snake USMC]

Dear Len, Guy, and Frag Master,

Usually when a person resorts to name calling, because they were asked for proof of their statements, it means only one thing, they have lost. Why? Because they cannot over come the objections presented to them.

When I asked frag master for test results, and data, he came back with an off the wall response. Len, do not band him from the thread, really he gives comic relief with his counter statements from thread to thread. I know if he worked for me and had that attitude, I would laugh in his face, but I digress

Now, I too am for conversation. That is one of the purposes of the invention. People have for some reason, which I have come across many times, truly believe waste treatment plants, and fish, reef, aquariums etc are totally different. No, in fact they are not. They are the same, but one is on a larger scale than the other. That is all.

Some of the statements of the Romeo Golf’s over a period of time, (not just on this thread) have shown their “theories” are not based upon fact. What I have seen for many years in the fish business is a very simple trend. I set up my tank like such and such, but when asked if this is the best way of setting up the tank, the response is,

“Actualy EVERY ONE THAT CAN READ HAS THE PROOF!!!!! It is on EVERY FREAKING MARINE HOBIEST BASED WEB SITE ON THE PLANET! IN MARINE BIOLOGY TEXT BOOKS, TEXT WRITTEN BY TRUE EXPErTS AS WELL AS REAL SCIENTIST, AND I AM SURE IT IS ON THIS WEB SITE AS WELL TOO. “ (Frag Master’s last quote)

As you can see, his statement is not based on science but emotion. I do not go with emotion, but cold hard facts.

As I stated before Len, I am willing to give you the materials (you must furnish the “massive equipment” and if you do not wish to put 4 fish in 19 L, you can get away with 1 or two if you so desire and a piece of coral. It will not make any difference with this system.

Since frag has never tested the material, he is not in any position to comment upon the working abilities of my product.

The bottom line is very simple - does it work, or does it not work. There is not other question that should be addressed.

No one is going to change your mind over night, nor should they. But a closed mind is a very bad liability in anything one does in this life.

Respectfully submitted,
Snake

 

[wade1]

If you want to run this test a little more stringently, it should be done without fish or corals. You can calculate and add an amount of free ammonia, or mixed organics to a system on a daily/weekly basis and follow that with the proper methods over time. That will prevent a) the unnecessary death of animals and b) stress due to improperly housing them in too small of an environment (which depends on species, no doubt).

You should not be asking anyone to do these tests for you as a promotor of this methodology. If you want us to be convinced, then run the tests in an impartial way, with transparency, and the science to convince us all. That means enough replicates and using static conditions for all your non-variables. If you think a bucket works well, then grab 20 buckets and give it a whirl over the next few months.

I'm sure, between some of the folks on this board, that we could readily come up with an acceptable scheme for the experiment.

 

[Anonymous]

Dear Len, Guy, and Frag Master,

Usually when a person resorts to name calling, because they were asked for proof of their statements, it means only one thing, they have lost. Why? Because they cannot over come the objections presented to them.

When I asked frag master for test results, and data, he came back with an off the wall response. Len, do not band him from the thread, really he gives comic relief with his counter statements from thread to thread. I know if he worked for me and had that attitude, I would laugh in his face, but I digress

Now, I too am for conversation. That is one of the purposes of the invention. People have for some reason, which I have come across many times, truly believe waste treatment plants, and fish, reef, aquariums etc are totally different. No, in fact they are not. They are the same, but one is on a larger scale than the other. That is all.

Some of the statements of the Romeo Golf’s over a period of time, (not just on this thread) have shown their “theories” are not based upon fact. What I have seen for many years in the fish business is a very simple trend. I set up my tank like such and such, but when asked if this is the best way of setting up the tank, the response is,

“Actualy EVERY ONE THAT CAN READ HAS THE PROOF!!!!! It is on EVERY FREAKING MARINE HOBIEST BASED WEB SITE ON THE PLANET! IN MARINE BIOLOGY TEXT BOOKS, TEXT WRITTEN BY TRUE EXPErTS AS WELL AS REAL SCIENTIST, AND I AM SURE IT IS ON THIS WEB SITE AS WELL TOO. “ (Frag Master’s last quote)

As you can see, his statement is not based on science but emotion. I do not go with emotion, but cold hard facts.
As I stated before Len, I am willing to give you the materials (you must furnish the “massive equipment” and if you do not wish to put 4 fish in 19 L, you can get away with 1 or two if you so desire and a piece of coral. It will not make any difference with this system.

Since frag has never tested the material, he is not in any position to comment upon the working abilities of my product.

The bottom line is very simple - does it work, or does it not work. There is not other question that should be addressed.

No one is going to change your mind over night, nor should they. But a closed mind is a very bad liability in anything one does in this life.

Respectfully submitted,
Snake

and cold hard facts is exactly what everyone here is asking for

 

[Snake USMC]

Dear Vitz,

The Cold Hard facts have already been posted on this net. If you are too lazy to search them out (for I have already informed where they are located) or after reading them discount them, well then nothing can be said about these Cold Hard Facts.

Respectfully submitted,

Snake

 

[brandon4291]

I know it gets hot and heated in these scientific circles! reduce the nip-twists if at all possible everybody (Texas colloquialism, ask me for specifics ) or we'll get 8-pages of nowhere...



B

 

[brandon4291]

snake I was also pondering something I read, either on your post or on one of skylab's links to that other site...can't recall after so many posts...

since we are considering replication procedures for this experiment I wanted to brainstorm over a statement where a tester of these ready-bacteria (on that other reef site) was going to use non-coral/non-live rock tank with false decor to assess the reduction abilities of these bacteria. Was that a Richard on that other site if I'm correct?

I was pondering controls they'd have to employ in order to fully eliminate cross-contamination with common ubiquitous strains of nitro and spirobacter and various nitrosomonads that ride in on the air currents to seed virtually any aquatic system that isn't antimicrobial in some fashion... seems to me like an accurate test would require autoclaved water and lab equipment (stirrers, vessels for water) along with positive air venting of the immediate lab environment to ensure that only the ready bacters are at work. Then one would need additional petri-plating and quality-control sampling of the selected bacteria (with separate inoculation and incubation) at hand to ensure against contamination, a complete microbiological work up which is quite fun but time consuming...(makes me miss my old days of plating e.coli 0157H-7 CFU's at a slaughterhouse in Texas and praying the previous night's party hangover won't reduce my steadiness ) I think a definitive test for these innovative ideas will use many scientific fronts in addition to aquariology.

Anyway, to sum up an outcome and apply it to certain isolated strains of bacteria takes lots of microbiology, not just aquarium tests, so that's my brainstorm. What controls or isolations have your crew initiated to measure these ready bacters> the more that have been put into place the more our readers would consider the validity of your new ideas. You have certainly gained a lot of readership in this thread, those additional controls would start to pique my interests too

 

[skylab1]

Here is video of the 5 gallon tank.

http://us.f13.yahoofs.com/bc/43e8d356m1 ... EBprrdyZV1

As you can see all fish are alive and well. In this video you will see the baby lionfish actually pushing the frozen mysid shrimp on the sand bed then eat it.
All of the lion I've kept have shown this type of behavior after they started eating forzen mysid shrimp. I have the video to prove it, so nobody can say I made it up.


Also, as a treat I included my clown at home spawning.

http://us.f13.yahoofs.com/bc/43e8d356m1 ... EB8f6q.DlC

 

[skylab1]

Ok, just found out the links doesn't work.

Here is the link to the folder where the files are uploaded.

http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/skylab170 ... yahoo.com/

you can download the file there.

If nothing show up, hit refresh few more time. I don't like yahoo briefcase, but it comes with my DSL so may as well use it.

 

[Anonymous]

Dear Vitz,

The Cold Hard facts have already been posted on this net. If you are too lazy to search them out (for I have already informed where they are located) or after reading them discount them, well then nothing can be said about these Cold Hard Facts.

Respectfully submitted,

Snake

wtf, and huh ?




sounds more and more like an ecoaqualyzer pitch every day

 

[Anonymous]

Remember in Biology we were instructed that all forms of life on this earth are carbon based. Now we find certain organisms living at vent holes on the bottom of the sea or in volcanos, are sulphur based.

Btw, this is incorrect. No non-carbon based lifeforms have been found as of yet.
The animals you're referring to that live near the undersea vents are carbon based. That entire little ecosystem is based on microbes that oxidize hydrogen sulfide. That's probably where you were thinking about the sulfur from.
Although none of this is really relative to the this thread.

 

[Snake USMC]

Dear Jasen,

This is where I had received my information concerning sulbased organisms.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=su ... ia&spell=1 As you said,it is a side note and not relative to the thread.

ReefkeeperI

have already posted two lab reports. Both were conducted in outside labs. They are on the OTHER nano thread on this blog. Go to that one and you can read the lab reports.

OceanEnviro LLC conducted the nitrate reduction test with starting values of 6,000 + mg/L of Nitrate and reduced them to 1.1 mg/L in seven days. It shows the daily reductions.

Cal Brett Inc conducted the test using ammonia, nitrite and nitrate in the same solution. The water was autoclaved and so was the TBPC to ensure no outside infiltration. The daily values were also stated on the test.

Considering the different tests my compound has been through over the years, including tests to ensure the safety of aquatic life demanded by certain states, unlike other compounds this one has been through the wringer.

The question is and still remains, can one replicate a 24 hour cycle with aerobic reduction in an aquarium following my protocol? The answer is yes.

Even though, and I agree that the common organisms do float around like all bacteria in the air and can seed any aquatic body of water, they still cannot perform the entire cycle in 24 hours, nor reduce nitrates, phosphates etc aerobically concurrently.

Respectfully submitted,

Snake