Bakki Shower/Bacteria House vs Conventional Submerged Filtration System.

[Maurice]

George, I don't want to comment until JR has his say on the matter.

'I typed some of the info, but I've edited it untill Jim has responded, this is where it was'

Too many comments already.
Maurice.

[Maurice]

Jim, CV = Curriculum Vitae, perhaps it's an 'English' thing?

You posted your big up, I've done this and that in koi. I'd like to reread it, but can't find it again.

It's in this thread somewhere.

Maurice.

[James P]

hi Maurice, hope all is well? Your right! I've never heard that expression before! Thought you were looking for a piece of filtering equipment!?

I don't recall Jasper's take on Jmat. What was it? I assume its in NI? I'll check it out or you can save me the trouble if you would and share what it is he said? JR

[Maurice]

I'm not sure if his findings have made the NI mag yet or not?

I've not got an article to refer to, only his findings personally coveyed during a chat this summer, I thought it would be in press by now, but perhaps not.

He says that Japanese Matting is a very poor filter media, very difficult for bacteria to get a foothold.

But even worse than this, the glue used to bond the indivdual fibres together gives off some toxins (can't remember what/which) that kill/inhibit the bacteria which we are trying to propagate.

He has a whole file on his study, with as you expect from Jasper, many macro photos to illustrate his findings.

If this is so, it makes a mockery of the wonderful media we've been using all these years. But then he does work for EA and Matting is a competitor of Kaldnes.

Maurice.

[mekoi]

Quote: Originally Posted by James P Good Morning Jon, I have been forced , in the past, to battle about PP use. This is shame as it is not the PP I had a problem with, but rather the USE of it! PP is an excellent chemo therapy for the eradication and control of certain protozoan parasites. But like every powerful oxidant, it should be used judiciously. Jmat is, of course, a common material in the koi hobby. It’s true use is as air conditioning filter and also for stabilizing steep roadside landscape. So by definition and design , it has a ‘trapping’‘ feature to it. The reason it works so well, and so quickly, as a bio media is that it has a relatively large surface space for bacteria to grow, it does not decay readily from bacteria action on its substrate and it has good void space. This void space is important for biofilm/water ratio and also for encourage a swirling effect WITHIN the complex of fibers that increases the reductive/oxidative reaction ( nitrification). This , as most things on earth, also has a cost associated with it. Along with invisible inorganic nitrogen toxins, fine organics are also delivered to these internal fiber sites. Over time this leads to two things- biofouling of the media surface with organic residue. And two) a biofilm that is well diversified with aerobic/ anaerobic species of bacteria, Organic an inorganic processing bacteria of other species, predator bacteria, fungi, algae, protozoa and other larger forms. In a well maintained biofilm, these things represent a living filter and micro-ecosystem in perfect balance with its greater environment and routine nutrient source. Over time however, this lush biofilm can be over grown which leads to further biofouling.This is then coupled with the daily bioloading of fish waste, food particles and dead cells. At that point, the presence of such a mass represents a threat to oxygen levels, species domination with the film, ORP levels etc. So cleaning is necessary. I favor the removal of the media and a dipping in clean pond water ( maybe done in a measuring tub or similar receptacle?) But many believe that a PP charge through the biochamber will oxidize the excess organic build up and reduce resident protozoa such as trichodina and the non pathogen form of costia. In a mature, well seasoned Jmat, PP does not have the power to ‘kill’ the entire colony. Because by definition, a mix of biofilm, bacteria and fine organic waste , is resistant to oxidation. At best, you oxidize the surface area and leave the rest untouched. On the other hand, I have seen , already clean Jmat, sputter and only partly function after a normal PP change. Usually the circulation is slow and the chamber is small in these cases. Or more often the system has been put under other chemo therapy such as malachite green or formalin recently. This is fairly common to see as new hobbyists, with the newest biofilm are often the ones who struggle most with water quality problems and parasitic outbreaks and also the ones who tend to use the most chemicals. The secret here is pretty simple- respect the microbes as that is what keeps the water quality- not you. And always work at returning the water to a base line rather than try to dominate it. PP is fine in a breeder setting- a valuable tool. In a hobbyist setting, the long term stability of the system is more important than shifting population management. So in that regard, a physical cleaning the Jmat is probably wiser than a routine PP charge. As far as a sterilizer before using equipment, no problem. Just remember that PP has a residual effect and that some minor reaction will take place for a time ( hours, not days). Not sure why you would worry about that?

Good morning JR,

Thank you for your explanations. I actually never use PP to clean biomedia/filter. I only use PP to clean new materials to be used in the pond and also to kill parasites. I think the best way to clean any biomedia is to use pond water nothing else. I know some pond keepers like using chemicals (no offence pls) but like me who’s still learning I only like using PP or salt, nothing else and always gets good results.

I’ve read somewhere that using PP on a daily or weekly basis will kill and prevent parasites/disease out break. I’m considering to do this on a weekly basis but I thought I better check see what other ppl think…………….Care to comment on this???

Again, I appreciate your input.

Rgds,
Jon

[mekoi]

Quote: Originally Posted by PapaBear James P, I think Jon's post was less about pond chemo (although your points are very well taken on that issue) but rather about pre-treating new Mat before introducing it to the system. I would tend to believe that such a pre-treatment would not only disinfect & cleanse manufacturing residues, but the oxidation of the media surface would promote more rapid colonization. What do you think? Jon, When you pretreat with PP do you do a follow up with H2O3 as you would in a general pond treatment? I would think the oxygen "supercharge" the mat would get out of that would be beneficial as well.

Hi Larry,

No I don't use Hydogen peroxide after PP. I just live it under the sun to baked dry But when I use PP in my pond sometimes I do if used high dosage, but 3ppm or less I just let the filter clear the water.

What the hell is "supercharge" you're not talking about V8 Supercars are you

rgds,
Jon

[PapaBear]

Quote: Originally Posted by mekoi Hi Larry, No I don't use Hydogen peroxide after PP. I just live it under the sun to baked dry But when I use PP in my pond sometimes I do if used high dosage, but 3ppm or less I just let the filter clear the water. What the hell is "supercharge" you're not talking about V8 Supercars are rgds, Jon

H203+H20=H20+O2. Any time you react Hydrogen peroxide with virtually thing water soluble you get a massive release of oxygen as a byproduct of the reaction. I was thinking that if you treated the media with it as you were putting it in place it would give a massive oxygen boost to it and possibly make it more attractive to our O2 hungry little biobugs that might be just floating around looking for a new home

[mekoi]

Hi Larry,

It wouldn't be a bad idea to use it but in my case I have a 60L/min air pump in my bio so I've decided not to use it but if I'm stressed out with my kids I always thought of using it to give myself an O2 boost

rgds,
Jon

[James P]

Well, as I'm sure you can guess, I'm not a big fan of weekley treatments! That oxidative reaction has been shown to do many things- here is a post I placed on another board about a week ago. I think it applies? The question was, what are the negatives, if any of regular PP use-

Four negatives :

certain filter systems with thin biofilm that require frequent changing and discharge of mulm, will be knocked down by PP. Especially if the filter is flushed and then the chemotherapeutic charge of PP is added.


Excess use causes microbial disruption. In other words, like any chemo, you kill some things that are drawn to your pond by the nutrient you produce under your stocking conditions/filter conditions. I have seen ponds that behave as if they were set up this past year, yet they are years old. No resiliency to the system at all?? In a well managed pond, the microbial life is evolve to fit like a hand in a glove to the nutrient source. Not so in PP dependent ponds.

You become dependent on a 'fraudulent system'. The flaw in the system that requires PP use is never addressed. This results in a fostering of bad koi keeping and this comes out in other ways since we can not fool mother nature long term. A bout now and then with ulcers, chronic parasite problems in spring and late summer, carp pox, hikkui, tumors- all from the rigors of a closed system with wild swings from base line readings.

PP is a powerful oxidant. Not unlike chlorine. In large doses it will kill fish. In moderate doses it will effect delicate cells. In small doses, it is a chronic irritant. In the old days we used PP to strip the slime coat off show fish and make them whiter! Today we understand what this does to the gills long term. This is by the way, one of the reasons why koi may not live normal life spans in our versions of captivity. The chronic stress from minerals, oxidants and changing water conditions can have the effect of wearing down fish to the point of early death- nothing dramatic just a chronic assault on gills and organs from the environment provided.
Often beginners and not-so-beginners ask “ what is the difference between a ‘natural high ORP’ and the ORP we get from a chemo charge of PP?” In the moment- none. In the big picture- lots! You add a chemo charge when your ORP slips. By definition this when pollution rises in your pond, reductive reactions rule and your koi are stressed physiologically to one degree or another. You blast the ORP high and stress the fish and also give the fish some relief! This ‘restores’ water to the illusion of highly oxidative water. But hours later, the water slips back towards low ORP and less than ideal conditions. And the koi must go along for this ride. Its just BAD koi keeping. ORP is a check on water’s natural oxidative nature - THAT IS, the water’s natural ability to handle pollution in the form of reductive reactions. By definition, the addition of PP is an admission that one’s pond is not capable of doing this ‘ on its own’.

[mekoi]

Hi JR,

Thank you again for your input about PP. The more I know about PP the more confident I get of using it. As I said the only time I use this chemical is when its needed coz like you said its a very powerfull checmical that if use without care/cautions it will kill our koi. And as far as I know every time you use this checmical you should always bypass your biofilter coz it is know to kill good bacteria.

rgds,
Jon