using old fresh water for new salt water

Aahhhh, the mystery of bacteria. Don't you love it? I am not going to try and be the "expert" on this subject matter, but this tennis match is making me dizzy. I think that the point of "where do bacteria reside" has been overlooked again. I personally work with bacteria that resides in the water column. The bacteria that I work with may or may not be considered as "nitrifying" or "denitrifying". Either way, there is no substrate that our targeted bacteria require. However, something that must be said is that, and it has been touched on, if there is food present there is also bacteria present. I do not care how far down the food is in the substrate, if there is something to eat, there are bugs that will go after it and eat it! Also, bugs can spend their entire existance suspended in a water column. All sorts of bacteria too! I have never met a bug that would immediately sink in slightly moving water.

Additionally, adding water, sand, mud, filter squeezings, etc. to a new tank is a kick start to the bacterial population. It does two things, 1) it adds food for bacteria to consume and 2) there is already bacteria on that food who will also begin reproducing in the new tank. Those younguns will then begin to seek out food of their own if they can't belly up to the buffet. If there is no food present, the strain will begin to die off. And MARCUS, you don't need to see the food in/on the bioballs or whetever for it to be there. Trust me, it's there.

Summary: BUGS ARE EVERYWHERE! In your sand (not just the first 2 inches either), in the water, in the rock, on your fish, in your mouth, on your hands, in the air... I think I need to go shower now. I feel yucky...

I see it, but Mark doesn't.  Mark, do you know what I see?  I see us actually agreeing on this but you don't know it yet.  So that we don't have to type four more pages of posts, I'll speed up the conversation here, and you tell me where I go wrong...

Adam- So Mark you agree that some bacteria can just live in the water column, like your friend who cultures them said?
Mark- Yes Adam I do
Adam- so would you believe that sometimes the bacteria are outgroing the surface area of a filter pad and are actually growing on the food particles trapped in the pad?
Mark- yes that makes sense, they would grow there because there is food there.
Adam- So wouldn't it be safe to assume that bacteria would grow in the water pockets of the substrate, growing on the food particles there?
Mark- yep that makes sense.
Adam- So isn't it possible that larger substrate size may be better than smaller substrate size because it allows food particles to "fall through" better and end up lower in the substrate where bacteria can more easily grow and remove them?
Mark- Adam are you suggesting that larger substrate may really be better than smaller sizes?
Adam- Well wouldn't you agree that substrate size can be too small, I mean mud is very fine, but it doesn't allow anything to grow or move around in it because it is too small and dense. Therefore it doesn't have nearly the filtration abilities of the other substrates.
Mark- Yes Mud is too fine, but oolitic is perfect sized.  Of course oolitic with a layer of larger particles on top.
---Jake interjects--- Hold on Adam is full of "Crazy Talk" don't listen to Adam tell you about the bacteria in the water around the substrate, all that matters is substrate surface area.
Mark- Well, maybe Adam is right.  Just maybe larger particles allow food and detritis to settle further in the sand bed, and allows more bacteria to quickly consume it. 

Okay now somewhere in this conversation I must have made a mistake.  So tell me where this conversation would have taken a different course from the one I just told.

Thanks

Adam

Mark Peterson wrote: Anywhere that nutrients are, you'll find bacteria. Nutrients are high in organic matter that's caught in filter media.

I agree.  So let me ask you this.  Are there bacteria in the filter media, that are not growing on the surface of the filter media?  Instead they are growing on the organic matter trapped there?  It sounds like that is what you are saying.

Adam

Marcus wrote: As far as squeezing a filter pad into someone else's tank and jump starting their tank, isn't that due to the waste from the pad giving the small amount of bacteria in the new tank sometime to "eat", thus letting it start to multiply?

No I don't believe so.  If we add waste to a new tank it causes problems. But water from a filter or sponge, or sock, or whatever (to me) is a good thing because it introduces all that bacteria.  I don't think we usually need to add food for the bacteria. 
However, you guys could argue against me that the when squeezing the sponge water out, you are actually squeezing out the bacteria that were growing on the surface areas of that sponge.  I think that is what Jake would argue, and that is a very good arguement.  That indeed may be what is happening and most people would agree with Jake on that. 

Adam

jfinch wrote: But, to me it only makes sense that the bacteria are on the surface.  How do you explain the effectiveness of a wet/dry where the water velocity is very high and change over of water is great.  The bacteria there have to be on the surface not in the water.

Yeah that is a good question.  I for one am not sure, but want to say that is the reason they are NOT that effective.  Now that is debatable as well, but my understanding is that what wet/drys do well is that they remove the organics (which get caught in the balls) and don't allow them to pass on to the rest of the system.  The actual breakdown process hasn't been proven to me. 
Also, I do agree bacteria are on the surface in all of these examples (wetdry, substrate, sponges, filter floss, ....) I just also believe the bacteria is ALSO high in the dead water spaces that accompany them.  So that is why I believe filter pads were so well, all that surface area, and all those little pockets of bacteria water.
Once again, me feelings why you can squeeze your filter pads into someone elses tank and quickly jump start their tank... all that water that you squeeze out is bacteria water.

I could be wrong, but this view point just makes too much sense to me to ignore it.

Adam

Marcus wrote: Adam, thanks!! This new information that you are writing about, is it from a new study? Do you think its possible for the rest of us to read it?

Yeah they are new studies, a couple from last year.  I don't think there is any online form of it, but I'll check.  I only know this stuff because one of my colleauges is a researcher who is studying this.  I just check with him when I have questions. 
I'm going to see if I can get an online view, or maybe a pdf file of the articles.  Unfortunately, it isn't overwhelming evidence either way.

Adam

jfinch wrote: Adam,  do you know if that's bacteria ON the substrate or is that from a water sample drawn from within the substrate? 2000 times more is significant, isn't it?

I missed the post from you Jon, sorry, just seeing it now.  First--- Marcus that was a great email you sent and a great response as well. 
Jon- it use to be assumed that when you took water from the substrate you were removing the bacteria that were growing on the surface of the substrate and that was being pulled from the substrate and sucked up into the pipette. 
Now, however, it appears (but is still shaky) that the bacteria is actually in that high concentration at all times in the water down there in the substrate.  This makes sense to me, so I don't see reason to think otherwise.  Basically, this theory is that the water down there is just really thick with bacteria. 

Adam

Adam,  do you know if that's bacteria ON the substrate or is that from a water sample drawn from within the substrate?

2000 times more is significant, isn't it? 

These things I agree with:

1. A lot of bacteria is found free floating in the water, but not even close to what is found on the surfaces in your aquarium (glass, substrate, filter pads, etc.)
2. Nitrification happens in the water column, but to a minor degreee compared to the nitrification happening in the substrate, filters, etc.

Thing I DISagree with:

1. Now the substrate WATER (NOT THE SUBSTRATE ITSELF) contains around 10x more than that.
• I disagree.  The majority of the bacteria found in the substrate is attached to the substrate not free floating in the water around the substrate.
• The number of organisms that can be maintained in a marine tank is usually proportional to the amount of surface area on the gravel of the aquarium available for the Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter bacteria to attach to (Marietta College, Water Science and Technology Volume 2002)
  
2. The actual bacteria count appears to be the same REGARDLESS of the substrate size. 
• If bacteria is more numerous on surface areas compared to free floating.  The more surface area provided for the bacteria the more bacteria you will have.  In other words the smaller the substrate grain size, the more surface area, the more bacteria.

My $0.02