This is both absolutely DISGUSTING and quite fascinating. I am not sure these images will ever leave me while I am poking around in my bins. I think it is probably very common to have such a variety of "wildlife" in your bins, and in my opinion probably best to just leave them alone and try not to think about it. That has always been my motto, whether there is a scary spider in my bedroom or a gigantic gecko (yep, been there). I'm not saying that's the best way of dealing with critters, but it has worked for me so far. :)

Great pictures of the great insects that are all around us, on our food, living on our bodies and floating in the air that we breath.

Struggling to even get URLs to videos loaded.

Paul

This post was edited by pskvorc on Fri, Jun 13, 14 at 21:31

Very interesting. I do not look at my little wormbin pets.....

I like the last photo. Looks like a scorpion crossed with a toad! Feed 'em to your fish with tweezers :)

Microscopes do things to stuff that we should probably just ignore like God intended us to do.

Total repulsion is looking at the stuff on your toothbrush under the scope.

Chuckiebtoo

FWIW.......It takes a couple of years or three to get right with all those "other" critters in the bin. If you can't, you'll need to take up a new hobby.

You need to understand that a worm bin is not just for the worms, it is a complex ecosystem that supports many forms of life including mites, springtails and many, many more forms of life. These all have a very important part to play in the breakdown of the food sources in the bin. Worms are only part of the process. Hopefully you will come to accept them and grow to appreciate their value.
Nice pics by the way.

I'm not certain who the "you" is in most of the above posts, but if it is me, "you" are preaching to the choir. HOWEVER, there are a couple of comments I would make that mitigate at least some of the assumptions made.

I've been a practicing field biologist for more than 40 years. I am quite certain I have an appropriate knowledge of and appreciation for both the biological diversity and the microbial make-up of my environment. That said, there are A HELLUVA lot of microbes and 'critters' that I do not "like". I don't like the hundred or so species of malaria-causing plasmodia, I don't like the HIV-causing virus, I don't like the many Rickettsia bacteria that cause the several TickBorne Diseases as well as thyphus, I don't like ticks, I don't like mites and the myriad diseases THEY cause, I don't bed-bugs, I don't like hyenas, I don't like politicians and other parasites, and the list goes on.

Second, I do not believe that parasites that infest the critter I am trying to culture, and reduce both my production and the critter's health, need "getting used to". Instead, what they "need" is elimination from my culture. Do not practice "your" daily calisthenics by jumping to the conclusion that I am a proponent of "mono-culture". Few are more adamantly opposed to that concept/practice than I. However, I find it approaching stupid to encourage parasites and disease vectors without SPECIFIC examples of beneficial contribution to animal or plant-specific husbandry/culture.

I find spring-tails interesting and consider them a key BENEFICIAL component of a detrital community. I consider ALL mites and other parasites as a HARMFUL component of ANY community. I await with open mind some objective evidence of their beneficial contribution to ANY community. All ectoparasites I am aware of are primary disease vectors.

I readily acknowledge that there are ectoparasites that ARE beneficial in some fashion. Leeches, have some medicinal uses. They are nonetheless disgusting and "in the wild" cause far more harm as debilitators and disease vectors, than ANY good they do. Mosquitoes, while not disgusting TO ME, are primary vectors of diseases that cause MILLIONS of human deaths (agonizing deaths) annually. However, without the MALE mosquito, there would be no flowering plants in the circumpolar boreal forests, as they are the primary pollinator of almost all arctic flowering plants.

A plastic bin is not a "natural" environment. It is "small" and closed, and as such is extremely vulnerable to "founder effect". A phenomenon in which "he who gets there firstest gets the mostest". In other words, if an organism, including a detrimental one, gets the initial population start in such a system, it can dominate the system because of the smallness and closed nature of that system.

I'm not inclined to "settle" for (or "get used to") a 'healthy' population of parasites and pathogens in a community of critters I am attempting to culture/husband. Mites, IN PROPER PROPORTIONS, are a component of a "natural" or "wild" system that includes worms. However, the plastic worm bin is neither "natural" or "wild" and has few to none of the controls of parasites and pathogens found in a wild system. I intend to eliminate, to the best of my ability, all mites from my inside worm bins. I have my doubts about being able to ELIMINATE them, but I will find a way to reduce their numbers to what I find acceptable. It is not my desire to feed mites or any other parasite.

Even when and if I am able to accomplish that goal in my indoor bins, I will STILL find them disgusting, as I do almost all ectoparasites.

mendopete - That 'thing' you suggest I feed to my fish, is almost invisible to the naked eye. I can probably measure it, but I suspect it is on the order of 100 to 200 microns. A little tough to get a grip on. However, since I moved my indoor bins out to the garage that is about 20 degrees cooler than my house, I have a "ton" of "pot worms". So many in fact, that I AM going to start harvesting them as fish food. I figure about the time I decide I "want" pot worms, they will VANISH from my indoor worm bins. If I could figure out a way to harvest and use mites, I'm equally certain they would almost instantly disappear from my bins. There is no faster way to drive a free-ranging species to extinction that to exploit it commercially.

Paul

It still remains that these creatures are all a NATURAL part of vermicomposting. By all means if you have an actual infestation of one particular creature look for the reason. Good luck Paul

No, Paul....the "you" in the above posts is not "me". Most of us who've posted for a long time do so addressing the particular post to ALL the wormers who read this stuff.

I suppose we could substitute the word "one" for "you", but that, to me, sounds a little too high and mighty for we who play with worm doo-doo.

Chuckiebtoo

FWIW....One can often be sensitive to responses to posts when those responses have been repeated over and over to other posters asking the same questions. Redundancy rules here. As it must.

"One can often be sensitive to responses to posts when those responses have been repeated over and over to other posters asking the same questions."

And hence my tendency to go to the extra effort to do my best to be understood by using ALL of the punctuation and editing tools available to me. (Unfortunately extraordinarily absent from this forum's editor. Maybe that's why there seems to be SO MANY misunderstandings at this - The Garden Web - website.)

EYE wasn't being "sensitive" in my response, I was letting people (whomever may be reading these threads) get to "know" me and my perspectives. One can respond with clarity and detail without BEING defensive, but it is impossible to "make" a reader understand original intent. My perspective is that this forum, like all forums, is a 'community'. The better each of us 'knows' the other, the better we can understand one another. This especially true when using only the limited communication tools available in this editor. It is another - but not the sole - reason for my lengthy posts.

THAT said, MAYBE the "sensitivity" you mention above was self-directed. Your "sensitive" response to having read MY "yech" and "disgusting" descriptors about various bin denizens, and were making "your" (the collective or non-specific "your") comments to "all those folks" that have made similar comments before, rather than to me specifically.

In EITHER case, I - for one - am not 'offended', but I do wish to be understood.

All of THAT said, and wanting to get

BACK ON TOPIC:

These bins are my first worm bins. Like all novices, I have learned a great deal from them even though I have not had them for too long - about 3 months. I am not particularly 'pleased' with them at the moment, and am considering a "scorched earth" approach unless someone here talks me out of it.

By that I mean:
1) Take what ever considerable time and effort is necessary to sort out the Eisenia fetida with as little "dirt" left on them as possible.
2) Sterilize "the hell" out of what remains by microwaving to a uniform temperature of 160 F, then lowering to -10 F and holding for 140 hours (5 days).
3) "Wash" the E. fetida with a mild solution of hydrogen peroxide. Acknowledging that some - hopefully not too many - E. fetida will be lost.
4) "Sterilizing" the bins with 25% Clorox for 24 hours.
5) Bringing the sterilized "food and bedding" material back up to room temperature and reintroducing HALF of the remaining E. fetida.
6) Starting with new sterilized food (horse manure) and bedding (corrugated cardboard) and introducing the other half of the remaining E. fetida.

This SHOULD be starting anew with as "clean" a substrate for the worms as I can reasonably attain. Any "bugs" found in the worm bins in the future SHOULD be only those that came from the worms - either from "on" them, or from "in" them. I will not attempt to sterilize new food after the initial inoculation with worms, but I will not add any food from "wild" sources like native leaves or moose marbles. I think it will be interesting to see what the fauna look like in the bins in three months.

If the faunal makeup is essentially the same as it is now - TONS of Enchytraeids (pot worms) and Collembola (spring-tails), and mites and whatever that "toad/scorpion cross" is - then I would consider it 'reasonable' to assume that such a makeup was "reality" and not a function of inoculation of "baddies" (which I currently believe it is), or 'founder effect', or both.

Given the "micro-habitat" nature of indoor plastic worm bins, that assumption is not particularly strong, but I think it is not unreasonable for the narrowly defined 'world' of plastic worm bins.

Paul

Paul, have you looked at the critters in your cage with a scope? I am curious if the same ones are present outside.

Are you planning on using the kitchen microwave for sterilization?? Is the new horse manure going in there for sterilization also? Unless your spouse is more tolerant than mine, you may consider a "garage sale" microwave for the shop :)

As for the peroxide bath for worms, I do not know...
Maybe consider multiple bubble-baths with water and an air stone. You could strain the worms with a flour sifter after each bath.

I always enjoy your posts and scientific perspective. You have caused me to reconsider several things I do and change my tea brewing technique.... No more root-beer floats! Keep on posting.

mendopete - I have not looked at the cage contents under the microscope. I haven't actually figured out a way to get a "representative sample". It would be interesting to note similarities. I certainly don't see all the springtails and potworms in the cage that I see in the plastic indoor bins. In fact, I SEE none in the cage.

Your suggestion of a "garage sale" microwave, AND doing the 'sterilization' IN the garage was a certainty from the start. It's my own 'sensibilities' that prevent me from putting horse manure in the "potable" in-house microwave!

Something else occurred to me with respect to how to get "clean" worms. I could find some cocoons and put them in the sterilized 'growth media". Any parasites or other vermin that were present MIGHT then be attributable to passing through the reproductive process. While that couldn't be claimed with certainty, it would at least be likely. There are parasites/pathogens that pass through bird and fish reproductive processes.

Thanks,
Paul

Apparently the weebeasties are as mortal as man. In the endless competition for life in the world or in the worm bin or in a forum I thought we got extra points for bin resident diversity. I thought variety was the goal. In the war of the little world the worms are not stressed by the weebadguys nor assisted by the weegoodguys. Absent these challenges their life will mimic our own antimicrobial soap, every surface Lysol-ed, there is only our body against the world with no familiars existence. Nature abhors a vacuum. Starting a bin with only a few numbers would seem to lower ones chances of winning the lottery. I think the benefit of these little guys is the same as ponds filling after a heavy rain preventing the water from running straight to the ocean. The tiny creatures preserve resources and release them as needed to other creatures or processes in the bin.

Really cool idea of clean worms via cocoons. Perhaps cocoons will do better than worms with the hydrogen peroxide bath.

Total repulsion is looking at the stuff that lives at the roots of eyelashes under the scope.

Stay tuned for a decoded translation for barbararose21101 in a few days.

This post was edited by equinoxequinox on Mon, Jun 16, 14 at 19:16

I don't think I'll ever 'like' the mites when I get them. I really try to not get them, and so far, so good!

There are those in the fish culturing industry that believe that 'cultured' fish (hatchery fish) should be "challenged" by the critters - beneficial and detrimental - that are found in the waters into which the fish are to be released. Those proponents argue that such fish will have a better survival rate than those that are not "challenged". That all sounds so "right", especially in the current political world of science and biology, but the facts reveal quite a different result.

Those that have seen my website know that my business identifies (using a non-invasive, natural pattern "tag") individual animals. We have done a lot of work at hatcheries in which we may "tag" upwards of a million fish. We had such a contract, although on a much smaller scale, with a tribe of native Americans that were raising sturgeon. The species is highly endangered, and both the Canadians and Americans are working very hard on preventing extinction. Among the methods used is raising fish in a hatchery and releasing them back into their native streams.

The native American hatchery was located on the river from which the brood stock came, and into which the fish were to be returned. Once the spawn was taken, it was split in half, one half remaining at the native American hatchery, and one half going north to a Canadian hatchery.

We were there to photograph the juveniles ("tag" them) before their release back into the wild. The hatchery manager of the native American reservation felt very strongly about "challenging" the fish. (He is not alone in support of this "theory".) He was convinced that if they were subjected to the same environment that the wild fish lived in, they would have a much higher survival. (How can anyone in their right mind argue with that? It sounds so "natural".) Therefore, he took water directly from the river, filtered it only for large particulate matter, and allowed it to go straight to the hatchery thereby exposing the hatchery fish to the same daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations, and to all the pathogens found in the river.

The Canadians on the other hand, while also on a river into which the fish would be released, took 100% of their water from a deep well. It was a constant 10 degrees C (about 50 degrees F), was essentially pathogen-free but they further filtrated it in filters that could exclude everything but viruses. After filtration, it was irradiated with high-intensity UV. It is fair to state that the water was sterile.

We first photographed the fish at the native American hatchery. We spent several weeks there getting to know the operation, testing the setup, and then finally taking pictures. Once we were finished there, we traveled into Canada to complete the photography of the other half of the same cohort.

WE WERE STUNNED WHEN WE SAW THE CANADIAN FISH!

The SMALLEST of them were MORE than TWICE the size of the "American" fish. The largest of them were four times the size of the largest American-raised fish!

The die-hards will at this point be clutching at the straws of "Yahbut, what about the differential survival rate once the fish were released." The difference wasn't just "significant", it was absolute. NO, None, zip, zero, nada, "American" fish were to be found 3 months after release. "Survival" was ZERO. The survival of the Canadian-raised fish was calculated to be 71%.

There's a helluvalot of "theorizing" being done today in the name of "evolution". The HISTORY teachers in my children's schools were even pontificating on the subject. The FACT of the matter is, damn few people know enough about evolution to talk about it intelligently, yet because of the politicizing of science, damn near everyone thinks they are "experts" in evolution and its mechanisms.

Strong, healthy critters do better than those debilitated, or even "challenged" by disease and other environmental stresses. "Diversity" that includes pathogens and other stresses is only "good" in a WHOLE POPULATION sense, AND over EVOLUTIONARY TIME FRAMES.

While it has been clearly and repeatedly shown that "mono-culture" is "bad" for plants ON AN INDUSTRIAL SCALE, the things most of us do with our hobbies is not even in the same universe with that level of "culture".

"You" - whomever "you" may be - are more than welcome to "challenge" your worms and other plants and critters as much as you feel appropriate. I am a fervent believer that we hobbyists should first and foremost find JOY and PEACE, and FUN in what we do. If believing that challenging your "stuff" with "diversity" is your way of finding joy, peace, and fun, then it would be not only rude, but stupid of me to tell you to "quit that". HOWEVER, the converse is equally true, and I can assure you that not only do I know the technical "truth" about "challenging" cultured 'things', I have seen the reality of it first hand, and more than once. Therefore, joy, peace, and fun are achieved BY ME by "coddling" the critters I 'husband'. Part of that coddling is removing, WITH VENGEANCE, stressors and pathogens, which includes parasites and competitors for food.

I am a VERY strong advocate for biological diversity, but SCALE is a CRITICAL aspect of ANY system in which biological diversity is a consideration.

Equinoxequinox - I wasn't thinking about 'dipping' the cocoons in H2O2, but I suppose it would probably be less stressful on the cocoon shell than it would be on the adult worms. Now I just gotta find some cocoons...

Paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqRLVUtAAV8&feature=youtu.be

Here is a link that might be useful: video of bin critters

EQ the only part I didn't understand was the "familiars existence" . . .

Whassup wit your Worm Inn these days ?
What did you think of . . . (did you see ?) . . . the burlap lining idea ?

Great video at that link, barbararose!

Paul

"Absent these challenges their life will mimic our own antimicrobial soap, every surface Lysol-ed, there is only our body against the world with no familiars existence."

"an animal, as a cat, that embodies a supernatural spirit and aids a witch in performing magic."

"in Western demonology, small animal or imp kept as a witch's attendant, given to her by the devil or inherited from another witch. The familiar was a low-ranking demon that assumed any animal shape, such as a toad, dog, insect, or black cat. Sometimes the familiar was described as a grotesque creature of fantasy, an amalgam of several creatures."

In The Little Mermaid Ursula had Flotsam and Jetsam familiars.

Refers to antibacterial soaps and chemicals that supposedly sanitize our hands but in reality kill the good along with the bad, thus leaving us naked without our little familiars or personal good bacteria working for us to combat the bad bacteria.

I hate mites with a passion. A few years ago I had more mites in my bin than I was comfortable with. Tried thinning them out with slices of bread, and melon slices. Rinse and repeat.

I finally harvested the bin and washed my worms. Put them in some water and the mites rose to the top of the water. Poured the water out and put the worms into a newly set up bin.

Refers to antibacterial soaps and chemicals that supposedly sanitize our hands but in reality kill the good along with the bad, thus leaving us naked without our little familiars or personal good bacteria working for us to combat the bad bacteria.

While I appreciate the "Madison Avenue" issues, I'm not quite ready to return to the days when infant/child mortality due to amoebic dysentery, cholera, rheumatic fever, measles, and so on and so on was more than TWENTY TIMES what it is today. In Pennsylvania in 1912, the infant mortality rate (deaths per thousand) was 150. In 2012 it was 8. Both figures - 1912 and 2012 - include ALL deaths, not just those bacteria-borne ones. Nonetheless, "the good ol' days" weren't, and for the most part, are a fantasy no less "fabricated" by a DIFFERENT "Madison Avenue" than the fabrications of the chemo/pharmo shills.

Sadly, in a world with such extraordinary access to information, it is harder to find THE TRUTH than it may ever have been in the history of human kind. We must all SEEK, and FIND, our own way in this world full of charlatans and snake-oil salesmen.

Precisely why I do not share the infatuation with "all things worm", that some do. The TRUTH I find has been something less than "magic". And while I profoundly appreciate fermented food and drink - with all it's "good" little microbes - I have no illusion that the "good" ones will "win out" over the "bad" ones. They haven't throughout history, I don't know why they should now. What "wins" is a strong immune system, and when that fails, "you" die, regardless of whether you use "anti-microbial" soap or not.

Paul

Got it !

I respect my personal bacteria and appreciate your point of view. Our bacteria, inner & outer, are, indeed familiar !
One of the reasons I like to garden is that I don't have to wash the bejabbers off my food. I don't wash the products at all unless apparently, patently necessary.

I think we could use a moisture advice thread. I have to find where I overstated advice . . .

It is absolutely true that excessive washing of hands, for instance, is a thing not recommended by the medical profession because of the destruction of our natural defenders against all the baddies trying to invade ourselves.

And that is exactly the thing that happens when chemoheads use those toxic things to destroy, say, one particular "baddie"...which it does, along with everything else that's good.

The ulterior motive for Monsanto, and Scotts, and the other chemical producers have when they make all the chemical fertilizers to replace that which they have laid to waste. It a vicious circle that keeps those industries in the green, so to speak.

And that is what vermicompost and AVCT do not do. They selectively take out the baddies. I don't know why, probably Mother Nature would need to help with that answer.

But I don't care why.

CD

CarlosDanger: "And that is what vermicompost and AVCT do not do. They selectively take out the baddies. I don't know why, probably Mother Nature would need to help with that answer. But I don't care why."

Is it OK if I tell you anyway?

Sorry it is pretty much all of the 18:00. So I can't save you viewing time.

How bacteria "talk"

Bonnie Bassler discovered that bacteria "talk" to each other, using a chemical language that lets them coordinate defense and mount attacks. The find has stunning implications for medicine, industry ��" and our understanding of ourselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXWurAmtf78#t=904

The short answer is because bacteria, sort of like chuckiebtoo and CarlosDanger are both... ... chatty.

~Mother Nature

"It's not nice to fool Mother Nature"....said Father Time.

Parallel universes exist all around us.

We keep perfecting telescopes that can see back thru time, and microscopes that can see deeper into smallness. Someday we'll look into smallness as deeply as our capabilities allow and we'll see that smallest visible "it" peering into a microscope.

And we have the audacity to try to know why something good simply........works and not utilize it if we don't have all the answers.

Chuckiebtoo

Moderation, Diversity, Patience, Philosophical Improvisation

Great Ted Talk. Don't miss it. She talks fast and says "quorum" as one syllable. Attention is required.

Effective metaphors and analogies, too.

and maybe add a notion of forums as quorum sensors ?

Duplicating the access:

Here is a link that might be useful: Bonnie Bassler