A thread tracking pure skip cycle instant reefs, no bottle bac

[MnFish1]

@Lasse and I have had conversations about the ability for nitrifiers to go dormant, often for a very long period of time. He specifically brought up soil nitrifiers during winter, but there would be no reason to think that the nitrifiers in our reefs wouldn’t do the same.

The major flaw in thinking that our bacteria will starve and die off if not ‘fed’ is that it assumes there is no other source of N in the system beyond what we add.

In the thread I’m referring to w/Lasse, I brought up the idea of carrying capacity (K) for a system, and how in regard to bacterial population, the population will shift its K in response to its less available limiting factor, but they will never actually go away. Then, if more N, for example, becomes available in the system, the K will shift accordingly.

Will it happen overnight? Not really. Will it take so long that animals are at risk of being in a toxic environment? Not really. Bacteria have been around for billions of years…they’re not new to the game. Nobody is getting rid of bacteria in their systems by doing anything short of pouring a gallon of bleach into the tank…and even then, something will find a way to survive.

There are multiple scientific articles documenting that obligate autotrophs (needing ammonia) - can indeed go Dormant - with die of as time increases.

 

[brandon429]

that's not relevant here because it implies there might be a time that a reefer in a display using cured live rock from a pet store might have to help out their bacteria


they won't.

this is a fear-free thread. we don't entertain any idea that these tanks need bacterial support beyond the initial steps that uniquely align each tank here.


the reason I don't want to espouse the statements from other threads is so that my claims can be measured on their own as future purchasers of seneye get their eyes opened.

 

[Gregg @ ADP]

There are multiple scientific articles documenting that obligate autotrophs (needing ammonia) - can indeed go Dormant - with die of as time increases.

That matches my experience as well.

I would say that in terms of a typical reef aquarium set up, it would take years and years of no animals in the aquarium or matter inputs before the bacterial population could be eliminated. I don’t even think it can be eliminated. Somewhere, in some deep, dark corner of the system, there will be some hanging on. Even a small closed-system like a reef aquarium does not have homogeneous conditions, so even if the NH3 level of the system overall is a zero as determined by testing, somewhere in the tank there will be something going on that is just enough to keep some nitrifiers running, even if just running on fumes.

If we bottomed out limiting factors, K will follow predictably. But I think that even years after all animals and inputs are removed, between dormancy and micro-environments, the population will not hit zero.

Then, if we suddenly added the inputs, and K shoots up, then I would suspect we would fairly quickly see a typical sigmoid growth curve, and the nitrifiers population will catch back up K very quickly.

Anyway, I’m just rambling on. This is all a response to the idea I see posited on here often that the nitrifiers population is this fragile, delicate thing that can easily be derailed or destroyed. My dad’s wife was a microbiologist. As she once told me ‘They’re bacteria…you’re not getting rid of them’

 

[MnFish1]

That matches my experience as well.

I would say that in terms of a typical reef aquarium set up, it would take years and years of no animals in the aquarium or matter inputs before the bacterial population could be eliminated. I don’t even think it can be eliminated. Somewhere, in some deep, dark corner of the system, there will be some hanging on. Even a small closed-system like a reef aquarium does not have homogeneous conditions, so even if the NH3 level of the system overall is a zero as determined by testing, somewhere in the tank there will be something going on that is just enough to keep some nitrifiers running, even if just running on fumes.

If we bottomed out limiting factors, K will follow predictably. But I think that even years after all animals and inputs are removed, between dormancy and micro-environments, the population will not hit zero.

Then, if we suddenly added the inputs, and K shoots up, then I would suspect we would fairly quickly see a typical sigmoid growth curve, and the nitrifiers population will catch back up K very quickly.

Anyway, I’m just rambling on. This is all a response to the idea I see posited on here often that the nitrifiers population is this fragile, delicate thing that can easily be derailed or destroyed. My dad’s wife was a microbiologist. As she once told me ‘They’re bacteria…you’re not getting rid of them’

I agree - except perhaps for the 'years' part. I.e. that even after years there would be an adequate bio load. However, I only say that because of my own experiments with this as well as various scientific articles. In my case, After a month of 'no ammonia', the recovery not delayed (i.e. the time to process 2 ppm ammonia in 24 hours) and If I remember correctly, it was delayed only by a matter of 12-24 hours when the experiment was repeated after 2 months. As I said in that other thread, of course, there are other heterotrophs that can go dormant, etc - that can process ammonia - there is no 'proof' that only obligate autotrophs can 'do the job'.

 

[MnFish1]

that's not relevant here because it implies there might be a time that a reefer in a display using cured live rock from a pet store might have to help out their bacteria


they won't.

this is a fear-free thread. we don't entertain any idea that these tanks need bacterial support beyond the initial steps that uniquely align each tank here.


the reason I don't want to espouse the statements from other threads is so that my claims can be measured on their own as future purchasers of seneye get their eyes opened.

Can you suggest where you get the idea that it's 'for sure' that cured live rock from an LFS is adequate to process a 2 ppm ammonia load? Because my experiments showed that rock from a sump taken out of a much larger amount of rock (i.e. lets say I took about 5% of the total rock in the tank to divide up into the 2 experimental tanks. Neither the lit nor the dark tank were able to process 2 ppm ammonia within 24 hours. I think some people are under the impression that (let's just take obligate autotrophs) keep spreading throughout the rock unrelated to the concentration of ammonia produced by the tank inhabitants. I do not think this is true - and is one of the reasons I did the experiment - So - my tank is very analogous to what I think you mean by a 'skip cycle' - in that I just took rock, divided it into 2 equal portions and put it into 2 new tanks (with only flow, no filtration) - and it took several iterations before that rock was able to process 2 ppm i.e. more bacteria had to grow to meet that criteria. So - my test of the 'skip cycle process' - suggests that though there is still ammonia reducing capability in rock from a separate tank, it is bio load dependent.

 

[brandon429]

MnFish due to past arguments I simply can’t interact with you, I choose not to. I’ve asked several times to please not post in my threads, I don’t post on your threads, but I’m aware the site allows nearly unfettered post destruction if someone wants to will it. I don’t want to interact the sincere version of that red avatar, it’ll just shift into sixteen pages of arguments two posts later and not examples of day one reef tank startups of well-planned systems. That’s what this thread is for, back analysis of live time jobs.




The question and quotation will only lead to an argument in type you’re posting, it won’t lead to a live time job I can work or collect here, I want to be able to opt out of that with you for the benefit of the forum.

 

[exnisstech]

Everything we do going forward in this thread reflects on that ability above, in the #1 example of a no-bottle bac NO AMMONIA TESTING skip cycle reef.

Hey @brandon429 I'm setting up a new tank and do not own an ammonia or nitrite test kit. Not sure if it's anything you are interested in or not . If so let me know and I can update here. It is my build thread but just getting started.
This is the tank 84x30x25"
Edit to correct tank size

I'll be using this to skip the cycle.

 

[ChrisPPolys]

MnFish due to past trolling I simply can’t interact with you. I’ve asked several times to please not post in my threads, I don’t post on your threads, but I’m aware the site allows nearly unfettered post destruction if someone wants to will it. I don’t want to interact the sincere version of that red avatar, it’ll just shift into sixteen pages of arguments two posts later and not examples of day one reef tank startups of well-planned systems. That’s what this thread is for, back analysis of live time jobs.


It’s not a prediction battle thread. You go make one of those, leave mine free please.

There’s never a setting in which a man could ask me to depart from his post interactions permanently last year, and I’d hold onto one tiny ability to track where he goes in the postverse even through today (by subbing to his threads)

It’s troll stalking in my opinion because it’s persistent, goes on for pages of distraction at your whim, it ignores requests to exit, I don’t want to interact with anyone like that ever again. You and I must hit the ignore button



I just wouldn’t do that if someone earnestly asked me to back out, and make my own work threads. That’s what I’m asking of you.

It’s funny how anyone who proves you wrong becomes a troll. Ignorance truly is bliss!

 

[MnFish1]

MnFish due to past trolling I simply can’t interact with you. I’ve asked several times to please not post in my threads, I don’t post on your threads, but I’m aware the site allows nearly unfettered post destruction if someone wants to will it. I don’t want to interact the sincere version of that red avatar, it’ll just shift into sixteen pages of arguments two posts later and not examples of day one reef tank startups of well-planned systems. That’s what this thread is for, back analysis of live time jobs.


It’s not a prediction battle thread. You go make one of those, leave mine free please.

There’s never a setting in which a man could ask me to depart from his post interactions permanently last year, and I’d hold onto one tiny ability to track where he goes in the postverse even through today (by subbing to his threads)

It’s troll stalking in my opinion because it’s persistent, goes on for pages of distraction at your whim, it ignores requests to exit, I don’t want to interact with anyone like that ever again. You and I must hit the ignore button



I just wouldn’t do that if someone earnestly asked me to back out, and make my own work threads. That’s what I’m asking of you.

Unfortunately, it's a discussion group. In this case, the experiment I did specifically addresses the topic of the discussion. But - as I've asked you to do multiple times - if you have a problem with my post - just go ahead and report them to a mod. I never even mentioned your name in my response - which was mainly to another poster. Here is an idea. (I've mentioned this before) - ask the site/mods to set up a location for collections of threads that support one opinion. What's odd is my post generally supports what your skip cycle thread says.

 

[brandon429]

@exnisstech

Yes that’s valuable here bc you want to carry new life and the majority of your scape won’t be live + no use of bottle bac. Nice

That’s what we wanted here, work examples, I owe you a solid one day for getting the thread potentially back into works analysis.

So my first question is, are you filling the the display with live rocks

If not, that material will need to come out of the sump and into the display where the ammonia generates during daily running.

 

[brandon429]

Why use dry rock in that setup you could do so much with some aged stuff? The uglies are so much worse in dry systems.

A display tank full of live rock cured and moved over from a pet store is what we collect here, but the endpoint of that was instant start ability so your approach is still a fun test-where to position active surfaces to get the most filter efficiency possible in the quick start setting.

What is the planned starting bioload

 

[exnisstech]

@exnisstech

Yes that’s valuable here bc you want to carry new life and the majority of your scape won’t be live

That’s what we wanted here, work examples, I owe you a solid one day for getting the thread potentially back into works analysis.

So my first question is, are you filling the the display with live rocks

If not, that material will need to come out of the sump and into the display where the ammonia generates during daily running.

All of the rock shown above will be going into the sump with no light. There will be some dry rock in the display but also the majority of this tank will be coming over as well. No offense taken if this is not what your interested in just let me know either way.

 

[brandon429]

That’s truly thousands of dollars you have on the line I would enjoy seeing it worked here, this is harder than bringing home rocks from a pet store and adding a few corals

You’re taking us from a negative post space into a positive one, that work example is appreciated!

the work you bring to the thread can darn sure be a reference on how to move reef parts among tanks in a confident manner with effective results, pet store to home or in your case a reef tank worth more than ten grand into another brand new tank. I’m glad to have the post for sure.

Some of those colonies look fifteen years old and fed and there’s no bad algae, that’s massive dollars on the line, massive time on the table.

What r u going to do about sand in the new tank, what’s the plan there

I for sure recommend reducing the light power on the new tank setup down -30% from where it sits now, at the current spectral tuning. If you cloudlessly relocate (rip clean transfer) all that stuff it’ll skip cycle perfectly. Light reramping is a bleach prevention trick

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

I think the issue is is Brandon429, wants this to just be a work thread. And fiscussions of right or wrong will interfere and cloudy up the thread making it difficult for those interested to follow.

While this is a discussion forum, this thread is meant to be more of a public post so all can see and form opinions as it progresses.

As he stated he may or may not respond in another thread but just asked people to create their own even directly related to this whether negative or positive.

I think typing out things can also be interpretted in different tones and what we have in our heads to say doesnt always get translated right when we speak or type. Some people are abbrassive when speaking or typing but may mean no harm. Attacking each other only detract from anything on any topics and hurts the hobby.

 

[brandon429]

Nicely said and I appreciate your picos perspective input it’s such a rare way to run a reef that’s already working great for you. We like the quick assembly examples here for sure

 

[exnisstech]

What r u going to do about sand in the new tank, what’s the plan there

This will be bare bottom

I for sure recommend reducing the light power on the new tank setup down -30% from where it sits now, at the current spectral tuning. If you cloudlessly relocate all that stuff it’ll skip cycle perfectly. Light reramping is a bleach prevention trick

This will be easy. I'm bringing the same lights over to the new tank and will match the current settings with an acclimation period. Also I have a par meter so no guessing. Not exactly sure of the time frame but I'll update when I start moving things in. Tank is filled with tap water for leak testing and I still have a lot of work to do.

 

[brandon429]

@exnisstech

Given early brainstorms over the dry rock inclusions it would be neat if they were kept in one section for lift - out guiding and all the rest of the aged rock was positioned another way in the tank

If you could get to those new rocks as needed to cut out bryopsis or gha that may seat in, it sure would be nice to run your tank with params that focus on supporting heavy corals vs params that aim to starve out plant life. If those dry rocks were the base of your new system, in the light, and we couldn’t get to them that’d be harder to manage

If you stacked live rock over dry base rock and it wasn’t in the light, I don’t think it would do much like the lit areas would grow as uglies phasing, that would be ideal it seems.

Your tank above is not packed in organic wastes like a common dsb tank -> then changing to immediately ripped clean or bare bottom, low organic loading. It’s going low organics back into low organics, a thirty percent light re ramp is just right. Whether or not you go back up to full current levels depends on coral coloration imo.

 

[brandon429]

I really really like to see tanks that corals show and not the rocks in the opening shots, that’s rare. Those corals are so big you can’t even see your rocks, but something is holding up that dome of dollars for sure. That is an entire reefing career’s worth of coral on the line your original plan is solid. The extra material from the sump does not have to move up, given that degree of life and surface area about to go into the tank.

It’s true you can cull out most or all of the live rock up under it all if you want, that reduction in surface area will not short change your cycle. Just move some, along with those pizza sized corals over and that’s enough surface area for twice your fish loading. The inert dry rocks take on free bac over time, and we never needed them to be live in the first place, you’re moving enough surface area over into the display where the fish waste originates.

Your job involves an element of removing existing cured rocks/surface area from the final job while keeping the bioload the same, that’s legit skip cycle work.

 

[Troylee]

@exnisstech

Given early brainstorms over the dry rock inclusions it would be neat if they were kept in one section for lift - out guiding and all the rest of the aged rock was positioned another way in the tank

If you could get to those new rocks as needed to cut out bryopsis or gha that may seat in, it sure would be nice to run your tank with params that focus on supporting heavy corals vs params that aim to starve out plant life. If those dry rocks were the base of your new system, in the light, and we couldn’t get to them that’d be harder to manage

If you stacked live rock over dry base rock and it wasn’t in the light, I don’t think it would do much like the lit areas would grow as uglies phasing, that would be ideal it seems.

Your tank above is not packed in organic wastes like a common dsb tank -> then changing to immediately ripped clean or bare bottom, low organic loading. It’s going low organics back into low organics, a thirty percent light re ramp is just right. Whether or not you go back up to full current levels depends on coral coloration imo.

I’ve upgraded. And changed tanks more than I’d like to discuss but I’ve always just took what I had like my last upgrade from 60gallon to 350 gallons and used that little bit of rock and moved everything over the same day and kept going with new dry rock! Never had an algae problem I’ve never seen an ugly phase either! It’s pretty simple if you add the dry rock and use calcium carbonate “diy coral snow” add some mb7 or zeo back and let it snow in your tank it coats the surfaces and allows the good bacteria to stay put on the rocks and keeps the uglies away.. I’ve added over 150 pounds of dry rock to my tank and never saw a spec of algae and they turn solid purple in 6-8 weeks…

 

[MnFish1]

I think the issue is is Brandon429, wants this to just be a work thread. And fiscussions of right or wrong will interfere and cloudy up the thread making it difficult for those interested to follow.

While this is a discussion forum, this thread is meant to be more of a public post so all can see and form opinions as it progresses.

As he stated he may or may not respond in another thread but just asked people to create their own even directly related to this whether negative or positive.

I think typing out things can also be interpretted in different tones and what we have in our heads to say doesnt always get translated right when we speak or type. Some people are abbrassive when speaking or typing but may mean no harm. Attacking each other only detract from anything on any topics and hurts the hobby.

No one attacked anyone. If someone did - it was the person that called me a troll (perhaps)?. Since my experiment is exactly what is being discussed - a 'skip cycle thread' and since the experiment supports the logic of the OP of the thread (i.e. does not contradict it) - I'm not sure why this is an issue - and unless contacted by a moderator, I will not discuss this issue further. As I said before - no one wants the site to become an attack zone - and there is a mechanism for people to make sure it does not become that - which is to ask a moderator to review any post they want to.