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

[MnFish1]

I have also seen that what sometimes happens on a dry start with bottled bacteria when someone adds too many fish, the ammonia doesn't kill the fish directly, but the lack of oxygen from a large bacterial bloom does.

BTW - being a manager is enough of an 'expert' - as I imagine you heard enough stories from people who had had problems. The point about the peppermint angel - My feeling would be that there are very few people that would take a peppermint angel add a bunch of live rock and test - granted - its a situation thats unlikely - but - would also apply to people that have multiple expensive fish or corals.

 

[Aquadude1]

BTW - being a manager is enough of an 'expert' - as I imagine you heard enough stories from people who had had problems. The point about the peppermint angel - My feeling would be that there are very few people that would take a peppermint angel add a bunch of live rock and test - granted - its a situation thats unlikely - but - would also apply to people that have multiple expensive fish or corals.

I agree! That would be a bold risk.
My reason would not have to do with the cycle. In my mind cycle and maturity are different. When I think of a cycle being the culprit for a fish death I think ammonia burns or suffocation.

 

[IceNein]

I guess I don't understand why you are calling it a "skip cycle" when you are starting with cycled live rock. That doesn't sound like a skip cycle to me. The rock was cycled, then you added it to another tank, and now your tank is cycled because the rocks are where the majority of your denitrifying bacteria are.

If what you're trying to prove is that using cycled rock in a new tank means that your new tank is cycled, then I don't think that's a controversial statement. Is it? Is anyone challenging you on that?

 

[brandon429]

Icenein, you are using 2025 glasses on that analysis

start date for this thread? not so common then. go easy there :)

page one has link examples where reef builders did not know of this so obvious thing. the thread is for them

those who know how to skip cycle/welcome here, this won't be new info for you. man it's neat to see all these skip cyclers nowadays, having tracked this for twenty years/this is a recent spring-up.

*if someone is reading this thread with sincerity, to see what patterns we're working with here, they'll see the first links on page 1 involve tanks stating they had cycle challenges based on test kit readings months after setup.

the utility and example was how I used assurances honed here, to advise them there based on the type of rock they used, their cycle could not be broken at all. the test was suspect, not the cycle or rocks.

We use this science to address the constant stream of broken cycle threads, it's not just for building a tank.

 

[MnFish1]

I agree! That would be a bold risk.
My reason would not have to do with the cycle. In my mind cycle and maturity are different. When I think of a cycle being the culprit for a fish death I think ammonia burns or suffocation.

I was talking about the cycle:). I probably wasn't completely clear

 

[Aquadude1]

I was talking about the cycle:). I probably wasn't completely clear

All good. I misread your post.

 

[MnFish1]

I'm sorry if my response sounded arrogant or it sounded like I was calling myself an expert.

I was a manager. I didn't own one.

I personally would not test. But I would start with hearty cheaper fish in case something happened so the customer would not be as upset (never lost a clownfish or similar fish because of this)

On the example of the peppermint angel. I would not attempt it in a tank without diverse established microfauna.

On the issue of multiple fish and all dry with bottled bacteria, i would start small. I have seen the results of not doing this.

On the issue of dry start vs starting with established rock, I would not suggest buying an ammonia kit for either. I have not found it necessary.

The only time I would use an ammonia test kit, is for qt systems. I am not opposed to them though.

PS - it didn't sound arrogant

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

I think the issue is the term skip cycle. Cycling and bacteria go hand in hand, they are separate. While cycling is what we see in the nitrogen cycle being broken down by bacteria, bacteria is what helps break down the ammonia and such.

What we all know and can agree mostly is:
1. Putting items in a tank that have been exposed to beneficial bacteria for even a short time, will begin to populate with bacteria to process ammonia and such.
2. Bottle bacteria adding to dry rock can also produce same results. (Not all bottle bacteria work).
3. The amount of bacteria established determines the bioload that can be handled.
4. Bacteria can be reduced if a food source is limited. So supplying a source of ammonia wether by livestock or dosing is important.
5. Testing while not necessary with this method, can still be done. With what ever method is reliable to you.

On a side note this does not prevent diseases or from something negatively impacting the tank. I just had a huge wipe of my corals. All that is left is my elegance and blasto from brown jelly. I did not nor ever dipped my coral. That is the price. My hitchhiker clam, gorgonia and macro algae as well as shrimp and fish are still well.

I still have never tested my tank for any ammonia nitrite or nitrate. However, I have low stock and change 100 percent water. Didn't do well when I didn't do this.

I think the major issue now is maintenance and bioload. Well you can establish bacteria you can have to much bioload. The bacteria can populate quickly. What we need is a measurement of the bioload to bacteria population. If I add this many fish or creates, it could create this amount of bioload. I have this amount of bacteria.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

3. The amount of bacteria established determines the bioload that can be handled.

I would qualify that statement to read

3. The amount of bacteria established determines the bioload that can be handled by bacteria.

In a fully established and stocked reef tank, bacteria may play little or even no role in critical ammonia processing. All of the corals, macroalgae, anemones, etc. are taking up ammonia.

 

[brandon429]

Skip cycling here and in all my cycle soapbox threads means knowing the safe time fish can be ethically added into the system.


a finished cycle on a set of rocks pass will calibrated seneye audits anytime it's ran, that's how I'm basing ethics into the term. Nh3 control from any basic bioload is the benefit, and in our case here it's done the minute the tank is setup

We addressed here among other things: die off from pet store live rock, Cured live rock, is a lark and doesn't happen. That old cycling rule was made up to answer the reason perfectly cycled tanks showed light green on api

The masses demanded an explanation, stalled cycles became the new replacement fear for untrained cyclers and ten million extra bottles of fear bacteria have been sold, just in case

The point of this thread is absolute confidence in cycling without bottle bac without testing.

In my 24 years online under this avatar, I've never once in my life heard another person use skip cycling before us and I've never once seen a cycling article or thread that conveyed absolute confidence for ready dates. I wanted to use this thread as a time stamp for those concepts in testing.


I deem cycled to mean the date at which waiting longer, dosing anything, testing anything, can't make the tank safer for fish.

A disease protocol is required for fish safety after we deem a cycle ready. Thank you both for posting kindly.
B

Ben
Agreed on disease
What we're doing is probably the worst disease import risk because we're instant stocked builds. Just because we can, doesn't mean it's disease free risk for corals and especially fish. Qt if you want the longest lifespan agreed


An additional point of the thread is for me to lay down predictions on file so that in 15 years when all of us actually own cheap accurate digital testers, and api is binned away forever in cycle threads, we can measure these skip cycle predictions well after the fact for reefs we already set up using the method.

We will know then: was ammonia truly controlled, or did dieoff really happen and the fish were only luckily protected by pH trending low for new systems.


Also

When diagnosing false stall threads, like the first examples here on page one, it sure seemed like a lonely venture at the time.


*All the "duh" skip cyclers must have been in the prep/ getting ready phase for 2025 :)

(Those threads are an example here to show how cycle umpires do not validate skip cycling, unless it's here of course. Then it's so obvious a baby can do it heh, gotcha)

For seneye trolls reading, there's only three of you from recent posting over and over:

The reason I'm making this a seneye reference thread is because I believe in how that tester aligns across tanks once calibrated. I believe we can do wonders updating cycling rules when more seneyes are in use for feedback.


* consider this ideal setting: you go work on your own 35 page thread as to why seneyes are invalid for cycling, and leave me to filter my own data. At your page 35, we compare outcomes.

Instead of keeping up arguments here despite my pleas to stop, you could make your own 35 page concept thread and sell people on joining it, be present and accountable for all outcomes publicly, then let me evaluate you after a few years in your thread--》 if that's not too much work. :)

Jk I know it's way too much work, coattailing is more fun for some. U can stay.

I only want seneye measures in my threads, this isn't a crime it's how i avoid messy data from terrible test kits in the hobby. If no seneye is available, then we're testless using visual cycling cues from the rock.

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

I would qualify that statement to read

3. The amount of bacteria established determines the bioload that can be handled by bacteria.

In a fully established and stocked reef tank, bacteria may play little or even no role in critical ammonia processing. All of the corals, macroalgae, anemones, etc. are taking up ammonia.

Correct but we need bacteria to also break down nitrite as while corals do absorb and utilize ammonia, some is still converted. We would also need to consider how much ammonia can each coral absorb without bacteria.

Thank you, for reminder. Why I am also a big fan of corals being put in at start of a tank.

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

Skip cycling here and in all my cycle soapbox threads means knowing the safe time fish can be ethically added into the system.


a finished cycle on a set of rocks pass will calibrated seneye audits anytime it's ran, that's how I'm basing ethics into the term. Nh3 control from any basic bioload is the benefit, and in our case here it's done the minute the tank is setup

We addressed here among other things: die off from pet store live rock, Cured live rock, is a lark and doesn't happen. That old cycling rule was made up to answer the reason perfectly cycled tanks showed light green on api

The masses demanded an explanation, stalled cycles became the new replacement fear for untrained cyclers and ten million extra bottles of fear bacteria have been sold, just in case

The point of this thread is absolute confidence in cycling without bottle bac without testing.

In my 24 years online under this avatar, I've never once in my life heard another person use skip cycling before us and I've never once seen a cycling article or thread that conveyed absolute confidence for ready dates. I wanted to use this thread as a time stamp for those concepts in testing.


I deem cycled to mean the date at which waiting longer, dosing anything, testing anything, can't make the tank safer for fish.

A disease protocol is required for fish safety after we deem a cycle ready. Thank you both for posting kindly.
B

Ben
Agreed on disease
What we're doing is probably the worst disease import risk because we're instant stocked builds. Just because we can, doesn't mean it's disease free risk for corals and especially fish. Qt if you want the longest lifespan agreed


An additional point of the thread is for me to lay down predictions on file so that in 15 years when all of us actually own cheap accurate digital testers, and api is binned away forever in cycle threads, we can measure these skip cycle predictions well after the fact for twenty thousand reefs we already set up using the method.


Also

When diagnosing false stall threads, like the first examples here on page one, it sure seemed like a lonely venture at the time. All the "duh" skip cyclers must have been in the prep/ getting ready phase for 2025 :)

(Those threads are an example here to show how cycle umpires do not validate skip cycling, unless it's here of course. Then it's so obvious a baby can do it heh)

One thing I don't see that I believe adds to the issue is the maturity of the live rock.
Currently most will auto dump it in a tank with saltwater. I think this is fine for live rock that has only been established a short period of time.

The other issue is when you get live rock that is aged or have tons of other life in it. (Tampa Bay Live Rocks) For example. Adding this straight to a tank will cause die off and you may see some ammonia depending on how much die off or you may see a high nitrate spike. I think acclimation of matured liverock should be added if going from different salt types/brands.

This could also be why on rare occasions ammonia is detectable.

 

[brandon429]

For Ben above: 190% yes that's uncured live rock, this is only for Cured and that's an easy distinction to mess up

I wonder if cycling articles out there in our magazines and blogs have detailed those differences?

 

[BeanAnimal]

I would qualify that statement to read

3. The amount of bacteria established determines the bioload that can be handled by bacteria.

In a fully established and stocked reef tank, bacteria may play little or even no role in critical ammonia processing. All of the corals, macroalgae, anemones, etc. are taking up ammonia.

Interesting and I don't disagree, and think that begs further analysis in context to this thread and Brandon's other "soapbox" threads. (using his words)

One of Brandon's "rules" and basis of this thread is that an established system is incapable of an ammonia spike. If so, then we’d have to dismiss situations where a major change in in ammonia processing occurs, right?

Wholesale removal of a large portion of biological material - say packing coral and macro up to go to a frag swap -- If these organisms comprise the bulk of the nitrifying capacity, removing them suddenly reduces that uptake. The remaining bacterial population would have to compensate. Bacterial expansion isn’t instant. If the fish and feeding load remain the same, then ammonia will temporarily rise until equilibrium is re-established.

A massive STN event -- This isn’t just a loss of said ammonia uptake organism, but an active release of ammonia from decaying tissue. The idea that bacteria in the rest of the system will instantly scale to match the load ignores reality.

So in context to this thread and "rules" being thrown about -- That means that the notion that live rock instantly and completely prevents any need for cycling operates on the same flawed logic. Starting with live rock absolutely speeds up stability, there is no argument there. However, it doesn’t erase the potential for die-off, transient shifts (sand rinse, coral removal, etc.) from creating an imbalance that needs time to come back to equilibrium.

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

Interesting and I don't disagree, and think that begs further analysis in context to this thread and Brandon's other "soapbox" threads. (using his words)

One of Brandon's "rules" and basis of this thread is that an established system is incapable of an ammonia spike. If so, then we’d have to dismiss situations where a major change in in ammonia processing occurs, right?

Wholesale removal of a large portion of biological material - say packing coral and macro up to go to a frag swap -- If these organisms comprise the bulk of the nitrifying capacity, removing them suddenly reduces that uptake. The remaining bacterial population would have to compensate. Bacterial expansion isn’t instant. If the fish and feeding load remain the same, then ammonia will temporarily rise until equilibrium is re-established.

A massive STN event -- This isn’t just a loss of said ammonia uptake organism, but an active release of ammonia from decaying tissue. The idea that bacteria in the rest of the system will instantly scale to match the load ignores reality.

So in context to this thread and "rules" being thrown about -- That means that the notion that live rock instantly and completely prevents any need for cycling operates on the same flawed logic. Starting with live rock absolutely speeds up stability, there is no argument there. However, it doesn’t erase the potential for die-off, transient shifts (sand rinse, coral removal, etc.) from creating an imbalance that needs time to come back to equilibrium.

Great point. We are doing the reverse adding live rock and coral that is established to an unestablished system. Now if we put a large eel in a 10 gallon tank and a pebble for live rock then yes, we will see ammonia and such. So to your point there is still a balance needed. How much love rock and coral can be used per the other bioload added such as fish and inverts.

On the other side, if you have a 40 gallon with a couple shrimp and few hermits and snails, and you have half the tank filled with coral and live rock, you could remove most of those without issue

More to your point is you can remove to much for a bioload so you can also not add enough for the bio load.

So how does someone need safely and correctly ensure they have enough and not overstocking with using this method of bacteria establishment where the ammonia is not seen or stays low enough.

 

[Garf]

One of Brandon's "rules" and basis of this thread is that an established system is incapable of an ammonia spike

I expect this to be true, if one uses a "Calibrated" Seneye, lol.

 

[brandon429]

Ben

The answer is nobody here has seen a crash in a reef tank from excessive bioload in a normal running reef. That happens in non reef systems. If you're building a reef, there's no worry. Don't let someone paint you a scenario around that which cannot be linked

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/r...f-tank-cycles-from-resident-advisors.1093593/
I got to sample there just three days before a similar scenario got that closed.

You can see, they haven't seen a crash

Neither have I. :) my threads are hard to keep open apparently. Glad for my staunch auditors, working the actual cycling jobs and tank transfers and bed swaps aren't enough pressure. Thanks!

 

[BeanAnimal]

Ben - my point is very simple.

Trying to boil all of this down to a "rule" to simplify things is clearly complicating things, especially given that it means pulling a soapbox up over and over and spending tens of thousands of words trying to explain the "simple" rules --- all in an effort to explain the "new science" of "not testing" based on those rules...

When the simple concept is, and always has been -- "If ammonia is present and rising, then give it a bit of time and it will begin to fall. Once you see it begin to fall, you are on the right track. You don't have to wait for zero, just know it is headed that direction... Happy reefing".

New tank, tank transfer, dry rock, live rock, it doesn't matter.

The answer is nobody here has seen a crash in a reef tank from excessive bioload. That happens in non reef systems. If you're building a reef, there's no worry.

Nobody is predicting a "tank crash" and that has absoultely nothing to do with Ben's post.

However, to continue to say that it is impossible to biologically overload a any reef tank and create a rise in ammonia is simply illogical. Bacterial expansion is not instantaneous. Equilibrium takes time.

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

Ben

The answer is nobody here has seen a crash in a reef tank from excessive bioload in a normal running reef. That happens in non reef systems. If you're building a reef, there's no worry. Don't let someone paint you a scenario around that which cannot be linked

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/r...f-tank-cycles-from-resident-advisors.1093593/
I got to sample there just three days before a similar scenario got that closed.

You can see, they haven't seen a crash

Neither have I. :) my threads are hard to keep open apparently. Glad for my staunch auditors, working the actual cycling jobs and tank transfers aren't enough pressure he he.

While one hasn't been seen does not mean it can not happen. We have to remember that nothing is absolute zero. Science is nothing more than a hypothesis that hasn't been proven wrong yet.

You can over feed or add to many nutrients sources and cause an ammonia spike. While an established take in theory should be able to convert, the time to convert vs effects is key. Now granted this may take something extreme, but it does happen on occasion.

If I dump a whole thing of food in a tank and keep doing so, at some point I should see ammonia. Now how much vs how long for bacteria to populate to handle is the question.

But to your point established live rock with normal stocking and setup SHOULD not have any issues.

 

[Ben's Pico Reefing]

Ben - my point is very simple.

Trying to boil all of this down to a "rule" to simplify things is clearly complicating things, especially given that it means pulling a soapbox up over and over and spending tens of thousands of words trying to explain the "simple" rules --- all in an effort to explain the "new science" of "not testing" based on those rules...

When the simple concept is, and always has been -- "If ammonia is present and rising, then give it a bit of time and it will begin to fall. Once you see it begin to fall, you are on the right track. You don't have to wait for zero, just know it is headed that direction... Happy reefing".

New tank, tank transfer, dry rock, live rock, it doesn't matter.


Nobody is predicting a "tank crash" and that has absoultely nothing to do with Ben's post.

However, to continue to say that it is impossible to biologically overload a any reef tank and create a rise in ammonia is simply illogical. Bacterial expansion is not instantaneous. Equilibrium takes time.

Correct. I have not disagreements. If you use live rock and such, testing should not be needed. However to your point, stocking should be within reason. But there is nothing wrong with testing either. Tests can be wrong as well. Tons of factors in play.