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

[BeanAnimal]

Hanna checker, got it. thats better than api, and within a thread where I've asked repeatedly only to source or include seneye, that's an acceptable forced offer/again.

So the the only data you wish to deem "valid" is data that supports your conclusions?

the link I posted was measuring that. That's our scope for this thread.

And within that scope you continue to present numerous arguable points, stated as absolutes. People are responding with relevant information to counter those points.

 

[brandon429]

ok u answer for Lasse

is that a sandbed action measure, or a live rocks action measure chart

how does the data you just saw in my comparison thread, align or disalign with Lasse's chart for risk aversion or confidence in this matter


what, is the usefulness of that chart here? is there a risk we're missing, that Lasse just illuminated?

 

[BeanAnimal]

your chart, among our results and that counter thread, conveys a risk to my approach here. if the chart was a measure of live rocks, Id not be as confused..

...is that a sandbed action measure, or a live rocks action measure chart

I explained that to you above.

It does not matter in the context of how bacteria work.

The point is simple, the bacterial capacity is not instantaneously scalable. They take time to adapt to higher input, and while they do, there is measurable ammonia left to be processed - that is contrary to the "rules" that you keep evoking.

 

[brandon429]

the benefit to posting sandbed charts and then making huge extrapolations to live rock threads is this constant bumping is getting me new messages for build jobs, and rip cleans, so thank you two for that.


did you read anything from the huge link I posted of rare seneye tanks, resolving ammonia fast? is all that data invalid, since it's seneye?

does Lasse's chart alter our course here or give a useful warning we can apply when carrying home skip cycle rocks from a pet store, without bottle bac?

 

[Garf]

did you read anything from the huge link I posted of rare seneye tanks,

I did. One chap has a large algae bed/filter. Another saw an increase in Seneye ammonia of 400% (impossible, right?). Your input appears to be limited to professing the importance of that thread.

 

[BeanAnimal]

did you read anything from the huge link I posted of rare seneye tanks, resolving ammonia fast? is all that data invalid, since it's seneye?

Of course I looked at it. The issue is that you are cherry picking convenient bits what you observed there to draw universal conclusions and create rules that are not supported by the actual observations. Any data presented to you that says otherwise, is discounted as error or unwanted in your thread. This pattern holds true site-wide.

I disagree with any chart that presents a risk, to a cycle crash, nobody can actually link. you guys missed your three day window to post proof in my crash collection thread, before ya'll got it closed. you had posted about ten links opposite of the ones I'd asked for/like here.

Nobody has posted such a chart or is talking about cycle crashes, here or anywhere, other than you.

"We" did not get your thread closed. Take a moment to understand why you get so much pushback and examine the language that you use to communicate with people. For example, repeatedly referring to your peers using petty names to passively disparage them creates contentious conversation, as does issuing smugly presented challenges that aren’t even relevant to the conversation.

If you don’t want debate in your threads, then the suggestion would be to stop inviting them by saying debatable things.

 

[GARRIGA]

Too many pages to read but seen where API often dismissed and not just on this thread. I can confirm after using several bottles that the API Ammonia strips do show zero and did reference test one against a sample I created myself with ammonium chloride.

No experience of recent with their titration test kit but pretty sure that's what I used in the 80s/90s (don't recall anything but API available) and don't recall not seeing zero post ammonia cycle back then when throwing fish and food at the problem in vogue, mostly.

 

[brandon429]

I'll resume when my new example is finished, then we'll be back to the heart of what we did before, and it won't have anything to do with these last few posts meant to argue

(how many of our initial pages went argument free?)

There's more pattern in that thread Garf than one example, all work threads are like that. Hop in the thread, and tell them how their findings are invalid, let's see their take.

 

[BeanAnimal]

You've offered nothing to sway or method at all.

Nobody is trying to sway any method.

People are responding to your various “rules” regarding nitrogen cycling.

 

[MnFish1]

Too many pages to read but seen where API often dismissed and not just on this thread. I can confirm after using several bottles that the API Ammonia strips do show zero and did reference test one against a sample I created myself with ammonium chloride.

No experience of recent with their titration test kit but pretty sure that's what I used in the 80s/90s (don't recall anything but API available) and don't recall not seeing zero post ammonia cycle back then when throwing fish and food at the problem in vogue, mostly.

This is my experience as well - and the main issue usually seems to be the 0-0.25 reading - which most people misread by not following the instructions of the test.

 

[MnFish1]

ok u answer for Lasse

is that a sandbed action measure, or a live rocks action measure chart

how does the data you just saw in my comparison thread, align or disalign with Lasse's chart for risk aversion or confidence in this matter


what, is the usefulness of that chart here? is there a risk we're missing, that Lasse just illuminated?

I'll give it a shot - its both - in the tank and under the sand.

 

[brandon429]

I noticed Randy expanded the acceptable range of safety now to include .5 / slightest extra green still OK in light of that. Per his recent article on ammonia being our friend

Api needs wide subjective allowances when working with public feedback. I know in your tap water testing thread you were able to use the test effectively. I don't like to prove kits by blanking on non biosystems because I think metabolites other than ammonia trip up some tests, so in drinking water those confounds won't be present.

 

[BeanAnimal]

but seen where API often dismissed and not just on this thread.

No experience of recent with their titration test kit

There is nothing wrong with API test kits in context to providing enough information to determine what general state the new aquarium's cycle is in.

Ammonia is either rising - stable - or falling. That is really all that matters. Once it is falling, then we know that the aquarium is ready, or will very soon be ready for fish. That is about as complicated as cycling advice needs to be.

 

[MnFish1]

Is it really a fair 'analysis' or an analysis that one can make rule with - if the analysis consists of only requested data points that agree with the requestor?

In a scientific paper, it would be like doing a meta analysis of - lets say a new covid vaccine - and there are 100 papers out there that show the vaccine is effective and 75 out there that say that it doesn't. Then in the meta-analysis, only the 100 papers saying the vaccine works are counted.

I remember Randy posting a while back (and others as well) - can you just post your ideas/protocol for setting up a tank - in a 1, 2, 3 manner - so everyone understands what you're trying to say? I'm guessing there is a vast difference between what one person thinks you're trying to say than another - because (apologetically) its ambiguous and/or not clear

 

[MnFish1]

I noticed Randy expanded the acceptable range of safety now to include .5 / slightest extra green still OK in light of that. Per his recent article on ammonia being our friend

Api needs wide subjective allowances when working with public feedback. I know in your tap water testing thread you were able to use the test effectively. I don't like to prove kits by blanking on non biosystems because I think metabolites other than ammonia trip up some tests, so in drinking water those confounds won't be present.

My thread was done in aquaria. With live rock - I did over 100 analyses - and one was an error (i.e. fresh saltwater - with no added ammonia) - and I realized that I had made a mistake in something - otherwise it was always as expected. In fact - it's how I determined that (at least in my bottle) - the Dr. Tims drop size - when following instructions resulted in about 8 ppm as compared to the desired 4 ppm. This required me to use a measured amount in a syringe for experiments. I believe it may also be a reason that people complain that their ammonia is not going down in the same manner (i.e. according to what it is supposed to per Dr. Tim's instructions) that the typical cycle says it should.

 

[brandon429]

I keep forgetting drop size yes that was a huge impact found you had stated


Heck of a find, nice experiment we can link it here it's inspecting live rock boundaries thread indeed. Cycle starvation

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/e...hout-ammonia-or-other-supplementation.890358/
Didn't you do one with live rock and tap water? That's good too, we're looking at live rock dynamics.

we get to see if harsh actions really do impact cycle. It's fitting.



https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/e...ubbing-live-rock-affect-nitrification.886715/

Do an airtime test! How many hours in air for live rock slows the bac rebound rate so badly it isn't practical cycle control anymore. It might take days/ amazing.

 

[Lasse]

Hanna checker,

Not - Hanna Marine Master is its own instrument - more stable than the checker. It use the same method - but its another design.

The graph was shown because you claim that NH3/NH4 never can be an issue in a mature aquarium. It clearly shows that there can be pockets there the NH3/NH4 is produced and this can happens if you have fishes that die and you can´t take them up. My aquarium was nearly 8 years when I tested it this way. And no - in my case - is probably not nitrification that convert the NH3/NH4 produced below the bed. The bed is anaerobic and the NH3/NH4 has disappeared even before it reaches the oxygenated waters above. The probably effect is either an anammox process or direct uptake (anammox - NH3/NH4 directly into N2 with help of NO2 under anaerobic conditions) or by the macro algae over the sand bed.

To understand whats happening - you need to analyse total ammonia (NH3+NH4) because the NH3 is such a small part of the complex (usually 5-10%) that it becomes impossible to use direct measurement of NH3 (Seneye). When you can measure with seneye - well then it has already gone out of control.

By using total ammonia, you can gain an understanding of the process and understand under what conditions it can go south.

I'm not interested in the 90% who don't have problems - I'm interested in understanding why things sometimes go wrong - because then you can avoid this.

I forgot to mention that samples from the bottom of the DSB was filtrated through 22 µm. I have edit the original post

Sincerely Lasse

 

[brandon429]

Lasse thank you for the updated clarification. You write kindly, thank you.

 

[brandon429]

I'm reading your post and tying it in to the graph, takes while at work. Be right back

 

[brandon429]

@Lasse

Would you expect to find the same ammonia values in a common sandbed? (no plenum)

If you test your top aerobic zones are the levels the same now? No trending needed, I was genuinely interested in knowing.

what does your inch layer of top sand read if you sample it real quick for nh4/3

That's first sandbed ammonia testing I recall. Plenum sandbeds are ultra rare in jobs we do.

what's the common man going to encounter as far as unused free ammonia, among sandbed bacteria with oxygen present? I cannot imagine such a valuable resource left unused in that proximity to hungry microbes.

I don't think this applies to live rock threads at all, it's a sandbed measure.

those were not alarming levels of ammonia posted even at the highest mark.

But for the sand transfer threads we do, I'm still interested in knowing.

If resident bacteria are able to generate pockets of waste gas ammonia from detritus proteins, and local aerobes aren't using it up and there's some for storage: that's impactful to the studies on the site that shows detritus to be rather inert/ Taricha has those posts and related studies in his threads.

Also, since I too linked a valid thread earlier showing copious ammonia dosing into seneye tanks, you can see many of those are prime value examples showing consistency down to thousandths ppm and you can see how many different reefs attain that average, after calibration.

do you personally feel your own tank couldn't degrade a fish or two> I've seen two tangs degrade in a 55 before and nothing died or even closed up/no clouding, those are rather slow degradation rates compared to adding in liquid AC as was done in my thread example.

Can I look to you to write a sensible comment on at least a brief review of that thread, as it applies to how live rock systems handle brief ammonia tests @Lasse?

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/does-anyone-dose-ammonia-and-or-how-would-one-try.770535/