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

Status
Not open for further replies.

BeanAnimal

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
3,427
Reaction score
5,198
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I can admit - I do not test when I start an aquarium because I start it in such way that I can´t get any toxic amounts of NH3 whatever and have a safe time frame for the start - please see my 15 steps

Sincerely Lasse
But you are not new to the hobby and have decades of experience, as well as understand the risk, as well as fully understand the chemistry and biology. Brandon's context here is aimed at those new to the hobby that have none of this experience or knowledge.
 

Ben's Pico Reefing

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
1,854
Location
Brevard county
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Yes my tank normally shown around 2 mg/L NO3 down to 0 but its because I have processes that take care of the produced NO3, If I stop these processes - NO3 will rise because my tank is cycled the way the word cycled should be understood - total nitrification from NH4/NH3 to NO3.

I could change your arguments

Without testing - you do not know if you get a stall or any other problems
Without testing - you do get any read at all
Without testing - you do not get any possible explanations/time to react for/before for a disease outbreak
Without testing - you do not get any knowledge of your system that you can use further on

I can admit - I do not test when I start an aquarium because I start it in such way that I can´t get any toxic amounts of NH3 whatever and have a safe time frame for the start - please see my 15 steps

Sincerely Lasse
Cycle means you have established enough bacteria to process waste into nitrate. It really has nothing to do with testing. The tests only show the waste products of the bacteria not taken in. It does not truly show anything about whether a tank has truly enough bacteria to process load. Now you could add ammonia, but if everything is in place. You won't see any results even nitrate with good nitrate intake and exportation.

I also don't understand a stall? How does bacteria stall? It is either their and processing or it's not. I think the term closest to stall would be nutrient overload. Meaning, where something changed where the available nutrients became greater than the established bacteria. If there is nutrients to be broken down, the bacteria will populate more to handle then will fall back to normal levels to balance out. Either something died, tank was bombed with food or something was added or done to kill bacteria. Killing bacteria can be done by some additives, treatments or chemical was added on accident or exposed.

I have a big issue with how "cycle" is used and it misleads new people right off the bat to chase and force numbers and testing that isn't needed.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with testing. Especially with tanks where there is trace element depletion and can't do large water changes.

Maybe I miss interpreted your post and I apologize if I did. I am not against testing. I am against How cycling term is used and tank stall lol. Maybe if you can explain further by what you mean tank stall. I have found that sometimes a term is used differently than I thought.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,979
Reaction score
23,848
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Lasse and I are never going to agree on cycling details. All my threads will always be testless cycles, he believes in testing and believes in cycle stalls, which I don’t. It’s good for science to have these competing approaches.

My threads will always be link based examples of real world builds. As long as the results remain what they are, I’ve no reason to change my threads and make them test-based.

All other cycle threads beyond mine are test-based, so now we can easily compare logged results between these two opposing methods. I have to keep my readers testless so we can have alternate results to log. If everyone is testing for cycles that can’t help foster a change into testless cycling/disease based focus
 

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
5,353
Reaction score
6,202
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I think the term closest to stall would be nutrient overload
"Stalling" initially was thought to be the cross over point in nutrient availability, causing a bacterial population shift. This shift meant that the previously processed nutrient consumption slowed, as the new bacterial population gained ground. Now, if that's true or not is a different matter. I think some folk have muddied the waters though and call a low ammonia level such as 0.25ppm ammonia a "stall" causing fear. Those folk should really consult a free ammonia calculator, pre-armed with a pH reading.
 

Ben's Pico Reefing

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
1,854
Location
Brevard county
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
"Stalling" initially was thought to be the cross over point in nutrient availability, causing a bacterial population shift. This shift meant that the previously processed nutrient consumption slowed, as the new bacterial population gained ground. Now, if that's true or not is a different matter. I think some folk have muddied the waters though and call a low ammonia level such as 0.25ppm ammonia a "stall" causing fear. Those folk should really consult a free ammonia calculator, pre-armed with a pH reading.
That makes sense and I can understand. Seems like a stall but still just bacteria shift to accommodate the higher nutrient spike. Usually seen in tanks with something that died off that's creating larger than normal levels. Longer it sits the more rapid it will decay. My view anyways or sand bed that went bad from improper care or nutrient sink and spike nitrates more and more or sudden release you happen to test at right time. There is always that one odd instance lol.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
23,228
Reaction score
22,255
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Cycle means you have established enough bacteria to process waste into nitrate. It really has nothing to do with testing. The tests only show the waste products of the bacteria not taken in. It does not truly show anything about whether a tank has truly enough bacteria to process load. Now you could add ammonia, but if everything is in place. You won't see any results even nitrate with good nitrate intake and exportation.
I don't get your comment - if cycled means you have established enough bacteria to produce waste into nitrate, how do you determine that without testing? Since the value of total NH4 should be '0' or close to 0, the presence of any except (as I said) a very small amount that by definition proves that the tank does not have enough bacteria to process the load in the tank. (Note - I'm not talking about testing ammonia after adding 2 ppm or 4 ppm. I'm talking about taking a tank with x fish, and doubling the number of fish in a day. It is rare in a cycled tank to not see 'some' nitrate, as compared to zero - unless the bioload is extremely small
I also don't understand a stall? How does bacteria stall? It is either their and processing or it's not. I think the term closest to stall would be nutrient overload. Meaning, where something changed where the available nutrients became greater than the established bacteria. If there is nutrients to be broken down, the bacteria will populate more to handle then will fall back to normal levels to balance out. Either something died, tank was bombed with food or something was added or done to kill bacteria. Killing bacteria can be done by some additives, treatments or chemical was added on accident or exposed.
I agree with you - the other possibility would be 1) testing error 2) the bacteria (assuming bottled bacteria was used) was not active or was dead.
I have a big issue with how "cycle" is used and it misleads new people right off the bat to chase and force numbers and testing that isn't needed.
Let's use another example. If your tank looks good, and is already established, what is the purpose of testing Ca, PO4, Nitrate, alkalinity? Especially if you've added nothing new and made no changes. The answer is self-evident - that these can change due to use by corals, and other factors. So - even though probably 99% of the tests done by reefers daily, weekly, etc (whatever the schedule) - are going to be 'normal'. I don't think many reefers would recommend merely observing a tank to prove that their parameters are normal. I say this becasue in my experience, corals and fish can tolerate (but not thrive) in many alkalinities, PO4 levels, etc. But eventually the tank can crash. Testing helps prevent surprises.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with testing. Especially with tanks where there is trace element depletion and can't do large water changes.

Maybe I miss interpreted your post and I apologize if I did. I am not against testing. I am against How cycling term is used and tank stall lol. Maybe if you can explain further by what you mean tank stall. I have found that sometimes a term is used differently than I thought.
I think there are many many definitions/causes of 'cycling stall' - and there a lot of very different ways to cycle a tank. Including adding fish and bacteria on day 1. (which is what many bacterial products say is possible). Were I to do that type of cycle - I would definitely be testing the water for ammonia. why? Because the tank and fish will look fine, until levels become too high, and then there is a crash. IMHO, it is imprudent for people to rely on 'visual cues' to determine if a tank is 'cycled'. When there are relatively simple, accurate cheap tests that can be done until it's documented.

I do agree with Brandon - that if a tank has wide open corals, anemones flourishing and fish doing well that at that minute, the tank likely does not have a toxic level of free ammonia.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
23,228
Reaction score
22,255
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
"Stalling" initially was thought to be the cross over point in nutrient availability, causing a bacterial population shift. This shift meant that the previously processed nutrient consumption slowed, as the new bacterial population gained ground. Now, if that's true or not is a different matter. I think some folk have muddied the waters though and call a low ammonia level such as 0.25ppm ammonia a "stall" causing fear. Those folk should really consult a free ammonia calculator, pre-armed with a pH reading.
And a temperature and salinity:).
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
23,228
Reaction score
22,255
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
There is always that one odd instance lol.
Which sums up with I think as well - and which justifies prophylactic testing when perhaps thousands of dollars of rock, etc and potentially fish/inverts are at stake - when setting up a new aquarium.
 

Lasse

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
10,955
Reaction score
30,065
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Cycle means you have established enough bacteria to process waste into nitrate.
I also don't understand a stall?
The classic nitrification cycle include 2 steps - the first when microorganism of different types oxidize NH4/NH3 (total ammonia) into NO2 (nitrite) . Its mostly ammonium oxidizing archaea (AOA) and ammonium oxidizing bacteria (AOB). The most well-known of these AOB is bacteria from the genus nitrosomonas This is normally a rather fast starting process that can take place in oxygen levels down to around 2-3 mg O2/L

The second step - oxidizing NO2 (nitrite) into NO3 (nitrate) is done by Nitrite Oxidizing Bacteria (NOB) and well known is different species from the genus nitrospira and nitrobacter.

Its here the process can go wrong and the complete cycle stalls - NO2 will be accumulated. This second process is known as a slow starter and high NH3/NH4 concentrations can slow down this second step. This step is also more oxygen depended than the first step. In fresh water - it needs a O2 concentration around 5 mg/L in order to work well. Its well documented that this stall often happens both in fresh and saltwater. Especially in new started tanks there PO4 is low or absent - IME

Both AOA, AOB and NOB is normally autotroph bacteria that do not use organic carbon or organic nutrients - they need inorganic carbon, PO4 and inorganic nitrogen like NH4/NO3

In saltwater NO2 is not very acute toxic to fish and other gill breathing animals because the chlorine content in the seawater block the uptake of NO2 ions through the gills. However - new literature has indicated that saltwater fish take up NO2 into the body but not through the chloride cells in the gills but through the mucous layer of the gastrointestinal tract. Instead will the chloride cells in the gills (that in freshwater with chloride content lower than 200 mg/L is responsible for the NO2 uptake) serve as an outgoing active ion "pump" for NO2. If NO2 accumulate in the blood - it will form methaemoglobin that can´t transport oxygen - brown blood disease among fish. Saltwater fish drinks, hence NO2 in the water end up in the gastrointestinal tract - a pathway for NO2 into the body that freshwater fish mostly lack because they do not drink

Because that NO2 not is acute toxic in saltwater many saltwater aquarist thinks that if only the first step works NH3/NH4 -> NO2 - everything its good and that nitrification works well. For me - if I should say that a tank is cycled - it has to have both steps completely functional. IMO - the uptake of NO2 ions in the gastrointestinal tract of saltwater fish is a stress moment adding to all other stressmoment there is in a newly started aquarium. Its also cost energy to get it out from the body through the chloride cells. I personally would not put in fish in a saltwater with know NO2 concentrations over 0.1-0.3 mg/L just because the stress factor. Stress is number 1 reason for many disease outbreak among fish.

The term cycle a tank is normally used for the autotrophic nitrification cycle - the other things mentioned in this thread with nutrient spikes from die off has not with this type of bacteria to do - is normaly done by heterotrophic bacteria and the result is PO4 and NH3/NH4. This NH3/NH4 will partly end up as NO3 later on because of nitrification . NO3 is never, ever a primary nitrogen compound from the breakdown of organic matter - its always a product from nitrification

I do agree with Brandon - that if a tank has wide open corals, anemones flourishing and fish doing well that at that minute, the tank likely does not have a toxic level of free ammonia.
I do not agree with this - there is situations where rather much total ammonia (NH3/NH4) can accumulate in anaerobic pockets of a mature tank, especially if it is feed with organic carbon. If these "pockets" are released in the wrong time (read high pH) toxic events can happens. Especially if the tanks normal nitrification rate is low. I have till now measured total ammonia (NH3/NH4) pocket around 0.9 mg/L in my aquarium. I know this because I measure.

Sincerely Lasse
 

Ben's Pico Reefing

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
1,854
Location
Brevard county
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I don't get your comment - if cycled means you have established enough bacteria to produce waste into nitrate, how do you determine that without testing? Since the value of total NH4 should be '0' or close to 0, the presence of any except (as I said) a very small amount that by definition proves that the tank does not have enough bacteria to process the load in the tank. (Note - I'm not talking about testing ammonia after adding 2 ppm or 4 ppm. I'm talking about taking a tank with x fish, and doubling the number of fish in a day. It is rare in a cycled tank to not see 'some' nitrate, as compared to zero - unless the bioload is extremely small

I agree with you - the other possibility would be 1) testing error 2) the bacteria (assuming bottled bacteria was used) was not active or was dead.

Let's use another example. If your tank looks good, and is already established, what is the purpose of testing Ca, PO4, Nitrate, alkalinity? Especially if you've added nothing new and made no changes. The answer is self-evident - that these can change due to use by corals, and other factors. So - even though probably 99% of the tests done by reefers daily, weekly, etc (whatever the schedule) - are going to be 'normal'. I don't think many reefers would recommend merely observing a tank to prove that their parameters are normal. I say this becasue in my experience, corals and fish can tolerate (but not thrive) in many alkalinities, PO4 levels, etc. But eventually the tank can crash. Testing helps prevent surprises.

I think there are many many definitions/causes of 'cycling stall' - and there a lot of very different ways to cycle a tank. Including adding fish and bacteria on day 1. (which is what many bacterial products say is possible). Were I to do that type of cycle - I would definitely be testing the water for ammonia. why? Because the tank and fish will look fine, until levels become too high, and then there is a crash. IMHO, it is imprudent for people to rely on 'visual cues' to determine if a tank is 'cycled'. When there are relatively simple, accurate cheap tests that can be done until it's documented.

I do agree with Brandon - that if a tank has wide open corals, anemones flourishing and fish doing well that at that minute, the tank likely does not have a toxic level of free ammonia.
Bacteria establishment has nothing to do with testing. Testing is an end result only. Ammonia is the end result of waste breaking down before it is intakes by bacteria to convert to nitrite. High ammonia is caused by a spike in nutrients. When starting a new tank and new dry rock, there is nothing. If left alone you will still get bacteria but very tiny amount. Now I add a small fish. You may not see any ammonia depending on size of tank. But leave it that way for a year no issues. Now I add 20 fish at once. And suddenly I have ammonia. Does this mean my tank was never cycled even though when I tested originally it didn't show anything? It was running for a year. Is my cycle stalled? No. I simply added more bioload than the current bacteria and the bacteria needs to populate. Now say it's been a few days no ammonia or nitrite and fish are good and no nitrate because I have excellent export control. Does this mean because I don't have any nitrate, ammonia or nitrite it isn't cycled yet?

What if say 5 fish die and I didn't notice. I now have ammonia building as the fish rot quicker and quicker. Eventually bacteria can catch-up even as the fish rot faster. Eventually when it reaches nitrate, if again, good export control. I may not notice. But say I have poor nutrient control and I see nitrate spike or test while bacteria is multiplying to handle. Is that a stall? No. The same bacteria is still there and in fact increasing. Testing again only shows the end result of the prior process. Not what is going on. Any of these scenarios can be looked at as Tank not cycled.

Crash usually means a loss in bacteria to keep simple. Unless you add something that will kill all the bacteria. It won't crash. Any ammonia seen will be depleted by bacteria as they further populate.

Testing is a great way to show things are off but not determine if a tank is truly "cycled" nor determine the amount of bacteria.

Testing for trace elements is different than testing for bacteria processing And again, I'm not opposed to any testing. Trace element testing I do recommend for those that don't do 100 percent changes. Even then depending on what you keep. I agree with you on this. Trace elements don't replenish themselves. These should be tested especially in high demand takes. I don't test mine personally because I change out about 100 percent weekly and keep a few LPS corals and not over stocked yet lol. Dosing for trace and replenishing I think go hand in hand in this aspect.

I also agree, many ways to cycle. Some I feel better than others but all can get you there. Unless you are using certain bottle bacteria or live rock/sand testing can be important. But if you add coral first and go slow, you avoid any real testing results. My tank started with just an elegance day one. I slowly added corals and then 2 inverts and then a couple more corals and a tiny fish. I did zero testing. But I went slow.

I don't believe in adding ammonia. Why add something that adds nutrients to tank that isn't needed at that time. This is where I think all lot of back and forth happens. You have one way of cycling due to dosing ammonia to cycle vs adding the bacteria or rock corals that are already established. Neither is wrong to do. I see using bacteria and slowly adding things that feed is a better option. Again, not wrong doing it the other way either dosing ammonia.

Again though with using already established or bacteria that is ready and stocking appropriately, the tests mean nothing and will not show what bacteria is established.

I am sorry for the long reply. I think we have the same ideas on things, just different views on them.
 

Ben's Pico Reefing

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
1,854
Location
Brevard county
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
The classic nitrification cycle include 2 steps - the first when microorganism of different types oxidize NH4/NH3 (total ammonia) into NO2 (nitrite) . Its mostly ammonium oxidizing archaea (AOA) and ammonium oxidizing bacteria (AOB). The most well-known of these AOB is bacteria from the genus nitrosomonas This is normally a rather fast starting process that can take place in oxygen levels down to around 2-3 mg O2/L

The second step - oxidizing NO2 (nitrite) into NO3 (nitrate) is done by Nitrite Oxidizing Bacteria (NOB) and well known is different species from the genus nitrospira and nitrobacter.

Its here the process can go wrong and the complete cycle stalls - NO2 will be accumulated. This second process is known as a slow starter and high NH3/NH4 concentrations can slow down this second step. This step is also more oxygen depended than the first step. In fresh water - it needs a O2 concentration around 5 mg/L in order to work well. Its well documented that this stall often happens both in fresh and saltwater. Especially in new started tanks there PO4 is low or absent - IME

Both AOA, AOB and NOB is normally autotroph bacteria that do not use organic carbon or organic nutrients - they need inorganic carbon, PO4 and inorganic nitrogen like NH4/NO3

In saltwater NO2 is not very acute toxic to fish and other gill breathing animals because the chlorine content in the seawater block the uptake of NO2 ions through the gills. However - new literature has indicated that saltwater fish take up NO2 into the body but not through the chloride cells in the gills but through the mucous layer of the gastrointestinal tract. Instead will the chloride cells in the gills (that in freshwater with chloride content lower than 200 mg/L is responsible for the NO2 uptake) serve as an outgoing active ion "pump" for NO2. If NO2 accumulate in the blood - it will form methaemoglobin that can´t transport oxygen - brown blood disease among fish. Saltwater fish drinks, hence NO2 in the water end up in the gastrointestinal tract - a pathway for NO2 into the body that freshwater fish mostly lack because they do not drink

Because that NO2 not is acute toxic in saltwater many saltwater aquarist thinks that if only the first step works NH3/NH4 -> NO2 - everything its good and that nitrification works well. For me - if I should say that a tank is cycled - it has to have both steps completely functional. IMO - the uptake of NO2 ions in the gastrointestinal tract of saltwater fish is a stress moment adding to all other stressmoment there is in a newly started aquarium. Its also cost energy to get it out from the body through the chloride cells. I personally would not put in fish in a saltwater with know NO2 concentrations over 0.1-0.3 mg/L just because the stress factor. Stress is number 1 reason for many disease outbreak among fish.

The term cycle a tank is normally used for the autotrophic nitrification cycle - the other things mentioned in this thread with nutrient spikes from die off has not with this type of bacteria to do - is normaly done by heterotrophic bacteria and the result is PO4 and NH3/NH4. This NH3/NH4 will partly end up as NO3 later on because of nitrification . NO3 is never, ever a primary nitrogen compound from the breakdown of organic matter - its always a product from nitrification


I do not agree with this - there is situations where rather much total ammonia (NH3/NH4) can accumulate in anaerobic pockets of a mature tank, especially if it is feed with organic carbon. If these "pockets" are released in the wrong time (read high pH) toxic events can happens. Especially if the tanks normal nitrification rate is low. I have till now measured total ammonia (NH3/NH4) pocket around 0.9 mg/L in my aquarium. I know this because I measure.

Sincerely Lasse
You have some great info but it muddies the discussion. We are not talking about fish processing nitrite.

As you stated, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate are all bi products of the prior process which is done by bacteria. Testing does not determine how much of these bacteria are available or what is happening. Testing doesn't even always show whether or not these process are being done. It only shows the after product of it does show.

Stating that nitrite must be low for you to say it is cycled is great. I don't think anyone is arguing that point either and shouldn't. This is your opinion but it's a safe one to go by. In fact zero nitrite is even better.

Now the lack of oxygen needed for certain bacteria to properly process and intake is a great point to make. But there will always be some established bacteria for those as oxygen will never be zero. This would be caused by something failing with equipment. This is a maintenance problem and not a reef problem. If any equipment fails, there will be issues. But you will still have those bacteria.

What you are more discussing is what if failures of equipment where short of a power outage or something extreme, will not happen. This thread is more of skipping a cycle than what if scenarios. If anything fails or happens, it can alter cycling. Cleaning and certain chemicals drop in such as bleach in high dosage or pesticides or even antibacterial cleaning products per say, can kill a cycle no matter how or if you test or not.

Is testing necessary to cycle a tank? No.
Is it possible to skip a cycle? Yes
Does testing help with cycling? No it only shows results of what is available from a prior process that hasnt been absorbed. Does not equal to overall bacteria. People spike tanks all the time when establishing bacteria by adding a high concentration of ammonia. Most use more than what a normal load and tank will see. As we don't see ammonia when tank is established so why add a large amount and wait 24 hours when we should never have to wait 24 hours any other time? Other wise ammonia should always be present in that case.

You have a lot of good information but most is off topic, muddies the conversation, or as you stated an opinion.

A toxic event would mean improper care or maintenance failure. If this ammonia spike happens? Does that mean your tank crashed or wasn't cycled? No. Does it mean your cycle stalled? No.

The info about the bacteria is a good read though. Thank you for that. Diffinetly learned more.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
23,228
Reaction score
22,255
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
@Lasse - thanks - thats why In my post I said - if I look at a tank with wide open corals, fish swimming, happy anemones and invertebrates that 'at that minute' there is no evidence of a high ammonia. But - that could change in an hour if one of the things you correctly mentioned can occur. Which Is why I would support testing in a new tank no matter how it looks at any given moment.


I do not agree with this - there is situations where rather much total ammonia (NH3/NH4) can accumulate in anaerobic pockets of a mature tank, especially if it is feed with organic carbon. If these "pockets" are released in the wrong time (read high pH) toxic events can happens. Especially if the tanks normal nitrification rate is low. I have till now measured total ammonia (NH3/NH4) pocket around 0.9 mg/L in my aquarium. I know this because I measure.

Sincerely Lasse
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
23,228
Reaction score
22,255
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Bacteria establishment has nothing to do with testing. Testing is an end result only. Ammonia is the end result of waste breaking down before it is intakes by bacteria to convert to nitrite. High ammonia is caused by a spike in nutrients. When starting a new tank and new dry rock, there is nothing. If left alone you will still get bacteria but very tiny amount. Now I add a small fish. You may not see any ammonia depending on size of tank. But leave it that way for a year no issues. Now I add 20 fish at once. And suddenly I have ammonia. Does this mean my tank was never cycled even though when I tested originally it didn't show anything? It was running for a year. Is my cycle stalled? No. I simply added more bioload than the current bacteria and the bacteria needs to populate. Now say it's been a few days no ammonia or nitrite and fish are good and no nitrate because I have excellent export control. Does this mean because I don't have any nitrate, ammonia or nitrite it isn't cycled yet?

What if say 5 fish die and I didn't notice. I now have ammonia building as the fish rot quicker and quicker. Eventually bacteria can catch-up even as the fish rot faster. Eventually when it reaches nitrate, if again, good export control. I may not notice. But say I have poor nutrient control and I see nitrate spike or test while bacteria is multiplying to handle. Is that a stall? No. The same bacteria is still there and in fact increasing. Testing again only shows the end result of the prior process. Not what is going on. Any of these scenarios can be looked at as Tank not cycled.

Crash usually means a loss in bacteria to keep simple. Unless you add something that will kill all the bacteria. It won't crash. Any ammonia seen will be depleted by bacteria as they further populate.

Testing is a great way to show things are off but not determine if a tank is truly "cycled" nor determine the amount of bacteria.

Testing for trace elements is different than testing for bacteria processing And again, I'm not opposed to any testing. Trace element testing I do recommend for those that don't do 100 percent changes. Even then depending on what you keep. I agree with you on this. Trace elements don't replenish themselves. These should be tested especially in high demand takes. I don't test mine personally because I change out about 100 percent weekly and keep a few LPS corals and not over stocked yet lol. Dosing for trace and replenishing I think go hand in hand in this aspect.

I also agree, many ways to cycle. Some I feel better than others but all can get you there. Unless you are using certain bottle bacteria or live rock/sand testing can be important. But if you add coral first and go slow, you avoid any real testing results. My tank started with just an elegance day one. I slowly added corals and then 2 inverts and then a couple more corals and a tiny fish. I did zero testing. But I went slow.

I don't believe in adding ammonia. Why add something that adds nutrients to tank that isn't needed at that time. This is where I think all lot of back and forth happens. You have one way of cycling due to dosing ammonia to cycle vs adding the bacteria or rock corals that are already established. Neither is wrong to do. I see using bacteria and slowly adding things that feed is a better option. Again, not wrong doing it the other way either dosing ammonia.

Again though with using already established or bacteria that is ready and stocking appropriately, the tests mean nothing and will not show what bacteria is established.

I am sorry for the long reply. I think we have the same ideas on things, just different views on them.
Bacterial establishment has everything to do with testing. Since - its bacterial establishment that results in ammonia and nitrite falling, nitrate rising and subsequently falling. Testing itself does not alter the process - or at least it doesn't need to - but many protocols exist whereby you add x amount of ammonia to lets say 2-4 ppm, and then test - once it reaches 0 or near 0, you add the same amount of ammonia and see if indeed it is processed. This isn't my protocol, and I'm not defending or criticizing it, however, in many cycling protocols testing is part of the process. So - anyone making a blanket statement about testing IMHO is sending a message which may be misunderstood by (especially newer) reefers.

You happen to like a method closer to what @Lasse recommends - and what I do myself. When starting a tank, I add dry rock, bacteria, and a very small bioload. I have never used an ammonia test except with various experiments I've done and posted on the site here. In fact I just moved 10 or so adult discus from one tank to another 210 to a 72 gallon temporarily - I added bacteria and the fish - which are doing fine. I do not plan on testing ammonia.

You said: 'Crash usually means a loss in bacteria to keep simple. Unless you add something that will kill all the bacteria. It won't crash. Any ammonia seen will be depleted by bacteria as they further populate" - IMHO, A crash is when multiple animals (vertebrates and invertebrates) die off quickly - this can be one fish that dies of something, decomposes, and there is a nutrient spike causing more problems. The aquarist keeps feeding hoping to turn things around - and it gets worse. A Crash is usually due to a toxin (such as an environmental issue or low O2 or potentially ammonia)

You said: "Testing is a great way to show things are off but not determine if a tank is truly "cycled" nor determine the amount of bacteria".

Again it depends on your protocol. But - there are clear definitions of how to tell if a tank is cycled using testing. Because you and I don't necessarily do that testing doesn't mean it's incorrect or unnecessary to do testing. And- yes you could tell if your tank is cycled by adding ammonia and watching it decline - of course, one would not do this with an established tank - this is just an example.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
23,228
Reaction score
22,255
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Now the lack of oxygen needed for certain bacteria to properly process and intake is a great point to make. But there will always be some established bacteria for those as oxygen will never be zero. This would be caused by something failing with equipment. This is a maintenance problem and not a reef problem. If any equipment fails, there will be issues. But you will still have those bacteria.
This I believe is incorrect. there are anaerobic areas in aquaria - and by definition anaerobic means 0 oxygen (or nearly 0). Fish and invertebrates do die with low oxygen levels (take an easy example - someone overfeeds their tank, there is a bacterial bloom, and the oxygen levels drop and everything dies. Those bacteria that bloom are not obligate autotrophs, but rather heterotrophs - which have a much shorter doubling time. Obligate autotrophs do best in a high oxygen area of the tank - and if it drops, their function and multiplication will also drop correspondingly
 

Ben's Pico Reefing

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
1,854
Location
Brevard county
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Bacterial establishment has everything to do with testing. Since - its bacterial establishment that results in ammonia and nitrite falling, nitrate rising and subsequently falling. Testing itself does not alter the process - or at least it doesn't need to - but many protocols exist whereby you add x amount of ammonia to lets say 2-4 ppm, and then test - once it reaches 0 or near 0, you add the same amount of ammonia and see if indeed it is processed. This isn't my protocol, and I'm not defending or criticizing it, however, in many cycling protocols testing is part of the process. So - anyone making a blanket statement about testing IMHO is sending a message which may be misunderstood by (especially newer) reefers.

You happen to like a method closer to what @Lasse recommends - and what I do myself. When starting a tank, I add dry rock, bacteria, and a very small bioload. I have never used an ammonia test except with various experiments I've done and posted on the site here. In fact I just moved 10 or so adult discus from one tank to another 210 to a 72 gallon temporarily - I added bacteria and the fish - which are doing fine. I do not plan on testing ammonia.

You said: 'Crash usually means a loss in bacteria to keep simple. Unless you add something that will kill all the bacteria. It won't crash. Any ammonia seen will be depleted by bacteria as they further populate" - IMHO, A crash is when multiple animals (vertebrates and invertebrates) die off quickly - this can be one fish that dies of something, decomposes, and there is a nutrient spike causing more problems. The aquarist keeps feeding hoping to turn things around - and it gets worse. A Crash is usually due to a toxin (such as an environmental issue or low O2 or potentially ammonia)

You said: "Testing is a great way to show things are off but not determine if a tank is truly "cycled" nor determine the amount of bacteria".

Again it depends on your protocol. But - there are clear definitions of how to tell if a tank is cycled using testing. Because you and I don't necessarily do that testing doesn't mean it's incorrect or unnecessary to do testing. And- yes you could tell if your tank is cycled by adding ammonia and watching it decline - of course, one would not do this with an established tank - this is just an example.
I think we are looking and agreeing on things just not quite connecting lol


Testing can't fully determine result of bacteria. As not seeing it doesn't mean there isn't any of its biproduct, waste what ever you call it is being used up as we see with using already available bacteria such as dry rock or certain bottles. But agree, for those protocols (which we both say can be done) it is needed.

Correct in your assessment of crash and how I usually use. This instance I was trying to speak more of people who state they lost bacteria or see spikes in testing in this thread. But yes normally it is normally caused by die off or other sources (something we did or didn't do).

I stated to show where things are for testing but not quite accurate. Hopefully I clarified above. Lol.

And agree, it is based on protocol and definitely not against testing. Only reaction and understanding what results meant. To many people don't see anything and are cycled but never saw any changes because they used something like fritz or live rock etc. as testing doesn't show the amount of bacteria. We just need bacteria tester that can tell us what type and how many for at home use lol. Then this would be perfect or more in right direction lol.
 

Ben's Pico Reefing

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 23, 2019
Messages
1,212
Reaction score
1,854
Location
Brevard county
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
This I believe is incorrect. there are anaerobic areas in aquaria - and by definition anaerobic means 0 oxygen (or nearly 0). Fish and invertebrates do die with low oxygen levels (take an easy example - someone overfeeds their tank, there is a bacterial bloom, and the oxygen levels drop and everything dies. Those bacteria that bloom are not obligate autotrophs, but rather heterotrophs - which have a much shorter doubling time. Obligate autotrophs do best in a high oxygen area of the tank - and if it drops, their function and multiplication will also drop correspondingly
Right but their numbers won't reach zero. And in cycling we can't determine if we have enough bacteria for the load we want usually. Unless we physically add those bacteria ourselves. I think you clarified for me what @Lasse was trying to state. Even then, always build up slowly with fish. Coral you can almost dump right in and load up but still better to go slow.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
23,228
Reaction score
22,255
Location
Midwest
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Right but their numbers won't reach zero. And in cycling we can't determine if we have enough bacteria for the load we want usually. Unless we physically add those bacteria ourselves.

The way to determine whether the amount necessary (nitrifiers) is whether the non-utilized ammonia is rising in the tank after you've added fish. And the only way to tell that is testing, right (or distressed fish, etc). IMHO - testing will give a 'quicker' answer - giving the reefer time to do water changes etc. BTW - I'm assuming - though I don't know - I assume you're using smaller tanks - and I'm using much larger tanks, so this may be changing our opinions slightly. In general I agree with many of your comments!
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,979
Reaction score
23,848
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
that's not true. I have been determining if a tank can carry fish or not over the internet for twenty years, in other people's reefs. I did not have to know their tests. lemme see a pic, or let me ask three questions and your cycle will be reliable. chances are best I'll be ignoring test kit levels given to me anyway, when I wasn't asking, as a form of distraction in cycle analysis.

testing during reef cycle troubleshoots, relying on others to give me the correct measure, harms my work vs helps it. determining how much green is acceptable in a test tube, with a little green being acceptable but not too much as the threshold, leads to madness in cycling threads we can see

but this thread? pure outcomes. Tight criteria determine which cycles go in here, we aren't accepting the majority of examples here. our entry rules are very restricted.

anyone with a calibrated seneye: please yesterday audit with your machine anything I've typed about reef cycling, quickly report back findings. I'm hungry to be seneye audited. I will report your findings in my threads after determining calibration status with zest.

I'm aware painted rock exists, I got zapped a few times last decade. we stepped up proofing in response, if the rock was wet from a pet store that'll do. there are no instances of it not doing, that's what our patterns show.

if you found an example of a skip cycle attempt that failed in someone else's reef tank post, and linked that here, it would be so on-point.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top