Best Fish to Cycle With
- Nano Build
- Thread starter mfrumkin
- Start date
- Tagged users None
NY_Caveman
likes words, fish and arbitrary statistics
Agreed. If you can get live rock locally you will likely be cycled right away. Still would need to let the tank mature though. Otherwise people use pure Ammonia or a piece of shrimp from the grocery seafood section.
ScottR
Surfing....
Ammonia is extremely toxic for fish and while a damsel can survive the ordeal better than other fish, you are subjecting it to torture. I agree with others. Get Dr Tim’s ammonia. Or a piece of shrimp. Live rock also works (worked for me).
Halal Hotdog
Valuable Member
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2017
- Messages
- 1,493
- Reaction score
- 1,881
To answer your question, mollies can be acclimated to a reef tank and are pretty hardy fish. Some YouTubers have cycled with them, and videos are available. They can also reproduce easily and are peaceful. Ammonia is toxic to all fish, so as stated above, fishless is better.
Smarkow
Valuable Member
We need to get beyond this voodoo concept that all fish based cycling is cruel.
Ammonia is toxic to fish in the same way that CO2 is toxic to humans. It’s all about the concentration in the water. So putting 1-2 small fish into a large enough volume of water is objectively not cruel to the fish, the same way that closing the door to your house is not cruel to your family and pets... assuming they are given proper space.
Those who are particularly concerned should consider adding a bacterial culture product or a piece of liverock from a trusted local reefer or LFS.
If the water volume is very small, maybe in a pico where keeping any fish will be a challenge, then okay fish based cycling may not be an option. However, paying retail price for bottled ammonia is... a tax on the willing? One could drop any small piece of food which will decompose, or just some small flakes of fish food every day, or even just pee in the tank to supply ammonia (not my first choice, but certainly budget friendly).
So the real question for @mfrumkin is what size tank?
Depending on the tank size, any reasonably hardy fish that the OP is willing to care for for the natural course of its life is fine.
Maybe consider choosing a fish which will not be particularly aggressive to future additions? Like a blenny who will also munch on some algae? Clowns are usually good but this is nano thread so maybe OP’s tank will not be big enough? Many Gobies are nice for nanos. Firefish could work but I can’t seem to keep them alive in my established tank for more than 3-6 months so I’m hesitant to recommend them. Some small basslets might work, as would some cardinals... that’s all I can think of trying off hand. Lots of character and color in that list.
Good luck and happy reefing
Ammonia is toxic to fish in the same way that CO2 is toxic to humans. It’s all about the concentration in the water. So putting 1-2 small fish into a large enough volume of water is objectively not cruel to the fish, the same way that closing the door to your house is not cruel to your family and pets... assuming they are given proper space.
Those who are particularly concerned should consider adding a bacterial culture product or a piece of liverock from a trusted local reefer or LFS.
If the water volume is very small, maybe in a pico where keeping any fish will be a challenge, then okay fish based cycling may not be an option. However, paying retail price for bottled ammonia is... a tax on the willing? One could drop any small piece of food which will decompose, or just some small flakes of fish food every day, or even just pee in the tank to supply ammonia (not my first choice, but certainly budget friendly).
So the real question for @mfrumkin is what size tank?
Depending on the tank size, any reasonably hardy fish that the OP is willing to care for for the natural course of its life is fine.
Maybe consider choosing a fish which will not be particularly aggressive to future additions? Like a blenny who will also munch on some algae? Clowns are usually good but this is nano thread so maybe OP’s tank will not be big enough? Many Gobies are nice for nanos. Firefish could work but I can’t seem to keep them alive in my established tank for more than 3-6 months so I’m hesitant to recommend them. Some small basslets might work, as would some cardinals... that’s all I can think of trying off hand. Lots of character and color in that list.
Good luck and happy reefing
Last edited:
Coralreefer1
Valuable Member
Best to use uncured live rock or dump a frozen cocktail shrimp in your tank for the cycle initiation.
If you still want to go the fish route, yes the standard Damsels work, though try to get these nasty fish out of your tank once your cycle is complete. Clown fish, Grouper, Lion fish and Triggers will handle the cycle process.
If you still want to go the fish route, yes the standard Damsels work, though try to get these nasty fish out of your tank once your cycle is complete. Clown fish, Grouper, Lion fish and Triggers will handle the cycle process.
NY_Caveman
likes words, fish and arbitrary statistics
Nice. I love that you were on point and did not pre-judge like the rest of us. Made me think a bit about my answer above. I used Mollies for freshwater several times in the past and they always worked well.
Paul Sands
Active Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2019
- Messages
- 329
- Reaction score
- 402
We need to get beyond this voodoo concept that all fish based cycling is cruel.
Ammonia is toxic to fish in the same way that CO2 is toxic to humans. It’s all about the concentration in the water. So putting 1-2 small fish into a large enough volume of water is objectively not cruel to the fish, the same way that closing the door to your house is not cruel to your family and pets... assuming they are given proper space.
Those who are particularly concerned should consider adding a bacterial culture product or a piece of liverock from a trusted local reefer or LFS.
If the water volume is very small, maybe in a pico where keeping any fish will be a challenge, then okay fish based cycling may not be an option. However, paying retail price for bottled ammonia is... a tax on the willing? One could drop any small piece of food which will decompose, or just some small flakes of fish food every day, or even just pee in the tank to supply ammonia (not my first choice, but certainly budget friendly).
So the real question for @mfrumkin is what size tank?
Depending on the tank size, and reasonably hardy fish that the OP is willing to care for for the natural course of its life is fine.
Maybe consider choosing a fish which will not be particularly aggressive to future additions? Like a blenny who will also munch on some algae? Clowns are usually good but this is nano thread so maybe OP’s tank will not be big enough? Many Gobies are nice for nanos. Firefish could work but I can’t seem to keep them alive in my established tank for more than 3-6 months so I’m hesitant to recommend them. Some small basslets might work, as would some cardinals... that’s all I can think of trying off hand. Lots of character and color in that list.
Good luck and happy reefing
No, We DO NOT need to get beyond this concept that all fish based cycling is cruel. It is cruel and it’s completely unnecessary. A bottle of Dr Tim’s ammonia is $2.79. Anyone with a reef tank can afford that. I threw out more expensive saltwater today doing a water change.
Just curious, do you even know what happens to a saltwater fish that is exposed to ammonia?
We need to get beyond this voodoo concept that all fish based cycling is cruel.
Ammonia is toxic to fish in the same way that CO2 is toxic to humans. It’s all about the concentration in the water. So putting 1-2 small fish into a large enough volume of water is objectively not cruel to the fish, the same way that closing the door to your house is not cruel to your family and pets... assuming they are given proper space.
Those who are particularly concerned should consider adding a bacterial culture product or a piece of liverock from a trusted local reefer or LFS.
If the water volume is very small, maybe in a pico where keeping any fish will be a challenge, then okay fish based cycling may not be an option. However, paying retail price for bottled ammonia is... a tax on the willing? One could drop any small piece of food which will decompose, or just some small flakes of fish food every day, or even just pee in the tank to supply ammonia (not my first choice, but certainly budget friendly).
So the real question for @mfrumkin is what size tank?
Depending on the tank size, and reasonably hardy fish that the OP is willing to care for for the natural course of its life is fine.
Maybe consider choosing a fish which will not be particularly aggressive to future additions? Like a blenny who will also munch on some algae? Clowns are usually good but this is nano thread so maybe OP’s tank will not be big enough? Many Gobies are nice for nanos. Firefish could work but I can’t seem to keep them alive in my established tank for more than 3-6 months so I’m hesitant to recommend them. Some small basslets might work, as would some cardinals... that’s all I can think of trying off hand. Lots of character and color in that list.
Good luck and happy reefing
+ 100
Please see my 15 steps for starting a reef aquarium. It describe a method that´s for sure is not cruel to any fish because it will not give any toxic concentration of NH3 (the toxic form of "ammonia") It is all about feeding regime.
I normaly use clowns but you need a rather well feed healthy fish that not is shy. It needs to be used of being out in the open space I have used this method in tanks down to 20 litre. Never, ever have problems with NH3. Which fish are you planning to have?
Sincerely Lasse
bluprntguy
Well-Known Member
I think the point of your method is to avoid any ammonia build up by dosing bacteria, but that is hardly certain using the method you suggest. I’ve done it more than a few times. Furthermore, you state that there is no need to do any testing using your method. I think this is generally just irresponsible to suggest to new hobbyists. Even if you use bottled bacteria, there is a chance of at least a small ammonia spike at some point. You need to test for ammonia during the initial stage on a regular basis. If you detect ammonia, you need to do a significant water change to correct it if you have fish in the tank. You can’t just do this method and not test.
I have no idea why someone would do this. A bottle of ammonia is practically free and works just as well. It avoids the problem of potentially subjecting living creatures to toxic ammonia/nitrates. Given your comments on other threads about the importance of feeding high quality foods, I’m surprised to see you recommend starving a fish by feeding it once every three days for a month.
You free to post this in the discussing part of my article. I will not answer in this thread because your post is off topic in this thread. But if you repost this in my discussion part of the article - I will gladly discuss it there
Sincerely Lasse
bluprntguy
Well-Known Member
OP asked a question about the best fish to cycle an aquarium with. Honestly, I haven’t seen this question asked in years, because everyone has generally moved to fishless cycling to avoid the potential problems caused by using live animals to “cycle” aquariums. Your “system” makes no mention of testing for ammonia or nitrate, which could create problems for the live animals that might be subjected to those conditions in a new tank. Bottled bacteria are hardly bullet proof methods to prevent ammonia build up in new aquariums.
If you are going to promote your article in a thread, then you should be prepared to answer questions about it in that thread. It’s entirely on topic.
Coralreefer1
Valuable Member
Ammonia is deadly to fish as well as inverts and corals. Ammonia is first taken in from the gills which will turn red and swell. From this gill failure results and ammonia builds up in the fish causing organ failure.
Fish will illustrate labored breathing, will often times hang out at the top or lethargic while laying on the bottom of the tank.
Water changes can help and represents the quickest and easiest way to get ammonia under control
Fish will illustrate labored breathing, will often times hang out at the top or lethargic while laying on the bottom of the tank.
Water changes can help and represents the quickest and easiest way to get ammonia under control
Smarkow
Valuable Member
Okay $2.79, way cheaper than I thought. You do have to buy the bacteria too ($22.46) for his method, but you're right, drop in the bucket in this hobby. And you can always get some live rock (not cheap, but you're buying regular rock anyways and how much of it has to be live? A couple good pounds of high surface area stuff at my LFS is about 7.99 per pound, and caribsea live sand costs about $40 for a 20lb bag, though you'd have to buy dead sand anyways or go bare bottom... it costs what it costs.
But you know what? OP wanted some hardy fish for a simple cycle, and I believe there are a lot of ways to practice this hobby.
So I'll choose to read friendly challenge, curiosity, and camaraderie in your post rather than arrogance and contempt. So with all due respect, sir, I believe I do know a thing or two about whether or not a fish based cycle is "cruel." Let's go to the peer reviewed literature...
After a brief review of the literature, the authors setup two Berlin style systems with deep sand beds and subjected them to various "perturbations," (adding rock, scraping glass, doing water changes, and a couple more minor things). They also included an established control tank (they state it has been up for years, but not how many) and natural seawater control (Bodega Bay, CA as their source water, which they also used for setup and water change). Their "live rock" was cured in a barrel for 2 months with periodic water changes. The authors sampled the bacteria (in triplicate) from the sand, walls, and mid-tank water (often times every day or twice daily) over a 90 day period and subjected samples to genomic identification. They tested a wide variety of water parameters daily during the initial setup and around "perturbations," and at minimum every 5 days otherwise. "Coral Pond 1" (CP-1 in figures) was setup 5 days prior to the second tank, "Coral Pond 2" (CP-2) but all "perturbations" were performed on the same day, thus CP-1 is given a slight head start. As an aside, aren't scientist great at naming things? Although the original paper does not include it, I have obtained this photograph of one of their tanks, below (Circa 2012, so some equipment is older than what we are used to, note the 14k metal halide fixture!?). All photo rights to the study authors. Other than their sumps being above their "displays" and not using traditional glass, please note, these are heavily stocked reef tanks very much in line with hobbyists. They put the corals in right away, not waiting for a completed cycle. The authors do not comment on specific stocking, I have reached out to them to clarify and have asked about any losses.
Their results indicate several points germane to our discussion.
Figure 1 indicates that in both tanks, the initial addition of 2 month cured live rock effectively and nearly immediately cycled the tank (Green doodle), despite the water starting with an ammonia concentration of 0.75 mg/L. In the author's words, "when the aquarium was seeded with live rocks... there was an immediate reduction in ammonia and nitrite levels." Addition of live rock (Sand disturbed?), water changes (presumably some ammonia in Bodega Bay?), and even scraping the aquarium glass produced some ammonia spikes (violet and red), which were promptly removed (my doodles and musings, not theirs).
There is a ton of other info on surprising microbial discoveries made by the authors. Pretty much every time they touched the tank the bacterial populations shifted in ways that were not detectable according to hobby kits, or as they put it, "No correlation between microbial shifts and water chemistry." The authors conclude that reef aquaria have multiple steady states at which they are stable and that microbial populations are highly redundant in terms of role. They also reported new taxa of microbes previously not known in aquaria, and demonstrated that the established microbial populations early in the cycle did not differ significantly from their years old established tank comparison, so a cycled tank is largely a cycled tank. Additionally, CP-1 with the head start on the cycle was not meaningfully different from CP-2.
The authors conclude that, "Our data set provides an overview of community changes over time, including the impacts of aquarium setup, conditioning, and routine tank maintenance such as wall cleaning and water changes. Notably, our results suggest that changes in microbial community composition do not always correlate with water chemistry measurements."
Hopefully what we have established is that 1) small ammonia spikes happen all the time in our tanks, 2) putting some cured live rock effectively cycles a tank in days, and 3) large shifts in aquarium bacterial composition happen beyond the hobbyists ability to detect both spontaneously and whenever we touch out tanks (the authors detected bacteria from the human GI tract in the tank, presumably from the scientists hands).
Let's talk about the ammonia spikes they noted. The authors report a maximum NH4 concentration of 1.0 mg/L, which accounting for pH, temperature, and salinity should get us to ~0.05 mg/L of NH3, the toxic part we care about for our fishies health. I used the "Free Ammonia Calculator" available courtesy of Hamza's Reef. This is right at the most conservative estimate (0.05-0.2 mg/L NH3) of what has been proposed as a "safe" range for "most" marine fishes. (Lemarie ́ G., Dosdat A., Cove `s D., Dutto G., Gasset E. and Person-Le Ruyet, J., Effect of chronic ammonia exposure on growth of European seabass (Dicentrarchus labrax) juveniles. Aquaculture, 229, (2004) 479-491)
There is great flux and shifts in understanding of the relationship between ammonia and marine fishes. I highly recommend the following review articles, which I found fascinating.
In short, we have made many incorrect assumptions about ammonia in marine fishies, most based off of our study of humans with liver failure. Some fishies, and particularly their larva, are very sensitive to even low concentrations of ammonia. Others seem to thrive in high concentrations. Indeed, analogs of proteins on our own red blood cell proteins (the Rh protein which gives our blood a + or - denotation) are theorized to help some fishes with their ammonia transport. Some fish adapt their gills quickly (usually < 3 hours in the species studied) to artificially high ammonia concentrations, while others exhibit gill changes which may not be adaptive. Other fish change their environment around them to make ammonia less toxic (the mudfish decreases seawater pH in its burrow all the way down to 7.0). The long held belief that hyperammonemia leads to fish respiratory distress has come under scrutiny of late, although fish do seem to have an area in their gills analogous to humans' means for responding to high CO2 levels which may affect their respiratory rate in response to ammonia.
Okay but clearly some fish die of ammonia poisoning... for the cruel people doing fish cycles, is one small fish possibly excreting enough ammonia to kill itself? I could only find numbers for the two-banded clownfish, but here goes... "Rates of ammonia excretion by the anemonefish Amphiprion bicinctus varied from a high of 1.84 μmole g−1 h−1 at 2 h after feeding, to a basal rate of 0.50 μmole g−1 h−1 at 24–36 h since the last meal." The authors state adult clownfish in typically weigh 11g and we feed these fish typically once per day, therefore we would expect ~300 micro mol/day of NH3, about 95% of which is converted to NH4 in seawater after leaving the fish, at pH 8.1, 25C, and 35 ppt salinity, so let's say 15 micro mol -> 0.26 mg per day (someone check my math, I assumed that over a 24 hour period there is a gradual decrease from 1.84 to 0.50). So this would depend on tank volume for concentration, and this is an adult clown so I'll go with live aquaria's recommendation for minimum tank size 30 gallons -> 113 liters (a big nano, but still), that gives you 0.26 mg / 113 L -> 0.002 mg/L ammonia per day that the tank has to process when cycling with an adult clownfish in a large nano tank.
(Roopin, Modi, Raymond P. Henry, and Nanette E. Chadwick. "Nutrient transfer in a marine mutualism: patterns of ammonia excretion by anemonefish and uptake by giant sea anemones." Marine Biology 154.3 (2008): 547-556.)
Anyways, I had fun reading and studying this. Learned a ton. And it's entirely possible my math is wrong or I've read the lit wrong, missed something etc. Feel free to correct me.
But bottom line from my review, @mfrumkin can go get whatever dang little fishy he wants and cycle his tank any number of ways. And he'll probably take care of his fish best when he's not branded as *cruel* two weeks after he's joined our community.
Cheers
bluprntguy
Well-Known Member
The OP didn’t indicate that he knows or used this method. His one line question indicates he’s looking for other fish to cycle the tank. Using already cured live rock to avoid the initial cycle or lessen the initial cycle is certainly possible, but there’s absolutely nothing in his post indicating that is what he’s doing. How do you know he didn’t just set up a tank with dry rock and sand?
Again, this assumes that one is starting with already cycled, live rock to help process ammonia. Dead dry rock without bacteria is not going to process ammonia and it will build up. Most people don’t call this “cycling” a tank. It’s using already established, cycled live rock in a new tank to avoid or lessen the initial cycle. Also, you included only fish in your calculation. You didn’t include excess food that inevitably finds its way into the aquarium, which will increase ammonia significantly more than fish. How much will it increase ammonia? I don’t know. It’s your argument and it’s missed a critical issue.
Similar threads
New Posts
-
Virginia Aquarium Controller Testing Drygoods Hydros X10 & IV- Latest: Mac Galinato
-
-
-
-
