Do you have sources for the claim that rocks do not have room to take on more bacteria after cycling? That would certainly be a fascinating read and a game changer in my understanding of marine bacterial colonization.
Can live sand actually allow you to "skip" the cycling process?
- Thread starter duberii
- Start date
- Tagged users None
yes, but you will likely not validate them as only old peer referenced works are accepted
but in the world of practical application, and accountability for claims:
Ill also ask you for links that disprove it. formal or not.
www.reef2reef.com
if you are truly interested in the science of it, mindstream from Daniel our mod tracks a delicate full sandbed removal, billionths ppm ammonia never changes though rocks have to instantly handle all the fish. that's proof. no ramp up occurs post cycle, and if it does we get cloudy water as surfaces hold no more and water shear carries the rest off into suspension.
its not found on google scholar for the exact same reasons pico reef biology is not found on google scholar, and we've got a million picos running by now. things do happen outside the permission or documentation of formal peers.
of course life and death cycles happen and bac numbers fluctuate.
Im saying you cant document with your Hach ammonia meter that it works oppositely than claimed. if you find a way to document that, pls link
Ill expect our sandbed removals to start killing tanks once this rule of surface area mechanics gets undone other than by a post debate.
but in the world of practical application, and accountability for claims:
Ill also ask you for links that disprove it. formal or not.
Official Sand Rinse and Tank Transfer thread
If you are reading this thread to cure a tank invasion from a link I sent you, we do not need to identify your type of invasion here we do not need you to test anything at anytime regarding nitrate, phosphate etc Above all, we do not need to see a microscope slide picture of your invasion at...
www.reef2reef.com
if you are truly interested in the science of it, mindstream from Daniel our mod tracks a delicate full sandbed removal, billionths ppm ammonia never changes though rocks have to instantly handle all the fish. that's proof. no ramp up occurs post cycle, and if it does we get cloudy water as surfaces hold no more and water shear carries the rest off into suspension.
its not found on google scholar for the exact same reasons pico reef biology is not found on google scholar, and we've got a million picos running by now. things do happen outside the permission or documentation of formal peers.
of course life and death cycles happen and bac numbers fluctuate.
Im saying you cant document with your Hach ammonia meter that it works oppositely than claimed. if you find a way to document that, pls link
Ill expect our sandbed removals to start killing tanks once this rule of surface area mechanics gets undone other than by a post debate.
Last edited:
WvAquatics
Valuable Member
No sand won't skip a cycle. It will add nitrates and will shorten the cycle. But alone it will still take a little time. I added Eden flakes and they added 5ppm nitrates. But ammonia didn't drop for 3 days. I then added Dr Tim's one and only and within a week I was processing ammonia in 24 hrs.
I'd invite you to watch this presentation by Richard Rossyes, but you will likely not validate them as only old peer referenced works are accepted
but in the world of practical application, and accountability for claims:
Ill also ask you for links that disprove it. formal or not.
Official Sand Rinse and Tank Transfer thread
If you are reading this thread to cure a tank invasion from a link I sent you, we do not need to identify your type of invasion here we do not need you to test anything at anytime regarding nitrate, phosphate etc Above all, we do not need to see a microscope slide picture of your invasion at...
if you are truly interested in the science of it, mindstream from Daniel our mod tracks a delicate full sandbed removal, billionths ppm ammonia never changes though rocks have to instantly handle all the fish. that's proof. no ramp up occurs post cycle, and if it does we get cloudy water as surfaces hold no more and water shear carries the rest off into suspension.
its not found on google scholar for the exact same reasons pico reef biology is not found on google scholar, and we've got a million picos running by now.
. It might explain why certain members have viewpoints that differ from yours with regard to the scientific method and hierachy of anecdotal reports vs. RCTs or even systematic observation.
nice deflection. I post 33 pages of only tank work, you post a side debate not related to surface area mechanics at all. not one iota mentioned there.
Ive already combed scholar for the info, and items from aquaculturing seem to confirm it (if you would like to check relevant data)
feel free to search and link up disproving references. our tank work over years becomes a fair reference in my opinion, its not luck or we'd be drummed out of town for killing tanks.
water shear and interspace competition and feed rates/export rates affect bac numbers and its dynamic. you dont get extra filtration carrying ability until you add surface area, not more bac
have you noticed there's a work thread of massive effort for most claims made regarding cycle science, and they're specific jobs to the claims?
hunt us down some cycling info. Im relaying what I think the most updated, testable science is on the matter.
Ive already combed scholar for the info, and items from aquaculturing seem to confirm it (if you would like to check relevant data)
feel free to search and link up disproving references. our tank work over years becomes a fair reference in my opinion, its not luck or we'd be drummed out of town for killing tanks.
water shear and interspace competition and feed rates/export rates affect bac numbers and its dynamic. you dont get extra filtration carrying ability until you add surface area, not more bac
have you noticed there's a work thread of massive effort for most claims made regarding cycle science, and they're specific jobs to the claims?
hunt us down some cycling info. Im relaying what I think the most updated, testable science is on the matter.
Last edited:
My intention was not to deflect, but rather to try and invite you to understand things from a different perspective so that we might better communicate and find a common ground. Unfortunately, it seems like we're still speaking two different languages.
I don't want to crowd this thread with an aside, so if you would like to continue the conversation, I'd love to try and understand each other over private messages.
I don't want to crowd this thread with an aside, so if you would like to continue the conversation, I'd love to try and understand each other over private messages.
OP
OP
duberii
Valuable Member
No I love to hear the debate! Please keep it going!
Belgian Anthias
Valuable Member
A new tank is cycled when it has completed the nitrogen and carbon cycles, all other cycles are supposed to have taken place during the nitrogen cycling process. Most essential organisms are supposed to be present after cycling. It will take at least 3 weeks. But a cycled tank is not conditioned for what is coming, the tank is not prepared to support the planned bio-load. This can be done by slowly increasing the food supply after cycling without a skimmer or GAC. Planning a high loaded mixed reef or a VLN coral tank? It makes a difference in conditioning a tank, not for cycling it.
I prefer to use bio-filters and prepare them by feeding the filters marine food as needed ( low protein food from marine origin, frozen food, the food you are planning to give? ), this will increase the remineralization and carrying capacity of the system and prepare the filter bed for what is coming. The protein content of the food source used is determent for the remineralization rate and the C/N ratio. High protein food has a low C/N ratio. A biofilter is easily sized and conditioned to support the needs of a HIHO system or an LNS.
OP
OP
duberii
Valuable Member
I'm curious on how you describe the nutrient spike from adding too much new bioload all at once... Many reefers would agree that you add new livestock you have to go slowly so the bacteria has a chance to catch up. What accounts for that?
OP
OP
duberii
Valuable Member
Would bottled nitrifying bacteria help at all? like Fritz turbo boost?
those dosers are not needed. im out here.
you get nutrients that would cause algae, but not excess ammonia.
in our work thread for sand rinsing, its important to consider how accurate parts per billion ammonia conversion rate is
these api measures that always claim free ammonia work in the tenths ppm, at best, which no reef reaches per seneye cycles. Our entire concept of what bacteria do in a reef tank is based on false measure, up until mindstream and seneye.
with rocks and sand and many fish= parts per billion ammonia conversion rate per minstream in that thread
sand instantly removed, this presents all the fish bioloading now to rocks only, no ramp up, didnt change ppb conversion rate on same tank, because ramp up doesnt occur. the rocks can always take on more bioload immediately because bacteria do not grow to match fish bioloading that's just something forums made up with about fifteen other cycling rules that no Macna convention will ever adhere to.
in one particular thread we have DjCity starving live rock no feed for three years, water only and a glass tank with live rock no feed, and then they instantly passed a cycling test with a spike of ammonia at month 36
also shows that we dont control bacteria like forums say we do.
The more bacteria you add to rocks the less filtration efficiency you get because they compete for resources but can't find extra exposure to wastewater. stacking bacteria in layers ontop doesnt increase surface area, it decreases it
W
if you try and fill in that letter W, which is two V's, with crud or with a bunch of bac it becomes slowly an O, which is less surface area. The more a reef accumulates detritus, which is a result of aging, the less efficient the biofilter becomes not due to lack of bacteria, there's extra now with the mess, its due to clogged W surface area and less contact water exposure. You're dealing in wastewater science in this discussion, Im amazed links arent coming from that domain.
you get nutrients that would cause algae, but not excess ammonia.
in our work thread for sand rinsing, its important to consider how accurate parts per billion ammonia conversion rate is
these api measures that always claim free ammonia work in the tenths ppm, at best, which no reef reaches per seneye cycles. Our entire concept of what bacteria do in a reef tank is based on false measure, up until mindstream and seneye.
with rocks and sand and many fish= parts per billion ammonia conversion rate per minstream in that thread
sand instantly removed, this presents all the fish bioloading now to rocks only, no ramp up, didnt change ppb conversion rate on same tank, because ramp up doesnt occur. the rocks can always take on more bioload immediately because bacteria do not grow to match fish bioloading that's just something forums made up with about fifteen other cycling rules
that no Macna convention will ever adhere to.in one particular thread we have DjCity starving live rock no feed for three years, water only and a glass tank with live rock no feed, and then they instantly passed a cycling test with a spike of ammonia at month 36
also shows that we dont control bacteria like forums say we do.
The more bacteria you add to rocks the less filtration efficiency you get because they compete for resources but can't find extra exposure to wastewater. stacking bacteria in layers ontop doesnt increase surface area, it decreases it
W
if you try and fill in that letter W, which is two V's, with crud or with a bunch of bac it becomes slowly an O, which is less surface area. The more a reef accumulates detritus, which is a result of aging, the less efficient the biofilter becomes not due to lack of bacteria, there's extra now with the mess, its due to clogged W surface area and less contact water exposure. You're dealing in wastewater science in this discussion, Im amazed links arent coming from that domain.
Last edited:
Me personally I would say you can try the live sand and test it within a week and see what your parameters are, And then ghost feed for two days and wait another week and check parameters again.The key is is that every tank doesn’t run the same and doesn’t perform the same. in my personal opinion Patience is the key and trying to cycle a tank faster to me is not patients. let it run its course.
OP
OP
duberii
Valuable Member
How does adding livestock slowly reduce the algae growing nutrients? Is there another type of bacteria that grows to consume them?those dosers are not needed. im out here.
you get nutrients that would cause algae, but not excess ammonia.
in our work thread for sand rinsing, its important to consider how accurate parts per billion ammonia conversion rate is
these api measures that always claim free ammonia work in the tenths ppm, at best, which no reef reaches per seneye cycles. Our entire concept of what bacteria do in a reef tank is based on false measure, up until mindstream and seneye.
with rocks and sand and many fish= parts per billion ammonia conversion rate per minstream in that thread
sand instantly removed, this presents all the fish bioloading now to rocks only, no ramp up, didnt change ppb conversion rate on same tank, because ramp up doesnt occur. the rocks can always take on more bioload immediately because bacteria do not grow to match fish bioloading that's just something forums made up with about fifteen other cycling rules
in one particular thread we have DjCity starving live rock no feed for three years, water only and a glass tank with live rock no feed, and then they instantly passed a cycling test with a spike of ammonia at month 36
also shows that we dont control bacteria like forums say we do.
The more bacteria you add to rocks the less filtration efficiency you get because they compete for resources but can't find extra exposure to wastewater. stacking bacteria in layers ontop doesnt increase surface area, it decreases it
W
if you try and fill in that letter W, which is two V's, with crud or with a bunch of bac it becomes slowly an O, which is less surface area. The more a reef accumulates detritus, which is a result of aging, the less efficient the biofilter becomes not due to lack of bacteria, there's extra now with the mess, its due to clogged W surface area and less contact water exposure. You're dealing in wastewater science in this discussion, Im amazed links arent coming from that domain.
OP
OP
duberii
Valuable Member
During that first week would I just put the sand in with water and nothing else? I do have ammonium chloride that I could add at controlled doses but I could just as easily add in some fish food (which you are saying may be better?), but I'm not sure I completely understand your instructions.
Frans1992
Community Member
I tested already nitrate after one day with live sand. I used 4 dead shrimps, so I think it does work. I didn't test any ammonia and nitrite.
Yep updated testing by taricha shows it works agreed. Since four years ago, testing progress has been made. Bagged live sand wet packed has filter bacteria like what they listed on the label.
Similar threads
