Cycle question.

[brandon429]

You know what I’d love to see here


two or three simple peppermint shrimp added, something delicate to test bioload carry, which you can see in my example threads is never a problem and these aren’t a huge disease vector risk for your tank like fish would be


do you have any practical way to add six bucks of common shrimp to the tank so we can again contrast delicate life form survival against a Red Sea ammonia alert? It would help cycle study science tremendously to have that big picture. As I read my ammonia alert post example thread we clearly see lots of people saying ‘Red Sea is at 2‘ or they’ll say .2 but never post the pic of the test kit. We are getting verbal confirmation of your stated levels but I didn’t press enough for actual pics to be uploaded. Their systems were fully stocked / we got the full tank pictures most of the time and the animals were fine, nobody was reporting the losses and crashes we expect for the whole thread if indeed they were missing ammonia control

it sure would be nice to see that test aspect in your tank. I think delicate shrimp which would never survive 2 ppm ammonia are a great test for your claimed stuck cycle. Its not a mean test because you can clearly see a trend of animals doing just fine in systems where Red Sea says things are not fine. That’s the heart of non digital test kit misreads in my opinion.

 

[brandon429]

Dan, the reason I can’t accept the api example as legitimate is because that’s the same water sample a calibrated seneye shows to be .04: he put a tuned seneye into a packed running nano and benchmarked it at .04 as the baseline, then moved the sensor over to the exact same new cycle reef producing that deep green api reading and still got .04 again and the cycled system was ten days beyond using dr tims cycling bacteria which works same day to reduce ammonia. In my opinion that, combined with near constant perfect bioload carry puts doubt on the cheap test kit, not the microbiology


we need test life put in this tank to get a big picture, since the OP doesn’t have a seneye.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

check this out. this is a common api reading people get in cycling.

all chemists and reefers agree that's a total fail, it's lethal ammonia off the charts.

or is it

this comes from a thread where exactly at the same time, a seneye calibrated on a years old running nano reef shows .04 nh3 and on that sample of cycling water above the seneye was also .04...the sample had met the submersion timeframes and surface area ratios we find in all false stalled cycle threads.

without the seneye, nobody would believe a misread of this magnitude was possible.

Who cares? No one is using an API kit is this thread. Sure, it may be crappy. There's also a broken down car I passed this morning. Does that mean my car is broken too?

"using Red Sea still reads ammonia reads 2,"

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

we need test life put in this tank to get a big picture, since the OP doesn’t have a seneye.

I do not recommend putting organisms into 2 ppm ammonia.

 

[brandon429]

Its not 2ppm ammonia anymore than this was eight:

Ammonia Pegged at 8.0 After 50% Water Change, Nitrate 10ppm, What's is happening!

Okay 2 to 3 days ago everything was fine, normal tank. First sign something was up was my tank got cloudy for about a day, fish seemed lethargic and unwilling to eat. I ran my test and right away I noticed The Ammonia was as high as the test could read, I didn't believe it so I checked my other...

www.reef2reef.com

8.0 stated, several fish alive, normal surface area, same age as this tank, same kit, benthic verification on surface area showing cycled:

Is 0.8ppm ammonia waterchange worthy ATM?

Hi all,my tank reached the end of its cycle give or take a month/month 1/2 ago. I've since added 2 clowns, and a snowflake eel. I've gone though a 40% water change 3 days ago due to a alkalinity issue I wasn't aware of. Used RODI water to complete the change. Anyways, I'm leaving on a 5 day...

www.reef2reef.com

Chemists pick and choose when to believe test kits. No objective measure factors


Here's telling someone the kit was wrong

Is ammonia typical in an established tank?

I regularly stopped testing my water but occasionally out of curiosity I take my water to the fish store to get tested by an AquaSpin. I know I’ve heard mixed things but results seem to be consistent and I know people who swear by them. So for some reason ammonia was measuring at 0.4 and...

www.reef2reef.com

The objective measure is no cycling chart has a 6 week ammonia drop line.

 

[brandon429]

We're never going to advance cycling using these kits, changing when to believe them on any given day. Something objective exists out there, we're searching for what that is, and why animals always do fine.

Nobody here can find a single seneye ever posted at 3 ppm much less 8 on week 6. Changing the kit changes the cycle ump calls, I'm not being closed minded its a trackable issue affecting how we all troubleshoot cycles

Even if my take here isn't agreeable those links show animals just fine, we don't have an example of them not being fine and it's always red sea or api
But never animal symptoms, not ever.

 

[brandon429]

EMERGENCY - ammonia help

im having the most random ammonia spike in my nano 10 gallon, its been setup since beginning of sept 2022, and i added a bubble tip anemone about a week and a half ago its been happy and all has been good until yesterday morning i woke up and it looked as if it had started to melt away and then...

www.reef2reef.com

a new one unfolding. non digital test kit caused.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Well, I'm not comfortable making any assumption that this kit is wrong just because you think other people using other kits did not have issues in measured 2+ ppm ammonia,.

 

[brandon429]

I'm awaiting pics of the fish in question for the thread above, the tank should look completely wrecked if indeed ammonia is .5 after adding biospira and fish.

 

[ReefGeezer]

Reefers Rule #1:
Nothing good happens fast in a reef tank
This is an old rule. Patience is an absolute requirement for establishing and maintaining a healthy reef tank. You will be waiting for something to happen from day one. You will also be tempted, and even prompted by others, to do things to make it happen faster. You must have confidence that what you are waiting for will happen, and have the patience to wait.

That's a nice set-up. That's not some micro-nano tank where you can just scrap everything and start over. Don't get started on the wrong foot by adding life to it too soon. I don't see Brandon's posts anymore but I can't imagine a scenario where I would not agree with @Randy Holmes-Farley that 2 ppm of ammonia as reported by the Red Sea kit is problematic. I don't know how high ammonia was initially driven, but there is evidence that there is or has been some bacterial activity. That would indicate that the cycle is progressing. Waiting, and possibly adding a another dose of bacteria, is all that is required.

 

[brandon429]

ammonia control happens fast in a reef tank (all seneye readings we can find on the internet)

fallow and quarantine does not. I realize new cycling science is never going to be accepted here, all I can do is keep garnering pics of animals doing just fine in claimed damaging water, well after day ten of the leadup, and let that sink in time after time. a tank picture of living animals is a very objective measure in my opinion.

symptomless ammonia burning is part and parcel of old cycling science. In the disease forum, in quarantine setups that lack surface area, and # of days running in prep oftentimes, ammonia burning is never symptomless and there are pics aplenty of the symptoms we can see.

we are redirecting cyclers away from disease preps and keeping a 30 year hyperfocus on ammonia, which does not happen when digital kits are the measure. that's the pattern on file anyone can search, it's not me making it up.

shrimp added here won't die, 2 clowns added here won't die, because that's always how it goes down when red sea is the gauge.

 

[brandon429]

New Tank Cycling Question

I have a new 10g saltwater aquarium. This was upgraded from a 2.5g tank after realizing that it was way to difficult to take care of. I was instructed to use new water (RO/DI) and new sand, so that's what I did. I was told to add 1 cup of old sand into the new aquarium and dose the tank with a...

www.reef2reef.com

Team, I found someone to test 2 ppm ammonia with life in it. track the thread for outcome. we're at day 4 on normal clowns, roasting in ammonia as claimed by api here:

thats exactly as bad as the op's claimed red sea reading here, only now we get to benchmark api on life carry


this tank had benthic cue markers that OP here did not have, that was an extra reassurance for us above in the example post (there are no uncycled reef tanks blanketed by any matted invader, those order in after aob)

the impact here is that even with two cycle closes in place, benthic cues + longer than day ten after adding a common bottle bac a non digital test kit still says 2 ppm and could easily, easily stay that way until april

new cycling science says those asymptomatic fish can't be on day four in cook water. symptomatology surpasses both red sea and api

*I sure would like to know what makes red sea and api misread to this level that's for sure. he recently moved things around in the tank, perhaps it's upwelling of waste particles

perhaps some legitimate low level ammonia spikes massively when combined with some other adulterant...I don't know


but what I do know is that's the four millionth online posting of a stuck cycle that carries fish which exhibit no symptoms for ammonia burning whatsoever. I also know that no calibrated seneye post uploaded to the web as old as this tank in question shows anything but safe ammonia, which coincides with the lack of symptoms.

all Im getting in the patterning is that red sea and api are literally lying all the time unless handled by a master chemist who by training or natural procedure skill knows how to prevent issues.

 

[brandon429]

@Dan_P

is it possible there that inherently lucky pH levels are protecting his fish, preventing ammonia from burning or causing symptoms

there is going to be a number of days before that dark green goes to .25, does this mean a brand new nano reef not using any form of direct pH controls keeps getting lucky every day, no flux happens day/night that would make that much ammonia killer?

 

[Garf]

@Dan_P

is it possible there that inherently lucky pH levels are protecting his fish, preventing ammonia from burning or causing symptoms

there is going to be a number of days before that darn green goes to .25, does this mean a brand new nano reef not using any form of direct pH controls keeps getting lucky every day, no flux happens day/night that would make that much ammonia killer?

PH matters with ammonia toxicity, that’s a current fact. From previous posts I’ve read on here, seneye is really bad with pH. I Don’t own one though to be able to subjectively check it out, do you?

 

[Dan_P]

@Dan_P

is it possible there that inherently lucky pH levels are protecting his fish, preventing ammonia from burning or causing symptoms

there is going to be a number of days before that dark green goes to .25, does this mean a brand new nano reef not using any form of direct pH controls keeps getting lucky every day, no flux happens day/night that would make that much ammonia killer?

I think pH may have saved some fish in new aquaria. It certainly does during shipping.

 

[brandon429]

It's fair to say it saves them in all new aquariums all the time owing to the fact not anyone reading can link us a mere ten ammonia- caused animal loss threads in bottle bac cycles, among literally more than a million logged cycles online. It's either a very reliable pH constant all tanks inherently assume or the test kits will be eventually in question factored against lack of symptoms

At least there is a plausible mechanism to explain the non symptoms even if the ammonia is backed up and takes ten more days to resolve


I would gladly accept five recent ammonia verified cycle loss threads, ten was unreasonable request

 

[brandon429]

we need a replicate test tank setup with the same rocks and sand and approx water volume, no bottle bac nor cycling attempt at all, and two clowns + anemone + daily feeding immediately upon setup to verify the performance of bacteria in these setups

if pH is the protector that will neutralize the need for bottle bac purchases just like it did for Prime

 

[Dan_P]

It's fair to say it saves them in all new aquariums all the time owing to the fact not anyone reading can link us a mere ten ammonia- caused animal loss threads in bottle bac cycles, among literally more than a million logged cycles online. It's either a very reliable pH constant all tanks inherently assume or the test kits will be eventually in question factored against lack of symptoms

At least there is a plausible mechanism to explain the non symptoms even if the ammonia is backed up and takes ten more days to resolve


I would gladly accept five recent ammonia verified cycle loss threads, ten was unreasonable request

Interesting thought. I wonder what the pH of a typical new aquarium is, before a pH meter is bought and the new aquarist reads about the importance of pH 8.

 

[brandon429]

Dan I thought about this phenomena this weekend and it made me wonder why we can't find ammonia toxicity post patterns from people subdivided among ph controlled setup copies (one person living in a large home vs many people, electrical heating, no gas, no pets, opens windows routinely) and those setups not prone to control (family of 6 plus pets heavy visitor traffic small home no open window habits, gas heated)

there is literally no loss pattern at all in cycle attempts even for the clear group who are likely to express nh3 in the arrangement. I'm not sure it's fair to claim inherent pH rescue for a million cyclers when in fact it's the surface area, timing, bioload ratio and bacteria sourcing they're copying and we don't find losses in either type of ph-extreme home.

I'm sensing clues to constant ammonia control not constant pH control.


we don't have to do anything to align someone's cycle bioload carry ability by day ten, but we have sixteen tuning mechanisms for people to use to keep pH within a decent range...

I just asked to see video of ammonia burning events in the disease forum, where low surface area qt is constant, it's the #1 place we'd be likely to see actual nh3 burning/nobody has any examples.

the thing we've been taught to shore up the most needed the least shoring for cost it seems, honestly it seems like that. then I factor in the seneye posts you and I have seen over the years, that pattern is ammonia control vs noncontrol and it's specific to ammonia vs pH expression

New Tank Cycling Question

If we can get a nice clear shot of the tank it’ll really shore up your cycle position for sure

www.reef2reef.com

today's updates on the test tank with video

 

[Dan_P]

Dan I thought about this phenomena this weekend and it made me wonder why we can't find ammonia toxicity post patterns from people subdivided among ph controlled setup copies (one person living in a large home vs many people, electrical heating, no gas, no pets, opens windows routinely) and those setups not prone to control (family of 6 plus pets heavy visitor traffic small home no open window habits, gas heated)

there is literally no loss pattern at all in cycle attempts even for the clear group who are likely to express nh3 in the arrangement. I'm not sure it's fair to claim inherent pH rescue for a million cyclers when in fact it's the surface area, timing, bioload ratio and bacteria sourcing they're copying and we don't find losses in either type of ph-extreme home.

I'm sensing clues to constant ammonia control not constant pH control.


we don't have to do anything to align someone's cycle bioload carry ability by day ten, but we have sixteen tuning mechanisms for people to use to keep pH within a decent range...

I just asked to see video of ammonia burning events in the disease forum, where low surface area qt is constant, it's the #1 place we'd be likely to see actual nh3 burning/nobody has any examples.

the thing we've been taught to shore up the most needed the least shoring for cost it seems, honestly it seems like that. then I factor in the seneye posts you and I have seen over the years, that pattern is ammonia control vs noncontrol and it's specific to ammonia vs pH expression

New Tank Cycling Question

If we can get a nice clear shot of the tank it’ll really shore up your cycle position for sure

www.reef2reef.com

today's updates on the test tank with video

Yeah, ammonia control could be the practice that makes new aquarium start ups successful. We have to admit though that there are some backstops that help those with less control of their ammonia or rate of adding fish. The pH is one of those backstops.

Fish don’t drop dead with a little free ammonia and the average aquarist might not notice slight gill burn. Maybe fish can handle some gill burn. So, this is a couple more backstops that makes more start ups successful.

The thing that makes start ups look successful is the fog of posting. Unless we systematically interview folks who discuss their new aquarium or issues they are having, we really don’t know what the heck is really going on. We end up filling in the missing data with our own narrative. This is a false backstop that makes it look like more startups are successful than the actual number. Call it success inflation.

There are holes in our hobby’s knowledge base, and not coincidentally, these are the areas that seem to generate the most popular posts on R2R.