Effects of tap water on Nitrifying during Rip-Clean method: Experiment

[MnFish1]

Seems like something we can come up with fairly easily. I believe that in general society the term rip clean or ripped clean is used to describe an extreme event or action.

When associating that term with reef keeping and more directly cleaning a reef system, I think it's fair to define a rip clean as the act of doing an extreme or complete clean of the reef. How does that sound to everyone?

Similar to other popular words we use in this hobby such as aquarium or even fish, who both have multiple definitions or uses, so would the term rip clean.

Whether that rip clean involves the use of fresh water, or salt water, or peroxide, or any other substance to clean the contents is not of consequence and can be detailed in their description of which type of rip clean they are doing.

From there I think anyone with an ounce of common sense can decide whether or not a rip clean applies to what they are doing. Obviously the person who took a few rocks out of their large reef and did what ever they did to them does not qualify as a reef rip clean, as much as the organisms who once occupied those specific rocks might disagree. It would more appropriately be called a rock rip clean.

The experiment was based on an example of a 'rip clean'. There is no definition of 'rip clean'. If you want to make one up - great. But - there are many many examples of 'rip cleans' - and many of them do not match each other. I will agree with you - its unfortunate - that the term 'rip clean' was used in the title of the OP. This was discussed pages ago. The fact, though, is - there is no definition - based on the links that were posted by 'the expert in rip-cleaning' himself.

1. A rip clean does not work with 1 lb rock /gallon. (Then posted an example with 3/4 lbs rock/gallon).
2. A rip clean that was called successful - that used hot water, and allowed rocks to dry. Sand was washed for hours with fresh tap water. That 'rip clean' was called a success. But - in this experiment - it was changed to being 'too extreme'.

I'm not being mean here - there are literally multiple examples posted here and elsewhere - that are 'rip cleans'. So - frankly it doesn't matter - maybe you didnt read it - the conclusion was that this experiment was not meeting one person's definition of 'rip clean' (at this moment) - we can only guess whether that definition will change with the next experiment.

 

[Coxey81]

Also, I would like to point out I never agreed "we" use saltwater 99.9% of the time... cause I would have no idea.

The whole point of this was to see what happens if you used tap water.

 

[ApoIsland]

The experiment was based on an example of a 'rip clean'. There is no definition of 'rip clean'. If you want to make one up - great. But - there are many many examples of 'rip cleans' - and many of them do not match each other. I will agree with you - its unfortunate - that the term 'rip clean' was used in the title of the OP. This was discussed pages ago. The fact, though, is - there is no definition - based on the links that were posted by 'the expert in rip-cleaning' himself.

1. A rip clean does not work with 1 lb rock /gallon. (Then posted an example with 3/4 lbs rock/gallon).
2. A rip clean that was called successful - that used hot water, and allowed rocks to dry. Sand was washed for hours with fresh tap water. That 'rip clean' was called a success. But - in this experiment - it was changed to being 'too extreme'.

I'm not being mean here - there are literally multiple examples posted here and elsewhere - that are 'rip cleans'. So - frankly it doesn't matter - maybe you didnt read it - the conclusion was that this experiment was not meeting one person's definition of 'rip clean' (at this moment) - we can only guess whether that definition will change with the next experiment.

Thanks for summarizing. And yes you are correct, I read the first couple posts and then occasionally catch up with a page now and then. I don't think I have ever commented on a thread before close to this long.

While I do disagree with using the term rip clean for this, I do love the experiment and effort from the OP, and did learn a couple things.

I had always used fresh water to rinse my sand but never considered using it for rocks as I was afraid of killing the beneficial bacteria. Appears I do not need to worry about that as long as I am not totally submerging the rocks for longer periods of time. That will make the process much easier the next time I have to move the tank and decide to give things a good cleaning.

So cheers to that!!!

 

[Coxey81]

Some are still alive!

Taken ~ 20 hours after rinse and redose of .75ml (3ppm)

NO3 - 2ppm

 

[Coxey81]

Thanks for summarizing. And yes you are correct, I read the first couple posts and then occasionally catch up with a page now and then. I don't think I have ever commented on a thread before close to this long.

While I do disagree with using the term rip clean for this, I do love the experiment and effort from the OP, and did learn a couple things.

I had always used fresh water to rinse my sand but never considered using it for rocks as I was afraid of killing the beneficial bacteria. Appears I do not need to worry about that as long as I am not totally submerging the rocks for longer periods of time. That will make the process much easier the next time I have to move the tank and decide to give things a good cleaning.

So cheers to that!!!

I'd keep following... mine aren't looking to hot after my rinse. Almost no ammonia processed. At least not compared to before.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Some are still alive!

Taken ~ 20 hours after rinse and redose of .75ml (3ppm)

NO3 - 2ppm

I had a funny feeling that the 100% water change may be causing a bigger impact than the rinse. I think I’ve mentioned that earlier in the discussion. Did you rinse the rock on day zero or was just a straight transfer from the sump?

 

[Coxey81]

I had a funny feeling that the 100% water change may be causing a bigger impact than the rinse. I think I’ve mentioned that earlier in the discussion. Did you rinse the rock on day zero or was just a straight transfer from the sump?

Straight transfer from the sump into new water.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Straight transfer from the sump

@MnFish1 may support my anecdote theory but I believe you will be worst than your first test. Reason be since I’ve performed this test I got a funny feeling that the brushing/rinse the rock removes a lot of bacteria from the rock surface. Plus all the extra floating bacteria from the water and glass being eliminated. All you got left IMO is what is inside the rock, being quite dense may not be as much.
@MnFish1 ive tagged you because I’ve read that you broke AquaBiomics records wend you stirred the surface of the rock before collecting a sample to post. This may support this theory and if correct you will be far worst for the bacteria that been clean away from your system not necessarily because the rinse killed any bacteria on the rock.

 

[MnFish1]

@MnFish1 may support my anecdote theory but I believe you will be worst than your first test. Reason be since I’ve performed this test I got a funny feeling that the brushing/rinse the rock removes a lot of bacteria from the rock surface. Plus all the extra floating bacteria from the water and glass being eliminated. All you got left IMO is what is inside the rock, being quite dense may not be as much.
@MnFish1 ive tagged you because I’ve read that you broke AquaBiomics records wend you stirred the surface of the rock before collecting a sample to post. This may support this theory and if correct you will be far worst for the bacteria that been clean away from your system not necessarily because the rinse killed any bacteria on the rock.

Yes - I agree. completely. Which - may explain why 'rip cleans' work. and should not be surprising. 1. Not a lot of ammonia load is being processed by the sand itself - as compared to the rock. So - rinsing it a million times won't make a difference, and 2. There are other things in the tank (lighted) that process ammonia - the bloom you saw in your tank was actually very very interesting and telling - that heterotrophs were exploding - as compared to nitrifiers. 3). Many/most of the threads of 'rip cleans' - are small tanks - with minimal bioloads - and IF (and I plan to do this experiment as well) - 1) Complete Step 1 of the experiment. 2) Do step 2 (hard rinse, etc) with the following change - add ammonia only very slowly - .1 ppm (total) on day 1, .2 ppm on day 2, .4 on day 3, .8 on day 4 , .16 on day 5, etc - you would never see any ammonia spike. By the way this experiment would require a control - that being - dry rock only - with the same ammonia added - and for that one - it might be best to use a measured amount of substrate in 2 tanks.

 

[sixty_reefer]

Yes - I agree. completely. Which - may explain why 'rip cleans' work. and should not be surprising. 1. Not a lot of ammonia load is being processed by the sand itself - as compared to the rock. So - rinsing it a million times won't make a difference, and 2. There are other things in the tank (lighted) that process ammonia - the bloom you saw in your tank was actually very very interesting and telling - that heterotrophs were exploding - as compared to nitrifiers. 3). Many/most of the threads of 'rip cleans' - are small tanks - with minimal bioloads - and IF (and I plan to do this experiment as well) - 1) Complete Step 1 of the experiment. 2) Do step 2 (hard rinse, etc) with the following change - add ammonia only very slowly - .1 ppm (total) on day 1, .2 ppm on day 2, .4 on day 3, .8 on day 4 , .16 on day 5, etc - you would never see any ammonia spike. By the way this experiment would require a control - that being - dry rock only - with the same ammonia added - and for that one - it might be best to use a measured amount of substrate in 2 tanks.

Yes would definitely be good to have a control something I tough from the begging just not possible in my case and coxey I believe. It’s cool you decided to contribute I expect big things coming from you

 

[Coxey81]

Taken 23.5 hours after rinse .75ml dose.
(3ppm)

NH4+ NH3 = off scale. But I would put it somewhere between 2.5 and 3 ppm.

 

[brandon429]

Coxey, I thought you were dismissive of initial recommendations I made to get a fair test, only to agree with them by page 30 anyway

as I fielded insult after insult trying to align what you’re measuring with the jobs we label as rip clean.

I asked Sixty once if his water was cloudy after dosing ammonia, no big deal if we aren’t speaking I can get visual confirmation patterns off several posts other than this one. The last few pages I tried to chill, no doubt by page 68 someone else will enjoy starting negativity again vs simply providing on track insight or counter experiments, how about just chill and keep seeing how long Red Sea takes to get to bone zero after these tests that’s presenting good boundary patterns to show us what bacteria tolerate. Next time, consider listening to alignment recommendations sooner— you’ll arrive at said results by page eight or so.

 

[brandon429]

From this point on——-> simply post about this experiment

everyone had aired their laundry, let’s watch the finals. soon we will know what extreme tap rinsing does inside or outside the boundaries of filter bac tolerance


folks, take ur mad switch and un flip it, this is an aquarium forum. Back on track, can we get fifteen or so folks simply watching for measurement updates it’s what I’m interested in seeing

to show sincerity I’ll not respond to the next thirteen angry callouts, Im simply watching for test updates and timing per challenge


I appreciate your work you do in cycling posts LRT if you were my neighbor I’d mow way past the middle strip to save you yard effort for a long time. You’ll have to accept a gracias from across the way

 

[Coxey81]

Coxey, I thought you were dismissive of initial recommendations I made to get a fair test, only to agree with them by page 30 anyway

as I fielded insult after insult trying to align what you’re measuring with the jobs we label as rip clean.

I asked Sixty once if his water was cloudy after dosing ammonia, no big deal if we aren’t speaking I can get visual confirmation patterns off several posts other than this one. The last few pages I tried to chill, no doubt by page 68 someone else will enjoy starting negativity again vs simply providing on track insight or counter experiments, how about just chill and keep seeing how long Red Sea takes to get to bone zero after these tests that’s presenting good boundary patterns to show us what bacteria tolerate. Next time, consider listening to alignment recommendations sooner— you’ll arrive at said results by page eight or so.

I'm sorry, what realignment did I take from others that you suggested?

 

[brandon429]

I learned from this thread the bacteria are tougher than I had originally thought they’d be. I never knew till this thread Jedi’s tap rinse was in hot water, it’s literally the first time I’ve seen that aspect tested



the filter bac are tougher in their insulating films moreso than I thought they could be. I thought Coxey did well in using Red Sea and positioning it to show changes. My initial skepticism was unfounded, the rocks passed to a degree I didn’t think they could.

 

[Coxey81]

I learned from this thread the bacteria are tougher than I had originally thought they’d be. I never knew till this thread Jedi’s tap rinse was in hot water, it’s literally the first time I’ve seen that aspect tested the bac are tougher in their insulating films moreso than I thought they could be.

Jeez man, we didn't even end up using hot tap water.

 

[Coxey81]

I learned from this thread the bacteria are tougher than I had originally thought they’d be. I never knew till this thread Jedi’s tap rinse was in hot water, it’s literally the first time I’ve seen that aspect tested



the filter bac are tougher in their insulating films moreso than I thought they could be. I thought Coxey did well in using Red Sea and positioning it to show changes. My initial skepticism was unfounded, the rocks passed to a degree I didn’t think they could.

Plus, if you haven't been paying attention.. which you obviously haven't.

Right now it looks like over 80 percent of my bacteria died.

 

[MnFish1]

Plus, if you haven't been paying attention.. which you obviously haven't.

Right now it looks like over 80 percent of my bacteria died.

I would also try to think of any possible confounding factors. in addition to the rinse.

 

[Garf]

Plus, if you haven't been paying attention.. which you obviously haven't.

Right now it looks like over 80 percent of my bacteria died.

Lol. At least it was only a few spare rocks. Could have been worse. Good work @Coxey81

I wonder if the scrubbing had more to do with the bacterial devastation your finding, rather than the freshwater. @Sixty showed a 50% drop, but didn’t get back to substrate and he showed a rapid bounce back. Your rocks were all substrate to start with.

Hope your up for a “grow back and scrub in saltwater test”

 

[sixty_reefer]

Plus, if you haven't been paying attention.. which you obviously haven't.

Right now it looks like over 80 percent of my bacteria died.

I would use the therm 80% lost of filtration capacity, at this point as we don’t know yet if any bacteria actually died.