Instant Tank Cycle

[MnFish1]

I literally did this a month ago and saw 20% reduction in free ammonia in 24 hours on day 27. Can you link me to original article? I saw what I saw but would be interested in reading more about it. I would rather not get drawn into the personal attacks or anything just want to read the article.

Here is the article - I believe you wanted. Either I'm getting senile - or I no longer can find the list of articles. Hope this is what you wanted

Establishing a Healthy Microbiome in a New Aquarium Using Live Rock

Studying the effects of live rock in a newly established aquarium shows that high-quality live rock promotes the rapid establishment of an effective biological filter and a microbial community similar to those found in mature reef tanks.

www.reef2reef.com

 

[brandon429]

I like how Eli uses group A and B rocks
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/the-microbiology-of-reef-tank-cycling.214618/
in the end we had different endpoint findings. I’m certain that all examples of a stalled or incomplete cycle comes from bacteria salesmen and api/Red Sea owners, the same owners who post using those kits that ammonia isn’t controlled in a five year old reef if the tests claimed it in our false ammonia alert thread.


we were directly told by Eli that visual cycling, the point of this thread, wasn’t valid.


No reef tank cycle has stalled, they all met the proper completion date relative to boosters used and none took past 30 days to complete for the very common starting bioload of two clowns plus a bottle of bacteria known to skip cycle.

 

[MnFish1]

I like how Eli uses group A and B rocks in his work, seems familiar from works we posted six years ago
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/the-microbiology-of-reef-tank-cycling.214618/
but in the end we have different endpoint findings. I’m certain that all examples of a stalled or incomplete cycle comes from bacteria salesmen and api/Red Sea owners, the same owners who post using those kits that ammonia isn’t controlled in a five year old reef if the tests claimed it.

No reef tank cycle has stalled, they all met the proper completion date relative to boosters used and none took past 30 days to complete. That’s the honest findings I can relay from works on file. I’ll always assume a sales motivation accounts for the lions share of claims that cycling can’t work exactly as we’ve shown it to work.

No one is claiming that 'cycling' cant work exactly as you've shown it to work, Are they?

Here are a couple of specific questions:

1. If I add bacteria (which costs $20 or so) and I add rock, fish, filtration, heat, flow, etc - can I do it more quickly than waiting for 30 days? (I think yes - for sure)

2. If I start with a sterile tank, add nothing and wait 30 days could I add the same number of fish that I added to tank #1 above, without any problem (I think possibly - but probably - no)? depending on the bioload.

3. If I start with a tank at day 0 - lets say a 100 gallon - and add 2 clown fish, and some sterile sand - will those clown fish do fine ? I think they will.

Now - I would like to see the 'threads' as well as your personal opinion that address all of those questions.

From what I've read, the main thesis you have is that you can take live rock from one tank - or nature, add it to a tank - and it will be cycled without all the testing (I agree). Another thesis is that if fish, corals, etc etc look good, there is no need to fret over ammonia testing (I agree with that as well)

 

[Lasse]

I literally did this a month ago and saw 20% reduction in free ammonia in 24 hours on day 27. Can you link me to original article? I saw what I saw but would be interested in reading more about it. I would rather not get drawn into the personal attacks or anything just want to read the article.

What did you use in order to measure free ammonia - senye? What was the pH? Before day 27 and after? Did you have an aeration going on (or skimmer). Do you mean NH3 with the term free ammonia?

Sincerely Lasse

 

[ReefGeezer]

I really need to stop reading these posts. Same old thing. Cycling a tank is simple, can be done a bunch of different ways, and can be done quickly and robustly via several methods. Whether testing is required probably is a matter of choice.

 

[brandon429]

Fairly said. my main description of cycling is that they're timely vs varying, and that the sellers of things have all the good timing down and the buyers of things are trained for variation, and fear of insufficient bacteria, because that's highly beneficial in a doubt based market. I feel a bit past the actual mechanics of making a reef tank ready for use and now into motivation assessment.


Just to save monotony: find one place on the internet that says there isn't an example available of a failed reef tank cycle attempt. what you have is a bunch of ready tanks misreporting on cheap test kits and about 90% are in spec as they're posting stalled, they're not considering the TAN estimates which are directly in the directions safe zone.

the failed reef tank cycle is hype, its not true, its a lark. That claim is new information for us to log, and I'm including fish-in cycles where folks buy legit cycling bottle bac and add it, then get excoriated by friends for 'harming' their fish in dry rock starts. Because seneye exists to give the masses some detail, we can see fish-in cycles aren't harming fish just the same. ammonia had no problem getting controlled in anyone's cycle, fish disease import is what kills fish in all posts...that and hardware failures.

the direct hint of all cycling articles and works ever posted by phD's is that the consequence for not following step is a failed cycle, burns to fish, and loss. So lets see one single example ever logged on any forum, any decade as a thread post.

 

[MnFish1]

the direct hint of all cycling articles and works ever posted by phD's is that the consequence for not following step is a failed cycle, burns to fish, and loss. So lets see one single example ever logged on any forum, any decade as a thread post.

pHD's run bacteria in a bottle companies or at least they are well researched I assume when they are made. Many of them say 'add fish on day 1'. Many people do this and have done this -you can look at my build-thread - I've described multiple times how I 'did it'. Using DRY ROCK, and bacteria. And fish on day 1. So you seem to be starting your discussion - with a false/untrue premise. Many people use rapid cycling methods with great success. @Lasse I believe has stated that he uses fish to cycle - with low density and feeding - especially at first.

I.e when you suggest that the method you suggest is not widely used over and over - its not a true argument - lots of people use it...

I do have a problem when you suggest that you can take a 100 gallon tank with sterile everything - and then add a full bioload after 30 days because 'the tank is cycled'. I disagree with this opinion of yours - and I doubt that there are many threads with these parameters. The key word here being a full bioload for 100 gallon tank, not a single clownfish and a frag the size of a little finger.

 

[Lasse]

@Lasse I believe has stated that he uses fish to cycle - with low density and feeding - especially at first.

Yes here 2.5 years ago in english - the original in Swedish 2017. And here is the method first described by an actual case 2006

Still see windmills

Sincerely Lasse

 

[brandon429]

Why no links of actual reef tanks Lasse

have you worked with any that wasn’t your own tank?

 

[Lasse]

have you worked with any that wasn’t your own tank?

Is working at two public aquarium since 2001 enough for you? Is construction and start of 4 recirculated indoors fish farms enough for you? Is working in 3 different LFS since 1980 enough for you? Daily leader for an experimental waste water aquaculture between 1993 - 2001 with emphasis too optimize nitrification among other things enough for you? Publicized in reviewed scientific papers both as major and co writer with emphasis on nitrification as an key factor for indoor waste water fish farms enough for you? Doing more than three studies and reports on filtration (read nitrification) in different fish farms enough for you? Including field work with measurements of ammonia, nitrite and nitrate with no hobby equipments. Probably have I take 10 000 plus measurements of nitrite, nitrate and ammonia with good equipments during my lifetime - is that enough for you?

Still working - at the age of 71 - in a rebuilding of a public aquarium with emphasis on water chemistry and automation enough for you?

Please come back if this is not enough for you. I can fill up another page with things I have done for others - and get paid for - connected to water chemistry

The ugly truth is that all my knowledge about nitrification have I done with system own by others - both in fresh and saltwater systems. This I have translated to my own system and knowledge. And I have done all this with my own hands - not read what others have done and put my own theories on other works.

As we say in Sweden - stick och göm dig

And I see many windmills - they need to be defeated - just saddle your donkey.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Here you can see some of our 12 reef tanks (between 1500 - 4000 L) at my present job. all started 1.5 years ago according to the same principles i have write about - is that enough for you?



More windmills below the horizon

Sincerely Lasse

 

[brandon429]

nice reefs, was looking for cycle verification links like we’ve been doing

Ammonia

i think ammonia is a much worse offender than nitrite. nitrite is less harmful but still no good imo. Nitrite is not a concern and is not worth measuring, unless one is trying to determine if a nitrate reading may be falsified by nitrite being present. Concerns about nitrite are a carryover...

www.reef2reef.com

that is a nice example of work cycling friends and I do on a daily basis

just about all cycles we troubleshoot using updated science get the same outcomes. as soon as his rocks were seen with a golden sheen, his cycle was deemed ready and you can see he made use of it too




the part where new cycling science played a role and differs from the rules you type was no concern over nitrite and fitting to this very thread, his cycle was deemed ready off visual benthic clues.




one thing you described in cycling Lasse in prior posts that I do relay and was impressed by was when you mentioned how the actual feed given to new fish setups can be more of a tax than the actual new fish. I use some of your recommends too, but not ever the nitrite ones lol it’s just my way that works and I think it saves people concern and unneeded expenditure. We name specific start dates in my cycles, everyone else tells the poster to just wait longer.

Forum posters are trained buyers who keep the sales machine going for unneeded bottle bac sales, I’m against any form of cycling that implies an inconsistent start date for aquarists….if marine conventions can pull off a timely start to sell us things out of reefs that never stall, then consumers can seize that same technique in order to reduce expenditures and reef stronger


this whole thread has examples of folks considering buying bottle bac for a tank already able to begin.

I think links provided from Neon and MSteven1 show that cycles can self- set in without feeding directly from us or bottle bac addition, you seemed to agree in Neons post link yesterday, so the disagreement seems lesser now.

 

[brandon429]

Build Thread - My SPS Waterbox Peninsula Mini 15

Beautiful build and scape!

www.reef2reef.com

Team

does that count as an unassisted cycle we can track out to completion


how does that reef square with what aquabiomics tested @taricha


Eli said in his article that in one month, dry rocks had no bacteria


how long did it take to support an anemone there

even if the feeding aspect boosts it above a totally unassisted cycle, where’s the info for even this ability at one month? I’m seeing the opposite claim, that without using live rock and or bottle bac, we can’t earn a biofilter in a month. That’s a nice reef above.

 

[taricha]

I literally did this a month ago and saw 20% reduction in free ammonia in 24 hours on day 27. Can you link me to original article? I saw what I saw but would be interested in reading more about it. I would rather not get drawn into the personal attacks or anything just want to read the article.

Here's a difference between aquabiomics and what you likely did...

"
set up two identical tanks with each type of rock, and arranged these randomly on each shelving unit. I filled each tank with sterile-filtered (0.2 µm) UV-sterilized artificial seawater (NeoMarine - Brightwell Aquatics) prepared at 35 ppt using RODI water. In addition to the rocks, I added 4 lbs of dry aragonite sand to each tank.

Throughout the process, I was careful to control the microbial community introduced into each tank. For this reason, I sterilized tanks, equipment, sand, and dry rocks (but of course not live rock!) using bleach or hydrogen peroxide. While setting up, maintaining, and sampling these tanks, I sterilized my hands with bleach to minimize cross-contamination."

But I think this part is even more key...
"For the next month I continued to measure water chemistry and sample for microbiome testing, leaving the lights off to avoid algal growth during this period."

Did your tank circulate in the dark for the month? Or was it lit / in a lit room?

The reason I think that may be more important than the specific differences in sterile techniques, is that there are very few organisms that can actually nitrify - oxidize ammonia to NO2/NO3, but uncountably many that can take up ammonia photosynthetically.
Maybe literally 1000's of times more species of organisms that can process ammonia photosynthetically than chemoautotrophically.

 

[brandon429]

They can move a lot for having not formed visual biomass though, algal turf scrubbing has to be harvested and copious but no visible mass harvest once runs a bioload plus feed? It’s at least a fair concern over the ratios at play between plant and moneran…in my opinion it’s an excellent potential but these home assemblies keep cycling when using rules nobody would advocate. MSteven1 did not shine light, the 60 day bringup here

Bacteria in a bottle, Myth or Fact

Did the online calc indicate to use one mil in the tank for your gallonage

www.reef2reef.com

what stood out to me in the capture was where he sterilized above, truly missed that part prior. Nobody else would do that, it eliminates the vectors therefore it does not represent home condition cycling?


if anything, wanting to be done at thirty days may not be as well as waiting sixty clearly is

wanted to establish there is a timeline and it’s practical, plus free. Not only is the information omitted from all written cycling training for reefs, people produce non home setting examples to reflect on home setting cycling that buyers will be doing.

 

[taricha]

Team

does that count as an unassisted cycle we can track out to completion


how does that reef square with what aquabiomics tested @taricha


Eli said in his article that in one month, dry rocks had no bacteria

I'll note some maybe relevant things here...

Since I can't even get my tank wet for maybe 3 more weeks, I've decided to cook my rocks in a brute and get the nitrogen cycle started. Since I'm using dead "live" rock from my previous build I believe there is nothing on it do die off. It's been sitting dry for 6 years. That said, I will run it for 2 days and do a NH3 test to see if there is any die off. If not, I will start to ghost feed.

Formerly live rock. dry for 6 years. What lurks there? nothing? We'll come back to that.

About a week into the brute cycling, a clear NH3 smell existed but API tests never showed a big spike. Now roughly 17 days later, I am stuck at the famous API .25/.5ppm color. Not much for NO2, and impossible to tell colorwise for NO3 but I think it's about 5.

Smell of decomposing flakes is heterotroph activity. Low - to undetectable ammonia could mean that the Flake is high carbs/protein ratio or it could mean that there is heterotrophic nitrification, converting some ammonia to NO3.

Meanwhile, I ghost feed daily a pinch of yummy reef flakes.

The raising of NO3 gives me confidence that I am where I need to go or be.

I'm only checking NO3 right now and it's a bit higher than I'd like (~20 to 25ppm w/ Salifert prior to water change). I think it's high from just processing all of that uneaten food.

I wish there weren't a switch from one NO3 kit to another. Guessing color is hard enough without kit switching, but I will accept that the NO2/NO3 is increasing - real nitrification. Likely heterotrophic nitrification using the carbon from fish flake.

My cycle only consisted of using old live rock (as good as dead but w/ perhaps some die off) and ghost feeding. No bottles of anything whatsoever.

Could there have been some traditional chemoautotroph nitrifiers in the deep interstices of the rock that held on in not fully dried biofilms? maybe not impossible, but that would be small, slow (if they are deep in the rock) and they couldn't keep the ammonia low during the rapid initial decomposing fish flake. More likely is that heterotrophic denitrifiers are doing the workd here. Some maybe from spores in the old rock. They form endospores and can stay viable until food comes to the rescue. It's not as unlikely as it sounds and seems a good fit for the data.

how long did it take to support an anemone there

even if the feeding aspect boosts it above a totally unassisted cycle, where’s the info for even this ability at one month? I’m seeing the opposite claim, that without using live rock and or bottle bac, we can’t earn a biofilter in a month. That’s a nice reef above.

Well, the bubble tip anemone is photosynthetic, so it'd probably be fine on day 1.

Like I've said, I measure nitrification within 30 days from any amount, even a drop of established tank water added to a new sample with food. So if you said 30 days after saltwater + addition of any material from an established system + food, then yeah. I'd agree. cycling happens in some form.

 

[Garf]

I'll note some maybe relevant things here...


Formerly live rock. dry for 6 years. What lurks there? nothing? We'll come back to that.


Smell of decomposing flakes is heterotroph activity. Low - to undetectable ammonia could mean that the Flake is high carbs/protein ratio or it could mean that there is heterotrophic nitrification, converting some ammonia to NO3.






I wish there weren't a switch from one NO3 kit to another. Guessing color is hard enough without kit switching, but I will accept that the NO2/NO3 is increasing - real nitrification. Likely heterotrophic nitrification using the carbon from fish flake.




Could there have been some traditional chemoautotroph nitrifiers in the deep interstices of the rock that held on in not fully dried biofilms? maybe not impossible, but that would be small, slow (if they are deep in the rock) and they couldn't keep the ammonia low during the rapid initial decomposing fish flake. More likely is that heterotrophic denitrifiers are doing the workd here. Some maybe from spores in the old rock. They form endospores and can stay viable until food comes to the rescue. It's not as unlikely as it sounds and seems a good fit for the data.



Well, the bubble tip anemone is photosynthetic, so it'd probably be fine on day 1.

Like I've said, I measure nitrification within 30 days from any amount, even a drop of established tank water added to a new sample with food. So if you said 30 days after saltwater + addition of any material from an established system + food, then yeah. I'd agree. cycling happens in some form.

I’ve had some live rock in the garage totally dry for 6 months, then decided to drill it to make a natural frag rack. It was still soaking wet internally.

 

[brandon429]

Taricha your summaries never disappoint they illuminate and also your ID of the isopod was spot on per app pics, rock on lol

 

[howaboutme]

I'll note some maybe relevant things here...


Formerly live rock. dry for 6 years. What lurks there? nothing? We'll come back to that.


Smell of decomposing flakes is heterotroph activity. Low - to undetectable ammonia could mean that the Flake is high carbs/protein ratio or it could mean that there is heterotrophic nitrification, converting some ammonia to NO3.






I wish there weren't a switch from one NO3 kit to another. Guessing color is hard enough without kit switching, but I will accept that the NO2/NO3 is increasing - real nitrification. Likely heterotrophic nitrification using the carbon from fish flake.




Could there have been some traditional chemoautotroph nitrifiers in the deep interstices of the rock that held on in not fully dried biofilms? maybe not impossible, but that would be small, slow (if they are deep in the rock) and they couldn't keep the ammonia low during the rapid initial decomposing fish flake. More likely is that heterotrophic denitrifiers are doing the workd here. Some maybe from spores in the old rock. They form endospores and can stay viable until food comes to the rescue. It's not as unlikely as it sounds and seems a good fit for the data.



Well, the bubble tip anemone is photosynthetic, so it'd probably be fine on day 1.

Like I've said, I measure nitrification within 30 days from any amount, even a drop of established tank water added to a new sample with food. So if you said 30 days after saltwater + addition of any material from an established system + food, then yeah. I'd agree. cycling happens in some form.

I don't dispute any of this. Thanks.

1 thing regarding anemones. Do people really think the "wait 6 months to a year" is so your tank can mature? No! It's so you, the reefer, can learn how to take care of your tank. Yes, anemones can go into a tank day 1.

 

[Lasse]

I´ll say it before and I will say it again - you cant say that a nitrification cycle is complete before you have establish that the second step nitrite to nitrate is following seamless after the initial step NH4/NH3 -> NO2

Heterotrophic bacteria that assimilates NH3/NH4 can be the reason in howaboutme´s case for the declining NH3/NH4 in the same way that thriving corallines can be the reason for NH3/NH4 decline in many of Brandon´s case. They take upp NH3/NH4 as an building block - not in order to use the energy differences between NH3/NH4 and NO2.

There is IMO only two cases there you can be sure that the nitrification cycle is established or not. You follow the nitrite measurements - note the top and wait for a decline in nitrite concentration. When nitrite is down to around 0.005 mg/L (after a peak) just confirm with a NO3 reading that show some concentrations. This method is good to use in the cases there you start with a given amount of NH3/NH4. Be aware that in 100 % conversion 1 mg/L NH3/NH4 will be around 2,6 mg/L NO2 and around 3.4 mg/L NO3

Because most hobby tests (if not all for the moment) build their analyzes by converting NO3 into NO2 and after that measure NO2 - to only use NO3 as an analyzing parameter will be worthles before the second step is working well. NO2 in the water will affect (in most cases) the NO3 result with between 50 to 100 times. It means if you read 5 mg/L NO3 and 0.05 mg/L NO3 with some brands - all of your detected "NO3" in reality is NO2 already present in the sample

The other method that is useful to establish a working nitrification is to add ammonia in very low amounts daily. It could be done with help of a fish. Its NH3/NH4 production is directly proportionally to the feeding ratio and with a low feed that slowly rise during time you can more or less establish both nitrification step simultaneous. (with a little lag because the second step can´t start before the first step at least have produce a small amount of it waste NO2) I have describe this in my 15 steps.

In both cases - to seed with already established cultures of AOO and NOO will speed up the process. Especially the NOO is slow in growth - many time a doubling time of more than 13 hours. AOO (Ammonia oxidizing organism - mostly archaea (AOA)) NOO (Nitrite oxidizing organism - mostly bacteria (NOB)) Seed could be bottled nitrifying organisms, living sand, living rock, sludge from established aquariums, soil or whatever that naturally contain this organisms.

IMO - the very large mistake Brandon is doing is that he mix together the term completed nitrifying cycle with a aquarium water that not kill fish. The nitrifying cycle is a scientific term that´s is defined - to manage a organisms to stay alive in a glass vase can be done in many ways - there the defined nitrification cycle is one way - although the most important in the long run at least in Fish Only and in the start before an ammonia consuming coral population is established in the aquarium. By the way - it would be a good thing to know if the fauna of nitrifying microorganisms differ between a fish only and a heavy coral populated reef aquarium- - something for @AquaBiomics to investigate?

Sincerely Lasse