No nitrite or nitrate during cycle- week 3

[spikedangles]

I am cycling a 10g tank to be used for frags. I have a Jebao pp4 for flow, a heater, thermometer and about 3 pounds of dry rock.

I started initially with a shrimp from the store but it started to stink up my room something awful. I took that out after about a week and the ammonia was at 5ppm. I did a 2 gallon water change and added aquavitro Seed bacteria per the instructions for 7 days.

I then had ammonia above 8ppm and did another small water change bc I heard of the ammonia was too high, it would take longer for the cycle to be completed.

I added a small amount of mysis shrimp to ghost feed the tank. The ammonia remained around 2ppm for four days untill it shot back up to 8ppm and I did a 2 gallon water change.

I added half a bottle of friz zyme9 bacteria and continued to measure ammonia. Same process, ammonia around 2ppm for a few days then it shot up above 8- 2 gallons water change.

It has been 3 days since the water change and my ammonia is at 2ppm, 0 nitrite and 0 nitrate still. I added a small amount of mysis shrimp to ghost feed again.

I feel like I should have measurable nitrite by now. The wave maker is on full blast and there is surface agitation for oxygen.


Any insight about this? What can I do to speed up the process? What I might be doing wrong?

The ultimate question-

Can you really have too much ammonia during the cycle?

 

[FlyinBryan]

First stop doing water changes. Second, to cut down on smell, and that's part of he process, just add a nylon bag of carbon, that will help.
Put the shrimp back in and walk away from your tank for about a month or more and don't touch it.
10 g for frags is going to be really tough to keep stable. Couldn't go bigger on tank or parents wouldn't let you have bigger?

Here's was my readings last week

And then 5 days later.

Trust me, the whole first floor stunk bad! Added a sock and carbon and it cleaned up nice.

 

[spikedangles]

So the too much ammonia thing was BS. I will use another shrimp. I live in a 1 bedroom apartment so a 10g frag and 10g QT takes up a lot of real estate as it is. I intend to use the frag tank as a coral QT primarily if that makes a difference. Did you use a bacteria additive to get those results in 5 days?

 

[Reef man 89]

What I did instead of add a piece of shrimp. So my house wouldn't stink. I used pure ammoina and bio Spria and my 40g cycled in about 3 weeks . With dosing pure ammoina you can control how much you dose and don't have to smell a rotten shrimp.

 

[spikedangles]

I read that you shouldn't use carbon when cycling. Is this also false?

 

[FlyinBryan]

I read that you shouldn't use carbon when cycling. Is this also false?

It's fine, it's not interrupting the cycle it's just helping to control the smell. It's not like GFO or any other ammonia reducing product.

 

[Tokash23]

So the too much ammonia thing was BS. I will use another shrimp. I live in a 1 bedroom apartment so a 10g frag and 10g QT takes up a lot of real estate as it is. I intend to use the frag tank as a coral QT primarily if that makes a difference. Did you use a bacteria additive to get those results in 5 days?

Dont believe its BS i have read on here a couple times before that too much ammonia can slow down the reproduction of the beneficial bacteria. I was in the same boat with my 40g i used a bottle of bacteria (smart start i believe it was called) and was cycled in about a week.

 

[brandon429]

I kicked up a cycling thread approaching 7 pages of collections of tanks out in the beginners forum


that thread has some tank rework examples that risk recycling and losing people's tanks if the microbiology was wrong...when $$ is on the line it makes for good reading.

so far in that thread we listed only three things that will harm your bacteria: true drying, temp extremes so bad no home aquarium will see them even in hardware errors, and medication events. While raw ammonia can hinder and stop a cycle it takes levels far higher than a shrimp w provide, rot on if you like. Even raw ammonia would have to be dosed, and sustained, to massive levels before that fell into the category of a medication event.

Raw ammonia is much cleaner and controllable.

Lastly from that thread, don't bother with nitrate and nitrite testing you'll enjoy cycling so much more. only what ammonia does after 30 days underwater matters in stamping a cycle closed. if you have a three week goal that's easily met in dr tims method we can see.

 

[Best Fish-Jake]

It is still important to have 0 detectacble nitrite prior to adding livestock.. I would also reccomend testing nitrate prior to adding livestock and make sure you're below 40 ppm. Otherwise +1 to @brandon429

 

[brandon429]

the only reason we advise against testing for nitrite at anytime in reefing is due to the number of ways the tests can be skewed for false positives. since its not a harmful metabolite we never cared even if some was present. lastly, lots of people have lingering nitrite at the end of 30 days even though they're cycled...they may have spiked ammonia using inaccurate tests (higher levels than we advise and also doing it more than twice in a cycling setup) and the leftover metabolites will not show after a water change and a normal bioload. The nitrite they read at day 40 seems to indicate a stalled cycle though cycles cannot stall...testing errors come along with nitrite testing

Nitrite testing causes more harm than good when you factor in hundreds of testers and cycling threads... we show ammonia only cycling as the way to go. Its not that accurate testing for nitrite is bad, when its done right nitrite 100% follows what ammonia does in the cycled reef tank.


https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/the-microbiology-of-reef-tank-cycling.214618/


we list why you might not see nitrate in the cycled tank as well. Def an ok thing to test for, so that you don't start adding fish to a system already at 100 ppm nitrate agreed. nitrate testing is handy for algae tuning though we do not need to measure it to cycle a tank.

 

[Brew12]

I read that you shouldn't use carbon when cycling. Is this also false?

You shouldn't have any problems using carbon when cycling.

Dont believe its BS i have read on here a couple times before that too much ammonia can slow down the reproduction of the beneficial bacteria.

I would suggest you read some of Dr Tim Hovanec's papers. He is the inventor of Biospira and Dr Tims One and Only. His research has shown that different AOB's process ammonia based on the concentration of ammonia available. This is the basis for his recommendations of dosing to 2ppm. In our aquariums, we want a healthy population of AOB's that work at low concentrations of ammonia. At levels above 5ppm the desirable AOB's start shutting down and are replaced by AOB's that thrive on the higher concentrations. At levels above 10ppm the desirable AOB's go close to dormant.
One sign that a person cycled their tank at too high of an ammonia level is when they can quickly go from 5ppm to 2ppm but then start to stall around 0.5ppm and can stay there for days or longer.

 

[brandon429]

I disagree with that though

We don't have anything skewing results after 40 days underwater and any form of boosting the cycle. I have seen links to what he wrote, its just not impacting us turning out tank after tank after tank fully cycled using only three ways to stymie bacteria: desiccation, temp extremes and medication events. I have never seen a stalled cycle tank that was verified. Ive seen ten thousand api ones


**being able to clear out a water column of all kinds of mixed metabolites after randomly spiking ammonia or using inaccurate testers to set the ammonia levels isn't indicating a stalled cycle in my take, and that's what everyone bases a stalled cycle on (0/0/0)

I claim you can take any form of boost-assisted tank, then change out all that mess at 40 days, then refill, and you'll be able to digest 1 or 2 ppm as we expect. Starting with a clean assessment palette is another way we corral cycles into compliance in our thread. we don't allow reporting at 40 days using the mixed approaches people use + the dirty water column. that clean fresh start helps to align so many cycles, and even if they spike to 9 ppm somewhere along the way, at that 40 day mark + water change I show the bacteria to still be there and active for a normal bioload oxidation test.

Fritz zyme has a page on nitrifier bullet points that comes up on google and I also differ with that take; its my opinion since they sell the bac, they shouldn't comment on how often we need to be replacing these naturally tolernant organisms. that page makes it seem like the slightest salinity or temp impact w retroscale the nitrifiers.

I think they use context incorrectly in a lot of what they write when sales is part of the resource. They state what single extracted nitrifier cells or colonies might do on a cold slide vs real world comparisons where everything is shielded in biofilms and has opposite tolerances, all my opinion of course. * so while I agree its possible to cite peer reviewed stuff for the limitation claims, when you factor that in context of a reef and not isolated colony tests that alone is enough to change outcomes.

We should start having true stalled cycle tanks in our threads if there is an ammonia threshold or a nitrite threshold within reason that w truly kill bacteria. most people are using API to make ammonia addition decisions, and interpretations of those tests range massively. the masses are ballparking ammonia in most cases. Nobody's nitrite will get to concerning levels if they'll use accurate and verified ammonia testing once or twice in a 30-40 day event cycle and stay under 2ppm.

 

[Brew12]

I disagree with that though

It raises a flag for me when someone disagrees with peer reviewed science based on anecdotal evidence.

its just not impacting us turning out tank after tank after tank fully cycled using only three ways to stymie bacteria: desiccation, temp extremes and medication events.

I have helped several people on here who have had cycling issues because of oxidation so no, those aren't the only 3 ways to stymie bacteria.

I have never seen a stalled cycle tank that was verified. Ive seen ten thousand api ones

What testing did you do that showed the tank hadn't stalled at a lower ammonia while the proper bacteria were propagating? How can you be so sure that they are all caused by bad test kits?

I would point out that we see this on the other end of the spectrum, also. People who have high ammonia and add bottle after bottle of bacteria products with no results. We often think that the bacteria product went bad but it is very likely that these products just contain the wrong strains of AOB's to process ammonia at those high levels. As soon as the ammonia drops, the AOB's added by the bottles take over the cycle quickly finishes.

Fritz zyme has a page on nitrifier bullet points that comes up on google and I also differ with that take; its my opinion since they sell the bac, they shouldn't comment on how often we need to be replacing these naturally tolernant organisms. that page makes it seem like the slightest salinity or temp impact w retroscale the nitrifiers.

I do agree with this.

I think they use context incorrectly in a lot of what they write when sales is part of the resource. They state what single extracted nitrifier cells or colonies might do on a cold slide vs real world comparisons where everything is shielded in biofilms and has opposite tolerances, all my opinion of course.

I suggest you read this. Dr Tim was involved in this prior to developing his own product, so no sales involved.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC93373/

I think you are missing the point of the high PPM ammonia and issues it causes with cycling. The issue is that the wrong bacteria are becoming dominant. Biofilm and bacterial tolerance don't come into play.

 

[dankreef]

Im not sure why no one is telling him to just put one cured rock and 6 gallons of established water in his tank and skip everything? GL

 

[brandon429]

agreed dank, I skip cycle, taking that option is nice. only the purplest quality live rock is the look I want so that's how it is from day 1 for my tanks.

Brew it is fun to hash out microbiology that's for sure... keeps evolution going in how we practice. Its a big leap at times to make peer links apply to aquarium work and its variables so I learned long ago to take them with a grain of salt> you can't believe the ones out there that claim pico reefs are impossible due to chemical allelopathy and various mechanisms, we used to get them en masse posting about tiny tanks back in the day.

im not working against the link authors, im working against the link wielders for proper context


There is an ammonia toxicity and nitrite toxicity or suppression level in microbiology, but the real context is a guy with three rotting shrimps wont reach it, even in a nano.

the smell w drive them back to research and by the time they make changes, the sustainment level required for ld50 will be unmet and the bacteria housed in protective biofilms will just proceed as if no insult.


maybe they dosed prime without telling us... and then have been posting constant .5 nitrite>then we post up a link saying what happens in high nitrite settings though the article writers weren't using api + prime to generate the readings.








Most people aren't haphazardly dumping raw ammonia into tanks to reach the level of toxicity you paint as a real risk in reef cycling, in my opinion. even when they begin a tank with a random ammonia input, unverified, it doesn't have the effects you are able to cite due to context and controls not happening from the postverse.



cyclers are always looking for a reason to accept an unverified test reading as accurate in spite of threads showing oppositely, and we found in our real world cycling thread that we didn't have to concern about anything after day 40 and a good water change. If they used boosters, even too much of one or both, I still keep finding compliant tank after tank.

 

[Brew12]

agreed dank, I skip cycle, taking that option is nice. only the purplest quality live rock is the look I want so that's how it is from day 1 for my tanks.

Brew it is fun to hash out microbiology that's for sure... keeps evolution going in how we practice. Its a big leap to make peer links apply to aquarium work though so I learned long ago to take them with a grain of salt> you can't believe the ones out there that claim pico reefs are impossible due to chemical allelopathy and various mechanisms, we used to get them en masse posting about tiny tanks back in the day. Now the waters are all quiet.

im not working against the link authors, im working against the link wielders for proper context

It becomes easy to say someone is discounting scholarly science but over the years Ive learned to battle that solely in the outcomes of other peoples tanks, when an average tank cycler's arrangement starts making tanks not cycled by day 40, we'll update our anecdotal list.

There is an ammonia toxicity and nitrite toxicity or suppression level in microbiology, but the real context is a guy with three rotting shrimps wont reach it, even in a nano. the smell w drive them back to research and by the time they make changes, the sustainment level required for those ppm will be unmet and the bacteria housed in protective biofilms will just proceed. by day 40 and a resetting water change/new oxidation test, we'll see the same nitrification measures across tanks. or, we'll update the three conditions an aquarist might encounter that would truly retroscale their filtration abilities.

I recall the thousands of posts about test variation, and interpretation, and I take all people's initial cycling params with a grain of salt. just because they posted constant .25 doesnt mean it happened.

maybe they dosed prime without telling us, and then have been posting constant .5 nitrite>

it never ends, the adulteration possibilities. we had to get something more concrete than testing to make cycles comply.



In a cycling thread, everyone accepts someone's posted .25 or .5 as gold but its not the case in the noncycling postverse and in many times we can see fill levels not matching the tubes or perhaps the known shaking of reagent X wasn't done correctly, yet major decisions are being made off unverified trace amounts of supposed metabolite from new reef testers.

I need to go back and re read how those peer reviewed articles were measuring their ammonia, was it API? In order to make a peer reviewed article, they're automatically using better methods than us and to me that starts to change up the impacts.

more contextual reasons we don't rely on peer review to take full control over what reef aquariums do.

Most people aren't haphazardly dumping raw ammonia into tanks to reach the level of toxicity you paint as a real risk in reef cycling, in my opinion. even when they begin a tank with a random ammonia input, unverified, it doesn't have the effects you are able to cite, due to context and controls not happening.

Readers come up with a litany of situations that will affect their tank bacteria...that fear promulgates all these algae issues we see decade after decade because they don't feel empowered to simply force clean the tank.

cyclers are always looking for a reason to accept an unverified test reading as accurate, in spite of threads showing oppositely, and we found in our real world cycling thread that we didn't have to concern about anything after day 40 and a good water change. If they used boosters, even too much of one or both, I still keep finding compliant tank after tank.

Theres no way to rectify that with scholarly links, and they didn't support pico reefing either.

Much of testing done in the paper I linked was done at ammonia levels between 5ppm and 10ppm so I would say it is relevant to a reef tank and cycling since we commonly see those levels by people using the shrimp method, especially in smaller systems. We actually see the results of this on a regular basis. If a tank could drop from 8ppm to 4ppm in 2 days then it should drop from 0.5ppm to 0ppm in under 12 hours. This is rarely what happens unless people have added bacteria products. What we do see is that ammonia drops rapidly from higher concentrations and starts to slow at lower concentrations. This paper explains why. It also explains why adding bacteria in a bottle rarely works when people add them to a system with high ammonia. It's not that the bacteria are dead, the ones in the bottle just don't work well in high ammonia concentration environments.

The simplest way to put it is that while a tank will cycle from 20ppm ammonia and eventually be ready for fish the majority of the AOB produced during that portion of the cycle will be worthless once ammonia drops below 1ppm. It is more efficient to keep ammonia under 5ppm during the cycle since the AOB produced are the ones you will rely on for long term tank health.

We agree on much of the aspects of cycling. From a practical application standpoint I completely agree with you. I just know many people don't want to wait 40 days to complete their cycle. 40 days is more than enough time to develop multiple strains of AOB's so the concentration of ammonia doesn't matter nearly as much. For people trying to optimize their cycle, keeping ammonia below 5ppm will help. If people weren't concerned with keeping their cycle as short as possible, bacteria in a bottle products wouldn't be nearly so popular.

 

[brandon429]

agreed

 

[dankreef]

By the way Dr. Tim told me himself that over 5.0 ammonia or nitrite can stall the cycle and could cause problems with the entire cycle. I used tims and cycled a 600 in about 2 weeks. I'd never recommend to anyone using shrimp again. Tim was giving me directions the whole time via email. Highly recommended.

 

[spikedangles]

I have been maintaining 2.0 ammonia. Dr tims website is where I originally read this information, though I didn't have immediate access to his products so I didn't use them

 

[brandon429]

here's some work at 8 ppm and higher, no stall.

http://www.thereeftank.com/forums/f6/1-week-cycle-8-ppm-ammonia-216696.html


This thread should become the official R2R test of the matter.


after this tank has been submerged 40 days guaranteed from the date that rock was prior dry, remove a good portion of the rocks into a test bucket. Spike that bucket to 8 ppm verified accurate ammonia and let it sit overnite at 8

the next day, change out all the water in the bucket 100% for new saltwater

48 hours later, after sitting in zero ammonia/aerated water for two days, input ammonia again but only to 1 ppm

post back ammonia results 24 hours later.