Like this if you have been lurking this discussion
Some interesting points going on I have to say.
Some interesting points going on I have to say.
Open challenge for the hobby: prove that fish-in cycles harm fish.
- Thread starter brandon429
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
OP
OP
See how I didn’t elitist mode that fish-in cycler on prior page #9
i would if he allowed gha all over his rocks but this is a cycling thread
I’m acknowledging the coming wave of cycling by fish + bottle bac, no guilt for following directions on the bottle
we want to analyze any type of cycle that is too darn fast here, post if you see any out there, from any forum. This thread isn’t advocating fish + bac day one starts, we’re measuring the current ones as they go.
i would if he allowed gha all over his rocks but this is a cycling thread
I’m acknowledging the coming wave of cycling by fish + bottle bac, no guilt for following directions on the bottle
we want to analyze any type of cycle that is too darn fast here, post if you see any out there, from any forum. This thread isn’t advocating fish + bac day one starts, we’re measuring the current ones as they go.
Last edited:
Karen00
2500 Club Member
Well said! I still feel the loss of every creature that dies prematurely (my fault) under my care. Even if they die at a ripe old age I still feel the loss of them. I have a little section in my yard where they get buried.
It all depends on the volume of water and how many fish are we talking about.
If you put a damsel in a 100 gallon tank and some bottle bac day 1, it'll be perfectly fine and will not die from ammonia. The caveat there is that it would take much much longer for the bacteria to populate due to how little ammonia that little guy can produce.
You can even dump in 3 juvenile tangs into a 20 gallon day one and not likely die from ammonia.
I've only had one instance where I had 4 tangs in a 20 gallon had a ammonia spike to 0.07 nh3 on seneye which is considered a extremely high level for over 6 hours before I realized it. They were all laying on the bottom on their sides but I got them all into buckets with airstones and they recovered within a day. None of them died from ammonia poisoning but it was certainly the most stressful situation I've had in this hobby.
Imo ammonia spikes are only dangerous when you don't know its happening and has gone on for a long time with no action taken because you aren't prepared with the knowledge to do something about it which is typically when you are new in the hobby.
If you put a damsel in a 100 gallon tank and some bottle bac day 1, it'll be perfectly fine and will not die from ammonia. The caveat there is that it would take much much longer for the bacteria to populate due to how little ammonia that little guy can produce.
You can even dump in 3 juvenile tangs into a 20 gallon day one and not likely die from ammonia.
I've only had one instance where I had 4 tangs in a 20 gallon had a ammonia spike to 0.07 nh3 on seneye which is considered a extremely high level for over 6 hours before I realized it. They were all laying on the bottom on their sides but I got them all into buckets with airstones and they recovered within a day. None of them died from ammonia poisoning but it was certainly the most stressful situation I've had in this hobby.
Imo ammonia spikes are only dangerous when you don't know its happening and has gone on for a long time with no action taken because you aren't prepared with the knowledge to do something about it which is typically when you are new in the hobby.
OP
OP
jumping *to* .07, from thousandths ppm typical running conversion rates, is exactly why I love seneye data. Seneye inputs are rare, two total here. Thank you
tenths ppm sustained nh3 doesn’t happen in reefing for anyone except during tank crashes which have obvious visual symptoms in 100% of crashing reefs.
hundredths ppm is the highest attained, during cycling, a few hours, never sticks for days, seneye data is little snippets of truth due to the sheer number of devices reporting this conversion rate, which matches oceanic data. I think it’s hard to state seneye is inaccurate, and api and Red Sea are accurate. we can not get titration kits in the thousandths, so they report falsely.
tenths ppm sustained nh3 doesn’t happen in reefing for anyone except during tank crashes which have obvious visual symptoms in 100% of crashing reefs.
hundredths ppm is the highest attained, during cycling, a few hours, never sticks for days, seneye data is little snippets of truth due to the sheer number of devices reporting this conversion rate, which matches oceanic data. I think it’s hard to state seneye is inaccurate, and api and Red Sea are accurate. we can not get titration kits in the thousandths, so they report falsely.
Last edited:
The funny thing about that situation was I didn't really take action for hours when it was 0.05. It wasn't until I saw the spike in ph to 8.4-8.5 when I could never get my ph above 7.8 previously that really caught my attention.
OP
OP
Does your current setup run in the thousandths ppm daily, as an average, so curious to know
we have a few seneye reading threads where they report .02-.05 as the lowest setting, and I now wonder if low pH is driving those numbers, forgot to ask about their pH at the time of report, nice call. Seneye corporate responded in one thread and confirmed the meter was bad, because no running reef should be even in the hundredths ppm conversion range and this one was stuck months at hundredths level in a reef filled with rocks and sand, which never permit sustained free ammonia above thousandths on majority of seneye machines and logs online. This exchange is one of the few where we will get true nh3 data, so I’m milking it for all usable details. Reef cycles do not stall, it’s a massive fallacy at work causing us to pay cash into the bottle bac machine long after cycle completion.
we have a few seneye reading threads where they report .02-.05 as the lowest setting, and I now wonder if low pH is driving those numbers, forgot to ask about their pH at the time of report, nice call. Seneye corporate responded in one thread and confirmed the meter was bad, because no running reef should be even in the hundredths ppm conversion range and this one was stuck months at hundredths level in a reef filled with rocks and sand, which never permit sustained free ammonia above thousandths on majority of seneye machines and logs online. This exchange is one of the few where we will get true nh3 data, so I’m milking it for all usable details. Reef cycles do not stall, it’s a massive fallacy at work causing us to pay cash into the bottle bac machine long after cycle completion.
Here’s a qt that has been setup for a week. I have 3 anthias and one orange storm clown in it. I only started copper yesterday but you can see nh3 have a uptick from when my auto feeder activates, fish poo then goes back to zero within a few hours.
Ammonia spikes during a crash happen very quickly from 0.02-0.05 within an hour or two and continue higher because for some reason the bacteria can’t oxidize the ammonia. But it’s normal for nh3 to tick u
P to 0.003-7 then back to zero. In an hour.
I’ve had a Seneye since I started this hobby and feel I understand it’s strengths and weaknesses. It’s helped me understand this ammonia thing rather well and results are repeatable. As for the guy sitting at 0.02-5 nh3 for long periods. I imagine he’s taking readings too often manually that it degraded the slide too quickly.
Last edited:
OP
OP
@Biglew11
I have this question: has any non seneye ammonia test taker ever known what their nh3 was? How can they, the TAN conversion chart brings them only to hundredths?
the api, salifert, nyos, red sea kits measures spikes, but not running rates? Their indicator cards don’t read thousandths, imagine discerning shades of green to get something that accurate
the hobby has been impacted by common ammonia readings never being validated by the apparently predictable seneye machine.
_________________________________________________
one hundred percent of procedural rules written for us to follow are based solely on the assumption our common test kits are reliable
nitrite isn’t zero. It has a conversion decimal too, but who cares what that is heh (chloride channel neutralization, RHF article, nobody cares about nitrite nowadays)
How many cycles are reported stalled due to nitrite readings on api?
The impact of pre seneye cycle rules is we’re on the needy buyer list for cycle help products, kept in the dark about what’s really going on, and only MACNA conventions get reefs that start on time, for us forum folks we buy bottled bac but still get to wait out the old school month cycle charts.
All reef tank cycling rules need to be rewritten, and anyone who has posted a video or a thread saying reef cycles stall can’t be on the rules board.
we want the type of cycle science that matches today’s actual reef tank readings, which match oceanic readings, to bring validity. We do not want the cycling rules that leaves thousands feeling stalled, buying up more items to unstall, when they were at thousandths ppm the whole darn time.
fish-in cycling with unverified bottle bac is a risk, agreed. But its panning out consistently because selling water bac inside a bottle of water isn't hard to pull off, creating the pure strains for bottling x one million is the hard part.
Jury:
if this was a reef court of law and you were instructed by the judge to factor only data and not my presentation style, have we established reasonable doubt that fish in cycling harms fish? If no, can we get some sort of test reading, pics of unhappy fish, or thread with outcome predictions, or digital readings, or post links of any kind? several veterinarians on rtr, I'd enjoy their input.
I have this question: has any non seneye ammonia test taker ever known what their nh3 was? How can they, the TAN conversion chart brings them only to hundredths?
the api, salifert, nyos, red sea kits measures spikes, but not running rates? Their indicator cards don’t read thousandths, imagine discerning shades of green to get something that accurate
the hobby has been impacted by common ammonia readings never being validated by the apparently predictable seneye machine.
_________________________________________________
one hundred percent of procedural rules written for us to follow are based solely on the assumption our common test kits are reliable
nitrite isn’t zero. It has a conversion decimal too, but who cares what that is heh (chloride channel neutralization, RHF article, nobody cares about nitrite nowadays)
How many cycles are reported stalled due to nitrite readings on api?
The impact of pre seneye cycle rules is we’re on the needy buyer list for cycle help products, kept in the dark about what’s really going on, and only MACNA conventions get reefs that start on time, for us forum folks we buy bottled bac but still get to wait out the old school month cycle charts.
All reef tank cycling rules need to be rewritten, and anyone who has posted a video or a thread saying reef cycles stall can’t be on the rules board.
we want the type of cycle science that matches today’s actual reef tank readings, which match oceanic readings, to bring validity. We do not want the cycling rules that leaves thousands feeling stalled, buying up more items to unstall, when they were at thousandths ppm the whole darn time.
fish-in cycling with unverified bottle bac is a risk, agreed. But its panning out consistently because selling water bac inside a bottle of water isn't hard to pull off, creating the pure strains for bottling x one million is the hard part.
Jury:
if this was a reef court of law and you were instructed by the judge to factor only data and not my presentation style, have we established reasonable doubt that fish in cycling harms fish? If no, can we get some sort of test reading, pics of unhappy fish, or thread with outcome predictions, or digital readings, or post links of any kind? several veterinarians on rtr, I'd enjoy their input.
Last edited:
Biglew11
Valuable Member
i'm not saying at all that these conversion tables are necessarily accurate, how can they be? as you have stated our test kits aren't necessarily accurate, prone to user error, or poor test practices. but it the person reporting an ammonia spike or stalled cycle understood the difference between nh3 and nh4+ and that these test kits measure total ammonia and not just nh3 (the dangerous one) then there would probably be much less panic.
I do disagree that more testing needs to be done to prove in fish cycle + bacteria doesn't harm fish, looking at the bottled bacteria manufactures (if data is trust worthy) the testing seems to have been done. i just think that educating the newcomer to the hobbie on the difference between there readings and whats really going on in there tank
I've only been doing this 3 years myself and still have a lot to learn.
OP
OP
well said. I dont own any ammonia test kit nor have I, and dont understand chemistry very much.
only web post patterns get me the info... its interesting to try detail truths for us in the hobby one way or another. I really like bottle bac but loathe its use for unsticking cycles, strange dichotomy there agreed.
*the bottles need some sort of indicator on the strip that interacts w them in suspension and states if they're live or not
or a part on the bottle you squeeze before use, it releases an nh3 vial/breaks, side indicator spikes showing entry, goes down in 24 hours, can use to fish-in cycle safely/ boom I retire from selling cable into reefing bliss.
only web post patterns get me the info... its interesting to try detail truths for us in the hobby one way or another. I really like bottle bac but loathe its use for unsticking cycles, strange dichotomy there agreed.
*the bottles need some sort of indicator on the strip that interacts w them in suspension and states if they're live or not
or a part on the bottle you squeeze before use, it releases an nh3 vial/breaks, side indicator spikes showing entry, goes down in 24 hours, can use to fish-in cycle safely/ boom I retire from selling cable into reefing bliss.
Last edited:
Biglew11
Valuable Member
i'm not a chemist or scientist eitherwell said. I dont own any ammonia test kit nor have I, and dont understand chemistry very much.
only web post patterns get me the info... its interesting to try detail truths for us in the hobby one way or another. I really like bottle bac but loathe its use for unsticking cycles, strange dichotomy there agreed.
*the bottles need some sort of indicator on the strip that interacts w them in suspension and states if they're live or not
or a part on the bottle you squeeze before use, it releases an nh3 vial/breaks, side indicator spikes showing entry, goes down in 24 hours, can use to fish-in cycle safely/ boom I retire from selling cable into reefing bliss.
from reading mostly here on r2r and general google searches it's my understanding (don't know if it's true or not) that there is always some form of ammonia in a tank, but with a mature biological filter its usually processed out faster than we can measure it, again this is just from reading. i don't know how all this chemistry works, but at least when i measure something in my tank I like to understand what it is that I am measuring.i'm guessing that most "stuck cycles" or "spikes" are either measuring nh4+ before it is processed, or just plain user error. I agree using bottle bac in this case is just nonsense. even with my chemclean incident with a high 1- 1.5 ppm ammonia reading the calculated free ammonia still wasn't instantly toxic. if there is true nh3 in the tank either from seney or calculated i think the use of bottle bac can be justified (even if it's not necessary)
i do like this idea
*the bottles need some sort of indicator on the strip that interacts w them in suspension and states if they're live or not
or a part on the bottle you squeeze before use, it releases an nh3 vial/breaks, side indicator spikes showing entry, goes down in 24 hours, can use to fish-in cycle safely/ boom I retire from selling cable into reefing bliss.
Putting it simply - does ammonia harm fish? I‘m pretty sure the “settled science” says yes. And it then follows that the more ammonia, the more the harm. So if you can put together a tank in 5 minutes that is cycled and is able to handle the bio load without creating a harmful level of ammonia, great. However, many new people to the hobby don’t do it right, follow bad advice from LFS or FB groups and are well advised to take it slow And test before adding new fish.
One other point, since fish can’t vocalize their pain or discomfort (or hunger) the only real way to find out if they were harmed is to examine them under a microscope to see if there are signs of ammonia burn. I often see posts where people ask why their fish died all of a sudden after a year or so. Nobody asks if the fish was in the tank during the cycle. Shortened life spans could result from harm caused by ammonia (from what I read, i never personally tested it).
One other point, since fish can’t vocalize their pain or discomfort (or hunger) the only real way to find out if they were harmed is to examine them under a microscope to see if there are signs of ammonia burn. I often see posts where people ask why their fish died all of a sudden after a year or so. Nobody asks if the fish was in the tank during the cycle. Shortened life spans could result from harm caused by ammonia (from what I read, i never personally tested it).
OP
OP
Disagreed but only on these points
-that fish won’t display clear injury behavior when injured.
We can search online in two seconds to find what fish do when burned by free ammonia.
-that anyone can find a recent post of a failed fish in cycle or showing any harm and post it here, vs summarize the litany of the posts in bulk. It’s rumors, that fish are harmed. It’s just something made up and typed, awaiting one link otherwise. It’s why people who passionately wanted to find and post such threads, can’t.
we have distilled the thread down to this: fish in cycling plus bac isn’t harmful if bac is alive, but if the bottle is dead it’ll harm them. Pre test for ammonia oxidation before adding fish, no burn. Disease protocols are always harmed by fish in cycles even if the bottle bacteria is alive. Fish-in cycles with working bottle bac never has harmed fish.
the reason why this is important: so we have control over our reefs. One way an instant cycle might be handy is to make up an instant reef no delay in the case of some rare emergency, we have threads of those emergencies / tank breaks etc,
yes people do use bottle bac to skip usual wait times, but that’s ok if they pre verified the oxidation. We simply have to accept the coming change.
nothing angered the establishment in 2001 like pico reefs did, you’d be amazed at the post wars over small reefs, and if they’ll wreck the hobby.
establishment had to accept, too many showed up to discount the new procedure. And now, members of that old guard keep pico reefs, establishment came full circle and they will here too
-that fish won’t display clear injury behavior when injured.
We can search online in two seconds to find what fish do when burned by free ammonia.
-that anyone can find a recent post of a failed fish in cycle or showing any harm and post it here, vs summarize the litany of the posts in bulk. It’s rumors, that fish are harmed. It’s just something made up and typed, awaiting one link otherwise. It’s why people who passionately wanted to find and post such threads, can’t.
we have distilled the thread down to this: fish in cycling plus bac isn’t harmful if bac is alive, but if the bottle is dead it’ll harm them. Pre test for ammonia oxidation before adding fish, no burn. Disease protocols are always harmed by fish in cycles even if the bottle bacteria is alive. Fish-in cycles with working bottle bac never has harmed fish.
the reason why this is important: so we have control over our reefs. One way an instant cycle might be handy is to make up an instant reef no delay in the case of some rare emergency, we have threads of those emergencies / tank breaks etc,
yes people do use bottle bac to skip usual wait times, but that’s ok if they pre verified the oxidation. We simply have to accept the coming change.
nothing angered the establishment in 2001 like pico reefs did, you’d be amazed at the post wars over small reefs, and if they’ll wreck the hobby.
establishment had to accept, too many showed up to discount the new procedure. And now, members of that old guard keep pico reefs, establishment came full circle and they will here too
Last edited:
OP
OP
the reason its important not to claim FIC burns fish is because that uses misinformation to manage, don’t be caught by tomorrow’s measurement tools making inaccurate calls today.
something as destructive should be easy to prove. Dead fish threads, hazy water threads on day 4, fish leaning over half dead, darting, fins withdrawn, increased opercular action visible from gill burning decreasing o2 exchange, hiding, taxiing to top water so they can breathe.
all missing data.
even brief spikes reported aren’t verified, we have seneye data to show how high spikes go, and they’re below irritation levels and certainly below lethality levels, skeptics don’t get to claim irritation in fish acting the same on day 1 as on day 250.
we should be pre verifying basic ammonia control before starting, but not in such as way as to still wait 2 weeks, 30 days, arbitrary times, for something so exacting nobody can demo a harm verified.
we simply dose the bac, bring ammonia levels up to the least degree the tester will indicate a rise in free ammonia, wait overnite and test for any movement towards zero, zero not required. Motion down means all your fish will live like twenty thousand initial search returns show.
The #1 thing we do not do is dose to 2ppm, and wait to zero. You’ll be here until spring break waiting for something fritz just charged you forty dollars to fix in 48 hours. Specifically, in Dr Reefs bottle bac thread, fritz is ready in under 48 hours and is immune to a full water change, it’s truly a speed cycler. Initial dosing even before benthic adherence results in the water column handing fish waste just fine.
there are some aspects of tank cycling we cannot slow down as a hobby, get on board last year.
something as destructive should be easy to prove. Dead fish threads, hazy water threads on day 4, fish leaning over half dead, darting, fins withdrawn, increased opercular action visible from gill burning decreasing o2 exchange, hiding, taxiing to top water so they can breathe.
all missing data.
even brief spikes reported aren’t verified, we have seneye data to show how high spikes go, and they’re below irritation levels and certainly below lethality levels, skeptics don’t get to claim irritation in fish acting the same on day 1 as on day 250.
we should be pre verifying basic ammonia control before starting, but not in such as way as to still wait 2 weeks, 30 days, arbitrary times, for something so exacting nobody can demo a harm verified.
we simply dose the bac, bring ammonia levels up to the least degree the tester will indicate a rise in free ammonia, wait overnite and test for any movement towards zero, zero not required. Motion down means all your fish will live like twenty thousand initial search returns show.
The #1 thing we do not do is dose to 2ppm, and wait to zero. You’ll be here until spring break waiting for something fritz just charged you forty dollars to fix in 48 hours. Specifically, in Dr Reefs bottle bac thread, fritz is ready in under 48 hours and is immune to a full water change, it’s truly a speed cycler. Initial dosing even before benthic adherence results in the water column handing fish waste just fine.
there are some aspects of tank cycling we cannot slow down as a hobby, get on board last year.
Last edited:
Bossman
Well-Known Member
Quite the contrary, why would anyone wait 4-6 weeks when they could add a proven product that populates beneficial bacteria and add fish instantly?
I've cycled 7 tanks with bacteria and fish successfully. The ammonia spike was minor and short as was nitrite. Haven't lost a fish yet.
I don't believe either way is wrong, but fishless cycling IMO is most definitely old school.
It has been proven so many times. fish suppliers ship the fish as fast as possible to prevent it he harmful effect of ammonia build up in the bags. This is a multi million dollar industry and if fish is not harm by the ammonia then they would have use longer transportation time for cheaper cost.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2016
- Messages
- 22,829
- Reaction score
- 21,964
My experience. I've never used 'ammonia cycling'. Ive never waited 'months for a cycle'. Ive never done a lot of the stuff that the 'experts' recommend. Why - is that because Im a rogue? No - its because from a scientific perspective - a lot of the conventional wisdom (to me) - doesnt make complete sense. Putting a clown fish or 2 in a 50 gallon aquarium - will not cause death or injury to the fish. adding fish slowly to the tank after a bit - will not cause injury or death to them (to me most of this relates to people putting a blue angel a queen angel - and huma trigger into a 20 gallon tank - and wondering what happened.the reason its important not to claim fish-in cycling + bottle bac burns fish is because that uses misinformation to manage, don’t be caught by tomorrow’s measurement tools making inaccurate calls today.
We explore here four points:
-can people make nh3 measurements accurately then subsequently advise what cycles are doing? We are all quite confident in our test kits...resolved on all readings and we make rules based on confidence. If the readings are wrong, our rules have been wrong, that’s embarrassing when future generations look up our advice and see we didn’t know what bacteria do but made some nice guesses for the gaps in ability to measure nh3 accurately.
-do fish in cycles using bottle bac harm fish, can you discern this status without any ammonia testing?
-what are the down sides to fish-in cycles with bottle bac, even if not ammonia harmed?
-if someone wants to FIC for reasons of not wanting to wait, or perhaps it’s a hospital tank to recover from a cracked display, how can they pull it off ethically?
___________________________________________________________________
Anytime someone adds bottle bac + fish on day one, we tell them unequivocally that they're harming fish/ammonia burned
I think that's false, and that ammonia burned fish act a certain way. so lets find a way to prove one way or another and end the false info spreading.
So if you've ever posted to another person that fish-in cycles are harming fish, how do you know? groupthink?
If we took an ammonia reading during the fish-in cycle and it showed some free ammonia yet the fish behaved well, fed well, swam normally, didnt die after days in the claimed burn condition, and we can find the same test kit indicating free ammonia in other fully matured reefs, does that mean fish-in cycling burns fish?
additional questions before anyone can prove anything here: whats the maximum nh3 typical clownfish and gobies can tolerate in marine systems?
are the ammonia testers we use in the hobby able to reliably measure those levels?
Once you find those answers, test without fish. Use liquid ammonium chloride, a tester for ammonia, some bottle bac. If your nh3 reaches what you found to be ld50 lethality levels, fish-in cycling harms fish.
Fish-in cycling harms disease vectoring, for sure. But burning animals? are these burnt? You can burn a three hundred dollar anemone and it still acts normal for half a year?
Bio-spira works great
I just started a new tank a little over a week ago. I started with all dry rock and new sand. I added a bottle of Bio-Spira and put fish and coral the same day. Never saw any ammonia and fish and coral seem healthy.www.reef2reef.com
- Status
Similar threads
