Seneye Cycling False or correct results?

[LRT]

I saw your previous post - I don't disagree with your 'reasoning' - I disagree with your advice. IMHO, you're incorrect to suggest its ok to 'ignore the pH' - becasue - Unlike you, the OP did not cross check or re-check his pH. If he had - and the second test was 'ok' - great no issues. If the Seneye (IDK if it does or doesn't) - has an issue with bottled bacteria, is it in their instructions to 'ignore a low pH' during startup?

IMHO There is no point to using equipment (or any test) - that gives false readings - that we just 'ignore'. Lets say there was a bacterial bloom in a tank - would you just ignore a 'low pH' with a Seneye? Would the Seneye be accurate? I mean IDK. If it is abnormal with bacteria in a bottle, why would it not be inaccurate with another bacterial bloom?

Ahh ok. I personally wouldn't ignore anything unless I had a tank to control that ph reading back to. Which I do. My experience with this particular bottle bac already tells me op is seeing same abnormalities ive seen.
But would not suggest ignoring the reading op is observing but confirm same observation is being made.

 

[LRT]

This, IMHO, as a microbiologist - does not make sense. I was under the impression you were suggesting that the bacteria somehow affected the slide itself. I also misunderstood what you did. If the bottled bacteria affected the slide - and a there was really a normal pH in the tank - but the Seneye read 7.1, putting that slide into a tank with normal pH - should not read 'normal' - if bacteria affected the slide - becasue any effects would still be seen.

The ONLY way to test this hypothesis is to check the pH in the 'supposedly low pH' tank - with another method and compare the 2. If anything the results (if I'm understanding them) - suggest the EiTHER the pH in the tank actually was low - OR - there is a problem with the Seneye in that tank.

Agree simple confirmation with another kit Or 2 on same tank. I like 3 controls.
All 3 controls have confirmed the abnormalities for me.
Definitely suggest op do more pH testing to confirm same abnormalities with other kits on same tank.

 

[SC017]

The reason that I said 'things are probably ok' is that it would be nearly unheard of (except in a disaster) - for a pH of a tank to be that low 'in reality'. BUT - if I had a tank with a pH measurement of 7.06 - 7.16 - I'm not sure I would be considering adding fish - unless I had rechecked (with another method) - the alkalinity, pH and total ammonia.

I wish this was made clear about a week ago when I first brought that up. Not within an hour of me having purchased and added livestock to the tank.

Very happy to see that your shrimp and Cardinals are doing well. However, this could have also been a thread that ended with 'I added a shrimp and 2 cardinals and they were both dead in a day'.

It absolutely still can.

 

[MnFish1]

this post matches all other seneye tracked bottle cycles by day ten


there are sensitive animals in place to double check safety limits

What you are saying again is (to me) conflicting - and probably to others as well. Here is a question - do all of the other tracked bottle cycles have a low pH? If not - why? You also seem to say 'its ok to ignore the pH' - unless the pH drops in every ammonia/bottled cycle - how do you know which ones to ignore.

My next question then is 'why use the Seneye at all'? If its a given that you can add bacteria, water and fish - why not just do it - without adding the ammonia of course?? What has happened with the Seneye when bacteria, fish and nothing else were added during a cycle?

Perhaps this link will help the OP:

Strange pH/NH3 readings - Seneye

>>>Why is my PH reading strangely on my seneye device<<<

answers.seneye.com

 

[LRT]

I wish this was made clear about a week ago when I first brought that up. Not within an hour of me having purchased and added livestock to the tank.

It absolutely still can.

Do you have a ph kit to test pH and confirm results in tank with seneye?
7.16 is abnormally abnormal

 

[brandon429]

MNFish

here is where we stand: all the questions you ask to try and frame a point don't come from work logs you created that have an ending measure or tank pic. My advice comes solely from those logs.

We have never, never tracked pH in any of my 20 page cycling threads, so the angle you're presenting is a lark. you hint at a consequence you've never seen, engineered a system to be free of, took time to document, or can even link as loss cycles in other's post. Its 100% made up consequence, implied as a question on a facet we still aren't going to take time to measure. there comes a time you must accept the patterns from a thousand completed and logged cycles. by that I mean when I assigned a start date to someone, the tank worked, that usually disagreed with everyone else posting in the same thread on start dates, and we can now track out their system by sending them a message and posting it here


see how much better that is that just finding a questionable angle in everyone else's work thread?

when you act like you're unclear on my statements, that's really just part of the redirection around not actually remotely working any aspect of a reef tank to be accountable for laying out an initial timing plan. You simply own a reef tank, a nice one



what we will track in this tank in my analysis thread is the happy animals, clear water and what the pics show to be evident day to day/

don't deal in false implied consequences that nobody is able to actually search out and see happening in a reef tank.

 

[MnFish1]

Agree simple confirmation with another kit Or 2 on same tank. I like 3 controls.
All 3 controls have confirmed the abnormalities for me.
Definitely suggest op do more pH testing to confirm same abnormalities with other kits on same tank.

Thats really all I was saying. But - You cannot test whether a result is ok by taking an abnormal results and taking the instrument and putting it into a tank with normal pH. Its a little unclear exactly what you did before. But - since there are MULTIPLE Seneye 'work threads' - if what you're saying is true, all of them should show a low pH. If thats not the case, there is really NO reason to ignore a low pH.

PS - I have no clue whether this is true - but - my GUESS / Theory - is that rather than the bacteria in the water affecting the pH - its the much higher than usual ammonia level in the water - which is why when you move the device to a new tank - it very quickly shows a higher pH. And - my guess is also - that if you just added bacteria and fish to a tank - there would be no change in pH (i.e. the bacteria shouldn't affect it)

 

[LRT]

Thats really all I was saying. But - You cannot test whether a result is ok by taking an abnormal results and taking the instrument and putting it into a tank with normal pH. Its a little unclear exactly what you did before. But - since there are MULTIPLE Seneye 'work threads' - if what you're saying is true, all of them should show a low pH. If thats not the case, there is really NO reason to ignore a low pH.

PS - I have no clue whether this is true - but - my GUESS / Theory - is that rather than the bacteria in the water affecting the pH - its the much higher than usual ammonia level in the water - which is why when you move the device to a new tank - it very quickly shows a higher pH. And - my guess is also - that if you just added bacteria and fish to a tank - there would be no change in pH (i.e. the bacteria shouldn't affect it)

Yeah man. All I was saying is based on the abnormal ph swings I've observed with this particular bottle bac. I wouldnt have leant much weight to it based on my observances thats all.
I most def would have confirmed those ph results being the control freak I am.
Id also def insist op confirm same abnormality and not ignore it.

 

[MnFish1]

here is where we stand: all the questions you ask to try and frame a point don't come from work logs you created that have an ending measure or tank pic. My advice comes solely from those logs.

We have never, never tracked pH in any of my 20 page cycling threads, so the angle you're presenting is a lark.

@brandon429 The TITLE of the thread is Seneye cycling, false or correct results. We have a tank right here - with a problem with Seneye results - 1 the pH is quite low. He was asking if its ok to add fish.

You're just saying 'its ok' - with no reasoning except that 'the ammonia is ok'. Now - you say you don't track pH in your work loads - so all of the points you brought up have very little to do with this thread (IMHO).

How is my pointing out that the pH results are 'ABNORMAL' derailing the thread? BtW - you're focusing (as usual) on 'ammonia'. Great - I already said (you probably didnt read it) that I agreed with you - if the OP used bottled bacteria etc - his tank is probably ready to go - I believe in the second post.

PS - Fish and shrimp can survive in pH of 7.2. So - again - the fact that they are swimming (I believe they've been in the tank an hour) may not have anything to do with the accuracy

 

[SC017]

Do you have a ph kit to test pH and confirm results in tank with seneye?
7.16 is abnormally abnormal

I don't.

I wasn't even expecting ph to be such a factor yet, it's certainly never been when I had freshwater.
I was planning on grabbing more test kits like ph further down the road when I add corals.

Perhaps this link will help the OP:

Strange pH/NH3 readings - Seneye

>>>Why is my PH reading strangely on my seneye device<<<

answers.seneye.com

This looks more like it.

I didn't soak the slide, but simply put it straight into the tank.

 

[brandon429]

your actions and motion on expected dates already line up with other Fritz documented cycles, that's why the animals are fine and not jumpy/being burned/acting burned in any way.

your slide has been soaking long enough now. accept no doubt on your cycle.

can we see a pic of the tank w the animals? helps to tie in overall large scope outcomes. helps to prevent minutiae from becoming the focus, as is all cycle stall threads. if we can just get updates that include pics of clear water, active surface area, fed and happy animals, that's the core counterbalance updated cycling science needs alongside all the test hashing.

burned nh3 fish won't eat, their gills won't exchange core waste and o2 correctly, breathing rates increase notably. they'll hover at the top or flash around wildly.

 

[MnFish1]

MNFish

here is where we stand: all the questions you ask to try and frame a point don't come from work logs you created that have an ending measure or tank pic. My advice comes solely from those logs.

We have never, never tracked pH in any of my 20 page cycling threads, so the angle you're presenting is a lark. you hint at a consequence you've never seen, engineered a system to be free of, took time to document, or can even link as loss cycles in other's post. Its 100% made up consequence, implied as a question on a facet we still aren't going to take time to measure. there comes a time you must accept the patterns from a thousand completed and logged cycles. by that I mean when I assigned a start date to someone, the tank worked, that usually disagreed with everyone else posting in the same thread on start dates, and we can now track out their system by sending them a message and posting it here


see how much better that is that just finding a questionable angle in everyone else's work thread?

when you act like you're unclear on my statements, that's really just part of the redirection around not actually remotely working any aspect of a reef tank to seek and log pattern. You simply own a reef tank, a nice one

but your input on cycling isn't coming from any logged experience outside that personal opinion about your own reef.

you and I don't deal in the same proof language, and we work tanks from a 100% different perspective on every job. We have no way to communicate on the matter.

what we will track in this tank in my analysis thread is the happy animals, clear water and what the pics show to be evident day to day/

you deal in false implied consequences that nobody is able to actually search out and see happening in a reef tank.

PS - This OP is asking a question about the accuracy of the Seneye. I've already said I agree with your comments about the cycle in this tank - thats a moot point. I particularly did that because I wanted to avoid your post similar to the above - which put words and impressions and statements 'into my mouth' that I never said or implied.

So - what exactly is your deal. His Fish have been in the tank FOR AN HOUR or so. So - frankly - rather than actually focus on the poor guy's results - which showed an extremely low pH - which also to me suggests his Seneye might be 'off' you go off on another one of your all too common rants about cycling. I don't care if you have 1000000 'work threads' - if you have no data on pH - you shouldn't be talking to me about it.

No offense - All I suggested was that he double check the results. LOL - Thats it I'm sorry - I could get hundreds of posts that say exactly the same thing. So - MANY posts here have logged the necessity of re-verifying tests before adding something - or doing something, etc.

 

[Garf]

Spoiler: Images:

Ammonia readings are now at 0.002 and I have a pair of Banggai Cardinals and 2 skunk cleaner shrimp in the tank.
Hoping all goes well from here.

I don't.

I wasn't even expecting ph to be such a factor yet, it's certainly never been when I had freshwater.
I was planning on grabbing more test kits like ph further down the road when I add corals.



This looks more like it.

I didn't soak the slide, but simply put it straight into the tank.

Don’t you read instructions, lol.
Read this;

http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-05/rhf/

 

[brandon429]

FOR AN HOUR or so


MN, that's the implied hinted consequence again that you do

you're stating a time consequence, we haven't elapsed enough yet to be in the safe zone. The prediction is set to the counter, all controls are in place and upcoming days will do fine-its why I'd like a pic of the tank now for later comparison if possible.

the time focus needs to be on the lead up time before fish were added, he waited longer than 98% of folks who buy bottle bac wait and should be rewarded, not questioned with yet another unsure angle. using today's best meter that runs backing on all my work threads he noted the required parameter drop, he's followed every updated rule.

all we do here or on any other thread is hash out ethical acceptable start dates for reefs. If the old work threads don't bring any value then these new ones can take their place, we're getting tons of new tank cycle work nowadays to track out.

need full tank shot pic for sure, its vitally important for proofing a cycle compared to coming days. sometimes we even catch unstated benthic growth cues from the pics, pics are a big deal in cycle threads---much moreso than any testing.

 

[LRT]

Thats really all I was saying. But - You cannot test whether a result is ok by taking an abnormal results and taking the instrument and putting it into a tank with normal pH. Its a little unclear exactly what you did before. But - since there are MULTIPLE Seneye 'work threads' - if what you're saying is true, all of them should show a low pH. If thats not the case, there is really NO reason to ignore a low pH.

PS - I have no clue whether this is true - but - my GUESS / Theory - is that rather than the bacteria in the water affecting the pH - its the much higher than usual ammonia level in the water - which is why when you move the device to a new tank - it very quickly shows a higher pH. And - my guess is also - that if you just added bacteria and fish to a tank - there would be no change in pH (i.e. the bacteria shouldn't affect it)

I'm still trying to figure out the riddle of why and how seneye shows wonky pH reading with bottle bac. Its either something happening on slide itself or maybe lens. Could possibly be both idk.
Def wouldn't have just ignored it.
Def should have been confirmed with another kit.
Also the seneye can give wonky readings across all params in the first 24-48hrs without a soak.
Thats why its best to have other means of testing always to cross refference back to.

 

[MnFish1]

can we see a pic of the tank w the animals? helps to tie in overall large scope outcomes. helps to prevent minutiae from becoming the focus, as is all cycle stall threads.

No one here is talking about a cycle stall - except one person. You - his fish have been in the tank for probably 2 hours now. Will that picture still help? Curious - what effect on fish (short-term) would you expect from a pH of 7.2 (My guess is very little). Btw - what is the effect of a lower pH on ammonia toxicity? For the OP - the affect is a lower pH lessens the amount of toxic) free ammonia in the water. So - until you've verified your pH is OK - I would not necessarily try to raise it quickly - but rather over several days (again - only if necessary). Hope all of this is not too confusing. And my strong feeling is that your tank will be fine

 

[MnFish1]

you're stating a time consequence, we haven't elapsed enough yet to be in the safe zone. The prediction is set to the counter, all controls are in place and upcoming days will do fine-its why I'd like a pic of the tank now for later comparison if possible.

More conflicting comments. YOU are the one that said that the fact that his fish were in the tank and 'healthy' meant everything was 'ok'. I was only pointing out - that they have been in the tank only for an hour. LOL.

 

[SC017]

you're stating a time consequence, we haven't elapsed enough yet to be in the safe zone. The prediction is set to the counter, all controls are in place and upcoming days will do fine-its why I'd like a pic of the tank now for later comparison if possible.

the time focus needs to be on the lead up time before fish were added, he waited longer than 98% of folks who buy bottle bac wait and should be rewarded, not questioned with yet another unsure angle.

Can you stop?

I'm worried about my fish and all you care about is your dang'ed gold-******** cycle knowledge.

I have a potential ph problem and your paragraphs are doing nothing but complicating matters. I personally hold you responsible for writing such confusing non-sense and straight up giving information to ignore certain parametres.

If you can't be concise AND helpful, then at least let others try.

 

[brandon429]

so you have a working reef tank, we met your start date is that right? You can easily manage things from here on out, you're welcome for the initial assurance and assistance and specific advice not to add more dosers or take unneeded action. you were instructed on how to manage ph from years of experience fixing up tanks just like yours.

have fun with your system. solid burn, solid.

 

[SC017]

I'm still trying to figure out the riddle of why and how seneye shows wonky pH reading with bottle bac. Its either something happening on slide itself or maybe lens. Could possibly be both idk.
Def wouldn't have just ignored it.
Def should have been confirmed with another kit.
Also the seneye can give wonky readings across all params in the first 24-48hrs without a soak.
Thats why its best to have other means of testing always to cross refference back to.

I'm personally hoping the incorrect ph is just me failing to even soak it at all.

I got hung-up on other things and didn't really think when I did that.