Should we rethink and refine means and methods for cycling tanks?

[Dan_P]

Thast´s the normal explanation and I know that it is true even at a given and stable load of ammonia. We can´t see this is in aquaria because our measurements tools are not sensitive enough. However - I have measure the ammonia and nitrite oxidation in several fish farms - hour for hours during 24 hours cycle. The pattern was this. Feed start 8:00 and continue to 20:00 - feed frequency - every 10 minutes. Ammonia start to rise around 1/2 hour after first feed and rise during the whole day till around 1/2 an hour after the last feed slowly going down to the same amount as the day before at 08:00. Nitrite follow the same cycle but around another 1/2 hour later than the ammonia graph. At 21:00 nitrite start to drop till it at 08:00 the next day was the same as the day before normal 0 for both parameters. Because the feeding only was between 8 - 20 we could not get down the concentrations to zero during feeding time. The population of nitrifier was determined of the whole load of food in 24 hours

However - there is a lot of studies that show the free ammonia (NH3) is capable to suppress the second step (NOB). the studies have been done in freshwater and at higher NH3 levels that you normally have in saltwater - but I do not know the needed concentrations in saltwater

NOB can be species that´s not is sequenced yet hence you can´t see them. I do not no which species DNA the analyze use. I know of two different families of NOB - nitrobacter and nitrospira. There can be more. These families consist of many different species of which there may be many where the genome is not sequenced

In saltwater not only AOB is important in the first step - AOA (Ammonia Oxidizing Archaea)are probably more important , especially for the speed this process have in the start


This is the base for my 15 steps - i have observed this for many years. This is the safest method in order to establish a good nitrification cycle (cycle the aquarium) You get a seamless transition - and you can increase the load a little a day and it will still be seamless. This is the reason why I´m against this ideas with adding a lot of ammonia day 1, 3 and so on. It is only create a stalled nitrification cycle. If you want to do it the chemical way - add trace amounts of ammonia and rise it very little each third day. If you want to do it with fish - follow the 15 steps

Sincerely Lasse

Excellent! Thank you. Dan

 

[MnFish1]

Lasse we discussed up front in this thread how I pretty much nearly mimicked your process in the 15 step guide.
Same end results. We pretty much shook hands on that.
I've said repeatedly that the goal is 0 ammonia and nitrites. Having the proper tools to be able to cross refference to and hold correct control every step of the way wil provide the data.

Having said that and ill ask you again.
Exactly what are the toxic levels of ammonia and nitrites?
My "cycle for fish ready" ive used all along and forever has always employed 0 ammonia.
Im sorry that I never put any real significance to testing nitrites. But I'm going to here although I didn't test for nitrites in my transfer and I've never tested for it in previous cycles. And countless others never do. Im going to do it for you.
The significance of nitrites is certainly different among those that are asked.
Some have works to back up the claims.

I guess I don't get it. Why would ANYONE EVER think that if you took everything from one tank - and put it in another - that there would be a cycle? I also don't understand the discussion - if you believe what you wrote above - that your goal is 0 ammonia and 0 nitrites? I mean - whats the debate/discussion about? BTW - I'm not trying to be critical - its just that what you're writing above doesn't make sense. If nitrite doesn't 'matter', why is 0 nitrite the 'goal'? Maybe I'm dense today

 

[MnFish1]

The first mechanism absolutely happens. Usually, when I challenge some nitrifying material with ammonia - the ammonia oxidizers respond first and there is a lag of multiple days during which nitrite is measurable - before the nitrite oxidizers catch up. This doesn't always happen though. Sometimes if the ammonia challenge is low enough, nitrite oxidiation capability stays caught up and NO2 is not observed though ammonia drops and NO3 increases.
(this mechanism, though can't explain the persistent low and variable amount of nitrite that both you and @Lasse have observed.)
Other mechanisms I'd just have to speculate on. I wonder if the nitrite being such a transient species and a narrow niche for microbes means that in some systems, nitrite oxidizers have basically faded into nonexistence. (aquabiomics finds no nitrite oxidizers in like half the tested systems).

The question is - does Aquabiomics sample the place where nitrite oxidizers 'live'. My guess is 'no' - OR - there are other bacteria/items in the tank the can also utilize nitrite.

 

[Dan_P]

I guess I don't get it. Why would ANYONE EVER think that if you took everything from one tank - and put it in another - that there would be a cycle? I also don't understand the discussion - if you believe what you wrote above - that your goal is 0 ammonia and 0 nitrites? I mean - whats the debate/discussion about? BTW - I'm not trying to be critical - its just that what you're writing above doesn't make sense. If nitrite doesn't 'matter', why is 0 nitrite the 'goal'? Maybe I'm dense today

Just an observation. When I grow biofilms on glass in tank water and then transfer it to Instant Ocean, it produces ammonia and sometimes phosphate. This makes me wonder, but have not look into it, what happens to biofilms on natural surfaces when they are suddenly exposed to Instant Ocean.

I also wonder if nitrifying biofilms are not evenly distributed on all surfaces. When moving things to a new aquarium, what percent of the nitrifying comes along?

 

[MnFish1]

good questions. I feel safe arguing that nature is going to demand that NOB populations cluster around the locations where the Nitrite is generated (so ought to be tight correlations with AOB).
The near-absence of NOB might point to how small a percent of ammonia actually enters the classical nitrogen cycle.

To me this doesn't make total sense. Were this the total case, wouldn't 'nature' have evolved nitrate reducing bacteria to live in the same location? Since this doesn't really occur, I'm not entirely sure why the ammonia and nitrite 'consuming' bacteria need to live next to each other.

 

[Lasse]

When I grow biofilms on glass in tank water and then transfer it to Instant Ocean

Have you test other salts ?

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Dan_P]

To me this doesn't make total sense. Were this the total case, wouldn't 'nature' have evolved nitrate reducing bacteria to live in the same location? Since this doesn't really occur, I'm not entirely sure why the ammonia and nitrite 'consuming' bacteria need to live next to each other.

We now know thanks to micro electrodes biofilm oxygen levels are not constant all over. For example, denitrifiers could be co-located but deeper in the biofilm.

 

[MnFish1]

Just an observation. When I grow biofilms on glass in tank water and then transfer it to Instant Ocean, it produces ammonia and sometimes phosphate. This makes me wonder, but have not look into it, what happens to biofilms on natural surfaces when they are suddenly exposed to Instant Ocean.

I also wonder if nitrifying biofilms are not evenly distributed on all surfaces. When moving things to a new aquarium, what percent of the nitrifying comes along?

My guess is that bacterial growth on something like glass or ceramic - while it occurs - is far far less due to the surface area. One piece of live rock probably has more bacteria growing surface area than an entire glass tank. Again - thats just a guess. So - for example. I do not think you could take a tank with a bunch of livestock in it, empty out the rock/sand, etc - and whatever filtration and then re-add the fish. I do think its very clear that you can take a sterile tank, add rock, fish, and whatever filtration to it and have no cycle whatsoever

 

[Dan_P]

Have you test other salts ?

Sincerely Lasse

I have not Lasse because I tried something else first. To stop “traumatizing” my biofilms, I switched to boiled tank water. It worked.

 

[MnFish1]

We now know thanks to micro electrodes biofilm oxygen levels are not constant all over. For example, denitrifiers could be co-located but deeper in the biofilm.

Yes - they could be. I guess what I was saying that I'm not sure that its a given that nitrite oxidizers necessarily live near ammonia oxidizers.

 

[Dan_P]

My guess is that bacterial growth on something like glass or ceramic - while it occurs - is far far less due to the surface area. One piece of live rock probably has more bacteria growing surface area than an entire glass tank. Again - thats just a guess. So - for example. I do not think you could take a tank with a bunch of livestock in it, empty out the rock/sand, etc - and whatever filtration and then re-add the fish. I do think its very clear that you can take a sterile tank, add rock, fish, and whatever filtration to it and have no cycle whatsoever

I was wondering about the surface area of natural surfaces vs glass or a ceramic tile, though isn’t one side of the ceramic tile quite rough?

 

[MnFish1]

I was wondering about the surface area of natural surfaces vs glass or a ceramic tile, though isn’t one side of the ceramic tile quite rough?

Yes - the 'rough' side would seem to have more surface area than the smooth side. I would still say the surface area on a rock of similar size is probably thousands if not more greater?

 

[Lasse]

To me this doesn't make total sense. Were this the total case, wouldn't 'nature' have evolved nitrate reducing bacteria to live in the same location? Since this doesn't really occur, I'm not entirely sure why the ammonia and nitrite 'consuming' bacteria need to live next to each other.

This could be seen as a symbios.

sincerely Lasse

 

[MnFish1]

This could be seen as an symbios.

sincerely Lasse

Yes - I was only saying I'm not sure that nitrite oxidizing bacteria don't disappear - I probably wasn't clear what I was referring to.

 

[MnFish1]

The things we add to start a cycle work so fast, the initial ammonia dose is nearly instantly oxidized to the hundredths while api holds at 1-3 ppm for eight days. All stalled cycle threads are misreads.

Its been a while since I took chemistry - But explain this to me - isn't (at a given pH) the ratio of free ammonia to total ammonia a fixed number? If so - there is no way what you're saying Is true (at least I can't see it). Either the test reading the free ammonia - or the test reading the total ammonia is 'wrong'. In other words (fake numbers - just an illustration) - the total ammonia cannot stay at '3' and the free ammonia '0' - for 8 days. I, despite reading hundreds of posts still find myself confused by words like 'stalled cycle'. What exactly does that mean? Anyone? Is there actually a definition? If not, how can we say anything about 'misreads'?

 

[MnFish1]

We now know thanks to micro electrodes biofilm oxygen levels are not constant all over. For example, denitrifiers could be co-located but deeper in the biofilm.

I meant to add - ok - if that were the case, there would be no nitrate in the tank - right?

 

[DrZoidburg]

@MnFish1 As I understand it bacterial mats occur in layers. Where in the less oxygen tolerant bacteria are deeper in the mat. I doubt they disappear. Maybe just that they are non existent on glass sample versus maybe a sample 3 inches inside a rock. Also if total ammonia used by bacteria is just nh3 part, leaving nh4. The leftover nh4 will turn into nh3/nh4 ratio again, on and on until there is none. If using a device to measure just nh3 for testing that is a flaw. If dosed ammonia, then turns to mostly nh4, not picked up by seneye. See then ok low levels cool, but if combined test it will show ammonia elevated. May be this why they see "instant oxidation"

 

[brandon429]

EMERGENCY - Ammonia 8ppm

Couldn't there also be real NH3/nh4? I'd still be doing a WC, adding a heap of bottled bacteria, etc as posted above.

www.reef2reef.com

Look what old cycling science caused falsely. I'm not even saying the test kit is bad, I'm saying you can easily convince 90% of the hobby that a cycling charts ammonia control line is bad, that a filter is broken, just by giving a subjective parameter report.

We are all trained to assume the broken bacteria mode. Peers drive it


They've been dosing prime and reacting to misreads the whole time. Because they doubted that the ammonia line from a cycling chart stays down after day ten is why all the concern... that and no seneye

If anyone read prior the link i said was one of the most important cycling threads this year, that 8ppm stuck cycle post will be explained with pictures and follow up. The system is fine it just needs a water change so that the % Prime additive per unit of volume goes down to 30%.

 

[taricha]

Were this the total case, wouldn't 'nature' have evolved nitrate reducing bacteria to live in the same location? Since this doesn't really occur, I'm not entirely sure why the ammonia and nitrite 'consuming' bacteria need to live next to each other.

I'm just saying that nitrite is short-lived in oxygenated water (unlike nitrate) and all the things needed for bacteria to oxidize NO2 are also present where bacteria oxidize ammonia (unlike denitrification) . So AOB and NOB in the same biofilm seems ideal for the NOB.
But lemme just poke around for some reading material. I'm sure this is already known territory. I'll be surprised if the NOB prefer to be anywhere other than where the AOB are.

 

[Reefahholic]

I’m gonna try to do the unthinkable in the new system. Try not to add a CUC hopefully avoiding Vermetid snails. Only adding 3-4 fish, live sand, and bacteria in the beginning. Problematic algae will be waiting to take over, but If I keep the feeding and light intensity to a minimum (in the beginning) maybe I can get lucky.

However, if I see one Vermetid snail make it into the system… all bets are off and in comes a large CUC.

I’m thinking if I can add just enough nutrients and more intense light to get some macro’s growing downstairs in the sump, maybe I can out compete the algae. If I can’t get the macro’s going…it will surely fuel the algae upstairs on the rocks.

Still debating on exactly what I wanna do and how brave I want to be. ;Hilarious

Typically I’d never try nothing like this…but with only live acro tissue going into the system…if I can avoid Vermetid’s it will surely make for some sweet photos.

Extremely tired of seeing Vermetid tubes coming up through a beautifully basing Acropora. :mad: