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

BRS
Status
Not open for further replies.
OP
LRT

LRT

FrankNPeeps;)
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
34,888
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
mesa arizona
It's been deployed lol
Here's the deal man. I can see just how insignificant this really may be to some. But its obviously not that insignificant to others. I personally never seen a thread attempting to shine a spot light on mostly any of the discussion that's taken place here.
I think we can get real data here and show some things to new reefers here. With data that supports certain things.
Some of my favorite peeps came in and joined the discussion and glad they did.
So far as invaluable as it may seem to some, the information being collected in this thread is already invaluable to others.
Hopefully we can continue to have this discussion.
I've never used the ognore button but only one time before. If I have to use it again I will.
The information being introduced here really is that valuable in my eyes.
Much love all
 
AS

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,953
Reaction score
13,883
Review score
+0 /0 /-0



you claimed we didn't need a distinction, that the public follows all nuances like we do. Read that thread, for the love of pete don't post in it, just read it and don't try and redirect, make waves, tell everyone you have a master's degree so you're the right auditor to be present (from Taricha's thread) or become challenging there just because its new ground you hadn't seen till just now.



that reefer was sold bottle bac incorrectly, old cycling science took his cash. if we hadn't intercepted he very well could have been told to dose ammonia, we figured that all out by linking him to prior works just like his. there are hundreds more just like that, those are the #1 examples I collect in all of reefing we have thousands of hours logged of how people spend money and handle cycling backwards, because old cycling rules do not make a distinction for ready cycled rocks. old rules assume all rocks need cycling, you're seeing it above without slant and you've seen it 200 more times, you were pretending above/that post of yours was the default challenge mode you go to and dig in heels for pages.
Dear @brandon429 please use the 'quote' feature - so the rest of us know what the heck youre talking about - and who the heck you're talking about. I mean is it so hard. I dont care what happened to '1 reefer' myself - because I have no clue as to what else that '1 refer' did'. There is a slant to all of your posts - frankly - its your slant - and no one in their right mind would go read through 200 posts/ threads to see if you're right. I think @Lasse is just about correct - Don Quixote
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,953
Reaction score
13,883
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
You want to edit that lowball comment before I post five examples of how the reefing public views rock transfer cycles? This is why I only selectively read your posts, you destroy others work threads but never make your own. You only critique, never build, make or add.


your MO is solid critique only which is a very safe zone to work from because you can just select a new angle of disagreement to drag out ten more pages.

You ruined MSteven1's hard work in documentation and came out flat, after going six pages directly opposite api testing we had in huge pictures right on file. its a form of lab trolling, what you do.
I do not understand your English. 1. Msteven1's hard work should stand on its own if its correct. I do not know who that Is. 2. I do not have any clue what 'low ball' comment you're talking about. USE THE QUOTE FUNCTION - THATS HOW DISCUSSION BOARDS WORK. 3. Stop insulting me personally - I dont do that to you.

When I agree with what you say you're all good - when I disagree - youre all over it. Get over it - its a discussion board - not Brandon's board. If you have a speciific complaint about something I've said about - or to you - please REPORT IT. And let the moderators decide.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,953
Reaction score
13,883
Review score
+0 /0 /-0



you claimed we didn't need a distinction, that the public follows all nuances like we do. Read that thread, for the love of pete don't post in it, just read it and don't try and redirect, make waves, tell everyone you have a master's degree so you're the right auditor to be present (from Taricha's thread) or become challenging there just because its new ground you hadn't seen till just now.



that reefer was sold bottle bac incorrectly, old cycling science took his cash. if we hadn't intercepted he very well could have been told to dose ammonia, we figured that all out by linking him to prior works just like his. there are hundreds more just like that, those are the #1 examples I collect in all of reefing we have thousands of hours logged of how people spend money and handle cycling backwards, because old cycling rules do not make a distinction for ready cycled rocks. old rules assume all rocks need cycling, you're seeing it above without slant and you've seen it 200 more times, you were pretending above/that post of yours was the default challenge mode you go to and dig in heels for pages.
I never said I had a masters degree. But then again - since you cant figure out how to use the quote function on this site - its impossible to know what or who you're talking to
 
AS

Bluefalcon2017

New Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 20, 2021
Messages
12
Reaction score
54
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
United States
Here’s how I cycled my last tank.
1. live sand / dry rock
2. Dosed a small eye dropper of ammonia day one and two.
3. day 3 dumped half a bottle of fritz in the am and other half in the pm
4. Day 4 does ammonia
5. Day 5 purchased two clowns and did a 10% water change.
tank was fully cycled by day 5 and hit the ditritus (spelling) stage.
6. Day 6 purchased hermits and snail crew (20 each)

then slowly added more stock for the next month. Never had an issue.
65 gallon tank. Refugium (sea Lettus kit) added around a month after setup.
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
21,880
Reaction score
17,931
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
tejas
That’s a perfect fritz cycle Blue Falcon, Dr Reefs bottle bac thread shows that two day delay to match fritz‘s deposition time onto surfaces where it’s locked in place, even a full water change won’t undo it by then. Hey did fritz smell really bad out of the bottle? still trying to figure out from another post if their bottle was just messed up they said it stunk the room up.
 
OP
LRT

LRT

FrankNPeeps;)
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
34,888
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
mesa arizona
That’s a perfect fritz cycle Blue Falcon, Dr Reefs bottle bac thread shows that two day delay to match fritz‘s deposition time onto surfaces where it’s locked in place, even a full water change won’t undo it by then. Hey did fritz smell really bad out of the bottle? still trying to figure out from another post if their bottle was just messed up they said it stunk the room up.
Usually is a bit stinky but I have seen it a little stinkier at times than others.
 

taricha

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
3,730
Reaction score
5,106
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Thread moved on from this question but I said I'd dig around anyway...
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.
"The tight interactions of ammonia oxidizers with NOB (e.g., [49]) are reflected by a close spatial co-aggregation of these nitrifiers, which is often observed in biofilms and activated sludge flocs and known as the ‘nitrification aggregate’"

"The classical concept of nitrification describes a mutualistic symbiosis where NOB depend on nitrite produced by ammonia oxidizers, which benefit from nitrite detoxification by NOB [92]. This results in a close juxtaposition of nitrifiers in biofilms (Figure I)."
-A New Perspective on Microbes Formerly Known as Nitrite-Oxidizing Bacteria
...it then goes on to say things can be more complex, and the symbiosis more involved than the classical idea. But anyway, yeah. nitrite oxidizers and ammonia oxidizers are spatially tied together.


Hi @taricha I really do like this. Yes and it will line up to what ive done in transfer.
What is the next greatest kit aside from measuring food input that we could possibly cross refference and correspond back to measuring weight?
Seneye for NH3.

for total ammonia: API kit modified by method of @Dan_P:
5 mL sample
3 red sea scoops of sodium citrate
4 drops of reagent 1
3 drops reagent 2.
for best sensitivity, run it through the hanna LR Silica checker (unless you've got a spectrometer) after 1hr.


that and a pH meter with 2 point calibration solutions at 7 and 10pH, and you're dialed in.
 

Forty-Two

Active Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Apr 15, 2021
Messages
276
Reaction score
207
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Israel
BTW - the title says "Should we rethink and refine means and methods for cycling tanks?"

What I don't 'get' is that taking all of the contents of one tank and putting them in a new tank says nothing about rethinking and refining means and methods for cycling tanks. Believe it or not - its been done since 1980 or before. BTW - I agree with the idea that the ideas should be 're-examined'. But - lets face it - Though some posters here want to claim they are re-inventing the holy grail - many people who have been doing this for a long time - have seen it all before. I appreciate the discussion, etc. But the last couple posts didnt make sense to me - so I wanted to clarify exactly what we were talking about. Now I see - there is nothing new here 'yet'

Ok - pretty big post below - my apologies. Get yourself a coffee.

Well I saw we got a bit derailed again - so I skipped some posts. Hopefully I didnt bypass something that will make what Im about to say redundant :) (Department of redundancy department?)

IMO - what we're talking about here is improving cycling by lowering/reducing/removing the "second phase" of cycling - (ill define it in a second so just wait please) where we see things go astray in most instances. The "second phase" of cycling can be, and is often the most painful/difficult, and leads to all sorts of problematic scenarios.

The "Second Phase" - is where we have a stable ammonia/nitrite/nitrate cycle. This part is done. Maybe its a bit fragile, we're scaling it up, but none the less, the tank can support some fish. Done and Done. Yofi (which means Great in Hebrew). So now we have some definition of the "Second Phase" of cycling - but when does it end? Well that's a bit of a tough definition. In my opinion (at this time) it ends when we see sustainable growth of coralline algae.

Why coralline algae? My guess, at this time is that coralline requires certain bacteria, or groups of bacteria which are more mature in order to survive. In other words, we've achieved some decent level of biodiveristy.

Therefore - the purpose of this thread is to explore ways of accelerating the "Second Phase" - or at least - to make it less painful and more stable. Hence - we're discussing moving coral frags from a tank that has completed the "Second Phase" into a New Tank which has just completed its initial cycle - or the "First Phase" which means it has a stable ammonia/nitrate/nitrite cycle.

This approach could be disasterous, or it could greatly improve the "Second Phase" of cycling by shortening it and/or making it more stable/less problematic. As I mentioned some pages back - simply throwing some corals into a tank which has completed its "First Phase" is counter-intuitive to me; which is to say it runs against what I would logically think is the best way to achieve a biodiverse and stable tank capable of supporting a real reef; however, upon further analysis - what we could be doing is introducing more mature bacteria into the tank on a scale which will shorten the length of time required to populate the tank with the appropriate bacteria that are usually aquired in the "Second Phase", and which truly moves us towards a mature and stable tank.

There are a number of good questions we've generated in the thread - but we're lacking answers at this time. Here are some of them:

Do we generally agree (without further better evidence) that the rudimentary definitions supplied between "First Phase" of cycling and "Second Phase" of cycling make sense? Does this improve our ability to discuss them? Are they accurate?

Is it possible to accelerate the "Second Phase" by adding in corals earlier than what is otherwise perceived as the "right time" to add corals? What is that time?

What is the density of corals/gallon required to reduce the time needed, or difficulty in the "Second Phase"?

Can we perform an experiment and gather evidence about how much this can reduce the "Second Phase" cycle time by? Or perhaps some evidence that it improves stability?

Using this method does it harm, or stress the coral life to an unacceptable level? Are there losses? If there are losses - are they acceptable? (in other words - the life lost due to accelerating the second phase may outweigh the life lost by the number of failed attempts to get through the "Second Phase" by having it overrun by dyno's etc)

Are there other methods that are more robust and less damaging to life forms?
 
Last edited:
Zoanthids

Lasse

7500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
8,948
Reaction score
26,024
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Ok - pretty big post below - my apologies. Get yourself a coffee.

Well I saw we got a bit derailed again - so I skipped some posts. Hopefully I didnt bypass something that will make what Im about to say redundant :) (Department of redundancy department?)

IMO - what we're talking about here is improving cycling by lowering/reducing/removing the "second phase" of cycling - (ill define it in a second so just wait please) where we see things go astray in most instances. The "second phase" of cycling can be, and is often the most painful/difficult, and leads to all sorts of problematic scenarios.

The "Second Phase" - is where we have a stable ammonia/nitrite/nitrate cycle. This part is done. Maybe its a bit fragile, we're scaling it up, but none the less, the tank can support some fish. Done and Done. Yofi (which means Great in Hebrew). So now we have some definition of the "Second Phase" of cycling - but when does it end? Well that's a bit of a tough definition. In my opinion (at this time) it ends when we see sustainable growth of coralline algae.

Why coralline algae? My guess, at this time is that coralline requires certain bacteria, or groups of bacteria which are more mature in order to survive. In other words, we've achieved some decent level of biodiveristy.

Therefore - the purpose of this thread is to explore ways of accelerating the "Second Phase" - or at least - to make it less painful and more stable. Hence - we're discussing moving coral frags from a tank that has completed the "Second Phase" into a New Tank which has just completed its initial cycle - or the "First Phase" which means it has a stable ammonia/nitrate/nitrite cycle.

This approach could be disasterous, or it could greatly improve the "Second Phase" of cycling by shortening it and/or making it more stable/less problematic. As I mentioned some pages back - simply throwing some corals into a tank which has completed its "First Phase" is counter-intuitive to me; which is to say it runs against what I would logically think is the best way to achieve a biodiverse and stable tank capable of supporting a real reef; however, upon further analysis - what we could be doing is introducing more mature bacteria into the tank on a scale which will shorten the length of time required to populate the tank with the appropriate bacteria that are usually aquired in the "Second Phase", and which truly moves us towards a mature and stable tank.

There are a number of good questions we've generated in the thread - but we're lacking answers at this time. Here are some of them:

Do we generally agree (without further better evidence) that the rudimentary definitions supplied between "First Phase" of cycling and "Second Phase" of cycling make sense? Does this improve our ability to discuss them? Are they accurate?

Is it possible to accelerate the "Second Phase" by adding in corals earlier than what is otherwise perceived as the "right time" to add corals? What is that time?

Can we perform an experiment and gather evidence about how much this can reduce the "Second Phase" cycle time by? Or perhaps some evidence that it improves stability?

Using this method does it harm, or stress the coral life to an unacceptable level? Are there losses? If there are losses - are they acceptable? (in other words - the life lost due to accelerating the second phase may outweigh the life lost by the number of failed attempts to get through the "Second Phase" by having it overrun by dyno's etc)

Are there other methods that are more robust and less damaging to life forms?
This is interesting question - and there is solution to this. But what we normally means with a complete cycling is completing of the nitrification process. The other - important things you mention - I refer to as the maturation period of a reef.

The real question is about if we should measure a methods success with lack of acute deaths of our animals or if we shall accept the fact that a toxin can be harmful in other ways than causing acute death. With nitrite we know that it makes damage in blood and gills. In saltwater fish - the blood is of no concern - it will probably not be raised levels of methemoglobin in the blood and hence lesser risk for acute toxic reactions with death as a result. But on the other hand - very few studies but never the less - recent studies show an uptake of NO2 in the digestive tract and excretion of this through the gills - probably the chloride cells. At least - this will rise the total level of stress and energy demand for fish in water with raised concentrations of nitrite. There have also been findings that indicate that raised concentrations of nitrite in saltwater can cause damage on the gills.

If any do the start with high load of ammonia (adding chemical ammonia) I would suggest - use nitrite measurements and do not add fish before NO2 is below 0.1

But I understand what you try to say - there is a life after the establishment of a proper nitrification process. I would love to see pictures of all these examples of "new cycling" we here about. Month for month during a year ot two. I have done that with my aquarium (80 G) that I start with some living sand, two kg living rocks, a clownfish and a CUC and very sparsely feeded. I use this method. The development of my tank - note - no uggly period, no problems at all


Sincerely Lasse
 
Last edited:

Lasse

7500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
8,948
Reaction score
26,024
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Believe it or not - its been done since 1980 or before.
It has been done since I start with aquarium around 1972
the bring a set of rock/filter stocked with bacteria? Why is this so novel to you?
I think it is because he has no experiences of saltwater fish in an aquarium. In another thread he state that his only have corals - no fish
You can basically do that by limiting feeding and with Siporax alone. Not that hard. That’s not even getting into protein skimmers, media reactors, LaCI, etc.
Exactly what I try to say
Thread moved on from this question but I said I'd dig around anyway...
Thank you for that but I do not understand why not others could do exactly what you probably have done - google nitrification and biofilms:D:D


Sincerely Lasse
 
Last edited:

UnderseaOddities

Well-Known Member
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
520
Reaction score
370
Review score
+1 /0 /-0
Location
Ohia
Ok - pretty big post below - my apologies. Get yourself a coffee.

Well I saw we got a bit derailed again - so I skipped some posts. Hopefully I didnt bypass something that will make what Im about to say redundant :) (Department of redundancy department?)

IMO - what we're talking about here is improving cycling by lowering/reducing/removing the "second phase" of cycling - (ill define it in a second so just wait please) where we see things go astray in most instances. The "second phase" of cycling can be, and is often the most painful/difficult, and leads to all sorts of problematic scenarios.

The "Second Phase" - is where we have a stable ammonia/nitrite/nitrate cycle. This part is done. Maybe its a bit fragile, we're scaling it up, but none the less, the tank can support some fish. Done and Done. Yofi (which means Great in Hebrew). So now we have some definition of the "Second Phase" of cycling - but when does it end? Well that's a bit of a tough definition. In my opinion (at this time) it ends when we see sustainable growth of coralline algae.

Why coralline algae? My guess, at this time is that coralline requires certain bacteria, or groups of bacteria which are more mature in order to survive. In other words, we've achieved some decent level of biodiveristy.

Therefore - the purpose of this thread is to explore ways of accelerating the "Second Phase" - or at least - to make it less painful and more stable. Hence - we're discussing moving coral frags from a tank that has completed the "Second Phase" into a New Tank which has just completed its initial cycle - or the "First Phase" which means it has a stable ammonia/nitrate/nitrite cycle.

This approach could be disasterous, or it could greatly improve the "Second Phase" of cycling by shortening it and/or making it more stable/less problematic. As I mentioned some pages back - simply throwing some corals into a tank which has completed its "First Phase" is counter-intuitive to me; which is to say it runs against what I would logically think is the best way to achieve a biodiverse and stable tank capable of supporting a real reef; however, upon further analysis - what we could be doing is introducing more mature bacteria into the tank on a scale which will shorten the length of time required to populate the tank with the appropriate bacteria that are usually aquired in the "Second Phase", and which truly moves us towards a mature and stable tank.

There are a number of good questions we've generated in the thread - but we're lacking answers at this time. Here are some of them:

Do we generally agree (without further better evidence) that the rudimentary definitions supplied between "First Phase" of cycling and "Second Phase" of cycling make sense? Does this improve our ability to discuss them? Are they accurate?

Is it possible to accelerate the "Second Phase" by adding in corals earlier than what is otherwise perceived as the "right time" to add corals? What is that time?

What is the density of corals/gallon required to reduce the time needed, or difficulty in the "Second Phase"?

Can we perform an experiment and gather evidence about how much this can reduce the "Second Phase" cycle time by? Or perhaps some evidence that it improves stability?

Using this method does it harm, or stress the coral life to an unacceptable level? Are there losses? If there are losses - are they acceptable? (in other words - the life lost due to accelerating the second phase may outweigh the life lost by the number of failed attempts to get through the "Second Phase" by having it overrun by dyno's etc)

Are there other methods that are more robust and less damaging to life forms?
@LRT @Forty-Two

I think we should all, throw away any test kit that isnt a reagent to test kh cal or mag! And train your eyes if the water is green its nitrate based pollution

@Forty-Two i like where your going with this but imma have to disagree with u on a couple things I've been at it since 06 and am an ex wholesaler ask me anything

So modern reefkeeping as we know it came around in the late 80s, this method of keeping a closed microclimate is/was called "The Berlin Method,"this method contains the pricpals maintaining a clean and stable environment within a saltwater aquarium, typically a coral reef system. This method relies on the use of ample live rock (rock with live marine organisms and bacteria on or in it).

So surface area = bacteria we knew this since the 60s but it wasnt improved upon until the 80s when people started to smuggle live reef rock live reef rock was a game changer

Fast forward 10 years we get bacteria in a bottle which was a gamechanger

So this bacteria in a bottle if u will started a whole movement and alot of people who lived inland could now maintain reef tanks without access to natural seawater(which was obtained generally from canal or local water sources and wasnt the cleanest,

Now granted alot of ppl back then couldnt keep coral they were viewed as alien something extraterrestrial from the murky depths many people struggled to keep the simplest corals alive such as xenias, cabbages,mushrooms,polyps,

All would die as ammonia would build up in the tank... but why you ask?

Because the bottle said you can add fish after 24 hours...

Which guess what was wrong

Fish were added in the systems infancy then coral as the nutrient output raises(increased bioload fish and coral eating an pooping(n,p) it has to be broke down and cycled somehow and without the propper amount of time for anaerobic bacterias to surfactant rock mediums and sand substrates


People who practiced the Berlin method however could keep certain corals like xenias blue ridge an cespistularias, German had reef tanks in the 90s that could rival some tanks today as germans were the first to develop a synthetic 13 ion salt in the late 80s these tanks were often big and bulky and powered by hid bulb which put out massive heat and did not have dumps everything was a contained unit and had a gravel layer that was 1in thick and a sand bed on top of it with a lb a gallon of live reef rock

But here's why it worked for them with a synthetic 13 ion salt the need to do a 35% wc with natural seawater daily to daily wc with new" pharmaceutical grade reef salt mix"


Fast forward to now were still using the berlin method 40 some odd years later

But to make a long story short

You can put fish in the same day its wet

Inverts after nh3 reads low


For coral we should wait awhile I(atleast a 2 weeks until bacteria settles)i believe we should gradually add corals overtime not to many at once, you start out with your space fillers mushies,softies, leathers, zoa, then put in your montis and chalices, then goniopora and alveopora then lps excluding eupiliya and gonis,all other sps, acro, nem box, then euphillidae
Lastly nps if you're gonna keep nonphotosynthetic gorgs and denros
Which need fed before lights on and before lights out when polyps are open



This is my method of cycling I call it hybridized cycling, it's an oldschool teq

So u start with sand and live rock,1# to 1 g

Then your saltwater
You then pour your biopsies dr tims microbacter 7 etc

Next is no filtration or light for 2 days then on 3rd day you can turn on pump hob etc then you add 2 clown or 2 then damsels you pick, add the fish after day 4 and start feeding you now have a nitrate source
Week 1 ends add light and skimmer


I wouldnt trust a test kit personally you can cycle anything under a 55 in a week realistically anything larger than that will take 2 weeks + more surface area = more time for bacteria to colonize


Also known as biogeochemical cycling
A tartration curve must occur over time not overnight or your just killing off your bacteria u paid for

My 2 cents
 
Last edited:

Lasse

7500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
8,948
Reaction score
26,024
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden

@LRT @Lasse @Forty-Two

Some water science for thought
Thank you for the lesson - personally I´m in the level that´s know that something like free hydrogen ions do not exist in real life - only in our attempts to explain it. The real thing that exist is hydronium. I have been working with water in different ways for more than 40 years now.

Sincerely Lasse
 
AquaCave Logo Banner

Dan_P

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
2,688
Reaction score
2,727
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Ok - pretty big post below - my apologies. Get yourself a coffee.

Well I saw we got a bit derailed again - so I skipped some posts. Hopefully I didnt bypass something that will make what Im about to say redundant :) (Department of redundancy department?)

IMO - what we're talking about here is improving cycling by lowering/reducing/removing the "second phase" of cycling - (ill define it in a second so just wait please) where we see things go astray in most instances. The "second phase" of cycling can be, and is often the most painful/difficult, and leads to all sorts of problematic scenarios.

The "Second Phase" - is where we have a stable ammonia/nitrite/nitrate cycle. This part is done. Maybe its a bit fragile, we're scaling it up, but none the less, the tank can support some fish. Done and Done. Yofi (which means Great in Hebrew). So now we have some definition of the "Second Phase" of cycling - but when does it end? Well that's a bit of a tough definition. In my opinion (at this time) it ends when we see sustainable growth of coralline algae.

Why coralline algae? My guess, at this time is that coralline requires certain bacteria, or groups of bacteria which are more mature in order to survive. In other words, we've achieved some decent level of biodiveristy.

Therefore - the purpose of this thread is to explore ways of accelerating the "Second Phase" - or at least - to make it less painful and more stable. Hence - we're discussing moving coral frags from a tank that has completed the "Second Phase" into a New Tank which has just completed its initial cycle - or the "First Phase" which means it has a stable ammonia/nitrate/nitrite cycle.

This approach could be disasterous, or it could greatly improve the "Second Phase" of cycling by shortening it and/or making it more stable/less problematic. As I mentioned some pages back - simply throwing some corals into a tank which has completed its "First Phase" is counter-intuitive to me; which is to say it runs against what I would logically think is the best way to achieve a biodiverse and stable tank capable of supporting a real reef; however, upon further analysis - what we could be doing is introducing more mature bacteria into the tank on a scale which will shorten the length of time required to populate the tank with the appropriate bacteria that are usually aquired in the "Second Phase", and which truly moves us towards a mature and stable tank.

There are a number of good questions we've generated in the thread - but we're lacking answers at this time. Here are some of them:

Do we generally agree (without further better evidence) that the rudimentary definitions supplied between "First Phase" of cycling and "Second Phase" of cycling make sense? Does this improve our ability to discuss them? Are they accurate?

Is it possible to accelerate the "Second Phase" by adding in corals earlier than what is otherwise perceived as the "right time" to add corals? What is that time?

What is the density of corals/gallon required to reduce the time needed, or difficulty in the "Second Phase"?

Can we perform an experiment and gather evidence about how much this can reduce the "Second Phase" cycle time by? Or perhaps some evidence that it improves stability?

Using this method does it harm, or stress the coral life to an unacceptable level? Are there losses? If there are losses - are they acceptable? (in other words - the life lost due to accelerating the second phase may outweigh the life lost by the number of failed attempts to get through the "Second Phase" by having it overrun by dyno's etc)

Are there other methods that are more robust and less damaging to life forms?
I like this narrative for a maturing aquarium. I will suggest that the development of the aquarium biofilm is the second phase.

This biofilm (probably more than one) can develop into many different types, depending how it is influenced, but I assume there are multiple pathways or trajectories to a “mature” biofilm, though the mature biofilms population are not all the same. This might be the basis for the idea that “every aquarium is different”.

The list of influences include, the amount of light, salinity, concentration of trace elements, nitrogen and phosphorous concentrations, dissolved organic carbon type and concentration and when and what species of microorganisms are introduced into the aquarium.

I suggest that biofilm maturation can be nudged to develop differently by manipulating the above influences. The time frame between nudging biofilm development and observing the effect is weeks. What you see happening today was probably caused by what you did a month ago. I believe this notion helps explain why causes for nuisance organism are difficult to discover.

The above is a narrative with backing from some science, some hands on experimentation and a large dollop of conjecture.
 

Aqua Man

Valuable Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Jan 19, 2020
Messages
1,027
Reaction score
1,352
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Why coralline algae? My guess, at this time is that coralline requires certain bacteria, or groups of bacteria which are more mature in order to survive. In other words, we've achieved some decent level of biodiveristy.
Good guess!

I suggest that biofilm maturation can be nudged to develop differently by manipulating the above influences.
This would explain some of the swings in a tank transfer. All the new surfaces that are getting covered by new biofilm.

This might be the basis for the idea that “every aquarium is different”.
As someone with mulitank syndrome, this drives me nuts!

They say nothing good happens fast. Lately I’ve thinking that “not much” happens when taking it slow. One of my tanks is almost 3 years wet and coralline is just now showing up. Algae didn’t even grow until I added a fish!(one year wet aprox). Tank had been ready, was just taking my time.
 

Aqua Man

Valuable Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Jan 19, 2020
Messages
1,027
Reaction score
1,352
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Example of fast, only one I can think of.

LFS set up a frag table, 6ft X 4ft 10 in deep, might be 8ft long not sure. Was told it’s around 80 gallons. No sump, just live rock and a massive skimmer tucked in the corner. Frag table is a white plastic material he picked up from a hydroponics shop.
Within a couple months he had that thing filled with coral! All kinds but mostly LPS and SPS. Acros included. The sides were growing coralline within a couple weeks. Every time I’m in there I’m amazed at how well everything is growing.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,953
Reaction score
13,883
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Thread moved on from this question but I said I'd dig around anyway...

"The tight interactions of ammonia oxidizers with NOB (e.g., [49]) are reflected by a close spatial co-aggregation of these nitrifiers, which is often observed in biofilms and activated sludge flocs and known as the ‘nitrification aggregate’"

"The classical concept of nitrification describes a mutualistic symbiosis where NOB depend on nitrite produced by ammonia oxidizers, which benefit from nitrite detoxification by NOB [92]. This results in a close juxtaposition of nitrifiers in biofilms (Figure I)."
-A New Perspective on Microbes Formerly Known as Nitrite-Oxidizing Bacteria
...it then goes on to say things can be more complex, and the symbiosis more involved than the classical idea. But anyway, yeah. nitrite oxidizers and ammonia oxidizers are spatially tied together.



Seneye for NH3.

for total ammonia: API kit modified by method of @Dan_P:
5 mL sample
3 red sea scoops of sodium citrate
4 drops of reagent 1
3 drops reagent 2.

for best sensitivity, run it through the hanna LR Silica checker (unless you've got a spectrometer) after 1hr.

that and a pH meter with 2 point calibration solutions at 7 and 10pH, and you're dialed in.
Thanks for looking this up!!
 
OP
LRT

LRT

FrankNPeeps;)
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
34,888
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
mesa arizona
Example of fast, only one I can think of.

LFS set up a frag table, 6ft X 4ft 10 in deep, might be 8ft long not sure. Was told it’s around 80 gallons. No sump, just live rock and a massive skimmer tucked in the corner. Frag table is a white plastic material he picked up from a hydroponics shop.
Within a couple months he had that thing filled with coral! All kinds but mostly LPS and SPS. Acros included. The sides were growing coralline within a couple weeks. Every time I’m in there I’m amazed at how well everything is growing.
Precisely what im after here with this thread.
Ive done it probably 10-12 x in last year alone setting up quick cycle tanks for incoming corals.
Frag shows do this pretty much every show.
Plenty of journals showcasing same techniques full of sps.
I sincerely do feel if we diligently follow the rules the pros set down for cycling that anyone can achieve the same success.
Timelines will change depending on methods used. There are plenty of ways to get from point A to B and achieve exact same results.
I do believe we can employ certain methods to "nudge" things along or we wouldn't see the success outlined in tank above.
This is what I want to look at.
 
Last edited:
AquaCave Logo Banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

Toys For Kids Drive

Untitled-2 copy.jpg

BRS

Have you ever had a nano reef tank?

  • I have one now (leave a photo in the thread)

    Votes: 221 45.9%
  • Yes, but in the past

    Votes: 107 22.2%
  • No and no plans to have one

    Votes: 82 17.0%
  • No but I want to have one in the future

    Votes: 64 13.3%
  • Other

    Votes: 8 1.7%
Torch SALE
Top