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

[ReefGeezer]

Shortly - yes. But in that case - I would use 50% old water and mix it with new salt water.

Sincerely Lasse

I like the short answer and agree some import of microorganisms, DOC, and nutrients with old water might help.
My point however, is that maybe I have been thinking incorrectly. My process has always been: 1) Establish a nitrogen cycle with ammonia/bacteria... easy enough; 2) Stock fish and let the system adjust and stabilize as the ugly phase progresses... again easy enough, but time consuming; 3) Begin to stock corals near the end of the ugly phase; and 4) Stock more sensitive corals after the uglies are done and the initial corals start to flourish. I suppose that's my own paradigm and, I assume, many others might be there also. I'm beginning to think there is a better way to get to the goal line, a new paradigm for me and maybe others on the forum. I thought your 15 step process pointed in that direction. Maybe it could be expanded and modified to create a new roadmap for people like me, with limited understanding of how things work, to help us establish a mature reef system with less fuss and frustration.

 

[LRT]

I have seen a similar pattern of nothing, when necessary ingredients are withheld.
I set up some tiny test tanks and cycled them, then just let them circulate. for months in the dark.
The NO3 in each tank stayed at its high post-cycling level (50+) for 90 days. Without light or any organic carbon input, the activity and probably the "maturation" of the system is very very low.
Could corals and fish live in there after "curing" for 3 months? yeah. Maybe the same as they could have on day 7 or 9.



This is also true. The conditions drive the biofilm. And the biofilm being stable and adjusted to the new conditions likely takes a week or more.

But the flip side is that fish and coral can drive the biofilm. Corals are very good at controlling their own large bacterial population. This can be seen most dramatically on the rare occasions when it disappears, when a coral gets a disease and can no longer control its microbiome - things go badly very fast. Im sure I'm not the only one who's seen a sick coral colony where part of the colony is dying and gets quickly overrun by nuisance algae while the other healthy part of the coral maintains itself totally clean and clear.

Would a healthy coral + coral-associated fish, if added to a new system very early (immediately after ammonia + no2 processing is established), cause the system to accelerate and rapidly develop the "mature" biofilm desired for a reef system?

From my observation.
Yes. And how fast this all occurs is solely dependant on how diligent we are at keeping params stable.
I'm going out on the limb and saying lighting fast depending on how many surfaces are covered with corals from healthy thriving systems.

 

[MnFish1]

I volunteered an answer as its handy patterning to relate questions about this setup to threads that have measured the items in question, we may want later to link them to check for patterns in outcome.

If ONLY you could use the quote feature - its the button on each response you're responding to - everyone would know what you're referring to.

 

[happyhourhero]

Now I see that the train wreck spilled into my thread.

 

[MnFish1]

I've done better and have done a bunch of experiments on the side with crushed coral. Not dry rock.
Let me ask you something.
You would continue to add bottle bac to a tank thats fully cycling given bioload?
Id advise against that unless your prepared for unstable alk and ph swings. Ive seen it a few times now.
Unless we aren't talking about a fully stocked tank of corals?

I'm not going to repeat my summary. I already answered all of these questions. If anyone is 'cycling' its your comments. There is no doubt in my mind - from your first post - that you would be successful. My guess is that if you took a poll 99 percent of people who have any experience in reefing would have agreed that you could do what you did with no problem. It seems like you're trying to invent a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Just for the sake of discussion - I said 'define fully cycling'. What exactly does that mean - frankly - its meaningless - there is no standard definition. Its like 'skip cycles', 'new cycling science', etc etc etc. People can keep repeating the words - but they are meaningless - and the average reader has no clue what you're saying. I do not know what a tank thats 'fully cycling' means. Every tank from the second water is poured in is 'fully cycling'.

I never said I would continue to add bottled Bacteria to anything - I said - I would follow instructions (in multiple posts) - and If I was going to use dry rock, and a high FISH bioload I add more. Why do you think adding 'bottled bacteria' to a coral tank - would cause unstable alkalinity (what is your definition of 'unstable'. 8.5 - 8.7? pH changes in my tank between 7.9 and 8.1 with time of day - do you mean more than that?

What you're saying is patently scientifically false. Because - in theory - every time you add food to your tank - within a couple hours bacteria are breaking down fish waste- and extra food thats left. Does that also cause extreme pH and alkalinity changes - ??? No.

 

[Dan_P]

Would a healthy coral + coral-associated fish, if added to a new system very early (immediately after ammonia + no2 processing is established), cause the system to accelerate and rapidly develop the "mature" biofilm desired for a reef system?

Let’s define a mature biofilm. Why do a fish or coral even need a biofilm?

Would a coral or fish thrive in a stream of freshly prepared synthetic seawater with container surface that inhibited biofilm formation?

 

[LRT]

I'm not going to repeat my summary. I already answered all of these questions. If anyone is 'cycling' its your comments. There is no doubt in my mind - from your first post - that you would be successful. My guess is that if you took a poll 99 percent of people who have any experience in reefing would have agreed that you could do what you did with no problem. It seems like you're trying to invent a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Just for the sake of discussion - I said 'define fully cycling'. What exactly does that mean - frankly - its meaningless - there is no standard definition. Its like 'skip cycles', 'new cycling science', etc etc etc. People can keep repeating the words - but they are meaningless - and the average reader has no clue what you're saying. I do not know what a tank thats 'fully cycling' means. Every tank from the second water is poured in is 'fully cycling'.

I never said I would continue to add bottled Bacteria to anything - I said - I would follow instructions (in multiple posts) - and If I was going to use dry rock, and a high FISH bioload I add more. Why do you think adding 'bottled bacteria' to a coral tank - would cause unstable alkalinity (what is your definition of 'unstable'. 8.5 - 8.7? pH changes in my tank between 7.9 and 8.1 with time of day - do you mean more than that?

What you're saying is patently scientifically false. Because - in theory - every time you add food to your tank - within a couple hours bacteria are breaking down fish waste- and extra food thats left. Does that also cause extreme pH and alkalinity changes - ??? No.

Bro ive clearly defined exactly what my intention is here.
Honestly everyone else thats taking part in this thread seem to get it.
From the looks of things some beyond seem to get it and we are clearly on our way to where we are going now.

 

[MnFish1]

Bro ive clearly defined exactly what my intention is here.
Honestly everyone else thats taking part in this thread seem to get it.
From the looks of things some beyond seem to get it and we are clearly on our way to where we are going now.

Well - likewise - I already answered the question that you answered. Its kind of like during a discussion where someone says 'so what you're saying is xxxx?' when in this case I spelled out exactly what I thought - and said. But you brought up something I never said or implied.

FWIW - Its clear - as from post 1. there is no reason to expect that transferring one tank to another - with coral especially - will cause any problem. Frankly and no offense - its like me saying - I'm going to shut my curtains - and see if the sun comes up tomorrow - and when it does - I say - wow the sun came up. So - even though 90 percent of what I just posted in my summary totally agrees with you - go ahead - keep saying things I didn't say.

 

[MnFish1]

Bro ive clearly defined exactly what my intention is here.
Honestly everyone else thats taking part in this thread seem to get it.
From the looks of things some beyond seem to get it and we are clearly on our way to where we are going now.

PS - no - everyone else does not 'get it'. My guess is that most people think that the success you had was common sense. Which is what I said - and as well - something I've done 20 times over the years. As @Lasse said as well. But - Good luck with your experiment. I guarantee you - the sun will come up tomorrow.

 

[LRT]

PS - no - everyone else does not 'get it'. My guess is that most people think that the success you had was common sense. Which is what I said - and as well - something I've done 20 times over the years. As @Lasse said as well. But - Good luck with your experiment. I guarantee you - the sun will come up tomorrow.

Quite frankly and no disrespect.
This thread was not made to appease you, me or lasse or anyone else for that matter. Ive politely and clearly pointed out the intentions of this thread. The rest and significance of whats herein is purely up to followers.
Some seem to get it very well.
Others idk but I guess I really can't make everyone happy on this one

 

[Lasse]

I like the short answer and agree some import of microorganisms, DOC, and nutrients with old water might help.
My point however, is that maybe I have been thinking incorrectly. My process has always been: 1) Establish a nitrogen cycle with ammonia/bacteria... easy enough; 2) Stock fish and let the system adjust and stabilize as the ugly phase progresses... again easy enough, but time consuming; 3) Begin to stock corals near the end of the ugly phase; and 4) Stock more sensitive corals after the uglies are done and the initial corals start to flourish. I suppose that's my own paradigm and, I assume, many others might be there also. I'm beginning to think there is a better way to get to the goal line, a new paradigm for me and maybe others on the forum. I thought your 15 step process pointed in that direction. Maybe it could be expanded and modified to create a new roadmap for people like me, with limited understanding of how things work, to help us establish a mature reef system with less fuss and frustration.

Would a coral or fish thrive in a stream of freshly prepared synthetic seawater with container surface that inhibited biofilm formation?

This two is linked together. It is my opinion that freshly mixed saltwater is to "chemical" for living things that have an interface to the water. Used water contain many small biological molecules like organic colloids that "soften" up the contact between water and sensitive tissue. Newly mixed saltwater is not very pleasant for the mucous layer that you find both on fish and corals,

@Dan_P - you can only dream about corals without biofilm - they build it by themself - probably biofilm and corals live in symbiosis.

@ReefGeezer I introduce corals rather fast and a huge CUC the same day I switch the light on. I have never seen an ugly phase - some diatoms before measurable phosphorus - but that's all - my CUC handle that

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Dan_P]

This two is linked together. It is my opinion that freshly mixed saltwater is to "chemical" for living things that have an interface to the water. Used water contain many small biological molecules like organic colloids that "soften" up the contact between water and sensitive tissue. Newly mixed saltwater is not very pleasant for the slime that you find both on fish and corals,

@Dan_P - you can only dream about corals without biofilm - they build it by themself - probably biofilm and corals live in symbiosis.

@ReefGeezer I introduce corals rather fast and a huge CUC the same day I switch the light on. I have never seen an ugly phase - some diatoms before measurable phosphorus - but that's all - my CUC handle that

Sincerely Lasse

Would a fish not live in permanently fresh synthetic seawater?

 

[MnFish1]

Quite frankly and no disrespect.
This thread was not made to appease you, me or lasse or anyone else for that matter. Ive politely and clearly pointed out the intentions of this thread. The rest and significance of whats herein is purely up to followers.
Some seem to get it very well.
Others idk but I guess I really can't make everyone happy on this one

OK - humor me - show me the post number where its been clearly pointed out the intentions of the thread (I fully agree you're always polite) - and I have no desire to be 'appeased'. The only reason I ask is because I recall 2 or 3? times where you've said 'maybe I should have called the thread 'xxxxxxx'' - If I misunderstood I surely apologize

 

[LRT]

OK - humor me - show me the post number where its been clearly pointed out the intentions of the thread (I fully agree you're always polite) - and I have no desire to be 'appeased'. The only reason I ask is because I recall 2 or 3? times where you've said 'maybe I should have called the thread 'xxxxxxx'' - If I misunderstood I surely apologize

Sorry I can't do that lol this thread has totally evolved somewhere around 10 times since its began. I tried to make it clear as we went. K8nd of exhausting at this point to keep going around and around on it.
I guess we will see when and where we end up?

 

[LRT]

This two is linked together. It is my opinion that freshly mixed saltwater is to "chemical" for living things that have an interface to the water. Used water contain many small biological molecules like organic colloids that "soften" up the contact between water and sensitive tissue. Newly mixed saltwater is not very pleasant for the slime that you find both on fish and corals,

@Dan_P - you can only dream about corals without biofilm - they build it by themself - probably biofilm and corals live in symbiosis.

@ReefGeezer I introduce corals rather fast and a huge CUC the same day I switch the light on. I have never seen an ugly phase - some diatoms before measurable phosphorus - but that's all - my CUC handle that

Sincerely Lasse

After reading this post its really hard to believe we disagree on much at all.
Lasse. Maybe uneducatedly I always kind of felt that cycling ammonia through peak and back to 0 would work me through process you posted.
I'm guessing alot of people may have same misunderstanding about the processes that occur afterwords
I never did rush things super fast I always took my time stocking and I've always kind of reached your results from 15 step program. Just a different testing path.
Tbh I highly doubt any of my stocked systems seen much of excessive nitrite levels if any by time I had fish in them.
Or ever for that matter.

 

[Reefahholic]

Quite frankly and no disrespect.
This thread was not made to appease you, me or lasse or anyone else for that matter. Ive politely and clearly pointed out the intentions of this thread. The rest and significance of whats herein is purely up to followers.
Some seem to get it very well.
Others idk but I guess I really can't make everyone happy on this one

He doesn't like other opinons...Only his own.

 

[MnFish1]

.

 

[Lasse]

He doesn't like other opinons...Only his own.

Are you talking to me?

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Would a fish not live in permanently fresh synthetic seawater?

Probably but the absence of biological molecules like colloids will - IMO - affect the mucous layer and the production of it. It will be a type of stress and energy demanding production of new mucous layer. These organic/biological molecules is always present in both natural fresh- and saltwater. In new started aquarium fish can be seen flashing and itching - a behavior that many people see as a sign of parasites - but - IMO - it can also be a sign of irritation in the mucous layer. I have often seen this behavior after huge WC.

I always prefer to have an amount of "old" water when I do fresh starts or i use Tetras Bactozym

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

After reading this post its really hard to believe we disagree on much at all

That´s right but it is not because I use "new cycling methods". It is because someone have reinvent methods that we oldies have use since childhood and name that for new cycling science. The real new cycling methods for me - as an European - is the ones with huge amount of chemical ammonia in the start.

Sincerely Lasse