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

BRS
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pimba

Community Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Oct 11, 2021
Messages
69
Reaction score
29
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Earth
IMO you should be able to add new fish at the very same time you finished setting up my tank if you add fast growing algae like chaeto. They will consume ammonia and as the time goes bacteria will grow eventually as well.
 
AquaCave Logo Banner

taricha

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
3,725
Reaction score
5,059
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
By the way haven’t coral farms figured this all out.
heh. this might be one where some reading would get answers faster than weeks of setup and testing.

here's a discussion I remember in aquabiomics article about how BattleCorals set up the system that they really liked the results of.

Transferred water (not rock) en masse from an old coral system to the new system.
AD: Great question. The system tested is not that old. I set it up in the spring of 2017, after construction of my new facility was completed. While I actually didn't use any of the rock from my older system, I did use a lot of the water. I transferred a few hundred gallons from the old, to the new when I initially set it up. Some of the rock in my older system had been in saltwater tanks dating back 20+ years, most of the rock over 15 at least. So it's been long established, built from many different sources, and through a great deal of ups and downs over the years.


EM
: Really interesting that you used old water but not old rock. I sometimes encounter the view that “most of the microbes are in the rock, what’s in the water doesn’t matter”. Of course, direct counts show tens of thousands of bacteria per ml of aquarium water, and DNA evidence shows these include many of the ones hobbyists care about.

Your experience shows that this water can also be used to establish a healthy microbiome in a new aquarium. At least if you add enough of it!

It's interesting, but certainly doesn't sound like it's a standard approach.
 

Dan_P

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
2,676
Reaction score
2,711
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
heh. this might be one where some reading would get answers faster than weeks of setup and testing.

here's a discussion I remember in aquabiomics article about how BattleCorals set up the system that they really liked the results of.

Transferred water (not rock) en masse from an old coral system to the new system.


It's interesting, but certainly doesn't sound like it's a standard approach.
The transfer of water but not rock touches on @Lasse idea that freshly prepared IO is harsh on fish.

It is clear whether the biofilm is needed on,y process waste? And the old water, just a soothing medium?
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,922
Reaction score
13,852
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
The transfer of water but not rock touches on @Lasse idea that freshly prepared IO is harsh on fish.

It is clear whether the biofilm is needed on,y process waste? And the old water, just a soothing medium?
I believe @Lasse answered this - that there are particulates - in the water that carry nitrifiers. Perhaps I'm incorrect
 

taricha

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
3,725
Reaction score
5,059
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Is it clear whether the biofilm is needed only to process waste? And the old water, just a soothing medium?

The old water can certainly seed new biofilm. The microbiome tests of that BattleCorals system found some of the largest proportions of nitrifiers (Ammonia and nitrite oxidizers both) among any system tested.

There is a widely and strongly held but fuzzy conventional wisdom that something besides waste processing is important. But nobody can definitively say what it is.
"bacteria" "diversity" "maturity" "stability" "biofilm" etc all are used to try to describe the thing that people think is important that happens to a system next after the ammonia->NO2->NO3 step, if it's improvements in waste processing, then nobody knows what is being processed better because the measurables are stable after ~two weeks or less.
The conventional wisdom describes it in terms of addition, all those quoted words above are trying to represent something people think increases with time. But who knows. Maybe it's subtraction - the aging of water and system could be depletion of bad things.
 
Click to watch best scape method in 5 easy steps!

Dan_P

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
2,676
Reaction score
2,711
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
The old water can certainly seed new biofilm. The microbiome tests of that BattleCorals system found some of the largest proportions of nitrifiers (Ammonia and nitrite oxidizers both) among any system tested.

There is a widely and strongly held but fuzzy conventional wisdom that something besides waste processing is important. But nobody can definitively say what it is.
"bacteria" "diversity" "maturity" "stability" "biofilm" etc all are used to try to describe the thing that people think is important that happens to a system next after the ammonia->NO2->NO3 step, if it's improvements in waste processing, then nobody knows what is being processed better because the measurables are stable after ~two weeks or less.
The conventional wisdom describes it in terms of addition, all those quoted words above are trying to represent something people think increases with time. But who knows. Maybe it's subtraction - the aging of water and system could be depletion of bad things.
There is another potentially very important variable we don’t seem to talk about: the aquarist. What the aquarist is doing varies over time. The subject might even be less understood than the aquarium microbiome :).

Maybe “diversity" "maturity" "stability" apply to the aquarist in terms of “diversity of information sources”, “maturity in thinking skeptically and avoiding fads” and “stability as it applies to breaking the habit of continually adding stuff to the aquarium”.
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,922
Reaction score
13,852
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
The old water can certainly seed new biofilm. The microbiome tests of that BattleCorals system found some of the largest proportions of nitrifiers (Ammonia and nitrite oxidizers both) among any system tested.

There is a widely and strongly held but fuzzy conventional wisdom that something besides waste processing is important. But nobody can definitively say what it is.
"bacteria" "diversity" "maturity" "stability" "biofilm" etc all are used to try to describe the thing that people think is important that happens to a system next after the ammonia->NO2->NO3 step, if it's improvements in waste processing, then nobody knows what is being processed better because the measurables are stable after ~two weeks or less.
The conventional wisdom describes it in terms of addition, all those quoted words above are trying to represent something people think increases with time. But who knows. Maybe it's subtraction - the aging of water and system could be depletion of bad things.
Maybe its not factual - which is my commentary - which I think goes along with the thread
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,922
Reaction score
13,852
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Maybe its not factual - which is my commentary - which I think goes along with the thread
By the way - what I mean - I am not sure there is any magic in waiting, time, etc - if bacteria are there - they are there. whether in a biofilm, floating on particles in the water, etc.
 
OP
LRT

LRT

FrankNPeeps;)
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
34,882
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
mesa arizona
Maybe its not factual - which is my commentary - which I think goes along with the thread
Oh Man I realize I wasn't quoted here but sure wish you could expand on your statement:D
eatingmontage-1418913339.gif
 
OP
LRT

LRT

FrankNPeeps;)
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
34,882
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
mesa arizona
By the way - what I mean - I am not sure there is any magic in waiting, time, etc - if bacteria are there - they are there. whether in a biofilm, floating on particles in the water, etc.
Hahaha thanks man
 
A Piece of the Ocean for Every Reef Tank

taricha

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
3,725
Reaction score
5,059
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Maybe its not factual - which is my commentary - which I think goes along with the thread
Yep. Also a strong possibility! One of my favorite recent comments, I'll have to look it up to give the poster credit...

They said, of course corals could survive early in a new tank. It's the hobbyist that needs to mature (not so much the tank) .
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,922
Reaction score
13,852
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Yep. Also a strong possibility! One of my favorite recent comments, I'll have to look it up to give the poster credit...

They said, of course corals could survive early in a new tank. It's the hobbyist that needs to mature (not so much the tank) .
I believe that was me:)
 
OP
LRT

LRT

FrankNPeeps;)
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
34,882
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
mesa arizona
The old water can certainly seed new biofilm. The microbiome tests of that BattleCorals system found some of the largest proportions of nitrifiers (Ammonia and nitrite oxidizers both) among any system tested.

There is a widely and strongly held but fuzzy conventional wisdom that something besides waste processing is important. But nobody can definitively say what it is.
"bacteria" "diversity" "maturity" "stability" "biofilm" etc all are used to try to describe the thing that people think is important that happens to a system next after the ammonia->NO2->NO3 step, if it's improvements in waste processing, then nobody knows what is being processed better because the measurables are stable after ~two weeks or less.
The conventional wisdom describes it in terms of addition, all those quoted words above are trying to represent something people think increases with time. But who knows. Maybe it's subtraction - the aging of water and system could be depletion of bad things.

There is another potentially very important variable we don’t seem to talk about: the aquarist. What the aquarist is doing varies over time. The subject might even be less understood than the aquarium microbiome :).

Maybe “diversity" "maturity" "stability" apply to the aquarist in terms of “diversity of information sources”, “maturity in thinking skeptically and avoiding fads” and “stability as it applies to breaking the habit of continually adding stuff to the aquarium”.
Maybe we can look at it like this.
Its totally factual to say we are going to take out what we put in no matter how we stock our tanks, no matter what level we are on and that can be applied to basicly everything reefing encompasses across the entire board.
I've seen with my own eyes through too many tank set ups now to not be convinced that the following is true.
Using the data and applying the science of cycle for livestock ready. Based off @Lasse 15 step method alone(which is brilliant actually) never knew it even existed and sure one day im going to totally regret getting him riled up.. Already kind of do.
Anyhow we actually can stock our tanks alot faster than most conventional wisdomers tells us to wait. Wait for what? What we are trying to achieve to magically happen?
The wisdom here is based on the knowledge the science gives us and the numbers in our testing proves that.
We can factually say we can stock our tanks as fast as the data proves we can with healthy thriving corals and bring in everything those corals love with them and fill the tank with everything they love and tip these things in our favor.
Common sense tells me that because I've seen the exact opposite putting algae infested, infected corals in a tank and grew just that as well. Pretty fast I might add.
@taricha I'm very glad you posted results from battlecorals testing.
Everyday the conventional wisdomers tell us DO NOT use old system water. That you cannot use it the way it was proven to be used in that testing.
Who's knowledge was most of this conventional wisdom based on anyway?
A bad experience someone had that tried it and didn't get it right?
Beliefs based on knowledge that we now to to not be true?
The science is there and we can prove certain methods can hugely benefit setting up new tanks.
I dont need to run a test tank to prove that. I'm seeing it everyday. Transfer tank is all the proof needed.
 
Last edited:
OP
LRT

LRT

FrankNPeeps;)
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Feb 20, 2020
Messages
8,450
Reaction score
34,882
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
mesa arizona
Had to look it up lol

Conventional Wisdom-
A generally accepted theory or belief.

I believe its past time to look as certain beliefs and propose new thoeries as there has been enough evidence posted in this thread alone that shatter some beliefs of conventional wisdom.
Battlecorals test sample proves this.
Most conventional wisdomers would say you can't use old tank water to set up a tank! Water column does not carry necessary bacteria. Most would tell you its equivalent to putting bad motor oil back in your car after changing oil. That's a good one I see posted quite enough.
Sure it may be true for some systems I wouldnt dream of reusing the water from.

But the conventional wisdom behind not reusing water for a new tank application is proven false. And the data proved that.
 
Last edited:

taricha

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
3,725
Reaction score
5,059
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
I believe that was me:)
actually it was this particular comment I was remembering...
1 thing regarding anemones. Do people really think the "wait 6 months to a year" is so your tank can mature? No! It's so you, the reefer, can learn how to take care of your tank. Yes, anemones can go into a tank day 1.
but you "liked" that comment too, so close enough! :)
 
Orphek OR3 reef aquarium LED lighting

taricha

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
May 22, 2016
Messages
3,725
Reaction score
5,059
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Most conventional wisdomers would say you can't use old tank water to set up a tank! Water column does not carry necessary bacteria. Most would tell you its equivalent to putting bad motor oil back in your car after changing oil. That's a good one I see posted quite enough.
Sure it may be true for some systems I wouldnt dream of reusing the water from.
yep. And if someone offered you 100 gallons of water from a system loaded with awesome corals to start your new system, you should take it.
(that's how much was used from the old system to start the new one.)

Also a coral grower can also load a new tank with tons of coral. That option is not available to most hobbyists, so maybe we have to be more clever.
 

Lasse

7500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
8,940
Reaction score
26,003
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
Had to look it up lol

Conventional Wisdom-
A generally accepted theory or belief.

I believe its past time to look as certain beliefs and propose new thoeries as there has been enough evidence posted in this thread alone that shatter some beliefs of conventional wisdom.
Battlecorals test sample proves this.
Most conventional wisdomers would say you can't use old tank water to set up a tank! Water column does not carry necessary bacteria. Most would tell you its equivalent to putting bad motor oil back in your car after changing oil. That's a good one I see posted quite enough.
Sure it may be true for some systems I wouldnt dream of reusing the water from.

But the conventional wisdom behind not reusing water for a new tank application is proven false. And the data proved that.
The question of how to derail the myth that it is bad to use "old" water is basically a question of logical thinking IMO. Just go back to the tank you take your water from - should you do a 100 % WC in that too? If it is "bad" to start a new tank with some % of that water - what it is for the original tank with 100% of that water? The question answer itself - it is a logical somersault. Today - with so many tanks running according to Tritons systematical thinking of no regular WC - we know that old water is not bad for corals.

Its right that old water - with help of particles - can contain a load of nitrifiers - but that´s not even the most important factor for me to use old water in a startup if I can.

For me - new mixed water is to "chemical" to work well with organisms which for their defense and/or possibility to survive is dependent on a mucus layer in the interface between the organism and the water. Old water content a lot of organic molecules and particles (among these many organic colloids) This can be a good help in order to withhold homeostasis in the mucus layer. For both participants on each side of an interface there is a general rule about equilibrium. The easiest way of understanding this is osmosis there different salts try to equalize themselves through an interface (membrane). For transport out to the water happens this for all substances that are more or less soluble in water or at least have one part that is hydrophilic.

I think the the general view of new synthetic water and old aquarium water is that the new is the highest quality and after that - the quality fall. That´s not my view at all - for me - the new mixed water is the starting point and then you refine this with time.

Sincerely Lasse
 

Dan_P

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
2,676
Reaction score
2,711
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
The question of how to derail the myth that it is bad to use "old" water is basically a question of logical thinking IMO. Just go back to the tank you take your water from - should you do a 100 % WC in that too? If it is "bad" to start a new tank with some % of that water - what it is for the original tank with 100% of that water? The question answer itself - it is a logical somersault. Today - with so many tanks running according to Tritons systematical thinking of no regular WC - we know that old water is not bad for corals.

Its right that old water - with help of particles - can contain a load of nitrifiers - but that´s not even the most important factor for me to use old water in a startup if I can.

For me - new mixed water is to "chemical" to work well with organisms which for their defense and/or possibility to survive is dependent on a mucus layer in the interface between the organism and the water. Old water content a lot of organic molecules and particles (among these many organic colloids) This can be a good help in order to withhold homeostasis in the mucus layer. For both participants on each side of an interface there is a general rule about equilibrium. The easiest way of understanding this is osmosis there different salts try to equalize themselves through an interface (membrane). For transport out to the water happens this for all substances that are more or less soluble in water or at least have one part that is hydrophilic.

I think the the general view of new synthetic water and old aquarium water is that the new is the highest quality and after that - the quality fall. That´s not my view at all - for me - the new mixed water is the starting point and then you refine this with time.

Sincerely Lasse
This might be an argument against water changes.
 

Lasse

7500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
8,940
Reaction score
26,003
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
This might be an argument against water changes.
Not so much WC if it needed but against large WC on a regular basis. But it also an argument for small WC if you chose that path. But if you have to do a large WC you need to do it. I need a large WC in my aquaria back in 2018 but I did it that way that I change 50 L a day (for 9 days) instead for 250 L (total volume 300 L and i needed a 80 % WC) the same time. Not as effective but - IMO - more safe

Sincerely Lasse
 

Dan_P

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
2,676
Reaction score
2,711
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Not so much WC if it needed but against large WC on a regular basis. But it also an argument for small WC if you chose that path. But if you have to do a large WC you need to do it. I need a large WC in my aquaria back in 2018 but I did it that way that I change 50 L a day (for 9 days) instead for 250 L (total volume 300 L and i needed a 80 % WC) the same time. Not as effective but - IMO - more safe

Sincerely Lasse
Informative clarification. Thanks.
 
Avast
Status
Not open for further replies.
BRS

Have you ever had a nano reef tank?

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

    Votes: 82 53.9%
  • Yes, but in the past

    Votes: 33 21.7%
  • No and no plans to have one

    Votes: 19 12.5%
  • No but I want to have one in the future

    Votes: 17 11.2%
  • Other

    Votes: 1 0.7%
NYOS
Top