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

[Lasse]

Hi Lasse the goal will be to fully cycle both ammonia and nitrites back to 0.
However I may be using Randy's graphs as safeguards to determine whether of not its safe to throw a cpl critters in along the way. He's done the work and feel like we can safely and responsibly work inside of his work here.

Do not use the word cycled then. Use halfcycled or whatever. You are not the one change the scientific nomenclature. Nitrification is completed (cycled) when both step works more or less seamless. Not you - not Randy - not me can say which concentration of nitrite create chronic or sub-lethal damage. We can say from those organisms that are tested at which concentrations 50 % is dead and there is a large variation between tested animals. Many says it cruel to use a fish - as I do - in a controlled cycling of the nitrification process but do not hesitate an inch to recommend people to through in fish in high nitrite concentrations. They will probably not die but we do not know what happens after that. IMO - this is very bad husbandry. Either do the start with low addition of ammonia or do not put in fish before NO2 is close to zero.

You can use the pope as your safeguard if you want - it does not matter for me. In your case with instant cycle - is not anything more than a normal transition of biofilms from one aquarium to another. First time I did that was back in 1973 - rather old method with other words. To recommend people that they are safe when nitrite is high or to recommend people that starts with (or add) 2- 10 ppm ammonia not to measure nitrite is IMO reckless. To advocate your self - you say that ammonia is not a problem because seneye shows much lower concentrations without saying that API and other tests for total ammonia shows the sum of NH4 and NH3 - Seneye - that´s is a hobby test too - shows only the toxic form NH3 which is between 5 - 15 % (in the 8 - 8.5 pH span) of the total ammonia

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

For validation I have seen in my own observance how the color charted kits really can show extremely high levels of ammonia, stuck, all the while seneye was tracking ammonia at super low concentrations. Sometimes in the thousandths. Same tank at same time.

Repeating the above

you say that ammonia is not a problem because seneye shows much lower concentrations without saying that API and other tests for total ammonia shows the sum of NH4 and NH3 - Seneye - that´s is a hobby test too - shows only the toxic form NH3 which is between 5 - 15 % (in the 8 - 8.5 pH span) of the total ammonia.

It means that if seneye shows 0.1 at ph 8 - total ammonia test should show 2 ppm - if the pH is 8.5 - total ammonia (API and other colour tests) is around 0.7. The other way around if API (and similar total ammonia tests) shows 2 at pH 8 - the toxic form is 0.1 ppm but at pH 8.5 - it is 0.3. With other words - if everything is okay and the test are accurate API should show between 20 - to around 6 times more than the Seneye in the pH range from 8 - 8.5

Sincerely Lasse

 

[LRT]

Do not use the word cycled then. Use halfcycled or whatever. You are not the one change the scientific nomenclature. Nitrification is completed (cycled) when both step works more or less seamless. Not you - not Randy - not me can say which concentration of nitrite create chronic or sub-lethal damage. We can say from those organisms that are tested at which concentrations 50 % is dead and there is a large variation between tested animals. Many says it cruel to use a fish - as I do - in a controlled cycling of the nitrification process but do not hesitate an inch to recommend people to through in fish in high nitrite concentrations. They will probably not die but we do not know what happens after that. IMO - this is very bad husbandry. Either do the start with low addition of ammonia or do not put in fish before NO2 is close to zero.

You can use the pope as your safeguard if you want - it does not matter for me. In your case with instant cycle - is not anything more than a normal transition of biofilms from one aquarium to another. First time I did that was back in 1973 - rather old method with other words. To recommend people that they are safe when nitrite is high or to recommend people that starts with (or add) 2- 10 ppm ammonia not to measure nitrite is IMO reckless. To advocate your self - you say that ammonia is not a problem because seneye shows much lower concentrations without saying that API and other tests for total ammonia shows the sum of NH4 and NH3 - Seneye - that´s is a hobby test too - shows only the toxic form NH3 which is between 5 - 15 % (in the 8 - 8.5 pH span) of the total ammonia

Sincerely Lasse

Let's call it "cycled for livestock ready" Unless you have a better term?
We are not going to call it half cycled because its fully capable of processing and "cycling" bioload given.
Perhaps you can go through the many pages and respond to all the confusion of the masses on the rest of the terminology nobody seems to be able to put a term to in this thread?
I already apologized in the other thread as well as clearly stated nobody is here to change scientific communities definition of cycle. Its proven science that I happen to believe works very well.

 

[Billldg]

13 pages, it will take me a bit to get thru all of this, BUT, this is an interesting topic, and I am sure we all can learn from it.

 

[LRT]

Repeating the above

you say that ammonia is not a problem because seneye shows much lower concentrations without saying that API and other tests for total ammonia shows the sum of NH4 and NH3 - Seneye - that´s is a hobby test too - shows only the toxic form NH3 which is between 5 - 15 % (in the 8 - 8.5 pH span) of the total ammonia.

It means that if seneye shows 0.1 at ph 8 - total ammonia test should show 2 ppm - if the pH is 8.5 - total ammonia (API and other colour tests) is around 0.7. The other way around if API (and similar total ammonia tests) shows 2 at pH 8 - the toxic form is 0.1 ppm but at pH 8.5 - it is 0.3. With other words - if everything is okay and the test are accurate API should show between 20 - to around 6 times more than the Seneye in the pH range from 8 - 8.5

Sincerely Lasse

Lasse im not sure why your getting so worked up.
Let's not confuse folks here .
Anyone and everyone that's been following along knows I've said repeatedly that im going to cycle ammonia back to 0. And be testing with multiple tools of measurement. And watching both Nitrites and Ammonia.

Do you want to set some control here?
I've asked you several times what you would consider toxic and harmful levels of Nitrites?
Unless you can provide back up to your reccomendation im running with Randy's proven work and graphs.
Plain and simple man
We will be able to follow the data and see where it leads from there.

 

[Lasse]

We are not going to call it half cycled

But I will do because it exactly what it is - cycled is not a term for fish surviving - it a term for the nitrification process. If it should be based on fish surviving - then should my tanks that have been started with the 15 steps method been seen as fully cycled minute 1 in their life because with that method (from incomplete nitrification) .the death rate is 0

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

Lasse im not sure why your getting so worked up.
Let's not confuse folks here .
Anyone and everyone that's been following along knows I've said repeatedly that im going to cycle ammonia back to 0. And be testing with multiple tools of measurement. And watching both Nitrites and Ammonia.

Do you want to set some control here?
I've asked you several times what you would consider toxic and harmful levels of Nitrites?
Unless you can provide back up to your reccomendation im running with Randy's proven work and graphs.
Plain and simple man
We will be able to follow the data and see where it leads from there.

I´m not the guy that confuse people - it is you that do that because you mix apples and pears and use that as a prove to people that´s not know that API (and other colour tests) and Seneye measure different things and their result can´t directly be compared. The real nomenclature is that most colour tests measure total ammonia (NH4+NH3) and seneye measure free ammonia (NH3) only

Sincerely Lasse

 

[LRT]

But I will do because it exactly what it is - cycled is not a term for fish surviving - it a term for the nitrification process. If it should be based on fish surviving - then should my tanks that have been started with the 15 steps method been seen as fully cycled minute 1 in their life.

Sincerely Lasse

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.

 

[brandon429]

Well said for sure. It’s true you do point and counter point constructively LRT.


your seneye is fully validated and benchmarked. It runs in a display what they all run. Once you move it to a low surface area test zone like a qt, it will carry bioload at lesser conversion rates more likely in the hundredths.


its not that you need a kit to proof your seneye it’s that your seneye is now the proof for other kits based on contextual details we already know about your machine.


there’s absolutely no reason to doubt your meter, the meter that when analyzed across 3000 owners has completely changed the rules on cycle timing, and validated every cycling chart written.


nobody who owns a benchmarked seneye has been unimpressed with its ammonia tracking precision it’s the opposite, they’re wowed and illuminated to new truths in cycling.

 

[Lasse]

I've asked you several times what you would consider toxic and harmful levels of Nitrites?

And I have answered that neither me or other person can´t say that because we do not know enough about the matter. We have some knowledge about LC50 for some species (with a high difference between species) but we have more or less no knowledge of chronic or sub-lethal toxicity. When we do not know - IMO - then the precautionary principle applies. In this case for me the concentration Zoo veterinarians have as threshold 0.1 ppm. You should not add anything before the nitrite is below that but if your nitrite rise over that in a already working aquarium - do not panic - just take care of it by use better nitrification tools.

This is not about fish will instantly die or not - its a question of good husbandry

Sincerely Lasse

 

[LRT]

And I have answered that neither me or other person can´t say that because we do not know enough about the matter. We have some knowledge about LC50 for some species (with a high difference between species) but we have more or less no knowledge of chronic or sub-lethal toxicity. When we do not know - IMO - then the precautionary principle applies. In this case for me the concentration Zoo veterinarians have as threshold 0.1 ppm. You should not add anything before the nitrite is below that but if your nitrite rise over that in a already working aquarium - do not panic - just take care of it by use better nitrification tools.

This is not about fish will instantly die or not - its a question of good husbandry

Sincerely Lasse

Lasse let me ask you a real question here.
You seen my transfer and results of that transfer. Did you see anything in the results that would suggest I went against anything you have said or proposed?

Its quite on the contrary. The husbandry needed to pull something like that off. The testing required. The due diligence in dosing and keeping system locked and stable is and was no easy task.
I responsibly say again I would not reccomend to any new reefer go down this road until you can say your 100% confident you can accomplish what ive described above!

0 or as close as humanly possible to 0 will be our target #'s for "cycled for livestock ready". Fish will not be put in any of my systems until im confident ive seen peak and 0 at least with ammonia its how ive always done it and will continue to do it.

 

[Quietman]

Maybe I got lost somewhere...why is the goal 0 nitrites before adding fish?

Isn't the only thing we're concerned with ammonia toxicity? During start up nitrites might be interesting to track but aren't toxic at the levels we see in our systems even during 'startup' as chloride in seawater will out compete the nitrite in the biological process concerned (not a biochemist so terms are not as specific). Nitrite is very much a concern (right behind ammonia) for freshwater fish as there isn't 20,000 ppm chloride present. Yes, nitrite is toxic to all fish, but due to seawater it's not taken up by the fish.

I've always gone by the .1 ppm take action, .2 take drastic action on NH3. Also why I recommend those badges that only measure free ammonia and a good selling point for the Seneye. You can use the API but only take 10% of the value to estimate toxicity at normal reef pH. Which is why all the new people reporting .05 and .1 ppm on API don't need to worry. But exact toxicity of NH3 has too many variables to establish exact numbers for startup even if monitoring only free ammonia.

Also good teaching point to newbies on pH impact to NH3 toxicity and not having really long acclimation periods in open bags.

 

[Soren]

Maybe I got lost somewhere...why is the goal 0 nitrites before adding fish?

Isn't the only thing we're concerned with ammonia toxicity? During start up nitrites might be interesting to track but aren't toxic at the levels we see in our systems even during 'startup' as chloride in seawater will out compete the nitrite in the biological process concerned (not a biochemist so terms are not as specific). Nitrite is very much a concern (right behind ammonia) for freshwater fish as there isn't 20,000 ppm chloride present. Yes, nitrite is toxic to all fish, but due to seawater it's not taken up by the fish.

I've always gone by the .1 ppm take action, .2 take drastic action on NH3. Also why I recommend those badges that only measure free ammonia and a good selling point for the Seneye. You can use the API but only take 10% of the value to estimate toxicity at normal reef pH. Which is why all the new people reporting .05 and .1 ppm on API don't need to worry. But exact toxicity of NH3 has too many variables to establish exact numbers for startup even if monitoring only free ammonia.

Also good teaching point to newbies on pH impact to NH3 toxicity and not having really long acclimation periods in open bags.

With regard to nitrite toxicity in saltwater, welcome to the recent controversial topic and, I assume, part of the reason this thread was started.

Nitrite Toxicity
Impact of Nitrites

 

[Lasse]

Lasse let me ask you a real question here.
You seen my transfer and results of that transfer. Did you see anything in the results that would suggest I went against anything you have said or proposed?

No - and I have said that - but you did not start the nitrification process from zero because you did introduce a nitrifying biofilm (with all the hundreds corals and living rock) that was enough to process the NH4/NH3 from your 4 fish. This is a method I have used since 1974 and my preferred method. However I normally use old sand, old rocks and old filters in order to introduce the active nitrifying biofilm. Its a risk free method - but it is not the same as the ones there the nitrification cycle stall at the second step and people say that you are fine. It is not an example of new methods - it is the oldest of the all to start an aquarium. But if you take this aquarium just now - buy 50 new fishes and rise the feeding 10 times more from the first day - you will get problem because you have not any overpopulation of nitrifying biofilm. it is adapted to you load - or with other words your feeding regime.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Quietman]

With regard to nitrite toxicity in saltwater, welcome to the recent controversial topic and, I assume, part of the reason this thread was started.

Nitrite Toxicity
Impact of Nitrites

Why recent, it's been known for quite sometime. And why controversial, something is or isn't. I know I'm oversimplifying plus I think freshwater is often entry point into the hobby so there's a lot of carryover of practices without understanding reasons behind them.

 

[brandon429]

I estimate to be eight years underway specifically storing up about fifty chat pages of positive nitrite reef starts, skip cycle fixes, and then about 300 combined online forum pages all of + nitrite starts and timing based ammonia control

meaning we didn't always have seneye to be the ref, we use # of days underwater and the known completion time from the 3 big cycling approaches in my threads to determine a start date. I have logs and logs of outcome patterns to support new cycling science, and there's no possible way anyone could assign toxicity to these works they were completely happy reefs and reefers.

the pertinent part is that its all live time participants we can send verification messages to, we can ask whay they think disease expression did positively or negatively using complete disfactoring of nitrite in any aspect of display tank reefing, cycling, or tank transfers.


when seneye came along, and we got to back-check those planned start dates, I went: yay.

 

[Quietman]

So a thought...maybe two.

If freshwater, if you plant your tank you really have nothing to worry about regarding toxicity due to nitrogen cycle establishing itself.

If in reefing (as opposed to FOWLR) we encourage people to start with corals instead of fish doesn't that have the potential to make a lot of things easier. This is the fundamental change I think is needed for start ups.

1) Some corals prefer to take up nitrogen via ammonia instead of nitrate.
2) No excess nutrient load caused by feeding fish resulting in a plethora of new tank issues
3) Tank will be ready for fish (but shouldn't be added) in a few short weeks of watching the corals grow.
4) Aquarist can get used to tests and water management without impacting fish

 

[brandon429]

Agreed that’s reasonable.

 

[LRT]

No - and I have said that - but you did not start the nitrification process from zero because you did introduce a nitrifying biofilm (with all the hundreds corals and living rock) that was enough to process the NH4/NH3 from your 4 fish. This is a method I have used since 1974 and my preferred method. However I normally use old sand, old rocks and old filters in order to introduce the active nitrifying biofilm. Its a risk free method - but it is not the same as the ones there the nitrification cycle stall at the second step and people say that you are fine. It is not an example of new methods - it is the oldest of the all to start an aquarium. But if you take this aquarium just now - buy 50 new fishes and rise the feeding 10 times more from the first day - you will get problem because you have not any overpopulation of nitrifying biofilm. it is adapted to you load - or with other words your feeding regime.

Sincerely Lasse

Hi Lasse. I know your stance on the insignificant cycle that I acquired in my transfer or even in your proven method.
As insignificant as it truly was it was a recorded cycle by definition.
Also understood that everything is going to change with the brand new cycled experimental tank.
Having said that and by using same principles outlined below I believe we are going to see alot of the same things. Maybe at a slower pace and maybe not.
Remember there are current sps filled tank threads. One was highlighted not to long ago using very similar methods to ours during start up.
I intend to use my corals, discs, tiles and rubble and everything else that comes in on them to help with the continuing cycle of new tank.
Once tank is "cycled for livestock" ready the goal is really to show fully cycled tank stocked immediately (as the data permits) track through it and hopefully learn something valuable that reefers may be able to use in setting up new tanks.

Again. There are too many fully cycled tanks on the boards now with little to no livestock in them currently.
All they really seem to be growing is algae.
I ask what are we waiting for in those tanks and do we think this macrobiodiversity is jist going to magically appear in them somehow? Or could they actually benefit from the introduction of corals, when they are ready to handle said corals very early on.

I'm going out on a limb that we will prove the latter.
I'm seeing this with my own eyes.

 

[Dan_P]

I love it man!
I have enough fully seasoned 5" tiles i could cover the bottom floor of a 10 gallon new start up tank easily if needed.
Idea of how much ammonia would need to be initially dosed to reasonably stock a 10 gallon tank after cycle?
How many square inches of cured tile area id need to cycle initial ammonia dose to stock tank?
This could be invaluable and bet we could come up with a really good way to estimate the initial capability of a new system from the rate of ammonia consumption per hour and compare that produced by inches of fish. Among other things.
Can you also give us an idea how fast we can expect biofilm to cover surface areas in inches per day?
This is getting super interesting now.

While I think about answers to your questions, what qualifies as a fully seasoned tile? What is it made of?