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

[MnFish1]

actually it was this particular comment I was remembering...

but you "liked" that comment too, so close enough!

HAHAHA - I was thinking about this one

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

"Why" may be a deeper question than can be answered? But if you search "coral recruitment" - the process by which a polyp selects where to live and then changes from planktonic to sessile, attaches and grows - that research is all about biofilms, surfaces, coralline algae, and the bacteria...

www.reef2reef.com

 

[LRT]

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

I would love to see a thread started specifically for debunking the myth that old water is the devil in new system start ups.
Battlecorals test results should be posted for all to see. I had absoloutely no idea test results existed.
You answer in this thread as to why and how this was possible should be quoted.
Maybe a short 5 paragraph explanation explaining from basic chemistry and science standpoint. This x that x the other = Reef heaven without the equations.
It should be stickied, locked and preserved so it can be tagged and used for folks for clarification.
I dont like the scared approach. Too many old conventional wisdom thoeries being 100% debunked across the board. We know more. Data in the science proves this here.
It really is super simple.
Common sense tells us not use water from old system if we know old system has any lingering algae or bacteria like like lets say cyano and dinos. Any signs of distress or infection in corals.
Water from healthy system without those lingering issues can be used and would more likely be supremely beneficial than not.
A super basic knowledge and ethic is needed to achieve this. Stability, due diligence in testing and keeping params locked in and as close as possible to the numbers the pros handed down. Doing your very best to achieve that. You dont even have to understand the chemistry on why those numbers work. It will click when you see the magic happen.
It also won't if you cycle a tank and leave it barren for algae to grow. That kind of magic does not happen all on its own.

 

[MnFish1]

I would love to see a thread started specifically for debunking the myth that old water is the devil in new system start ups.
Battlecorals test results should be posted for all to see. I had absoloutely no idea test results existed.
You answer in this thread as to why and how this was possible should be quoted.
Maybe a short 5 paragraph explanation explaining from basic chemistry and science standpoint. This x that x the other = Reef heaven without the equations.
It should be stickied, locked and preserved so it can be tagged and used for folks for clarification.
I dont like the scared approach. Too many old conventional wisdom thoeries being 100% debunked across the board. We know more. Data in the science proves this here.
It really is super simple.
Common sense tells us not use water from old system if we know old system has any lingering algae or bacteria like like lets say cyano and dinos. Any signs of distress or infection in corals.
Water from healthy system without those lingering issues can be used and would more likely be supremely beneficial than not.
A super basic knowledge and ethic is needed to achieve this. Stability, due diligence in testing and keeping params locked in and as close as possible to the numbers the pros handed down. Doing your very best to achieve that. You dont even have to understand the chemistry on why those numbers work. It will click when you see the magic happen.
It also won't if you cycle a tank and leave it barren for algae to grow. That kind of magic does not happen all on its own.

I am not sure this is the 'conventional wisdom'. I always use some old water. The problem - there is NO WAY - to keep cyano, algae, etc 'out' of a system. they will bloom - if/when conditions are 'right' no matter what.

 

[LRT]

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.

100% agreed. I feel like 99.9% of reefers on this forum can obtain corals from healthy thriving source and would be super beneficial for them to do exactly that. The magic doesn't come in waiting for it to happen on its own. Its probably 100% counter productive to wait for the magic to happen on its own..
Stocking your tank with healthy corals from thriving systems up front makes that magic happen.
Its happens super fast when those basic rules of keeping system stable, testing and keeping your numbers locked in to the basic parameter numbers the pros pass down.

 

[LRT]

I am not sure this is the 'conventional wisdom'. I always use some old water. The problem - there is NO WAY - to keep cyano, algae, etc 'out' of a system. they will bloom - if/when conditions are 'right' no matter what.

Agreed. I have 2 identical tanks i built in transfer. Literally twin set ups. Same equipment, liverock from old system. Identical.
In shroom lagoon I diligently tested all params and kept it locked in to basic numbers the pros passed down. Kept all that stable to best of my ability. The only place I had cyano or dino even dare to grow was on brand new plastic frag rack.
The other tank. Im kinda embarrassed to say I did pretty much nothing with for a cpl months. Total wreck full of dinos. Nutrient levels sky high. Etc.

 

[Lasse]

Maybe a short 5 paragraph explanation explaining from basic chemistry and science standpoint. This x that x the other = Reef heaven without the equations.

It needs no science, statics, examples or other approaches in order to debunk that theory - only common sense and some thinking. I have a working aquarium - been working for a while. I will start a new aquarium - I take 20 % of this old water to my new aquarium. Let us call it old water - you should not start with 20 % "old water" - its bad says someone. Ok - I after the start I have two aquariums - one with 20 % "old water" - another with - just that - 80% old water. What should I do with the aquarium with 80 %old water if the one with 20 % old water is bad? It mus be a ****** - the old DT. And do not think the thought that you did take no water from the old tank - and it means that it is 100 % old water. If the one with 20 % old water should be bad - what´s about a tank with 100 % old water - 5 times more bad or........

The creator of this myth is someone that only have his/her head to wear hats on and every one that without thinking keep on and spread this myth do not even use it for wearing hats - IMO. If you have a tank like my or another well working tank - with that statement to use 20 % startup water is bad you also say that 100% of my water is bad

Sincerely Lasse

 

[chema]

I think the discussion above is derailing from the original purpose.
Also, if the discussion is about the microbiology of nitrification we should not mix it up with the chemistry of old or new water.
None experiment is sound when too many variables are analized.

 

[Soren]

I think the discussion above is derailing from the original purpose.
Also, if the discussion is about the microbiology of nitrification we should not mix it up with the chemistry of old or new water.
None experiment is sound when too many variables are analized.

I agree that it can get complicated with so many facets, but part of the question about nitrifying microbiology is if there is significant microbiology in the water itself that is developed over time. This is what brings up and justifies the relevancy of the old water/new water question in this thread, if I understand correctly.

 

[Lasse]

I think the discussion above is derailing from the original purpose.
Also, if the discussion is about the microbiology of nitrification we should not mix it up with the chemistry of old or new water.
None experiment is sound when too many variables are analized.

The question was if it was possible to start with only corals and that the accompanying nitrification bacteria plus the photosynthesis of corals would cope with a small bioload of fish. My answer was yes - but in that case it needs some old water in the mix. From this it started with bad or good water. I´ll think it its in line

Sincerely Lasse

 

[LRT]

It needs no science, statics, examples or other approaches in order to debunk that theory - only common sense and some thinking. I have a working aquarium - been working for a while. I will start a new aquarium - I take 20 % of this old water to my new aquarium. Let us call it old water - you should not start with 20 % "old water" - its bad says someone. Ok - I after the start I have two aquariums - one with 20 % "old water" - another with - just that - 80% old water. What should I do with the aquarium with 80 %old water if the one with 20 % old water is bad? It mus be a ****** - the old DT. And do not think the thought that you did take no water from the old tank - and it means that it is 100 % old water. If the one with 20 % old water should be bad - what´s about a tank with 100 % old water - 5 times more bad or........

The creator of this myth is someone that only have his/her head to wear hats on and every one that without thinking keep on and spread this myth do not even use it for wearing hats - IMO. If you have a tank like my or another well working tank - with that statement to use 20 % startup water is bad you also say that 100% of my water is bad

Sincerely Lasse

Hi Lasse the only rebuttal I have for this is we have a saying in field on construction jobs that rings true here.
Common sense for some may not be so common for others.
Pirates may have there own saying for that haha.
99% of the folks posting anything about using old water are posting about it being equivalent to using old car motor oil.
You and @taricha may possibly be the only ones I've seen educate people on that. Totally crush that concept actually.
Some of you old pirates may actually be smarter for the majority of reefers own good

 

[ReefGeezer]

I think the discussion above is derailing from the original purpose.
Also, if the discussion is about the microbiology of nitrification we should not mix it up with the chemistry of old or new water.
None experiment is sound when too many variables are analized.

I agree the discussion has evolved, but I like the direction it has gone. I understand your desire to limit variables, but biological processes will inevitably be affected by them. I do like discussing the different ways nitrogen compounds are used in a complete biosystem and the variable that can impact how well they work. Some of my own thinking has been challenged here. I've learned a few things that I will incorporate into my current system and my next build.

 

[DrZoidburg]

Back at the water change thing. IMO since saying imo seems to be necessary. Its more of an issue of some salts taking long time to dissolve, and still some chemical reactions happening. If you notice in pitch black room when making diy mix, or sometimes brand synthetic. Some times one can see little tiny tiny flashes like mini nukes these are chemical reactions. Have personally observed this upwards of a few days later.

 

[Garf]

Back at the water change thing. IMO since saying imo seems to be necessary. Its more of an issue of some salts taking long time to dissolve, and still some chemical reactions happening. If you notice in pitch black room when making diy mix, or sometimes brand synthetic. Some times one can see little tiny tiny flashes like mini nukes these are chemical reactions. Have personally observed this upwards of a few days later.

I’d be checking my mixing pump for a short, to be honest.

 

[DrZoidburg]

I’d be checking my mixing pump for a short, to be honest.

Not in that case. Here I quote for you "Many chemical reactions produce both light and heat. A burning candle is such a reaction. When a candle is lit, its flame both glows and becomes hot. It is much less common for a chemical reaction to produce light without heat." Plus it doesn't stay flashing like I mention. One of the "7 clues of a chemical reaction" I guess some will just have to trust me on that.

 

[Paul B]

Of course I cycled my tank the Old School way because I started it as soon as the hobby started and we had no test kits, bottled bacteria or credit cards.

This 24 hour or 24 minute cycling may work (I doubt it) but it doesn't matter because what most hobbiests feel is cycling means your five dollar test kit says you have no ammonia, nitrite or Pepsi Cola.

To me cycling doesn't mean any of those things specifically. To me a tank cycles continousely throughout it's entire life and is not just a measure of 3 chemicals.

Even at 50 years old my tank is still cycling. Of course I can add some fish, but when I do like this week I added 4 of them, the bacteria will grow to control that new load and if I remove 4 fish the bacteria will die off to compensate for the reduced load.

A 48 hour old tank can only support enough livestock that can reduce that amount of waste.
If you cycle with a dead shrimp, you only have enough bacteria in there to consume one dead shrimp and not 10 tangs.

If you add those tangs to early, they will die.

But besides cycling, which I always thought was a silly criteria, a new tank will not be very healthy if started with dead rock and water I don't care what is in the bottle you added.

There is a reason almost all the tanks on the disease forum are new and it's not just the experience of the owner although that plays a huge part.

Water gets better with age, up to a point. To me thats part of cycling. If new water was so good, why don't we change 100% of it and why do new tanks have so many problems especially with disease.

Why don't I have to quarantine and never have problems? I feel old water has a lot to do with it.

Now I want to start a new tank so I am going out to look for a dead shrimp.

Have a great day, sorry to jump into this fascinating discussion.

 

[Aqua Man]

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.

It might not be a good idea but I add the water to my tank from the LFS when I add coral purchased from there. Hoping to increase the good stuff (biodiversity) in my tanks.

Water gets better with age, up to a point.

My only exports are coral growth, water changes and the small amount of algae that grows in my HOB overflow. Although I am changing less water than I was. I don’t run a skimmer or have any other major exports.

 

[LRT]

Of course I cycled my tank the Old School way because I started it as soon as the hobby started and we had no test kits, bottled bacteria or credit cards.

This 24 hour or 24 minute cycling may work (I doubt it) but it doesn't matter because what most hobbiests feel is cycling means your five dollar test kit says you have no ammonia, nitrite or Pepsi Cola.

To me cycling doesn't mean any of those things specifically. To me a tank cycles continousely throughout it's entire life and is not just a measure of 3 chemicals.

Even at 50 years old my tank is still cycling. Of course I can add some fish, but when I do like this week I added 4 of them, the bacteria will grow to control that new load and if I remove 4 fish the bacteria will die off to compensate for the reduced load.

A 48 hour old tank can only support enough livestock that can reduce that amount of waste.
If you cycle with a dead shrimp, you only have enough bacteria in there to consume one dead shrimp and not 10 tangs.

If you add those tangs to early, they will die.

But besides cycling, which I always thought was a silly criteria, a new tank will not be very healthy if started with dead rock and water I don't care what is in the bottle you added.

There is a reason almost all the tanks on the disease forum are new and it's not just the experience of the owner although that plays a huge part.

Water gets better with age, up to a point. To me thats part of cycling. If new water was so good, why don't we change 100% of it and why do new tanks have so many problems especially with disease.

Why don't I have to quarantine and never have problems? I feel old water has a lot to do with it.

Now I want to start a new tank so I am going out to look for a dead shrimp.

Have a great day, sorry to jump into this fascinating discussion.

Id be willing to bet we could take your 50yr old used car oil water and start up an incredible tank. Disease free and all
I dont think 1 dead raw shrimp start cycle could possibly handle 10 tangs.
Would be interesting to see just how much it could handle though.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say alot more, alot faster than being touted from more of the scared old school wisdomers.
I do believe it could handle the biload we could stuff into a 10 gallon tank as soon as those 3 numbers begin functioning like "cycling" tank. What that means idk but ive seen it happen in little as 12hrs. For the record ive seen that happen with alot less than a whole dead shrimp and only handful of rubble(maybe a lb), a few critters and few feedings of half a cube frozen food in 10 gallons of brand new salt mix water that sat for a day.

 

[LRT]

It might not be a good idea but I add the water to my tank from the LFS when I add coral purchased from there. Hoping to increase the good stuff (biodiversity) in my tanks.

My only exports are coral growth, water changes and the small amount of algae that grows in my HOB overflow. Although I am changing less water than I was. I don’t run a skimmer or have any other major exports.

I'm probably going to get fried for say this as well but one of my lfs has a system that's been running on rock that's probably older than I am. Maybe closer to Paul's age haha.
They build and tear down tanks everyday. The owner tells me he's been taking rock from tear down systems for probably longer than I've been alive and adding them to his main system in as many years.
I've been eyeballing some rubble pieces I've been looking at sitting in the bottom of his $1/lb bin for 3yrs.
@taricha I do believe reefers could get extremely clever

 

[Paul B]

I dont think 1 dead raw shrimp start cycle could possibly handle 10 tangs.
Would be interesting to see just how much it could handle though.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say alot more, alot faster than being touted from more of the scared old school wisdomers.
I do believe it could handle the biload we could stuff into a 10 gallon tank as soon as those 3 numbers begin functioning like "cycling" tank. What that means idk but ive seen it happen in little as 12hrs.

I would much rather use a dead clam than a shrimp because a clam is almost all guts and I want the gut bacteria which is why I feed my fish clams and never shrimp. Bottled bacteria (whatever that is) is not composed of gut bacteria because that specific bacteria is only found in guts.

Those 3 chemical measurements mean almost nothing to me. They just mean (as I said) you have enough bacteria in there to process that dead shrimp, clam or bottle of ammonia and nothing more.

If you then add that tang, lobster, lanternfish etc. it will take some time, maybe a few days or a week for the bacteria to grow to those quantities to process the wastes from those creatures and bacteria, are like me, but besides me being much better looking and I can dance, bacteria are stubborn and won't reproduce any faster no matter how much of anything you add.

If there are not enough "of the proper" bacteria, wastes will build up. Fish can handle that waste for a while as long as it isn't a ridiculous amount.

Eventually the bacteria will catch up to be able to process the waste from that one fish and you can add something else.

This process will not be done in 48 hours unless you have some new type of alien bacteria from Haley's Comet.

Even after your tank is all set up and you have a dozen fish swimming in there doing the macarana seemingly happy, the tank isn't cycled.

It may be for the criteria on these forums, but it is not, which is the reason new tanks, even if Jacques Cousteau himself sets it up with help from Noah, look lousy and are often on the disease forum.

Cycling those 3 chemicals isn't the main thing we need to think of.
But what do I know, maybe some of you guys have cycled a tank in the time it took you to read this.

 

[LRT]

I would much rather use a dead clam than a shrimp because a clam is almost all guts and I want the gut bacteria which is why I feed my fish clams and never shrimp. Bottled bacteria (whatever that is) is not composed of gut bacteria because that specific bacteria is only found in guts.

Those 3 chemical measurements mean almost nothing to me. They just mean (as I said) you have enough bacteria in there to process that dead shrimp, clam or bottle of ammonia and nothing more.

If you then add that tang, lobster, lanternfish etc. it will take some time, maybe a few days or a week for the bacteria to grow to those quantities to process the wastes from those creatures and bacteria, are like me, but besides me being much better looking and I can dance, bacteria are stubborn and won't reproduce any faster no matter how much of anything you add.

If there are not enough "of the proper" bacteria, wastes will build up. Fish can handle that waste for a while as long as it isn't a ridiculous amount.

Eventually the bacteria will catch up to be able to process the waste from that one fish and you can add something else.

This process will not be done in 48 hours unless you have some new type of alien bacteria from Haley's Comet.

Even after your tank is all set up and you have a dozen fish swimming in there doing the macarana seemingly happy, the tank isn't cycled.

It may be for the criteria on these forums, but it is not, which is the reason new tanks, even if Jacques Cousteau himself sets it up with help from Noah, look lousy and are often on the disease forum.

Cycling those 3 chemicals isn't the main thing we need to think of.
But what do I know, maybe some of you guys have cycled a tank in the time it took you to read this.

For sure Paul. I dont remember saying or remember anyone saying that a reefer should or could go out and cycle a tank for livestock ready. Irresponsibly.
I do believe that plenty of evidence has been presented here and in countless reefs across the boards.
That a reefer can stock his tank intelligently and common sensibly with the right stuff out of the gate that absoloutely can and will expedite the right reactions exponentially in the right set up and in proper conditions.
Im saying ALL a reefer really needs is basic testing knowledge and wherewithal to maintain proper parameters the pros pass down to achieve this.