ammonia and nitrite misreads have caused the greatest amount of completely wrong inference and takeaway about how bacteria work for our hobby over any other hardware ever introduced. It’s bad level, I’m talking the hobby is working in retrograde regarding understanding of what bacteria do vs progressing 2019+ and beyond like other areas in our hobby
The era of digital testing will undo the complete mythinformation but since there’s 20 yrs of it online, w take a while.
It’s takes a virtual crowbar to dislodge the test kit out of someone’s hand and tell them their tank is cycled, we have issues team and it’s with titration.
Before we begin proofing
Does anyone doubt I have forty ammonia misread links handy, twenty nitrate misreads (where other testers show vast difference etc) and fourteen thousand nitrite - after - Prime misreads. Exactly that many. This means the tests aren’t reliable and when someone posts a reading online, we shouldn’t just jump and assume it’s correct. I think posted titration readings are correct 30% of the time and they will hardly ever agree with any other brands test read regardless of param.
Also
Aquarists are at total war with google cycling charts regarding timing and linking of ammonia to nitrite, requisitely
Why doesn’t google scholar search return show all varying charts to suit the posts from reef forums? Because cycling doesn’t vary much. A million charts show ammonia and nitrite complying by day 30
Have bacteria broken aeons of adaptation only recently, discovered by us, or are titration test kits the biggest game of horseshoes going on this side of the Milky Way? Was bottle bacteria necessary when they wrote the cycling charts in the 50’s? Go look in the new tank forum right now at the number of ammonia misread threads we are umpiring. Step up and post if feelin’ froggy.
What bacteria do in an aquarium is predictable without test kits, every time, 100% of the time. Something needs to usher in a change to stop the hesitations and put confidence back into biology. We do that by making work example threads. It would be neat if someone did an updated article on today’s titration comparisons/ multiple people sent a calibrated unmarked sample/take and log measures/ everyone posts back. If that’s done, especially with a verified .25 ammonia sample and a zero ammonia sample, I predict results will back up the horseshoe theory. Send them some sealed nitrite samples to work with, not any two people will get the same measure even on the same test kit I’ll bet, nitrite is the absolute worst of all due to number of confounds that skew the test. I can’t stand nitrite testing, why not just base the cycle on argon testing.
I know six people who can command an api master kit in ways I’d trust 100% but that’s the problem. It’s not just api. We collect misreads across tester brands and for sure there are many who can use api fine, I’m only remarking on what’s going on in the new reefers forum on every board right at this second check any board, an ammonia misread is happening making someone think a cycled tank isn’t cycled. For twenty years twenty times a day
B
The era of digital testing will undo the complete mythinformation but since there’s 20 yrs of it online, w take a while.
It’s takes a virtual crowbar to dislodge the test kit out of someone’s hand and tell them their tank is cycled, we have issues team and it’s with titration.
Before we begin proofing
Does anyone doubt I have forty ammonia misread links handy, twenty nitrate misreads (where other testers show vast difference etc) and fourteen thousand nitrite - after - Prime misreads. Exactly that many. This means the tests aren’t reliable and when someone posts a reading online, we shouldn’t just jump and assume it’s correct. I think posted titration readings are correct 30% of the time and they will hardly ever agree with any other brands test read regardless of param.
Also
Aquarists are at total war with google cycling charts regarding timing and linking of ammonia to nitrite, requisitely
Why doesn’t google scholar search return show all varying charts to suit the posts from reef forums? Because cycling doesn’t vary much. A million charts show ammonia and nitrite complying by day 30
Have bacteria broken aeons of adaptation only recently, discovered by us, or are titration test kits the biggest game of horseshoes going on this side of the Milky Way? Was bottle bacteria necessary when they wrote the cycling charts in the 50’s? Go look in the new tank forum right now at the number of ammonia misread threads we are umpiring. Step up and post if feelin’ froggy.
What bacteria do in an aquarium is predictable without test kits, every time, 100% of the time. Something needs to usher in a change to stop the hesitations and put confidence back into biology. We do that by making work example threads. It would be neat if someone did an updated article on today’s titration comparisons/ multiple people sent a calibrated unmarked sample/take and log measures/ everyone posts back. If that’s done, especially with a verified .25 ammonia sample and a zero ammonia sample, I predict results will back up the horseshoe theory. Send them some sealed nitrite samples to work with, not any two people will get the same measure even on the same test kit I’ll bet, nitrite is the absolute worst of all due to number of confounds that skew the test. I can’t stand nitrite testing, why not just base the cycle on argon testing.
I know six people who can command an api master kit in ways I’d trust 100% but that’s the problem. It’s not just api. We collect misreads across tester brands and for sure there are many who can use api fine, I’m only remarking on what’s going on in the new reefers forum on every board right at this second check any board, an ammonia misread is happening making someone think a cycled tank isn’t cycled. For twenty years twenty times a day
B
Last edited: