The importance of nitrite measurements in a reef aquarium

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,062
Reaction score
12,720
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
@Lasse - do you think one of the reasons you disagree is that you have the ability to measure these things in real-time? I mean frankly - I think your nitrite argument makes complete sense. Ammonia I think is a secondary issue. BUT - I do not want to do nitrite tests every day or week or month.
 
Click to watch best scape method in 5 easy steps!

DrZoidburg

Well-Known Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
913
Reaction score
565
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Near Lake George
I test for problem times, adding new things, die offs, big cleaning events, new tanks. I admit is not something I test as much as others. This though can give you hint at what could be going on. Is also funny looking back on some of my threads mr brandon edits some of his posts 1 month after comment LOL. He does this in a lot of others too. Whose the one with ill intent and hidden agendas? I genuinely like this thread aside from the blabber.
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
21,086
Reaction score
17,321
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
tejas
I sometimes edit out a thrashing after I know you saw draft one.


Dr. Z if we track your recent posts this last week, click on your name and select all posts, they’re not going well wouldn’t you say? Your chemistry analyses have been rejected wholly. It’s directly listed in your post history for the last month. I’m saying that because it makes me doubt your input on what aquarium filters do. Dan is showing masterful writing control and poise dealing with your presence in their careful work threads
 

Garf

Valuable Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
1,514
Reaction score
1,811
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
BEEFINGHAM
I test for problem times, adding new things, die offs, big cleaning events, new tanks. I admit is not something I test as much as others. This though can give you hint at what could be going on. Is also funny looking back on some of my threads mr brandon edits some of his posts 1 month after comment LOL. He does this in a lot of others too. Whose the one with ill intent and hidden agendas? I genuinely like this thread aside from the blabber.
Lasse, who I have great respect, told Brandon to leave this thread, has he?
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
21,086
Reaction score
17,321
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
tejas
I didn’t see that but considering the standards for proof accepted here I don’t mind leaving, have many work threads to manage. Why would you all want any real challenge for these made up claims anyway lol. This thread lacks all credibility.
 
Orphek OR3 reef aquarium LED lighting

DrZoidburg

Well-Known Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
913
Reaction score
565
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Near Lake George
I sometimes edit out a thrashing after I know you saw draft one.


Dr. Z if we track your recent posts this last week, click on your name and select all posts, they’re not going well wouldn’t you say? Your chemistry analyses have been rejected wholly. It’s directly listed in your post history for the last month. I’m saying that because it makes me doubt your input on what aquarium filters do. Dan is showing masterful writing control and poise dealing with your presence in their careful work threads
you guys have no clue what your talking about.
 
OP
Lasse

Lasse

7500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
8,606
Reaction score
24,940
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
@Lasse - do you think one of the reasons you disagree is that you have the ability to measure these things in real-time? I mean frankly - I think your nitrite argument makes complete sense. Ammonia I think is a secondary issue. BUT - I do not want to do nitrite tests every day or week or month.

I have a lifelong experiences of nitrite testing in many freshwater systems, Aquariums, public aquariums, fish farms and experimental sets up. In freshwater it is a demand to monitoring nitrite cause it is your early warning system. I have seen that´s 0 concentration normally is a hoax and you have a good monitoring system. I have tested "hobby" equipment for nitrite readings together with professional measurements - ending up with the experience that hobby nitrite tests rather reliable. I have test ammonia too but because of low reliability and that most tests (that are reliable) use mercury (Nesslers reagent) and the ion selective electrodes are nonlinear (at least was) in our concentrations I have skip that analyse. As many here understand - most tests also give the result in total ammonia and that´s worthless if you do not in the same time have a good pH meter. It is not the total ammonia that kill - it is the part that is as NH3 (ammoniac) that kill - and the percentage is mostly pH dependent. According to the methods claiming only to measure free NH3 (ammonia alert and Seney as an example) it has recently coming up doubt if they in reality only measure NH3 - there is some uncertainty that they also report other forms of inorganic N as NH3. I do not do a nitrite test every week - but I have test so much that I know for sure where my baseline is - it means that it can be a tool if I run into problems

I sometimes edit out a thrashing after I know you saw draft one.


Dr. Z if we track your recent posts this last week, click on your name and select all posts, they’re not going well wouldn’t you say? Your chemistry analyses have been rejected wholly. It’s directly listed in your post history for the last month. I’m saying that because it makes me doubt your input on what aquarium filters do. Dan is showing masterful writing control and poise dealing with your presence in their careful work threads
@brandon429 - you are free to insult me how much you want in my threads but not to insult others. I have also seen the discussions between different people in different threads but it would not ever come into my mind to insult people using a third person as a baseball bat. You ofen do that - use other known and respected persons standpoint in order to knock down others when your own capacity not is enough. And if you have read these threads (and understand it) you also know that if some of the manufacturer's claim for seneye is true - some of the manufacturers claim of Prime must be untrue - or the other way around.

I didn’t see that but considering the standards for proof accepted here I don’t mind leaving, have many work threads to manage. Why would you all want any real challenge for these made up claims anyway lol. This thread lacks all credibility.
Totally true - your level of argumentation do not meet basic standards for proof in this thread - IMO. I only report things that my own experiences have shown up and try to explain these experiences from known and accepted scientific knowledge (which I'm aware of). I´m prepared to change my mind if my explanation can be shown not to be scientific or that newer scientific knowledge show something else. My experiences - however - I will never change - these are my basic observations. I do not base my knowledge on others observations if they are going against scientific knowledge if the observer not can show a plausible explanation. One example - when I was kid - we learned that the pH in a water was depended of the amount of free hydrogen ions in the water. This is not true today - there is nothing like free hydrogen ions in water - they do not exist. Some of you choked on a thing just know but see this

I spite of this - I still write free hydrogen ions when pH is discussed because nothing in the way we see things has changed - but the knowledge how it exactly works has been better but I will not argue against anyone that still use the old explanation. But Brandons explanation about the nitrification cycle is still in the fifties and around 1960 the basic understanding of the nitrification cycle was used in practical treatment of waste water here in Sweden. And the understanding changed totally.

Sincerely Lasse
 

Dan_P

2500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Sep 21, 2018
Messages
2,533
Reaction score
2,506
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
There have been a lot of threads about nitrification and cycling lately. IMO - the most important measurements tool you have in order to indicate if your cycle is done or not is the nitrite level. It is a rather stable tool and will give stable results with few interferences. One of the myths about nitrite (NO2) is that it should be 0 in a working aquarium. This is not really the truth - it has been shown that concentrations between 0.01 and 0.05 is rather common in reef aquariums. In freshwater aquariums - nitrite is one of the most important tests in use. This is because nitrite in freshwater is rather deadly. Fish take up nitrite from the water through the gills. When nitrite reaches the blood in the fish - it reacts with haemoglobin (the compound responsible for oxygen uptake and transport in the blood) and form methaemoglobin - a substance that is brown and does not bind or transport oxygen. Further on - it has been shown that chlorides in the water will block this uptake of nitrite from the water, hence nitrite is non-toxic for saltwater fish - it will not come into the bloodstream at all.

The acceptance that nitrite is non-toxic in saltwater has led to measurements of nitrite in saltwater to not be as common any longer. However - for me it is one of the more important measurements of different reasons.

Nitrite is formed inside the aquaria from the microbiological processes that always take place and mostly through two major pathways.

Pathway 1

A bad working nitrification process.

The nitrification process consists of two different parts.

The first step is the ammonium oxidation step. This step can be done of many different bacteria strains (AOB) and by different types of archaea (AOA). It starts rather quick and can happen in oxygen levels down to 3 – 4 ppm. It is an important step because it is especially important that total ammonia should not build up into concentrations that allow high levels of the toxic form – ammoniac (ammonia gas or NH3) – in the water. How much of the total ammonia that consist of the toxic form (NH3) is mostly depended on pH, salinity and temperature.
This tool can be a help

The second step is nitrite oxidation into nitrate. This step is done by few bacteria (NOB) – mostly from the genus Nitrobacter and/or from the genus Nitrospira (or Nitrospira like)

This step is more sensitive and often needs oxygen around 5 ppm. It seems also that they need more phosphate in the water in order to have a good growth – and there are some reports that indicate that high ammonia concentration stops this step. The result of a stoppage is that high levels of nitrite will be built up. A nitrite check during the start of the cycle is a good tool that indicate that the cycle is done the whole way. When nitrite levels are down below 0.05 – it is ok – IMO.

Pathway 2a

Pathway 2a is the normal denitrification process. Sooner or later - the denitrification process will start in nearly all aquarium - especially in those with sand beds. This process - in order to be fully completed - demands nitrate, an anaerobic environment and some type of DOC source (external or internal). If this process is not fully worked out – there can be a nitrite build-up.

Pathway 2b

If you use a sulphur-based denitrification – a not fully completed process can result in nitrite build up in the water column if there is not enough filtering capacity for the nitrification pathway.

If nitrite is not toxic in saltwater – why worry?

As I know it – most investigations have been on gill breathing animals with haemoglobin as an oxygen transporter in the bloodstream. There are few other – if any -investigation according animals not using haemoglobin as oxygen carrier and/or in animals that have different oxygen uptake mechanisms than gills. You can´t be sure that there are not animals that take up nitrite in the bloodstream and get into a situation with low uptake of oxygen.

Further on – bacteria and archaea that are important for the nitrification process are oxygen using autotrophs and slow growers. They compete with fast-growing heterotrophs for both oxygen and space to sit on. There is indications that the second step is more sensitive for competition and a build-up of nitrite in a mature system. This can be caused by too much organic load in the system. This is also the reason why we should not add either DOC (dissolved organic carbon) or heterotrophic bacteria in the start of an aquarium. Only nitrifiers should be added in the start. Nitrite measurements in the start cycle show us when the cycle is done, and we can go further with the creation of our unique ecosystem. IMO – this is also the reason why the “rotten shrimp method” should be avoided in the start. If you start with chemical addition of NH
3/NH4 and bottled nitrification bacteria it is essential to know when the nitrite spike is gone IMO. If you start the aquarium the way I have outlined in my 15 steps – you will not have a nitrite spike at all IME.

In a mature aquarium – denitrification will happen. In anaerobic (without oxygen) environment many heterotrophic bacteria can shift from oxygen to nitrate as a metabolic electron acceptor and nitrogen gas will be the waste from that process. This process is named denitrification. However – in this process they need an electron donator too – the denitrification bacteria can use different types of DOC as donators (Dissolved Organic Carbon). If the DOC level is too low – the denitrification process will leak some nitrite and if there is to less nitrification filtering capacity (and – IMO – it is often the case in reef aquarium – some do not want “nitrification factories” – one of the myths – IMO). Nitrite will build up in the water column – a measurement of nitrite will tell us if something happens. It is important to stress that too low DOC concentrations led to nitrite build up by halting the denitrification process and too much DOC led to the inhibition of the nitrification process and further build-up of nitrite in the aquarium. A proper translation of the Swedish word “lagom” would be a good tool here – Lagom means not too much and not too little – maybe – just enough or just right is the proper English expression here.

Nitrite measurements as a tool for proper care of the ecosystem – yes – but can it have other advantages as well?

Many of us measure nitrate as one of the key parameters in our reef. There is a discussion about levels of nitrate. Many uses 5 – 10 as a guideline, other want it to be between 0.5 and 5.

All hobby tests I know (with exception of the upcoming ION director from GHL) are based on the same principle. A metal salt is in use to reduce the nitrate into nitrite. The test reads nitrite but after a certain time when x % of the nitrate has been converted into nitrite. The colour chart translates back the nitrite reading into mg/L nitrate with a certain conversion factor. This factor is depended on brand and metal salt in use but vary from 50 to 100 times. It means that if there is nitrite in the sample from the beginning – you will have a too high reading. The brand I use for the moment (Tropic Marine PRO nitrite/nitrate test. Fauna Marines PRO seems to be the same type) have 100 as a multiplying factor. It means that if I have 0.02 mg/L of nitrite from the beginning – my nitrate readings are 2 mg/L too high. 0.05 ppm nitrite from the beginning -> 5 ppm too high nitrate reading. As I have seen – it is rather normal with these nitrite readings in mature reefs and if I want to have Nitrate levels below 5 mg/L I must analyse my nitrite concentrations in order to get a decent (and right nitrate reading)

IMO even nitrate readings up to 10 mg/L can be very wrong if you do not know your nitrite readings.

As I see it – there are a lot of reasons why nitrite readings should be done both in newly started aquariums and older more mature tanks.

Sincerely Lasse
@Lasse, happy one year anniversary on your nitrite post.
 

ReefJonas

New Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
8
Reaction score
11
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
sweden
Thank you for posting the nitrite levels above, that they land in the hundredths consistently is nice to see I’m assuming that is your matured display reef. That closely matches nh3 turnover rates too, on most kits. I think thats the first time I recall seeing detailed running data for nitrite using accurate testing.


Having the requirement that cyclers post zero nitrite before beginning, and that shows above systems don’t run at zero = easy to see how conflicts can arise on lesser test kits.

everyone has seen this article saying it’s ok to not measure nitrite



my thread above is a test for that claim, it’s panning out to be an accurate claim.
I have red all Randys articles. This article is an old and good article as most material from Randy, and is mostly telling what we all agree, that nitrite is not dangerous to marine fish. so thats not controversial. But then Randy leaves the scientific and add a personal comment (which is ok, its his article), where he says its waste of time and money to measure nitrite of that reason. But he forgets that nitrite varies more than he maybe knows, and also is an early indication when something happens in tank. Its never bad with an info like that. As I said its an old article, maybe Randy has another opinion today. ? Every time I measure (MT) no3 i got no2 ”for free”. NO2 is mostly stable around 0.02 or lower, but if it suddenly raises (new fish=more feeding ) I know tank must catch up increased load before I purchase another fish etc. Its helping me.
 
Zoanthids

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
21,086
Reaction score
17,321
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
tejas
if you stopped testing for it, you can still add fish without harm, we cover surface area physiology in detail in my work threads, and surface area physics are never discussed here as Lasse has created a hyperfocus on nitrite to the exclusion of fish disease warnings as far more important than nitrite assessment.

it is not true that filter bacteria have to be given time to ramp up to changing bioloads, that's part of old cycling science and its false because it omits surface area dynamics that matter more than small changes in bacterial colony counts for control over aquariums.


I would assume your nitrite kit isn't digital is this correct?

if so, it has a lag time that doesnt match reality. if it is, you're seeing harmless flux based on nitrogen loading and nothing was ever near a crash, or going to continue up should you add just one more fish.

Dont think we have pressed our filtration surface area near collapse, and the last final move we do or withhold determines a crash


the only crashes on file are from fish disease wipeouts that happened when someone was not home to remove the fish...that or hardware failures. Reefs that get heat and current inherently run without crashing and absorb mild ammonia shocks in a few minutes, not days= new cycling science. we dont have to measure or reactively dose things to keep up the pace of the biofilter= new cycling science. old cycling science teaches the polar opposite of what we use to produce large pattern work threads.

The sand removal thread is fifty pages of instantly removing half of people's surface area and a few are tested on seneye to show no change in nitrification rates, for the same bioload. the bacteria were given no ramp up time to increase numbers on remaining surface area/tank rocks. if those tanks spiked in nitrite, it didn't matter. we didn't measure for it due to its enduring neutrality in the reef tank. ammonia was what we tracked, the few times a seneye poster or mindstream poster did the move.

we can send messages to folks who did rip cleans five years ago, to see how their tank is today.

this finding directly goes against Lasse's posts in his filter writeup. There must be allowed room to debate Lasses points and at least mention places we've collected directly opposing digital measures.

your minor fluxes in nitrite have no bearing on your bioload carry, you are not teetering on the edge of crash by adding fish or having a better than normal feeding run.


we are going to have to decide do we want me gone or here as a balancing presence. Garf votes gone, check.


nobody has written anything to beat that as the official nitrite reference. I was going to let Lasse and Garf continue their stances without challenge, nobody to disagree they get full sway, but am summoned back and though it might be tempting to read into, and to add to, Randy's article above--I wouldn't.

what if we consider Randy's statements above well tested in my twenty page work thread? remember, its the only proof work that exists here one way or another, the rest is exploratory writing.
 
Last edited:

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
21,086
Reaction score
17,321
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
tejas
Also Jonas yours is the type of nitrite testing I'm not particularly against. you aren't reactively buying and adding bottle bac in response to slights ups and down perceived I'm assuming...well they do if we teach nitrite reaction and measure to new tank cyclers


I would assume you already have a fish disease protocol in place, or even without one your tank is running acceptably and it's well beyond the cycle close date, inherent stability has kicked in

if the only thing nitrite measurement is causing you is some delay in how you stock or feed the tank, that's harmless to use nitrite as a meter for those activities if you'd like. you are choosing to monitor it in a fully running reef to learn its reaction to various additions or withholdings you may experiment with, that's fine and the data is interesting actually if its digitally acquired data. the hanna checker for low range nitrite

peoples subjective reporting about nitrite as read from a color sample and gardient chart, only to be foiled by kitchen lighting from one of the smart bulbs that ouputs heavier in purples is the bane of my existence online lol.

that or they didn't shake the reagent correctly, or they didnt wait the right time to report the reading. maybe the fill line was off for the sample, you can see my point about subjectivity and a neutral parameter either way.
 
Last edited:

ReefJonas

New Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Aug 1, 2021
Messages
8
Reaction score
11
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
sweden
if you stopped testing for it, you can still add fish without harm, we cover surface area physiology in detail in my work threads, and surface area physics are never discussed here as Lasse has created a hyperfocus on nitrite to the exclusion of fish disease warnings as far more important than nitrite assessment.

it is not true that filter bacteria have to be given time to ramp up to changing bioloads, that's part of old cycling science and its false because it omits surface area dynamics that matter more than small changes in bacterial colony counts for control over aquariums.


I would assume your nitrite kit isn't digital is this correct?

if so, it has a lag time that doesnt match reality. if it is, you're seeing harmless flux based on nitrogen loading and nothing was ever near a crash, or going to continue up should you add just one more fish.

Dont think we have pressed our filtration surface area near collapse, and the last final move we do or withhold determines a crash


the only crashes on file are from fish disease wipeouts that happened when someone was not home to remove the fish...that or hardware failures. Reefs that get heat and current inherently run without crashing and absorb mild ammonia shocks in a few minutes, not days= new cycling science. we dont have to measure or reactively dose things to keep up the pace of the biofilter= new cycling science. old cycling science teaches the polar opposite of what we use to produce large pattern work threads.

The sand removal thread is fifty pages of instantly removing half of people's surface area and a few are tested on seneye to show no change in nitrification rates, for the same bioload. the bacteria were given no ramp up time to increase numbers on remaining surface area/tank rocks. if those tanks spiked in nitrite, it didn't matter. we didn't measure for it due to its enduring neutrality in the reef tank. ammonia was what we tracked, the few times a seneye poster or mindstream poster did the move.

we can send messages to folks who did rip cleans five years ago, to see how their tank is today.

this finding directly goes against Lasse's posts in his filter writeup. There must be allowed room to debate Lasses points and at least mention places we've collected directly opposing digital measures.

your minor fluxes in nitrite have no bearing on your bioload carry, you are not teetering on the edge of crash by adding fish or having a better than normal feeding run.


we are going to have to decide do we want me gone or here as a balancing presence. Garf votes gone, check.


nobody has written anything to beat that as the official nitrite reference. I was going to let Lasse and Garf continue their stances without challenge, nobody to disagree they get full sway, but am summoned back and though it might be tempting to read into, and to add to, Randy's article above--I wouldn't.

what if we consider Randy's statements above well tested in my twenty page work thread? remember, its the only proof work that exists here one way or another, the rest is exploratory writing.
Agree that a slightly raise in nitrite is not a problem. We have the margins. But its telling me something and for me that makes me maybe feed some less or wait another week with next fish purchase. Its impossible to prove what have happened if I ignored this, as I have, like you, in decades, not used nitrite as an indicator but if the tank is old enough I just trust its mature. And yes, it works in 9 of 10 cases . But I still cant see any harm with more info. Maybe we can see NO2 as a fine tuning to help us do the last final judgement? At least, we can agree, that if No2 goes from 0.02 to 0.1 during a few days, something has happened. That gives me an alert and higher attention for a few days. But I agree, If i didn’t know this, probably everything would have been fine. I was luckily unknown. But, as we havent measured NO2 so much ”until now” there is maybe something we can learn?. At least I get info now that I didn’t know existed. Info must not always lead to action.
I measure digital in a way yes. I measure with with Mastertronic, so its a photometric way, so its doing in same way all time, meaning I will get high precision and reliable signals when something is changing.

We have soo many parameters today thanks to ICP that is more questionable if they are giving us so much back. But thats another subject.

sorry for interrupting this thread. Now I will leave you alone and will read. I am enjoying the debate, its always valuable to read people different thoughts.

Happy reefing
Jonas
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
21,086
Reaction score
17,321
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
tejas
-Its impossible to prove what have happened if I ignored this



only that part above needs fixing up





if you cease testing for nitrite permanently in your display, nothing bad happens, even with stark changes you may make.

post a pic of your reef, from this we garner aging details and crucial surface area position and degree. need your tank pics to show you why you dont need any form of nitrite testing


we have already tested every opposite time that factoring nitrite was stated to be required, and we logged the results. it can't be accurate to claim there is a time we must factor nitrite, without equal test threads on more than one tank showing the need.

it cant just be biochemistry paragraphs written by someone on the internet as the swing vote against Randy's article, not sold.

Randy's article and post article discussions with me in threads did not make we want to measure nitrite with API in my reef or accept input in cycling threads from those that do, I'm relaying that to readers first hand.

as a person who likes to study patterns I am highly interested in digital nitrite data from any type of setup, display or quarantine. it wouldnt change anything we do in work threads, but to learns its nature and pattern would be a great opportunity if someone has a reputable objective measure.
 
Last edited:
OP
Lasse

Lasse

7500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
8,606
Reaction score
24,940
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
seneye to show no change in nitrification rates,
Stop using wrong nomenclature when you try to advocate yourself. Seneye measure free ammoniac (NH3) not nitrification rate. - Nitrite measurements on the other hand is a good tool to estimate nitrification rate (or lack of that).

That you need to give filter bacteria time to grow after present bioload is not old cycling thinking - it is common sense with known growrates for NOB (Nitrite Oxidizing Bacteria) shown in thousand of scientific papers.

as Lasse has created a hyperfocus on nitrite to the exclusion of fish disease warnings as far more important than nitrite assessment.

Thank you for the kind overestimation of my significance

Never the less - once again
Once again - and I think I have to repeat it for another couple of years before it stuck into Brandons head - the reason why I believes that nitrite testing is an important tool have nothing to do with if fish survive or not. The reason is that it is needed in order to get a right nitrate reading ant that the bacterial second step is one of the more sensitive bacterial processes in an aquarium. If the nitrite level rise above the normal level - it is an early warning that something is going wrong. In a start - it is also a sign if the full nitrification cycle is done or not.

High nitrite concentrations in the start - above 0.5 - can contribute to the different stress moments a fish have in a start of a new aquarium. Stress in fish make them more sensitive for disease. To recommend people to keep on stocking when they report high NO2 readings - as you have done in some threads - is just childish and irresponsible.

What I have said in this thread and in many more has not with crashes to do - it has with proper husbandry to do.

need your tank pics to show you why you dont need any form of nitrite testing
You have not a single idea who you are discussing with :D:D:D:D

Once again Brandon - I ask you to stay out from this thread and promote your thinkings in your own threads. You are totally trolling this thread in order to not let another standpoint form itself. I can take a discussion if it is serious and based on scientific facts but not with the crap you produce in order to defend your own thinkings.

Sincerely Lasse
 
Orphek OR3 reef aquarium LED lighting

fachatga

Well-Known Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
900
Reaction score
1,330
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
oak park
Hi lasse. Thanks so much for posting this thread. It’s really helpful and useful. I think most if not all of us here see how Brandon is completely missing the point of what’s being discussed here. But this is really good info to help me understand my tests and what’s going on in my tank.
 
OP
Lasse

Lasse

7500 Club Member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Mar 20, 2016
Messages
8,606
Reaction score
24,940
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
Källarliden 14 D Bohus, Sweden
see how Brandon is completely missing the point of what’s being discussed here.
Thank you and according to the sentes i quote - My thoughts of his writing is that they could have been in the novell "l ingénieux chevalier don quichotte de la manche" and that there is a lot of windmills here at R2R :D:D

Sincerely Lasse
 

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,062
Reaction score
12,720
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
if you cease testing for nitrite permanently in your display, nothing bad happens, even with stark changes you may make.

The truth is. If you cease testing most of the stuff we test for, nothing bad will happen. BUT - that doesn't mean the science behind the test is incorrect. You seem to be totally ignoring the points multiple people have tried to politely make. I think everyone - including @Lasse has agreed that most people don't test nitrite daily - and that their tanks do fine. What (IMHO) you're missing @brandon429 is that just because people tend not to test nitrite and their tanks seem fine, does not mean that their tanks wouldn't be BETTER - if they followed nitrite. Just because 99 percent of people do something a certain way, doesn't prove they are doing it 'right' - no matter how many threads, posts, etc there are about it. Right?
 

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
21,086
Reaction score
17,321
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
Location
tejas
That summary just now came from last week when you had advised the new cycler to keep waiting for nitrite compliance well after the cycle was done, and then I stated that wasn't necessary. It still isn't, no point is being missed they're just being made here relative to prior troubleshoots where you and I too disagreed.


don't muddy up the summary: I show instances where we dont have to use nitrite testing in reefing, Lasse's point is that we must do so during all cycles to catch any filter crashes early, before they arise to stress the system.

we are actively debating that distinction, what's your summary of the impacts of nitrite now that you've been part of some cycling posts/ able to see outcomes people post?

how have you found it impactful to not factor nitrite in cycles? can you link a crashed attempt, or stressed out fish/ cuc that died in the posts for cycling you've seen (we can ask the poster for their nitrite info during the crash)
 
Last edited:

MnFish1

10K Club member
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
View Badges
Joined
Dec 28, 2016
Messages
12,062
Reaction score
12,720
Review score
+0 /0 /-0
don't muddy up the summary: I show instances where we dont have to use nitrite testing in reefing, Lasse's point is that we must do so during all cycles to catch any filter crashes early, before they arise to stress the system.
Don't muddy up what 'summary'? You ignored everything I said. So I'll say it again: In my opinion, you cannot assert with any kind of certainty, that because a lot of reefers do not do 'xxxxxx' and their tanks are 'ok', that their tanks would not do BETTER if they did 'xxxxx'.
 
Fritz

ARE YOU PROUD OR EMBARRASSED OF YOUR REEF TANK?

  • Proud

    Votes: 223 58.1%
  • Embarrassed

    Votes: 49 12.8%
  • Neither proud or embarrassed

    Votes: 95 24.7%
  • Other (please explain)

    Votes: 17 4.4%
GHL Advanced Technology
Top