Top ten reasons you should NOT dose a new cycling tank to 2 ppm ammonia

Status
Not open for further replies.

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,493
Reaction score
23,572
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
We are all 100% familiar with the sales adage that a cycle is only proven when you can move 2ppm ammonia to zero multiple times before a cycle can be deemed reliable

9.9/10 cycling umpires online stand firm with this information in unison to anyone posting doubt about cycle completion, what happens if we break ranks and-- don't?

Can a cycle still be proofed as ready even without the massive ammonia dose event we're trained (by bottle bac sellers) to do?

Here's ten reasons I'll state that the practice is terrible information and has the primary outcome of tricking the masses into buying multiple bottles of bacteria for the same aquarium to remedy a completely false stall:

1. Here is one of several linkable examples I have where liquid ammonia was not dosed to 2 ppm and a full reef was created from a dry start rock set, and you can track that reef to total maturity then upgraded parts into a larger reef destined to become equally as nice. We open with a direct example of not dosing to 2 ppm ammonia yet still being able to cycle a dry start reef to carry a common starting bioload. A simple pinch of fish food+ wait time following a common cycling chart and no initial dosing of ammonia to 2ppm produced:

*even if we never test that setup for any degree of cycling params, ammonia nitrite and nitrate, any set of rocks set stewing in a mix of saltwater and fish food will upcycle without bottle bac in 30 days, see any cycling chart ever written.



2. Cycling a reef tank breaks down into four common approaches and three of the options have a predetermined maximum wait time to establishment, a timeframe for the number of days we'd wait which has nothing to do with a starting dose of 2 ppm liquid ammonia. (uncured rocks cure out relative to the growths they bring in, wait time varies per set and per location of keeping)

See any cycling chart for the pertinent # of days to controlling ammonia in fed or boosted setups, try and find seneye cycles that don't back up that information. Four common reef cycling approaches are:

A-dry start setups; they get either bottle bac or no bottle bac

B-live rock skip cycle setups that begin a new tank with rocks completely full of bacteria and require zero wait times since moving rocks from old water to new water doesn't kill bacteria (every reef convention aquarium display you've ever seen)

C-blended cycles where both live and dry rocks are kept together in the same flow path

D-uncured ocean rocks shipped to a home where adding ammonia is the last thing we'd ever do-copious water changes are sometimes needed to prevent ammonia spiking and causing a loss cascade much less dosing 2 ppm right at the start.

***why don't sales cycling ads break down the four types of cycles to see if you even need to proof your cycle at all? Sales ads are trying to sell you things or set you up to buy things, it doesn't benefit them to outline that 50% of cycles we see online don't need ammonia added as they're guaranteed to show up with a full set of bacteria already in place. If a cycling umpire isn't matching your specific approach to timing already well-studied, and readable in an actual link not from their tank, you are getting parroted into doubt and will eventually perceive a stall and invest more money in cycling bacteria-where you don't need any extra

3. The masses use API and not seneye. 2 ppm cycling wouldn't have the deleterious effects on the hobby it has if we all used digital nh3 trackers to assess controls. Do this search on google: stalled reef tank cycle.

that's 450,000 pages of what test kit? seneye?

here is a direct link of a comparison between seneye and API cycling on an initial ammonia dose following normal amounts. How long did API take to register the drop vs seneye>

4. 2ppm ammonia, especially dosed more than once, is the sole reason you're being advised to do 100% water changes to start clean after your cycle completes.

this is easy for nano reefers, we don't care how much raw blast you want to input, it can be changed out for new and your cycle will be fine (see below, stalled cycles are false sales ad claims)


if you're cycling a 260 gallon dry start reef, you need means that don't require a ~200 gallon water change at the end. Use the method from tenet #1 to avoid the big water change, forego the ripoff advice to dose massive amounts of algae food into your new aquarium to alleviate trained doubt.

5. The types of bottle bacteria we employ want carbon and other nutrients (fish food, #1 above) that ammonia alone doesn't provide, that's the type of energy these clades have developed to employ for biomass expansion and to set up shop as biofilter constituents. Source for claim: Dr. Reef's 110 page bottle bac analysis thread, common online research papers/ anyone feel free to link some here. *when folks don't add food, and blast the raw ammonia, carbon and nutrients still get in anyway albeit much slower than by direct feeding. Take a strip of packing tape/clean and go stick it to the top of your blinds mount on a window, or the top of your living room fan blade. peel the tape back off and look at the tape angled into a flashlight beam in a dark room-there's your natural sourced carbon and assorted gnat wings/goodies.

When people forego bottle bac (tenet #1) and add only fish food, the proteins in that food are broken down by common bacteria in liquids within a home to yield the ammonia portion (nitrogen) the filter bacteria need. The point is, given enough wait time, you can't mess up a cycle by day 30 wait and any common bottle bac cycle is ready by day 10 although your cheap test kits may not show it (#3 above seneye vs api cycle link)


6. Purveyors of 2ppm cycling literally do not have one single example of a seneye failed cycle where 2 ppm dosing was skipped. not one, from a calibrated and benched seneye unit. There aren't any posts in pattern we can find on the entire internet that skipping 2ppm ammonia verification tricked someone into starting too early, and their fish died in a cloudy smelly haze of gray water (how crashed tanks look in crashed tank threads) from a cycle that just plain wasn't ready yet.

(side note, I have seen acclimation stress initial loss-I floated my shipping bag opened for 2 hours before adding into tank, sumps built with mold proof silicone losses/hardware errors. Seneye is what you'd use to discern patterned ammonia issues, good luck finding any)

you are being sold a practice over, and over, and over, painted with doubt and fear and need for verification yet no examples exist for the consequences of noncompliance. Any cycle attempt you can find on the internet worked fine; their fish are swimming and eating well (until velvet kicks in by month 8)

if we are operating on a continuum of some cycles working, and some failing, there will be easy death losses we can link here for patterning. There aren't. its a false notion.

7. Alternate methods of cycle proofing exist, that don't use any parameter testing at all, sellers and influencers don't take time to elucidate this option because it's free and doesn't involve risk that concerns you into a purchase. Can you find youtube videos on this approach? Macna talks? Visual benthic cuing of a cycle = when you wait long enough for modes A & C above to transmit growths of diatoms, algae, cyano or dinos onto formerly all-white surfaces. The casting of those growths around the tank came after your basic filtration abilities were established. Get a seneye, run an option A or C cycle until the sand is covered in red spots, and load test the setup on seneye and post your results. it will always pass basic oxidation controls that manage any common starting bioload. You can actually tell some systems are cycled by merely seeing a picture of the tank. Here's two specific recent times we did that; watch the cyclers now add bioloading and see how it fares:


and

(notice the # of days at work, the prediction of events before we get pics, all A and C cycles follow this timing)
*look at post #64 and the follow up pics

8. I'm out of ideas lol, a title of ten reasons not to get tricked sounds better than seven reasons.


so as we debate these claims I'm going to need to see actual failed cycles linked, true fails, please. we need to see some dead fish in pattern and some seneyes pegged to 8ppm nh4 in order to find the patterns we need, to believe the hype.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,493
Reaction score
23,572
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
so let's say someone wants to use ammonia-it feels too strange not to use it/all rules say we must

if we're not going to proof it out to 3x movements of 2ppm to zero, what can we sub in then? How can we make at least some use of the Dr. Tim's cycling ammonia we just bought?

here's an easy way:



buy Biospira, Dr. Tim's cycling bacteria, or fritz (top three brands tested on Dr. Reef's massive bottle bac thread)

input into your rocks and sand + saltwater the dose from the bottle's label and then a couple pinches of flake food ground up into powder, put that into the display. add a few drops of ammonia, approximate, it does not have to be exact. wait ten days, you are cycled to the degree of surface area you had stewing in the ten day boosted mix

**you can then buy a seneye, input your desired initial bioload, and that seneye will show total safety for the coming days until disease wipes out the fish.

here's 30 straight pages of testing a ten day wait approach, no fails, passes seneye audits from seneye owners who tested the claims:

I realize dead bottles of bacteria exist in the world. did we encounter any above? are we likely to this year? if you search out every cycling thread I've ever typed in, did the fish die in a gray smelly haze of unready water or did 100% of them work out fine (until velvet, month 8)

dead bottle bac is part of the fear continuum. we deal in dilution levels and pH tendencies that make it a non issue, in specific reef tank display cycles, as I see it. that context matters 100%

*what about other brands of cycling bac, mb7, brightwell xlm etc?

I don't have seneye data on those so I'd rather divert to the top three where we do have copious seneye data to feedback with and pattern from. However, can anyone here post me a failed cycle off mb7 that isn't just an api or red sea nh4 scare?

I bet they all work just fine, once we get a seneye tester to feedback.
 

Eagle_Steve

Grandpa of Cronies
View Badges
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
11,564
Reaction score
60,954
Location
Tennessee
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
My fishless cycle with dry rock (although I never use dry rock anymore)

Rock, sand water.

1 single black mussel and 1 little neck clam (fresh not frozen stuff)

Bust open each and stab violently with a fork to kill them.

Place in tank.

When both begin to degrade, remove from tank and test ammonia using API test kit.
If you see ammonia present in test, do not put shells and mush back in. If no ammonia, put back in and repeat next day.

With nothing in tank, let sit a day and test ammonia again. If ammonia, wait until next day and test again.

When 0 ammonia, test nitrites and nitrates. There should be some of both. If none, then add a heap of fish food sitting in a net and allow it to degrade and raise ammonia back up. Repeat until you get 0 ammonia, a hint of nitrite and some nitrates.

Once you have them, remove food and net.

Let tank sit and test until nitrites are gone or undetectable on API kit.

When only nitrates are present, do water change and try to bring down to 5-10 if above it.

Add a fish or 2 after water change.

Slowly add fish to tank and allow for bacteria population to catch up to bioload.

If adding tons of corals, frags with plugs and all of that stuff, stock a little heavier, as I am importing diversity from the plugs and skeletons of the corals.

Let things mature from there and take it slowly with adding things.

None of the above applies if I am setting up a tank with real pulled from the ocean live rock. I just stock the crap out of a tank once I am sure all die off is processed from shipping the rock.

I will never use bottled bacteria to setup a tank for myself. The 2 mentioned items I use to cycle have the bacteria we want living in them and on their shells. They just need food and surface area to expand their population.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,493
Reaction score
23,572
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Steve thank you for posting! I can see how that’s certain to work just fine.


I like how you’re independent from bottle bac above. true diversity in starting, them mussels are filthy bacteria magnets / true diversity at the start
 

Karen00

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
3,565
Reaction score
6,490
Location
Toronto
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I don't use bottle bac anymore. I ditched that back in my freshwater days. Freshwater I start by adding flake food for the ammonia source and my saltwater tank (this is my first) was started with dry rock and live sand.

I only recently read about dosing to 2% ammonia. How long has that been around because I never, ever did that, even with freshwater. At the same time I have never done a full blown stocking right after a cycle. I have always gone slow so high bioload right after cycling was never a problem. Is 2% supposed to mean you can stock a ton of livestock right after cycling? Where did the magic number of 2% even come from?
 

srobertb

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 16, 2021
Messages
986
Reaction score
1,059
Location
SE Texas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I didn’t realize the fishless cycle required such extensive research and discussion. Is this a major barrier many folks are running into?
I have no idea and have to agree. I’ve always setup tanks 2 different ways

1. Use gulf live rock- put it in tank. See ammonia spike from die off during transport. See nitrite spike. See nitrate spike. Water change. Ghost feed tank (feed the sponges, pods, worms, etc) for a few weeks then stock tank slowly CUC, fish, Cora, fish, etc.

2. dead rock. Ghost feed or add a little ammonia. Do the same as above. Use snails for the 3-4 months of uglies.

I always appreciate these lengthy posts and I think it’s wonderful people put so much time and research into it but ultimately this isn’t rocket science. It requires some patience- in dosing ammonia/food and waiting for the tank to cycle (which often includes a hair algae, cyano, and diatom bloom(s).
 

GARRIGA

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 12, 2021
Messages
2,139
Reaction score
1,687
Location
South Florida
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Start of cycle I go to 2 ppm but end of cycle I stress test to 4 ppm and do it soon as nitrites dropped to zero. Then add carbon and heterotrophic bacteria and stress test nitrates. Want a balanced system. Water changes aren’t the solution with todays dosing if everything and anything needed with ICP resting to guide one as to best to do it.

Perhaps the real issue is we don’t cycle long enough. To impatient to add first coral. Something I wouldn’t add until coralline show up unless just keeping a small fish bio load which I’m not a fan of. Reefs aren’t devoid of fish. Their waste part of the ecosystem.
 

jda

10K Club member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 25, 2013
Messages
14,325
Reaction score
22,134
Location
Boulder, CO
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Maybe I am just a pessimist and/or have seen too much of the author's work in the past, but there have been other strawman that get folded into many, many posts as time goes on. I think that most of us can agree that this is not a widespread thing, but we might see tons of posts down the road about all of the tanks that had successful cycles that did not use the mostly non-issue 2 ppm method like he suggested as if he saved the entire hobby from the destruction of 2 ppm as proof of something that does not exist... all while asking us who point out that it does not matter for proof of success of what we did.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,493
Reaction score
23,572
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Garriga

that's an example of painting fear without any links, it implies we suffer from not taking that groupthink approach and it also means not any single thread linked was factored in the response. we wanted to show that the firm mode of blasting in massive amounts of ammonia has downsides, that are never relayed to us, by purveyors of the method.

If you'd mentioned fish disease preps with that passion, we'd be on track for updated cycling science.

for example: we don't get less fish disease loss by cycling longer, or with more ammonia. We dont get less uglies and near permanent tank invasion prevention by following that commonest method.


in the very least that input encapsulates what 98% of all cyclers for new reefs believe, and are told by sellers. its valid in that the statement provides the gradient we work against between old cycling science and new means. we listed a litany of testing mishaps that can happen, false stalls, re buying of bottle bac, fuel for uglies that for some folks lasts two straight years, all while training the focus for the new cycler away from fish disease when in fact fish disease loss is the ONLY source of cycling loss in pattern we can find, or post, across any forum.

Karen, that 2 ppm ammonia dosing idea is about 15 or 20 years old, it emerged with the advent of highly concentrated bottle bac that really is able in most cases to move that huge amount of ammonia I never promote for anyone's cycle.


new cycling science knows the cycle is fine however we approach it, and that fish disease preps are where we aim concerns and preps. new cycling science knows that digital means of measuring ammonia removes 100% of the common concerns about cycle completion we can all search out nowadays and going back decades as false stall posts.



old cycling science is everything to the opposite of that.

if you're reading anything in a set of cycling advices that implies risk, or doom outcome/noncompletion/non ability to handle your starting bioload that's old cycling science designed solely to sell you peace of mind retail helps.
 
Last edited:

happyhourhero

Burner of the Tips
View Badges
Joined
Aug 5, 2015
Messages
3,586
Reaction score
6,413
Location
Pensacola, FL
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Maybe I am just a pessimist and/or have seen too much of the author's work in the past, but there have been other strawman that get folded into many, many posts as time goes on. I think that most of us can agree that this is not a widespread thing, but we might see tons of posts down the road about all of the tanks that had successful cycles that did not use the mostly non-issue 2 ppm method like he suggested as if he saved the entire hobby from the destruction of 2 ppm as proof of something that does not exist... all while asking us who point out that it does not matter for proof of success of what we did.
Work threads only please.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,493
Reaction score
23,572
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
100% agreed Happyhour.


speak in links that we were part of, or originated even better, so we can see the bad outcomes painted but NEVER delivered.

show some times we stepped up and directly affected a cycle and stuck around to measure the outcomes, vs sideline evals.


we had predicted above that retorts without actionable links are hot air strictly. more will follow. I can nearly certainly list the coming challenge authors that will be word only writeups of doubt. there's 7 more folks left.

this is what happens when we rattle the comfort zones of trained click buyers.
 

Karen00

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
3,565
Reaction score
6,490
Location
Toronto
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I have no idea and have to agree. I’ve always setup tanks 2 different ways

1. Use gulf live rock- put it in tank. See ammonia spike from die off during transport. See nitrite spike. See nitrate spike. Water change. Ghost feed tank (feed the sponges, pods, worms, etc) for a few weeks then stock tank slowly CUC, fish, Cora, fish, etc.

2. dead rock. Ghost feed or add a little ammonia. Do the same as above. Use snails for the 3-4 months of uglies.

I always appreciate these lengthy posts and I think it’s wonderful people put so much time and research into it but ultimately this isn’t rocket science. It requires some patience- in dosing ammonia/food and waiting for the tank to cycle (which often includes a hair algae, cyano, and diatom bloom(s).
I think threads like this are good for new folks. I think new folks are sold products that aren't needed but because they don't know any better they buy whatever the store person tells them to. I was sold the full bill of goods with my first freshwater tank but I also didn't do any research prior to getting it. Now I know better. I setup my first saltwater tank 6 months ago and the store person recommended a bunch of stuff but because I had done my research on here first I knew I didn't need it. I think that's why threads like this are important, for the newbs. Experienced folks don't necessarily need it. I will admit I did buy the saltwater bottled bac as a "just in case I need it in an emergency" because this is my first tank. I haven't touched it yet. :)
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,493
Reaction score
23,572
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
two types of retorts are coming:

1. ones from prior beefs last year that have no links and are very nonspecific


2. sincere studies of cycling science that give us insightful information we can read that elevates the matter of 2 ppm verification cycling, regardless of who brings up the topic. lets see how the predicted ratio plays out. Thanks all for posting. ***many thousands of cycles did the 2 ppm verification process and API agreed it worked, we just saw one as a biospira cycle in the chemistry forum yesterday. There are WINS using that old method, its not all bad. I expect some folks who can wield API very well to still enjoy the 2ppm verification option, I'll hit like on those detraction posts. Ill hit triple like if they practice and or advise fish disease prep options when they make cycling calls to new reefers.
 

Jekyl

GSP is the devil and clowns are bad pets
View Badges
Joined
Jan 15, 2019
Messages
11,271
Reaction score
15,491
Location
Michigan
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Easy solution to all this. Live rock > dry rock in every aspect. "BuT wHaT aBoUt PeStS!?!?" So what... everyone at some point will deal with some unwanted thing in their tank.
 
OP
OP
brandon429

brandon429

why did you put a reef in that
View Badges
Joined
Dec 9, 2014
Messages
29,493
Reaction score
23,572
Location
tejas
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
million percent agreed. here's a live rock skip cycle tracking thread

-also keeps up the standard a work thread exists already for any of the four cycling groups

Its the only kind of rock I'd ever want or choose and its not from KP or TBS/shipped rock either although those are fine sources.

My ideal rock is skip cycle live rock using coralline cured rocks from a big vat sitting in a pet store ala 2006 like this one:

coralline.jpg



the reason I have no fear of hitchhikers is because I know they'll get in anyway, and worse, if I used white rocks and because massive work threads exist to show handling any of them. using other people's tanks, not my tiny pico reef.

when we buy live rock in a tank marked live rock from a pet store, and whorled coralline exists on the rocks, and ophiuroid brittle star arms poke out from all crevices, and the bottom of the tank is lined is castings of pods and shells and asternia stars, to dose 2 ppm ammonia to that source of rocks is the height of cycling blasphemy. It means there's zero mental command of cycling bacteria going on right from the start, and the tank is doomed lol.
 
Last edited:

Eagle_Steve

Grandpa of Cronies
View Badges
Joined
Jan 30, 2018
Messages
11,564
Reaction score
60,954
Location
Tennessee
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Easy solution to all this. Live rock > dry rock in every aspect. "BuT wHaT aBoUt PeStS!?!?" So what... everyone at some point will deal with some unwanted thing in their tank.
I agree 100% with LR over Dry.

The one thing that gets left out a lot is how easy it is to deal with "pests" in LR.

If buying form KP, TB or wherever, a few things can be done to easily eliminate them. If buying from an LFS vat, just look over the rock a few times before you buy it. Like a few different days and at different times of the day. This will allow you to see any nasties, hopefully, before you make a purchase.

Not going to get into extreme detail here, but plenty of post on here about how one person or another made a trap, dipped rock in 1.030 water, etc.
 

Karen00

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 7, 2020
Messages
3,565
Reaction score
6,490
Location
Toronto
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Easy solution to all this. Live rock > dry rock in every aspect. "BuT wHaT aBoUt PeStS!?!?" So what... everyone at some point will deal with some unwanted thing in their tank.
I'm doing everything humanly possible to keep them out. My dry rock helped with that. LOL. My "new to saltwater" brain wouldn't have been able to handle pests that might've come in on live rock. It was all the worm threads that did it for me. Haha. I would have no problem starting with dry rock again. :)
 

GARRIGA

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 12, 2021
Messages
2,139
Reaction score
1,687
Location
South Florida
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Garriga

that's an example of painting fear without any links, it implies we suffer from not taking that groupthink approach and it also means not any single thread linked was factored in the response. we wanted to show that the firm mode of blasting in massive amounts of ammonia has downsides, that are never relayed to us, by purveyors of the method.

If you'd mentioned fish disease preps with that passion, we'd be on track for updated cycling science.

for example: we don't get less fish disease loss by cycling longer, or with more ammonia. We dont get less uglies and near permanent tank invasion prevention by following that commonest method.


in the very least that input encapsulates what 98% of all cyclers for new reefs believe, and are told by sellers. its valid in that the statement provides the gradient we work against between old cycling science and new means. we listed a litany of testing mishaps that can happen, false stalls, re buying of bottle bac, fuel for uglies that for some folks lasts two straight years, all while training the focus for the new cycler away from fish disease when in fact fish disease loss is the ONLY source of cycling loss in pattern we can find, or post, across any forum.

Karen, that 2 ppm ammonia dosing idea is about 15 or 20 years old, it emerged with the advent of highly concentrated bottle bac that really is able in most cases to move that huge amount of ammonia I never promote for anyone's cycle.


new cycling science knows the cycle is fine however we approach it, and that fish disease preps are where we aim concerns and preps. new cycling science knows that digital means of measuring ammonia removes 100% of the common concerns about cycle completion we can all search out nowadays and going back decades as false stall posts.



old cycling science is everything to the opposite of that.

if you're reading anything in a set of cycling advices that implies risk, or doom outcome/noncompletion/non ability to handle your starting bioload that's old cycling science designed solely to sell you peace of mind retail helps.
Been cycling since the 70s. Knew of Fishless cycling in the 90s but stuck to just adding fish and letting ammonia show up eventually. That always took minimum six weeks.

Now I use ammonia. I don’t base it on just what I’ve read or been promoted. Based on my experience. Ammonia/nitrites cycled within a week. Nitrates another two to three. The latter I don’t see being talked about.

Solution being water changes. I’d be more concerned with why the industry refuses to embrace complete cycling and peddling constant water changes vs 2 ppm anything. Lots of money in salt. Considerably more than bacterial products or ammonia dosing regiments.

Plus all the equipment to remove nutrients and then added back such as sumps with socks and skimmers and carbon dosing and GFO and all the macro and trace elements with took out because that’s what we must.

That’s where I’d fight the fight. This nonsense we must otherwise we won’t be successful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top