What fish should i get for cycling saltwater

[brandon429]

Rmc

again I’ll ask

have you ever in your reefing career seen a seneye cycle indicate that a fish was being burned in a bottle bac cycle


-or-

did you see api tan reading of .25, expect it to be zero, and just assume the fish was being burned? That’s what the group is thinking here


nobody is telling him it’s mean to use fish because he’s skipping disease preps, they’re hinting at ammonia burn and thats made up. It isn’t real data learned from experience / it’s groupthink fear relay.

 

[brandon429]

I’ll check back in a few pages and see how many readable links we are missing (Paragraph testimony + cartoon memes is the standard here so far)




this is about one hundred reefs cycling exactly the way I said it works, no fish burn:

How to unstick any seemingly stuck cycle

Here's my theory of what's happening in my tank. I believe it is "cycling" and it can be debated whether or not it's "ready". I believe you and I may agree that it is more ready than not. I also believe I am "stuck" at .25/.5ppm NH3 (API) and 0 NO2 and negligible NO3 because there is just not...

www.reef2reef.com

 

[SpyC]

I’ll check back in a few pages and see how many readable links we are missing (Paragraph testimony + cartoon memes is the standard here so far)




this is about one hundred reefs cycling exactly the way I said it works, no fish burn:

How to unstick any seemingly stuck cycle

Here's my theory of what's happening in my tank. I believe it is "cycling" and it can be debated whether or not it's "ready". I believe you and I may agree that it is more ready than not. I also believe I am "stuck" at .25/.5ppm NH3 (API) and 0 NO2 and negligible NO3 because there is just not...

www.reef2reef.com

can you also please post readable links to the studies that disprove any ammonia burn can occur in a cycling tank please? So far you have only posted theories or replies you made while stating this has been scientifically and demaning proof from others. Why not prove them wrong with the scientific peer reviewed papers you are referencing?

 

[brandon429]

Spy I don't mind if you don't feel convinced.

In my posted link above, we cycle tanks using the rules I'm stating, that pattern is all that matters (whether or not the fish and corals live or die is the deciding factor of success vs failure)

what you guys do is hint at failure you can't link from any source, anecdotal or not.




when people post for assistance on the cycle thread above there's no arguing, memeing, kickback, doubt

we just work unabated and build full reefs. everyone knows you can't build full reefs inside uncycled ones. you can't get happy fish from burned ones. we force people to consider the macro proof there, to step out of hyperfocus on API readings which is what's driving the incorrect umpire responses here.





We are discussing there how finicky web forums are: the same information that runs our 40 pages there in harmony has you all in a full uptight revolt lol, the exact same info.

its because this thread is a philosophical debate it's not a work thread of actual jobs where the outcomes are objective



when jobs are on the line, I'd like to see how someone rolls live time. we are disagreeing about air so far, nothing tangible.

its not like someone is going to post: hey I took time to upcycle these tanks (insert link) and I found something different, ammonia wasn't in control (insert link) can you comment on that?

we aren't going to see that mode of disagreement in this thread.

 

[SpyC]

Spy I don't mind if you don't feel convinced.

In my posted link above, we cycle tanks using the rules I'm stating, that pattern is all that matters (whether or not the fish and corals live or die is the deciding factor of success vs failure)

what you guys do is hint at failure you can't link from any source, anecdotal or not.




You and I don't speak the same proof language, so why bother engaging to sell you? All I care about is getting work jobs to log patterns from, real tank work.

when people post for assistance on the cycle thread above there's no arguing, memeing, kickback, doubt

we just work unabated and build full reefs. everyone knows you can't build full reefs inside uncycled ones. The pattern in outcome is our proof, but not for you, I'm aware. thats ok by me, I'm in the game to collect work jobs not just type on a keyboard.

it is not possible to cycle that many tanks using bad science, some will die along the way. if we get to page 500 and there's no deaths, you still won't believe unless a link from google scholar gives a permission = comfort zoning is a nice evaluation perspective

above, if I kill someone's tank it's live time and in public for everyone to see.

so that means when I'm relaying findings to this thread from not failing there, we think this doubt from you guys reads funny. posting in this thread where everyone is against the claims has already got me +2 more chat jobs for cycles which will go into that thread above when completed.


We are discussing there how finicky web forums are: the same information that runs our 40 pages there in harmony has you all in a full uptight revolt lol, the exact same info.

its because you're not logging actual work; that allows you to make big swaths of disagreement.


when jobs are on the line, I'd like to see how someone roll live time.

You do recognize that you are also providing anecdotal proof while saying everyone else with anecdotal proof is wrong or using illegitimate means to come to their conclusions?
I’m asking for the same form of evidence you demand from others, but refuse to provide.
I can tell you I lost fish in a cycle years ago from rushing the build. You’ll demand evidence of an autopsy. There will be no evidence we can provide that you will accept.

 

[92Miata]

can you also please post readable links to the studies that disprove any ammonia burn can occur in a cycling tank please? So far you have only posted theories or replies you made while stating this has been scientifically and demaning proof from others. Why not prove them wrong with the scientific peer reviewed papers you are referencing?

Again, you keep asking for proof for claims he's not making.


People need to actually read posts and stop responding to their own personal narratives. There is no question that old 1980s style throw-a-bunch-of-damsels-in-and-do-nothing can kill fish - but that's NOT WHAT HES TALKING ABOUT.


There is 30 years of data on cycling using bacterial colonies at this point. This is something every public fishkeeping institution in the world has been doing since the 90s. Rather than fighting with him, spend 15 seconds and educate yourself. It's not his job to prove gravity to you.

 

[brandon429]

I'm glad to see balanced input here for sure.


I thought just now about that BRS video posted earlier/showing fish + bottle bac cycling as a very normal thing

it's amazing nobody is flaming their comments this way...

buyers vs sellers information is just fascinating to watch in reefing debates, how we impact markets and how we're impacted by $ over .00x digital nh3 rules anyone is free to discover in play


It isn't possible to be a seneye owner and have ammonia control doubts. it isn't possible to be a reader of seneye threads and think any display reef tank is having ammonia control issues without a bunch of diseased dead fish rotting among the rocks as the sole cause in all of reefing. the emergence of mindstream (also measured nh3 in ppb) and now seneye just bodyslammed old cycling science to the mat and it was gone. it was such a rough ending to a paradigm, it was fascinating to see nearly all old claims from market-based cycling science completely undone in pattern-still going on to this day.

it is very very very very behind the curve to be relaying among peers that ammonia burning of fish is happening in bottle bac cycles, considering direct studies showing it's not happening.

 

[homer1475]

You guys didn't know brandons way is the only way that works 100% of the time? Just look at his work threads.

Man you guys know nothing.

 

[92Miata]

I'm glad to see balanced input here for sure.


I thought just now about that BRS video posted earlier/showing fish + bottle bac cycling as a very normal thing

it's amazing nobody is flaming their comments this way...

buyers vs sellers information is just fascinating to watch in reefing debates, how we impact markets and how we're impacted by $ over .00x digital nh3 rules anyone is free to discover in play


It isn't possible to be a seneye owner and have ammonia control doubts. it isn't possible to be a reader of seneye threads and think any display reef tank is having ammonia control issues without a bunch of diseased dead fish rotting among the rocks as the sole cause in all of reefing. the emergence of mindstream (also measured nh3 in ppb) and now seneye just bodyslammed old cycling science to the mat and it was gone. it was such a rough ending to a paradigm, it was fascinating to see nearly all old claims from market-based cycling science completely undone in pattern-still going on to this day.

it is very very very very behind the curve to be relaying among peers that ammonia burning of fish is happening in bottle bac cycles, considering direct studies showing it's not happening.

Sorry - just picking nits here - but the way people seem to want to do things in this hobby isn't by any means science and the "old cycling science" has basically never been the accepted scientific viewpoint.

The scientific world - public aquariums, food aquaculture facilities, breeding facilities, etc - have been fast cycling using bacterial additives for basically forever. Keeping tanks fish free for months is nonsense that only exists in the newbie sections of reef forums. We've been culturing nitrosomonas and using it since the 1950s. The local public aquarium had a fridge full of petri dishes, and an entire setup of stir plates, flasks, etc to build up numbers enough to inoculate tanks before adding fish in the 1980s.

Again, for the cheap seats, what Brandon is telling you here has been established science since the 50s, and has been pretty much the only way it gets done in scientific settings since the 80s or 90s. This hobby is just incredibly friendly to nonsense.

Calling it "old science" gives it way too much credit.

 

[92Miata]

You guys didn't know brandons way is the only way that works 100% of the time? Just look at his work threads.

Man you guys know nothing.

Do you have anything productive to add to this discussion, or are you going to continue to troll post?

 

[homer1475]

Troll all I want, and there isn't anything you can do about it.

And yes I know you are a supporter of brandons, and all the rubbish he speaks. I'm not saying he's wrong, he's actually right 99% of the time. His way of posting and acting like he's the reef god of cycling, and disease preps, leave a little less to be desired.

Have a nice day.

 

[92Miata]

Troll all I want, and there isn't anything you can do about it.

And yes I know you are a supporter of brandons, and all the rubbish he speaks. I'm not saying he's wrong, he's actually right 99% of the time. His way of posting and acting like he's the reef god of cycling, and disease preps, leave a little less to be desired.

Have a nice day.

It's a direct, deliberate violation of the forum rules.

 

[SpyC]

Again, you keep asking for proof for claims he's not making.


People need to actually read posts and stop responding to their own personal narratives. There is no question that old 1980s style throw-a-bunch-of-damsels-in-and-do-nothing can kill fish - but that's NOT WHAT HES TALKING ABOUT.


There is 30 years of data on cycling using bacterial colonies at this point. This is something every public fishkeeping institution in the world has been doing since the 90s. Rather than fighting with him, spend 15 seconds and educate yourself. It's not his job to prove gravity to you.

But he has made those claims. You obviously are not reading what he posts

 

[homer1475]

It's a direct, deliberate violation of the forum rules.

If I give you a dollar, will you call someone that cares?

And calling every poster in this thread a liar isn't violating it either? Double standards anyone?

 

[Peace River]

Friendly reminder - R2R was founded on the simple premise to develop a warm, friendly, suitable place to gather and discuss this hobby for people of all ages, backgrounds, and experience levels. The “Be Nice” policy is something we take very seriously. This can be especially challenging when we perceive trolling activity or - please work to separate the problem from the people and focus on addressing the problem.

 

[92Miata]

But he has made those claims. You obviously are not reading what he posts

Can you point me to a post where he has made this claim? I can point out to you where he specifically mentions bacteria.



Seriously - link to it. I've read all his posts in this thread - he's a little tough to read - but he's specifically talking about cycling with bacterial additives.

 

[ReefGeezer]

What affordable best fish should I get for cycling

To answer your question directly, the "best" might be Black Mollies from the fresh water section. They will live quite happily in salt water, are super hearty, don't bring marine diseases, and eat the crap out of algae. Cardinals are good also. They are hearty enough, are not aggressive later on, but once established are aggressive enough to compete with other fish you put in the tank. I'm not a big fan of Damsels and Clownfish as the first fish in a tank. They can get pretty aggressive when you add more fish.

BUT... Other's here are correct... some sort of bacterial booster, be it Dr. Tim's, Turbo Start, or whatever brand is available to you. They all work and would help keep ammonia low and really speed up the process. Sorry you had to put up with all the cycling BS.

 

[SpyC]

Can you point me to a post where he has made this claim? I can point out to you where he specifically mentions bacteria.



Seriously - link to it. I've read all his posts in this thread - he's a little tough to read - but he's specifically talking about cycling with bacterial additives.

He was directly asked for links to articles and he provides anecdotal evidence with no scientific data while also claiming anecdotal evidence is useless in prior posts. He is coming off combative and like a troll while attacking others. Whether he is right or not he is doing a tick poor job at making his argument. He attacks others while touting himself as the SME of cycling. When people act like this it is not uncommon for scientific evidence to be provided when they state the scientific evidence does not support other’s beliefs. He is a troll unfit to have the excellence badge


Post in thread 'What fish should i get for cycling saltwater'
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/what-fish-should-i-get-for-cycling-saltwater.945209/post-10729686

 

[92Miata]

To answer your question directly, the "best" might be Black Mollies from the fresh water section. They will live quite happily in salt water, are super hearty, don't bring marine diseases, and eat the crap out of algae. Cardinals are good also. They are hearty enough, are not aggressive later on, but once established are aggressive enough to compete with other fish you put in the tank. I'm not a big fan of Damsels and Clownfish as the first fish in a tank. They can get pretty aggressive when you add more fish.

BUT... Other's here are correct... some sort of bacterial booster, be it Dr. Tim's, Turbo Start, or whatever brand is available to you. They all work and would help keep ammonia low and really speed up the process. Sorry you had to put up with all the cycling BS.

"Damsels" is a really wide umbrella - and a lot of the ones you'll commonly at LFS are absolutely a problem. There are however a whole bunch of damsels that aren't all that aggressive.

One of my tanks's first fish was a captive bred Pomacentrus Pavo. Mine isn't from biota - but they are selling them now. Super docile. Springers and Talbots are pretty safe. There are a bunch of others - but yeah, absolutely do not go into a store and buy a damsel without knowing exactly what it is.

 

[92Miata]

He was directly asked for links to articles and he provides anecdotal evidence with no scientific data while also claiming anecdotal evidence is useless in prior posts. He is coming off combative and like a troll while attacking others. Whether he is right or not he is doing a tick poor job at making his argument. He attacks others while touting himself as the SME of cycling. When people act like this it is not uncommon for scientific evidence to be provided when they state the scientific evidence does not support other’s beliefs. He is a troll unfit to have the excellence badge


Post in thread 'What fish should i get for cycling saltwater'
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/what-fish-should-i-get-for-cycling-saltwater.945209/post-10729686

Again, that post is specifically talking about bacterial additives. He even references a thread about bacterial additives.


This all stems from you guys jumping all over a post that literally says "there are no examples of a failed bottle bac cycle in reefing. that is a very very very hard bit of data for old school cycling proponents to digest, they'd rather shoot the messenger."



You're tilting at windmills here. He's not being combative - you keep misquoting him and misattributing arguments to him that he has not made.

And not only has he not made those arguments - he has corrected you several times, and you REFUSE TO STOP MISATTRIBUTING ARGUMENTS TO HIM.

Do you understand how ignoring what people are actually saying is causing the argument? At no point in this thread has he said that high ammonia levels aren't harmful to fish. NOT ONCE.