0.25 Ammonia

[rebeledd]

Hi.

I don't know what step to take next. I upgraded my tank on the weekend using the same media from the old tank. There now seems to be a slight amount of ammonia (the API test kit shows a slight hint of green which is difficult to see in some lights.)

I tested the tap water last night and this also shows a slight tinge. I use Tetra Aquasafe when changing water and I have been doing 25% changes for the last 2 days with no change.

Please can someone advise me on what to do next.

Thanks, Edward

 

[TallTree01]

If you're cycling than ammonia is good. If you're not cycling, than you need to do tonnes of water changes....... fast

 

[techen]

If you are using the API test kit. It's uncommon for the test kit to show .25 when it's zero. If your tap shows the same it will be fine.

 

[rebeledd]

Thank you. Should I just leave it as is (i.e is this tap water ammonia safe for the fish?)

Would you recommend using bottled water instead on the next water change?

Thanks again.

 

[Mamashack]

As TallTree says if you are doing fishless cycling ammonia is good but really needs to be 4-5ppm to get the process started. If not cycling and you've the same amount of ammonia in the tap water as the tank then all the tap water changes in the world won't help unless you go for RO or distilled water. I wouldn't panic at 0-0.25 ppm but if it is 0.25 or above then you'll have to consider sourcing some better replacement water or adding something like Aqua Detox which will remove ammonia, nitrites and nitrates - however in doing so it will be competing with the friendly bacteria and removing their food source. It comes in the form of a sachet which needs to be recharged every week with aquarium salt and then replaced every 2 months or so - quite effective tho. I used one for 1 day and it got nitrates down from 80ppm to 5ppm in about 28 hours! My tap nitrates are 40ppm so water changes were kind of ineffective at reducing it.

 

[Lunar Jetman]

If you are using the API test kit. It's uncommon for the test kit to show .25 when it's zero. If your tap shows the same it will be fine.

I think what Techen means is it's not uncommon rather than it's uncommon so you should be fine but if you're worried you can change some water or get a tape safe product that also reduces ammonia just in case.

I think you should be fine though. This just highlights the unreliability of living and dying by test kits. They're never 100% accurate.

 

[Mamashack]

I think what Techen means is it's not uncommon rather than it's uncommon so you should be fine but if you're worried you can change some water or get a tape safe product that also reduces ammonia just in case.

I think you should be fine though. This just highlights the unreliability of living and dying by test kits. They're never 100% accurate.

Agreed! The tests are a good indicator tho, but it's important to know your fishes' normal behaviour too.

 

[jnms]

I've been having a similar problem with ammonia in a new tank with old media.
 
Best option is the add Seachem Prime.  This will neutralize the ammonia and make it safe for you fish by converting it into ammonium.  This means there will still be plenty of food available for the bacteria in your filter.

 

[TwoTankAmin]

if you are doing fishless cycling ammonia is good but really needs to be 4-5ppm to get the process started

 Please provide research to support this statement as it is not accurate, imo. One of the original proponents of fishless cycling from a 1996 online article has since revised his work which now says. The researcher who is credited with identifying the specific strains of bacteria in tanks also suggest similar dosing levels.
 

Conclusions:
The method remains viable. I don't see any reason for people to NOT use the method if they take the proper precautions. After looking at the newer material,  I don't see any reason to change the basic procedure, either. What should be added is a warning to buffer your water if you have low buffering capacity (you probably should be doing this anyway, then?) and to aim for a target level of 1-2 ppM ammonia while cycling.

 From http/www.csupomona.edu/~jskoga/Aquariums/Ammonia.html
 
Please, do not dose to to 4-5 ppm as the more likely result is you will stall your cycle and make it run way longer than necessary.
 

 

[mark4785]

When you transferred the media from the old tank to the new it is conceivable that the bacterial colony on the filtration media would become depleted due to making contact with air, partially dechlorinated water, lowered temperature and lack of oxygen. With this in mind, and if your ammonia level is 0.25 ppm you should consider doing 50% water changes every day until you reach a reading of 0 ppm. You should also cut back on feeding if your aquarium is stocked.

 

[TwoTankAmin]

The likelyhood that the transfer killed of any bacteria is small. Just having contact with the air will not kill it otherwise wet dry fuilters would kill not encourage bacterial colonies.
 
Unless the temperature was low enough to freeze water that will not only have no effect, but low temps( above freezing) actually help to extend the usefulness of bacteria longer.
 
Nor will short term lack of O kill it. Research acutally shows that altering periods of aerobic and anaerobic conditions often strengthens bacteria rather than the ooposite.
 
Finally, chloramines will not kill established nitrifiers and chlorine takes much longer to penetrate the bio-film in which the bacteria live. The odds are decent that low levels of chlorine like those you might see in your tap will out-gas from an active tank before it can do serious harm to the bacteria.
 
Finally, given the inaccuracies of ammonia hobby kits, the low level of the reading and the fact that .25 ppm of total ammonia will not contain enough of the toxic NH3 form unless one's pH is over 8.2 and the tank temp is ay least 80 or above, I do not think you have a serious problem.
 
A better indication here would be to observe the fish, if they are behaving as usual and not swimming erratically, gasping at the surface, hiding a lot or refusing to eat, the odds are good there are no current ammonia issues. Moreover, if you are getting real ammonia reading the odds are very high you must also get some sort of nitrite readings too. If you do not see these the odds are really good the ammonia reading is wrong.
 
Finally, the bacteria can multiply fast enough to recover to full capacity with that low level a reading- a matter of hours. I would not be concerned unless the levels start to rise and nitrites do the same.

 

[rebeledd]

Wow. Thanks everybody for your help, it's much appreciated.

My only issue is I can't measure the PH very accurately using the Api Master Test Kit as the low range test shows an off the chart dark blue and the high range test shows a reddy brown colour which is also not on the chart. Had anyone else had this issue?

I will keep an eye on the behaviour of the fish. How often do people do water changes and in what quantity. I may buy some of the Seachem Prime to add to the water on a change.

Thanks once again.

 

[Mamashack]

if you are doing fishless cycling ammonia is good but really needs to be 4-5ppm to get the process started

 Please provide research to support this statement as it is not accurate, imo. One of the original proponents of fishless cycling from a 1996 online article has since revised his work which now says. The researcher who is credited with identifying the specific strains of bacteria in tanks also suggest similar dosing levels.
 


 
Conclusions:
The method remains viable. I don't see any reason for people to NOT use the method if they take the proper precautions. After looking at the newer material,  I don't see any reason to change the basic procedure, either. What should be added is a warning to buffer your water if you have low buffering capacity (you probably should be doing this anyway, then?) and to aim for a target level of 1-2 ppM ammonia while cycling.

 From http/www.csupomona.edu/~jskoga/Aquariums/Ammonia.html
 
Please, do not dose to to 4-5 ppm as the more likely result is you will stall your cycle and make it run way longer than necessary.
 
 

I was quoting information I'd found in the pinned article in The Beginner's Resource on Fishless Cycling by a TFF moderator called rdd1952 and he/she definitely states getting it to a level of 4-5ppm also the TFF calculator recommends 5pmm. In 1996 the author of the article you quoted says " I would like to share what I believe" and whilst a lot of quotations are cited it seems to me to be the author's personal opinion rather than research (in my opinion). If you believe that the advice is poor or wrong in the pinned articles perhaps you should challenge the people who wrote them rather than the ones who quoted them.

 

[TwoTankAmin]

I thought that was what I was doing. I also hope that by so doing it causes folks to think about the wisdom of following the article you cited.
 
Mama- you make my point very well. What you are/were doing is basically quoting somebody else without confirming whether that information was sound or not. It reminds me of that TV commercial where the girls says "They can't put anything on the internet that isn't true." When asked where she learned than she replies, "On the internet."
 
It would make sense that the cycling information on an aquarium forum should be correct. For years I made the same assumptions. And than my recessive curiosity gene woke up and I decided to check it out for myself. I had been blindly repeating what I had read without question and suddenly I had to stop and in many cases say just the opposite.
 
But mama, to fault me for not chiding the information source when it was you who stated, it is off the mark. Had you written that according to the site article found here, you must dose to 4-5 ppm, I would have posted that the article was wrong. But you merely stated it as fact with no reference. So I corrected you which was appropriate, imo.
 
But let me ask folks out there this. If you have ever done or read about a fishless cycle, where and when do you think the idea got started? People have been keeping tanks for many decades (my dad had one in the 1950s), yet I doubt you will find references to fishless cycling much before the  1996 article linked above. And if you think about it, it makes perfectly good sense that in the earliest days they would erroneously conclude that dosing ammonia to 4 or 5 ppm was a good idea.
 
Firstly, most people using the method, and there were not many, were the most experienced fish keepers. They had cycled tanks to tap for seeding, which it was always recommended be done to the maximum level possible. And many of them would also have live plants or algaes. In a well seeded tank with plants and/or algae, one can dose more ammonia and not have issues. But they did still did see some issues with overdosing. And then over time the method itself started to gain more traction in the hobby. This meant less seeding, less live greenery being used as more newbies were doing it. And the number of problems grew exponentially right along with this.
 
It has taken some time for the original proponents and the science involved to catch up. But that article I linked shows the difference. Mama is correct about what the author said in 1996- it his opinion mostly. But then look at the Update and at all the the links he added. Suddenly it went from the realm of hobby experimentation and opinion right into the world of science and research. The additions to the bibliography include several of Dr. Hovanec et. al. papers. Now fast forward from that update to Dr H's current site and the fishless cycling instructions there and you see the most current science. You will not be advised to dose ammonia to 4-5 ppm as the recommended level.
 
mama, I agree this site needs a rewrite of its cycling articles. So you tell me why that article is still there with its 4 -5 ppm dose level or the one that recommends daily high dosing? And why is there nothing on test kits and where they might be unreliable or what results might mean?

 

[DrRob]

Some very good advice here. I'll echo TTA's comment particularly on watching the fish and the nitrite. Techen's original response is often correct, the test kits can be out. The risk is that the reading is real and that the nitrite levels will jump. Hopefully it's simply a glitch.
 
 

mama, I agree this site needs a rewrite of its cycling articles. So you tell me why that article is still there with its 4 -5 ppm dose level or the one that recommends daily high dosing? And why is there nothing on test kits and where they might be unreliable or what results might mean?

 
Always an interesting point. The article hasn't been rewritten for the simple reason that it hasn't been rewritten, and the other hasn't been written for the same reason, nobody with the knowledge has had the time to get typing (or nobody has told us how useful another post is so it hasn't been pinned - pinning post here). I'm not going to claim to be an expert on either. If someone out there wants to put the data together I'd happily turn it into an article, but I'll warn you I'm a little light on time for the next couple of weeks with end of financial year stuff.