Jack sparrow
New Member
I would just like to say brilliant job and well done.
Kind Regards
Jack
Kind Regards
Jack
Ask Questions About Cycling
Thanks, TTA ! I'm actually using Salifert but the implication is the same. As I stated before I have used your chart to create an Excel conversion chart so that I can follow Dr Tim's instructions to the letter as advised since they are written in -N and not ions which are the units for most of the liquid water tests most of us hobbyists use. Kleenoff is my ammonia source of choice since that is readily available and aquarium safe so I'll also be using your conversion chart to help with accurate dosing.
I wish that scientists would consider the hobbyist when selling their products and include both types of results to avoid any confusion and/or mathematical problems. We can't all afford to get digital meters for our water tests and most of us have to rely on the liquid tests available.
EDIT: Is there any chance you could do an additional section on fishless cycling using Dr Tim's One and Only or Tetra's Safe Start as they seem to be similar products, TTA?
TwoTankAmin
Fish Connoisseur
Mama- I am prepared to try and write whatever the powers that be would like. Of course that would be limited to areas where I feel competent to do so. Next up is Water Parameters- testing them, and what to know about the test kits we use. (I have a go ahead for this now.) If it were up to me, I would take a shot at "How to Rescue a Fish in Cycle Gone Bad." I would like to do a more advanced cycling article with details on going bigger on the ammonia dose, cycling with plants and issues such as bacterial survival, seeding. I would also like it to include a discussion of how toxic the nitrogen complex is to both bacteria and fish. There are some really intersting things out there too- Chloramine T is actually being used to treat certain fish diseases.
But I tend to have a different view on this than most members and the staff may not agree with what I would say. To give you a quick idea- some fish in certain tanks can be kept in 2 ppm of ammonia, using an API kit, for some number of days or even a week or two and not suffer any permanent damage. They may not be happy, but they wont be hurt. Think of it as the difference between being stuck on the freeway in traffic on a high smog alert day vs driving into your garage, closing the door and sitting in there with the engine running. One is unpleasant and may even give you a headache and cause your eyes to burn. But, all this will pass. The other way you end up brain damaged if found before you die.
The one thing I do feel strongly about is that the best solution for a fish in cycle out of control is one of those products. Next is some removal of fish (sometimes all) from the system and the very least appealing choice is trying to work through it using big water changes day after day after day.
Incidentally, Dr Tim is actually one of the few people to talk about the two different test scales on several sites. It was reading his posts on several forums some time back that set me on the trail of looking into test kits how they work and what the difference is between a $4 and a $4,000 one. I know I have linked to these postings someplace on this site. I will try to dig out those links for you.
But I tend to have a different view on this than most members and the staff may not agree with what I would say. To give you a quick idea- some fish in certain tanks can be kept in 2 ppm of ammonia, using an API kit, for some number of days or even a week or two and not suffer any permanent damage. They may not be happy, but they wont be hurt. Think of it as the difference between being stuck on the freeway in traffic on a high smog alert day vs driving into your garage, closing the door and sitting in there with the engine running. One is unpleasant and may even give you a headache and cause your eyes to burn. But, all this will pass. The other way you end up brain damaged if found before you die.
The one thing I do feel strongly about is that the best solution for a fish in cycle out of control is one of those products. Next is some removal of fish (sometimes all) from the system and the very least appealing choice is trying to work through it using big water changes day after day after day.
Incidentally, Dr Tim is actually one of the few people to talk about the two different test scales on several sites. It was reading his posts on several forums some time back that set me on the trail of looking into test kits how they work and what the difference is between a $4 and a $4,000 one. I know I have linked to these postings someplace on this site. I will try to dig out those links for you.
TwoTankAmin said:
I guess that depends on your definition of 'hurt'. If you mean long term damage, you may very well be correct (and I assume, you probably are, based on your extensive readings on the subject). If you mean lack of 'pain', I will disagree. Speaking as an unfortunate individual whom happened to take a deep breath at the wrong time while using 9.5% ammonia solution to clean a tank (diluted to about 2.5%), I can tell you that the ammonia that went into my lungs that it is extremely painful. I'd never realized exactly how far down in my chest the lungs went, but the searing pain that went through my lungs like a knife into every little airsac of the lungs told me exactly where the lungs are in my chest. I quickly took myself outside and got fresh air, but it still took about 2 hours before I could breath without discomfort again. The first 5 minutes were excruciating. I believe the pain dropped like an exponential curve, but none the less, the pain lasted incredibly long and that was from a single breath and I was fortunate enough to be able to have access to fresh air immediately. Our fish aren't so lucky. If they are exposed to ammonia, they have no escape, no fresh water source to retreat to. For me, at least, that's why I am a bit squeamish regarding ammonia in the tank.
TwoTankAmin
Fish Connoisseur
Fist off it, it unfair to compare human respiration and lungs to fish respiration and gills.
Second, fish regularly "exhale" NH3. So it is normally passing out. During cycling it moves the other way too. Now you say you inhaled a 9.5% wiff or was it 2.5%? Would not a solution that is 2.5% ammonia be .025 X 1,000,000 or 25,000 ppm? Well lets see 2 ppm total ammonia at pH 7.4 and temp of 78 means of that 2 ppm .007 ppm is NH3. That is very small by comparison, if making such comparisons were meaningful.
NH4 burns are external and easy to spot in ammonia experiments. It is the NH3 that kills the fish. It is also why most studies show the unionized Ammonia-n readings and many include the total ammonia or TAN as well.
But you still fail to address the other side of my argument. What about the stress issue associated with big daily water changes. the more stress the weaker the ability of the fish to deal not only with ammonia, but other potential diseases, parasites etc, that in good health they resist. I still see the balance in favor of letting the ammonia rise well above .25 before doing wcs. Of course there is a limit and it is a sliding one based on the fish involved, where in the cycle it is, what stocking and most of all the pH and temp of the water. The same applies to nitrites which can be mitigated short term with salt if need be.
But I will again fall back on the final criteria involved since just looking at test results is insufficient. And that is to observe the fish. Fish not happy show us, fish really in bad shape show us. So even if the numbers look safe, if the fish do not eat and act normally, screw the readings and change the water. On the other hand, if the readings look high but the behavior is good, same thing. the research shows show fish will try to avoid pain or unpleasant environment.
Lastly, I am not suggesting nor endorsing the use of fish in cycles. I believe in fishless. But I also would be wrong not to state the facts regarding the process as best as I can see from the research I have done. If I am incorrect, so be it. But I would need evidence to show that just as I have used evidence to reach the conclusions I have so far. And in the end its like life- sometime there is a little pain on the way to better things. Do you wear a gas mask in that traffic jam? Do you not go to work to avoid that headache? Think of a little discomfort for the fish as a small price to pay in the long run. The other choice is a longer run of what you would likely still conclude is only less, but not zero, discomfort. You can not cycle a tank with undetectable levels of ammonia and nitrite. There always has to be more than the bacteria need to get them to divide until there are enough. Even if the API test doesn't show it, it still has to be there. How do you know the fish doesn't have a low level headache every day for weeks on end as opposed to a few days of a migraine so to speak? If neither cause permanent damage, how do you compare the two? But how do you even know the lower level but much longer exposure times cause no permanent damage?
I have had surprise eggs hatch and become free swimming fry on 3 occasions over the years in tanks i thought empty and into which I was dosing ammonia to keep them cycled. The dosing stopped when I discovered the fry. the fish were zebra danio, either choprae or roseus danio and Pseudomugil furcatus or gertrudae- can't remember since I kept both the danios andthe blue eyes together. Its was a bunch of years back and OBS strikes here. The fish did grow into nice adults and were with me for years. Anecdotal, I know, but still true for me at least.
But then look at how I suggest people get out of a fish in cycle gone bad. Get most or all of the fish out, get bacteria in, try not to resort to lots of repeated big water changes. Given the three choices I know which one is likely to damage the fish the most.
Second, fish regularly "exhale" NH3. So it is normally passing out. During cycling it moves the other way too. Now you say you inhaled a 9.5% wiff or was it 2.5%? Would not a solution that is 2.5% ammonia be .025 X 1,000,000 or 25,000 ppm? Well lets see 2 ppm total ammonia at pH 7.4 and temp of 78 means of that 2 ppm .007 ppm is NH3. That is very small by comparison, if making such comparisons were meaningful.
NH4 burns are external and easy to spot in ammonia experiments. It is the NH3 that kills the fish. It is also why most studies show the unionized Ammonia-n readings and many include the total ammonia or TAN as well.
But you still fail to address the other side of my argument. What about the stress issue associated with big daily water changes. the more stress the weaker the ability of the fish to deal not only with ammonia, but other potential diseases, parasites etc, that in good health they resist. I still see the balance in favor of letting the ammonia rise well above .25 before doing wcs. Of course there is a limit and it is a sliding one based on the fish involved, where in the cycle it is, what stocking and most of all the pH and temp of the water. The same applies to nitrites which can be mitigated short term with salt if need be.
But I will again fall back on the final criteria involved since just looking at test results is insufficient. And that is to observe the fish. Fish not happy show us, fish really in bad shape show us. So even if the numbers look safe, if the fish do not eat and act normally, screw the readings and change the water. On the other hand, if the readings look high but the behavior is good, same thing. the research shows show fish will try to avoid pain or unpleasant environment.
Lastly, I am not suggesting nor endorsing the use of fish in cycles. I believe in fishless. But I also would be wrong not to state the facts regarding the process as best as I can see from the research I have done. If I am incorrect, so be it. But I would need evidence to show that just as I have used evidence to reach the conclusions I have so far. And in the end its like life- sometime there is a little pain on the way to better things. Do you wear a gas mask in that traffic jam? Do you not go to work to avoid that headache? Think of a little discomfort for the fish as a small price to pay in the long run. The other choice is a longer run of what you would likely still conclude is only less, but not zero, discomfort. You can not cycle a tank with undetectable levels of ammonia and nitrite. There always has to be more than the bacteria need to get them to divide until there are enough. Even if the API test doesn't show it, it still has to be there. How do you know the fish doesn't have a low level headache every day for weeks on end as opposed to a few days of a migraine so to speak? If neither cause permanent damage, how do you compare the two? But how do you even know the lower level but much longer exposure times cause no permanent damage?
I have had surprise eggs hatch and become free swimming fry on 3 occasions over the years in tanks i thought empty and into which I was dosing ammonia to keep them cycled. The dosing stopped when I discovered the fry. the fish were zebra danio, either choprae or roseus danio and Pseudomugil furcatus or gertrudae- can't remember since I kept both the danios andthe blue eyes together. Its was a bunch of years back and OBS strikes here. The fish did grow into nice adults and were with me for years. Anecdotal, I know, but still true for me at least.
But then look at how I suggest people get out of a fish in cycle gone bad. Get most or all of the fish out, get bacteria in, try not to resort to lots of repeated big water changes. Given the three choices I know which one is likely to damage the fish the most.
TwoTankAmin said:
First - I don't disagree with that. The question though is about 'pain' Does it 'hurt'?
Second - Yup, I probably had quite a dose in my lungs... hurts just thinking about it actually. But it hurt for HOURS later.
Granted, my physiology and a fish's physiology are far different - not denying that. But for me, that's a hard part to get over. There is what we 'know' to be true and then there's what we 'believe' deep within ourselves. Sometimes those conflict. My own personal experience with ammonia clouds my feelings about ammonia and fish. I don't deny it. Its just why I am squeamish about it. (And its why I use the term "squeamish". I am also squeamish about touching eyes. I wear contact lenses, but each and every time I have to put them in or take them out it is a bit of a battle for me, and I can't watch someone else do it. Nor can I watch my wife use a eyelash curler. It just isn't something that I can stomach. But I don't stop my wife from using the eyelash curler, I just make sure that I'm not around when it happens.)
And I know you are a strong fishless cycling advocate. The only question I have is regarding the word "hurt". It is an ethical question, and you raise good questions. I am just 'squeamish' is all. I couldn't even consider any other than a fishless cycle. I do want a proper fish-in guide though to help those unfortunate newbies who either jump in the deep end of the pool before checking out the water and for those that blindly follow the advice of some LFS that say run the tank for 24 hours and add fish the next day. Those people need help. I think water changes are far less stressful than others I suppose. My fish really seem to enjoy them. Maybe that's me misreading them, or maybe its because I usually feed them when I'm done the water change (often with frozen bloodworms, which they love) and I might be equating the Pavlovian response to the food to the water change... or that my fish are acclimated to my presence by this point that I have to work hard not to suck them up at time while vacuuming.
(Anyway, I fear I may have derailed this thread... so I will cease and desist.)
TwoTankAmin
Fish Connoisseur
Not really. It is all a part of the same discussion, just from different angles. its like chlorine and chloramine- worse for fish than the bacteria.
I see it more like this. When we keep fish in a glass box often decorate to please us, fish bolt and run into the glass or wood etc. I have e had fish die this way or suffer injury. So i suppose i could argue that the simple act of keeping fish means they will suffer some hurt at the hands of the fish keeper who set it all up. Yet do you now take down your tanks and leave the hobby?
I see the properly controlled ammonia and nitrite exposure in a fish in cycle in much the same light. How about this analogy. A parent teaches their child how to ride a bike. When those training wheels come off and they are on their own and wobbly and likely to fall, you still encourage them to do something likely to cause pain. It could even maybe break a bone. Yet parents have been doing it for decades.
If I were convinced that level of ammonia and nitrite while much lower but also for a much longer exposure time caused no pain or discomfort, it would be another story. And as for saying your fish enjoy a wc. Some may learn not to fear it. Some never do. And certainly newly introduced fish almost universally do. So I know during a fish in cycle wc will cause stress.
For me the big problem is that the odds of a first time cycler doing a fish in cycle properly are pretty poor. And that does mean fish will suffer and likely it will be some level of permanent damage. And that is why we need to explain how to do it right and why it is hard to do well. it will also help those caught in the trap already get out the fastest and safest way for the fish as well.
I believe most folks can grasp the basics if they know the facts. Given ways to help them get bottled bacteria, cycled media or to rehome some fish, many will be motivated to do so. And I firmly believe this will be a better outcome than the lots of wc route. It is needed for an immediate fix, but should not be the ultimate fix only a bridge to it.
I see it more like this. When we keep fish in a glass box often decorate to please us, fish bolt and run into the glass or wood etc. I have e had fish die this way or suffer injury. So i suppose i could argue that the simple act of keeping fish means they will suffer some hurt at the hands of the fish keeper who set it all up. Yet do you now take down your tanks and leave the hobby?
I see the properly controlled ammonia and nitrite exposure in a fish in cycle in much the same light. How about this analogy. A parent teaches their child how to ride a bike. When those training wheels come off and they are on their own and wobbly and likely to fall, you still encourage them to do something likely to cause pain. It could even maybe break a bone. Yet parents have been doing it for decades.
If I were convinced that level of ammonia and nitrite while much lower but also for a much longer exposure time caused no pain or discomfort, it would be another story. And as for saying your fish enjoy a wc. Some may learn not to fear it. Some never do. And certainly newly introduced fish almost universally do. So I know during a fish in cycle wc will cause stress.
For me the big problem is that the odds of a first time cycler doing a fish in cycle properly are pretty poor. And that does mean fish will suffer and likely it will be some level of permanent damage. And that is why we need to explain how to do it right and why it is hard to do well. it will also help those caught in the trap already get out the fastest and safest way for the fish as well.
I believe most folks can grasp the basics if they know the facts. Given ways to help them get bottled bacteria, cycled media or to rehome some fish, many will be motivated to do so. And I firmly believe this will be a better outcome than the lots of wc route. It is needed for an immediate fix, but should not be the ultimate fix only a bridge to it.
TwoTankAmin said:
Granted.
Jack sparrow
New Member
Just a quick question regarding a cycled tank. I have been helping a mate set up his tank, it is cycled now, but he won't be getting fish for a few days. Would I be correct in thinking just to add a third of the normal dose untill he is ready for the water change and to add fish.
Kind Regards
Jack
Kind Regards
Jack
TwoTankAmin
Fish Connoisseur
Yes- dose about 1/3 or so every 3 days is fine. You can also dose less more often. The bacteria, unlike us, can go a while without eating and not suffer much from it. And if its only a short time, they revive and get back to full strength very fast. Finally, if they are well fed and then feeding stops, they stay stronger and rebound faster when it is resumed.
So in the case of waiting a few weeks to stock, just giving them a regular "snack" should be fine. However, if the time frame is more prolonged I would advise a larger dose since the goal is to keep the entire colony thriving for some time without fish.
So in the case of waiting a few weeks to stock, just giving them a regular "snack" should be fine. However, if the time frame is more prolonged I would advise a larger dose since the goal is to keep the entire colony thriving for some time without fish.
Jack sparrow
New Member
Thank you very much TTA. It was as I thought but best be safe than sorry.
Kind Regards
Jack
Kind Regards
Jack
Thanks TTA & tcamos, excellent work.
I finally feel like I understand cycling a new tank. This is after reading close to a dozen articles - many with contradictory statements.
Looking forward to reading the testing article!
I joined just to thank y'all.
Best to you and yours.
jonesin1
I finally feel like I understand cycling a new tank. This is after reading close to a dozen articles - many with contradictory statements.
Looking forward to reading the testing article!
I joined just to thank y'all.
Best to you and yours.
jonesin1
FungusTrooper
New Member
Heyo, sorry if this was answered already, but I'm cycling in a planted (fishless) tank. I started 4 days ago and used Ace ammonia to get the tank to 3ppm. I just did my first 3 day ammonia/nitrite reading - they were both 0. I'm guessing the plants are eating the ammonia.
What do I do? Keep dosing ammonia until bacteria turn it into nitrite, or just wait, or what?
Thanks.
What do I do? Keep dosing ammonia until bacteria turn it into nitrite, or just wait, or what?
Thanks.
Add 3ppm ammonia again and test in 3 days...
TwoTankAmin
Fish Connoisseur
Actually, I agree with the add 3 ppm, however, test daily so you know how fast the ammonia goes down. if it is going down in 24 hours, the plants are likely taking it all. If it goes down in 48, the there is some over for the bacteria. I seems it doesn't last 3 days. Also test for nitrite if you are testing for ammonia on day 2.
If if is gone in 24, start adding fish. If is it is gone after 48, dose the 3 ppm amount again and test for both things every 24. Follow this pattern until every time you add ammonia it is gone in 24. You should see some nitrite and it should not last long. if you don't, I still think you are good to add fish. It means the amount of bacteria you need with your plant load to handle leftover ammonia is so low the nitrite it makes is to low to catch on a test kit.
I have not yet written up the directions for cycling with plants. It matters how many and what type of plants one uses as to how one should dose and test. Depending upon one's estimate of the level of planting, I will suggest one dose accordingly. The goal is to figure out what level one actually has by how much ammonia the plants consume in what amount of time. So the initial ammonia dose would be"
Low level planting- start with a 1 ppm addition.
Moderate level planting- start with a 2 ppm addition.
Heavy level planting- start with a 3 ppm. (Usually here one is adding CO2 and fertilizing regularly with high light levels.)
Each level of planting should consume that amount of ammonia in 24 hours or less. So you dose and test in 24. If you don't have a 0 reading, you don't have that level of planting. Depending how long it takes to clear the ammonia will determine how one proceeds. For the bigger plant loads the process goes one way and for smaller loads it goes another.
In your case it looks like you have a moderate level of plants. So if you have not added the 3 ppm suggested by eagle, change it to 2/3 the original dose amount so you are adding 2 ppm and test every 24 til its gone. If you have added the 3 ppm, not a biggie, still test every 24.
If the 2 ppm is gone in 24 or the 3 ppm takes 24 to 48 to hit 0, you have two options. You can continue fishless or switch over to fish. If you switch to fish in, just add about 1/3of the full stock to start (a bit under is OK but not over). Wait to insure all is well, and then add up to another another 1/3 or so of the fish until stocked. When in doubt, add fewer rather than too many.
If you wish to continue fishless and be able to add 100% of the fish all at once, when you see 0 ammonia and you have nitrite under 5 ppm (even 0), dose 3 ppm of ammonia. Test daily. Whenever ammonia is 0 and nitrite is not rising from the prior reading and is clearly under 5 ppm, add to 3 ppm again. The goal here is to insure any needed nitrite bacs have a chance to establish. You are trying to see this happening because you can test some amount of nitrite. But if you do a few 3 ppm ammonia doses that go to 0 inside 24 and never test any nitrite, you are good to go. It is likely some ammonia and nitrite bacs rode in on your plants and this could well account for this.
Just an FYI- in a heavily planted tank, 3 ppm of ammonia is 0 overnight and you stock right away. Also, the above assumes one is not yet dosing macro ferts, NPK, for the plants. Doing N reduces their need to take up ammonia.
If if is gone in 24, start adding fish. If is it is gone after 48, dose the 3 ppm amount again and test for both things every 24. Follow this pattern until every time you add ammonia it is gone in 24. You should see some nitrite and it should not last long. if you don't, I still think you are good to add fish. It means the amount of bacteria you need with your plant load to handle leftover ammonia is so low the nitrite it makes is to low to catch on a test kit.
I have not yet written up the directions for cycling with plants. It matters how many and what type of plants one uses as to how one should dose and test. Depending upon one's estimate of the level of planting, I will suggest one dose accordingly. The goal is to figure out what level one actually has by how much ammonia the plants consume in what amount of time. So the initial ammonia dose would be"
Low level planting- start with a 1 ppm addition.
Moderate level planting- start with a 2 ppm addition.
Heavy level planting- start with a 3 ppm. (Usually here one is adding CO2 and fertilizing regularly with high light levels.)
Each level of planting should consume that amount of ammonia in 24 hours or less. So you dose and test in 24. If you don't have a 0 reading, you don't have that level of planting. Depending how long it takes to clear the ammonia will determine how one proceeds. For the bigger plant loads the process goes one way and for smaller loads it goes another.
In your case it looks like you have a moderate level of plants. So if you have not added the 3 ppm suggested by eagle, change it to 2/3 the original dose amount so you are adding 2 ppm and test every 24 til its gone. If you have added the 3 ppm, not a biggie, still test every 24.
If the 2 ppm is gone in 24 or the 3 ppm takes 24 to 48 to hit 0, you have two options. You can continue fishless or switch over to fish. If you switch to fish in, just add about 1/3of the full stock to start (a bit under is OK but not over). Wait to insure all is well, and then add up to another another 1/3 or so of the fish until stocked. When in doubt, add fewer rather than too many.
If you wish to continue fishless and be able to add 100% of the fish all at once, when you see 0 ammonia and you have nitrite under 5 ppm (even 0), dose 3 ppm of ammonia. Test daily. Whenever ammonia is 0 and nitrite is not rising from the prior reading and is clearly under 5 ppm, add to 3 ppm again. The goal here is to insure any needed nitrite bacs have a chance to establish. You are trying to see this happening because you can test some amount of nitrite. But if you do a few 3 ppm ammonia doses that go to 0 inside 24 and never test any nitrite, you are good to go. It is likely some ammonia and nitrite bacs rode in on your plants and this could well account for this.
Just an FYI- in a heavily planted tank, 3 ppm of ammonia is 0 overnight and you stock right away. Also, the above assumes one is not yet dosing macro ferts, NPK, for the plants. Doing N reduces their need to take up ammonia.
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
371 -
249 -
205 -
187 -
178 -
176 -
174 -
172 -
145 -
103 -
101 -
99 -
97 -
97 -
82