KISSfn
Fish Herder
I do wish you success though!Bacterial Additives...
- Thread starter eaglesaquarium
- Start date
I do wish you success though!
OP
OP
KISSfn
Fish Herder
Well... It has only been 2 days so I hope I am correct that it is too early to see movement yet. All 6 Barbs are still alive so that's a great thing! Thanks for asking!
OP
OP
Well... It has only been 2 days so I hope I am correct that it is too early to see movement yet. All 6 Barbs are still alive so that's a great thing! Thanks for asking!
If it doesn't take, you could always try Nutrafin Cycle or some other product! You know what the oldage is: "A fool and his money are soon parted."
KISSfn
Fish Herder
I think Nutrafin Cycle is the only product I haven't tried! If this fool hadn't already parted with around $700 so far, I would have switched to a pet rock a while ago!
OP
OP
OP
OP
Latest update:
Day 8: 05/07/11 - 07:00 - NH3: 1.0-2.0ppm, NO2: 0ppm, NO3: 40-80ppm, temp 83F
Ammonia seems to be processing quickly now (>2ppm in only 12 hours). NItrite appears to be keeping pace, as I have yet to see a single nitrite reading on this tank. (I did get a reading once when I tested my brother's ADF tanks.) Nitrate is high now. (I did retest my tap once I realized that I wasn't testing properly, and my tap is 0ppm.) SO, the nitrate has to be coming from SOMEWHERE... and the only thing I can think of is from the ammonia.
Looking for any and all cycling experts to chime in here...
Day 8: 05/07/11 - 07:00 - NH3: 1.0-2.0ppm, NO2: 0ppm, NO3: 40-80ppm, temp 83F
Ammonia seems to be processing quickly now (>2ppm in only 12 hours). NItrite appears to be keeping pace, as I have yet to see a single nitrite reading on this tank. (I did get a reading once when I tested my brother's ADF tanks.) Nitrate is high now. (I did retest my tap once I realized that I wasn't testing properly, and my tap is 0ppm.) SO, the nitrate has to be coming from SOMEWHERE... and the only thing I can think of is from the ammonia.
Looking for any and all cycling experts to chime in here...
waterdrop
Enthusiastic "Re-Beginner"
Yes, it is possible you have seen a small "seeding" effect from the bottle, especially of the N-Bacs (Nitrospira hopefully) and when we do get some seeding effect we often see a bit more of it with the N-Bacs than the A-Bacs regardless of whether the source was bottled bacteria or mature media (the really -good- mature media seedings of course usually just catapault you to a full working biofilter that quickly can pass a "qualification week."
So two significant things there eagle: you may have found a little something from this BB and secondly, for your own individual tank, you also need to be cautious.. because one of the painful things about this whole business I'm afraid is that virtually all the cases of "false endings" have occurred when the fishless cycle was declared successful in less than a month (this is for standard un-seeded and BB cases, not MM cases.) So try to remember that added factor, one that I try to keep in mind, that all non-MM cases under a month retain some suspicion.
Of course, you are not yet even at anything we could declare as the end of the 2nd phase, even if the BB was pushing you silently past the signs that mark the gateway between the first and second phase. The thing that says you've moved from first phase to second phase is that ammonia is always processsed from 4-5ppm to zero ppm within 24 hours and that nitrite(NO2) has spiked high (we of course suspect the BB may have eliminated the big spike, but we can't rule out that it has just been delayed, either.) The thing that says you have moved from the second to the third phase is that -both- ammonia and nitrite(NO2) are dropping from 4-5ppm daily ammonia dosing to zero ppm of both substances within 24 hours. So what we're watching for is this double-zero within 24 hours to see if the BB has helped accomplish this in less than 3 weeks, which would be quite good in my book.
Then, of course, in a normal standard ammonia fishless cycle we'd expect the third phase to take a while, and we'd be watching the nitrite (and in a few cases the ammonia) get to read less and less at the "12 hour after dosing" test. And of course the 5ppm dropped to double-zeros at 12 hours would mark the start of a qualifying week. In a standard fishless cycle we've seen the qualifying week begin anywhere from 3 weeks to 10 weeks or so.
~~waterdrop~~
So two significant things there eagle: you may have found a little something from this BB and secondly, for your own individual tank, you also need to be cautious.. because one of the painful things about this whole business I'm afraid is that virtually all the cases of "false endings" have occurred when the fishless cycle was declared successful in less than a month (this is for standard un-seeded and BB cases, not MM cases.) So try to remember that added factor, one that I try to keep in mind, that all non-MM cases under a month retain some suspicion.
Of course, you are not yet even at anything we could declare as the end of the 2nd phase, even if the BB was pushing you silently past the signs that mark the gateway between the first and second phase. The thing that says you've moved from first phase to second phase is that ammonia is always processsed from 4-5ppm to zero ppm within 24 hours and that nitrite(NO2) has spiked high (we of course suspect the BB may have eliminated the big spike, but we can't rule out that it has just been delayed, either.) The thing that says you have moved from the second to the third phase is that -both- ammonia and nitrite(NO2) are dropping from 4-5ppm daily ammonia dosing to zero ppm of both substances within 24 hours. So what we're watching for is this double-zero within 24 hours to see if the BB has helped accomplish this in less than 3 weeks, which would be quite good in my book.
Then, of course, in a normal standard ammonia fishless cycle we'd expect the third phase to take a while, and we'd be watching the nitrite (and in a few cases the ammonia) get to read less and less at the "12 hour after dosing" test. And of course the 5ppm dropped to double-zeros at 12 hours would mark the start of a qualifying week. In a standard fishless cycle we've seen the qualifying week begin anywhere from 3 weeks to 10 weeks or so.
~~waterdrop~~
I am going to agree with WD in most respects but this thread is now about 3 weeks old. At about 3 weeks I expect a tank to be processing ammonia fairly well with no help from bottled additives. Nitrites should also be starting to be processed, although inefficiently, by that point. From my own perspective, we have another example of absolutely no benefit from the bottled bacteria.
KISSfn
Fish Herder
I agree (more than anyone) that bottled bacteria is useless but although the thread is 3 weeks old Eagle's cycle is only 8 days old. My tank is 4 weeks old with fish and I'm still waiting for ammonia to be processed efficiently. My Nitrites are still 0.
OP
OP
As pointed out by KISSfn, the thread is older than the actual cycle. I started the thread to ask the question regarding bacterial additives. About a week into the thread, I decided to buy the stuff (since I was buying a bunch of other stuff anyway from an online seller, and the prices of the stuff was so cheap compared to the LFS, that I saw substantial savings, evening adding a potentially worthless $10.00 on to the total). Then I waited about a week for delivery of the stuff (order was placed the Saturday before Easter), and the cycle actually started on 4/29/11, when I set-up the tank, tested the tap parameters and finally when I added ammonia. The first day of reading happened on 4/30/11. So, while the thread is 3 weeks old, the CYCLE is only 8 days old.
Just a quick hypothesis about that.... You are having zero nitrite readings after 3 weeks, and I have had zero nitrite readings for all 8 days. Based on this, is it possible that the additives are better at colonizing N-bacs (nitrospira, and primarily the work of Dr. Tim) than it is at the A-bacs? I have very little experience with cycles, so I don't have the history of old cycles to think on, but is it possible that the BB is actually better with N-bacs than A-bacs? (After all, I read waterdrop somewhere saying that he believes that the N-bacs are harder to colonize, but that they hang on better than the A-bacs.) I could be misinterpreting that comment, but a little insight into the actual meaning would be beneficial.
KISSfn
Fish Herder
My Nitrites have been 0 for all 4 weeks. 
We do often see it take longer to see any effective N-bacs than it took to see the effect of A-bacs. I am not so sure that menas that they are harder to culture but merely that we cannot control their growing chemistry as easily as we do the A-bacs. We carefully control A-bac growth conditions to less than 5 ppm of ammonia. Nitrites are whatever we get, not a carefully controlled concentration. I suspect that is one of the main reasons we find them more difficult to cultivate. A typical unenhanced cycle starts to show some results for A-bacs in 10 days to 3 weeks depending on the number of chance bacteria that come in with your original water supply. At 8 days in I am not at all surprised to see some minor progress. The 10 days to 3 weeks is the time it usually takes to remove the entire first dose of ammonia in a tank with no plants to remove any nitrogen.
OP
OP
OP
OP
A little late for the final results for the end of Day 8, but here they are.
Day 8, 5/7/11 - 22:30 - pH: 8.2ish, NH3: 0-0.25ppm (closer to 0ppm), NO2: 0ppm, NO3: very close to 80ppm, temp: 85F
Well, I am now seeing a slight drop in pH, and I am wondering if it might be related to the higher amounts of nitrates. Secondly, the ammonia levels have dropped very close to 0 in the last 24 hours, and still NOT A TRACE of nitrites, aside from the one night with a slight purple in the very bottom of the tube, but when reshaken, it blended in with the blue.
I was becoming extremely skeptical of the BB (as I know many on this board are), based on the lack of nitrates showing up as the ammonia was disappearing. BUT, now that I have corrected the nitrate test, things seem to be falling in line with the linked "study" by Barry a few pages back. That study showed that ammonia and nitrite were supposed to be zeros by Day 10. I am on Day 8, soon to be Day 9. I am now dosing the ammonia back up to 4ppm tonight. We shall see in 24 hours where the levels are.
SafeStart link from Seapets Aquatics
The link above I believe is comparing to a fish-in cycle (I think), I'm not really sure how they went about creating the graph on the page. Perhaps they did a true fish-in cycle (but I'm not sure how a fish could survive the amounts of ammonia sited on that graph. Perhaps they added a bit of ammonia daily (something like 0.25ppm-0.50ppm), in an attempt to mimic a fish-in cycle, and by day 10, the ammonia levels were zero. Ironically, it does NOT focus on the nitrite at all, either as an oversight or by design. I haven't seen a single spike in nitrite, not even ONCE.
I am becoming a bit of a believer that the product may actually be working, and that I might actually be ending phase 2 of the cycle (as defined by waterdrop) in a day or two more.
Folks, I know there is a LOT of skepticism about these products on this board, and these results are but a mere blip on the radar of all the fishless and fish-in cycles that have been performed. I started this thread in an effort to find some evidence either in favor OR against these products. KISSfn has tried SafeStart, One and Only and finally Turbo Start, and had no success reported that it actually did anything to reduce his ammonia. But, his "trial" was a fish-in cycle. This is a fishLESS cycle. I will also mention that I am GROSSLY overfiltering the tank. I have a Penguin 350 (rated for up to a 50-60 gallon tank, with just the biowheels, not the cartridges in place. I also have a air pump driven sponge filter (rated up to 50 gallons) in place as well. (I will mention again, that I do not have a substrate in place as of right now. I don't really think that matters as the amount of bacteria that colonizes that part of the tank would be minimal compared to the other two options.) That's a TON of filtration for a little 10 gallon tank. This may or may not play a huge role in this test. Perhaps it does, as the amount of oxygen available to these bacteria (from whereever they came) is substantially more than would be available if I were cycling the 56 gallon tank I will be getting shortly (on backorder currently). Perhaps that plays a huge role in the process. I am doing it this way, because the things I've read about cycling says that you need to provide as much surface agitation as possible and as much oxygen as you can get. I am getting HUGE agitation, as evidenced by the fact that I am losing about a liter or so of water to evaporation on a daily basis (certainly this is playing a role in the ammonia disappearance as well, and could be wholly responsible for the ammonia drop - but would NOT account for the rise in nitrates). Nitrates would only be introduced as far as I know by the bacteria breaking down the ammonia.
I am considering doing a 100% water change (except for the water in the filters) to remove the vast majority of the nitrates in the tank, to try to track their rise more closely throughout a day (maybe next weekend). Does anyone believe that would be a worthwhile effort, or would it be completely fruitless. My science background would indicate to me that the more data available the better for analyzing what is going on.
I am not near a conclusion yet, but the evidence so far is lining up in a clear way right now. (I've disclosed as much information as I can to folks for the purpose of allowing each individual to judge the results for themselves. After all, it is an individual decision about whether or not you are going to purchase a BB product or not. And I am in no way suggesting that this exercise will definitively "prove" anything. I would love to see other cycles logged like this, in order to build a more extensive library of cycles with the products. I have no doubt that the majority of them are probably crap, probably because they focus on nitrobacter as the N-bac, and not nitrospira as Dr. Tim has shown is the dominant nitrifying bacteria in a home aquarium set-up. But, it might just be possible that a few of these products COULD work, if properly handled from the manufacturer until it reaches the consumer. (That is a BIG if, by the way.) Maybe I am getting lucky. Maybe the cycle will stall soon. I don't know. I will continue to update it as it goes along for any and all who are interested in the results, whether good or bad.
Day 8, 5/7/11 - 22:30 - pH: 8.2ish, NH3: 0-0.25ppm (closer to 0ppm), NO2: 0ppm, NO3: very close to 80ppm, temp: 85F
Well, I am now seeing a slight drop in pH, and I am wondering if it might be related to the higher amounts of nitrates. Secondly, the ammonia levels have dropped very close to 0 in the last 24 hours, and still NOT A TRACE of nitrites, aside from the one night with a slight purple in the very bottom of the tube, but when reshaken, it blended in with the blue.
I was becoming extremely skeptical of the BB (as I know many on this board are), based on the lack of nitrates showing up as the ammonia was disappearing. BUT, now that I have corrected the nitrate test, things seem to be falling in line with the linked "study" by Barry a few pages back. That study showed that ammonia and nitrite were supposed to be zeros by Day 10. I am on Day 8, soon to be Day 9. I am now dosing the ammonia back up to 4ppm tonight. We shall see in 24 hours where the levels are.
SafeStart link from Seapets Aquatics
The link above I believe is comparing to a fish-in cycle (I think), I'm not really sure how they went about creating the graph on the page. Perhaps they did a true fish-in cycle (but I'm not sure how a fish could survive the amounts of ammonia sited on that graph. Perhaps they added a bit of ammonia daily (something like 0.25ppm-0.50ppm), in an attempt to mimic a fish-in cycle, and by day 10, the ammonia levels were zero. Ironically, it does NOT focus on the nitrite at all, either as an oversight or by design. I haven't seen a single spike in nitrite, not even ONCE.
I am becoming a bit of a believer that the product may actually be working, and that I might actually be ending phase 2 of the cycle (as defined by waterdrop) in a day or two more.
Folks, I know there is a LOT of skepticism about these products on this board, and these results are but a mere blip on the radar of all the fishless and fish-in cycles that have been performed. I started this thread in an effort to find some evidence either in favor OR against these products. KISSfn has tried SafeStart, One and Only and finally Turbo Start, and had no success reported that it actually did anything to reduce his ammonia. But, his "trial" was a fish-in cycle. This is a fishLESS cycle. I will also mention that I am GROSSLY overfiltering the tank. I have a Penguin 350 (rated for up to a 50-60 gallon tank, with just the biowheels, not the cartridges in place. I also have a air pump driven sponge filter (rated up to 50 gallons) in place as well. (I will mention again, that I do not have a substrate in place as of right now. I don't really think that matters as the amount of bacteria that colonizes that part of the tank would be minimal compared to the other two options.) That's a TON of filtration for a little 10 gallon tank. This may or may not play a huge role in this test. Perhaps it does, as the amount of oxygen available to these bacteria (from whereever they came) is substantially more than would be available if I were cycling the 56 gallon tank I will be getting shortly (on backorder currently). Perhaps that plays a huge role in the process. I am doing it this way, because the things I've read about cycling says that you need to provide as much surface agitation as possible and as much oxygen as you can get. I am getting HUGE agitation, as evidenced by the fact that I am losing about a liter or so of water to evaporation on a daily basis (certainly this is playing a role in the ammonia disappearance as well, and could be wholly responsible for the ammonia drop - but would NOT account for the rise in nitrates). Nitrates would only be introduced as far as I know by the bacteria breaking down the ammonia.
I am considering doing a 100% water change (except for the water in the filters) to remove the vast majority of the nitrates in the tank, to try to track their rise more closely throughout a day (maybe next weekend). Does anyone believe that would be a worthwhile effort, or would it be completely fruitless. My science background would indicate to me that the more data available the better for analyzing what is going on.
I am not near a conclusion yet, but the evidence so far is lining up in a clear way right now. (I've disclosed as much information as I can to folks for the purpose of allowing each individual to judge the results for themselves. After all, it is an individual decision about whether or not you are going to purchase a BB product or not. And I am in no way suggesting that this exercise will definitively "prove" anything. I would love to see other cycles logged like this, in order to build a more extensive library of cycles with the products. I have no doubt that the majority of them are probably crap, probably because they focus on nitrobacter as the N-bac, and not nitrospira as Dr. Tim has shown is the dominant nitrifying bacteria in a home aquarium set-up. But, it might just be possible that a few of these products COULD work, if properly handled from the manufacturer until it reaches the consumer. (That is a BIG if, by the way.) Maybe I am getting lucky. Maybe the cycle will stall soon. I don't know. I will continue to update it as it goes along for any and all who are interested in the results, whether good or bad.
Similar threads
Most reactions
-
397 -
262 -
197 -
178 -
177 -
171 -
168 -
162 -
146 -
109 -
106 -
106 -
99 -
97 -
F
68