Cycling….

[Dave Spencer]

Adding plants is only of any use if you want a planted tank.

I have never "fishless cycled" simply because I approach setting up a new tank from a different angle. For me, setting up a new tank (all of mine are planted) is a case of getting a stable tank that is 99.9% free of algae. By default, this means that the tank will be ready for fish by the time I am ready to consider adding them.

I use daily 50% water changes alongside Zeolite and a huge, fast growing plant mass with excessive CO2 to keep the ammonia levels to an absolute minimum. Adding ammonia is anathema to me because it is a major algae trigger.

My guess is that people will jump on this thread and say that the tank can`t be cycled because off all the ammonia removal, but the removal can never be 100% and my filters do develop bacteria colonies. A glass of water will cycle. I have never seen any stress in any of my fish at any time using this method.

The method of cycling pushed on here also relies heavily on testing. I don`t think people should be relying on test kits in the manner that gets general approval on here. I have often read on here about people saying their fish are fine, but their test kit says the water is crap. What are we to believe, the fish (read plants and algae as well) or the test kit? If a test kit is calibrated it can be used as a useful indicator, but should not be interpreted as an accurate result. I have used a NO3 kit to get a general idea of nitrate uptake in my tanks.

In terms of what fauna can be added to an immature tank, Otocinclus sp and Caridina multidentata are fine. They have always been part of the clean up crew that go in to planted tanks first, and without any problems.

I have read threads where people on this forum scoff at LFS staff who have never heard of "fishless cycling", but there are many ways to start up a new tank. Due to the network created by forums such as this, there should be plenty of mature media to go around. Waiting six weeks for a tank to cycle is far too long for a lot of people new to the hobby.

Dave.

 

[Syphoniera]

I expect some have probably been groaning in anticipation of my now-typical quoting patterns cropping up.

Granted, converts are notoriously fanatic, but having made a progressively less cautious entry into conversion, every tank I set up/redo will be a Walstad.


http/tgvas.com/Forum/showthread.php?t=1716

... A little background. In 1999 Diana Walstad wrote the book "Ecology of the Planted Aquarium - A Practical Manual and Scientific Treatise for the Home Aquarist". Diana is a biologist, a micro-biologist and a technical advisor for the Aquatic Gardeners Association, as well as being a long time aquarist.

The ideas in her book have developed an avid following. Basically, she explains the science behind using the plants themselves as filters in a home aquarium, and how to set up a natural tank using soil, sunlight, minimal water exchanges, no other filters (some water movement, though), high density of plants, moderate stocking of fish, fertilizing only with excess fish flake food and the waste produced by the fish.

It's really a very old method of aquarium keeping - it's what people did in the late 1800's all the way into the 1950's when things like pumps, filters and fluorescent lighting became mass produced. Diana explains why it works. It's a very interesting book - a bit technical in places. I'll loan it to anyone who wants to read it. ...


http/www.myaquariumclub.com/blogs/

... One of the monthly aquarium magazines just published an interesting bit of information about cycling a newly established tank to get rid of the ammonia spikes that are deadly to fish. Fish waste, food waste, and plant decay all produce ammonia, which is a compound of nitrogen and hydrogen. Beneficial bacteria, so conventional wisdom goes, convert the ammonia into nitrogen or a nitrogen compound that plants can metabolize. The bacteria, when well established, then eat up and convert all of the ammonia in the aquarium. Getting the bacteria established and doing their thing is what takes all the time of cycling an aquarium. I suppose we’ve all read that before.
The magazine article stated that live plants can control nitrogen spikes from day one. In other words, they say that cycling is not necessary if the aquarium has plenty of live plants. ...


http/www.aquabotanic.com/plants_and_biol..._filtration.htm

PLANTS and BIOLOGICAL FILTRATION

by Diana Walstad

(My comment: certainly, there's a lot more to the Walstad system than the simple use of plants - but I don't even recall how long ago it was, consciously or not, that I noticed differences and determined that (apart from quarantine conditions) I'd never want to keep fish without plants.
And while cycling was previously unheard of, I don't recall problems with fish dropping dead but, unlike now, with today's chemical stew in water, food and air, sick fish were rarely bought from stores, at least in my admittedly limited experience.
At the time, the immune systems of fish, like virtually all other 'higher' life forms, were not noted to be damaged world-wide in the degree and manner they are today, due to increasing and cumulative industrial pollution.
And there also wasn't the propaganda that expensive lighting and co2 systems were required to grow plants then commonly sold which were able to deal with lower-light conditions, at least in my area.
Sp people were more likely to have them.)

Dan Quackenbush
http/www.malloftheworld.com/aquarium/part2.htm

... In a fish tank without live plants, the fish have zero ability to improve their water. In fact, their entire metabolism is geared to turn the aquarium into a cesspool. Without a filter and partial water changes, the fish will die a toxic death of their own doing. Even with filters and water changes, it always seems fish tanks are close to impending danger. Most disasters can strike without any change to the water clarity. For this reason, I have been a big advocate of just about any test kit available, in hopes of spotting water quality problems before they occur.

When it comes to plants, you can use all the same test kits and at least 4 more. They include; iron(Fe), Carbonate hardness ( K or dCH),CO2, and phosphate (PO4). Naturally, I bought them all. Unnaturally for me, I seldom use them, with one exception, and that's the pH test kit. I will not suggest you should stop using test kits, but I can't resist telling you why I seldom do.

I know that statement is going to generate a lot of e-mail heat so let me defend my position a little. First of all, if you were to own all the test kits out there, your talking several hundred dollars and a lot of time to use them. Once you have determined hardness and pH, you have a good handle as to the quality of water you have for plants or at least what corrections your going to have to make. There is a great deal of chemistry change that goes on in a low-tech aquarium, but once the low-tech aquarium ages a bit, you will find that most of the big changes occur from morning to night. If you made the same test at the same time each day, you will find little variance from day to day.

As I stated before, in a typical filtered FISH tank without live plants, the fish are only capable of degrading their aquarium. When fish and plants are combined, a wonderful partnership is born. The various poisons that fish produce are cherished as food by the plants. They especially love what can be the most toxic, ammonia. Even the CO2 that the fish produce, but have no use for, is sucked up by the plants. In effect, the potential toxins are now improving the water quality.

To my knowledge, no one has ever come up with an exact formula for partial water changes that is proven to be just the right amount, at just the right frequency, and that will work best for all aquariums. My seat of the pants recommendation therefore seems as valid as anyone else's. In a low-tech plant aquarium (not a fish tank), I do partial water changes based mostly on the clarity of the water. I have one 20 gal, with a small filter, that probably averages two 30% partial water changes a month. I have a no-tech tank that went about 8 months before I did a partial water change other than to replace evaporated water. But this is not so easy for a beginner who typically overfeeds.

The point I am trying to make is, that a low-tech plant tank often create such a stable condition that I now rely almost totally on the observation of the plants condition and water clarity as an indicator, instead of test kits. ...

 

[prankster705]

Actually fish only tanks seem to work really well - most really big tanks have no plants what-so-ever, simply because you can't keep plants with some fish. Take for example rays, they require pristine water, produce a lot of waste and they need a big footprint, plants would just make that footprint smaller. Than there are fish like silver dollars that turn any kind of plant matter into a salad bar. So for many big aquariums plants are simply not an option. There is a natural gas exchange happening at the surface and you can increase that with surface agitation that takes care of CO2 and O2 exchange. Furthermore water stats in big tanks with no plants and sometimes even no decor are usually perfect, which is accomplished through massive filtration and big regular water changes. Such big tanks usually house fish worth a lot more than your average community fish and often they are more sensitive than most common fish. So plants are not really a must have - big filters and water changes do a good role - fish have no ability to improve their water, that's what the human care takers are there to do, it's a well proven concept that works.

 

[dwarfgourami]

6 months cycling sounds incredibly long. When I started up again in the hobby, I cycled my first tanks fishless with ammonia and it never took more than two weeks. At that rate, it's less hard work than fish cycling with daily water changes. To me, it seemed the easy option.

 

[petertr]

6 months cycling sounds incredibly long. When I started up again in the hobby, I cycled my first tanks fishless with ammonia and it never took more than two weeks. At that rate, it's less hard work than fish cycling with daily water changes. To me, it seemed the easy option.

I beleive that point is put forward in most fishless-cycle guides!

Its easy to spent a few minutes each day adding some ammonia and checking for ammonia and nitrite.


Its far less easy to do a 50% water change every day.

 

[GShorty1981]

I always cycle fishless with soem dead prawn for a week,empty for second week to kick start the bacteria,do a water change of 10%,add my first fish...water change 10% everyday....add second fish the following week and carry on with water chanegs pretty much everyday until im comfortable my tank can handle the bioload.

 

[pippoodle]

when we last fishless cycled a very large tank 600 litre custom built corner tank
we never added any ammonia just set up the tank and fed it with a bit of fish food every day for one week
then the start of the second week tested the tank
hubby then added human urine to the tank (not directly into the tank)
continued feeding every other day
3rd week clear tests for 4 days so went and got 3 x2"goldfish (were into fancy golds back then)

4th week tested tank small ammonia spike 2ppm
50% water change then 30 minnows added next day
5 more goldies added following week all 1" ones

didnt test the tank again but the goldfish stayed happy and healthy in that tank for 8 years then moved onto grandads pond
minnows died off of old age gradually

i know now that 8 large goldies shouldnt have been kept in that tank but we didnt know that back then and they were all healthy and the blackmoor is now huge and over 10 years old cant identify the other fishies cos they all sort of look the same - grandad has adopted lots of grandchildrens orandas etc over the years
but we know thats the blackmoor cos he is really huge about 10"-hard to measure under water

So when we got married that tank was packed up and sold

we then got a 5 ft and a 4 ft tank cycled the same way , when we had to move these had to go again so all was stripped down and sold

the next tank we got was a 17 litre elite for the kids a few years later this was cycled in the same way and only tested once - again no deaths from this tank
from then on all other tanks have been cloned through exsisting mature filters or filter media - carry on from the original elite 17

i hope that makes sense (MS HEAD) always makes sense to me lol

Thanks Sarah x

ALL the tanks had quite a few live plants in them from the start
i'm not telling people to do it that way just sharing my experience

 

[millie1]

i agreee wiht the OP

what happened all them years ago when we brough back fish from fairs?? weekly water changes with no meds!

i had 4 in small tank which lived for years till i gave them to a guy with a pond lol

 

[Ludwig Venter]

One up,... one down, and despite a lengthy discussion,..... I am not any the wiser.......Some verrrrry rational (& interesting) discussions in this post, but IMO, not convincing enough to change my perception.....

My 87 guppies placed in a scrubbed 1 day old, gravelless tank are still 87 and frolicking.... none the worse for wear..... ( maybe, The S.A. water supplies just come from the tap, already cycled)....

 

[prankster705]

1 thing that might be worth a consideration is that guppy fry are a very minimal bio load, therefore the dilution of waste is good and the guppies well being is in no way endangered .

 

[Ludwig Venter]

1 thing that might be worth a consideration is that guppy fry are a very minimal bio load, therefore the dilution of waste is good and the guppies well being is in no way endangered .

Thanks Prankster, but in the whole of this topic, I used the guppy fry as an example, but in fact, I've been doing it with all of my fish.....just no waiting period for anything from Discus, neons, Oscars, etc. etc. etc..... No fish is given priority treatment w.r.t. cycling norms.... & they all smile.... (hey!!!... I've got cycled tap water)

 

[Ludwig Venter]

I am (primarily) bumping this thread as I am (firstly) still not yet convinced that we have a conclussion in any direction here and I am also extremely impressed with the diverse (very interesting) opinions expressed in this topic on a sensitive issue without a direct confrontation in any direction.

As we speak, I'm busy filling up a brand new tank (with brand new washed gravel & plants) and it is my intentions to stock it tomorrow (as I've done for the past 40 years) without reservation (or fear) that it would be to the detriment of my fish..... (they have always survived)

The objective is not to convince anyone that "cycling" is not required (IMHO), but simply for you to convince me why it is..... (so please.... if it is your conviction to cycle.... do not follow my example)....

 

[Lolly123]

As many people have said a very interesting thread and a great way to provide an overview of different methods that each of us use.

I'm not replying to convince you as I have been keeping fish for about 4 years, so not a patch on your fish keeping career and obviously not as knowledgeable as some on here. However, I have taken something out of this thread which mainly focuses on newbie fish keepers.

I honestly think that all newbies should be encouraged to fishless cycle their tank initially. The thought behind this stems from my experience when entering in to this hobby. I feel this method 'encourages' the individual to establish a basic knowledge of how an aquarium functions. Personally, I feel that it is a benefit for a first time keeper to get to grips with the technicalities behind the hobby, firstly to start out successfully and secondly to create an understanding of why things maybe going wrong for them and if they are, having a basic knowledge of how to solve issues...because tbh alot of newbies do go wrong, myself included when I first started. I think the worst enemy newbies face is impatience.

To be clear, I do not mean that you are disputing any of the above as you have clearly stated that fishless cycling seems to help newbies get their heads around things.

I do not have anything negative/alternative to say about an experienced keeper using an alternative method that works for them and their livestock, at times its quite refreshing to hear such methods. However, I feel that this hobby is a complete privilege and for those wishing to begin the journey of a fish keeper, then a bit of focus, dedication and patience to begin with is something that should be put in to practice before we are permitted to venture further into the hobby...if that makes sense?

 

[Geoff-]

How heavily chlorinated is SA tap water?

You may be lucky in the sense that A-bacs and N-bacs are already present in the water, and hence your filter establishes itself very quickly. If water was pristine, heavily chlorinated and devoid of all bacterial life and nutrients then it will be hard to get a cycle started. Additionally if your water is acidic then you won't get ammonia poisoning.

 

[Squidward]

I am (primarily) bumping this thread as I am (firstly) still not yet convinced that we have a conclussion in any direction here and I am also extremely impressed with the diverse (very interesting) opinions expressed in this topic on a sensitive issue without a direct confrontation in any direction.

As we speak, I'm busy filling up a brand new tank (with brand new washed gravel & plants) and it is my intentions to stock it tomorrow (as I've done for the past 40 years) without reservation (or fear) that it would be to the detriment of my fish..... (they have always survived)

The objective is not to convince anyone that "cycling" is not required (IMHO), but simply for you to convince me why it is..... (so please.... if it is your conviction to cycle.... do not follow my example)....

Have you ever used the Safe Start type products?
I have found them fantastic in my limited experience of them.

But there may be something in Geoff's comments about the SA water.
When I was growing up in SA many years ago, we had a fishroom with many tanks. Never cycled either. Filled a tank with water, gravel and plants etc. Left it for a few hours for the chlorine to dissipate, and popped the fish in. And never had a problem.