Nitrite High Ammonia Low

[linux442]

Hi All,

my nitrite is quite high no matter how much water change i do.

it was around 1 or 2 ppm and i did a 70% watrer change and it is now around 0.25 and goes up in few days again

i did another water change yesterday( around 60 liters) in my 190 liter tank and still 0.25

the ammonia is 0

this happened since i change the carbon filters to sponge in my u4 filter( fluvel). the fluvel has 2x sponge, 1 bio and 2 x carbon. i replaced the 2x carbon with 2x sponge so now i have 4x sponge. the reason for this was that i didn't want to change the carbon every two weeks and though that the sponge can host some bactirias and doesn't need frequent changes

i also emptied the gravel two weeks ago and did put some new gravel in on sunday


i have also used the api quick start which is meant to instantly cycle the tank and start braking down nitrite but it is useless and i wasted £10 ( do they work at all )?


i should add that i have also added the 2nd 1000 lph filter thus have two running in parallel for few days but no changes

all ideas and helps are welcomed and appreciated

Many thanks

 

[Livewire88]

I would say that you have caused a mini cycle because the bacteria that remove the Nitrite are now at to low a level to process the amount of Nitrite that is being produced.

The bacteria should catch back up but in the mean time you will NEED to do huge (as much as possible) daily water changes to keep the Nitrite level down as low as possible.

Keep testing the Nitrite level daily, and keep changing water daily intill the Nitrite is no longer building up in your tank.

 

[KittyKat]

Your filter is not fully cycled right now. I am yet to see any quick start product that actually works, and the best option for speeding up a cycle is to pick up some mature media from someone. Were the carbon sponges really just carbon? Some sponges are able to absorb ammonia and nitrite.

So questions are, when was the tank set up? Are there any fish in it? Can you post full stats?

 

[linux442]

thanks for the reply

the guys said that api is the best and unlike tetra they spend money on research and not packaging

he saind the quick start works and .... so i sort of said lets give it a try but i belive the water change was much more effective


i have also tried the nitrite reducer and no results so i guess all these nitrite reducers and .. are just scam and they don't work at all

 

[4seasons]

If you removed 2 filters out of 4 you cut your biological filtration by 1/2. Also some of the beneficial bacteria will grow in your gravel so if you changed gravel at the same time you thru out more than 1/2 of the bacteria that your tank needs. Then to complicate matters even further the addition of a 2nd uncycled filter. The second filter will have to grow some bacteria, and 1/2 the media in the first filter is uncycled.

Oh and the guy that said bottled bacteria works is simply lying to you. It won't hurt anything but your LFS people are sales people. They make more money on food and bottles of chemicals than anything else. Don't waste your money on a bottle that claims to speed cycle, change PH, reduce nitrite or nitrate, or some other line of bull that some snake oil sales guy is trying to push on you.

 

[KittyKat]

the guys said that api is the best and unlike tetra they spend money on research and not packaging

I haven't tried the Tetra test kits, but the API liquid kits are accurate enough for most hobbyists, as long as one follows all the instructions.

he saind the quick start works and .... so i sort of said lets give it a try but i belive the water change was much more effective

The most effective way to deal with ammonia and nitrite is to have a cycled filter. I assume that the tank has fish in it, as you keep talking about water changes, in which case, you should be aiming to never let ammonia, nor nitrite, reach 0.25 ppm, let alone go over. If you have fish and your nitrite rises to around 1 ppm, then think of it as the nitrite suffocating them because it prevents them from absorbing oxygen.

Have you checked your tap water ammonia (pre- and post-dechlorination) and nitrite? If not, I really recommend that you do.

Are you using a dechlorinator which claims to "deal" with nitrite? If not, you should be, because your nitrite is not at safe levels (where safe == 0 ppm), so it is better for the fish if it is less harmful.

i have also tried the nitrite reducer and no results so i guess all these nitrite reducers and .. are just scam and they don't work at all

If you use a nitrite reducer in the long term, the filter will not be able to cycle. They do work, but are generally a very bad idea.

If you removed 2 filters out of 4 you cut your biological filtration by 1/2.

In this case, it was fine as they were changing the carbon media every two weeks anyway, and it takes 4-6 weeks for the media to become fully seeded, so they were relying on the two other sponges for the bio-filtration. In practice, removing a 50% of the media, where the removed media is 2 week cycled and the remainder is fully cycled only removes around 10-20% of the bacteria, so is relatively safe in itself.

Also some of the beneficial bacteria will grow in your gravel so if you changed gravel at the same time you thru out more than 1/2 of the bacteria that your tank needs.

In aquaria that do not use an undergravel filter, the amount of bacteria in the gravel is insignificant compared to that which is in the filter, so it is completely safe to replace all the gravel. If I had to estimate how much out of all the bacteria in the tank were on the gravel, I'd say it's less than 0.25%, with over 99% being in the filter and less than 0.75% on other surfaces.

Then to complicate matters even further the addition of a 2nd uncycled filter. The second filter will have to grow some bacteria, and 1/2 the media in the first filter is uncycled.

The addition of a second filter cannot have any negative impact on any aquarium, it is actually impossible All it would do is increase the surface area that the bacteria can colonise, which would actually have a positive effect on the bacteria.

 

[linux442]

Thanks Kittykat,

I added the 2nd filter to help with the cycle and reducing the nitrite

would nitrite and ammonia bactiria grow in both sponge and bio filter?

me having 2x 1000 liter per hour filters in a 190 liter tank , is that ok ? is it not like a constant flow pressure for my goldies( i should say they love it and often swim against and then let themself loose so they float


i have used tetra water conditioner which i think has some thing to ease the fish but not sure what it is called.

the conditioner finished and when i bought a 2nd 500 ml tetra , they guys has sent me a pond tetra which i think is exteremly concentrated . you should add 10ml per 200 liter of water compared against 5 ml per 20 liter for normal tetra

what i did was i divided 10 by 20 so to get the amount of the pond water conditioner that i should use for my tank which is 0.5 ml for every 10 liters

is that a cause of problem ? certainly it is much more effecient and cheaper

 

[KittyKat]

I added the 2nd filter to help with the cycle and reducing the nitrite

would nitrite and ammonia bactiria grow in both sponge and bio filter?

The collective noun for all the bacteria that do the ammonia to nitrite and nitrite to nitrate conversions is "nitrifying bacteria". They will live on any surface that they can get access to, which includes both sponges and ceramic media.

The second filter would not have increased the rate at which the bacteria multiply, as they can only double approximately once every couple of days, but it does give you more of a safety net in the long term, in case something goes wrong with one of the filters when you're out of the house.

me having 2x 1000 liter per hour filters in a 190 liter tank , is that ok ? is it not like a constant flow pressure for my goldies( i should say they love it and often swim against and then let themself loose so they float

As long as your goldfish are not struggling, then the flow is probably fine. Keep in mind that a 1000 lph filter rarely outputs 1000 lph when full of media (Eheim are the only company that I know of that give relatively accurate flow rates), so it's quite likely that the flow is less. It is also possible to decrease areas of strong flow by using spray bars or by pointing the outlet along the glass instead of straight into the open areas. Goldfish are quite messy, so two filters is a relatively good idea with them anyway. Keep in mind that they will probably need a bigger tank in the long term!

i have used tetra water conditioner which i think has some thing to ease the fish but not sure what it is called.

the conditioner finished and when i bought a 2nd 500 ml tetra , they guys has sent me a pond tetra which i think is exteremly concentrated . you should add 10ml per 200 liter of water compared against 5 ml per 20 liter for normal tetra

what i did was i divided 10 by 20 so to get the amount of the pond water conditioner that i should use for my tank which is 0.5 ml for every 10 liters

is that a cause of problem ? certainly it is much more effecient and cheaper

Using pond dechlorinator is not a problem. The seller was correct that it is just more concentrated.

If the dechlorinator does anything to ammonia or nitrite, then it will always say this outright because it's a big selling point. The only dechlorinator that I can think of right now which "deals" with nitrite is Seachem Prime. Dechlorinator keeps for a very long time, so I do recommend that you get a bottle of it to use in the immediate future.

 

[TwoTankAmin]

In aquaria that do not use an undergravel filter, the amount of bacteria in the gravel is insignificant compared to that which is in the filter, so it is completely safe to replace all the gravel. If I had to estimate how much out of all the bacteria in the tank were on the gravel, I'd say it's less than 0.25%, with over 99% being in the filter and less than 0.75% on other surfaces.

This is absolutely not the case. I would challenge the poster to link to any "scientific" evidence to support the numbers given. In fact if one reads the earliest articles on fishless cycling they all suggest substrate makes a usefull jump starter. Here is what Dr. Chris Cow, Ph.D. Organic Chemistry wrote:

Good sources of beneficial bacteria are ranked from best to least: 1) Filter material (floss, sponge, biowheel, etc.) from an established, disease free tank. 2) Live Plants (preferrably potted, leave the rockwool on until cycling is finished). Crypts or amazon swords are good choices, and not too demanding. 3) Gravel from an established, disease free tank. (Many lfs will give this away if asked nicely) 4) Other ornaments (driftwood, rocks, etc.) from an established tank. 5) Squeezings from a filter sponge (any lfs should be willing to do this...)

From http/www.aquarticles.com/articles/management/Cow_Fishless_Cycle.html

If you read the research regarding the determination of the actual bacteria that handle the nitrogen cycle in fw aquariums, you will see it involved collecting the bacteria from gravel in tanks. If there were so little bacterial to be found there, they would have chosen a different collection site. The discovery of the first pure strain of ammonia oxidizing Archaea was made from gravel/rock in a public sw aquarium.

Finally, do a Google for "bacteria in aquarium gravel"

Most bacterial starters are useless, but some do contain the needed live bacteria and do work. Tetra Safe Start and DrTim's One and Only are two that should work. I have used the latter twice with results as advertised.

When carbon becomes "full" (needs to be changed) it is no longer a useful chemical media, however, it does still make an acceptable bio-media. So by removing both the gravel and the carbon, there is a real good chance this is exactly what caused the mini cycle.

Further, there is no evidence that the bacteria on/in bio media in a filter or on gravel/decor/plants is distributed evenly. That is to say if one takes out a sponge from a filter and cuts it in half, there is no reason to conclude you have also also divided the bacterial colonies in half. You could say the same thing for any other bio media as well.

Nor is Prime the only dechlor that detoxifies nitrite etc, Kordon Amquel Plus will as well.

Finally, a sponge is a bio media and a mechanical media. I use sponges stand alone or as the primary media (along with filter floss) in over 35 of my filters. I prefilter canisters, power filters and powerheads with sponges as well.

 

[KittyKat]

This is absolutely not the case. I would challenge the poster to link to any "scientific" evidence to support the numbers given. In fact if one reads the earliest articles on fishless cycling they all suggest substrate makes a usefull jump starter. Here is what Dr. Chris Cow, Ph.D. Organic Chemistry wrote:
[…]
From http/www.aquarticles.com/articles/management/Cow_Fishless_Cycle.html

I completely agree that *anything* from an established aquarium is more useful than nothing when cycling a new tank as anything from an established tank will contain larger numbers of bacteria than tap water. Even tank water or pond water is very likely to contain more useful bacteria than chlorinated tap water.

The estimates given (as mentioned) are my own, so I cannot give you any published research to back it up. My evidence is my own experience from seeding new tanks: tanks seeded with anything other than filter media (in any form or shape) take considerably longer to finish cycling than tanks seeded with filter media.

If you read the research regarding the determination of the actual bacteria that handle the nitrogen cycle in fw aquariums, you will see it involved collecting the bacteria from gravel in tanks. If there were so little bacterial to be found there, they would have chosen a different collection site.

Link/paper? The paper should say why the collection site was chosen (it could have been chosen for ease of working with, for consistency or even some reason that has not crossed either of our minds).

Further, there is no evidence that the bacteria on/in bio media in a filter or on gravel/decor/plants is distributed evenly. That is to say if one takes out a sponge from a filter and cuts it in half, there is no reason to conclude you have also also divided the bacterial colonies in half. You could say the same thing for any other bio media as well.

While it is unlikely that bacteria is perfectly distributed, in practical terms, the assumption is likely accurate enough because most of us really only need to know if there are "lots" or "few" bacteria likely to be on something that we are seeding with or removing.

Nor is Prime the only dechlor that detoxifies nitrite etc, Kordon Amquel Plus will as well.

Never said it was.

Finally, a sponge is a bio media and a mechanical media. I use sponges stand alone or as the primary media (along with filter floss) in over 35 of my filters. I prefilter canisters, power filters and powerheads with sponges as well.

Is this still for me? Of course a sponge acts as both, hence why sponge filters work pretty well. My personal preference is for ceramic media as it's easier to clean and I don't care much about mechanical filtration (as long as the debris is not causing any harm).

Have you ever observed a "normal", average, established community tank have a filter removed and show no cycle symptoms? I have not. I have removed all décor from tanks countless times while keeping a cycled filter and inhabitants without seeing any spikes in water parameters. I'm not saying that it can't happen, just that it's relatively unlikely if this was an established tank to start off with, and if it wasn't, then that is the root cause of the problem.

 

[4seasons]

I seemed to have started a fight here by only stating a few facts.

1. Assuming that the filter was fully cycled the common accepted number is 1/3 of the media can be replaced without causing ill effects. In the OP's first post he said that 2 of the four filters were replaced. Assuming that they are the same size that is 1/2 of the media. 1/2 is more than 1/3 right?

2. FACT - Some beneficial bacteria will form on gravel. It may be a small amount or even an insignificant percentage, but some is there. If the filter was cycled and could just barely handle the bio-load then even losing the small amount of bacteria in the gravel could cause a problem. It may be a small problem and if the filter had not been disturbed it could have very easily recovered fast enough that no problem would ever show. But with only 1/2 of the filter media, a small problem can complicate things farther.

3. The addition of a second filter is a third place for the bacteria to grow. That is a good thing, more surface for bacteria to grow more "potential" biological filtration. But right now it is just potential. It has yet to be cycled and has no bacteria in it. If it was added when the other filter was handling the bio-load just fine, then it could grow some bacteria while the other filter was doing its job and double the bio-filter in a short time. But since it was added while the other filter is not up to the task it is another complication. Again not a big complication, not the major problem and by now probably has some bacteria growing in it so it may be helping. But if you think of all the places that the bacteria grows, filter media first, gravel second, decoration third, you have doubled the size of filter media, replaced gravel and probably disturbed decoration in the process.

My point was with 1/2 the bio-filter in place the surfaces that is has to grow on have been more than doubled and it will take a while to catch up. Assuming that the new filter has the same media as the old, now only 1/4 of your filter media has the bio-filter bacteria growing on it. This is similar to when someone donates media from an established tank to jump start a cycle. If they gave you 1/3 of the media from a 100 gallon tank and you put it in a 20 gallon you have an instant cycle as you have more than enough bacteria to handle the smaller load. But if someone donated 1/3 of the media from a 10 gallon and you put it in a 50 gallon setup it is going to take some time for that bacteria to catch up.

Basically what I am saying is there is one major problem with a couple of complicating factors. Now is someone wants to take a scientific approach and figure in the percentages of what grows where and all the stuff that makes some cycles take 3 weeks and some 3 months and get out the slide rule, carry the 2, take the square root of pi, and give an exact answer to how long it will take the bacteria to catch up, more power to them.

P.S. I didn't add that sometimes stirring up substrate can loose some old food or waste that will cause an ammonia spike if your bio-filtration isn't up to the task. I just didn't what to make it that complicated.

 

[linux442]

Good sources of beneficial bacteria are ranked from best to least: 1) Filter material (floss, sponge, biowheel, etc.) from an established, disease free tank. 2) Live Plants (preferrably potted, leave the rockwool on until cycling is finished). Crypts or amazon swords are good choices, and not too demanding. 3) Gravel from an established, disease free tank. (Many lfs will give this away if asked nicely) 4) Other ornaments (driftwood, rocks, etc.) from an established tank. 5) Squeezings from a filter sponge (any lfs should be willing to do this...)

thanks for the replies, does point number 5 mean, i will be killing bactrias by squeezing the filter? i do squeeze mine hard when clean them so this could mean i am killing most of the bactrias

 

[4seasons]

Good sources of beneficial bacteria are ranked from best to least: 1) Filter material (floss, sponge, biowheel, etc.) from an established, disease free tank. 2) Live Plants (preferrably potted, leave the rockwool on until cycling is finished). Crypts or amazon swords are good choices, and not too demanding. 3) Gravel from an established, disease free tank. (Many lfs will give this away if asked nicely) 4) Other ornaments (driftwood, rocks, etc.) from an established tank. 5) Squeezings from a filter sponge (any lfs should be willing to do this...)

thanks for the replies, does point number 5 mean, i will be killing bactrias by squeezing the filter? i do squeeze mine hard when clean them so this could mean i am killing most of the bactrias

5) Squeezings from a filter sponge (any lfs should be willing to do this...)
The point here is to gather some of the beneficial bacteria from a fully cycled tank. If you can't get your hands on some used media (IE the sponge itself) to add to your tank, you may find someone willing to give their sponge a squeeze into a bag of water for you. This should break loose some of the bacteria you need into the water then you rush home and dump this old used dirty water into your filter in the hopes that some of the bacteria will survive and start growing on your filter. While it can work it is not the best method and is why it is listed last. There is really no need for you to do this as you already have good bacteria in your filter media. You just need to grow more. Until your cycle is complete I wouldn't touch your filter media. If you notice a huge reduction in flow it may be necessary to clean them in some old tank water but every time you do this you will disturb some of the bacteria and set your cycle back. It may only be a small percentage but it is still a setback. A fully cycled and well established tank can afford to lose a few bacteria here and there but you don't want that right now.

 

[linux442]

thanks for the info, it may be a silly question but do you guys know how long a bactiria can survive when the filter is not dipped in the water or it is turned off. for example for cleaning i usually turn the filter off for around 30min to 1 hour to do cleaning.

also if someone squeezes a bit of their lovely bactirias into a water, they should survive, wouldn't they ? is it because they may have no ammonia/nitrite thus dies ? this bring on another question that i have which is if you simply leave the filter media inside the filter and turn the firlter off, would the bactirias all die? this mean the bactiria on the gravel should also die as they have no machine or propellerto pass the water through them

 

[KittyKat]

1. Assuming that the filter was fully cycled the common accepted number is 1/3 of the media can be replaced without causing ill effects. In the OP's first post he said that 2 of the four filters were replaced. Assuming that they are the same size that is 1/2 of the media. 1/2 is more than 1/3 right?

Assuming that the filter was fully cycled, then that would be correct. My point was that 50% of the sponges were being replaced every two weeks, so they were not "fully cycled" at the time when they were removed.

P.S. I didn't add that sometimes stirring up substrate can loose some old food or waste that will cause an ammonia spike if your bio-filtration isn't up to the task. I just didn't what to make it that complicated.

That is a good point, and is a common problem in an average community tank when the substrate is bothered.