Not Another Fishless Cycle

[FISH-FRY]

(Final stocking in 5 weeks)​

This is how my fish-in cycle worked for me and liked the fact that I didn't have to wait months to begin enjoying it. I wasn't going to tell my little one week after week that they couldn't have their fish yet.

I dove into this aquarium pretty quickly, reading and asking questions just prior to and during its building phase. At just 5 weeks I reached my stocking goal and have enjoyed my 16 gallon bow front tank's inhabitants since day two. And so has the family.

I purchased some of the hardware on the evening of February 13 and cleaning the Seachem Flourite substrate was such a pain that I stopped because I was tired and it was already late. I also cleaned everything with hot tap water and wiped down all parts that could not be submerged. I left about 25% of the tank filled with dechlorinated water soaking the substrate overnight and continued in the morning.

By 10:30 a.m. on the 14th I had the aquarium finished. I initially removed the murky water from the substrate and left whatever was covering the substrate. I added the faux tree trunk and carefully poured dechlorinated water over a plastic bowl and filled it to about 60% trying to keep the temperature in the mid 70°F range. I then added one Amazon Sword and two Anubias plants. I rinsed the plants in running tap water and then in a new bucket. I added the thermometer (set to 75°F) and filter with media, filled up the rest of the tank, covered it and turned on all the electrical components. It all worked!

On the 15th I added a Wisteria plant and two Java fern; I rinsed them prior to placing them into the tank of course. On the 16th I added the faux drift wood, external thermometer with remote probe and Seachem Ammonia Alert. On the 17th I replaced the filter with a new model and kept the media for a day behind the new one. There wasn't much in there so it made no sense really keeping it around; they were different sizes anyway. On the 21st I changed out the heater. On March 7 I added some Java moss and on the 10th I added some Tropical Hornwort along with a few stray Duckweed pieces that made it into the bag.

Pets added:
02/15 - 3 Neon Tetra
02/20 - 3 Neon Tetra
02/28 - 2 Panda Cory
03/05 - 4 Red Cherry Shrimp
03/06 - 1 Siamese Algae Eater
03/13 - 2 Panda Cory, 3 Harlequin Rasbora & 1 Tracked Nerite Snail
03/21 - 3 Harlequin Rasbora

This wasn't the order or my initial stocking plan but pretty close. Things happen so you adapt. I wanted to make sure I had fish at the top, mid and bottom along with a clean team to help tidy up the place some because cleaning is not my idea of fun. I still have to do water changes and clean up and every little bit helps.

I pretty much did water changes three days after introducing new members of the aquarium. I started with 2 gallons, then 3, 4 and 5. I then started again with 2 gallons working my way up. I tested the water prior to making the changes but made the change whether it needed it or not.

I'll do a final "introduction" water change in three days and then wait a week and to do another. I'll be testing the water daily, as I have been, in case there are any undesired readings and do a change as necessary. I'll then see if I can go 2 weeks without a change, testing the water on a daily basis and changing as needed.

I test the water parameters every day and there have been times I've tested up to twice daily, but not that often. When I feel I have a normal tank then I'll probably end up testing weekly or perhaps biweekly. The Nitrates started out with 0 ppm (mg/L) and have been under 20, mainly 10 all along; my tap water reading is 10. The Nitrites were 0 ppm (mg/L) then would go up to about .5 after an introduction and then go back down to 0. For the past couple of weeks they have been around .25 or less but not 0. Today they were back to 0. I'm still trying to figure this one out. Different people I trust have told me it's not really a concern at that level but to keep an eye on it. I have hard water (150 ppm), 0 ppm (mg/L) chlorine; my alkalinity has risen to 80 ppm and a steady 7.2 pH the whole time.

My plants are doing fine with a 15 Watt T-8 8,000K Fluorescent Lamp except for the Wisteria that I've caught at least one shrimp eating. No, the leaves were not dead before it munched on it. I believe I've had some Diatoms but it seems to be clearing up by itself or the cleaning crew has been at work. I know I've seen at least one shrimp eat some major crud off of a Java fern leaf. I've also seen some tiny round patches of green colored algae that someone has been munching on. I started out with 12 hours of light running on a timer. On March 9 I changed it to 10 hours thinking some of my minor algae issues could have been due to too much light. I'm trying to balance enough algae growth for the inhabitants to be happy with.

So far I've fed them Aqueon Color Enhancing Tropical Flakes but stopped before adding the shrimp since it has Copper sulfate as an ingredient and didn't want to risk it even if its trace amounts. The snail wouldn't appreciate it either. I got it as a sample and never finished it and I also have a larger container I never opened. I'm currently using Sera Vipan Staple Diet (another sample) for flake food and so far everyone has liked both. I also use Nutrafin Max Bottom Feeder Sinking Food Tablets that everyone loves. The Tetras hover around the Pandas while they munch to grab the floating bits and the Rasbora are right behind them. The SAE is still shy about going in with the others and prefers to nibble on the tablet when the coast is clear. I also feed them Hikari Frozen Brine Shrimp and Brown Worms. Luckily everyone loves it all. Maybe that's the reason they're a little too healthy. I only feed them once a day and sometimes skip a day. For the first week or so I was only feeding every other day.

In this short time I've seen how the Tetras behaved by themselves and how they interacted with the others as I added them in. They like Shoaling with the Rasbora and vice versa at times. All the fish are all over the place and appear comfortable shoaling or doing their own thing. None are chasing each other as if there's a territorial dispute and all seem happy. I now have baby shrimp, Tetra eggs, and Panda eggs, and think I even saw a Panda fry. I just added the other half of the Rasbora and think I now have two females.

Had I gone the other route I would have been lining the pockets of ammonia makers, playing with a toxic chemical and disposing of it down a drain. Yeah, I know it doesn't cost that much and the quantities aren't going to kill you, but it sounded good. But, it is an extra expense and you can get ammonia burns. I also would not have enjoyed all the time and effort expended doing a fishless cycle. I probably would still be waiting another month before I could even put in a plant to enjoy it had I gone the other route. The animals and plants will be fine with this method. Remember when you were little and you did all those "bad" things to your goldfish? They probably lived a long time too, didn't they?

This is one man's experience and I’m not knocking the fishless cycle.

 

[OldMan47]

It sounds like you have indeed had some fish survive the fish-in cycle that you have been following. So far you have zero time to find out if that method is even reasonably viable for the long term fish's health. Many fish will survive higher levels than they should be exposed to, for a short time, like a month or two, but will have issues that show up instead as a reduced lifetime. You have allowed your poison levels to rise well above anything we would normally recommend here and only time will tell how much that has impacted your fish. In 3 or 4 years, I would be interested to know if your cories or your rasboras are still around. My cories in my first tank, since re-entering the hobby, are over 6 years old and are doing great and are sharing the tank with rasboras that I got around the same time. I have an angel in the same tank that is still going strong. Your water parameters are not hard water parameters but are rather soft water with a low KH. At 150 ppm, you have moderately soft water, with a GH of only about 8 degrees, and a KH of 80ppm is almost so low that it would be unstable, it is just over 4 degrees of KH. You could try my water at a GH and a KH each above 10 degrees and a TDS of over 225 ppm which makes it moderately hard.
Your plantings were heavy enough and done early enough to prevent much of the ammonia build that you might have otherwise experienced, but the light initial stocking along with the plantings may have saved your fish from dying right then and there. You do not have a conventionally cycled tank but one that you are still controlling with water changes and plant growth. The planting aspect is leaning toward a Walstad style tank with plants being the main filter element but you don't have enough plants to rely solely on that approach, so you are doing water changes that are still the only control for the fish poisons in your water. I do have a Walstad style planted tank that has been planted heavily enough from day 1 to allow me to stock the tank without first cycling it. It is doing fine for controlling the poisons so that the fish are not being endangered. Unfortunately, you are interpreting fish survival as all being well with the fish. You are wrong in that respect. Fish survival means you have kept the poisons from outright killing your fish on the spot, it does not mean that you are doing the right thing for their long term health.

 

[Curiosity101]

I'd like to hear your interpretation of what time and effort you think a fishless cycle is more than a fish in cycle?
Fishless cycles once started can basically be forgotten about for the first week and when you start testing daily you never have to worry about causing any damage to your fish.
Also you never have to even think about any algae blooms/outbreaks due to free ammonia floating around.

Also fish-in cycling, even when done correctly, does still result in mid-term ammonia and nitrite poisoning. It's minimal, and wont result in a fast death. But fish-in cycled tanks do often have premature deaths. Ie. a fish that should live to 2 years might perhaps last 1 1/2 years instead.

Oh and ammonia isn't a toxic chemical lol. Not in the respect of being poured down a drain. It also isn't that dangerous to be honest, if you get any on your hands so long as you rinse them relatively soon it's not an issue.

 

[Assaye]

What do you think is a long time for a goldfish to live? Most people who did "bad" things to their goldfish had a fish that died after 2-5 years (if not sooner) and didn't reach over 2-3 inches.

Anyway. Glad to hear your fish seem fine. I wouldn't ever recommend your method to anyone through. Aside from the fact that one usage doesn't prove it is reliable, you admit that you allowed the nitrites to sit at around 0.25 ppm for the best part of two weeks. This would not kill fish outright but will have caused a degree of internal damage that may affect the fish in the weeks, months or years to come. You also don't report on your ammonia readings?

I also don't think that not wanting to mess about with ammonia is ever a reason to subject fish to their own waste. Even the most controlled fish-in cycle involves fish being exposed to a degree of poison.

 

[FISH-FRY]

What do you think is a long time for a goldfish to live? Most people who did "bad" things to their goldfish had a fish that died after 2-5 years (if not sooner) and didn't reach over 2-3 inches.

Anyway. Glad to hear your fish seem fine. I wouldn't ever recommend your method to anyone through. Aside from the fact that one usage doesn't prove it is reliable, you admit that you allowed the nitrites to sit at around 0.25 ppm for the best part of two weeks. This would not kill fish outright but will have caused a degree of internal damage that may affect the fish in the weeks, months or years to come. You also don't report on your ammonia readings?

I also don't think that not wanting to mess about with ammonia is ever a reason to subject fish to their own waste. Even the most controlled fish-in cycle involves fish being exposed to a degree of poison.

Please don't call peta on me because I "allowed the nitrites to sit around". It was around .25 or less and I was making adequate water changes and trying to figure out what was going on. Did you want me to make a "my nitrites are less than .25 help me because I'm a n00b that didn't listen to everyone and did a fish-in cycle" post so you could rescue me? Please spare me the drama. At .5 you really start to worry, at 1 you need to do something quick and over that you really have problems. My readings were not alarming and is sometimes normal when you add new stock to a tank. I'm hardly the fish destroyer you make me out to be.

There was no detectable ammonia except for the minute amounts that trigger diatoms for a short while and are now gone.

So with all the harmful things I've done to my aquarium I'm happy to report that my corydoras have been littering the tank with eggs as well as my Tetras and my shrimp. I just saw about eight shrimplets when I did a water change today after not doing one for a week. I didn't have to make the change because all my numbers where at zero, but I still did. Now I'm going to shoot for a 2 week water change as long as my readings support it.

 

[Curiosity101]

You haven't responded at all to my post fish-fry.

 

[roadmaster]

Although Fisless cycling is without a doubt the safest way to allow a tank to mature with respect to possible damage to fishes, and should be of paramount concern,,, I see a lot of might's,and maybe's being suggested with respect to fishes welfare as a result of fish in cycling in this particular tank.
Have also expierienced no loss of fish using a controlled method of fish in cycling and have had these fish live considerably beyond their life expectancy and produce offspring .
Trouble with fish in Cycling is nearly everyone, begins with too many fish,too large of fish,,inappropriate fish,too much feeding of fish,and next to no understanding of the nitrification process.(or they just don't care)
Have also seen fish expire in cycled tanks due to all of the above reasons.
I would always recommend fishless cycling for new hobbyist's but Using raw ammonia is not something I would suggest to young hobbyist's without adult supervision.
I might consider using raw shrimp,fish food,or even a dozen snails fed sparingly to help the tank mature.
Some claim that they don't wish to place decaying organics in their tank (shrimp,fishfood) but it is precisely what they do each time they feed their fish.Same bacteria feeds from both forms of ammonia and makes no distinction.Smell is another reason some often cite but with weekly water change,smell is kept to tolerable levels and it doesn't slow the cycling time by any measureable degree despite claims to the contrary.
I also like the fish food or shrimp method because there is no daily dosing or testing involved. Simply check the water parameters at the end of three weeks and if all is zero, with some Nitrates(prolly high), perform 70 or 75 percent water change and slowly begin stocking the tank.
Many claim that Raw ammonia method assures one of being able to stock their tank to capacity immediately ,and I have heard of many who have done so without issues.Have also heard of those who witnessed spikes in ammonia by doing so. It does not surpise me and one can always argue as to whether they did it right or MAYBE they didn't or any other number of factors may have played a part. Once again,might's and maybe's.
The only trouble with this particular thread that stood out to me was.. the original poster indicated that they were trying to figure out what was happening with regards to the method they chose and thus,elevated toxins were observed for possibly a week.
In my view,you need to know precisely, what is happening and at what time frame it is likely to occur if you are to use fish in method for allowing the tank to mature or (cycle) you don't want to wait until it happens, otherwise it is quite likely if not probable ,that fish will suffer to some degree, no if ,but's,or maybe's about it.

 

[waterdrop]

A good thoughtful post there roadmaster, you sound like one of the older hobbyists who has had a chance to master some of the best practices used when a Fish-In Cycle is done well. You may even find yourself in close rank with oldman47, who I find to be one of a fairly small percentage of many-year hobbyists who examine various changes in practice with a very open mind. Its not surprising that the progress since 1980 of the household ammonia method has been slow. The very people, the experienced ones, have little direct need for it since they can simply clone filters, as everyone can do once they are past their very first cycle.

Given your good observation there of the common trouble of so many cases of people beginning a fish-in cycle with too much stock, too much feeding, etc. I'd like to mention that one of the things I like to try and do in my posts is to regularly distinguish between the two different circumstances we see: I try to remember to refer to either a "Planned Fish-In Cycle" or a "Fish-In Cycling Situation" or similar language. The latter, of course, better refers to the common situations you were describing of coming in to the fish-in cycle from lack of any overall understanding of cycling. I figure that by being consistent about the phrasing over a long time it might help promote clarity of communication among the members since getting things clear on a forum can be so hard.

~~waterdrop~~

 

[Assaye]

What do you think is a long time for a goldfish to live? Most people who did "bad" things to their goldfish had a fish that died after 2-5 years (if not sooner) and didn't reach over 2-3 inches.

Anyway. Glad to hear your fish seem fine. I wouldn't ever recommend your method to anyone through. Aside from the fact that one usage doesn't prove it is reliable, you admit that you allowed the nitrites to sit at around 0.25 ppm for the best part of two weeks. This would not kill fish outright but will have caused a degree of internal damage that may affect the fish in the weeks, months or years to come. You also don't report on your ammonia readings?

I also don't think that not wanting to mess about with ammonia is ever a reason to subject fish to their own waste. Even the most controlled fish-in cycle involves fish being exposed to a degree of poison.

Please don't call peta on me because I "allowed the nitrites to sit around". It was around .25 or less and I was making adequate water changes and trying to figure out what was going on. Did you want me to make a "my nitrites are less than .25 help me because I'm a n00b that didn't listen to everyone and did a fish-in cycle" post so you could rescue me? Please spare me the drama. At .5 you really start to worry, at 1 you need to do something quick and over that you really have problems. My readings were not alarming and is sometimes normal when you add new stock to a tank. I'm hardly the fish destroyer you make me out to be.

There was no detectable ammonia except for the minute amounts that trigger diatoms for a short while and are now gone.

So with all the harmful things I've done to my aquarium I'm happy to report that my corydoras have been littering the tank with eggs as well as my Tetras and my shrimp. I just saw about eight shrimplets when I did a water change today after not doing one for a week. I didn't have to make the change because all my numbers where at zero, but I still did. Now I'm going to shoot for a 2 week water change as long as my readings support it.

Please don't overreact. I simply critised your method, I never suggested you were a killer of fish or anything else over the top.

Fact - you let your nitrites sit at an elevated level for a many days. Opinion - this may or may not have done a degree of internal damage and your fish may be absolutely fine. However, this is a harmful substance and in fishkeeping we shouldn't be cutting as fine a line as possible to what science currently says we might be able to get away with. These are living creatures and we shouldn't be letting a harmful substance sit around in their tank simply because most experienced fish keepers don't think it will do too much damage.

It's like encouraging people smoke because a lot of the time, they don't have any major health complications as a result. And who cares about the cough and un-noticed damage to their lungs? As long as they don't die at 40, right?

See, I can use OTT language as well.

 

[roadmaster]

A good thoughtful post there roadmaster, you sound like one of the older hobbyists who has had a chance to master some of the best practices used when a Fish-In Cycle is done well. You may even find yourself in close rank with oldman47, who I find to be one of a fairly small percentage of many-year hobbyists who examine various changes in practice with a very open mind. Its not surprising that the progress since 1980 of the household ammonia method has been slow. The very people, the experienced ones, have little direct need for it since they can simply clone filters, as everyone can do once they are past their very first cycle.

Given your good observation there of the common trouble of so many cases of people beginning a fish-in cycle with too much stock, too much feeding, etc. I'd like to mention that one of the things I like to try and do in my posts is to regularly distinguish between the two different circumstances we see: I try to remember to refer to either a "Planned Fish-In Cycle" or a "Fish-In Cycling Situation" or similar language. The latter, of course, better refers to the common situations you were describing of coming in to the fish-in cycle from lack of any overall understanding of cycling. I figure that by being consistent about the phrasing over a long time it might help promote clarity of communication among the members since getting things clear on a forum can be so hard.

~~waterdrop~~

Ahh,yes. Sadly,, many are thrust into a fish in situation through misinformation from fish store employees,or by their own misunderstanding. Is an often painful learning curve.

 

[Dan-CR4]

I can honestly say, i have had no chemical burns from ammonia, can the same be said that no harm has come to the fish in a fishin cycle?

when i was first thinking of getting tropical fish, i knew nothing about fishless cycling. I looked round the internet and found a video on video jug that gave me the impression that within a week i could have fish in my tank. Im glad i decided to read further and find other sites like this one that told me i could harm the fish if the tank was not cycled and thats the last thing i wanted to do.

I think people need to read about both cycles and decide for themselves whats best, myself i am glad i chose the fishless cycle, as i know i have done the best i can not to harm any fish once my tank is cycled.

 

[Truck]

#92###, The OP did a fishless cycle, you'd think that he/she had killed someone the way some of you go on.

Personally I prefer fish in cycles, pet stores use, it and so did hobbyists before people actually twigged about using ammonia instead of fish faeces, short term exposure to ammonia and nitrite, may <<<< MAY harm the fish, there is no solid evidence to say it will, it depends on the fish species, the water temperature and the PH of the water, seriously, stop shooting the guy down, a fish in cycle is a totally acceptable way of cycling a tank.

 

[Curiosity101]

My objection wasn't so much to do with the fact it was a fish in cycle (just incase it came across that is was). Just the way it was portrayed as being somehow significantly easier or 'safer' than a fishless cycle.

• It's not easier due to the large amount of testing and water changes needed.
• It's not cheaper as you use alot more dechlorinator (not so much of an issue if using seachem prime) and it uses more water (painful if you're on a water metre!). You also use up the tests in your test kit much faster cause you're testing more often.
• The ammonia we recommend for a fishless cycle isn't a dangerous chemical. It's a mild irratant, and although roadmaster makes a very good point that young keepers should have adult supervision. I'd speculate that most people on here are old enough to use household ammonia without result in any skin irritation or hospital trips.
• The ammonia is also pretty cheap because people don't tend to use it nowadays but it's still dirt cheap to produce.
• It can be started and then the tank can be wrapped up and left to do it's thing for a couple of weeks where (if you're a new keeper) you can really get to grips with the huge number of fish available and start thinking about exactly how you want your tank to be. As opposed to possibly just going to the shop and seeing what is there, then seeing how the tank develops from there.
• Impatience normally drives a fish-in cycle, but impatience is the biggest problem in the hobby cause it's so easy to end up with incompatible fish. (not saying that is the case here).
• Another thing that just occured to me, when you're new you presume fish shops know what they're talking about (which is true for some), so taking some time to really learn about the hobby and trust in your own knowledge can sometimes be essential. That way you don't have anyone pushing a 'hard sell' on you, or convincing you that your ideas on stocking are silly.
  

I personally would never do a fish-in cycle cause I just don't see the point when there is a fishless alternative that wont expose the fish to ammonia and/or nitrites un-neccesarily (and has other benefits). But I'd certainly not disagree with the fact that it can be done successfully by people with the time and effort to do it properly.

 

[waterdrop]

^what she said (have always wanted do a post like this )

 

[Assaye]

#92###, The OP did a fishless cycle, you'd think that he/she had killed someone the way some of you go on.

Personally I prefer fish in cycles, pet stores use, it and so did hobbyists before people actually twigged about using ammonia instead of fish faeces, short term exposure to ammonia and nitrite, may <<<< MAY harm the fish, there is no solid evidence to say it will, it depends on the fish species, the water temperature and the PH of the water, seriously, stop shooting the guy down, a fish in cycle is a totally acceptable way of cycling a tank.

My objection isn't really the fish-in cycle, it's the attitude and the way it was handled - unless I am very much mistaken, the OP allowed the nitrites to sit at an elevated level for around two weeks.

A "may harm the fish" is, in my book, as good as a "will harm the fish". It's a living creature and we shouldn't be gambling with it's health if it can be avoided.

Now, if the OP actually meant he tested the water at least once daily, got levels of 0.25 and then did a very large water change (according to fish-in cycle 'best practice') and this continued for two weeks, then that's all normal. However, that didn't come across in the post.

I'm not knocking a fish-in cycle. They are often necessary. However, convinience is a poor excuse and the fact that fish stores and old time hobbyists do them is definitely not an excuse. People also used to regularly dock the tails of dogs, but we don't do that without a valid medical or working reason anymore.