Top ten reasons you should NOT dose a new cycling tank to 2 ppm ammonia
- Thread starter brandon429
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Jekyl
GSP is the devil and clowns are bad pets
I have bristleworms and some others you need a microscope to see in my tank. They were free clean up crew.I'm doing everything humanly possible to keep them out. My dry rock helped with that. LOL. My "new to saltwater" brain wouldn't have been able to handle pests that might've come in on live rock. It was all the worm threads that did it for me. Haha. I would have no problem starting with dry rock again.
OP
OP
When Garriga asked about nitrites and nitrates, I’ll repost a link from above and you can see they don’t factor in marine tank cycling any longer @GARRIGA
of course without actually reading and giving thought to the matters tested, the re link won’t apply.
www.reef2reef.com
of the thirty pages of happy cycles, how many times did we factor nitrate or nitrite? In fact I spend most time trying to convince folks not to post their guess measures.
what you are saying is nonsense is backed by 200 live time cycles. Caring about nitrites in a marine cycle is literally decades old outdated info, I can see why it’s a concern if we base all cycle advice only on our own tanks and not the study of others, using updated rulesets designed to keep fish alive by applying disease-specific preps.
back when you were cycling using the classic means, fish disease wasn’t as pronounced as you can clearly see it is today, here:
www.reef2reef.com
of course without actually reading and giving thought to the matters tested, the re link won’t apply.
How to unstick any seemingly stuck cycle
Updated Cycling Science in Action This is a testless reef tank cycling thread, the only one from any board. If you ever had trouble with reef tank cycling in the past, you won't any longer after working some jobs with us. chances are you are using/about to use a method of reef tank cycling...
www.reef2reef.com
of the thirty pages of happy cycles, how many times did we factor nitrate or nitrite? In fact I spend most time trying to convince folks not to post their guess measures.
what you are saying is nonsense is backed by 200 live time cycles. Caring about nitrites in a marine cycle is literally decades old outdated info, I can see why it’s a concern if we base all cycle advice only on our own tanks and not the study of others, using updated rulesets designed to keep fish alive by applying disease-specific preps.
back when you were cycling using the classic means, fish disease wasn’t as pronounced as you can clearly see it is today, here:
Fish Disease Treatment and Diagnosis
A forum for discussing treatment and diagnosing saltwater reef fish.
www.reef2reef.com
Last edited:
OP
OP
Karen
2ppm dosing is a random number chosen by Dr. Tim as a decent uptake rate to expect from his bottle bacteria. Most brands of bacteria can also move that amount, but only if we get lucky on their ability to run cheap test kits and relay the info correctly.
it is not a hardfast rule at all. I spend my days/decades online running cycles using completely opposite means.
2ppm dosing is a random number chosen by Dr. Tim as a decent uptake rate to expect from his bottle bacteria. Most brands of bacteria can also move that amount, but only if we get lucky on their ability to run cheap test kits and relay the info correctly.
it is not a hardfast rule at all. I spend my days/decades online running cycles using completely opposite means.
Karen00
2500 Club Member
The problem I would have with pests (like worms) is that my current tank is just a 5g. If things like bristleworms got in and managed to grow to full size (let's say their average of 2-3") it would dominate my tank. A 3" bristle worm is 20% of the dimensions of my tank. Even a few of those would ruin it. That's all I would see looking at it. LOL. I might feel differently if I had a larger setup. Any pest becomes a plague fast in a pico.
I totally understand their benefits though.
I look at it like this.
Why overload a tank with 2ppm ammonia if your only planning on stocking a cpl small fish to begin with?
Seems counter productive to me at this point when you can build healthy ammonia cycling with much smaller doses of ammonia. Or better yet even a few mysis shrimp and a cpl hermits thats fully sufficient and capable of handling bioload of cpl small fish?
To me the second option is much more efficient if your only planning on stocking a cpl small fish.
Why overload a tank with 2ppm ammonia if your only planning on stocking a cpl small fish to begin with?
Seems counter productive to me at this point when you can build healthy ammonia cycling with much smaller doses of ammonia. Or better yet even a few mysis shrimp and a cpl hermits thats fully sufficient and capable of handling bioload of cpl small fish?
To me the second option is much more efficient if your only planning on stocking a cpl small fish.
Jekyl
GSP is the devil and clowns are bad pets
The only way that could happen is due to poor maintenance. Bristleworms can only grow and multiply based on the amount of food available.The problem I would have with pests (like worms) is that my current tank is just a 5g. If things like bristleworms got in and managed to grow to full size (let's say their average of 2-3") it would dominate my tank. A 3" bristle worm is 20% of the dimensions of my tank. Even a few of those would ruin it. That's all I would see looking at it. LOL. I might feel differently if I had a larger setup. Any pest becomes a plague fast in a pico.
Karen00
2500 Club Member
Thanks so much for explaining this. I first came across 2% a few years ago on YouTube. I don't even know how I came across it because I wasn't cycling anything. I then started searching the reason for 2% but was never able to find an answer but that was awhile ago.
OP
OP
well said @LRT
Plus, as we're all trained to click buy bottle bac on impulse for the slightest perceived threat regardless of ability to wield and interpret and relay cheap test kits, what's left out from the training:
the mechanics of surface area in cycling.
we're trained to hyperfocus on bacteria for a reason: they can be bottled.
The copious surface area we employ in all reef displays is conveniently excluded in all stuck cycle posts, risks and analyses.
For example: can anyone link me a youtube influencer video or MACNA talk on the physics of surface area in wastewater management within a reef tank
because I can find fifty seven videos all on bacteria, and commuted risks
but where's the other side of the cycling coin in training=surface area?
conveniently missing, from all discussions about cycling, all the time.
unspoken, noncommunicated, non taught, non reviewed surface area mechanics inherent to all display cycles are exactly why detractors can't post any examples of a truly failed ammonia cycle.
bottle bac sellers and the peers who prop them up don't want us to know that most of the time we're double-adding bottled bacteria there aren't any attachment points left, that all vital space is 'slicked and taken up, and that what we're dosing will be simple extra bioloading skimmed right out or handled in the next water change, or left as collective floating useless material in a system already well-able to handle its free ammonia, see any seneye owner's post in reefing history.
Plus, as we're all trained to click buy bottle bac on impulse for the slightest perceived threat regardless of ability to wield and interpret and relay cheap test kits, what's left out from the training:
the mechanics of surface area in cycling.
we're trained to hyperfocus on bacteria for a reason: they can be bottled.
The copious surface area we employ in all reef displays is conveniently excluded in all stuck cycle posts, risks and analyses.
For example: can anyone link me a youtube influencer video or MACNA talk on the physics of surface area in wastewater management within a reef tank
because I can find fifty seven videos all on bacteria, and commuted risks
but where's the other side of the cycling coin in training=surface area?
conveniently missing, from all discussions about cycling, all the time.
unspoken, noncommunicated, non taught, non reviewed surface area mechanics inherent to all display cycles are exactly why detractors can't post any examples of a truly failed ammonia cycle.
bottle bac sellers and the peers who prop them up don't want us to know that most of the time we're double-adding bottled bacteria there aren't any attachment points left, that all vital space is 'slicked and taken up, and that what we're dosing will be simple extra bioloading skimmed right out or handled in the next water change, or left as collective floating useless material in a system already well-able to handle its free ammonia, see any seneye owner's post in reefing history.
GARRIGA
2500 Club Member
West Palm Beach Reefer
305 Reef Club
MAC of SW Florida
Rock Pool Reef Keepers
One’s own experience often all that’s needed. Hard to dispute what one actually experiences vs relying on just the input of others especially when so many variables are involved.When Garriga asked about nitrites and nitrates, I’ll repost a link from above and you can see they don’t factor in marine tank cycling any longer @GARRIGA
of course without actually reading and giving thought to the matters tested, the re link won’t apply.
How to unstick any seemingly stuck cycle
Updated Cycling Science in Action This is a testless reef tank cycling thread, the only one from any board. If you ever had trouble with reef tank cycling in the past, you won't any longer after working some jobs with us. chances are you are using/about to use a method of reef tank cycling...
of the thirty pages of happy cycles, how many times did we factor nitrate or nitrite? In fact I spend most time trying to convince folks not to post their guess measures.
what you are saying is nonsense is backed by 200 live time cycles. Caring about nitrites in a marine cycle is literally decades old outdated info, I can see why it’s a concern if we base all cycle advice only on our own tanks and not the study of others, using updated rulesets designed to keep fish alive by applying disease-specific preps.
back when you were cycling using the classic means, fish disease wasn’t as pronounced as you can clearly see it is today, here:
Fish Disease Treatment and Diagnosis
A forum for discussing treatment and diagnosing saltwater reef fish.
Best perhaps to setup several identical tanks like BRS does and run some test. I don’t. I know what I’ve done. Will continue to do so because it’s worked for me and until it fails there’s no reason to adjust my approach plus I don’t need quicker cycling the. I’m presently experiencing and I don’t perform any water changes. Latest build on original water except for one experimentation to bring it to brackish then back to full salt.
Seems this take on cycling might be thought than needed plus one could just add shrimp and go old school. Just takes a while.
Karen00
2500 Club Member
You're probably correct and I'm sure I will have them (pests) at some point. I'm sure it is unavoidable and I'm sure entirely manageable regardless. I'm just too new to want anything in my tank I didn't put there.
Give me a few years and I might be on the other side of the fence. LOL
We have beat up the whole 2ppm dose many times here and nobody has ever really given a solid reason as to why dose 2ppm besides thats what certain bottle bac cycles require. Not necessarily if that even fits a reefers specific needs for particular livestock they are planning to stock.Thanks so much for explaining this. I first came across 2% a few years ago on YouTube. I don't even know how I came across it because I wasn't cycling anything. I then started searching the reason for 2% but was never able to find an answer but that was awhile ago.
OP
OP
Garriga that's a nice summary.
although its fun to debate and evolve reef practices/see what changes we can influence I think the heart of the matter exists in predicting changes in the hobby that bring us down before they fully manifest.
people here who track the disease forum linked on prior posts will see an absolutely shocking degree of fish loss, shocking, as a new emergence far different that 2006 or even 1986
a change has happened. Jay could not possibly be busier making work threads using other people's reefs never talking about his own reef, to stem the loss tide before they manifest and usually right during.
why do we all even care about cycling anyway, new school or old? to make the best habitation zone for our animals
new cycling science sees that the old methods of focus are far too late in highlighting disease preps needed right up front in new setups nowadays. we ignore nitrite not just to offend the old schoolers who are also justified in waiting until it's zero; its because using Randy's nitrite article from 2005 we are free now to forego testing on a param that's completely neutral in our cycles and disease expression, its one less hesitation removed in the assigned start date of reef tanks and we can literally aim concerns at not killing our fish within 8 months of setup regardless of the means to establish the tank that we choose.
we can all find 20 reefs here fully cycled that report zero nitrate, does that mean they're uncycled? it means nitrate readings are probably the most inaccurate relays of all possible params, and we know biologically that to purposefully dose or import nitrifying bacteria and then see a drop to any degree of ammonia means nitrate was produced, even if we can't see it for 57 reasons. Trust is part of new cycling science, and prediction as measured for pages in links provided.
although its fun to debate and evolve reef practices/see what changes we can influence I think the heart of the matter exists in predicting changes in the hobby that bring us down before they fully manifest.
people here who track the disease forum linked on prior posts will see an absolutely shocking degree of fish loss, shocking, as a new emergence far different that 2006 or even 1986
a change has happened. Jay could not possibly be busier making work threads using other people's reefs never talking about his own reef, to stem the loss tide before they manifest and usually right during.
why do we all even care about cycling anyway, new school or old? to make the best habitation zone for our animals
new cycling science sees that the old methods of focus are far too late in highlighting disease preps needed right up front in new setups nowadays. we ignore nitrite not just to offend the old schoolers who are also justified in waiting until it's zero; its because using Randy's nitrite article from 2005 we are free now to forego testing on a param that's completely neutral in our cycles and disease expression, its one less hesitation removed in the assigned start date of reef tanks and we can literally aim concerns at not killing our fish within 8 months of setup regardless of the means to establish the tank that we choose.
we can all find 20 reefs here fully cycled that report zero nitrate, does that mean they're uncycled? it means nitrate readings are probably the most inaccurate relays of all possible params, and we know biologically that to purposefully dose or import nitrifying bacteria and then see a drop to any degree of ammonia means nitrate was produced, even if we can't see it for 57 reasons. Trust is part of new cycling science, and prediction as measured for pages in links provided.
GARRIGA
2500 Club Member
West Palm Beach Reefer
305 Reef Club
MAC of SW Florida
Rock Pool Reef Keepers
Stress testing the bio load capabilities ensures the system can handle a larger bio load and the bacteria don’t die out. Just go dormant.
Good points honestly ive always used the shrimp and wait until ammonia cycles out. Works plenty good and is standard thought and use for many including myself.
For me it wasn't until I started setting up tanks for incoming livestock, that I realized that that whole shrimp is just not necessary when I could use a fraction of that in small mysis shrimp to handle small bioloads much more quickly and efficient.
I dont think there's really a one size fits all. Probably shouldn't be either. There are other sizes we can put on that fit our particular needs in certain settings. For sure
Sorry for any confusion here but I'm not sure why anyone would overdose and stress test a system if there plan is to only stock a cpl small fish. Why not build bioload with small measured feedings if your system can handle said bioload of your particular livestock?
GARRIGA
2500 Club Member
West Palm Beach Reefer
305 Reef Club
MAC of SW Florida
Rock Pool Reef Keepers
My goal to test nitrite is because Dr Tim pointed out how that’s more likely to be a first indicator that something has gone wrong than ammonia. Who am I to question him. Plus when I cycle ammonia is quickly converted and why I depend on nitrite before adding more ammonia.
As nitrates being zero. Problem with hobby grade testing is lack of accuracy and unless we test every minute than it’s possible that all three major nutrients might at some point be present yet not when we tested. I however have never gotten zero nitrates. My readings have always shown something. My goal is to keep it under 5 ppm yet don’t get alarmed if it rises above 20 ppm.
I use API. Know it’s not as accurate as Hanna but I’m not looking for precision. I’m often looking for presence or absence or extremes. Day I add sticks then I’ll get Hanna but only for phosphates which I normally keep under 0.25 ppm which is likely alarming to most and I don’t worry because I don’t have GHA or other nastiest. Just too much base algae the type African cichlids love and only because I ran my lights too intense for too long. Crazy experiment gone wrong yet easily fixable.
Hobby might want to progress to having a more natural approach vs constant tinkering and adding new tools without grasping the ramifications of what one extreme might cause. Such as overzealous GFO use vs bacteria encouraged to do what they do. Nature found a way billions of years ago. Why we keep trying to improve on her is beyond my scope.
OP
OP
Garriga
before we go down the highly predicted six times road of types, without any proofs, start here
Stress testing the bio load capabilities ensures the system can handle a larger bio load and the bacteria don’t die out. Just go dormant.
post just one example from the entire internet where that occurred, where the cycle wasn't ready and the animals died as a result. just one
You are listing multiple risks we've already neutralized in the threads you aren't reading, so you get to source one now and the difference is I'll actually read it.
show bacteria that went dormant and needed emergence time during a ramp up cycle attempt
show any cycle started too soon, before the tank was ready and the surfaces were functional.
if you find one, its going to be an nh4 reading off of api or red sea, that's the prediction, and none will be seneye-proven, not one.
Since this is my thread/vs one you made/ I'm friendly asking to respond with a direct link vs more type, I've been fair about responding with direct example links so its not a lopsided request.
when this request is ignored I'm still not mad, I just want to show the ridiculous nature of risk based cycling where no actual proofing work is ever, ever, ever attempted. no matter how I ask, indirect or direct, there's simply only air
before we go down the highly predicted six times road of types, without any proofs, start here
Stress testing the bio load capabilities ensures the system can handle a larger bio load and the bacteria don’t die out. Just go dormant.
post just one example from the entire internet where that occurred, where the cycle wasn't ready and the animals died as a result. just one
You are listing multiple risks we've already neutralized in the threads you aren't reading, so you get to source one now and the difference is I'll actually read it.
show bacteria that went dormant and needed emergence time during a ramp up cycle attempt
show any cycle started too soon, before the tank was ready and the surfaces were functional.
if you find one, its going to be an nh4 reading off of api or red sea, that's the prediction, and none will be seneye-proven, not one.
Since this is my thread/vs one you made/ I'm friendly asking to respond with a direct link vs more type, I've been fair about responding with direct example links so its not a lopsided request.
when this request is ignored I'm still not mad, I just want to show the ridiculous nature of risk based cycling where no actual proofing work is ever, ever, ever attempted. no matter how I ask, indirect or direct, there's simply only air
GARRIGA
2500 Club Member
West Palm Beach Reefer
305 Reef Club
MAC of SW Florida
Rock Pool Reef Keepers
Because this allows one from the start to grasp the potential of their system and preload it with bacteria that don’t just go away because deprived of nutrients for a short period. Don’t know where the concept that bacteria die off. Were that the case then bottles of them wouldn’t be sold.
Plus it does provide the option to add all specimens at once to avoid individual prolong QT or aggression to set in as first inhabitants set up shop. I know for most this isn’t feasible but nice to have the option.
When I add new fish last I worry about is a spike. My filter is ready.
GARRIGA
2500 Club Member
West Palm Beach Reefer
305 Reef Club
MAC of SW Florida
Rock Pool Reef Keepers
Unlike you. I don’t listen to the internet. I read what it provides. Do my own research but first and foremost go off my own experience. Other than freshwater in the 70s when I knew less, I’ve never started a tank with fish in salt other than damsels back in the day. Yet those fish were exposed to high ammonia. Don’t recall what it was but I know much higher than 5 ppm. Nitrites weren’t tested until ammonia was cycled. By then even that wasn’t higher than 2-3 ppm.
If others believe that cycling can be had another way because of internet anecdotal data than have at it. I’m not. I’ll never expose a fish to any levels of cycling. Ammonia in a bottle too cheap. Confident in a couple of weeks my only issue are high nitrates for which I’m no longer concerned with.
- Status
Similar threads
