Freshwater cycling
- Thread starter Rbishop
- Start date
Rb- exactly how does one accomplish a fish-in cycle and maintain a 0 ammonia reading from day one. I am dying to know the answer. In fact almost every fish keeper in the world would love to know the answer.
But forget all that for a moment and explain this:
Dogmas and controversies in the handling of nitrogenous wastes: Is exogenous ammonia a growth stimulant in fish?
http://jeb.biologists.org/content/207/12/2043.short
The cost of living for freshwater fish in a warmer, more polluted world
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2001.00424.x/abstract;jsessionid=69184E6019B0B3CC3AE7E6BFA9615E2F.d02t03?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
But forget all that for a moment and explain this:
Dogmas and controversies in the handling of nitrogenous wastes: Is exogenous ammonia a growth stimulant in fish?
http://jeb.biologists.org/content/207/12/2043.short
The cost of living for freshwater fish in a warmer, more polluted world
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2486.2001.00424.x/abstract;jsessionid=69184E6019B0B3CC3AE7E6BFA9615E2F.d02t03?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
Last edited:
Rb- lets get real. You can not have it all three ways. First you claim that 0 ammonia is the target. However, O ammonia will never get a tank to cycle, a fact you should know. And then you say the way you have no ammonia during a fishless cycle is you test and get an ammonia reading and do a water change. But doesn't this mean there was not 0 ammonia? Having boxed yourself in on this one, you then say that the test results can not be trusted. So how do you know an ammonia reading of .25 or .50 ppm is real if the kits are no good. And then you say to use the same inaccurate test kit to see that ammonia is 0 after doing a water change. Talk about contradictory.
I think you need to back up and research this subject a whole lot more or else learn to misstate things a bit more cleverly so they are not so patently comtradictory. Here are a few questions you need to be able to answer if you expect folks to accept what you wrote:
1. Why do all articles on fishless cycling suggest dosing from 2-4 ppm of ammonia if it only takes a 0 reading to accomplish this process according to you?
2. What level of ammonia must be present to cause the AOB to divide/reproduce? From what you have written above that would appear to be virtually 0.
3. Since you state that ammonia test kits are notoriously inaccurate, what test method do you use or at least would you suggest to somebody who wanted to get reasonably accurate readings?
4. Why do people who run large scale fish farming operations where ammonia levels, particularly NH3 vs NH4+ can affect anywhere from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars in stocking do things in the manner I suggest and not that you do? The focus is on NH3 levels and not TAN.
5. I can show you as many studies as you need to see showing that ammonia levels are considered the growth limiting factors in AOB communities and in the nitrification cycle. Here is just one (and its a complete study not just an abstract) Growth at Low Ammonium Concentrations and Starvation Response as Potential Factors Involved in Niche Differentiation among Ammonia-Oxidizing Bacteria
http://aem.asm.org/content/68/10/4751.full
Can you show me just one that indicates AOB colonies will continue to grow no matter how limited ammonia is?
While I agree that, over the longer term, readings of 0 total ammonia on the commonly used ammonia test kits are the ideal goal. This is not the case during fish-in cycling which is a short term proposition. As long as the NH3 levels are kept very low, NH4+ and hence total ammonia is not a cause for concern.
I think you need to back up and research this subject a whole lot more or else learn to misstate things a bit more cleverly so they are not so patently comtradictory. Here are a few questions you need to be able to answer if you expect folks to accept what you wrote:
1. Why do all articles on fishless cycling suggest dosing from 2-4 ppm of ammonia if it only takes a 0 reading to accomplish this process according to you?
2. What level of ammonia must be present to cause the AOB to divide/reproduce? From what you have written above that would appear to be virtually 0.
3. Since you state that ammonia test kits are notoriously inaccurate, what test method do you use or at least would you suggest to somebody who wanted to get reasonably accurate readings?
4. Why do people who run large scale fish farming operations where ammonia levels, particularly NH3 vs NH4+ can affect anywhere from hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars in stocking do things in the manner I suggest and not that you do? The focus is on NH3 levels and not TAN.
5. I can show you as many studies as you need to see showing that ammonia levels are considered the growth limiting factors in AOB communities and in the nitrification cycle. Here is just one (and its a complete study not just an abstract) Growth at Low Ammonium Concentrations and Starvation Response as Potential Factors Involved in Niche Differentiation among Ammonia-Oxidizing Bacteria
http://aem.asm.org/content/68/10/4751.full
Can you show me just one that indicates AOB colonies will continue to grow no matter how limited ammonia is?
While I agree that, over the longer term, readings of 0 total ammonia on the commonly used ammonia test kits are the ideal goal. This is not the case during fish-in cycling which is a short term proposition. As long as the NH3 levels are kept very low, NH4+ and hence total ammonia is not a cause for concern.
don't be so literal. 0 ammonia is just a goal to attempt. it's impossible to achieve, but the point is to keep it as low as possible. you don't really need 2 ppm of ammonia at one time. If ammonia if being produced faster than the bb can consume it, they will multiply and get your tank closer to being cycled, regardless of WCs.
I never claimed "0" was the target, I stated zero was reasonable as opposed to .25-.5 ppm on a fishy cycle.
And, as you know..the test kits we have as home aquarists have a wide margin of error..even if the "test" claims "0", we know some is there... as when it "reads" .25, it really could be higher.
I also, never said ammonia was zero after a water change.
I never said it takes "0" ammonia to accomplish a cycle.
You use the kits that are there and work with them.
If you feel your method, what ever that is, feel free to submit it as an article for review and posting. At least I tried to help new folk with an uncomplicated posting, that works. You seem bent on trying to over complicate things, come in and make random posts. You are very knowledgable..and I have learned a lot from your links. But most of it isn't necessary for a person to understand the concepts and safely cycle a tank.
It is nice to see that my post keep you posting vice your normal silent behavior and griping about the site while in chat.
Have a great weekend!
And, as you know..the test kits we have as home aquarists have a wide margin of error..even if the "test" claims "0", we know some is there... as when it "reads" .25, it really could be higher.
I also, never said ammonia was zero after a water change.
I never said it takes "0" ammonia to accomplish a cycle.
You use the kits that are there and work with them.
If you feel your method, what ever that is, feel free to submit it as an article for review and posting. At least I tried to help new folk with an uncomplicated posting, that works. You seem bent on trying to over complicate things, come in and make random posts. You are very knowledgable..and I have learned a lot from your links. But most of it isn't necessary for a person to understand the concepts and safely cycle a tank.
It is nice to see that my post keep you posting vice your normal silent behavior and griping about the site while in chat.
Have a great weekend!
Rb- I am almost never in chat any more, and have not been for over a year really. Nor can I remember the last time I complained about the site either. Probably, 20 months now? I did not even visit for over six months from mid feb to mid aug 2011. And prior to that hiatus was my last complaint.
Most of what I post is due to folks making posts which tend to promulgate the urban myths of fish keeping. And yes you did indicate 0 ammonia was the goal, let me quote you.
I use both a digital TDS meter and pH meter. I also use the API test kits. I have checked the GH and KH reading from API vs my TDS readings and they pretty much confirm each other. Enough that I would say those two kits produce results acceptable for most fish keeping applications. I have tested my pH meter against the API low rang pH kit and they agree, at least in the 6-7 pH range. I have also used the ammonia kit when dosing known strength mixtures of ammonium chloride and gotten readings that conform to what the dosing should produce. So, no, I do not agree with your assessment of test kits. I rarely will use the ones for nitrite, nitrate and some of the more esoteric measurements for things like co2, O2, phosphate or iron etc. Those I will agree are likely not to be trusted.
Here are a few more urban myths that fish sites like to promulgate but which science shows not to be the case.
- Any exposure to chlorine at the levels in tap water, for any amount of time, will kill off all the established bacteria in a filter or tank.
- Prolonged exposure to chloramine at levels typically found in drinking water systems will kill off an established bacterial colony.
- Ammonia or nitrite levels of 5 ppm or higher are acceptable during a fishless cycle.
- No bottled bacteria products can possibly work to establish a cycle.
- Nitrifying bacteria can not function at a pH much below 6.5 and not below 6.0.
I spend far more time reading research papers on this subject than I spend posting on all the sites I use combined.
If you want to know what methods I use for cycling, go here and read them. This is where I send most folks who ask me in PMs. Start here and then click the link at the bottom of "A Quick Guide to Fishless Cycling" for the full in depth information http://www.drtimsaquatics.com/resources/fishless-cycling And rest assured that the day you earn your Ph.D. in microbiology, I will start to pay as much attention to what you say as I do to what Dr. Hovanec says. I do not recommend folks do a fish in cycle. If you must, then I suggest using a reliable bacterial starter mix.
Oh yes one less comment. Earlier this year I exchanged emails with another Ph.D. microbiologist and cancer researcher who is also a fish keeper. We were disussing the research in 2011 suggest Archaea not bacteria do most of the ammonia processing in tanks. One of my cristicisms of the paper was the researchers used Jungle Lab test strips to measure certain things in the tanks- besides ammonia and pH. This was his reply to that
Oh and glabe when you wrote
Most of what I post is due to folks making posts which tend to promulgate the urban myths of fish keeping. And yes you did indicate 0 ammonia was the goal, let me quote you.
And no, the test kits are not as awful as you are trying to lead folks to believe. And how is it you not only "know" that they are not accurate but that they only understate ammonia but don't overstate it?
I use both a digital TDS meter and pH meter. I also use the API test kits. I have checked the GH and KH reading from API vs my TDS readings and they pretty much confirm each other. Enough that I would say those two kits produce results acceptable for most fish keeping applications. I have tested my pH meter against the API low rang pH kit and they agree, at least in the 6-7 pH range. I have also used the ammonia kit when dosing known strength mixtures of ammonium chloride and gotten readings that conform to what the dosing should produce. So, no, I do not agree with your assessment of test kits. I rarely will use the ones for nitrite, nitrate and some of the more esoteric measurements for things like co2, O2, phosphate or iron etc. Those I will agree are likely not to be trusted.
Here are a few more urban myths that fish sites like to promulgate but which science shows not to be the case.
- Any exposure to chlorine at the levels in tap water, for any amount of time, will kill off all the established bacteria in a filter or tank.
- Prolonged exposure to chloramine at levels typically found in drinking water systems will kill off an established bacterial colony.
- Ammonia or nitrite levels of 5 ppm or higher are acceptable during a fishless cycle.
- No bottled bacteria products can possibly work to establish a cycle.
- Nitrifying bacteria can not function at a pH much below 6.5 and not below 6.0.
I spend far more time reading research papers on this subject than I spend posting on all the sites I use combined.
If you want to know what methods I use for cycling, go here and read them. This is where I send most folks who ask me in PMs. Start here and then click the link at the bottom of "A Quick Guide to Fishless Cycling" for the full in depth information http://www.drtimsaquatics.com/resources/fishless-cycling And rest assured that the day you earn your Ph.D. in microbiology, I will start to pay as much attention to what you say as I do to what Dr. Hovanec says. I do not recommend folks do a fish in cycle. If you must, then I suggest using a reliable bacterial starter mix.
Oh yes one less comment. Earlier this year I exchanged emails with another Ph.D. microbiologist and cancer researcher who is also a fish keeper. We were disussing the research in 2011 suggest Archaea not bacteria do most of the ammonia processing in tanks. One of my cristicisms of the paper was the researchers used Jungle Lab test strips to measure certain things in the tanks- besides ammonia and pH. This was his reply to that
That would suggest they are more reliable than either you or I believe. Oh and the reason they used lab grade testing equipment in the study to measure ammonia is due to the fact that the tanks involved were pretty much all well cycled and such test equimpment was needed to measure the ammonia at levels home test kits can measure. The fact is even in the best cycled of tanks there is always a minute level of ammonia. Its what the bacteria feed on. The reason the test kits can't see it is the bacteria consume it becfore it can accumulate to kit measurable levels.
Oh and glabe when you wrote
This is incorrect. Levels for ammonia or nitrite in excess of 5 ppm will inhibit a cycle and, at higher levels, they will begin killing of the bacteria. Actually, the research points to it being free nitrous acid rather than nitrite itself which inhibits the bacteria. So it is a question of how much bacteria is present and how much excess ammonia there may be.
I'm pretty sure the bottom line is that fish-less cycles are always recommended, but generally the case is that people come to the site unknowingly stuck in a fish-in cycle. From there the option is almost decided for them, unless they are willing to return the fish...
I don't see the problem in recommending people to shoot for a 0 ppm "reading" (seeing as colors could be open for interpretation) on their test kit if they do happen to cycle with fish. Priority number 1 is to minimize exposure to the fish, and given that the next color indicator is .25 ppm, I'd much rather be on the other side of that number (another, albeit older, site of Dr. Hovanec advises under .1 ppm of TOTAL ammonia). Obviously there's no amount of water changes or what have you that is going to completely negate every single molecule of ammonia for a tank 24/7, which is good news for whichever bacteria species establishes your tank.
I don't see the problem in recommending people to shoot for a 0 ppm "reading" (seeing as colors could be open for interpretation) on their test kit if they do happen to cycle with fish. Priority number 1 is to minimize exposure to the fish, and given that the next color indicator is .25 ppm, I'd much rather be on the other side of that number (another, albeit older, site of Dr. Hovanec advises under .1 ppm of TOTAL ammonia). Obviously there's no amount of water changes or what have you that is going to completely negate every single molecule of ammonia for a tank 24/7, which is good news for whichever bacteria species establishes your tank.
my quote is taken out of context or maybe i didn't imply obviously enough. I meant you can keep it near 0 the whole time with frequent water changes and be fine.
Can you link me to that site? Dr. Hovanec does maintain that in an established aquarium both ammonia and nitrite should be <.1 ppm. That is not the same thing as what level of ammonia can be tolerated by fish during cycling which should only last a matter of 10 days or so and that includes a spike up and the subsequent drop. Moreover, he is a major proponent of fishless cycling and the use of bottled bacteria. Nowhere have I read anything by him regarding fish-in cycling and specific ammonia levels. He does say this:
Moreover, he states that:
This is not quite what I have found, but then I have no lab and I am more than willing to concede his opinion on kits is more accurate than mine.
Interesting isn't it Rb- you say the ammonia kits underestimate and he says it is the reverse. I know who I believe
Somehow I don't think he is arguing for changing water when ammonia is tested at .25 ppm nor is he suggesting one let it rise to 3 ppm. But If you like I can contact him and ask for more specific numbers.
Moreover, he states that:
From http://www.fishforums.net/index.php?/topic/251936-interview-with-dr-timothy-a-hovanec/page__st__40
This is not quite what I have found, but then I have no lab and I am more than willing to concede his opinion on kits is more accurate than mine.
Interesting isn't it Rb- you say the ammonia kits underestimate and he says it is the reverse. I know who I believe
