Question about Fishless Cycling

[bob s]

Tricky but sucessful

I stocked a 15g tank with 4 dwarf gouramis and 10 glowlights after following directions for fishless cycle in the sites articles.

In the first 2 weeks I lost 2 of the tetras and 1 gourami altough the testing kit told me water quality remained good (no ammonia or nitrite), so I put losses down to marginal health on fish (1 of tetras was definately ill right from the start). Since then tank has been great.

It took me 5 to 6 weeks to complete cycle - I think it took a while as I wasn't regularly checking pH and had a pH crash during the cycle (didn't read instructions carefully enough!). Fortunatley I must have caught it in time and some sodium bicarbonate got me back on track.

bob

 

[Rbishop]

That doesn't make sense to me. One benefit of fishless cycling is that you can stock with a full bioload of fish immediately. If all the fish you buy (at once) come from the same LFS, then chances are, if there is disease, they already all share a risk of carrying it before they reach your tank (and hopefully your LFS has some sort of guarantee on their fish.) To add fish gradually means that you will lose some of the biofilter you worked so hard to develop, plus with each batch of fish you add there is a risk of introducing disease...which may affect your current livestock regardless of how strong their immune systems might be. To avoid that you would need to quarantine each new addition fish before adding to the main tank.

Can you give me a link on where I can buy the" bacteria level for bio-load control" test kit?

Otherwise, I'd go with a progressive increase of population.

 

[mishi8]

Can you give me a link on where I can buy the" bacteria level for bio-load control" test kit?

Otherwise, I'd go with a progressive increase of population.

That sounds like the comment of someone who hasn't done any of their own reading on fishless cycling, nor has actually gone through the process.

The level of ammonia typically used for the process (~5ppm) is more than what an adequately stocked tank of fish would produce. Thus you are developing a very large biofilter. Even if you fully stock as soon as the cycling process is complete, there will likely be a reduction of the biofilter to accommodate the levels of ammonia that the fish produce.

 

[Rbishop]

Actually, I have done both, along with extensive reading, and listening to the results of those who posted on this forum and others.

If there is any "typical" values, I see 2-3 more often than 5, but as is always the case, there are many variables.

Personally, I would rather just move extra sponges or media to a new tank and put the fish in. But I am in a position to be able to do that.

The people that I see most on here are just starting up for the first time or recovering from the first attempt that went totaly sour. I am glad they are at least trying to learn and cycle the tank vice tossing in the fish in a bowl of tap water.

They also have a tendency to overstock and not always look at compatibility. Maybe an approach to recommend bringing up the bio-load in stages would also offer them the ability to see those issues and prevent further problems.

 

[carpguy]

Maybe an approach to recommend bringing up the bio-load in stages would also offer them the ability to see those issues and prevent further problems.

Or maybe not. Maybe your incrementalist approach would encourage them to think another fish or two every couple weeks is fine so long as its been a couple weeks. Seems to me the standard fully-stocked approach encourages people to have a thought out stocking plan. But it really wasn't a psychology question.

I'm glad your in a position to move sponges over. Are they the kind with the bio-load guages in the side? Its the Newbie forum: most folks aren't in that position.

The standard model is to dose to 5 ppm and then half that after nitrites show up. You should be at 2 to 3 ppm by the end of the cycle.

Here's a link to the updated article by Chris Cow, the guy who originally came up with the fishless cycle. The short version:

"The advantages of this process over the traditional method of cycling a tank using a few small, hardy fish to get the bacterial colonies up and running all result from "front-end loading" the tank. The amount of ammonia added is far above that generated by a reasonable number of cycling fish, resulting in faster growth of the bacterial colonies, and larger colonies when you're finished. In practical terms, this means that your tank cycles faster (reports of anywhere from 10 days to 3 weeks, depending on the fish tank... compared to average of 4-6 weeks for traditionally cycled tanks), and that you can fully stock a tank when the cycle is complete. This latter point is of particular interest to keepers of african cichlids or other aggressive fish. If these fish are all added together as juveniles, they're much more tolerant of each other than if they're added in small groups after the first fish have established their territories."

After a fishless cycle it is safe to stock fully to a reasonable level, following moderate stocking plan. I did that way back when and didn't get a spike, have any problems, lose any fish. I've read dozens of accounts of people doing that and not getting spikes, having problems, losing fish.

 

[mishi8]

Personally, I would rather just move extra sponges or media to a new tank and put the fish in. But I am in a position to be able to do that.

And I prefer to move extra media over to a new tank, challenge the biofilter, and/or develop it further fishlessly before I test it with live fish.

Maybe an approach to recommend bringing up the bio-load in stages would also offer them the ability to see those issues and prevent further problems.

Why should I adopt that approach? The method works as stated. I personally have had good success with fishless cycling and then completely stocking with fish (but not overstocking.)

 

[RockabillyChick]

during a fishless cycle, you have to do water changes every few days to keep the levels low, not as low as possible, but about 1-2ppm. otherwise the cycle can stall, since too much ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate can kill off your good bacteria.

once you've got your levels dropping pretty fast, you can start spiking the ammonia a bit higher and more frequently to build up more bacteria.

 

[mishi8]

during a fishless cycle, you have to do water changes every few days to keep the levels low, not as low as possible, but about 1-2ppm. otherwise the cycle can stall, since too much ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate can kill off your good bacteria.

once you've got your levels dropping pretty fast, you can start spiking the ammonia a bit higher and more frequently to build up more bacteria.

Water changes are not necessary. If you follow the directions for fishless cycling correctly, then all should go well. It's important to halve the original dose of ammonia once you start seeing nitrites so that you don't end up with nitrites and nitrates way off the charts. Sometimes there are issues with a stalled cycle, and/or a significant drop in KH and pH and water changes can help.

 

[Rbishop]

Are they the kind with the bio-load guages in the side? Its the Newbie forum: most folks aren't in that position.

I did that way back when and didn't get a spike, have any problems, lose any fish. I've read dozens of accounts of people doing that and not getting spikes, having problems, losing fish.

No, there are not any magical gauges on the sponges, and I did acknowledge the difference of capabilities, just as there are not any absolute value indicators of bacteria levels to handle the upcoming bio-load from fish, while doing a fishless cycle. We know some fish are heavier feeders/polluters than others and that is about it. Once you have the load there, you can do before water change and after water change measurements at set intervals and estimate the load, and that is about it.

Yes, it is the Newbie forum, all the more reason to go on an incremental approach in recommendations. Mishi...I did not mean for you to adopt any one approach. What works for you and your experience is absolutely fine and wouldn't expect you to change, nor see the need to.

I've seen just as many posts on cycling from individuals not acheiving acceptable results from the fishless cycling process. The terms, "reasonable" , "thought out'', "standard", "typical", and others are open to extreme levels of definition and understanding.

If..and that is normally a large factor in the equation, they have thought out a stocking level, it only occasionally includes compatibility and adult size and characteristics of the fish.

So the incremental approach may let them see some of those issues before they just "cycle up" a tank and dump "X" load in there and now see that the 8 tiger barbs and two angels is not necessarily best for a 20 gal tank.

IF you have the experience to dump the full bio-load at once, which you may have to do on some terriotorial species, (which there are ways to avoid or minimize), then by all means do so.

Incremental is not the only way to go, but IMO/IME, with Newbies, it is.

 

[RockabillyChick]

everywhere i have read about fishless cycling says to do water changes every few days to keep the nitrites and nitrates in check and prevent a stalled cycle.