Whether your tank is cycled or not is not a function of time alone. The readings in your tank indicate that your bacterial colonies are not established well enough to handle the bioload on the tank. I.e. not cycled completely.
And jagr, yes nitrites may not be as lethal in SW as they are in FW aquaria, but testing for them still helps to get a feel for how far the cycle has progressed. Just because it doesn't affect the fish one way or another doesn't mean its a useless test. Like the article says, in established aquaria, completely unnecessary. However, I would call this tank far from established.
Pallen I'm sorry but I have to agree with Jagr.. While I agree that Nitrites should be tested because they can tell you when something is wrong with your system, I don't agree that Nitrites are affecting anything in his system at its current levels. And his nitrates are at the upper levels of what a FO or FOWLR system should be kept at but again are not at what is considered harmful levels.
I found that article a long time ago in my readings and it is by Randal-Holmes-Farley, someone that I respect as one of the leading people in the field of Marine Studies. I can respect that you have a differing opinion but I don't agree with it because there is a study that proves otherwise. I can also point to other threads where people with more experience than I would agree with this assessment but have not been online in a while and haven't seen to this post.
Now to the original OP
88 Hatch - if your testing has always read a reading of .1 since you've had the tank running then honestly I am going to question the acuracy of your test. I am not sure which kit you are using but it may have expired. Its great that you are going to have your LPS verify your readings and was going to be my suggestion.
If I were you, I would be buying a new test kit while I was there. Like I said above you do have something happening in your system that is causing the issue. When you said that your ammonia was always 7.5 to 8 can you explain that one a little better please? Does that mean your ammonia peaked at a 7.5 to 8? What exactly how you phrased that is confusing me in that you stated that its been a solid 7.5 to 8.
The RO/DI water that you have been buying is it just the plain water or with Salt Added? Have you tested this water before adding it to your tank?
Pallen I'm sorry but I have to agree with Jagr.. While I agree that Nitrites should be tested because they can tell you when something is wrong with your system, I don't agree that Nitrites are affecting anything in his system at its current levels. And his nitrates are at the upper levels of what a FO or FOWLR system should be kept at but again are not at what is considered harmful levels.
I found that article a long time ago in my readings and it is by Randal-Holmes-Farley, someone that I respect as one of the leading people in the field of Marine Studies. I can respect that you have a differing opinion but I don't agree with it because there is a study that proves otherwise. I can also point to other threads where people with more experience than I would agree with this assessment but have not been online in a while and haven't seen to this post.
Now to the original OP
88 Hatch - if your testing has always read a reading of .1 since you've had the tank running then honestly I am going to question the acuracy of your test. I am not sure which kit you are using but it may have expired. Its great that you are going to have your LPS verify your readings and was going to be my suggestion.
If I were you, I would be buying a new test kit while I was there. Like I said above you do have something happening in your system that is causing the issue. When you said that your ammonia was always 7.5 to 8 can you explain that one a little better please? Does that mean your ammonia peaked at a 7.5 to 8? What exactly how you phrased that is confusing me in that you stated that its been a solid 7.5 to 8.
The RO/DI water that you have been buying is it just the plain water or with Salt Added? Have you tested this water before adding it to your tank?
Ya testing for nitrites is fine during the cycle but not necessary. You should be able to tell how far along you are in the cycle by just testing ammonia and nitrate.
I'm not sure what testing for silica would help but I'm not opposed to it. My tank had ALOT of diatoms but it wasn't anything a good CUC couldn't fix. Now I actually have some red slime but I don't mind it. I added 1 turbo snail and it is almost gone which is kind of disappointing in a way.
A member here at the forum asked me to stop by and comment on this thread and after reading through it I decided to because there is a bit of misunderstanding on a few things.
Ammonia & Nitrites are toxic in a marine tank. Nitrites of any amount are not good for most fish and WILL/CAN kill them. While nitrites are not as toxic as ammonia it is still very much toxic.
Part of the reason people sometimes think nitrites aren't toxic is because once an aquarium is established there is a steady amount of ammonia and nitrites in the tank and they don't fluctuate as the bacteria population is easily able to grow and shrink to take care of it. Ammonia and Nitrites are always present to some degree even when your cheap/hobby grade test kit says it's zero.
Once the tank is established as just mentioned the ammonia and nitrites are very near ZERO levels and there isn't a need to test for them any more. However, a single fish death in some aquariums can result in a downward spiral of nitrite poisoning (ammonia too) as the bacteria can't break down the nitrites as fast as it did the ammonia.
Elevated Nitrites are deadly for inverts & corals as well as many fish. High levels are almost certainly leathal for everything in the tank including damsels which people use to cycle tanks with.
Nitrates (with an A) on the other hand are not toxic to fish but still are to most inverts and corals. In reef and even fish only tanks people still watch the nitrate levels but almost always do so for the wrong reason. Nitrates and dissolved inorganic nutrients almost always go hand in hand but you can't measure the DIN with a test kit so people use nitrates as a "guide" to knowing the DIN. When you do things like add carbon or water changes it's not to lower nitrates "per say" but to lower the dissolved inorganic nutrients.
There's been mention of Randy Farley just a post or two back. Randy would surely/clearly state that both ammonia and nitrites are very much toxic at any elevated levels. They just happen to be of no concern is well established and running tanks with the proper amount of substrates.
If anyone would like clarification on anything mentioned above just let me know and I'll elaborate at length if needed. I can also point you to many works from fellow authors and experts like Fenner, Calfo, Carlson if needed.
I appreciate that you have taken the time to stop by and explain your point of view. It was I that used Randall's name because he was the person who wrote the above article that was referenced as well as this one http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-06/rhf/index.php Where he explains that yes Nitrites are toxic but not as toxic to reef aquaria including invertabrates as some might think.
Now if you are saying that the above article is incorrect I would appreciate you pointing me to other literature that disputes this study. I will not say that I have the knowledge of some of the leading experts in the marine field and can only base what I know off of their studies, however I do like to ensure that I have the correct information as I don't want to be responsible for stearing someone in the wrong direction.
i don't think silica testing is necessary, and i actually here its pretty inaccurate. Silica is
not known to lead to algae, although it is i guess a speculation. Most sand has a little silica in it, but not all that much.. pool sand is not used in SW aquariums because it is high in silica.
Its just a possibility if nothing else appears wrong with the tank that something odd like high silica levels could be leading to algae. Most tanks go through diatoms in early stages, i would say its more because of unstable ph, as well as ammonia nitrite and nitrate levels (tank is still cycling.)
A member here at the forum asked me to stop by and comment on this thread and after reading through it I decided to because there is a bit of misunderstanding on a few things.
Ammonia & Nitrites are toxic in a marine tank. Nitrites of any amount are not good for most fish and WILL/CAN kill them. While nitrites are not as toxic as ammonia it is still very much toxic.
Part of the reason people sometimes think nitrites aren't toxic is because once an aquarium is established there is a steady amount of ammonia and nitrites in the tank and they don't fluctuate as the bacteria population is easily able to grow and shrink to take care of it. Ammonia and Nitrites are always present to some degree even when your cheap/hobby grade test kit says it's zero.
Once the tank is established as just mentioned the ammonia and nitrites are very near ZERO levels and there isn't a need to test for them any more. However, a single fish death in some aquariums can result in a downward spiral of nitrite poisoning (ammonia too) as the bacteria can't break down the nitrites as fast as it did the ammonia.
Elevated Nitrites are deadly for inverts & corals as well as many fish. High levels are almost certainly leathal for everything in the tank including damsels which people use to cycle tanks with.
Nitrates (with an A) on the other hand are not toxic to fish but still are to most inverts and corals. In reef and even fish only tanks people still watch the nitrate levels but almost always do so for the wrong reason. Nitrates and dissolved inorganic nutrients almost always go hand in hand but you can't measure the DIN with a test kit so people use nitrates as a "guide" to knowing the DIN. When you do things like add carbon or water changes it's not to lower nitrates "per say" but to lower the dissolved inorganic nutrients.
There's been mention of Randy Farley just a post or two back. Randy would surely/clearly state that both ammonia and nitrites are very much toxic at any elevated levels. They just happen to be of no concern is well established and running tanks with the proper amount of substrates.
If anyone would like clarification on anything mentioned above just let me know and I'll elaborate at length if needed. I can also point you to many works from fellow authors and experts like Fenner, Calfo, Carlson if needed.
:grinno: ummmm no! Im not gonna argue about this fact anymore because people dont seem to understand it. Nitrite DOES NOT affect SW fish like it does in FW. Yes it can be toxic. But only at levels like 100ppm which would be the tank owners fault if it got that high. Nitrate on the other hand is harmful to SW inhabitants. He clearly states that in the article linked to on Page 3 but it is obvious the people who are saying nitrite is harmful never read the article.
i don't think silica testing is necessary, and i actually here its pretty inaccurate. Silica is
not known to lead to algae, although it is i guess a speculation. Most sand has a little silica in it, but not all that much.. pool sand is not used in SW aquariums because it is high in silica.
Its just a possibility if nothing else appears wrong with the tank that something odd like high silica levels could be leading to algae. Most tanks go through diatoms in early stages, i would say its more because of unstable ph, as well as ammonia nitrite and nitrate levels (tank is still cycling.)
Normally I wouldn't recommend it - I've never tested for it. I was just clutching at straws seeing as he/she seems to be having an extremely long cycle. At least it would be another thing to rule out
