Cycling for life!
- Thread starter spanko
- Start date
ky kats
New Member
Originally Posted by PEZenfuego
http:///forum/post/3000872
It will add ammonia and WILL start a cycle. However like you said who knows what else you are adding to your tank when you do it.
I tried to do a test by cycling a freshwater tank with my urine...but I lack the control to urinate in a teaspoon.
Urine is sterial. Look it up. http://www.heartlandhealing.com/page...apy/index.html
also lol try to urinate in a cup then use the spoon.
http:///forum/post/3000872
It will add ammonia and WILL start a cycle. However like you said who knows what else you are adding to your tank when you do it.
I tried to do a test by cycling a freshwater tank with my urine...but I lack the control to urinate in a teaspoon.
Urine is sterial. Look it up. http://www.heartlandhealing.com/page...apy/index.html
also lol try to urinate in a cup then use the spoon.
pezenfuego
Active Member
Originally Posted by Ky Kats
http:///forum/post/3201050
Urine is sterial. Look it up. http://www.heartlandhealing.com/page...apy/index.html
also lol try to urinate in a cup then use the spoon.
My logic (at the time) probably had something to do with the fact that if I wouldn't put apple juice, tea, gatorade, and soda in my tank...I shouldn't put urine in it either. You're probably right if you think that no harm will be done...but seriously? Why risk it when you can just cycle by putting fish food in your tank?
http:///forum/post/3201050
Urine is sterial. Look it up. http://www.heartlandhealing.com/page...apy/index.html
also lol try to urinate in a cup then use the spoon.
My logic (at the time) probably had something to do with the fact that if I wouldn't put apple juice, tea, gatorade, and soda in my tank...I shouldn't put urine in it either. You're probably right if you think that no harm will be done...but seriously? Why risk it when you can just cycle by putting fish food in your tank?
ky kats
New Member
Originally Posted by PEZenfuego
http:///forum/post/3201066
My logic (at the time) probably had something to do with the fact that if I wouldn't put apple juice, tea, gatorade, and soda in my tank...I shouldn't put urine in it either. You're probably right if you think that no harm will be done...but seriously? Why risk it when you can just cycle by putting fish food in your tank?
True. LOL I wouldn't put in mine either.
http:///forum/post/3201066
My logic (at the time) probably had something to do with the fact that if I wouldn't put apple juice, tea, gatorade, and soda in my tank...I shouldn't put urine in it either. You're probably right if you think that no harm will be done...but seriously? Why risk it when you can just cycle by putting fish food in your tank?
True. LOL I wouldn't put in mine either.
beaslbob
Well-Known Member
Perhaps I am missing something here but I thought the process of cycling an aquarium was to prevent ammonia (and nitrItes) and carbon dioxide build up from the fish. So anything we do to cycle a tank is aimed at that so that the fish will not be stressed and survive.
What I do and recommend is to start a tank with fast growing macro algaes right from the start. Plant life like macros prefer to consume ammonia over nitrates while consuming co2 and returning oxygen. So with plant life ammonia never spikes and the co2 (as reflected in low pH) never rises to dangerous levels.
So that after a week hardy fish like FW mollies can be added with no feeding for a week. Then start very light feeding.
What happens is pH remains high, ammonia never rises, there instead may be an initiral nitrate bump up, and the fish survive and thrive. Then after a few weeks the nitrates drop down (to unmeasureable levels) as the aerobic bacteria builds up and start consuming the ammonia instead of the algae.
IME there is a totally different "cycle" when plant life is included. And one that is highly desirable.
And it may also explain why some report similiar cycles with live rock. After all if the rock is covered with algae (even corraline) the same "planted" cycle would result.
my .02
What I do and recommend is to start a tank with fast growing macro algaes right from the start. Plant life like macros prefer to consume ammonia over nitrates while consuming co2 and returning oxygen. So with plant life ammonia never spikes and the co2 (as reflected in low pH) never rises to dangerous levels.
So that after a week hardy fish like FW mollies can be added with no feeding for a week. Then start very light feeding.
What happens is pH remains high, ammonia never rises, there instead may be an initiral nitrate bump up, and the fish survive and thrive. Then after a few weeks the nitrates drop down (to unmeasureable levels) as the aerobic bacteria builds up and start consuming the ammonia instead of the algae.
IME there is a totally different "cycle" when plant life is included. And one that is highly desirable.
And it may also explain why some report similiar cycles with live rock. After all if the rock is covered with algae (even corraline) the same "planted" cycle would result.
my .02
spanko
Active Member
Originally Posted by beaslbob
http:///forum/post/3201413
Perhaps I am missing something here but I thought the process of cycling an aquarium was to prevent ammonia (and nitrItes) and carbon dioxide build up from the fish. So anything we do to cycle a tank is aimed at that so that the fish will not be stressed and survive..........
my .02
Saying the same thing here I think. The discussion topic I wanted to start was one where on the original setup some use a soft cycling technique, much like you may be saying here. Then some just go all out and, even when using live rock, let the ammonia go as high as it will. The soft cycling being a way to keep the ammonia low and to save as much life as possible that may come with the live rock. I can see the benefit of using macro algae in the beginning stages of a tank but I don't know, only because I am ignorant of what the facts are, if macro algae are a good enough vehicle to keep ammonia from spiking over .5.
Any thoughts here beaslbob?
http:///forum/post/3201413
Perhaps I am missing something here but I thought the process of cycling an aquarium was to prevent ammonia (and nitrItes) and carbon dioxide build up from the fish. So anything we do to cycle a tank is aimed at that so that the fish will not be stressed and survive..........
my .02
Saying the same thing here I think. The discussion topic I wanted to start was one where on the original setup some use a soft cycling technique, much like you may be saying here. Then some just go all out and, even when using live rock, let the ammonia go as high as it will. The soft cycling being a way to keep the ammonia low and to save as much life as possible that may come with the live rock. I can see the benefit of using macro algae in the beginning stages of a tank but I don't know, only because I am ignorant of what the facts are, if macro algae are a good enough vehicle to keep ammonia from spiking over .5.
Any thoughts here beaslbob?
beaslbob
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/3201419
Saying the same thing here I think. The discussion topic I wanted to start was one where on the original setup some use a soft cycling technique, much like you may be saying here. Then some just go all out and, even when using live rock, let the ammonia go as high as it will. The soft cycling being a way to keep the ammonia low and to save as much life as possible that may come with the live rock. I can see the benefit of using macro algae in the beginning stages of a tank but I don't know, only because I am ignorant of what the facts are, if macro algae are a good enough vehicle to keep ammonia from spiking over .5.
Any thoughts here beaslbob?
I agree.
If you start the tank with macro algaes and get them established, ammonia will be hard pressed to hit .5 ppm.
Even if you have the "sexual" event so what? There are no fish or corals to kill. And in a slightly longer amount of time the macros will reestablish themselves or new macros will feed off the event.
Plus thriving macros are very good visual indication the tank is healthy.
my .02
http:///forum/post/3201419
Saying the same thing here I think. The discussion topic I wanted to start was one where on the original setup some use a soft cycling technique, much like you may be saying here. Then some just go all out and, even when using live rock, let the ammonia go as high as it will. The soft cycling being a way to keep the ammonia low and to save as much life as possible that may come with the live rock. I can see the benefit of using macro algae in the beginning stages of a tank but I don't know, only because I am ignorant of what the facts are, if macro algae are a good enough vehicle to keep ammonia from spiking over .5.
Any thoughts here beaslbob?
I agree.
If you start the tank with macro algaes and get them established, ammonia will be hard pressed to hit .5 ppm.
Even if you have the "sexual" event so what? There are no fish or corals to kill. And in a slightly longer amount of time the macros will reestablish themselves or new macros will feed off the event.
Plus thriving macros are very good visual indication the tank is healthy.
my .02
florida joe
Well-Known Member
Henry with those legs of yours Cycling for life is definitely out of the question
beaslbob
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/3201430
Henry with those legs of yours Cycling for life is definitely out of the question
+1
me 2
http:///forum/post/3201430
Henry with those legs of yours Cycling for life is definitely out of the question
+1
me 2
spanko
Active Member
Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/3201430
Henry with those legs of yours Cycling for life is definitely out of the question
And a Happy New Year to you too my friend!!
http:///forum/post/3201430
Henry with those legs of yours Cycling for life is definitely out of the question
bang guy
Moderator
Just an observation here and providing food for thought. I'm going to avoid Beaslbob's Macroalgae thought, it's perfectly valid but incorporating it into my bacteria thought can quickly become confusing. For now let's just consider using only bacteria to process Ammonia into Nitrite and Nitrite into Nitrate.
Nitrifying bacteria are mostly only limited by surface area and food. Any reef tank with 1/2" or more of sand is going to have 10X more surface area than will ever be required to grow enough bacteria to process the ammonia from even an overstocked amount of livestock.
So, the limiting factor is usually food (Ammonia/Nitrite). When Ammonia is at 0.0ppm the bacteria present are consuming all available ammonia and there fore are limited by food. The population cannot rapidly increase because there is not enough food to feed a larger population.
If ammonia is reading 0.25ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population.
If ammonia is at 2.0ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population. They will not reproduce any faster than at the lower ammonia level of 0.25ppm. As long as ammonia does not register 0.0ppm they are not limited by food.
Nitrifying bacteria are mostly only limited by surface area and food. Any reef tank with 1/2" or more of sand is going to have 10X more surface area than will ever be required to grow enough bacteria to process the ammonia from even an overstocked amount of livestock.
So, the limiting factor is usually food (Ammonia/Nitrite). When Ammonia is at 0.0ppm the bacteria present are consuming all available ammonia and there fore are limited by food. The population cannot rapidly increase because there is not enough food to feed a larger population.
If ammonia is reading 0.25ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population.
If ammonia is at 2.0ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population. They will not reproduce any faster than at the lower ammonia level of 0.25ppm. As long as ammonia does not register 0.0ppm they are not limited by food.
florida joe
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by spanko
http:///forum/post/3201477
And a Happy New Year to you too my friend!!
Ditto
http:///forum/post/3201477
Ditto
pezenfuego
Active Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/3201501
Just an observation here and providing food for thought. I'm going to avoid Beaslbob's Macroalgae thought, it's perfectly valid but incorporating it into my bacteria thought can quickly become confusing. For now let's just consider using only bacteria to process Ammonia into Nitrite and Nitrite into Nitrate.
Nitrifying bacteria are mostly only limited by surface area and food. Any reef tank with 1/2" or more of sand is going to have 10X more surface area than will ever be required to grow enough bacteria to process the ammonia from even an overstocked amount of livestock.
So, the limiting factor is usually food (Ammonia/Nitrite). When Ammonia is at 0.0ppm the bacteria present are consuming all available ammonia and there fore are limited by food. The population cannot rapidly increase because there is not enough food to feed a larger population.
If ammonia is reading 0.25ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population.
If ammonia is at 2.0ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population. They will not reproduce any faster than at the lower ammonia level of 0.25ppm. As long as ammonia does not register 0.0ppm they are not limited by food.
You're right. More ammonia does not increase the rate by which the cells undergo cell division. More ammonia DOES increase the rate at which certain organisms die.
http:///forum/post/3201501
Just an observation here and providing food for thought. I'm going to avoid Beaslbob's Macroalgae thought, it's perfectly valid but incorporating it into my bacteria thought can quickly become confusing. For now let's just consider using only bacteria to process Ammonia into Nitrite and Nitrite into Nitrate.
Nitrifying bacteria are mostly only limited by surface area and food. Any reef tank with 1/2" or more of sand is going to have 10X more surface area than will ever be required to grow enough bacteria to process the ammonia from even an overstocked amount of livestock.
So, the limiting factor is usually food (Ammonia/Nitrite). When Ammonia is at 0.0ppm the bacteria present are consuming all available ammonia and there fore are limited by food. The population cannot rapidly increase because there is not enough food to feed a larger population.
If ammonia is reading 0.25ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population.
If ammonia is at 2.0ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population. They will not reproduce any faster than at the lower ammonia level of 0.25ppm. As long as ammonia does not register 0.0ppm they are not limited by food.
You're right. More ammonia does not increase the rate by which the cells undergo cell division. More ammonia DOES increase the rate at which certain organisms die.
spanko
Active Member
Originally Posted by Bang Guy
http:///forum/post/3201501
Just an observation here and providing food for thought. I'm going to avoid Beaslbob's Macroalgae thought, it's perfectly valid but incorporating it into my bacteria thought can quickly become confusing. For now let's just consider using only bacteria to process Ammonia into Nitrite and Nitrite into Nitrate.
Nitrifying bacteria are mostly only limited by surface area and food. Any reef tank with 1/2" or more of sand is going to have 10X more surface area than will ever be required to grow enough bacteria to process the ammonia from even an overstocked amount of livestock.
So, the limiting factor is usually food (Ammonia/Nitrite). When Ammonia is at 0.0ppm the bacteria present are consuming all available ammonia and there fore are limited by food. The population cannot rapidly increase because there is not enough food to feed a larger population.
If ammonia is reading 0.25ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population.
If ammonia is at 2.0ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population. They will not reproduce any faster than at the lower ammonia level of 0.25ppm. As long as ammonia does not register 0.0ppm they are not limited by food.
Don't know if you are addressing my comments or not, but yes I agree completely with your statements above. However the original thread was started to give options to the new aquarist. To help to decide on how much time and energy could be should be put into cycling a tank with live rock that may have much more life on it, than something like base rock or already cured rock that may or may not have the same amount of life. The option being of course to try to save as much life as possible by limiting the rise of ammonia to less than .5.
I think you know where I was going here Bang but just needed to make sure.
http:///forum/post/3201501
Just an observation here and providing food for thought. I'm going to avoid Beaslbob's Macroalgae thought, it's perfectly valid but incorporating it into my bacteria thought can quickly become confusing. For now let's just consider using only bacteria to process Ammonia into Nitrite and Nitrite into Nitrate.
Nitrifying bacteria are mostly only limited by surface area and food. Any reef tank with 1/2" or more of sand is going to have 10X more surface area than will ever be required to grow enough bacteria to process the ammonia from even an overstocked amount of livestock.
So, the limiting factor is usually food (Ammonia/Nitrite). When Ammonia is at 0.0ppm the bacteria present are consuming all available ammonia and there fore are limited by food. The population cannot rapidly increase because there is not enough food to feed a larger population.
If ammonia is reading 0.25ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population.
If ammonia is at 2.0ppm then the bacteria are free to reproduce, there is abundant ammonia to feed a growing population. They will not reproduce any faster than at the lower ammonia level of 0.25ppm. As long as ammonia does not register 0.0ppm they are not limited by food.
Don't know if you are addressing my comments or not, but yes I agree completely with your statements above. However the original thread was started to give options to the new aquarist. To help to decide on how much time and energy could be should be put into cycling a tank with live rock that may have much more life on it, than something like base rock or already cured rock that may or may not have the same amount of life. The option being of course to try to save as much life as possible by limiting the rise of ammonia to less than .5.
I think you know where I was going here Bang but just needed to make sure.
florida joe
Well-Known Member
we need to make sure we are not confusing rate of growth with amount of growth
meowzer
Moderator
Originally Posted by florida joe
http:///forum/post/3201690
we need to make sure we are not confusing rate of growth with amount of growth
And we sure do not want to confuse it with length of growth
http:///forum/post/3201690
we need to make sure we are not confusing rate of growth with amount of growth
And we sure do not want to confuse it with length of growth
florida joe
Well-Known Member
now as you and I know your main concern is not length but thickness. We do have an obligation to fill now don't we
florida joe
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by rlablan
http:///forum/post/3201757
OMFG... earmuffs!!
Or, eye-muffs rather...
UMMM and you do drive stick well
http:///forum/post/3201757
OMFG... earmuffs!!
Or, eye-muffs rather...
UMMM and you do drive stick well