# Yoghurt and cycling



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

Hey folks

I am sorry if this is in the wrong place, but I wanted to confirm whether yoghurt (which I used to paint on some wood to grow moss) is going to affect bacterial growth in my filter? I'm cycling with a good chunk of mature media but nothings moving and I wondered if the yoghurt.might be doing something to affect it?

Any advice gratefully received


----------



## Edvet (26 Feb 2014)

I don't expect any measurable influence (except when you use 1 lit in a gallon size tank)


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

Thanks for the reassurance! I spose I'll just have to be patient


----------



## Fern (26 Feb 2014)

Hi 
I would think that the yogurt method would probably only work well in a DSM set up, so putting in aquarium filled with water probably wouldn't be worth doing. But having said that, I can't see the yogurt doing anything bad to the water, as it would be so dilute.



brumbird said:


> I'm cycling with a good chunk of mature media but nothings moving


Can you be more specific, what's not moving?

Fern


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

Sorry I have been very vague! I used the yoghurt for a DSM technique but I only left it a week before I put it in the tank. 
The nitrogen results aren't moving ie ammonia isn't going down etc. I've just got to be patient!


----------



## Fern (26 Feb 2014)

Ah ok! 
You say ammonia isn't going down, and nitrogen results aren't moving, are you testing with a kit? If you are I would just forget the results, stop testing, and continue with large daily water changes. Are you adding ammonia to cycle? If you are I would forget that too, I'm assuming you don't have any livestock yet, and just have plants, let the plants do their job


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

I'm using the fishless cycling technique using ammonia and testing - how do you cycle a tank without ammonia? Will it still grow sufficient  numbers of nitrosomona and nitrobacter to deal with a fully.stocked tank?


----------



## Andy D (26 Feb 2014)

Brumbird, things work a little differently over here with regards to cycling. I can provide further details later when I am not at work and trying to sneek using these forums!


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

OK thanks Andy


----------



## Iain Sutherland (26 Feb 2014)

hey, below is a post by clive in another thread that will explain things a little...

quote - 
Well get ready for more surprises:

Ammonia is toxic to bacteria, even the bacteria that eat ammonia. Adding ammonia to your tank is like feeding a baby a drink of water from a fire hose. It's just too much. Adding ammonia kills more bacteria that it propogates. It especially is toxic to the bacteria that DO NOT eat ammonia. The problem is that there are many more of_those_ that are just as important to the health of your tank as the ammonia eaters which are wiped out when you add too much ammonia to the tank. So just because there is a perceived increase in Nitrosomonas, it does not mean that you are doing the tank any good.

Just as a reality check, can you see this product?




Well it has ammonia and we use it to kill bacteria on the floors and kitchen surfaces. It's pretty effective. That's probably why you have it under your sink, remember? So don't be quick to jump on the ammonia bandwagon. It's a toxin and it doesn't help any more than simply adding nothing at all.

Secondly, Nitrosomonas/Nitrobacter are in a class of organism s called "che·mo·au·to·trophs" which means that they are able to make their own food from different inorganic substances, like CO2, for example. Because there are varied substances that they can use, they are NOT dependent on only ammonia. They simply switch to a new source of nutrition when the primary nutrient is in short supply,

Thirdly, there is always ammonia being produced in the tank. Any body of water will automatically develop bacterial colonies, even if there is nothing in it at the beginning. Residue, spores and precipitates from the air settle into the water and there develops a culture in the body of water whether we want to or not. Why do you think stagnant pools of water have an odor? The odor is produced by bacteria.

Even better is if you plant your tank at startup with lots of plants. All the bits and pieces that fall of and decay results in small amounts of ammonia which build in concentration naturally and at a proper pace. If you didn't have any plants you could just toss in some flake food and let it go at that. whatever animals or vegetable matter dies in the water immediately produces ammonia, so in reality Nitrosomonas never runs out of ammonia. In 6-8 weeks the tank can be considered mature and stable.

Fourthly, ammonia in the tank has to be converted to NO2/NO3 which, if there is a population of Nitrosomonas, will crash the Oxygen availability in the water. The bacteria require more Oxygen than ammonia, that's for sure. So sudden population rises ssuffocate the tank, which then kills bacteria because these guys are aerobic. When the tank goes into Oxygen debt those species we are trying to propagate fail at the expense of toxic anaerobic species, further deteriorating the health of the tank. People can't see that because they are measuring useless information like NO3 and they do not generally have tools to measure the things that really matter, like Oxygen or bacteria population demographics.

So nobody needs to dump ammonia into their tank, which is actually counter productive. People all over The Matrix turn their tanks into toxic waste dump sites and they think they are doing the right thing. Later they have plant or fish problems that developed from these procedures but they do not trace the problems back to this practice of pollution.

Change you water frequently to help control Oxygen levels, feed you plants with nutrition and ample CO2, keep the tank clean BE PATIENT and in a short will the tank will develop the necessary populations and diversity required to keep the tank healthy.

Cheers,


----------



## Andy D (26 Feb 2014)

Yeah that was one of the posts I have a link to... 

Along with the issues with test kits etc

But I think we should also be clear that we are dealing with planted tanks over here and usually well planted tanks.


----------



## Fern (26 Feb 2014)

Well Brumbird, basically plants consume ammonia and nitrate as nitrogen source, there is no need to build up nitrifying bacteria as long as there are enough plants growing well from the start. You can choose quick growing plants that will do their job and can be replaced with something else later, if you wish.
Cycling is all about building up “something” that can prevent deadly levels of ammonia and nitrites in the water, plants do this very well  This then allows you to add fish, a small shoal, and build up gradually if you wish. With time, there will always be a natural build-up of bacteria in the filter with or without our help
You just have to make sure you do large daily water changes for a week or too, and then every few days, then a couple of times a week, keep lighting lowish, and feed your plants!

Ah, beaten to it while eating lunch lol


----------



## Rob P (26 Feb 2014)

Andy D said:


> Brumbird, things work a little differently over here with regards to cycling. I can provide further details later when I am not at work and trying to sneek using these forums!


 
LOL, it's a struggle switching between the two sites isn't it!!


----------



## Andy D (26 Feb 2014)

Rob P said:


> LOL, it's a struggle switching between the two sites isn't it!!


 
Yep. 

I accpet what Clive and others say on cycling (and again I think we have to remember that this is a forum dedicated to planted tanks) but can you imagine trying to suggest this on PFK!

Let alone dumping the test kits.


----------



## Rob P (26 Feb 2014)

Yes I know mate, remind me what a test kit is? lol


----------



## ian_m (26 Feb 2014)

Yet another falls for the "fishless cycling" matrix myth and wonder why things don't work, them nicely sterilising their tanks adding ammonia.

&quot;Fishless&quot; cycling | The Skeptical Aquarist

Years ago (pre-1999) I remember reading about people would put pots of garden soil in the tank to provide a bacterial start or even leave their washed gravel/sand outside in a bucket for a week or two before putting in the tank, in order to "seed" the filters.


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

Well.... this approach feels like a sort of gentler, more elegant refinement of the basic principle. People on this site are as much gardeners as pet owners, if not more, so it stands to reason that the focus will be different.

I think PFKs approach is to hammer home the basics and get peoples tanks ready for fish asap, there are still so many fish keepers out there who don't know about any of this and I get the impression that this is their priority on the PFK forum


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

["ian_m, post: 337694, member: 8584"]Yet another falls for the "fishless cycling" matrix myth and wonder why things don't work, them nicely sterilising their tanks adding ammonia.

&quot;Fishless&quot; cycling | The Skeptical Aquarist

Years ago (pre-1999) I remember reading about people would put pots of garden soil in the tank to provide a bacterial start or even leave their washed gravel/sand outside in a bucket for a week or two before putting in the tank, in order to "seed" the filters.[/quote]

I used ammonia in my first tank and have not experienced any problems.... what sort of thing are we talking about?

Tanks


----------



## ian_m (26 Feb 2014)

brumbird said:


> I used ammonia in my first tank and have not experienced any problems.... what sort of thing are we talking about?


People pile in ammonia and wonder why they have continuous and repeated nitrite issues. It is because the ammonia is killing the very bacteria that they are trying to grow.

Much better ways are :-
- Be patient let it all happen naturally, maybe 6 weeks.
- Be not so patient, but with frequent water changes.
- Use 2nd hand substrate and/or filter media.


----------



## ivydree (26 Feb 2014)

Please don't let Ceg see this thread... He'll just go mad!


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

Who is Ceg and why would this make them mad?


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

I haven't had any problems with nitrites. Which bacteria does ammonia kill that are necessary for a.healthy tank? Looks like my ammonia may have inadvertently sorted out any issues caused by the yoghurt anyway....


----------



## Nathaniel Whiteside (26 Feb 2014)

brumbird said:


> Who is Ceg and why would this make them mad?



...an unstoppable force of nature, the likes of which has never been seen before.


----------



## Andy D (26 Feb 2014)

brumbird said:


> Who is Ceg and why would this make them mad?



Who indeed?!


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

Nathaniel Whiteside post: 337721 said:
			
		

> ...an unstoppable force of nature, the likes of which has never been seen before.


Well that sounds exciting, i hope Ceg does see the post


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

Where can I find more information on this? My fish are going to produce ammonia so I am guessing its to do with the concentration of ammonia.


----------



## MirandaB (26 Feb 2014)

brumbird said:


> Who is Ceg and why would this make them mad?


Ceg is the UKAPS equivalent of The Stig


----------



## brumbird (26 Feb 2014)

Hello stranger! I'm so uncool - is that a Top Gear reference?


----------



## MirandaB (26 Feb 2014)

Hi there BB  it is kind of


----------



## ceg4048 (27 Feb 2014)

I also moonlight as Morpheus.

I can only show you the door Neo. _You _must walk through it.

Cheers,


----------



## James O (27 Feb 2014)

*Boom* there he is!

In reference to the thread title 'yoghurt and cycling' - unless you are severely lactose intolerant I see no issue taking a ride after eating a muller light


----------



## brumbird (27 Feb 2014)

ceg4048 said:
			
		

> I also moonlight as Morpheus.
> 
> I can only show you the door Neo. _You _must walk through it.
> 
> Cheers,


My mind is open, but I do need details to understand it properly


----------



## Fern (27 Feb 2014)

Why has this method of adding ammonia to ermmm, 'kick start' the cycling process become to be used? Maybe I can answer my own question to what I think maybe why, but would like some other feed back.
I'm guessing it was developed so that an aquarium could be 'fully stocked' after cycling with ammonia, because the species of fish that someone wanted to have was territorial, so was an aid to help with aggression because a good number of these fish should be introduced all at the same time? eg Old World Cichlids?
Now, I don't know very much about these fish, but I understand that they have an appetite for plants and digging around in the substrate, so using a planted tank set up cycle would be difficult to achieve?
Fern


----------



## ian_m (27 Feb 2014)

Fern said:


> Why has this method of adding ammonia to ermmm, 'kick start' the cycling process become to be used?


It was only done to supposedly speed up tank cycling, you could put fish in a new tank after a couple of weeks rather than just being patient for 6 weeks odd. There are much better and more reliable ways to achieve suitable tanks than poisoning things with ammonia.


----------



## Fern (27 Feb 2014)

ian_m said:


> There are much better and more reliable ways to achieve suitable tanks than poisoning things with ammonia



I agree, my aim has always been to have a healthy aquarium firstly with plants, get that right, then add my choice of fish, I'm only putting my plants in danger of dying, not my fish


----------



## brumbird (27 Feb 2014)

Fern you might be right about the reason for the ammonia method becoming popular, as you do end up with bacterial colonies that are.able to process a fully stocked tank. It doesn't just take a fortnight though Ian - mine took 5 weeks.

In terms of the criticisms of the method, I have the following questions:

Why is ammonia from a bottle different from ammonia produced by the fish, and bacterial mineralisation of dead matter? its chemically the same so I don't get it. I understand that the concentration of ammonia may be critical to whether it is lethal to certain types of bacteria (particularly nitrobacters but I can't find any empirical support for that claim), but that doesn't mean it can't be used safely with the right dosage (same as CO2 can be lethal hence drop checkers)

How do you know when its safe to add fish?


----------



## Fern (27 Feb 2014)

My first ever aquarium. Juwel Rio 180l | UK Aquatic Plant Society

Have a read of this brumbird, might help answer your questions


----------



## brumbird (27 Feb 2014)

OK I've read some of that thread (its mammoth!) And its just raising an absolute tonne of questions!

First though I need to clear up something else from this thread that was bugging me. Where Clive has been quoted further up, he suggests that nitrifying bacteria are chemoautotrophs, and that this means they can use things like CO2 INSTEAD OF ammonia or nitrite. I thought they required CO2 AS WELL AS ammonia and nitrite?? CO2 is their only source of carbon for growth (fixed via the Calvin cycle, god my A level biology finally comes in handy!) Also, as they are chemolithoautotrophs (which can only use inorganic matter as an energy source) I just don't get why bottled ammonia is being viewed as more poisonous than the inorganic result of organic decay and metabolism.

 Onto the journal!
Why do the vast majority of people cycling their tanks on the PFK forum experience the same pattern of results from their test kits whilst cycling? Surely if they are wildly inaccurate there would be no correlatiin between one persons results and another's. Yet the results follow a pattern which can be predicted and explained by the nitrogen cycle. 

Will the tank be automatically ready for fish after 8 weeks? Is there no equation which takes into account plant mass/fish mass/water volume?

If you replace all this water don't you remove the bacteria's food source, making the build up of the relevant colonies take even longer?


----------



## dw1305 (27 Feb 2014)

Hi all, 





brumbird said:


> I just don't get why bottled ammonia is being viewed as more poisonous than the inorganic result of organic decay and metabolism.


 It isn't any real difference, in solution they are both NH3/NH4+ (dependent upon pH). The main difference is between the small amounts that are continually diffusing from the bioload (shrimp/fish/snails etc), and adding ~ 5 ppm in one hit. 

The problem really comes with the whole concept of "cycling", it is based upon the idea that all the nitrifying bacteria are in the filter media in the filter and that if they don't get a constant supply of ammonia they will all die, this is an extremely dubious premise at best, and as soon as you add plants and substrate it is virtually irrelevant.  You also have to factor in that "plant/microbe systems" are about an order of magnitude more efficient than "microbe alone" systems in processing ammonia.

In reality if we have plants we just need to ensure that we have high levels of dissolved oxygen and some supply of carbon (usually as HCO3-). Plants (and particularly those with emergent stems or floating leaves) are a "_win,win, win_" scenario, they add dissolved oxygen (even outside of the photo-period, and into the substrate via the root rhizosphere), they preferentially take up ammonia (and NO2/NO3), and they provide surfaces for nitrification.

Environmental scientists, the waste water and aquaculture industries etc. don't talk about cycling at all, they are interested in "Biochemical Oxygen Demand" (BOD) <Biochemical oxygen demand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia> & <Carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia>. As a _"rule of thumb"_ in any system as long as the oxygen supply exceeds the oxygen demand then the system won't crash. 

I wrote this for the keepers of fish with high oxygen demand a few year ago, but it is relevant to all fish keeping <plecoplanet: Aeration and dissolved oxygen in the aquarium>.

cheers Darrel


----------



## brumbird (27 Feb 2014)

Thank you for the reply Darrel. I've just had a skim through but.will definitely reading more thoroughly later - are you essentially saying then that oxygen is the limiting factor in the growth of all the beneficial organisms in the tank?


----------



## dw1305 (27 Feb 2014)

Hi all, 





brumbird said:


> are you essentially saying then that oxygen is the limiting factor in the growth of all the beneficial organisms in the tank?


 Pretty much in terms of biological filtration, if you look on a lot of marine forums they've gone away from wet and dry trickle filters because they are "_*nitrate factories*_". All this really means is that because these filters have a huge gas exchange surface, and the filter media remains aerobic, you can deal with a huge bioload.  

All aerobic is definitely a winner for me.

A lot of discussion on the more expensive filter media relates to them potentially supporting both aerobic and anaerobic within varying sized pores. I can't see any point to this, all it means is that a small increase in your bioload will cause all the filter media to become de-oxygenated, with catastrophic results. 

Have a look at "Greg's Peas" posts in this thread <Alfagrog for reducing Nitrates? | UK Aquatic Plant Society>.

cheers Darrel


----------



## brumbird (27 Feb 2014)

OK I've read it all properly now, had to make some notes to keep myself on track 

I am glad to have read an explanation for keeping the tank clean and doing water changes - at first I didn't get the link between BOD and nitrification but the last article spelled it out very well.


----------



## brumbird (27 Feb 2014)

dw1305 said:


> A lot of discussion on the more expensive filter media relates to them potentially supporting both aerobic and anaerobic within varying sized pores. I can't see any point to this, all it means is that a small increase in your bioload will cause all the filter media to become de-oxygenated, with catastrophic results.



I got everything else but this  don't worry if you are sick of explaining everything to me, I get it off my toddler (why, why, but why mommy...!)

I've seen a video about the anaerobic nitrate munching bacteria, can't say it interests me though as I've barely registered nitrates in my tank since I completed the cycle (I know you guys don't like test kits but hear my point) because its a jungle full of elodea frogbit and java fern


----------



## dw1305 (27 Feb 2014)

Hi all, 





> I got everything else but this


 No problem, simple enough to explain. The bacterial conversion of NH3 to NO2, and eventually NO3, is aerobic and can only occur in the presence of oxygen (you can see this from the formula, you've gone from three hydrogen atoms to three oxygen atoms and the definition of an acid is "a H+ ion donor", so this process will also reduce pH, more description here <http://www.skepticalaquarist.com/bioacidification>). 

Nitrate is the end product of this aerobic process, but you can potentially out-gas the nitrogen as N2 gas, this is an anaerobic (bacterial) process.

It is theoretically possible for both aerobic and anaerobic processes to take place in the same filter. The sellers of Siporax etc will tell you that their media is optimal because as "mature biofilm" develops on it both processes will occur. Nitrification will happen in the outer skin of bacteria, and as they deplete the oxygen, deeper in the pores  anaerobic denitrification happens. This is potentially true, but the "_devil is in the detail", _because we have to hit the "sweet point" where both processes can occur. If you keep all the filter media aerobic this balancing act becomes irrelevant, we won't out gas our NO3 as N2, but we don't need to, we have plants to mop the NO3 up. 





> because its a jungle full of elodea frogbit and java fern


 Perfect.

cheers Darrel


----------



## brumbird (27 Feb 2014)

Thanks so much! The other bit I didn't get was how the small increase in bio load would crash the filter....?


----------



## dw1305 (27 Feb 2014)

Hi all, 


> The other bit I didn't get was how the small increase in bio load would crash the filter....?


 It is back to the balance again, because for both aerobic and anerobic processes to occur in the filter you need to be at the sweet spot where dissolved oxygen is being depleted to a fairly low level. If flow drops, or you add more ammonia (your fish have grown, you've added another fish, you've added some medication, fed sweet potato, had a dead fish etc) the BOD will rise and ammonia will start to pass through the filter untreated, and build up in the tank water. Usually low dissolved oxygen levels start killing the livestock, but even the most tolerant fish will eventually fall victim to the rising ammonia levels which adds more ammonia and you enter a positive feedback loop of de-oxygenation, rising ammonia and death.

The difference in an aerobic system is that in the same circumstances you need to add a large amount of ammonia to overwhelm the system. If you have plants even better, more ammonia stimulates plant growth, and greater plant growth takes up more ammonia. 

It is a much more stable and resilient system.

cheers Darrel


----------



## brumbird (28 Feb 2014)

Darrel you are very kind to help me understand all this, thank you.


----------

