What should I be dosing?

[Andy D]

I will definitely think about a journal, feel like too much of a novice to be putting my pics up.next to the likes of some of the others though 🙂

It will be worth it. We have all got to start somewhere right? I am in the same position in trying to get to grips with doing a decent planted tank. Have a look at Rob P's journal. He was in a very similar position and look how he is doing now.

What i dont get is why the naturally released ammonia route is being offered as a better solution to providing a source of ammonia, seeing as it is this very process that exerts an increased BOD on the system (via heterotrophic bacteria processing waste) and sucking the oxygen out of the tank.

As Clive explained to me we are trying to create a mature and stable environment. This takes 6-8 weeks. There is no way to speed this up as it takes time for all of the necessary bacteria populations to grow. The problem we have (following the programming from The Matrix 🙂 ) is that we assume that once our tanks are able to process ammonia and nitrite in 12 hours we consider the tank to be cycled and ready for fish. A cycled tank is not the same as a mature tank.

If we let the process occur naturally without adding ammonia then ALL (so not just those processing ammonia and nitrite) of the necessary bacteria/organisms needed for a mature and stable tank would have grown to sufficient numbers.

If we add ammonia we typically dose to between 1ppm and 4ppm and all in one hit. In terms of toxicity levels this is massive. Whilst we can agree that the bacteria that process ammonia and nitrite still develop, that level of ammonia kills the other bacteria/organisms that go towards creating a mature environment. Therefore once we consider a tank to be cycled it is far from mature and stable.

I suppose you could dose really low levels of ammonia but this would still not be necessary in a planted tank (not sure about a fully non-planted tank mind you, what do the bacteria feed on?) for a few reasons. First of all it would be very hard to measure and get the dose right. Secondly, the tank is being hit with ammonia in big dose whereas this would happen over time as a plant leaf etc decays. Thirdly if we add ammonia on top of the natural supply we are back up to high toxicity levels again.

How often do we read about fish losses on PFK after a fishless cycle and no-one can explain why? Compare that to this forum.

(Ps, this all assume my understanding is correct so I hope to be corrected if I am wrong)

🙂

 

[brumbird]

Thank you for the supportive words - maybe I will do a journal - I do feel that my understanding will come on much quicker by asking questions on this forum.

I understand what you are saying Andy, but I still want to know what these other crucial bacteria are, and why so many tanks do absolutely fine (like mine did) when only cycled but not mature.

I'm sorry if it frustrates anyone that I talk about measurable factors but there is quite a lot of precise science quoted on this forum, yet when it comes to 'maturing' a tank it suddenly seems to become vague and magical. 6-8 weeks, regardless of substrate, planting density, water volume, plant growth, plant death/decay. Surely the addition of huge amounts of CO2 affects the survival anything aerobic??

And then when the 6-8 weeks is up - what stocking level is advised?

I definitely need a journal for all these questions 🙂

 

[harryH]

Hi Brumbird,

Well! someone like you with all your questions (very sensible ones may I add) can't fail to succeed

This is one great site .. a fountain of knowledge and has made even an old bloke like me realise just how much we are all still learning. I can honestly say the planted tank hobby is almost unrecognisable from what it was 25 years or so ago, having new methods, new plants, modern equipment. Just stick at it, keep asking the question and enjoy. We are all learning and all helping each other.

 

[brumbird]

Thank you Harry, I find this stuff absolutely fascinating.

If its anything like PFK then I'm sure my questions have been asked before - if anyone could direct me to any good threads I would be grateful - my searches keep going off on tangents as I click on something, it turns out not to be relevant to new tanks but I get engrossed and lose another half an hour 🙂

 

[ceg4048]

there is quite a lot of precise science quoted on this forum, yet when it comes to 'maturing' a tank it suddenly seems to become vague and magical.

That's because we cannot possibly measure all the factors. For example do you have a microscope? If you do, can you then, visually or by other methods identify all the thousands of bacterial species and calculate their relative populations? We are not even capable of measuring their chemical byproducts accurately or consistently.

However, we have loads of empirical data that indicate when the tank is cycled, and from that data we can determine when there are sufficient populations of the microorganism available. Why is that considered vague or magical? You put water in a bucket anywhere in the world and the process of bacterial colonization begins, follows a mathematical progression and concludes. You measure how long that occurs and consistently it takes 6-8 weeks. I don't see anything vague about that.

Surely the addition of huge amounts of CO2 affects the survival anything aerobic??

No. This is another illusion of The Matrix. That's because people never bother to study the fundamental principles of gases in solution. Gases are independent. They are free agents. The presence of any gas in any solvent has no bearing on the availability of any other gas dissolved in that solvent. Aerobic organisms always have access to Oxygen if it is dissolved in the water. It doesn't matter how much CO2 is also dissolved at the same time. CO2 cannot displace O2. Each gas has it's own solubility and no other gas can affect that solubility. The solubility and availability of a gas is only ever a function of temperature, pressure and salinity.

And then when the 6-8 weeks is up - what stocking level is advised?

Do the sensible thing and add the inhabitants a few at a time. Even so, having plants in the tank means that you can do the non-sensible thing and add more than a few at the same time. Plants feed on NH3/NH4. Additionally a mature tank that has been sitting around for 6-8 weeks also has loads of organisms that process the toxicants. The water change frequency, which should be adhered to is an added level of safety. I don't see a problem here. I and many others follow this procedure all the time and we don't have any difficulties, because it's a consistent natural process.

Cheers,

 

[daizeUK]

Thanks to all for an interesting discussion.

How do you determine whether a lightly planted tank has enough plants to mature naturally in this way? Would the same principles work for yeast CO2, liquid carbon or non-CO2 tanks?

 

[harryH]

Would the same principles work for yeast CO2, liquid carbon or non-CO2 tanks?

Yes any tank works on this principle. I have always cycled my tanks without fish or chemicals and haven't used a test kit for years. It's so easy, just set up your tank place in the plants and leave it. You will need to do a water change once or twice a week then after 6 to 8 weeks just start adding your livestock, a few each week.

I usually try to cover at least 80% of the substrate with plants as this was the way I was taught years ago. It's still good practice to plant heavily with fast growing plants.

Harry

 

[Fern]

just set up your tank place in the plants and leave it

Don't forget to feed them 😉

Fast growing plants are good to start off with, you can replace them for other more choice plants later if you wish

 

[brumbird]

That's because we cannot possibly measure all the factors. For example do you have a microscope? If you do, can you then, visually or by other methods identify all the thousands of bacterial species and calculate their relative populations? We are not even capable of measuring their chemical byproducts accurately or consistently.

However, we have loads of empirical data that indicate when the tank is cycled, and from that data we can determine when there are sufficient populations of the microorganism available. Why is that considered vague or magical? You put water in a bucket anywhere in the world and the process of bacterial colonization begins, follows a mathematical progression and concludes. You measure how long that occurs and consistently it takes 6-8 weeks. I don't see anything vague about that.


No. This is another illusion of The Matrix. That's because people never bother to study the fundamental principles of gases in solution. Gases are independent. They are free agents. The presence of any gas in any solvent has no bearing on the availability of any other gas dissolved in that solvent. Aerobic organisms always have access to Oxygen if it is dissolved in the water. It doesn't matter how much CO2 is also dissolved at the same time. CO2 cannot displace O2. Each gas has it's own solubility and no other gas can affect that solubility. The solubility and availability of a gas is only ever a function of temperature, pressure and salinity.



Do the sensible thing and add the inhabitants a few at a time. Even so, having plants in the tank means that you can do the non-sensible thing and add more than a few at the same time. Plants feed on NH3/NH4. Additionally a mature tank that has been sitting around for 6-8 weeks also has loads of organisms that process the toxicants. The water change frequency, which should be adhered to is an added level of safety. I don't see a problem here. I and many others follow this procedure all the time and we don't have any difficulties, because it's a consistent natural process.

Cheers,

Thanks for the reply. What is the empirical data we have to confirm a tank is cycled and ready for fish?What is measured?

With respect, you say that these bacteria are vital, but you don't know what they are... you suggest that the proof is in the fact that your fish don't die, but I could use the same evidence to support my own hypothesis that cycling g with ammonia creates a healthy tank, based on the numerous tanks which have thrived after ammonia cycling, versus those we see day in day out which are not and go wrong. My explanation for why your fish don't die after using the natural method is that you change enough water to keep the toxins below deadly levels.

With regard to CO2 I am not suggesting their is an interaction with O2 but I thought that drop checkers were used to stop you giving your fish CO2 poisoning, and wanted to confirm whether bacteria could be poisoned by am excess of CO2?

I just haven't read anything empirically convincing (yet) that supports the idea that any/all levels of planting would provide sufficient resources to grow sufficient quantities of bacteria to support the conversion of fish waste. How much stocking is 'sensible' How do you measure what is sensible? Cm of fish per gallon of water?

 

[brumbird]

Also, you mention that a bucket of water will become colonised with bacteria. Giving hat the.purpose of cycling/maturation for a fish keeper is to ensure fish waste can be rendered harmless to fish, and dissolved oxygen appears to be a limiting factor for bacterial growth, arent you giving the nitrifyers a leg up by providing a food source for them (ammonia) whilst removing the food source of other heterotrophs (dead matter) which will compete for oxygen? The natural method just seems to allow the decomposers take over and prohibit nitrifyers from growing.

Sorry this is all coming out as a stream of consciousness - got to get my post in while the kids are content (its all usually gone pear shaped by 4pm)

 

[daizeUK]

I usually try to cover at least 80% of the substrate with plants as this was the way I was taught years ago. It's still good practice to plant heavily with fast growing plants.

Harry

This is the advice I keep seeing: that it is best to use fast-growing plants when starting a tank. That's why I was concerned that a tank planted with slow-growing plants would not be able to absorb the NH4 fast enough. But Clive says the 6-8 week method will work even for slow-growing plants. I'm interested because I'm planning on starting a 35L planted mostly with crypts. I just can't imagine this kind of tank will be able to handle the same bioload as a tank with fast-growing plants in the same timeframe.

 

[Rob P]

versus those we see day in day out which are not and go wrong.

I think the ones we see daily on PFK that go wrong are almost always, no - always, the ones where fish have been added to a new system within days, not weeks...

 

[brumbird]

Do you feel that we see problems where people have fishlessly cycled correctly (including a qualifying week so as to ensure the results are stable)?

 

[Rob P]

Do you feel that we see problems where people have fishlessly cycled correctly (including a qualifying week so as to ensure the results are stable)?

We see a lot of issues with dying plants and algae!! 😀 LOL

 

[brumbird]

So you think the ammonia method is more for the fish keeper than the planted tank enthusiast?

 

[Fern]

Brumbird, I know you want the information (and good on you!, but meh it mostly goes over my head!) to understand the scientific data regarding bacterial colonies and microorganism etc on why it's beneficial to mature a tank this way rather than using ammonia, but for me, all I needed to do was look around here and know that it works!
I'd been reading up on this site for a quite a while before I joined, put all that reading into practice, had the confidence to have a try and guess what? I have three successful aquariums, (albeit a million miles away from the amazing aquascapes people have on here) they are healthy, thriving and not one dead fish!
It is all a matter of personal preference of course, it's your aquarium, but at the end of the day, why add ammonia when you don't need to !

 

[brumbird]

I know Fern 🙂 I see lots of successful tanks that have been cycled too, this is why I am after the detail. If its any consolation I did think twice about dosing today (first time I've tested for ammonia in a few days) and it was at zero. I've re-dosed at a much lower 1ish ppm in hope of finding some middle ground. I've also turned on the venturi in the hope that this will help O2 levels.

 

[dw1305]

Hi all,

What is the empirical data we have to confirm a tank is cycled and ready for fish?

There isn't any empirical data really, even with a lab full of analytical equipment and a scientists who can use it, access to a microbiologist and a huge amount of "man" hours you would struggle to quantify whether a tank is cycled or not.

Because of the difficulties of measuring these parameters, even the water companies with £millions of kit, the financial imperatives of their share holders and a tight regulatory framework will use a "5 day BOD" test to estimate water quality, and even after 5 days it is only an estimate. They aren't doing this because they enjoy it, they are doing it because there isn't a cheaper alternative.

I did think twice about dosing today (first time I've tested for ammonia in a few days) and it was at zero. I've re-dosed at a much lower 1ish ppm in hope of finding some middle ground.

When people say "I've got 1ppm ammonia, nitrate etc" you don't really know what that value is, or even whether the kit has really registered the parameter they are interested in at all.

I don't see any problem with you adding ammonia to your tank, but because it has a high plant mass and lots of oxygen. The ammonia is still toxic, but assuming that you have some source of carbonates and sufficient oxygen, the large plant mass (and associated microbial community) will reduce ammonia levels fairly rapidly, it has nothing to do with cycling.

I see lots of successful tanks that have been cycled too

There definitely are some, if you are relying on filter bacteria alone for biological filtration. Personally I've never kept an un-planted tank or added ammonia, and I never will, because plants/microbe systems are simple, effective and robust.

Even though I've never added ammonia to a tank, that is sort of how I came back to fish keeping. After working on "landfill leachate" (basically just very polluted water, with a huge range of pollutants), I realized that a lot of my problems as a fish keeper in my earlier incarnation was because I'd failed to maintain water quality. This time it has been a lot better (certainly for the fish).

Cheers Darrel

 

[brumbird]

Thank you for your reply Darrel, I appreciate your input. I use a calculation based on the ammonia% and tank volume to ddose ammonia as even as a kit user I know they can only give a ball park idea of what is going on (the colour differences are minute and I struggle to read differences, but can observe relative changes

 

[brumbird]

Thank you for your reply Darrel, I appreciate your input. I use a calculation based on the ammonia% and tank volume to ddose ammonia as even as a kit user I know they can only give a ball park idea of what is going on (the colour differences are minute and I struggle to read differences, but can observe relative changes.