Reef Discussion

[Azedenkae]

@slin1977 Okay, let's get this thing going!

This is for slin1977 and I to discuss this thing, without derailing anymore topics. I guess others can chime in, but let's establish a few things:
1.) Please read all the discussion before commenting.
2.) Please stay on topic.
3.) Let's not get rowdy. The moment someone gets rowdy it's sorta pointless...

This is in hopes that just discussions to be had.

So, to refresh our memories,

Hey mate!

Once all the parameters you are aiming to get to zero hit zero, or close enough, you need to check that your aquarium is able to return to that state after a reasonable amount of time after each feeding.

To do this, well, you need to 'pretend' that you are feeding your livestock by well, 'feeding' the tank that much food (a daily amount), and see if the parameters can lower to zero (or close enough) within 24 hours. If it can, then that means that your aquarium has undergone the initial cycle. If it can't, it means that further cycling is necessary.

Once you are done with the cycle, I'd recommend a big water change - as large as you can make it. Things may have built up during the cycle that you can't test for, so a big water change is just a safe practice. Give your tank some freshness.

And once that is done, test parameters again to make sure everything is in place. Then stock your aquarium.

The above is what I wrote. slin1977, you disagreed with the above (right?)

Let's start with a few definitions. In my opinion, the initial cycle is basically a microbial propagation phase, whereby we are trying to establish enough microbes to effectively deal with at least ammonia and nitrite (if not nitrate) when our tank is fully stocked, and beyond that in cases of any higher-than-normal parameter spikes for whatever reason (deaths, etc.). Do you agree? If not, what do you believe the initial cycle should achieve?

 

[MagicJ]

Can I play :)

I'm not sure of the context of the original discussion but ..

That is not my idea of the initial cycle, although there is probably no absolutely correct answer.

For me, the initial cycle is when anything that is going to die in the live rock, dies - this can include worms, crabs, sponges, corals etc etc. These break down and form ammonia, which then get converted to nitrite and so on.

Base/artificial rock i.e. rock with no living organisms, will not have an initial cycle.

 

[Azedenkae]

Mhm, there is indeed many different viewpoints/definitions regarding this. Which is why I wanted to start with definitions first. :) And am I glad that I did! XD

Well let's go with your definition first. If that is the case, what would be next after the initial cycle, in your view? So essentially I am assuming by the end of this, ammonia, nitrite (and perhaps nitrate) is zero, right? What comes after?

 

[curly747]

I think I agree with azedenkae on the definition. I thought the purpose of the cycle was to build up a population of bacteria that converts ammonia to nitrite and nitrate. I thought if you started with artificial rock you should add something like a piece of fish meat or dead prawn so the cycle still happens before adding live fish

 

[mscott]

I would say that what you are describing would be the full, complete cycle. But then doing a say 100% water change is defeating the purpose really, because the water you add would also have to cycle. Let's go back to freshwater for the sake of what I'm trying to say, the water needs to cycle in a freshwater system, most setups are fake ornaments, fake plants etc etc, the only thing that cycles is the water. Doing 100% in freshwater tanks would lead to a cycl. So presumably the same thing would occur just on a lower scale in Saltwater tanks

 

[curly747]

Pretty funny. We can't even agree on a definition. And now we are sidetracked onto freshwater cycling.

 

[slin1977]

Mhm, there is indeed many different viewpoints/definitions regarding this. Which is why I wanted to start with definitions first. :) And am I glad that I did! XD

Well let's go with your definition first. If that is the case, what would be next after the initial cycle, in your view? So essentially I am assuming by the end of this, ammonia, nitrite (and perhaps nitrate) is zero, right? What comes after?

To answer the final sentence in the above statement with what comes after..... Broadly speaking I present to you the concept of Redfield ratio with regard to nutrient limitation.
It's an interesting read mate and I know you like peer cited information.
Please follow this link.

http://www.cost869.alterra.nl/FS/FS_NPratio.pdf

 

[Azedenkae]

@mscott: I have long since departed from anything freshwater, so I am not really in a position to discuss freshwater specifically. That would be opening a whole new can of rather unrelated worms, so if you would like to discuss that, then perhaps a new topic is best. But on to other things. I can see how it can be the full cycle, what I am describing. I only chose to call it 'the initial cycle' as others do say there are other 'cycles' that can occur, like blooms of pods and the likes before mass disappearances and all that, which is fair enough because I guess it can be called a 'cycle'. In the context of my 'cycle' though, microbes would be mostly established in or on surfaces, that wouldn't be mostly removed through a water change, no matter how big. Which is why in my view, a huge water change wouldn't affect the system, not materially. The filtration system should still, after the huge water change, be still as robust as before it.

@curly747: That's just how it is with this hobby unfortunately. :/ It's almost as if everyone has different definitions for every single thing sometimes.

@slin1977: Thank you for that link. I am aware of the redfield ratio, and have read the entire article. I still have yet to receive the answer to my question though. What happens after the 'initial cycle', as defined above by MagicJ? I guess specifically what I am asking is... do you think it would then be time to add live stock? Wait longer? Add some sort of chemical? What exactly would be expected to be done, or can be done? If there is no blanket answer, then as per the examples given, what happens if:
a.) Live rock was added, spikes in ammonia and stuff happened, then dropped to zero?
b.) Base/dry/artificial/whatever rock is added?

 

[dino]

@slin1977

Let's start with a few definitions. In my opinion, the initial cycle is basically a microbial propagation phase, whereby we are trying to establish enough microbes to effectively deal with at least ammonia and nitrite (if not nitrate) when our tank is fully stocked, and beyond that in cases of any higher-than-normal parameter spikes for whatever reason (deaths, etc.). Do you agree? If not, what do you believe the initial cycle should achieve?

Cycling is the process of preparing an aquarium to sustain the inhabitants that will be kept. Establishing a healthy colony of denitrifying bacteria is the first step of the cycling process.
These bacteria feed on ammonia, converting it nitrites, then to nitrates. By adding a source of ammonia - whether from die-off from live rock, seafood, dead prawn, fish food, fish poo - allows us to observe a spike in ammonia then nitrites, then a subsequent fall in ammonia and nitrites to confirm that a colony of bacteria has been successfully established. This spike may be dampened or sometime not be apparent if you added a large colony of these bacteria to the tank to begin with (eg using substrate from an existing tank, using cured live rock, or a commercial bacteria product). If this ammonia / nitrite spike was missed, I would agree with Azedenkae that you could test the denitrifying power of the tank by adding some food to the tank to see if a rise in ammonia is detectable. If ammonia or nitrites are still detectable, then the tank has not established enough denitrifying bacteria. It is also important to note that these nitrifying bacteria needs somewhere to cling onto - hence the importance of providing material with large surface area - eg substrate, live rocks, rubbles, or some commercial products - an empty bare bottom tank will not cut it.

The cycling process is not complete until the tank is safe to accept the intended inhabitants. All other parameters have to be stable - more so for sensitive corals such as SPS.

Doing a large water change after the tank is cycled may help correct other parameters such as Alk, Ca, Mg, but is not recommended to do it in one go, as it could shock and kill off some of the bacteria if for example the temp or pH was too different.

 

[slin1977]

@slin1977: Thank you for that link. I am aware of the redfield ratio, and have read the entire article. I still have yet to receive the answer to my question though. What happens after the 'initial cycle', as defined above by MagicJ? I guess specifically what I am asking is... do you think it would then be time to add live stock? Wait longer? Add some sort of chemical? What exactly would be expected to be done, or can be done? If there is no blanket answer, then as per the examples given, what happens if:
a.) Live rock was added, spikes in ammonia and stuff happened, then dropped to zero?
b.) Base/dry/artificial/whatever rock is added?

@Azedenkae
Since we are all starting to ramble on a bit I will start too.
It would be fair to say that there is no difference between a saltwater or freshwater cycle. Why would there be one?
It's the same nitrogen cycle.
One body of water has a specific gravity that differs to the other. Let's move on from that revalation.
To answer your original post, the one that started this is going to happen in my next post. Pls be patient.

 

[slin1977]

Once all the parameters you are aiming to get to zero hit zero, or close enough, you need to check that your aquarium is able to return to that state after a reasonable amount of time after each feeding.

In essence what you have described above is simply a nitrogen cycle.
After each feeding you get another nitrogen cycle and so it continues......


To do this, well, you need to 'pretend' that you are feeding your livestock by well, 'feeding' the tank that much food (a daily amount), and see if the parameters can lower to zero (or close enough) within 24 hours. If it can, then that means that your aquarium has undergone the initial cycle. If it can't, it means that further cycling is necessary

Well the above statement is simply starting a fresh nitrogen cycle.
I honestly see no point in adding food at this stage....
First off it will take at least three days for bacteria to colonise and start the process of decomposition.

Once you are done with the cycle, I'd recommend a big water change - as large as you can make it. Things may have built up during the cycle that you can't test for, so a big water change is just a safe practice. Give your tank some freshness.

Again I disagree, there is nothing in the water that warrants a big water change.
There is no need to change a drop. The only thing that has changed is a nitrogen cycle has taken place.

Now since I have answered your post - looking forward to sharing my opinions further about a topic so close to my heart.

 

[Azedenkae]

Doing a large water change after the tank is cycled may help correct other parameters such as Alk, Ca, Mg, but is not recommended to do it in one go, as it could shock and kill off some of the bacteria if for example the temp or pH was too different.

Just about this specifically, because I don't have an issue with anything else really, it would take quite a big difference to really shock the bacteria to death in my opinion. Even if we say, go from a pH of 8.2 to say 7.2 or something, or a temperature change from 30 degrees to 15 degrees or something all in one go, I doubt that would kill off any amount of bacteria that would have a major effect. No I do not have any literature to support this off the top of my head, just is what I would assume based on what I know about these bacteria. Though not even considering larger changes, if your water is that different (and in terms of alk and stuff as well) compared to the water that was in the aquarium, it may be another thing to heavily consider altogether.

I guess whenever one does that, just try to match the parameters as much as possible. What do you think?

 

[Azedenkae]

Again I disagree, there is nothing in the water that warrants a big water change.
There is no need to change a drop. The only thing that has changed is a nitrogen cycle has taken place.

Now since I have answered your post - looking forward to sharing my opinions further about a topic so close to my heart.

So just to clarify, the only issue that you had with my original post was in regards to the water change?

 

[dino]

The only time one would do a total water change is when moving tank (when one would commonly observe a new cycle once the tank is refilled), or when trying to save stock after some crisis event.

If the tank's water parameters are closely matched to the new water, then there would be no need to do a big water change.

 

[Azedenkae]

The only time one would do a total water change is when moving tank (when one would commonly observe a new cycle once the tank is refilled), or when trying to save stock after some crisis event.

If the tank's water parameters are closely matched to the new water, then there would be no need to do a big water change.

Fair enough if the parameters are matched, but it could be things that we can't test for, like trace elements. Phosphates (and nitrates) could also be very high at the end of the cycle, if there's no passive method of removal, and so a huge water change would set all that to zero. Many may not aim to propagate denitrifying bacteria as their main source of nitrate removal, so for many tanks at the end of the cycle they'd have zero ammonia and nitrite, but very high nitrates.

However, it is fair enough to say that if a.) measured parameters are in line anyways, and b.) phosphates/nitrates is not an issue; then that large of a water change is not necessary. So I will concede that I am wrong on that, it should be more of an optional/situational thing, rather than 'oh you must always do a 100% water change at the end of the cycle'. I guess this is especially more so if the cycle only went on for a few weeks anyways.

 

[slin1977]

@slin1977: Thank you for that link. I am aware of the redfield ratio, and have read the entire article. I still have yet to receive the answer to my question though. What happens after the 'initial cycle', as defined above by MagicJ? I guess specifically what I am asking is... do you think it would then be time to add live stock? Wait longer? Add some sort of chemical? What exactly would be expected to be done, or can be done? If there is no blanket answer, then as per the examples given, what happens if:
a.) Live rock was added, spikes in ammonia and stuff happened, then dropped to zero?
b.) Base/dry/artificial/whatever rock is added?

@Azedenkae
Nitrification occurs as aerobic bacteria metabolize and oxidize ammonia to nitrite and nitrite to nitrate. The ammonia and nitrite are a food source for the bacteria. Typically the bacteria Nitrosomonas europaea and Nitrobacter winogradskyi , however there are a considerably large number of species that do this.

Denitrification occurs as anaerobic (heterotrophic) bacteria use the nitrates as part of their biomechanical respiration, not as a food source. Anaerobic bacteria use organic (carbon-containing) compounds as a source of energy. This characteristic distinguishes heterotrophic bacteria from chemoautotrophic (chemosynthesizing) and photoautotrophic (photosynthesizing) bacteria, which assimilate CO2 as a source of carbon.
There are a number of known species of bacteria, both aerobic and anaerobic, that are heterotrophic.
Many heterotrophic bacteria utilize sugar, alcohol, and organic carbon say plant or animal matter (fish poo).
Heterotrophic bacteria take an active part in the natural recycling of substances.
There are a large number of heterotrophic bacteria which can function as denitrifiers.
The other denitrification process is where the nitrate is directly absorbed into the tissue mass of algae or bacteria.
The nitrogen is permanently removed from the system when algae is manually harvested by the aquarist and discarded or the bacteria are removed by some filtration method like protein skimming or are consumed as food by coral.

 

[slin1977]

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-01/eb/index.htm

 

[Azedenkae]

@slin1977 Mate, can you just answer my questions? There are two outstanding:

1.) So just to clarify, the only issue that you had with my original post was in regards to the water change?
2.) What happens after the 'initial cycle', as defined above by MagicJ?

Thank you for all the links, all those are common knowledge and nice to read again. However you have yet to specifically answer my questions. If you feel that you shouldn't be answering said questions, or have queries or clarifications that you'd like, feel free to let me know.

As of right now I am rather confused as to where you stand.

 

[slin1977]

@Azedenkae
To clarify , I answered each statement from your original post yesterday in this thread.

To answer your question about what happens after the initial cycle is, logically one would add fish not fish food as you stated in your original post.

You add fish, fish poo and heterotrophic bacteria continue the process of denitrification .

 

[Azedenkae]

Apologies, I only realized now that your answers were intermixed with what I wrote. I assumed you just misquoted my entire post, rather than responding to each part in turn. I should have read your entire post anyways.

Let me address each of your responses in turn then:

In essence what you have described above is simply a nitrogen cycle.
After each feeding you get another nitrogen cycle and so it continues......

Well the above statement is simply starting a fresh nitrogen cycle.
I honestly see no point in adding food at this stage....
First off it will take at least three days for bacteria to colonise and start the process of decomposition.

Actually what I am describing is not (just) the nitrogen cycle. The nitrogen cycle is implied in there of course, but it is more than that. What I am suggesting, is to make sure that ammonia, nitrite and nitrate can return to zero within 24 hours per daily feeding, which would show that there is enough microbes to deal with the increase in nutrients each time there is a feeding. If you notice, there'll be threads around where people's ammonia and nitrite and stuff kept on increasing over time (after the assumed 'cycle', and that is because the amount of microbes in the aquarium was not able to keep up with the feeding. What I suggest is just a way to ensure that there is definitely enough microbes to deal with the increased nutrient load.

In response to the decomposition of food and when bacteria starts to colonize it, it actually happens much earlier than three days. This I know from experience, as I was able to pick up ammonia and everything in tests soon after adding food into the aquarium. Specifically, I tested the day after whenever I add food in, so it is at least clear that it doesn't take three days.

Again I disagree, there is nothing in the water that warrants a big water change.
There is no need to change a drop. The only thing that has changed is a nitrogen cycle has taken place

Well, the answer here would be the same as to dino. I would be wrong to say it is compulsory here. There are things though that would warrant such a water change, for example with too much phosphate at the end of it. One can get rid of all of it (or at least as much of it as possible) all in one go, as opposed to then slowly reducing it through other means. There are also other changes, which may not be testable - or at least easily so - including many trace elements. However, I guess it does make sense that if a cycle didn't go on for too long, it won't matter too much. If people can get away with smaller water changes every week or two, then there shouldn't be a need for a full water change. So I am wrong there. I guess I personally would still do it though, just to be safe. It doesn't materialistically harm anything, so might as well.

Last but not least,

To answer your question about what happens after the initial cycle is, logically one would add fish not fish food as you stated in your original post.

You add fish, fish poo and heterotrophic bacteria continue the process of denitrification .

Well two things.

Firstly in my view, yes, one would obviously stock the tank after the cycle. What I am talking about though, is simply testing that the cycle is completed.

Because secondly, I have a question now. Following on from the cycle as per MagicJ:
If either a.) we start with live rock, things die and stuff, ammonia and nitrite and stuff are zero; or b.) we start with base/dry/artificial rock, which means there is essentially no 'cycle':
1.) How do we know that there is enough microbes (in conjunction with the rest of the filtration system) to handle the bioload of whatever fish we add?