-
You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up
Yoghurt and cycling
- Thread starter brumbird
- Start date
Nathaniel Whiteside
Member
...an unstoppable force of nature, the likes of which has never been seen before.
Andy D
Member
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 1,461
Last edited:
MirandaB
Member
Ceg is the UKAPS equivalent of The Stig
MirandaB
Member
Hi there BB 
it is kind of 
it is kind of 
I also moonlight as Morpheus.
I can only show you the door Neo. You must walk through it.
Cheers,
I can only show you the door Neo. You must walk through it.
Cheers,
James O
Member
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
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
Fern
Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 156
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
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
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
Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 156
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
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?
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
Member
- Joined
- 8 Aug 2013
- Messages
- 156
My first ever aquarium. Juwel Rio 180l | UK Aquatic Plant Society
Have a read of this brumbird, might help answer your questions
Have a read of this brumbird, might help answer your questions
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?
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?
Hi all,
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
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
