Mini cycle
- Thread starter alicia24
- Start date
- Tagged users None
more luck examples, pH must really be in my favor for ten years here.
www.reef2reef.com
that's a thread solely aimed at predicting what your kind of rocks do if you move them to a new tank, just like this thread.
so for seventeen pages there, again, multiple jobs I worked personally and was accountable for the outcomes, all we get in report is happy reports from reefers, how did I attain that?
by banning any form of testing for the whole thread. if we aren't discussing nh4, there's nothing to argue about if the tank keeps living in pattern.
this meme sums up 100% of cycling arguments about live rock I've ever seen. Old cycling science is the dad
A thread tracking pure skip cycle instant reefs, no bottle bac
THE GOLDEN EXAMPLE OF A SKIP CYCLE DAY 1 REEF https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/octo-high-end-sps-skip-cycle-build.713256/ read that entire thread before you read ours. that's the heart of skip cycling. Everything we do going forward in this thread reflects on that ability above, in the #1...
www.reef2reef.com
that's a thread solely aimed at predicting what your kind of rocks do if you move them to a new tank, just like this thread.
so for seventeen pages there, again, multiple jobs I worked personally and was accountable for the outcomes, all we get in report is happy reports from reefers, how did I attain that?
by banning any form of testing for the whole thread. if we aren't discussing nh4, there's nothing to argue about if the tank keeps living in pattern.
this meme sums up 100% of cycling arguments about live rock I've ever seen. Old cycling science is the dad
alicia24
Active Member
I'm not sure if you're implying I don't know about qt and fallow. I am not a complete newbie. I have a 90g and 60g. Have done fallow before. All my livestock have been qurantined per Jay's protocol and I've talked with him many of times when in question of diesease. There's a reason there aren't fish in this tank currently. They're being treated with copper as we speak.
Look on the bright side, Brandon hasn't accused you of falsifying your ammonia results yet. His posts remind me of a rat I shot in the garden, the legs were twitching but the brain was gone.
alicia24
Active Member
Lol I guess I'll have to start taking pictures of my hanna checker in preparation. It's not fair someone to imply someone knows nothing about disease prep or that I'm setting myself up for fallow failure...these argumentaive type debates are what keep people from posting in forums when they need help unfortunately. I usually only post here out of desperation.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 4,893
There really is no debate happening so there is nothing to be confused about.
Always beware of the man/woman who claims he/she has a scientific theory, but under no circumstances can it be questioned or tested. By definition, this is the antithesis of science.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 4,893
There is not a single post in this thread telling the OP to be fearful of anything. Nobody is trying to scare the OP into following advice... well except you telling them to be afraid of any advice that does not come from you or their will be an endless cycle of death!
Brandon's "view" is that most of us (the entire community and published authors and personalities) are gravely misinformed about "reef science" and have been brainwashed by the publishers and vendors in this hobby in a grand conspiracy (or are part of the conspiracy) meant to hide the truth for profit and name recognition, as well as persecute him for trying to spread said truth.
If you can honestly decipher what he is saying and weigh that against the advice of others, then go for it. There is no "argument" because he can't be nailed down.
How is the tank today? Things looking any better?
alicia24
Active Member
Thank you for asking. The nems seem sligtly happier today (more bubbled tips) than yesterday. Ammonia's still going up. I added bottled bac yesterday. My lfs didnt have turbo start or the other one someone recommended so I just got an API one.
There is something I'd be interested to see regarding this specific hanna kit for the thread
Take it to a pet store, tell them your thread is an in-process reef battle where all future cycling science is at stake and run your specific kits using your reagents, on their display reef. What's that reading
I don't necessarily accept a low one from them as proof yours is in extended ammonia distress, i claim simple organics confuse that non seneye kit, plus we need future readings not given as nh4 but reef specific nh3
So if you ask them their pH, and then take the reading, and then do the chart that converts those data into nh3, that really does help future assessments here to be more accurate and it's a nice objective measure for this thread
Nh3 is the measure reefs use and want
All your future tests on your tank need to be converted to nh3 as well given as the update (it won't be a reading of .xx such as .66 but will be in this position: .0X like .06, that's a decent nh3 conversion)
That would honestly make this thread a strong reading reference for others as we all compete to establish predictability in your setup. Your data absolutely will factor into how I handle unrinsed sand transfer jobs in the work thread. One guy spent about $1000 on actual Tampa Bay live sand for a huge home reef we did in chat one time. He wanted to never rinse that and still transfer it, but I wasn't sure how that would do he also had thousands in fish. I simply said move it and take the chance if you must, some of that benthic life is now in your rocks they're seeded and he never posted back in follow up. Successful jobs often give no follow up. Failed ones=I'll be hunted down on all forums and outed by the harshest thread title
Seeing your case outcome long ago would have helped
It's a good thread in my opinion
Take it to a pet store, tell them your thread is an in-process reef battle where all future cycling science is at stake and run your specific kits using your reagents, on their display reef. What's that reading
I don't necessarily accept a low one from them as proof yours is in extended ammonia distress, i claim simple organics confuse that non seneye kit, plus we need future readings not given as nh4 but reef specific nh3
So if you ask them their pH, and then take the reading, and then do the chart that converts those data into nh3, that really does help future assessments here to be more accurate and it's a nice objective measure for this thread
Nh3 is the measure reefs use and want
All your future tests on your tank need to be converted to nh3 as well given as the update (it won't be a reading of .xx such as .66 but will be in this position: .0X like .06, that's a decent nh3 conversion)
That would honestly make this thread a strong reading reference for others as we all compete to establish predictability in your setup. Your data absolutely will factor into how I handle unrinsed sand transfer jobs in the work thread. One guy spent about $1000 on actual Tampa Bay live sand for a huge home reef we did in chat one time. He wanted to never rinse that and still transfer it, but I wasn't sure how that would do he also had thousands in fish. I simply said move it and take the chance if you must, some of that benthic life is now in your rocks they're seeded and he never posted back in follow up. Successful jobs often give no follow up. Failed ones=I'll be hunted down on all forums and outed by the harshest thread title
Seeing your case outcome long ago would have helped
It's a good thread in my opinion
Last edited:
@Dan_P
Is there any way you could take a calibrated accurate seneye unit and put it near your sandbed with no disturbance to recalibrate a baseline then just do one stick stir tiny right near it. Curious if nh3 spikes.
Curious if a common reef tank sandbed has unused ammonia, as if a reef sandbed is always anaerobic and would allow no photosynthetics or nitrifiers to be present alongside the claimed shale reservoirs of ammonia to simply keep them in check even if originating from protein decomposition in the sand
We've all spent a good deal focusing on the bacteria. Her system above is unique in its aging and maturity. I bet even if the bac are dead that much inclusive photosynthetic material on those types of rocks, those rocks are aged close to or beyond ten years i can see in the benthic life quality- pulls ammonia fast
Their plant loading alone commands ammonia, fast. So if that seneye spikes legit, I'll be left confounded for eight days in preponderance
But if you report a resolve rate for the spike at 1-3 minutes vs a ten hour reduction delay, that'll apply here bigtime in scale testing.
Proximity of the probe to the sand when you light stir makes up for dilution in my opinion. Heck, turn off pumps for a sec and let it bake a sec if we need a stress test in scale
I would have never considered photosynthetic command from micro benthic plant communities before seeing yours and Tarichas super good works. If reef tank sandbeds have ammonia and you have considered any alternate compounds in detritus, you guys' testing for detritus has shown relative inertness so where would loads of ammonia come from, I'll take that to heart and try to work it into my understanding of stratification levels in reef tanks.
That's important data for tank transferers/ where are the shale deposits
Is there any way you could take a calibrated accurate seneye unit and put it near your sandbed with no disturbance to recalibrate a baseline then just do one stick stir tiny right near it. Curious if nh3 spikes.
Curious if a common reef tank sandbed has unused ammonia, as if a reef sandbed is always anaerobic and would allow no photosynthetics or nitrifiers to be present alongside the claimed shale reservoirs of ammonia to simply keep them in check even if originating from protein decomposition in the sand
We've all spent a good deal focusing on the bacteria. Her system above is unique in its aging and maturity. I bet even if the bac are dead that much inclusive photosynthetic material on those types of rocks, those rocks are aged close to or beyond ten years i can see in the benthic life quality- pulls ammonia fast
Their plant loading alone commands ammonia, fast. So if that seneye spikes legit, I'll be left confounded for eight days in preponderance
But if you report a resolve rate for the spike at 1-3 minutes vs a ten hour reduction delay, that'll apply here bigtime in scale testing.
Proximity of the probe to the sand when you light stir makes up for dilution in my opinion. Heck, turn off pumps for a sec and let it bake a sec if we need a stress test in scale
I would have never considered photosynthetic command from micro benthic plant communities before seeing yours and Tarichas super good works. If reef tank sandbeds have ammonia and you have considered any alternate compounds in detritus, you guys' testing for detritus has shown relative inertness so where would loads of ammonia come from, I'll take that to heart and try to work it into my understanding of stratification levels in reef tanks.
That's important data for tank transferers/ where are the shale deposits
Last edited:
It was determined long ago that generally the NH4/NH3 total ammonia result was most useful as it doesn't jump up and down with pH, and is relatively easy to test for. An NH3 result on its own is great but likewise does not indicate the reservoir of total ammonia unless pH is known.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 4,893
Sure is if all of your rhetoric, verbosity, bloviation and made up "science" trying to explain how the test results just can't be valid or trusted is removed. We would be left with a page of simple conversation and be at the same exact point.
You spent the first 4 pages trying to convince everyone that this is just another "false ammonia alert" thread predictable by what you call "new cycling science".
Were the initial pages of rhetoric wrong and the "critics" correct or will you go back and edit your your posts (for 2nd or 3rd time) to change their meaning yet again?
You quite literally go around making fun of people for thinking that (I can quote a post from less than an hour ago in another thread or posts from this thread) and now you are asking because you don't really know?
Meanwhile, you have upshifted to overdrive and are tagging other people who do real science and pontificating about:
"benthic life quality"
"photosynthetic command"
"micro benthic plant communities"
"stratification levels in reef tanks"
"extended ammonia distress"
"stress tests in scale"
How (honestly) is one supposed to read any of this and take it seriously? You can't just don a lab coat, chain words together, talk to a few scientists and then pretend to be one.
All in the context of "we" as if the participants in this thread are working in concert with you and this is a controlled experiment that you can put under your cap as another "outbound job" as proof of your opinions when in-fact that only thing that has been confirmed is that you contradict your own rhetoric, and do it often.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 4,893
In between the walls of text, Brandon suggested using your Hanna checker and reagent to test the LFS's water to have something to compare to. This is not a terrible idea, and as indicated, a test of your fresh change water would also be helpful.
What Brandon did not address (it would mean him admitting he was wrong.. about everything he preaches) was that your readings are continuing to climb. In any case, What is your reading now? What about pH?
Last edited:
alicia24
Active Member
would checking one of my other dt's water be equivalent to checking lfs dt? I can check my fresh water change too. I will do that. Ph is still low at 7.8. Skimmer is on. Ammonia is 2.23. I haven't done a water change yet since initially filling most of the tank. I know I should I just was really hoping the bottled bac would move things in the right direction.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 4,893
I am not going to pretend to have the full explanation of what is happening or default to blaming the test kit or operator.
My opinion is that moving a tank AND sand will result in very significant fauna die-off as well as expose numerous sequestered compounds from the sand bed and expose tremendous surface area that was previously unexposed. This can easily throw off many things that were once in relative balance.
alicia24
Active Member
I'm wondering if it's because of the few dead nems I found. Maybe there's more in the sand bed I have no clue I don't want to disturb it anymore but there are so many baby nems in this tank. I thought I mature reef could handle 2ppm in a day so I am also very confused and frustrated.
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2009
- Messages
- 3,244
- Reaction score
- 4,893
It never hurts to check your instrument/kit against another system, especially if that system has tests results from a different instrument. It may not tell you which one is correct if they are different. If they are close it can give you some peace of mind.
Even bottled bac is going to take a day or three to do its thing, depending on how out of balance the system is and how much bacteria is in the bottle compared to the load it has to multiply and process.
When you scoop and move sand, the shear and crushing forces will kill a tremendous amount of the macro fauna living in it. If there were nems, crabs, isopods, mini stars, etc. mixed in, then they were likely damaged and/or ground into the sand as it was removed and replaced.
I would be considering a water change even if what is left is looking a bit better.
Similar threads
