Open challenge for the hobby: prove that fish-in cycles harm fish.

[brandon429]

Mindme

Yes essentially we (non trolls) agree thats the case, the bacteria have been shown by Dr Reef using digital means to immediately act on bioloading while in suspension, before they implant. The risk to a new cycler is two fold: needs to be a live bottle of bac, a small % are dead in bottle, and they need to avoid water changes for a few days to allow for implantation


the reason JDA is being condescending to your post is because I’ve asked him to leave, he’s unwelcome here, yet he persists because the mods permit him to do this to my threads even with reports and direct request to separate jda out of my threads. We just have to accept the arguments coming from him. The ignore button is the only way to manage it all.


JDA, again I’ll ask: please cease communications in any of my threads

@revhtree

why is it you and Daniel asked me to stay out of X’s posts, you know who, so that they can review nitrite details (which I complied) but when asking over three different report threads on JDA wrecking our friendly analyses this similar request goes ignored?

@Peace River Im asking you to be fair as a moderator, I’m asking for JDA to be removed from my posts by direct request. I had no trouble complying when asked. Jda and recurring cohorts will not stop until this thread is closed too after two years fair review in collecting outcome patterns.

I have no issue with MN’s input here at all. I’m watching the mods refuse interaction until the bickering continues until my thread is shut down, I’m requesting you remove the offending parties before our fair work thread is closed due to their presence.

like what jda did here, you ignored my request report and closed my thread, then left him free to close this one too by sheer arguments over and over. I believe you manage with bias, not even handedness.

Top ten reasons you should NOT dose a new cycling tank to 2 ppm ammonia

We are all 100% familiar with the sales adage that a cycle is only proven when you can move 2ppm ammonia to zero multiple times before a cycle can be deemed reliable 9.9/10 cycling umpires online stand firm with this information in unison to anyone posting doubt about cycle completion, what...

www.reef2reef.com

 

[jda]

BTW - I regret saying that I blame anybody in the post above. Since it is chicken-bleep to edit posts in this material type of manner, it can stay so that everybody can see how wrong I was. I do not blame anybody.

I do feel that one of the main purposes of this board is to help people. People don't just come here to hear that they need to just follow directions. Many on this thread have warned people not to always take advice from manufacturers to heart, so it is perfectly reasonable when somebody has questions or does question somebody who makes a product.

 

[MnFish1]

BTW - I regret saying that I blame anybody in the post above. Since it is chicken-bleep to edit posts in this material type of manner, it can stay so that everybody can see how wrong I was. I do not blame anybody.

I do feel that one of the main purposes of this board is to help people. People don't just come here to hear that they need to just follow directions. Many on this thread have warned people not to always take advice from manufacturers to heart, so it is perfectly reasonable when somebody has questions or does question somebody who makes a product.

This is actually Extremely interesting - and important to me - here are some posts I've responded to:

1. I quarantined my fish for a week - now they have 'Ich'?
2. I quarantined my fish - but I was worried about using a full dose of copper - so I decreased the level to 1.5 - but now they have velvet.
3. I treated my fish with one dose of prazipro - but now they have xxxx (when the recommendations are for 2)
4. I didnt quarantine my fish at all - now I have a problem.
5. My ammonia level with API has been .25 for 6 weeks - and its not going down. But my nitrite is 0 - and my nitrate is 30.

These are but a few examples - and no offense to the people using the questions - but obviously everyone (including those with whom you disagree) - are trying to be helpful. I doubt many people have the goal of being 'harmful'.

In nearly EVERY case of a problem - the issue was 'follow the protocol'/'directions' - as compared to some rare disease/issue/problem. So - IMHO - the most important recommendation/question - in nearly every issue - is 'Did you follow the instructions'. Again JMHO

 

[MnFish1]

No one is making this argument. Stop arguing in bad faith.

I'm going to humbly disagree - site-wide - the issue with a dry rock/bacteria in a bottle cycle - is that it leads to 'uglies' as compared to other methods. So - that was what I'm referring to. Maybe I have a little more experience reading these threads than you - and I agree no one has brought up this issue 'here' - but its a HUGE issue on the site. So - My apologies. I was not arguing. And 2 I was not arguing in 'bad faith'. This is a discussion - not an argument. IMHO

 

[mindme]

If this is a real post, and I hope that it is sarcasm or some sort of mocking, then this is all that anybody needs to know about how these type of discussions can be harmful. Of course just putting bacteria in your tank is in no way, shape or form a cycle. This type of stuff can harm people looking for help or wanting to learn... just put in some bacteria and you are all set...

Yeah, I've been in this hobby for 12 years now, and I've heard these same myths the entire time. I'm glad I think for myself, rather than constantly making the assumption that anything which is easier/faster is by default worse. Which sadly, is 90% of the advice in this community.

The only thing you are doing by old fashioned cycling is waiting for the bacteria to build up. When you put the bacteria in a bottle into your tank, your just putting in bacteria that has already grown elsewhere.

The only thing you can say is that the ratio itself might not be exactly inline with the tank, as you likely have more bacteria than needed. But that's probably true for our tanks at all times, because as your tank matures you're going to need less bacteria to convert the ammonia etc. It's constantly changing.

And some bacteria need to be treated differently than others. For example, I used Microbacter XLM Start on my 180g. The use of any other bacteria with that can cause the tank to have a delayed cycle. So I used dry rock and dry sand on it. Where as with biospire, I just put in live sand normally.

One of the biggest highlights over the past few years was the moment Ryan at BRS realized all their recommendations about putting rock to sit for 6 months to gain bacteria and all that was a total waste of time. That it did nothing to help their bacteria, and he didn't get relief until he started to add bacteria from other sources. In fact, it might even set people back because it's going to be harder for newer/better bacteria to take hold. The entire thing was predictable, but it's a good example of what happens in an echo chamber where people are afraid to question things.

If it didn't work, people wouldn't be posting about it. It's not like ich for example where people have all kinds of weird ideas on what works because they don't understand the life cycle of the parasite.

 

[HomebroodExotics]

Yeah, I've been in this hobby for 12 years now, and I've heard these same myths the entire time. I'm glad I think for myself, rather than constantly making the assumption that anything which is easier/faster is by default worse. Which sadly, is 90% of the advice in this community.

The only thing you are doing by old fashioned cycling is waiting for the bacteria to build up. When you put the bacteria in a bottle into your tank, your just putting in bacteria that has already grown elsewhere.

The only thing you can say is that the ratio itself might not be exactly inline with the tank, as you likely have more bacteria than needed. But that's probably true for our tanks at all times, because as your tank matures you're going to need less bacteria to convert the ammonia etc. It's constantly changing.

And some bacteria need to be treated differently than others. For example, I used Microbacter XLM Start on my 180g. The use of any other bacteria with that can cause the tank to have a delayed cycle. So I used dry rock and dry sand on it. Where as with biospire, I just put in live sand normally.

One of the biggest highlights over the past few years was the moment Ryan at BRS realized all their recommendations about putting rock to sit for 6 months to gain bacteria and all that was a total waste of time. That it did nothing to help their bacteria, and he didn't get relief until he started to add bacteria from other sources. In fact, it might even set people back because it's going to be harder for newer/better bacteria to take hold. The entire thing was predictable, but it's a good example of what happens in an echo chamber where people are afraid to question things.

If it didn't work, people wouldn't be posting about it. It's not like ich for example where people have all kinds of weird ideas on what works because they don't understand the life cycle of the parasite.

You just said that if you simy put in bacteria in a bottle on the aquarium you are done, but you also claim that if you use 2 different ones it will delay your cycle. How is it possible to delay a cycle of its done after you put in the bacteria? None of this makes any sense.

 

[jda]

Intentions aside, saying that QTing fish always works is the equivalent of what we are talking about here.... but not really diving into what QT really means. If your point is that not everybody does it right, then I agree.

A better false equivalency for this thread would be to give advice, before people screw up, about how a select group of people handle QT who are more talented than most and then offer it as proof that you don't need to do it. For example, jda does not QT fish and has not needed to in decades - this is true. I know that this does not work for everybody, so I don't offer it much without a LOT of context and nuance about why and how it works from actual experience. I stay out of a lot of this stuff since I am aware enough to know that what I do should not be done by everybody and bottling it as a one-size-fits all is harmful.

...or, person XYZ on a board has compiled a huge list of people whose fish were cured of ich just with Garlic. ...so they tell everybody that garlic is all that is needed since people who it did not work for are haters.

Like I said, I am not a huge disease expert, but what makes Jay soooo good is that he can sniff out when the directions are not likely to work or need adjustment.

Not all people are going to always follow directions. In dynamic environments, not all directions are going to work the same all of the time. This is where experience matters. This is where the help is really needed.

 

[Reefing Madness]

Personal attacks on other members will stop right here, right now. They will not be tolerated and are against policy. Going forward in this thread, be warned, you will be removed if this continues.

 

[brandon429]

Ok reefing madness we can work with that, thank you. Will tow the line in accordance with rules agreed.

 

[jda]

Yeah, I've been in this hobby for 12 years now, and I've heard these same myths the entire time. I'm glad I think for myself, rather than constantly making the assumption that anything which is easier/faster is by default worse. Which sadly, is 90% of the advice in this community.

The only thing you are doing by old fashioned cycling is waiting for the bacteria to build up. When you put the bacteria in a bottle into your tank, your just putting in bacteria that has already grown elsewhere.

The only thing you can say is that the ratio itself might not be exactly inline with the tank, as you likely have more bacteria than needed. But that's probably true for our tanks at all times, because as your tank matures you're going to need less bacteria to convert the ammonia etc. It's constantly changing.

And some bacteria need to be treated differently than others. For example, I used Microbacter XLM Start on my 180g. The use of any other bacteria with that can cause the tank to have a delayed cycle. So I used dry rock and dry sand on it. Where as with biospire, I just put in live sand normally.

One of the biggest highlights over the past few years was the moment Ryan at BRS realized all their recommendations about putting rock to sit for 6 months to gain bacteria and all that was a total waste of time. That it did nothing to help their bacteria, and he didn't get relief until he started to add bacteria from other sources. In fact, it might even set people back because it's going to be harder for newer/better bacteria to take hold. The entire thing was predictable, but it's a good example of what happens in an echo chamber where people are afraid to question things.

If it didn't work, people wouldn't be posting about it. It's not like ich for example where people have all kinds of weird ideas on what works because they don't understand the life cycle of the parasite.

All of this nuance and explanation is much more accurate than just saying that bacteria = cycle. Of course just having bacteria does not mean that a tank is cycled. I also agree that some bacteria need treated differently than others. It is not smart to say such simple comments like bacteria = cycle since somebody who does not know better can take it the wrong way and make a bad decision.... and if somebody does make a bad decision based on a post like that, then it is not really all that helpful to tell them that they should have just followed the directions.

Don't even get me start about people who believe BRS videos. ...there is not enough time left here in the day. However, do BRS instructions qualify as directions/instructions?

What is more accurately happening here is that SOME/RIGHT bacteria can usually get people through until a real cycle can start to work and take hold. Just because fish don't die and some element is/is not present never means that a cycle is done. If the hobbyist is smart and still have some patience, then all could be well. Some caution should be given about inverts and coral since some are well demonstrated to have ill effects in these scenarios that are never covered in these topics (my apologies if I missed them). ...you know the whole story. This is no less true than using a single piece of live rock or any other seed including fish gut bacteria - if you can keep the bioload low enough for the added bacteria source population, then you will be OK, but if you don't then you will fail since you have not truly cycled.

 

[mindme]

All of this nuance and explanation is much more accurate than just saying that bacteria = cycle. Of course just having bacteria does not mean that a tank is cycled. I also agree that some bacteria need treated differently than others. It is not smart to say such simple comments like bacteria = cycle since somebody who does not know better can take it the wrong way and make a bad decision.... and if somebody does make a bad decision based on a post like that, then it is not really all that helpful to tell them that they should have just followed the directions.

Don't even get me start about people who believe BRS videos. ...there is not enough time left here in the day. However, do BRS instructions qualify as directions/instructions?

What is more accurately happening here is that SOME/RIGHT bacteria can usually get people through until a real cycle can start to work and take hold. Just because fish don't die and some element is/is not present never means that a cycle is done. If the hobbyist is smart and still have some patience, then all could be well. Some caution should be given about inverts and coral since some are well demonstrated to have ill effects in these scenarios that are never covered in these topics (my apologies if I missed them). ...you know the whole story. This is no less true than using a single piece of live rock or any other seed including fish gut bacteria - if you can keep the bioload low enough for the added bacteria source population, then you will be OK, but if you don't then you will fail since you have not truly cycled.

Following instructions properly seems to be implied to me. If people don't follow the instructions properly, I don't find the product itself to be the blame for that.

That's just something I have no wiggle room or sympathy for as far as not accepting responsibility. I've screwed up a few things myself. It was my fault when I didn't follow instructions, and it's other peoples fault when they don't.

If you did the cycle test after adding bacteria, it'd pass the test the same as the old fashioned cycle. For the purpose of the bacteria and to avoid "new tank syndrome", that says cycled to me. Things that happen beyond that never really seem to stop from what I understand. In my tank now, which is 1.5 years old, I don't care about the bacteria that converts ammonia so much, I want the bacteria that consumes the phosphates and nitrates. This is also another area where in the past it would take 6 months to a year to get established, but it's yet another kind of bacteria we can buy to skip all that now.

To me, these are what I call advances of the hobby.

BRS has helped me a lot in the hobby, so I can't hate on them too much. But sometimes I just had to shake my head is all.

 

[nereefpat]

The main problem I have with this thread (more like, these threads) is that it is easily misunderstood by someone new reading this. The title is an example. I can easily prove that cycling a tank with fish in it is harmful to the fish.

If you want to say that it's reasonably safe to start a tank with bottled bacteria and live rock, as long as you take it slow with livestock and follow the directions, then sure. All of us will agree that if you use enough live rock and don't overstock, you won't have an ammonia problem. I'm not sure why that's even brought up so often.

I will still always recommend test kits. And new hobbyists should learn to use them and trust them. And the worst thing a new hobbyist can do is to hurry.

 

[jda]

Following instructions properly seems to be implied to me. If people don't follow the instructions properly, I don't find the product itself to be the blame for that.

That's just something I have no wiggle room or sympathy for as far as not accepting responsibility. I've screwed up a few things myself. It was my fault when I didn't follow instructions, and it's other peoples fault when they don't.

If you did the cycle test after adding bacteria, it'd pass the test the same as the old fashioned cycle. For the purpose of the bacteria and to avoid "new tank syndrome", that says cycled to me. Things that happen beyond that never really seem to stop from what I understand. In my tank now, which is 1.5 years old, I don't care about the bacteria that converts ammonia so much, I want the bacteria that consumes the phosphates and nitrates. This is also another area where in the past it would take 6 months to a year to get established, but it's yet another kind of bacteria we can buy to skip all that now.

To me, these are what I call advances of the hobby.

BRS has helped me a lot in the hobby, so I can't hate on them too much. But sometimes I just had to shake my head is all.

What do you say about the people who followed BRS's instructions? BRS puts themselves out there as an authority. Many, including me, tell people to not trust everything that they read or hear. Since I tell them this, I don't blame them if they want some advice or help. Seems like double talk to me. Surely lots of people followed BRS's instructions. Are the hobbyists to blame for that?

You typed this above and it is a good sentiment: "Yeah, I've been in this hobby for 12 years now, and I've heard these same myths the entire time. I'm glad I think for myself..." I echo this and also constantly tell people not to trust any manufacturer since they want to sell product more than be helpful. I know that mnfish has said the same thing in the Vibrant threads, at least. ...so where does somebody who knows nothing draw the line? It is up to us to help them, right? Not all instructions are right.

You are not skipping anything. You just have the ability to keep fish while all of the other things still happen. It is not like adding a bottle of bacteria permanently keeps oxic, anoxic, matting, surface and waterborne bacteria from forming and acts like a permanent solution. Again, the implication matter. The nuance might be lost on some, but you would really be helping the ones that get it if you explained this or used different terms. I guess that the need to wait to add a smart amount of fish is skipped, but this might be better termed as a skip-wait instead of a skip-cycle since the real cycle has to happen still.

 

[brandon429]

I consider bottle bac to be engineered so effectively all thought process is removed from being able to carry the desired bioload without burning it.


Im honestly trending towards Mindme’s assessment on the ease of the matter. Open lid, add bottle. Add fish, results from every cycling thread I’ve personally ever seen are that the fish will live and behave exactly as you want it to the first few months, at least.

and then if some other keeper wants a live rock transfer, he gets to keep his initial bioload without needing bottled bacteria.


both are cycled, functionally speaking. They both carry an intended bioload from day one. The first link in this thread is a giant full start reef and anemone and fish and corals on day one, using only biospira. We can’t say it’s uncycled if it just carried a full reef without allowing ammonia buildup.

One set of rocks can endure full water changes right at the start (live rock tank transfer skip cycle) and the other bottle bac cycle needs ~ three days minimum wait time for implantation to occur, then that set of rocks can endure full water changes.

That’s the difference, time of wait until system is immune to water change export.

It’s not the bioload carry that differs or we’d be on a continuum of harmful symptoms here linked. at page eighteen I’m asking to see examples of bad bottle bac posts we can analyze for cause.

The only measures I see on file are of wins, like Ike’s full reef on day one. That was a win, an instant cycle. it just didn’t stick in place until day three, per Dr. Reef’s bottle bac thread averages

 

[MnFish1]

Intentions aside, saying that QTing fish always works is the equivalent of what we are talking about here.... but not really diving into what QT really means. If your point is that not everybody does it right, then I agree.

Agreed - its about 50/50 - that say 'QT works'

A better false equivalency for this thread would be to give advice, before people screw up, about how a select group of people handle QT who are more talented than most and then offer it as proof that you don't need to do it. For example, jda does not QT fish and has not needed to in decades - this is true. I know that this does not work for everybody, so I don't offer it much without a LOT of context and nuance about why and how it works from actual experience. I stay out of a lot of this stuff since I am aware enough to know that what I do should not be done by everybody and bottling it as a one-size-fits all is harmful.

I would be interested in your methods. I have also never had a QT tank.

...or, person XYZ on a board has compiled a huge list of people whose fish were cured of ich just with Garlic. ...so they tell everybody that garlic is all that is needed since people who it did not work for are haters.

This I would guess - is not going to happen - BUT - it might be similar to people who say 'product xxxx' lowered their ammonia.

Like I said, I am not a huge disease expert, but what makes Jay soooo good is that he can sniff out when the directions are not likely to work or need adjustment.

Yes - Agree

 

[brandon429]

Verifying the bottle of bacteria isn’t dead before use is ideal in all cases. Then it’s taking no chance


It’s a little hard to advise the masses to verify it with api for reasons linked (absolutely any nh4 detected tells the keeper the ammonia is lethal burn level vs understanding most full running reefs read .25 as nh4 on api because reefs don’t run at zero ammonia) so I’m at a loss as to how folks should verify their bottled bac


mainly I intended to look at the process by and large the masses are doing which is add bottle bac and then go, with two small fish. That’s working in any example I can find. since every seneye + bottle bac cycle I’ve seen was nh3 well under control, I have no reason to believe fish-in cycling is harming fish as a practice.

thinking fish-in cycling with bottle bac harms fish as a general practice seems to be a misnomer driven largely by nonmeasure (folks aren’t taking time to search for and document instances of true failed cycles with convincing measure) and by failure to consider symptoms lacking + dilution trends and rarity of dead bottle bac in circulation.

 

[MnFish1]

It’s a little hard to advise the masses to verify it with api for reasons linked (absolutely any nh4 detected tells the keeper the ammonia is lethal burn level vs understanding most full running reefs read .25 as nh4 on api because reefs don’t run at zero ammonia) so I’m at a loss as to how folks should verify their bottled bac

This is frankly not true. If you use the calculator below - if the ammonia is 0.25 - with a pH of 8 - the free ammonia is not anywhere near toxic. So - in reality - it depends on the free ammonia. It also depends on the 'average person' following the directions on the API test kit. If the vial is not completely 'yellow' - people interpret that as being 0.25 ppm total ammonia - in fact thats not how the instructions read. So there's that.

I have tested 4 different API test kits (that I used for my experiments) - and when I expected the ammonia to be zero - it was zero (yellow) - I perhaps put one extra drop of one reagent into one vial and it read between 0 and 0.25 - which led me to read the instructions - after doing so the 'reading' was 'zero'. Though it didnt match completely the 0 on the tab.

Then there is lighting, drop size, etc etc. Done correctly IMHO - API tests are as good as any of the other color based tests (except Hanna - which I sold on Ebay - for a loss - due to their lack of reproducibility). Many will disagree with that

Free Ammonia Calculator

Aquarium calculator; Estimate the free (un-ionized) ammonia (NH3) concentration, given the total ammonia concentration.

www.hamzasreef.com

I would encourage a lot of people to enter ammonia values into this calculator - and see the results. In fact - even an ammonia level of 0.25 - with no cause - on an API test kit will not give a free ammonia suggesting a toxic level.. That said - It should be 0 - and if done correctly, and read under the correct light - if its 0 - it will measure 0 In my experience

 

[brandon429]

Well said counter point.

your poll didn’t have the majority as running yellow on cycled tanks, only scientists pull that off

Dan, T, Dr. Reef, yourself, Randy I’d assume, all nimble api testers admitted. Earns yellow consistently across tests... And then there’s the rest of us mixing in the procedural fouls + no nh3 referencing, agreed.


we need new cycling rules. Why hasn’t some author discerned the truth yet, it’s 2022


our hobby needs updated published cycling studies we can reference.

 

[brandon429]

I thought you’ve done a good job in the research forum with your measures in cycling dynamics.

 

[mindme]

What do you say about the people who followed BRS's instructions? BRS puts themselves out there as an authority. Many, including me, tell people to not trust everything that they read or hear. Since I tell them this, I don't blame them if they want some advice or help. Seems like double talk to me. Surely lots of people followed BRS's instructions. Are the hobbyists to blame for that?

You typed this above and it is a good sentiment: "Yeah, I've been in this hobby for 12 years now, and I've heard these same myths the entire time. I'm glad I think for myself..." I echo this and also constantly tell people not to trust any manufacturer since they want to sell product more than be helpful. I know that mnfish has said the same thing in the Vibrant threads, at least. ...so where does somebody who knows nothing draw the line? It is up to us to help them, right? Not all instructions are right.

You are not skipping anything. You just have the ability to keep fish while all of the other things still happen. It is not like adding a bottle of bacteria permanently keeps oxic, anoxic, matting, surface and waterborne bacteria from forming and acts like a permanent solution. Again, the implication matter. The nuance might be lost on some, but you would really be helping the ones that get it if you explained this or used different terms. I guess that the need to wait to add a smart amount of fish is skipped, but this might be better termed as a skip-wait instead of a skip-cycle since the real cycle has to happen still.

Nobody is right or wrong 100% of the time. While I don't always agree with BRS, I have never found them to be dishonest or purposely misleading people. I find them more helpful than not.

If someone posts something that is incorrect, it should be corrected. But some of the time it really doesn't even matter. Like this thread. It doesn't really matter what method people use to cycle their tank, so long as it works. Even though I think the old fashioned way is dated and takes longer than is needed, I'm not going to care if someone wants to do it that way.

And when it would take me a month to reach the point where I could add fish vs same day adding fish, I think it skips quite a bit. Same for the other bacteria we are able to add now which helps skip many of the ugly stages. Introducing the bacteria allows for systems to become mature much faster, even if things like corals getting bigger still take longer.

Also I'm not really sure why you think the cycle takes as long after adding bacteria. I guess it can depend on the type of bacteria, but as long as they are in your tank reproducing at a rate that is enough to handle the fish load, I'm unsure what else you are really going for at that stage of the tank. There is no point where it stops working, you are seeding the tank.

It's kind of like sod. You can wait for the grass to grow naturally, or you can buy sod and have a great lawn right away. None of my business which you choose, but I would find it odd for the guy who grows grass to say the other guy doesn't have a real lawn because the roots haven't fully taken hold or whatever.