Should we rethink and refine means and methods for cycling tanks?

[Lasse]

I think it is a matter of how they are acclimated to it, or species tolerance. I personally have lost some fish at these .5 levels.

Just play around with the first calculator and you will see how dangerous it could be if someone just say false if anyone report these figures. Just use this automatically with references to other aquariums without knowing any more background about the actual aquarium should be included in the 7 deadly sins - IMO

Sincerely Lasse

 

[brandon429]

Thats false Lasse, we've built a thousand tanks running just fine off it, and you have no counter works to show for that claim, its just made up.


Everyday our list grows of new tanks we can inspect a year out, and we have a massive list of tanks from last year we can also inspect, not taking time to inspect anything to base your claims makes them easy to make, in other people's work threads.

Lasse it would help if you would post inside cycle help threads their specific allowed start dates as you see it, so that we have something to measure several months out. if you want them to wait months for nitrite zero, then sell them on doing so, and build a link thread around those patterns. you create and sustain a no-work no accountability comfort zone by just having your own reef as the center of cycling advice, that literally doesnt help new cyclers with dry rock starts for example, if they don't agree to wait for stocking months to allow the rocks time to take on growths and mature a little. today has a quicker start date requested component than that, and if you'd like to claim yours is a better disease control model, that's why we need your specific advice seen in a work thread that you make and that uses other people's reef tanks not just your sole reef tank as the focus.

I know you weren't totally against quarantine as observation so you could be combining those two options, qt and maturing out the tank weeks past the normal start date, so that as a group we can see who agrees to wait that long and how it turns out. I get chats from plenty of folks doing the BRS 4 months start delay, its big on youtube, we track those out months after the stocking rate routinely. I'm here to relay disease emergence isn't affected by meeting assigned quick start dates, or waiting for system maturity, velvet still rips through the fish if vectored in.

it would help tremendously if you'd sell new tank help requests on your own method and build some patterns we can all look back on vs just relaying opinions not backed by anything we can read for pages, and pages.

its not helpful for your entire catalog of proof to be from your own reef and from books you own. that's omitting the one form of stinging accountability we need to see for claims...working in other people's reef tanks.

 

[DrZoidburg]

@Garf Yes but in one particular case it was a direct link. With an established fish. Was just a matter of it rising too quickly. vs slow build up.

 

[brandon429]

7 deadly sins




Thats total hype, we have thousands of happy aquarists using updated cycling science that handles cycling opposite of how you handle it Lasse. the claim is totally unrelated to our earnings and outcomes and aquarist happiness using our system.

Whats funny is I dont think your system is bad at all, there's nothing I'd cast down about it.

waiting months and only starting with matured rock is everyone's ideal, I'm for it. Since we still encouter 99% of posts daily that won't use that method, we need to address the larger requested need for a viable start date


sitting back in disagreement with their quick starts isn't addressing the changing ways the public is cycling nowadays.

you should hop into quick start cycle thread help posts and try and build up some outcomes that aligned with your advice, find ways that set your control group away from the others and log them. Since 2019 we've been debating these same things and I never got to see two years of aquarists using your method, but we have about 400 dry start setups using new cycling science we can inspect.

 

[DrZoidburg]

7 deadly sins




Thats total hype, we have thousands of happy aquarists using updated cycling science that handles cycling opposite of how you handle it Lasse. the claim is totally unrelated to our earnings and outcomes and aquarist happiness using our system.

How also would you explain a few threads on here just the past couple days. (nothing of yours) Where people had fish that died in low level ammonia, and no obvious disease. Also to add to above not just sensitive species, time of rise, but time of being in this environment. The gill damage grows exponentially.

 

[Lasse]

es indeed so at a pH of 8.0, 79F, 35ppt you’d have to get it up to around 1ppm total ammonia to reach 0.05 NH3, which appears to be the alert level according to Seachem anyway, not even alarm level.

Sure but if you take that figure in the morning - before light - then photosynthesis - pH 8.5

What I try to say is if you should give any advices in a situation like this - you need to know a lot about the actual aquarium - not only automatically says false or not of concern.

Thats false Lasse, we've built a thousand tanks running just fine off it, and you have no counter works to show for that claim, its just made up.


Everyday our list grows of new tanks we can inspect a year out, and we have a massive list of tanks from last year we can also inspect, not taking time to inspect anything to base your claims makes them easy to make, in other people's work threads.

You still not get it - it could be of no concern for all of these cases - but it does not mean that the situation in the next aquarium is the same. You must analyse every case for itself. I have had a driver license since 1968 - drive in average 15 000 km a year. Had have one serious accident because of overspeed (in my second year of driving - a newbie) since that I have drive more than 750 000 km without any serve accident - but that do not means that if I miscalculate (or get an advise of just that bend - you can drive in 100 km/h) something that I will not have any accident next trip.

Instead, the probability increases that the next km causes a serious accident with each km I drive.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[brandon429]

its ok if you don't want to study other people's systems using your method, we will have several more on file before this year closes to build up the method I'm using. every day, week and month we build new inspection logs, that's where you and I differ on data generation and analysis. Ive noticed the difference is accountability too, by stating specific start dates there's other people's money on the line, time and animals, that's what we're inspecting months after the call.

by always just typing on a keyboard to wait longer, there's nothing on the line. any losses are just because they didn't wait long enough, this prevents you from having any real stake in your claims and it makes it easy for you to evaluate the work others do as negative, when in fact the results are 100% positive. by having nothing on the line for an inspection date, you can state "seven deadly sins" to hundreds of folks who were helped by our method, not harmed. we took a false stalled cycle and fixed it free, without any purchases or extra wait times, and now their tanks can be clicked on for reading and they can be sent messages to ask about outcomes.

you didn't get the seven deadly sins advice for example by asking any of my thread participants, it was just made up risk again.

 

[Garf]

Sure but if you take that figure in the morning - before light - then photosynthesis - pH 8.5

What I try to say is if you should give any advices in a situation like this - you need to know a lot about the actual aquarium - not only automatically says false or not of concern.



You still not get it - it could be of no concern for all of these cases - but it does not mean that the situation in the next aquarium is the same. You must analyse every case for itself. I have had a driver license since 1968 - drive in average 15 000 km a year. Had have one serious accident because of overspeed (in my second year of driving - a newbie) since that I have drive more than 750 000 km without any serve accident - but that do not means that if I miscalculate (or get an advise of just that bend - you can drive in 100 km/h) something that I will not have any accident next trip.

Instead, the probability increases that the next km causes a serious accident with each km I drive.

Sincerely Lasse

I’ve never seen that level of ammonia, with ghost feed, waiting, but I can see how ammonia dosing could make things a lot more precarious.

For what it’s worth, the calculator suggests a pH of 8.5 would need 1.4ppm total ammonia to reach Seachem ALARM level of 0.2 NH3. But if that’s just a guess on their part, who knows.

I always get zero, zero, before adding fish or inverts, it used to be the law
Small readings like DrZ mentioned would not concern me if they were on their way down WITH nitrite confirmation. I HATE the idea of not testing nitrite as it can confirm step 1.

 

[DrZoidburg]

disease emergence isn't affected by meeting assigned quick start dates

"disease emergence isn't affected by meeting assigned quick start dates"
Will have to double quote it incase it gets changed 5 minutes from now or two months later. IMO Not true. Scientifically shown that certain conditions can alter fish immune system.

 

[brandon429]

Disease control is what we battle most about even though it seems we battle over cycling


you can clearly see my assigned start date cycles, that we log for years, aren't having trouble carrying animals. The implied risk is disease emergence compared to long wait cycles/classic cycles which you advocate. I can see your matured system cycles certainly don't have trouble carrying animals once all three tests on API agree for the start.

I'm relaying in total honesty I'm not seeing a difference in disease outbreaks among cyclers, the difference comes when they read Jay's forum and adhere to it in prep and practice. I have seen the cycling method doesn't matter after inspecting hundreds and hundreds of cycling reefs and their 8 mos-1 yr outcome, its an honest relay of pattern. The relay comes directly from working in other's reef tanks as the sole data collection method. I didn't take time to log it and chart it, but my verbal summary isn't worthless toast lol but its ok to keep disagreeing too it provides helpful checks and balances to claims.

as long as aquarists are simply happy with my method that's what will stay in place for a while longer, no reason to change yet. I promise if disease factors were worse we'd be waiting longer/I'd be at least advising not to add fish on day ten for example in bottle bac cycles.

 

[Garf]

"disease emergence isn't affected by meeting assigned quick start dates"
Will have to double quote it incase it gets changed 5 minutes from now or two months later. IMO Not true. Scientifically shown that certain conditions can alter fish immune system.

Lol. I’ve edited my last one, you better have a look

 

[brandon429]

this next coming year will be a year of patterned disease tracking, we've got the start date thing down complete.

 

[DrZoidburg]

Disease occurs regardless of what way one cycle. However certain conditions can for a fact contribute to more probability.

 

[LRT]

Hahaha incredible
@Lasse Randy Did post in this thread and did tell us.
"Cycle with Ammonia if you want to."
"Cycle with Nitrates if you want to."
"Test nitrites for fun"
Everyone paying attention now know that nitrites is of no significance cycling with ammonia at the levels of light measured feedings we have discussed in this thread.
Seneye gives nh3 readings down to super low precise concentrations. Any reefer can verify those low concentrations with a cheap Api kit

 

[Lasse]

Thats total hype, we have thousands of happy aquarists using updated cycling science that handles cycling opposite of how you handle it Lasse. the claim is totally unrelated to our earnings and outcomes and aquarist happiness using our system.

I cross streets every day without looking to the left, looking to the right and looking to the left again before I cross. I´m still alive - but will I be that the next time? I do not know the actual situation - so I do not know that. One of my favorite endings in a novel is something like this

when he came up over the crest he saw that there was fog down by the bridge as usual. Since he had driven this road every night for twenty years, he know the road and the weak curve after the bridge. He increased his speed into the fog. That night, a truck had its engine stopped at the weak curve----- the End

You do not understand that with a system that is dynamic and different in every tank - you can´t advise people to do things before you know most parameters and all basically fact about the actual setup.

I’ve never seen that level of ammonia, with ghost feed, waiting, but I can see how ammonia dosing could make things a lot more precarious.

For what it’s worth, the calculator suggests a pH of 8.5 would need 1.4ppm total ammonia to reach Seachem ALARM level of 0.2 NH3. But if that’s just a guess on their part, who knows.

I always get zero, zero, before adding fish or inverts, it used to be the law
Small readings like DrZ mentioned would not concern me if they were on their way down WITH nitrite confirmation. I HATE the idea of not testing nitrite as it can confirm step 1.

Exactly my point. Things change and our methods need to adapt and I do not advise before I have enough of data in the actual case. If there is not enough of data in the actual case - I will put on more than 10 factor of safety in my advise - and also tell how unsure I am . What Brandon does in nearly every beginner thread is - IMO - the most ruthless way of handling other people's animals. The "working threads" he refer to is - in best case - true for that case - but it does not mean that there is no truck standing on the road in the next upcoming case.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[LRT]

Thats false Lasse, we've built a thousand tanks running just fine off it, and you have no counter works to show for that claim, its just made up.


Everyday our list grows of new tanks we can inspect a year out, and we have a massive list of tanks from last year we can also inspect, not taking time to inspect anything to base your claims makes them easy to make, in other people's work threads.

Lasse it would help if you would post inside cycle help threads their specific allowed start dates as you see it, so that we have something to measure several months out. if you want them to wait months for nitrite zero, then sell them on doing so, and build a link thread around those patterns. you create and sustain a no-work no accountability comfort zone by just having your own reef as the center of cycling advice, that literally doesnt help new cyclers with dry rock starts for example, if they don't agree to wait for stocking months to allow the rocks time to take on growths and mature a little. today has a quicker start date requested component than that, and if you'd like to claim yours is a better disease control model, that's why we need your specific advice seen in a work thread that you make and that uses other people's reef tanks not just your sole reef tank as the focus.

I know you weren't totally against quarantine as observation so you could be combining those two options, qt and maturing out the tank weeks past the normal start date, so that as a group we can see who agrees to wait that long and how it turns out. I get chats from plenty of folks doing the BRS 4 months start delay, its big on youtube, we track those out months after the stocking rate routinely. I'm here to relay disease emergence isn't affected by meeting assigned quick start dates, or waiting for system maturity, velvet still rips through the fish if vectored in.

it would help tremendously if you'd sell new tank help requests on your own method and build some patterns we can all look back on vs just relaying opinions not backed by anything we can read for pages, and pages.

its not helpful for your entire catalog of proof to be from your own reef and from books you own. that's omitting the one form of stinging accountability we need to see for claims...working in other people's reef tanks.

Brandon my next thread is going to be-

Cycling with Ammonia and Seneye NH3
The most efficient way to cycle and stock a tank in record time
We will put 0 "Significance" on the testing of nitrites. We will "test the for fun" but prove the "Significance" of Randy's statement!

 

[LRT]

I meant to add that info regarding how long he sat in there, for that reason. I wouldn’t think more than a few hrs.
I think my “0” nh3 readings were off?( user error possibly because I’m getting consistent .25-.5 readings now. Even after 20% WC which I did hrs after finding dead fish. I do and have been testing nitrites through cycling… never got much in regards to it though. Some,but not much.
im paranoid now that I wasn’t cycled.
I guess I should just keep testing until I get consistent 0 nh3 for a while or what?
I didn’t mean to hijack this post.

No problem
Honestly if I was a betting man I'd say you bought an unhealthy fish and it died not because of your cycle.
Its not unheard of for ammonia to sky rocket with a dead fish in water for 3 hours.

I cycle ammonia in the form of small feedings with cured rubble, a few mysis and a few cuc. Ive seen Api Ammonia and Seneye Nh3 read .001 to themselves twice in as little as 12 hrs and had a fully healthy fish that is still alive today and doing well.
I dont believe ammonia was a factor for you at all.

 

[Lasse]

Hahaha incredible
@Lasse Randy Did post in this thread and did tell us.
"Cycle with Ammonia if you want to."
"Cycle with Nitrates if you want to."
"Test nitrites for fun"
Everyone paying attention now know that nitrites is of no significance cycling with ammonia at the levels of light measured feedings we have discussed in this thread.
Seneye gives nh3 readings down to super low precise concentrations. Any reefer can verify those low concentrations with a cheap Api kit

Are you insane? or are you in favor of the sentence that if a lie is repeated enough of times - it will be true

Here is what he wrote in post #731 He does not talk about cycle at all - the word cycle is not mentioned in the post at all, You have change his word in favour for your hypothesis - you just are a simple counterfeiter. But maybe it is my bad english that says that measure and cycle not is synonyms.

Cycle with nitrite if you want - how in the whole world did you fit that together?

You owe us a big apology for falsifying what a person wrote in your thread

I don't agree. Can you cite any examples where these hypotheses of yours actually turned out to be true and useful?

I see no benefit to measuring nitrite except for:

1. Fun (chemistry is fun for some of us)
2. To ensure the accuracy of nitrate measurements that are interfered with by nitrite

Anything else is best handled other ways.

If you care about ammonia, measure ammonia. If you care about nitrate, measure nitrate.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[LRT]

I’ve never seen that level of ammonia, with ghost feed, waiting, but I can see how ammonia dosing could make things a lot more precarious.

For what it’s worth, the calculator suggests a pH of 8.5 would need 1.4ppm total ammonia to reach Seachem ALARM level of 0.2 NH3. But if that’s just a guess on their part, who knows.

I always get zero, zero, before adding fish or inverts, it used to be the law
Small readings like DrZ mentioned would not concern me if they were on their way down WITH nitrite confirmation. I HATE the idea of not testing nitrite as it can confirm step 1.

Exactly sir. Sorry to leave you hanging here.
We've already come to agreement Nitrate and Nitrites are big fat nothing burgers here. Nothing to be a concern with it all. Thanks for holding down the fort!

 

[LRT]

Are you insane? or are you in favor of the sentence that if a lie is repeated enough of times - it will be true

Here is what he wrote in post #731 He does not talk about cycle at all - the word cycle is not mentioned in the post at all, You have change his word in favour for your hypothesis - you just are a simple counterfeiter. But maybe it is my bad english that says that measure and cycle not is synonyms.

You owe us a big apology for falsifying what a person wrote in your thread



Sincerely Lasse

Yup and we already agreed we don't need to fear mongering anything outside of Ammonia here. The slow measured feedings and concentration of all lets us get super precise.
Again there is no significance in doing anything other than Tracking Seneye Nh3 and Confirming it with ApI ammonia.
Anything else really is "just for fun."
And of "NO SIGNIFICANCE"