A thread tracking pure skip cycle instant reefs, no bottle bac

[MnFish1]

I do consider the sheer inability of any cycling umpire to provide an example of a truly failed cycle they've directly seen an aspect of updated cycling science.


Old cycling science painted the risk as high, not low, constant, many-fold, for thirty years or more.

Waiting for Lasses input. I'm sure he's seen an aquatic production pond fail at a fish hatchery, but I'm asking for simple reef tank links from a thread he worked.

If I can't find a single fail example, much less 3, from the top reefers I know, then that's amazing and we should quit painting these risks to readers that we can't produce.

Her is a potential problem you haven't thought of. My guess is that you're not seeing/getting either a complete nor balanced number of cycling questions. I'm especially thinking of new reefers - taking their 'live' rock home sticking it in their tank - with xxx fish and invertebrates - since there is no way to know how much bioload one can handle with rock from a pet store, I'm sure there are lots of people who have failed, but don't report it or know they can report it. I know - when I was younger - until I figured it out - it was pretty easy to kill fish with overloaded bioload, etc.

 

[brandon429]

that's reasonable agreed. Its why the least I can do is put concrete trackable examples here so there's accountability for the approach. all I can do is be accountable to the ones I see and can work.

If anyone copies what we do here silently, without making a thread: it isn't going to fail.

 

[Lasse]

Just got Lasse's answer, it met the predictions in place.

Nobody here has seen one failed cycle in their reefing career that they can clearly link, no recent examples, no past ones, that's amazing. I figured I'd get at least 4.

Right now, Bean is combing the web furiously for links of anything, failed acclimations/anything we can pin on ammonia lol. post what u find Bean

You must lost your mind or - you ask me in my NO2 thread if I have seen any crashes caused by NO2 in saltwater. I have never claimed that.

On the other hand - I have seen many deaths because of NH3 toxification both in new aquarium with too much fish/food and in fish transport over 24 hours where people mix the bag water with high pH water from their tanks.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[brandon429]

agreed, too much fish food can overcome resident bacteria and ammonia crash. that hasn't been a problem for me though, ever, in any cycle worked because we don't use copious feeding. I would also consider a weeklong power outage that stopped a reef from having motion, heating or basic supports not a cycle crash either.

I had shortened the example list to: display tank reefs only for a reason (that's what we're working with here)


the only way a smooth transfer of rocks among two tanks is going to fail, or be problematic, is if we have them provide a proving ammonia pass test using non-seneye kits. at that point, we'll have every false stuck cycle thread on the internet (working animals, in all cases, only a degree of debatable nh4 to argue about/not really a fail)

 

[Lasse]

both in new aquarium with to much fish/food

agreed, too much fish food can overcome resident bacteria and ammonia crash.

Not to much fish food but if you feed more fish than your nitrification process manage to handle - you get a rise in total ammonia and if pH is high - NH3. To adjust the nitrification process to expected load - that´s cycling

Sincerely Lasse

 

[brandon429]

well said.

 

[revhtree]

Closed under staff review.

 

[Daniel@R2R]

After careful review and discussion, the administration has decided to reopen this thread. This decision was made after thoroughly evaluating both its original purpose and the circumstances that led to its closure. Our goal is to foster constructive discussion and ensure that valuable information remains accessible to the community.

While past challenges with this thread have been acknowledged, we recognize that its content has been beneficial to members over the years. Moving forward, we expect all participants to engage respectfully and adhere to our community guidelines. Healthy debate is welcome, but personal attacks, disruptive behavior, or hostility will not be tolerated.

We are reopening this thread with the expectation that it remains a space for meaningful discussion. Its continued availability will depend on the quality of interactions within it. We appreciate everyone’s cooperation in keeping discussions productive and look forward to seeing further contributions to this topic.

 

[brandon429]

Very happy to be open for example collection business

This thread was started with the objective to collect and analyze only objective data:

-To visually proof a set of rocks as skip cycle, or not, using repeating clues for benthic organism biomarkers that signal complete cycling is in place (coralline, algae, limpets, other corals accreted into the rock, forams, the life we see on real live rock)

As a dedicated reefer of 25 years I've never once seen a cycle article linking visual cues on surfaces to cycling completion, with confidence in fact, we have a strong benefit to being allowed to study those patterns here. Thankful for the renewed start for sure.



-To skip all manner of ammonia testing here, for reasons stated, unless the data is from a calibrated seneye machine- then we want it so bad I might paypal you a little bounty for running some inspections...

-To look at what animals do when installed in a skip cycle new reef tank setup: do they display harm symptoms, or skip cycle safe behaviors and symptoms

- how many years can we keep up perfect results with this approach

- to discuss and define the contrast in reef materials handling paradigms from professional aquarists at reef conventions / fears no cycle / to every cycling post currently running on the internet where cyclers can never really be certain their tank was safe for fish (because they battle over various test kit subjectivity)

- to include disease preps as the absolute pressing need for all reef tank cycles: predicting ammonia status has always been the easy part (works for dry cycles too, have fifty pages of examples handy)


I wanted to build tanks and study outcomes from reef systems that break the cardinal rule in reefing:

nothing good happens fast.


We here can make good things, fast

I'll work up some new builds, won't take long.

Happy reefing to all!
B

 

[Troylee]

Ahhhh perfect timing! Here’s how you skip cycle! Same day tank with sps and never looked back! Grabbed 10 pounds of rock from display and threw it in the sump and filled the frag tank with my display water! It’s, its own system running on its own and zero cycle! Sps looked great the minute I dropped them in!

 

[MnFish1]

Very happy to be open for example collection business

This thread was started with the objective to collect and analyze only objective data:

-To visually proof a set of rocks as skip cycle, or not, using repeating clues for benthic organism biomarkers that signal complete cycling is in place (coralline, algae, limpets, other corals accreted into the rock, forams, the life we see on real live rock)

As a dedicated reefer of 25 years I've never once seen a cycle article linking visual cues on surfaces to cycling completion, with confidence in fact, we have a strong benefit to being allowed to study those patterns here. Thankful for the renewed start for sure.

I hate to jump into this pool again - and I generally agree with you on this - however, by the time there are visual cues, the tank itself may continue to spiral downward. Many new reefers are even less likely to pick up on visual cues. So - I don't understand the reticence to use a simple ammonia test when starting up a tank - despite the occasional false reading?

-To skip all manner of ammonia testing here, for reasons stated, unless the data is from a calibrated seneye machine- then we want it so bad I might paypal you a little bounty for running some inspections...

I don't understand the rationale for a Seneye. If there is no value to ammonia testing, there is also no rationale for a Seneye the way I think about it - I'm curious why?

-To look at what animals do when installed in a skip cycle new reef tank setup: do they display harm symptoms, or skip cycle safe behaviors and symptoms

- how many years can we keep up perfect results with this approach

- to discuss and define the contrast in reef materials handling paradigms from professional aquarists at reef conventions / fears no cycle / to every cycling post currently running on the internet where cyclers can never really be certain their tank was safe for fish (because they battle over various test kit subjectivity)

Just a couple of posts ago - when I mentioned that I have never done ammonia testing - and never had a problem, the answer was that since I was experienced, of course I can do it - but can a beginner? The people setting up at Marine shows, etc - are also extremely experienced (by definition) - and I would bet that at least some of those people add bacteria.

- to include disease preps as the absolute pressing need for all reef tank cycles: predicting ammonia status has always been the easy part (works for dry cycles too, have fifty pages of examples handy)

QT/Disease awareness is important - agree. It is also true, though, that bacterial blooms, high ammonia levels can often look like disease.

I wanted to build tanks and study outcomes from reef systems that break the cardinal rule in reefing:

nothing good happens fast.


We here can make good things, fast

I agree with this.

I'll work up some new builds, won't take long.

Happy reefing to all!
B

 

[MnFish1]

Ahhhh perfect timing! Here’s how you skip cycle! Same day tank with sps and never looked back! Grabbed 10 pounds of rock from display and threw it in the sump and filled the frag tank with my display water! It’s, its own system running on its own and zero cycle! Sps looked great the minute I dropped them in!

Since corals utilize ammonia, I think this is different than a skip cycle with fish - i.e. my guess is putting the live rock in was not necessary either - the coral acts as its own 'live rock'. You have a very nice tank and frag system!!!

 

[BeanAnimal]

So - I don't understand the reticence to use a simple ammonia test when starting up a tank - despite the occasional false reading?

IMHO the extreme attempts to redefine the entire "cycling" process and "simplify" it are making it exponentially more confusing, as is all of the invented language and terminology. It feels more like obfuscation for the sake of being contrary than it does "simplification". Likewise. the notion that all of these test kits and people testing can't be relied on and only a "seneye" is trustworthy, and only if that seneye reads "0" -- or it too can't be trusted -- are not even close to being true. It is certainly not simplifying information to help newcomers.

The entire premise itself is simple. Ammonia in almost all cases will begin to be processed. All we are looking for is a definite downward trend to verify that we are on the right side of the progression. "Zero" is not the goal "clearly moving toward zero" is.

 

[Troylee]

IMHO the extreme attempts to redefine the entire "cycling" process and "simplify" it are making it exponentially more confusing, as is all of the invented language and terminology. It feels more like obfuscation for the sake of being contrary than it does "simplification". Likewise. the notion that all of these test kits and people testing can't be relied on and only a "seneye" is trustworthy, and only if that seneye reads "0" -- or it too can't be trusted -- are not even close to being true. It is certainly not simplifying information to help newcomers.

The entire premise itself is simple. Ammonia in almost all cases will begin to be processed. All we are looking for is a definite downward trend to verify that we are on the right side of the progression. "Zero" is not the goal "clearly moving toward zero" is.

Agreed! Tons of people like myself are dosing ammonia daily! I dose 50ml of pretty potent ammonia and the fish don’t mind and the corals love it! I don’t have a ammonia test I just watch my nitrates and adjust accordingly.. I get this thread is more for the beginners than the advanced but in the end it’s all the same! It’s a process and that’s called cycling! Plenty of ways to skip it or speed it up etc etc.

 

[Troylee]

Since corals utilize ammonia, I think this is different than a skip cycle with fish - i.e. my guess is putting the live rock in was not necessary either - the coral acts as its own 'live rock'. You have a very nice tank and frag system!!!

I would have had fish in there the same day but the stores were pretty empty. The rocks are just to keep it balanced, the sand was old and I rinsed it in tap water and filled it up a hour later lol. I did put some snails and a couple crabs in the same day.

 

[brandon429]

I'm 100% for/pro dosing ammonia to boost nitrogen in systems, I do it as well in my old pico reef.

The ammonia fears we prevent here are those associated with the common, well-written fears online of noncontrol of ammonia ability during the cycle.

this particular set of reefs are immune to that condition, risk not present. I wanted to section off one type of reef tank where the cycling concern is 0%, from the second we lay eyes on the rocks to be used in the system. absolute cycling confidence begins right there, based on what we saw.

skip cycling isn't as shocking as it was at the start/20 years ago. it's not meant to be a shock or totally astounding new info/this is 2025 we're a bit spoiled on procedure options now...the point of the thread is simple patterning, to collect what we've been collecting and just see if any patterns present.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I would have had fish in there the same day but the stores were pretty empty. The rocks are just to keep it balanced, the sand was old and I rinsed it in tap water and filled it up a hour later lol. I did put some snails and a couple crabs in the same day.

In that specific context, the issue that I have is between choosing to "not test" and understanding the ramifications of being "wrong". If one understands what is going and and chooses not to test, that is on them. On the other hand telling people, not in the know, that there is never a need to test, because the profess can never cause a problem, is both misleading and not educational.

So in that vein -- I have an issue with made up a terms like "new cycling science" used to encompass "rules" that are not actually rules or absolutes.

The simple point is that there are numerous instances of "skip cycle" and "tank transfer" situations where there is unquestionably a spike in ammonia due to temporary disruption of the nitrifying bacterial colonies. To discount these as 100% "testing error" is to blatantly ignore facts, chemistry and and biology. So again using obfuscation and rhetoric to complicate something that can be easily and simply explained.

The ammonia fears we prevent here are those associated with the common, well-written fears online of noncontrol of ammonia ability during the cycle.

Framing the conveyance of factual information is not "fear" -- it is teaching people about how the nitrogen cycle works.

this particular set of reefs are immune to that condition, risk not present. I wanted to section off one type of reef tank where the cycling concern is 0%, from the second we lay eyes on the rocks to be used in the system. absolute cycling confidence begins right there, based on what we saw.

I simply don't agree and over the years, you have been exposed to countless instances that clearly show this not to be the case. You simply don't count them and chalk them up to testing error.

The rub here, as has been every time this comes up is your framing things in absolutes that are not supported by the biology itself. Nitrifying bacteria are not magic, the colonies follow the same rules that all bacteria do. Lag, log, stationary and death. In the process of these invasive actions, that balance, in relation to the what needs to be processed can (and is) disrupted and it can take time, days, for it to catch back up. The debate about what constitutes dangerous levels or timeframes is another discussion and should not be conflated.

So, as I mentioned in the other thread, instead of absolute language, it would be proper to say "If this method is followed there is low risk of..." or "In most cases, even if ammonia is present, it will likely not be at damaging levels, but a simple test will help to verify...."

skip cycling isn't as shocking as it was at the start/20 years ago. it's not meant to be a shock or totally astounding new info/this is 2025 we're a bit spoiled on procedure options now...the point of the thread is simple patterning, to collect what we've been collecting and just see if any patterns present.

I am not sure that I follow. What scientifically has changed, or are you just speaking to the process that you follow now?

 

[Lasse]

Ahhhh perfect timing! Here’s how you skip cycle! Same day tank with sps and never looked back! Grabbed 10 pounds of rock from display and threw it in the sump and filled the frag tank with my display water! It’s, its own system running on its own and zero cycle! Sps looked great the minute I dropped them in!

This is not new cycling science - its old as the stones in the streets. Starting a new tank using already cycling water, already cycling sand, already cycled rocks and frags from a cycled aquarium. I have done the same technique in bots fresh and saltwater since the beginning of the seventies. Is not a skipped cycle because all used things has already been cycled.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[brandon429]

this isn't a thread to battle if this is new or old science. that battle got my thread closed you're aware.




what would be positive, helpful a change from prior behaviors:

feel free to post any link for any read, showing the history of skip cycling. that's objective.


show links to articles that detailed these works from years ago.

Find an old article that details visual cycling confirmation, post that.