# Opinions: Do most people take "tank cycling" too seriously?



## cyfan964 (Dec 9, 2009)

A fellow aquarist and I were having a discussion the other day about the "cycling" process of aquariums. We came to the conclusion that most people take the whole process maybe to seriously so I was interested in everyone elses opinion. 

Every aquarium I have ever set up I always do the exact same thing. I do a partial water change on my other tanks and add that water to the aquarium. I then fill the remainder of the tank with tap water and then add dechlorinator. After that I squeeze some filter media into the tank and hook up some aeration/new filter.

I then add a handful of any floating plant I can find and continue to feed the tank with flake food as if there were fish in it for a week. After a week I do an approximately 30% water change and immediately add fish at that point. I don't even own water parameter testing equipment and I have never lost a fish from "new tank syndrome" or whatever you want to call it.

I often read of people adding household ammonia, special store purchased items, and waiting weeks-months before adding fish.

I'm of the mindset that if you feed properly, do weekly/bi-weekly water changes you don't need to be to concerned of the "cycling" process. Am I way off base here? 

Let's try not to get chippy, everyone has their own ideas, I'm just honestly curious what others think.


----------



## PlantedRich (Jul 21, 2010)

Depends on how you deal. If you keep small fish and add them a few at a time, it works. But if you are the type who wants to order fish and that often means ordering all at once to save shipping, cycling is about the only way to go. 
Simple, cheap fish like tetras or mollies are not so expensive that most would get warped by their dying. If you are ordering 6-8 fish that costs $50 and up, you will likely want to do it more carefully. 
The cycle with ammonia, done correctly , will set the bio filter up to handle a full load where otherwise one has to work more slowly and watch more carefully for ammonia and nitrite if doing a fish-in cycle.


----------



## jrill (Nov 20, 2013)

Around 45 years ago when I first started keeping fish you never heard talk about cycling fresh water tanks. Only saltwater. Even 10 years ago I don't remember it being made such a big deal bout it like you read today. 

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk


----------



## mikeh7172 (Feb 22, 2013)

*lo tech amateur*

I'm just a lo tech amateur that prefers live plants as opposed to plastic. I have a 55 gal tank at 75% capacity. The only thing I do is 30% wc every 2 weeks and add dechlorinator (city water). I've had almost all my otos die and 2 mollies in the last 2 weeks. All others are healthy. My wife said she always used straight well water and rarely changed her 10 gallon. She even did complete flushes as I used to do and the fish survived. I would say some get too bent around the axle about it.


----------



## cyfan964 (Dec 9, 2009)

jrill said:


> Around 45 years ago when I first started keeping fish you never heard talk about cycling fresh water tanks. Only saltwater. Even 10 years ago I don't remember it being made such a big deal bout it like you read today.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk


Couldn't agree more. I read all these posts and am just so confused by the answers given to "beginners". It seems like we are turning something relatively simple into some crazy to achieve process. I had a co-worker recently tell me that they were going to get a tank for their kids, but after reading about the amount of work to get it set-up correctly online they passed and got a video game instead. That makes me sad.


----------



## jeremy va (Dec 22, 2012)

Given the incredible level of ignorance and misinformation at many PetStores (where most new aquarium keepers seem to get their "facts") and the tendency for people to buy a tank and bunch of fish and then show up on forums asking why their fish are dying it makes perfect sense for more knowledgeable people to get out there and preach about cycling. It takes time to cycle a tank and time to read about nitrates and nitrites and so on -- if they don't get some pressure to learn many will not bother. Once a month or thereabouts I see a post on this site where the poster's fish or inverts are clearly doomed because the person does not understand the basics. So, I think it makes perfect sense to preach the gospel of cycling and more: Quarantine and the responsible disposal of surplus fish or plants are two others that come to mind.

The difference between you (OP) and the folks I just mentioned is that you know what you are doing -- you can break the rules because you know them!

So, personally, I think it good to be an evangelist for "best practices" and preach cycling even if I don't practice it.


----------



## cyfan964 (Dec 9, 2009)

jeremy va said:


> Given the incredible level of ignorance and misinformation at many PetStores (where most new aquarium keepers seem to get their "facts") and the tendency for people to buy a tank and bunch of fish and then show up on forums asking why their fish are dying it makes perfect sense for more knowledgeable people to get out there and preach about cycling. It takes time to cycle a tank and time to read about nitrates and nitrites and so on -- if they don't get some pressure to learn many will not bother. Once a month or thereabouts I see a post on this site where the poster's fish or inverts are clearly doomed because the person does not understand the basics. So, I think it makes perfect sense to preach the gospel of cycling and more: Quarantine and the responsible disposal of surplus fish or plants are two others that come to mind.
> 
> The difference between you (OP) and the folks I just mentioned is that you know what you are doing -- you can break the rules because you know them!
> 
> So, personally, I think it good to be an evangelist for "best practices" and preach cycling even if I don't practice it.


I agree 100%. I guess I should have said in the beginning that I don't think any information given out is necessarily "bad" or "wrong", just that I was confused as to if every person out there was really going to such excessive lengths to get their tank ready for fish. I've read so many articles advising people to add certain percentages of store bought ammonia to get the tank cycling on a daily basis. How many people actually do that? To me advising a beginner to dump ammonia in a tank is almost scarier than having them do nothing... maybe I'm way off base here.


----------



## jeremy va (Dec 22, 2012)

cyfan964 said:


> I agree 100%. I guess I should have said in the beginning that I don't think any information given out is necessarily "bad" or "wrong", just that I was confused as to if every person out there was really going to such excessive lengths to get their tank ready for fish. I've read so many articles advising people to add certain percentages of store bought ammonia to get the tank cycling on a daily basis. How many people actually do that? To me advising a beginner to dump ammonia in a tank is almost scarier than having them do nothing... maybe I'm way off base here.


True. Then there is peroxide.


----------



## twentypoundtabby (Dec 7, 2013)

I've been keeping fish since 1969. I don't remember exactly when I learned about the nitrogen cycle, but it was a long time ago from library books. Way back then they didn't talk about fishless cycling and test kits, but they did strongly emphasize starting out with a few hardy fish to get things going and then to add fish slowly so the bacteria could catch up. 
So, for most of my fish keeping experience I've not done testing when setting up a new aquarium (most of my tanks have been set up for over 30 years), but I always took it very very slow and rarely lost fish due due to new tank syndrome. But I certainly know of people who bought a tank, set it up and promptly added a bunch of fish only to have them get sick and die in a few weeks when ammonia and/or nitrites built up because they didn't understand that their clean looking water wasn't as good as they thought it was.

Cycling was emphasized years ago:
Just recently I was cleaning out a bunch of stuff from the basement and found aquarium related magazines from late 1980's to early 1990's. I read a few of them again and noticed that they really really emphasized cycling! Every magazine had at least one large article about it, I assume to make sure that readers were educated on the subject. Some of the later magazines from 20 years ago talked about even fishless cycling. 

In the last few years my daughter started up her own tanks so I thought we'd get some test kits for our selves and follow the cycle. Since her tanks are betta tanks we didn't bother with a fishless cycle since bettas seem to be exremely tough. Even with plenty of media from my very established tanks, we observed the ammonia spike and then nitrite spike following by nitrates forming, taking almost a month to complete. With water changes and such we never observed any obvious stress on the fish, but it was definitely a learning experience to know that the fish were probably going through some stress. 
IMO, the nitrogen cycle is one of the most important things a person new to fish keeping needs to know. How they cycle their tanks, whether with a few tough fish, fish food or ammonia isn't the critical thing.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

jrill said:


> Around 45 years ago when I first started keeping fish you never heard talk about cycling fresh water tanks. Only saltwater. Even 10 years ago I don't remember it being made such a big deal bout it like you read today.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk


+1 and all the yammering has not saved fish.

Water changes, not sure why there's an aversion to them, but any new planted tank with CO2 etc, it's going to be a wise thing and will make the start up much much easier, eg, 2-3x a week, 50-70%. 

You get a planted tank, or otherwise, water changes are what you signed up for. Non CO2 can do without them, but............there's some caveats and serious trade offs. 

Plants take up NH4, so cycling is pointless for planted tanks.
There is no "cycle" of any concerned. I suppose if you have 1 Anubias and 30 Gallon tank...........then add 50 cardinals in it and feed them like mad right away, but those folks will kill their fish anyhow. They'd do best to do the water changes more and not play with ammonia. I'm trying to think of any good that Fishless cycling might do for a hobbyists, and I'm really coming up with very very few reasons anyone should bother with it.

Several others with decades also have essentially stated the same things.

Using mulm, or that brown muck from the filter sponge of filter media that's being cleaned is ideal cleaned, or swap out an old pad for the new filter pad etc. Plant roots are also covered with bacteria. So the seeding is easy. 
Why wait 3-4 weeks when you can add precisely what you need that's live and fresh?

Goad newbies into doing water changes, that will save more fish over time than any FC ever has. One simple universal thing. And teach them to do so and make it easier, eg, python like things or 20 years before python or similar hose doohickies came out, we used this:





Hang on the tank to drain, twist to set the height % you want changed, clean filters, do any other things you need while it drains out onto the lawn, drain etc. Once drained, then you take the other end and get a garden hose to PVC adapter(Most all hardware stores have these) and get generally 1/2" thread for the shower head. Adjust the tap temp and connect to refill the tank with tap water and add dechlorinator etc to the tank. No buckets are harmed, you can change multiple tanks in a few minutes. 

Plenty of folks have killed or toasted their tanks using Fishless cycling also, like anything that can kill fish...........


----------



## MarkM (Sep 16, 2012)

hmm, still do a cycle when I set up my tanks, not that hard and just takes a bit of time...

I like your pvc tank drain fill as it is really simple, I will modify mine a bit with your idea, I also have a 3/4" pvc with a 1.5" inlet for vacuuming when I do that

I normally do a 50% change every 3-4 weeks on a 120 and 50 at the same time, it takes me about an hour, during the drain and fill time I do some plant trimming, glass cleaning, and general housekeeping...


----------



## cyfan964 (Dec 9, 2009)

plantbrain said:


> +1 and all the yammering has not saved fish.
> 
> Water changes, not sure why there's an aversion to them, but any new planted tank with CO2 etc, it's going to be a wise thing and will make the start up much much easier, eg, 2-3x a week, 50-70%.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the reply Tom. You basically reaffirmed my opinion on the subject. Appreciate it.


----------



## twentypoundtabby (Dec 7, 2013)

Whether or not planted tanks will negate a cycle depends on the planted tank. A high light, high tech, CO2 tank with loads of plants is not a newby kind of tank. A low light low tech tank with lots of crypts and java fern will not take up the ammonia of anything more than a very low fish load. I will agree that adding floating plants such as pennywort or watersprite can soak it up pretty good, but it still won't allow someone to dump a bunch of rummynose into their tank right away. 
Even seeding with lots of old filter media can still take some time to properly colonize an entire new tank.

I've seen plenty over the years to totally convince me that cycling (and PATIENCE) is important for most fish keepers. And water changes. I will definitely agree with water changes.

I don't think it has to be complicated nor expensive. I'm very low tech, very old school - l learned to keep fish when I was a kid and no extra money so did without test kits and chemical additives, back in the day when I could declorinate water by just aging it a day and the only live plant I could find was elodea or hornwort.


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

Some things I think get missed are:
The nitrogen cycle is an inevitable occurrence in an aquarium. Whether we want one or not is irrelevant, it will happen.
A guppy is a very small fish, and its waste products must necessarily be extremely tiny compared to the size of a typical aquarium tank. It takes a lot of them, or other small fish, to produce a measurable amount of ammonia.
The bacteria that convert ammonia to nitrite will exist in equilibrium with the amount of ammonia that is present to feed them. Add a teaspoon of ammonia to the tank and grow a big colony of those bacteria, but stop adding the ammonia, and the bacteria colony has to shrink as a result. Add a few fish, instead of the ammonia, and the colony can quickly adjust to that, without overshooting and dieing back.

The above is why I like to plant my tank relatively heavily from the start, give it a week or two for the plants to start growing well, then add a few fish, wait a week or so, add a few more, wait another week or so and add the rest of the fish. ADA Aquasoil complicates this a bit, but the idea is still valid, in my opinion.


----------



## PlantedRich (Jul 21, 2010)

For those who say it makes no sense to cycle a tank, I have a question as I feel you may be ignoring one whole aspect of the hobby. Not all tanks are set up and used as your tanks are so there are other cases where I feel the tank needs to be cycled with a fishless cycle. 

Example: An experienced fish keeper who knows how to deal with fish, moves and wants to set up his tank. He doesn't want to settle for a few small fish as he has in the past. He wants nice, big, expensive fish that he can't get locally so he has to order them. 
The fish are only available from a dealer across the country so shipping is too expensive to do more than once. 

Does he do a fish in cycle and change water until he is blue and risk loss or damage to the fish ? Or does he need to do a fishless cycle and make the tank ready to support a full load of fish added all at once? 

There is not one true way to do this game but it does take some thought as to which works best in each situation. Of course there are those who can't do a fishless cycle correctly. But is that the fault of the process or the fault of the user?


----------



## jrman83 (Nov 22, 2010)

Isn't it all really just a choice? Is either means harder than the other? Most of you have experience and know what to expect and can deal with it. Is it better for someone new to aquariums to learn the nitrogen cycle through a somewhat artificial means where they are not forced to do water change or their fish die?

Given a choice between the two methods, which is better for the new aquarist _*and*_ the new fish that they want? 

I have done it both ways. If I want to mail order fish and order a lot to save by getting free shipping, if it is a new tank I am occupying I am going to go with a fishless cycle. I put close to 100 fish in an unplanted 125 in one day...something I wouldn't suggest as the first fish for any tank. If I just bought a new tank and wanted to stock with African cichlids, could I stock fast enough to fight against aggression issues...since normal practice is to overstock to prevent aggression? The last two tanks I cycled fishless I did it in 10 days or less and I could dose to 4ppm NH3 and it would be gone in less than 24hrs.

My preferred way is to heavily plant, wait a week or two and slowly stock. Most new aquarists don't have that kind of patience.

Point is, both ways have good and bad points. To me, both are extremely easy. It's like choosing a filter...we all have our own opinions on which type is best.


----------



## Byron (Aug 20, 2009)

To answer the initial question in post #1, no, beginning aquarists must understand the nitrification cycle and somehow deal with it, or dead fish will result. I wrote an article a couple years back on bacteria, and as my contribution to the discussion I will cut and paste relevant portions, being those directly concerned with nitrification.

*The Nitrogen Cycle*

Nitrogen comprises about 80% of our atmosphere, and every life form on earth works hard to acquire it. In the aquarium, nitrogen exists in four forms: ammonia [NH3], ammonium [NH4], nitrite [NO2] and nitrate [NO3]. [This excludes the denitrifying aspect where some of the nitrate returns to nitrogen gas.]

Ammonia is a by-product of all aerobic metabolisms—fish, snails, invertebrates, fungi and bacteria; it naturally occurs from continuous biological processes and living organisms in any aquarium, and even at very low levels this ammonia is very highly toxic to all life. At levels between 0.5 and 1 ppm there can be long-term or permanent gill damage. Ammonia is never healthy at levels that can be detected by our standard test kits, and in most cases will have negative effects on the fish. [1]

The fastest uptake of ammonia in an aquarium occurs with live plants; ammonia can be both assimilated (as a nutrient in the ionized form ammonium) and taken up (as a toxin, NH3) by plants. But ammonia is also taken up (though more slowly) by certain nitrifying bacteria, and this produces another form of nitrogen—nitrite, which is also highly toxic to all life at very low levels. Fish readily absorb nitrIte from the water and it combines with the hemoglobin in their blood, forming methaemoglobin. As a consequence, the blood cannot transport oxygen as easily and this can become fatal. At 0.25 ppm nitrite begins to affect fish after a short period; at 0.5 ppm it becomes dangerous; and at 1.0 ppm it is often fatal. 

Another group of bacteria take up nitrite, producing nitrate, which is still toxic though much less so. High levels of nitrate, above 40 ppm, have been shown to slow fish growth, suppress breeding, and depress the immune system making the fish much more susceptible to disease. While different fish species show some variation in tolerance, a level below 20 ppm is recommended, and preferably below 10 ppm. After all, most of our fish occur in waters with nitrate so low it can scarcely be measured. Live plants and regular partial water changes both work to achieve this desired state in a balanced aquarium.

The bacteria responsible for this nitrification process of converting ammonia to nitrite to nitrate are termed nitrifying. But the nitrogen cycle is only complete (in aquaria) when it includes de-nitrification; in this stage, different bacteria that are termed denitrifying convert nitrate into nitrogen gas which is released back into the atmosphere. Another component of the complete nitrogen cycle in nature but not present in our aquaria involves the “fixing” of atmospheric nitrogen by cyanobacteria and other life forms.

*Nitrifying Bacteria*

Nitrification is the oxidation of ammonia/ammonium to nitrite and then the subsequent oxidation of nitrite to nitrate; this is performed by two groups of bacteria known collectively as nitrifying bacteria or nitrifiers. True nitrifying bacteria are autotrophs; they use chemosynthesis to manufacture their energy by using oxygen plus nitrogenous waste (ammonia or nitrite) and carbon (from CO2). There are several different bacterium species involved, all in the family Nitrobacteraceae, that carry out this function in soil, and it used to be thought that these, particularly _Nitrosomonas europa_ and _Nitrobacter_, were the nitrification bacteria in freshwater. But Dr. Timothy Hovanec led the team of scientists that proved this to be a mistaken assumption. Ammonia is converted to nitrite by bacteria of the _Nitrosonomas marina_-like strain [2] and nitrite is converted to nitrate by bacteria closely related to _Nitrospira moscoviensis_ and _Nitrospira marina_. [3] With several subsequent scientific studies by other scientists on wastewater nitrifying bacteria this data is now accepted and confirmed scientific fact. [Ed. This is now believed to be the bacteria in new systems; these disappear as the aquarium establishes, to be replaced by another lifeform, archaea.]

Once established, the population of these bacteria in an aquarium will be in direct proportion to the amount of ammonia or nitrite respectively. Nitrifying bacteria require 12-32 hours to multiply, which they do by binary division [each bacterium divides into two bacteria]. _Nitrosomonas_ multiply in less time (12+ hours) while _Nitrospira_ require more time (up to 32 hours). In a new aquarium, it can take up to eight weeks for the bacteria populations to reach a level capable of eliminating ammonia and nitrite.

The nitrogen cycle bacteria in aquaria are lithotrophic; the word comes from the Greek lithos [= rock] and troph [= consumer], so literally it means “rock eater.” Realistically, it means these bacteria colonize surfaces. The scientific processes that cause this may most simply be described as the bacteria being pulled from the water by several actions occurring on the surfaces. Bacteria are sticky; they exude protein coatings that allow them to build up into a slimy film that we term a biofilm.

*Endnotes:* [bracketed numbers above]

[1] For more detailed information, see “Nitrogen Cycle,” The Skeptical Aquarist website. Also Neil Frank, “Ammonia Toxicity to Freshwater Fish” on The Krib website. Also Robert T. Ricketts, “Aquarium Microbes, Part 1, Nitrification” on The Aquarium Wiki website.

[2] Paul C. Burrell, Carol M. Phalen, and Timothy A. Hovanec, “Identification of Bacteria Responsible for Ammonia Oxidation in Freshwater Aquaria,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology, December 2001, pp. 5791-5800.

[3] Hovanec, T. A., L. T. Taylor, A. Blakis and E. F. DeLong, “Nitrospira- Like Bacteria Associated with Nitrite Oxidation in Freshwater Aquaria,” Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Vol. 64, No. 1, pp. 258-264.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

This is a planted forum. Even a general aquarist is well advised to do water changes. LFS tell folks this all the time. So does the web.

Cycling with or without NH4 is going to happen as Hoppy states and if you add a fair amount of plants, there's certainly no reason to FC. 

You have to go with bad advice or bad ill advised methods/routines, additions to cause an issue where FC might have some merits. And often given the no#'s of issues that are caused by this, I think the trade off is not worth it, FC causes more problems than it helps.

You can always use the argument that we can find a better idiot. 
Poor advice to start off with often is the root cause.

Can it be done? Certainly, is it good advice? I do not think so.

You can also FC a filter in a simple small bucket and not pollute the entire tank and require more water changes etc. I never see such ideas offered in any FC threads. Not once. You still wait the exact same time before adding fish to the new tank.

Meanwhile I have a packed tank and fish and shrimp etc and no algae.
Patience is also not an argument for FC either.

I've still not heard anything new here or in any thread as to the real merits for FC, yes, you can do it if you believe the drivel written and if you look for aquarist that really are not going to listen much anyway, but latch on to this for some reason.

FC does not avoid the water change.
FC does not teach you about cycling anymore than any other type of testing.
FC can be done in a bucket. 
Good basic advice, eg adding plenty of plants from day one, floating water sprite etc if they are not good with plants etc. Duckweed, whatever. 
Not overloading the tank.
If you mail order a lot of fish, you are going to put them in Quarantine.
You are going to do a lot of water changes(discus folks do even with mature filters). I get large lots for clients, been here, done this. 

I'm not seeing any decent arguments for FC.


----------



## BruceF (Aug 5, 2011)

Obviously they do. 

The thing about cycling a tank with plants is that you have to know how to grow the plants in the first place, adding fish to that equation can make it even harder.


----------



## jrman83 (Nov 22, 2010)

A fishless cycle does not require water changes until the very end when ammonia and nitrites are 0. This could be 1-2wks usually. A fishless cycle doesn't teach any less about a nitrogen cycle either. If you mail order a lot of fish and its the first fish a tank gets, that tank _is_ the q-tank. The fishless cycle doesn't try to get away from water changes, these are still needed weekly - after. It only gets you through the process of creating the colonies of bb, nothing else.

Your right though, this is a planted site. Given that, most come here with planted tanks and the experience level is higher than most sites I have been to. Go to a general fish forum and you see the number of newbs not typically seen here (not compared to the other forum I go to), that are struggling through a new tank with dying fish.

You could debate the merits or non all day long. The one thing for sure is a fishless cycle absolutely cannot harm a fish. If I don't change water in a fish-in cycle with increasing levels of toxicity, not so. In the fishless I not only don't have to worry about that, I add 4ppm ammonia everyday to drive those levels high on purpose.

I don't really argue for one or the other, but I can see the merits in both. People who have done it certain ways and never had a problem for many years are not likely to open up to a different idea. Why fix something that isn't broke, right?


----------



## mef1975 (Jun 24, 2013)

Too seriously? Seems like it, at least when compared to creating a stabilized system to avoid algae blooms. It's nice that hobbyists want us to have a cycled system to start, but they also need to help beginners understand how important it is that the system be stabilized, do water changes to avoid spikes and drops of nitrates.


First is the nitrates, now is the algae, what next?


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

mef1975 said:


> First is the nitrates, now is the algae, what next?


You lost me with that!:icon_sad: What did you mean?


----------



## ryan_calif (Feb 13, 2014)

cyfan964 said:


> A fellow aquarist and I were having a discussion the other day about the "cycling" process of aquariums. We came to the conclusion that most people take the whole process maybe to seriously so I was interested in everyone elses opinion.


I completely agree that people are getting a bit too OCD over it, however I feel the motive behind this idealistic obsession over 'perfect cycling procedure' is rooted in good faith. People just want the best possible environment for their fish to live in, and since proper cycling isn't terribly labor-intensive (relatively speaking), why not do the best you can to make the fish's home as nice as possible?

That being said, when I started the hobby in the early 90s (age 7) I was told to just put the fish in some conditioned tap water, and do regular water changes. That was it. No test kits, no special additives. I never lost a fish following this method.

In the end, if people feel like "geeking" out over water parameters, I say let them. It certainly can't hurt the fish, and if anything might their lives a bit more pleasant.


----------



## Planted-tnk-guy (Dec 23, 2013)

I think if a fish can live in a small bag with 500 + other fish flying overseas to be dumped out into another bag of fresh water with no acclimation then reshipped to a wholesaler or retailer I think they can live through a cycle even more so a planted tank cycle with water changes once or twice a week no problem. Even in the wild spikes happen a deer dies and falls in the pond etc life is a cycle never constant. Just a thought but I dont claim to know anything but nothing =)


----------



## micheljq (Oct 24, 2012)

Hi,

I am on many forums about freshwater aquariums and almost each week I see a guy beginning in the hobby and losing a lot of fishes because the local pet shop did not say to wait 3-4 weeks before adding fishes to the tank.

I always cycle the tank but adding nothing more than tap water and let the filter run for 3-4 weeks, and do not add a lof of fishes at the same time in the beginning.

In the case of planted tanks, if the tank is well planted plants can absorb or minimize ammonia pikes, because plants take up ammonium. But even so, I prefer play safe.

For saltwater tanks, I know nothing.

Michel.


----------



## Topekoms (Dec 19, 2013)

I don't know about any of you but i look at it this was if it saves me money to avoid fish losses i am going to do it. I see no point in risking money when i can use that money to buy something else i want. Cycled aquariums FTW!!!


----------



## roadmaster (Nov 5, 2009)

cyfan964 said:


> A fellow aquarist and I were having a discussion the other day about the "cycling" process of aquariums. We came to the conclusion that most people take the whole process maybe to seriously so I was interested in everyone elses opinion.
> 
> Every aquarium I have ever set up I always do the exact same thing. I do a partial water change on my other tanks and add that water to the aquarium. I then fill the remainder of the tank with tap water and then add dechlorinator. After that I squeeze some filter media into the tank and hook up some aeration/new filter.
> 
> ...


What you propose work's fairly well assuming one has access to already mature filter media/plant's.


----------



## roadmaster (Nov 5, 2009)

The one thing that alway's get's a chuckle from me is from those who insist that fishless cycling is the only way to safely create biological filter with no harm to fishes.
I have set up maybe a hundred class room tank's with but a few small fish per volume of water,regular water changes,careful feeding's with zero losses.
The other thing that makes me LOL outloud,, are those who state.." I am running X number of tank's and all of em were fishless cycled"
Why would anyone need to fishless cycle if you already have healthy mature tank's running??


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

For me the idea of a FC in a planted tank is the same as the 10x turnover filtration rate. These are fossilized myths usually (in my area anyway) kept alive by LFS. LFS is general don't cater to planted tank folks especially in USA. If you doing what you should be doing anyway, neither is necessary. Growing plants, WC and adding fish at responsible rates. This hobby is much more fun without testing and worrying about the nitration cycle. Someone said it earlier in the thread all the nitration worries and the testing really hurts the hobby IMO. It's just not that complicated especially in a planted tank. Isn't that what makes it great that the plants are 'uptaking' much of the worries.


----------



## yukinyc (Feb 5, 2014)

this is so helpful for a new beginner like me. thank you. 



Byron said:


> To answer the initial question in post #1, no, beginning aquarists must understand the nitrification cycle and somehow deal with it, or dead fish will result. I wrote an article a couple years back on bacteria, and as my contribution to the discussion I will cut and paste relevant portions, being those directly concerned with nitrification.
> 
> *The Nitrogen Cycle*
> 
> ...


----------



## tetra73 (Aug 2, 2011)

You should take it seriously if you want your fish to make it... I am the pragmatic type. I like to plan out everything before I take the first step. BTW, I have 2 tanks here and I could easily seed a new tank with my established bio media...yeah, in this case, I don't need to cycle my tank because it is already cycled. What if you have someone decided to setup a 20g and putting in 20 fish in there without cycling, brand new tank? One of my family members did that and getting dead fish once a week. It was sad. By the time the tank was established, he only had about 10 fish left.


----------



## Diana (Jan 14, 2010)

I think information about the nitrogen cycle is required information for fish keepers. 
Did people have tanks without this info? Yes. Was that the best way? Probably not. 
I was one of them. I started keeping fish when the only test available was pH. And that was not emphasized. 

How many people lose fish and give up the hobby because no one said anything about cycling the tank? A lot! I also began my internet hobby as a moderator at a site that was aimed at non-planted tanks, and every day there were posts from people who had no clue as to why their nice clear water was killing the fish. 

When I saw the fishless cycle (at a site that has been gone for many years) I started posting about it, and refined the information so that the way I post it, the details, are the fastest way to grow the nitrifying bacteria, especially if you have no material to jump start the colony. 

Is the push to understand the nitrogen cycle too much? No. 

Is it overboard for _experienced_ people at a _planted_ tank site? Probably. 
Experienced people can indeed start a tank without the fishless cycle because they already have tanks running to share the bacteria colonies, and know how to keep the plants thriving so the plants play a big role as part of the bio filter. This 'Silent Cycle' works just fine. But knowing what is going on is helpful. 

I do not think a beginner can reliably do this. An experienced aquarium keeper can develop a feel for what is going on, and can push the limits, perhaps without testing the tanks. (It has been a long time since I have tested any of my tanks) A beginner cannot do this, even with testing the tank. 

In spite of all my push about the fishless cycle, can I admit that I have done it only once, in its entirety? 
I got all my tanks going by splitting the filter media and sharing the fish loads, then gradually building back up the populations in the new and the donor tanks. 
I have notes about doing the fishless cycle in a bucket, and I have sort of done that (well, kept bacteria alive in a bucket using FC techniques). But how many newbies know a month ahead of time that they are going to set up a tank and will need a cycled filter, or even know what one is? 

I also mention in the FC article that you can use the right bacteria in a bottle (Containing Nitrospira species) to do the whole cycle in just a few days. 

Cycling is very important when you want to fully stock a new tank immediately, as is done with Rift Lake Cichlids. That is how the basic information that I post as the fishless cycle was generated: A couple of scientists wanted to pre-cycle a tank without plants in anticipation of overstocking it for a Rift Lake tank. 

The information that I post in the FC can also be helpful when people are having problems with a tank that may be related to the bacteria such as Old Tank Syndrome. By correcting the water chemistry back to the fishless cycle requirements the bacteria regrow or added bacteria from a bottle will live. 

I am going to continue to post the fishless cycle when I see a thread indicating that it might be useful. The original poster might use it, or others seeing the thread and saying, 'Hey, I have that problem, too!' may find it useful. I encourage everyone to show it to friends, take it to fish clubs where newbies can use the information, and in other ways spread the information. 

'Aquariums need a healthy bacteria population, and here is one of the best ways to grow those bacteria'


----------



## rajah_22 (Dec 12, 2013)

cyfan964 said:


> Couldn't agree more. I read all these posts and am just so confused by the answers given to "beginners". It seems like we are turning something relatively simple into some crazy to achieve process. I had a co-worker recently tell me that they were going to get a tank for their kids, but after reading about the amount of work to get it set-up correctly online they passed and got a video game instead. That makes me sad.


This statement is spot on. And in my opinion it applies to more aspects of keeping a planted tank than just cycling. Making things overly complicated deters people from the hobby. It results in beginners purchasing a lot of unnecessary 'stuff'. I see adds on Craigslist all the time for people selling their ten gallon tank with 8,000 bottles of additives and 500 hundred different test kits. Keeping a FW tank is not rocket science, and for some reason lots of people try to make it rocket science. 

I have kept lots of healthy freshwater tanks and I've NEVER owned a single test kit for freshwater. My approach is to simply add fish slowly, see how things go, and gradually work up to a fully stocked tank. I can't remember the last time I lost a fish, other than carpet surfers. My point being, can't we just tell newbs to be patient in stocking fish rather than giving them overly complicated advice about how to "properly" cycle a tank? I think more people would join our awesome hobby if this were the case.

And I'm guessing 98% of beginning aquarists are not mail ordering large numbers of expensive fish to add to their tanks all at once. So being patient seems like the best advice to me - no need to emphasize hourly measurements of every form of nitrogen known to mankind! 

Don't worry about the cycle, just stock your fish slowly!


----------



## houseofcards (Mar 21, 2009)

tetra73 said:


> ..What if you have someone decided to setup a 20g and putting in 20 fish in there without cycling, brand new tank? One of my family members did that and getting dead fish once a week. .


Well why would one do that? If one is concerned about cycling and doing things right why would one add fish like that? What's the emergency? That's like saying I like to overfed my fish too, or I like to run my lights all 24/7. If the tank is setup with plants, water changes, organic removal media, the FC is irrelevant.

The whole nitrogen cycle to newbies is a big turnoff. It's fine to understand what the overall process is, but to worry about the cycle and then buy all the BS test kits is a big problem in the hobby. It gets old really fast.


----------



## FreshwaterFinatic (Feb 24, 2014)

Well, I guess I take it too far. I purchased some household ammonia to cycle my tank after the fish in it pass (still taking great care of them) because if I was going to go from 1 fish and 3 snails to 8 fish (including a small pleco!), 4 snails plus babies, and shrimp, Im pretty sure I would be doing daily changes, in a full on fish-in cycle. I am ordering from different breeders, but still ordering around the same time.

You can calculate how much ammonia to add on an "Ammonia Calculator" you can find on the web. Add 3ppm of ammonia, and wait. Once you start seeing nitrites, wait until ammonia is 0, then add 3ppm, wait for nitrites, add 1 ppm snack, wait for nitrites, once ammonia is 0 wait for nitrites to start turning into nitrates, then add 3ppm, etc, until you can dose 3 ppm and have a reading of 0 ammonia and 0 nitrites in 24 hours.

Quite easy, and one more thing. Adding water does nothing. You cut off about 1/3 of the filter media out of the old established filter, put it into the new, and you should be cycled in a week. Very easy to do, and you can do a full stock at once.

Bacteria in a bottles dont do much either, unless you pour the whole bottle in your filter and then wait a day to turn it on for the bacteria to attach to the media. Then give it 3ppm of ammonia and wait.

To understand the nitrogen cycle is quite simple, you just have to say "Dumb it down a little, for me, Im new at this" So the people dont go quoting scientific facts and make a page long answer.

Another random note, Google Chrome says "3ppm" isnt spelled right. Chrome is a liar! lol


----------



## tetra73 (Aug 2, 2011)

houseofcards said:


> Well why would one do that? If one is concerned about cycling and doing things right why would one add fish like that? What's the emergency? That's like saying I like to overfed my fish too, or I like to run my lights all 24/7. If the tank is setup with plants, water changes, organic removal media, the FC is irrelevant.
> 
> The whole nitrogen cycle to newbies is a big turnoff. It's fine to understand what the overall process is, but to worry about the cycle and then buy all the BS test kits is a big problem in the hobby. It gets old really fast.



Yeah, that's same as asking why my sister refused to invest in a real tank with real filtration for my niece betta fish. Instead, the fish is living in a half a gallon small pet container. No heat. No filtration. No gas change. Occasionally overfeeding it. Maybe doing water change once a while straight from the tap. She has gone through 3 betta fish in 2 years. Why? I don't know because maybe they didn't feel like spending so much time and resource keeping a $3 fish alive and happy.


----------



## Diana (Jan 14, 2010)

I could distill the fishless cycle down to a few sentences, but then I get questions about why did it fail. 
I prefer to give all the info so that someone who wants specific, detailed instructions gets it all at once, not have to come back 3 times and get dribbles on info spread out over a few weeks. The fishless cycle can be done faster than that, if it is set up right the first time. But by the time someone has tried something, failed, come back and posted for help, tried something else, come back again... their patience is wearing thin. 
"why didn't you say that in the first post?"
Well, I do say it the first time around.


----------



## Hoppy (Dec 24, 2005)

One thing should be obvious by now, after 37 posts. We don't all agree about the need for "fishless cycling". And, people succeed very well whether they believe that fishless cycling is a critical thing that must be done and done correctly, or that fishless cycling is a waste of time. From that you must conclude that there are other things that are important in setting up a successful planted tank, and the total process may be more important than any one part of it.


----------



## 00camaro16 (Mar 7, 2014)

If I may bump a kind of old thread here. I just wanted to add my prospective as a new aquarium planter.

I will be doing a fishless cycle for about a month in my planned nano. I think my reasoning may not be mentioned in this thread.

For me adding live plants adds a whole new aspect to keeping tanks which I haven't dealt with before. In my non-planted tanks all I worried about was the fish dying, now I am going to have plants too. 

I plan on fishless to get the experience with plants first. See how to care for them, get down how to deal with water parameters, then have 2 weeks to get the parameters constantly right before I add fish. I am expecting a learning curve and would rather concentrate on just plants, instead of plants and fish.

When I get the parameters good for the fish the next month is getting them good for shrimp. This will allow me to deal with certain spikes without harming livestock and am going from the least demanding to the most.

Just my view which I don't think was represented, and I am currently searching on which parameters to watch while doing a cycle, hence how I found this thread.

Chris

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk


----------



## ctaylor3737 (Nov 14, 2013)

I think it is overstressed and that is simply because of alot of fish stores that sell a new beginner a tank and give them fish the same day. It is talked about alot because there is always someone asking the same questions about the cycle. So therefore it just keeps getting brought up alot. 

Done properly and with existing media I have added fish immediatly to a new tank. After awhile you just can look at them and tell whats wrong. Too a beginner its hard to get them to understand why you do a WC. Just what I think, there is always some sort of cycle though either way.


----------



## brandon429 (Mar 29, 2003)

most common cycling misconceptions in reefing and freshwater aquarium biology, in my opinion:

-bacteria wont seed unless you add them
-bacteria can't grow unless -the keeper- adds ammonia in some measurable source (vs the myriad ways trace ammonia gets into a bare bones cycling tank, time is the factor. all natural simply takes longer, but bacteria seed and grow where there is water unless specific exclusion steps are taken, period.)
-that large water changes kill bacteria and always cause mini cycles (only substrate clouding does this, pour slowly, no prob, i have vids of it in my reef tank and freshwater is even easier)
-that substrates must cure in the presence of fish to be able to support fish, example fallow tanks. it is not accurate to assume a full running tank with fish will not be able to handle that same fish bioload if you remove them, leave it fallow for months, then put them back. the system doesnt down regulate bacteria in their absence, too much organic loading especially in planted systems which prevents their decline)



*Only in aquarium circles do keepers think they have the sole control over their bacteria*

All other forms of science know bacterial growth is out of your control to stop unless you use antibiotics or various extremes. All the aquarium keeper controls is *time* for colonization not the completeness of colonization. Add to this assumption API tests that show .25 ammonia where there isn't, and you have a broken or deluded understanding of bacterial cycles in cycling tanks for the vast majority. If you remove fish here are two ways bacteria maintain regulation out of a likely 100+ ways on the viable substrates-

1. Millions of bacteria have inoculated the tank that aren't even true aquatic bacteria. As a rule, where you have water, bacteria seed. these life forms have life cycles and die which contribute to fuel the various strains of nitrifying bacteria as their mass is tiny bits of protein that degrade like any other protein, with the endpoint being deamination and eventually ammonia. Consider the little bugs that fall into a tank, gnats etc. or your skin cells wafting in the air that land in a tank in your house. So dead flies and dust only collect on the windowsills, but somehow the tank stayed sterile if you didn't add a bottle bac? Nope, tank gets it too 

2. Especially especially in planted tanks- mulm. Permanent bacteria food. Planted tanks have so much reserve organics your tank will never down regulate to a condition where a reasonable bioload can't be processed. All surface area X remains fully inoculated with burgeoning/dying/burgeoning bacterial life cycles. The life and death and renew cycle of our nitrifying colonies means any reasonable bioload can be oxidized even if that bioload wasnt present during the initial ramp up phase because other contributing factors maintain the bacteria in the absence, or the presence of fish. 

Want to change ALL your water during a cycle? Go for it. Want to not change the water out of fear of starving the bacteria? Ok don't. We don't control the bacteria, only the rates, so in the end both tanks will be cycled. 

If you take a fifty gallon aquarium and full it up with nothing but red bricks and ro water literally, and wait a year, it can handle a decent fish bioload and you added no fish, bacteria or ammonia or carbonates during the setup. The supposed things we require to cycle. But the time factor stinks, as it did for me in the 80s as we sat there for a month and waited for our colored gravel and plastic plants to 'filter up' lol.

There is X amount of surface area in a given tank, and given ONLY time and water (notice I didn't say ammonia added by us or bottle bac) thousands of species will colonize X surface area. Adding fish and by extension ammonia only speeds up the time factor. 

The biggest problem causing purchase we make to further misunderstanding about tank cycling is API brand ammonia test kits to judge the cycle by. 



api test kit readings cause more problem cycling threads than actual cycling problems do, pure fact that can be linked off searches galore. 

sorry to always be an api hater, but if you run google searches specifically about their ammonia kits its not me on there making the terrible search returns, its the littany of mislead testers. use api if you want, but you have a poor chance of accuracy with it. I realize some use it to indicate mere changes in ammonia concentrations etc, or have good tests that correspond to other name brand ammonia readings, but for the average tank keeper you are better off using no ammonia testing from api and simply going off known seed times for aquaria. I take everything too seriously and especially tank cycling heh.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

Diana said:


> I could distill the fishless cycle down to a few sentences, but then I get questions about why did it fail.
> I prefer to give all the info so that someone who wants specific, detailed instructions gets it all at once, not have to come back 3 times and get dribbles on info spread out over a few weeks. The fishless cycle can be done faster than that, if it is set up right the first time. But by the time someone has tried something, failed, come back and posted for help, tried something else, come back again... their patience is wearing thin.
> "why didn't you say that in the first post?"
> Well, I do say it the first time around.


This is true.

I get it with plants and EI.......EI is a one two line explanation tops. Instead, I've written 5-6 articles and have graphing cal's and dosing cals and a long winded in depth hee haw about it. 
That's the nature of the web.

So you have to deal with each person, you cannot hit all thr bases with any one article or explanation. some will just not get it.

In person, this is rectified rapidly.

Large frequent water changes= cures marine, FW, issues relating to cycling.
One simple bit of advice, this will save more fish than anything relating to Nitrogen cycling. 

Good basic care cannot be replaced. 
I did 50% weekly water changes before I kept plants seriously and long before I used ferts.

Water changes are something most signed up for when they got a fish tank.
It's much easier to convince the masses to do this than to test and do the whole cycling thing. I did this when I worked at the Fish Gallery as kid. Worked great then back in the 1970's. Still does today.


----------



## plantbrain (Dec 15, 2003)

ctaylor3737 said:


> Too a beginner its hard to get them to understand why you do a WC. Just what I think, there is always some sort of cycle though either way.


No, not really, depends on how you tell them and show them nice examples of long term care.

I was able to do this to adults when I was 10 years old working at a LFS. 
If a 10 year old can do it.............:wink:

You can use the bathroom or the car analogy. 
If you hit them with WC's and the N cycle and and and........forget it. One step at a time. 

Some still will not listen. Marine guy paid 100$ for the clown trigger, killed it in 3 weeks, came back, then he listened real well. I suggested to many to use floating water sprite if they neglect their tanks(removed NO3/NH4).

Bathroom: what happens if you stayed in your bathroom only and never flushed the toilet for a few weeks and have say 5 people in there???

Car: Change the oil more(WC's) often if you are hard on the car and drive faster. 

Dishes in the sink: best to do them before they pile up all over the place and you get roaches, bad smells and rats. Same with a water change.

you spend much less on medications if you do frequent large water changes.

See this handy hose and PVC?
Takes just a few minutes and no buckets shall be harmed.

With Marine tanks, this cost more due to salt mix.
But it works the the same.


----------



## Diana (Jan 14, 2010)

In response to post 41:

No, the bacteria that remove ammonia and nitrite will not stay at high levels when there is such a minimal source of ammonia as house dust and flies. 
The bacteria population will reduce until it matches the food supply. 

If you start with a well cycled tank, lots of all sorts of organisms, then remove the fish, shrimp, plants and other macroorganisms, leaving just the microorganisms, then there will be a big die off of microorganisms because their main food supply (fish food) is not longer available. So each organism that dies is the food that keeps the others alive, for a while. But eventually the population will get low enough until it is supported by whatever food is getting added to the tank. 
If there is enough light, algae will grow, and this will provide the food for a certain level of microorganisms. 

But the tank will not be able to support a sudden increase in food in the form of restocking with livestock. 
The wastes from that livestock are no longer being removed fast enough to keep from poisoning the livestock.


----------



## talontsiawd (Oct 19, 2008)

It is funny how many things in this hobby get so blown out of proportion that they can actually be counter productive. When I started, it was pretty normal to add some fish food on this forum specifically, nothing more. I honestly have not started a new tank in so long without an already established filter that I cannot remember the last time I would have even needed to cycle. It's kind of funny reading stories where people are cycling their tank with a dead shrimp they bought at the grocery store and are struggling to be around their tank because it smells so bad.

I don't think it's bad advice to tell someone to cycle a tank because at the least, it tells a new hobbyist to pay attention to things. If they are really enthusiastic, they learn about the purpose of a bio filter and the like.

I think it's the experienced members who tend to really not need the cycle process. If we are using CO2, many of us want to blast it at first and get our tank going which can add a lot of time before we even want to add fish where the new hobbyist often buys a tank, substrate and fish on the same day. A lot of us use AS which cycles itself. Then we have some practical knowledge of how it all works anyway so we know what works and likely learned what didn't. Pair that with the fact we use plants and often use massive filters and the margin of error shrinks tremendously. I actually have never kept a tank without plants myself so I don't even know how different it is but I basically have "techniqued" my way out of needing to cycle for reasons that have nothing to do with fish.


----------



## frog111 (Feb 13, 2006)

I will echo Tom Barr's comments. Lately, I was toying with writing an article called, "doing it all wrong". I have had fish since I was 8 ( now 46 ). 

I have started tanks from scratch, African cichlids, south american cichlids, central American cichlids, community tanks for classrooms, ponds, and even discus, and it was always about two things:

Observe the fish behavior for stress or distress.

Do a water change if fish appear stressed.

As a child in the 70s, this was the rule. No mention of nitrogen cycle, bacteria, filters, etc. 

If you pay attention to the fish behavior, you can avoid fish fatalities. 

Yesterday I was at a big chain store, and the young lady started asking me questions about my tanks when I asked to purchase a fish. My wife laughed as it was clear the sales associate was just following the script. But after talking to the sales associate , she asked, "since you have kept fish for so long, is there a type of filter that will allow people not to change the water? ". 

There still is a resistance among newbies to doing water changes.


----------



## brandon429 (Mar 29, 2003)

Diana said:


> In response to post 41:
> 
> *No, the bacteria that remove ammonia and nitrite will not stay at high levels when there is such a minimal source of ammonia as house dust and flies.
> The bacteria population will reduce until it matches the food supply.
> ...


what counts as a viable food supply is very generous for the bacteria I've worked with.

One of a few counter points I would make to the assertion that fish must be present to be able to handle fish waste is we do not see this when removing all fish from a tank for X number of months to create a fallow period in reef tanks to starve trophonts.
Our lfs will rent holding tanks in the store for people's fish and you pay them care fees for them, then put them back in your tank two months afterwards and there is no cycle and the ich has been starved from the system. I don't disagree some down regulation of colony density can occur, its just my observation enough remains that replacement of fish isn't critical, especially in freshwater setups where fish urine is so dilute compared to marine fish urea concentration.

additionally, we typically boost surface area in tanks, and that s.a. remains a mix of nitrifying and non nitrifying bacteria in what would be considered a highly non sterile surface. I agree you wouldn't want to increase the new shock bioload or anything, my view is more of a reflection for the forgiving nature of a biofilter vs biofilters being dependent on fish inclusion.


By distilling alt food sources down to dust and flies only in the quote, we are excluding myriad food sources that arent topically apparent but still a big contributor to the ability to support generalized aerobic bacterial communities.


The invasion and death from non filtration bacteria is a notable source of invisible decay in any tank at any age, its incessant, and combined with other feed sources.

maybe another example is the tanks ability to handle a little bit more feeding than it was previously used to without mini cycling. My point is, the excessive surface area in our tanks allows for some down regulation but not enough to make fish the tripping point on keeping bio filters effective. My reefbowl has never had a fish, but two gobies can go in right now with no ammonia readings and probably more. Its only a gallon so that would actually be quite a bioloading challenge. 



what always remains as active biofilms and areas of self sustaining colony deposits are still coating football fields of surface area in an average canister filter, rocks, substrate beds etc. and I see time and time again the ability for a cycled tank to handle fish bioloads having had periods of fish removed, or no fish at all while the tank was cycling. I think a decent middle ground might be not to exceed the initial fish bioloading greatly after a period of no fish, don't challenge a new cycle tank with a high fish load but go conservative, thats the heart of the matter I think.


----------



## Byron (Aug 20, 2009)

The evidence from a scientific study suggests these bacteria do remain "alive" much longer than some think. This study was reported in Practical Fishkeeping in February of 2012, and the article can be read here:
http://www.practicalfishkeeping.co....w_filter_bacteria?_Dream_on…&utm_content=html

This is the relevant passage on bacteria surviving long periods without ammonia:

*AOBs die in absence of ammonia – nope.
*Another ‘folk wisdom’ follows that without a continuous food source, AOBs will soon starve, die, and it’s game over. A scout around various forums reveals that the usual time suggested by well-wishers (myself included) hovers at about eight hours before the Nitrosomonas will turn their tiny starved toes up.

Again, the research forces a rethink. It’s noted that Nitrosomans europa can be starved for weeks or months, and then when placed in ideal conditions (in this case experimental ones, admittedly) regain their abilities to oxidise ammonia within just a few minutes. Older studies put forward a more lingering timescale before reactivity, over 150 hours before oxidising is properly resumed, but the fact remains that the AOBs are bouncing back from hardship.

But, and it is a but that can’t be ignored, there is more to this than may meet the eye. Although the recovery of single cells can be rapid, an entire population may take somewhat longer to emerge. And autotrophs are notoriously slow at ‘dividing and conquering’.

Different Nitrosomonas bacterial strains reactivated at different rates, and what seems to have some consistency is the longer the time in starvation, the longer the time for recovery.


----------



## brandon429 (Mar 29, 2003)

didn't know they were flagellates and motile in terms of active relocation. I'd have lost a bet about them being swimming/motile my concept was they stay in one place, divide and conquer.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

Byron said:


> A scout around various forums reveals that the usual time suggested by well-wishers (myself included) hovers at about eight hours before the Nitrosomonas will turn their tiny starved toes up.


Is that advice you're referring to resulting from N-bacteria being starved of FOOD or of OXYGEN? It's usually O2 I'm worried about when I start throwing around timeframes like 8 hours in regards to N-bacteria, personally.

I'm a big proponent of teaching people how to cycle. I think education is an important key to helping people be successful in the hobby, and success is what makes a hobby enjoyable. I'm also a big proponent of trying to meet people where they are. 

When I say "how to cycle," I include using plants, mulm/established media, etc all as a part of that process when it's available. However, with a newbie's very first tank, they're usually pretty limited in access to other healthy established tanks (and I sometimes cringe rather than telling someone to ask for substrate/media from a friend or LFS tank, picturing all the ich, fungus, columnaris, fish TB posts, etc that might follow a week or so later). And I also hesitate before suggesting they head to Petsmart or Petco to ask for Water wisteria or Hygro... knowing full well that chances are excellent they'll end up being sent home instead with some entirely non-aquatic species... 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's all about approach. We can make a post that basically takes a ton of jargon and information and use it to show off, or beat someone up because they should somehow "know better," or we can invest some time, listen long enough to actually figure out what they do and don't yet understand and what resources they do or don't have access to, and try and walk them through things step by step.

Not everyone has the patience to do that, not everyone enjoys doing that, they're a member of this forum for other reasons... and that's fine too (as long as they're not RUDE to a newbie who's just sincerely trying to get a little help... that's a QUICK ticket to get on my own Bad Side lol).

But back to the main question- IMO yes, understanding the *basics* of the Nitrogen cycle is VERY important if someone wants to be successful keeping fish long term. Too many things can go wrong in closed systems that end up with mass fish dieoffs.

So anyways- that's my 2 cents. :fish1:


----------



## Hjgpoole (Feb 6, 2014)

Just my opinion.
Years ago (before all the neat products we have now, before Internet, and when your best resource was the person at the LFS). 
I got a "pretty" 30 gallon high aquarium put some stress coat in it and some "cool" fish. Everything I had was "recommended". I fought the ammonia level, cloudy water, and rascally Oscar daily. Water changes constantly. Plants? Didn't even know where to get them. It was not a relaxing hobby by far because I didn't understand basics likes cycling, fish needs etc.

Then I went years without a tank because it was such a hassle. I happen to see a picture of a planted tank and started researching. Cycling, lights, plant needs, snails, shrimp, ferts, substrata, Walstad method ... Everything I could find on the net, in books, hobbyists, and LFS.

With everything I learned I went to work and setup a 55 gallon tank. I used what I had learned and experimented. I am now in a 75 with hopes to reset up the 55 as a well scraped tank ... The one I have now is a jungle! I have not lost any fish or shrimp. 

Bottom line .... The knowledge of how it worked got me back into the hobby with success. I don't take the cycling as seriously as the first tank when I change tanks or help a friend because I know what I am looking for and I usually run sponge filters now which I use to seed other tanks HOWEVER at first the information kept me from giving up, spending lots of extra money replacing, dosing, fixing, changing etc.

Go into a Petsmart and listen to the Customers and Employees. You can almost guess who will have a tank sitting in the garage or on Craig's list.


----------



## Byron (Aug 20, 2009)

lauraleellbp said:


> Is that advice you're referring to resulting from N-bacteria being starved of FOOD or of OXYGEN? It's usually O2 I'm worried about when I start throwing around timeframes like 8 hours in regards to N-bacteria, personally.
> 
> I'm a big proponent of teaching people how to cycle. I think education is an important key to helping people be successful in the hobby, and success is what makes a hobby enjoyable. I'm also a big proponent of trying to meet people where they are.
> 
> ...


I was citing an excerpt from the article, and it was referring to ammonia (food). In another section of the article they deal with oxygen, and here too it seems from the study that low oxygen does not mean the demise of bacteria as they have ways to "get around" this. I linked the article previously so I won't cite more from it.

I certainly agree with you on the importance of beginners understanding nitrification and beyond. It is just a fact that success in such a scientific hobby is only going to occur if one understands what is going on. These processes are outside our direct control, as they are natural and will occur no matter what; understanding them means we can provide the necessary environment to save the first fish and beyond.

And I also agree fully with those advocating plant cycling. I have done this in dozens of new tanks and never had ammonia or nitrite issues. But again, one needs to understand the processes, with or without plants. When something goes wrong, as it can, the knowledge of the process can make all the difference in resolving the issue.

Byron.


----------



## eisBear (Nov 10, 2012)

What do you think about ammonia in the tap, how would that play into your method? I didn't get to do a fishless cycle but may have wanted to because my tap water has ammonia. I have readings of about .5 ppm out of the tap. (its actually from chloramine, it think, (sp?) - which breaks down into chlorine and ammonia when its hit with de-chlorinator). 

If I started from scratch, with no access to old media, using my tap water, I would probably want to start first with HOB filters with media in them in a bucket or something while I was getting the rest of the set-up together over the next weeks. This would get a fair amount of bacteria on the filter media going so that it would at least be enough to remove the ammonia from the tap water. Then, I would have a 'base' colony that I could start working with and using some of the other methods mentioned in this thread.

Though, the trade-off is that doing WCs adds ammonia so no need for throwing shrimp or flakes into the tank while trying to build a colony.

When I set up a tank for the first time in 20 years, I didn't get the fortune of doing a fishless cycle. Like a few other posters, I had a couple of successful tanks as a kid using dechlorinator and WCs with almost immediate addition of fish (I think I waited a day). I just used that method again but in a different state on a different muni water supply.

I had gotten a betta before I discovered that there was ammonia in the tap. I tried to keep the level as low as possible but it can't go below the natural level of the tap water. 

I wanted to be able to use tap water if I could because sourcing water can be expensive and a hassle and if I used a britta or something, it might not be as stable. I just didn't like the idea of putting ammonia into the system by way of water changes (even at a pretty low level).

edit: I have prime and standard dechlorinator; I know prime 'locks' the ammonia for a certain amount of time; but, i guess, do you want your little bacteria colony of minions to do the work or WC and prime every day; seems like both would work...

As, essentially, a beginner, I learned a lot about cycling from my recent experience. I'm thankful for the info that is out there regarding how the nitrogen cycle is critical for long term fish health and the various methods for getting it going. It seems like a theme which is prevalent here on this thread which is that having a basic understanding of the cycle will allow you to use methods that best fit your own circumstances.


----------



## Diana (Jan 14, 2010)

eisBear:
The amount of ammonia in tap water is a little bit for the bacteria, but to grow a good sized colony you would have to do 2-3 full water changes every day. My tap water has 1 ppm ammonia from chloramines. At first the bacteria would be fine with this low level of ammonia. But as they get growing they will use that up in just a few hours. To grow these bacteria the fastest you would need to add more and more ammonia. To use tap water as the source this means 100% water changes. 

Much better just to follow the fishless cycle. You can do this in a separate bucket with almost any sort of circulation, or just do it on the tank while you are setting it up, adjusting things and so on. 
If you start with no source of bacteria the right species will find the tank and it will take about 3 weeks to cycle it. 
If you start with any amount of the right species then the cycle will go faster. 
If you want to start cycling the filter ahead of time in a bucket, then go for it. I have run a canister (both the Fluval 404 and a Filstar XP3) on 5 gallon buckets, and HOB filters fit best on any square/rectangle sort of plastic bin. The volume of water is not important. Just keep adding the ammonia. 

If you can find the right species of bacteria in a bottle then the cycle is pretty much instant. 
Read the label and look for Nitrospira species.


----------



## HUNTER (Sep 4, 2012)

Just because you don't cycle your tank and you don't lose fish, that doesn't mean it's the proper way to introduce your fish into the unknown healthy/unhealthy environment. Not using a testing kit especially in the beginning before introducing fish, is just careless for the sake of the fish. It's just like saying, here's the box with water you can swim in, it's not the proper example for the new hobbyist.


----------



## brandon429 (Mar 29, 2003)

I see it differently. I'll still be setting up tanks when I'm 80 and still won't own an ammonia test kit nor be testing for any...all those decades of cycling tanks without ammonia testing, without using fish or cleaner ammonia...my point in utilizing alt sources of ammonia and time is that we don't have to test and dose ammonia to truly fish less cycle a tank. You just add water and wait. Ammonia gets in, bacteria get in, time is a cycler if we aren't in any great rush to stock a bunch of fish. 

While some use boosts to cycle quickly, some just add water and wait knowing cycling begins as soon as something gets wet and stays that way. The point of the thread as I see it is there are even more ways to cycle a tank correctly, without sacrificing animals, and you don't have to use either fish or direct ammonia boosting, or ghost feeding, or any manual source or ammonia to do so. All my tanks marine and fresh are done this way.

The biomechanics of cycling are the most predictable aspect of our hobby imo. Once you learn natural cycling (non boosted) timelines, it works forever and its all I use.

The thread is good for distilling truths in cycling I think.


----------



## Lab_Man (Dec 7, 2012)

Years ago, people thought much differently about smoking than they do today.

15 years ago, I had a LFS owner tell me that you could actually add urine to start a tank cycle.

My point is that we didn't know what we know today. Before the internet, a person didn't have access to all the knowledge that is available. I used to add hardy fish until the tank cycled. Then I would add the fish I really wanted to put into the aquarium.

Now I know that there is a better way.


----------



## jrman83 (Nov 22, 2010)

It doesn't matter to me which way people cycle tanks. It is very hard however to tell someone that a fishless cycle is a "bad" way to go. There is no harm, no foul to anything. Nothing is at risk. Anything else above that potentially puts harm to fish in play.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

brandon429 said:


> my point in utilizing alt sources of ammonia and time is that we don't have to test and dose ammonia to truly fish less cycle a tank. You just add water and wait. Ammonia gets in, bacteria get in, time is a cycler if we aren't in any great rush to stock a bunch of fish.
> 
> While some use boosts to cycle quickly, some just add water and wait knowing *cycling begins as soon as something gets wet and stays that way. *The point of the thread as I see it is there are even more ways to cycle a tank correctly, without sacrificing animals, and you don't have to use either fish or direct ammonia boosting, or ghost feeding, or any manual source or ammonia to do so.


Um, what? Where is your ammonia magically coming from?

You could fill a tank and leave it running empty for 3 months... and it won't *begin* till cycle till the day you add the first living organism that will produce some ammonia... or any other ammonia source. Ammonia won't just appear from airborne spores like algae will.

I agree that you can cycle safely without using test kits if you're super patient and willing to stock very slowly. Most people are not that patient as a rule, however.


----------



## brandon429 (Mar 29, 2003)

its ok if you disagree we had covered that in detail previously. There are many ways trace ammonia gets in a tank, and trace is all it takes to get started. By your logic, humans control bacteria by what they add, there is no other way for it to be done and that's not the case, natural mechanisms seed -and sustain- your beginning colonies even if you don't, as soon as water is added. Links exist like the ones put up about nitrifiers and you can find them if you look around. I don't bother with them much, my links are my tanks ran in this way and the many done by pm over the years.


when you set up a tank with water, contamination occurs and in the mix are nitrifiers. The trace ammonia gets in by ways detailed, and a cycle begins independent of extras we throw in to speed things up. You can run a small bioload at the end of 6~8 weeks solely off natural cycling or a little ghost feeding. done it plenty of times. Once a small bioload is added, with just a day the catch up by the seeded bacteria is astounding.

humans affect cycling by adding these things discussed, but if they add nothing, it still occurs slowly and steady even if we resist that notion initially. Some use that method only to set up tanks, its reliable. What you literally said doesn't begin until a human action intervenes actually began as soon as you add water to a tank with dry rocks and media.


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

I will agree with you in principle.

The whole context of this conversation is "artifical," however- we're talking about boxes of water in which we are creating closed systems that REQUIRE our intervention in order to ensure a healthy environment for the critters we are installing in them.

I think my issue is with your choice of wording... and that in practice, too many new hobbyists could take that one post out of context and believe they can set up a tank, fill it with only water and run it for a month and then be able to start stocking- without experiencing any ammonia spikes.

It's all about proportions. Tank size/volume of water vs how much "trace" ammonia has been available to jump-start the N-bacteria colony vs initial bioload. 

There's no way that tossing a betta into a 2.5 gal tank [unplanted] that's been "cycling" based on "trace" ammonia for a month is a good idea. It needs to be cycled to be sure that fish isn't going to suffer from ammonia and/or nitrite poisoning. *Might* not be such a problem with a 30gal tank.


----------



## jrman83 (Nov 22, 2010)

brandon429 said:


> its ok if you disagree we had covered that in detail previously. There are many ways trace ammonia gets in a tank, and trace is all it takes to get started. By your logic, humans control bacteria by what they add, there is no other way for it to be done and that's not the case, natural mechanisms seed -and sustain- your beginning colonies even if you don't, as soon as water is added. Links exist like the ones put up about nitrifiers and you can find them if you look around. I don't bother with them much, my links are my tanks ran in this way and the many done by pm over the years.
> 
> 
> when you set up a tank with water, contamination occurs and in the mix are nitrifiers. The trace ammonia gets in by ways detailed, and a cycle begins independent of extras we throw in to speed things up. You can run a small bioload at the end of 6~8 weeks solely off natural cycling or a little ghost feeding. done it plenty of times. Once a small bioload is added, with just a day the catch up by the seeded bacteria is astounding.
> ...


How did you verify any of this if you have never owned an ammonia test kit? The tanks in your links are proof of nothing. Unless those qualify your expertise in how you should/should not treat fish.


----------



## brandon429 (Mar 29, 2003)

I wouldn't keep a betta in 2.5 as the test subject but  yes I see what you mean. I would be more concerned a new keeper might be using api ammonia kits to discern their cycle vs winging it on a two month time frame lol but the methods I use surely seem outdated. The last two tanks done just used seeded filter pads and wood/plants as any dry cycle method is boring!


----------



## lauraleellbp (Feb 3, 2008)

brandon429 said:


> The last two tanks done just used seeded filter pads and wood/plants as any dry cycle method is boring!


I'm "boring" too LOL


----------



## brandon429 (Mar 29, 2003)

jrman83 said:


> How did you verify any of this if you have never owned an ammonia test kit? The tanks in your links are proof of nothing. Unless those qualify your expertise in how you should/should not treat fish.



how can I verify there is no ammonia right now in my pico reef? I cant with no test, right?

steps can be taken that account for free ammonia at all stages of a tank's design if that kind of thing is important to know. Right now I'm positive there is no free ammonia in my pico reef at any level a hobby level kit will detect, yet its never been tested.

I rely on someone else to make my ro/di so if they fail upstream that may very well introduce it undetected. I don't see that happening and luck to some degree has been part of all successful tanks it seems. I controlled my ammonia in design by having inert substrates with no organic loading (flourite typically) and extra surface area that was submerged in clean aerated water for weeks plus a light entry bioload, its as close to zero reading as api will ever let you get




attaining this same state of reliability isn't hard in a 20 g fw tank that's been filled for three months including filters and has a few small fish as the initial bioload. others did the testing before they wrote books detailing the old school option of fill it up come back in ten weeks. They accounted for dilution, safe initial bioloads, natural inoculation and foodstuffs, plus other controls such as source water that factor in as well.

All I'm doing is recalling a natural option is there, it's slow, it begins when you hydrate not make a retail purchase, it's good food for thought to keep perspective about natural systems I think.


----------



## observing (Feb 2, 2010)

If I can put in my two cents. I have been keeping fish since the 70's. In that time my wife and I built 4 pet stores ran them for a couple of years and then sold them. We had an average of 85 aquariums all of which we would set up add water and then order 15 to 20 boxes of fish at a time to stock the tanks. The fish would show up go into the tanks and get 50% water changes 2 to 3 times a week. Our loses were never more then 1% of the total and most of that was shipping stress. I am a firm believer in the more water the better that to me makes testing unnecessary. Even now with only 40 aquariums up as a hobbiest I do 75% water changes weekly and have not had a fish loss in years. Other then old age.


----------



## brandon429 (Mar 29, 2003)

That is a lot of water man and heckuva dedication. Hope you make some threads about em.




Very good case in point about how seemingly clear, untained water is tainted beyond belief if we only had microscopes at our disposal:

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/showthread.php?t=635802


----------

