returnofsid
New member
You now seem to be talking to yourself, or at least responding to yourself.
How long do i have to wait!
- Thread starter Marinalovesfish
- Start date
He's been spouting crap all over the new to the hobby about cycling and 10 inch fish for several days now and especially about the cycle and how the bacteria is stongest after the initial cycle and how he cant understand how we all recommend stocking slowly to beginners, im not saying its untrue, However this is the new the hobby where 99% of the reefers come for advice, to suggest to a complete newcommer that testing isnt required just a nitrite test only is poor advice imo, his argument is if nitrite is evident after 14 days and not on day 35 then the cycle has occured, yes ok true, but what if the kits faulty? and surely the novice needs to learn to test for ammonia and see the cycle so he knows 100% its over or in process, also these big words he keeps using are not helping at all, my suggestion is he starts a thread on cycling for us all to enjoy and stops jamming up every thread on the subject, in his thread he should suggest his preffered method and say it in basic language reefers as young as 15 can understand so it can help not confuse. yesterday there was hardly any posting at all in here, his big words and constant posting about his views in other reefers threads was scaring the life out of all the rookies here. he bored the pants off me for sure, and even when fantastic reefers like todd and sister came on he still kept arguing because he didnt like the replies, we learn through dialogue admittedly, but constant posting and almost harrassment on the subject kills the disscussion rather than help it, start your own thread, leave the newcommers to get straight answers they can understand, especially in english.
wooden_reefer
New member
I think you mean that you know how to cycle for and prepare a new tank for a very large fish, but you won't say how.
Even if you are not going to say how, you do imply that it is possible.
I suggest that whatever way you prepare for such a very large fish may also be the way you cycle for many medium size fish.
Bioload is not linear to the size of the fish. A ten inch fish generates not twice as much waste as a five inch fish, but many times more.
wooden_reefer
New member
The attitude that you have here is not conducive to growth of skill in this hobby.
Knowledge and fact have their values. It is not true that whatever reason, real or not, that you can get a newbie to stock fish slowly is good. The end does not justify the mean. The incorrect concept can seriously limit the later growth of a newbie.
I am not being academic here.
There are two strong cases here, first is adherence to QT, second is the detriment of mini-cycling to fish.
A newbie asks:
1. You said I MUST stock fish slowly, one at a time, and the reason is that the system has time to "really settle", for nitrification bacteria population to adjust.
2. I must QT for at least eight weeks.
So, he adds the two together.
Does it mean that stocking ten fish in a 125 gal tank will take 80 weeks of QT?
So what would you tell him? Yes, it always takes 80 weeks to QT ten fish no matter how much more skill you later acquire?
I know what I should tell him: When you are a newbie you still do not have the skills to combat fish diseases, this is the real reason why you should stock fish slowly. An ich or virulent bacterial infection outbreak involving many fish is very hard for a newbie to cope with, very scary. So as you learn you should limit your losses.
The other is the detriment of mini-cycling. This is very bad for fish. The science and practical applications of nitrification is very easy; even a newbie should master them very well. Mini-cyling is very bad for fish. This is the cause of much trouble and is 100% preventable. This is now 2009, there is alsolutely no need to accept limited nitrification, or new tank syndrome. One can very easily overcome this supposed limitation
Last, how would you prepare to house a very large fish in a new tank?
Do you know how? Perhaps, you are not confident about putting a ten inch fish in a new (in time) setup. If you do, chances are that you would not have this attitude.
Actually, the greater challenge is to add an extremely large fish in an established tank, cycled a year earlier, that currently already has a few small or medium fish, say a 220 gal tank that only has two or three medium sized fish, well below the carrying capacity of a 220 gal. If you are very confident in doing so, I'd say you have mastered both the science and practical applications of nitrification. I certainly know how to do so.
The reasons to stock fish quickly are compelling for the very experienced, for those who are well-versed with fish disease control. I always stock as quicky as possible.
Last edited:
wooden_reefer
New member
Not to digress too far from the thread..
The remedy that I suggest involves cycling for QT to house the eight fish that are here already.
How do you cycle for all eight fish at once? Very similar to the way you cycle for one large fish. Very easy. I suggest that if invertebrates are added without QT (having been fishless for eight weeks), the chance of a serious ich outbreak is high.
The remedy that I suggest involves cycling for QT to house the eight fish that are here already.
How do you cycle for all eight fish at once? Very similar to the way you cycle for one large fish. Very easy. I suggest that if invertebrates are added without QT (having been fishless for eight weeks), the chance of a serious ich outbreak is high.
im not sure what you want everyone here to tell you, all i keep seeing is 10" fish, 10" fish,10" fish, well its not rocket science is it? preparing a tank to handle your 10" fish is the same as preparing it for a 1" fish, you need to ensure your biological filtration is adequate to handle the fishes waste, if you have a large tank and you are going to add a 10" fish then you need lots of established bacteria capable of handling the waste, whilst the fish is newly in the tank you should have more ready if the colonies you already have created cant handle the waste, not too mention water changes if and i say if any ammonia were to be detected.obviously once the tank is cycled the bacteria if prepared wil be adequate and so i understand your argument about adding all at once.
i also get your point about QT, and wouldn't disagree at all, however when a newcommer asks if his tank is ready for a fish or two, you dont need to keep on about QT, try to keep on topic, and rather than keep telling every body you know and asking us if we do, try telling us and instead of playing a silly game, we all know you like to talk about cycling media ready for marine aquaria, try starting a thread explaining why.
i also get your point about QT, and wouldn't disagree at all, however when a newcommer asks if his tank is ready for a fish or two, you dont need to keep on about QT, try to keep on topic, and rather than keep telling every body you know and asking us if we do, try telling us and instead of playing a silly game, we all know you like to talk about cycling media ready for marine aquaria, try starting a thread explaining why.
wooden_reefer
New member
About the reliability of just two test nitrite tests...
Suppose on day 14 you do detect significant nitrite and on day 35, using the same test kit, you no longer detect any nitrite, it is rather reliable, IMO.
Why? You expect to detect two different outcomes, and, with the same test kit, you do detect two different outcomes.
If you never detect any nitrite, your test kit can be questionable.
Suppose on day 14 you do detect significant nitrite and on day 35, using the same test kit, you no longer detect any nitrite, it is rather reliable, IMO.
Why? You expect to detect two different outcomes, and, with the same test kit, you do detect two different outcomes.
If you never detect any nitrite, your test kit can be questionable.
wooden_reefer
New member
Exactly! You can always prepare so that a tank can handle the waste from one very large fish. Why won't you do so for several smaller fish that produce the same waste? Very easy right? Pretty much the same way. Why not?
So I ask, is the reason why a newbie should stock fish slowly limited nitrification? I say NO NO NO. Those would know how to house a very large fish in a new tank should agree.
Is it because stocking slowly is necessary because the tank needs time to "really settle"? Generally NO.
As far as nitrification is concerned, the "really settled" should have taken place BEFORE you add a single fish or other livestock to a tank. Right after cycling, the nitrification capacity such be very high.
Further, if you say that "really settled" is not just nitrification but denitrifcation and other ecological balance, I agree certainly. But should this govern the rate of stocking of fish, no. As far as fish is concerned, nitrification is far more important than denitrification. Ammonia kills and even low levels of ammonia exposed long enough is very bad for fish. Ammonia is the acute concern for fish. The detriment of nitrate is less direct and far less acute.
the reason id sugest to a newcommer to start slow is they have not usually got the skills to cope with sudden changes in water quality, with a newly set up tank they can control the parameters easier than a stocked at once tank, i never said you were wrong about stocking, only we were right to advise them to stock slowly, this is the new to the hobby forum after all
wooden_reefer
New member
"Actually, the greater challenge is to add an extremely large fish in an established tank, cycled a year earlier, that currently already has a few small or medium fish, say a 220 gal tank that only has two or three medium sized fish, well below the carrying capacity of a 220 gal. If you are very confident in doing so, I'd say you have mastered both the science and practical applications of nitrification."
This is also interesting.
I urge the newbie to think about it.
This is also interesting.
I urge the newbie to think about it.
wooden_reefer
New member
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15737326#post15737326 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by Michael
the reason id sugest to a newcommer to start slow is they have not usually got the skills to cope with sudden changes in water quality, with a newly set up tank they can control the parameters easier than a stocked at once tank, i never said you were wrong about stocking, only we were right to advise them to stock slowly, this is the new to the hobby forum after all
Perhaps learning the science of "water quality" is also a reason why a newbie should stock fish slowing, in addition to not having the skills to combat fish diseases.
As long as limited nitrification is NOT the reason to stock fish slowly, I agree.
Precisely, a newbie should know about nitrification well and master it very well. So a newbie should know that limited nitrification should never be the reason to stock fish slowly, but there are other compelling reasons to stock fish slowly.
A newbie should learn to NOT accept limited nitrification as a necessity to live with. Rather, limited nitrification can be avoided easily. Limited nitrification is a very bad idea during stocking of fish.
Last edited:
jtrasap
Elite Member
Here's a little info directly from the RC faq section. This information pertains directly to Marina's situation.
"You can add fish or corals once the tank is cycled. It is important to start off slowly, since your tank will experience a mini cycle each time you add more livestock. Test often during this period to make sure you are not exceeding your tank's nutrient export mechanisms. Additionally, many corals require established tanks to do well and you may need to wait longer in order for that to happen. This is also true with clams."
http://www.reefcentral.com/FAQ/general/index.php
Also, here's a bunch more info from various sites which support what I've repeatedly stated regarding bacterial population in correlation to bio-load.
Much of it may be removed, as I'm not sure on RC's policy in regards to links to other sites.
"Remember, add livestock slowly as livestock creates waste which creates ammonia. You have to allow bacteria to catch up and multiply to keep your system balanced."
http://www.vividaquariums.com/NanoCycling.asp
"be sure to stock your aquarium gradually to allow the biological filtration to catch up to the new aquarium inhabitants."
http://www.liveaquaria.com/PIC/article.cfm?aid=129
"So, think about this for a moment... the more fish you add, the more ammonia is produced, that makes sense, right? So, wouldn't it seem reasonable to start with just a couple of fish? Problem shouldn't be as bad then should it? And it will give mother nature the time she needs to get her tank housekeepers on duty."
http://www.kushaiah.com/fish/underwater/fishschool/think.htm
"Only add one or two saltwater fish at a time. Only adding a couple saltwater fish at a time gives your filtration system the time needed to take on the increased biological load that the new fish introduce."
http://www.fishlore.com/SaltwaterAquariumSetup.htm
"The ammonia levels rise when you add something to the tank. That is why you add things slowly and wait for everything to stabilize before you add more."
http://www.reeftime.com/reef-articles/adding-reef-livestock-safely/34.htm
"Above all, add the livestock slowly and with ultimate regard for its needs."
http://www.reefs.org/library/newbieguide.html
"You can add fish or corals once the tank is cycled. It is important to start off slowly, since your tank will experience a mini cycle each time you add more livestock. Test often during this period to make sure you are not exceeding your tank's nutrient export mechanisms. Additionally, many corals require established tanks to do well and you may need to wait longer in order for that to happen. This is also true with clams."
http://www.reefcentral.com/FAQ/general/index.php
Also, here's a bunch more info from various sites which support what I've repeatedly stated regarding bacterial population in correlation to bio-load.
Much of it may be removed, as I'm not sure on RC's policy in regards to links to other sites.
"Remember, add livestock slowly as livestock creates waste which creates ammonia. You have to allow bacteria to catch up and multiply to keep your system balanced."
http://www.vividaquariums.com/NanoCycling.asp
"be sure to stock your aquarium gradually to allow the biological filtration to catch up to the new aquarium inhabitants."
http://www.liveaquaria.com/PIC/article.cfm?aid=129
"So, think about this for a moment... the more fish you add, the more ammonia is produced, that makes sense, right? So, wouldn't it seem reasonable to start with just a couple of fish? Problem shouldn't be as bad then should it? And it will give mother nature the time she needs to get her tank housekeepers on duty."
http://www.kushaiah.com/fish/underwater/fishschool/think.htm
"Only add one or two saltwater fish at a time. Only adding a couple saltwater fish at a time gives your filtration system the time needed to take on the increased biological load that the new fish introduce."
http://www.fishlore.com/SaltwaterAquariumSetup.htm
"The ammonia levels rise when you add something to the tank. That is why you add things slowly and wait for everything to stabilize before you add more."
http://www.reeftime.com/reef-articles/adding-reef-livestock-safely/34.htm
"Above all, add the livestock slowly and with ultimate regard for its needs."
http://www.reefs.org/library/newbieguide.html
wooden_reefer
New member
" It is important to start off slowly, since your tank will experience a mini cycle each time you add more livestock."
This is false. Don't trust any thing you read. Think about the reason, if any, that people give.
Can you justify this assertion? Can you explain it with your reasoning?
Do you mean to say that you cannot add an extremely large fish to a new tank and avoid any ammonia problem? If you say that you can, you also repudiate this assertion, in effect.
As I said, adding an extremely large fish into an established tank with only a few small fish is even more challenging. But it can be done with confidence. There will be no mini-cycling if it is done right.
My systems will NEVER experience any mini-cycle.
Within three weeks after a robust cycle, there should never be any mini-cycling when you add livestock. Studies in the wastewater industry even give plots of the decline of aerobic bacteria after nutrient sources end. Bacteria do not die quickly from starvation.
Mature filter medium, separately prepared in advance, can be added to any system even a year after the initial cycle. This is in addition to the ease of creating high nitrification capacity after cycling, that last about a month.
Nitrification is easy to apply practically.
Those who do not apply nitrification practically retain the restriction of limited nitrification, I do not.
This is false. Don't trust any thing you read. Think about the reason, if any, that people give.
Can you justify this assertion? Can you explain it with your reasoning?
Do you mean to say that you cannot add an extremely large fish to a new tank and avoid any ammonia problem? If you say that you can, you also repudiate this assertion, in effect.
As I said, adding an extremely large fish into an established tank with only a few small fish is even more challenging. But it can be done with confidence. There will be no mini-cycling if it is done right.
My systems will NEVER experience any mini-cycle.
Within three weeks after a robust cycle, there should never be any mini-cycling when you add livestock. Studies in the wastewater industry even give plots of the decline of aerobic bacteria after nutrient sources end. Bacteria do not die quickly from starvation.
Mature filter medium, separately prepared in advance, can be added to any system even a year after the initial cycle. This is in addition to the ease of creating high nitrification capacity after cycling, that last about a month.
Nitrification is easy to apply practically.
Those who do not apply nitrification practically retain the restriction of limited nitrification, I do not.
Last edited:
wooden_reefer
New member
itrasap:
Step by step, do you actually know how to house an extremely large fish into a new tank and still have no ammonia problem?
Actually, more simply, do you think it can be done? Yes or no?
As long as the answer is yes (even if you are unwilling to disclose your skill), you have repudiated the claim that mini-cycle is unavoidable. In this case, it may not even be mini anything. If you don't prepare correctly in this situation, it may be an extremely large fish belly up soon.
You cannot gradually stock an extremely large fish into a new tank. Can it nonetheless be done? Yes or no?
Step by step, do you actually know how to house an extremely large fish into a new tank and still have no ammonia problem?
Actually, more simply, do you think it can be done? Yes or no?
As long as the answer is yes (even if you are unwilling to disclose your skill), you have repudiated the claim that mini-cycle is unavoidable. In this case, it may not even be mini anything. If you don't prepare correctly in this situation, it may be an extremely large fish belly up soon.
You cannot gradually stock an extremely large fish into a new tank. Can it nonetheless be done? Yes or no?
Saltyllama
New member
OP? Where are you OP? 
jtrasap
Elite Member
An extremely large fish should be introduced to an extremely large tank.
Such a tank that could support the bio-load of an extremely large fish.
A tank with a large enough volume to dilute the waste produced by the fish, to levels that are not toxic to the fish in question.
We are talking about eight fish being added to a relatively small (120 gallon) aquarium.
The eight fish in question would easily have a greater bio-load than a ten inch angel.
I listed plenty of resources supporting my position.
Would you kindly do the same?
Such a tank that could support the bio-load of an extremely large fish.
A tank with a large enough volume to dilute the waste produced by the fish, to levels that are not toxic to the fish in question.
We are talking about eight fish being added to a relatively small (120 gallon) aquarium.
The eight fish in question would easily have a greater bio-load than a ten inch angel.
I listed plenty of resources supporting my position.
Would you kindly do the same?
