Help Interpreting Fishless Cycle Progress

[Firewater]

Hello all,

Here is the story of my fishless cycle thus far. Following are a few questions.

(Note: 55g tank had been conditioned on 11/17 with stress coat + stress zyme)

*11/22*
First added ammonia
am: 0.50
nitrite: 0
Nitrate: 0
Added more ammonia

*11/23*
am: 1.0
nitrite: 0.25
nitrate: 0
more ammonia added

*11/24*
am: 1.5
nitrite: 0.50
nitrate: 0
ammonia added

*11/25*
am: 1.0
nitrite: 0.75
nitrate: 0
limited ammonia add; stress zyme added

*11/26*
am: 0 (oh no, did I not keep am levels high enough?)
nitrite: 2.0
Nitrate: 5.0

Note: I just added some ammonia, but have yet to test level.

Questions:

1. what level should I keep the ammonia at this stage of the cycle?

2. If my goal is to have 0 ammonia and 0 nitrite, should I now just let the nitrate producing bacteria eat off the nitrite then do a water change and call it cycled?

3. Am I doing this right?

Thanks.

[Lady Hobbs]

Your ammonia should remain at 5 until nitrites began to show and then reduce ammonia to half.

[jeffs99dime]

Your ammonia should remain at 5 until nitrites began to show and then reduce ammonia to half.

i concur as well
just make sure that when both levels are at zero, don't immediately put fish in. instead, wait until you are positive that the levels STAY at zero. and when they do you can add fish, a few at a time gradually

[Firewater]

My ammonia has never been to 5; highest was 1.5. I now have nitrites at 2.0 and nitrates at 5.0. So I should bring ammonia levels up to 2.5?

[Lady Hobbs]

Yes. Using this higher level builds more bacteria so you have had a decent number of fish without setting the tank back and ammonia spikes when you do add more fish.

[Firewater]

O.K. so I guess I should have had higher levels of ammonia from the start. Then those nitrites should hit 5.0 before they begin to drop.

Thanks for the clarification.

[jeffs99dime]

just make sure you don't put too many fish in once the cycle is complete. i can't stress this enough

[Fishguy2727]

Don't cut the amount of ammonia added at all. If you cut it in half, you cut the number of nitrifying bacteria in the end in half. The whole point of this is to get a lot of bacteria going without fish. If you don't do this you run the risk of not having enough to keep it balanced when fish are added. Keep the same amount of ammonia going in so that you keep the bacteria populations up.

[Firewater]

just make sure you don't put too many fish in once the cycle is complete. i can't stress this enough


I will not.

[Lady Hobbs]

O.K. so I guess I should have had higher levels of ammonia from the start. Then those nitrites should hit 5.0 before they begin to drop.

Thanks for the clarification.

Ammonia is added to 5.0 and kept at 5.0. When the bacteria grows, you will see the ammonia has declined by the end of each day and the nitrites are climbing. At this time, lower the amount of ammonia you are adding to 2.50. Continuing adding this amount of ammonia daily until you are getting a reading of 0 ammonia and 0 nitrites by the end of the day and your nitrates are high.

You are now done with your cycle. Do a large water change now to reduce those nitrates and add your fish. (NO CLEANING) Do not wait too long to add fish or you will kill off the bacteria you have just grown.

There is no set amount your nitrites will climb to. Just add the ammonia as instructed, daily, and you'll have your cycle in several days. Since you have been using a small amount of ammonia up to now, you already have some bacteria growing but not enough to support the fish you wish to add.

Congrats on going fishless. You have prevented the suffering of fish.

[Firewater]

Don't cut the amount of ammonia added at all. If you cut it in half, you cut the number of nitrifying bacteria in the end in half. The whole point of this is to get a lot of bacteria going without fish. If you don't do this you run the risk of not having enough to keep it balanced when fish are added. Keep the same amount of ammonia going in so that you keep the bacteria populations up.


Yeah, I just gave the tank a really good dose of ammonia. I really don't mind waiting in the name of doing it right.

The thing is I have read so much stuff on cycling a tank that I'm beginning to get confused on certain details--like how much ammonia to cycle with.

I guess the more ammonia my tank can process in the quickest amount of time, the better off I am.

[Fishguy2727]

Why is it being suggested to cut down the dosing of ammonia at some point during the fishless cycle?

[Lady Hobbs]

[Only Registered Users Can See Links.]

[Only Registered Users Can See Links.]

[Only Registered Users Can See Links.]

[Only Registered Users Can See Links.]

Every site on the web advises to cut back on the ammonia once nitrites start. And this is the way I do it with great success.

[Fishguy2727]

Yes, but what is this supposed to do? There is success with cycling with fish. There is success with fishless cycling with fish food. There is success in a lot things but we should try and figure out what works best. I am not trying to question anyone's experience, but I am trying to get to the bottom of this.

I see no benefit in cutting it back. I see no harm in keeping it the same. Why not keep the food level up (amount of ammonia added) for the bacteria so you have more of them in the end?

[Lady Hobbs]

I have no idea but it's the way I've read to do it from day one and it's the way I do it and it works for me. It took me about 5 minutes to find all those sites that say the same thing and I guess I could find more if I wanted to put time into it.

But in my own experiences here, the only problem I've seen with continuing to add the same amount of ammonia for the entire cycle is that the nitrites seem to get "stuck" and will not continue to decline by adding the same amount of ammonia for the entire cycle. I've seen several already have to do a large water change before they can get their nitrites to come out of the limbo stage. They've had to reduce the ammonia to get it moving again.

My only explanation is that you have your bacteria when the nitrites start climbing and the lower amount of ammonia is maintaining it and keeping it growing and living but no burning it out. There is only so much room to grow bacteria and once you have it, you can over-do it and no more can be handled.

This is only my lame explanation because I not into the science of it or the logistics.

But even with reducing the amount of ammonia, you are still supposed to be able to start with many fish without a set back.

edited to say.........more fish than usual.......not many fish. As always, fish need to be added with some intelligence and not 30 at once.

[Firewater]

I didn't mean to start a debate. I just want a healthy aquarium when all is said and done.

But it can be agreed that the level of ammonia needs to be initially high (5.00) and then needs to end up being 0.

What I had was wrong: I never had ammonia levels of over 1.0. Then my nitrites spiked to 2.0, thereby depleting the am. At the same time I got nitrate readings of 5.0. All this in four days!

for a second I thought I could add a few drops of ammonia to keep producing
just enough nitrites to keep the nitrate producing bacteria growing. Then wait for the ammonia and nitrites to drop off while still having nitrates.

In my mind I'd then be cycled. But, in truth, I would only then have done a sort of really weak cycle, producing only small amounts of beneficial bacteria. This would leave my tank prone to high levels of ammonia and nitrites if I added lots of fish.

Bottom line: more ammonia would have produced a "bigger cycle." This line of thinking lends credence to fishguy's belief. Weather there is a limit to the degree bacteria in a given space can make use of ammonia (a theory held by lady hobbs), I have no clue.

Ahh, I don't know where I'm getting with this besides to say that I'm no scientist.

[Fishguy2727]

There is a maximum amount of bacteria in a tank, but we should neve reven come close to that. I probably have much more ammonia going into my very well stocked 75 than if I was actually adding it, but it is fine. It is possible, but I do not think maxing out their capacity is what is happening. I don't know if those sites explain it but it doesn't make sense to me at all. I think we have enough intelligent people here to not need to go strictly by what other sites are saying, even if it is the majority of them. It works, but I don't think it is the best way.

[digital3]

Just to add to the pro "don't cut ammonia" debate. When I did my fishless cycle I also didn't cut my ammonia in half. In fact, I think it was after reading a post from Fishguy. And my cycle went extremely well. Even though my Nitrites started climbing, I kept dosing the same amount of ammonia and by the next morning it would get back to zero. And then eventually all Ammonia, and Nitrites went to zero and Nitrates stayed low (after a water change of course). My paramaters have been solid since.

I'm thinking both methods probably work. Of course, I've only done one proper fishless cycle.

:ezpi_wink1:

[Fishguy2727]

That is always the debate in things like this, both ways WORK, it is just a debate as to which is better.

UGFs work, but there are better options for filtration.

Live food works, but is pelleted better?

The list goes on.

[Lady Hobbs]

When I first got into the fishless cycling, I didn't go alone by what I was told here and never do. I checked online at other sites. When I read a site that said to cut-back on the ammonia, I still didn't go by that site but checked again at another site. And checked and checked. After awhile, when every site advises the same method, why would I use another or give advice contrary to everything that I've read? Unless, of course, every site is wrong.

All I can say is this is the information I have given for over the last year and will continue to do so and the same method I used in my last 6 fishless cycles. But like everything we do here, we do things differently. It doesn't make anyone wrong if what you do works for you.

However, my advice stands. Because I don't understand the science behind cutting back doesn't make it ill advice.

The purpose is to save our fish by doing a fishless cycle. That is what we are aiming at here no matter how you chose to do your fishless cycle.

[Fishguy2727]

It works. But so does cycling with fish. I find many sites to be wrong on lots of things, sometimes they are all wrong on something. I am assuming there was originally some reason for it, but if none explain why it seems that they themselves may simply be regurgitating the info from other sites/experiences. I try and question everything I hear and if it doesn't make sense I don't go by it. This is one of those cases. If there is a reason for the cut back it does not seem to be a big one. Either way fishless cycle and add the fish slowly when you do.

[Firewater]

Just an update on the progress.

Yesterday evening i juiced up the ammonia level to around 4 (a compromise between hobb's and fishguy's suggestions).

I checked the levels after work this evening.

am. 0
nitrites: 2.0 (where they were yesterday)
nitrates: 10 (up from 5)

Seems good? The tank is certainly taking care of ammonia and the nitrites are being kept level by the growing nitrate-producing bacteria.

I just added ammonia in the hopes of bringing the levels up to at least 5.
If it is depleted to zero by tomorrow's tests, i will bring the level up even further. I'm gonna continue this trend until the ammonia can no longer be completely depleted in one day. At that point, i will scale back. Hopefully at that point, the nitrites will be kept well in check on a daily basis.

I figure this way will teach me a lot about what my tank can control once I add fish.

Thanks for all the imput

[Lady Hobbs]

You're on your way. Good luck to a quick cycle.

[themusician]

I have a theory:

If you want your colony of bacteria to grow, you must provide a surplus of food. Extra food means the bacteria can replicate very quickly. You see this in other animal populations; when food is plentiful, they reproduce, and when food is scarce, they don't. I think I learned in science class eons ago that reproduction requires more energy, thus the need for more food. At some point you want to maintain the size of the colony as it is, so you cut back on their food. They're not going to die off because the colony at it's current size only needs a certain amount of food.

I've thought a lot about this because I'm one of the one Lady Hobbs mentioned as having a fishless cycle stall out and having to do a huge water change to get it going again. I got to where my bacteria were using 4.75 of the ammonia every day (always leaving .25 behind) and my nitrite was off the charts, and then nothing changed for a full two weeks. After I did a water change and reduced the amount of ammonia I was adding, my cycle finished in 3 or 4 days. I don't know if my theory is right, but it's the most plausible one I've been able to come up with.

[Firewater]

I have a theory:

If you want your colony of bacteria to grow, you must provide a surplus of food. Extra food means the bacteria can replicate very quickly. You see this in other animal populations; when food is plentiful, they reproduce, and when food is scarce, they don't. I think I learned in science class eons ago that reproduction requires more energy, thus the need for more food. At some point you want to maintain the size of the colony as it is, so you cut back on their food. They're not going to die off because the colony at it's current size only needs a certain amount of food.

I've thought a lot about this because I'm one of the one Lady Hobbs mentioned as having a fishless cycle stall out and having to do a huge water change to get it going again. I got to where my bacteria were using 4.75 of the ammonia every day (always leaving .25 behind) and my nitrite was off the charts, and then nothing changed for a full two weeks. After I did a water change and reduced the amount of ammonia I was adding, my cycle finished in 3 or 4 days. I don't know if my theory is right, but it's the most plausible one I've been able to come up with.

It sounds reasonable to me. I would think that as long as ammonia is being eaten, there has to be a resulting increase in nitrites. But those nitrites feed the nitrate-producing bacteria colony, which has to be at least as big as the nitrite producing colony in order to keep the tank free of ammonia and nitrites. I guess that is the definition of "being cycled."

I would also imagine that if you end your cycle, and the fish you put in do not produce the amount of ammonia you had been adding during the fishless cycle, part of the nitrite-producing colony will die for lack of food. Less nitrites, we could assume, will result in a smaller nitrate-producing colony and less nitrates.

Its weird, you don't really want ammonia, nitrites, or nitrates in your water but you need enough of the the first two in order to sustain the bacteria colonies that make the tank livable. Ah, life is a paradox.