Curing dried rock

[jeffaquarius]

When you introduce BB via "live" rock, filter media, etc. you are not "cycling" the tank but rather "seeding" it with BB and hoping for a good colonization. The system does not go through a cycling phase, but rather a lag phase in which the seeded BB can colonize the "clean" material to a point of being able to handle the bio-load.

If I have a new tank and I use 50/50 of LR and base rocks am I not cycling the tank before it is safe for my livestock? In my understanding Nitrogen Cycle is a continuous process of converting Nutrients to Nitrites into Nitrates and Nitrogen consumed by algae which is back to food and so on. You can not have a tank to cycle (safely) if you do not have enough BB to consume the bioload. I would like to emphasize that cycling does not happen only once or only when setting up a new tank. Stable tanks continuously perform this cycling process. We just use the term CYCLING in new tanks when we are trying to produce more bb to maximize the conversion process.

 

[PB_Smith]

If I have a new tank and I use 50/50 of LR and base rocks am I not cycling the tank before it is safe for my livestock? In my understanding Nitrogen Cycle is a continuous process of converting Nutrients to Nitrites into Nitrates and Nitrogen consumed by algae which is back to food and so on. You can not have a tank to cycle (safely) if you do not have enough BB to consume the bioload. I would like to emphasize that cycling does not happen only once or only when setting up a new tank. Stable tanks continuously perform this cycling process. We just use the term CYCLING in new tanks when we are trying to produce more bb to maximize the conversion process.

Isn't that pretty much what I said?

True, the cycle is ongoing, but the commonly thought of process when talking about "cycling a tank" is the initial first colonization of the required bacteria, true?
So in that sense and with the commonly accepted definition of "cycling", no, you are not "cycling" the tank when doing a 50/50 mix, you are "seeding" it with bacteria.

I honestly don't know what is hard to understand about the difference.
it really is a matter of semantics and not science at this point....


and I pronounce it to·ma·to with the long "A" sound.

 

[jeffaquarius]

Are you saying that with 50/50 rocks you do not need ammonia and the seeding will just take off on its own? If you are adding ammonia it means you are still CYCLING the tank.

 

[tomtom14]

Thanks everyone on all the info I've got another question. I want a deep sand bed but don't have enough sand I would like to top it up with live sand but I don't have enough sand to do that with my other marine tank. So I wanted to know what sand product had the most life in it? As I've been told live sand in bags isn't very live. So how am I going to get a lot of live sand?


Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

 

[mr_X]

There is no way anaerobic bacteria can travel in a high oxygen environment. So, you aren't seeding the tank with this at all. It's already present in low oxygen zones before you add a drop of salt water. Up to a few years ago, you could google pectinia coral, and it would come up as sps. Truly a mass copied mistake. I'm sure there are many others, including this misconception.

 

[jeffaquarius]

There is no way anaerobic bacteria can travel in a high oxygen environment. So, you aren't seeding the tank with this at all. It's already present in low oxygen zones before you add a drop of salt water.

Correct and in base rocks they may have those anaerobic bb inside them but may not have the aerobics bb. When we seed the tank with LR it's not the former bb that we are seeding but the later bb. That is the reason why we keep the LR wet when moving to new tank.

 

[jeffaquarius]

Thanks everyone on all the info I've got another question. I want a deep sand bed but don't have enough sand I would like to top it up with live sand but I don't have enough sand to do that with my other marine tank. So I wanted to know what sand product had the most life in it? As I've been told live sand in bags isn't very live. So how am I going to get a lot of live sand?


Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

This is a new topic and I would suggest to copy it and paste to a new thread.

 

[PB_Smith]

Are you saying that with 50/50 rocks you do not need ammonia and the seeding will just take off on its own? If you are adding ammonia it means you are still CYCLING the tank.

Nope, I did not say that at all, simply that what is taking place is different in the two scenarios.

 

[PB_Smith]

There is no way anaerobic bacteria can travel in a high oxygen environment. So, you aren't seeding the tank with this at all. It's already present in low oxygen zones before you add a drop of salt water. Up to a few years ago, you could google pectinia coral, and it would come up as sps. Truly a mass copied mistake. I'm sure there are many others, including this misconception.

What?

again, not a misconception at all.
I honestly do not know what you are getting at with this one.

what is your point about high oxygen zones?
If seeding with rock that has anaerobic bacteria colonies present within, why do you assume that they would not survive when being introduced to a new tank?
how could it be present in dry rock?
what you posted really makes little sense nor is it scientifically sound.
Again seems as if you are being contrary simply for the sake of it.

 

[jeffaquarius]

Well let let me say it simple then. Curing and seeding are both parts of CYCLING.

 

[PB_Smith]

Correct and in base rocks they may have those anaerobic bb inside them but may not have the aerobics bb. When we seed the tank with LR it's not the former bb that we are seeding but the later bb. That is the reason why we keep the LR wet when moving to new tank.

Wrong, when you seed a tank with established "live rock", then you are introducing all types of bacteria, if the rock was transported properly.

why would the rock be populated with anaerobic bacteria, which takes considerably longer to get established, but not aerobic, which is present in greater numbers and multiplies faster?

Honestly, what you two are saying does not coincide with the science or common sense at all.

Again, why is this such an issue for you two.



by the way, the sky is blue and grass is green.

 

[jeffaquarius]

It's and issue between the 3 of us because we don't agree on certain points. Both bbs have different functions in the filtering process. For the benefit of others, anaerobic bb is more on cleaning up nitrates while aerobic bb is more on ammonia and nitrites. If a tank has out of control nitrates it is a sign that it has insufficient anaerobic bb.

 

[PB_Smith]

It's and issue between the 3 of us because we don't agree on certain points. Both bb has different functions in the filtering process. For the benefit of others, anaerobic bb is more on cleaning up nitrates while aerobic bb is more on ammonia and nitrites. If a tank has out of control nitrates it is a sign that it has insufficient anaerobic bb.

Yes, I concur with that, so why the disagreement?
What do you think I posted that is in error? Please quote me.

I actually thought I made clear mention of the differing roles of the BB and even the different time frames before they have thriving populations.

again it feels as if I am going to get an automatic contrary attitude from certain members here regardless of what I post.

Oh well, I'm getting a headache from this .
If you guys think I am completely wrong, site the science that would indicate that.

 

[jeffaquarius]

I believe the disagreement lies in how anaerobic is seeded or colonized. The following link states that it will not survive in oxygenated areas.

Difference Between Aerobic and Anaerobic Bacteria | Difference Between | Aerobic vs Anaerobic Bacteria

.

 

[mr_X]

What?

again, not a misconception at all.
I honestly do not know what you are getting at with this one.

what is your point about high oxygen zones?
If seeding with rock that has anaerobic bacteria colonies present within, why do you assume that they would not survive when being introduced to a new tank?
how could it be present in dry rock?
what you posted really makes little sense nor is it scientifically sound.
Again seems as if you are being contrary simply for the sake of it.

Not at all. My point is that bacteria that lives in a low oxygen environment will not live in a high oxygen environment, correct? If so, you aren't seeding the new, dry rock with low oxygen bacteria, but none the less, it's there. The same goes for aerobic bacteria. It's already there. All it needs is food to grow to meet the bio load. No bottled bacteria or pre-cycled rock needs to be added and you'll still have all the beneficial bacteria you need in just a short time with the introduction of ammonia. People do it every day with BRS "reef saver" rock or similar. They don't want hitch hikers, so they use no live rock.
A month or so and it's a fully functional filter, just as ocean rock would be.
IF they want pods, sponges, coralline, etc., they use a piece of live rock to seed it.

 

[PB_Smith]

I believe the disagreement lies in how anaerobic is seeded or colonized. The following link states that it will not survive in oxygenated areas.

Difference Between Aerobic and Anaerobic Bacteria | Difference Between | Aerobic vs Anaerobic Bacteria

.

again, old news.
I've known this for decades. Did you miss the part earlier when I said it takes 8-12 weeks if anaerobic bacteria is also considered?
you are reading something into my posts I didn't write or you are not understanding them.
I'll ask again, if you think I posted wrong information, please quote it and I will attempt a clearer explanation.

 

[PB_Smith]

Not at all. My point is that bacteria that lives in a low oxygen environment will not live in a high oxygen environment, correct? If so, you aren't seeding the new, dry rock with low oxygen bacteria, but none the less, it's there. The same goes for aerobic bacteria. It's already there. All it needs is food to grow to meet the bio load. No bottled bacteria or pre-cycled rock needs to be added and you'll still have all the beneficial bacteria you need in just a short time with the introduction of ammonia. People do it every day with BRS "reef saver" rock or similar. They don't want hitch hikers, so they use no live rock.
A month or so and it's a fully functional filter, just as ocean rock would be.
IF they want pods, sponges, coralline, etc., they use a piece of live rock to seed it.

Yeah, so what have I posted that makes you think I don't understand all of this or that represents it incorrectly?
I'm confused because you guys keep posting things that I have already said.

Maybe you guys should go back and actually read what I have posted.

As I said before, I have set-up tanks using every methodology around, and in real world testing of water parameters, seeding a system with the BB makes a considerable difference.


and as a side note, urine works great as an ammonia source, better than pure ammonia actually.

 

[jeffaquarius]

If one wants to do it faster, doubling the initial number of bbs as long as you do it right the cycling will complete half the time. It's a very simple math.

 

[PB_Smith]

If one wants to do it faster, doubling the initial number of bbs as long as you do it right the cycling will complete half the time. It's a very simple math.

than why in the heck have you guys been giving me grief when that is essentially what I have been saying all along????????

 

[jeffaquarius]

:If seeding with rock that has anaerobic bacteria colonies present within, why do you assume that they would not survive when being introduced to a new tank?

What MrX and I are saying is that the anaerobic bb has a low survivability to move from rock to rock when oxygen level is high in the column of water. Thus seeding for this bb is not gonna happen. I never said the word "wrong" but you did. I am only clarifying what I think is right.