55 Gallon Tank Cycle w/ Fish

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well... since you're not interested in answering questions as to why cycling with fish is a better method, I'm done following this thread. Seems to me that you're the one that's being closed minded around here if you're not even going to answer any questions.

Good luck!
 
CLOSED THIS THREAD!!!!!! Excuse my French But just another Idiot trying to prove a point that does not make any since, Close Minded isn't the word... We are all here for Advice and to ask for help everyone is welcome to there own opinion but when it comes to someone trying to prove that cycling with FISH is better and can't tell us WHY? Then you don't deserve to even be apart of this Forum... Sorry Mentor and Moderators but just tired of threads like this that someone could say a cycling with Fish is BETTER... Well Hope everything goes well.....:mad:
 
Keep the thread on topic, attacks of any sort will not be tolerated. The question has been asked that you please explain your position. I feel this is a fair question.

I am a FW person and am personally against cycling with fish for either FW or SW, the reason I feel this way is that I feel it is wrong to submit any fish to a toxic substance for no reason. Fishless cycling has the same end result with no potential harm for the fish.

People are not being closeminded. They are asking you to explain your statement that you feel fish cycling is better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 919
Everyone needs to step back and relax a little...

1. Damsels are hardy fish, and recommended as a cycle fish in "The Conscientious Marine Aquarist" by Fenner. Widely viewed as the definitive reference on salt water aquariums.

2. I am posting my parameters to show, that my tanks is cycling and my fish are fine.

3. Every time I have cycled, utilizing other means; I have always experienced a mini cycle no matter how slowly I add additional fish.

4. I have yet to see any definitive quantifiable evidence that cycling with fish is not any worse than without fish. I understand the value of rules of thumb, but following them blindly is a horrible idea.
 
Here is an interesting blurb from the above mentioned book:

"The greatest testimony to their toughness is that they do "damelsfish duty" in "popping" new systems - establishing bio - geo - chemical cycling wihile giving the untrained aquarist his or her first taste of keeping marine fishes. Miraculously, most damsels manage to live through it all and some go on to live for many years."
 
So let me get this straight. You are denying that as a result of your cycle that ammonia and nitrites are not at a high and toxic rate for the fish in the tank. When the "The Conscientious Marine Aquarist" was written that was the accepted thing because no one knew any better. Now it is a proven standard that fish dont have to be put through that. That an ammonia source without the fish will accomplish the same thing. Did you read that article on the fishless cycle that I gave you or were you being closeminded. I have provided my evidence now where is yours.
 
Miraculously, most damsels manage to live through it all and some go on to live for many years."

Most damsels. That means some dont make it. And why should they have to manage to live through it.
 
Miraculously, most damsels manage to live through it all and some go on to live for many years."

Important words in bold. MOST live through it. SOME go on to live long lives.

Which means the process kills some of them, even though they're "hardy." And just being able to survive the process doesn't mean they aren't suffering for it.

There's no reason to put any sort of fish through prolonged periods of 2-3+ ppm ammonia when there's an easy alternative that doesn't make any fish suffer.
 
You have provided one source for your theory. I haven't read the book so I can't comment on the book.

I can however state that my uncle kept fish for many years and has some considerably outdated ideas that he stands behind today. It is possible that the author of the book has the same frame of mind.

Whenever I have done any type of research into fish vs. fishless cycling, I have always found references to ammonia and nitrite being toxic to fish of both FW and SW aquaria.

You have stated your opinion and are most certainly entitled to it. You will find however that the majority of members here will disagree and will choose fishless cycling. Their opinions are to be respected as well as yours. I personally disagree with fish cycling, but can clearly see I would not be able to talk you out of your opinion. I can agree to disagree.
 
First printing 1998...

that was the first printing of the second edition i believe... ive read it... it contradicts every other book ive been reading....


but dont take it from me... im just a :n00b:

-Brad
 
Everyone needs to step back and relax a little...

1. Damsels are hardy fish, and recommended as a cycle fish in "The Conscientious Marine Aquarist" by Fenner. Widely viewed as the definitive reference on salt water aquariums.

2. I am posting my parameters to show, that my tanks is cycling and my fish are fine.

3. Every time I have cycled, utilizing other means; I have always experienced a mini cycle no matter how slowly I add additional fish.

4. I have yet to see any definitive quantifiable evidence that cycling with fish is not any worse than without fish. I understand the value of rules of thumb, but following them blindly is a horrible idea.

919... thanks for finally posting your reasons. I wasn't trying to bait you, but I just wanted to know your reasons - even if I don't agree with them. As long as the thread stays on topic and doesn't get nasty, it doesn't seem like it should be closed or locked, but that's just my opinion. If folks don't want to read it, then well... don't read it!

You say that there is no quantifiable evidence that cycling with fish is any worse (for the tank) than cycling without. Strictly from an ammonia standpoint, I believe you're correct. Ammonia is ammonia, whether it's from fish poop/respiration/feeding or something rotting away. But the flip side of that argument (which is also true) is that there is no quantifiable evidence to say that cycling with fish is any BETTER - which you are claiming. Both methods supply the needed ammonia.

Where I think many folks run into problems with fishless cycling is that they don't get enough ammonia in there to start with, and don't build up enough bacteria to really handle the first fish. Or they often add too many to start with. Not sure if any of these possibilities could explain your experiences, but having cycled my main tank and a quarantine tank fishless, I can vouch that it will cycle a tank and in my case have no measurable cycle as livestock are added.

Regarding the comment that you're posting your parameters that show you're cycling, and the fish "are fine"... well... I guess the fact that they're alive is the definition of "fine." I think that's were most folks will disagree with you.

Finally... before trotting out Mr. Fenner's book as your strongest support, you should read some of his more recent writings here:

EstBioFiltMar

I'll quote part of Mr. Fenner's article here:

About Damsels & Torturing Other Wildlife :In the Dark Ages, back in the 1950’s, when such pet-fish luminaries as Robert Straughan were discovering and disseminating how to set-up working marine systems, people fell into the habit of using "tougher" livestock like Damselfishes (family Pomacentridae), Anemones… even brackish Turtle species to provide starter and ongoing ammonia to establish nutrient cycling. Turns out, these organisms aren’t necessary, nor advised. There is plenty of ammonia available from live rock, live sand organisms, old/used media, and even starter cultures.

As you said, following blindly is a horrible idea.
 
Time Date Ammonia Nitrate Nitrite Alkalinity pH Temp Salinity Notes 8:00 12/2/2008 3 20 0 300 7.8 79 1.0215 cleaned brown film off substrate
 
Time Date Ammonia Nitrate Nitrite Alkalinity pH Temp Salinity Notes 8:55 12/3/2008 3 20 0 300 7.8 79 1.0215 6 healthy looking fish
 
Time Date Ammonia Nitrate Nitrite Alkalinity pH Temp Salinity Notes 9:24 12/5/2008 3 20 0.5 300 7.8 79 1.0215
 
Time Date Ammonia Nitrate Nitrite Alkalinity pH Temp Salinity 8:15 12/6/2008 3 20 1 300 7.8 79 1.022
 
Time Date Ammonia Nitrate Nitrite Alkalinity pH Temp Salinity Notes 7:30 12/11/2008 2.0 20 0.5 300 7.8 79 1.022 6 healthy fish
 
Time Date Ammonia Nitrate Nitrite Alkalinity pH Temp Salinity Notes 4:22 12/13/2008 2 20 0 300 7.8 79 1.022 6 healthy fish
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom