Post your test data

[threnjen]

Sorry, I didn't die =/

I just have lost some focus. I still really, really, really want to run the study. It just seems like all of the proposed variables were shot down so I lost sight of what we were studying. I WANT to run the study, lots. Let's just agree on parameters and see who is still interested Who cares if we learn nothing? Maybe if anything we simply prove that cycling works without problems when all of the criteria are followed correctly. There is still value in this.
I'm convinced about the water changes. Let's do it!

Aqua_chem that last post was soooo helpful! Also it's nice to know where you're coming from as far as background.

Being lectured was kind of a bummer, It's sometimes like people don't want us talking about this, which is weird. This has been such a great thread.

 

[Caliban07]

Ok. I am still interested. We need tank conditions and intructions. I dont know if the others have lost interest or not though.

Sent from my SM-T210 using Aquarium Advice mobile app

 

[threnjen]

OK! I vote we either go 5ppm and use water changes, OR 2ppm and don't use water changes
Or do 4ppm and dose less and have one specifically located water change

 

[Caliban07]

Ooo I like that. 2ppm with 0 water changes. That way I get my lower dose and you get your 0 water changes.

 

[threnjen]

Ooo I like that. 2ppm with 0 water changes. That way I get my lower dose and you get your 0 water changes.

Agreed, I'm going to bump up the participant thread, chime in in a few if I miss anything

 

[aqua_chem]

As for nitrites toxicity to bacteria, again, tests were conducted at levels as high as 50mM which equates to a ridiculously high ppm with still no stall so I think this would have to be well in the hundreds.

Can you link me that paper?

 

[threnjen]

Dr Tim's paper comes to mind, he's one of the few testers who actually ran lab work on real live aquariums (rather than just extrapolating that their data could be applied to aquaria)

Nitrospira-Like Bacteria Associated with Nitrite Oxidation in Freshwater Aquaria

"A total of 246 mmol of ammonia was added to each tank during the test."

Nitrite reached 11 mmol in the aquariums that they just dosed basically the same method we use but a much bigger dose
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=124703_am0181256004.jpg

 

[aqua_chem]

Dr Tim's paper comes to mind, he's one of the few testers who actually ran lab work on real live aquariums (rather than just extrapolating that their data could be applied to aquaria)

Nitrospira-Like Bacteria Associated with Nitrite Oxidation in Freshwater Aquaria

"A total of 246 mmol of ammonia was added to each tank during the test."

Nitrite reached 11 mmol in the aquariums that they just dosed basically the same method we use but a much bigger dose
PubMed Central Image Viewer.

I think you may be confusing units though. Millimoles (mmol) is physical amount of something, not a concentration. From the procedures:

Three aquaria were set up as previously described with 4.53 kg of gravel and were filled with 30 liters of city water which had been passed through activated carbon. The test was run for 138 days, during which the aquaria were individually dosed with 8.9 mmol of filter-sterilized (0.2 μm) ammonia (as ammonium chloride) on the first and second days of the test. From days 12 to 78 of the test, further additions of 8.9 mmol of ammonia were done on average every 3 days. A total of 246 mmol of ammonia was added to each tank during the test. The water was sampled three times a week for chemical analysis. The aquaria were run for 80 days with freshwater, at which time the water was switched to seawater (32 ppt) by draining and refilling with water mixed with artificial sea salts (Marineland Commercial Aquariums, Moorpark, Calif.). After the switch, the testing continued for an additional 57 days.

8.9 mmol added to 30L is about 5 ppm. 246 mmol were added to each aquarium over the entire course of the 137 day experiment, and much of it was added after the tank had fully cycled. Their charts and math are a bit confusing, but by their data, their nitrite levels only got up to about 32 ppm at its peak level.


Here's another interesting article I found regarding the matter. In essence, they compared nitrobacter and nitrospira in low nitrogen and high nitrogen. Key points was that in high nitrite environments, nitrospira colonies died off and were overtaken by nitrobacter. When nitrite returned to lower levels, nitrospiras levels didn't recover. This is an interesting finding that could potentially be explained by nitrite toxicity to nitrospiras, but the author suggests that it could be the nitrobacter that grew in the high-nitrite environment inhibiting the surrounding nitrospiras.


Also worth noting is that this experiment was not done in culture media, and the author notes that the solution had additional nutrients added to it, particularly phosphate, potassium, magnesium, sulfur, iron, zinc, copper, and molybdenum.

 

[threnjen]

I think you may be confusing units though. Millimoles (mmol) is physical amount of something, not a concentration. From the procedures:

8.9 mmol added to 30L is about 5 ppm. 246 mmol were added to each aquarium over the entire course of the 137 day experiment, and much of it was added after the tank had fully cycled. Their charts and math are a bit confusing, but by their data, their nitrite levels only got up to about 32 ppm at its peak level.

What's the math on that? We tried to do the proper conversions and came to much higher ppm (but I am not a chemist... and I suck at math)

here's what I wrote on some other page of the thread (I don't remember what page, I had just sent it to my father-in-law to check over, he's a chemist but he never got back to me)

So mM MEANs moles per liter.
So mMol or mM conversion to ppm is exceptionally simple. In practice it is nothing more than the concentration of the solution * the molecular weight of the solution.
So if they say "50 mM of Ammonia" you just multiply 50 * 17.031 (molecular weight of ammonia) to get 851.55 mg/liter which is 851.55ppm

Source: http://www.ehow.com/how_8412601_conv...moles-ppm.html

ppm = A x mmol/l
mmol/l = ppm/A
Where A = atomic mass of the ion

mmol/L is millimoles per litre
mM is "milliMolarity" which is millimoles per litre
both are millimoles of solute per litre of solution
So we may see it written either way but it means the same thing.



Is this incorrect?

 

[aqua_chem]

What's the math on that? We tried to do the proper conversions and came to much higher ppm (but I am not a chemist... and I suck at math) here's what I wrote on some other page of the thread (I don't remember what page, I had just sent it to my father-in-law to check over, he's a chemist but he never got back to me) So mM MEANs moles per liter. So mMol or mM conversion to ppm is exceptionally simple. In practice it is nothing more than the concentration of the solution * the molecular weight of the solution. So if they say "50 mM of Ammonia" you just multiply 50 * 17.031 (molecular weight of ammonia) to get 851.55 mg/liter which is 851.55ppm Source: http://www.ehow.com/how_8412601_conv...moles-ppm.html ppm = A x mmol/l mmol/l = ppm/A Where A = atomic mass of the ion mmol/L is millimoles per litre mM is "milliMolarity" which is millimoles per litre both are millimoles of solute per litre of solution So we may see it written either way but it means the same thing. Is this incorrect?

You're right so far. In the linked paper, nitrite only got as high at .7 mM though (Figure 6), which converts to 32.2 ppm nitrite.

 

[Caliban07]

You're right so far. In the linked paper, nitrite only got as high at .7 mM though (Figure 6), which converts to 32.2 ppm nitrite.

We picked up on the nitrobacter taking over at higher nitrites and surprising nitrospira a while back but maybe didn't go in to it in enough detail. Could explain why nitrobacter is the dominant bacteria in waste water plants. Problem is, there's not enough research on nitrospira as I think it's not been long since this bacteria became apparent for nitrification.

So we need to find more on nitrite toxicity or if it's doing any good having to switch from bacter to spira and back again if spira doesn't die. It must come back though or cycles wouldn't complete at all but it definitely could stall. But do we know at what levels this happens?

 

[Caliban07]

One thing I also saw somewhere is that Nitrospira prefers low nitrites and high temps, where Nitrobacter prefers high nitrites and low temps.
It's very, very possible that we are building different bacterial colonies from each other when we choose different cycling techniques, that all accomplish the same thing in the end. It's interesting!

Here is the bit way back that Jen picked up on

 

[Caliban07]

Ok I've just read the whole thread again from scratch. It really makes sense to me that we should dose lower ammonia less often and here why.

Less danger of nitrite toxicity (not fully proven but seems to be a recurring theme throughout the thread)

Less chance of creating nitrobacter rather than nitrospira (again we don't know what level nitrites make the happen)

Less chance of ph crash

Nutrients used slower as less to convert

Could be done with no water changes.

API test kit easier to read (not off the charts)

I know some of these aren't fully proven but ARE cause for concern so why not take precautions and dose less, 3 days apart for example.

 

[Delapool]

Will that still be good for full stocking?

 

[Caliban07]

Will that still be good for full stocking?

I dont know, id have to look in to it. I think its going to be difficult to say how much ammonia the average tank produces. I think 4ppm was chosen as it was overkill. If we wanted to grow bacteria to a population that could convert 4ppm ammonia and subsequent nitrite I woukd suggest adding 4ppm ammonia but once a week. Since we understand the bacteria goes dormant.

Sent from my SM-T210 using Aquarium Advice mobile app

 

[threnjen]

What the heck I didn't get any notifications (I must have missed it) I thought no one was saying anything!
Let me go catch up...

 

[threnjen]

Ok I've just read the whole thread again from scratch. It really makes sense to me that we should dose lower ammonia less often and here why.

Less danger of nitrite toxicity (not fully proven but seems to be a recurring theme throughout the thread)

Less chance of creating nitrobacter rather than nitrospira (again we don't know what level nitrites make the happen)

Less chance of ph crash

Nutrients used slower as less to convert

Could be done with no water changes.

API test kit easier to read (not off the charts)

I know some of these aren't fully proven but ARE cause for concern so why not take precautions and dose less, 3 days apart for example.

I agree with everything you've said

 

[threnjen]

You're right so far. In the linked paper, nitrite only got as high at .7 mM though (Figure 6), which converts to 32.2 ppm nitrite.

So I'm reading the chart wrong? I see now it says uM so that's something different eh

 

[Caliban07]

So I'm reading the chart wrong? I see now it says uM so that's something different eh

m is milli power minus 3 and u is micro to the power minus 6

 

[flyfishfan1966]

Check out aquaplaned app for iOS.
The water test charts are easy.
The guy who wrote the app was very accessible and seems willing to update his app or help.