Cycling canister filter for 125 G

[Jacky12]

The plan is to cycle the new canister by adding BB squeezed from various established filters into the tank water. This method was suggested by a top breeder.
I will need to keep the BB alive until I get a few more things set up. I know they will need ammonia to say alive. I also see that fish food works, but sounds messier because it has to be cleaned from substrate whereas liquid ammonia would be taken up.
I am not seeing online yet how much to add. I would be using an ammonia that is typically used for fishless cycles. Thanks.

 

[Aiken Drum]

Assume that all the squeezing out sponges etc into the tank isn't going to instantly cycle the aquarium, but just speed things up. Last time I did what you are suggesting it still took 2 weeks to cycle. If it does give you an immediate cycle, then that's a bonus.

Dose 2ppm of ammonia. If you are using an aquarium specific ammonium chloride product it should come with dosing instructions to achieve that. If you are using household ammonia you would need to calculate that knowing the dilution of the purchased which it should tell you on the packaging.

As with a fishless cycle, test daily. Once your ammonia and nitrite have dropped to zero, redose 2ppm ammonia. Once you are seeing zero ammonia and nitrite 24 hours after dosing, you are cycled. If you still aren't ready to add fish, add the 2ppm everyday. Continue to test daily to ensure your cycle is still removing all the ammonia.

If you need to stock the tank before your cycle has established, do 100% water change to get any ammonia and nitrite down to zero and stock your tank. Proceed with a fish in cycle process until cycled.

 

[Jacky12]

Thank you. So the suggested method is a possible jumpstart to the fishless cycle? I did that once. 18;days of tedium. I will consider adding a few fish & carefully monitoring params & doing large daily water changes. I will take a closer look at Dr. Tim’s ammonia bottle.
I believe it assumes one is not seeding the filter.

Edit
Just reading on fish in cycling. Not for me. Could endanger life of fish and appears to take as long as fishless.

 

[Aiken Drum]

Yes, the squeezing out of filter media will jumpstart the cycling process and should speed things up. The only surefire to instantly cycle an aquarium would be to transfer the whole filtration system from an established aquarium to your new one. Or at least transfer the filter media. But then you are just cycling the new aquarium but uncycling the old one. You could take a little filter media from a lot of different filters, and use that to fill your new filter. That might give you more of an instant cycle without removing too much from the established filters.

The stated dosage of 4 drops of Dr Tims Ammonium Chloride per gallon is to bring ammonia up to 2ppm. Dr Tims instructions and timescales given to fishless cycle an aquarium using Dr Tim's One and Only and Dr Tim's Ammonium Chloride are unrealistic. The One and Only is seeding the filter and the ammonium chloride is feeding the bacteria so it grows, but your plan of using established filter media will do a better job.

 

[Jacky12]

Yeah, I have cycled a few new FX4s by swapping out some medium from other established FX4s. I decided to order the Polaris Aurora this time. But more than likely the FX4 media could be custom adaped.

 

[Andy Sager]

The speed of cycling a tank with just sponge filter squeezins will all depend on how many fish you put into the tank. I did this with my breeding pairs of Angelfish so the tank was never overloaded and was " instantly" cycled. There was never any rise in ammonia in those tanks I did that with. Now say you want to have a school of medium to large sized fish, or a fully stocked aquarium instantly, that would require more than just some squeezins. That would require using a filter system from an established tank and you'd still need to monitor the ammonia and nitrites until the bacteria bed grows.
So as with everything fish wise, it's all situational.

 

[Jacky12]

Great advice, thank you. Based upon Mr. Drum’s comment regarding borrowing filter from an established tank I have decided I will take that route. (& yours). I feel foolish for not thinking of it myself as I have done this before with multiple FX6 & FX4 & Fluval & Tidal 110’s.

This new 125 tank that will have a Polar Aurora now has 2 large uncycled sponge filters. They are not the only source of oxygen. Would cycling both in a bucket containing BB squeezed from established filters be better than simply squeezing the nitrifying bacteria into the entire tank? Thank you.

Edit: the sponges would be running in the bucket. I’ve seen them clarify dark water rather quickly

 

[Andy Sager]

Great advice, thank you. Based upon Mr. Drum’s comment regarding borrowing filter from an established tank I have decided I will take that route. (& yours). I feel foolish for not thinking of it myself as I have done this before with multiple FX6 & FX4 & Fluval & Tidal 110’s.

This new 125 tank that will have a Polar Aurora now has 2 large uncycled sponge filters. They are not the only source of oxygen. Would cycling both in a bucket containing BB squeezed from established filters be better than simply squeezing the nitrifying bacteria into the entire tank? Thank you.

Edit: the sponges would be running in the bucket. I’ve seen them clarify dark water rather quickly

Doesn't matter because denitrifying microbes will go to any surface that has high oxygen water around it. The reason people's " go to" place is the filter is because that is one area where the oxygen level is high. If you had an air stone in the tank, they would colonize there too or if you had decorations near the filter outlet or an air stone, they would colonize there too. Where they aren't is swimming around in the water column.

 

[Jacky12]

Oh Really? I always thought the vast majority resided in the filters & very few were to be found elsewhere.

 

[Andy Sager]

Oh Really? I always thought the vast majority resided in the filters & very few were to be found elsewhere.

Nope. It's any porous surface where there is high oxygen.

 

[Jacky12]

Very interesting. I will take your word for it. But PhD me in biology would welcome controlled studies on this, but not enough to pursue sources, at least not now.

 

[Jacky12]

I don’t doubt you for a second, Andy, but I would like to see numbers if they are to be found at all. For example, are 85 to 95% in the filter? 5% in the substrate? .5% on air stones? 1% in the water column? It’s just the way my mind works after a post graduate education in biology. The vast majority in the filter makes the most sense to me because that is where fish and food waste would be found in the highest concentrations & secondarily in the substrate.

 

[Aiken Drum]

It wouldn't be possible to put proportions on it like that. These microbes will grow wherever there is a good flow of oxygenated water across a surface that the microbes can grow on.

In most aquariums, the filter will be where most of these microbes grow as that is where these conditions are most prevailent. How much a filter can accommodate will depend on the quality and how much surface area a particular type of media provides and how much media it can hold. Stuff a filter with socks and these microbes will grow on the socks. Fill it ceramic rings that have better surface area and more microbescan grow. Fill it with a better quality porous media like Matrix or Biohome and it can hold even more. aquariumscience.org has done a comparison of the surface area of common media types.



If you have good flow of water over your substrate, more microbes will grow compared to if you have low flow conditions. A busy aquascape will accommodate more microbes on the aquascape than a sparse aquascape.

All this is limited by how much food (ammonia) is available though. You can't grow more microbes than there is food to support them. But how many microbes are in the filter, how many are on the substrate, how much on the glass or in the water is situational. You could have a very poor filter, with very poor media, and the majority would then be somewhere other than the filter. One of our members who doesn't post much any more doesn't have a filter at all, and relies 100% on airstones, plants and what microbes can establish in the aquarium.

 

[Andy Sager]

I don’t doubt you for a second, Andy, but I would like to see numbers if they are to be found at all. For example, are 85 to 95% in the filter? 5% in the substrate? .5% on air stones? 1% in the water column? It’s just the way my mind works after a post graduate education in biology. The vast majority in the filter makes the most sense to me because that is where fish and food waste would be found in the highest concentrations & secondarily in the substrate.

Yeah what Aiken said.
But seriously, I've done it with used slates from my breeder tanks that had an air stone over the eggs " cycle" a new tank as I have with the old penn plax bubble decorations with constant bubbles vs the ones that periodically let loose a bubble. As for the substrate, when undergravel filters for marine tanks became a thing, more oxygenated water was going through the substrate than with the old flat freshwater plates so using that substrate was better than nothing but not as good as when the powerhead generation came about and they were pulling a lot of water through the substrate so just using that substrate was enough to really get a cycle completed in a new tank. Again tho, as Aiken pointed out, it all depended on how much ammonia production one has going on whether the nitrifying microbes can keep up with it or whether it needs the bed to grow larger. I didn't need a PhD to find all this stuff out. I just had " sperience" from trying all these things out over 50+ years. As my Mentor, a certified ichthyologist, used to tell me, " Try it and see if it works or not. " so I did. That's what running hundreds of tanks allows you to do. I have an extra 125 tanks if you'd like to try it yourself.

 

[Airborne 82nd]

I'll take the 125 Delivered setup no leaks. 638 miles 9hrs 52min I'll buy lunch Unless someone closer makes you a better deal

 

[Andy Sager]

I'll take the 125 Delivered setup no leaks. 638 miles 9hrs 52min I'll buy lunch Unless someone closer makes you a better deal

LOL It's not a single 125 gallon tank. It's 125 ( one hundred and twenty five) spare tanks. 20 gallon longs, 22 gallon breeders and 25 gallon breeders You can come and get them, just bring a check or cash.

 

[Jacky12]

Yeah what Aiken said.
But seriously, I've done it with used slates from my breeder tanks that had an air stone over the eggs " cycle" a new tank as I have with the old penn plax bubble decorations with constant bubbles vs the ones that periodically let loose a bubble. As for the substrate, when undergravel filters for marine tanks became a thing, more oxygenated water was going through the substrate than with the old flat freshwater plates so using that substrate was better than nothing but not as good as when the powerhead generation came about and they were pulling a lot of water through the substrate so just using that substrate was enough to really get a cycle completed in a new tank. Again tho, as Aiken pointed out, it all depended on how much ammonia production one has going on whether the nitrifying microbes can keep up with it or whether it needs the bed to grow larger. I didn't need a PhD to find all this stuff out. I just had " sperience" from trying all these things out over 50+ years. As my Mentor, a certified ichthyologist, used to tell me, " Try it and see if it works or not. " so I did. That's what running hundreds of tanks allows you to do. I have an extra 125 tanks if you'd like to try it yourself.

I’m nominating you for the Nobel Prize. I have Swedish connections. Wear your medal proudly, and don’t blow the cash award all at one time.
Buy QQQ stock, & VTI in case you’re inexperienced.

 

[Jacky12]

It wouldn't be possible to put proportions on it like that. These microbes will grow wherever there is a good flow of oxygenated water across a surface that the microbes can grow on.

In most aquariums, the filter will be where most of these microbes grow as that is where these conditions are most prevailent. How much a filter can accommodate will depend on the quality and how much surface area a particular type of media provides and how much media it can hold. Stuff a filter with socks and these microbes will grow on the socks. Fill it ceramic rings that have better surface area and more microbescan grow. Fill it with a better quality porous media like Matrix or Biohome and it can hold even more. aquariumscience.org has done a comparison of the surface area of common media types.

View attachment 390535

If you have good flow of water over your substrate, more microbes will grow compared to if you have low flow conditions. A busy aquascape will accommodate more microbes on the aquascape than a sparse aquascape.

All this is limited by how much food (ammonia) is available though. You can't grow more microbes than there is food to support them. But how many microbes are in the filter, how many are on the substrate, how much on the glass or in the water is situational. You could have a very poor filter, with very poor media, and the majority would then be somewhere other than the filter. One of our members who doesn't post much any more doesn't have a filter at all, and relies 100% on airstones, plants and what microbes can establish in the aquarium.

I am referring to controlled lab studies at university research centers, not anecdotal data. They would not be situational, but precise in all parameters. I’ve read through several papers, but not on this subject. Many journal articles can be found online by adding the words academic journals before whatever you’re searching for. Some can be easily accessed & others not. Some required permission of the university professors in order to be read without a subscription to whatever journal. I was always granted permission. Quite likely academic papers have already been published on this subject. I’ll try to pursue it someday.

 

[Andy Sager]

I’m nominating you for the Nobel Prize. I have Swedish connections. Wear your medal proudly, and don’t blow the cash award all at one time.
Buy QQQ stock, & VTI in case you’re inexperienced.

Stocks???? No, I'm buying more fish!!!!

 

[Andy Sager]

I am referring to controlled lab studies at university research centers, not anecdotal data. They would not be situational, but precise in all parameters. I’ve read through several papers, but not on this subject. Many journal articles can be found online by adding the words academic journals before whatever you’re searching for. Some can be easily accessed & others not. Some required permission of the university professors in order to be read without a subscription to whatever journal. I was always granted permission. Quite likely academic papers have already been published on this subject. I’ll try to pursue it someday.

The point , I believe, to the whole discussion is that no 2 fish tanks are usually identical which would make the results not valid for every aquarium. Using my example of transferring the breeding slates, I had 100 of them in a hatchery and I guarantee you that not all of them had the same amount of aeration over them and due to the fact that the pairs they came from were not identical in size, meaning their ammonia production would be different, under a microscope, one would suspect that the amount of nitrifiers would also be different. So if you were to take a controlled lab result where the ammonia was artificially added so that the comparisons would be more from an equal baseline, the only way that result would be transferrable would be if you had fish that produced the exact same amount of ammonia as the baseline. OR, what if you were comparing the microbe levels from substrates and one is using an undergravel filter with the old fashioned bubbling lift tube and the other is using a powerhead on the same style filter, the results should be different. What if both tanks had an air stone included but the stone was not at the bottom of one tank and the other stone was buried in the substrate? I'd expect the substrate with the buried air stone to have more microbes than the other tank's substrate. Bottom line, you could do a count of the microbes present but those results would not necessarily be transferrable to every aquarium which kind of makes the whole experiment a moot point because, as I stated at the beginning, no 2 aquariums are usually identical. Seeding a tank is just adding microbes to a systems that does not have any yet. ( They will happen naturally but it takes longer.) Those microbes then take over and grow or shrink to a level that is sustainable by the amount of food ( ammonia) present. Because people think that the " Cycle" is a physical structure ( which it's not) and that when your tank is finished cycling that they can put any amount of fish in the tank because it's cycled, it shows a lack of understanding what the cycle actually is. You can cycle a tank with 1 fish, 10 fish, 100 fish or any amount of fish you like but the end result is that when the cycle completes, there are still only enough microbes present to consume and convert the amount of ammonia present at the time of the end of the cycling process. What that means is that you cannot cycle a tank with 1 fish and expect to add 10 fish when the cycle finishes and not expect there to be problems. Where those microbes are doesn't really matter as long as they are within the system.

Class dismissed.