If you are doing a fishless cycle or giving advice to others...please read this:

[eco23]

It is true that excessive nitrite can be harmful to nitrifying bacteria and therefore stall the cycle, the same is true of ammonia. This means that if the concentration of either gets too high (I have heard 4-6ppm, but I am not sure that those numbers came from studies) water changes to reduce the concentration need to be performed. Your opinion that it would have to be ridiculously high is your opinion, but scientific studies have put numbers to that (although I don't know them off hand).

The main point of this thread was to state the fact that daily or every other day water changes are not necessary during a fishless cycle. I'm all up for debate and gaining knowledge for myself...but let's not get the purpose of the initial post muddled with another discussion about nitrIte toxicity to bacteria. I'm all for that as a new thread...but that's not the point of this one. I'll happily word it differently if it is causing this much debate on the topic. I personally believe it is a combination of multiple things which cause stalls.

 

[Fishguy2727]

Nitrifying bacteria have such a little mass that even in a tank as small as a ten gallon they could never use up all the 'nutrients and trace elements'. If this was the case and the true cause of the stall a cycled tank would stall every day due to lack of water changes not supplying these 'nutrients and trace elements'.

 

[Fishguy2727]

When you state something that conflicts with what scientists have supported with studies, people will disagree with you.

 

[eco23]

Nitrifying bacteria have such a little mass that even in a tank as small as a ten gallon they could never use up all the 'nutrients and trace elements'. If this was the case and the true cause of the stall a cycled tank would stall every day due to lack of water changes not supplying these 'nutrients and trace elements'.

So do you support that same conclusion considering the buffers in the water? If the amount of nitrifying bacteria are incapable of consuming that as well...then the issues of pH crashes would be a non-issue...but they occur.

 

[eco23]

When you state something that conflicts with what scientists have supported with studies, people will disagree with you.

You're welcome to disagree. The simple purpose of this thread was stating that daily or multiple pwc's weekly during a fishless cycle are not necessary. If they were...there'd be no point in doing one. Add fish, change water every couple days, and done.

You can pick and choose different statements to disagree with (which some have already taken out of context and tried to magnify)...but the purpose of my initial statement stands true.

Again, even though I personally advise doing pwc's during the process...the fact remains that countless people have totally completed fishless cycles without replacing a single drop of water during the entire process.

 

[TheJT]

Do we know if have anyone else available to do a fishless cycle soon? Preferably in different regions of the world? Fresh and saltwater. I would accept as many as we could get to do a full study but I would think 3-5 would be sufficient for our purposes. I don't see why sanitizing the tank and replacing the media would be an issue. I can do that. As my chart reads up to 5.0ppm why don't start the PWCs when NO2 gets to that point. If need be I can run the test at even lower levels hopefully with full analysis from the local water company.

 

[Fishguy2727]

And those people may have cycled their tanks faster if they had done some water changes.

This may be one reason people have different results with the length of time it takes to fishless cycle. I can't remember if it was this forum or a different one but people couldn't believe that you can do a fishless in only a couple weeks. They cited that their fishless cycle took up to a couple months. If you up the temp to the ideal temp for nitrifying bacteria (around 95F) they grow much faster and the tanks cycles much faster.

You came across as though your main point was that nitrite isn't toxic to nitrifying bacteria and therefore you do not need to do water changes it it gets too high, which is not true, according to science.

You still need to do water changes. The cycle will go faster if you do not allow ammonia or nitrite to get too high (over 6ppm?). So although the reason is different for fishless and fish-in cycles, they may need to be done in either case (or may not).

 

[eco23]

And those people may have cycled their tanks faster if they had done some water changes.

This may be one reason people have different results with the length of time it takes to fishless cycle. I can't remember if it was this forum or a different one but people couldn't believe that you can do a fishless in only a couple weeks. They cited that their fishless cycle took up to a couple months. If you up the temp to the ideal temp for nitrifying bacteria (around 95F) they grow much faster and the tanks cycles much faster.

You came across as though your main point was that nitrite isn't toxic to nitrifying bacteria and therefore you do not need to do water changes it it gets too high, which is not true, according to science.

You still need to do water changes. The cycle will go faster if you do not allow ammonia or nitrite to get too high (over 6ppm?). So although the reason is different for fishless and fish-in cycles, they may need to be done in either case (or may not).

First, we apparently gather our facts from different sources because 95 degrees isn't remotely near what I believe research has shown as ideal for colonizing nitrifying bacteria.

Second, if you chose to take one paragraph out of the entire post and view that as the total subject line...that's on you. I clearly stated my intention of the initial post numerous times within the first post...and more than ample times since.

I'm not sure how much more clearly or how many more time I can state this- DOING DAILY PWC's EVERY SINGLE TIME YOU SEE A PURPLE TEST TUBE IS NOT NECESSARY DURING A FISHLESS CYCLE.

^ If you choose to do this...Why are you doing a fishless cycle to begin with?!

 

[Fishguy2727]

Nevermind. There is obviously no debate going on here. Just you stating something for the sake of argument. When people share their opinion you argue that you aren't arguing or the way they are arguing, or continue to make statements without a single bit of factual support.

When you have more facts on hand besides your opinions that happen to conflict with everyone's facts, start up again.

 

[eco23]

Nevermind. There is obviously no debate going on here. Just you stating something for the sake of argument. When people share their opinion you argue that you aren't arguing or the way they are arguing, or continue to make statements without a single bit of factual support.

When you have more facts on hand besides your opinions that happen to conflict with everyone's facts, start up again.

The point of this thread was for one purpose (which you continue to miss). Information was being regurgitated without the people giving advice having experience with what they were advising. After a couple threads where I saw people say "Eco23 said you should do pwc's every time nitrIte is high", I felt it was my responsibility to end the statements that were being skewed by people simply based on what they heard second hand without any experience to back it. When I see my name attached to a statement I didn't make...it needs to be remedied.

I have also asked you questions about your statements that you have failed to back up, however I do not follow up with posts challenging your knowledge. Perhaps you're used to threads containing conflict due to the nature of your arguments on other topics (which I have supported you on)...but you yourself are trying to take things into a different conversation which is not the subject. So maybe you should be the one to read the entire thread and be the one starting over when you understand the purpose.

 

[Fishguy2727]

I don't think you have cited anything. If you have, please point it out for anyone else who may have missed it too.

Here: Using Household Ammonia for Humane Cycling of a Tank

Excerpts:
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Both Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter have optimal temperature ranges for growth and metabolism of 30 - 35 C (86 - 95 F) (Lawson, p. 234, and Johnson).

[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1] aim for a target level of 1-2 ppM ammonia while cycling.[/SIZE][/FONT]

 

[eco23]

Here's a few for starters not including the PDF files I have, and leaving out the multiple guides on fishless cycling (including mine which I did an ungodly amount of research on), as well as the article written by AA member 7enigma who is an actual scientist.

http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/Nitrogen_Cycle.html
http://www.algone.com/aquarium-articles/aquarium-filtration/nitrifying-bacteria
http://www.aquaponicswiki.com/index.php?title=Nitrifying_Bacteria
http://onedersave.com/blog/497/take-good-care-of-nitrifying-bacteria-in-the-aquarium/
http://www.oscarfish.com/article-home/water/71-autotrophic-bacteria-manifesto.html
http://www.pondtrademag.com/articles/ar-154/

You will see the information I am providing supports my statements...and challenges a few of yours. You've still yet to mention how bacteria is unable to consume nutrients...yet it is able to annihilate the buffers in the water which cause pH crashes.

Not only can I link more articles if you'd like, but personal experience as well as the numerous first hand accounts of people I talk with on a daily basis on a couple forums including here via cycling threads and PM's will also support the opinions I provide as well as the advice I contribute.