Cycle

[griddlebone]

i have used cycle, i didnt see a difference in the process using it or any other brand, but it isnt bad... i wouldnt spend 8.99 on a bottle though, i got mine when they changed there bottle design and all the old bottles were reduced to nearly nothing. Either way, it worked fine for me, i tested my water every few days and it seemed to be normal. its better then the petsmart brand anyway :3

 

[snowflake311]

I said NO but I have used it. It did NOTHING for my tank. I tried it when I did a fish-in cycle. It was a waste. My fish all lived but no thanks to that stuff. I'm now doing a fishless cycle ( OMG so much easier and stress free for me and the fish.) Only thing I used to cycle this tank is ammonia and time.

 

[oswoldy]

I put No. Just out of interest has anyone ever tested it with there test kits, im not sure if this would work but might give some result???

Mike

 

[saz326]

... I do use cycle, and it does have an effect.

How strong the effect is I do not know,

Then, how do you know it has an effect? This is one of the most basic tenants of scientific inquiry -- if something is present, it must be detectable by some means. Otherwise, 1) there is no evidence that that something does exist and 2) it doesn't matter if it exists or not if there is no detection possible.

For example, if I said I had an invisible dog that lives in my backyard that leaves no evidence of its existence... does it really exist? Does it even matter? No, because there is no evidence.

So, again, look at your statements here -- "It does have an effect" and "how strong the effect is I do not know". Well, if you don't know how strong the effect is, how do you know it has any at all?

Oh I know i know... Its just one of those things that I cant put a value to. If my boss would let me Id set up a series of tanks in the lab and take regular readings comparing products but Im not that mad a scientist. (plus we work pharmaceuticals so there may be a clenliness issue!)

The effect it had was in aiding the bacteria from my old substrate to settle and colinise the filter. Having not started a tank from scratch for a long long time I wasnt able to compare the speeds of set-up against each other.

I was able to introduce the remaining fish from my move within 3 days, slowly and surely. I didnt have that many water changes either. So somehow- whether it was the effect of the cycle or not, my tank cycled quickly and sustainably.


Back more to the point of this topis however: Yes Id use it when provided with a new tank - but I wouldnt buy it as a filter aid or support. Why buy manky water? (thats basically what it is)

 

[Bignose]

Oh I know i know... Its just one of those things that I cant put a value to. If my boss would let me Id set up a series of tanks in the lab and take regular readings comparing products but Im not that mad a scientist. (plus we work pharmaceuticals so there may be a clenliness issue!)

The effect it had was in aiding the bacteria from my old substrate to settle and colinise the filter. Having not started a tank from scratch for a long long time I wasnt able to compare the speeds of set-up against each other.

I was able to introduce the remaining fish from my move within 3 days, slowly and surely. I didnt have that many water changes either. So somehow- whether it was the effect of the cycle or not, my tank cycled quickly and sustainably.

All this sounds highly suspect to me. "just one of those things that I cant put a value to" ... com'on, really? You even work in a a field (pharmaceuticals) whose entire goal is to be statistically significant above placebo. What you are describing here is classic placebo. "I don't know, it just seemed to help." This is why hard data is needed, not feeling and imperfect recollections.

And, quite simply, all the hard data I've seen is that cycle is pretty worthless. It may do a little in terms of chemically converting the ammonia into a less-toxic form so that it doesn't show up on the tests in the same level. Otherwise, it doesn't contain live bacteria. It doesn't even contain either of the ammonia or nitrite oxidizing bacteria species that colonize fishtanks. The evidence out these just don't support the claims.

 

[rewlyn]

I put No. Just out of interest has anyone ever tested it with there test kits, im not sure if this would work but might give some result???

Mike

i dont know if it means anything but i just tested the cycle with my api master test kit and the results are

ammonia: 0ppm
nitrItes: 0ppm

 

[oswoldy]

I put No. Just out of interest has anyone ever tested it with there test kits, im not sure if this would work but might give some result???

Mike

i dont know if it means anything but i just tested the cycle with my api master test kit and the results are

ammonia: 0ppm
nitrItes: 0ppm

Could you poss test NitrAte aswell please?

Mike

 

[rewlyn]

nitrAtes: 10-20ppm

 

[oswoldy]

nitrAtes: 10-20ppm

Thank you. Hopefully someone that knows a little more about this can answer as to whether this is what should be expected if it were a working bottle of cycle. Although it could just be water.

Mike

 

[saz326]

And, quite simply, all the hard data I've seen is that cycle is pretty worthless. It may do a little in terms of chemically converting the ammonia into a less-toxic form so that it doesn't show up on the tests in the same level. Otherwise, it doesn't contain live bacteria. It doesn't even contain either of the ammonia or nitrite oxidizing bacteria species that colonize fishtanks. The evidence out these just don't support the claims.

You are right there. The hard data is a bit trashy and I cannot back up my gut instinct of how it helped - it is educated guesswork on my half (and no - Im not paid by Hagen ), and I apologise to the whole scientific community coz chemistry degrees ain't worth poop unless you remain a scientist.. *sigh*. Its just observation and opinion.

I have to add this to my opinions though. My bottle did say "store in a refridgerator after opening"..... this would have been to keep bacteria from eating all of the food available in the bottle - therefore lengthening the bottles lifespan. It said to discard after several months. i.e. the bacteria would be useless after dying off.

So maybe the formula has changed since then as new bottles do not say to do this...

Im wondering whether the stuff I used is infact the same formula as is available now.

What makes me think even more that the formula has changed is that the readings performed by Rewlyn (thanks for doing that by the way) tested the stuff there were no readings for ammonia or nitrite.... and in order for any bacteria to be kept alive they would need a food source so there should be quantities of ammonia and nitrite in the solution.. Unless they are somehow supplied as "bound" forms which break down into ammonia and nitrite as required..

I wonder - how old was the bottle that you tested Rewlyn? Does it say to store it in the fridge after opening? Could it be old and so any "bacteria food" has been used up?

 

[rewlyn]

to start they have to import it to australia(though this may not be important) i brought it 2 days after being delivered, I had it for 4 days before i did the test. I just checked the bottle not sure on manufactor date but the expiry date says 08 2011, I did not store in fridge as there is no mention of it

 

[rewlyn]

any experts out there

 

[rewlyn]

anybody ???

 

[oswoldy]

Hi,
I have put a link to this topic in the scientific section, hopefully someone from there will be able to answer.

Mike

 

[rewlyn]

Hi,
I have put a link to this topic in the scientific section, hopefully someone from there will be able to answer.

Mike

thanks i started it there but it got moved