is there a third cycling technique

[Torrean]

I have this stuff called ammo lock. I believe they also make a nI lock. This stuff locks the ammo and nI into a harmless form until the bacteria build up enough to break it down into nA. I see fishless cycling as a big hassle but fishy cycling is an even bigger one since you end up with a million dead fish. I was just curious, is there another way to cycle. If you use ammo lock and nI lock during the cycle the fish should do just fine right? And your bacteria will be able to develop without having to worry about adding ammonia. Cause if you forget to add ammonia at the right time your bacteria can die during a fishless cycle. It seems to me that ammo lock and nI lock along with daily 10% water changes (maybe more) to keep the levels within the limits of these products would be the easiest and least painfull (ammo burns your nostrils ) method of cycling. Am I dead wrong? If this would work then I what is the benefit of fishless cycling?

 

[Inchworm]

Bump

 

[SirMinion]

I usually just clone my tanks thus avoiding the need to cycle at all.

I'm no chemist, but the way I understand it is that ammo-lock bonds with the ammonia, locking it away as a non-toxic ammonium salt. (hence the name 'ammo-lock')
This new compound also makes the ammonia unavailable to the ammonia eating bacteria meaning the cycle would stall (or never start)

 

[Torrean]

Oh I was under the impression that it locked it up without stoping the bacteria from breaking it down. That's interesting.

 

[SirMinion]

Oh I was under the impression that it locked it up without stoping the bacteria from breaking it down. That's interesting.

I could be wrong.
As I said, I'm no chemist (or bio-chemist), but that's how I've always understood it.

 

[Torrean]

anymore opinions out there guys. It sure would simplify the beginer's forum cycling explanations if this really worked. I used Ammo-lock once during the worst part of my cycle and even though it will give you false readings for a couple weeks my tank was ammo-0 nI-0 nA-50 in about a month and a week. So I don't think it really hurts the cycle. But like I said I only used it once during the ammo spike.

 

[Bloo]

Oh I was under the impression that it locked it up without stoping the bacteria from breaking it down.  That's interesting.

I could be wrong.
As I said, I'm no chemist (or bio-chemist), but that's how I've always understood it.

Me too and that's why I've never used it.

I see fishless cycling as a big hassle but fishy cycling is an even bigger one since you end up with a million dead fish

Torrean, I don't believe that to be true by the way. If it's one slowly and with hardy fish suited to the applicable water conditions (PH & hardness).
That aside fishless cycling is better and cloning best

 

[Undawada]

I agree with the sentiments above. There are only a couple applications I would use ammo-lock.

1. If I were transporting fish in a bag or similar container for more than a couple hours
2. Possibly in a betta tank or similar, that doesn't have filtration and will never properly cycle anyway, and then only when I was going away on vacation or something and couldn't do a water change.

 

[terrorist_124]

cloning a mature tank is the best option

 

[Inchworm]

Hi Torrean

When I first saw your thread and bumped it, I did so because it seemed like a good question and I was hoping that one of our more chemistry savvy members would provide an answer. Perhaps if I get it back up one more time someone will see it and respond.

Personally, I've always favored starting a new tank with real fish and frequent small water changes like you suggest doing while using those products. It will take a bit longer, but a slow cycling is a safer cycling process, IMHO, even without using them.

Of course, with many tanks, I always clone them, but this is not really cycling. It's just moving bacteria around to have an instantly cycled tank.

 

[Torrean]

Thank you inchworm. I hope to get one of the more chemistry savy member's to answer as well. I've seen some complex equations worked out here so I figured someone would know for sure.

I know cloning a tank is the best option but what if you are a beginner and you have no fishkeeping friends or your friends all happen to have a bout of disease. I'd like to avoid unneccessary stress on the beginner's fish. Most begginners that I've seen on here hear the word cycle annd say HUH? They also usually already have fish. So fishless cycling is sort of irrelevant to this thread.

Thanks for all the replies guys I hope someone who know's a bit more about the subject comes along though.

 

[Ed4567]

This is far beyound my chemistry so I'll quote from an article (even though it is actually discussing removing chloramine from the water the product is for binding ammonia:
http/reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-11/rhf/feature/index.htm

Other products, such as hydroxymethanesulfonate (HOCH2SO3-; a known ammonia binder15 patented for aquarium uses by John F. Kuhns16 (sold as Amquel by Kordon and ClorAm-X by Reed Mariculture, among others) can be used to treat chloraminated water because they both break down chloramine and bind up the ammonia.

The reaction of ammonia with hydroxymethanesulfonate is mechanistically complicated, possibly involving decomposition to formaldehyde and reformation to the product (aminomethanesulfonate; shown below).15 The simplified overall reaction is believed to be:

NH3 + HOCH2SO3- => H2NCH2SO3- + H2O

Whether once bound the ammonia is still usable by bacteria, here: http/www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthre...ighlight=Amquel is a post on RC where the conclusion seems to be no one is quite sure on the effect.

 

[sinistral]

I was going to post a similar quotation about the chemistry of AmQuel from a different post I made a month or so back. I don't know how Ammo-lock works (probably very similarly). Supposedly the ammonia group on the resulting molecule is still available to be metabolised by nitrosomonas.

It is notable to point out that in the advertising material for Ammo-Lock 2, the company suggests that it can be used to cycle a tank in the way that Torrean described earlier.

I didn't look at the link Ed4567 provided, unfortunately, as it requires membership.

To respond to Torrean's question directly about the benefit of fishless cycling-- it's cheaper, and it's proven to work. Ammo-lock costs $$$ compared to a few cents worth of ammonia or fish food, and as Ed pointed out, it's not clear exactly what happens (though the company claims it works just fine).

IMO, cycling with fish or fishless also prepares a newbie for the most significant quality you can develop in keeping fish, which is patience Of course, if the Ammo-lock method is better and safer, then we all may want to revise how we're looking at cycling tanks. It doesn't pay to be dogmatic...

 

[Ed4567]

Sorry didn't realise you needed to be a member:

bertoni
Team RC Member

Registered: Mar 2002
Location: Foster City, CA, USA
Occupation: Software Engineer
Posts: 9186

Amquel: am confused...
I've been thinking (probably a bad sign) about Amquel and cycling, since I was reading a post in the NTTH forum where someone was concerned about die-off on live rock during the cycle. I mentioned water changes, but was wondering about Amquel.

In this thread, you talk about not dosing Amquel through the cycle, but the thread made me wonder about the tradeoffs or problems involved in it. I didn't see a thread in which you got more specific about the issue, but maybe I'm not so good at searching...

So what issues might there be? Or are they even known? I understand the risks of not developing a bacterial population, but if a tank is showing 4ppm ammonia, isn't that a bit more than is really needed?

Some people have asked about using Amquel or the like as a replacement for cycling, and I've counseled against it, but I don't really have my rationale or references ready.


__________________
Jonathan Bertoni

Nemo ocellaris meus est

Hobby Experience: 5 years
Interests: martial arts, reefs, rock climbing



Open this post in a new window | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged


 
  09/09/2004 05:34 AM         

thedude
The Dude abides

Registered: Nov 2002
Location: grass valley, ca
Occupation: Web developer & Network engineer
Posts: 1211



It was my understanding that Amquel and similar products somehow "fixed" the ammonia and kept it from being toxic to critters. In the "fixed" state the bacteria were supposed to still be able to digest it. Thus the bacteria population would still thrive, but larger critters wouldn't suffer.


__________________
Chris

Hobby Experience: Since 1990
Current Tanks: 75 gallon Reef, 2 175w 10k XM
Interests: reef tanks, bowhunting



Open this post in a new window | Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged


 
  09/09/2004 01:13 PM           

Randy Holmes-Farley
Chemistry Moderator

Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Arlington, Massachusetts
Occupation: Chemist (Drug Discovery at Genzyme)
Posts: 31043



It might well help in the way that Chris suggests.

It might also drive the growth of different species of bacteria, and not allow as rapid build up of bacteria that actually use ammonia.

I really don't know what effects it will have. To some extent I expect the answer depends on how much you add, and for how long.


__________________
Randy Holmes-Farley
Want to talk chemistry? Try the Reef Chemistry Forum at Reef Central

Hobby Experience: 9 years with reefs
Current Tanks: 2 x 90 gal mixed reefs
Interests: Reefkeeping, science, photography

Hope no one is offended by the link, but IMO it was worth adding due to Randy's specalist knowledge (and we still didnt get a definite answer).

 

[sinistral]

Thanks for adding the post to the discussion Ed4567.

It seems that the only way to determine if it'll work (at least for our purposes on TFF) is to conduct an experiment.

Chris Cow does mention Amquel and Ammo Lock in his original article on fishless cycling, in which he recommends *not* using either product during fishless cycling. However, I believe that the scenario he describes is *not* similar to the one that Torrean proposed. Here is the link to that discussion. The relevant part is under the heading "Water Changes and Ammonia Removing Chemicals".

The Krib (one of my favorite sites) also makes mention of Amquel/Ammo Lock in one of their Beginner FAQ articles:

Thus, adding Amquel causes the ammonia produced by the fish to be neutralized instantly, yet still allows the nitrogen cycle to proceed. Using Amquel during the cycling phase has one significant drawback, however. Amquel (and similar products) may cause ammonia test kits to give false readings, making it difficult to determine exactly when cycling has completed.

Here is the link to that website.

Ammo Lock is cheaper than I thought. At petco.com it's 5.99 USD for 4 oz, which the bottle says will treat 240 US Gallons. That's about 2.5 cents per gallon of water. If you estimate a cycle taking about 4 weeks for a 20 gallon tank (very rough figures), if you treat the tank daily, that's 20gal/day x 28 days x 0.025 USD/gal = about $14 for a complete cycle. Those are all very rough estimates.

I can't find a price for ammonia right now, but if you use 10 drops per day it's vanishingly cheap.