No dumb questions? I'm trying...

GaryE28 143

Moderator
Staff member
Global Moderator ⚒️
2x Fish of the Month 🌟
Joined
Oct 14, 2011
Messages
11,290
Reaction score
20,549
Points
113
Location
Eastern Canada
I'm getting 8 sponge filters today, which I'll use in killie fry raising tanks. This morning while drinking coffee, it had a thought - a rare thing early in the morning. What if I were to wipe the interior underwater glass of established tanks with these sponges before starting them up? Would that seed them with starter bacteria and archaea? I would then add a lot of plants to the tanks, as usual.

Before I get jumped on, I don't seriously worry about the cycle for these fry, as I aggressively change water and the filtration does get seeded via the plants. I don't own a test kit and haven't had one for decades now. I don't lose fish to the cycle, as I manage it via filters in established tanks, and low stocking. But I don't usually start 8 double sponge filters...

A five gallon tank only holds maybe ten miniscule fry, and they don't stay in such a limited water volume after they approach one cm. But a slightly filtered tank is better than an unfiltered one.
 
Worth a shot! Or if you don’t need them all right away let them seed in an established tank until you use them. Or swap the new sponges with any established ones you may have. Let the established sponges go in the new tanks and fresh ones in your mature ones 🤷‍♀️
 
I'll try it, and also swap one sponge off my older double filters. I'll never know if it helped, as it isn't an experiment with a control. But all the tank they'll go into (as second filters) are oldies with lots of invisible life in them.
 
Probably not sufficiently - even when i take a multi-year old seasoned sponge filter for a new 10 it can take 3 to 7 days for the tank to stop producing ammonia from fishes. While the ammonia usually stays below 0.5 - around 0.25 it is measurable; amusingly the last time i setup (a 15) cycled in well less than 1/2 a day. I suppose a bit depends on fish bioload et all though all my 10s usually just start with 2 fishes. hum... what do i know. Not very much. I do 50% water changes daily until i can no longer detect ammonia for two mornings in a row.
 
The nitrifying bacteria are photphobic. So the odds that they are on the glass is not likely at all. They are way more likely to be found on surfaces out of the light and where there is decent flow since they need to have everything delivered to them.

So they will mostly be found in filter media, the top of the substrate (less than 1 inch deep) and then on the underside of decor of all kinds as that is out of light for the most part.

The ammonia oxidizing Archaea are even more photophobic the the ammonia oxidizing bacteria.

Merbt, S.N., Stahl, D.A., Casamayor, E.O., Martí, E., Nicol, G.W. and Prosser, J.I. (2012), Differential photoinhibition of bacterial and archaeal ammonia oxidation. FEMS Microbiol Lett, 327: 41-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2011.02457.x

Abstract​


Inhibition by light potentially influences the distribution of ammonia oxidizers in aquatic environments and is one explanation for nitrite maxima near the base of the euphotic zone of oceanic waters. Previous studies of photoinhibition have been restricted to bacterial ammonia oxidizers, rather than archaeal ammonia oxidizers, which dominate in marine environments. To compare the photoinhibition of bacterial and archaeal ammonia oxidizers, specific growth rates of two ammonia-oxidizing archaea (Nitrosopumilus maritimus and Nitrosotalea devanaterra) and bacteria (Nitrosomonas europaea and Nitrosospira multiformis) were determined at different light intensities under continuous illumination and light/dark cycles. All strains were inhibited by continuous illumination at the highest intensity (500 μE m−2 s−1). At lower light intensities, archaeal growth was much more photosensitive than bacterial growth, with greater inhibition at 60 μE m−2 s−1 than at 15 μE m−2 s−1, where bacteria were unaffected. Archaeal ammonia oxidizers were also more sensitive to cycles of 8-h light/16-h darkness at two light intensities (60 and 15 μE m−2 s−1) and, unlike bacterial strains, showed no evidence of recovery during dark phases. The findings provide evidence for niche differentiation in aquatic environments and reduce support for photoinhibition as an explanation of nitrite maxima in the ocean.
 
Last edited:
The nitrifying bacteria are photphobic. So the odds that they are on the glass is not likely at all. They are way more likely to be found on surfaces out of the light and where there is decent flow since they need to have everything delivered to them.

So they will mostly be found in filter media, the top of the substrate (less than 1 inch deep) and then on the underside of decor of all kinds as that is out of light for the most part.

The ammonia oxidizing Archaea are even more photophobic the the ammonia oxidizing bacteria.

Merbt, S.N., Stahl, D.A., Casamayor, E.O., Martí, E., Nicol, G.W. and Prosser, J.I. (2012), Differential photoinhibition of bacterial and archaeal ammonia oxidation. FEMS Microbiol Lett, 327: 41-46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2011.02457.x

Abstract​


Inhibition by light potentially influences the distribution of ammonia oxidizers in aquatic environments and is one explanation for nitrite maxima near the base of the euphotic zone of oceanic waters. Previous studies of photoinhibition have been restricted to bacterial ammonia oxidizers, rather than archaeal ammonia oxidizers, which dominate in marine environments. To compare the photoinhibition of bacterial and archaeal ammonia oxidizers, specific growth rates of two ammonia-oxidizing archaea (Nitrosopumilus maritimus and Nitrosotalea devanaterra) and bacteria (Nitrosomonas europaea and Nitrosospira multiformis) were determined at different light intensities under continuous illumination and light/dark cycles. All strains were inhibited by continuous illumination at the highest intensity (500 μE m−2 s−1). At lower light intensities, archaeal growth was much more photosensitive than bacterial growth, with greater inhibition at 60 μE m−2 s−1 than at 15 μE m−2 s−1, where bacteria were unaffected. Archaeal ammonia oxidizers were also more sensitive to cycles of 8-h light/16-h darkness at two light intensities (60 and 15 μE m−2 s−1) and, unlike bacterial strains, showed no evidence of recovery during dark phases. The findings provide evidence for niche differentiation in aquatic environments and reduce support for photoinhibition as an explanation of nitrite maxima in the ocean.
very interesting paper.
 
So... if one scrubs things like rocks or decorations, say b3csuse of algae or similar; or when a filter intake sponge is rinsed; doing those things "too much" can lead to imbalances?
 
Rarely. It takes more than rinsing media to dislodge the microorganisms. And if a decoration had some biofilm attached to it and it was then covered by algae yhickly enough that you need to scrub it, the microorganisms will have likely have died off by then.

They reproduce based on ammonia levels. If ammonia is increased, they reproduce faster and their numbers go up until they can handle that total mount of ammonia. The reverse works the same way. If ammonia levels drop, then they reproduce more slowly and the total number shrinks. The lifespan of a bacterium is a day. But a colony consits of a lot of bacterium. There are constantly dying and reproducing.

The need to do anything when one has an ammonia reading depends one how much of that ammonia is in the toxic unionized fore NH3 vs how much is in the form of ammonium NHB4 which is way less toxic. Some say NH3 is 100 times as toxic and NH4.

Most of out test kits measure Total Ammonia (TA) which is the sum of NH3 and NH4. To know how much might be in either form can be done in one of two ways. The first is to have a second ammonia test kit which only measures NH3. Then you can take the TA reading and subtract the NH3 reading from the TA reading and what is left must the amount of NH4. OR you can do something easier. You will need to know both the pH and temperatures of you tank water.

I am assuming here that we are talking about a tank which has no salt in the water or else you will need to know the salinity as well. But I am assuming here that the tank has no salt added to it and it is all freshwater. Then here is what you should do which is from one of the cycling articles on the site says:

Knowing how dangerous any level of TA might be requires that one know not only how much total ammonia there is but also how much of that total is in each form? The answer depends upon two other water parameters- pH and temperature. The higher the pH and/or temperature, the more of the TA that is in the toxic NH3 form. To calculate how much of the toxic NH3 form of ammonia requires that you know what the pH and temperature of your tank water are. Once you know all three numbers (total ammonia, pH and temperature) there is a formula for calculating how much of the total ammonia is in the form of NH3. It is way more complicated to use than most of us can handle. Fortunately, there are charts and tables available for this calculation. There is also currently a handy dandy ammonia calculator you can find here: http://www.hamzasreef.com/Contents/Calculators/FreeAmmonia.php

1. Choose NH (NH3 + NH4)*
2. Enter in the total ammonia reading from your test, choose ppm.
3. For a fresh water tank, enter 0 for the salinity.
4. Enter your tank’s current pH.
5. Enter your tank temperature and choose F or C, whichever applies.
6. Click Calculate.

The number you want to know is the one for NH3.

[* If your kit measures ammonia as nitrogen aka –N, choose NH-N (NH3-N + NH4-N) in step 1. above.]

Why do you want this number? Because, to get a tank cycled you need to have ammonia (and nitrite) present and you want to have as much total ammonia present as possible without causing permanent harm to the fish. And it is the NH3 that will cause the real harm. Your goal is to allow the total ammonia to rise as high as possible as long as the NH3 content does not get to .05 ppm using that calculator. And even if that level of NH3 is not reached, there is still a limit to how high one can allow total ammonia to rise.

Remember, NH4 can still cause ammonia burns. This writer’s normal cutoff for total ammonia for more than a few days or so is 2 ppm. As a rule of thumb, you can run at 2 ppm of total ammonia with the NH3 being well under .05 for some short amount time. The lower it is under .05, the better. At under .02 ppm of NH3 many fish can be in up to 2 ppm for a number of days and still be OK. The best sign of how long is how the fish behave. If they act distressed, then that is high and/or long enough. Some fish can manage in higher levels, others can’t. This is why you must also watch the fish as well as the test levels.

Hint: As a rule, problems from ammonia become increasingly serious as one’s pH goes above 8.0 and by 8.5 one must really be doing a fishless cycle only. This is very relevant for those keeping rift lake cichlids

There are two goals in fish in cycling which are diametrically opposed. One is to allow ammonia and nitrite to get high enough to get the cycle done as quickly as possible. The other is to keep the ammonia and nitrite from being high enough to cause permanent harm to the fish. Every water change slows the cycle. But the failure to do one at the proper time can harm or even kill the fish.

SIGNS OF AMMONIA POISONING
Fish will not behave as they normally do. Signs of ammonia poisoning can include sluggish behavior, panting, and gill discoloration (gill burn). Fish may hang just below the water surface or they may hide or stop eating. When you know you have ammonia in the tank during cycling and you notice such behavioral changes, the best course of action, regardless of test results, it to do an immediate water change of 50% or more.

The sake articles explains why one does not need to change water when nitrite is present as adding a bit of salt qwill prevent the nitrite fron getting into the fish and causing the blood not to be able to carry oxygen. The articles is here: https://www.fishforums.net/threads/rescuing-a-fish-in-cycle-gone-wild-part-il.433778/
 

Most reactions

Back
Top