Please, Please Some Advice?

[waterdrop]

Yes, agree with indigo. I didn't comment because I was trying not to gush (which, I guess I'm doing now.) Prime, as far as I can tell from lots of little comments over time, is the top choice among many of the experienced fishkeepers that I trust here. It does all the little "extras" right. As indigo said, it -is- one of those that detoxes and yes, the other forms are there to be read and you can't tell the difference and you can't tell of course how long this "good state" lasts. But normally, in most cycling situations this is good, since either way.. you are feeding the bacteria and either way.. its showing you how much progress the bacteria have made or not made. I use it. I'm sure you've seen my standard recommendations to people about it: I think its the one to use for cycling and problem situations and I recommend it for beginners. Once a tank gets really mature and is running normally one can move on to pond dechlor (or no dechlor for small percentage changes in larger volume tanks if that is one's choice.) And for all conditioners, Prime included, I recommend 1.5x or 2x dosing during "fragile" stages or if one has info the water authority might be overdosing chlorine/chloramine but I recommend not going over 2x dosing during cycling (in problem situations, especially after cycling, going over 2x is not a problem.)

~~waterdrop~~

 

[ellena]

Thank you for the explanations How would that work in practice though? I've tested twice since the reading of 1ppm and I've got 0.25ppm and today 0.5ppm so I've done 1 or 2 50% changes to get it down.
If I used prime, would I just ignore all ammonia readings, presuming it was 'safe' ammonia due to the prime? Would it negate the need for water changes altogether? If not, when would I decide when there was 'real' ammonia in there and do a change?
It looks as if my colony is completely shot doesn't it? There's no ammonia being processed at all, I might as well switch the filter off for all the good it's doing. And 18 weeks of work on the fishless cycle down the drain. Would I be any worse off if I'd just chucked fish in after a few days?
I realise this doesn't apply to fishless cycling in general, just my sorry case

 

[indigoj]

Something odd is going on that's for sure. Have you tested your tap water for ammonia? (there shouldn't be any but worth a shot?)

To play safe I'd assume 50% of any ammoina reading is 'safe' and water change accordingly BUT see what WD says - s/he seem to offer very good water advice

 

[ellena]

Yes, tap water has 0 ammonia. I had a clear 7 days of 0 0 readings in 12hrs, so it can do it (when it feels like it!)

 

[drobbyb]

...BUT see what WD says - s/he seem to offer very good water advice

WD is a he >

 

[waterdrop]

...BUT see what WD says - s/he seem to offer very good water advice

WD is a he >

This is good to know!

OK, sorry Ellena, read your post at work but didn't have a chance to comment, not that I'm much help on this...

It may be that we're just not spotting the problem.. Barring that though my own opinion is still that these are just lousy filters (sorry! don't mean to be indelicate)... when a filter gets too small it is very difficult to design it such that you avoid "cheat routes" for the water. Think about it - as a layer of irregular shaped objects, such as gravel, as an example, gets thicker it gets harder and harder for a given cluster of water molecules to pass through without coming into close contact with some of the gravel surfaces. As you remove gravel and thin out the layer, more and more water can pass by the gravel without ever touching it. I know you know all this.. I'm just trying to help think out loud. Am I crazy or weren't we looking at pics of your filters as now I can't find that thread.

~~waterdrop~~

 

[ellena]

Yes, it's post #12 in this thread. There are certainly cheat routes in the hex and the bowl. Not so much with the elite mini filter I wouldn't have thought. But then, I wouldn't mind if it just didn't work. It's the way it does work for a time and then goes into complete meltdown

 

[waterdrop]

Yeah, I wonder if that could be fluctuations in waste concentration? Could be that with only one fish in there the waste pattern is less evened out and the filter handles it when its low but not when its higher. In other words just another variation of a filter not being able to handle the peak load that's being asked of it perhaps.

 

[ellena]

Just a quick bounce 'cos I've edited

 

[ellena]

Right, just stripped the tank completely and there are definitely only 4 endlers in there. All 6 galaxies accounted for. No sign of any remains, although they are tiny fish, so I suppose I could have missed them.
I had a ring round the local shops and one might have some in. I want to replace them as soon as possible.
I sort of wish I'd gone for ember tetras instead of the galaxies-they're so boring, I hardly see them. Such a contrast with the endlers who have bags of personality. Hey ho, it's not forever

 

[sjolliff]

Tetras need a mature tank after cycling 6months+

 

[ellena]

What ember tetras? I thought that was just neons?

 

[waterdrop]

Yes, its only neons/cards that we say to wait 4 to 6 months for. Many other tetras are quite happy in new tanks and good for initial introductions. That's not to say there might not be variations. There are a lot of types of tetras out there!

~~waterdrop~~

 

[ellena]

Hi WD, what do you think on the dead fish idea? Could they have caused what is now looking like it was a spike?

 

[Harlequins]

Hiya
Did you ever find the missing endlers? just wondered if they might have got sucked up by the filter which may cause a spike if they're decomposing in there