Ammonia processing rate of established tank?

[brandon429]

This thread shows the true nature of filtration bacteria better than any article, book or post I've ever seen man. Nice.

[dandelion]

I actually ordered seachem tests because my API tests are running out. I'm going to repeat my tests with the different brand to confirm.

 

Basically when I cycled my tank almost 2 years ago I waited until 1ppm of ammonia would be digested into nitrate within 24 hours. Then the tank was running for about a year with corals and later 1 fish. I wanted to repurpose my tank, so I moved all my live stocks into a different tank. It's been running fellow since, except for the few colonista snails and a dime-sized encrusted montipora that refused to die. Adding 1ppm of ammonia still required ~24 hours to digest, and 5 about 5 days.

[brandon429]

I have began to link this around because its worth detailing. who else has data in the same category to offer, this is new data for aquarium eyes.

 

 

Stress test bacteria threads should come about more often, our hobby has been around a long time and many articles are reinvented wheels, but not nitrification stress test posts. that's new.

 

well done thanks so much.

 

its in Randy's chem forum at reef2reef in a post  he made about the ammonia demand and competition among nitrifiers in seawater... great post. ammonia is gold, the reef soooo hungry for it (there are ammonia dosers to live reef tanks, search them out, interesting and nonlethal in the amounts they add)

 

consider this read above, how do you feel it is related to your readings? You just took ammonia reserves down to fully abnormal and sustained measures, from a prior bioload, but were able to earn that same instant (within a day extra max?) digestion ability right back upon bioload introduction. on top of shaking the grounds that many of our procedures in the hobby come from, how in the world did those rascals get by without our offerings

 

how did they get feed before aquarists mattered i am off to find links~

 

for once, we have a thorough and well-tested thread where we can search out formal links that explain what we just saw, not the other way around.

[brandon429]

Forgot link

 

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/wow-ammonia-more-valuable-than-gold.322350/

 

 

[dandelion]

2 hours ago, brandon429 said:

Forgot link

 

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/wow-ammonia-more-valuable-than-gold.322350/

 

 

Was going to ask you for it coz I couldn't find it. 

[seabass]

On 6/23/2017 at 10:06 AM, brandon429 said:

you  have a nice working api too agreed/admitted/rejoice and clone it heh.

@brandon429, as we have discussed on numerous occasions, (owning more than a half a dozen of these kits over the years) I've never had an issue with API's ammonia test kit.  @dandelion is working with a mature tank here, one that is capable of processing ammonia (including low levels of ammonia).  I believe that almost all, if not all, of the anecdotal evidence that API was giving false positive results (of 0.25 ppm or less) came from people who had newer systems (where the biofilter had not yet matured).  That's why I have always been insistent that the kit in question be confirmed on a healthy, mature reef tank (as opposed to another kit, which might not be as sensitive to low levels of ammonia).

[brandon429]

 

 

darn good thread though isn't it> im linking around to see who picks up on the bigtime clues here and how this stuff flies in the face of how most of us view bac

[brandon429]

Dandelion

 

Nobody really ever simply keeps fallow tanks running this long to test, or we'd have more data. Its amazing that in a hobby as complex as ours, there was low hanging simplicity fruit for the taking and observation for really quite huge paradigms that run titans of industry and pretty much all procedures touted in reefing.

 

Makes one wonder, how many more simplicity reductions and proofs are out there we can measure in interesting ways

 

 

ghost feeding as a requirement for bacterial preservation is dead as a concept. nano-reef.com killed a reefing fallacy again, well done

[seabass]

On 6/22/2017 at 8:54 PM, dandelion said:

Since March I have been slowly moving corals out of this pico, not to mention my clown jumped. So the bioload has been steadily reducing. Either the bacteria can thrive on low nutrient input or they went dormant only to wake on a moment's notice.

I feel that previously having a heavier bioload in this tank has greatly helped the ability to process this amount of ammonia.  Bacteria do seem to be able to rebound after several months of a decreased bioload.  However, I'm unsure just how long this "dormancy" might last.

 

On 6/23/2017 at 10:06 AM, brandon429 said:

people who make their tanks fallow for ich care and prevention really benefit from what your tank shows in a back-and-forth condition regarding nutrients and surface area.

An excellent example of the above.  You don't lose the biological filter by removing the fish for a couple of months.

 

On 6/23/2017 at 10:30 AM, brandon429 said:

ive been too lazy to start one, but the cousin to this thread needs to be how long does it take totally dry rocks and sand, no form of ammonia boosting or bac added via bottle at all, to become a cycled tank when we just add sw and maintain it.  1-2 ppm digest ability....prediction, 2-4 mos

You are talking about using dry media (rock in this case) that hasn't been exposed to a marine environment.  I'm not sure, but this might be important as previous exposure might somehow contain dormant bacteria.  In order to test this, you should use brand new bio-balls in one tank and dried out bio-balls that were previously a biofilter in another.  Let them circulate in saltwater for two months and see if either (or both) could process 2 ppm of ammonia in two days.  I might even be willing to perform this experiment as I believe I already have the necessary equipment here.

 

While the bacteria strains should be present, I doubt their populations would be adequate to support a full bio-load.

 

On 6/25/2017 at 11:22 AM, brandon429 said:

If you ever get a chance to do a big spike 8-9 parts per million, online material show the nitrifiers won't keep up after five parts per million but I think the system will just bring it back down over a few days.

I am also interested in how it would handle excessively high levels of ammonia.  However, you must realize that established bacteria is already present in this tank and it might not react the same as a tank where you are still building up the biofilter.

[seabass]

6 hours ago, brandon429 said:

Dandelion

 

Nobody really ever simply keeps fallow tanks running this long to test, or we'd have more data. Its amazing that in a hobby as complex as ours, there was low hanging simplicity fruit for the taking and observation for really quite huge paradigms that run titans of industry and pretty much all procedures touted in reefing.

 

Makes one wonder, how many more simplicity reductions and proofs are out there we can measure in interesting ways

 

ghost feeding as a requirement for bacterial preservation is dead as a concept. nano-reef.com killed a reefing fallacy again, well done

I actually have two 32 gallon Brutes which are full of previously dry rock.  I've kept them with circulating saltwater for several years for use whenever I need them.  They were started with a bacteria culture, I top them off every few weeks, and I add ammonium chloride every now and then (when I'm thinking about it).  It's been forever since I've tested them for ammona, but I'm pretty sure they both have working biofilters.  I could do a quick test and report back.

 

 

[Weetabix7]

11 minutes ago, seabass said:

I actually have two 32 gallon Brutes which are full of previously dry rock.  I've kept them with circulating saltwater for several years for use whenever I need them.  They were started with a bacteria culture, I top them off every few weeks, and I add ammonium chloride every now and then (when I'm thinking about it).  It's been forever since I've tested them for ammona, but I'm pretty sure they both have working biofilters.  I could do a quick test and report back.

 

This would be interesting.

[brandon429]

that would build this thread up so well SB

 

by the way, ill have to find the post and link back here, but just the other day at reef 2 reef we have examples of someone taking live rock outside the tank for 8 weeks straight, rehydrating, and then being able to pass an ammonia digestion test within 24 hours amazingly so

 

every form of skeptical inquiry was quick applied to that claim

 

poster has multiple test kits for comparison/rare

 

he didn't put outside, for true likely desiccation much quicker than 8 weeks but he put in a dark closet

 

that's a different humidity profile than outside, and, just like it would only seem natural that fallow cannot self sustain, I do believe this poster about his rocks due to very unique emersion details, in a cold dark closet just set on a shelf after they were through dripping

 

8 weeks, felt totally dry outside, rehydrated, can pass ammonia digestion by next day. dormancy like some of the bottle bacs that are shipped in clear water/no ammonia feed?

 

so the point is, I think we might have a current record for longest verified emersion still retaining live bac, ill go search real quick

[seabass]

I'll play along tomorrow.  Testing prior to any dosing (last dosed a couple of weeks ago).  I might have to check on how much ammonium chloride I have left, and base how much to dose on that.  Hopefully I can dose up to 2 ppm.  I'll order some more to play around with.

[dandelion]

18 hours ago, seabass said:

I'll play along tomorrow.  Testing prior to any dosing (last dosed a couple of weeks ago).  I might have to check on how much ammonium chloride I have left, and base how much to dose on that.  Hopefully I can dose up to 2 ppm.  I'll order some more to play around with.

Would you amuse us by doing a nitrate test as well. Just curious if any nitrifying bacteria managed to grow in there.

[seabass]

1 minute ago, dandelion said:

Would you amuse us by doing a nitrate test as well. Just curious if any nitrifying bacteria managed to grow in there.

Good thought.  I've kind of wondered about high high it might be.  One of containers holds a rock that's more than 25 lbs by itself.  I expect there might be some denitrifying bacteria present.  I'll make sure that I do that.

[seabass]

So both Rubbermaid Brute containers showed no detectable ammonia using an API kit.  And each showed about 75 ppm nitrate using a Salifert kit (It's been over a year since I've changed any of the water).

 

Apparently there is little, if any, denitrification.

 

I dosed 50 drops of DrTim's Ammonium Chloride per each bin, which gave me about 2 ppm ammonia in each bin (more than 3 times what I usually dose).  Also, keep in mind that I don't dose with any consistency.  And the bins sometimes go for several months without any dosing.

 

I'll test again tomorrow and post the results.

 

 

 

[brandon429]

all sharp work and documentation. so rare to have fallow running setups already on hand

 

 

the last time we got this kind of information, a gentleman on r2r had dark-cured some live rock in a bin for over a year and swore it tested able to digest ammonia. we believed him then, shows about 100% likely now in hindsight with these growing results so far posted here.

 

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/want-to-see-a-thread-that-shows-what-our-filtration-bacteria-tolerate-from-a-unique-perspective.323248/

[seabass]

Yesterday:

 

Today:

I would call it 0.25 ppm.  I expect that it would be undetectable by tomorrow.

 

[seabass]

Day 0:

 

Day 1:

 

Day 2:

[dandelion]

This is a big ask, but it would be really interesting if you could hold ammonia dosing in one can for a few months, and continue dosing the other can. At the end we can compare the rates of the two.

 

I'm glad this thread is really turning into something interesting here. 

[seabass]

OK, so here's the plan.  No dosing at all in one until December.  Fairly regular dosing in the other.  Then I'll dose 50 drops of ammonia into each and see if we can notice a difference in how it processes ammonia.

 

My guess is that they will be similar.

[Kerber13]

Is it weird that i'm absolutely giddy to see the results of that test and was fascinated by everything done here. Great information and amazing job guys, this is so awesome!!!! Boy I'm such a science nerd lol

[brandon429]

Agreed. For me it's the upscaling of toughness/ work we can do in an aquarium that is reflected here. if measures continue on current path, total surface area and hydration constants will show to be the swing vote in oxidation testing (hopefully) and not provisions offered by the aquarist. It will hopefully be a microbiological humbling moment for many, these little microbes might have just been fine without us darn it lol 

 

if they're that tough- able to secure their own foodstuffs during blight- then we are able to clean, move, upgrade downgrade and sidegrade a tank without the age old fear of hurting the bacteria. Emersion testing will show the extremes out of water they can tolerate 

 

This thread will also serve as an awakening for anyone with microbial OCD, we are sorry to report you can't wash them away either (says the sand rinse thread heh) stratified squamous epithelial cells simply retain them too well... if our skin wasnt stratified/new roof shingles on top of old, but made of steel, the scrubbing would work.

 

 

*anyone who has posited about the effects of peroxide on a biosystem should not shudder when a compadre hits their fallow setup with a good one mil per FIVE gallons dilution single dose right in the middle of fallow phase testing, the ultimate stress test for claimants. One to ten was the normal dose. Let's double. This ones for Disc-1 and TMZ at reefcentral. 

 

 Not that any real reef tank will be as devoid of organic sponges as a fallow test tank, but if they still survive that blast then it will be humbling results

 

 

[seabass]

34 minutes ago, brandon429 said:

if they're that tough- able to secure their own foodstuffs during blight

It's likely that they are not securing an alternate food source.  It's more likely some form of dormancy.  In my test tanks, there is nothing organic and no other source of ammonia.

[1891Bro]

1 hour ago, seabass said:

It's likely that they are not securing an alternate food source.  It's more likely some form of dormancy.  In my test tanks, there is nothing organic and no other source of ammonia.

Even without going dormant wouldn't lack of food cause some bacterial die off that would generate ammonia for the living bacteria to continue feeding off of?