High ammonia, nitrates AND nitrites

[seabass]

12 hours ago, brandon429 said:

How can we rectify the sheer numbers of non stuck cycles on new digital kits when in contrast to non digital kits that somehow cause 99% of owners to take a hesitation stumble or purchase?

What are you referring to as a stuck cycle?  Lingering 0.25 ppm ammonia readings, or something else?  And for how long is the cycle supposedly "stuck"?

 

The only issue I'm aware of, are when ammonia and/or nitrite exceed 5 ppm.  Then the process seems to slow down.  I could be wrong, but I believe that because the typical strains of nitrifying bacteria which we have in our tanks prefer (or tend to exist in) lower levels.

 

The ammonia levels of a typical nitrogen cycle look a little like the following (ignore the different names of cycles):

With incremental color charts, it can appear that the ammonia level doesn't change for a week or so.

 

As we have discussed, low levels of ammonia often remain detectable when there is an active ammonia source.  This seems especially the case with new systems.

 

 

12 hours ago, brandon429 said:

ammonia noncontrol

Sorry, I'm just not familiar with this terminology.  What is ammonia control or non-control?  Does this mean predictability?

 

 

12 hours ago, brandon429 said:

studies that show side by side seneye vs api ammonia tests where ammonia reads high, darker green, on api while seneye has nh3 at safe levels on day one

There is no doubt that comparing free ammonia to total ammonia won't yield similar results.  If they were both measuring total ammonia at a specific pH (let's say at 14), then we could more easily compare the two.

 

I'm not familiar enough with the details of how Seneye measures free ammonia to speculate on what's causing conflicting results.

 

If the question is if the API color chart for ammonia in saltwater is completely accurate, then I would say you could be right (especially at lower levels).  My biggest question with API's ammonia kit has been regarding its color chart.

 

A supplementary chart with smaller increments (like:  0.0 / 0.1 / 0.2 / 0.3 / 0.4 / 0.5) could prove helpful, although differentiating the color shifts might be challenging.

 

That Free Ammonia Calculator you referenced, looks like an interesting tool.  I assume that it's accurate.  I wonder if everybody is making the same calculations when computing NH3 from total ammonia values.

 

The other question being, what level of NH3 is considered acceptable (non-harmful)?  Much of what we read about ammonia toxicity isn't very clear if they are referring to NH3 or (NH3 + NH4), and do they use NH-N to compute Total Ammonia Nitrogen (TAN)?

 

Or maybe we are just better off working with total ammonia numbers, as provided by API.

[Toomanymatts]

10 hours ago, mje113 said:

What is an ammonia badge?

https://www.amazon.com/Seachem-Laboratories-Ammonia-Alert-Monitor/dp/B007R52CZ2/ref=asc_df_B007R52CZ2/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=507600687309&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=16265643271916294290&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9031211&hvtargid=pla-1306352242767&psc=1

[brandon429]

That chart above, built from digital or non digital kits? Asking because the timing of the ammonia drop will be 100% different depending on measurement source 

 

 

my entire point is that huge timing difference seen between digital and non digital charts vs boosted/ non boosted cycle arrangements. Display reefs always used boosted arrangements which disagree with the timing of that chart, when measured digitally.

[brandon429]

We are also stuck until we get a picture of cubes tank and his actual ammonia measurement so we can see it, and apply nh3 conversion approximation to the kit as it reads in the pic 

[seabass]

Hey @brandon429, I just added to that last post.

 

2 minutes ago, brandon429 said:

That chart above, built from digital or non digital kits?

I built that over a decade ago using API and Seachem MultiTest kits.  You can click on the graph to take you to the thread.  Originally I was trying to prove that regular water changes during the cycle would be helpful.  But I discovered that 25% water changes only helped lower ammonia values after ammonia started coming down on it own.

[seabass]

 

Quote

 

Toxicity of Ammonia

---

Ammonia is very toxic to marine fish. The mechanisms of toxicity are complicated and are an active area of continued investigation by researchers. Its effects include damage to the gills, resulting in poor gas exchange, ion regulation and blood pH regulation.¹⁴ Other effects include hampering oxygen delivery to tissues, disrupting metabolism and toxicity to the nervous system that causes hyperactivity, convulsions and death.¹⁴ Ammonia can also be very toxic to many other organisms found in reef aquaria.

 

Toxicity can be measured and reported in many ways. One common way to measure acute toxicity is to measure how high the concentration needs to be in order to kill half of the organisms in a given time period. A commonly used time period is 96 hours (four days). Such data are called the 96 h LC₅₀ (LC stands for Lethal Concentration, 50 meaning 50% killed).

 

The other complication that comes with ammonia's toxicity is the relative amount of free ammonia and ammonium ion. While ammonium ion may be toxic to marine fish, it is probably less toxic than free ammonia, and toxicity data are often reported only for the concentration of free ammonia. Aquarists should recognize, however, that such data may not be appropriate if the pH used in the test, or the situation to which it will be applied, deviates significantly from normal seawater's pH (as in a shipping bag, for example, whose pH may be well below pH 8.2, and whose toxicity may actually be coming from ammonium, and not the low concentration of free ammonia). Nevertheless, many scientific articles report ammonia toxicity in ppm (or mg/L) NH₃-N. It may also be reported as just ppm NH₃.

 

Marine fish14 generally have 96 h LC₅₀ levels that range from about 0.09 to 3.35 ppm NH₃-N. That result is not particularly different from the range observed for freshwater fish,14 0.068 to 2.0 ppm NH₃-N. Remember that these values are ppm NH₃-N, and at pH 8.2, the marine range becomes 1.3 to 50 ppm total NH₄-N because only 7% of the total ammonia in seawater is present as free ammonia.

 

Concentrations of ammonia that are not acutely lethal can still cause significant problems for fish. Salmon in seawater at pH 7.8, for example, show changes in white blood cells and various blood chemicals, and were more prone to disease, when exposed to sublethal concentrations of ammonia.¹⁵ Consequently, aquarists should strive to keep ammonia concentrations well below lethal levels.

 

Ammonia Concentration Guidelines

---

Because ammonia's toxic effects appear at levels significantly below those that are acutely lethal (0.09 to 3.35 ppm NH₃-N or 1.3 to 50 ppm total NH₄-N at pH 8.2), and because some organisms in a reef aquarium may be more sensitive than the few organisms that have been carefully studied, it is prudent to err on the side of caution when deciding what concentrations of ammonia to allow in a reef aquarium or related system.

 

My suggestion is to take some sort of corrective action if the total ammonia rises above 0.1 ppm. This suggestion is also made by Stephen Spotte in his authoritative text, Captive Seawater Fishes.⁶ Values in excess of 0.25 ppm total ammonia may require immediate treatment, preferably involving removal of all delicate (ammonia sensitive) organisms from the water containing the ammonia. Some of the possible actions to take are detailed in the following sections listed below.

 

source:  https://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-02/rhf/

 

Here we see Randy stating that NH3-N can be acutely lethal at 0.09 to 3.35 ppm (a pretty large range).  However, he suggests concern when total ammonia (NH3 + NH4) rises above 0.1 ppm, and that corrective action might be needed when total ammonia exceeds 0.25 ppm.

 

Using the Free Ammonia Calculator, we can translate acute lethality starting at 1.6 ppm of total ammonia at a pH of 8.1, or 3.1 ppm of total ammonia at a pH of 7.8.  That's pretty high.

 

So you can imagine how less lethal reports of non-negative test results (slight color changes) are at 0.25 ppm at a pH of 7.8 (which is not that uncommon in newer tanks).  Also take into account how hardy many of these starter fish are (like clownfish), and you can see why there aren't many/any reports of deaths despite these non-negative tests.  Still, we want the best for the animals in our care, so I recommend doing what we can to limit exposure to higher levels of ammonia (which is pretty easy to do).

[Tired]

In addition to the concerns about lethality and permanent harm, we don't want to cause the fish any pain or unnecessary stress. Since the fish we keep are small wild animals, they're generally going to be quite good at hiding their pain, since showing pain or distress makes them targets for predators. Fish can act normally without actually feeling normal. 

 

Fish-in cycling might not hurt your fish, if you do things right. It may cause them discomfort- we aren't sure. It does expose them to ammonia. Fish-out cycling will definitely not expose your fish to ammonia. This is not a hobby where rushing things works out well, so, especially with someone's first tank, it's best for them to not cycle with fish. If the tank really is cycled by the bottle bacteria, there's no harm in waiting a few days to make sure. If it turns out it's not cycled, well, good thing the fish aren't in there. 

[brandon429]

they're generally going to be quite good at hiding their pain
 

 

 

I must disagree, they aren’t. that’s a statement made to fit a non nh3 converted ammonia statement where we haven’t got to see the test yet, to apply that conversion. The statement above that the fish would be symptomless in a system that can’t control ammonia needs examination, studies searchable have already measured clownfish negative behavior at .05 ppm nh3 and higher, a general tolerance range is already used in marine studies.

 

 

none of these bottle bac threads exceed that rating, or we’d see bad pics.

 

 

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/does-anyone-dose-ammonia-and-or-how-would-one-try.770535/

 

for anyone interested in reading updated measure of waste conversion in reef tanks, digital measure, see that thread. It shows how fast systems eat up ammonia, minutes not days. Days is the realm solely for non digital test kits, we see more than one seneye above prove a reef tank that can convert ammonia does it at a very fast rate. **how far away do reef tanks run from .05 ppm nh3 in that digital measure thread? A long ways away. That’s a huge massive spike most reefs will never see….hence all the healthy fish pics, if we could get pics of the tank here by Cube that would really help wrap things up

 

if we then search out seneye + bottle bac + fish posts, we see full ammonia control day one because bottle bac is good, fast 

 

 

there will be some instances of dead bottle bac, when they freeze etc in transit. Once we see one of those on a seneye cycle we will know how high the nh3 attained

 

whats the chances this exact thread is dead bottle bac

 

all details given so far report completed cycle. Not mid cycle…

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tired]

Prey animals are good at hiding pain. That's a known fact. Lack of visible distress in an animal doesn't mean no distress is present, just that it's not currently an amount of distress that overrides their instinct to hide it. 

[Cubeguy11]

Sorry for the late response, here are the pictures:

[seabass]

Thanks for posting that.  It is definitely showing elevated ammonia readings.  The fish will likely be fine unless the levels continue to rise.  Keep an eye on it.

 

As I wrote before, my recommendation would be to continue dosing a nitrifying bacteria culture like MicroBacter7 daily until the level comes back down.

 

Looks like a fun little tank.

[brandon429]

Since that reading matches all one million online readings from fully matured reefs, on api, after nh3 conversion it’s certainly not elevated and this explains the no symptom in fish. Your tank was able to carry bioload day one, bottle bac works, cycle was easy to troubleshoot here there was never any doubt. The pics match the prediction along with all patterns from a bottle bac post.  Cube thank you for posting that, it clears the matter up. Any reader here can search api pics from matured tanks and post back findings. 99/100 will be that degree of yellow green.

[seabass]

6 hours ago, brandon429 said:

Since that reading matches all one million online readings from fully matured reefs, on api

That has not been my experience (from testing numerous tanks and bins, and going through numerous bottles of API's reagents).  I've even run comparisons against Seachem's MultiTest kit, which uses their Ammonia Alert Badge technology.  I primarily disagree with the word "matured."

 

I could agree with a statement like, "That reading matches the results of other online posters reporting high ammonia levels after recently starting their reef tanks."  These tanks might even have a working biofilter; but I don't believe that they are "fully matured."  I would have even accepted "fully cycled" versus "fully matured"; although I'd probably still cringe a little at that.

 

I feel that if you revisited the posters of these one million readings, and had them retest now (say at least six months after originally posting their non-negative results), you might find that they are now closer to undetectable (keeping in mind that all living reef tanks will contain some ammonia, even if some hobby grade kits can't detect it).

 

As I said before, API's kit seems more sensitive to low levels of ammonia than other similar type test kits.  Plus, newer tanks appear to maintain somewhat elevated levels of ammonia (detectable by API) for awhile after most people would consider their tanks fully cycled.  @Cubeguy11, while it's probably fine, I still consider these levels to be slightly elevated, and you should probably continue to monitor it for awhile longer.

[Cubeguy11]

Ok I will look into microbactor7 as I don’t currently have any, however I’m not sure if water changes are necessary because when I was just about to start at 20% water change I decided to test and the nitrates were at 10 ppm so I’m not sure.

[seabass]

A 20% water change has the potential to reduce nitrate by 20% (or 4 ppm), which is hardly enough to detect on your nitrate test kit.  At this point, I'm not saying to change the water, or not change the water.  It should have limited effect either way.

 

53 minutes ago, Cubeguy11 said:

Ok I will look into microbactor7

Good.  I think it could be beneficial.  It certainly shouldn't hurt anything, except for the price.

[Cubeguy11]

Ok so I just tested the water again here are the new numbers: 

 

ph: 8.0

ammonia: 0.25 ppm

nitrite: 0 ppm

nitrate: 0 ppm

 

I now just seems like I need a bit more nitrifying bacteria so I will 100% get microbacter7. I’m also seeing a small amount of brown algae at the bottom, is this a good sign or a bad sign? Does this mean I need snails?

[seabass]

The brown algae is likely diatoms.  That's actually a good sign that things are progressing.  Yeah, you could pick up a few herbivorous snails.  Diatom blooms (if that's what you have) are fueled by silica.  It is very common to experience a diatom bloom as the cycle is finishing up.

 

Do you use RO water, RO/DI water, distilled water, or conditioned tap water?

[Cubeguy11]

19 minutes ago, seabass said:

Do you use RO water, RO/DI water, distilled water, or conditioned tap water?

I use distilled water that I buy at my local grocery store.

[brandon429]

Growth of any new matted organisms is a sign of a completed cycle. There are no tanks underwater long enough to grow new diatom or cyano mats that can’t control ammonia, those growths come after basic ammonia control which has kept your fish alive even with daily feedings. You literally have about eight indications of being completed but are about to buy more bacteria, old cycling science wants your fear and your cash 🙂 you didn’t stand a chance of taking any other route. This thread is added to page 31 of our false stall cycle study thread.

 

 

Cube was given cycling fear, doubt, and will respond with a purchase to alleviate that fear even though he already owns a tester saying nothing was wrong the whole time (the badge) we simply pick what we feel is the bad reading kit, and assign a status of ‘stalled’ to the cycle even though eight other reliable markers shows this bottle bac cycle went well.

 

Nobody talks about fish disease preps, so we are heading down the path of highest % animal wasting in reefing, a no disease preps setup. We study how old cycling science is actually killing fish in a delayed manner by this mechanism.

 

[brandon429]

Cleaner shrimps are the weakest animals in reefing I forgot you had one of those this whole time, your ammonia was never suspect and it isn’t now, or that animal would be dead 

 

Old cycling science depends on symptomless pain claims.

 

 

old cycling science will ignore all counter proofs and solely focus on an unconverted nh4 reading to assess doom risk, which never happens. Excellent study thread here when combined with three years of others exactly like it.

[brandon429]

https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/bio-spira-works-great.668674/

 

Read that thread to see an entire reef started day one from bottle bac, no wait time.

 

 

The only difference between Cubes post and that one above is we didn't run api in Ikes thread, therefore no doubt happened.

 

He begins on day one with ten times the bioload that cube started with, and we can track Ike's reef out to two years now. See how symptoms/ lack of symptoms keeps us in line with cycle calls? There's no way anyone can claim a full reef system won't show symptoms of failure to control ammonia. Ikes cycle was never in question because the $250 anemone lived since day one, with a full load of fish and corals and inverts. Bottle bac is this able.

[seabass]

6 hours ago, brandon429 said:

This thread is added to page 31 of our false stall cycle study thread.

What stall? 😕  This tank is only a couple of weeks old; and things seem to have progressed quite nicely.  Actually, I've never heard of a stalled cycle unless ammonia has been overdosed (above 5 ppm).

 

 

6 hours ago, brandon429 said:

Cube was given cycling fear, doubt, and will respond with a purchase to alleviate that fear even though he already owns a tester saying nothing was wrong the whole time

Yeah, I don't feel anybody was trying to scare the original poster into anything.  Instead, we were providing information (to the original poster as well as those following along) to make good choices.  The tank is new and there was photographic evidence of an elevated ammonia level (albeit by a small amount).  We are just looking out for the good of the livestock.  There is nothing wrong with wanting the best for our pets.

 

I don't believe that anybody else has claimed that the cycle has stalled.  In a newly setup tank, ammonia doesn't typically become immediately undetectable unless you've introduced a robust biofilter (like established live rock).  Over time ammonia levels tend to drop (closer to undetectable using API's kit).  I'll test my tanks later today and post an example API's results taken from a mature reef tank.

 

Sure, I recommended dosing a bacteria culture to help deal with the elevated level.  But as I pointed out, "I think it could be beneficial.  It certainly shouldn't hurt anything, except for the price."  You can make the case that you don't have to purchase anything to establish a cycle; and that would be 100% true.  Bacteria cultures just help speed the process up.  You yourself (in this thread) have touted how effective bacterial cultures are.

 

 

6 hours ago, brandon429 said:

Nobody talks about fish disease preps, so we are heading down the path of highest % animal wasting in reefing, a no disease preps setup. We study how old cycling science is actually killing fish in a delayed manner by this mechanism.

I appreciate that you've brought up fish diseases (which includes quarantine and prophylactic treatments).  It's typically off topic in ammonia conversations (unless we are talking about cycling a quarantine tank), so it's not usually brought up.  Diseases cause a large number of deaths; whereas you have correctly pointed out, ammonia poisoning is relatively uncommon.  Although, I'm not aware that anybody was saying that the fish in this thread were at risk to die.

 

 

6 hours ago, brandon429 said:

Old cycling science depends on symptomless pain claims.

I'm not sure that I'd call it old.  Old cycling techniques involved putting hardy fish (like damsels) into a tank until ammonia input could be processed.  These damsels didn't show signs of distress (heavy breathing, lack of appetite, etc) either.  However, less hardy fish species didn't do as well in this type of environment.

 

More recently, we have developed ways to cycle without fish (limiting exposure to free ammonia).  Today, there is no real need to cycle with fish.  Sure, it's possible, as was demonstrated decades ago.  Also, now that we have decent bacteria cultures, cycling with fish is safer than ever.

 

I'm not sure if this is your point or not.  Are you recommending that people cycle with fish?  Is this the "new" science?  Companies have been selling instant cycling products for decades (bottled bacteria and even bagged "live" sand).  Sure, people, resisted this at first.  I (even in this thread) stated, "Nitrifying bacterial cultures do help, but they do not instantly establish a robust biofilter as implied."  Maybe this is old school thinking, but I'll stand by it, which I feel is backed up by the low, but slightly elevated, level of total ammonia.

 

But you could be right that the below level of free ammonia is safe (and not harmful).  I'm basically ready to concede this point.  But I do know that lower levels are possible.

• Total ammonia: 0.25 ppm
• pH 8.0
• 1.025 specific gravity
• 80°F

Which, according to the Free Ammonia Calculator, would translate into a NH3 level of 0.0129 ppm.  So maybe this is considered safe.  But what if the total ammonia level was 0.5 (with a free ammonia level of 0.0259 ppm)?   IDK, maybe you have the data that provides this information (and how they determined what is safe).  I'd sure appreciate that link if you have it.

 

It would be helpful to know what levels are considered not harmful to our livestock (either in terms of total ammonia, or free ammonia).  Because, at this point, there is a lot of speculation that something is considered harmful or not harmful (often based on observation).  Obviously, acute lethality, is more easily studied; but knowing the level that kills half of the animals in a given period of time doesn't designate the line between harmful and not harmful.

 

 

5 hours ago, brandon429 said:

Ikes cycle was never in question because the $250 anemone lived since day one

Does bottled bacteria work?  Sure, no argument here.  Adding bottled bacteria was what I recommended; then was somehow accused of fear mongering. 😕

 

All I know is that API's kit is capable of detecting fairly low levels of total ammonia.  Also, based on experience, we can often find lower levels in mature reef tanks.  Loss of life, while an easy thing to determine, might not be the best way to define the recommended level of ammonia.

 

 

Look, it seems like we are getting into the weeds here.  Your point appears to be that low levels of ammonia aren't cause for worry.  My point is that there might be something that we can do better to help limit levels (possibly improving the environment in which we keep our animals).  Neither of us is saying that 0.25 ppm of total ammonia (as determined with API's ammonia test kit) is lethal to the hardy livestock that is sold in the saltwater aquarium industry.  I get more concerned when I see levels closer to 0.5 ppm of total ammonia; but even these levels don't usually result in fish deaths.  And like you pointed out, disease is by far a bigger concern.

 

I think this has been a helpful discussion.  And I hope that people have found it helpful, whether they side more with you, or more with me.  Actually, I don't feel we are that far apart here.

[Cubeguy11]

Hello everyone, the ammonia level has started to go down, it now looks kinda like a mix between the colors of 0 ppm and .25ppm I also just got a pair of nassarius snails to help with algae and even after just a few hours of being in the tank they seems to have made a considerable dent in the amount of algae. Thanks for your help everyone!

 

and to address what a lot of people were saying, that a fish in cycle is not ethical, I now agree. This is my first time setting up an aquarium and all of my research had said that fish in cycles were good. In the future I will no longer do fish in cycles and I feel bad that my fish has to go through that. 
 

again, thanks for your help everyone, my tank seems to be well on its way to being a great habitat for my fish.

 

cheers!

[seabass]

I'm glad that the ammonia levels are dropping.  That's good news.

 

14 minutes ago, Cubeguy11 said:

I also just got a pair of nassarius snails to help with algae

Actually, they are not herbivores.  They will eat left over food, any dead critters, and the like.  You might want to add a couple of:

• Astraea (herbivore)
• Cerith (omnivore)
• Trochus (herbivore)

 

14 minutes ago, Cubeguy11 said:

I feel bad that my fish has to go through that

I wouldn't feel too bad; but I'm glad that you are considering cycling fishless in the future.

[Cubeguy11]

18 minutes ago, seabass said:

Actually, they are not herbivores.  They will eat left over food, any dead critters, and the like.  You might want to add a couple of:

• Astraea (herbivore)
• Cerith (omnivore)
• Trochus (herbivore)

Oh ok, I will get some of those, interesting though because they do seem to have eaten some of the algae.