8.0 Ammonia for almost two months

[SinkyShippy]

Here are my latest readings in addition to my still 8.0 ammonia. As you can see slight traces of nitrites and nitrates so cycle seems to be in work but still in disbelief why the ammonia seems so high after all the work done since 5/28, two filters now, live rocks, RODI and prepacked saltwater and live sand. So wait for the cycle or water change up to 25%?

You need to get a different test. Test strips are never accurate. Try red Sea or API.

 

[Water Dog]

Looking at your test strip, I don’t see any reading for ammonia... Are you still using the API kit for your ammonia testing and can we get a picture of your test result of 8? See if you can get a Red Sea ammonia test kit. That’s what I use. Even Salifert is a much more reputable brand. I tend to stay away from API test kits.

It stands to reason that if you performed a 25% water change and tested soon thereafter, the ammonia reading should go down by 25% to 6 ppm. If you did a 50% water change, it would dilute down to 50% for a reading of 4 ppm. Try the water change and post your ammonia test results with pictures.

 

[MnFish1]

Looking at your test strip, I don’t see any reading for ammonia... Are you still using the API kit for your ammonia testing and can we get a picture of your test result of 8? See if you can get a Red Sea ammonia test kit. That’s what I use. Even Salifert is a much more reputable brand. I tend to stay away from API test kits.

It stands to reason that if you performed a 25% water change and tested soon thereafter, the ammonia reading should go down by 25% to 6 ppm. If you did a 50% water change, it would dilute down to 50% for a reading of 4 ppm. Try the water change and post your ammonia test results with pictures.

I think he said he did a 100% water change and it went down to zero - but then increased again.

 

[Water Dog]

I think he said he did a 100% water change and it went down to zero - but then increased again.

Yeah, I remember that. What I want to see is a shot of the test results after a 25% water change to verify if it goes down to 6 ppm. If it doesn’t we can look at testing error / poor test kit. If it goes down to 6 and then 3 days later it goes back up (with a photo of the test result of course) then perhaps we can consider decaying bound organics in the rock as a culprit.

 

[MnFish1]

Yeah, I remember that. What I want to see is a shot of the test results after a 25% water change to verify if it goes down to 6 ppm. If it doesn’t we can look at testing error / poor test kit. If it goes down to 6 and then 3 days later it goes back up (with a photo of the test result of course) then perhaps we can consider decaying bound organics in the rock as a culprit.

What is funny to me - is that the ammonia level in that first picture seemed to be far higher than 8 ppm based on the extremely dark color

 

[Water Dog]

Indeed it did.

 

[MnFish1]

That's not a rule, and certainly wouldn't cause this issue...

There is so much misinformation in this thread.

What is the misinformation in the thread? Just curious. (BTW - the one pound / gallon (as im sure you know) used to be a widely followed 'rule'. Certainly it is not followed now.

 

[brandon429]

if the live rock is the claimed source of ammonia at 8 ppm, daily, then it smells horrible


but i bet here: lift out live rock=smells normal

wheres that ammonia coming from? daily at 8ppm supplemented is claimed and not a shred of nitrification to reduce it at all.

I bet a dollar this live rock doesn't smell like a rotten egg if lifted up and checked, the tank if true 8 ppm w smell the whole house and that w be reported.

take a water sample to a lfs.

live rock always blamed for emitting stuff was what kept api's .25 a legit reading for twenty years, it never does what people claim it does in order to shore up testing variance issues. its tougher than people allow it to be

I like to investigate how tough live rock is and we find it never causes these problems. he may have a dead eunicid worm but its unlikely, and can be smelled. we have non chemistry ways to assess ammonia claimed to be that high and sustained wo any chem testing.

 

[asting]

What is the misinformation in the thread? Just curious. (BTW - the one pound / gallon (as im sure you know) used to be a widely followed 'rule'. Certainly it is not followed now.

Exactly. The other misinformation on the first page I quoted was that not enough live rock was causing 8ppm ammonia. You can cycle an empty tank. Maybe a high bioload would struggle, but there's still lots of surface area. You can cycle an empty tank. Look at half of the quarantine setups that have bacteria established.

 

[brandon429]

Asting on a side note, Id once guessed on another big microbiology battle thread that an empty tank wasn't enough surface area to handle 1-2 ppm ammonia oxidation per day without some form of extra surface area, but then again I don't keep fish nor work with barren qt tanks much

is that right, the bare glass alone is enough surface area for a fish or two in holding? perhaps a pvc elbow as well or two, but still very low surface area compared to typical reef fare. do barren qt tanks still handle full loading? I figured they were all using filters in some way, the ones I saw locally used little hang on back filters/extra surface area so wouldn't make a good comparison to surface area limitations in cycling.

 

[MnFish1]

if the live rock is the claimed source of ammonia at 8 ppm, daily, then it smells horrible


but i bet here: lift out live rock=smells normal

wheres that ammonia coming from? daily at 8ppm supplemented is claimed and not a shred of nitrification to reduce it at all.

I bet a dollar this live rock doesn't smell like a rotten egg if lifted up and checked, the tank if true 8 ppm w smell the whole house and that w be reported.

take a water sample to a lfs.

live rock always blamed for emitting stuff was what kept api's .25 a legit reading for twenty years, it never does what people claim it does in order to shore up testing variance issues. its tougher than people allow it to be

I like to investigate how tough live rock is and we find it never causes these problems. he may have a dead eunicid worm but its unlikely, and can be smelled. we have non chemistry ways to assess ammonia claimed to be that high and sustained wo any chem testing.

He already took the water to an LFS and it tested high.

 

[asting]

Asting on a side note, Id once guessed on another big microbiology battle thread that an empty tank wasn't enough surface area to handle 1-2 ppm ammonia oxidation per day without some form of extra surface area, but then again I don't keep fish nor work with barren qt tanks much

is that right, the bare glass alone is enough surface area for a fish or two in holding? perhaps a pvc elbow as well or two, but still very low surface area compared to typical reef fare. do barren qt tanks still handle full loading? I figured they were all using filters in some way, the ones I saw locally used little hang on back filters/extra surface area so wouldn't make a good comparison to surface area limitations in cycling.

1-2ppm at what volume? A cube tank? Rectangle? The size of the tank as well as dimensions really set surface area too.

My QTs that are rockless have PVC, and aquaclear filters. I seed filter media (including a little air filter for extra oxygen in the water). That approach combined with biospira has never given me registered or readable ammonia (using alert badges). I've had fairly heavy stocking for 20L. My bottom tank has a 2" foxface, 2" sailfin, 4" PBT, and 2.5" flame angel.

Top tank just finished with a 1.5" blue hippo, mccoskers, banggai, royal gramma. Same ac and air filter.

Also did 8 small chromis in a similar setup.

 

[brandon429]

I see. the extra surface area in the filters is handling the load and not the requisite sand and rock in the tank, makes perfect sense I see what you mean.

 

[MnFish1]

I see. the extra surface area in the filters is handling the load and not the requisite sand and rock in the tank, makes perfect sense I see what you mean.

Brandon - if its not something decomposing in the rock (or the canister filter - or somewhere) what do you think is causing the problem? Error in testing? (I can see an error in testing causing a slight 2-4ppm error - but not a >>>>>>>8 ppm error), poor reagents (he said he did verify the test at an LFS), another contaminant (does Chloramine cause positive ammonia (though his chlorine was 'negative'), some inadvertent addition of ammonia (cleaners, etc), the use of another chemical / additive in the tank that interferes with the test?

Its too bad the OP doesnt update more often.... Hint hint @Vic73

 

[Water Dog]

The OP has changed out all of his sand to 40# of commercial bagged live sand. He has done a 100% water change with saltwater made with RODI. He has purchased preboxed saltwater from the LFS to perform water changes. Yet here we are at 8ppm ammonia again.

So as far as I can tell, we have two variables here. Testing error/bad test kits or the rock that has been in the tank from the start. Hence my recommendation to do a water change of a known quantity and post pictures of a retest to see if the ammonia reading reduces proportionately after that water change. With that hopefully we can rule out testing error. The only variable left that I see is the rock. Am I mistaken here?

 

[MnFish1]

The OP has changed out all of his sand to 40# of commercial bagged live sand. He has done a 100% water change with saltwater made with RODI. He has done water changes with preboxed saltwater from the LFS. Yet here we are at 8ppm ammonia again.

So as far as I can tell, we have two variables here. Testing error/bad test kits or the rock that has been in the tank from the start. Hence my recommendation to do a water change of a known quantity and post pictures of a retest to see if the ammonia reading reduces proportionately after that water change. With that hopefully we can rule out testing error. The only variable left that I see is the rock. Am I mistaken here?

Not mistaken (I guess) - but - he already did this experiment right?- when he did the 100% water change... it went to zero then .25 than 8 (if I understood him).

 

[brandon429]

I cannot answer any combination of causatives here or measures due to pics, timing of stuff etc. My adjusted test back a few pages was critical to measuring bac in the known 24 hour period/not done.

I'm reading along but its too pieced out to be any type of test with firm causatives in place/agreed upon by the quorum

 

[asting]

Brandon - if its not something decomposing in the rock (or the canister filter - or somewhere) what do you think is causing the problem? Error in testing? (I can see an error in testing causing a slight 2-4ppm error - but not a >>>>>>>8 ppm error), poor reagents (he said he did verify the test at an LFS), another contaminant (does Chloramine cause positive ammonia (though his chlorine was 'negative'), some inadvertent addition of ammonia (cleaners, etc), the use of another chemical / additive in the tank that interferes with the test?

Its too bad the OP doesnt update more often.... Hint hint @Vic73

Could some type of metal or other element kill the beneficial bacteria or prevent its formation?

 

[MnFish1]

Could some type of metal or other element kill the beneficial bacteria or prevent its formation?

Yes - but then the ammonia wouldn't go up - there is nothing in the tank to make the ammonia rise....

 

[brandon429]

in my opinion that would not occur here but metals can be antimicrobial/silver etc. I still think we can show the tank has no lingering high level ammonia and that the bac are alive but not with fifty chiefs driving lol

no mention from a nearby lady of homestink is the prime indicator so far of misreading being at play somehow it seems.

what I needed to know to frame an opinion was what his 24 hours looked like after using ammonium chloride (known source of ammonia) to drive up to about half a ppm after that rare full water change/retest next day using the adjusted API ammonia kit. Once that framing is bypassed we're literally guessing/horseshoeing from here on out.

If he would have done that retest using a known ammonia source, and then next day it was back to 8 ppm (up vs down) then we could call mind=blown but that did not happen. we never got to see the ammonia test rendered the instant the full water change was done, and that was a critical step in calibrating the reading imo. the instant 100% of that water was changed out, he was not back at 8 ppm.