Best Fish to Cycle With

[Tony Thompson]

Hi @Gareth elliott , interesting to read your recollections of youth,. I sort of grew up the same way, always fascinated with the biology of aquatic life. Luckily I lived by the coast so would spend endless hours scouring the tidal zone. I would often collect specimens in a bucket and try to sneak them past my mother, every time I would fail and reluctantly return them to where I collected them. That was roughly 50 years ago now ha ha. I am still fascinated with the animals and there biology, but now i get to keep them in the comfort of my home / shop where I can sit and observe them at will.

Back on point, I would like to make one thingh clear,. It's not the questions and seeking advice that I am confused by, its the comments. I just think the simplest method is usually the least prone to failure. You don't even have to keep dosing ammonia. If you dose a measured level of ammonia and that level turns to zero over a 24 hour period then the bacteria are working so you are good to make any decisions you wish from that point on.

Its just so simple.

 

[DSC reef]

This dude used live rock and two months later his ammonia is still at 8.
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/8-0-ammonia-for-almost-two-months.604736/page-10

Thank god he didn’t follow your advice and put a fish in there straight away. It would be dead.

I know right, why do people here even take me seriously. I'm glad your here to keep us all on our toes to give out proper information ;Troll;Hilarious

 

[DSC reef]

Lets report the whole story....

1. An ammonia of 8 ppm is extremly unlikely unless there is a dead thing somewhere
2. see # 1
3. This is the most ridiculous rebuttal - he used sands from muliple sources. second - he had live rock that might have had dying things.

This post alone suggest you have an agenda - and good luck with it

An agenda big time, I finally hit the ignore button

 

[Lasse]

Hi @Gareth elliott , interesting to read your recollections of youth,. I sort of grew up the same way, always fascinated with the biology of aquatic life. Luckily I lived by the coast so would spend endless hours scouring the tidal zone. I would often collect specimens in a bucket and try to sneak them past my mother, every time I would fail and reluctantly return them to where I collected them. That was roughly 50 years ago now ha ha. I am still fascinated with the animals and there biology, but now i get to keep them in the comfort of my home / shop where I can sit and observe them at will.

Back on point, I would like to make one thingh clear,. It's not the questions and seeking advice that I am confused by, its the comments. I just think the simplest method is usually the least prone to failure. You don't even have to keep dosing ammonia. If you dose a measured level of ammonia and that level turns to zero over a 24 hour period then the bacteria are working so you are good to make any decisions you wish from that point on.

Its just so simple.

In this case I do not really agree with you but this thread was not from the beginning about pros and cons of fishless cycling. But some make the thread to handle about this. However I think it is very important to stay on topic, therefore I do not want to discuss this in this thread. You are welcome to discuss that with me in my article about 15 steps. see the link below

Sincerely Lasse

 

[bluprntguy]

These are biological products; there is no way to guarantee a time frame. As a metaphors this is like saying on the best buy date on your milk is the day its going to spoil. Shopper a leaves on the counter shopper b puts in the fridge. They will not have the same results. Reminds me i have a container of phyto in my fridge i need to throw away before someone else finds it [emoji23]

That's exactly the point. If you don't know how fast they work, or if it's worked, you shouldn't put a fish in that tank.

 

[Tony Thompson]

In this case I do not really agree with you but this thread was not from the beginning about pros and cons of fishless cycling. But some make the thread to handle about this. However I think it is very important to stay on topic, therefore I do not want to discuss this in this thread. You are welcome to discuss that with me in my article about 15 steps. see the link below

Sincerely Lasse

Hi @Lasse, hope the weather is kinder to our Northern Cousins than it is here in North Yorkshire at the moment "it's raining cats and dogs" and I have to be up at 5 am to drive to the fish wholesalers to re stock my shop. I will eagerly read your thread. I have always found them very informative. I take it the part of my comments which you quoted, with which you disagree is in connection with using a pure ammonia source? Surely you don't have a disagreement with my childhood recollections

Best wishes from a very wet UK.

 

[MnFish1]

That's exactly the point. If you don't know how fast they work, or if it's worked, you shouldn't put a fish in that tank.

It is exactly the point - you're correct. How many people are here saying their 'cycle' stalled - or they added fish and now the ammonia is xxxx Or they did their cycle and there is xxxxxx problem.. Search the forums. Then come back. Curious - How many tanks have you 'cycled'. 20 - 30 - 40? You own a fish store - and you've done it hundreds of times? You show fish at MACNA - and you have set up dozens of tanks>


Cause - here's the deal - if the answer is any of the above - you wouldn't be talking the way you are (with due respect). How do you suppose that people set up tanks at shows? Do you think they wait for weeks or months? How do you suppose aquarium shops open up for business? Do you supposed the have an empty (of customers) store - and just wait for weeks of cycling to occur?

The answer to your question above (no one knows how fast they work) - is that they use the products/common sense./etc - and open their stores. And - it works. So unless you have a better explanation - I would humbly suggest that this might not be your topic. I'm sure there are numerous threads on which you could argue - judging from prior experience. BTW - before the R2R police come down on me. Frankly I'm done, He constantly is trolling threads only it seems to create an argument. Never a positive comment, never an I might be wrong. He is not the only one - but if this is supposed to be a friendly site - from my perspective its people like him that ruin it. If that makes me unfriendly - feel free to ban mne. I only try to provide information - not argue. I won't mention his partner in crime - but its not hard to figure out.

 

[JustAnt]

Use blue green chromis

 

[FrancineJ]

You have not given any reason 'not' to use fish either. Many of the products (if not all) state that you can add fish immediately. I don't understand the 'outrage' with using products as directed on their labels.

I appreciate your anecdotal evidence - I wonder then why so many others require 3 weeks, 6 weeks, even 6 months?

The thing is - its all about bacteria. Bacteria will multiply with fish waste, added ammonia, or time (as @brandon429 has stated) - as things fall into the tank. To me there is no immorality using a fish to cycle. Note - this assumes that you have some product, old sand, an old filter, etc - providing enough bacteria such that ammonia levels do not get to toxic or even elevated levels.

Is the misunderstanding that you take a 100 gallon tank put a fish in and then they are subjected to 2 ppm ammonia and die in order to cycle the tank? That is not 'fish cycling'. Thats cruelty. To me using fish in 'starting a new aquarium' has no risk t the fish - and to me no reason not to do it.

I am not saying that you can add fish immediately with those products... as I have done just that... I use Biospira to run hospital tanks and QT when I need to set one up right away...

But that was NOT the question... the question was about using fish to cycle an aquarium.... not adding fish right away after using the product so I simply explained how to cycle an aquarium without fish...
The reasons NOT to use fish to cycle an aquarium is because like I stated it’s not needed anymore... by using only fish to cycle an aquarium it subjects the fish to ammonia and nitrite poisoning for no reason.... so I choose to use Biospira and ammonia (or live rock while curing) instead of adding fish because I find it unnecessary in this day and age....

 

[JustAnt]

I used birospira, caribsea life rock, and 2 chromis when I cycled 3 yrs ago. I still have the chromis. They survived just fine.

 

[MnFish1]

I am not saying that you can add fish immediately with those products... as I have done just that... I use Biospira to run hospital tanks and QT when I need to set one up right away...

But that was NOT the question... the question was about using fish to cycle an aquarium.... not adding fish right away after using the product so I simply explained how to cycle an aquarium without fish...
The reasons NOT to use fish to cycle an aquarium is because like I stated it’s not needed anymore... by using only fish to cycle an aquarium it subjects the fish to ammonia and nitrite poisoning for no reason.... so I choose to use Biospira and ammonia (or live rock while curing) instead of adding fish because I find it unnecessary in this day and age....

Agreed - as has been said at least a couple times - the idea is not to 'cycle' a tank with a fish - IMHO - that has the potential to be cruel.

 

[Paul Sands]

Agreed - as has been said at least a couple times - the idea is not to 'cycle' a tank with a fish - IMHO - that has the potential to be cruel.

Weird. The title of this thread is “best fish to cycle an aquarium with”. Are you just ignoring that FACT?

 

[Eve]

Looking for options other than Damsels.

Wow just wow

 

[Paul Sands]

It is exactly the point - you're correct. How many people are here saying their 'cycle' stalled - or they added fish and now the ammonia is xxxx Or they did their cycle and there is xxxxxx problem.. Search the forums. Then come back. Curious - How many tanks have you 'cycled'. 20 - 30 - 40? You own a fish store - and you've done it hundreds of times? You show fish at MACNA - and you have set up dozens of tanks>


Cause - here's the deal - if the answer is any of the above - you wouldn't be talking the way you are (with due respect). How do you suppose that people set up tanks at shows? Do you think they wait for weeks or months? How do you suppose aquarium shops open up for business? Do you supposed the have an empty (of customers) store - and just wait for weeks of cycling to occur?

The answer to your question above (no one knows how fast they work) - is that they use the products/common sense./etc - and open their stores. And - it works. So unless you have a better explanation - I would humbly suggest that this might not be your topic. I'm sure there are numerous threads on which you could argue - judging from prior experience.

Nobody is claiming these things don’t work. The point that has been made on numerous occasions is that they fail sometimes - i’d Say often. You seem to want to ignore that fact. And yes, all sorts of tank cycling fails for all sorts of reasons. That’s no excuse to not do everything that we can to make sure a brand new tank can do the bare minimum that it needs to do.

It doesn’t take much effort at all to check a tank and make sure it’s processing ammonia. You should do this before you put a fish in. This is basic, responsible husbandry and that’s all that anyone except you has argued.

There are a number of people that posted the EXACT SAME THING other than me and @bluprntguy. No reason to attack and bully either of us. Frankly, the vast majority of people on R2R understand the argument about why you shouldn’t use a fish to cycle or “test” a tank. It’s a small vocal minority making your arguments.

 

[KrisReef]

Smoking flames of heaven?

I’m going to enjoy reading this thread fully some other day, and I hope to track down and read the related threads and science articles that have been mentioned in the heat of diss-cussing... great stuff,

I bet no one suggested using a dead fish for cycling? (Or did they, I can be wrong sometimes.)
The lfS has dead fish and these won’t suffer at all and neither will anybody feel like you abused it even if you add ammonia to the tank a few thousand times after you “toss-in” the dead fish. Get a really nice one, they are a great bargin at free.

Then measure or don’t and wait 68-74 days fallow (to avoid the other fish problem) and you’re good to go!

Guilt free, bacteria growing and no one judging you for torture and you get to have an amazing fish from day one that you can replace with a live one layer.

How can the next generation ever be established after a hurricane if the new arrivals just fight for space instead of working together to get a community reestablished?

Can’t work but always does.

 

[Coralreefer1]

I would just be worried about transferring a potential harmful virus or parasite into my tank with a dead fish. I could be way off point with my answer as I have never seen or heard some one do this not to say that it hasn’t been done or won’t in the future. I would just be leary by starting a new tank and possibly getting off on the wrong foot.

 

[Smarkow]

Agree with that. People can potentially torture fish by putting them in uncycled tanks if they want to be that type of person. However, I’m going to continue to think that is both cruel and unnecessary, which it is.

Since you won’t respond to evidence or data which contradicts your view, I’ll offer a rebuttal in the form of a song:

 

[Smarkow]

This dude used live rock and two months later his ammonia is still at 8.
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/8-0-ammonia-for-almost-two-months.604736/page-10

Thank god he didn’t follow your advice and put a fish in there straight away. It would be dead.

Funny enough, had he put a fish in, the bacteria on its skin surface and in its GI tract probably would have helped his cycle.

 

[Lasse]

Smoking flames of heaven?

I’m going to enjoy reading this thread fully some other day, and I hope to track down and read the related threads and science articles that have been mentioned in the heat of diss-cussing... great stuff,

I bet no one suggested using a dead fish for cycling? (Or did they, I can be wrong sometimes.)
The lfS has dead fish and these won’t suffer at all and neither will anybody feel like you abused it even if you add ammonia to the tank a few thousand times after you “toss-in” the dead fish. Get a really nice one, they are a great bargin at free.

Then measure or don’t and wait 68-74 days fallow (to avoid the other fish problem) and you’re good to go!

Guilt free, bacteria growing and no one judging you for torture and you get to have an amazing fish from day one that you can replace with a live one layer.

How can the next generation ever be established after a hurricane if the new arrivals just fight for space instead of working together to get a community reestablished?

Can’t work but always does.

I love old fashion sarcasm – will only ad “or the old defend their old territory”

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Smarkow]

Why do I still see these types of comments in the hobby?

My involvement in this thread went from “here’s a few small hardy fish you might enjoy mr OP” to “IT’S ON” when someone called my advice *cruel* and baselessly insisted there was only one way to cycle a tank. So that’s why you still see these posts :/

Surely adding a measured ammonia source instead of live animals is just so, so, easy and it works. The science is simple. Ammonia source is cheap...

I cycled my first tank this way. It was slow but worked. It’s important to note that this method will only select for a few strains of bacteria at first, the obligate ammonia oxidizers which get their carbon source from dissolved CO2. These strains alone do not accurately reflect the full microbial populations of coral reefs, so the idea that this method is natural is factually incorrect and the idea that it is lower risk remains unproven. However, the method you advocate is one common, simple, and acceptable method for starting an initial cycle. There are others. Using the method you describe, other forms of bacteria would not be introduced until fish entered the system.

Why take the risk? or more precisely why risk the animals welfare? One of the consequences of using live animals is, if it goes wrong or you make a mistake, the animal could be put through extreme stress and even die.

I, and others, have demonstrated some rough estimates that fish based cycling will produce no risk to the fish. In regards to ammonia testing, I would personally recommend it, with the caveat that we should recognize the known error margins regarding hobby-grade tests. In the event a cycle fails to produce the first time, water changes would solve the issue and give the cycle a second chance. We cite our calculations based on peer-reviewed literature.

What are the benefits of using a live animal compared to a measured ammonia source?
What is so difficult about adding ammonia that would make one even consider using a live sample?
[\QUOTE]
It’s not that the ammonia way is more difficult. Understanding of the health implications of the relationship between host (our fishies) and microbiome (the unique set of microorganisms composing a specific environment or organ, in our cases rock surface, fish intestines, and fish skin) is growing. There are implications for disease and health that need to be taken into account. The bacteria which process waste are not limited to those we select for with ammonia dosing alone. Adding in some organic carbon dosing (fish food, shrimp piece) will expand that number somewhat. Bacteria in a bottle solutions are mostly unlabeled, with the exception of biospira. Given the difficulty of mixing strains in a bottle and storing it, I would be surprised if Dr. Tim’s, microbacter, or others contained more strains than what biospira does (just the obligate ammonia and nitrite oxidizers).

The bacteria found on reef rock and on coral reef fish skin are remarkably consistent across sites and species. Bacteria within fish GI tracts are less consistent (likely related to different diets, therefore different nutrients to process). This type of consistency across species and geography, when found in nature, almost always has health implications.

My argument for possible benefit to fish based cycling is that it will produce a more natural microbiome of bacteria on the rock within our tank. A wider variety of organisms seeded into the rock from the start means that the tank might be more disease resistant or handle overall waste processing better. The required bacteria to process reef waste go wayyyy beyond ammonia oxidizers. Why should we give the ammonia oxidizers the first crack? Especially in tanks with algae, who are likely absorbing the ammonia at a much higher efficiency rate than the nitrifying bacteria...

Nothing Voodoo about it, the concept of fishless cycling is just common sense and IMO shows a proper regard for the care of the animals in your charge.

Probably should not have used the word “voodoo,” but the contempt for fish based cycling is disproportionate to the evidence. There are many ways to cycle a tank with respect for its inhabitants, and the “best” practice remains undefined.

Also comparing ammonia to carbon dioxide seems rather bizarre. Why not compare ammonia exposure of your animals to ammonia exposure in your home. That would be a little more accurate. Ammonia is considerably more toxic to both Humans and Fish.

I chose this analogy for a couple reasons. First, ammonia toxicity to fish produces respiratory distress and rapid gill movements. Hypercarbia in humans also produces respiratory distress and rapid breathing. Both are dependent on the concentration of the chemical in the exterior environment to produce their effect. Seal off a human in a confined environment and they will quickly become hypercarbic. Seal a human inside an airplane hanger and it will take a very long time for adverse effects. Place a 4” grouper in a 10 gallon tank and see effects quickly... place a 1” clown in a 30g and it will take much longer.
Secondly, much of what we presume to know about ammonia in fish is based off of its known toxicity in humans. There are several wonderful papers in the past ten years or so documenting that some tropical marine species are highly resistant to ammonia based off if differing gill structures and rhesus protein variations. This might explain why some fish are “hardy” for cycling and others are not. Ammonia is universally toxic to humans, not so to fish, depending on species.

Anyways, thank you for your thoughtful comments. You’re absolutely right that fishless cycling is simple and will likely work. And it’s important to note the different techniques - cycle with pure ammonia vs ammonia plus carbon source, etc. But that doesn’t mean fishless is the “best” way to cycle, nor does it mean fish based cycling is inherently cruel.