Cycling question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Adam_J
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users None
Just for the record the fish will not feel any stress because all the ammonia being generated will be consumed by the macro algae and all the co2 generated will be also consumed by the macro algae. And fish food plus oxygen will be returned to the system. So the fish will find a low co2 high oxygen and no ammonia environment.
I dont think macros absorbed ammonia.They absorb nitrates for molecular nitrogen.
 
Just to supply a little more info to the discussion....*

Take the example of a single fish (say it's one you actually like) cycling a 55 gallon tank.
  • Feed him (and assume he eats) like is was going out of style - 300mg of flake food per day.
  • If the food is about 50% protein and about 16% of that is nitrogen (N), and the fish uses 50%, you'd be supplying the tank with about 12mg of excess nitrogen to make NH3 (the toxic ammonia).
  • 12 mg per 55 gallons is a concentration of about 0.054 mg/L (ppm).
  • 0.5 mg/L (ten times that amount) is the smallest amount detectable by a Salifert ammonia test kit.
Considering that 300mg is a huge amount of food for a single fish (you'd feed much less) AND considering that you've seeded the tank with chaeto macro algae and its endemic nitrifying bacteria (and other life), it seems like it would be impossible for a toxic level of ammonia to build up in this scenario. (This is why it works for people.)

Cycling a relatively big tank with a relatively small fish isn't a bad way to go.

As I said originally, the key is simply to stock up slowly and not overwhelm the bacteria. Newbs make the mistake of stocking too much too fast (and overfeeding them) all the time....but not usually after thinking it through like this! :)

* Cribbed these numbers from another discussion and applied them to our conversation...see it here for more details.
 
Last edited:
All that said..what's the point? Say it does work, how are you better off than if you simply fishless cycled and don't have to worry about returning the fish, and taking care of it. I can't imagine this would cycle the tank faster, in fact it'd probably take much longer than if you seeded the tank with a few rocks or rubble. It'd also cost the same amount as going out and buying a ball of chaeto + a fish. If you can get your hands on chaeto easily, I assume you could get a few pieces of LR.
 
I just did this. I got 3 dead shrimp, put them in a bag, and left them for a month. When I took the bag out the shrimp where mostly gone.

I heard stories that if the rocks were once live, you would be fine, but I got a piece from a local reefers sump just in case.

I am sure there are people on your area that have tanks. If you can't find anyone, I'll send you a rock.

You could also use dr tims one and only. People I know started with base rock and great success.

The best advice I could give is to not get in a rush. You will be sorry if you do. I have setup multiple tanks and when I cut corners I was screwed.
 
All that said..what's the point? Say it does work, how are you better off than if you simply fishless cycled and don't have to worry about returning the fish, and taking care of it. I can't imagine this would cycle the tank faster, in fact it'd probably take much longer than if you seeded the tank with a few rocks or rubble. It'd also cost the same amount as going out and buying a ball of chaeto + a fish. If you can get your hands on chaeto easily, I assume you could get a few pieces of LR.
Actually there wouldn't be much difference at all under the assumption the LR is covered with algae. A ball of chaeto makes sure you have the required plant life.
So it takes longer (which I doubt but for the sake of discussion) to establish the aerobic bacteria? So what? As long there is not ammonia/nitrite spike who cares?
The key is no spikes, removing the co2 and returning fish food and oxygen.
my .02
 
I do stand corrected. I found a good article which describes what your saying as well:

Ammonia and the Reef Aquarium by Randy Holmes-Farley - Reefkeeping.com

Still with that said, I still don't think molly's or any fish are a good method for cycling the tank. For one thing you would have to be sure that you provide enough macro to consume all ammonia, and in this case you would only be slowing down the production of the nitrifying bacteria. You would be slowing this down as the ammonia would be consumed from other sources.

Also buying an unwanted fish to possibly stress out only as an ammonia source seems like a round about way to get ammonia....why not just dose it directly?
for experienced saltwater people the mollies aren't necessary. But of newbies who need "practice" at acclimating saltwater fish and don't want to lose a $40 fish it makes total sense.
In my experience I have found the aerobic bacteria is not slowed down but then who actually cares? After all the ammonia/nitrite spikes are eliminated anyway. That could take forever and the fish would still not be stressed in any way. But In my experience after 4-6 weeks the nitrates do drop down indicating the aerobic bacteria have built up.
my .02
 
I don't get how there wouldn't be much of a difference.. Under the assumption the chaeto doesn't have the bacteria required to cycle a tank (of a sizable amount) versus live rock which contains tons of bacteria (depending where you get it from). And if, for the sake of the conversation, it does take longer, why not go the faster way. That is, since you end up with at least as good of results.
 
I'm going to assume the OP got dry rock 1) because it's cheaper but also because he wanted to keep out potential pests from LR. If that's the case then I would say just be patient and go the fish less route. I like the idea of cycling with chaeto but even chaeto can introduce pests.
 
I do have dry rock and was hoping to keep it that was , don't really like the chaeto idea
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%

New Posts

Back
Top