Why Ignore Nitrite?

[brandon429]

That’s very neat, first digital reading I’ve seen for it. Maybe that’s the functional live time conversion rate among all post cycle reefs, the true reading of ammonia / trite is never hard zero its whatever the consistent turnover rates have evolved to be. Seneye shows that rate for nh3 to be in the thousandths ppm I have never seen a baseline for nitrite. Guess you posted the first benchmark for it.

 

[OREGONIC]

Keep it simple, if you test 0 ammonia and you have nitrates you are ready to SLOWLY start stocking. Nitrate is just the in between stage of ammonia being processed to nitrate.

 

[Variant]

So I took a bit of a risk and put in one of my gigantea carpet anemones in the ~1 month old tank from my bin of mature live rock where it lived for a few months after cipro treatment. It's basically a healthy specimen to start with. It's been day 3 and the anemone looks very good and there has been zero deflation. If the anemone continues to look healthy, I will consider moving another anemone or clam into the display tank.

Assuming that the anemone doesn't take a sudden turn for the worst... I'm surprised the tank is able to support an anemone that is considered one of the more sensitive and hard to keep species.

 

[Spare time]

Nitrite is toxic to the bacteria that produce it. If it rises to a high level, you may see ammonia begin to rise (this is according to Dr. Tim and his Macna talk on cycling).

 

[brandon429]

only because reef forums are fun places to banter: I believe I have data to render that no longer an accurate claim.

let the record reflect Im no phD but I have patterned work threads now/years worth to show nitrite cannot stall ammonia control.
the only reason to see if that claim was true or not was to discover how MACNA conventions have been running twenty years never stalling.

we wanted in forums what the people that never have to follow cycling rules were using, so they can all get a consistent start date. They disfactor nitrite.


I literally have 300 threads with positive nitrite and zero stalled cycles. the claim has been replaced by what MACNA has been doing since the 90s. nitrite control takes 25 days per cycling charts, conventions must start on time. or if we move to a new home, we must start on time with our current setup, and knowing that only nh3 control matters is the complete ability to meet critical start dates.

at no time in display tank reefing will nitrite matter. that's the most recent info I have on it. let the record reflect not many in reefing believe that claim/admitted lol. so I just keep collecting the threads until its own momentum is sufficient to reshape the rules

 

[Spare time]

only because reef forums are fun places to banter: I believe I have data to render that no longer an accurate claim.

let the record reflect Im no phD but I have patterned work threads now/years worth to show nitrite cannot stall ammonia control.
the only reason to see if that claim was true or not was to discover how MACNA conventions have been running twenty years never stalling.

we wanted in forums what the people that never have to follow cycling rules were using, so they can all get a consistent start date. They disfactor nitrite.


I literally have 300 threads with positive nitrite and zero stalled cycles. the claim has been replaced by what MACNA has been doing since the 90s. nitrite control takes 25 days per cycling charts, conventions must start on time. or if we move to a new home, we must start on time with our current setup, and knowing that only nh3 control matters is the complete ability to meet critical start dates.

at no time in display tank reefing will nitrite matter. that's the most recent info I have on it

The guy spent his life researching this bacteria so he knows what he is talking about. And in regards to those threads you read, they may not have hit the level required to have this problem. You can have nitrite and not kill the bacteria that produce it, but if it builds up very high, it can kill them. It is their waste product that they are trying to expel.

In regards to data you have, you can't really know anything from it. It follows this reasoning.

1. If nitrite is toxic to the bacteria that produce it, then it would stall ammonia removal
2. Nitrite has been seen in tanks with ammonia still being removed
Conclusion: Therefore, nitrite is not toxic to the bacteria that produce it.

While this is a valid argument, it is not sound as it is not taking into account that the level of nitrite is what causes the ammonia stall, not just the presence of nitrite. We can see the same valid setup in a similar argument below

1. If the sun was that hot, it would kill me when was outside.
2. I am alive when I walk outside
Conclusion: Therefore, the sun is not that hot.

You can see here that while this is valid, it is not sound. The fact that you can be exposed to some sun and not die does not mean that a certain level of radiation from the sun won't kill you (as it will if you move closer to the sun itself)

 

[brandon429]

I made the blanket statement that in no time in display tank reefing has a cycle stalled to invite counter links that show some stalling. I'm waiting to post my links until I see some, post ones beyond Dr T's videos. Of course if we follow the videos the cycles will work, this is water borne bacteria being shipped around in water.

on forums we know if we omit the nitrite portion, that brings into account we don't have testers to back up API's readings.

For example

try and find a fish-in cycling thread (fish plus bottle bac on day one, no wait) that didn't work.



we go from hardly ever trusting api for other readings into instantly accepting it for accurate nitrite, see the inherent problem with no benchmarking available

*realize though hardly anyone agrees on what a stall is-my definition of a stalled cycle is does not meet a predicted start date (reef convention Friday/new home etc)

by 'does not meet' I mean things die, we started too soon. They'll die in a cloudy stinky smelly non ammonia control haze. the cycle kill.

some people say a cycle is stalled if API says so. is it stalled if no animals die and they act and feed normally

I think we must define what is a stalled cycle first.

eventually Im pressing solely for nh3 control and that no common arrangements or dosing mistakes will stop a cycle. They're specifically destined to complete, on time. especially when dosed from a bottle.

 

[Cell]

When a product is being hawked along side the science, I'm a bit wary of the science.

 

[brandon429]

In the end I was benefitted in chatting with Dr T in prior posts regarding bacteria for sure learned new details from him/such as the ability for resident filter bac to simply take on orders more ammonia work, quickly, without having to double in number.

This explained nicely why in our sand rinse thread where we go instantly bare bottom, in every reef on this board if wanted, the live rocks are enough to handle the bioload, no ramp up time needed. That shatters one of the toughest staunchest rules made in reefing, that surface area can never be removed without causing deficit, and we smashed the notion in the sand rinse thread.

rule=ejected. we can remove sandbeds instantly from any reef here and track the nh3 digitally and it will remain controlled, that's been logged plenty. The old rule did not allow for that, ever.

We needed an explanation for that ability as tracked by seneye/mindstream (our best cycle umps) and Dr T did provide the best one i'd heard.

my only shaping of how people interpret that famous cycling video from him is that if we simply omit all the nitrite data, things work as the due date on the bottle says they will. and, you can't test for nitrite there is no comparative test to make API automatically right in every case for us to be thinking nitrite was overdone in the first place. its a guess test/omit it.

The #1 thing we do in our proof threads is make a desired start date, work.



To show am not trying to be controversial, here's a fine work thread. 8 ppm ammonia attained, days, rules say that stalls a cycle. But irl:

100% Water Change

So in my previous thread, I had an ammonia issue that was out of hand. As suggested, I did a 100% WC and now i’m wondering when I should start adding fish back. If anyone has suggestions, let me know!

www.reef2reef.com

so much science can be discerned from that thread. it in the top twenty breakthrough threads for 2020.

*waiting for wastewater is different than starting w a water change.

 

[brandon429]

I think a big change in 2020 cycle findings was the fact that if we remove the mixed wastewater, which indeed might have taken months to balance into a chart-compliant cycle, then the bioslicks are clearly still functional. that's the whole point of J's thread. evaluating the tank from a clean water condition vs a pumped full of ammonia condition was key in finding a start date where his whole current reef could begin.

as if it showed up in parts for a reef convention, ready. no hes

the cycle only stalls if you leave the wastewater in there. if you don't, then what's on the rocks carries every known starting bioload in reefing.



of course I don't want to be against everyone in cycling, but we want consistent explanations for why some people never stall cycles and others do. in my opinion these findings explain that mechanism.

it makes sense that if someone wants to test early on for nitrate they need to be under nitrite compliance, that's a legit reason to wait. Testing for nitrate exactly and before day 30 isn't all that helpful, its more of a long term balance and even with nitrite being factored we simply need something other than api to add data, like what was posted digitally earlier.

 

[brandon429]

It would be neat if JDA can run a test on current tank using api if avail, just for the first side by side calibration

does the duality of api not shock anyone-gewe are used to accepting the posted nitrite readings as correct but we challenge most other single point api reads.

I personally like API we just used it right there above to prove a cycle was ready. we just used it three different ways, then it all works nicely. when the instructions are lacking...

 

[SMSREEF]

If you start with some real live rock from the reef with lots of sponges, inverts and algae; this would not be an issue because it has many more strains of bacteria and different organisms that will not come in the bottle.

The life on rock from the ocean will be able to use ammonia, nitrite, nitrate as ammonia source.

If you start with a bottle of bacteria, you are stuck with the strains in the bottle and the strains that float in through the air and are able to live in saltwater.

Even a few pieces of rock from the ocean will help expand the tanks biome.

 

[brandon429]

the classic dilemma is finding already cured perfection rock for sale close by. I say cough up the dough until its avail, for the right price sources can be found. looking for coralline and all goodies in tact, that's gold. its better than curing headaches until the next yr or so

a lfs can be sold on parting with their good display stuff if you truly invest.

 

[Variant]

I love how a simple thread has devolved into debate; i love it!

As I conceptually think about what has been discussed and some of the skepticism, perhaps we need to better categorize different types of environments and outcomes.

Environmental influencers:
1. use of mature live rock
2. use of well established sand
3. dry rock
4. bare bottom
5. etc

Outcome:
1. ammonia reduction for purposes of keeping fish alive
2. ability to keep acropora and other sensitive species
3. etc.

I think trying to bucket all there primary influencers and outcomes will mean more points for disagreement. Just a thought. For example, if the outcome we're trying to benchmark against is the ability to keep fish, then perhaps nitrite does not matter unless it reaches an extreme concentration at which perhaps the nitrite itself is not the cause of fish mortality but something else that is influence by extreme concentrations of nitrite.

On the flip side, perhaps this calculus all changes when we talk about acropora. Perhaps this changes when you have extremely well established coral colonies that are used to certain conditions for 3-5 years and you make a sudden change.

 

[SMSREEF]

I love how a simple thread has devolved into debate; i love it!

As I conceptually think about what has been discussed and some of the skepticism, perhaps we need to better categorize different types of environments and outcomes.

Environmental influencers:
1. use of mature live rock
2. use of well established sand
3. dry rock
4. bare bottom
5. etc

Outcome:
1. ammonia reduction for purposes of keeping fish alive
2. ability to keep acropora and other sensitive species
3. etc.

I think trying to bucket all there primary influencers and outcomes will mean more points for disagreement. Just a thought. For example, if the outcome we're trying to benchmark against is the ability to keep fish, then perhaps nitrite does not matter unless it reaches an extreme concentration at which perhaps the nitrite itself is not the cause of fish mortality but something else that is influence by extreme concentrations of nitrite.

On the flip side, perhaps this calculus all changes when we talk about acropora. Perhaps this changes when you have extremely well established coral colonies that are used to certain conditions for 3-5 years and you make a sudden change.

I guess it depends on what you think a debate is. More of conversation from my viewpoint. There are many ways to be successful with a reef tank.

Find a tank you like and copy what the owner did and do what they think led to the success.

IMO nitrite is not gonna make or break a tank. It’s just a symptom of an immature biome. Many ways to overcome this, no one way is right.