Re: Include plants when cycling tank? [Archive]

August 17th 03, 10:18 PM

"rapdor" > wrote in message >...
> When starting up a new tank using the fishless cycle method, should I
> include aquatic plants or just the gravel and driftwood?

Why would you need fishless cycling in the first place?
Plants assimilate NH4. The first product of fish waste. The end
product of the bacterial cycle is NO3, also used by plants. So if you
add plants from the start, there is no "cycle" since you are growing
plants, bacteria on the other hand will simply adjust to whatever is
left over. Your NH4 dosing in th start will produce a large colony,
but this large colony will die back to a nominal level after wards.

As far as adding a good colony on bacteria, what the heck wait 2-3
weeks? This is foolish. Simply vacuum an established tank/(friend's,
one of yours, a LFS's, etc) and add the mulm/dirt/detritus tot he
bottom half of the gravel/a little bit into the filter and there you
are, a fully cycled tank with the bacteria and a little organic
material.

That's all that's missing from an established tank, the bacteria and
organic material. It's plain silly to wait and spend time messing with
this fishless cycling mumbo. It takes less time to do a 50% weekly
water change in th beginning to prevent any build up. A weekly 50%
water change is cheaper and certainly simpler as well.

Why folks get this fishless cycling hair is way beyond me. LFS's and
folks that kept fish long before ggest and we added the fish that day
or the next.

I've never measured any NH4 with a Lamott kit on any plant tank. Also
plant roots are loaded with bacteria and will help cycle a tank
quickly.

If you live far away from a LFS/don't have any established tanks
already/don't have any fish tank friends around etc, then you might
consider this method, but I cannot think of many other situations
where it would be useful for non planted tank. For a planted tank,
there is no use for fishless cycling at all.

Regards,
Tom Barr

~Vicki ~

August 18th 03, 05:47 AM

I have to agree with Tom here. In the 20+ years I have kept fish I have
never done a fishless cycle. It is a waist of time in my opinion.
Start out with one or two fish a week or "seed" your tank from someone
elses' established tank. Add your plants and enjoy your tank. Check
with your LFS and ask for a handful of gravel or used filter media.
They should give it to you for free or next to nothing.

Vicki

rapdor

August 18th 03, 10:44 AM

Hmmmm.

Yes, well, waiting several weeks with a brand new $1,000 tank in the lounge
room but no fish doesn't appeal to me either. In fact, I doubt my own
capacity to let it sit there, fishless, totally fishless, for that long.

I haven't kept fish for over 30 years, so thought I'd better catch up on the
latest ideas. And fishless cycling seems to be very prominent among those
new ideas. However my concern with the replies from yourself and Tom is
that you are both telling me exactly what I want to hear. And I like it.

Anyway, it's food for thought. Thanks for your replies.

LeighMo

August 18th 03, 12:04 PM

>I have to agree with Tom here. In the 20+ years I have kept fish I have
>never done a fishless cycle. It is a waist of time in my opinion.
>Start out with one or two fish a week or "seed" your tank from someone
>elses' established tank. Add your plants and enjoy your tank. Check
>with your LFS and ask for a handful of gravel or used filter media.
>They should give it to you for free or next to nothing.

I've done it both ways, and I think both methods have their place.

There are good reasons why you might want to put in all the fish at once. If
you're keeping aggressive Africans, for example, an instant crowd reduces
bloodshed. Or if you're ordering your fish online, and there's a flat delivery
charge, regardless of how many fish you order.

And if you don't have a quarantine tank, putting all the fish in at once is
probably better than treating the tank with a prophylactic ich medication for
weeks and weeks as you gradually add new fish -- especially if you're setting
up a very large tank.

Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

Jim Seidman

August 19th 03, 06:36 PM

(LeighMo) wrote in message >...
> I've done it both ways, and I think both methods have their place.
>
> There are good reasons why you might want to put in all the fish at once. If
> you're keeping aggressive Africans, for example, an instant crowd reduces
> bloodshed. Or if you're ordering your fish online, and there's a flat delivery
> charge, regardless of how many fish you order.

Even adding several fish at once, you can avoid cycling. I recently
tore down my 125-gallon community tank to replace the substrate,
temporarily putting about 20 fish in a plastic tub.

Two days later, the tank was back together. I didn't "seed" the tank
with mulm. It's running filterless, so I didn't save filter bacteria.
I didn't do much of anything except add a lot of plants before putting
the fish back.

I must admit that I was a little nervous about this, so I diligently
monitored NH3 and NO2 levels. Nothing. Neither ever reached a
detectable level. And I'm not even using CO2 injection, and only 120W
of light!

I am now convinced that it's a lot easier to take care of the ammonia
than people normally believe. I'll certainly never cycle a community
tank again.

- Jim

LeighMo

August 19th 03, 10:05 PM

>Even adding several fish at once, you can avoid cycling. I recently
>tore down my 125-gallon community tank to replace the substrate,
>temporarily putting about 20 fish in a plastic tub.
>
>Two days later, the tank was back together. I didn't "seed" the tank
>with mulm. It's running filterless, so I didn't save filter bacteria.
>I didn't do much of anything except add a lot of plants before putting
>the fish back.
>
>I must admit that I was a little nervous about this, so I diligently
>monitored NH3 and NO2 levels. Nothing. Neither ever reached a
>detectable level. And I'm not even using CO2 injection, and only 120W
>of light!
>
>I am now convinced that it's a lot easier to take care of the ammonia
>than people normally believe. I'll certainly never cycle a community
>tank again.

I'm glad it worked out for you, but I really can't recommend that everyone try
this method. I've read far too many frantic posts from newbies in a panic
because their fish are dying due to ammonia. Heck, I can still remember when I
*was* that frantic newbie.

I don't know how big your 20 fish were, but since you're running filterless, it
sounds like you don't have much bioload in your very large tank. That can be a
wonderful, low-maintenance way to keep a tank, but most of us, and especially
newbies, tend to overstock. We need our filters, and stocking such a tank
fully overnight is likely to cause nightmarish cycling problems.

Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

[email protected]

August 19th 03, 10:15 PM

Jim et al have never found any NH4 or NO2 when starting and new tank
with plants if set up properly or the method I suggested,
I'm not just tooting here, I have Lamott test kits and have used
them...........

Many many folks have found the same thing, blah blah blah on the
fishless cycling, get it out of here.
If I can do this with Discus and not have issues(no NH4/NO2 measured),
I think I can say pretty confidently it does not have a place in a
planted aquaria.

I mean don't folks do water changes frequently in the beginning also?

I'm lucky to get any nitrogen for that matter.........I'm adding it
for pete sake.

Regards,
Tom Barr

(Jim Seidman) wrote in message >...
> (LeighMo) wrote in message >...
> > I've done it both ways, and I think both methods have their place.
> >
> > There are good reasons why you might want to put in all the fish at once. If
> > you're keeping aggressive Africans, for example, an instant crowd reduces
> > bloodshed. Or if you're ordering your fish online, and there's a flat delivery
> > charge, regardless of how many fish you order.
>
> Even adding several fish at once, you can avoid cycling. I recently
> tore down my 125-gallon community tank to replace the substrate,
> temporarily putting about 20 fish in a plastic tub.
>
> Two days later, the tank was back together. I didn't "seed" the tank
> with mulm. It's running filterless, so I didn't save filter bacteria.
> I didn't do much of anything except add a lot of plants before putting
> the fish back.
>
> I must admit that I was a little nervous about this, so I diligently
> monitored NH3 and NO2 levels. Nothing. Neither ever reached a
> detectable level. And I'm not even using CO2 injection, and only 120W
> of light!
>
> I am now convinced that it's a lot easier to take care of the ammonia
> than people normally believe. I'll certainly never cycle a community
> tank again.
>
> - Jim

LeighMo

August 19th 03, 10:44 PM

>Jim et al have never found any NH4 or NO2 when starting and new tank
>with plants if set up properly or the method I suggested,
>I'm not just tooting here, I have Lamott test kits and have used
>them...........

How about for unplanted tanks? Does cycling have a place in those?

A lot of people who post here asking questions about plants don't really have
planted tanks. They have standard fishtanks that they plan to put a few live
plants in. (Often choosing plants completely unsuited for their light levels,
if not for aquariums in general.) I suspect the original poster might have
been one of those, since his main concern was not wanting to have the tank
sitting there empty for weeks and weeks. A true planted tank isn't empty, even
if there's no fish in it. :-)

Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

Josh

August 20th 03, 12:47 AM

just make it easy on yourseld and go buy the new Bio-Spira from
Marineland... lol sorry just had to bring that into play also! lol _ But
seriously if you want to cycle a tank fast with no problems that stuff is
amazing and it definatly works. I was workin at an LFS when it came out and
a Marineland rep came and talked to us about it, Marineland really has put
ALOT of research into this product (I think it was something like 20+ years)
and from the dozen or so people that i personally know that have tried it
said it worked perfectly and definatly could of stocked their tank to 75%
within the next few days, of course none of them did except the 29gallon
guy, and he has no problems at all. Now I prolly wouldnt use this stuff if
you are doing a serious planted aquarium and just go with that article from
Chuck, if you read it it really does make sense and I have decided a while
ago to go with that method and see how it goes. Ill let ya all kno how it
works - Josh (sorry vout the long post)
"LeighMo" > wrote in message
...
> >Jim et al have never found any NH4 or NO2 when starting and new tank
> >with plants if set up properly or the method I suggested,
> >I'm not just tooting here, I have Lamott test kits and have used
> >them...........
>
> How about for unplanted tanks? Does cycling have a place in those?
>
> A lot of people who post here asking questions about plants don't really
have
> planted tanks. They have standard fishtanks that they plan to put a few
live
> plants in. (Often choosing plants completely unsuited for their light
levels,
> if not for aquariums in general.) I suspect the original poster might
have
> been one of those, since his main concern was not wanting to have the tank
> sitting there empty for weeks and weeks. A true planted tank isn't empty,
even
> if there's no fish in it. :-)
>
>
>
> Leigh
>
> http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

[email protected]

August 20th 03, 04:01 AM

> How about for unplanted tanks? Does cycling have a place in those?

No.
If you are one of those folks that overstocks and over feeds and does
not do water changes, well, no method/advice is going to save those
fish. But if you follow general good healthy tank guidelines, the
fishless cycling is of no use unless you hav no friends with fish
anywhere close by, no LFS's close by, no other tanks around, no plants
etc.
Heck, you are pretty damn isolated if this is the case. There are a
few folks in this boat, but 99% are not.

Mulm adds precisely what you need, the bacteria.
This method works for SW, Brackish, FW, planted AF etc.
LFS's have been doing this for well over 50 years. I've never had an
issue yet. So unless you are really and truly isolated, there is no
need to wait, nor add NH4.

Planted or not.
Salt or Fresh.

Does Fishless cycling hurt if no plants/light is added? No, but it's
not needed. I see no need to use NH4 to cycle a tank.

No one has provided _any_ good argument to counter my opinion except
the total isolation viewpoint which is very rare.

Regards,
Tom Barr

> A lot of people who post here asking questions about plants don't really have
> planted tanks. They have standard fishtanks that they plan to put a few live
> plants in. (Often choosing plants completely unsuited for their light levels,
> if not for aquariums in general.) I suspect the original poster might have
> been one of those, since his main concern was not wanting to have the tank
> sitting there empty for weeks and weeks. A true planted tank isn't empty, even
> if there's no fish in it. :-)
>
>
>
> Leigh
>
> http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

LeighMo

August 20th 03, 11:41 AM

>No.
>If you are one of those folks that overstocks and over feeds and does
>not do water changes, well, no method/advice is going to save those
>fish. But if you follow general good healthy tank guidelines, the
>fishless cycling is of no use unless you hav no friends with fish
>anywhere close by, no LFS's close by, no other tanks around, no plants
>etc.

This hasn't been my experience, I'm afraid. Mulm speeds cycling, for sure, and
I use it, but it doesn't eliminate ammonia and nitrite spikes if you're
stocking the tank fully all at once. And as I said, there are instances where
stocking, even overstocking, all at once is necessary. African tanks are often
overstocked, all at once, to minimize aggression and to keep any one fish from
getting a "home tank advantage."

In my newbie days, I had a couple of terrible experiences with cycling -- in
established tanks, not new ones. Once when I changed the gravel in a tank, and
once when I just vacuumed the substrate in a tank with a UGF too thoroughly.
The tanks recovered relatively quickly, but I did lose some fish. Both were
unplanted; I didn't have any problems at all when I changed the gravel in my
planted tank.

Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

Racf

August 21st 03, 05:21 AM

" > wrote in message
om...
> > >No.
> > >If you are one of those folks that overstocks and over feeds and
does
> > >not do water changes, well, no method/advice is going to save those
> > >fish. But if you follow general good healthy tank guidelines, the
> > >fishless cycling is of no use unless you hav no friends with fish
> > >anywhere close by, no LFS's close by, no other tanks around, no
plants
> > >etc.
> >
> > This hasn't been my experience, I'm afraid. Mulm speeds cycling,
for sure, and
> > I use it, but it doesn't eliminate ammonia and nitrite spikes if
you're
> > stocking the tank fully all at once. And as I said, there are
instances where
> > stocking, even overstocking, all at once is necessary. African
tanks are often
> > overstocked, all at once, to minimize aggression and to keep any one
fish from
> > getting a "home tank advantage."
>
> You have not convinced me there is a place for it yet, the isolated
> aquarist is the best hope I've seen thus far.
>
> Having bred AF cichlids from both lakes for many years(15) before
> coming to fully planted tanks and also by stating not overstocking
> from the start I still disagree.
>
> Small juvenile fish should be purchased if adding all the fish at once
> is the goal to prevent home town advantage. Adults have different
> behaviors than sub adult fish.
>
> I did the same thing back then as I do now. I never had issues with
> water quality. I simply did water changes like I do today.
> Small juvenile fish cost less, often are 1 to 1.5" long and perfect
> for starting a tank with or for breeding later on. When you add
> adults, well you are asking for it and fish behavior is unique to each
> fish, it's difficult to say what will happen even with a broad
> generalization. Often you have to have other tanks waiting in case of
> problems with territorialism as rule o have dead/battered fish/LFS
> donations etc.
>
> Sure you can come up with some weird situation to make an exception
> for fishless cycling but hell, 99.5% of the cases are still where I've
> stated. There's no need unless you plan to over stock all at once
> which is bad practice and something I'd not advise anyone to do.
>
> And here's a lynch pin even if you don't know a hoot about AF fish.
>
> If you know you are going to overstock/fully stock etc in
> advance(you'd __have to know this__ 3 weeks in advance to use this
> method), why not run your filter on another tank a few weeks first,
> then slap it on the new tank when you add the fish?
> Takes the same time, far less hassle and no left over NO3 requiring a
> series of water changes to lower..........also I/we know how
> inaccurate the NO3 test kits are. Amano uses this method. So do the
> LFS's.
>
> Regards,
> Tom Barr

I recall a short few years ago, fishless cycling was all the popular
rage. Anyone suggesting cycling with fish was usually flamed until
medium done. Here in 2003 I still read about fishless cycling, but its
more rare... It seems I read a lot more about adding plants these days
as a cycle solution. To me its interesting advice as I really do not
really see how that's going to cycle anything... Using someone else's
used media, fish poop, plants, etc.... will probably speed up the
process of adding in all sorts of things that are usually not
wanted.....like parasites, snails, pathogens, etc.... I guess you get a
lot of bad things also just adding in the desired fish.

I still wonder the best method for getting a new tank cycled as any
method has good and bad points, including doing nothing. Lucky me for
having more than one tank already. I wonder what will be popular in
2006..?

PS. I loved the reference to Amano and what he would do. I recently
read somewhere he uses Activated Carbon for the first week or so for
Ammonia removal.....which I thought was amazing, too...

Jim Seidman

August 21st 03, 09:04 PM

"Racf" > wrote in message et>...
> ...It seems I read a lot more about adding plants these days
> as a cycle solution. To me its interesting advice as I really do not
> really see how that's going to cycle anything...

You are correct, adding plants does not "cycle" anything. Rather, it
prevents the cycle.

The cycle occurs because NH4 builds up faster than bacteria reproduce
to process it. As those bacteria grow, NO2 builds up faster than
bacteria reproduce.

But plants consume NH4. In fact, they prefer NH4 to NO3. (Studies have
shown that many plants don't even produce the enzyme "nitrate
reductase" in the presence of NH4, meaning that they won't process NO3
when there's NH4 to be had.) So if you add enough plants, you don't
need that bacterial population.

So is my tank cycled? No. I'm quite sure that if I pulled out all my
plants today, I'd have terrible NH4 and NO2 spikes before things
settled down.

Now, is my tank stable? Yes. It was stable from the day I set it up,
insofar as NH4 and NO2 were, and still are, undetectable.

For me, having a stable tank is a lot more important than having a
cycled tank. :-)

Jim Seidman

August 21st 03, 09:26 PM

(LeighMo) wrote in message >...
> I'm glad it worked out for you, but I really can't recommend that everyone try
> this method. I've read far too many frantic posts from newbies in a panic
> because their fish are dying due to ammonia. Heck, I can still remember when
> I *was* that frantic newbie.

I was just discussing this with my wife last night. We both agreed
that this would be a *better* approach for newbies. There'd have to be
some careful definition of what "heavily planted" meant. And sure,
they should start off with a smaller bioload for safety's sake. But
the planted tank approach was much less stressful (for both me and the
fish!) than doing a traditional cycle with fish. (And really, how many
newbies will leave their tank empty for 6 weeks while doing a fishless
cycle?)

> I don't know how big your 20 fish were, but since you're running filterless,
> it sounds like you don't have much bioload in your very large tank. That can
> be a wonderful, low-maintenance way to keep a tank, but most of us, and
> especially newbies, tend to overstock. We need our filters, and stocking
> such a tank fully overnight is likely to cause nightmarish cycling problems.

My tank isn't overstocked, but I wouldn't say it's a light load
either. They're mostly moderately-sized fish (dwarf gouramis, rosey
barbs, corys, clown loaches, etc.).

However, I'm quite confident that I could add more without a problem.
Why? Because I can't maintain my nitrate levels. When I set up the
tank, my NO3 was about 1.5 ppm. (This is the level in my tap water.)
It took less than a week for my NO3 to hit zero.

In other words, the plants are wanting to consume significantly more
nitrogen than I'm giving them in the fish food. I'm trying to get to a
chemical-free regimen, so I've been increasing the fish load to try to
get to a point where I don't have to add KNO3 like Tom does.

When you say "We need our filters," I have to disagree. It's only in
the past few decades that filters became common. The original
advertisements for the UGF called it "The Miracle Filter" and carried
the tag line, "Never change your water again!" While the hyperbole has
died down since then, I still think filters are overrated.

Think about it this way: would you rather have a filter that helps
process toxins, or plants that actually remove toxins from the water?

LeighMo

August 21st 03, 10:20 PM

>I was just discussing this with my wife last night. We both agreed
>that this would be a *better* approach for newbies.

Only if they were disciplined enough to stick to the plan, which many of them
aren't. Heck, many of us experienced fishkeepers aren't.

>However, I'm quite confident that I could add more without a problem.
>Why? Because I can't maintain my nitrate levels. When I set up the
>tank, my NO3 was about 1.5 ppm. (This is the level in my tap water.)
>It took less than a week for my NO3 to hit zero.

Nitrate, IME, isn't the problem in a filterless tank. The problem is oxygen.
It may not be an issue in a planted tank during the day, but it can be at
night.
And it can be a total disaster in an unplanted tank that's overstocked.

>When you say "We need our filters," I have to disagree. It's only in
>the past few decades that filters became common.

True, but now the whole trade is set up for them. The fish offered, the advice
given, the photos of tanks, etc., are all geared for a filtered tank. The
person who posted the question that started this thread wanted a tank full of
fish, right away, and I'm afraid he's typical. The low bio-load of
Victorian-era filterless tanks would look barren to him.

>Think about it this way: would you rather have a filter that helps
>process toxins, or plants that actually remove toxins from the water?

I want both. :-)

This may be heresy on this newsgroup, but I actually wouldn't recommend a
planted tank for a total beginner. It adds expense and an extra learning curve
that most people setting up their first tanks don't need. As it is, the vast
majority of people who start keeping tropical fish give up. I'm all for
anything that adds to a newbie's chance of success, including fishless cycling
and powered filters.

Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

LeighMo

August 21st 03, 10:33 PM

>If you know you are going to overstock/fully stock etc in
>advance(you'd __have to know this__ 3 weeks in advance to use this
>method), why not run your filter on another tank a few weeks first,
>then slap it on the new tank when you add the fish?

That works if you're setting a small tank. If you're setting up a large one,
as this guy was, there will still be an ammonia spike.

I've had success using a combination of seeding with mulm from an established
tank and fishless cycling. Do the fishless cycle *and* add mulm or filter
material from an established tank. The tank can be fully cycled and ready for
a full bioload in as little as three days.

>Takes the same time, far less hassle and no left over NO3 requiring a
>series of water changes to lower..........also I/we know how
>inaccurate the NO3 test kits are. Amano uses this method. So do the
>LFS's.

I do it, but only from my own tanks. I don't have any local friends whose
tanks I'd trust. And the LFSs are even worse. If I didn't have an established
tank, I'd definitely stick with fishless cycling.

Leigh

http://www.fortunecity.com/lavender/halloween/881/

rapdor

August 22nd 03, 11:11 AM

The
> person who posted the question that started this thread wanted a tank full
of
> fish, right away, and I'm afraid he's typical.

no, thats not true--im the original poster i didnt mention wanting a
tank full of fish right away i just asked if plants should be included
when cycling a new tank

but having watched the thread, i guess what i will do is use some gravel
from my mates tank, cut the sponge in his filter in half and put it in my
tank, add some of that ager product, add a limited number of plants and
check the ph a few days later if all is well i will add a few fish and
see how we go

how does that sound as a plan?

Jim Seidman

August 22nd 03, 06:18 PM

(LeighMo) wrote in message >...
> >I was just discussing this with my wife last night. We both agreed
> >that this would be a *better* approach for newbies.
>
> Only if they were disciplined enough to stick to the plan, which many of them
> aren't. Heck, many of us experienced fishkeepers aren't.

We could probably argue for a long time over whether abandoning the
plan is worse in a plantless filtered tank or a heavily-planted
filterless tank. Personally, I think that a planted tank would be more
resistant to mistakes.

> Nitrate, IME, isn't the problem in a filterless tank. The problem is oxygen.
> It may not be an issue in a planted tank during the day, but it can be at
> night.
> And it can be a total disaster in an unplanted tank that's overstocked.

When I said my tank was "filterless" I didn't mean to imply "without
circulation." I do use a powerhead for water movement. I have however
heard of several people who run without circulation in heavily planted
tanks without a problem.

I'm curious, though: have you heard of many oxygen problems (for
newbies or otherwise)? Usually when I hear of fish gasping at the
surface, it's because their gills are inflamed from ammonia poisoning,
not because oxygen levels are too low.

> This may be heresy on this newsgroup, but I actually wouldn't recommend a
> planted tank for a total beginner. It adds expense and an extra learning curve
> that most people setting up their first tanks don't need. As it is, the vast
> majority of people who start keeping tropical fish give up. I'm all for
> anything that adds to a newbie's chance of success, including fishless cycling
> and powered filters.

While it would require retraining fish store employees, I'm not sure
that it adds expense or learning curve. The total value of equipment
on my 125 gallon actually went down when I redid it, as did the
maintenance required. A low-tech tank really doesn't require that much
investment.

A lot of beginners don't even learn about the nitrogen cycle, or that
even after the cycle you need to be careful to add fish gradually.
Plants, on the other hand, can adapt quickly to changing levels of
ammonia. The planted tank will also be much more forgiving of bad
water change schedules. Failing to change the water in a new unplanted
tank can mean death, while failing to change the water in a new
heavily planted tank just means that it looks overgrown. (Similar
arguments can be made for filter maintenance.)

It's a moot point, since stores won't give up their lucrative filter
sales. But if I were advising a newcomer to the hobby, I'd point them
towards a heavily planted tank, since I truly belive that minimizes
their odds of dead fish.

- Jim

Racf

August 23rd 03, 11:42 AM

I have nothing against doing water changes, as I do plenty with fully
cycled and planted tanks. Based upon my experience: To use only the act
of a WC to keep ammonia and nitrite levels at non-deadly levels in a
un-cycled, non-planted,and moderately stocked tank would be around 100%
per day....not all at once but cumulative. I assume the pH is above 6.0
and there is not an unusual amount of Chloride in the water. I cannot
understand how a once per week WC of unknown size would be
adequate...even if a blob of "mulm" were added.

I would gladly trade the mulm for a pint of Amquel, some aquarium salt,
and a Seachem Ammonia Alert. I would also prefer to trade the mulm for
a few bunches of Water Sprite or Java Moss or Wysteria or just about any
fast growing low light plant that is free of snails and parasites...

I am definately down with WCs, I just believe there is some practical
limit where they can be a lone success in the dilution of the poisonous
Ammonia and Nitrite. I do not disagree entirely with your remarks or
those of Kirstin or with any one elses, really. There are many ways and
styles to not kill fish.

Danae

August 23rd 03, 06:02 PM

"LeighMo" > wrote in message
...

> This hasn't been my experience, I'm afraid. Mulm speeds cycling, for
sure, and
> I use it, but it doesn't eliminate ammonia and nitrite spikes if you're
> stocking the tank fully all at once. And as I said, there are instances
where
> stocking, even overstocking, all at once is necessary. African tanks are
often
> overstocked, all at once, to minimize aggression and to keep any one fish
from
> getting a "home tank advantage."

Thank you all for this very interesting discussion!

I am actually in the process of setting up my 45 long tank, and this issue
is extremely relevant to me. It's going to be a moderately (20 - 40%)
planted tank stocked with Mbuna cichlids (yes,I'm aware that they are
herbivores!). I plan on fully (over?)stocking my tank at once to avoid
aggression, which means I will be adding 4-5 yellow labs, 6-8
pseudotropheous demasonis, and one bristlenose pl*co all at once. Needless
to say, cycling is an issue.

Right now I'm leaning towards fishless cycling, as the last thing I want to
do is damage or kill all of my new fish to an ammonia or nitrite spike.
After reading some algae horror stories from those who have tried to
fishless cycle with plants, I'm thinking of doing the fishless cycle sans
plants in a dark tank. Once the cycle is complete, then I'll add the
plants, and the next day the fish. The only tank that I trust is safe
enough to use filter media from is my own, but it's a lightly stocked
heavily planted 10 gal, so I'm not sure how beneficial it will be as a seed.
Hopefully it helps somewhat.

Does this sound like a reasonable plan? If I was going with a peaceful
community tank, I would most definitely use Chuck's method of cycling a
planted tank and add fish slowly. But I just can't see it working with
demasonis, which I understand can be mean little buggers. Especially since
I'm not going with a heavily planted tank, as it's primarily rock work.

Kristen

August 23rd 03, 09:25 PM

Aside from the whole debate going on, I have one observation to make:
if there's anything I learned specifically from spending 8-10 hours a
day for years on these groups helping newbies with their problems is
that there is no one "best" way to do something. Every person and
every situation is different.

Some people just aren't comfortable with cycling a tank with fish in
it, period: no matter the water changes, no matter the test kits, no
matter the plants. And if they want to be relieved that they finally
heard of a way to cycle a tank without using fish, then I say let them
be happy and use the method; don't rain on their parade just because
you don't like the method. All we can do as a group is present them
with the sum of our knowledge on how to prevent problems in various
ways and let them make the decision about what they're going to do.

By the by...

>But the water change, so simple and so underated....

Yes, they are, but they're not a complete cure-all. And I have also
heard on several occasions, and I'm not exaggerating here,
well-respected fish store employees telling newbs buying their first
tank that they should cycle with several fish (in a 10 gal this is the
final stocking level) and _not do any water changes for two months!_
They tell them it will slow down or even stop the cycling process by
reducing ammonia levels and in the same breath that they should expect
many of the fish to die. And because the poor saps don't understand
how these bacteria work, they believe it and probably go do it. What
a terrible introduction to the hobby! And talk about something to
teach them bad habits... :( I'm just reminding you what we're up
against here.

Unfortunately, if these guys aren't lucky enough to look on the net
and find some good info about testing and changes before applying the
bad advice, then there's a good chance we've lost them to the hobby.
But maybe at some point before or after, when they've learned the
horrors of cycling with fish the wrong way and don't like the idea of
trying the fish method again, they'll see a mention of fishless
cycling and that will interest them in trying again more than another
round of their LFS's previously-advised toxic waste dump method will.
And with fishless cycling, there are so many variations on how you can
do it, they certainly can employ water testing and changing as part of
the method if they wish. Sure, it doesn't cure every potential
problem or bad habit, but only time and experience will do that.

I was so lucky when I seriously got started over 10 years ago that
these groups existed. I'd had lots of problems with ammonia in
goldfish tanks and was about to give up, but when I decided to set up
my first tropical tank, I came to Usenet to read how to do it (the web
didn't exist yet.) I learned about the nitrogen cycle and used
fishless cycling to start the tank - seeded the UGF, dumped in the
ammonia, turned up the heat, and tested every day to watch the cycle
happen. It cycled in a couple weeks with almost no effort from me,
and after a small water change, I added about half the stock and some
plants in one day without having to stress anybody out with measurable
ammonia exposure for even one minute. After that first effort, I've
never had to "cycle" a tank since because of the vast array of
techniques I read about and have employed. If only every person could
start out like that... :/

Oh, yeah, something about plants to stay on topic...anubii!

See ya,

Kristen

Victor M. Martinez

August 23rd 03, 09:59 PM

Danae > wrote:
>Does this sound like a reasonable plan? If I was going with a peaceful

I think your plan is great, and I for one appreciate your concern for the
well-being of your fish.

--
Victor M. Martinez

http://www.che.utexas.edu/~martiv

~Vicki ~

August 23rd 03, 10:27 PM

How about for unplanted tanks? Does cycling have a place in those?
A lot of people who post here asking questions about plants don't really
have planted tanks. They have standard fishtanks that they plan to put a
few live plants in. (Often choosing plants completely unsuited for their
light levels, if not for aquariums in general.) =A0 I suspect the
original poster might have been one of those, since his main concern was
not wanting to have the tank sitting there empty for weeks and weeks. A
true planted tank isn't empty, even if there's no fish in it. :-)
Leigh
>
>
>
I think people make the cycle more difficult than it needs to be
regardless of planted or non planted tanks. I have never pre cycled a
tank just started out with a small fish load and some gravel to seed the
tank. Even without the gravel I have never had any trouble with the
process if I don't overload the tank to start out with. As far as
plants go I would have to think that some of the bacteria is clinging to
them when they are added to the tank so again the tank is seeded. This
is just my opinion tho.

Vicki

On a personal note I think a planted tank is healthier for the fish. I
have kept fish in a non planted tank for a long time till this past
winter when I started adding live plants. Now I believe that there is
more of a balance and my plants are growing like weeds, also I have
noticed fish spawning that never did before.

~Vicki ~

August 23rd 03, 10:50 PM

no, thats not true--im the original poster =A0 =A0 i didnt mention
wanting a tank full of fish right away =A0 =A0 i just asked if plants
should be included when cycling a new tank
but having watched the thread, i guess what i will do is use some gravel
from my mates tank, cut the sponge in his filter in half and put it in
my tank, add some of that ager product, add a limited number of plants
and check the ph a few days later =A0 =A0 if all is well i will add a
few fish and see how we go
how does that sound as a plan?
>
>
>
Better yet just swap out his sponge for your new one. That way you get
all his nice happy bacteria, he gets a new sponge filter and both of
y'all are happy. Add a few fish to feed the bacteria, some low/moderate
light plants like amazon swords and enjoy your tank. Just remember to
feed the plants and provide them with a nice full spectrum light to
grow. Leave the expensive lighting CO2 stuff alone till you are ready
for that part of the hobby. Personally I don't use that stuff and all
is well. Also keep in mind that many fish don't like extreme lighting
anyways.

Vicki

rapdor

August 24th 03, 01:06 AM

~Vicki ~

August 24th 03, 06:54 AM

Better yet just swap out his sponge for your new one. That way you get
all his nice happy bacteria, he gets a new sponge filter and both of
y'all are happy. Add a few fish to feed the bacteria, some low/moderate
light plants like amazon swords and enjoy your tank. Just remember to
feed the plants and provide them with a nice full spectrum light to
grow. Leave the expensive lighting CO2 stuff alone till you are ready
for that part of the hobby. Personally I don't use that stuff and all is
well. Also keep in mind that many fish don't like extreme lighting
anyways.

Vicki

OK, thats an improvement on my plan Vicki, thanks.

On the subject of lights and plants: the tank is 75 gallon (US), 4' long
and has space for 3 tubes. =A0 =A0 I plan to start off with a modest
number of plants, but hope to develop this into a heavily planted tank
as time goes by (I work in a tree nursery, so love plants and the
challenge of aquatic plants seems like a potential consuming hobby). Any
recommendations on the combination of tubes I should buy?
>
>
>
You sound a lot like me. My husband has a full service garden center
and after messing with ponds for a while I decided to do the planted
aquarium thing. I have a 55g myself with the factory hood on it. I
only have low/moderate light plants and use two 15w 10,000K deep reef
lights. They are for coral and plant use and get the light down good
for my deep tank. If you plan on only growing similar plants than that
is all you will need. Just make sure that you read the label on the
tubes first and make sure that they are full spectrum and not acnic
(sp?) bulbs. You can even try a 50/50 bulb on the third spot for a
bulb. It will not do much for the plants but will really bring out the
colour of your fish.

If you plan on growing higher level lighting plants than there are folks
in here that know more about that.

Vicki