Ammonia... Whats "dangerous" in new tank?

[striker3636]

I just added all my live rock yesterday to my new 150 gal. setup... I did an ammonia check today and it seems to be around 1.2 to 1.3 on my Salifert test...
There is nothing in the tank except sand, water and rock, but my rock seems to have lots of little bristle worms and what i think are sponges and corals, etc...
I don't really want to be changing water every day if I can avoid it, does anyone know at what levels the ammonia will be toxic to the little worms and critters? Can I let it get close to a certain reading and then do the change?

[Tarasco1]

I wouldn't worry about it too much, a bunch of that stuff will survive through the cycling process (although not all of it will). There are stories of finding various things in the live rock that survive the cycling process, from macroalgaes to crabs. I would avoid the water change.

[MalHavoc]

I wouldn't avoid the water change. Sure, a lot of stuff may live through the ammonia spike, but a lot of stuff may not. You're the one who paid good money for the rock - try to keep as much stuff as you can alive.

[Tarasco1]

OK, I guess that I'm wrong, but I thought that the Ammonia was necessary for the cycle, and doing manual removal would slow it down. Maybe I'm just confused...

[reefworm]

Agreed. Don't change the water as all you'll do is extend the cycle time. It may take a bit of time as is since you don't have much in there to produce waste. Try throwing in a piece of shrimp to jump start things a little. Instant waste product and you're not endangering anyone. As Tarasco said, you'll lose a little bit of life inevitably. Glad you didn't put fish in to start the cycle. Kind of rough on the poor things - even damsels!:D [the fish from h...]

regards,
-rw

[MalHavoc]

Yeah, but the point is, you'll still have ammonia to start the cycle with water changes. Doing water changes doesn't mean that it won't be produced. Stuff that is dying on the rock will continue to die, and there's no amount of water changes in the world that can fix that. The idea is to get your tank to a "steady state" where waste products being produced in the tank are immediately broken down by bacteria. If you have a huge ammonia spike, sure, you get lots of bacteria to break them down. But what happens once the cycle is over and those bacteria no longer have food (since ammonia production is now low)? They die off to a population much lower, one that is consistent with the amount of food. It's the standard "S-curve" with respect to predators and prey that they teach in first year biology. If there's no food, there won't be anything to eat that food. And you're in exactly the same place you would have been had you done water changes during the cycle. Every time you add anything to your tank, you're going to cause a cycle anyway. Your first one doesn't need to be harsh.

Craig Bingman recommends dumping in a whole bottle of phytoplankton, actually. The phyto eats ammonia, and you get this huge surge in phyto population, which in turn feeds all of the critters that came on the rock, increasing their own populations. The bacteria for cycling the tank will take care of itself once you start adding things like simple invertibrates and a few hardy corals well after your water "tests fine". I say "tests fine" because water often "tests fine" when there is still a ton of stuff in it that can kill corals and fish and other invertibrates. I strongly recommend that everyone wondering what the difference is between a "mature" tank and a "cycled" tank read the following link:

http://archive.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1978331#post1978331

[Tarasco1]

Thanks MalHavoc, lots of good information in that link. What you said certainly makes sense. Glad to know that I'm still constantly learning, even about the stuff that I think I already know.

[Diehl]

Originally posted by MalHavoc
Yeah, but the point is, you'll still have ammonia to start the cycle with water changes. Doing water changes doesn't mean that it won't be produced. Stuff that is dying on the rock will continue to die, and there's no amount of water changes in the world that can fix that. The idea is to get your tank to a "steady state" where waste products being produced in the tank are immediately broken down by bacteria. If you have a huge ammonia spike, sure, you get lots of bacteria to break them down. But what happens once the cycle is over and those bacteria no longer have food (since ammonia production is now low)? They die off to a population much lower, one that is consistent with the amount of food. It's the standard "S-curve" with respect to predators and prey that they teach in first year biology. If there's no food, there won't be anything to eat that food. And you're in exactly the same place you would have been had you done water changes during the cycle. Every time you add anything to your tank, you're going to cause a cycle anyway. Your first one doesn't need to be harsh.




Craig Bingman recommends dumping in a whole bottle of phytoplankton, actually. The phyto eats ammonia, and you get this huge surge in phyto population, which in turn feeds all of the critters that came on the rock, increasing their own populations. The bacteria for cycling the tank will take care of itself once you start adding things like simple invertibrates and a few hardy corals well after your water "tests fine". I say "tests fine" because water often "tests fine" when there is still a ton of stuff in it that can kill corals and fish and other invertibrates. I strongly recommend that everyone wondering what the difference is between a "mature" tank and a "cycled" tank read the following link:

http://archive.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=1978331#post1978331 :D



I couldn't of said it better myself:D