The Puffer Forum

IMHO the tank was overstocked and too warm. Leaving food in the tank an extended period only added insult to injury and boosted the bioload even more. I am not certain that a tank of twice the size could handle that load at that temperature. The rapid stocking of the tank may have contributed to the problem also.

The tank likely was insufficiently oxygenated to support the bioload at elevated temperature.

Plants as an ammonia source? That is only a bacteria source. You have already been told Cycle contains nothing but dead bacteria. Go back & read those fishless cycling articles. You might also want to read the other articles about microbes, so you better understand the biology of the closed aquatic system.

Pufferpunk wrote:Plants as an ammonia source? That is only a bacteria source. You have already been told Cycle contains nothing but dead bacteria. Go back & read those fishless cycling articles. You might also want to read the other articles about microbes, so you better understand the biology of the closed aquatic system.

Go to any planted tank forum and there are many people who will say that you don't need to cycle a tank if a large proportion of it is planted because of the plants ability to use ammonia, nitrite and nitrate as a fertiliser. It often comes with small print such as every plant has to be growing and healthy and any leaves showing signs of decay should be removed immediately.

Personally I think that it's a lovely theory but how would you know that you will be growing perfectly healthy plants continuosly for the first few months while your bacteria is building up in the filter? I wouldn't trust a fishes life on the theory and would always use the tried and trusted fishless cycling method.

+1. I wish more people were aware of and used fishless cycling, as it is far superior in avoiding damage to fish, as well as getting a sizable colony of bacteria established. Not to mention it's really easy once you find pure ammonia.

Iliveinazoo wrote:Go to any planted tank forum and there are many people who will say that you don't need to cycle a tank if a large proportion of it is planted because of the plants ability to use ammonia, nitrite and nitrate as a fertiliser.

I kinda doubt this is the case. And this application still doesn't use plants as an "ammonia source". My guess is the OP still doesn't understand the cycling process. It's OK--we're gonna teach him, if he's interested...

He said that he was using the plant *substrate* as an ammonia source. I've never used one like this myself, but apparently some plant-specific substrates release ammonia for a while after you first get them. Maybe that's what the OP meant.

I still do not believe this to be the proper way to fishless cycle a tank. Too many variables.

Surprised nobody caught this: " My ammonia, nitrites, and nitrates were ALL 0." If that's the case then your tank wasn't cycled. You should also thaw the mussels before feeding.

FYI, healthy heavily planted tanks do not require any biofilter, period. To expand a bit for clarity: "healthy" here means actively growing with no, repeat no, nutrient or light deficiencies - which includes dissolved CO2 concentrations at appropriate levels; "heavily planted" means that when viewed from above, 80 - 100% of the substrate is fully covered by healthy plants.

The above is nothing new. But that does not mean that all hobbyists follow or fulfill the requirements there. I am uncertain why there is so much confusion on that topic. One extremely well know planted tank hobbyist even avows that biofilters are detrimental to plants. I do not understand why she feels that way, as not only is it extremely easily tested, but her style tanks are notorious for high nitrate readings. She declined to expand on where the nitrate comes from - because in tanks, significant nitrate readings in the water column are primarily the result of bacterial action on ammonia and in turn nitrite. The fact that she uses no bioflters does not mean that there are no nitrifying bacteria in her tanks. The presence of significant to high levels of nitrate in her style tanks give heavy implication that such bacteria are present.

Way back in the dark ages of my youth, tanks were filtered by small plastic boxes or charcoal and spun glass fibers, driven by short bubble tubes. The spun glass was discarded frequently, the charcoal regularly. That is not a good biofilter, as the media is discarded routinely. Nitrification bacteria were disseminated through the tank on surfaces such as glass, rock, gravel, castles and other ornaments. We did eventually learn how to do it better. These days the filterless tank do sill have nitrification bacteria which primarily function during the dark phase of the lighting cycle.

My heavily planted tanks all have functional biofilters. But those biofilters are not sufficiently active to support the bioload present in those tanks. They are only sufficient for a smaller bioload. The plants out-compete the biofilters easily, but apparently do not take up ammonia 24/7. The bacterial biofilters in such tanks only function while the plants are not actively up-taking ammonia, so have smaller colonies than you might expect from the bioload. But those biofilters are very well-inoculated and require ordinarily only a couple of doublings (~2 days+/-) to be able to process a comparable bioload without plants in the tank. So that "expert" has it backward - plants out-compete biofilters, but only while the plants are working actively. She also does not believe in routine water changes and believes in very heavy stocking and feeding, so nitrates do accumulate in the water. That differs markedly from most planted tanks, where we have to add nitrogen routinely to support the plants. Pobody's nerfect.

HTH