# Used wrong brand ammonia for fishless cycle



## AElliott (Feb 14, 2010)

Title says it all: 


Geez im embarrassed.I swear that I had read walmart brand ammonia (with a purple label) was described as ok for fishless cycling. I checked the bottle after reading a post last night and realized that there were in fact surfectants in it. I have since done a 95% water change and wiped down the inside glass with paper towels. I realize that I may have killed off some good bacteria in this process. I have dosed with the new ace brand ammonia (which is WAY more concentrated than the walmart brand) to around 5 ppm. I plan on doing another very large water change tomorrow. I am tempted to break down the filter and rinse in fresh water,however this would effectively be like hitting the reset button on this entire cycling process. Anyone else ever make this mistake??


----------



## PfunMo (Jul 30, 2009)

I've not done it myself but I have read several comments various places that state it is not a problem. Perhaps it is one of the things which we try to avoid on basic thinking which may not truly be as large a problem as assumed. I would continue and see for myself then post back what results you have. It may also be a case of it being a problem in some water and not others.


----------



## Rhinox (Sep 10, 2009)

From what I've understood, not a huge problem. no need to rinse out the filter, and probably your 95% water change was enough to make the tank safe for fish again. wiping down the glass probably didn't help either. Its a dilution thing - if you're still worried about it, do a few more big water changes, but you shouldn't have to do anything more than changing water. No need to do it all right now either. I'd wait to start doing water changes until after the nitrite spike, so you'll have the benefit of keeping the nitrites on the charts.

I know there is a user on the boards here who cycles using the walmart ammonia with surfactants because no other options are readily available, and then does a 100% water change before adding fish and doesn't have any problems.


----------



## AElliott (Feb 14, 2010)

Rhinox said:


> I'd wait to start doing water changes until after the nitrite spike, so you'll have the benefit of keeping the nitrites on the charts.


Funny thing about the water change, my nitrites have already spiked so this was the initial water change after the nitrite spike. Odd thing was that the readings for both nitrite and nitrate remained the same pre water change. In the last week my nitrite readings have slowly reduced to about .05ppm while nitrate is hanging at 5ppm, weird because I would think the nitrate would have an equal and opposite reaction to nitrite levels. Suffice is to say this cycle isnt over yet. Thanks for the calming words......


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

No offense guys, but I think making suggestions based on zero expereince that oppose general logic is a bad idea...

"Suffacants" basically means soap, and it's common knowledge that soap is bad for aquariums...

Suggestions based on heresay is a quick way to get someone in trouble, I think we should all resist it...

Consider how much ammonia w/ suffacants you've used... doing a thorough water change to remove it is a good idea, the more you've used the more thorough you will want to cleanse the system to remove it. If you've just begun, you may be able to just flush things with a few big water changes and be rid of the effects.

There is no benefit to using ammonia with suffacants, and there is considerable 'risk' involved... so to me it makes absolutely no sense to use it...

and suggesting it's acceptible to put something with soap into an aquarium is a bad suggestion...


----------



## locomotive282 (Jun 2, 2009)

I use ammonia with surficants in it. No big deal, just do a 100% water change after the tank is cycled. That is the beauty of the fishless cycle.


----------



## PfunMo (Jul 30, 2009)

While I have looked at the question of what surficants do, I will admit that I would not recommend suffacants as I'm not at all sure what they do. Sometimes we do need to do a bit of study before we recommend things. Maybe you need to read up a bit on the "common knowledge " that it is soap?


----------



## Toby_H (Apr 15, 2005)

Sorry I typoÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ed surfactants as suffacantsÃ¢â‚¬Â¦

A quick review shows that although the definition of surfactant is not Ã¢â‚¬Å"soapÃ¢â‚¬Â


----------



## fmueller (Jan 11, 2004)

After Toby-H has taken the trouble to clear up what suffacants are - namely a misspelling of the word surfactants, let me ad that surfectants, surficants are also misspellings of the same word.

Surfactant is a fancy word for soap or detergent. The definition Toby-H posted for surfactant is perfectly correct, but it's a bit hard to understand. Let me try to make things a bit clearer. We all know that oil or grease doesn't mix well with water. A surfactant is a chemical that consists of molecules that have one lipophilic (lipo=grease, philic=loving) end and one hydrophilic (hydro=water, philic=loving) end. The grease loving end attaches itself to the dirt, and the water loving end to the water. That makes it easier for the grease to be dissolved in water and washed away. Or if you want to put it fancy, the 'interfacial tension' between water and oil is reduced.

There is no good reason to put surfactants into a fish tank, and it makes no sense to dump any chemical into a fish tank without good reason. That means using ammonia without surfactants for fishless cycling is safer than using ammonia with surfactants.

That said, if you have accidentally used ammonia with surfactants like the original poster, a 95% water change should easily take care of the issue, especially considering that another big water change will be needed to remove the nitrate produced by fishless cycling right before introducing the fish. Thus you will get two big water changes which should reduce the concentration of surfactants in your system so much that no harm to your fish can reasonably be expected.

Many people wash their hands with soap before reaching into a fish tank, and I have never heard the remaining small amount of soap on their fingers to have any adverse effects.


----------



## Rhinox (Sep 10, 2009)

Just so we're clear, no one (or I wasn't, at least) was recommending using ammonia with surfactants over ammonia without surfactants.


----------



## PfunMo (Jul 30, 2009)

That was my point. If is has been done, it is not a major worry. Far worse things will happen to the tank than the wrong type of ammonia being used. With no fish present, I consider it little loss even if all the BB is killed. My recommendation was to continue on as if nothing had happened and then let others know what his results were. If he found there was a major problem doing this, I would like to know. If he found there was no problem at all, that would also be something I would like to know. While we can debate the theoretical dangers, I like to know the real results even more cause at some point the question always comes around again. Isn't the point of a forum to try to gather information so we can do better next time whether it it us or someone else?


----------

