# super seeded cycling success?



## Baggly (Feb 2, 2012)

Just wanted to share what I did. Not sure if good or bad. 
Most people know seeding a new filter will help speed up the cycling process. I had a Fluval 406 and eheim 2217 running on the 125 cycling for about a week in the typical add ammonia fashion. I was waiting for the ac110 to show up. Ammonia was holding steady at 3-4ppm all week. 
I was apprehensive about taking too much of the media out of my 2217 on the 55 as it's not that big, and my only filter on it, but i wanted to help my cycling along too. When I was looking at the 2217 on the 55g I noticed enormous amounts of gunk on the bio media. I guess I hadn't looked too closely at it for a while. I thought, what the ****, I need to seed the big tank so I took it out to clean it. What a bonehead move I did. The last time I cleaned it I forgot to put the coarse sponge below the bio media lol. The bio media was put in charge of first stage mechanical filtration  It was filthy, as was everything in there. I got the five gallon bucket and a strainer and cleaned all the media and sponges (with tank water) of the 2217. Now I was left with this bucket full of filth. I heard squeezing an established sponge filter will help with seeding. I just dumped the whole bucket of nastiness into the 125.

The next night, bam, ammonia was zero. Nitrites through the roof. Ammonia has been zero for two days now. Nitrites very high. I've done two 20-30% water changes. Do you think there was enough beneficial bacteria in all the filter gunk to get it started that fast? Or is all the gunk throwing off my readings? I mean the gunk is now all in the filters as the water is clear. I dosed to 2ppm ammonia last night and I'll check it when I get off work. I guess if ammonia is zero I can just continue with the nitrogen cycle?


----------



## pancakeloach (Feb 4, 2008)

Dumping fresh mulm in a tank is a quick-cycle technique I've seen recommended elsewhere. Nice to see some stats on it in case I need to quick-start a tank in the future!  Definitely keep going with the nitrogen cycle.


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

Dumping fish mulm is actually not a good idea at all. There's lot of bacteria, but not the kind you need. Mulm is broken down by what's called heterotrophic bacteria into ammonia. For the most part you just dramtically increased your bioload. Ammonia drops in about a week to 10 days so it was due to anyway. Nitrifying bacteria works most efficiently when it's built up into a biofilm that's established on a hard surface or filter media. You didn't add any of that. The places where mulm is thick and heterotrophs thrive is a harsh environment for nitrifiers. Did you manage to add some? Sure, but you'd have done a lot better if you'd have added a filter pad. The 2217, if in a long established tank, would have done just fine by having one of it's filter pads swapped out for a new one. It doesn't take a lot of media to seed a new tank. I'd vacuum up all of that stuff and add a filter pad instead.


----------



## Baggly (Feb 2, 2012)

Well, like I said, I wasn't sure if it was good or bad. You learn something new everyday!
The tank bottom is clean. I vacuumed up during the water changes whatever mulm didn't make it to the filters. I have a diy cartridge filter I added to help increase flow in the tank and it collected a great deal of the stuff i dumped in. What I failed to mention in the op is that I did seed both the fluval 406 and ac110 with a handful of rings from the 2217 on the 55g. I'm certain its effectively seeded.
Thanks


----------



## Dawg2012 (May 10, 2012)

I'm still trying to learn the intricacies of this whole process. I get the main idea, but not all the details, so pardon this probably noob question.

If you seed a filter with existing media, and bacteria are capable of ramping up/down production very quickly, as they are reported to, why does any ammonia show up in the first place? E.g., why can't you seed a new filter with existing media and be good to go right away?


----------



## GTZ (Apr 21, 2010)

It's all dependent upon how much bacteria you have versus the bio load. If you add enough bacteria to handle the bioload, then no ammonia should show up. Conversely, if there isn't enough bacteria, you'll get an ammonia reading.


----------



## pancakeloach (Feb 4, 2008)

Bacteria form biofilms over every surface they can - even the surface of the water! So seeding a tank with filter media gives a new tank only a fraction of the bacterial population, in numbers and species diversity, that a mature tank carries. That's why you have to wait and feed them up before putting a big bio-load in the tank.

Perhaps some time someone (maybe me!) will to do an experiment with two containers, one seeded with just a mature filter sponge, and one seeded with the detritus of post-canister cleaning. Feed them both the same and see which one "jump-starts" quicker (and how high the nitrates get!). Simply as a hypothesis, I would think that the mulm-seeding would work faster, although nitrate buildup would be something to keep in check - the people I've seen advocate this method are starting heavily-planted aquariums this way, and if you're going to be dosing nitrate into the water column anyhow, it doesn't hurt to have a whole lot of it from mulm. I could see the organics becoming a problem, though.

... hmm, I don't know that I currently have the equipment to run a proper controlled-variable experiment at the moment; no identical filters in storage! Bet I could find some cheap internal ones on CL though. XD


----------



## Dawg2012 (May 10, 2012)

Okay. Makes sense...

So here's a question. Say I have a heavily populated and thoroughly cycled 75g. I then remove all but one fish, and leave it like that for several weeks. It's been suggested that the Bacteria will kind of... ramp down... but be able to ramp up again very quickly given a moderate to medium restocking.

So if I understand correctly, this is true because one is not disturbing the biofilm. The bacteria are still present, just kind of dormant, where as a new tank doesn't have any of that and it takes time for the few bacteria present from a seeding, dormant or not, to colonize all the surfaces of a new tank?


----------



## prov356 (Sep 20, 2006)

Dawg2012 said:


> Okay. Makes sense...
> 
> So here's a question. Say I have a heavily populated and thoroughly cycled 75g. I then remove all but one fish, and leave it like that for several weeks. It's been suggested that the Bacteria will kind of... ramp down... but be able to ramp up again very quickly given a moderate to medium restocking.
> 
> So if I understand correctly, this is true because one is not disturbing the biofilm. The bacteria are still present, just kind of dormant, where as a new tank doesn't have any of that and it takes time for the few bacteria present from a seeding, dormant or not, to colonize all the surfaces of a new tank?


That's correct. If you saw a spike, it'd be brief. I've left tanks empty for weeks before restocking. Keep in mind that there will be organics in the filter being broken down into ammonia also. It doesn't all come from the fish.


----------



## Baggly (Feb 2, 2012)

In hindsight, I should have just used a pad or some media to seed it. But looking at the big picture, the tank is cycling perfectly; ammonia gone in a day, nitrite levels responding to water changes and dropping slowly. I'm getting closer to stocking and that's all that matters :dancing:


----------

