is this normal???

[ODShaun]

i have a 50 gal with live sand and LR. sump/refugium w LR and cheato, with an in tank skimmer. My tanks been cycling for a little bit over two weeks, last week i did my first water change (50%) with scripts water.. Today I tested my water and the ammonia is just about 0 but my nitrite and nitrate are high? Now is this normal for a tank to be two weeks old with these type of readings? What should i do next??? thanks

[mbbuna]

don't do any water changes yet. just keep testing and when you get 0 for ammonia and nitrites then the tank is cycled. then you can start doing water changes and add a few snails, in another week or two after this add a small fish

[raggie]

agreed don't do any changes at all just let it run threw the more you let it site with circulation the better the cycle will be,, some people get stuck at the nitrite an nitro parts of the cycle for well over 3 months

[JMCAquarium]

doing water changes like that large one you did just help start the process over agian so your hurting yourself

[WinnipegDragon]

Why would a water change restart the cycle? All he did was dilute the amount of Nitrite/trate. It's not going to cause di-off all over again or anything. A 100% change would be bad, but 50% wouldn't do anything serious.

I think water changes during the cycle are fine. There have been a ton of posts, people have done it both ways, and it's never caused a problem.

[mbbuna]

the idea of not doing water changes while cycling is to allow the ammonia, nitrite and nitrate to build on there own and as they do, the appropriate bacteria will build to a population large enough to process it. if you do water changes during the cycle you are doing the work you want the bacteria to do and you will end up with a smaller bacterial population

[WinnipegDragon]

I've heard that too, but I've also heard arguments that letting ammonia/nitrite get that high will actually hurt other organisms in the live rock too.

Anyhow, I'm not trying to argue, I just know that the 'water change/no water change' argument is far from settled.

[kau_cinta_ku]

from waterkeeper. in this monthes RK mag.

"At the same time that last month’s column was released there was a thread in the New to the Hobby Forum talking about curing live rock. It was a lively exchange and various views were presented. One of the threads questioned the need for water changes and using separate curing vats. The objection being that it cost far too much money for equipment and salt mix.

Actually, the cost of curing rock by that method is usually cheaper. Why? Well, when live rock is cured in say, a hundred gallon tank, you have a lot of water to make for not all that much rock. When using a curing vat, you can easily place about 50 pounds in a shallow 10-gallon tray. Now, do a total water change and only throw out about three or four gallons of water per tray, rather than 80 or 90 gallons, as there would be in a full tank. That, right there, is a big savings. True, ammonia levels will be far higher in the small vessels, but during the curing process ammonia levels will top 10 ppm in just about any size tank, which is toxic to all but the hardiest of species anyway."