dancerhas

Does this mean that if you have water with a PH of 6.7, and you start a new tank, and keep fish that are comfortable in that PH level, your tank will never cycle and does not need to cycle

CHoffman

Good question..I saw that too.

Red1313

No as far as i know it just means that you need more ammonia before it becomes toxic, water can only buffer so much. Sometimes it also means that you may always have a trace reading on your tests but its a non-toxic form. Your tanks will still cycle (its bacteria usable as far as i know).

dancerhas

So in other words, they won't die of ammonia poisoning, they'll just die of nitrite poisoning?

Shawnie

I do not trust that statement no matter how many scientist/biologist say it...to me I take the stand that ammonia is deadly no matter what the ph is...if you can get a reading of it on your test kit, its not good...

all tanks need to cycle...will it cycle at that low of a ph? heck ya....because as far as I am aware, ammonium will be picked up on a test kit as ammonia and is deadly imo .....

Red1313

are you cycling a tank right now?
But to answer you're question, the cycle should proceed as normal and the nitrites will eventually be converted into nitrate. If you're having nitrite issues right now water changes and plants should help. (or if you're impaitent like me adding a dose of tetra-safestrat may give your cycle a boost. However I'd wait for a second opinon on that)

KyWildFish

It wont ever be a pure amount of NH3 or NH4+. The pH only facilitates a larger percentage of the later being produced by the bacteria. You still need to follow all the proper cycling procedures. NH4+ (ammonium) is still broken into Nitrites and Nitrates, and it can be reduced to plain old ammonia as well. It all depends on the particular bacteria present.

CHoffman

I would have to agree...Ammonia scares me in any amount and even if I were told otherwise I wouldn't believe it..I think since it CAN cycle with a low PH it's not worth it to do it any other way.

dancerhas

I'm not cycling a tank or anything, I just saw that paragraph and was curious. Thanks for all the replies.

sirdarksol

Ammonium is toxic to fish (and to other animals). Not only do I not believe otherwise even if I hear it from a biologist/chemist, I will question anything said by that biologist/chemist afterward.
Ammonium is produced as a waste product by fish. The reason it is a waste product is that it is harmful to the fish. In most creatures other than fish and aquatic inverts, ammonium is turned into urea, because urea is less toxic than ammonium, and thus can be stored within the body for a longer period of time (fish don't have to worry about this, because they can just excrete their waste as it is produced).
To give you an idea of the toxicity of ammonium, look at the statement that urea is less toxic than ammonium. Now think about this: urea is the product in hair-removal products that causes the loss of hair. If you leave these products on your skin for 10 or more minutes, you will likely get blisters. Our skin is a far cry more durable than our fishes' gills, and they're left to swim in a substance that is more toxic than this stuff that causes us to blister in 10 minutes.

Now, granted, the urea in hair-removal products is in higher concentration than the theoretical ammonium in our aquariums, but it also is only in contact with us for a matter of minutes, rather than the 24/7 that we're talking about in the "never cycle the tank" scenario.

To further dissuade this idea, let's look at this: To have a pH of less than 7.0, you likely will have very soft water (very little mineral buffer). When fish waste, plant detritus, and uneaten food breaks down, it creates a mildly acidic substance. This isn't a problem in most cases, but in water with little mineral buffer, this can precipitously drop the pH, causing severe harm to the fish.

Dozey

Doh... Just when I thought I had the whole ammonia thing figured out.

dancerhas

haha I know me too.