Why am I getting a 0.5 ppm ammonia reading from new water?

[strayner]

I put brand new water into my brand new tank last night, and I was about to put ammonia into it tonight to start the cycling process. I thought i'd test the water beforehand and i'm getting a reading of .5 ppm.

The only thing I can think of is...

I took about a liter of water from my 5 gallon to add some bacteria to the new tank, but that should only be a drop in the bucket to a 29 gallon.

Maybe my test kit is expired?

I haven't added any water conditioner, but I have added a little tetra fert cause I just stuck in a small amount of java fern.

[Jaykit]

You could try testing your tap water, I know mine straight out of the tap is quite high in nitrates. It may be possibly that the test kit is too old as you said or any chemicals used to clean the tank could have dried on the glass and would have redissolved into the water again(i.e. bleach).

[strayner]

just tested the tap water, about the same reading. Looks like Edmonton has got alot of ammonia in it's water supply.

Can anyone else confirm this?

[strayner]

Well, I went ahead and added ~4.5 ml of ammonia to the tank and I am getting a reading of 2-3 ppm, so if the kit is inaccurate it's not off by a ton.

[ChakaRaka]

Hi Strayner,

Short answer is you are getting that level of ammonia reading because you live in Edmonton.

Long answer:

Epcor uses Chloramine (NOT Chlorine) in the water here. Chloramine, put simply, is chlorine bound with ammonia chemically. When you use your water treatment (dechlorinator) such as Prime, Aqua Safe etc, you are not removing the Chloramine; that only works if there is only Chlorine in the water. Instead with Chloramine, when you treat, you are releasing the Chlorine component of the Chloramine, thus leaving behind the ammonia. Now ammonia can off-gas or dissipate with enough time, but if you are anything like me you don't have weeks (or however long it takes) to age this ammonia out of your water. So when you "treat" your water for water changes, you are going to be adding water and Ammonia to your tank.

Additionally, do not discount your test-kit so quickly, I did some tests last weekend (with a good Master Test Kit) and my tap-water was showing approximately 0.2ppm Ammonia. Then I treated the water with my dechlorination product and it then showed approximately 0.5ppm Ammonia. So really, it sounds like your equipment is showing just what mine is. All the more reason to build up a killer team of Nitrifying bacteria when cycling your tank and likely another great argument for "real" plants.

Hope that reassures your curiosities or confusion.

ChakaRaka.

[strayner]

Hi Strayner,

Short answer is you are getting that level of ammonia reading because you live in Edmonton.

Long answer:

Epcor uses Chloramine (NOT Chlorine) in the water here. Chloramine, put simply, is chlorine bound with ammonia chemically. When you use your water treatment (dechlorinator) such as Prime, Aqua Safe etc, you are not removing the Chloramine; that only works if there is only Chlorine in the water. Instead with Chloramine, when you treat, you are releasing the Chlorine component of the Chloramine, thus leaving behind the ammonia. Now ammonia can off-gas or dissipate with enough time, but if you are anything like me you don't have weeks (or however long it takes) to age this ammonia out of your water. So when you "treat" your water for water changes, you are going to be adding water and Ammonia to your tank.

Additionally, do not discount your test-kit so quickly, I did some tests last weekend (with a good Master Test Kit) and my tap-water was showing approximately 0.2ppm Ammonia. Then I treated the water with my dechlorination product and it then showed approximately 0.5ppm Ammonia. So really, it sounds like your equipment is showing just what mine is. All the more reason to build up a killer team of Nitrifying bacteria when cycling your tank and likely another great argument for "real" plants.

Hope that reassures your curiosities or confusion.

ChakaRaka.

Good to hear this! I wish I had known this about the ammonia straight from the tap a month or two ago, as I was doing excessive water changes for my betta tank thinking that the ammonia was building up too quickly and my filter could not take care of it. In reality, it was (likely) me just adding new ammonia into the tank with a water change. Kind of a nasty cycle!

[JLake]

Basically same readings here in Sherwood Park less than 1 ppm.

[strayner]

Also, with Prime, I believe it splits the ammonia from the 2 chlorines in chloramine and further binds with chlorine and ammonia - but the ammonia is still available to the bacteria. I've got a bottle but i'm not using it until my cycle finishes as it will give false ammonia readings on my Salicylate based kit.

[ChakaRaka]

To JLake, not sure whether you are agreeing or not but Sherwood Park is on the same water system as Edmonton. So you should more or less get the same readings.

Strayner, I have no idea what you are saying about false negatives. Prime or no Prime, the Ammonia that's shows on the test is the Ammonia that is there, Prime frees some up from the Chloramine (so it shows higher than plain tap-water) but that is because it IS higher than plain tap-water. The water pre-treatments basically just oust the Chlorine and leave behind the Ammonia when added to Chloramine Treated tap-water.

Another note, let's make sure we are not comparing Apples to Oldsmobiles here too. If you are using a stick-on "water testing unit" or using the quick read 85-in-1 test strips, then your results and readings are almost irrelevant. To ensure we are comparing Apples to Apples (or at least Apples to Oranges) the only readings that are worth discussing are those that come from a liquid test such as those found in a Master Test Kit. And that would still leave much room for variables...slight deviation in sample water test volume, as well as the fact that we are using a mass produced, 1/50 of a cent orifice to measure "x" amount of drops, different brand's variance, and even changes from batch to batch of testing liquids. So comparing each others numbers excessively is only really useful as a baseline, what I think is more important is our own consistency when doing these test and logging the results so we have a relevant reference to fall back on.

This is still a hobby, albeit a rather scientifically driven one, still it is important not to take this too seriously and remember to slow down and enjoy the ride...

ChakaRaka.

[strayner]

To JLake, not sure whether you are agreeing or not but Sherwood Park is on the same water system as Edmonton. So you should more or less get the same readings.

Strayner, I have no idea what you are saying about false negatives. Prime or no Prime, the Ammonia that's shows on the test is the Ammonia that is there, Prime frees some up from the Chloramine (so it shows higher than plain tap-water) but that is because it IS higher than plain tap-water. The water pre-treatments basically just oust the Chlorine and leave behind the Ammonia when added to Chloramine Treated tap-water.

Another note, let's make sure we are not comparing Apples to Oldsmobiles here too. If you are using a stick-on "water testing unit" or using the quick read 85-in-1 test strips, then your results and readings are almost irrelevant. To ensure we are comparing Apples to Apples (or at least Apples to Oranges) the only readings that are worth discussing are those that come from a liquid test such as those found in a Master Test Kit. And that would still leave much room for variables...slight deviation in sample water test volume, as well as the fact that we are using a mass produced, 1/50 of a cent orifice to measure "x" amount of drops, different brand's variance, and even changes from batch to batch of testing liquids. So comparing each others numbers excessively is only really useful as a baseline, what I think is more important is our own consistency when doing these test and logging the results so we have a relevant reference to fall back on.

This is still a hobby, albeit a rather scientifically driven one, still it is important not to take this too seriously and remember to slow down and enjoy the ride...

ChakaRaka.

Just going to quote the SeaChem site as it's easier

Q:I tested my tap water after using Prime and came up with an ammonia reading. Is this because of chloramine? Could you explain how this works in removing chloramine?

A: Prime works by removing chlorine from the water and then binds with ammonia until it can be consumed by your biological filtration (chloramine minus chlorine = ammonia). The bond is not reversible and ammonia is still available for your bacteria to consume. Prime will not halt your cycling process.

I am going to assume that you were using a liquid based reagent test kit (Nessler based, silica). Any type of reducing agent or ammonia binder (dechlorinators, etc) will give you a false positive. You can avoid this by using our Multitest Ammonia kit (not affected by reducing agents) or you can wait to test, Prime dissipates from your system within 24 hours.

I am using an API master test kit.

No doubt, I enjoy every second.

[jvision]

So, of course, you are reading a 'false positive'. What that means is that the ammonia is there (positive), but it won't kill your fish (false positive). When doing a fishless cycle, I guess you can use Prime, but I never have until I started adding fish - it's really not necessary until then, just wasting money, really.

[strayner]

So, of course, you are reading a 'false positive'. What that means is that the ammonia is there (positive), but it won't kill your fish (false positive). When doing a fishless cycle, I guess you can use Prime, but I never have until I started adding fish - it's really not necessary until then, just wasting money, really.

Not using Prime yet. I used a little of big al's conditioner just to remove chlorine/chloramine so the beneficial bacteria have a chance to get a foothold easier.

Edited January 28, 2010 by strayner

[Vallisneria]

So, of course, you are reading a 'false positive'. What that means is that the ammonia is there (positive), but it won't kill your fish (false positive). When doing a fishless cycle, I guess you can use Prime, but I never have until I started adding fish - it's really not necessary until then, just wasting money, really.

If you don't use a water conditioner when doing a fishless cycle won't the chloramine kill the bacteria or at least make it so it takes longer for it to grow? Washing your sponges in tap water kills the bacteria off, why wouldn't you get the same result from not using water conditioner?

Just wondering as I've always used it at the starting as I figured the chloramine would hurt the bacteria or retard the process. Plus its only a few cents of Prime.

[strayner]

I suppose if you refrain from using water conditioner it's a possibility you could be encouraging hardier bacteria, as it's being selected for resistance to chlorine/chloramine. Would be difficult to confirm this anecdotally because it may just take longer for the bacteria to build up with no selective advantage.

[jvision]

I suppose if you refrain from using water conditioner it's a possibility you could be encouraging hardier bacteria, as it's being selected for resistance to chlorine/chloramine. Would be difficult to confirm this anecdotally because it may just take longer for the bacteria to build up with no selective advantage.

Chlorine is highly reactive with almost all simple organic material, so the chances of bacteria surviving and becoming 'resistant' to chlorine is impossible. The don't build up antibodies like we do when we catch a cold, the chlorine actually destroys the cell wall. That being said, using the Big Al's conditioner will bind the chlorine and keep the ammonia free - which is probably what causes the .5ppm reading.