55-gal community tank question...

[rgo]

Six weeks ago, I bought a 55-gal tank. I got home with it, put gravel into it, hooked up a filter with powerhead, no heater, put in some plants and let it alone for a day. Then I went to the LFS and bought:
10 Tiger Barbs (Barbus Tetrazona)
12 Rosy Barbs (Barbus Conchonius)
14 Swordtails (Xiphophorus Helleri)
8 Guppies (Poecilia Reticulata)
4 Mollies (Poecilia Schenops)
10 Auratus (Melanochromis Auratus)
16 Yellow Labido (Labidochromis Caeruleus)
8 Altum Angels (Pterophyllum Altum)
16 White Cloud Mountain Minnows (Tanichthys Albonubes)
1 Flame Dwarf Gourami (Colisa Lalia)
12 Zebras (Brachydanio Rerio)
6 Zebra Loaches (Botia Striata)
4 unidentified freshwater shrimp

To date, death toll includes:
1 shrimp (climbed out of the aquarium and crawled into the garden, where ants promptly smothered it)
2 Yellow Labidos
2 Zebras
3 Swordtails (harrassed by the tiger barbs and fin-nipped)
1 Altum (some sort of fin rot)

The tank has gone through 1 major water change after 1 month (about 50 percent) and another one this week (about 35 percent). I don't fertilise plant. I have 2 60 watt regular Phillips INCANDESCENT bulb over the tank. I don't test for ph, hardness, ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, etc. I have not vacuumed the gravel. I don't use co2 or fertilizer for plants.

I feed freeze-dried tubifex and blood worms, and regular fish flakes, and hatched baby brine shrimp liberally. Yellow Labidos are twice the size I got them, livebearers are likewise plump, Altums are not growing so much, loaches are active and showing nice bellies.

Water is clear and doesn't smell. Plants have not shown need for replacing, and some are breaking the water surface.

Would someone tell me what I'm doing wrong, please...
Should I spend lots of cash on commercial products that some company is telling me I should pour into my tank, despite the fact that the tank is obviously OK (and hopefully will continue to be OK)? Should I expect doomsday soon?

I've kept aquariums before at minimal cost and fuss, without gadgets etc. This is my first tank of this size. I'm reading a lot of rules online, particularly on fish population size, lighting requirements, maintenance regiment, etc. I'm following a few of these, and yet my tank is looking nice enough, and the fish seem happy enough.

So, the real question is...
Are we over maintaining, over medicating, over fussing with our aquariums? Do we really need to pay cash to commercial companies that in reality are just selling things we don't really need? etc, etc, etc...

Just curious, that's all... Would appreciate all comment on the above questions. Thanks. Here's a pix of the tank. [/img]

 

[FawnN]

You definitely put your tank in an overload of ammonia with all those fish during your cycling process. And IMO, all your fish died from ammonia poisioning.

The tank has gone through 1 major water change after 1 month (about 50 percent) and another one this week (about 35 percent).

There's your second problem right there. You should be doing smaller 25% water changes everyday with that bioload. And you should be testing your water parameters every 2-3 days, more during your cycling process. What are your ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate reading now?

Looks are deceiving and until you test your water, you won't really know if your fish are healthy. From the many deaths you have had, your tank is not where it should be.

I would suggest you test everyday, if not every other day and do as many water changes as necessary to keep ammonia levels down. Once a month water changes are not enough, especially with as many fish as you have now.

 

[rgo]

You should be doing smaller 25% water changes everyday with that bioload. And you should be testing your water parameters every 2-3 days, more during your cycling process. What are your ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate reading now?

Well, that's just it. I'm NOT testing anything. I've lost ONLY 8 fish in the last six weeks (discounting the shrimp that got out) out of what seems to be an incredible overload of biomass in the tank. The word "only" seems apt here, considering what's been touted as the dangers of not properly cycling tanks, of not overloading with fish population, etc, etc, etc.

The fish SEEM healthy. Always hungry, no overly fast swimming, normal breathing rates, no signs of injuries or stress. I can barely get a finger in the tank without it getting swarmed by them trying to nibble something.

The deaths occurred in the first 2 weeks, and I've not lost any since then (so it's been a month and a bit more since the last death).

I think I'm really asking (and please take this as an attempt to get some sort of discussion on the subject matter) is this:
Are we, as people who keep fish as pets and as a hobby, getting bombarded with too much information, from other hobbyists and commercial companies?
I'm not trying to prod into the question of "aw, hell, just toss some fish in there and see if they'll live," but rather explore the possibility that we can still keep fish without test kits, worrying over spiking ph, ammonia etc, and techno-talk, which frankly, I am beginning to suspect, most people have got no clue to begin with.
Fish keeping, after all, has been a hobby for thousands of years (look at the Chinese, the Japanese, etc) and certainly, they didn't have test kits back then.

 

[rubysoho]

8O thats A LOT of fish for a new tank, you're lucky there haven't been more deaths.

*edit* to add now that I saw your second post. Yes there is a lot of info out there, lots of it conflicting, but just because you aren't having problems now doesn't mean you are in the clear. You could be setting yourself up for one big tank crash. Fish can be kept in all sorts of conditions, and they can live, but that doesn't mean they have the best life possible. Which is why a lot of us do research. A lot of us want our fish as happy and as healthy as they can be. That is why we try to match species that go well together and try to match their water specs with what they have in the wild. There has already been a topic of someone who tried to push the boundary of putting all sorts of fish together. You can look that one up, but basically they lost a lot of fish.

 

[FawnN]

They may seem healthy, but obviously they are not because some have died.

Fish keeping, after all, has been a hobby for thousands of years (look at the Chinese, the Japanese, etc) and certainly, they didn't have test kits back then.

The key word, is back then. The fish and this hobby itself has definitely changed since then. And I don't belive the chinese kept the sort of fish we have now in tanks. They were more goldfish in ponds.

Looking healthy and actually being healthy are 2 different things. And just because they are surviving, doesn't mean they are happy and healthy.

 

[rgo]

8O thats A LOT of fish for a new tank, you're lucky there haven't been more deaths.

*edit* to add now that I saw your second post. Yes there is a lot of info out there, lots of it conflicting, but just because you aren't having problems now doesn't mean you are in the clear. You could be setting yourself up for one big tank crash. Fish can be kept in all sorts of conditions, and they can live, but that doesn't mean they have the best life possible. Which is why a lot of us do research. A lot of us want our fish as happy and as healthy as they can be. That is why we try to match species that go well together and try to match their water specs with what they have in the wild. There has already been a topic of someone who tried to push the boundary of putting all sorts of fish together. You can look that one up, but basically they lost a lot of fish.

Yep, yep. I'm not presuming anything, really. But at the same time, as a newbie to aquarium life, I'm also wondering if there's just been TOO MUCH made out of getting the conditions "just right" for the fish we as keepers end up having in our tanks. I've done some research, and beyond "confusing" and "conflicting," I'm trying to gauge how much of it is just marketing spread by companies that make money off fishkeepers, etc.
Should I lose sleep over the fact that my tank, in the respected opinions of perhaps people with much more experience at this, is overloaded with livestock? Should I expect a huge crash at some point in the near future? How much time is enough for me to finally breathe a sigh of relief and be confident that the tank is stable? Is a water-testing kit a better judge than how my fish appear, as to the condition of the fish themselves?

To add a bit into this line of query, when I was a kid, I used to breed Betta Splendens by simply putting a male and a female inside a cement flower pot and putting a cover on it. Sometimes that didn't work, and I don't get anything. Many times, however, it did work and I got babies, which were promptly donated to my LFS at the time.

I just moved to Sri Lanka about two months ago, and found a fairly good LFS, from which I bought a male/female Betta pairing last week. I threw them into a flower pot, put a cover on it, and they spawned two days ago. I know for a fact, and from first hand observation, that bettas live in HORRID conditions, as in muddy, hot, stiffled water. I've been reading quite a bit of literature, in books and on the net, about how to keep bettas, none of which offers the suggestion that the fish might do best in muddy, still, polluted water.

Now, I'm not suggesting that we should treat our pets that way, but at the same time, I can't help asking the question, and going back to the original intent of this post: Do we really need to go to all this trouble just for the sake of keeping animals that in their original states live in less-than-ideal situations? By striving to create that "ideal" situation for our pets, are we in fact just creating "one condition" in which they may live, and if so, why do we then propagate views that this created condition is the only one in which our kept animals may actually survive and give us the enjoyment and pleasure that we so obviously get from having them around?

 

[Corty]

"By striving to create that "ideal" situation for our pets, are we in fact just creating "one condition" in which they may live"

Keeping fish that I do not intend to breed in an isolated environment is not going to affect fish in other people's tanks all over the world, nor the wild.

Responsible breeders do not breed weak fish with deformities, and strive to bring out the best in every species they breed. Poor environment is not needed to remove the weaker fish, so that the best quality can create the next generation.

"..and if so, why do we then propagate views that this created condition is the only one in which our kept animals may actually survive"

Feral cats frequently only survive for two years, but cats kept inside in an enviroment where they are cared for easily get up to 15. Fish CAN survive out in the wild, certainly in horrible conditions, but why force them to go through the same when we're already stressing them out by bringing them into a new environment?

"Fish keeping, after all, has been a hobby for thousands of years (look at the Chinese, the Japanese, etc) and certainly, they didn't have test kits back then."

I'll bet you they lost a lot of fish too. Goldfish and Koi were the fish you seem to be speaking of, and they can survive in a bowl for a short period of time - HOWEVER, in proper conditions they live a LOT longer, grow larger, are more active and less prone to disease.

"despite the fact that the tank is obviously OK (and hopefully will continue to be OK)?"

Losing eight fish is nowhere remotely near my definition of "OK".

"none of which offers the suggestion that the fish might do best in muddy, still, polluted water."

Think there might be a reason for that?

"As a newbie.."

As a newbie to ANYTHING the best thing to do is watch, listen, and THEN after years of experience, experiment.

"I'm also wondering if there's just been TOO MUCH made out of getting the conditions "just right" for the fish we as keepers end up having in our tanks"

There cannot be too much made out of trying to give living creatures a good home.

Look, I agree with you on that most chemicals are not needed, but basic common sense is. You *do* need to cycle your tank, you do need to keep it clean, and you do need to pay attention to the fact that your fish are DYING.

I also agree that you're lucky that only eight died, I think the plants likely helped with that.

I'm sorry if my reply seems a little sharp, but I'm a bit put off by your apparent disregard for the animals in your care. I'm also sorry if I did not reply to all of your points - I found it difficult just to read most.

 

[TankGirl]

This is a very interesting thread - but the thing that really sticks out to me is the different types of fish introduced that really are known to not do well together. You are mixing Africans, aggressive mbuna (auratus are VERY tough customers) that have to be stocked very carefully even when being kept with their own species, with peaceful fish from waters that are very different.

I started out in the hobby about 20 years ago and learned a lot of stuff the hard way, and one thing I can tell you for sure is slow, gradual stocking with carefully selected tankmates will go a long way to preventing tank meltdowns like what you describe. People kept fish long before there were test kits, that's for sure, but they learned to stock slowly, even if they did not know WHY they were stocking slowly. I was cycling my tanks long before I even know what the nitrogen cycle was.

If you are setting up this fish tank to have a beautiful thing to look at with happy healthy fish in it that rarely get ill and maybe even spawn for you, then there are definite ways to go about achieving that. I would keep a betta because I enjoyed looking at the fish in a nice little tank, not because I enjoyed looking at the lid of a flowerpot, but not everyone keeps fish for the same reasons. Here is a link to what the rice paddies look like where bettas come from: http://www.bettadreams.com/ricepaddies.html

I am happy to assist in any way I can to getting that 55gal into healthy life-sustaining condition. You do not need any products, other than dechlorinator, and the main thing you will need is "tincture of time" and patience, to allow the bacteria to multiply and "filter" the fish-killing properties out of the water. The plants won't live without fluorescent light, so if there is no natural light getting to the plants then they will die for sure. You don't necessarily need to even test your water (can't believe I'm saying that!) but very small partial water changes during the cycling period (weeks) will protect the fish from the toxic ammonia and nitrite. There are major compatibility issues with the fish also, but you'll have to decide if you want help with that.

Good luck, and thanks for starting a very provocative thread

 

[rgo]

"I'm sorry if my reply seems a little sharp, but I'm a bit put off by your apparent disregard for the animals in your care. I'm also sorry if I did not reply to all of your points - I found it difficult just to read most.

No worries about the sharpness. There's no sense in making dull points. Thanks for taking the time.

Please let me apologise for coming off as having a "disregard for the animals" in my care. I hope you can believe that my intent is indeed to become more well-versed in the art of fish keeping, that each little fish death was deeply felt, and that I have no wish to see more fish die off. Yes, mea culpa for the stupidity in getting such an overload to begin with.

I'm quite interested in hearing more viewpoints on this subject matter, as well as on TankGirl's take on the species selection. I hope there'll be more information coming this way. Ta.

 

[Corty]

Thank you for being understanding.. I don't like to bite my tongue :]

"I hope you can believe that my intent is indeed to become more well-versed in the art of fish keeping, that each little fish death was deeply felt, and that I have no wish to see more fish die off"

I do indeed believe you, and feel that once you're more experienced in fish keeping, you might make some quite valid discoveries down the line that could help us all out.

If you're looking for general information, sticking around and reading other people's posts always helps. I know it's stopped me from making a mistake I didn't even know I was about to make.

Hope to see you around.

 

[Rocket2001]

RGO- as far as you points about alot of info being out there etc. etc...I found what works for me is to do some research online...read some books...ask my LFS "expert" and ask alot of questions on this forum (there's alot of good advice along with some bad). And with all that info I try to do what the majority of my sources say is the right thing.. And I also use some common sense.

 

[poppab02]

I probably will be very direct in what I say, please take it as a precautionary warning and not a direct attack on you. I have alot to say so let me get started

10 Auratus (Melanochromis Auratus)
16 Yellow Labido (Labidochromis Caeruleus)

I can guarantee these fish are still babies basically otherwise in a 55 gallon you would have them sitting on top of each other. Just these two sets of fish represents somewhere around 150 inches of fish as adults. You can't tell me there's nothing wrong with keeping them in a 55 gallon and if there is any info to the contrary please point it out to me so I can go to the website and tear them a new one. The second point on these african cichlids is that at such a small size and age they will not cause problems with other fish. Their aggression comes at sexual maturity and you just won't see the problems from them as babies. I guarantee if these fish survive the experiment to reach the point of sexual maturity they will kill every single thing in that tank including each other until there are only around 7-10 of these guys left and nothing else.

Next, 6 weeks is not a significant amount of time to measure how these fish are doing. I once had feeder guppies survive in my qt tank with a full grown male african mbuna cichlid of 6 inches for nearly two months. One morning I woke up and they were all gone. I had a 1.5 inch Green Spotted Puffer in my community tank for around 3-4 months. What happened? One morning I awoke and he had killed nearly all of his tank mates including a 6 inch columbian shark. I've had tiger barbs and rainbows survive with african cichlids for months upon a time, but the end result is always "I woke up one morning and they were gone". With the exception of one solitary rainbowfish who has been living in my african tank for a long while(over a year), I've had plenty of experiments and all of them usually last a good while(and I have adult fish not babies) but all end very badly.

I think the best measurement of fish care is what percentage of their natural life do they survive in your care. If you have an angelfish that lives 2 years in your care before dying but can live up to 15 years--I would say you didn't do a very good job. 8 deaths in 6 weeks is not an insignificant amount.

Fish can survive in very adverse conditions, in fact they can do wonderous things including breeding. However, there is evidence that under stressful conditions certain fish, the betta included will breed as a sign of species propogation. In simple terms, they believe they are going to die soon and thus breed as a last ditch effort to keep the species survival. This is found more in species that regularly can live in poor conditions. My point is, breeding is not always a sign of good conditions amongst all species of fish.

Are we using too many medications and chemicals? Oh most definitely!!! I use three things in my tank: dechlor when adding water, melafix for damages fins, and aquarium salt for illnesses. Otherwise the stuff they try and sell you just screws up your tank even more.

Topics like this come up from time to time. What usually happens is that people try to warn the person about these problems and they don't listen. Then when the tank crashes the person never posts here again. Please, no matter what happens don't stop posting. I could get on my soapbox all day and tell you which fish have to go back or to get another tank, etc., but it sounds like you're set on following this experiment through. I already know how it's going to end but alot of times people need to learn things on their own. One last thing, I too have found alot of conflicting info everywhere about fish keeping--on this site people speak from personal experience and not from simply info they found in a book or on the web, and thus they are nearly always correct with their recommendations.

Keep us updated

 

[Menagerie]

[center:dd84188006] Welcome to AA, rgo! [/center:dd84188006]
Lots of things to mull over in this thread.
First, as a lover of African cichlids and a former owner of a Melanochromis Auratus, I will say that there will be problems. Cichlids can be tough customers. When I met my husband, he had some Africans and a Central American in the same tank. Slowly they killed each other or we gave them away. Once we had a stable community of Mbuna cichlids (rock dwellers from Lake Malawi), we realized they were still young and in need of a bigger tank--they were in a 30 gal, which also explains the losses. They went from a 30 gal to 80 gals and we added well over $500 in rock. Yes, rock. When I think of the nice jewlery I could have sometimes I want to kick myself. However, we love our fish, as you can tell from the pics in my gallery.
Secondly, the only chemical you need in your tank is dechlorinator. As for pH up and down and fairy dust, leave it at the store. Remember, a stable pH is better than a "perfect pH."
Finally, test kits and weekly or bi-weekly PWC are necessary, IMO and IME.

 

[rgo]

Thanks for the constructive comments so far. The cichlids are juveniles, but they're growing quite fast. Perhaps I'd have to look into returning them to the breeder.
I guess I'm also taking to heart Menagerie's comment about stable PH being better than perfect PH. Does this also apply to many other aquarium conditions?
Seems most of the people who responded here are quite experienced. I'm curious to hear from newbies like myself, though, on their thoughts about setting up tanks and the glut of material, literature, etc. Is this something that's scaring off people, keeping them awake at night, etc?

 

[benji-star]

newbie responding-
I have to start by saying that imo half of the fun is in setting up the tank and getting it cycled and ready to go. -that could just be me

second i have to say that you are very fortunate to have found this site it has some very knowledgeable people to help. shout out to menagerie-tankgirl-bearfan and many others

i hope you stick around and obtain the information to keep your tank from going into a downward spiral. and get it on the road to becoming a happy and healthy community tank.

good luck
and best wishes

 

[rubysoho]

still a huge newb here. I just started my first 55 gallon tank. I'm not worried about it, I know I'll keep up with water changes, but I had a lot the fun researching and planning on fish to keep in there that would do well in the natural pH of my tap water as well as do well together in a community tank. The only sleepless nights here are from me being addicted to this website

 

[aquazen]

I always find myself leaning towards Tankgirl's opinions. She just makes a great deal of sense. And no, she's not my boss.

Moving right along, compared to many in this forum, I too am a 'newbie'. And like many 'newbies', I've read up quite a bit on fishkeeping and fish culture. It is important to walk away from all the information you have come across and sort them all out, taking with you the essentials and stripping away the superfluous.

In the 2-3 months I've kept my tank, I've yet to lose a single fish. I've never tested my water. Ever. Some of you may be gasping at my disregard for the welfare of the fish right about now, but let me assure you that I love these guys very much and I do all the weekly water changes, etc. But at the same time, I want to pull myself away from all the trappings that some claim we 'should' have to be able to do well in this hobby.

I agree that this hobby has become somewhat commercialized, but not all of it is bad. A dechlorinator is probably all the chemical you will ever need. I am, however, guilty of using Stability to set up an instant biologic medium for my tanks. I wouldn't have if I didn't see it work with my very own eyes in my friend's 7 tanks (he's been doing this for the past 4 years). And after I used it with wonderful results, I can say with confidence that I am completely comfortable with this non-cycling technique.

Fishkeeping is, to me, very much like being a physician. Treat the patient, not the numbers. I know many in this hobby have developed that 'inner sense' of what keeps fish happy and healthy, yet you can't shake that feeling that something MIGHT be wrong, and reflexively reach for that omnipotent measuring strip which will set aside your fears and uncertainties. Why not? It will tell you that the water is good. But didn't you already know this?

Also, be wise about the fish you choose. Not all fish get along in a community tank. This is where your research will pay off.

I expect that many do not agree with me based on the replies posted so far. I respect all of your opinions regardless of our difference in techniques for fishkeeping. I know my fish are doing well with my methods. May all of your fish live long and prosper as well.

 

[TankGirl]

I would definitely agree that stable conditions are sometimes more important than "perfect" conditions.

Nitrate is one that comes to mind. A lot of people may know or have known someone who has kept a tank set up for years and years, and claims to have never made a water change, never tested the water, only tops off for evaporation, and replaces the filter cartridge periodically, or whatever. They boast that all that water change stuff is bunk, etc. Conditions need to be right in other respects for this to work, but these tanks are extremely stable, and may have a nitrate level that is through the roof, but the fish are completely acclimated to this. Someone goes in there and decides to do a major water change and get that horrific level of nitrate down, and all the fish die, and the tank crashes.

I am a water changing fool as I am convinced that this helps keep my fish healthy, but my tap water quality is very good here, which is not true for everyone.

Good advice above to research as much as you can and distill it down to what makes sense to you, and see what works. Trying it out will demystify the process and validate what you have researched, and all we want to do here is to keep fish from having to die from the learning curve of their keepers.

P.S. Thank you for your support, aquazen and benji-star

 

[mle421]

thank you! i agree! all this talk about ph and nitrate and nitrite and cycling is a bit excessive. mind you i'm only new to this, but i'm a pretty smart kid, and if you change 30% of your tanks water twice a week, and feed your fish. they'll be fine. you don't have to be a chemist to have a fish tank. that's why people who cant devote a lot of time to a pet get a fish anyways right?

 

[Umberle]

I would argue that cycling is pretty important...of course I have a horror story to impart. I'm a fellow newb and in the process of getting my tank to cycle I lost about 6 fish to ammonia poisoning, ick, fin rot, and parasites. The illnesses you can probably mark up to stressers from the cycling debacle

Why did my tank have such humungor problems and yours aren't? because it's tiny. it's a 2 gallon. any problem in the water get's out of hand fast! So just because you didn't/aren't having problems doesn't mean it isn't important and it doesn't mean you won't someday run into problems.

Now my tank's cycled (for about 6 months now I think) and it's very foregiving of my forgetfulness and I'm planning my 20 gal. The lessons I learned cycling my itty bitty tank will serve me well getting a much more foregiving larger tank going I'm sure.

That being said, check the ammonia every day, do water changes often and you'll probably be fine. It really isn't rocket science.