The myth of infinite acclimation in freshwater fishes

[trennamw]

The water where I live is so soft that I can't keep rift lake cichlids alive without the use of buffer (I've tried). Even in a tank full of holey rock and aragonite sand, the pH won't go above 7.4, and once I killed an entire tank of Julidochromis filling the tank from the tap like I always do- the new water was just too different from what was in the tank. I was always a staunch proponent of the "fish can adapt, so don't mess with the water chemistry" idea, until I actually experienced living somewhere that it isn't possible. LOL. I still fill from the tap, I just add the buffer while the tank is filling.

Me too. So soft I couldn't even keep bettas because of pH fluctuations.

My favorite fish book noted the only time to add stuff to the water is when it is extremely soft ... And then add buffers. It suggested low doses of products made for cichlids, and I found a sweet spot with cichlid buffer plus seachem equilibrium.

Of course, extremely soft water has an extremely low TDS. So this is consistent with what Dalto is saying. TDS could be too low in ridiculously soft water.

Would anyone keep discus in straight RO water? Or do they supplement it too?


Sent from my iPhone with three hands tied behind my back.

 

[dalto]

Would anyone keep discus in straight RO water? Or do they supplement it too?

If the water is truly 0 KH RODI water than then the pH will crash shortly after the introduction of fish. In my experience, this will lead to a pH just below 5. Typically 4.8 or 4.9. I don't know why it doesn't fall lower than that but I am sure there is a chemically sound reason since I get the same results every time pH crashes on me.

I have kept tanks like this for very specific species but I wouldn't generally recommend it. I am not sure how well discus would do in that scenario.

I definitely wish that I had soft water like you guys do. I am jealous.

 

[jetajockey]

Fish will die in 100% straight r/o water. It needs to be remineralized to some extent, even if it's kept soft.

 

[dalto]

I'm not trying to but I have to wonder, since no specifics were given as to the nitrate levels, is it possible that the fish that were dying were in fact being killed off by the fish that were spawning? That IS typical cichlid behavior as I know it.
Also, in a tank where no water changes are being done, and nitrates accumulate, if there is algae present in the tank ( a typical side effect of no water changes and higher nitrate levels) , it might be consuming the nitrates and while the tank might look nasty and dirty, the water, in fact, was being naturally cleaned by the algae so the actual level wasn't as high it might be without the algae?
Just tossing that out there

No, in this case there was no damage or any other signs of aggression. Also, this was a long established tank with the same fish plus a small number of their offspring.

There was no real algae growth in that tank.

I don't remember how much the nitrates were. I think that she did 2 30% changes and 2 50% changes to get down in the 80ppm range? It was a while ago so it is hard to remember.

My personal opinion here continues to be that some fish spawn in spite of their environment.

 

[PB_Smith]

Hey folks, while on the topic of RO/DI water and stuff, I just got an Email from Marine Depot that their "black Nov. " prices start, but here is the one that got my attention and may get some of yours;

15% Off for Life - Reverse Osmosis Replacement Filters

buy any RO unit from them and any time you order replacements cartridges they are automatically 15% off. I imagine that could amount to some $$$$ for some people who go through a lot of them and may be shopping for a new unit.



anywho, I'm not an employee/salesman or anything, just thought I would pass on a good deal.

 

[jetajockey]

I concur with that. It's easy to show that healthy "happy" fish spawn better but the drive to reproduce is also one of the most important.

Sent from Peabody's rabbit hole.

 

[Andy Sager]

No, in this case there was no damage or any other signs of aggression. Also, this was a long established tank with the same fish plus a small number of their offspring.

There was no real algae growth in that tank.

I don't remember how much the nitrates were. I think that she did 2 30% changes and 2 50% changes to get down in the 80ppm range? It was a while ago so it is hard to remember.

My personal opinion here continues to be that some fish spawn in spite of their environment.

Thanks for the reply. Guess we will never know for sure. That's the thing with the fish hobby. different things happen in different places. How or why, who knows for sure?

 

[trennamw]

I definitely wish that I had soft water like you guys do. I am jealous.

Just one of many reasons Portland is awesome! That, and The Wet Spot Tropical Fish.

Funny thing is, you'd think all the fish stores would say "oh hey by the way ... " and there'd be a standard approach to dealing with out water. But I couldn't stabilize it until I read the suggestion about buffered cichlid salts in an old book.

I've done a dilute test so I could get more specific than one degree hardness, and the KH and GH came out at 0.1 degrees or less. I haven't checked with a tds meter.

Again ... Life is pretty good till you hit extremes. And it's interesting how common it is to not know if you've got extreme tap water, or extreme changes from the store to your tank.

Might also be why Portland has so many amazing deals on aquarium equipment on craigslist.


Sent from my iPhone with three hands tied behind my back.

 

[Caliban07]

Great post Dalto. I have been away and missed this one but I would agree with everything with which I feel I have the experience to comment on. The breeding side of things I can't say.

You see, I can't even get my swordtails to breed. My water is probably a little softer than they would like though.

I agree that usually you can tell how a fish is doing by mere observation.

Can anyone comment on the correlation between thriving plants and fish. For example, does anyone believe that if the plants are doing well and growing ok then there is every chance that the fish are just as happy?

I went on a training course for a week and was unable to do a water change before I went. Before I left I was having problems with my neons. Possible columnaris. One was in a bad way and I had just lost a harlequin of all fish! I had been doing my usual water change of about 30-40%. My plants, particularly my wisteria was forming little holes in it's leaves and was covered in algae. My elodea was turning yellow.

I was dreading what I would find on my return. After 2 weeks without a water change I couldn't believe it. The tank looked amazing. All the algae was gone from the glass, my nearly dead neon was 100% better, my wisteria had turned green and there were less holes and it had even sprouted new leaves and my Elodea was almost touching the surface and had grown new stems. It had even attached itself to my driftwood. The most noticeable thing though was that all my fish looked fantastic. There colours were vibrant and my two rams I had put in a week before I left looked incredible.

Do you think that also how plants look and respond to water is also a good indicator to how the fish might be too?

Just another thought.

I don't inject co2 or add ferts on a regular basis.




Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

 

[Brookster123]

Jeez caliban.. figured you'd be here much sooner! Ever since threnjen bailed.. no one to have super smart, meaningful discussions with

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Aquarium Advice mobile app

 

[Caliban07]

Lol Brookster. My thirst for aqua knowledge has taken a back seat for the time being. Any who, there are enough AA heavyweights (me not one) on here that can sniff out an interesting thread the moment one surfaces and provide the forum with these things.

Threnjen was a big loss. Turns out she found another topic to obsess over. Her enthusiasm struggles to be matched. Hey ho.


Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

 

[Andy Sager]

Can anyone comment on the correlation between thriving plants and fish. For example, does anyone believe that if the plants are doing well and growing ok then there is every chance that the fish are just as happy?

I went on a training course for a week and was unable to do a water change before I went. Before I left I was having problems with my neons. Possible columnaris. One was in a bad way and I had just lost a harlequin of all fish! I had been doing my usual water change of about 30-40%. My plants, particularly my wisteria was forming little holes in it's leaves and was covered in algae. My elodea was turning yellow.

I was dreading what I would find on my return. After 2 weeks without a water change I couldn't believe it. The tank looked amazing. All the algae was gone from the glass, my nearly dead neon was 100% better, my wisteria had turned green and there were less holes and it had even sprouted new leaves and my Elodea was almost touching the surface and had grown new stems. It had even attached itself to my driftwood. The most noticeable thing though was that all my fish looked fantastic. There colours were vibrant and my two rams I had put in a week before I left looked incredible.

Do you think that also how plants look and respond to water is also a good indicator to how the fish might be too?

Just another thought.

I don't inject co2 or add ferts on a regular basis.
Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

Could this be a visual indication that all that you do on a daily/ weekly schedule is too much for the tank? It sounds like the tank "fixed" itself by finding it's own natural balance. Since no one was doing anything to the tank for the 2 weeks,( I'm assuming) there was only what was already there for the plants to live off of as well as the fish.
It is similar to establishing a biological filter in a tank. You get it really sour (high ammonia and nitrites) then let it fix itself ( 0 ammonia , nitrites). Once fixed, it's a stronger environment for the aquatic life.

As for plants being an indicator for the fish health, I would think it depends on the plant. Can a plant that thrives in soft acidic water, for example, tell you how an African Cichlid ( again just an example), from hard alkaline water, is doing? In theory, one of the 2 should be suffering.

 

[PB_Smith]

Could this be a visual indication that all that you do on a daily/ weekly schedule is too much for the tank? It sounds like the tank "fixed" itself by finding it's own natural balance. Since no one was doing anything to the tank for the 2 weeks,( I'm assuming) there was only what was already there for the plants to live off of as well as the fish.
It is similar to establishing a biological filter in a tank. You get it really sour (high ammonia and nitrites) then let it fix itself ( 0 ammonia , nitrites). Once fixed, it's a stronger environment for the aquatic life.

I been sayin' for a while I'm sure a lot of issues folks have is because they are chasing numbers and futzing around with the tank far too much as a result.

One of the most useful bits of advice I can offer is "leave it alone for awhile".

 

[dalto]

As for plants being an indicator for the fish health, I would think it depends on the plant. Can a plant that thrives in soft acidic water, for example, tell you how an African Cichlid ( again just an example), from hard alkaline water, is doing? In theory, one of the 2 should be suffering.

I agree with this.

I might even take it one step further and say that sometimes I think that what fish need for their health is at odds with what the plants need. But, it really depends on which fish and which plants you are talking about.

 

[Caliban07]

My girlfriend was feeding the fish. I don't really do anything with the tank other than change the water weekly.

That's kinda what I was getting at. It seemed to me that the time it took for things to stabilise and balance out after the last water change was 2 weeks. Nitrates are rising but the rate and growth of plants suggest to me that they are dealing with those. It was more the fact that my neon got better and my rams not really known as the 'hardiest' of fish seem to be doing quite well visually.

I'm not saying I believe that the two (healthy plants, healthy fish) always go hand in hand I was just wondering what people thought about that notion.



I don't really know much about plants. They are low light plants and I'm not really forcing anything in to the system to keep them alive.


Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

 

[dalto]

My girlfriend was feeding the fish.

Clearly, the only logical conclusion is that your plants preferred the higher nitrate environment and your fish just like your girlfriend better.

 

[Caliban07]

Clearly, the only logical conclusion is that your plants preferred the higher nitrate environment and your fish just like your girlfriend better.

Yes lol probably. How the plants got better is really irrelevant. I was just wondering if some people in the hobby use their plants as a sort of diagnostic tool to indicate possible imbalances in the system and whether anyone had seen any correlation between deficiencies in plants and fish losses.


Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

 

[Brookster123]

Yes lol probably. How the plants got better is really irrelevant. I was just wondering if some people in the hobby use their plants as a sort of diagnostic tool to indicate possible imbalances in the system and whether anyone had seen any correlation between deficiencies in plants and fish losses.


Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

Interesting point.. in my high tech tanks it's kind of moot point, everything I do for the plants is basically on the borderline of killing/stressing the fish (high light, co2, glut, ferts, phosphates). fish come first for me though. I'll have my plants suffer a bit for the fish to thrive. It's totally a give and take.. with delicate fish I can't have both. certain deficiencies seen in plants could be an indicator that the fish are most likely suffering as well. For example if you're seeing algae associated with elevated phosphates and your fish are acting off? two birds one stone.. it's a fine line.. you could let your nitrates go a bit, your plants will love it but the rams may not like it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Aquarium Advice mobile app

 

[Caliban07]

Interesting point.. in my high tech tanks it's kind of moot point, everything I do for the plants is basically on the borderline of killing/stressing the fish (high light, co2, glut, ferts, phosphates). fish come first for me though. I'll have my plants suffer a bit for the fish to thrive. It's totally a give and take.. with delicate fish I can't have both. certain deficiencies seen in plants could be an indicator that the fish are most likely suffering as well. For example if you're seeing algae associated with elevated phosphates and your fish are acting off? two birds one stone.. it's a fine line.. you could let your nitrates go a bit, your plants will love it but the rams may not like it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Aquarium Advice mobile app

Yes I totally agree there about adding things to keep your plants alive my not necessarily be good for fish.

You could argue that this is a less natural system though where the plants are bound to look healthy as all their needs are being met.

I think in a system 'left alone' there is going to be much more of a natural balance achieve which would suggest to me that the fish are more likely to be happier in the scenario.

Sorry for talking this thread west. I really didn't mean to.

I was just wondering if some of the more experienced keepers who have been keeping both plants and fish for many years could use their plants as indications that things are about to go wrong. Literally just curious.


Sent from my iPhone using Aquarium Advice

 

[Andy Sager]

Clearly, the only logical conclusion is that your plants preferred the higher nitrate environment and your fish just like your girlfriend better.

+100 % ( sorry, couldn;t resist. )