# Whater changes ...Whats everyone's preferred method?



## Cja313 (Oct 25, 2012)

For the last several years, When I would do a waterchange, I would do maybe 25-30% water changes in my 55 Gal tank. I would add the Decholrinator (API Stress Coat) in the appopriate amount ( for approx 15 gal of new water) directly into the tank, either just before or just after adding the new tap water.

I've heard of others who let tap water sit in a bucket for 24-48 hours and that supposidly removes the cholrine or makes it safe to use for water changes with out the Dechlorinator?

Which Method is best? 

Thanks!


----------



## Geomancer (Aug 23, 2010)

I'd always use a conditioner.

While it is true that letting water sit for 24 hours will let the Chlorine outgas, that only works for Chlorine and not for Chloramine. If your water utility suddenly switches, you may not know and could end up killing your fish.

I change between 33% and 50% each week, on my large 125g tank I use an Aqueon Water Changer (other brand name is a Python) so I can hook it up directly to the sink. I add conditioner to the tank and fill directly to the tank. On my smaller tanks I use a syphon into buckets.


----------



## jeaninel (Aug 24, 2007)

I use a Python so I add the dechlorinator just before refilling the tank. No need to let the water sit in a bucket as the dechlorinator works instantly.

Many municipalities also use chloramines so letting the water sit in a bucket may take care of the chlorine but not chloramine. Also many dechlorinators will take care if any heavy metals the water.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

+ one,
I add dechlorinator to the tank just before I add the new water with Aqueon water changer syphon.
When I used bucket's:roll:, I added the dechlorinator to the bucket's before pouring bucket's into the tank.
If your water conatain's chloramines,,then water conditioner/dechlorinator should in my view be used.
PRIME is excellent product, and cheaper in the long run than most other dechlorinator's.


----------



## Cja313 (Oct 25, 2012)

Yea I use the Python Siphon as well since it drains/and fills using the faucet and no buckets are needed. I recently bought a bottle of the PRIME as well. I was just curious as to what the advantages and disadvantages of buckets were for waterchanges. Guess I was going about it the right way after all. Thanks!


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

Python and Prime, the only way to go! 800 gals of tanks running is proof in the pudding  Be sure to match the temp of the water in tank as close as possible (some fish can tolerate up to a 2 degree difference either way but why take a chance?) Dose the Prime according to the total gallons of the tank (not the amount of water you are replacing) As freshwater is going into the tank, add your Prime.


----------



## Cja313 (Oct 25, 2012)

lakemalawifish said:


> Python and Prime, the only way to go! 800 gals of tanks running is proof in the pudding  Be sure to match the temp of the water in tank as close as possible (some fish can tolerate up to a 2 degree difference either way but why take a chance?) Dose the Prime according to the total gallons of the tank (not the amount of water you are replacing) As freshwater is going into the tank, add your Prime.


 
Wow that was mistake #1 I was making...Dosing to the Gallons I was replacing 10-15 gallons in a 55 Gallon tank, not for 55 Gal each time!! Thank You!


----------



## Geomancer (Aug 23, 2010)

Cja313 said:


> Wow that was mistake #1 I was making...Dosing to the Gallons I was replacing 10-15 gallons in a 55 Gallon tank, not for 55 Gal each time!! Thank You!


Well, people are 50/50 on that. There isn't any difinitive answer as far as I know. Some do it the way you were, others doing enough for the whole tank.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

Cja313 said:


> Wow that was mistake #1 I was making...Dosing to the Gallons I was replacing 10-15 gallons in a 55 Gallon tank, not for 55 Gal each time!! Thank You!


Yes, there are differing views on this. But one thing is clear, adding an amount of conditioner sufficient for the* replacement* water does the job without problems for the fish. And this without reference to live plants which will take some of this up anyway. Dosing for the entire tank is wasting conditioner, plus more to the point is adding double the chemicals, and even more to the point double the TDS (total dissolved solids) and these do affect fish, esp soft water fish.


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

Byron said:


> Yes, there are differing views on this. But one thing is clear, adding an amount of conditioner sufficient for the* replacement* water does the job without problems for the fish. And this without reference to live plants which will take some of this up anyway. Dosing for the entire tank is wasting conditioner, plus more to the point is adding double the chemicals, and even more to the point double the TDS (total dissolved solids) and these do affect fish, esp soft water fish.


Sorry to disagree with you Byron but in reference to the Prime product, I heard similar differences and called Seachem to verify. To each his own way, but I will take the manufacturer's advice


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

I too dose for entire volume of water when filling with python or similar device.(as per suggestion's by Seachem)
Back when I used bucket's,,I dosed only for the amount in the bucket,or that which I removed.
Have seen no negative effect's either way.
If I'm getting low on dechlorinator,,I sometimes only dose for amount removed.
Prime is reported to be safe up to three times the suggested dose for emergencies, so I am not too worried bout toxicity, but do agree with Byron regarding TDS with soft water species.
Problem is in my view,, is everything we add to the aquarium, from dechlorinator,fertilizer's,fish food's,increases the TDS.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

lakemalawifish said:


> Sorry to disagree with you Byron but in reference to the Prime product, I heard similar differences and called Seachem to verify. To each his own way, but I will take the manufacturer's advice


Two points, respectfully submitted.

1. Seachem, while a fairly reputable business, is still just that, a business. If they can convince you to use 2 or 3 times the amount of their product, they will sell more.

2. With respect to the amount, there is not a shred of evidcence anywhere that conditoner (whatever the brand) needs to be added for the full tank. None. And those of us who have been dosing only for the replacement for 20+ years and not lost fish as a result are proof that it is not necessary.

By contrast though, there is scientific evidence that adding to TDS will affect fish. I see no reason to risk my fish and spend more money.

We are all free to hold varyhing opinions on this and that, no issue there. But scientific fact is another matter.;-)


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

You know Byron, I have read several of your stabbing comments, not just this one but several of them in other posts. You have a way of making your point of the matter very clear as if you really think your way is best. Sure, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and to be right according to their best judgement and former practice. Thank God we do not have to have a PhD to keep fish alive. Everyone is free to make their own choice as to how to care for their beloved fish. To me, that is just part of enjoying fishkeeping... to have beautiful and healthy fish and help others do the same. Bad advice is just that... bad, and I don't think anyone would purposely give it. I hope others on this forum are able to ascertain the difference between bad advice, one sided advice and good advice. We have over 800 gallons of tanks running in our home and several thousands of dollars of fish, I am going to follow the manufacturer's directions.


----------



## beaslbob (Oct 17, 2012)

Cja313 said:


> For the last several years, When I would do a waterchange, I would do maybe 25-30% water changes in my 55 Gal tank. I would add the Decholrinator (API Stress Coat) in the appopriate amount ( for approx 15 gal of new water) directly into the tank, either just before or just after adding the new tap water.
> 
> I've heard of others who let tap water sit in a bucket for 24-48 hours and that supposidly removes the cholrine or makes it safe to use for water changes with out the Dechlorinator?
> 
> ...


I guess both would work.

I just replace evaporative water with no chemicals on my planted tanks. That works fine for me.

but worth to others at most .02


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

I have heard of people letting their water sit out for 24 hours also, but this will only rid it of chlorine. If you local water company uses chloramines to disinfect the water, chloramines are fatal to fish. I used to use API Stress Coat and I believe that is correct, you only have to add the amount of product for the water you are replacing. When we switched to Prime because so many of our friends with fish swore by it, that is when we found out that it is recommend that it is best to add it to the fresh water first, according to the amount of fresh water you are adding to the tank. But, if you are adding it directly to the tank, add the product according to the volume of water in the entire tank. I don't know the reason why the company says to do it this way, all I know is I want to remove chlorine and chloramines from the water and all of our tanks are filled with a python so that is what we do. I trust Seachem, they are a great family owned company in Madison, GA. The have superior products. They have a Customer Support team that is fantastic and a real person answers the phone and you get a qualified tech support person immediately. They are an American owned and operated company. Some years ago I called API with a question, several different times, nobody called me back. We have had great results with Prime and I would not use anything else without very very careful consideration. Prime is as important to me as my first cup of coffee in the morning. I freak out when we start running low on it.

Seachem has another product that I am looking at to get for all of our tanks called Matrix. Because our tanks have so much water movement there's not much area, if any, for anaerobic bacteria to grow. The water is forced through the canister at such a fast rate that it can't grow there either. This anaerobic bacteria is critical for the removal of nitrates. Matrix is a highly porous biomedia that is ideally sized for the support of nitrifying and denitrifying bacteria. This allows Matrix, unlike other forms of biomedia, to remove nitrate along with ammonia and nitrite, simultaneously and in the same filter. Another great thing about this product is it does not have to be replaced or recharged. We tried the Seachem Purigen, it did reduce Nitrates more effectively than the API NitraZorb did, but Purigen has to be removed and re-charged (cleaned with Chlorine Bleach) and I do not want to have to mess with bleach, especially with as many tanks as we have running.

Here's the link to Matrix (seriously I can't wait to get this stuff)
Seachem. Matrix


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

At the risk of annoying you again, I would question the benefits of Matrix in a balanced system. The majority of bacteria live outside of the filter in the substrate. Do you have a nitrate problem?


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

Byron said:


> At the risk of annoying you again, I would question the benefits of Matrix in a balanced system. The majority of bacteria live outside of the filter in the substrate. Do you have a nitrate problem?


Byron, I see that you have a 115 gallon planted tank with small fish. Not sure if that is the only tank you have running, but it really does not matter. The point I would like to make is you apparently have NO knowledge of large tanks and large fish keeping. Yes, you are annoying me. It seems like every time I post something you have to throw in your negative comments to the contrary. The anaerobic bacteria in your tank is in the substrate, your substrate is rarely, IF EVER, bothered and you have small fish swimming around. Please stop trying to compare your tank and your methods of fish keeping with others who have tanks and fish totally different from yours. NO... we do not have beneficial bacterial in our substrate, one of the main ways we have to remove Nitrates from our tank is to thoroughly vacuum the poop and food waste from the sand. Nitrates also collect in the canister when it is dirty and needs cleaning. NO we do not have a Nitrate problem at present, I am simply trying to help others on the forum who do. And YES the Matrix does play a very important role in the canister as far as creating a highly porous biomedia where anaerobic bacteria can grow. Now, would you please leave me alone. Thank you.


----------



## jentralala (Oct 5, 2012)

Wow, not to jump on at the last second, but lakemalawifish, that was pretty rude. If you didn't like what he said you could have shrugged and moved on. Instead you post an entire rant attacking him -for all the internet to see- in quite a vicious fashion. There was absolutely no need for that and it leaves a rather bitter taste in my mouth that you reacted in such a volatile fashion.


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

jentralala I apologize to you and anyone else who reads my comments directed at Byron and realize that was not the correct way to confront someone who has offended me. Byron I apologize to you for not contacting you privately.


----------



## Sanguinefox (Nov 29, 2011)

lakemalawifish said:


> Sorry to disagree with you Byron but in reference to the Prime product, I heard similar differences and called Seachem to verify. To each his own way, but I will take the manufacturer's advice


Personally I set my water out temp matched in a tub/bucket and add enough prime to that particular amount. So if 30 gallons were taken out and are going back in, I add prime to the tub of 30 gallon temp matched water and agitate it. Then that goes into the tank.

So far I've had really good results with this but I respect other people who do things differently.


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

Since I have been unable to quote what I was told by the Representative at Seachem, here is the explanation given to another individual for clarification regarding this matter

----------------------------------------------------- beginning of copied thread

I heard back from my contact at Seachem. Here is his reply. Pretty much what has already been stated by a lot of people here.

Hey Larry, 

Sorry I am just getting back to you, I have been out of the office at a show. We are very happy to sponsor such events and I am glad that it was a success. Just wish I could have made it, especially for the auction! 

To address the dosing of water conditioners, we must first look at how they function. All water dechlor or conditioners function by employing a reducing agent. This compound reduces and binds with assorted molecules to render them harmless. In the case of chlorine, a reducing agent will break the bond between the two atoms resulting in two chloride atoms. The same happens with chloramine only this results in three chloride atoms and a nitrogen. Most conditioners, especially Prime and Safe, also bind with other compounds to render them harmless. Ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate are just a few of the common compounds that are effected. So, when you add Prime to a solution containing ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, and chlorine, some of the Prime will break apart the chlorine and some will bind with the other compounds. So, if you are doing a water change in a tank that contains a fair amount of nitrate or some other compound, some of the conditioner will be utilized to detoxify these and will not be available to break apart the chlorine or chloramine. If you treat the water before adding it to the aquarium, the conditioner will remove any of the chlorine and chloramine. Any remaining conditioner will then bind with other compounds when added to the tank.

So... if adding water to the tank before treating, it is best to treat for the volume of the entire aquarium. This ensures that there is enough of the conditioner available to remove any chlorine or chloramine, without being effected by any ammonia, nitrite, or nitrate currently in the water. Think of it this way, when treating water before adding it to the tank, there are less harmful compounds to be detoxified. When adding it to the tank first, the conditioner will have more than just chlorine and chloramine to detoxify and therefore will require a larger dose. With Prime and Safe being as concentrated as they are, this typically requires little product but, is a great way to ensure your fish are safe. 

Hope this helps, let me know if you have any additional questions or need me to clarify anything.
---------------------------------------------------------------- end of copied thread


----------



## Bluewind (Oct 24, 2012)

I'm quite sure I do my pwc different than anyone else ever has, but here is what I do...

First, I fill my 1.8 gallon container with warm water and add 1/2-3/4 the recominded amount of Tetra AquaSafe as I do not have clorine (well water), but I still want a bit in there for it's benifits. Then, I place a thermometre in it to float while. I run my old Tetra 3i in it to remove the bit of sand my water has so it's nice and clean when I put it in my tank. When the water gets down to the same temp as the tank, I turn off the tank filter and remove the aproprite amount of water from the tank. I then pour in the fresh in the open filter back so as to not stress my fish with a sudden strong current. I do this 3x a week. 2x is just scooping out water from the top and 1x a week is a light substrate vacuming.

Yep, I know I over do it! But my babies are gonna be healthy if I have anything to say about it! XD
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## silvershark (Nov 30, 2012)

*adding boiled water for partial water change .*

hi 
is it alright to add some boiled water to bring the temperature up when doing water changes ? i have done two water changes since i set my 200ltr tank up on the 24/11/12 i done one on the 30Th a 10ltr change and one today a 40ltr change i have been doing this with buckets of cold tap-water filled 3/4 up and topped up with boiled water from a kettle so as not to stress the fish to much witch are 3 giant giant danios to help with cycling i also add aqua plus into the buckets before adding into the main tank, i know my tank is still cycling and i have had a problem with a bacterial bloom but looks a lot cleaner after i done that water change earlier today i hope things will improve now. please let me know if i am doing the right thing where the boiled water is concerned. thanks everyone.:thankyou:


----------



## jeaninel (Aug 24, 2007)

I just adjust the water temp at the tap.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Geomancer (Aug 23, 2010)

silvershark said:


> hi
> is it alright to add some boiled water to bring the temperature up when doing water changes ? i have done two water changes since i set my 200ltr tank up on the 24/11/12 i done one on the 30Th a 10ltr change and one today a 40ltr change i have been doing this with buckets of cold tap-water filled 3/4 up and topped up with boiled water from a kettle so as not to stress the fish to much witch are 3 giant giant danios to help with cycling i also add aqua plus into the buckets before adding into the main tank, i know my tank is still cycling and i have had a problem with a bacterial bloom but looks a lot cleaner after i done that water change earlier today i hope things will improve now. please let me know if i am doing the right thing where the boiled water is concerned. thanks everyone.:thankyou:


 Don't you have a hot water heater? Otherwise your showers must be ... interesting 

Just use warm water from the tap, far easier to get the correct temp and your water heater is more efficient at heating water than your stove.


----------



## Cja313 (Oct 25, 2012)

Kinda Glad there's no more arguing going on.....and to think I had to worry about the cichlids picking on one another!! LOL!! Thanks to everyone who gave their 2 cents on how they do waterchanges and what they think is best. great bits of info!


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

lakemalawifish said:


> ----------------------------------------------------- beginning of copied thread
> 
> I heard back from my contact at Seachem. Here is his reply. Pretty much what has already been stated by a lot of people here.
> 
> ...


Interesting that this is much along the lines of what I have said everywhere, concerning the ammonia, nitrite or nitrate...if these are not a problem, things are different.

It is perfectly clear to all that either adding conditioner sufficient for the replacement water or adding it for the entire tank will make no difference with respect to a water change in a healthy balanced system.

So that takes one to the issue of the additional chemicals and TDS, and I contacted Seachem yesterday on this and they replied that they had no idea of the TDS in Prime.

Everyone is entitled to know all the facts, that is why we are all here, or so I thought.

Byron.


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

Byron, here you go on your high horse again. I have come to enjoy your debatable comments so let's get it on and I will try my best to keep things civil for the sake of forum members because hopefully we can all learn from these debates 

1. Most people, including myself do not even know what TDS are. I had to look this up. I have the link below for others to hone up on. I trust Seachem products and have many years of successful experience with them and have fish friends with more years of experience than I have to back that up. If Seachem is not concerned about the TDS in their product... then neither am I. I trust Seachem that much. Obviously we and others who have successfully raised fish without the concern of TDS... have not had to be concerned with TDS's.

2. Since I am just researching TDS's... only because you keep making such a big deal about it... I realize why I have not been concerned with them and most of the fishkeepers I know are just like me and have never heard of TDS's. We are not keeping saltwater tanks, we are not trying to introduce a new species from the wild and trying to ascertain what kind of water the fish lives in.

3. Just wondering, how often do you test your water for TDS's? What type of device do you use for this?

4. Can you explain TDS's and the cause for so much concern? How does it relate to your planted tank? How does it relate to people who have tanks that are not planted? If you are going to cause such a fuss about something, please explain why it is so important so people can learn from that. Don't just leave an open-ended response that appears to be "belittling" someone else rather it be a company that provides a great product, or a consumer who is trying to pass that great product knowledge onto someone else.

Eagerly awaiting your kind response!

oh... here's the link regarding TDS's
TDS - The Free Freshwater and Saltwater Aquarium Encyclopedia Anyone Can Edit - The Aquarium Wiki


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

*Second topic of debate - Byron & lakemalawifish*

*Quoting Byron*

_Interesting that this is much along the lines of what I have said everywhere, concerning the ammonia, nitrite or nitrate...if these are not a problem, things are different.

It is perfectly clear to all that either adding conditioner sufficient for the replacement water or adding it for the entire tank will make no difference with respect to a water change in a healthy balanced system._

Read more: http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/...-preferred-method-121884/page3/#ixzz2EIMgRcVt

Ok Byron, here's my rebuttal to that statement:

People with planted tanks have completely different concerns and practices than those with non-planted tanks. Planted tanks are a perfect example of an aquarists attempt to create a perfectly balanced biosystem. And I say "attempt" here only to elude that only God's perfect balance in nature has this perfected, not to offend.

Every fish tank, I don't care how well it is maintained, is going to be out of balance in some way. When we first started keeping fish I went through an entire API Master Water Test Kit in 3 months. I tested our tanks' water until I was blue in the face, trying to find that perfect balance. I bought another API Master Water Test Kit and have been using it when needed, i.e., fresh tank start up, during the process of cycling a tank, when the power was out for 2 days, etc. I am saying this because now I know, without a shadow of a doubt, that our tanks are never going to be in perfect balance.

I do not, and highly doubt if anyone else, check the ammonia, nitrite or nitrate levels in my tank before I perform a routine water change (with 800 gals of tanks in our house water changes occur several times a day every day of the week) The only time I do check these water parameters is when, like I stated above, it is a fresh tank set up that is not fully cycled yet, or I have some other concern going on in the tank.

The reason I do not feel the need to test my water parameters prior to a routine water change is because I fully trust the Prime product, when used as directed, will cover whatever is going on with the water quality in our tanks. I am grateful to have such a product at my disposal and hope others will use it as directed by the manufacturer, to assist in keeping their aquatic friends healthy.

I would like to add here that Prime will bind ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate for 24-48 hours so if a tank is not fully cycled or has other issues that need to be addressed, that is the time frame you have to take care of problem areas, or perform another water change "with Prime" to keep your fish safe until the problem can be determined and addressed.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

First, thank you (I am being sincere, not facetious here) for this post. It will allow us to explore this issue the correct way, through research and discussion.



> Byron, here you go on your high horse again.


I can't seem to make a statement of fact without you seeing something else behind it.:-(



> I have come to enjoy your debatable comments so let's get it on and I will try my best to keep things civil for the sake of forum members because hopefully we can all learn from these debates


Likewise.



> 1. Most people, including myself do not even know what TDS are. I had to look this up. I have the link below for others to hone up on.


I have written on this in various threads, but will put something together and post it in this one. The Wiki synopsis is fine as far as it goes, but it obviously doesn't go far with freshwater, so I will get into this momentarily in a separate post to avoid bogging this one down. I'll track down some reliable FW sources.



> I trust Seachem products and have many years of successful experience with them and have fish friends with more years of experience than I have to back that up. If Seachem is not concerned about the TDS in their product... then neither am I. I trust Seachem that much.


I trust them too--but only as far as one should trust any business that exists to make money. I buy some of their products regularly. But one is not absolved from questioining and researching. They have a product called Excel which is a liquid carbon supplement for planted tanks, intended to provide an alternative to organic carbon which is does--but the actual chemistry of how it does this no-one, including SeaChem, knows. I will not use this, nor will I recommend it, because it is frankly toxic and dangerous. It's only ingredient (apart from water) is glutaraldehyde: an antimicrobial, bactericide, fungicide, and virucide, commonly used to sterilize medical instruments in hospitals. It is also used as an embalming fluid, as an ingredient in Anti-Freeze, an antibacterial agent in cooling towers, a leather tanning agent, a biocide in water treatment, a sanitary solution for portable toilets, and is used to sterilize ballast tanks in ships moving from one water source to another (to kill off pathogens and critters that may be transferred in the tanks from one water way to another). I don't want this in my fish tanks. Admittedly, it needs overdosing to achieve these toxic effects, but such substances do not belong in an aquarium. And regardless, some plant species (Vallisneria for one) are usually killed by this even at the recommended dose.

The fact that Seachem is not concerned with TDS doesn't mean it is not significant. They also don't fully understand how Prime works in dealing with nitrite or nitrate.



> Obviously we and others who have successfully raised fish without the concern of TDS... have not had to be concerned with TDS's.
> 
> 2. Since I am just researching TDS's... only because you keep making such a big deal about it... I realize why I have not been concerned with them and most of the fishkeepers I know are just like me and have never heard of TDS's.
> 
> 3. Just wondering, how often do you test your water for TDS's? What type of device do you use for this?


I don't, because first I can't afford the equipment. But I also know there are ways of keeping TDS low so it is safe not to have to worry. I never test for ammonia or nitrite, because I know they will never be present in my tanks--unless something seriously goes awry, and then I do test just to ensure these factors are not involved. I sporadically test for nitrates, maybe once every 4-5 months (or when something affects the fish, again as a preliminary step), and in 15+ years the nitrates in my tanks have never wavered. This is not to say one shouldn't test for this or that, if periodically, but the point is that establishing stability is the key, and to do this we must understand the science to some extent.

Like any aspect in life, from our health to the health of our fishes, as discoveries are made we learn more, and hopefully benefit by learning ways to make our fish healthier, which is my prime objective. Fish don't need to be dying to be unhealthy, and avoiding pitfalls that can cause stress is always wise, because all fish disease and premature death can be linked back to stress. Thus, preventing stress as much as we can should--and will we now know--ensure healthier fish. TDS is a fairly new aspect but already we know it affects fish [more later].



> we are not trying to introduce a new species from the wild and trying to ascertain what kind of water the fish lives in.


The concern over water parameters is relevant to all fish, not just wild caught. Another thread discussing nitrates has a comment that our commercially-raised fish are different from wild with respect to nitrates, but this is incorrect thinking. Nitrate is on a par with ammonia and nitrite, they are forms of nitrogen, and all are toxic, and all will kill at differing levels. It defies logic to think that tank-raised fish that cannot adapt to higher ammonia or higher nitrite will somehow mysteriously adapt to higher nitrates.

There is sufficient scientific evidence now to show that fish must have an environment that is as close as possible to that for which they evolved, if we are concerned about keeping them in their best health. I'm sure you share this aim, as hopefully all members do. Healthy fish are happy fish.



> 4. Can you explain TDS's and the cause for so much concern?


This will be in a separate post, as mentioned above. This one is already becoming a novel.

Byron.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

OK. I'll bite.
I believe it may have been me that suggested that many of our aquarium fishes nowday's are being raised in water's far removed from what they would see in the wild and as such,,,they either adapt to the water or they don't.
The fact that their natural water's may be low in TDS, or nitrates, is something for us to perhap's to strive for, but not realistic in many area's ,or in closed system's such as our's that rely on ever increasing pollution tainted sources for water replenishment.
As I mentioned the other day in another thread,Everything we add to the tank from Dechlorinator,Bacterial supplement's,fertilizer's,fish food's, increases the TDS.Would you stop adding dechlorinator's,fish food's with the metal's ,phosphates,animal protein's,etc, buffering agent's such as the Equilibrium that you and other's use?
Not much different in my view between fishes that adapt or don't,,,and the bacterial pathogen's that we see becoming more and more resistent to those antibiotic's that used to work.
Is a fluid situation pardon the pun.
Personally,,I would be more fearful of dirty organic rich tank's where little to no maint is performed,before I began sweating over a few extra ml of Prime during water change.
It is the lesser of two evil's (Way less).


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

Thank you 1077 for your insight. Byron, we are not trying to gang up on you. We are just trying to understand the importance of certain issues and how they relate to our fish. 95% of our fish are wild caught or F1 Lake Malawi Cichlids. Our wild caught fish source has them imported, he very carefully treats them for parasites and acclimates them to life in a fish tank environment. Even after we purchase them, some of the more delicate species have to be drip acclimated to the tank environment that we are putting them into. These fish are the most beautifully colored fish I have ever seen, second to saltwater fish. I believe that the people on this forum are doing everything they can to take proper care of their fish, to the best of their knowledge and ability, or they would not be here attempting to learn more from others in order to keep their fish healthy, happy and as stress free as possible. When you throw curve balls regarding TDS into the equation, that quite honestly you have failed to successfully back up thus far in my opinion, and then start bad-mouthing companies like Seachem who I am sure have scientists and biologist with multiple degrees who design and formulate products they sell to ensure their safety, that is where I have a big problem.


----------



## Bluewind (Oct 24, 2012)

I think it's wonderful that we are on a forum that people are so pasionate and well informed about fishkeeping. Where questions can be asked and many different opinions can be given which the OP can then research and find the best approach for them. I like facts and good information. I want this place to be just that.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

1077 said:


> OK. I'll bite.
> I believe it may have been me that suggested that many of our aquarium fishes nowday's are being raised in water's far removed from what they would see in the wild and as such,,,they either adapt to the water or they don't.
> The fact that their natural water's may be low in TDS, or nitrates, is something for us to perhap's to strive for, but not realistic in many area's ,or in closed system's such as our's that rely on ever increasing pollution tainted sources for water replenishment.
> As I mentioned the other day in another thread,Everything we add to the tank from Dechlorinator,Bacterial supplement's,fertilizer's,fish food's, increases the TDS.Would you stop adding dechlorinator's,fish food's with the metal's ,phosphates,animal protein's,etc, buffering agent's such as the Equilibrium that you and other's use?
> ...


I can't disagree with this. I would simply say that knowing this to be the case, we should work to reduce the "toxins" as much as possible--and not go adding more without good reason. These include the organics [obviously the planted tank enters into this] and TDS [and bear in mind, that your high organics are part of the total solids which are TSS and TDS--but I won't get into that here [I am drafting an article on this now, to hopefully explain this as was requested of me]. So in a sense, there is not two evils, just one--total solids. And eliminating as many as we can is the goal.

Yes I add conditioner and Equilibrium and fish food, all of which contribute to the TDS. But I don't over-load with any. Only what is essential. As with medicines for fish and humans, more than the necessary dose is not better, but worse.;-)


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

lakemalawifish said:


> Thank you 1077 for your insight. Byron, we are not trying to gang up on you. We are just trying to understand the importance of certain issues and how they relate to our fish. 95% of our fish are wild caught or F1 Lake Malawi Cichlids. Our wild caught fish source has them imported, he very carefully treats them for parasites and acclimates them to life in a fish tank environment. Even after we purchase them, some of the more delicate species have to be drip acclimated to the tank environment that we are putting them into. These fish are the most beautifully colored fish I have ever seen, second to saltwater fish. I believe that the people on this forum are doing everything they can to take proper care of their fish, to the best of their knowledge and ability, or they would not be here attempting to learn more from others in order to keep their fish healthy, happy and as stress free as possible. When you throw curve balls regarding TDS into the equation, that quite honestly you have failed to successfully back up thus far in my opinion, and then start bad-mouthing companies like Seachem who I am sure have scientists and biologist with multiple degrees who design and formulate products they sell to ensure their safety, that is where I have a big problem.


I am working on an article for total solids in between posting here. I should have it finished today, and will post it in the Freshwater Articles section and link to it in this thread. I like to have the whole picture, and you seem to be similar, which is good, so bear with me and you will see my understanding and approach to this.

As for Seachem, I have high regard for them, or I wouldn't use their products. But I do disagree that one should nedver point out the truth for fear of somehow maligning this or any company. What I have stated about Seachem is fact, and if anyone can prove otherwise, do so.

Byron.


----------



## pop (Aug 29, 2012)

Hello:
I have been considering using Prime conditioner but when I am at the LFS I just can’t seem to force myself to purchase the product. I don’t believe that adding manufactured substances is necessary or prudent. 

Bryon in my opinion is correct about a possible negative effect of excessive Total Dissolved Solids. Just because a product is on the market and appears to work will not necessarily indicate there are no negative aspects using it.

Generally speaking all people are prone to discovering facts that support predetermined conclusions. This includes me and the makers of Prime and other water conditioning products.
pop


----------



## jeaninel (Aug 24, 2007)

Pop, you don't use a water conditioner when you do water changes?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

Missed this post earlier, only found it when I went back to check something. I only have a couple comments.



> People with planted tanks have completely different concerns and practices than those with non-planted tanks. Planted tanks are a perfect example of an aquarists attempt to create a perfectly balanced biosystem. And I say "attempt" here only to elude that only God's perfect balance in nature has this perfected, not to offend.


I agree. I have written recently and more than once that every aquarium is an artificial closed system that cannot possibly function as nature in its completeness.



> Every fish tank, I don't care how well it is maintained, is going to be out of balance in some way.


One of the problems with internet forums is that we can't know what the other person is thinking when words are typed. By "balanced" I mean that the fish in the tank are suited to the tank volume and layout, respecting their size and numbers, with compatibility in all aspects (water params, environment, other species, etc), receiving proper water changes, and so forth. All of this is solely at the control of the aquarist.



> I do not, and highly doubt if anyone else, check the ammonia, nitrite or nitrate levels in my tank before I perform a routine water change (with 800 gals of tanks in our house water changes occur several times a day every day of the week) The only time I do check these water parameters is when, like I stated above, it is a fresh tank set up that is not fully cycled yet, or I have some other concern going on in the tank.


This is my method too, as I noted in another post here.



> The reason I do not feel the need to test my water parameters prior to a routine water change is because I fully trust the Prime product, when used as directed, will cover whatever is going on with the water quality in our tanks. I am grateful to have such a product at my disposal and hope others will use it as directed by the manufacturer, to assist in keeping their aquatic friends healthy.


On this we will differ, because I will never rely on some chemical to mask problems. I don't use Prime simply because I have no ammonia, nitrite or nitrate issues, and can't imagine this changing unless something drastic should occur such as an extended power outage.



> I would like to add here that Prime will bind ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate for 24-48 hours so if a tank is not fully cycled or has other issues that need to be addressed, that is the time frame you have to take care of problem areas, or perform another water change "with Prime" to keep your fish safe until the problem can be determined and addressed.


When cycling a new tank, fine. I frequently recommend Prime in those situations. Or if ammonia, nitrite or nitrate are present in the source water, I always recommend Prime (or Ultimate).


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

Thanks Byron for clarifying these things. Words do get lost in translation via internet posts and often times are very misleading. I think one hang up between the two of us is, you have a planted tank and your plants are taking care of or assisting in the removal of nitrates, etc. and as much as I love planted tanks, we can not have plants with our fish and have to rely on other things whether it be a product, a technique in maintaining the tank, etc. to keep our fish healthy.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

lakemalawifish said:


> Thanks Byron for clarifying these things. Words do get lost in translation via internet posts and often times are very misleading. I think one hang up between the two of us is, you have a planted tank and your plants are taking care of or assisting in the removal of nitrates, etc. and as much as I love planted tanks, we can not have plants with our fish and have to rely on other things whether it be a product, a technique in maintaining the tank, etc. to keep our fish healthy.


There are some plant options. In another thread I just suggested floating plants to someone with a rift lake cichlid tank. And a clump of Vallisneria perhaps under a rock in one area might work. B.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

Finally got the article done on TSS and TDS, here's the link:
http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/...al-solids-tss-tds-freshwater-aquarium-122027/

I usually like to mull over articles for a few days before posting them, so bits may change especially if anyone has questions or thinks something needs clarifying, etc. My desk is piled with research, though most I use now is from the internet.

Hope this helps explain why this is really an important issue; I must confess that I have come to realize this even more from pulling this together.

I came across a fine article by Paul Loiselle, a name you cichlid buffs should recognize, although the youngsters;-) may not. Dr. Loiselle was at the fore-front with the "new" rift lake cichlids back in the 1980's, and I was privileged to spend several days with him and some other ichthyologists at a convention when I was president of the VAS. Memories.

Byron.


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

Thanks for the suggestion, are they low light plants? We just have LED's on the 220 and 120, we have standard fluorescent lights on the 125 Tang and T5's on the 46 bowfront. All of the rest of the tanks are in the fish room and have standard shop lights.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

lakemalawifish said:


> Thanks for the suggestion, are they low light plants? We just have LED's on the 220 and 120, we have standard fluorescent lights on the 125 Tang and T5's on the 46 bowfront. All of the rest of the tanks are in the fish room and have standard shop lights.


The floating plants should be fine with any decent light [by which I mean spectrum and intensity, to distinguish from moonbeams and such which won't do it]. Lower plants, like the Valls, are more demanding obviously, so it would depend upon the LED. T5 will certainly be sufficient, T8 should depending jupon floating plant cover.

Vallisneria is a lovely plant, but I can't grow it because my water is too soft. Ceratopteris cornuta thrives like a weed.


----------



## mikejp67 (Mar 31, 2012)

lakemalawifish said:


> You know Byron, I have read several of your stabbing comments, not just this one but several of them in other posts. You have a way of making your point of the matter very clear as if you really think your way is best. Sure, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and to be right according to their best judgement and former practice. Thank God we do not have to have a PhD to keep fish alive. Everyone is free to make their own choice as to how to care for their beloved fish. To me, that is just part of enjoying fishkeeping... to have beautiful and healthy fish and help others do the same. Bad advice is just that... bad, and I don't think anyone would purposely give it. I hope others on this forum are able to ascertain the difference between bad advice, one sided advice and good advice. We have over 800 gallons of tanks running in our home and several thousands of dollars of fish, I am going to follow the manufacturer's directions.


I agree 100%
One thing i have found is that there are some people on here that think they know all and its their way or no way. What I have found it that most of whats been written is totally contradictory to what I've read on many other sites as well as people who have yrs and yrs of experience not only keeping fish but breeding them as well. I have asked in other posts to provide some data and also asked for their credentials....i heard nothing but crickets. I've read in other posts the phrase "thru my research"...that is a misleading statement. Running 4 tanks full of neons and guppies dont qualify as research in my book.


----------



## mikejp67 (Mar 31, 2012)

By the way, I read the directions off the label and follow them. Im no chemist and I certainly didnt mfg the product so I'll just do as whats directed and spend a few extra cents when I do my water changes.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

mikejp67 said:


> I agree 100%
> One thing i have found is that there are some people on here that think they know all and its their way or no way. What I have found it that most of whats been written is totally contradictory to what I've read on many other sites as well as people who have yrs and yrs of experience not only keeping fish but breeding them as well. I have asked in other posts to provide some data and also asked for their credentials....i heard nothing but crickets. I've read in other posts the phrase "thru my research"...that is a misleading statement. Running 4 tanks full of neons and guppies dont qualify as research in my book.


If this is directed at me, which I assume it is, you have left yourself wide open.

I don't care what you've read on whatever sites. Reliability in information and data is determined solely by the source. Anyone can start up a website and post rubbish, which unfortunately many believe. There are many of us here who dispel that rubbish.

And to do so we use the scientific factual data from professional ichthyologists who have the knowledge to make the statements.


----------



## mikejp67 (Mar 31, 2012)

Byron said:


> If this is directed at me, which I assume it is, you have left yourself wide open.
> 
> I don't care what you've read on whatever sites. Reliability in information and data is determined solely by the source. Anyone can start up a website and post rubbish, which unfortunately many believe. There are many of us here who dispel that rubbish.
> 
> And to do so we use the scientific factual data from professional ichthyologists who have the knowledge to make the statements.


Your right, anyone can start up a website and post rubbish....yet, anyone can sign up on a blog site and post rubbish as well.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

mikejp67 said:


> Your right, anyone can start up a website and post rubbish....yet, anyone can sign up on a blog site and post rubbish as well.


I just responded to your post in another thread on this, that covers the issue. If you don't agree with what I post, go and convince the ichthyologists and biologists who published the data I use, not me.


----------



## jentralala (Oct 5, 2012)

mikejp67 said:


> I agree 100%
> One thing i have found is that there are some people on here that think they know all and its their way or no way. What I have found it that most of whats been written is totally contradictory to what I've read on many other sites as well as people who have yrs and yrs of experience not only keeping fish but breeding them as well. I have asked in other posts to provide some data and also asked for their credentials....i heard nothing but crickets. I've read in other posts the phrase "thru my research"...that is a misleading statement. Running 4 tanks full of neons and guppies dont qualify as research in my book.


I don't quite agree with that. There are in fact many different ways of fish keeping, although very few are the 'right' way. By 'right' I mean a fishkeeping method that is specified to a fish's temperament, water parameters, etc, that creates the best environment possible.

However, there are many, many, MANY wrong ways, that people may insist are right. I will fully admit that just about every aspect of fishkeeping can be debated one way or another with evidence to back it up, it's all a matter of choosing what is best for the owner's personal fish, which may differ from anyone else's. 

I think when people are as passionate as this forum's members are, they try to help as best as they can with what they know.
I always research what is written hear, I do agree that you can't always trust someone. Even those who run fish shops don't always know best.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that there will always be differing opinions, and different advice, but don't just discount it because what you've read other places can seem to discredit it. Remember that at one time it was common practice (even ADVISED) that a pregnant woman drink alcohol daily?
I think fishkeeping can be the same. There's always going to be new information and it may be different from the norm. I'm not saying it's always right, but it might not be wrong either.


----------



## mikejp67 (Mar 31, 2012)

jentralala said:


> I don't quite agree with that. There are in fact many different ways of fish keeping, although very few are the 'right' way. By 'right' I mean a fishkeeping method that is specified to a fish's temperament, water parameters, etc, that creates the best environment possible.
> 
> However, there are many, many, MANY wrong ways, that people may insist are right. I will fully admit that just about every aspect of fishkeeping can be debated one way or another with evidence to back it up, it's all a matter of choosing what is best for the owner's personal fish, which may differ from anyone else's.
> 
> ...


I totally agree. Whats good today most likely wont be good tomorrow. Just because it was written by the good Dr in 1987, doesnt mean its the right way. And anyone of us who have aquariums remember the old ways things were done which are completely out the window today. Nearly everyone on this site is open to new methods and suggestions, but some are not. And state it with a arrogant tone.


----------



## djembekah (Feb 13, 2012)

lol Byron is the least arrogant one on this thread.


----------



## AndrewM21 (Mar 4, 2012)

lakemalawifish said:


> I do not, and highly doubt if anyone else, check the ammonia, nitrite or nitrate levels in my tank before I perform a routine water change (with 800 gals of tanks in our house water changes occur several times a day every day of the week) The only time I do check these water parameters is when, like I stated above, it is a fresh tank set up that is not fully cycled yet, or I have some other concern going on in the tank.


^ Opinion: I keep a very detailed log book of EACH water change on every aquarium I own. This helps me understand (in the event something goes wrong) what went wrong and when. I check my water parameters prior to each PWC weekly regardless of any signs of distress or issues with the system. While many fish owners here (including myself) do not keep multiple large aquariums like yourself, this does not mean we are ignorant to the cause. Some would call this method excessive and that's perfectly fine. But at least I have the comfort of knowing that my water parameters haven't deterred over a period of time without my knowledge and one day I suddenly realize there is an internal mishap that has went unacknowledged for an extended period of time. 

Regardless of how much upkeep you have on your aquarium, you will eventually run into a problem. 



lakemalawifish said:


> The reason I do not feel the need to test my water parameters prior to a routine water change is because I fully trust the Prime product, when used as directed, will cover whatever is going on with the water quality in our tanks. I am grateful to have such a product at my disposal and hope others will use it as directed by the manufacturer, to assist in keeping their aquatic friends healthy.


Again, completely your method of doing things and is completely fine by standards and I have no intent of disputing that. People have different methods of maintaining their aquariums and none should be rightfully disputed unless fact shows it is an improper method and should not be done. If the method works and causes no harm to the habitat, then god speed. 



lakemalawifish said:


> I would like to add here that Prime will bind ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate for 24-48 hours so if a tank is not fully cycled or has other issues that need to be addressed, that is the time frame you have to take care of problem areas, or perform another water change "with Prime" to keep your fish safe until the problem can be determined and addressed.


I would also like to add (my opinion, which is what you have as well) that I have used Byrons advise directly given to me and indirectly (by reading his posts) and have had marvelous outcomes. Obviously if my method of maintaining my aquariums works for me then I have no obvious need to take his advice (nor would you in this case), his advise is still intelligent and shouldn't be disregarded as ignorant.

You obviously have a long standing term when it comes to aquariums and obviously you have your own methods and others may follow your methods, but, be warned before-hand that everyone is [not] going to agree with your methods and will choose different methods that work for them and thus would choose not to follow your advice and choose the advice of another. This does not mean your method is wrong, it simply means the chosen individual would rather use a different method that would work all as well as yours as their chosen method. 

You can sit here and having a wizzing contest all day with Byron, but it will not change the fact that your method nor his method works better than the other in terms how certain individuals choose to maintain their aquariums. 

Good luck


----------



## pop (Aug 29, 2012)

hello:
One factor that is being missed here is gaining knowledge bestows authority of subject to the individual to the extent of the knowledge. Being fish keepers we all have some authority of knowledge of the subject through experience, discourse and contemplation of specific events. We all are enamored with ziet-gist (spirit) of aquaria and believe our particular paradigm is the only view that is sound and resist the inclusion of other concepts. The reason I come to this forum is I wish to partake dialog with others knowledge of subject and have increased my own knowledge. In a dialog one is limited to considering ideas and concepts and not to challenge authority of subject by degrading the dialog to personal incriminations and false reasoning.

I am very disappointed in this thread we have lowered our high standards and reduced a viable topic of water changes to quibbling over a piece of candy.
pop


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

mikejp67 said:


> I totally agree. Whats good today most likely wont be good tomorrow. Just because it was written by the good Dr in 1987, doesnt mean its the right way. And anyone of us who have aquariums remember the old ways things were done which are completely out the window today. Nearly everyone on this site is open to new methods and suggestions, but some are not. And state it with a arrogant tone.


I find this very ironic. If you give some intelligent thought to what I post, you will readily find that in the vast majority of cases I am actually advocating methods or ideas that are so new most here have never heard of them or thought about them. Scientific discoveries carry us forward, and I have never been regressive as you are suggesting. It is you who needs to change your thinking.

And frankly, this discussion is not relevant to this or any other thread.


----------



## AbbeysDad (Mar 28, 2011)

Hmmm... This has been an 'interesting', if not slightly disappointing thread compelling me to make a few observations...

First, it goes without saying that there is a plethora of really bad advice advice out there by well meaning hobbyists. Unfortunately a good lie told often enough, no matter how absurd, seems to be true... until it's examined more closely.

On the issue of the amount of conditioner required for partial water changes. Lets first consider that not all aquariums are equal. A well planted, established tank with only a moderate amount of stock is very different from a non planted, newer tank that's more heavily stocked. Not to mention potential negative maintenance factors and differing water change volumes and frequencies.
We might say that 'x' amount of conditioner is required for 'y' amount of water. Now we have two camps. One says that we only need an amount required for the new source water, regardless of how it's introduced, while the other feels the conditioner required is the amount of the total volume.
The justification stated for the latter is that the effects of conditioner for dechlorination will be reduced by the amount of ammonia, nitrite and nitrates in the water. Okay, first, except for very special cases, we can rule out ammonia and nitrites as they just don't exist in any amounts to be a factor. Next, are we to conclude that the same active ingredient that dechlorinates also detoxifies nitrates?
The process of dechlorination creates ammonia, so binding ammonia and/or converting to ammonium is a good thing. 
We can not dispute that so many successfully only add the amount of conditioner required for the volume of new source water. However, we might infer that this is only safely possible when other water quality factors promote success. In some cases, where water quality is lower, it may be safer to use a larger amount of conditioner to better ensure stock safety.

Lets talk about total dissolved solids just a little. I have spent years (30+) in organic gardening. I have made manure, compost and vermicompost teas. A diluted liquid manure of sorts used to fertilize plants. Although far less concentrated, this is exactly what happens in every filter and every substrate to decayed organic material. A brown polluted water containing containing copious amounts of crud. Pure water has very little of this. Our objective in fishkeeping should be to keep TDS as low as possible to achieve the purest water practical.

Now lets talk about NITRATES...a subject I DO know a little something about. As I have stated (or is it whined) in many threads, I have very high nitrates in my well water. I blame this on the 95 acre farmers field across the road that gets a fair amount of organic and chemical fertilizers.

Lakemalawifish, I appreciate your enthusiasm regarding Seachem Matrix. As much as I see the comparison to live rock, the micro and macro pores in Matirx 'should' promote the culture of anaerobic bacteria to convert nitrates into nitrogen gas.
*Unfortunately*, I have been working with Seachem Techs on their support site for over a year using Matrix and De*Nitrate with Stability with no evidence of nitrate reduction! Seachem repeatedly told me my setup should work fine but my test results cannot confirm it.

With respect to the synthetic polymers: Seachem Purigen does a good job of adsorbing dissolved organics and as such should indirectly reduce tank generated nitrates. Purigen is regenerated several times with a 50/50 solution of chlorine bleach and water.
API Nitra-Zorb as well as Fluval Lab Series Nitrate Remover both adsorb nitrates, removing them from the water column. Both are regenerated several times in concentrated salt water. Use life is significantly reduced if/when dissolved organics plug pores. (I have successfully used these products primarily to pre-filter my well water to remove nitrates).

I will reserve comment on the point / counter point 'debate', except to say that I have come to value Byron's opinions, resulting from study and observations based on years of experience.


----------



## Bluewind (Oct 24, 2012)

I didn't want to get so... detailed, but I think that opinions gain credibility with research, facts, and data and loose credibility with agression and negitive emotions. It's kind of like when people get in an argument and in place of proof, they use a lot of pathos and try to discredit the other parties with slander. Political canadates use this tactic all the time.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## lakemalawifish (Nov 24, 2012)

This thread, that started out as an innocent request for information on how to perform water changes has gone crazy. I chimed in because I have been corresponding with the author of this posting who is in the process of starting up a Lake Malawi Cichlid tank. I did not want "bad" advice regarding how to perform water changes to affect this person's new tank and beautiful fish.

When it comes to our fish, I am very picky about choosing companies to do business with, whether it be the food we feed them or tank maintenance products. There are some good, some not so good, and some bad ones. Just like some of the advice in this forum, you pick and choose for yourself.

We may have only been keeping fish for 3 years, but we have had to learn fast and furious. Thankfully, we have a wonderful friend who we get our Lake Malawi and Lake Tanganyika Wild Caught and F1 Cichlids from who has over 20 years experience raising and breeding these fish. He is a wonderful mentor and it is a great privilege for us to be able to spend time at his fish farm, talk with him and purchase his outstanding fish. He is a very kind person, does not push his authority, and he does not have to. What he has accomplished in 20+ years speaks for itself, and he is not finished yet. He is in the process of building a huge green house to equip heated ponds for raising large predatory cichlids year-round. I admire him, and I think you would too.

His website is: African Cichlids in Nashville, Tennessee riftfish.com

For some reason, the Video link on his main page is not working (probably because his emphasis is on his fish, not his website, so I will let him know)... but if you click on "stock list" then "video"... the video on the top is one I took while at his fish farm. It is not the greatest as I am no pro, but he liked it.

This is where I come in with this whole deal. I was very frustrated with Byron for what I consider to be bad advice as to Seachem's instructions on dosing prime. Then he throws in lots of other variables that do not pertain to the question at hand that not only confused the heck out of me, but I am sure would confuse someone new to the hobby who is asking a simple question. I was wrong for showing how upset I was, and I apologized for it. But, the simple fact still remains... most people here, including myself, are here for answers, not to be bombarded with scientific data that is hard to understand or have other issues that really do not pertain to the question thrown in to further complicate matters.

Then you have the posts where moderators and friends of moderators are taking up for each other... I can't even tell who is picking on who anymore, and I am sure I am being picked on and called arrogant and don't even realize it anymore. This is pathetic to say the least. I feel as if I have joined a forum full of tyrants who are ganging up on me now and it is totally taking the fun out of having nice conversations with anybody here. Even the newbies who have questions about their 10 gallon tanks, who I am trying to help the best I can. I am so frustrated with this forum that I cannot even think straight anymore to help these people. We started out with a 10 gallon tank and Platies and now have 800 gallons of fish, because we love this hobby. I do not love all of this bickering. Sure... I did step out of line and I am sorry I did that. But, I have yet to hear anyone apologize to me for the rude, sarcastic and arrogant comments they have thrown back at me.

I have given this individual my personal email address so I can try to help them set up their Lake Malawi tank. I am now removing myself from this forum as soon as I post this message. I am a member of other forums and have never seen anything as ridiculous as this.


----------



## jeaninel (Aug 24, 2007)

Wow, what a novel this thread has turned into. Lol

I have always thought that the reason for adding the conditioner for the full volume of the tank _when adding directly to the tank_ was because the conditioner would be too diluted if the amount added was only enough for the volume of water removed compared to if you are pre-conditioning water in a bucket before adding it to the tank. I don't use Prime, I use AquaSafe but since I use a Python on most of my tanks (not the 10 or 20 gallon) I do add enough for the full volume of the tank. When I use the bucket method for my smaller 10 and 20 gallon I only treat the replacement water. Maybe my reasoning is wrong but it's what has worked for me and my fish are healthy. I also do clean my filter pads at each water changes (swished in dechlor water) and this removes a ton of crud. I don't touch the biomedia (ceramic beads) except every few months they do get a swishing in dechlor water. I have never touched the biowheels on the Penguin 350s I have.

Everyone has a method that they are comfortable with so when asking "what's everyone's preferred method" you are bound to get many different responses. And it is an interesting learning experience to hear everyone's methods and opinions.


----------



## jeaninel (Aug 24, 2007)

Lakemalawifish, I am so sorry you have had such a bad experience on this forum. I have been a member here for many years and this is one of the best forums (yes, I am a member of a few other forums). But I do see your point about feeling ganged up on as I do see on this on occasion in other threads as well. But there really are a lot of wonderful and very knowledgeable people on this forum so it's a shame when a few make a new member feel unwelcomed.


----------



## Bluewind (Oct 24, 2012)

Mal, I'm sorry you misunderstood my comment. I wasn't taking up for anyone. I was just saying that I know you are a passionate fishkeeper who loves her pets and wants to help, but when you try to discredit others with angry comments, it discredits you and what you stand for. If you believe they are wrong, prove it with proof, hard facts, and data. Your opinion will be better heard and your wonderful wealth of knowlege will be credited and weighed aproppriatly. Anything else just makes you look... petty. Like disagreeing for disagreements sake. I can see that you are a passionate fishkeeper. Please don't let your knowledge be lost in the muck 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Mikaila31 (Dec 18, 2008)

This thread has gotten quite silly, regardless I have learned something. Thank you Byron for the TDS and Prime comment as this is new information for me. 

Prior to august this thread would not interest me in the slightest. Water changes for me always had been simply drain tank, connect hose to tap, and refill. Dechlor is either not used or used depending on the tap water at the various places I have lived in the past. I know my tap water better then my tank water and that is really the only thing I test is the tap. My current tap has initial readings of a pH of 8.5, 0.5ppm ammonia, 0 nitrites, 5ppm Nitrate, and a TDS reading of ~130ppm. This water isn't great for doing direct water changes to my planted tanks mainly because of the pH. I let my water sit in a 33gallon garbage can for at least 24 hours before pumping it into the tanks. After sitting 24 hours the pH drops to 7.8. I tried to use an 40/60 RO mix for a few months only to find there was much too little buffering capacity as my largest tank would drop to a pH of 6.6.

I do not currently use any dechlor or water treatment on my tap apart from letting it sit. It does indeed have chloramines in it, indicated by the 0.5ppm ammonia it always has. I run heavily planted tanks and neither they nor me care about a bit of ammonia or chloramines. Both will get used up very very fast before they do any real damage. I do 50% water changes and do run my filter during them and my fish are very happy and breeding. 

As far as TDS goes to some individuals it does matter. As I have already stated I have a TDS meter as well as a pH meter. Both cost roughly $10 off ebay and they are the really the only things I test. I use to never test anything regularly but my current tap water requires more monitoring then most. There are ideal TDS ranges depending on the type of fish. However I simply find it an easy test to preform that tells you a single number for everything in the water (hardness, ammonia, fertilizers, organics, ect) its all reported as TDS. Simply comparing tap and tank TDS against eachother tells you how the tank is doing. I use heavy fertilizers an i'm sure my tanks produce more organics then most so TDS difference is pretty significant. Every tank behaves differently. You do not want TDS as low as possible except for very few fish which are the sensitive softwater ones. Fish like african cichlids would want it on the high end. For example my tap TDS is ~130ppm. I was sick all last week and did not change the water in my 20 gallon so its a week behind. I tested it today and its TDS is 261ppm. In comparison nitrate in tap is 5 and in that tank it is ~25ppm. This reason it is said you do water changes for much more then just nitrate. Much more goes on in a tank then just the nitrogen cycle. The 100ppm of buildup in the tank over 2 weeks not counting nitrate is why water changes should be done regardless of nitrate. 

As far as prime and TDS goes. The prime solution itself does have a very high TDS. I've never tried testing it before, but I did learn my meter can't lol. It just gives me an error trying to test 100% prime solution. Nor could I test it at 50%. Eventually I got a 1:6 ratio of prime to RO that did test, I think thats 14% prime. The TDS of that mixture was 7530ppm. For control the RO water it was mixed with measured at 7ppm. A very high TDS for prime is expected given how concentrated it is. When dosed to tanks its not going to have a large effect IMO, but I also dry dose fertilizers heavily so in comparison to literally adding solids to the tank it does not have as much of an effect. A single dose of prime on my tanks could not really be detected as far as changing TDS. Doing the maximum allowable dose of 4x did however show a 15ppm increase in TDS. 

Okay thats my addition to this silly thread hopefully it helps someone. Now to go remove all the prime from my tanks....


----------



## twocents (Feb 22, 2010)

what works for one individual, may not work for another. one of the reasons we have water tests.. 
I never have even thought about 'TDS', and I have had it mentioned to me by another fish keeper elsewhere. 

as for methodology of water change? I keep a rubbermaid 50 gallon garbage can full of water with a heater and small water ciculation pump. It usually sits for a week before I use it. As far as I know, Suffolk County Water Authority does not use cholarmines as of yet. I use a gravel cleaner to dump the water out the window. A 1/6 hp sump pump with a hose attached refills the tanks. So far, I have not used any conditioner although I think I will start using the API tap water conditioner I was using afore hand to guard against a sudden unannounced change in water quality and additives. I will just put it into the 55 gallon along with the refill water.


----------



## AbbeysDad (Mar 28, 2011)

lakemalawifish said:


> This thread, that started out as an innocent request for information on how to perform water changes has gone crazy. I chimed in because I have been corresponding with the author of this posting who is in the process of starting up a Lake Malawi Cichlid tank. I did not want "bad" advice regarding how to perform water changes to affect this person's new tank and beautiful fish.
> 
> When it comes to our fish, I am very picky about choosing companies to do business with, whether it be the food we feed them or tank maintenance products. There are some good, some not so good, and some bad ones. Just like some of the advice in this forum, you pick and choose for yourself.
> 
> ...


I have reread this thread twice and cannot find a single "rude, sarcastic and/or arrogant comment thrown back to you."

The real 'issue' here is challenging the notion of how much conditioner is required when doing partial water changes. Byron's (and many others) longstanding position and point was that for the better part of 20+ years, he has successfully used only the amount of conditioner required for the new source water being added, even when mixed in the tank. 
I too used to think that in so doing, the conditioner would be diluted and less effective. On the other hand, the active ingredient that breaks down chlorine into ammonia and other elements is not not affected by water volume, but more by the amount of chlorine/chloromine. It is not clear to what extent this affects Prime's ability to also detoxify nitrates and heavy metals. I submit that Seachem doesn't even know since in their words, this was an "unexpected benefit of the product".
I'm also suspicious of the claim that Prime is safe at up to 5 times the recommended dose. I can't think of anything else that's 'safe' at 5 times a 'normal dose'.

Also, within the frame of the conversation, I believe it's valid to point out that using any excess chemicals is unnecessary and likely does more harm than good. I don't think referring to total dissolved solids (although perhaps less of a concern than the actual chemicals involved) is too technical for this forum.

Finally, as I mentioned, I've dealt with Seachem Technical Support personnel repeatedly for well over a year. I find them generally knowledgeable, however in many cases I've found that one will write something that another will completely contradict in subsequent posts or in another thread. Even they have differing opinions about their products and proper usage.

I think it's sad that anyone would abandon this forum because their opinion on something was challenged by someone else, especially a more experienced fish keeper. After all, why are we all here if not to participate, exchange ideas, share and learn?


----------



## beaslbob (Oct 17, 2012)

Mikaila31 said:


> ..
> 
> I do not currently use any dechlor or water treatment on my tap apart from letting it sit. It does indeed have chloramines in it, indicated by the 0.5ppm ammonia it always has. I run heavily planted tanks and neither they nor me care about a bit of ammonia or chloramines. Both will get used up very very fast before they do any real damage. I do 50% water changes and do run my filter during them and my fish are very happy and breeding.
> 
> ...


Glad to hear this from someone else. It has been my experience for years and year but then I just top off and do no whater changes.


I have even heard that public water systems have to be flushed out because they get nitrates in the pipes. Seems the aerobic bacteria in our tanks flouish and break down the chloramines.

All I know for sure is I top off with untreated tap water to my tanks and just like you there is absolutely no indication of stress to the fish.

Still just my .02


----------



## jeaninel (Aug 24, 2007)

AbbeysDad said:


> the active ingredient that breaks down chlorine into ammonia and other elements is not not affected by water volume, but more by the amount of chlorine/chloromine.


See, I learn something new everyday in this hobby! 

AD, You have proof to back that up buddy? :tease: Haha, just kidding. But really, I'm no scientist so would never have known that.


----------



## twocents (Feb 22, 2010)

just to add some more, I add straight tap water to my small betta tank. I have a double tail in a 5.5 gallon, and before anyone gets their panties in a wad, this fish cannot swim well at all. 
Was a sort of 'rescue', who almost died on me and was tough enough to revive. (he was floating on his side on top of the water). 
he is a very happy fish (at least I think he's happy) and comes out of the greenery to have his betta treats


----------



## mikejp67 (Mar 31, 2012)

Byron said:


> I find this very ironic. If you give some intelligent thought to what I post, you will readily find that in the vast majority of cases I am actually advocating methods or ideas that are so new most here have never heard of them or thought about them. Scientific discoveries carry us forward, and I have never been regressive as you are suggesting. It is you who needs to change your thinking.
> 
> And frankly, this discussion is not relevant to this or any other thread.


I never said that you were regressive. What I was saying is that you think your way is the right and only way. None of which are opinions. Which brings me back to one of my questions about your credentials. You seemed to have written half of this site. 
What are your credentials?


----------



## Mikaila31 (Dec 18, 2008)

mikejp67 said:


> I never said that you were regressive. What I was saying is that you think your way is the right and only way. None of which are opinions. Which brings me back to one of my questions about your credentials. You seemed to have written half of this site.
> What are your credentials?


Honestly I've seen no where in this thread where byron has said his methods are the only right way to do anything. There is no one right way to do much of anything in this hobby. If you want to fill straight from the tap or let water sit for a period, dosing dechlor or not, dosing it for the full tank or just the water changed, paying attention to TDS or ignoring it completely. Honestly ALL these methods are right IMO as long as they work with your tap water. In the end thats all any one wants, is something that works. There is no righter method IMO. Tap water is variable hence variable methods, no method is right for all tap water.


----------



## Molinious (Jan 12, 2012)

Regarding watr changes i always replace what iv taken out using buckets, usually 40litres per tanks, they are both 140ltres. Im in th e uk and usually use a product called fresh start, but i have found a different product that is in a crystal form and the useage is only 0.10 >0.30 of a gram per 10 litres of water. Its called sodium thiosulphate and i have noticed a bneficial change in plant growth and color since using it. The fish arent affected neither are my CRS.
The cost of this product is vastly less than any of the liquids i have previously used.
Anyone else using this or have any thoughts or imformation please feel free to respnd...........nicely :-D


----------



## Mikaila31 (Dec 18, 2008)

Yes I also have a pound of sodium thiosulfate which cost me $5. It is typcially the same exact thing found in most the dechlors out there. Its certainly the cheapest way to dechlor water. I've never really noticed any difference from it. I mix it up as a liquid basically to recreate a liquid dechlor then use that as its easier to measure liquids then fractions of a gram. I know my one pound can treat 260,000 gallons of water. 

Also something that has not been pointed out regarding dechlor doseage is most all dechlors are dosed in far excess even following the recommend doseage. Prime I know recommened doseage treats 4ppm chlorine and 5ppm chloramines, which is often many times the levels found in tap water. The legal limit for chlorine and chlormines is both 4ppm in the US. Often at your tap the levels are 2ppm or less unless they are flushing the lines. I've yet to have tap water with levels over 1ppm. This is why feel knowing my tap water is better then knowing my tank water. I don't really care whats in the tank, I want to know what it going into it. From there it is fairly easy to predict what will occur in the tank.


----------



## Molinious (Jan 12, 2012)

Its easy enough to measure out, i bought myself some gold scales for it, does the job nicely


----------



## Mikaila31 (Dec 18, 2008)

Molinious said:


> Its easy enough to measure out, i bought myself some gold scales for it, does the job nicely


yes I have a jewelers scale as well which is what I use to make up solution. I just don't want to have to pull the scale out every time I need to dose sodium thiosulfate. So I make a concentrated solution stick it in an old dechlor bottle and simply dose that to the tank measuring out mL to gallons, which I find easier then messing with the scale so much.


----------



## Molinious (Jan 12, 2012)

I just fimd it works out soooooo much cheaper especially as a bought liquid doesnt last to long,changing 80+lites a week. Be evenworse we i getmy other 2 online


----------



## Mikaila31 (Dec 18, 2008)

Yes it is very cheap and definelty my favorite dechlor as well. its simply the most basic way you can dechlor with no other additives. I'm not sure how your stuff comes however mine is crystals that are pretty large. Some weighing over a gram each which may be why I find i harder to weigh out. 

I mentioned before I don't like to go by standard dosing instructions but I know many prefer the ease of them. Rather I like to determine how much chlorine is present then dose accordingly. Typically when I bother to use a chlorine test however tap water barely registers and I decide whatever and don't even bother removing it lol. As you add untreated water to a tank it is diluted by the exsisting water and both chlorine and chloramines are quickly exhausted in a aquarium, especially planted ones as they bind to organics.


----------



## Molinious (Jan 12, 2012)

The crystals i have are quite small and barely need the ip of a teaspoon full


----------

