# Water tested everything! What do I do?



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Tap Water
PH 7.6
Hr PH 7.8
Ammo .50 ppm
Nitrites 0 ppm
Nitrates 0 ppm

10 Gallon overstocked, planted tank 2-3 50% water changes per week
Currently 83 degrees
PH 7.6
Hr PH 8.0
Ammo .25 ppm
Nitrites 5 ppm
Nitrates 10 ppm

55 Gallon cycling, lightly planted, no fish
Currently 79 Degrees
PH 7.6
hr PH 7.4
Ammo 0 ppm
Nitrites 0 ppm
Nitrates 0 ppm

The 55 has been cycling for a couple weeks now, with media, plants and gravel from a cycled tank. Is it okay to transfer my 10 Gallon community over to that one? I'm debating on drift wood, how much could I expect my PH to fall? <2 lbs wood for 55 gallons. Do I even want it to fall? Help?

Also do you have stocking suggestions for the 55 gallon? I am not a fan of cichlids or aggressive fish.


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

I think you should begin moving a few fish to the larger aquarium. It will help it to cycle, and will remove some of your biolad from the smaller tank. If I was getting 5.0 ppm nitrite readings, I'd be doing 50% changes repetitively until I could get a reading of less than 1.0. I'm hoping you might have missed a decimal there, like that it's actually 0.5? 

As to stocking that 55-gallon goes, the sky's the limit for you! If I were you, I might look at some of the bigger gouramis (Kissing gouramis and Blue Gouramis are two species that jump to mind as being very tolerant of water with a relatively high pH), a school of clown loaches, and maybe a couple trios of Bleher's rainbowfish. 2-3 SAEs might come in handy, as well.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Mister Sparkle said:


> If I was getting 5.0 ppm nitrite readings, I'd be doing 50% changes repetitively until I could get a reading of less than 1.0. I'm hoping you might have missed a decimal there, like that it's actually 0.5? .


Big changes are the plan of the day for Saturday. THe rock is out of the tank and I've got my buckets lined up lol.



Mister Sparkle said:


> 2-3 SAEs might come in handy, as well.


SAEs? What does that stand for? I'm going to do some research on The Guarmis, rainbows, and loaches you suggested. Thank you


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

Sorry! SAE = Siamese Algae Eater.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

*Discovered the issue with the ten gallon!*

Turns out, not only did I have a batch of dead fry, my kids have been feeding the fish at five in the morning.:evil:

I just finished a huge water change and could not believe how much refuse and fish flakes were floating about. As I siphened off the bottom, kicking the gravel around, I kicked up about ten dead fry. They were way early. The mama probably had those early because of the conditions. 

SO, I did about 70% water change. After watching the existing filter miss all the stuff floating, I decided to go big. I have my 350 biowheel on the front of the tank. The five Platy and em. cats are moved to the big tank and left 5 molly/guppies. That should ease the bio load and distribute the pending fry more evenly. I'm going to run my huge filter with redundant filters for another couple of hours then do another test and possible another water change. Oh and I pulled the big rock out of there.

After water change & before big filter, and fish removal:
PH 7.4 down
Ammonia .25 ppm same
Nitrite 5.0 ppm same
Nitrate 80 ppm (It was up 70 ppm from yesterday's 10 AFTER the water change according to my math, the test kit doesn't even go as high as it probably was.)

Will test again this evening. Wish me luck:-(


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Second question: Fertilizer for the plants. What should I use? Should I use it? Will affect my levels?


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

TexasTanker said:


> Second question: Fertilizer for the plants. What should I use? Should I use it? Will affect my levels?


:lol: Based on those nitrate readings, there should be no need for fertilizer at this time!


----------



## JohnnyD44 (Dec 5, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> Second question: Fertilizer for the plants. What should I use? Should I use it? Will affect my levels?


 
Do you know what kind of plants you plan on keeping?? Based on what you decide, we can recommend different kinds of ferts.

Stem plants and rooted plants depend on two different kinds of ferts. Stem plants rely on the water column for their nutrients, which means you'll need a liquid fertilizer. Seachem's "Flourish Comprehensive" is widely recommened by all the members on here.

Rooted plants, such as crypts and swords rely on a gravel based fert. Seachem also makes "root tabs" that you imbed in your gravel and replace every 3 months or so.

So if you end up going with say, sword plants and vals, you'll need both the comrehensive liquid fert and the root tabs. 

Those are the two I use. I dose my tank weekly with the liquid fert. Both have worked great in my tank without affecting the parameters


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

I would try to change some of your filter media. If you are still getting the same readings AFTER a 70% water change, I suspect there's a major constant contributor. I also worry that the existing biofilter may have crashed. 

One other question for you: have you tested your tap water for nitrite?


----------



## JohnnyD44 (Dec 5, 2008)

good point,

what does your tap water test at?? I never thought it coud be an issue and one day i was bored and tested mine, my tap water a natural reading of 10ppm....


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

JohnnyD44 said:


> good point,
> 
> what does your tap water test at?? I never thought it coud be an issue and one day i was bored and tested mine, my tap water a natural reading of 10ppm....


cold - 7.6 PH, 0.5 ppm Ammonia, 0 ppm Nitrate/trite Hot has a little more ammonia and nitrites.



Mister Sparkle said:


> I would try to change some of your filter media. If you are still getting the same readings AFTER a 70% water change, I suspect there's a major constant contributor. I also worry that the existing biofilter may have crashed.
> One other question for you: have you tested your tap water for nitrite?


 The filter that goes to that tank is a Aqueon Whisper 10. I'm purchasing a bio-wheel for it tomorrow. See below.... it got worse with another change...

And yes, it is part of why I do not use hot water from my tap. Yucky hot water heater.



JohnnyD44 said:


> Do you know what kind of plants you plan on keeping?? Based on what you decide, we can recommend different kinds of ferts.
> 
> Stem plants and rooted plants depend on two different kinds of ferts. Stem plants rely on the water column for their nutrients, which means you'll need a liquid fertilizer. Seachem's "Flourish Comprehensive" is widely recommened by all the members on here.
> 
> ...


Right now I have Hornwort, Foxtail, Anacharis and a couple unidentifiables that straggled with the chosen plants and latched on.



Mister Sparkle said:


> :lol: Based on those nitrate readings, there should be no need for fertilizer at this time!


Aint that the truth... I have a feeling that if my tests could read higher, it would be much higher.... the shade of purple my test is making isn't on the card.



After the 70% water change I set up my big biowheel 350 on the little tank, took out eight fish, and left it alone for about four to five hours.

When I got home I tested again.
PH 7.6 up
Ammo .5 up
trite 5.0 ppm same
trate 80 ppm same

I did a 50% water change using my gravel vac thingy. The water I put in tested at 7.4, 0ppm, 0ppm, 0ppm.

I waited an hour and tested it yet again...
PH - 7.6
Ammo - 1.0 ppm
trite - I dunno, it was hot pink, not a shade of purple... I guess it's close to 5.0 ppm (repeated twice, slowly.. reading and counting carefully... no amount of lighting changed how that looked)
trate - depends on the lighting..... could be 10ppm(LED lighting) or 80 ppm (incandescent).... 

I'm beginning to wish I got test strips.... Do they have digital tests like those new fancy pregnancy tests that have the smiley faces down to frowny faces? or a number readout? I mean that's all we really need here.

And yes, I've tested the nitrite test on other water sources including bottled water, other tanks and tap. All gave reasonable and recognizable readings.

Okay, so I clearly need a better filter. Based on my frigged up testing here... Do I have too many plants? Am I gonna have to dump the tank and re start? I'm ready to at this point. If the tests are coming back that high so soon after a water change then it defies all my math skills. pffff:roll:


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

TexasTanker said:


> Do they have digital tests like those new fancy pregnancy tests that have the smiley faces down to frowny faces? or a number readout? I mean that's all we really need here.
> 
> And yes, I've tested the nitrite test on other water sources including bottled water, other tanks and tap. All gave reasonable and recognizable readings.
> 
> Okay, so I clearly need a better filter. Based on my frigged up testing here... Do I have too many plants? Am I gonna have to dump the tank and re start? I'm ready to at this point. If the tests are coming back that high so soon after a water change then it defies all my math skills. pffff:roll:


OK...first of all...I was only JUST THINKING about trying to come up with a test system that does EXACTLY what you just described. If you invent it, I expect a cut! :lol:

I would keep doing 50% changes until you start to get a reading that makes you feel better (change it, test it, change it again). Just by the simple dynamic of dilution, you are bound to cut into that nitrite reading. Nitrite poisoning can be really bad...it's worth the work. Believe me. I can remember having issues like yours. Don't give up. There's a light at the end of the tunnel, as long as your tap water isn't the source.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Mister Sparkle said:


> OK...first of all...I was only JUST THINKING about trying to come up with a test system that does EXACTLY what you just described. If you invent it, I expect a cut! :lol:



Dibs... period. ;-)


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

*The midnight test 10 Gallon*

Ph - 7.6 same
Ammo - 1.0 ppm ammo carb added to filter, will retest in 24 hours
Nitrite - Still hot pink ? ~5.0 same
Nitrate - 0ppm down

I'm at a loss! I think I've changed the water six times now. The Nitrites are not going down AT ALL!!! I'm going to take the water in and get an independent test done and see what they say. Maybe the nitrite test solution is not compatible with my tank lol. 

To be safe, I'm gonna skip a feeding (and lock the food in the gun cabinet....grrrr kids) retest tomorrow at LFS and probably do another water change. Also picking up a bio wheel filter for the tank. The booklet with the test reads like an advertisement for their products. One was Nitrazorb. Supposedly it will absorb my nitrites and nitrates. I have had the tank set up for a solid three months and it should have cycled completely by now, but should have isn't fool proof. I worry about circumventing the natural filter but my fish need a break. Would it be okay to use this product?

The Platy and emerald cats like the big tank. Now I gotta get it all the way together. So much for taking my time. The good news is my kid's tanks will be up by Friday and they can use our current platy/molly/guppy population to cycle their tanks.:lol:


Super big thanks to everyone that's been walking me through this;-). This tank spiked a month and a half ago but went back to normal a couple days later with ONE water change. This is insane. I gotta go lock up the fish food and play tooth fairy (FYI, don't let your kids watch The Toothfairy movie if they're still losing teeth. both mine yanked out teeth tonight:roll


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

TexasTanker said:


> Would it be okay to use this product?
> :roll


Normally, I'd say no. But extreme times call for extreme measures. Have you had the opportunity to change out your filter media?


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Does that mean change filters? Or does that mean change brand? I added ammo carb to the filter chamber. It is worth pointing out that the crap that came with the tank SUCKS!!!. with a basic filter the water couldn't get through so it flows right over a little lip and back out. No wonder the water was uber nasty.


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

What kind of filter are we talking about? If you have a hang-on-the-back external power filter, they almost always come with cartridges...these should be changed approximately every month or so. I change mine @ about 3 weeks.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Yes, it is a hang on the back kind. I changed the filter three days ago, I'll do that again now. I'm fixin to scuttle the whole tank and start over. there is no reason for this nitrite to be soooooo damned high.


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

hmmmmm....time for a full 100% change, perhaps?


----------



## iamntbatman (Jan 3, 2008)

I would get a second reading. What test kit are you using? Are you sure the test kit hasn't expired? Getting a permanent 5.0 ppm nitrite reading even after doing water changes with 0 ppm water makes no sense at all to me.

How are you cycling the 55g? If you've got zeroes across the board it seems like the tank isn't cycling yet.

I can't say I agree with some of Mr. Sparkle's stocking suggestions for the 55g. Three spot gouramis would work (blue, gold) but I'd only get one as they can be territorial/aggressive with one another. Kissing gouramis can grow up to a foot long so should really be in a bigger tank than a 55g. Clown loaches also grow to well over a foot and are active schoolers so should be in a much larger tank than a 55g.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> Yes, it is a hang on the back kind. I changed the filter three days ago, I'll do that again now. I'm fixin to scuttle the whole tank and start over. there is no reason for this nitrite to be soooooo damned high.


 
Material in the filter be it a cartridge,sponge,pad,etc is where the bacteria needed to cycle a tank lives and it IS a living thing. Changing out the material, sponge,pad,cartridge,etc will remove a significant portion of the needed bacteria, so too will washing the material in tapwater containing chlorine.
Filter should not need cleaning too often if feedings are not excessive, and should it ever need cleaning, best to clean it in dechlorinated water or old aquarium water .
Dechlorinator such as PRIME or AMQUEL + and tapwater is all that is needed to add to the aquarium at each water change.
Adding ammonia scavengers such as ammo-lock or similar products can skew the results of some test kits and also slow down the (cycling ) process by robbing the bacteria of food.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

I am using API Freshwater Master test kit. It is not expired. I'm getting outside tests done today. the place closed before I could get there yesterday. 

The 55 Gallon has been running for a week or so with gravel from a cycled tank (kept wet in transit) and plants from a cycled tank (not the nitrite tank). Given the 10g tank's condition I did move my emerald cats and five platy over to the 55. So it is cycling now. I'm not going to stock the 55 with long term residents until it's all the way cycled and I have it planted and set up just the way I want it. 

I did another series of tests yesterday, testing the water in the filter of the 10, and the tank water. No good. I am getting a Marineland Penguin 150 for it today. I'm thinking to just scrap it and start over. This will give me a chance to get it moved and set up for one of the kids. The current five fish can go to the big tank while I make the changes then the two guppies can come back for the cycle process. 

QUESTION: Can you have too many plants in a tank? Could that be throwing everything off? I've included a recent pic. There are about 15 plants in there. 

I will update tonight.


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

iamntbatman said:


> I can't say I agree with some of Mr. Sparkle's stocking suggestions for the 55g. Three spot gouramis would work (blue, gold) but I'd only get one as they can be territorial/aggressive with one another. Kissing gouramis can grow up to a foot long so should really be in a bigger tank than a 55g. Clown loaches also grow to well over a foot and are active schoolers so should be in a much larger tank than a 55g.


Typical adult clown loaches are between 7 and 10 inches. While 55-gallon may be pushing it, I've done it before with very little issue. While you feel that it may be generally advisable to house them in a larger space (and your opinion is supportable), saying that they grow "well over a foot" isn't very accurate - the largest one ever was I think 14 inches, or "just over" a foot (and it is not the norm). Similarly, I rarely see kissing gouramis get longer than 9 inches and usually they won't be any more than 6 inches, so 55 gallons is pretty sufficient for these fish. As to the aggression in kissers, it's pretty much limited to the "kissing" wars. You won't even have that if there's just one male in the aquarium with 1 or 2 females.

I don't' have a problem with you disagreeing with me on the recommendations...not at all. I just think you exaggerated a touch on the rationale behind your disagreement.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

*The latests tests.... confused now*

TAP WATER:
GH 180
KH 40
PH 7.5
NO2 0
NO3 0
AMMO 0.25

10 GALLON PROBLEM TANK 3 mos old, 3 molly 2 guppy
GH 3
KH 0
PH 7.5
NO2 5.0
NO3 40
AMMO 0~0.25


55 GALLON CYCLING TANK 2 weeks, 5 platy 3 cats
GH 180
KH 40
PH 6.5
NO2 0.5
NO3 0
AMMO 0.5 ~ 1.0

I know to expect the various spikes in the 55 Gallon tank with it cycling. I am doing a 25% water change tomorrow. Can someone give me a run down of the spikes and how they correlate to the cycling process? I am afraid I didn't pay much attention or track anything with the smaller tank and that's why I'm having issues now.

Can someone explain the significance of the GH and KH and how they fluctuate?

Also the PH dropped significantly in the 55 since I last tested. Which leads me to wonder if I got a bum kit to start with? I'm checking their website right now to track the lot numbers.

I was debating on tearing down the ten anyway.... Do you think the five current residents would be okay in the 55 gallon or should I wait until the new 16 gallon tanks are ready to start their cycle on Saturday or Sunday? I don't wanna stress them but if the ten gallon is as toxic as I think it may be, I doubt they'd make it much longer.

On a side note: How to you tell a healthy angel fish from mediocre ones? I saw some today that were really pretty, but I can't tell if they actually look_ good._ Would my 55 be suitable for one or two? After it's cycled and stable of course?

Okay, I think that's all my questions for a few minutes. Thank all of you for answering my questions as I stumble through this.


----------



## iamntbatman (Jan 3, 2008)

Mister Sparkle said:


> Typical adult clown loaches are between 7 and 10 inches. While 55-gallon may be pushing it, I've done it before with very little issue. While you feel that it may be generally advisable to house them in a larger space (and your opinion is supportable), saying that they grow "well over a foot" isn't very accurate - the largest one ever was I think 14 inches, or "just over" a foot (and it is not the norm). Similarly, I rarely see kissing gouramis get longer than 9 inches and usually they won't be any more than 6 inches, so 55 gallons is pretty sufficient for these fish. As to the aggression in kissers, it's pretty much limited to the "kissing" wars. You won't even have that if there's just one male in the aquarium with 1 or 2 females.
> 
> I don't' have a problem with you disagreeing with me on the recommendations...not at all. I just think you exaggerated a touch on the rationale behind your disagreement.


I feel that if a fish has the potential to reach a certain size, it's our obligation to keep them in a tank that will support a fish of that size rather than banking on them being smaller specimens. I never said kissing gouramis were aggressive; however, due to their kissing behaviors, they can "annoy" other fish so shouldn't be kept with particularly shy fish or with fish that might misinterpret the kissing behavior as being more aggressive than it really is and react violently. Due to their potential size, I would not keep kissers in anything smaller than a 75g and believe adult clowns should have yet more space, ideally 100+ gallons.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

Mister Sparkle said:


> Typical adult clown loaches are between 7 and 10 inches. While 55-gallon may be pushing it, I've done it before with very little issue. While you feel that it may be generally advisable to house them in a larger space (and your opinion is supportable), saying that they grow "well over a foot" isn't very accurate - the largest one ever was I think 14 inches, or "just over" a foot (and it is not the norm). Similarly, I rarely see kissing gouramis get longer than 9 inches and usually they won't be any more than 6 inches, so 55 gallons is pretty sufficient for these fish. As to the aggression in kissers, it's pretty much limited to the "kissing" wars. You won't even have that if there's just one male in the aquarium with 1 or 2 females.
> 
> I don't' have a problem with you disagreeing with me on the recommendations...not at all. I just think you exaggerated a touch on the rationale behind your disagreement.


 
Even at seven inches,a group of clown loaches would be quite uncomfortable in 55 gal. Same for the kissing gouramis. The reason we rarely see specimens attain their potential ,is largely due to fish being kept in tanks that do not allow proper growth and or being kept in improperly maintained smaller tanks or even larger tanks. 
Stunted fish are much more commomnly seen in the trade and health issues as a result of stunting often prevent fishes from living long enough to achieve their potential.
Many are those who say... "I'll get a larger tank soon" Some do, and some don't.
I suspect if fishes were puppies or kittens,folks would be more inclined to provide proper enviornments .
Perhaps some day..... Just my two cents.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

I agree with batman and 1077. Here's a link to info on the clown loach from a highly acknowledged site on loaches (contributors include several loach experts in the hobby).
http://www.loaches.com/species-index/clown-loach-chromobotia-macracanthus

And a comment on the angelfish question. In a 55g I would go with 4 or 5 angels, plus a group of bottom fish and a groups of shoaling characins (tetras) suitable for angels. Angels are shoaling fish and should be either in a group or in a pair if you can get a male/female mated pair.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Okay, I've poked around and found some fish that i like. No I do not plan on getting all of these. I do especially like the Zebra Danios. But they would exclude the Angel Fish and discus. Which leads to my next question. Can they do well outside of their ideal KH if everything else is ideal? Is the KH more fro breeding purposes?

**1-2** Veiled Angel fish KH 1-5 PH 5.8-7, up to 6" up to 79 degrees

**10** Zebra Danios schoolers KH 8-12 PH 6.5-7 64-75 degrees

**too tricky**Neon Blue Discus KH 1-3 PH 6-7.5 79-86 degrees

**dunno how many** Flame Dwarf Gourami KH 4-10 PH 6-7.5 72-82 degrees

**1 as the very last introduction into the tank** Double full red cockatoo cichlid KH 2-15 PH 5-7 72-86 degrees

Keep tank static around 73-75 degrees. PH between 6.5 -7.0 KH How variable is KH to the fish?


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

Some fish are more adaptable than others to differing water parameters (in this discussion, hardness and pH). And being commercially (tank) raised or wild-caught also makes a difference on how "adaptable" they may be.

I personally feel the general hardness (GH) is more important than the carbonate hardness (KH). Some wild-caught fish can adapt to somewhat different hardness and pH, though they may not spawn unless maintained in parameters close if not identical to their habitat. But if the fish are not "comfortable" to the extent they will spawn, I suspect the different parameters may have more significance than some might imagine. We do know that hard water can affect internal organs, causing early demise of what otherwise appear as "healthy" fish.

Temperature is important because it can affect the fish's physiology. For instance, mixing zebra danios with discus would not work--aside from other issues, temperature is here significant. The danios would "burn out" at 82-84F, and conversely the discus would chill out below 80F and likely develop other health issues as a result of being quite simply too cool.

With a pH between 6.5 and 7.0 the hardness is likely going to be soft to moderate. You shouldn't have much trouble with the fish you name from this aspect; but the temperature and behaviours are quite a different matter. Sedate fish like discus and angels do not appreciate boisterous active fish like danios in their tank.

Byron.


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

1077 said:


> The reason we rarely see specimens attain their potential ,is largely due to fish being kept in tanks that do not allow proper growth and or being kept in improperly maintained smaller tanks or even larger tanks.
> .


I'm going to go ahead and say that this isn't exactly true.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Byron said:


> Sedate fish like discus and angels do not appreciate boisterous active fish like danios in their tank.
> 
> Byron.


I already nixed the Discus because of the temperature variant. So, you think the angels would be overwhelmed with a school of Danios and a few stragglers?

Thank you


----------



## iamntbatman (Jan 3, 2008)

Mister Sparkle said:


> I'm going to go ahead and say that this isn't exactly true.


http://wetwebmedia.com/FWSubWebIndex/fwchemcommunication.htm

http://wetwebmedia.com/FWSubWebIndex/GrwLmtChems.htm

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119626752/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

http://jeb.biologists.org/cgi/reprint/203/9/1477.pdf

What all of these articles suggest is that hormones can inhibit or promote fish growth. Under stressful circumstances (i.e. being in a tank that's too small, inadequate nutrition, excess nitrate, etc.) growth hormone production may be curbed. Likewise, hormones that prevent fish growth will obviously accumulate faster in a smaller volume of water. As these are chemically-driven phenomena, one can "alleviate" the problem via increasing the water change regimen. However, as we have no way of directly measuring hormone levels present in the water and thus no way of knowing how effective our water changes are in reducing the levels of growth inhibiting hormones, it only makes sense that increasing the volume of water in which we keep our fish is beneficial in preventing stunting problems.


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

There's actually no consistent tell-tale traceable "symptom" to explain for the fact that ALMOST EVERY SINGLE AQUARIUM FISH will NEVER reach its wild size in the aquarium. There's been a lot of scientific speculation, but it is as open-ended as ever. You can take any size of aquarium you want, from 100-10,000 gallons, and I'll give you about a 5% chance that a clown loach will get any longer than 10 inches...I don't care how great you think your water or your feeding is. And there is an ABSOLUTE 0% chance that this fish will reach "well over a foot" in ANY AQUARIUM, ANYWHERE! I've seen it, and I've done it...a clown loach can live AND THRIVE in a 55-gallon aquarium. You need to understand your idea of the "minimum" is a very round figure that is actually pretty arbitrary. There is actually a good amount of literature out there that agrees that 55-gallons is adequate. I'm sorry if I take published authors' word over yours, but in 26-years of keeping fish I've learned that opinions come pretty cheap. I'm more into credentials.

Just ask anyone who made the mistake of buying a red-tailed catfish how much the volume of their aquarium stunted the fish's growth.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

Mister Sparkle said:


> Look, man, there's actually no consistent tell-tale traceable "symptom" to explain for the fact that ALMOST EVERY SINGLE AQUARIUM FISH will NEVER reach its wild size in the aquarium. There's been a lot of scientific speculation, but it is as open-ended as ever. You can take any size of aquarium you want, from 100-10,000 gallons, and I'll give you about a 5% chance that a clown loach will get any longer than 10 inches...I don't care how great you think your water or your feeding is. And there is an ABSOLUTE 0% chance that this fish will reach "well over a foot" in ANY AQUARIUM, ANYWHERE! I've seen it, and I've done it...a clown loach can live AND THRIVE in a 55-gallon aquarium. You need to understand your idea of the "minimum" is a very round figure that is actually pretty arbitrary. There is actually a good amount of literature out there that agrees that 55-gallons is adequate. I'm sorry if I take published authors' word over yours, but in 26-years of keeping fish I've learned that opinions come pretty cheap. I'm more into credentials.
> 
> Just ask anyone who made the mistake of buying a red-tailed catfish how much the volume of their aquarium stunted the fish's growth.


 I will go ahead and say that you arent' exactly accurate. I Too have kept fish for a few decades and your arguments and statements do not hold water.
I have raised more than a few species of loaches including clown loaches (have three presently) and can assure anyone interested that with proper quarters,diet,and tank maint, that they can and do reach ten inches at around six to seven years. They actually grow quite quickly to four or five inches and then the growth slows a little.
If it credentials that interest you, (I prefer expierience) then those at the sites batman listed would be a good source. A few who contribute at the sites listed are indeed published authors and have degrees along with many years of expierience.
I would agree that clown loaches can live and thrive in smaller aquariums when they are juveniles as can many fishes. But minimum tank size holds little value to me and others,, who seek to provide for their pets to the best of their ability. I look to all particular needs of possible fishes that interest me,ALL fishes,,, and potential size of the fish as adult ,is but one consideration. I try to provide accordingly, to do otherwise ,,in my opinion is NOT fishkeeping.(opinions Vary)
I sincerely apologize to original poster of this thread for straying from topic.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> Okay, I've poked around and found some fish that i like. No I do not plan on getting all of these. I do especially like the Zebra Danios. But they would exclude the Angel Fish and discus. Which leads to my next question. Can they do well outside of their ideal KH if everything else is ideal? Is the KH more fro breeding purposes?
> 
> **1-2** Veiled Angel fish KH 1-5 PH 5.8-7, up to 6" up to 79 degrees
> 
> ...


 
Danios are a species that can adapt to various water parameters but will do much better in the long term with cooler waters than the Angelfish. Danios that I have kept and am keeping presently (long finned blue) do much better at temps around 74 to 77 degrees F ,while Angelfish prefer temps between 80 and 82 degrees.
Do also note, that there isn't very much that swims capable of snatching food more quickly than the Danios with the exception of some Barbs, (tiger, Cherry and others). 
This can become problematic at feeding time for rather slow deliberate fish such as Angelfish.
Do google info on" Iridovirus among Dwarf gouramis'' before you place them in your tank. Some report few problems with this species but I believe it to be the exception. I might consider the honey gourami, or Pearl gourami who are said to be hardier.
Have never kept the cockatoo but would also google.. info on care of that particular species and then assimilate all of the info from various sites and form my opinion as you have apparently been doing (wise).


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

Mister Sparkle said:


> I'm going to go ahead and say that this isn't exactly true.


 
I said 'In large part" and it is entirely true and simple albeit perhaps a bit cruel, for each hobbyist to see for themselves.
Place a three inch Clown loach for example (although it applies to many species), in a thirty gal, and another three inch Clown loach in a 55 gal with same decor,same water parameters,same diet, temps,same filtration, same water change and maint routine.
Won't take long to witness the results.
Always somebody who declares that they have,or know someone who has,kept this fish or that fish . Blah, Blah, Blah. 
I could raise a kitten in a bird cage ,holds about as much merit.


----------



## iamntbatman (Jan 3, 2008)

Mister Sparkle said:


> Look, man, there's actually no consistent tell-tale traceable "symptom" to explain for the fact that ALMOST EVERY SINGLE AQUARIUM FISH will NEVER reach its wild size in the aquarium. There's been a lot of scientific speculation, but it is as open-ended as ever. You can take any size of aquarium you want, from 100-10,000 gallons, and I'll give you about a 5% chance that a clown loach will get any longer than 10 inches...I don't care how great you think your water or your feeding is. And there is an ABSOLUTE 0% chance that this fish will reach "well over a foot" in ANY AQUARIUM, ANYWHERE! I've seen it, and I've done it...a clown loach can live AND THRIVE in a 55-gallon aquarium. You need to understand your idea of the "minimum" is a very round figure that is actually pretty arbitrary. There is actually a good amount of literature out there that agrees that 55-gallons is adequate. I'm sorry if I take published authors' word over yours, but in 26-years of keeping fish I've learned that opinions come pretty cheap. I'm more into credentials.
> 
> Just ask anyone who made the mistake of buying a red-tailed catfish how much the volume of their aquarium stunted the fish's growth.


I've provided links to articles by both respected names in the aquarium hobby and scientific studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals that support my position while you have provided nothing of the sort. I might take your opinion more seriously if you could give links or citations for any credible sources that would back up your claims, but so far you haven't done so other than vague references to "the literature." What literature?


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

Mister Sparkle said:


> Look, man, there's actually no consistent tell-tale traceable "symptom" to explain for the fact that ALMOST EVERY SINGLE AQUARIUM FISH will NEVER reach its wild size in the aquarium. There's been a lot of scientific speculation, but it is as open-ended as ever. You can take any size of aquarium you want, from 100-10,000 gallons, and I'll give you about a 5% chance that a clown loach will get any longer than 10 inches...I don't care how great you think your water or your feeding is. And there is an ABSOLUTE 0% chance that this fish will reach "well over a foot" in ANY AQUARIUM, ANYWHERE! I've seen it, and I've done it...a clown loach can live AND THRIVE in a 55-gallon aquarium. You need to understand your idea of the "minimum" is a very round figure that is actually pretty arbitrary. There is actually a good amount of literature out there that agrees that 55-gallons is adequate. I'm sorry if I take published authors' word over yours, but in 26-years of keeping fish I've learned that opinions come pretty cheap. I'm more into credentials.
> 
> Just ask anyone who made the mistake of buying a red-tailed catfish how much the volume of their aquarium stunted the fish's growth.


 
Red tailed Catfish along with other large species too numerous to mention, often don't live long enough to become stunted for reasons already mentioned.
Visiting Clown loach forum(s) along with public aquariums and one can see more than a few very large specimens easily exceeding twelve inches.
The capabilities of waste dilution in larger aquariums between water changes, as opposed to smaller aquariums ,,will ALWAYS result in healthier fish. Healthier fish will ALWAYS grow larger than sickly, or stunted fish.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

*PH Dropping.... what now?*



1077 said:


> Have never kept the cockatoo but would also google.. info on care of that particular species and then assimilate all of the info from various sites and form my opinion as you have apparently been doing (wise).


Thank you:-D



New issue:

I have new tests and have been getting redundant tests from LFS. My PH is dropping. Tap water is 7.5. When I set up the tank it was 7.6. Four days ago it was 6.5. Now my PH is 6.0... maybe lower. :shock:

Here's the current weather conditions:

75 degrees
PH 6.0
GH 0
KH 0
NO2 .5
NO3 20
Ammonia .25

I'm about to do a 25% water change. I've heard the word buffer. Is that what I need? I'm concerned that it's dropping so fast in a cycling tank.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> Thank you:-D
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
If fish store is performing the tests, then I would be leery of any results they produce especially if test strips are being used. If nothing but gravel ,water,and dechlorinator is in the tank and tapwater has ph of 7.5 with your own test kit? then I can see no reason for the ph to fall this sharply. 
Is true that at pH levels below 6.0 nitrifying bacteria cannot thrive and develop much better in more alkaline water such as that you report from the tap. 
If it is API freshwater master kit that is rendering the ph readings then I might be tempted to add some crushed coral to the filter compartment in a mesh bag to help increase the buffering capacity and to keep the (cycling) process from stalling.
It is not uncommon to see fluctuating pH levels during (cycling) but not as sharply I don't believe as that which you report.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

I think we first should be definite on the tap water (or was it well water, sorry, I've forgotten) hardness levels. I'm assuming your latest set of numbers is from the aquarium.

The tap/well water hardness, both GH And KH, will tell us what to expect in any aquarium. Can you give us these, from a reliable (liquid) test?

And second, exactly what is in the tank, in the way of substrate (type of gravel, sand, whatever), real wood, etc.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

My tests AND the LFS are coming back with a PH of 6.0. They also matched when I got the 6.5 a few days ago. 

What can cause the PH to drop so radically? My other tank never experienced a drop during it's cycling process.

After a 40% water change (got carried away vaccuuming ** then found some fry in the tank) the parameters are:
Temp 76 Degrees
GH 0
KH 0
PH 7
NO2 .5~1
NO3 20
Ammonia same

What does a 0 GH and KH mean? What is the purpose of a buffer? What will the coral do? Is that the same thing?


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Quick question... Rocks bring up PH and wood brings it down? Could I potentially scuttle a few rocks? Does this exclude all the wood I've been soaking for three weeks from going in there?


----------



## redchigh (Jan 20, 2010)

Some rocks raise PH, some rocks leach metals to kill everything in your tank..

Wood DOES lower PH, and it often releases visible tannins as well (giving the water a brownish hue- then again, many acid-loving "forest fish" LOVE tannins in the water and it encourages their health.

Depending on the fish 6.0 could even be perfect. Sorry I dont remember.

Also, dolomite gravel will raise KH, thereby raising PH.

PH and KH are closely related- if you have water with a PH of 7.0 but the KH is low (mine is less than 1.) then the water will only stay 7.0 until a fish uses the bathroom in it. Biological processes will lower the PH VERY QUICKLY if there is no KH to buffer it.

So. If you raise the KH, the PH will rise but more importantly it will be stable.

I tried dolomite gravel once, and nothing happened whatsoever. I tried it again with much finer gravel, and worked like a charm. Just make sure you only add it a couple tsp at a time so it doesn't rise too fast. Plus that way you will know when there's enough and the PH is where you want it.

The longer the wood is soaked the less dramatically it will affect PH since the tannins will leach out. Again, dolomite can counter it... It'd probably be best to avoid DW if your goal PH is above 7.
If you want it 7 or less, then go with driftwood.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

In my experience, wood and rock have minimal effect on the pH/hardness. Hardness is the dissolved mineral content of water, measured as GH (General Hardness) and KH (Carbonate hardness). GH is basically the amount of calcium and magnesium; the more there is, the "harder" (=higher number) the water. The measurement is either in ppm (parts per million) or dGH and dKH (degrees GH/KH). The two can be converted back and forth; we use dGH in our profiles as it is generally more universal.

The amount of KH is what acts as a buffer for pH. The higher the KH, the more the water resists a pH change. I know the effect of all this, but not the scientific explanation and it would get very complicated.

In an aquarium, the natural biological processes gradually allow the pH to drop, becoming more acidic. Adding wood, dry leaves, peat, etc. increases this acidification; as does using CO2 in planted tanks. The degree of KH (and GH) of the water determines how fast and how much this acidification will be. Adding a buffer like crushed coral (not the best, dolomite is better) would add mineral content to the water and thus raise the GH and KH and thus prevent the pH from fluctuating and lowering beyond a certain point; this pint is determined by the hardness of the source water and the amount of buffering agent (coral, dolomite) used; it does not take very much, I use dolomite in my 115g and 1/2 cup keeps the pH at 6.0-6.2 instead of 5.0.

But before experimenting with any of this, as it can have consequences, we need to know the hardness of your source water, not the tank.


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

1077 said:


> If it credentials that interest you, (I prefer expierience) then those at the sites batman listed would be a good source.


Firstly, experience IS a credential. The difference is VERIFIABLE experience.

Secondly, if you'd look at the links provided, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF those which are viewable (the Wiley link gives me an error message) said anything about the size of an aquarium being essential to overcoming the proposed hormonal "limiters" of the fishes. In fact, the overriding #1 theme of their recommendations was WATER CHANGES. Big surprise! I'm a water-changing fiend...I'm OCD about that stuff. Hardly goes to bolster an argument that keeping clowns in a 55-gallon means I'm not providing for their well-being. I don't see the connection between his links and his argument, which is why the credentials of the authors has no bearing on his own credibility on this matter.


----------



## Mister Sparkle (Apr 13, 2010)

1077 said:


> Won't take long to witness the results.


Nope, but it would be tough to distinguish between the two. Not that anyone has suggested a 30G.


----------



## iamntbatman (Jan 3, 2008)

Mister Sparkle said:


> Firstly, experience IS a credential. The difference is VERIFIABLE experience.
> 
> Secondly, if you'd look at the links provided, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF those which are viewable (the Wiley link gives me an error message) said anything about the size of an aquarium being essential to overcoming the proposed hormonal "limiters" of the fishes. In fact, the overriding #1 theme of their recommendations was WATER CHANGES. Big surprise! I'm a water-changing fiend...I'm OCD about that stuff. Hardly goes to bolster an argument that keeping clowns in a 55-gallon means I'm not providing for their well-being. I don't see the connection between his links and his argument, which is why the credentials of the authors has no bearing on his own credibility on this matter.


The point is that growth-inhibiting chemical production increases during stress, and smaller tanks are more conducive to being stressful. Less room to move, quicker nitrate buildup, etc. Also, in a smaller volume of water, water changes would have to be yet more frequent to combat the buildup of growth-inhibiting chemicals. Water changes are certainly a good thing but there is such a thing as too much of a good thing and I believe that once you reach a certain frequency and/or volume of water changed, you're doing more harm than good by way of stressing the fish. You could refute my claims by saying that either a) smaller tanks are not more stressful than larger tanks or that b) increasing the water change schedule to compensate for the increased production of growth-inhibiting chemicals (not to mention accumulating nitrate) would have no adverse effects on the fish. Better still, you could provide an article where a respected authority contests Martin Thoene's claim that "Adults will eventually require an aquarium measuring at least 6’ x 2’ x 2’."

(I apologize to the OP and everyone else for contributing to the derailing of the thread, but keeping clown loaches in a 55g tank is tantamount to animal abuse as far as I'm concerned so I feel the need to continue defending my claim that these fish would be better off in a much larger tank and hope that the OP considers both sides of the argument before accepting any stocking recommendations for the tank in question).


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Byron said:


> I think we first should be definite on the tap water (or was it well water, sorry, I've forgotten) hardness levels. I'm assuming your latest set of numbers is from the aquarium.
> 
> The tap/well water hardness, both GH And KH, will tell us what to expect in any aquarium. Can you give us these, from a reliable (liquid) test?
> 
> And second, exactly what is in the tank, in the way of substrate (type of gravel, sand, whatever), real wood, etc.



This is tap water and I have redundant tests with strips, liquids, and the LFS uses liquid tests. All our PH and amonia readings were within .5 of one another.

PH 7.5, GH 180, KH 40, NO2 0 NO3 0, AMMO .25. temp 75

Currently in the tank I have 30 lbs blue fine gravel from established tank. 28 lbs larger white gravel bought new and rinsed. 30 lbs larger rel graven bought new & rinsed. 
8 Anacharis plants. 
no wood, no ricks, no decor.
3 molly, 5 platy, 3 guppy, 3 emerald catfish. 
Currently running a Marineland 350 biowheel with redundant filters on both sides (4)
I use stress coat water conditioner for water changes. (40% earlier today + 15% just now)
My buckets were bought new.
The tank itself was previously a salt water tank. It was soaked, scubbed (with salt), drained, and rinsed several times. It ran sans fish for well over a week prior to a final water change before introducing 3.
I have not put "freshwater salt" or any other treatments in this tank. JUST fresh water.

I am about to test it again.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

iamntbatman said:


> "
> 
> (I apologize to the OP and everyone else for contributing to the derailing of the thread, but keeping clown loaches in a 55g tank is tantamount to animal abuse as far as I'm concerned so I feel the need to continue defending my claim that these fish would be better off in a much larger tank and hope that the OP considers both sides of the argument before accepting any stocking recommendations for the tank in question).


If you'll notice, the rest of the thread (that has gone on without commenting on you two) is discussing the OP's rapidly falling PH. It's worth mentioning somewhere in all that fodder the OP also narrowed down the desirable fish list to the exclusion of clown loaches... (cause they look creepy).;-)


----------



## aunt kymmie (Jun 2, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> narrowed down the desirable fish list to the exclusion of clown loaches... (cause they look creepy).;-)


I won't tell my group of clowns that you have said this. 
They think (as do I) that they are quite cute! ;-)


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

aunt kymmie said:


> I won't tell my group of clowns that you have said this.
> They think (as do I) that they are quite cute! ;-)


LOL It's the clown part. Guerrilla suit loaches? I'd go for it. But not clowns. Makes the Pennywise line "we all float down here." even creepier.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> This is tap water and I have redundant tests with strips, liquids, and the LFS uses liquid tests. All our PH and amonia readings were within .5 of one another.
> 
> PH 7.5, GH 180, KH 40, NO2 0 NO3 0, AMMO .25. temp 75
> 
> ...


Byron explained the effects of KH and GH much better than I could and I agree.
Next to no buffering capacity can allow ph to drop ,so can low levels of dissolved oxygen. I might as mentioned,consider the crushed coral or dolomite along with the addition of an airstone or two to help bring water possibly low in dissolved oxygen from the bottom of the tank to the surface for better oxygen exchange.
Am also wondering if the product stress coat you are using is stress coat +. Stress coat +,claims to address chlorine,chloramines,AND ammonia.(good thing) Other, older bottles,, perhaps placed on shelves at stores to sell off the lot ,, do not say anything on the bottle about removing or detoxifying ammonia. Have seen such bottles at Walmart.Petco,etc and bottles just say stress coat without the + and make no mention of anything other than chlorine and chloramines.
Haven't the time at present to go into lengthy explanation between the two and how it relates to Cycling tanks ,but suffice to say a product such as PRIME water conditioner would be my choice and it takes less than a third of the amount of other conditioners to treat the same volume of water while detoxifying chlorine,chloramines,ammonia,and nitrites along with any traces of metal and is used by myself and many others.
Some water conditioners through chemical reaction can also deplete oxygen levels temporarily and yet others ,,contain oils such as aloe that in my view only clog up filters prematurely and could affect bacteria's ability to develop in filter (theory), as well as coat the fishes gills,and nostrils. (my belief)
Get with Byron on how fast dolomite works if you decide to increase the buffering capacity for I have not used it. Crushed coral works slowly (good for fishes) and I have used it at a rate of 1/2 to 1 cup per twenty gallons in a mesh bag inside the filter.
Over time,crushed coral will become coated with silt,mulm,alage,and bacteria (good kind) and will need to be either cleaned with hot tapwater to remove that which is coating it,or replaced lest it become less effective. 
Wish I could offer more but I am running out of ideas.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

What's the difference between the Stress Coat+ and Prime? I have the plus with a detailed label.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> What's the difference between the Stress Coat+ and Prime? I have the plus with a detailed label.


 As mentioned,all it ever did in my expierience (stresscoat) was gum up the filters . In my view,products that claim to coat the fishes skin, must then also coat the fishes gills thus possibly making breathing more difficult. Am not at all certain that aloe can adhere to anything in water.
Prime as mentioned, uses three times less product to treat same volume of water. 1 ml treats 10 gal while it would take nearly a tablespoon of most other conditioners to treat the same 10 gal, more value for the dollar.
Prime can also be used at five times the recommended dosage for emergency treatment for nitrites without any danger to fishes.
In nearly 40 years,I have tried just about every potion,medication,powder,etc and some of the newer products as well. I tend to stick with those that produce the best results for me, and I recieve no form of compensation from Seachem or any other companyfor pluggin their products.


----------



## aunt kymmie (Jun 2, 2008)

1077 said:


> TexasTanker said:
> 
> 
> > What's the difference between the Stress Coat+ and Prime? I have the plus with a detailed label.
> ...


Agreed. I used it once (never again) and it left a fine layer of "gunk" floating on the surface of my tank. Sort of like an oil spill, but clear.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

On the pH and hardness:

Tap water results are PH 7.5, GH 180, KH 40, NO2 0 NO3 0, AMMO .25. temp 75.

Tank tests last posted were pH 6 (0r 6.5?) and GH and KH zero.

With no fish in the tank, and nothing basically but water, I do not understand this much of a difference. The tap water is soft, KH of 40 is not going to buffer much, but in my 115g with GH at about this level it keeps the pH at 6.0 rather than letting it drop to 5 as in the 90g which has zero hardness. When I had the 33g with just plants (no fish), the pH remained at 7.0 which is the tap water pH, and zero hardness. This is to explain just how this relates.

Fish such as mollies, platy and guppys prefer basic/alkaline water that has some mineral content, and all livebearers do better with such water. If this is your intended fish for this tank, I would consider dolomite or coral to raise hardness and pH. But go slowly, it doesn't take much. Decorate the tank as you intend it to be, that is with plants, wood, rock, whatever. Then add maybe 1/4 cup of dolomite or coral in a nylon bag in the filter (this works best as all the water is flowing over the material and it can easily be removed to add to or lessen). Monitor the pH daily for a week, with no partial water changes during the week. Then proceed depending upon results (we can comment further if needed at that time).

On the other hand, if you want soft water fish, I would set up the tank with plants, wood, etc., and with no water changes monitor pH for a week. Again to see where it is heading.

Byron.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Byron said:


> On the pH and hardness:
> 
> Tap water results are PH 7.5, GH 180, KH 40, NO2 0 NO3 0, AMMO .25. temp 75.
> 
> ...


There are fish and some plants in the tank. I did total 30 gallons water change yesterday. I pulled a lot of needled plants out yesterday and I need to sucks a few of those up again, so I will try to keep it down to a five gallon change today.

Today's results are:
GH 180
KH 0
PH 7.0
NO2 2
NO3 40
Haven't done ammonia yet. 

GOING TO GO BUY PRIME RIGHT NOW!!!

Will there be some weird refusal to blend between the stress coat water and the Prime water? Or a reaction I should worry about? 

I have 2 fry, in a net breeder box in the tank. I put gravel and a couple floating plants in there. It was the only way i could be sure they were getting the food they need. pretty sure they're premature.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

*Went shopping!!! And PH still dropping???*

I'm super paranoid about the four fry I found and finally broke down and bought them food. They are segregated into a fry net thingy. They're not hiding in the rocks or plants anymore. I think they're teasing the adults. 

I FINALLY got my 48" Coralife light ballast thing. I put a 6700 Daylight bulb and a colormax. I'm not sure I like the Colormax though. With just the daylight, my blue platy actually looked blue. Now they're back to white with visible internal organs. I'm going to experiment with the lights. The ballast came with the 10,000k daylight and the acsomething blue light. 

I also bought prime for future changes. It also says it has some kind of fish coating stuff in it. I read allllll the bottles and it all said that.????

I just tested the water and the NO2/3 is going up and the PH is going back down. 

GH 120
KH 0
PH 6.5
NO2 3
NO3 40

Gonna do a water change now.

SO, where do I get dolomite and does it have a different market name? I asked and I got blank stares back.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

Odd about the dolomite, I get the same reaction. It used to be very common, saltwater hobbyists used it as gravel in tanks, as did those with rift lake cichlids. I had it in my livebearer tank and my RL cichlid setup years ago. Now I can't find it anywhere. It is gravel crushed from dolomite, a calcareous rock. It is about the best because it leeches both calcium and magnesium into the water, and these are the prime minerals that make water "hard". Coral to my knowledge is just basically calcium, and I have been told that it is not as effective since it does not significantly alter the hardness, though it does raise pH.

The actinic tube is not good for plants, but it will promote algae. The daylight 10,000K would be OK with a second tube to balance with some red; I have a 11000K and a 6700K tube on my 115g, you can see from the photos it looks natural even though it is higher in the blue. And the plants thrive.

Byron.


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> I'm super paranoid about the four fry I found and finally broke down and bought them food. They are segregated into a fry net thingy. They're not hiding in the rocks or plants anymore. I think they're teasing the adults.
> 
> I FINALLY got my 48" Coralife light ballast thing. I put a 6700 Daylight bulb and a colormax. I'm not sure I like the Colormax though. With just the daylight, my blue platy actually looked blue. Now they're back to white with visible internal organs. I'm going to experiment with the lights. The ballast came with the 10,000k daylight and the acsomething blue light.
> 
> ...


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Okay that makes sense. I saw the "Provides Slime Coat" on the front. Read the back with my thinking cap and it makes more sense now.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

Last night during the water change I was inspecting the water for fry. What I found totally grossed me out. Little worms that resemble inch worms in their movement. It was almost teardrop shaped when stretched. White to sand in color and about an inch long. I also noticed these teeny tiny little bugs that I can't describe but to say they look like dots on crack. The single snail I first saw is now dozens of tiny snails of the Malaysian trumpet variety. My fish seem fine but in my googling of the worms last night I found an article that says detritus worms (which could resemble my worms... or most any worm) can kill KH and lower PH rapidly during a wormy population explosion. I happen to have that problem. My KH is non existent and it's a battle to keep my PH above 6.5. 

ideas?


----------



## 1077 (Apr 16, 2008)

TexasTanker said:


> Last night during the water change I was inspecting the water for fry. What I found totally grossed me out. Little worms that resemble inch worms in their movement. It was almost teardrop shaped when stretched. White to sand in color and about an inch long. I also noticed these teeny tiny little bugs that I can't describe but to say they look like dots on crack. The single snail I first saw is now dozens of tiny snails of the Malaysian trumpet variety. My fish seem fine but in my googling of the worms last night I found an article that says detritus worms (which could resemble my worms... or most any worm) can kill KH and lower PH rapidly during a wormy population explosion. I happen to have that problem. My KH is non existent and it's a battle to keep my PH above 6.5.
> 
> ideas?


All manner of planaria and or copepods can be found in aquariums where they often pose little threat and many are eaten by fishes. Large infestations are usually associated with perhaps more than minimal organic waste that is allowed to build up or from possible over feeding. 
Often reducing the amount of food available by either reduced feedings and or gravel vaccuming will result in fewer numbers. I seem to recall that you used approx 30 lbs of mature gravel for the tank?
Could be that they hitch hiked in with the mature substrate or on recently added plants. If you are feeding sparingly, both the snail population and the worms,bugs,etc should thin out due to lack of food available.
I would in this case consider gravel vaccuming one third of the tank once each week and a different one third each time. in this way you can reduce numbers of the offending worms,bugs,and perhaps snails without disturbing too much of the nitrifying bacteria that gathers on substrtae as well as in the filter.
To keep pH above 6.5 i would consider the dolomite or crushed coral in mesh bag placed in filter compartment as mentioned earlier.


----------



## TexasTanker (May 5, 2010)

1077 said:


> I would in this case consider gravel vaccuming one third of the tank once each week and a different one third each time. in this way you can reduce numbers of the offending worms,bugs,and perhaps snails without disturbing too much of the nitrifying bacteria that gathers on substrtae as well as in the filter.
> To keep pH above 6.5 i would consider the dolomite or crushed coral in mesh bag placed in filter compartment as mentioned earlier.


I've been vacuuming the gravel at each water change. The plants I put in then pulled out were super messy and I'm still rehabbing the tank from that little fiasco. My levels are elevated because of the cycling process, but not high. I'm testing daily right now. 

I'm still looking for the Dolomite. The owner of one of the LFS is what I'd call old school and probably won't look at me like i'm insane. Some of these other places are killing me. Their response to any question is chemical. Its not all together surprising to see the differences between chem-trolled tanks and actual freshwater tanks. I'm a newbie to all of this and am learning new stuff almost hourly and still I'm treated like a prodigy when I tell other customers that I maintain the tank sans chemicals.
;-)


----------



## iamntbatman (Jan 3, 2008)

If the dolomite proves elusive I think crushed coral would make a decent substitute, even if it's not quite as magnesium-heavy.


----------



## Byron (Mar 7, 2009)

iamntbatman said:


> If the dolomite proves elusive I think crushed coral would make a decent substitute, even if it's not quite as magnesium-heavy.


Yes, I agree; I've had to go this route myself. Coral will maintain a stable pH. I still have conflicting info on the hardness aspect, but no matter, it works on the pH.


----------

