# Schooling Fish Suitable for Angels



## noledoc

I understand that some "schooling fish" form loose schools while others form a more tight,coherent group. In a very large planted aquarium >400 gal, what fish would most likely form the tightest schools if the number of fish in the school was 20 to 30? The shooling fish would necessarily need to be compatible with angels.
Thanks
Paul


----------



## aunt kymmie

Is there a size limit as far as the individual fish for this school that you want in this *tight* shoal? I have 20 Cardinals in my Discus tank and they are always -thisclose-
In a 400gl tank a shoal 20 to 30 Cardinals may not look that impressive but in my 100 it looks great. 
400 gallons is a HUGE tank. :shock:


----------



## VTonic

Same as Aunt Kymmie said, I personally have a group of 10 Cardinal Tetras and they stay in pretty tight nit groups. Now as far as compatibility with angels I guess that would depend on the species of angel you have. According to the fish profiles on this site “second tab from the left on the blue bar at the top” Scalare Angels live in pretty close water parameters as cardinal tetras. It does say that they are not compatible with smaller tetras but cardinals can grow to up to 2 inches so I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Especially in something as big as a 400 gal, if the Angels decide to snack on the Cardinals as long as you have enough stuff in the aquarium for the Cardinals to retreat to then they should be fine.
VTonic


----------



## 1077

Columbian Tetra's could work in my view. They get too large to become snacks ,and travel together for the most part.
Have kept cardinals with Discus and Angelfish, and depending on particular group of Discus or Angelfish,they may or may not become snacks once the larger fish reach adult size.


----------



## jeaninel

Rummynose have always been my favorite and school nicely. A huge school of them would look stunning in a large planted tank.


----------



## noledoc

*Schooling Fish wi Angels n Large Tank*

Great ideas! What do you think of Harl Rasboas? And a school of Cory's?


----------



## Byron

"Schooling" is something freshwater fish technically don't do, comparable to marine fish. "Shoaling" is perhaps a better description, though for most of us the two words probably mean much the same. A shoaling fish--which by the way angels absolutely are, as are discus--means the fish needs a group of its own species to be free of additional stress. The group obviously brings safety, at least to the fish's mind, but many species also establish an interaction within the group that can vary from species to species in its components. Angels set up a pecking order, and having at least 5 of them will ensure no individual is likely to be picked on to the extent of health problems and death.

To the smaller shoaling fish; few will swim together as a group (one difference from marine schooling fish). But there are a few that are fairly consistent at swimming together. Rasbora almost always remain in a swimming group. Some of the danio and barbs do from time to time but no where as consistently as rasbora. Among the characins, the best is probably the Rummynose, all three species. Cardinal tetra also do, but less often. In their native habitat, cardinals have been observed remaining in groups of 5-6 closely within larger groups of hundreds if the water is vegetated; in more open water they remain in much larger groups of hundreds. In the aquarium my experience has been that they remain fairly close, though their swimming is significantly less active than say rummys so the latter are more "obvious" when swimming. The false or green neon, Paracheirodon simulans, also is fairly good at remaining in a group. And many of the pencilfish do, and certainly the hatchetfish. Other tetra species vary their grouping, though they tend to remain fairly close, within "eye contact." Not all of these wil last with angels though.

As for companions to angels, cardinals are a risk. 1077 correctly noted that sometimes this works and sometimes not. It is certain that the risk is there. At 6 inches body length, angels are expert predators, and the "torpedo" shaped tetra often fall prey. Tetra that are more disk-shaped fare much better, and some of the best companions are the species in the Rosy Tetra clade of Hyphessobrycon or the similarly-shaped Hemigrammus species. Several of these are included in our profiles, and it mentions their suitability to angel habitats. Rasbora, if not introduced small to grown angels, might work. Cetainly corys are fine, indeed most substrate fish will be left alone, except during spawning.

Byron.


----------



## Cpt NAPA

While the profiles may not reccomend it I have a small school(shoal) of "serpae tetras" and a small scool of what were formerly known as Pristella ridelli and a group of corys in a 30g long with 3 good sized angels. Two of the angels are going through the jaw locking prespawn display at preasent. I have not had any problems with this mix and have kept angels with other similar sized tetras in the past without any signifacant tragedies. The angels don't usually go out of thier way to antaganize the other fish especially if there is sufficient space for all concerned. 
It would be fun to have a 400g with large schools(shoals) of some of the fish mentioned in this thread. Post some pictures when you get your tank up and running Cpt NAPA


----------



## noledoc

*angels with discus?*

Are discus suitable to be kept with angels? I'm wondering about the water temp mostly.


----------



## noledoc

Kym, would linking a political blog type thing with this site be appropriate?


----------



## Byron

noledoc said:


> Are discus suitable to be kept with angels? I'm wondering about the water temp mostly.


This is not recommended. Jack Wattley, who knows perhaps more about discus than anyone, having caught them, raised them, spawned them for more than half a century, has often written that angels should not be combined with discus. His primary reason is that angels are more aggressive at feeding than discus and can (in his experience) often out-compete them. While the discus may eat, they may not, or may not eat sufficient, or even if they do eat may still be stressed by the ordeal of having to overcome the angels.

Byron.


----------



## iamgray

I've got 5 angels and 8 harlequin rasboras in a 67g planted tank... the rasboras tend to stick together for the most part, and the angels pretty much ignore them. However the angels are still very small (bodies are just larger than a quarter), so I can't really speak for what might happen once they are fully grown.


----------



## noledoc

*angels and discus II*

Byron, one of the questions I keep coming up with as I anticipate putting together the > 500 gal tank, (which I plan to kind of compartmentalize into smaller zones), is this; how does that vast increase in tank size effect the compatibility of fish? The information about these two species is helpful but I wonder about the effect this size tank has in all kinds of ways. I know we tend to think about the aquatic world in terms of much smaller sizes. Your thoughts? Kym?


----------



## Byron

noledoc said:


> Byron, one of the questions I keep coming up with as I anticipate putting together the > 500 gal tank, (which I plan to kind of compartmentalize into smaller zones), is this; how does that vast increase in tank size effect the compatibility of fish? The information about these two species is helpful but I wonder about the effect this size tank has in all kinds of ways. I know we tend to think about the aquatic world in terms of much smaller sizes. Your thoughts? Kym?


There is no doubt that the larger the tank, the better many fish species will fare. But one must remember that it is still an enclosed system, and fish that would avoid each other in the wild are unable to do so in an aquarium. Fish secrete pheromones into the water; this is one issue with water changes, to remove some of them regularly. Other fish may or may not pick up on these, depending what they are for and the particular fish species. It is now known that shoaling fish communicate chemically; characins are especially adept at this. And the chemical signals secreted by some species are only caught by that species, or at any rate, other species seem to ignore them. This is one reason why chemical substances are so risky in an aquarium, they can interfere with some species' natural chemical releases.

I would argue that regardless of tank size, "compatibility" in a community of fish is always the same issues: water parameters, environment, behaviour. The latter is what we are somewhat discussing here, and while the larger tank may allow for more flexibility, there is still the fact that fish read things the way nature programmed them. If a Tiger Barb is sending out chemical signals about aggression, even if the other fish are able to stay out of its way due to a large space the signal is still being read. And that means stress. And stress means health issues are more likely to occur.

This is why one cannot place much trust in "appearance." For an aquarist to say that the barbs and angels are living well together is an unproven statement, because the aquarist cannot possibly know what is going on in the mind of the fish in the aquarium. It does not have to end in actual physical violence to be a problem.

Byron.


----------



## noledoc

Byron,
Thank you again. Do you offer preceptorships for those of us who know so little? You have a way of introducing relevent information without being dogmatic.
Do you know whether the chemical signals are all or mostly of danger and stress or is it possible that some of them are of a positive nature? The kind that signal, "This is a nice place to hang out."
As you know, in the human species, these chemical signals have mostly been replaced by vastly enhanced visual and auditory signaling that is mostly available for subliminal pickup.


----------



## Cpt NAPA

[quote=Byron;532407
This is why one cannot place much trust in "appearance." For an aquarist to say that the barbs and angels are living well together is an unproven statement, because the aquarist cannot possibly know what is going on in the mind of the fish in the aquarium. It does not have to end in actual physical violence to be a problem. 



Taken from the above information I would expect that the compatability recomendations in the profiles on this forum are not to be taken as correct as the person or persons that submited the profiles have no way of getting in to the mind of the fish. However, since we need some parameter to gauge the acceptability keeping different species in the same aquarium we will have to accept the recommendations of those that have observed the interaction of the various species in captive situations such as we intend or simply forge ahead blindly and see what happens. Cpt NAPA


----------



## noledoc

*Don't Bite the Hand that Educates You*

Cpt Napa,
I've found Byron to be exceptionally helpful. To take a well meaning meatphor out of context and use it to take a swipe at someone so wise and generous with his time, isn't quite as gracious as a simple thank you.
Just a thought.:hmm:


----------



## Cpt NAPA

Excuse me Byron. I didn't intend to sound ungracious in my reply. I have been following this thread since it started and thought that the original question was about keeping schooling fishes with angels in a 400g aquarium. 
While I find the thread to be quite informative and thought provoking in presenting different ways of looking at the origanal inquiry, we have thrown a monkey wrench into the entire compatibility issue. 
For as long as I can recall compatibility was judged on the probability of keeping fish of multiple species or single species in an aquarium in seeming harmony. Sort of like keeping a group of kids together without them tearing each others hair out. Most all books from Exotic Aquarium Fishes onward include a short snopysis of compatibility of each species. They are based on observed behavior. However having said that I again apologize for voicing my thoughts with out thinking. It is 
your thread noledoc. Cpt NAPA


----------



## noledoc

Cpt Napa,
I think you raise a very interesting question and I'm very glad you're getting involved. I think your message to Byron was very appropriate and helpful. Best wishes.


----------



## Byron

noledoc said:


> Byron,
> Thank you again. Do you offer preceptorships for those of us who know so little? You have a way of introducing relevent information without being dogmatic.
> Do you know whether the chemical signals are all or mostly of danger and stress or is it possible that some of them are of a positive nature? The kind that signal, "This is a nice place to hang out."
> As you know, in the human species, these chemical signals have mostly been replaced by vastly enhanced visual and auditory signaling that is mostly available for subliminal pickup.


According to research and published findings by Dr. Stanley Weitzman and his colleagues, and various other highly-qualified ichthyologists, the chemical signals cover many areas. Obviously danger is one, but also food. Hans Baensch wrote of how one can scatter food on the surface of a stream in Amazonia, and characins are invariably the first to find it en masse. Dr. Weitzman also studied reproduction and there are chemical signals for this. It is also said that smell is of more importance to many forest fish than sight in feeding. I inserted some info on this in another thread recently, how fish have taste cells not only around the mouth, but on the skin covering the head, flanks and in some even fins. This is closely related to chemical identification. I believe second to chemical is the auditory perception; fish has very high "hearing" capability, greater than humans in fact. Their "ears" achieve this but also the lateral line system of receptors.

Briefly on the issue of compatibility, Dr. David Sands, an authority on catfish especially the Coryadoradinae, did some experiments (I believe for his PhD) on defense strategies of Corydoras. Even the presence of a dummy predator (made of wood) caused panic in the fish. Nature has programmed so much into the fish's physiology and instincts that we should attempt to avoid situations where such responses are triggered by the presence of unsuitable fish.

Byron.


----------



## Byron

> Taken from the above information I would expect that the compatability recomendations in the profiles on this forum are not to be taken as correct as the person or persons that submited the profiles have no way of getting in to the mind of the fish. However, since we need some parameter to gauge the acceptability keeping different species in the same aquarium we will have to accept the recommendations of those that have observed the interaction of the various species in captive situations such as we intend or simply forge ahead blindly and see what happens.





> While I find the thread to be quite informative and thought provoking in presenting different ways of looking at the origanal inquiry, we have thrown a monkey wrench into the entire compatibility issue.
> For as long as I can recall compatibility was judged on the probability of keeping fish of multiple species or single species in an aquarium in seeming harmony. Sort of like keeping a group of kids together without them tearing each others hair out. Most all books from Exotic Aquarium Fishes onward include a short snopysis of compatibility of each species. They are based on observed behavior. However having said that I again apologize for voicing my thoughts with out thinking.


This is a forum intended for exchange of ideas and we never stop learning, and there is frequently more than one answer. So any criticism or opposite view is welcomed.

Since I wrote many of the freshwater profiles, I am able to explain the source of the information. I do not make it up. I use evidence of qualified ichthyologists who _have_ managed--as much as one can--to get inside the fish's mind, so to speak, through scientific research and discovery. The information in the profiles about water parameters, compatibility and behaviour are the results of thorough scientific investigation, and represent the vast majority of acknowledged expertise; where there is a difference from a reliable and reputable source, I include it. I know of no better parameter to achieve success.

Science continually challenges itself, and as new techniques and new understanding occur, some of the previously-held opinion is bound to change. It is only in the last 20 years that scientific research has expanded in the study of the fishes maintained in home aquaria, probably faster than ever before. One has only to read through many of the profiles on the cyprinids for example to see the significant changes in scientific names of these fish, due to new understanding about their evolution. This tells us a great deal about each species, and much of this manifests itself in how we should care for the fish. If our goal is to maintain our fishes as healthily as possible, we cannot ignore these findings. 

Byron.


----------



## noledoc

*Communication Amongst Fish*

Byron,
This is fascinating and I greatly thank you for sharing some of your learnings. Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. The chemical signals for these times are deeply engrained and supported by many Pavlovian associations. ;-)


----------

