# 'Dirty' tank but healthy as ever?!



## KellyL

Now I'm probably going to get slated for this but I have been neglecting my 200l tank slightly over the past few months. My normal routine was 40% water change every week with a full glass clean and gravel vac once a fortnight.
Since starting a new job a few months ago I just haven't had the time to care for it as much and I'd say it hasn't had a gravel vac for about 6 weeks now . Its been topped up with water but only whats evaporated out.

The thing is . . . I haven't lost a single fish since I started the new job (except the one that got herself stuck in a piece of bog wood :-? ) Before I was loosing loads for no apparent reason. The tank has been setup 2 years now and in that time I have had 2 failed attempts at introducing cory (lost 15 in total - have 1 left!) I've lost molly, neons, hybrid guppy, otto . . . . all sorts! the only original member of my tank is a very impressive red tailed shark.

Now that I'm starting to have a little more time to myself I really need to pick up the maintenance again but I dont know how to go about it, I dont want to go back to what I was doing before because it obviously wasnt good!!

Any ideas?!

Thanks all!


----------



## Flear

the last water change in my tanks was ... about 5 months ago (memory isn't that good going back that far)

that water change was to deal with an ammonia issue due to ... lots

PH change converting ammonium to ammonia
removing an excess of plant trimmings for a tank that was very overgrown
the excess plants were in priority for any ammonia/ammonium in the tank so there wasn't an established beneficial bacterial colony to process ammonia.

the last fish i lost was ... due to the ammonia spike.

in my searchings on the net in enough forums i have lost count, ... i never did the "i have to do these maintenance's because it's what everyone else does."

i've heard "water changes to deal with excess nitrates", ... but what if you've got plants that keep your nitrates down ? ... then comes other excuses "because of fish hormones" ... really ???

water changes to deal with nitrates, fine, nitrates are toxic in excess, and it makes sense to change the water on a regular basis.

vacuuming the gravel makes sense to deal with organic breakdown that would result in higher ammonia (and ultimately higher nitrates once processed.

cleaning the glass, provided you don't have anything that can clean the glass, otherwise strictly aesthetics only

if you have plants, just measure your nitrates, if they're in excess (you decide what excess means to you) then change "enough" water to keep your nitrates from being that high.

i've heard (i don't measure) that plants can enjoy nitrates up to 40 as optimum under 10 could be N deficiencies

otherwise, ... water changes mean changing tank parameters, 40% sounds like a rather drastic change every week, a minor change if tank parameters match the water going into the tank, otherwise, that sounds like a lot of undue stress.

when i started i heard 10-20% water change every week, i heard that for tanks that don't have plants

i have plants in my tank with the idea that they'll process nitrates making water changes obsolete.

5 months without a water change says something you know.

last time i vacuumed the gravel ??? the tank has been setup for over a year and a half, i've never vacuumed the gravel.

i don't clean the glass, i have a pleco ... not that the pleco is particularly great at managing the green spot algae, but that was my excuse before, ... as the tank has matured and the plants stabilize, and the nutrients do whatever the nutrients do, the green spot algae isn't as obvious as it used to be.

---

in all honesty, ignore everything i have said.
do what you feel is necessary, ... but know why your doing it.
if your noticing levels in your tank are stable, why upset that ?, ... "if it's not broke don't fix it"

if your doing things because "of regular maintenance" stop that. while just my opinion, not knowing why your doing anything other than "it's because what everyone else says to do" ... pretty foolish way to live.

if you are finding your levels are getting out of hand, ... do smaller changes, vacuum the gravel if you don't have plants. if you have plants your plants will appreciate what's accumulating in the gravel. your plants will also appreciate being left alone instead of being uprooted (i don't know why people rearrange their planted tank, so many do 

if you have no plants, ... definitely resume your water changes, ... but 40% ?, if you are medicating your tank, 40% sounds like a great water change otherwise, quit that. your only changing enough water to keep your nitrates down. ... unless someone has something a little (or a lot) more valid than "hormones in the water" i see zero reason to change water for any other reason than nitrates.


----------



## jaysee

If you are changing 40% a week, then it is not a drastic change because the tank water will be almost identical to the source water. No stress there. Drastic changes come from NOT changing the water, because the chemistry changes over time. For example, I would not do a 40% water change if the water hasn't been changed in 5 months because the pH is likely very different.

I do 80% changes every 4-6 weeks. I work ridiculous hours in the summer and let the tanks go all summer without a water change.


----------



## Flear

i have lost fish before because i was not aware of the stress a drastic PH change can do, ... that was heartbreaking  also the last time i just let the water temperature acclimate. ... since then i have looked at more to test/check for PH differences when adding fish and making a gradual change for the fish.

yes, that was a horrible lesson/learning experience 

first one lasted a few days before it died
second one lasted about half-a week or more, but fins clamped down showing it was not happy till it finally died.

i felt horrible 

---

KellyL have you tested your water your adding to your tank ?, check to see if it's different than what would have been removed from your tank ?

what i see from Jaysee brings to my mind an important consideration.

if his added water is of similar PH and other parameters to what's being removed from the tank (the important parameters) he can do more drastic changes.

while this is just a guess - if his added water was drastically different 80% water changes would be brutal to the tank inhabitants (his hint at my tank to not do large water changes for a tank that hasn't had a change in many months) if his added water is close to what's in the tank, there will be no stress and 80% becomes very beneficial to ensuring the tank is healthy.


----------



## Flear

other notes, i have no idea if this relates, it's only important to me as i'm trying to focus and read up on it currently

redox/orp
Aquarium Redox Balance | Fish Health | Potential & Reduction

a complex subject that isn't easy to grasp, but findings point out how important this stuff is to the health of our tanks, and relates to the health of ourselves as well

mild general relations between Oxigenation potention, PH, free-radicals, anti-oxidents, ... that can relate to the health of our fish, our tank, ourselves, ... 

maybe it's nothing more than intellectual curiosities as with most things leaving well enough alone is the best thing, but if nothing more than helping us understand what is going on if our tanks are doing good, this is of that much benefit.

if found that we can look at this information and see something drastically wrong that explains why our tanks aren't operating at levels we would like to see, then the hope is to know what if anything that can be done about it, ... 

unlike PH, which for short term we can add PH up or PH down, i don't know if we can look at our tanks, see a drastically out of balance ORP/Redox # and add a simple fix, but if our tanks are so out of balance we can look into what direction we would like to move things in to improve the health of our tanks.


----------



## jaysee

Such long posts, I will have to pull this up on the laptop...it's tough to take it all in on the phone


----------



## beaslbob

KellyL said:


> Now I'm probably going to get slated for this but I have been neglecting my 200l tank slightly over the past few months. My normal routine was 40% water change every week with a full glass clean and gravel vac once a fortnight.
> Since starting a new job a few months ago I just haven't had the time to care for it as much and I'd say it hasn't had a gravel vac for about 6 weeks now . Its been topped up with water but only whats evaporated out.
> 
> The thing is . . . I haven't lost a single fish since I started the new job (except the one that got herself stuck in a piece of bog wood :-? ) Before I was loosing loads for no apparent reason. The tank has been setup 2 years now and in that time I have had 2 failed attempts at introducing cory (lost 15 in total - have 1 left!) I've lost molly, neons, hybrid guppy, otto . . . . all sorts! the only original member of my tank is a very impressive red tailed shark.
> 
> Now that I'm starting to have a little more time to myself I really need to pick up the maintenance again but I dont know how to go about it, I dont want to go back to what I was doing before because it obviously wasnt good!!
> 
> Any ideas?!
> 
> Thanks all!


Having a red tail shark as your first fish can create many problems. they are real meanies.

But other then that, I understand you were losing fish and got a real job and as a result 'neglected' to do water changes. And all the sudden to your surprise the fish did much better?

What happened is the tank settled in with the tank (especially plants) taking care of things. Once that happened the conditions of the tank were more stable and not being upset by your "interferring" water changes.

Now don't get me wrong. There are times you need to take drastic action.

but IME allowing the tank to settle in and stabilize is the best thing for the fish, the plants, and the hobbists.

but them I'm just a fumble fingers who seems to screw things up everytime I try to correct something.


my .02


----------



## KellyL

Sorry guys it was late when I posted! I do 20% water changes weekly (40l)! sorry, was going to work out a % then realised it would be just as easy to give you the amount in liters and messed it up! :/

Your very right Flear, I have no idea why I'm doing it!! I had a small 10l tank for a Betta first and of course that needed regular water changes to keep it habitable. I guess I applied the same rule to the big tank without realising! All the research I did raved about the need to do water changes too so it reinforced what I was doing.

I was considering adding Plecto of some sort after my failed cory attempts but didnt really know what to go for? My first thought was the huge plec I saw returned to the fish store once (was as long as my hand&forearm!) so if anyone could give me advice on (smaller) plec I would be grateful!

the tap water is very good, soft and about 6.0PH, I artificially rise it to around 7.5 for the Molly's benefit while keeping it low enough for everything else.

I have that about the shark a lot, it was actually the last one to go in when we first stocked the tank 2 years ago. What I meant is that out of that first stocking it is the only one that has survived the 2 years. It is generally ok with the smaller fish, it had a 'problem' with my dwarf gourami when I first introduced them in the summer but as they have grown bigger he doesnt bother them at all.

I think I covered everything! thank you for your help!  I guess I'm going to have a 'dirty' tank forever!!
But I will have to clean the glass . . . it drives me mad being green!


----------



## Flear

while looking at the website i posted earlier there's a page/article on "why do water changes"

Aquarium Cleaning | Reasons & Methods | Frequency | Siphon

everything i read from these guys is detailed, long, but very detailed and educational 
this will explain more and better than i know, or know how to say


----------



## Flear

the standard 'common' pleco

i would never recommend for any tank unless you like the look

they are more omnivore when younger, and when older prefer a diet of near strictly meat

there are a couple pleco oriented forum sites on the net to get information on individual pleco's, ... but as there are nearly 600 different pleco's to choose from, ... and what seems like near half of them are not available for one reason or another, over fishing, near extinct, import/export regulations, etc., ... k, so that's still like 300 pleco's to choose from.

better idea, ask your LFS what pleco's they have access to and look up those (smaller list, easier to pick what you want)

as for your glass being green, ... a healthy planted tank, ... an established healthy planted tank tends to solve this issue on it's own i hear (i have yet to see it fully realized in my own tank - but the green spot algae i have i notice is much diminished over what it used to be. ... i hear the common issue is low phosphate.

also as i hear for algae issues, for new tanks/new planted tanks, algae is ... common enough. give it time, ignore the algae, just look after your plants, cater to your plants health and i hear that's the most important step in getting rid of algae, and give it time, ... one recommendation i heard was something like a year for a planted tank to correct it's own algae issues.

for algae concerns, most of what i have to go on is what i have heard, ... i'm one of the more backwards people that sees algae as a free food source for fish (Florida flag fish), ... that are eating my hair & clado algae faster than it's growing


----------



## jaysee

There is no difference between big filtered tanks and little filtered tanks. They are exactly proportional. "Need" is relative. Some people do need to do more frequent water changes to keep their fish healthy, for whatever reasons. Other people don't need to do frequent water changes to keep their fish healthy.

IMO it's best to start out doing to many water changes and dial it back over time, rather than start out not doing enough and have to step it up because of problems.


----------



## beaslbob

Flear said:


> while looking at the website i posted earlier there's a page/article on "why do water changes"
> 
> Aquarium Cleaning | Reasons & Methods | Frequency | Siphon
> 
> everything i read from these guys is detailed, long, but very detailed and educational
> this will explain more and better than i know, or know how to say


I did take a look at that and for those who looked also, consider this equation

before water change={(build up between water changes)/(fraction of water changes)}+ replacement water.

That applies to any linear measure where things are constant.

So consider that your tank is increasing nitrates at 1ppm/day. and you are changeing 10% of the water each 10 days with 30 ppm water.

before water change=(1ppm/day)*(10days)/(1/10)+30ppm=(10PPM)/(1/10)+30PPM=100+30=130ppm

So the tank will wind up at 130ppm before a water change, the drop down to 120ppm and be back up to 130ppm the next water change.

But if you change the build up between changes to 0 you get a constant 30ppm. With plants consumeing that 30ppm the tank will actually be a 0 ppm.

To me what is important is to get the tank balanced out and stabilized so water changes at best make no difference and at worse can cause a tank crash.

my .02


----------



## Agent13

I'm just curious what you were doing to raise your PH? That alone may have been the cause of your fish loss.


----------



## beaslbob

Agent13 said:


> I'm just curious what you were doing to raise your PH? That alone may have been the cause of your fish loss.


 
+1


----------



## Flear

Beaslbob, 

i won't agree with the summarization of water changes having either no improvement or can contribute to a tank crash without explaining more about the tank

plants consuming nitrates if the tank is at 30ppm to bring it down to zero, ... only if there are no other processes going on in the tank that would be contributing to additional nitrates.

if there are no plants, water changes are mandatory in my mind (unless your looking into live rock or equivalent)
if there are plants and nitrates are high, increase the plants, add fast growing plants, replace water (or a combination)

above 40ppm for nitrates, ... water change (regardless of plant level) - possible exception for high tech, CO2 enriched etc. but then 50ppm is max to ensure the plants have enough nitrogen (more personal guess than experience)
below 10 nitrates, i don't think this number is high in any book (reef tanks being the exception)

it's still a numbers game
if there's a reason to do water changes, make sure the water going in is safer than what's coming out.

there are lots of ways to reduce nitrates, plants, water changes, or denitrification (DSB or live rock or equivalent - requires anoxic areas)

---

but as i look at the link i posted, ... there's lots of other reasons to consider water changes as well
(nitrates was previously the only one i was aware of)

i think nitrates are the only ones talked about as it's really the only thing spoken of when it comes to water changes, and there is a lot of things that could factor into if water changes are something to do out of necessity or because they're needed. 

today has been an informative day reading through the redox info on that site, as well, reminds me of some of the concerns i've heard expressed in a DSB. and as i look at my tank gives me lots to think on about what could be going on, ... 5 months without a water change, never vacuumed the substrate, ... i have no idea what kind of root coverage i have there, although i know plant roots can add O2 to the substrate, gives me things to consider about what is going on in my tank for sure.


----------



## Flear

Aquarium Water Changes Calculator - Are your filters up to the job? | Aquarium Tools | Aquarium Tools

does all the math for you 

type in initial values
how often your doing a water change, how much is being changed, how much is in the water your adding.
gives you a result of what is expected after 100 days

Edit:
exploring other 'tools' on that site, ... very interesting


----------



## jaysee

Thanks for that link flear. Confirms what I already know about my tanks, but am too lazy to verify 

That calculator PERFECTLY shows how ineffective small water changes are.


----------



## Flear

i wouldn't say 'small' water changes are being ineffective
infrequent small water changes are though

changing 5% a day can have a significant effect on a tank without the stress of water parameters changing significantly in any one day.


----------



## jaysee

Flear said:


> i wouldn't say 'small' water changes are being ineffective
> infrequent small water changes are though
> 
> changing 5% a day can have a significant effect on a tank without the stress of water parameters changing significantly in any one day.


Depends on what one considers effective...

By that calculator changing 5% a day would have a little less than no impact on my tank - nitrates would rise over time.

For me, the benefit of doing small daily water changes does not exceed the hassle, and the concern over stress from changing parameters does not warrant changing my current schedule of massive monthly changes.


----------



## ao

Kelly, does your tank have any algae?


Sent from Petguide.com App


----------



## beaslbob

jaysee said:


> Thanks for that link flear. Confirms what I already know about my tanks, but am too lazy to verify
> 
> That calculator PERFECTLY shows how ineffective small water changes are.


and to Flear also. :lol:

I think you will find my equation will confirm the calculator. Only you have to do enough changes to that the values before any water change is the same. Not the intial few changes.

Plus I think the equation is very instructional as well.

Now to the point of small water changes being ineffective.

consider "tying" the frequency of water change to the amount of water change. say 1% water change per day. 1% 1 day, 2% every two days, 10% every 10 days etc. etc.

and just to put in some numbers 1% per day increase with 30% in the replace water as before.

Using my super duper crazy beaslbob equation, what will be the level just before the water changes under any of the schedules?



ans: 130PPM 

*what will change is the level after the water changes*.

More frequent smaller water changes will not raise or lower the final before water change value.

what will change is the value after the water change which will be closer to the 130ppm with smaller more frequent changes. To the limt where a constant change at the rate of 1% per day results in a constant 130ppm.


As I stated before what is actually important is to get the rate of change down.

but still just my .02


----------



## KellyL

Forgot to mention, no plants at the moment. I've kept a few small plants before but never had much luck! I dont have fertilising substrate anyway just gravel (I know nothing about plants)

Agent13, I'm using a hand full of coral gravel to rise the PH. I was told its better than constantly using chemicals.

Aokashi, yes, I have plenty of algae! - do you want some lol!? Its dark green and on the glass like little spots all over. It stuck to the decorations too and is slightly 'grassy' on some of my silk plants. 

It's late again so I'm gonna look at all the complicated water stuff tomorrow!

Thanks for the plec info! I'll call the fish store and ask what they can get then post the list. Do they still have fish profiles on here? I cant find them :S 

Thanks again everyone!


----------



## ao

Well there you go  the algae's been keeping your tank clean for ya!


----------



## Flear

Aokashi, that's an interesting way to look at things, i wouldn't have thought about that, ... but yes, algae can do the same stuff as plants for helping to keep things safe


----------



## beaslbob

KellyL said:


> Forgot to mention, no plants at the moment. I've kept a few small plants before but never had much luck! I dont have fertilising substrate anyway just gravel (I know nothing about plants)
> 
> Agent13, I'm using a hand full of coral gravel to rise the PH. I was told its better than constantly using chemicals.
> 
> Aokashi, yes, I have plenty of algae! - do you want some lol!? Its dark green and on the glass like little spots all over. It stuck to the decorations too and is slightly 'grassy' on some of my silk plants.
> 
> It's late again so I'm gonna look at all the complicated water stuff tomorrow!
> 
> Thanks for the plec info! I'll call the fish store and ask what they can get then post the list. Do they still have fish profiles on here? I cant find them :S
> 
> Thanks again everyone!


no need for fertz in the substrate for plants.

I agree that what has happened is the algae stepped up and is maintaining the tank. IMHO that should be a big hint.

What I do (see link in signature) is simply start the tank with plants to begin with. Then just replace evaporative water. So all the bioload is absorbed by the plants. Makes for a very easy to maintain tank that lasts for years and years.

but then that's just my

.02


----------



## Flear

yup, with plants things are easy 

as i have found with my own tank trying to go for 'maintenance free' stem plants are ... never believe how long/tall they get, ... they keep growing, till they reach the surface, then depending on the type will either rise above the surface or clog the surface up.

i've been casually looking for short plants, crypts, swords, grass's, and such that don't grow very tall that i can plant and walk away from. mother nature never designed her plants with aquariums in mind, she never designed her plants that the water depth would be a couple feet at most, so many of these plants have leaves that will reach 2-3 feet in length (individual leafs)

i am looking for a truly maintenance free tank 
-including zero pruning , at least by my hands, tank inhabitants are encouraged to prevent the plants from completely overtaking the tank


----------



## KellyL

With that said, I think I'll just clean the front and maybe the bits of the sides that you can see!!! 

I will have to look at live plants, any suggestions for easy ones?


----------



## beaslbob

KellyL said:


> With that said, I think I'll just clean the front and maybe the bits of the sides that you can see!!!
> 
> I will have to look at live plants, any suggestions for easy ones?


You can check out the link in my signature.

I recommend a mix of fast growing plants (anacharis, vals), and slower growers (small potted crypts, swords plus a single amazon sword).

But I think you will find plants that work for you.

Please check to see that they are true aquatic plants. Some plants sold for aquariums are actually like house plants which grow above the water. And those don't do very well underwater.


my .02


----------



## rsskylight04

*hi*

I would say your algea or cyanobacteria are helping your tank. Gravel is a primary location for bacteria to colonize so don't clean it TOO good. Also your filter works better at biofiltration if you leave it dirty as much as possible. I think your maintainance cleaning was more disruptive to your ecosystem than the waterchanges. I'm a big believer in regular water change schedule, but I'm still learning more all the time. Remember its the tank, gravel, and filter that has to be aged and cycled, not the water. Fresh clean water that has been treated to nuetralize chemicals and metals will not hurt your tank- I speak from many years of experience. Make sure the fresh water is dechlorinated and close to the temp of your tank. Also hard water with high ph is more stable under most conditions than soft water.


----------



## Flear

i haven't red walstads book "secrets of the planted tank" but for what i've heard, start with fast growing stem plants, don't worry about vacuuming the substrate, let it accumulate all it can.

if your gravel is large, consider something smaller, otherwise ... could go wild with whatever appeals to you from your LFS, ... unless there's something specific your after, ... but just to get started, whatever works 

hmmm, you said you haven't had a lot of success with plants before, ... lighting, i think that's the big thing everyone overlooks, (people overlook other things but as for generalizations, more people overlook lighting than anything else - not all just the most frequent single thing overlooked - i would recommend 6500K if you want florescent bulbs - i like fluorescent lights over LED, call me what you will)

Annubias & java ferns are the easiest to get ahold of that will resist anything eating them except the hungriest most desperate fish interested in plants. (as they're also recommended for those who want plants in goldfish tanks, something to consider) java fern grows faster than annubias.

pay attention to how you plant them, some plants if you bury all but the leaves the plant will die (anubias is one such plant), ... secure it to the bottom, it will form it's own roots and grow successfully - other plants have their own quirks but they are general and grouped into a few categories that make it simple once you know what your looking for, (i'm just starting taking this part serious so don't look to me for answers here)

neither anubis or java fern are stem plants, between the two, (and i'm no expert or even close) i like the look of the anubias, but java fern i find to be ... extremely resiliant and easy to grow, once started (and i've heard some have gotten impatient with it) once started it may take a bit to take off but can have some really pleasing results 

if flagfish would eat java fern i would have made it my plant of choice 
-hey, it's free food if they'd eat it 

Edit:
risky, i tend to stick a large bucket by the tank with a bubbler in it to assist in removing chlorine, (what is used here anyway)
next day it's safe for the tank and while cooler than a heated tank, is going to be relatively close


----------



## rsskylight04

*this is a little off topic for this thread...*

... but I have a 10 gallon tank that I fill with fresh tapwater 2 days prior to my water change day. I add Prime and aerate with a powerhead for 48 hrs . To get it up to temp I add hot tap water till it reads close to the temp in my tank. Last, I add another dose of prime just before filling my tank


----------



## Hallyx

Flear, You're sure your water supplier is using chlorine and not chloramine?

Skylight: Save your expensive Prime for dosing your refill water just before filling. If you dose 2 days ahead, all that bound ammonia is released by time you're ready to refill. Your water is back to what it was right after you dosed Prime in the first place....minus the chloramine.

I guess I don't understand why you're going through all the trouble of aerating. I'd be obliged if you would explain your reasoning.

I'll read the water change article later. I'm a great admirer of Carl Strohmeyer, so I'm looking forward to it.


----------



## rsskylight04

*superstition I guess*

Thanks for the tip, I will definitly save my prime. I have always aerated e water for my tanks but I have no real science or even observations to indicate that its necessary. I started keeping fish long ago when info on practices and the science behind fishkeeping was not so easy to come by as it is today. Fish stores had little advice to give, and what they did say was often guessed. I remember reading many times "wait 24 after setting up to add fish", recipe for disaster. I learned most of what I know by direct observation of my fishtanks , things that didn't work I never did again, things that seemed to help I repeated. I read orheard somwhere that gasses and volital substances could be driven out of tapwater by setting exposed to air and that aeration helped the process.I've been in the habit of aerating change water for so long that I don't even think about it anymore. 
Thanx hallyx for bring this to my attention. I would love to use half as much prime and not have to set up so much water- I guess its just superstition that has kept me processing my water. This forum has increased my knowledge of fishkeeping so much already, and I'm always looking to learn more.


Unless maybe you think it might help?


----------



## Agent13

I have always tossed the prime right into my tank after I start the hose refilling during my water change.


Sent from Petguide.com App


----------



## Hallyx

Back when chlorine was the most common anti-bacterial added to municipal water, leaving water to age allowed most of the chlorine to evaporate. These days, most municipal providers use chloramine which doesn't evaporate. Prime breaks the chloramine into chlorine (which it "neutralizes") and ammonia (which it binds/detoxifies). And your aerator is probably raising the pH.

So nowadays, I see no advantage to "aging" water (unless, like LittleBettaFish and other "wild" Betta keepers, you need to manipulate the pH). Modern conditioners work instantaneously.


----------



## DeboraBremner

Kelly. You might want to check out the Albino Bristlenose Pleco. They stay around 3 - 4" and are amazing algae eaters!!


----------



## Hallyx

That was a very informative article by Strohmeyer. Geez, I wish he knew how to write. 

Byron has something to say about water changes. And he really knows how to write.
http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/freshwater-general-articles/regular-partial-water-changes-188641/


----------



## rsskylight04

*no more setting up water!*



Hallyx said:


> Back when chlorine was the most common anti-bacterial added to municipal water, leaving water to age allowed most of the chlorine to evaporate. These days, most municipal providers use chloramine which doesn't evaporate. Prime breaks the chloramine into chlorine (which it "neutralizes") and ammonia (which it binds/detoxifies). And your aerator is probably raising the pH.
> 
> So nowadays, I see no advantage to "aging" water (unless, like LittleBettaFish and other "wild" Betta keepers, you need to manipulate the pH). Modern conditioners work instantaneously.


My tapwater ph is high out of the faucet. Definitly doesn't need to be raised any. I learn somthing new everyday from you guys( and girls/ladies). Thanks TFK!

Byron is an excellent writer. His reference materials on this site are informative and a joy to read. I teach english at university and to read his sharp, scientific prose is a very welcome change from the endless theory that I usually work with. Thanks
Strohmeyer, as well, has a certain flair that I find very appealing.


----------



## NewFishFiend

Flear said:


> the last water change in my tanks was ... about 5 months ago (memory isn't that good going back that far)
> 
> that water change was to deal with an ammonia issue due to ... lots
> 
> PH change converting ammonium to ammonia
> removing an excess of plant trimmings for a tank that was very overgrown
> the excess plants were in priority for any ammonia/ammonium in the tank so there wasn't an established beneficial bacterial colony to process ammonia.
> 
> the last fish i lost was ... due to the ammonia spike.
> 
> in my searchings on the net in enough forums i have lost count, ... i never did the "i have to do these maintenance's because it's what everyone else does."
> 
> i've heard "water changes to deal with excess nitrates", ... but what if you've got plants that keep your nitrates down ? ... then comes other excuses "because of fish hormones" ... really ???
> 
> water changes to deal with nitrates, fine, nitrates are toxic in excess, and it makes sense to change the water on a regular basis.
> 
> vacuuming the gravel makes sense to deal with organic breakdown that would result in higher ammonia (and ultimately higher nitrates once processed.
> 
> cleaning the glass, provided you don't have anything that can clean the glass, otherwise strictly aesthetics only
> 
> if you have plants, just measure your nitrates, if they're in excess (you decide what excess means to you) then change "enough" water to keep your nitrates from being that high.
> 
> i've heard (i don't measure) that plants can enjoy nitrates up to 40 as optimum under 10 could be N deficiencies
> 
> otherwise, ... water changes mean changing tank parameters, 40% sounds like a rather drastic change every week, a minor change if tank parameters match the water going into the tank, otherwise, that sounds like a lot of undue stress.
> 
> when i started i heard 10-20% water change every week, i heard that for tanks that don't have plants
> 
> i have plants in my tank with the idea that they'll process nitrates making water changes obsolete.
> 
> 5 months without a water change says something you know.
> 
> last time i vacuumed the gravel ??? the tank has been setup for over a year and a half, i've never vacuumed the gravel.
> 
> i don't clean the glass, i have a pleco ... not that the pleco is particularly great at managing the green spot algae, but that was my excuse before, ... as the tank has matured and the plants stabilize, and the nutrients do whatever the nutrients do, the green spot algae isn't as obvious as it used to be.
> 
> ---
> 
> in all honesty, ignore everything i have said.
> do what you feel is necessary, ... but know why your doing it.
> if your noticing levels in your tank are stable, why upset that ?, ... "if it's not broke don't fix it"
> 
> if your doing things because "of regular maintenance" stop that. while just my opinion, not knowing why your doing anything other than "it's because what everyone else says to do" ... pretty foolish way to live.
> 
> if you are finding your levels are getting out of hand, ... do smaller changes, vacuum the gravel if you don't have plants. if you have plants your plants will appreciate what's accumulating in the gravel. your plants will also appreciate being left alone instead of being uprooted (i don't know why people rearrange their planted tank, so many do
> 
> if you have no plants, ... definitely resume your water changes, ... but 40% ?, if you are medicating your tank, 40% sounds like a great water change otherwise, quit that. your only changing enough water to keep your nitrates down. ... unless someone has something a little (or a lot) more valid than "hormones in the water" i see zero reason to change water for any other reason than nitrates.


The only thing you neglected to address is stability and alkalinity. Trace minerals get used up so if you arent doin water changes how do u keep dkh and ph stable? Does just topping off work? I understand everything you said and totally agree that nitrates usually dictate when a water change is necessary. In a heavily planted tank there is usually very little nitrates. Gravel vacuuming also not necessary in planted tanks ( imho). But in my planted 5 gallon betta tank, if i dont do 10% pwc once a week then my dkh is used up and ph swings. How do u avoid this? Nitrates are never an issue in that tank, just alkalinity


----------



## beaslbob

NewFishFiend said:


> The only thing you neglected to address is stability and alkalinity. Trace minerals get used up so if you arent doin water changes how do u keep dkh and ph stable? Does just topping off work? I understand everything you said and totally agree that nitrates usually dictate when a water change is necessary. In a heavily planted tank there is usually very little nitrates. Gravel vacuuming also not necessary in planted tanks ( imho). But in my planted 5 gallon betta tank, if i dont do 10% pwc once a week then my dkh is used up and ph swings. How do u avoid this? Nitrates are never an issue in that tank, just alkalinity


 
Don't know if this will help.

My tanks are heavily planted with no water changes, no filtration, no dosing.

With a play sand only substrate kh (and gh) did rise to very high values. Like 20 dkh or higher.

in my tanks with peat moss in the substrate kh was 4 degress and gh was 9 degrees for 2-3 years.

in all the tanks pH was 8.4-8.8 (purple on the api high range test kit)

you could try a little baking soda to keep KH up in the betta tank.


my .02


----------



## jaysee

beaslbob said:


> in my tanks with peat moss in the substrate kh was 4 degress and gh was 9 degrees for 2-3 years.


Begs the question - what happened after 2-3 years?


----------



## NewFishFiend

beaslbob said:


> Don't know if this will help.
> 
> My tanks are heavily planted with no water changes, no filtration, no dosing.
> 
> With a play sand only substrate kh (and gh) did rise to very high values. Like 20 dkh or higher.
> 
> in my tanks with peat moss in the substrate kh was 4 degress and gh was 9 degrees for 2-3 years.
> 
> in all the tanks pH was 8.4-8.8 (purple on the api high range test kit)
> 
> you could try a little baking soda to keep KH up in the betta tank.
> 
> 
> my .02


I tend to have the opposite problem, the dkh is depleted and the ph drops substantially if I don't do water changes. I mean it only takes like 3 minutes so it's not a big deal. It was more along the lines of just trying to learn something new. Always something new to learn


----------



## rsskylight04

Should I dose my whole tank with prme or just treat the refill water.


----------



## jaysee

rsskylight04 said:


> Should I dose my whole tank with prme or just treat the refill water.


You'll be fine somewhere in the middle.


----------



## beaslbob

jaysee said:


> Begs the question - what happened after 2-3 years?


actually don't know. At the worst replace the substrate? :lol:


----------



## beaslbob

rsskylight04 said:


> Should I dose my whole tank with prme or just treat the refill water.


 
If you must use Prime which I don't recommend, then just treat the replacement water.


my .02


----------



## jaysee

Do you not recommend prime in general or just with your system? What's not to like besides the smell??


----------



## Hallyx

I understand the reasoning behind both methodologies. I think Jaysee has the right compromise. In other words, it's not that important which way you decide to go.


----------



## jaysee

Hallyx said:


> I understand the reasoning behind both methodologies. I think Jaysee has the right compromise. In other words, it's not that important which way you decide to go.


You know it also is determined by how much water you change. I change 80% so I just dose the whole tank. If someone were doing a 25% change, then dosing the whole tank is more of a waste of product, especially when dosing for half the tank still gives you twice of that which you need.


----------



## Hallyx

Here's another consideration. If your tank is cycled, you really only need a dechloraminator. The bacteria and plants handle the ammonia. Many keepers like to minimize chemical and TDS in their tanks.

I'd rather use an ammonia locker in my refill and let the ammonia unlock over a day or two.


----------



## Flear

sorry to the OP, i tend to ramble on and on at times, this seems to have been one of those times.
didn't mean to hijack the thread. seems i did that

---

Hallyx

i thought the local water was using chloramine before & got stuff to deal with that
then i found out they were using nothing when they started adding chlorine, ... a little bit of conspiracy stuff in that direction, but oh well, for the moment there's a guarantee i'm dealing with chlorine, i hope they don't move to chloromine.

as fr the air bubbler, ... just to speed things up, ... a large bucket only has X surface area regardless of how deep it is, the bubbler is to help speed up the process of removing the chlorine. if it works great, if it's only in my head, no harm done. otherwise to ensure lots of O2 instead of stagnant, likewise about if it's in my head or not

if i'm ever dealing which chloromine,
-i heard that stuff is a nightmare, ... to boil off chorline vs. choloromine, 1h vs 26 hours, i have no idea what that translates into letting it sit
-i've heard the water companies claim they are using the least toxic form of chloromine wanting praise, then as it reacts with whatever it finds it mutates into far more toxic by-products and the water company is in denial that they are responsible.
if i hear water here is using chloromine then i'm off to use additives to deal with it (i hope that is held off as long as possible) our modern world places such a high priority on maintaining stuff and human health doesn't seem to be the same on the priority list, we're told otherwise, but realistically ?

---

NewFishFiend
my PH is stable, high, but stable, i'm wanting it to be a little lower actually, it's above 7.5 (off the scale of the one test kit i have) i want it between 7.0 & 7.5.

my dH, kH, gH (whatever they are) i honestly have no idea what they are, ... as i'm currently consumed by how my pH is affecting nutrient avaliability i'm putting priorities there, overly concerned about nutrient avaliability when the pH is going to drive out the nutrients anyway i figure is a little pointless.

in my 'zero water change' idea. for a bit i was clipping, drying, crushing, and readding this to the tank (nutrients would be recycled, ... then i got thinking "wait, if i'm already dealing with nutrient deficiency problems this will not resolve the nutrient problem, it will only prolong it", ... so i stopped that, still have a small container of dried crushed clippings (i'm stubborn for no reason). when i start this again i'm going to be using peat with the hope of adding balanced nutrients

but this 'nutrient recycling' idea has met some unforeseen issues, ... it's a great idea in theory, except some forms of various nutrients have a stage that is gassious , and subject to evaporating out of the tank, leaving a total net loss over time and creating nutrient deficiencies that take a lot more planning.

nitrogen in ammonia form (not worried about N2 form)
chlorine (which apparently in whatever trace amounts have a benefit to the tank (but i'm sure in far less levels than are ever present in tap water)
... others i dono, but it's been a major stumbling block suddenly about "what am i really doing, solving a problem or creating one "

---

as for what i'm doing ...

a whole lot of guess-work

there's very little information on doing anything other than water changes
for planted tanks ... nutrients added to the tank because of what water from the city treatment and pipes have added to replace what the plants have consumed, dosing the water column to compensate for what the plants have consumed, ...

then there is walstad tanks & mineralized top soil alternatives
-i was surprised to see the walstad method of adding fast growing plants from day 1 to consume ammonia produced by the substrates initial decomposing to be a bit of an eye-opener, not a peasant surprise or a scary surprise but a "huh, that's why that's in her formula" (i have yet to read the book)

while looking up ideas for substrates currently ...
-one forum someone had decided to go several steps beyond walstad and formulate his own substrate. a mix of minerals and nutrients formulated to bring a balance on what the plants want.
-ideas for chelated minerals
-concerns about man-made fertilizers for gardening & farming (excess salts that are essencially nutrients that are unavaliable to plants that can destroy beneficial bacterias in the soil and encourage farmers to use 5-10x the amount of fertilizers they would otherwise need, while they are destroying their farm-land all at the same time. i guess that's why for aquariums the emphasis on organic soils only.
-concerns about chelating chemicals, mirroring concerns about artifical fertilizers.
-substrate/soil ideas to allow for high CEC & AEC to be of benefit for plants, ... how pH affects these

all in the pursuit of something that can bring nutrients sitting in the substrate to be avaliable for plants instead of being removed from the system forcing dosing to ensure healthy plants in the aquarium.

there is lots talked about asking us, to maintain our tanks, to ask us to do all this extra work, water changes, dosing, vacuuming, feedings, filters, ... sure it works, but ... i look outside my windows at home and see this marvelous thing called nature and it does it all on it's own, we're not out there maintaining riverbeds, or mountain sides or forest floors to make sure things keep working, nor do i see some divine god out there tilling the ground, pulling weeds, and adding fertilizers to compensate for everything we do in our tanks.

i see everything going on on a large scale, something thousands of times larger than the largest aquariums we have ever built to do all this naturally. so there is that that says we will never duplicate that in the aquarium.

but i see no one trying, i see no information on "hey, this can be done and it helps" instead i see "buy this, we are telling you it works, ... till we have the next model, the next upgrade, the next technology, then we'll tell you don't get that last one, it doesn't work, ... now buy this new one, it works"

the undergravel filter, an outdated technology, ... with the idea of us maintaining our tanks it's a great thing, it's just not the newest technology, and no one has any reall definititve idea why it's bad & doesn't work. ... for everything i could find if your maintaining your tank with all the regular maintenance there is, it's a beautiful thing to use in your tank.

no one talks about where they are good or bad, only the broad generalized "they're not good" yet looking farther no one has any answers, ... you really really gotta look before finding some pretty obscure reading about them and find their only drawbacks are planted tanks, but otherwise surpass so much of what else is out there for biological filtration.

---

but there is very little information out there on building an aquarium with the idea of having it maintain itself, everything & everyone all say 'we with our mechanical devices and our technology and our infinite time & money and elbow grease can do better than nature" ... hasn't history shown us we are about the last beings on the planet to trust we can do a good job at maintaining anything ? but we buy devices, we spend money on product research to build better products, we promote expensive ad. campaigns to say "buy this, it is good for you" i'm surprised (well not so much) plants replace many of the devices we buy and products we purchase, they're cheaper, and last longer. ... but they're sold for aesthetics, so i guess they're not seen as negatively impacting the manufacture companies that want you to buy their stuff.

not knocking the stuff (not all of it), i use lots of that stuff, gravel, lighting, heating, HOB filter, air bubbler, treatments, test kits, ... i'm running on an idea though that the less "I" do, the more then tank can do, the healthier the tank is.

right now, ... concerns about dH, gH, kH, ... pH it is, i need to get it down. i need to get the nutrients in the water column down, i'm sure they're beyond high with the recycling idea/experiment, so stable, better believe it, the plants are pale, lighting is very high, i've got potassium deficiencies (obvious visual evidence), i think i have iron deficiencies and/or manganese deficiencies (not as obvious visual, but pH suggests certainly in combination with visual). and without the PH lower i can't solve those, i could dose, but i fear the moment the tank balances out everything I've dosed will immediately go into nutrient toxicity levels, ... not good at all.

i guess this goes back to the OP's question about water changes, a healthy tank, ... and everything related, ... if i'm doing all this maintenance because i'm expected and don't know what's going on, ... if i am doing all this maintenance because i'm expected and i do know what's going on, ... both scenarios avoid the question "do i have to do this maintenance or am i doing it because i think i should ?

sure i understand maintenance concerns (or lack of maintenance concerns) if things are not stable, things get unbalanced because of a lack of maintenance. ... but that's not always the case. sometimes (as is seen from the op's tank she's talking about things being more stable with less maintenance, or others who's tanks are more stable with maintenance, ... the unspoken "there's more going on then anyone is aware of, why is one persons tank stable and another unstable ?"

my tank is stable, not where i want it, but it's stable
-oh ya, and why i want a ph of 7.0-7.5 ... zooplankton, snails, inverts, otherwise 6.5 would be a much better ph. but my ph goal has sent me down a road with lots of questions i never thought to consider, with lots of learning i never dreamed of necessary before. that i am grateful for now.
-most important question for learning, "why?" forget taking things for granted because someone said so who was convinced of it's importance, but doesn't know why it's important other than they were told.... ask "why"

one of those learning directions, the DSB (deep sand bed), ... don't listen to anyone, it's all BS. the value is BS, but so is every concern about why they're doomed to failure, that's BS too, every side of that argument is filled with ignorance to promote their use or discourage their value. and so much of what i have found in this hobby is just that, those who say "yes" say yes because it's what they were told, and those who say "no" say so because it's what they were told, ... and it might as well be a huge research project that should have a PhD diploma at the end of it if you can come out of it years down the road and know what your doing, why, what is going on, how it affects the system and on and on it goes, ... 

the OP posed a question based on seeing evidence that what she was told was needed was causing more problems than if she left well enough alone, ... i won't say it's going to work idefinitly, but she's looked at the evidence, asked some questions, realized some assumptions, learned "wait a bit, why was i doing it before?" and looking to improve while understanding what she is improving upon. 

that's better than ... i could guess up to 50% of the people in this hobby.


----------



## Roccus

My tap water varies anywhere from 7.8 - 8+ and contains a high copper content ( I had a water annalissis done by the town before I built my ornamental pond).... so i bought a R/O D/I system for top offs and changes... on changes, i use conditioned tap water ( prime) mixed with enough ( usualy about 3:1) R/O water to balnce my ph and KGH, by doing it this way, i can keep the integrity of my water change and still replace the needed buffers with out them over powering my water to maintain a balanced system at the lower PH I desire.. I use the D/i water for top offs to keep the mineral content exactly where it is.. the system I bought ( 100 GPD R/O budy) was IMHO inexpensive and has taken the headache out of water changes..since going to this method, the live stock in my tank are the most active i have ever seen them.....


----------



## Hallyx

Thanks for the data point, Roccus. What do you keep your pH at now? KH? GH?


----------



## rsskylight04

*high ph*

My ph varies from 7.8-8.2. Lower in summer, higher in winter.My tanks are stable and my fish seem happy. Should I be worried about longterm effects for my fish from the high ph? 

Also, can water be softened just by boiling and cooling it?


----------



## Hallyx

Theoretically, all things being equal, keeping fish outside their pH range should cause them to use more energy in osmoregulation. Things are not equal, howeer, and there are more important factors to consider. This is just my opinion, and I'd like someone to contradict me in the interest of an educational discussion.

I've never heard of boiling water in order to soften it. Logically, boiling would tend to harden the water as evaporation decreases the water volume, thereby elevating the relative mineral content.


----------



## rickey

Hallyx said:


> Theoretically, all things being equal, keeping fish outside their pH range should cause them to use more energy in osmoregulation. Things are not equal, howeer, and there are more important factors to consider. This is just my opinion, and I'd like someone to contradict me in the interest of an educational discussion.
> 
> I've never heard of boiling water in order to soften it. Logically, boiling would tend to harden the water as evaporation decreases the water volume, thereby elevating the relative mineral content.


You would think boiling would rise pH wouldn't you, Wrong.
In chemistry, bicarbonate (recommended nomenclature: hydrogen carbonate) is an anion with the chemical formula HCO3−. and has a crucial role in the pH buffering system and is driven off by boiling. So once again we are back to the carbon cycle.

R


----------



## Austin

I didn't read this whole thread but I'm sure people already mentioned that if you are adding food to the tank daily, you're adding more and more (eventual) waste. Yes the plants assimilate it, but what happens when their leaves die? They rot and the waste returns to being waste. So possibly if you had little enough fish and trimmed the plants you could have a "balanced system," but there's no way you can keep adding food and expect your aquarium to stay balanced unless you are removing something as well.


----------



## Roccus

Hallyx said:


> Thanks for the data point, Roccus. What do you keep your pH at now? KH? GH?


sorry for the late reply... been busy etc.... 

I dont have the exact numbers for KH and GH in front of me now.... I dont bother to check them often at this point... I temper my tap water with the r/o water until i reach the desired PH (7.2 give or take what light shade of blue I'm seeing that particular day) and call it good.. I can tell if the water is geting "hard" or "soft" in the tank by simply watching the bubbles in the UGF... the size changes dramaticaly ( they get larger and less numerous in hard water and small and more numerous in soft water)... weekly controlled water changes keep that in check.. 
so my PH is directly related to my KH and GH and because i am using the water itself in dillution ( unlike the experimint below) my PH remains stable and as long as i continue to replace the KH buffers( that deplete over time) using weekly water changes.. everyone remains happy..

I know the PH of the tank which I ,maintain at 7.2 - 7.4.. I feel this gives me a "fudge " margin in my comunity tank .. tap water, comes out anywhere from 7.8 to 8.6... it's been higher as of late.... i tried an experimant once... taking 5 gallons of untreated tap water with a PH of 8+.. I dropped 1/2 of a 10 gallon dose of PH 7.0 in the 5 gallon bucket... when the fizzing stopped i stired the water and tested the PH.. it was @ 7. something.... I tested it again in the morning and it was 8+ again.. I applied the remaining dose tested ,, got my 7. something reading and waited till morning again.. it was back up in the 8's again... it was at that point that I began to understand the buffering qualities of water...


----------



## Hallyx

That was really enlightening, Roccus. I especially liked the part about estimating hardness by the size of the bubbles from your filter.

Great sigline quote, too.


----------



## Roccus

rsskylight04 said:


> My ph varies from 7.8-8.2. Lower in summer, higher in winter.My tanks are stable and my fish seem happy. Should I be worried about longterm effects for my fish from the high ph?
> 
> Also, can water be softened just by boiling and cooling it?


boiling will alter the KH...not the GH..


----------



## beaslbob

rsskylight04 said:


> My ph varies from 7.8-8.2. Lower in summer, higher in winter.My tanks are stable and my fish seem happy. Should I be worried about longterm effects for my fish from the high ph?
> 
> Also, can water be softened just by boiling and cooling it?


 
No to both.

Those pH values are actually lower then what I see in my unfiltered, uncirculated tanks. And they have ran for up to 9 years with happy fish.

With your fish being happy I don't think you will have any long term effects.

Besides running a tank long enough to see differences between summer and winter is long term to newbies.

my kh and gh did rise to high levels with a sant only substrate. But both remained constant for 2-3 yes when I had peat moss capped by sand.


my .02


----------



## Hallyx

Roccus said:


> boiling will alter the KH...not the GH..


Yeah, that squares with Rickey's explanation earlier in this thread. I think I'll try that. How long should I have to boil the water?


----------



## Roccus

Hallyx said:


> Yeah, that squares with Rickey's explanation earlier in this thread. I think I'll try that. How long should I have to boil the water?


 
I missed Rickey's reply ( or I would not have).. I've never done it.. only have seen it in print a few times...might be grounds for an experiment some day when I'm bored..


----------



## Hallyx

Rick's explanation is post #56 (page 6) on this thread.


----------



## Roccus

Hallyx said:


> Rick's explanation is post #56 (page 6) on this thread.


i went back and read it ... IMHO, anything he writes is worth reading!


----------



## KellyL

Hi all, no worries about stealing me thread! the bits I understand are very interesting!! 

But I have to go back to my original question though because . . . . I topped up the water on Sunday (about 30l - yes, I had really neglected it recently) and I had had 3!!!!! yes, 3 dead female molly since then!!! 3 in a week and not one since August!! 

I dont know what on earth happened! any ideas?

Thank you!


----------



## Hallyx

Did you do that most recent water add without using Prime for the whole tank? Did we cover ammonia shock resulting from a pH spike on this thread? (I'll re-read it later, to find out.)


----------



## Flear

KellyL, i dono if this has been asked before, ...

do you recall what your PH was before water changes ?
do you know what your PH is after water changes ?


----------



## KellyL

Prime is quite difficult to get ahold of here and is very expensive even when you consider that you use far less. I was told API Stress Coat+ was a good alternative, so thats what I use.
I never use it on the entire tank, just the new water.

I have tested the before/after and new water PH before, there was a little dip in PH because I artificially rise it a little bit but it wasn't a lot. Cant remember exactly what it was but its between .5.
I'll look for the ammonia shock posts, must have missed those.


----------



## Hallyx

Knowing the pH reading before and after you added the top-off water would tell a lot. Stress Coat uses the same stuff as Prime and most of the other ammonia-lockers. When used in a whole-tank dose. It doesn't matter much if your pH varies. 

Anyway, what is it now? And what are your other readings?


----------



## KellyL

ok, tap water is 6.8PH, tank is between 7.4 and 7.6. I'm waiting on Ammonia then I will wash the vials and start on the N's! lol

Should I fully dose the tank when changing water from now on?
Thank you!


----------



## KellyL

Ok I have the rest:
ammonia is a little above 0 but nowhere near 0.25 (the next reference on the chart)
Nitrite is dead on 0.
Nitrate is a little high, about 25ppm


----------



## Flear

nitrates are fine at that


----------



## Hallyx

Nitrate is OK. Means you cycle is working. If your ammonia has always read near 0.0ppm, then my ammonia spike conjecture is not applicable. Your tapwater pH mitigates against it, too. Can't eve guess why your Molly died. How much salt are you using for them?


----------



## rsskylight04

There are chemists and professional breeders on this forum- I am neither so someone please correct me if I say anything wrong. Also, I work with English literature, not chemical compounds, so I'm going to give you this in English, not scientific notations and formulas
So now that we have the disclaimers out of the way....Ammonia shock can result from a swing in ph, most often caused by adding or changing water. As water sits in your tank and is used by fish, bacteria, and plants, it becomes depleted of trace minerals and electrolytes ( salts). Water also becomes depleted of its buffer which holds ph high and stable( thanks Hallyx). Your ph starts to drop over time, but low ph does not harm fish directly. It actually causes ammonia to convert to a relativly harmless form. Sounds good , but not so fast. All the ammonia is still there in your water, just in a different form due to the low ph. When you add fresh water you restore the buffer and ph rises, again it is not the ph that affects your fish directly. As ph rises the converted ammonia returns back to its more toxic form and kills fish. I think this is a major killer of aquarium fish world wide and also why some people have negative attitude toward water changes. Best way to avoid it inmy opinion is to do weekly water changes even if your test readings are fine.
As I recall you have soft water with low ph- you're set up for a ph swing right out of the tap.
Please correct me if I said anything wrong or if some of you more science based peopl could add to our understanding of ph, buffers, ammonia/ammonium, or any of the compounds involved in this mess!
Thank you kelly for giving us this thread, you should read it a few times- I wish so one would have told me this stuff when I was getting into the hobby.
None of this may apply to your situation right now, but its valuable knowledge for your fishkkeping mental toolbox!
Best wishes


----------



## Flear

if the tank pH is between 7.4 & 7.8, and ammonia readings are pretty close to 0, adding water with a lower PH will only cause the PH in the tank to move lower (if at all)

lower PH takes whatever ammonia is in the tank and tends to convert more of it (not an absolute conversion just a relative ratio) to move more ammonia into a safe ammonium state.

this would move an ammonia reading of near zero to a safer number even closer to zero

i don't see the problem being related to ammonia.

that doesn't rule out pH causing a shock to the tank
if the PH before and after a change are drastic, then there's a bit of a concern, ... what 'drastic' counts as i dono, i don't change my water often enough to know.

there was a concern about salt, ... 

now i don't know too much about what is going on vs. hypotheticals.

if the perimeters coming out of the tank are similar to what's going into the tank there's little or no concern for shock, if evaporation is concerned though, ...

with evaporation being concerned, it's less of a concern of what goes out & what goes in, and that the numbers are the same week-to-week to ensure tehre are no buildups

still that leaves me baffled as to why things are stable when there are no water changes and why water changes are killing fish.

like KallyL, i am so beyond baffled, i could throw all kinds of ideas, but that will only add confusion.

from the sounds of it, things relating to the nitrogen cycle & PH, that looks good to me, i'm going to side with the problem must be elsewhere.


----------



## beaslbob

Flear said:


> ...
> 
> 
> still that leaves me baffled as to why things are stable when there are no water changes and why water changes are killing fish.
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> .


 
No surprise here.

Also wasn't the fish deaths female mollies? I hear they do much better is brackish to full marine tanks.

my .02


----------



## KellyL

Ye the book says that the Nitrate is ok at that, its just higher than the others. How long does it take for the Ammonia to get that far down the cycle? I mean 'X' amount of days ago my Ammonia must have been higher to produce this reading down the line? or does it build up in that stage more than the other stages?

The salt has been a trouble to me for a while, I have a packet of salt that is 454g it says that it should treat 404L (107gallons) - my tank is 200L. But I followed the instructions and measured 1 rounded tablespoon per 5gallons/20L (I used my baking measuring cups) and I used nearly the entire packet!! based on the instructions it should be roughly 1g of salt per Litre.

I put in 100g salt that should be 0.5g of salt per liter. for every 10L I remove I replace 5g of salt (I dont add salt for evaporated water since the salt stays behind.)

I'm pretty sure thats right, Its seemed to work so far!

Your welcome for the thread! I will have to sit and read it all again! read most of it on my phone to be honest!!  Your right, you never know all of this when you start keeping fish! i couldn't get decent info anywhere before I found this place!

Thanks again everyone!


----------



## Flear

i don't know about the timeline to go from ammonia to nitrite to nitrate

to go from nitrate to nitrogen gas requires a different environment present in the aquarium (anoxic, without oxygen) - not something to worry about

but, ... once things progress to nitrates, they just build up over time. for tanks that don't have the ability to process (either anoxic areas or plants - including algae as was mentioned) then water changes are required ... considering your description of your tank, that it's safer without changes, ... i'm going to side with whatever algae and such you have in the tank is keeping nitrates low enough to be safe.

but your origeonal question, "how long", ... i dono
i'm going to side with whatever reading your getting is going to be saying that things are relatively stable ... (as far as nitrates are concerned.

as ammonia is produced and processed, those levels will stay near zero, then the algae in your tank (or plants if you have some now) are keeping the nitrates at a safe level.

i'm also going to side with once established, and ammonia and nitrites are processed into nitrates in a cycled tank, things are established and safe and no worries after that

doesn't mean i'm right, it's just where my thinking is
if your ammonia readings are near zero, chances are they were near zero before, and with your PH, (as has been mentioned) there is nothing to worry about there.

so we're back to "i really don't think what's going on in your tank has anything to do with your nitrogen cycle"


----------



## KellyL

Now this is a bit 'off the wall' but could it be the molly themselves? The molly I've had in the past, the males where roughly the same size as the females . . . .
Well the story is that my mum bought me 6 molly (without asking) because I didnt have any left. It was 5 males, 1 female :/ so I bought 10 females from somewhere else.
These looked small compared to what I had had before (and the 6 new ones I had at home) but I assumed they where young. 
While the 6 have grown in size (I think some of them are crossbreds with sailfin molly so they are really big) the 10 females are still really small and dont seem like the ones I have had before for some reason. I lost 3 of these 10 females months ago and its another 3 that died this week . . . . could it be them? I know the shop has baby fish given to them sometimes, molly especially. Is it possible that they are inbread or that they have been crossbread with other forms of molly/platty and are weak? Its far fetched and I blamed the water straight away but since it seems ok . . . i just done know!

I hope that made sense! :/


----------



## rsskylight04

Main problem I see with not doing regular water changes is evaporation. You will have to add water to your tank to compensate for evaporation. If your old water is depleted of its buffer, and you top off the tank with harder water you are setting up conditions for a swing.

By doing scheduled changes, you ensure that the buffer is never depleted- no ph swings.
To answer your question about mollies... yeah some that I've seen are just weak and sickly, prone to ich in my experience.


----------



## Flear

even if the old water is 'depleted', ... all that stuff has to go somewhere for it to become depleted

and likely will become saturated. all these ideas make beautiful sense IF things were dying because no water changes were being done, ... all these ideas make no sense as things are dying with water changes.

weak genetics could be a factor
KellyL as you mention genetics, could the dying fish be related to being beaten up by others ? (i have no idea what aggressive tendencies of any fish you may have in the tank)


----------



## beaslbob

Obviously it was the mollies at least in the sense if they had been stronger then would have survived.

I know this is hard for most to "warp their head around", but to me what is important is to provide a stable, healthy environment for our fish. I have found over the years that planted tanks with peat moss in the substrate provide that environment.

When you have that kind of environment, water changes can only degrade that.

Sure if something shocked the setup like say the accidental addition of some toxin, then water changes would probably be called for. But other then that extreme situation, a stable healthy environment is the goal. Which means as little disruption from environment as possible. Including water changes and chemicals.

But that's just my expereience and it's worth at most.


.02


----------



## jaysee

rsskylight04 said:


> Main problem I see with not doing regular water changes is evaporation. You will have to add water to your tank to compensate for evaporation.


If you use canister filters and glass tops, there is no evaporation. HoB filters lose water out the top, especially if there's no lid, while canisters (and for the purpose of this discussion any internal filters too, with the use of a glass top) are completely contained. Those plastic hoods don't do anything to keep the water, or heat, in.

Otherwise, yes evaporation can be a problem.


----------



## Agent13

jaysee said:


> If you use canister filters and glass tops, there is no evaporation. HoB filters lose water out the top, especially if there's no lid, while canisters (and for the purpose of this discussion any internal filters too, with the use of a glass top) are completely contained. Those plastic hoods don't do anything to keep the water, or heat, in.
> 
> Otherwise, yes evaporation can be a problem.


I can't completely agree. My 72 runs 2 canisters and has a glass top and there is *some* evaporation. Not enough to bother me.. Well except when I didn't do a water change for 6 weeks and then the water was almost an inch down. 


Sent from Petguide.com App


----------



## jaysee

Yeah I lose maybe a half inch in a month.


----------



## ao

amazing, I lose a whole tank in one month 


Sent from Petguide.com App


----------



## jaysee

Too, since you all heat your tanks they will evaporate faster.

My unheated tanks could probably go 6 months before id even hear water noise (spray bars)


----------



## rsskylight04

I've been reading a lot of threads and posts about water quality and water changes since I joined this forum about 6-7 weeks ago, and there seems to be no concensus regarding what constitutes a " good " water change schedule. I've read everything from no changes ever, to 50% twice a week, and everything in between. So many succesfull aquarists but no two agree exactly on amount and frequency. 

I guess it would depend on many things... size of tank; number, kind and size of fish; type of food and frequency of feeding; temperature; ph and hardness of water; plants or no plants; qualities of the tapwater....

The science and chemistry behind fishkeeping is such complex and beautiful thing, but it can't answer such a simple question as " how should I change my fish's water" !?!?!?!?


----------



## jaysee

However you like


----------



## Hallyx

Can I _double-like_ Skylight's post?


----------



## Agent13

Hallyx said:


> Can I _double-like_ Skylight's post?


Lol. You can do even better. Like then thank then quote( but don't write anything) then like again.. And you could even thank your quote .. Haha


Sent from Petguide.com App


----------



## Hallyx

Hallyx said:


> Can I _double-like_ Skylight's post?


I really _double-like_ Skylight's post. But I can't _thank_ or _like _my own posts, even though I often do...LoL

...


----------



## rsskylight04

Thanks for liking but its really not a great post, just a little frustration. I have no problems with my water or water changes, but I would think that there must be a best practice for water changes. All I'm looking for is amount and frequency. Maybe its like changing your socks- a couple dozen ways to do it and all are fine as long as the old socks get off and new ones get on. So many experienced and brilliant people but no one will say firmly : " This is the best ". Sure you can do whatever you want with your fishtank, but with the HEALTH OF THE FISH as the primary cocern, some practices and strategies must be better than others.
Thanks to everyone on this site. Its a wonderful place to learn about fishkeeping.


----------



## beaslbob

rsskylight04 said:


> Thanks for liking but its really not a great post, just a little frustration. I have no problems with my water or water changes, but I would think that there must be a best practice for water changes. All I'm looking for is amount and frequency. Maybe its like changing your socks- a couple dozen ways to do it and all are fine as long as the old socks get off and new ones get on. So many experienced and brilliant people but no one will say firmly : " This is the best ". Sure you can do whatever you want with your fishtank, but with the HEALTH OF THE FISH as the primary cocern, some practices and strategies must be better than others.
> Thanks to everyone on this site. Its a wonderful place to learn about fishkeeping.


 
To me one of the things the entire water change question avoids it why do we have to do water changes to begin with. And also why are water changes considered the solution to everything?

After all we could maintain a tank by constantly doing 100% per hour water changes. But that would require and large source of good water constantly bing poured into and drained from your tank.

I just concentrate on the actuall tank environment itself and how the natural processes maintain the tank. I consider that the key to success as opposed to conatantly changing the water.

still just my .02


----------



## jaysee

The thing I think is the worst is the notion that fish are going to die if they skip their weekly water change. I think for many, fear is a motivating factor. They do seem afraid that things are going to fall apart if they slack off from the weekly period. Aquariums are not a house of cards waiting to come crashing down.


----------



## Flear

i don't know if this was brought with more than asking about specific possible nutrients

if water changes are causing more stress than your fish can handle, then they die, what is so different between the two water sources ?

what is used in your local water to keep it sterile ? (chlorine ?, chloromine ? something else ?) - might require a phone call so your not guessing)

what happens with the water that after a few days (or more) it's safe, ... although by this time it's already taken it's toll on your fish.
-is something gassing off ?
-is the excess (whatever) being processed by bacteria/algae in the tank ?

i don't know the extent of the test kits you have, i won't recommend buying more unless you know what you're looking for (could get excessively expensive comparing your tank water nutrient levels with the tap water you have)

find a local aquarium club see what they know.
talk with your LFS to see if they are aware, if so what do they know.
-maybe they don't know (could be lack of staff knowledge, could be no issues like what your having, could be fish turnover rates at the store doesn't give them a chance to see there is an issue)

worst case scenario
-it might be your tank
(just looking at possibilities no matter how obscure)

might require a second tank to allow the water you'll put into the display tank to be mature already to solve

already seen lots of advice that would make sense if fish were dying without a water change
it's gotta be something else
-either toxins
-or excessive levels of something that is causing excessive stress and death with a water change

don't care how things are dealt with but something is going on that's causing issues
left along they resolve themselves, so it's gotta be the tap water or a difference between the tank and the tap water


----------



## KellyL

I lost one of the male molly yesterday (one of the ones i thought was 'healthy')!
I haven't touched the tank since the water top-up last Sunday and now the death toll is 4.

I think I'm just going to let whatever is going to happen, happen! then give up on the molly! I have to do a full clean in the next few days so it looks presentable for Christmas so god help.
At least I won't have to worry about rising the PH and the salt issue anymore!
I may get more dwarf gourami or something completely new! what kind of temperament do barbs have and do the different types generally get on with each other?

As for the evaporation issue, I do have a plastic lid and it did have two florescent tubes in it up until last week when they packed in. Despite my best efforts and calling reinforcements (daddy) we couldn't bring it back to life so I've gone LED! Should save me some water!

Thanks again all!  Happy christmas!


----------

