Aquarium Forum
 


Menu
  · Tropical Fish Home
· Fish News
· Aquarium Forum
· Buy & Sell
· Calculators
· Equipment reviews
· Free Aquarium Ebook
· Feedback
· Link to us
· Photo gallery
· Plant species
· Tropica Plant DB
Tropical fish species
· By Common name
· By Scientific name
Tropical Marine fish
· By Common name
· By Scientific name

_________________
 
      
        Via paypal

  AC news is a part of
      Nature Blog Network

      Reef Aquarium Blog

Privacy & Ad Policy

Articles
  · African Cichlids
· Algae Control
· Aquarium Decoration
· Aquarium Resources
· Aquatic Plants
· Barb Fish
· Betta Fish
· Breeding Fish
· Catfish
· Central American Cichlids
· Cichlids
· Clownfish
· Corals
· Corydoras Catfish
· Discus Fish
· Dwarf Cichlids
· Fish Diseases
· Frogs and Turtles
· Goby Fish
· Goldfish
· Gourami
· Invertebrates
· Jellyfish
· Killiefish
· Lake Victoria Cichlids
· Livebearers
· Malawi Cichlids
· Marine Aquariums
· Marine Aquarium Fish
· Other Fish
· Pleco
· Predatory Fish
· Photography
· Pond Fish
· Responsible Fish Keeping
· Rainbow Fish
· Shark Fish
· South American Cichlids
· Tanganyika Cichlids
· Tetra Fish
· Tropical Fish Food

View Poll Results: is it important to keep soft water species in hard water and vice-versa

Voters
26. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes, all fish need to be kept in proper hardness and PH

    6 23.08%
  • most fish need to

    7 26.92%
  • only a select few fish meed to be kept in their proper hardness and pH

    13 50.00%
  • no, fish needs proper Ph and hardness

    0 0%
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 63
  1. #1

    Default is hardness important


    0 Not allowed!
    there has been some debate weather or not hardness and ph is important.
    please vote to see who wins.
    Last edited by vafa; 08-19-2013 at 07:41 PM.
    i hear some people say, "i kept a goldfish in a bowl and it lived for a year."
    they don't know how lucky they were and all goldfish live at least 15 years in proper conditions.
    that is equal to saying my human lived in his closet for 5 years!

  2. #2

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    how can i edit the poll title it is suppose to be is it important to keep soft water species in soft water and vice-versa
    i hear some people say, "i kept a goldfish in a bowl and it lived for a year."
    they don't know how lucky they were and all goldfish live at least 15 years in proper conditions.
    that is equal to saying my human lived in his closet for 5 years!

  3. #3

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Interesting idea, I'm curious to see what the majority thinks.

  4. #4

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    I'm going to assume this poll is only dealing with fishes and not inverts/corals.

    I'm also going to assume that we base our opinion on where the fish come from (can be same type of fishes but depending on if it is domesticated (for how long) or wild, the answer can vary).

    I'm also going to assume that the degree of change in pH/hardness isn't drastic like going from freshwater to salt, or going from a pH of 4 to 9/totally soft to totally hard....but with some of moderation....

    and after full acclimation into the new water, the water is kept that way so that it is stable and doesn't fluctuate.

    With these in mind, I will cast my vote.
    Think with logic and rationality more than emotion. Act with moderation and consideration. Contemplate ideals and realistic goals and weigh out possibilities and options. Temper not with personal delusions or false hope but learn to accept and move on.

  5. #5

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Spardas View Post
    I'm going to assume this poll is only dealing with fishes and not inverts/corals.
    Yes. It's an ongoing debate in the freshwater section. Personally I think you should try to be as close as possible. Other believe in the fish adapting or the fact that if a species is bred in captivity it means they can live in whatever water.

  6. #6

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    I had to think about whether I hold option 1 or 2, and in the end went with 1, that all fish need to be kept in proper hardness and pH...though I would prefer to change the wording a bit to say that all fish should be maintained in their preferred range of hardness and pH. All fish will be healtheir if they remain in water parameters for which they have evolved over thousands of years, and these are not going to change within a few generations. I have noticed lately that more sources are advocating this position than used to be the case. And there are good reasons behind it, as we learn more about our fish. And it has to do with stress.

    If I may be permitted, at this point I am going to cite a few passages from an article I prepared on stress a couple of years back. This article is online at another forum [where I was until recently a member, before making AC my home], but in case anyone wants to see the entire in context, I will post the link at the end. The references in parentheses are given in the article.

    Homeostasis is defined as “the tendency of an organism or a cell to regulate its internal conditions, usually by a system of feedback controls, so as to stabilize health and functioning, regardless of the outside changing conditions.” Physiological homeostasis, or physical equilibrium, is the internal process animals use to maintain their health and life: “the complex chain of internal chemical reactions that keep the pH of its blood steady, its tissues fed, and the immune system functioning” (Muha, 2006).

    Four important body functions of homeostasis are closely associated with processes in the gills: gas exchange, hydromineral (osmoregulation) control, acid-base balance [pH] and nitrogenous waste excretion [ammonia]. These processes are possible because of the close proximity of the blood flowing through the gills to the surrounding water, as well as the differences in the chemical composition of these two fluids (Bartelme, 2004). Each species of fish has evolved within a specific environment—and by “environment” in this context we mean everything associated with the water in which the fish lives—and the physiological homeostasis only functions well within that environment. This greater dependence upon their surrounding environment is why fish are more susceptible to stress than many other animals (Wedemeyer, 1996).

    Each species of fish has evolved over thousands of years to live in a particular environment. The water chemistry along with the environmental factors of the habitat are crucial not only to the life of the fish but to the state of its health during that life. As we learned above, the fish’s homeostasis only functions well within the species’ natural environment. A normal lifespan is virtually impossible if the fish’s environmental needs are not met to some extent. For instance, if one intends to house tropical forest fish, “the chemical and physical properties of aquatic environments associated with rainforests must be duplicated, or at least approximated, in order to keep these fishes in the best of health” (Weitzman et al., 1996).

    Water parameters play a vital role in preventing stress. We know that many common species seem to manage in an array of differing water parameters—but surviving is very different from living a normal and healthy lifespan. The physiology of each fish species is designed by nature to operate within a specific range of water parameters, meaning general hardness [total dissolved solids], pH and temperature. The physiological equilibrium mentioned previously only operates properly within specific ranges (Muha, 2006). When the parameters extend beyond these ranges, the fish must expend considerably more energy just to “keep going” and this results in chronic stress that further wears down the fish.

    Water is continually entering the fish’s cells via osmosis, and to prevent those cells from exploding, the fish controls the water flow through osmoregulation, which is a complex series of chemical processes. The pH of the tank water affects the pH of the fish’s blood, so another complex series of chemical reactions must occur to control the pH of the blood. The pH also affects the fish’s ability to transport oxygen through the blood to its tissues, and changes to the blood pH affect the ability of the fish’s hemoglobin to hold oxygen (Muha, 2005).

    The total dissolved solids are another major factor. This not only includes common general hardness (calcium and magnesium mineral salts that make up the GH) but the dissolved solids that enter via fish foods, water conditioners, pH adjusters, medications, additives like salt, and others. This is one reason why a regular significant water change—which is the only way to remove these TDS—is so important for fish health.

    A change in temperature beyond the preferred range for the species alters the rate of all the afore-mentioned chemical reactions within the fish’s body, plus the rate they metabolize food; temperature also impacts the level of oxygen in the water which in turn affects the amount of oxygen that can be transported by the hemoglobin in the blood.

    http://www.tropicalfishkeeping.com/f...m-fish-188673/
    Last edited by Byron; 08-19-2013 at 09:22 PM.

  7. #7

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Byron, the whole idea of osmoregulation isn't on most peoples radar. Good explanation though.

  8. Default


    0 Not allowed!
    good poll, and yes the more a person gets into the hobby, the more preferable it is to keep fish in the proper conditions. One thing comes to mind research
    we are all on a journey.
    Apparently there is nothing that cannot happen today.

  9. #9

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    What's "proper?" The suggested parameter range from variable sources online or in books?

    Does proper include variances in nature? Does it account for rain, floods, the leaking of tannins from tree limbs that fall into rivers and/or lakes? Is nature truly stable, or is it ever-changing?

    If a fish swims down stream, from a raging river, full of rocks, limestone, etc... and ends up in a somewhat-peaceful lake full of rotting and/or water-logged wood, moss and a variety of different plants, do the proper parameters include both measurements from both locations?

    It's been my experience and the experience of many fish keepers, including the observances in nature, that most fish are adaptable - much like any other animal. Just like a cat, dog, hamster, bird or bee can adapt to different humidity, temperatures, qualities of air, landscapes, etc... fish can adapt to different water systems with different parameters.

    Heck, just look at how "invasive" species react to being relocated. Oftentimes they do extremely well, even when introduced to water unlike they've ever lived in before. There are at least 50 invasive fish species that are testament to this fact.

    Sure, there are probably certain areas of the world that are likely untouched (they just found a place they call the Garden of Eden that looks as though it's never been touched by nature... besides it being entirely natural), and perhaps in this lake, there's relatively little variance in water parameters, so the animals living within might not be able to adapt as well as most. Even then, if you took a fish out and acclimated it slowly to new parameters, you could probably get it to survive, with the possibility of having it flourish.
    Adventures in Aquaria - The KevinVA Story

    When in doubt, ask yourself... W.W.L.S (What would Lee Say)?

    Have a fish problem? Fill out and post this completed questionnaire in the General Aquarium Forum, when you start a new thread.

  10. #10

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Some relevant questions raised here, to which I would like to offer my comments if I may.

    What's "proper?" The suggested parameter range from variable sources online or in books?
    One must always consider the sources of information; some are reliable, some not. When I authored more than 250 freshwater fish profiles for TFK I used several sources for my research. And without exception, they agreed on parameter numbers. I know one can find other sources that might not, but frankly they are not reliable. Ichthyologists and biologists and collectors like my friend Heiko Bleher are reliable sources. When one finds that the true experts--by which I refer to the professional ichthyologists and biologists who have spent their lives studying fish--all agree, one can be fairly assured.

    Does proper include variances in nature? Does it account for rain, floods, the leaking of tannins from tree limbs that fall into rivers and/or lakes? Is nature truly stable, or is it ever-changing?
    The parameter ranges take into account these factors, which is why they are ranges. And while the water parameters of many of our fish do change over the course of the year, primarily due to the rainy/dry seasons, the extent of this change is no where even close to what some think they can subject the fish in an aquarium. The initial question here was with hardness. Soft water fish such as the cardinal tetra as an example never encounters hard water, or a variance of more than a few tenths of 1 degree in their habitat watercourses. I'll come back to this species below with some hard facts.

    If a fish swims down stream, from a raging river, full of rocks, limestone, etc... and ends up in a somewhat-peaceful lake full of rotting and/or water-logged wood, moss and a variety of different plants, do the proper parameters include both measurements from both locations?
    This scenario is actually very rare in nature, by which I mean that a species of fish would never move between such opposites. There are a few species that do live in such varying conditions. Pristella maxillaris is one tetra that occurs in varying habitats. This species occurs across the basins of the Amazon and Orinoco, and coastal river drainages of the Guianas, and is found in calm coastal waters and in densely vegetated swamps inland. This fact clearly is the reason this species does adapt so well. But this is the exception, not the norm.

    It's been my experience and the experience of many fish keepers, including the observances in nature, that most fish are adaptable - much like any other animal. Just like a cat, dog, hamster, bird or bee can adapt to different humidity, temperatures, qualities of air, landscapes, etc... fish can adapt to different water systems with different parameters.
    I would have to disagree with "most fish" here; the fact is that few are so adaptable. What we take for "adaptable" is often the opposite. Back to the cardinal tetra. The late ichthyologist and characin authority Dr. Jacques Gery once pointed out that when provided with very soft water, this fish will easily live over ten years. But few aquarists see it lasting more than a couple years, and the reason is the GH of the water. Mineral in the water shortens their lifespan due to calcium blockage of the kidneys. A study (that I will gladly provide if asked) by two German ichthyologists over a period of years proved that the lifespan of this fish is shortened proportionally to the level of calcium and magnesium in the tank water. There is absolutely no doubt that this applies to other soft water fish as well. Many consider these fish "adaptable," but the fact is that they are not; they merely manage to exist for a time before they eventually succumb. Without dissection following death, the reason would be completely un-noticed by the aquarist.

    Some species do adapt better, as you pointed out with invasive species. But this is the exception, and not the norm.

    Sure, there are probably certain areas of the world that are likely untouched (they just found a place they call the Garden of Eden that looks as though it's never been touched by nature... besides it being entirely natural), and perhaps in this lake, there's relatively little variance in water parameters, so the animals living within might not be able to adapt as well as most. Even then, if you took a fish out and acclimated it slowly to new parameters, you could probably get it to survive, with the possibility of having it flourish.
    This is partly connected to the preceeding. Fish simply do not adapt like this, it takes thousands of years. And the fluctuations in their natural waters as I pointed out earlier do not exist to any degree like some think.

    Please don't hesitate to question any of this; I am more than happy to explain where I can.

    Byron.
    Last edited by Byron; 08-20-2013 at 04:54 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •