Tropical Fish Forum
Tropical Fish Keeping Help and Advice => New Fishkeepers => Topic started by: ChrisP1969 on January 18, 2018, 06:53:07 PM
-
:wave:
Hi everyone, I'm a newcomer to the hobby - I've done plenty of research of recent months, in terms of reference books, PFK magazine and of course; online research but have yet to acquire my first tank.
Over time, my 'planning' has evolved (on the premise that everything I've read seems to advise that bigger really is better, coupled with the fact that I live in a bungalow with only one location suitable to site a tank) from a Tetra 54l Starter set-up, to a Juwel Primo 60 through a 70 then a 110, to a Juwel Rio 125 to the point where I'm now saving towards a Juwel Vision 180. Although I'm trying not to set my sights too high, I'm hoping to finish up with a live plant/rock/wood and of course; fish set-up.
As well as reading up, I've also visited and spoken to staff at a number of retailers in my area and almost without exception have been advised (sometimes quite disparagingly) that "cycling a new tank isn't actually necessary, we stock a full range of water conditioners that will let you add fish the same day, or certainly within 24hrs".
Am I just being recognised as a noob and targeted for easy sales. How good are these products, should I go down that route or stick to my plan to be patient and cycle the tank the way I've read up about it.
Can anyone offer relevant advice, opinion or anecdote. please. As I've mentioned, the space I have available is limited, so I'm intending going for the biggest start-up I can afford, but obviously I don't want to mess it up and waste money/make mistakes that will dim my enthusiasm for the hobby.
:fishy1:
-
Welcome :wave: and well done for doing the research in advance (the way it ought to be done) rather than after the event (the way many people do it, unfortunately).
I completely agree that bigger is better due to the inevitability of discovering there are more fish you'd like to keep, if only the tank were big enough - a 54-litre tank really only houses two minimum-number shoals of fish, for example, but there are soooooo many more species I'd love to keep if only I had a larger tank.
Your experience of retailers' advice is very common and your cynicism re this potentially being a sales tactic is correct. The evidence of effectiveness for these products is not clear at all - there are one or two products which show a bit more promise than others, but often this depends on it having been kept in line with its required conditions from manufacture through to arrival at the store, so the safest, most ethical and best way is to do the proper fishless cycle.
Hope that helps. :fishy1:
-
Hi there and welcome to the forum. :wave:
I'm thrilled to hear that you have decided to go for a larger tank. You won't regret it.n ;D
It's great that you have researched fishless cycling, and are planning to go forward with it. I thought this might be helpful for you...
https://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/blog/articles/2017/7/20/promises-in-a-bottle?rq=cycling
Generally it is thought that some additives may speed up cycling, but it's not an overnight thing.
A good way to give a fishless cycle a kick start is to use some media from a mature tank to seed your filter. There are several people on this forum who are willing to send mature media. Even with this it can still take a couple of weeks to complete the cycle, but that's better than without.
-
There are no products that cycle a tank within 24 hours. The two that actually do something if they have been stored correctly since manufacture are Dr Tims One & Only and Tetra Safe Start. Dr Tims isn't widely stocked in the UK, and most is imported - with the problems involved with freight being kept in cold conditions which won't do it any good. Try Tetra Safe Start but use it to do a fishless cycle rather than adding fish straight away.
I remember being in a shop a few years ago where the chap was telling a customer that all he had to do was buy this product and he must fully stock the tank at the same time or it wouldn't work. When I got home, I looked up the product and the manufacturer's website said that fish must be added very slowly, a few at a time, over several weeks.
I never believe anything a shop says.
Here's how to do a fishless cycle https://forums.thinkfish.co.uk/fishtank-filtration-and-cycling/fishless-cycling-how-to-do-it/ Ammonia can be bought from Homebase in the cleaning section, Amazon, Ebay, and local diy shops (the one in my town stocks Jeyes KleenOff Household Ammonia)
If you use Tetra Safe Start the cycle should go quicker.
There is another alternative - do you plan on having live plants in the tank?
-
I'm hoping to finish up with a live plant/rock/wood and of course; fish set-up.
If you can get to a point where the plants are growing happily in your tank (which you should be able to quicker than you can cycle a tank), you can add say three fish straight away and build up the stocking slowly adding up to a third more fish each week :)
-
Thanks Matt, I missed that :-[ ;D
Provided you have more than just 2 or 3 plants, you can get away without cycling. Plants use ammonia as fertiliser and they usually extract it from the water faster than the filter bacteria. So provided the fish:plant ratio doesn't make more ammonia than the plants can extract, they'll take care of the ammonia for you.
-
There are no products that cycle a tank within 24 hours. The two that actually do something if they have been stored correctly since manufacture are Dr Tims One & Only and Tetra Safe Start...
Don't forget Biomature, which has been cycling tanks successfully since the 1960s - the only one to be at all reliable until Dr Tim's.
Tetra Safe Start works now because it's make up has changed, and it now uses Dr Tim's 'recipe'. I'll be using it soon when I set up my big tank again, but I'll also be using PolyFilter, just in case.
-
Wow, I wonder how they managed to get hold of the recipe. I'll bet they were cuffed to bits though. :)
In the past I've used a combination of mature media from other tanks and some Safe Start to "boost" the bacteria (don't ask me to explain my logic, I have none), and the tanks have fully cycled in under a week, which I was happy with.
@hampalong what are you doing with your big tank?
-
Hi
I keep seeing something called Aqua plus which is suppose to help cycling but no idea if it does or not. Maybe others might know more about it.
-
The Evolution Aqua "Pure Aquarium" product?
Hope this is helpful.
https://www.practicalfishkeeping.co.uk/features/articles/evolution-aqua-pure-aquarium-review
-
I keep seeing something called Aqua plus which is suppose to help cycling but no idea if it does or not. Maybe others might know more about it.
There seem to be a number of non-fishkeeping products by that name but I assume the one you're referring to is Fluval Aqua Plus. :)
I did read the Practical Fishkeeping mag staff making positive comments about their early experiences with Microbe-Lift Nite-Out II - but accepted that it was too premature to say anymore at present; I wonder if Microbe-Lift has got hold of the coveted recipe! The staff at my LFS tell me that Microbe-Lift Extreme is the same recipe as Seachem Prime.
I don't think any of these products are instantaneous, though.
In my naive days, and failing in a fishless cycle using fish food and without bicarbonate of soda (which I ought to have used due to such low KH of 1-2), I used Tetra SafeStart to get the process moving. However, knowing what I know now, I'd do a fishless cycle.
-
@hampalong what are you doing with your big tank?
I don't know. I have a very long shortlist, but I don't know how to decide. I always have this problem...
-
Me too.
So many fish, not enough tanks. :)
-
Wow, I wonder how they managed to get hold of the recipe.
Because Dr Tim identified the correct species of nitrite eater while employed by Marineland. He and Marineland jointly held the copyright. Dr Tim left to set up his own company, and could use the recipe because he was a copyright holder. Marineland was taken over by Tetra who could make Safe Start because they too now hold the copyright.
Once upon a time there were two other products, Biospira and Bactinettes, that also contained the right bacteria. One was American, one British but I can't remember which way round. You still see them mentioned occasionally in google searches.
-
Ahhh, that makes sense. :)
-
:wave:
Hello again and Thank You all for the replies and info. (esp. Littlefish and Sue for the helpful links).
Although this was/is my first post on here, I've been visiting the site for quite some time, mainly to read the Articles, Fish Profiles and of course; play around and daydream with the Community Creator (alas, so many fishy ideas and so little money/space :( ).
I neglected to mention before; the water parameters for my area (as per my local water companies website) are:-
Slightly Hard @ 50mg/ltr Calcium and 125mg/ltr Calcium Carbonate (Clarke 8.75*, German 7.0*, French 12.5*)
and the most recent water report shows PH values of 7.3 Low / 7.7 High = 7.425 Mean Average.
Which suggest to me that either Cichlids or Rainbowfish would be the most appropriate families to consider
(at present I'm leaning towards the Rainbowfish, starting with a shoal of Dwarf Rainbowfish and then adding some, not all, of paired Boesman's / Lk.Tebera / Lk.Kutuba / Banded Rainbowfish as 'feature' fish) or am I being too ambitious, considering my level of inexperience.
The tank I'm aiming for (the Juwel Vision 180) has a 92 x 31/41cm footprint and ideally I'd like to have a combination of live plants with rock/wood hardscape.
So once again, any advice/suggestions regarding my ideas?
:fishy1:
-
The community creator can be very addictive :cheers:
Rainbowfish sound good to me.. careful if you do start looking at cichlids, for hard water you want the African ones not the South American ones for hard water. These are quite unique in terms of stocking as you need to overstock them and have a lot of rocks in the tank etc etc - they arnt really a beginner species.
-
with those water parameters you could have almost any fish as the figures aren't high.
I would go for the African cichlids if I was going to set up a tank, but my water is 17dh german.
At 7dh german you have a lot more scope.
I am quite partial to rainbowfish though, they've got some lovely colours.
-
Actually your water isn't hard at all. For fishkeeping, hard water starts at 10 german deg and yours is only 7. This is why it is better to go with numbers rather than words.
The two units used in fish profiles are ppm (which is the same as mg/l CaCO3) and dH aka German degrees. The values you need to compare to a species' hardness range are 125 ppm and 7.0 dH.
So to take your rainbowfish, Boeseman's and Lk Kubutu need hardness 10 - 20 dH; Lk Teberas 10 - 15 dH; and banded 8 - 20 dH. The word 'hard' in your water company's website is misleading.
And those 4 species also need to be in shoals of at least 6 of the same species and a tank at least 120 cm long.
Info from here http://www.seriouslyfish.com/knowledge-base/
Dwarf rainbows are the exception; they need hardness 5 - 15 dH and a tank over 60 cm long, so they'd be fine.
Provided you ignore fish that must have very soft water, the majority of soft water fish will be fine in your water. I'm afraid African cichlids - or at least the ones from the Rift Lakes like L Malawi and L Tanganyika - are not an option as your water is much too soft for them. But kribs (African river cichlids, Pelvicachromis pulcher) need hardness 0 - 12 dH so they'd be fine, as would the south American cichlids Apistogramma cacatuoides (0 - 268 ppm) and A. agassizii (0 - 179 ppm).
-
When you've had a look at fish requirements on Seriously Fish, it's also worth having a look at this site
http://aqadvisor.com/
It's like a bigger version of the community creator here. Although the stocking levels are stricter, it also gives information on possible compatibility issues with any fish you've chosen, along with a temperature range where the requirements of all chosen fish overlap (or not, as the case may be).
:)
-
:yikes: :yikes: :yikes:
Sorry everyone, the figures I gave earlier were what came up when I looked online tonight, however they're significantly different to the ones I'd based my stocking idea on. To clarify, the figures I'd been using were from a PDF of a Water Report I downloaded back in Oct 2017, which were...
----------------------------------------------------------
Water Report for ZS 110 based on 24 testings from 01/01/2015 to 31/12/2015.
Moderately Hard @ 80 mg/ltr Calcium and 200mg/ltr Calcium Carbonate (14.0* Clarke, 11.2* German, 20.0* French)
and the PH values were given as 7.2 Low / 7.6 High = 7.3792 Mean Average.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Compared to the figures I got tonight from...
Water Report for ZS 111 based on 24 testings from 01/01/2016 to 31/12/2016
Slightly Hard @ 50mg/ltr Calcium and 125mg/ltr Calcium Carbonate (8.75* Clarke, 7.0* German, 12.5* French)
and the PH values were given as 7.3 Low / 7.7 High = 7.425 Mean Average.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Both sets of figures came up based on Post Code (DH6 xxx, btw, just in case there are any local members out there with experience of similar water conditions) and as I haven't moved in the three months or so and presumably the water conditions themselves shouldn't have changed that much, I can only guess that either there's been an admin/input error when the figures were entered online (note the different zoning numbers) or perhaps there's been a change in the way my water company records/administers it's zoning areas.
I'm tempted to believe the 'harder' figures are correct as where I live is slightly elevated and we've traditionally had problems with furring/deposits, etc. compared to surrounding areas. But I'll try contacting them direct, asap, to see if they can shed any light on this discrepancy. In the meantime, maybe I'll work off values based on averaging out the two sets of figures.
Okay, now that that's clarified, when I mentioned the paired Rainbowfish earlier, that was based on the min stocking levels and tank size requirements given in the TF Fish Profiles section and use of the Community Creator, so boy am I pleased to have access to the personal knowledge available through this Forum.
So, apologies everyone for giving the misleading figures before and Thanks Littlefish and Sue for the new links.
:fishy1: :fishy1: :fishy1:
-
http://aqadvisor.com/
... Although the stocking levels are stricter
It is a useful website to cross-check against and useful for the reasons you mention; however, its stocking levels seem to be stricter for some people but less strict for others - it would "allow" me an extra shoal of fish in my tank which, while very tempting, I don't actually think is realistic.
-
Goodness - those figures are considerably different, so I definitely think you're taking the right course of action in contacting the water/utility company to get some sort of verification/explanation as to what's happened/ing and to establish the correct figures - they'll probably be glad that you've highlighted this.
-
It's always worth getting the numbers confirmed before making any decisions. :)
-
You water supply is now coming from a different source I think. The ZS code is a water supply zone I believe which relates to an area of the water network supplied by a treatment works. The water networks are linked together and one can feed another so it could be that your water company has decided to use more of one source of water or treat more water at a particular treatment works. Hopefully they can confirm exactly what's gone on when you speak to then.
-
I'll also add that those reports were for 2015 and 2016. There is probably a more up to date report, if you can find it.
I'll echo what @Matt says and highlight that the water companies can change the source of their water. I'm at the edge of the peak District so that is where my water usually comes from (lots of peat on those hills, so soft water). But when I checked my postcode before Christmas, we were apparently being supplied by the Lake District! (A very long way away). But I'm guessing that a lot of their water is direct into the reservoirs, so is even softer. Just as I was getting my head round the implications of this on my fish, I noticed that the data had been updated (the day before my last check) and we were back on our normal source. Phew.
-
I agree, contact the company. But I would phone rather than email - when I emailed mine to ask if they used chlorine or chloramine, all they did was send me the water quality report that was already on their website.
The database and CC on here are a bit out of date. I joined the forum in its previous incarnation in 2006 and they were already here back then so they are at least 11 years old. Our knowledge of fish is constantly improving, and Seriously Fish does update its database so I always check on there.
-
Just to let folks know progress regarding the water quality issue raised previously, I did contact my local water company via their website and they replied as follows (slightly paraphrased) - (yes, I know it was a while ago now. I was going to wait until I'd actually got the aquarium set-up underway; to update you all, but I was browsing the forum today and reading the latest posts and thought I clear things up
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr Xxxxxx
Thank you for your email which I received on 4 February 2018 regarding the water quality in your area.
I understand your post code was uploading incorrect information on our website for your water quality report. I have spoken to our Water Quality team, who have confirmed that the water in your area can change and it is dependant on a few factors.
Your water is fed from a ground station in New Winning; ground stations can be expensive to run due to them needing pumps and electricity to work. Therefore, depending on the cost the water can be alternatively sourced from a service reservoir.
The source can also change depending on the demand for water in your area and surrounding areas, if the demand is higher than what can be pumped out of New Winning station, again the water would need to come from a different source.
I appreciate you needing this information to enable you to understand the water conditions for your intended new hobby. I have set out a table below - [I couldn't figure out how to cut & paste the actual table from their e-mail, so I just copied the information manually] - which shows the correct details for your area from 2015 to 2017 from our water quality team, they have sent this to our media team as I am aware this is different to the information you were given from our website.
Year 2015
Water Quality Zone S110 Easington South Zone
110 (mg/l Ca)
Description Hard water
Year 2016
Water Quality Zone ZS111 New Winning and Peterlee Zone
190 (mg/l Ca)
Description Very hard water
Year 2017
Water Quality Zone S211 New Winning and Peterlee Zone
150 (mg/l Ca)
Description Very hard water
I hope the above information is useful, should you wish to discuss any of the details contained in this email or have any further points you would like to raise please contact me by...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, as of this point in time, I'm still thinking of either Rainbowfish or Cichlids and assuming things go according to plan, I hope to be in a position to get the project started in a couple of months.