Originally Posted by Quantum
so it was written by Byron and his disciples that more area is less territory and space, so it shall be
Your point about total footprint size is quite valid, indeed it is precisely why I was interested in the 50 gallon tank to begin with.
You'll notice that many of the fish in my stocking list are bottom dwellers, so I was of the mind that greater square inchage would be important.
However, I am also interested in the greater length of the 55. The 48" length will fill the space I have available quite nicely, and I will admit to being callow enough that the apparent size of the 55 gallon has it's appeal.
As far as room for territories goes, does the extra 6" of depth that the 50 gallon offers compare to the extra 12" of length that the 55 supplies?
I realize that each fish would have a deeper territory, but wouldn't they be forced into tighter proximity in the 50 where in the 55 the buffer zones between territories could be larger, leading to happier denizens?
As I said, the general opinion seems to be that the 55 gallon is the better choice, but our sample size was quite small.
I think that the 55 gallon is more common, so more people have had one, or have seen one, and therefore have an opinion on one.
You yourself pointed out that my question may well be moot as Petsmart may not even carry the 50 gallon, I guess we'll find out at the next sale