Thinking about an EcoSphere. - Page 4
Tropical Fish

Tropical Fish Keeping - Aquarium fish care and resources » Freshwater Fish and Aquariums » Beginner Freshwater Aquarium » Thinking about an EcoSphere.

Thinking about an EcoSphere.

This is a discussion on Thinking about an EcoSphere. within the Beginner Freshwater Aquarium forums, part of the Freshwater Fish and Aquariums category; --> Originally Posted by Canadian Fish The Earth isn't flat? good one...

Check out these freshwater fish profiles
Celestial Pearl Danio
Celestial Pearl Danio
Burmese Loach
Burmese Loach
Like Tree17Likes

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools vBmenu Seperating Image Search this Thread vBmenu Seperating Image
Thinking about an EcoSphere.
Old 12-12-2012, 04:42 PM   #31
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Fish View Post
The Earth isn't flat?
good one


beaslbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 07:45 PM   #32
 
thekoimaiden's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beaslbob View Post
Although not a biologist I would like to think that an engineer (from my profile) would indicate someone who does have a basic understanding of static and dynamic behaviour of systems over and above the "layman" level.
With all due respect, being an engineer doesn't make you a competent biologist. A few of my good friends are engineers, and they only have a rudimentary knowledge of biology, equivalent to what a high schooler would know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by beaslbob View Post
It is not about under what conditions nitrIte is dangerous to fish. But rather how to render nitrItes and other things in our systems safe and healthy for our fish.
You missed the point entirely. I just picked that as an example; I could have used any of his resources such as "Growth Inhibiting Substances on Fishes" that cites articles from Transactions of the American Fisheries Society and Journal of Ichthyology. I'm not arguing about whether or not nitrate is dangerous to fish. I'm saying if you have a problem with any point Byron brought up, go to the source and look at the data.

Quote:
Originally Posted by beaslbob View Post
And the biosphere did have the problems you mentioned.

But not our tanks.
It's an established fact that larger bodies of water are more stable. So then tell me how does a massive body of water like what would be found in Biosphere 2 have more problems than the miniscule amount of water found in a normal aquarium? Do you think that they didn't have live plants in the water?


Quote:
Originally Posted by beaslbob View Post
I am not aware of any fish that cannot live in an aquarium providing the aquarium has sufficient size for the fish. Obviously great whites require a little larger tank than neon tetras. perhaps you can fill me in on some examples.
How many barreleyes have you seen in an aquarium? And what about ocean sunfish? Or whale sharks? Or South American Leaf fish? It's not just about size. Some fish just don't adapt well to captivity especially large migratory fish or deep-sea fish. If captivity truly was better than all fish would be able to live comfortably under our care.

If your methods work so well to keep the water clean, then why don't breeders use them? People who breed discus do large almost daily water changes which is a lot of work. If they could make the same profit while decreasing the amount of work they would have to do, one would think they would be all over that.
Byron and Canadian Fish like this.
thekoimaiden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 09:46 PM   #33
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by thekoimaiden View Post
With all due respect, being an engineer doesn't make you a competent biologist. A few of my good friends are engineers, and they only have a rudimentary knowledge of biology, equivalent to what a high schooler would know.
agreed. but this engineer has kept heavily stocked aqauriums with no mechanical filtration or circulation for up to 9 years with no water changes in 1/2 dozen cities since the late '70's
Quote:


You missed the point entirely. I just picked that as an example; I could have used any of his resources such as "Growth Inhibiting Substances on Fishes" that cites articles from Transactions of the American Fisheries Society and Journal of Ichthyology. I'm not arguing about whether or not nitrate is dangerous to fish. I'm saying if you have a problem with any point Byron brought up, go to the source and look at the data.
the only problem i have with Byron and others is when things presented do not agree with my experience or contradicts articles I have read previously
Quote:


It's an established fact that larger bodies of water are more stable.
are you sure your not confusing stability with constant? Perhaps you need to talk to your engineering friends on exactly what stability is. I have noted this confusion among many references, articles and even presentations by highly respected biologists.
Quote:
So then tell me how does a massive body of water like what would be found in Biosphere 2 have more problems than the miniscule amount of water found in a normal aquarium? Do you think that they didn't have live plants in the water?
seems to me that you are absolutely correct. a massive glass dome in the middle of the arizona desert is not the same as an aquarium in a heated and air conditioned room. And yes part of the bioshere was a planted area to recycle the waste products.
Quote:



How many barreleyes have you seen in an aquarium? And what about ocean sunfish? Or whale sharks? Or South American Leaf fish? It's not just about size. Some fish just don't adapt well to captivity especially large migratory fish or deep-sea fish. If captivity truly was better than all fish would be able to live comfortably under our care.
So now we're comparing those fish to tetras, guppies, mollys, platies and so on? Therefore a balanced natural aquarium can't work at all unless you do massive water changes?
Quote:

If your methods work so well to keep the water clean, then why don't breeders use them? People who breed discus do large almost daily water changes which is a lot of work. If they could make the same profit while decreasing the amount of work they would have to do, one would think they would be all over that.
I give up why?

the more common fish guppies, platies, tetras, anglefish, danios, and so on seem to breed prefectly well in planted aquariums. Some even are rasied in the same tanks as the parents by hiding in the plants.
beaslbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 11:20 AM   #34
 
Byron's Avatar
 
Quote:
If your methods work so well to keep the water clean, then why don't breeders use them? People who breed discus do large almost daily water changes which is a lot of work. If they could make the same profit while decreasing the amount of work they would have to do, one would think they would be all over that.
Quote:
I give up why?

the more common fish guppies, platies, tetras, anglefish, danios, and so on seem to breed prefectly well in planted aquariums. Some even are rasied in the same tanks as the parents by hiding in the plants.
The issue we are debating is the partial water change. With the sole exception of certain planted tank authors [and there we are dealing with a quite different situation], you are not going to find any credible source that does not advocate regular partial water changes as being essential for a healthy aquarium and fish. The evidence that is now available to us, which I reference in my article, cannot be dismissed.

Some fish have a higher level of tolerance to a poor environment than others. That is no reason to subject them to it. Discus are one of the sensitive species, and professional breeders carry out daily water changes, in some cases up to 90% of the tank. Some breeders do this 3 times every day. They know it results in healthier fish, faster growth, and stronger immune systems. No one can logically dispute this.

Applying this same logic to the average home aquarium, a minimum weekly partial water change of 1/3 to 1/2 the tank volume is going to improve the health of the fish. This too is indisputable. And while there are still those that have not accepted this fact, the hobby and science have moved forward as we learn more and apply that knowledge. There is still much info out there that is obviously inaccurate; the reliability of what one reads is determined by the source of that data/information.

Byron.
Canadian Fish likes this.
Byron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 11:52 AM   #35
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron View Post
The issue we are debating is the partial water change. With the sole exception of certain planted tank authors [and there we are dealing with a quite different situation], you are not going to find any credible source that does not advocate regular partial water changes as being essential for a healthy aquarium and fish. The evidence that is now available to us, which I reference in my article, cannot be dismissed.

Some fish have a higher level of tolerance to a poor environment than others. That is no reason to subject them to it. Discus are one of the sensitive species, and professional breeders carry out daily water changes, in some cases up to 90% of the tank. Some breeders do this 3 times every day. They know it results in healthier fish, faster growth, and stronger immune systems. No one can logically dispute this.

Applying this same logic to the average home aquarium, a minimum weekly partial water change of 1/3 to 1/2 the tank volume is going to improve the health of the fish. This too is indisputable. And while there are still those that have not accepted this fact, the hobby and science have moved forward as we learn more and apply that knowledge. There is still much info out there that is obviously inaccurate; the reliability of what one reads is determined by the source of that data/information.

Byron.
We agree to disagree.


In your opinion is it ever the case where a water change degrades the health of the fish?

my .02
beaslbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 12:12 PM   #36
 
Byron's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by beaslbob View Post
In your opinion is it ever the case where a water change degrades the health of the fish?
Yes. And as I mention this in the article, I gather you haven't actually read it, or perhaps didn't understand what I was getting at?
Byron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 01:07 PM   #37
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron View Post
Yes. And as I mention this in the article, I gather you haven't actually read it, or perhaps didn't understand what I was getting at?

the general gest of the article is that water changes are necessary to maintain a healthy tank.

You do mention some small adverse effects is some case with large water changes.


IMHO in a planted balanced out and stabilized tank where say kh and gh remain low for years and years, the only best thing a water change can do is maintain what the tank is already maintaining. The only change possible in that case with a water change is to degrade the environment. With resultant fish losses after the water change.


my .02
beaslbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 01:19 PM   #38
 
Byron's Avatar
 
Quote:
the general gest of the article is that water changes are necessary to maintain a healthy tank.

You do mention some small adverse effects is some case with large water changes.
I also point out that parameters need to be close, that could cause issues too.

Quote:
IMHO in a planted balanced out and stabilized tank where say kh and gh remain low for years and years, the only best thing a water change can do is maintain what the tank is already maintaining. The only change possible in that case with a water change is to degrade the environment. With resultant fish losses after the water change.
This ignores the whole issue of pheromones and allomones (and possibly allelopathy, to a much lesser extent), which is crucial to healthy fish. And water changes are the best way to maintain true stability. There is no other.

I'm sorry, but I'm having difficulty accepting that you really read the article.
Byron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 01:34 PM   #39
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Byron View Post
I also point out that parameters need to be close, that could cause issues too.



This ignores the whole issue of pheromones and allomones (and possibly allelopathy, to a much lesser extent), which is crucial to healthy fish. And water changes are the best way to maintain true stability. There is no other.

I'm sorry, but I'm having difficulty accepting that you really read the article.
Gee I guess you don't accept that it is possible to balance out and stabilize tank operation without water changes.

Like plants filtering out those pheromones and allomones. Other biological forces are in effect.

Without those effects then those things will build up even with water changes to very high levels. at least with water changes convienent to hobbists.

Again as I stated before, unless you maintain a totally open system with constant 100% daily water changes.

So again we agree to disagree.
beaslbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 02:22 PM   #40
 
Byron's Avatar
 
Quote:
I guess you don't accept that it is possible to balance out and stabilize tank operation without water changes.
Correct, in the vast majority of tanks. This may be possible in tanks with few fish, tons of plants, and such. But not in the majority of tanks, no.

Quote:
Like plants filtering out those pheromones and allomones. Other biological forces are in effect.
As the article makes clear, these are not sufficient on their own, except as mentioned above.

Quote:
Without those effects then those things will build up even with water changes to very high levels. at least with water changes convienent to hobbists.
With adequate water changes and in a "balanced" system these substances will never build up.
Byron is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nasa ecosphere? southafrica1001 Freshwater and Tropical Fish 13 07-03-2008 12:53 AM
EcoSphere jsm11482 Off Topic Discussions 3 12-03-2006 12:13 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:28 AM.