Article: What You Should Know About Fish Nutrition

i'm maybe a bad/cruel fish keeper but tbh i don't look 'that' deeply into it. i've always bought something like king british flakes and king british pellets, i feed them once per day with a mixture of the flakes and pellets, the former tend to get snapped up by everything bar my pictus who tend to get the majority of the pellets, i say 'majority' as some of them get claimed by other fish on their way down the tank!
Depending on what species you have one or two sizes of pellets at the most should be sufficient.

I wouldn't use automatic feeders. They are not air tight so some of the nutrients can be lost to the oxygen and humidity. If you use them I wouldn't use them as the only thing feeding them, you should feed as well. This means the food you feed will be fresher and you can watch them eat, which can be very helpful.

Depending on the species feeding twice per day should be fine.
ok thanks for that i think i'll go for the smaller fish tub because im looking at getting a few different species of tetra and the all round community tub... would the community tub be ok for the algae loving fish or a bigger fish species i read that the algae lovers can be fussy and only go for the algae wafers.

Ive done a bit of reading on the NLS products and its all good, cant wait to get set up after my fishless cycle
Mine never get wafers. All my plecos will come out and actively feed on the same pellets that all the other fish eat.

I feed the New Life Spectrum Thera+A formula. This particular formula has enough garlic to kill some parasites, something that can be very valuable with new fish. The 1mm pellet should be perfect for almost all small community fish out there.
i think this is an interesting read but is a view of one person the op only , and nobody is doing wrong by what they feed their fish. there is nothing to say that New Life Spectrum Thera+A formula is the best ever fish food to feed your fish. this is just one fish food of many many good foods by different manafacturers. This is a personal view of that food is good and if you find that works for you then good but i certainly wouldnt advise anyone to feed that food exclusively as the best diet imo is always a good proper varied diet. and find with this you will get best results better than on one food only. i use many many different makes and have used new life, and use alot of zm foods etc etc . but would never advise feeding one food exclusively and i think this is something that needs to be made clear here especially to newbies. it is also not a common fish food at all in the uk and is hard to find to be honest , maybe alot more in america etc.
I have a question for the OP, what size are the "small fish" pellets? i bought some small pellets (king british brand) today to try and even though they were only approx. 1.5mm in diameter, many of my fish struggled with them, even the dwarf gourami, the largest fish in my tank.
Thanks :)
ok thanks, they may be slightly smaller then, might order some when i run low :)
With NLS Thera+A the small is 0.5mm, regular is 1mm, medium is 2mm, and large is 3mm. It also comes in larger sizes, but no need to discuss those here. For most community fish the 1mm is ideal IME.

I disagree. IMO even newbies should feed NLS exclusively. IME the best results I have ever gotten with any of my fish were when they are on NLS exclusively. It is not just my opinion, most of the people I have talked to who have tried NLS exclusively for months have been converted, they see how good it can be. If yo;u don't mind my asking, how long have you fed NLS exclusively? To what species?

I did not recommend feeding NLS exclusively in the article, that came up later. In fact, I did not mention ANY food by name in the article. If I had it would have been Hikari Algae Wafers and Sinking Carnivore Pellets as examples of foods that have proven to do things that no other food at the time had done. NLS came up later when people specifically asked. The goal of the article was not to promote or recommend against any particular food at all, it was to bring another view to the table in hopes that people would think differently about what they feed.
You know I can't read something like this and not put my 2 cents in. One food does not fit all and there is sufficient scientific research to show this. I will illustrate this by looking at just one common ingredient in many fish foods and which is also in the NLS Thera- ascorbic acid aka Vitamin C. Here are some excerpts and links to some research specifically on this subject.

Vitamin C Requirements of the Angelfish Pterophylum scalare
Based on the long possible life span of angelfish in the aquarium, we proposed a conservative dietary ascorbic acid requirement of 360 mg/ kg diet, necessary to maintain maximum tissue storage of this vitamin.
From Journal of the World Aquaculture Society Vol 31, Issue 2 Mar 2000

Oscars, Astronotus ocellatus, Have a Dietary Requirement for Vitamin C
Oscars without dietary AA supplementation gained only 37% of their initial weight, compared with 112, 102 and 91% gained by fish fed 25, 75 and 200 mg AA/kg diet, respectively.

The minimum dietary AA concentration tested in this study, 25 mg AA/kg diet, was sufficient to prevent growth reduction and AA deficiency signs in oscars.
From American Society for Nutritional Services- J. Nutr. October 1, 1998 vol. 128 no. 10 1745-1751

The dietary vitamin C requirement was estimated for Cichlasoma urophthalmus, a particularly important Mexican native cichlid.

The minimum level of vitamin C required for normal growth was 40 mg/kg diet, and the minimum amount required to ensure healthy fish was 110 mg/kg.
Aquaculture 1990 Vol. 86 No. 4 pp. 409-416

So one fish needs a 360 mg/ kg diet, another 110/mg/kg and the third a 25 mg/kg diet- exactly how does a single food provide three different levels???? And I know that at least the first 2 studies above used ascorbic acid in the same form as Thera does- L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate

What does this say about one food fits all?
They all listed minimums, not exact concentrations or maximums.

This assumes there is no error in their studies, which can't be determined with excerpts, we would need to read the original studies in their entirety.
I chose those three (and you can see the abstracts for all of them) because the results were so disparate. The difference betwen 25 and 365 is pretty great. If either is even just close they are still so far apart as to be illustrative of why one food doesn't fit all.

The first one you have to be a member of certain societies to see it for free or you can pay to see it all.

The second one you can see the entire study here http://jn.nutrition....5.full.pdf+html

The third you can see if you pay.

And how about this?

R.P. Wilson

Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA
Available online 3 October 2003.

The nutritional value of carbohydrates varies among fish with warmwater fish being able to utilize much higher levels of dietary carbohydrate than coldwater and marine fish. No dietary requirement for carbohydrate has been demonstrated in fish; however, if carbohydrates are not provided in the diet, other nutrients such as protein and lipids are catabolized for energy and to provide metabolic intermediates for the synthesis of other biologically important compounds. Thus, it is important to provide the appropriate level of carbohydrate in the diet of the fish species being cultured. The relative use of dietary carbohydrates by fish varies and appears to be associated with the complexity of the carbohydrate. For example, certain species have been shown to utilize simple sugars as well as, or better than, complex carbohydrates whereas other species do not utilize simple sugars as an energy source. Most species utilize cooked starch better than raw starch. Oral glucose tolerance tests result in persistent hyperglycemia in fish. This prolonged hyperglycemia and the relative inability of fish to utilize high levels of dietary carbohydrates has been assumed to be the result of low levels of endogenous insulin. However, recent studies have shown that insulin levels in fish are similar to or often higher than those observed in mammals, thus indicating that fish are not diabetic as previously thought.

(Red is mine)- From http://www.sciencedi...044848694903638

I don't think he will give up. I don't know why he is arguing as he said himself, the way he feeds hasn't been proven by paper, just what is working for him.

So tell me fishguy how do you know something else won't work?
I know something will work better, I just don't know if it is on the market yet. I haven't heard of other foods doing what NLS does, simple as that. When it comes out and proves itself I would love to try it.

It is not just me who it is working for. It is almost everyone who has truly tried feeding this food exclusively. That says something, a lot actually.

Again, different minimum requirements doesn't mean the range they need doesn't overlap a lot. I have seen angels and oscars on it exclusively for years and both were thriving, obviously any difference in minimal Vit. C requirement isn't really an issue at all.

So anyways, back to the article that doesn't mention any brand at all...

Most reactions