Dalmatian Mollies dying one by one

[Slaphppy7]

What kind of test kit do you use?

 

[Sgooosh]

in my experience (please dont argue)
my guppies are more hardy in hard water, they live naturally in that so will have a natural comfort i guess

 

[Sexy Rexy]

What kind of test kit do you use?

API

 

[Byron]

@Essjay cited my information from another thread--and please, read that info very carefully, it is derived from the scientific fact--but having now read through this present thread I would like to emphasize a couple things that stand out from the other posts.

First is, we still do not have the GH of your water. This is critical here, and I would bet it is not hard enough (the water) for mollies so they are weakening and are or will slowly continue to expire. The mention of a water softener plus the pH of 7.1 both suggest softer water than what is essential for livebearers, but knowing the GH would at least confirm or reject this point, and it is the starting point if you want to improve and hopefully save the remaining mollies. The water softener is a serious issue for all the fish as others have mentioned.

Second, the angelfish issue...the info in general does not lead me to think the angelfish are the problem here (with the slowly dying mollies). But two angelfish can become a real terror over time, depending upon their gender and inherent individual behaviour traits, which can take weeks to even a few months to develop to where you can see problems (depending upon the gender). Just a caution for the future. The other issue I see is having Black Skirt tetras in with angelfish--never do this, the former are notorious for fin nipping sedate fish, and here again, it can take weeks for this to appear, but given it is "normal" for the BS tetra species, it is most likely going to become a real problem, though again not the molly issue.

Third, the "conflicting" information in the hobby. This is a continual source of extreme frustration for me, but I can do nothing to prevent it, other than warn against it. The only way to ensure you are receiving accurate advice is to know the knowledge level of the individual giving it. This means not "experience" which for many is worthless to begin with, but knowledge of the biological facts involving fish. Some individuals study biology and have degrees, which should and in my experience does qualify them--I am thinking of individuals such as one of my best and most trusted friends I've made online, Dr. Neale Monks--but there are many in this hobby who similarly stand like Neale at the pinnacle of this hobby but who themselves have no professional study degrees-- individuals like another online associate I have made, Ian Fuller. I have spent considerable time over the last ten years researching topics involving fish biology and habitat, always confirming any "ideas" with individuals such as those mentioned, and never venturing to counter the science or the empirical facts; I would not have been made an advisor and contributing editor to the knowledge base by the owner (a trained biologist himself) of Seriously Fish if otherwise.

Forums can be a good source of reliable information, depending who is on them of course, but at least here we have peer review; anything I post is seen by others and can be questioned, and this is much more likely to be valuable in the long run. This happens to be the backbone of scientific discovery, so it is a "tried and true" process, at least it can be most of the time. Arguing over scientific fact is not what such knowledgeable individuals do as it is pointless. As an analogy, evolution is now accepted proven scientific fact, yet many do not "accept" it, but that changes nothing, it is still undisputed fact.

I've rambled enough. But I hope this helps answer your uncertainty.