Efforts of filterless setups

f_luxus

New Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2025
Messages
41
Reaction score
45
Location
Germany
Hello everyone,
I've been keeping and breeding various tropical fish for a while now, focusing on species that thrive in very specific, low-pH, clear water environments. My main focus has been on wild-type Bettas and the beautiful German Blue Ramirezi (Mikrogeophagus ramirezi), but I’ve also successfully bred Cardinal Tetras (Paracheirodon axelrodi)—though the effort vs. reward for the Cardinals in Europe is low, especially when healthy, cheap stock is available from places like Czech farms selling direct.
The common thread between all these fish is their origin: they come from slow-moving backwaters, pools, and side arms of tropical clear-water rivers, characterized by extremely soft, acidic water and often very minimal current.
This has led me to a long-standing question: Where exactly does the benefit of elaborate aquarium filtration end, and where do the aspects of a truly still water environment become more beneficial for these biotope-specific species?

My filter experiences so far:
I’ve experimented with various filter types over time:

Large Canister Filters: Always felt excessive. I typically used minimal media (maybe 20% capacity) and often baffled the output to just use a fraction of their flow capacity, making them feel like an over-engineered solution for a stillwater setup.

Small External Filters (Hang-on-Back/HOB): Cost-effective, practical, and offer the right low-flow rate. However, they clog quickly, and cleaning can be fiddly.

Internal Filters: Can work very well, and many are shrimp-safe, but they inevitably take up valuable space in a smaller breeding tank.
Air-Driven Filters (Sponge/Box): Too loud for my preferences, and critically, they are CO2 strippers—a definite no for my heavily planted, low-pH tanks.

Surface Skimmers Only: I still use these in the initial setup phase to promote circulation and break the protein film/pellicle. I only run them intermittently or as needed once the tank is established.

The Stillwater Advantage:

Microfauna and Filtration
Here’s my major observation and the core of my discussion:
What is the unseen cost of most mechanical filtration?
I strongly suspect that certain beneficial microfauna populations—especially Cyclops (copepods) and various tiny crustaceans that inhabit the water column—are negatively impacted by constant, strong filtration.
In my truly low-flow or filterless, well-established tanks (usually run with just a skimmer for occasional circulation), these micro-organisms absolutely thrive. And they are not just free-swimming live food; they are active cleaners!

Observation: In these mature, stillwater setups, I rarely, if ever, have to clean the glass. If the tank is running optimally, it looks pristine, as if freshly cleaned, without me lifting a finger.
Furthermore, I’ve noticed a significant difference in fry survival and growth rates. Fish larvae (especially the sensitive Betta and Ram fry) fare much better and grow faster in these well-established, low-flow environments. I attribute this partly to the constant availability of natural micro-invertebrates as a first food source, which the parents either miss or ignore.


Discussion Points:

Do you deliberately try to minimize flow in your specialized low-pH/blackwater setups?

Have you noticed a correlation between the development of beneficial microfauna (Cyclops, Daphnia, etc.) and low/no-flow tanks?

Are we over-filtering—mechanically and biologically—for fish that inherently come from biotope conditions that lack high flow?

Looking forward to hearing your experiences and thoughts!

Greetings from Germany, Felix
 
Hey,

Are we over-filtering—mechanically and biologically—for fish that inherently come from biotope conditions that lack high flow?

Not just for the latter, but in general, in my opinion.

Approx. calculation:

If you take fish food with 25% protein content, and take an average of 2% "weight of the fish" as food per day, we're generating 0.07 grams NH3/NH4 per 100g of fish. Let's round this to 0.1 grams.

To convert this to nitrates, you need a surface area of 1 sqm. for 0.2 grams of NH3/NH4.

A 60x30x30 tank has 3*(60x30)+2*(30x30) = 0.72 sqm. of surface area.

That's enough for 144g of fish.
So about 144 neon tetras. (Please don't put 144 neon tetras in a plain 60x30x30)

Of course, we're only talking about nitrifying bacteria here, and a tank is so much more ... but yeah, most of the time we're definitely over-filtering.

However! Filters have a much bigger influence on the whole tank, than just nitrifying or even just providing surface area. Due to the nature of the water flow and how they're set up, filters can (and will!) actually change quite a bit. They're basically an ecosystem on their own.
Take black beard algae for example ... doing to opposite of what you're doing right now with the filter, e.g. if it's almost empty, stuff it with media ... or if it's full, remove some media, can be a game changer in the microflora that exists within the tank and absolutely get rid of them.

Crazily interesting topic, this. And your approach is fascinating, I've seen your tanks live. Awesome stuff.

The microfauna you mentioned is certainly a huge thing. Most of it has quite some problems with strong water flow. A ton of botanicals help in setups with external filters and can provide safe spaces for the critters you mentioned. And I would bet a good amount on the reason being 'protected from currents'.

Greetings,
Dominic
 
Interesting stuff.
My cardinals are in a 2 metre tank. 1/3 of it is slow water movement, and the fish find their spots. The cardinals like the quiet end.

In Gabon, I found myself at the habitat of Aphyosemion primigenium, a fish I had always kept in slow water and that some old school keepers maintain in unfiltered tanks. The water where we caught them (well, I didn't but a person beside me did) was moving more than any aquarium I've ever had. You can't get that kind of flow in a box with walls.
I saw the same thing with Epiplatys huberi, who were in very fast, highly oxygenated water, but in the root tangles where they wouldn't be swept along.
It has given me pause. In still, barely moving pondwater, we caught... nothing.

I haven't fished in South America. But a large flat flood in a forest will have currents and wind movement.

This isn't an attempt at a definitive answer - just thoughts.

I keep two species of Carnagiella hatchet fish in different tanks, with HOB filtration but wood cut and positioned to drive the flow deep, and to leave the surface rather calm.

I noticed a lot of Aphyosemions and tiny barbs - fish not shaped for speed or endurance, were found in high flow water, but in the quieter sections protected by rocks. At the base of a waterfall where we caught both Aphyosemion citrineipinnis and A. joergenscheeli, I could catch the fish behind a crescent of rocks and wood where the water was a few square cm slow island in a moving stream (which fell a metre through rocks no more than 2 metres away). If I fished elsewhere and returned five minutes later, I could catch more, for as long as we were at that habitat.
I find myself thinking of oxygen levels in the water.

And so, I lost a lot of certainty, and have actually tried to increase flow in tanks with traditionally slow water fish, to see what happens. I need huge tanks...
 
Hey,

I saw the same thing with Epiplatys huberi, who were in very fast, highly oxygenated water, but in the root tangles where they wouldn't be swept along.

I would suspect that has, at least somewhat, to do with their favorite pastime ... food! :)
In nature, it's a fight for survival, so they stay where the food comes from. From wherever the water comes.

In fish tanks, they have those huge, weird creatures from the outside world that drop edible stuff in from the sky, sometimes multiple times a day.

So why waste energy fighting currents, if life can be that easy? Energy preservation matters tons to them.

Tuna have the short end of the stick. If they stop moving, they die. :(
 
In my opinion this is kind of an apples and oranges comparison.
As much as we would like to replicate nature in our home aquariums, it's not really possible and in many instances impractical.
So we employ other methods as fish keepers to get as close as we can to provide our fishes with conditions that imitate what they find in nature. I use the word imitate because again we can't replicate it 100%.
 
Take black beard algae for example ... doing to opposite of what you're doing right now with the filter, e.g. if it's almost empty, stuff it with media ... or if it's full, remove some media, can be a game changer in the microflora that exists within the tank and absolutely get rid of them.
I never had them in ANY of my stillwater tanks 🤔😉
 
Hey,



I would suspect that has, at least somewhat, to do with their favorite pastime ... food! :)
In nature, it's a fight for survival, so they stay where the food comes from. From wherever the water comes.

In fish tanks, they have those huge, weird creatures from the outside world that drop edible stuff in from the sky, sometimes multiple times a day.

So why waste energy fighting currents, if life can be that easy? Energy preservation matters tons to them.

Tuna have the short end of the stick. If they stop moving, they die. :(
Tuna aren't alone. Many/most sharks need to move to breathe.

As to flow/current in a tank a lot depends on the species. Yes, in nature, some species have adapted to faster water due to the food supply but others actually seem to enjoy and play in the flow. I bring them up a LOT as they are my current favorite fish but let's take Panda Garra. They actually seem to 'play' in a current. They will swim into the current and then let the flow throw them back then repeat. LOL! sort of reminds me of kids sledding down a snow hill then trudging back to the top. Also, since they are not 'lung fish' like ropes, they can't breathe air yet will play in bubbles.
 
Yeah, and neither proper light. :p:p🫂
Whaaaat do you remember how i started the 35cm Cube? 2x Chihiros A351! 🤣
That was almost sun level. Frechheit, unverschämter Bengel 🤣

I changed to 6W Aquael Leddys because the fish prefer it 🙄

20250127_215458 (1).jpg


That was after i killed almost the complete biology using a (not complete) empty 5L H2O2 Bottle to do water changes (no fish were harmed!). 🤯
 
Last edited:
If you have a tank that big I'LL live in it.
You only have to feed me once a day, but it's gonna be steak and lobster.
My dream isn't a tank quite that large. I'd settle for 400 gallons of salt with a leopard shark. LOL! I don't think it would be wise to put 400 gallons of salt water in a third floor apartment. A ton and a half just doesn't seem smart. ;)

A cool thing about leopard sharks is they will restrict their growth to about 6 inches per 50 gallons. A BIG downside is they can be the only fish in the tank as they will kill and eat anything else, even grouper.
 
The only blackwater lower pH tank I ran was for my Altum angels. They are not from still water. They lived in a 55 gal. with two Aquaclear hang-ons and twp 4x4x4x Poret foam filters.

I ran a few Matten filter whose surface area is better than most bio-media. I ran a lot of the air powered Poret cubefilter which also has a lot of surface area for nitrifiers and the other heterotrophic bacteria which also colonized the bio-film. I ran these on my pleco breeding tanks which had a light used only when I had to work in the tank. The plecos I worked with were the expensive b&W ones. I produceds many hundreds of fry over the years.

I also have a decent number of planted communities. I always had a fair amount of surface agitation which insured there was plenty of CO2 in the water. Fish also exhales CO2. My planted tanks are all jungles.

I have used UGF/RUGF, power filters, canister filters, foam filters including Mattenfilters and canisters. Aside from the foam, I have never used power filters. Most of my air foilters are pretty quiet. I place them on top of foam which helps to keep the quiet.

Hopefully, we all do what works well for us and the fish etc. we have.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top