Random fishkeeping thought.

[SAChichlidLover]

Hi all!
So after reading one of my older threads someone mentioned something which really caught my eye... Dogmatism in fishkeeping and how every experience is different. Alot of sites will say one thing and then pro fishkeepers another and then even beginners another. Prime example is with Ph and cichlids, alot of people say cichlids from certain biotopes require near replicated conditions and water quality, that sounds pretty correct and true right? Yet so many fish don't get credit for how hardy they actually are or the large range of conditions they can actually live in. Another true example of this is my grandad who kept angelfish with oscar fish, anyone would say what the hell to that right? Yet for almost 10 years they coexisted fine in weird water perametres, weird numbers and actually all had a good disease free life with next to no aggression.. Maybe thats a one off but what I am trying to say is isn't it crazy how unique each fish can actually be? I've heard people keeping african cichlids in soft water conditions for years and a huge bombshell but yellow labidochromis with cardinal tetras for years! Yet almost everywhere advises against this and maybe they are one off situations but its really got me thinking.. Anybody else thought about the same?

 

[PheonixKingZ]

Fish can survive in weird parameters/water hardness, but it’s not good for them.

 

[SAChichlidLover]

Fish can survive in weird parameters/water hardness, but it’s not good for them.

It isn't you aren't wrong, but fish that are raised in thsoe conditions for example at the shop or at home wouldn't be able to survive in its natural conditions in the wild due to living its whole life acclimated to a certain quality range of water.. such a crazy thing to think about but theoretically that means instead of looking at whether the fish is in its wild caught cousins conditions we should probably look at the captivity conditions and whether it was a biotope or an artificial environment and the same goes for tankmates like if we raised an electric blue hap with a gold severum, they could probably coexist like its natural or they could end up tearing each other to shreds but they would share one common factor which is that they would tolerate the same water conditions as they were born and raised in it which is really baffling to think about. In all honesty I think I'm thinking way too deeply into it all but its a cool sort of thing to think about ?

 

[Byron]

This is an involved topic, and one that I have written upon quite a bit over the past several years, here and there. There is a lot of mistaken assumptions bandied about by sometimes well-meaning hobbyists, but a lot of it is completely off the mark. I'll hopefully be easier to follow if I separate out a couple of individual basics that are critical to recognize as a starting point.

First, the plethora of conflicting information. There is only one reliably accurate source of data on freshwater fish, and that is the scientific community. This is a purely scientific hobby--the maintenance of living species in a very artificial environment but one in which the natural laws of biology and chemistry still play out regardless. Know the person behind the data, be it a website or posts on a forum. By "know" I mean either their credentials or personally (the same thing really as we tend to know the knowledge level of people we know). Not all will have scientific degrees, that is not the issue, but responsible aquarists will have researched (which is always superior to any level of experience though the two can go together) and you will find they all tend to agree on the underlying science.

Moving to the biological reality--each species of freshwater fish on this planet has evolved over thousands of years to function best in a very specific environment. This environment refers to water parameters (GH, pH, temperature, maybe KH depending), habitat features (substrate, wood, rock, plants, water flow, light), numbers in the species group that live together, and other species that share that specific geographic area where the fish lives. Marine fish are quite different, because the water parameter issue (GH, KH and pH, not including temperature here) is basically the same throughout the ocean. But freshwater is very specific; it is programmed into the species DNA, and in the majority of species we are not going to change that except through continued evolution--though this itself may not always be successful as we are seeing with increased species extinctions due to our own interference with habitats.

The point above is, the FW fish species has very specific needs, and we must recognize them if we are responsible aquarists. Providing what we know the fish "expects" is key to healthy fish. As for those who claim fish can adapt, sometimes this is true, but with most species it is not accurate. Survive is not thrive. Fish have no option but to accept what we provide for them when it comes to their environment, and like most all animals their natural instinct is to survive somehow. This is why aquarists who say things like "my cories are perfectly happy over gravel because they are eating" are so off the mark; how do they know the fish are "happy?" Unless these individuals are able to converse with the fish, there is no way they can make such ludicrous statements. I can tell you factually the fish are anything but "happy" in such situations. And this is why we turn to the "scientific" folks, for the true biological facts about the particular fish.

I've remained fairly general in the above, because there are many affecting factors in this or that situation, and it can get quite involved. But the underlying premise is sound, and we should be glad that today we have forums like TFF available to all of us, where we can discuss and learn. When I first got fish there were very few books, and certainly no internet. But these resources are only helpful if we know how to use them, and that is what I have tried to outline above.

Feel free to question, I will do my best to explain; we never stop learning, and my extensive research over the past decade continues to teach me.

 

[SAChichlidLover]

This is an involved topic, and one that I have written upon quite a bit over the past several years, here and there. There is a lot of mistaken assumptions bandied about by sometimes well-meaning hobbyists, but a lot of it is completely off the mark. I'll hopefully be easier to follow if I separate out a couple of individual basics that are critical to recognize as a starting point.

First, the plethora of conflicting information. There is only one reliably accurate source of data on freshwater fish, and that is the scientific community. This is a purely scientific hobby--the maintenance of living species in a very artificial environment but one in which the natural laws of biology and chemistry still play out regardless. Know the person behind the data, be it a website or posts on a forum. By "know" I mean either their credentials or personally (the same thing really as we tend to know the knowledge level of people we know). Not all will have scientific degrees, that is not the issue, but responsible aquarists will have researched (which is always superior to any level of experience though the two can go together) and you will find they all tend to agree on the underlying science.

Moving to the biological reality--each species of freshwater fish on this planet has evolved over thousands of years to function best in a very specific environment. This environment refers to water parameters (GH, pH, temperature, maybe KH depending), habitat features (substrate, wood, rock, plants, water flow, light), numbers in the species group that live together, and other species that share that specific geographic area where the fish lives. Marine fish are quite different, because the water parameter issue (GH, KH and pH, not including temperature here) is basically the same throughout the ocean. But freshwater is very specific; it is programmed into the species DNA, and in the majority of species we are not going to change that except through continued evolution--though this itself may not always be successful as we are seeing with increased species extinctions due to our own interference with habitats.

The point above is, the FW fish species has very specific needs, and we must recognize them if we are responsible aquarists. Providing what we know the fish "expects" is key to healthy fish. As for those who claim fish can adapt, sometimes this is true, but with most species it is not accurate. Survive is not thrive. Fish have no option but to accept what we provide for them when it comes to their environment, and like most all animals their natural instinct is to survive somehow. This is why aquarists who say things like "my cories are perfectly happy over gravel because they are eating" are so off the mark; how do they know the fish are "happy?" Unless these individuals are able to converse with the fish, there is no way they can make such ludicrous statements. I can tell you factually the fish are anything but "happy" in such situations. And this is why we turn to the "scientific" folks, for the true biological facts about the particular fish.

I've remained fairly general in the above, because there are many affecting factors in this or that situation, and it can get quite involved. But the underlying premise is sound, and we should be glad that today we have forums like TFF available to all of us, where we can discuss and learn. When I first got fish there were very few books, and certainly no internet. But these resources are only helpful if we know how to use them, and that is what I have tried to outline above.

Feel free to question, I will do my best to explain; we never stop learning, and my extensive research over the past decade continues to teach me.

Very valid points and I think that you are very correct in all of you're points! I will admit sometimes hearing about so many experiences throw me off the scientific aspects of the hobby and makes me wonder what if there are certain parts of the hobby that are possible and should be more well known. Theres also a constant debate to what makes fish happy and what doesnt make them happy or content in their tank based off experience which I guess is also incorrect as it should be based off scientific knowledge, but saying that its hard to tell what the scientific knowledge is apart from the other fishkeepers experiences knowldege as including myself alot of help I give people these days is from my own experience of what works and what doesnt work with fish but instead of basing it off fish deaths I try to base it off stress symptoms and aggression which I guess is wrong. Unfortunately like you mentioned most information will always be conflicted even the scientific evidence is as nowadays everything is based off experience of it. I'm really interested to know more in all honesty and I'm glad you replied

 

[Byron]

During my past four to five months of dealing with some side effects of the cancer that kept me off TFF because of the non-stop pain and lack of any physical or mental energy, I tried to get my mind off things by surfing here and there in a general way. I came across the quotation below, which upon reflection is incredibly wise and bang on the mark. I did not copy the source, so my apology to the initial author for the lack of acknowledgement.

What refutes science:

• Further scientific investigation and empirical data.

What does NOT refute science:

• Feelings
• Religion
• Politics
• A half-baked opinion after watching two YouTube videos.

 

[PheonixKingZ]

A half-baked opinion after watching two YouTube videos

Most people in the world in 2020-2021. ^

 

[AbbeysDad]

It almost goes without saying that I truly respect my friend Byron's opinions, but I'm not sure that any given species of fish can only thrive in a very narrow range of water chemistry or conditions. We might look at nature and as one example, water chemistry and temperature changes significantly during the rainy season.
---
The water from my well here in Central New York state is neither hard nor soft, yet I've had good luck with Angels and livebearers. They seem happy, eat well, reproduce, and live long lives. But then the Angels were bred and raised in tanks in local waters (got them in a fish club meeting auction). The water is also muddy (punny too) because the fish we see in the hobby are bred and raised in a wide range of water chemistries. Fish that in the wild may inhabit fast moving rivers, while the fish you got may likely have been bred and raised in a tank, vat, or pond.
---
We tend to think that Cory's can only do well with a sand substrate as gravel may injure their barbs. However, after a fish collecting trip in South America, Cory McElroy of Aquarium Co-Op documented finding Coryadoras thriving in a stream with very abrasive gravel.
---
So as much as we might generalize that certain species do better in soft water, while others do better in hard water, we might agree that there's an acceptable range. When we say soft water, are we talking about water that is totally mineral free like RO or distilled water? When we say hard water, are we speaking of slightly elevated TDS due to minerals or are we talking 'liquid rock'? My Angels probably wouldn't do well in liquid rock, but then I'm not sure that they'd do well in pure RO water either.
I think that it's just not a black and white issue.

 

[Byron]

I won't argue post #8 with Mike, except to say that I did mention exceptions and they exist but we must always delve into the specifics to see why, as there is usually a reason (natural for the species), or the question of just how truly "healthy" the fish may be is relevant and we cannot talk with them to find out. We do know that fish will always be more likely to have normal (functioning) lives if they live in an environment closely reproducing that of their respective habitat.

However, one issue does require comment, and that is the misleading statement from Cory McElroy. I know this same "observation" has been mentioned on Corydoras World, and site owner Ian Fuller has debunked it completely. However, I did manage to find the video linked in the article on the Aquarium Co-op site and just watched it, and as I suspected, it is misleading.

Anyone can sit in a stream and pick up a handful of large/rough rock material and claim that is "the substrate." It is clear from the subsequent scenes in the video that the substrate in fact is mixed and there is a lot of sand involved.

All species of Corydoradinae live over a substrate that includes sand. This may be pure sand entirely, or it may include dirt/mulm, or it may include (as in this video) broken rock substrate. But all habitats where any of the fish in this family naturally occur have sand within the substrate, and the fish can filter feed naturally. And the filter feeding is the real issue; these fish are programmed to filter feed, and that they can not do over gravel.

I have not been to all these watercourses to verify this, but Ian Fuller is one of the most knowledgeable cory authorities and he has been to many of them. Heiko Bleher has told me similar. Fact is fact, regardless of how anyone may wish to interpret it.

 

[AbbeysDad]

Let me just say that I was not disagreeing with my friend Byron, but pointing out that even in the wild, fish live, and often are forced to live, in an environment of changing water chemistry or a range of a preferred water chemistry.
I very often see parroted posts where well meaning hobbyists proclaim that this or that species of fish must be in soft or hard water. But how soft or how hard? I believe that fish can do well in a range of water chemistry and temperatures, and some do fine in a fairly wide range and others not so much.
---
We tend to think that our tropical fish need 76°F - 78°F water temperature. I have a turtle pond (5' diameter kiddie pool) in my unheated basement (55°F in winter). Three turtles and several fathead minnows from the bait shop (originally intended as food, but much too fast for slow turtles!). Cold well water for the water changes. Here and there, I skim duckweed to add to the pond from the 110g heated stock tank where I colony breed red swordtails. Some unseen fry made the trip to the turtle pond where to my surprise, they have grown to adult fish in the cold water! (I feel like this is a Ripley's Believe it or Not!). Of course not all fish would survive in such conditions. But many tropical fish species have adapted to extreme conditions (thinking now of fish in mountain streams in Mexico).
---
As to Cory McElroy's video, I didn't think it was misleading when he was surprised to find Corys in a rather harsh environment. Let me say that I have a fair amount of respect for Cory as he often 'cuts against the grain' of the 'internet knowledge' of fishkeeping. He bases his opinions on years in the hobby and fish store business as well as having made many collecting trips to the southern US as well as South America and Asia.
---
We all suffer from a degree of tunnel vision. As much as we rely on science and 'experts' we must also realize that opinions vary and scientific facts are all too often changed as we learn more. (I remember when Pluto was a planet).
---
Can fish only thrive in a very specific hardness at a very precise temperature or maybe is there an acceptable range of either or both that's just fine? And If a there's a range, is the range wider for some species than for others?
Food for thought.

 

[SAChichlidLover]

You both are very knowledgeable and have very good points! I wish everyone knew the facts you both do so all fish can be treated the best way possible!